- This topic has 434 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Why would the Choctaw self identify as “red people”?
The name Oklahoma comes from the Choctaw phrase okla humma, literally meaning red people. Choctaw Chief Allen Wright suggested the name in 1866 during treaty negotiations with the federal government regarding the use of Indian Territory, in which he envisioned an all-Indian state controlled by the United States Superintendent of Indian Affairs. Equivalent to the English word Indian, okla humma was a phrase in the Choctaw language used to describe the Native American race as a whole. Oklahoma later became the de facto name for Oklahoma Territory, and it was officially approved in 1890, two years after the area was opened to white settlers
Have you thought it’s because “redskins” was never ever widely used as a derogatory term?
I see you used the word ‘widely’, which implies it was used as a derogatory term.
If it was derogatory why does a tribal american high school use the term?
Dunno, did they lose their trademark too?
Can you find me any instance from all history where a purposely derogatory name was used for a mascot?
I’m absolutely positive that no one has ever chosen a mascot to be derogatory. Actually, that’s not true, there were the Fightin’ Whities for a while…..but still, the point isn’t, was it chosen to be derogatory. The point is, is it considered derogatory? Since no one would use it to refer to a Native American, I can only assume that yes, it can be considered derogatory, and therefore not trademarkable term.
I don’t know what I find more laughable, the idea that people on a college athletics message board are qualified to dictate what is/is not offensive to others or shouting down others because their opinion of what is offensive differs from theirs. Some of you guys need to give it up; you aren’t going to change the opinion of your opposition and the adolescent debate tactics and trolling of some are growing tiresome.
Social norms change and evolve. Because you can’t see it or accept it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
As Wulfpack has alluded to, the real issue here is Snyder’s lack of foresight. The name change is inevitable. There is a growing push for the change in the public and in the media. Why not be proactive and garner some goodwill and positive PR. The fans aren’t going anywhere. So long as they retain the colors and general look of the logos fans will stick by the team.
I’ve never heard the term used for other than a football team. I DO NOT think it is derogatory under any circumstances. Many tribal Americans self identify with that term. That is what the point of the High School is. Why be intentionally obtuse? Aren’t you man enough to concede a point? Gee whiz. Forget the trademark, that’s for the courts to decided. Do you want them to change the name or not?
I don’t know what I find more laughable, the idea that people on a college athletics message board are qualified to dictate what is/is not offensive to others or shouting down others because their opinion of what is offensive differs from theirs. Some of you guys need to give it up; you aren’t going to change the opinion of your opposition and the adolescent debate tactics and trolling of some are growing tiresome.
Social norms change and evolve. Because you can’t see it or accept it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
As Wulfpack has alluded to, the real issue here is Snyder’s lack of foresight. The name change is inevitable. There is a growing push for the change in the public and in the media. Why not be proactive and garner some goodwill and positive PR. The fans aren’t going anywhere. So long as they retain the colors and general look of the logos fans will stick by the team.
[blah blah blah. You are all immature because you are arguing this. Here is my arguement.]
LOL!
Hope that knife in your pocket is sharp…
Doesn’t think it’s derogatory, wouldn’t use it under certain conditions. Makes perfect sense.
I DO NOT think it is derogatory under any circumstances.
Hope that knife in your pocket is sharp…
Do what?
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Wulfpack wrote:</div>
Hope that knife in your pocket is sharp…Doesn’t think it’s derogatory, wouldn’t use it under certain conditions. Makes perfect sense.
Will not answer direct questions about faulty logic or concede a single point despite being proven wrong.
Will not answer direct questions about faulty logic or concede a single point despite being proven wrong.
If I missed a direct question, I’m sorry. Point it out to me and I’ll answer it for you.
Also, I’m curious which part of my logic you find faulty.
Why would the Choctaw self identify as “red people”?
The name Oklahoma comes from the Choctaw phrase okla humma, literally meaning red people. Choctaw Chief Allen Wright suggested the name in 1866 during treaty negotiations with the federal government regarding the use of Indian Territory, in which he envisioned an all-Indian state controlled by the United States Superintendent of Indian Affairs. Equivalent to the English word Indian, okla humma was a phrase in the Choctaw language used to describe the Native American race as a whole. Oklahoma later became the de facto name for Oklahoma Territory, and it was officially approved in 1890, two years after the area was opened to white settlers
here is another, why would a tribal american (100% Navajo) high school use the mascot of Redskins?
Ah, I see.
I don’t know about why the Choctaw identify as okla humma. I really don’t see why it’s relevant. The issue is the word redskin, not oklahoma or any other word that relates to Native Americans.
here is another, why would a tribal american (100% Navajo) high school use the mascot of Redskins?
And again, I don’t know, and don’t see why it’s relevant. We’re talking about the Redskins losing their trademark. Unless the high school team’s mascot is trademarked, I don’t see any double standard.
But, while we’re on the subject, most of your examples deal with what Native Americans call themselves. At this point, in this country, it’s generally well accepted that there are words that are offensive, or derogatory, when used by a person of a different race than the person it’s applied to. So again, it’s irrelevant what they call themselves.
Ah, I see.
I don’t know about why the Choctaw identify as okla humma. I really don’t see why it’s relevant. The issue is the word redskin, not oklahoma or any other word that relates to Native Americans.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>StateRed44 wrote:</div>
here is another, why would a tribal american (100% Navajo) high school use the mascot of Redskins?And again, I don’t know, and don’t see why it’s relevant. We’re talking about the Redskins losing their trademark. Unless the high school team’s mascot is trademarked, I don’t see any double standard.
But, while we’re on the subject, most of your examples deal with what Native Americans call themselves. At this point, in this country, it’s generally well accepted that there are words that are offensive, or derogatory, when used by a person of a different race than the person it’s applied to. So again, it’s irrelevant what they call themselves.
If you don’t find these points relevant than to me you are saying it is not relevant whether it is really an offensive term or not.
Can you forget the trademark for a tic, that’s for the courts to decided. Do you want them to change the name or not? And why?
If you don’t find these points relevant than to me you are saying it is not relevant whether it is really an offensive term or not.
I don’t think that follows. As I said, we generally acknowledge, rightly or wrongly, that there are words it’s OK for on group to use in reference to themselves, that it’s not ok for outside groups to use. I think the name Redskins might fall into that category, albeit at a low level. As far as if it’s relevant that it can be considered offensive, we were talking about a trademark ruling. In that context, it absolutely matters.
Can you forget the trademark for a tic, that’s for the courts to decided. Do you want them to change the name or not? And why?
I can forget the trademark for a bit, but remember, the title of the thread is, “U.S. Patent Office cancels Redskins trademark registration”. I’ve more or less been putting in my $0.02 on whether the ruling of the USPTO is justifiable. Which, I think it is.
As for whether I want them to change the name or not….I don’t really care. Really, I hate the Redskins color scheme more than I hate the name.
I’m not even arguing that the name Redskins is offensive. I do find it a little disingenuous to claim that it’s absolutely non-offensive, while at the same time admitting that it’s not ok to use under certain circumstances.
Ok. Thanks. We have found some common ground.
I think you are too hung up on this “would you call someone a redskin” thing. Although it seems to be a strong emotional appeal, it is faulty because:
1) this is a name of a football team, not a personal name or racial slur directed at a person
2) I’ve never ever heard anyone call a tribal american anything other than an Indian
3) this is a term that if it ever did have any derogatory meaning (which is highly spurious based on evidence of their self identification using that term) it has now morphed into totally a descriptor for a football club.
4) not only is it a descriptor for a football club, but it also has positive attributes assigned to it1) this is a name of a football team, not a personal name or racial slur directed at a person
2) I’ve never ever heard anyone call a tribal american anything other than an Indian
3) this is a term that if it ever did have any derogatory meaning (which is highly spurious based on evidence of their self identification using that term) it has now morphed into totally a descriptor for a football club.
4) not only is it a descriptor for a football club, but it also has positive attributes assigned to itSorry, I feel like I’ve addressed all of these in one form or another already. I’ll be back to piss off people if we can make it to some new ground.
2) I’ve never ever heard anyone call a tribal american anything other than an Indian
If that dumbass Italian dude had been looking for an alternate route to Nigeria, imagine the mess we’d have then!!!!
(think about it)Sorry, just trying to stir shit up. Carry on.
iirc… those Seminoles quietly get a ‘decent’ amount of cash ever year via license fees from the ‘Noles….
… and I wonder if any of ya’ll find this North Carolina “Redskins” tradition OFFENSIVE ??
(six pages of comments on this Topic… probably means some of ya’ll are bored sh&tless )
#NCSU-North Carolina's #1 FOOTBALL school!It’s time for all short native Americans living in Spain to unite against the oppression!
OH… MY… GOSH… Would you look at that!… Holy Cow Batman! That’s all kind of intermingled exponential insensitive offensations going on.Can you imagine how harmful this would be if you were a short Native American living in Spain?
And look at that company name, “Planters”… I know what that means. Planters owned Plantations. Yep, You see it now…. We all know what that means.
Hey wait a minute… wasn’t Jimmy Carter a peanut farmer? Ha, all this time Jimmy’s been an incognito racist. Who knew.
Oh that’s right, Incognito is the name of that bully Miami Dolphins player who used racist and homophobic slurs.
So Jimmy is a racist and a homophobe. Wow.
I don’t know how anyone can live in this cruel insensitive world.
-
I Find the user name “pakfanistan” offensive. It mocks an entire ethnic group, and possibly a country.
Can the mods please look into this and get the insensitive twit that uses it to change it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
