An interesting debate

if they drop the name, when does it end?

States like “Indiana” or “Kansas” would have to change their names too.

This is nothing but a money grab by people claiming to be offended.

Many Indians or Native Americans are Redskin or Chief fans here in New Mexico. I also know Navajo peoples that see it as an honor and don’t mind the names.

This country has become too sissified and PC. There are plenty of other problems that need to be dealt with instead of a football mascot.

in 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the prior poll’s findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions.

Is this post a joke? I am not sure if I should take it seriously. While we are at it, why don’t we get rid of the “blatantly racist” Notre Dame Fighting Irish? Is this a football blog or is it a synchronized swimming blog?

I love football because of the warrior, kick them in the balls mentality. Take this weakness and get it out of here. My biggest pet peeve when it comes to blogs is that it tends to draw an overabundance of politically-correct weenies.

I would rather spend my time speculating on how many yards Knowshon will rush for as to wondering if I am hurting people’s feelings.

My undergrad university fought over being “The Indians”. It was immensly stupid. The local indians (no, they didn’t want to be called “native americans”) were the most vocaly opposed to the name change. When the school mascot was originaly picked, local tribes were honored by the naming. When a few, rich, white, snobby and poiliticaly correct students tried to change the name from The Indians, local indians protested that they hadn’t been consulted, and they wanted the name to stay. What did our white, privledged students do? Disallow the “indians” from being allowed to be present at our student government meetings because, since they aren’t students, they shouldn’t have a voice (over my objection that those “indians” are also tax payers and funding the school). Cute. The supposedly “race sensitive” students wanted to change the name even though the “other” culture didn’t want to be spoken for, and then those same students tried to shut down the voices of those tribes. The side that wanted to change the name couldn’t even produce one native american, but the opposing side had a petition with several dozen names. Go figure.

The name change failed. But years later, the school changed the name anyway. They don’t get a dime of money from me anymore.

This is political correctness run amok. Folks take pride in “The Fighting Irish” (though I’m really a Scot, and have no real tie to Notre Dame). Mascots are chosen out of pride. Given the Battle of Thermopolae, The Spartans are a vogue name. Indians (Redskins, whatever) are a culture of warriors when imprinted with football. But of course, the movement to change these names often come from those who are easily offended, and not those who are honored. (Name a team “The HoosierTeachers” and have the mascot be some 6’4" 250 guy that wears little, round “schoolboy” glasses and looks a little dorky, but BIG and dorky. I’d buy up the tickets!)

I think the charge to change mascots is rooted in some false sense of guilt that comes from well intentioned but misguided people that don’t belong to the community that is “mascoted”. That’s just what I think, for what it is worth.

i agree that it pays homage to the native warriors but they should change their main logo to that spear thing again -way cooler

I don’t know that the name ‘Redskin’ is inherently derogatory. For example, when you call someone ‘white’ or ‘black’ you are essentially saying they have white or black skin (i.e. ‘whiteskin’ or ‘blackskin’). The issue is how that culture is being portrayed. I don’t know that I think that Washington is portraying Native Americans in a negative light. The picture on the helmet reminds me of a strong and noble warrior. That doesn’t inherently mean that all Native Americans are warriors or violent.

Broncoman,

The Native Americans have embraced all of the Indian names with pride for their warrior ancestors.
It is very appropriate and relevant to say “Red-skin.” Like the majority of Americans when they think of Redskins they think of Indian heros or legends. But it is in no way considered in a demeaning context. When Cheifs fans sing Indian chants and throw the Tomahawk sign down, they are chanting in a positive way for their “Heros”.

 * If you want to talk about Redskins Football, Cheifs Football and how it may or may not impact the DENVER BRONCOS then I’m all for it. Otherwise let’s get back to the Mile High Report!

Should Washington be forced to change the team name by anyone? No. Do I think they should do it anyway…well, I would do it, for what it’s worth. I just can’t see how the term “redskin” gives any honor to anyone. No problem with Irish (don’t see anything derogatory there), Vikings (nothing there…and I’m Scandanavian), or using “Indian”, “Brave”, “Chief”, or actual tribe names (Seminoles, Utes, Sioux (which is going away, as one of the two tribes did not endorse UND’s use), etc), as they are not derogatory either.

Just my though, and I’m not lobbying for change. Flame away, if you want.

Go find something more worthy of your time to complain about, and I’ll go find something else worth reading.

What a worthless debate this is. Are the Denver Broncos racist against Horses? What about the Raiders? Are pirates getting discriminated against? Come on…enough with this crap already! I hate to be rude, but I can’t stand political correctness. I think it is destroying America…I really do. If a person doesn’t have the ability to show TACT when communicating with others then he is a CLASSLESS individual. I don’t need the PC Police coming in and telling me what is proper and what isn’t. If I want to be a classless individual then that is my God given right. I won’t buy into these silly arguments.

Growing up, my school was the Chiefs…ohhhhhh, the SHAME! How DARE WE honor the heritage and history of the Native American culture by naming our teams after their heroes. ONLY THEY can honor their heritage. It’s an absurd argument…really. I’m done ranting, but I still can’t stand the ideology of Political Correctness. I prefer allowing people to decide what is right and what is wrong…there are plenty of people I’ve come across who were classless, I choose not to associate myself with them. Do the same, Mike Silver.

Wait, no, Silver is right. We should IGNORE Native American culture. Strike it from all of our records. Pretend they do not exist. Do not honor them. Keep them on their reservations, so we don’t offend their sensibilities and ours. Is that what Silver wants? I know that’s what Political Correctness in its extreme wants. I will never read another of his articles since I now have confirmation he is a complete buffoon.

FYI – this came to a head by the NCAA (natch), but because there were Sioux tribes who agreed that the name was “hostile” and offensive, UND will drop the nickname and mascot. For what it’s worth, it’s not as if there was 100% agreement within the Sioux tribes about this – as there seemed to be a lot of support to keep the name from the Sioux as well.

But, lest anyone take offense, to anything…alas.

I accidentally hit the wrong button. I don’t want them to change their name. If they did, where would it end? The Indians, Chiefs, Braves, Blackhawks, and countless colleges would have to follow suit. I say let them keep the name unless a group of actual Native Americans decide that it is offensive.

….between, say Chiefs or Seminoles and, say savages or scalpers, and maybe Redskins falls in between somewhere. But surely the Washington owners did not mean the name as a disparagement when they chose it for their team. That should count for something.

from the others because it is not just the name of a group, but a derogatory name for a group. It would be the difference between having a mascot called the Chinamen as opposed to the Chinese. Both are offensive at some level, but the first is in a different category, so it at least permits an answer to the question of where does it stop. Having said all of this, I am not in favor of them changing the name. I doubt that the use of the nickname currently has any link to views about native americans, but I am open to persuasion on that point with empirical evidence.

Can’t remember exact details, but it was something like this:

New York Jews
Detroit Negroes
Kansas City Honkies
Sante Fe B**ners

How does it feel?

It occured to me when I saw it that nobody would dream of naming a team any of these things. How is it then OK to do it if were just ‘celebrating’ native americans. Try walking into a bunch of native american strangers and say, ‘hey look, a bunch of redskins!!’

I bet you won’t get thanked for the flattery.

How about some moderation here.

I can see that opinions on this topic are pretty emotionally charged (I’m not sure where I fall on the Redskins name-change issue, haven’t ever really thought about it I guess).

But let’s not flame one another simply for expressing a differing opinion. Broncoman raised an issue that’s important to him, and asked what other people think. I don’t think that qualifies him for getting flamed. Just as I don’t think anyone who disagrees with him deserves to be flamed either.

Let’s approach this topic with the same kind of critical analysis that has characterized the vast majority of our discussions on the Bronco’s off-season.

What anyone of us thinks. The Skins nickname has been part of that team since 1937 when they were in Boston. The Skins won their suit and are not going to change their nickname. I personally have found more things blantantly racist than this name. Why wasnt this brought up in the 70’s when stars such as Marlon Brando and other were protesting the plight of the American Indians? This country has become to sensitve. Honestly do you think they will change their name. Silver is a douche and I dont care what he writes, I quit reading him a long time ago. So should FSU and the Chefs stop doing the Tomahawk chop also?

On the central question, I don’t walk in those shoes, so I can’t really say. And while this topic may not belong and I understand the frustration with PC-ness, I have to second BShrout here. “Sissified”, “politically-correct weenies”, “a few, rich, white, snobby”,“PC is destroying America”. Really? Come on folks, name-calling just lowers the bar and makes us look foolish. Either respond respectfully or give this one a miss. Oh yeah, Go Broncs!

I’m not meaning to single you or anyone else out. I think some folks are way too sensitive, and perhaps that serves to stifle critical thought and informed, respectable debate. But I don’t think so. The Republic’s been here awhile and will outlive all the PC stuff. I just think a lot of folks on both sides of these get too emotionally involved and lose sight of both intellectualism and courtesy – OK, I’m done.

If I didn’t weigh in here? Of course my answer is a moderate, nuanced answer, which wouldn’t translate well into a televised 10-second soundbite. Here goes. No team should be forced to change their name, because the present-day usage of the names carries no intent of racism, nor presumably, did it at the inception of the use of the name. Think about it. Would the founder of a team name that team a name which they equated with an inferior person (or anything undesirable?) Racism is 100% about intent, and you can’t convince me that any right-thinking person would choose to market their valuable assets by degrading them with an intentionally negative name. People should just calm down, and worry about more important things. There are plenty of them to be upset about, that there’s no need to focus on something so trivial.

On the other hand, this notion that “political correctness” is some far-reaching problem which threatens our society is also misplaced. That term has become a bogeyman, for use in communicating to stupid TV watchers in the aforementioned soundbites, and it openly aims to do nothing more than stir negative feelings in people. I liked the use of the term “racial sensitivity” above. Being sensitive to the feelings of your fellow people is a good thing; it’s what they sometimes call common courtesy. Nobody would like to be marginalized based upon demographic factors, so it’s incumbent upon us all not to marginalize others based upon them. That’s not political correctness, that’s being a respectful member of society. Making racist comments is simply indefensible, and says much more about the person who says them than it does about the person who they are said about. Honest discourse need not be limited by mutual respect within a society. I think both extreme sides of the poltical spectrum get this completely wrong, and the world would be better off if each person were just encouraged to embrace their own responsibility to be respectful of others, and secure enough in themselves not to feel the need to ignorantly degrade others.

I must say that it has taken me by surprise how hot this debate is running. Now I may very well be wrong on this since I lack your cultural back ground, but to me the name “Redskins” was probably chosen, because of the fear that “redskins” seems to inflict on settlers in popular american culture. Thus I do not see it as a tribute to native americans.

Is it racism then? It is certainly felt by some as racism, which I think is all we can reasonably agree on.
Are those feelings justified? I think to some extend that they are, in that the term “redskins”, while not meant to be racist, invokes a stereotypical image of native americans that some would fell is negative. (Though it may invoke other images in football fans).
Should the team the change its name? Personally I don’t think they should, because the name is a part of american history and culture now. But with that said, I hope that the team feels a responsibility (because of the name), to help correct any harmfull stereotype that might still linger about native americans.

Broncoman, are you a native American, or was your response in which you segued into a discussion of the poor treatment of that group (which I haven’t heard anyone argue) just a personal feeling?

My grandfather was born and raised in the south. As long as I can remember he and my grandmother had an African American maid who they treated like family. At one point Pearl got in trouble with some loan sharks and my grandfather paid his own attorney to take care of them for her. At the same time, as long as I can remember my grandfather used the n-word. I don’t think he evr gave it a thought or ever considered it derogatory. In fact I remember that many African Americans didn’t consider it derogatory at the time. And today we see it used quite frequently in a totally different connotation. But should that fact that some didn’t have any ill intent, or that some didn’t find it derogatory trump the concerns of those who did find it highly offensive and derogatory?

I know some Native Americans who couldn’t care less about the names of sporting teams. I am part Native American and fall into this group as well. I also know those who are highly offended by the names. Whose rights should come first?

 instead of the vanilla “Cardinals” when I was there in the 1970s. I still think of them that way.

I agree with Broncoman, that the name “Redskins” is at least cringe-worthy when you think about it, but there’s lots more serious problems that concern me a lot more.

Really, it only starts here. Once this is done the animal rights people will be after The Broncos to change the name because it supports animal cruelty. Don’t laugh, the state of wyoming has been attacked several times for having the horse and rider on the states license plate with the assertion that it supports animal cruelty ie:rodeo. We are a civilized nation now and the name Redskins is no insult and imo should be considered an honor. Trust me it will not stop here, next the Braves in baseball, then the Yankees because somebody feels that their relatives are dishonored by it…………on and on. Besides if 91% of a race considers it an honor, where is the problem? Just my humble opinion.

As a person of a totally differently ethnicity and unfortunately a person who has no close Native American friends or acquaintances, I cannot comment on whether or not Native Americans should find this offensive enough to have the Redskins change their name.

However, I do know this word is indeed offensive. Most, perhaps all, definitions you find of the word “Redskin” uses the words “offensive”, “disparaging”, and “derogatory” to define it. Nowhere have I seen any positive descriptions of it. I feel like we should all be agreeing here that this is indeed an offensive word…

Ok, as for intent… even if the original team owners had good intentions, it doesn’t change the fact that some Native Americans may find it offensive. Does that merit the need for the team to change… as I said, I can’t say what’s the right or wrong thing to do here. At the same time, as someone’s example above, if someone started a team with the name San Fransisco Chinamen (I’m Chinese), I know for sure I would be offended and would want that team to change their names.

I also remember hearing some high school in Illinois back in the day being called the “Chinks”. They might not be some high and mighty NFL franchise, but what were the brainchilds of that HS thinking when they came up with that as their school name?! As for intent again, did they have good intentions? Somehow in their own distorted and incredibly deranged way, probably they did. But it doesn’t change the fact that it was incredibly offensive and sure enough they were forced to change names.

Because it specifically refers to the color of skin. For me, it is akin.

I personally have no problem with: Indians, Chiefs, Braves, Aztecs, and the like.

my twopence, for what it’s worth.

…has run so far blooming amuk in recent years that we, as Americans, are losing our…well losing what we used to be. To me the meaning of Redskin is ‘Great Warrior’…it is not degrading name it is a fun name. Had I been around during the Revolution I wouldn’t mind being called, ‘Blue Coat’ nor during the French Indian Wars would I mind being called a ’White Skin"

     I loved it, when I was selling cars, when a Native American came in—they payed no sale tax—and I loved that. I also know that most of them would rather be known as Americans—they only use the reservation card to get out of the taxes. The biggest problem with ‘White Men’ is the liberal thought that ‘Redskins’ should revert back to what they were 200 or maybe 400 years ago. I have no problem with remembering heritage—God knows that this entire country is re-writing our Christian heritage as if it were bad—not knowing that this country will not survive if ‘We The People’ no longer understand that this Nation was built by standards found in the Bible .

    Personally I think one of the biggest mistakes this Country made was calling reservations ‘Nations’ within a Nation. That makes no sense. They are just Americans just like me.

     I am really sick of people yelling, “Racist” I’m really sick of it. I am also really getting sick of people not knowing that this Country has, for most of our history, been Great, and Good, and Kind. We bailed the World out of two World Wars…..at our expense. We send more ‘Real’ help not from our Government, but from Christian ministries, to more places in the world than all nations put together.

I better stop this comment or I will really get wound up…and then….

You do such a good job writing please don’t throw generalities out there like your comment about blue states and productivity. It’s beneath you and furthermore, the job you do researching the information you write in regards to the Broncos is refreshing and very interesting reading.

Don’t tarnish your talent with a stab at unsubstantiated spin. Don’t forget I live in IL so I can get that any day. MHR is my escape-please don’t ruin it.

I don’t want to discuss politics but if we did I am POSITIVE we would have to agree to disagree.

I got a little excited and shouldn’t have said anything. I appreciate your response and after reading your articles there is no doubt in my mind you work extremely hard as do I.

Thanks again.

Go BRONCOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We talk about kicking Vick out of football, (after he has already been in prison for 20 months and lost the better part of an amazing fortune) for engaging in dog fighting, and yet virtually all of the meat consumed by humans around the wrold comes from the most cruel and inhumane institutions (not to mention breeding grounds for new deseases, like the most recent flu – pig farms in Mexico). Not to mention the government-sanctioned torture adn cruelty in connection with the “war on terror” against, in many cases, people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. And at the same time, we defend the rights of rapists and multiple murderers to receive appropriate medical and dental care, but for lack of spending a single dollar on a vaccination we condemn a child born in poverty (name the country in the world, including the US) to a life of pain and disability above and beyond what his/her horrible proverty will bring. We argue about names, but the reality behind the names is too frightening to handle.

I’m not saying I am necessarily in support or against any of the above, I am just saying that we humans have these weird shifting values that seem to make mockery of the kind of discussions we are having here.

Of course, it can also be argued that “the journey of a thousand li (Chinese term for distance) begins with one step.” And George Orwell knew the importance of words and names having real meanings (and I’m sure he was turning over in his grave during the Bush years). So maybe we do need to review the meanings of names from time to time.

So what the heck, it’s a crazy world.

Anyone remember this? They tried to show people how offensive it would be to have the name of a team use “Whites.” Instead, everyone loved it and they sold a ton of merchandise.

As for the Potomac Region Indigenous People Redskins, I don’t care one way or the other what they name their team, as long as we beat them when we play.

i appreciate your willingness to take a stand and as i can see through this all you kept your point pretty well. However, I dont see the point. If the redskins had one 3 of the last 4 superbowls would this be an issue? The same people who put this issue up for debate only do it when the team in question (pick you team and sport) is in a losing stint. These people just jump on whatever bandwagon normally and jump off when it is a dead issue. Now I am not saying you are one of those what I am saying is this comes up every few years with teams like the “redskins” or the “braves” et al. i just see it read it and move on.

Am I going to have to change my name? I didn’t mean to offend the oranges. And I didn’t mean to offend all you good people that might have blood in you.

Looks like we have someone who is one step ahead of us? Purchase your Washington “REDNECKS” hat today! Go Fighting Rednecks! YEAH

For everyone who’s brought out the “if we start with the Redskins, then where does it end” argument — you know, the one that says we’ll have to rename everything that offends anybody — please remember that Syracuse changed its name from the Orangemen to the Orange in 2004. This terrible, terrible PC act has pushed us down such an awful slippery slope that…. nobody here has even seen fit to mention it.

I mean, seriously, you can say the name’s offensive or that it’s not, but the idea that changing the Redskins’ name would unleash some kind of name-changing fury is ridiculous. People, institutions and government make changes all the time to avoid unnecessarily salting wounds. The acts are self-contained. It’s not like there’s some name-changing plague waiting to be unleashed.

My own two bits are that the name’s terrible, but the mechanisms by which people would push to change it aren’t so clear. You can separate the two points, though: they should change the name. That’s a goal. How to get there is a separate, open question. Either way, it doesn’t really bother me. One of the many nice things about being a white guy in the U.S. is that you’re about as lucky as can be. Remembering that always makes it pretty easy for me to have a thick skin and not feel threatened by stuff like this.

The people that want to force a change of name on the Washnington Redskins would really enjoy the sense of power that would ensue if they forced the change.

please accept the fact that some are offended…and some are not…and some seem to want to score points for “their” side…please…can we talk about football?

are all held up as “warriors” on the field.

my non-PC comment of the day: White people are too easily offended, usually on the behalf of others, for their own selfish reasons.

Etymology doesn’t matter here. It really doesn’t. You could tell me right now that my great-great-great-great-grandfather himself coined the term Chinaman and I would still be fiercely offended if someone I’m not close to referred to me by it.

This is not a matter of intellect; it’s about Empathy. Imagine how you would feel as a Native American if a stranger called you a Redskin. Note – this does not mean that you should think “This is how a Native American should react.” There’s a difference. If you cannot empathize, then move on to the next question.

As Papi and others have so eloquently posed, ask yourself this Question. Would you, yourself, think to call a total stranger a Redskin to their face? If not, then it’s just not an appropriate term. Doesn’t matter where it came from.

When I think of, or say the word Redskin it is always in the context of Football and the “Washington Redskins” football player(s). There would never be a point to call someone by a supposed collectivist “group” name because I don’t believe in the concept of collectivism? These words are related to make believe “sports names” that stay only in the realm of Sports and do not apply to reality. Those that are stuck on the “RACE-Card” think in a collectivist mindset. Yes, context or intent is very important. Once we begin to believe in Individualism and treat others by the person instead of by their coincidently-similiar-background “group,” then we will move forward as a society. But when individuals claim they are targeted because of their collectivist group mindset, they actually perpetuate the very thing they are wishing to avoid!
Some might say, Yes, but how does the word REDSKIN make some individual FEEL?
Call me what you want, but I decide to feel good or decide to feel bad about it… We interpret words differently and we choose to either act upon them or not.
We are all individuals but we are all one. Always remember that we are talking about Sports and not real world scenarios for speculation. It would certainly be foolish to walk into some individuals who are from the same region of the world and to call out a collectivist word – of course! If I called you all “Purple” You would say “Ahhh, Ok?” whatever? Therefore intent and context is always important. Another point is when, individuals from a similar background call themselves a negative collectivist word it’s supposedly “OK” because “they are calling themselves the same right?” Again Intent and Context is very important. But we are talking about a Sports Team name right????

and great comments everyone. I go away for awhile, come back, and here’s this article with nearly 300 comments. LOL Good to see no one has lost their opinions during the slow news week. ^^

The Redskins moniker does seem a bit sketchy to me, but the logo conveys a sense of pride and dignity.

The Cleveland Indians logo is quite the opposite. I’m all for tradition, but Chief Wahoo is a golliwogg with a feather.

that the most recent lawsuit to force a name change did not originate with a white community which felt guilty.

It was led by Susan Harjo, a Native American from Oklahoma who has long been an activist on behalf of the Native American population, and who served under Jimmy Carter as the congressional liaison for Indian Affairs. She and 6 others filed a suit with the Patent and Trademarks Office asking that the NFL team lose it’s trademarks rights due to the fact that the term “redskins” was considered to be disparaging to Native Americans. The P&T Office granted their request, which was later appealed and overturned, and eventually made its way to the US Supreme Court which upheld the Washington Redskins’ right to retain the trademark.

Does it make it right or wrong? I don’t know.

What I’m gleaning from all of this & in reading about Harjo’s work, I’m seeing a move based less on the issue of racism, as it is on a fear of losing cultural significance. The Native American population, IMHO, is suffering more from being ignored as a people than it is from racism. From the things I’ve read about Harjo’s work, she wants a wider embracing, in a positive fashion, of the rich history and cultural significance of Native American cultures (and there are more than one of them), and does not want to see those cultures relegated to the arena of cultural insignificance.

nice… i still say they keep the name and change the logo back to the spear

Well, I headed over to the Redskins blog, thinking of inviting them to this debate (with the caveat that they remain respectful, of course), when I noticed this link:

Federal court backs Redskins in lawsuit challenging mascot