Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
Hope that knife in your pocket is sharp…
Doesn’t think it’s derogatory, wouldn’t use it under certain conditions. Makes perfect sense.
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.
Interesting we just picked up Henderson from WVU and will be playing them.
Must have been a condition of the trade deal.
Who are you to say what is and what is not offensive to anybody? Stop acting as if the “protected” groups are more important than anyone else. They aren’t.
Who said protected groups are more important than anyone else? Do you find Indianapolis offensive? The Braves? Chiefs? Reds? Oklahoma? Any of those? Would you use them in a sentence with no reservation (ha) in 99% of circumstances?
Just curious, because we’re still trying to treat literally everything as equivalent to the word redskins, which, again, and again, everyone has admitted, no, they wouldn’t use it to refer to Native Americans.
There is a clear, discernible difference between a word you would say under any circumstance, and a word you wouldn’t say under some circumstances. Why is this so hard to comprehend.
Again, the name isn’t being taken away from the Redskins, only a level of trademark protection. They’re still free to call themselves anything they want.
Then just do away with team names and monikers then if it means nothing. Address each team by city name and hope the Indianapolis team doesn’t get sued by the pc patrol for offensive tribal word associations.
Back to slippery slope, everything is offensive on the same page. Well done people! We’ll crack this nut eventually….
Before the British, true. But if you keep up with the science journals, you know that accepted ‘history’ is getting rewritten all the time. European remains have been found along the Eastern seaboard that predate the accepted date of native Americans by tens of thousands of years.
I’ve seen some mention of Vikings making it to the Eastern seaboard, but that was in the 1200s. Do you have a source for predating Native Americans by “tens of thousands of years”?
The thing that folks forget about with dissing the Pack defense is the impact of one and done (both transfers and early entrants) and the restrictions on coaching time. It used to be that most players stayed 4 years. There was continuity and repetition of defensive principles. With the limits on coaching time Gott and his staff have to make decisions on how to spend that time. I believe that as our offense has gotten more refined over the 3 years our defense will also with more time and players in the system for longer. I do believe that Gott chooses to allocate more time to offense but defense will move to at least avg in the coming years. You can look at Duke to see the impact of limited practice and player turnover on defense. K’s defense is no where near as intense as it was 15 years ago.
Thoughts?I think you’re on to something. It seems like every year is a completely new team, so I’m sure for the coaching staff, it’s almost like starting over. I’m not sure our offense has gotten more refined. Last year the whole offense was, “give it to TJ”. I thought our overall offensive flow was better the previous two years, but, those were upperclassmen who had been in the system a couple of years.
It’s pretty clear that Gott likes offense over defense. Honestly, I think that’s a choice that he’s made because more kids want to play offense than defense, so it’s an easier sell.
In closing, “They gotta guard us too pal!”
Would we ask the Brits if they wanted the 13 colonies back? Read your post 2x and I can’t tell what point you think you are making.
If you want to head down that path, we’re about to hit some semi-esoteric philosophy on the concept of ownership, that I don’t think anybody is willing, or prepared to address.
The Native Americans were here ten thousand years before the British arrived. There’s no way to get from giving the Native Americans their land back, to giving the British back the colonies. Mostly because it’s the same turf, and the Native Americans have a much older claim.
I see we’ve come back to, the slippery slope, everything is offensive portion of the discussion, where people treat words nobody would hesitate to use the same as words that EVERYBODY admits they wouldn’t use.
Good times, good times.
I find your use of “B” in “BSW” offensive. Anyone got the 800 number for the US Patent Office complaint line?
It’s meant to honor him.
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 know what Tyler was thinking: “I’m getting killed out here.”
Purvis:
“my teammates hate me.”I want to play point guard, but I’m not as good at it as the two guys ahead of me, also, I’m not a great shooter so rather than sticking it out and getting better, I’m going to a different school.Gott: “hell with em. Cat Barber is my point guard.”
I’m glad we got Henderson. Welcome aboard.
Aarrrrggghhhh those brainwashed, liberal, PC police Native Americans overstepping their constitutional powers to confiscate the property of a fine upstanding American institution!
Thanks Obama! :/
I know this is a pipe dream, but I kinda hope this list lights a fire under Gott to evaluate what he thinks he knows about basketball, and make himself a better coach.
Note, I’m not saying he doesn’t know anything about basketball, but everyone can benefit from questioning their knowledge base, and basic assumptions from time to time.
I’m not going to create a new thread because I’m sure there will be one tomorrow, but Terry Henderson, WV transfer, is coming to play for the 76th best coach in the nation and State.
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?
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)?
