What's in a name? — Washington Redskins

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by citizenzen, Oct 6, 2013.

?

Should the Washington Redskins change their name?

  1. Yes

    51 vote(s)
    35.4%
  2. No

    86 vote(s)
    59.7%
  3. Undecided

    7 vote(s)
    4.9%
  1. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #1
    Now that President Obama has weighed in on the issue, this is definitely fodder for PRSI ...

    This issue has actually been around for a while, and it seems as if teams—both college and pro—eventually let go of their traditional, more controversial name/mascot and adopt more politically correct ones.

    Should the Washington Redskins change their name? I personally think they should.

    If they did change, what would be a good alternative?

    Here's one ...

    The Washington Obstructors

    I'm sure you folks can come up with better.
     
  2. Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #2
    yeah, i think they should.
     
  3. macrumors 6502a

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #3
    The Washington Fili-busters
    The Washington Lobbyists
     
  4. thread starter macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #4
    BTW, this doesn't have to be just about the Redskins. I'm curious whether there are any teams in other countries with controversial names and how that's being addressed.
     
  5. macrumors 6502

    haxrnick

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Location:
    Seattle
    #5
    I think this is really a non-issue. Unless I'm missing something I have yet to hear any of these Indians, Native Americans, whatever you want to call them complain. The way I see it, it would be an honor to have a team named after/about me. This is a drummed up story of the politicians who, again, have nothing better to do and think they know what's best for me/my family/my feelings/my tribe.
     
  6. thread starter macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #6
    Dude it's football. There has to be some kind of macho, brute force edginess.

    Then again there are the Miami Dolphins

    ... the New England Patriots

    ... the Phoenix Cardinals

    ... New Orleans Saints

    Okay. Never mind the macho angle.
     
  7. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #7
    No.


    Obama should be more worried about getting the ass clowns in Congress to do their ****ing jobs then worrying about the name of a football team.

    Why is this just targeting the Redskins too? What about the Indians? Braves? Chiefs?


    I'm so sick of everyone being "offended" over everything. Time for this country to wake up, grow some balls, and stop letting the inmates run the asylum.
     
  8. thread starter macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #8
    Okay. Here's a complaint from Native Americans. Does that change your mind?

     
  9. macrumors 6502

    haxrnick

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Location:
    Seattle
    #9
    No.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #10
    The main issue as I see it lies less in the use of names like this by the team and it's fans, and more with the potential more derogatory use by fans of opposing teams.

    Redskins is probably different though, as there's little redeeming value in a name that was used in a derogatory fashion from the get-go.

    But take Florida State University (Seminoles) and the University of Utah (Utes) as examples:

    As a graduate and fan of the UofU, I've seen fans of our historic rival, Brigham Young University (BYU), take our team name and intentionally change the spelling (Yewts) and then substitute it for swears and all sorts of other foul things. You'll hear them say stuff like "we would have won if our team didn't "take a yewt" all over the field". Or tell someone that they're a piece of "Yewt".

    The problem? When spoken, Yewt and Ute sound exactly the same; and as a result, the name of a proud tribe is denigrated. I don't think that is acceptable.

    Now the Ute tribe has graciously allowed the UofU to use the tribe name. After all, the state of Utah gets it's name from the Ute tribe who were among the dominant tribes in the area when the Mormons came to settle. But I think that through no fault of the University of Utah, a situation has arisen where even the allowed use of the name by the Ute tribe may no longer be appropriate.

    It's sad, because I think this type of thing could be done in a way designed to honor and recognize a tribe, but it just opens up a door to unearned ridicule.

    But as I said before, Redskins is not the name of a tribe, and is pretty derogatory to begin with. I think the team name should go.

    My idea: change the name to reflect the party in the white-house. Right now it could be the Washington Asses (isn't an ass the mascot of the Democrats?)
     
  11. thread starter macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #11
    I had a feeling ...

    ----------

    Well played.
     
  12. macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    Michigan
    #12
    We stole their land and decimated their people; why should we care about changing the name of the football team?
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    JohnLT13

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Location:
    Boston (aka Red Sox Nation)
    #13
    Team established in the 30s and now people want the name changed?:confused:

    ----------

    Patriots are notorious for winning wars.
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #14
    The Washington Concussions
     
  15. macrumors G5

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #15
    Agreed. Keep the name.
     
  16. macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    Michigan
    #16
    The Washington Greenbacks

    DC Comets
     
  17. thread starter macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #17
    Teams change names. It happens.

    Why not change the name when it's considered by many to be offensive?



    ----------

    I'm sorry, but who exactly are the inmates in this case?
     
  18. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #18
    Very rarely. It mostly only happens when a team moves.

    Because it's not all about them. If you tried hard enough you could probably find whiners now who are offended by every team's name.

    The inmates are the clowns who are self-righteous and feel the need to be offended by everything. When did Americans become such thin-skinned whiners? It's just a name.


    Even your quote earlier from the Native Americans.
    “We do not deserve to be called Redskins. We deserve to be treated as what we are: Americans.”

    Nobody is calling them Redskins. They're trying to build up an argument against something that doesn't exist, and then complain about it. It's just the name of the team.
     
  19. thread starter macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #19
    Okay. People have asked a number of times in these threads not to be labelled as "Teabaggers" even though that name was coined originally by the Teabaggers themselves.

    Are they likewise self-righteous and thin-skinned whiners who don't understand it's just a name?
     
  20. macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #20
    The issue is the term Redskins is a derogatory term toward native americans much like the n word is toward blacks.

    If a team was named the Washington N word, I think there would be a bigger push to get the name changed.

    I don't have an issue with the Cleveland Indians or the Braves, etc because it isn't derogatory toward them. Though the Redskins is.
     
  21. macrumors 65816

    BenTrovato

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Location:
    Toronto
    #21
    Obviously the name is offensive to Native Americans. I can't see it being more offensive than when the early Americans obliterated, destroyed and forced the Natives out of their own lands but I guess that's all relative nowadays.
     
  22. macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    The Washington Burgundy Cutis.

    Personally, its just a name and I don't care. I don't think words could ever offend me.
     
  23. macrumors 6502a

    JohnLT13

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Location:
    Boston (aka Red Sox Nation)
    #23
    Seems these days that almost anything offends someone because someone deems it offensive.:rolleyes:
     
  24. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #24
    Yes, but for the tea party (American Taliban), it's not just because of the name.



    The bottom line is nobody is forcing anyone to watch the NFL or Redskins football. If you don't like it, don't watch. Just like if you don't like music that says the n-word all the time, don't listen to it.
     
  25. thread starter macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #25
    Exactly. The truth is everybody tries to control language and labels. Each side has their politically correct and acceptable terms.

    Trying to claim otherwise is simply disingenuous.

    If it's just a word, then someone ask why Bill O'Reilly thinks there's a "War on Christmas".
     

Share This Page