Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by Spurffelbow833, Jun 12, 2013.
Exactly... damn sluts. :laugh:
I got a laugh imagining if that was actually their intended argument.
"What are you guys so offended for? The cartoon indian head isn't even that slutty looking really."
"I mean look at it, it doesn't even have its eyes squeezed shut and it's mouth hanging open."
The Washington Bison. :grin:
In what context? Are anybody's rights being violated? As long as we can agree that there is no need for government intervention, then the rest is just a matter of people choosing what they will support, what they won't support, and trying to convince folks to one side or the other. I consider this a non-issue, and the beauty of freedom in our country.
It's only a matter of time before our sea-faring friends in the Middle East find out about our pirate team names. Then it will be an international dispute.
Pretty sure "Native Americans" (another silly term, but not your fault) did ignore it, and the crowd that gets offended on behalf of others made it a cause to try to convince Native Americans that they should be offended by it.
Why compare it to that? Why not compare it to "Yankees" or "Canucks?" People choose to be offended. When you choose to not be offended by something, you take the power away from the offending party.
Words or slurs get reappropriated all the time, but that doesnt mean their use is "acceptable" in all contexts. You obviously wouldnt call a Native American a "Redskin" to his face.
The Washington Vultures.
People can call each other any combination of insulting terms under the sun and not be violating rights.
Is that the bar we want to set?
Do the victims of insults forfeit their right to protest the insults because somebody on a message board doesn't want to hear it?
If this is a non-issue as you say, then it should be non-issue that people are protesting. As I said in my prior post, the team and the league can feel free to ignore those protests at their own peril. If the use of the term is a big enough deal, people will let them know with their hard earned money.
You could be right. I dunno who the most vocal antagonists are here.
But I would not be surprised if Native Americans take offense at the term Redskins.
Right, and the context is football teams. I absolutely would call a "Native American" a "Redskin" to his face, if he was wearing a shirt that indicated he was a fan of the Washington Redskins. Seriously, how many people do you know that would consider a context other than the football team if you mentioned "Redskins" to them?
Is there a group of Native Americans asking for this name change, or is it a bunch of stay at home activists looking to sign their name to something?
Radio, television ... basically on the same level wrt journalism.
For the government to get involved? Absolutely.
Who suggested this? I enjoy a good nonsensical protest. We have them all the time here in GAINESVILLE.
I believe I mentioned this as such above.
I'm fine with that.
I reserve the right to make jokes that aren't funny.
So we've basically been in agreement all along.
Well, the actual name of the team happens to be a slur, and the team is a profit seeking entity. So that's a bit of problem. Probably a similar problem to the one that anyone who tries to publish Joseph Conrad's excellent book "The Nigger of the Narcissus" faces. What do you do with that ugly, outdated word on the cover? With the Redskins, the stakes are much higher because they are a billion dollar entity, not a work of literature in the public domain. It is just a word, or just a title, its a product of its time. But you also don't want to scare away money, because we live in a capitalist society, with different values than in Conrad's day, or noted racist George Marshall's day. I don't think there is a "right" or "wrong" way per se. I just think the people who say the name isnt a big deal shouldnt make such a big deal about it possibly changing. Its just a name right?
I guess so. You said you disagreed with me!
Exactly...it looks nothing like Mel Kiper.
It's not a slur, as you said, context is key. When you hear a stadium full of Redskins fans singing "Hail to the Redskins" you can't honestly believe that they are intending disrespect of any sort, can you? That's why I compared it to the Yankees and the Canucks rather than to Nazi Germany or whatever other negative exaggeration you want to use.
I don't plan on protesting the protesters, that's for sure.
No, it is a slur. Just that in a certain context its still "acceptable" to use/say. Just like when I refer to the book "Nigger of the Narcissus," or quote Big Lebowski by saying "The Chinaman is not the issue" I can say the "n word," or a slur against the Chinese. That doesnt render the word any less of a slur though.
Slur as in "deliberate slight?"
I guess we can agree to disagree.