SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on May 28, 2013 23:04:34 GMT -5
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,394 
|
Post by hoyainspirit on May 29, 2013 6:48:39 GMT -5
That name change can't happen fast enough! Snyder's on the wrong side of the fence on this one, IMO.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on May 31, 2013 8:46:55 GMT -5
Title of this thread is in error. Congress did not send this message, merely ten members of Congress sent it. You could get ten members of Congress to send any letter, on any subject.
Furthermore, if anyone wants to put pressure to change nicknames, why are Indians or Braves and the like okay? Fighting Irish? I object to that as offensive to all of us Irish. Yankees, I find that offensive to us Southerners. And Heat? Nothing could be more offensive. Or Red Sox? Or Crimson Tide? Isn't this the same Tide that can cause flooding? Or the poor endangered Terrapins?
Only solution: ban all nicknames. Ban them now. Now. Now.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,394
|
Post by hoyainspirit on May 31, 2013 9:31:22 GMT -5
Title of this thread is in error. Congress did not send this message, merely ten members of Congress sent it. You could get ten members of Congress to send any letter, on any subject. Furthermore, if anyone wants to put pressure to change nicknames, why are Indians or Braves and the like okay? Fighting Irish? I object to that as offensive to all of us Irish. Yankees, I find that offensive to us Southerners. And Heat? Nothing could be more offensive. Or Red Sox? Or Crimson Tide? Isn't this the same Tide that can cause flooding? Or the poor endangered Terrapins? Only solution: ban all nicknames. Ban them now. Now. Now. You should send letters, too. |
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on May 31, 2013 10:17:47 GMT -5
I will support any criticism directed at Danny Boy and/or the NFL franchise he owns, by anyone and for any reason.
Just one example: did you know he claims credit for making everyone in the league wear pink accents on their uniforms for 1/4 of the season each year? He's almost certainly exaggerating his role, but I don't see why we shouldn't loathe him for it regardless.
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on May 31, 2013 12:06:33 GMT -5
Title of this thread is in error. Congress did not send this message, merely ten members of Congress sent it. You could get ten members of Congress to send any letter, on any subject. Furthermore, if anyone wants to put pressure to change nicknames, why are Indians or Braves and the like okay? The title of the thread was merely copied and pasted from the title (at the time) of the ESPN story. Secondly, while not defending the names you mentioned above, even the most intelligence-challenged among us should be able to discern a difference between names such as Braves, KC Chiefs, FL Seminoles or Chicago Blackhawks - names that could at least be argued are honoring the more noble qualities of various groups - much as Cowboys, Vikings, Steelers or even Saints might imply - and the use of the term "Redskins". But choosing to continue to use the name "Redskins"? Perhaps you might understand the comparison better if the University of South Carolina decided to switch from the Gamecocks, to the South Carolina Honkies. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on May 31, 2013 12:39:11 GMT -5
SirSaxa,
I didn't realize a nickname had to get your approval before it becomes acceptable. You have decreed that Redskins is an abusive name. I disagree it is any more abusive than Fighting Irish or Warhawks or a thousand other names you have not decreed as abusive and unacceptable. As for your clever, off-handed chop at South Carolina, well, that's abusive to me.
Ed
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,394
|
Post by hoyainspirit on May 31, 2013 12:55:24 GMT -5
SirSaxa, I didn't realize a nickname had to get your approval before it becomes acceptable. You have decreed that Redskins is an abusive name. I disagree it is any more abusive than Fighting Irish or Warhawks or a thousand other names you have not decreed as abusive and unacceptable. As for your clever, off-handed chop at South Carolina, well, that's abusive to me. Ed I think you are confusing SirSaxa with Native Americans, who have decreed the name offensive and unacceptable. |
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Jun 1, 2013 7:03:16 GMT -5
As for your clever, off-handed chop at South Carolina, well, that's abusive to me. Hooray! Wow.. we finally found a name that Ed finds abusive offensive (I believe that's the word you were thinking of?) Guess what. I find it offensive too. I would hope everyone on this board would find Honkies offensive. Why? Because it IS offensive. That is exactly the point. Words that are derogatory about certain groups - ethnic, gender, racial, national... etc. ARE offensive. Demeaning. Hurtful. Ugly. We have teams named Vikings and Celtics - clearly referring to White folks, but those names are not offensive. Honkies also refers to white folks.. and it is highly offensive. There is a difference. and it is very easy to see. During WWII everyone referred to our enemy in Asia as "the Japs". When was the last time you heard someone use that term? Now they are our respected allies and we call the Japanese. It's the same as using terms like Chiefs, Braves, Seminoles or Blackhawks (although some Native Americans would prefer we don't use those names either) vs. a derogatory name like "Redskins". I don't believe this is a difficult concept for anyone to grasp - certainly not someone with a GU education. And I find it hard to believe that in 2013 an NFL team - let alone one that represents our Nation's Capitol -- would be using such a hurtful, derogatory term. Frankly, it is a disgrace. And for Danny to come out brazenly shouting that he will never change the name? That clearly tells us all we need to know about the man. |
|
DanMcQ
Moderator 
Posts: 30,614
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jun 1, 2013 8:16:00 GMT -5
Frankly, if Redskins has to go then Indians, Braves, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Seminoles etc have to go too. You can parse all you want about "honoring" and "noble" names, but there is no difference. All in some way reduce an ethnic group to caricatures. The case at FSU is interesting in that the Floride Seminole tribe 'sanctions' the use of the name / mascot by the school while at least some in the Oklahoma Seminole tribe find it deeply offensive. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_mascot_controversyAs for this whole dust-up telling us about the man, anyone who thinks Dan Snyder would ever let ANY outside party tell him what to do with his property is delusional. The mere fact that pressure is being put on this way is a virtual guarantee he'll never cave on the issue. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jun 1, 2013 12:09:45 GMT -5
As for your clever, off-handed chop at South Carolina, well, that's abusive to me. Hooray! Wow.. we finally found a name that Ed finds abusive offensive (I believe that's the word you were thinking of?) Guess what. I find it offensive too. I would hope everyone on this board would find Honkies offensive. Why? Because it IS offensive. That is exactly the point. Words that are derogatory about certain groups - ethnic, gender, racial, national... etc. ARE offensive. Demeaning. Hurtful. Ugly. We have teams named Vikings and Celtics - clearly referring to White folks, but those names are not offensive. Honkies also refers to white folks.. and it is highly offensive. There is a difference. and it is very easy to see. During WWII everyone referred to our enemy in Asia as "the Japs". When was the last time you heard someone use that term? Now they are our respected allies and we call the Japanese. It's the same as using terms like Chiefs, Braves, Seminoles or Blackhawks (although some Native Americans would prefer we don't use those names either) vs. a derogatory name like "Redskins". I don't believe this is a difficult concept for anyone to grasp - certainly not someone with a GU education. And I find it hard to believe that in 2013 an NFL team - let alone one that represents our Nation's Capitol -- would be using such a hurtful, derogatory term. Frankly, it is a disgrace. And for Danny to come out brazenly shouting that he will never change the name? That clearly tells us all we need to know about the man. I'm certainly glad you were able to define for everyone what is abusive (not offensive) so no one else has to bother with it ever again. You have proclaimed the truth. Ed |
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,783
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 1, 2013 21:20:13 GMT -5
I see a lot of name changes as either political correctness (e.g., Marquette Warriors) and/or a financial opportunity (New Orleans Pelicans). As long as it is a private corporation, Dan Snyder can do what he wants and people can accept it or decline it at their choice.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jun 2, 2013 10:44:47 GMT -5
Marquette, St. John's, Stanford, and Dartmouth changed voluntarily. Other schools kept their names but got rid of cartoonish caricatures as logos. Some stopped having white guys prance around dressed up in war paint and feather headdresses with spears and tomahawks.
There is somewhat similar situation at Ole Miss. They are still the Rebels but they got rid of Col. Reb, the white-bearded planter mascot and banned the confederate flag waving and playing of Dixie. But everyone still knows what kind of rebels they are supposed to be.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Jun 13, 2013 18:35:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 19, 2013 10:36:36 GMT -5
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 19, 2013 11:06:49 GMT -5
Is it possible and/or acceptable for me to both (A) believe the name should be changed and (B) be completely nauseated but pompous self-righteous pricks like Dave Zirin? (Not that I am a fan of Rick Reilly either, who hasn't been entertaining in more than a decade). Geez, a lot of things making me want to puke this morning. Maybe I'm pregnant. |
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,460
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Sept 19, 2013 14:27:01 GMT -5
The worst thing about the Reilly article is that he would have been absolutely savaged by Grantland but since they are under the same umbrella and Reilly is so highly paid, anyone there who really takes him to task is going to be wading into career jeopardy.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Sept 19, 2013 14:35:13 GMT -5
I tend to agree that the name is offensive. I also tend to believe on the list of major problems in society, this ranks fairly low.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,394
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Sept 19, 2013 17:26:10 GMT -5
I tend to agree that the name is offensive. I also tend to believe on the list of major problems in society, this ranks fairly low. I agree. However, given the fact that it's the NFL, which occupies such a prominent place in our culture, action needs to be taken. |
|
nathanhm
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,041
|
Post by nathanhm on Sept 19, 2013 17:48:10 GMT -5
Let's be serious - the only reason this is even a debate is because native Americans are such a tiny percentage of the population.
No sports team in the US would ever go by the name of blackskins, whiteskins, yellowskins, or brownskins.
You're talking about a group of guys primarily white and black on a team named redskins. Anyone who thinks this isn't offensive is lying or an idiot.
Can you imagine a team of primarily whites and Asians on a team called the blackskins?
How about an NBA team with only blacks and Asians calling themselves the whiteskins. Their mascot a Native American dressed up in a costume to look like a characture of a white guy.
These ideas wouldn't even get out of a brainstorming session.
People can argue the teams been named that forever - that doesn't make it right. Doing something wrong for a long time doesn't justify the behavior.
The name needs to change and it should have changed a long time ago.
|
|
