Among the Native Americans reached over a five-month period ending in April, more than 7 in 10 said they did not feel the word “Redskin” was disrespectful to Indians. An even higher number — 8 in 10 — said they would not be offended if a non-native called them that name......
Across every demographic group, the vast majority of Native Americans say the team’s name does not offend them, including 80 percent who identify as politically liberal, 85 percent of college graduates, 90 percent of those enrolled in a tribe, 90 percent of non-football fans and 91 percent of those between the ages of 18 and 39. |
yet the first line states:
"Among the Native Americans reached over a five-month period ending in April, more than 7 in 10 said they did not feel the word “Redskin” was disrespectful to Indians."
I'm not a rocket scientist or anything, but when I do the math ...
Clearly sipping the lib kool-aid aren't we? Your evidence for any of this is where exactly? Huffington Post? LMAO
My concern is not really so much about the Redskins name per-se and this has nothing to do with whether I think the name is offensive to the american indians. It is about government stepping in and forcing a change where they really have no right. Today it is the redskins and tomorrow something else less visible/public.
Maybe someone can educate me on the legal side of this if my comment above was off base.
Clearly sipping the lib kool-aid aren't we? Your evidence for any of this is where exactly? Huffington Post? LMAO
My concern is not really so much about the Redskins name per-se and this has nothing to do with whether I think the name is offensive to the american indians. It is about government stepping in and forcing a change where they really have no right. Today it is the redskins and tomorrow something else less visible/public.
Maybe someone can educate me on the legal side of this if my comment above was off base.
There are still activist groups that protest them, though they don't seem to get as much traction due to the official relationship between the tribal organization and the school.
There are certain requirements that the Seminoles have in order for FSU to use the name - classes on Native American culture, etc.
Quote:
FSU is a bit different because the Seminole Tribe of Florida officially sanctions the use of the name. That's the only reason they're still the Seminoles, as opposed to the many schools that have changed their nickname. Same thing with the Utah Utes, Central Michigan Chippewas, and Catawba Indians.
There are still activist groups that protest them, though they don't seem to get as much traction due to the official relationship between the tribal organization and the school.
There are certain requirements that the Seminoles have in order for FSU to use the name - classes on Native American culture, etc.
I saw proof on the History Channel btw!
What if you were at work?
What if you were at work?
well if the earlier stat is correct in that 10% of native americans find it offensive, then your scenario would be if there was a party with 1000 people and one of them found it offensive would you use the term?
I saw proof on the History Channel btw!
1) Vikings were the ones terrorizing people in your post and are the ones with a team named after them, not the victims.
2) The name "Vikings" doesn't have anything to do with a racial skin tone asa slur. It's just the name of a group of people.
Again, Blackhawks, Seminoles... Your post sucks and is stupid.
Again, that's just what I've been told anecdotally by a friend who is full Navajo and lives in New Mexico in a region that is largely Indian.
Quote:
is also highly offensive to other Europeans who's ancestors they terrorized for many years.
I saw proof on the History Channel btw!
You think you're being clever but all you are doing is showing how much you missed the point. Even in your shitty analogy and awful attempt at humor and making a point, you fail to realize that:
1) Vikings were the ones terrorizing people in your post and are the ones with a team named after them, not the victims.
2) The name "Vikings" doesn't have anything to do with a racial skin tone asa slur. It's just the name of a group of people.
Again, Blackhawks, Seminoles... Your post sucks and is stupid.
There are still activist groups that protest them, though they don't seem to get as much traction due to the official relationship between the tribal organization and the school.
It's not about having a Native American name, its about one construed as demeaning (again though, I think this is all dumb bullshit for people to get worked up over unless they're a Native American themselves, save for that disgusting Cleveland Indians logo which nobody should be proud of, but people inevitably are [those who think it's standing up to political correctness]).
Quote:
Go figure
I'm sure there's a segment of Native American's who are offended by the term, for a number of reasons whether politically driven or not, and there's also undoubtedly a segment who could give a flying fuck. Either way, the idea that some of the BBI elites squawk as if they're infinitely offended speaks to their need for attention and their need to elevate themselves as a group so overwhelmingly evolved. Gimme a break!
Call me crazy, I don't think it's the place of one ethnic group to be telling other ethnic groups what they should or should not be offended by.
Hold this L kid
Quote:
In comment 12963759 LeonofKiev said:
Quote:
is also highly offensive to other Europeans who's ancestors they terrorized for many years.
I saw proof on the History Channel btw!
You think you're being clever but all you are doing is showing how much you missed the point. Even in your shitty analogy and awful attempt at humor and making a point, you fail to realize that:
1) Vikings were the ones terrorizing people in your post and are the ones with a team named after them, not the victims.
2) The name "Vikings" doesn't have anything to do with a racial skin tone asa slur. It's just the name of a group of people.
Again, Blackhawks, Seminoles... Your post sucks and is stupid.
It's a stereotype reflecting barbarism in a state with an above-average proportion of people of Scandinavian descent.
Vikings is what they're fucking called. Redskins is not a tribe name of a group of Native Americans.
False equivalency bullshit that's idiotic and only makes sense to people who are trying to prove that somehow Redskins is a perfectly fine name.
Quote:
If you were at a party and you knew 1 of 10 people thought the term 'Redskin' was offensive, would you use it?
What if you were at work?
well if the earlier stat is correct in that 10% of native americans find it offensive, then your scenario would be if there was a party with 1000 people and one of them found it offensive would you use the term?
Quote:
Most Indians don't give a shit one way or the other - don't love the name, don't hate it either, don't really care. Many of them roll their eyes at the idea of white people getting bent out of shape about the names of sports teams while ignoring the many very serious problems present in a lot of their communities. There is a small, noisy activist contingent that does care. Few Indians pay them much mind, either.
Again, that's just what I've been told anecdotally by a friend who is full Navajo and lives in New Mexico in a region that is largely Indian.
I think this is probably the most feasible thing to believe. And while there may be a small noisy minority, is it really such a big deal to acquiesce to them within this particular context?
This is not my argument in favor of retaining Redskins because I don't care one iota in either direction about the name. However, it's fascinating to me how similar arguments can go in either direction because they are shaped by what the advocate himself supports or doesn't support.
Hold this L kid
No, I don't really give two shits about the name Redskins to be honest. You writing a really stupid fucking post and me being angry are mutually independent.
And no thanks, I stopped smoking blunts, I picked up a Pax for dry herb and have THC oil sticks. Highly recommend you try them.
Your post was fucking dumb and deserved to be called out as fucking dumb. If you write something insightful I'd have given you kudos for insight.
Find me a team called the crackers or honkies and I'll agree with you.
Quote:
If you were at a party and you knew 1 of 10 people thought the term 'Redskin' was offensive, would you use it?
What if you were at work?
well if the earlier stat is correct in that 10% of native americans find it offensive, then your scenario would be if there was a party with 1000 people and one of them found it offensive would you use the term?
That poll was directed solely at Native Americans. It did not poll the general public. I would guess that there is a segment of the population that finds it offensive just based on reaction from this site. Just for arguments sake, say it is 5% (I'd guess higher as Webster defines it as usually offensive). Would you feel comfortable using it in referring to a Native American?
Quote:
In comment 12963760 therealmf said:
Quote:
If you were at a party and you knew 1 of 10 people thought the term 'Redskin' was offensive, would you use it?
What if you were at work?
well if the earlier stat is correct in that 10% of native americans find it offensive, then your scenario would be if there was a party with 1000 people and one of them found it offensive would you use the term?
Chris, one percent of our population is American Indian. So, if just 10% of them are offended, then that would be one tenth of one percent... or one out of a thousand
Quote:
In comment 12963712 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
Most Indians don't give a shit one way or the other - don't love the name, don't hate it either, don't really care. Many of them roll their eyes at the idea of white people getting bent out of shape about the names of sports teams while ignoring the many very serious problems present in a lot of their communities. There is a small, noisy activist contingent that does care. Few Indians pay them much mind, either.
Again, that's just what I've been told anecdotally by a friend who is full Navajo and lives in New Mexico in a region that is largely Indian.
I think this is probably the most feasible thing to believe. And while there may be a small noisy minority, is it really such a big deal to acquiesce to them within this particular context?
If you find that percentage to be the same as those who are offended by Harry Potter and magic in public schools, would you likewise feel that you should acquiesce?
This is not my argument in favor of retaining Redskins because I don't care one iota in either direction about the name. However, it's fascinating to me how similar arguments can go in either direction because they are shaped by what the advocate himself supports or doesn't support.
No, I would not. But that's why I said "in this particular context".
The US has pillaged these people and fucked them over for so long. Is it really any skin off our back (there's a scalp joke in there) to just change the name to something a little more palatable that's not based on their skin color?
Braves? Warriors? Whatever tribe was native to Washington? Something that could at least be *construed* as honorary?
Context matters and I specifically said "in this situation" to point out that it's not always the right move to acquiesce a vocal minority.
Clearly sipping the lib kool-aid aren't we? Your evidence for any of this is where exactly? Huffington Post? LMAO
Ever watch the news or, perhaps, listen to Trumps speeches or, perhaps, be aware of anything at all?
What a winner he is!
Quote:
In comment 12963770 EricJ said:
Quote:
In comment 12963760 therealmf said:
Quote:
If you were at a party and you knew 1 of 10 people thought the term 'Redskin' was offensive, would you use it?
What if you were at work?
well if the earlier stat is correct in that 10% of native americans find it offensive, then your scenario would be if there was a party with 1000 people and one of them found it offensive would you use the term?
Chris, one percent of our population is American Indian. So, if just 10% of them are offended, then that would be one tenth of one percent... or one out of a thousand
Do you commonly use the 'N' word when there are no blacks around? Non American Indians can find the term offensive.
Another stupid post. Did you just learn these terms today on urban dictionary or something? If colleges are notorious for having "safe spaces", how would you conclude that "SJWs and safe spaces don't have the internet".
I don't give a fuck about SJWs or safe spaces, I give a fuck about human decency.
I just made a scalping joke in jest in my previous post, but yeah, sjw/safespace/libtard/<insert buzzword here>
Wanna hear a joke? What time is it in India.... 7:11 on the dot. There ya go, such an SJW sheltered safe space libtard that I have no problem cracking jokes about my own heritage.
Quote:
In comment 12963781 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 12963712 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
Most Indians don't give a shit one way or the other - don't love the name, don't hate it either, don't really care. Many of them roll their eyes at the idea of white people getting bent out of shape about the names of sports teams while ignoring the many very serious problems present in a lot of their communities. There is a small, noisy activist contingent that does care. Few Indians pay them much mind, either.
Again, that's just what I've been told anecdotally by a friend who is full Navajo and lives in New Mexico in a region that is largely Indian.
I think this is probably the most feasible thing to believe. And while there may be a small noisy minority, is it really such a big deal to acquiesce to them within this particular context?
If you find that percentage to be the same as those who are offended by Harry Potter and magic in public schools, would you likewise feel that you should acquiesce?
This is not my argument in favor of retaining Redskins because I don't care one iota in either direction about the name. However, it's fascinating to me how similar arguments can go in either direction because they are shaped by what the advocate himself supports or doesn't support.
No, I would not. But that's why I said "in this particular context".
The US has pillaged these people and fucked them over for so long. Is it really any skin off our back (there's a scalp joke in there) to just change the name to something a little more palatable that's not based on their skin color?
Braves? Warriors? Whatever tribe was native to Washington? Something that could at least be *construed* as honorary?
Context matters and I specifically said "in this situation" to point out that it's not always the right move to acquiesce a vocal minority.
Quote:
I didn't know they let SJWs use the internet within a Safe Space?
Another stupid post. Did you just learn these terms today on urban dictionary or something? If colleges are notorious for having "safe spaces", how would you conclude that "SJWs and safe spaces don't have the internet".
I don't give a fuck about SJWs or safe spaces, I give a fuck about human decency.
I just made a scalping joke in jest in my previous post, but yeah, sjw/safespace/libtard/<insert buzzword here>
Wanna hear a joke? What time is it in India.... 7:11 on the dot. There ya go, such an SJW sheltered safe space libtard that I have no problem cracking jokes about my own heritage.
What a winner he is!
It's a false equivalency and it's trash.
The name Redskin doesn't even offend me. But it's cool, keep using millenial buzzwords you learned last week. I'd much rather be exaggerated into that bucket than in the other direction.
Quote:
In comment 12963759 LeonofKiev said:
Quote:
is also highly offensive to other Europeans who's ancestors they terrorized for many years.
I saw proof on the History Channel btw!
You think you're being clever but all you are doing is showing how much you missed the point. Even in your shitty analogy and awful attempt at humor and making a point, you fail to realize that:
1) Vikings were the ones terrorizing people in your post and are the ones with a team named after them, not the victims.
2) The name "Vikings" doesn't have anything to do with a racial skin tone asa slur. It's just the name of a group of people.
Again, Blackhawks, Seminoles... Your post sucks and is stupid.
It's a stereotype reflecting barbarism in a state with an above-average proportion of people of Scandinavian descent.
You would be well advised to some extensive reading on Norse and Danish cultures, of which the Vikings were actually a small part and who, for their time, were certainly no more barbaric than anyone else. In fact, they established trade with most of the known world at the time and are the namesakes for Russia (i.e., the "Rus").
Quote:
In comment 12963803 LeonofKiev said:
Quote:
I didn't know they let SJWs use the internet within a Safe Space?
Another stupid post. Did you just learn these terms today on urban dictionary or something? If colleges are notorious for having "safe spaces", how would you conclude that "SJWs and safe spaces don't have the internet".
I don't give a fuck about SJWs or safe spaces, I give a fuck about human decency.
I just made a scalping joke in jest in my previous post, but yeah, sjw/safespace/libtard/<insert buzzword here>
Wanna hear a joke? What time is it in India.... 7:11 on the dot. There ya go, such an SJW sheltered safe space libtard that I have no problem cracking jokes about my own heritage.
But wouldn't that joke be on someone of a different gender?
Find it yourself, jerky. Try using Google, if you know what that is.
Quote:
In comment 12963777 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 12963759 LeonofKiev said:
Quote:
is also highly offensive to other Europeans who's ancestors they terrorized for many years.
I saw proof on the History Channel btw!
You think you're being clever but all you are doing is showing how much you missed the point. Even in your shitty analogy and awful attempt at humor and making a point, you fail to realize that:
1) Vikings were the ones terrorizing people in your post and are the ones with a team named after them, not the victims.
2) The name "Vikings" doesn't have anything to do with a racial skin tone asa slur. It's just the name of a group of people.
Again, Blackhawks, Seminoles... Your post sucks and is stupid.
It's a stereotype reflecting barbarism in a state with an above-average proportion of people of Scandinavian descent.
You would be well advised to some extensive reading on Norse and Danish cultures, of which the Vikings were actually a small part and who, for their time, were certainly no more barbaric than anyone else. In fact, they established trade with most of the known world at the time and are the namesakes for Russia (i.e., the "Rus").
How else are poor brown people oppressed by the evil white man.
Tell us!
Quote:
In comment 12963815 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 12963803 LeonofKiev said:
Quote:
I didn't know they let SJWs use the internet within a Safe Space?
Another stupid post. Did you just learn these terms today on urban dictionary or something? If colleges are notorious for having "safe spaces", how would you conclude that "SJWs and safe spaces don't have the internet".
I don't give a fuck about SJWs or safe spaces, I give a fuck about human decency.
I just made a scalping joke in jest in my previous post, but yeah, sjw/safespace/libtard/<insert buzzword here>
Wanna hear a joke? What time is it in India.... 7:11 on the dot. There ya go, such an SJW sheltered safe space libtard that I have no problem cracking jokes about my own heritage.
But wouldn't that joke be on someone of a different gender?
Gender. Not sure what you mean. I chose that joke because I myself am an Indian-American, if you count my families heritage (like India the country...I was born/raised in NJ though and my mom was born/raised in Staten Island)
I am not interested in any discussion of Trump himself. All I am saying is this:
1) It is not debatable that what he said "offended" people
2) He is a Presidential Candidate
3) Therefore, the notion that "you can't offend anyone anymore" is bullshit.
That's the complete line of thinking with Trump, I am not talking about his platform. I am simply saying that he has said things which other people will find offensive (not saying I do or don't), and considering his current position in politics, it's proof that yes, you can still say offensive things.
Quote:
In comment 12963786 Bill L said:
Quote:
In comment 12963777 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 12963759 LeonofKiev said:
Quote:
is also highly offensive to other Europeans who's ancestors they terrorized for many years.
I saw proof on the History Channel btw!
You think you're being clever but all you are doing is showing how much you missed the point. Even in your shitty analogy and awful attempt at humor and making a point, you fail to realize that:
1) Vikings were the ones terrorizing people in your post and are the ones with a team named after them, not the victims.
2) The name "Vikings" doesn't have anything to do with a racial skin tone asa slur. It's just the name of a group of people.
Again, Blackhawks, Seminoles... Your post sucks and is stupid.
It's a stereotype reflecting barbarism in a state with an above-average proportion of people of Scandinavian descent.
You would be well advised to some extensive reading on Norse and Danish cultures, of which the Vikings were actually a small part and who, for their time, were certainly no more barbaric than anyone else. In fact, they established trade with most of the known world at the time and are the namesakes for Russia (i.e., the "Rus").
SO you're saying that the image that comes foremost to your mind when hearing the word "Viking" is shopkeeper?
Lord you ARE dim.