Maybe they can change their name to the Redhawks!

 

They did it my Alma-mater....

 

 

Lonesome lives!

I have always thought it was awesome and an honor to have a team with the name like those of The Native Americans. Those teams are fighting to win and show pride in their teams and name.

Andrew Jackson is on the 20 and this is what Congress finds to be the most pressing issue in Native American relations... Sure.

And, that I can agree with, so long as any term is not meant to insult, I am fine with it. And, I have to think the the name of the NFL franchise is not meant to be offensive. I've always thought it was a way of showing the American Heritage. I don't think they named the team and said, "Hey, lets make fun of the Native Americans". Just like the Cowboys are not meant to downplay real Cowboys, it's meant to speak of them in a positive light.

 

I believe Native Americans look at the term similar to how women look at the terms chicks, dames, broads, etc.. Someone may be using those three terms meaning no harm but women still don't care for them.

Yeah, I guess calling them the Washington Redskins would be the same as calling them the Washington Negroes or the Washington Blacks. Redskins is not worthy of saying R-word and it's definitely not on the level of N-word but I do understand why names like the Braves and Redskins are deemed offensive and probably shouldn't be used to label sports teams. I think Seminoles or Cherokees may be more appropriate since they are names of actual tribes and may not be deemed derogatory in nature but I could understand some saying those are offensive also.

I despise being called African American. I was born in Houston and raised in Kentucky. Call me black.

 

I had a lady who I supervised for years, she was black and I considered her a very good friend. We were talking one day about this issue and I asked her what she preferred, black or African-American? She told me to call her Marrion (her first name). That's all I needed to know on that issue.

I had a lady who I supervised for years, she was black and I considered her a very good friend. We were talking one day about this issue and I asked her what she preferred, black or African-American? She told me to call her Marrion (her first name). That's all I needed to know on that issue.

 

I agree 100%.

 

No need to add black, white, etc. when referring to anyone.

I had a lady who I supervised for years, she was black and I considered her a very good friend. We were talking one day about this issue and I asked her what she preferred, black or African-American? She told me to call her Marrion (her first name). That's all I needed to know on that issue.

 

I agree 100%.

 

No need to add black, white, etc. when referring to anyone.

 

 

I don't disagree. Now get the rest of the world to think that way.

We had one of them come in our office today. She was more lily-white than me, but her guttural English accent told me she can definitely claim that heritage. I suppose it might be more correct to call her an "Afrikaan-American," however.

 

I woldn't have believed that possible.

We had one of them come in our office today. She was more lily-white than me, but her guttural English accent told me she can definitely claim that heritage. I suppose it might be more correct to call her an "Afrikaan-American," however.

I have to see it to believe it!

Yeah, I guess calling them the Washington Redskins would be the same as calling them the Washington Negroes or the Washington Blacks. Redskins is not worthy of saying R-word and it's definitely not on the level of N-word but I do understand why names like the Braves and Redskins are deemed offensive and probably shouldn't be used to label sports teams. I think Seminoles or Cherokees may be more appropriate since they are names of actual tribes and may not be deemed derogatory in nature but I could understand some saying those are offensive also.

 

Why is Redskin not on the same level as the N-word? How do you get to decide that? Is the F-word for homosexuals on the same level, or are you going to decide whether or not it is offensive?

Why is Redskin not on the same level as the N-word? How do you get to decide that? Is the F-word for homosexuals on the same level, or are you going to decide whether or not it is offensive?

 

Because it isn't. Never has been. Never will be. Go to Harlem and use the N-Word and then go to an Indian reservation with a Redskins tee shirt and hat on and find out which is worse. Better yet, go to the Indian reservation first because you won't make it out of Harlem unless Samuel Jackson happens to be around again.

 

The fact that the Redskins is just now becoming the R-word and the N-word has been called the N-word for so long is more proof. The N-word is the most dehumanizing word I have ever heard in my life and the 8 million ways to use it in a dehumanizing way is sickening.

 

Not to mention Redskin is a word that by definition describes Indians in a derogatory manner. The definition of an N-word is an ignorant human being. By technical definition it isn't supposed to single out a specific race but we all know it does and how it does it. I cannot possibly imagine that any Indian or homosexual would be as offended as a black person when being called the R-word, F-word or N-word. The rage that follows being called the N-word is something no one should want to see or be a part of.

This is all just a tempest in a Tipi .

I hope the R-word is not on the same level as the N-word. I have one on the back of a Letterman jacket.

 

A few years ago when the schools were getting sued for using 'Braves, Seminoles, Illini, Chiefs, Indians, Warriors, etc.' I did think it was rediculus to attack schools who had mascots of real tribes with real names and if there was one term that would be 'offensive' it would be "Redskins". It is definitely race-based. Is it 'derogatory' in its modern context? Hard to say. But it would appear to not be that same.

Because it isn't. Never has been. Never will be. Go to Harlem and use the N-Word and then go to an Indian reservation with a Redskins tee shirt and hat on and find out which is worse. Better yet, go to the Indian reservation first because you won't make it out of Harlem unless Samuel Jackson happens to be around again.

 

The fact that the Redskins is just now becoming the R-word and the N-word has been called the N-word for so long is more proof. The N-word is the most dehumanizing word I have ever heard in my life and the 8 million ways to use it in a dehumanizing way is sickening.

 

Not to mention Redskin is a word that by definition describes Indians in a derogatory manner. The definition of an N-word is an ignorant human being. By technical definition it isn't supposed to single out a specific race but we all know it does and how it does it. I cannot possibly imagine that any Indian or homosexual would be as offended as a black person when being called the R-word, F-word or N-word. The rage that follows being called the N-word is something no one should want to see or be a part of.

 

"Redskins" has always been derogatory. Americans just haven't cared and generally speaking native american's don't want to get caught up in U.S. politics. How many reservations have you visited? The fact that you would be treated more harshly for using the N-word in one environment and the R-word in another is certainly not a reflection of dehumanizing affect of the word.