- This topic has 434 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
As I understand it there is no such technicality to get the Redskins off this time around. Now the Skins can (and will) appeal but most legal analysts believe the name is a cooked goose today.
You guys do realize things change, don’t you? Attitudes change. Times change. Because the Redskins name has been around for 80 years means nothing if it is deemed to be offensive, and then is held to be so once again on appeal. We’ll see what happens with this one but it isn’t looking good for the name. Why not change it now? What is the big deal?
I believe that is the Redskin’s attorney statement.
The big deal is you are confiscating private property based on nothing but undocumented hurt feelings.
I am sorry but that just is not a big deal to me. Many more important things to worry about in my life.
Undocumented???
No, I do not own anything (I don’t think) that is widely regarded as offensive to a specific group of people.
So no, I’m not losing sleep at night over this.
Private property is not a big deal? Do you own anything? Do you own a business?
Is a trademark the equivalent of a car or a house or any other physical good?
There has to be some difference, because I can’t think of a comparable situation with a physical thing, where you no longer had the right to it, but could still use it and defend it.
Can you explain why you think this name is offensive? Be specific. Also why is courage, valor, sportsmanship, teamwork etc deemed offensive to you?
Is this name offensive? Oklahoma. The state’s name is derived from the Choctaw words okla and humma, meaning “red people”.
Why or why not?
Can you explain why you think this name is offensive? Be specific. Also why is courage, valor, sportsmanship, teamwork etc deemed offensive to you?
I think the first part about why the name can be considered offensive has been beaten into the ground. If you can’t see it, I don’t know what to tell you.
As for the second part, who has been offended by courage, valor, sportsmanship or teamwork?
No, I do not own anything (I don’t think) that is widely regarded as offensive to a specific group of people.
So no, I’m not losing sleep at night over this.
Until someone decides iwhatever you own is offensive. The PC police are again running down a slippery slope. No one seems to care, until they are the target of those same people.
That amount of time and money spent arguing this minutia is insane. But it seems as a country we would rather argue over this than do anything productive.
Until someone decides iwhatever you own is offensive. The PC police are again running down a slippery slope. No one seems to care, until they are the target of those same people.
Not everything is a slippery slope. This isn’t even physical property.
As far as the PC police….
I’ve noticed no one wants to address the question, would you call a native american a redskin? Nobody cares if it was meant to honor a dude that probably wasn’t even native american.Simple yes or no question, would you use it to refer to a person or people (outside of the football team)?
Redskins is not offensive. To anyone. Nobody cares about this except liberals that like to get their panties in a wad in their self-righteousness. They like to make an issue out of nothing, so they can irritate the you-know-what out of everyone.
I don’t even like the Redskins (grew up a Cowboys fan, now a Panthers convert). But I hope they keep their mascot because of all the history around it. It wasn’t about lynchings. It wasn’t about racial slurs. It is a football team mascot. Period. Nothing more, nothing less. And because it will irritate the liberals who are needlessly making a big deal out of nothing.
When one hears the term “Redskins,” they don’t think indians. They think FOOTBALL TEAM. If we’re all perfectly honest about it.
This is just a stupid matter. And I haven’t even weighed in on the government forcing this change. Essentially, that is what is happening. They know canceling the trademark will result in lost revenue for the REDSKINS organization, and likely lead to a mascot change. The government is trying to force something on the people that is unwanted and unnecessary (which is nothing new, since the same can be said for the Affordable Care Act).
This is just a political move. And a distraction from the other REALLY important things they are doing to us.
Stan, say hello to the Red Mesa High School (drumroll) REDSKINS!.
Welcome to Red Mesa High School
Red Mesa High School is located in Red Mesa, Arizona, which is about 25 miles southwest of the Four Corners. The school is located on the Navajo Reservation and is a public school. We have nearly 100% Navajo students are coming from low-income families. The students are bussed in everyday from as far as 60 miles away. We have approximately 196 students, ranging from freshman to seniors.
Would you NOT call these guys Redskins out of your PC philosophy?
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Rick wrote:</div>
Until someone decides iwhatever you own is offensive. The PC police are again running down a slippery slope. No one seems to care, until they are the target of those same people.Not everything is a slippery slope. This isn’t even physical property.
As far as the PC police….<br>
I’ve noticed no one wants to address the question, would you call a native american a redskin? Nobody cares if it was meant to honor a dude that probably wasn’t even native american.Simple yes or no question, would you use it to refer to a person or people (outside of the football team)?
I would not use it to refer to a person or people. Good thing the Redskins are not doing that, either. It’s a FOOTBALL team. Nothing more, nothing less.
Stan, say hello to the Red Mesa High School (drumroll) REDSKINS!.
…
Would you NOT call these guys Redskins out of your PC philosophy?Is their logo trademarked?
I would not use it to refer to a person or people.
Why not?
This is just a political move.
Do you have any proof of that?
Bradleyb123,
Someone must think it is offensive. In particular, the Indians who filed the cancellation proceedings. Also, the dictionaries and encyclopedias that the plaintiff’s cite specifically say that the name is offensive. I doubt that the Indians named in the proceedings are “self-righteous liberals.”
I personally didn’t originally find “Redskin” to be offensive – but I am white and don’t interact with Native Americans very often. I don’t think I am (or you are -unless you are an Indian) in the right to define what is or is not offensive to a whole swath of people – especially when representatives of those people say something is offensive to them. The U.S. Constitution’s preamble reads “We the People” not “We the majority.” Good governments are judged on how they protect the rights of the minorities’ voices to be heard.
This is the Federal Government operating exactly as it was intended to operate based on laws passed way back in 1946. The current presidential administration has nothing (at the very least-nothing directly) to do with it. The cause of action was allowed to go forward based on the USPTO’s judgment. Three TTAB judges at the USPTO (based on the authority given by Federal Government many years ago) heard the evidence presented by both sides. Two judges agreed with the plaintiffs and one judge agreed with the defendant based on the statutes and regulations enacted by the Federal Government and the evidence presented.
The only people making this political are the talking heads on the 24 hour news cycle. Sounds like you took their bait.
Simple yes or no question, would you use it to refer to a person or people (outside of the football team)?
No reasonable person would. If they did, I hope they have a knife to bring to that fight.
Until someone decides iwhatever you own is offensive.
And if they ever did find something I owned offensive, I’m the type of person that would certainly hear them out to try to understand their point of view.
That is what is so astonishing about Snyder – he won’t even acknowledge the viewpoint, that is being legitimized by folks like John McCain and now Tony Gonzalez. It’s real. That to me is sort of the ugly truth behind discrimination – the idea that your views don’t matter. That is essentially the crux of the ugly part of our collective history. Fortunately, we have progressed. But we aren’t done, yet. We aren’t a stagnant people. We evolve.
Buckle up, here we go again:
A Native American group is planning to file a $9 billion federal lawsuit against the Cleveland Indians and their “offensive” Chief Wahoo logo, according to CBS Cleveland. The suit is expected to be filed next month.
Aarrrrggghhhh those brainwashed, liberal, PC police Native Americans overstepping their constitutional powers to confiscate the property of a fine upstanding American institution!
Thanks Obama! :/
An interesting article that has some good points and some information I hadn’t realized.
http://voices.yahoo.com/is-redskins-name-offensive-native-americans-4710337.html?cat=37
In 1933, the name was changed to Redskins by the team’s coach William “Lone Star” Dietz who was actually Sioux. He was known to dress up in regalia and be open about his pride of being Native American. He saw the name as bestowing an image of pride and recognition for the Native American people. Therefore, the name itself came from a Native American who saw nothing wrong with the name.
This right here discredits the whole article. There’s serious reason to doubt Dietz had ANY Native American ancestry.
I think it’s well past time that NC State come out with a public apology. Aside from having red as an official school color, obviously mocking Native Americans and Firemen, the institution has at different times in its history, used Aggies, the Techs, the Red Terrors, and Farmers as names for its athletic teams. That’s a whole lotta offenses going on from just one school.
And to top it off, the current “Wolfpack” was created out of anger when an alum used it in a derogatory comment about misbehaving NC State football players. Intent is important, more so than results, or so the national media tells us when dealing with national and foreign policy, so I find this highly offensive too. I bet PETA ain’t too happy about it either, along with Snoopy, Rin-Tin-Tin, Lassie, Huckleberry Hound (He’s still upset about that line in Tombstone), Goofy, Astro, Mr Peabody, and Underdog.
Come clean, NC State. Admit your sins and repent! It’s time to change one more time. How about the “Opaque Generic Flowers”?
And what’s with this pink color from the school’s past? It was obviously a misogynistic attempt at mockery for the future breast cancer awareness movement from a time dominated by men who subjugated women.
^ Edit. Actually, I’d like to change that. I think “Dogwoods” would be better, tying in the historical canine aspect with the State flower.
Foose referred to Doc Holiday’s — by multiple accounts, historically accurate — line to Ringo, “I’m your Huckleberry.”
Now, for the rest of the story. The context is usually intended as the tough-sounding “I’m your man.” In fact, what Holiday likely said was “hucklebearer” (he was from Valdosta, so there would’ve been a drawl that made it sound like “huckleberry”), a southern slang of the times for “pallbearer.” So what he was really saying had even more bravado: “I’ll put you in your grave.” Very cool.
Also, “cowboy” was originally a derogatory term for the lawless folk of 1870s territories (such as Curly Bill and his ilk) that eventually changed when Hollywood started making westerns and cowboys were cool.
German U-boat groups were called Wolfpacks.
I don’t offer an opinion on Redskins, I just like history.
As I recall, Florida State recently fought off a challenge by one of the Seminole nations who wanted the name changed. Central Michigan had a similar challenge with the Chippewas.
Thanks LRM. Knew Holliday was from Georgia but didn’t know the history of huckleberry line.
Damn. I meant to include a reference to the U-Boat wolfpacks but forgot.
The Seminole Tribe of Florida actually officially sanctions FSU’s use of ‘Seminoles’. The tribe takes pride in it. Once the Seminole Chief told the PC police to back the f’ up, there was little they could do.
History factoids. The Florida Seminoles never surrendered. Pretty sure only Native American Tribe that can make that claim. They frustrated Pres Tyler and retreated into the Everglades. Tyler gave up and unilaterally declared victory in the Seminole War.
The very name of the tribe, ‘Seminole’, may one day be made to be a racial slur for those looking for offenses. It derives from (a corruption of) cimarrón, a Spanish term for “runaway” or “wild one.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
