I do not and have never followed USA sport, however with my peripheral awareness I have heard of Washington Redskins, and that is it. I have heard of them, the name or term Redskins hasnever concerned me nor have I ever considered it offensive.
Welcome to Charlton Life, Sitting Bull, I'm pleased to hear that you have Moved on.
At this point, I'd like to explain why I started this thread. To me the name "Washington Redskins" means almost nothing. But I have a good friend who is Native American and who told me some of the history around the name of the team and something about how hurtful that name is. I placed the thread here, as a question and, after several replies, I pointed my friend to it. I was genuinely interested in how the views on CL would be perceived by someone who is immediately impacted by the issue.
Here are some of the things she told me, after reading this thread:
That is way more civilized than comments I generally see. One thing I'd like to add is this: calling a team Braves or Indians isn't problematic in itself because they aren't slurs. That being said, their mascots are a big problem because having a bunch of white people wearing fake headdresses and making hatchet gestures and whooping sounds makes most of us want to [object, strongly].
We are STILL being killed, displaced, saddled with disease (now in the form of pollution by way of toxic waste dumping on sacred lands, etc), and worse. The genocide is SOOOOOOO not over, so the tantrums white people pitch just being asked to please change the name of their sports team are completely off the map and really, really galling.
What strikes me as being so dumb about all of it is that teams often leave cities and, for the most part, fans adjust. I have faith that white America could somehow survive their sports team coming up with a new name and mascot that isn't a shitty slur. That there is even a fight about it wears me out inside.
Bottom line: if your club isn't Native (owners/players/city) the name has to change. Period.
So, thanks to everyone for commenting (and for being "civilised" - that's a first!). I thought it would be interesting to see the views of someone who is directly effected by this topic.
At this point, I'd like to explain why I started this thread. To me the name "Washington Redskins" means almost nothing. But I have a good friend who is Native American and who told me some of the history around the name of the team and something about how hurtful that name is. I placed the thread here, as a question and, after several replies, I pointed my friend to it. I was genuinely interested in how the views on CL would be perceived by someone who is immediately impacted by the issue.
Here are some of the things she told me, after reading this thread:
That is way more civilized than comments I generally see. One thing I'd like to add is this: calling a team Braves or Indians isn't problematic in itself because they aren't slurs. That being said, their mascots are a big problem because having a bunch of white people wearing fake headdresses and making hatchet gestures and whooping sounds makes most of us want to [object, strongly].
We are STILL being killed, displaced, saddled with disease (now in the form of pollution by way of toxic waste dumping on sacred lands, etc), and worse. The genocide is SOOOOOOO not over, so the tantrums white people pitch just being asked to please change the name of their sports team are completely off the map and really, really galling.
What strikes me as being so dumb about all of it is that teams often leave cities and, for the most part, fans adjust. I have faith that white America could somehow survive their sports team coming up with a new name and mascot that isn't a shitty slur. That there is even a fight about it wears me out inside.
Bottom line: if your club isn't Native (owners/players/city) the name has to change. Period.
So, thanks to everyone for commenting (and for being "civilised" - that's a first!). I thought it would be interesting to see the views of someone who is directly effected by this topic.
Well, as the usual suspects can't say she's being offended on other people's behalf will they use that other cop out of bigots "Must have a chip on his shoulder"?
Thanks for sharing Chizz, as she said there are bigger issues for native Americans but that doesn't mean they shouldn't raise it, especially as the solution would be so simple and quick if the owner wants to act.
I think the Minnesota Vikings should change their name. Women and Christains must be offended by the amount of attacks carried out by Norsemen going viking.
In homage to the great Dane,(Simon from our parish) can we please turn a blind eye (like Harold and Nelson had to) and promote the Vikings for the peace loving people they were. The Saxon Sun spoke a load of Boloc**
I think the Minnesota Vikings should change their name. Women and Christains must be offended by the amount of attacks carried out by Norsemen going viking.
Presumably an attempt at humour. The significant diference being that that Vikings actually existed and the term Viking is not perjorative. Redskins have never existed outside of fruit and cheese and the term is offensive to native Americans.
I think the Minnesota Vikings should change their name. Women and Christains must be offended by the amount of attacks carried out by Norsemen going viking.
Presumably an attempt at humour. The significant diference being that that Vikings actually existed and the term Viking is not perjorative. Redskins have never existed outside of fruit and cheese and the term is offensive to native Americans.
Vikings did not exist it's the norse term to go on a pirate raid which imho is a pejorative. Do you think well of Norsemen going around attacking the native populations of the UK and the rest of europe? Should that be celebrated by the Norse immigrates of Minnesota using the term for their sports team?
I think the Minnesota Vikings should change their name. Women and Christains must be offended by the amount of attacks carried out by Norsemen going viking.
Presumably an attempt at humour. The significant diference being that that Vikings actually existed and the term Viking is not perjorative. Redskins have never existed outside of fruit and cheese and the term is offensive to native Americans.
Vikings did not exist it's the norse term to go on a pirate raid which imho is a pejorative. Do you think well of Norsemen going around attacking the native populations of the UK and the rest of europe? Should that be celebrated by the Norse immigrates of Minnesota using the term for their sports team?
The Viking period began in AD 793 with a raid on the monastery of Lindisfarne by pirates from Scandinavia. In the following centuries their swift sailing ships ...
I don't understand why you're trying to say the Vikings is exactly the same as Americans uprooting and then genociding Native Americans, then naming a sports team (the capital's team even!) after a popular slur of them.
The Norse went viking. The term Vikings is the incorrect Saxon term for Norseman. The point I'm trying to make is using the name Vikings is celebrating a bunch of murdering rapist who populated the north of England at the expense of the native population, and could be very offensive to women, and Christians. In the same way Redskins is offensive to native Americans coming from a bunch of people who behaved towards them like the Norse did to the Saxons. So you should also change their name. As another CL said "we should learn from history"
The Norse went viking. The term Vikings is the incorrect Saxon term for Norseman. The point I'm trying to make is using the name Vikings is celebrating a bunch of murdering rapist who populated the north of England at the expense of the native population, and could be very offensive to women, and Christians. In the same way Redskins is offensive to native Americans coming from a bunch of people who behaved towards them like the Norse did to the Saxons. So you should also change their name. As another CL said "we should learn from history"
Not heard of anyone being offended by the term though. Have you.
Incidentally please read the link I posted. It clearly states that Vikings by name and society existed.
The Norse went viking. The term Vikings is the incorrect Saxon term for Norseman. The point I'm trying to make is using the name Vikings is celebrating a bunch of murdering rapist who populated the north of England at the expense of the native population, and could be very offensive to women, and Christians. In the same way Redskins is offensive to native Americans coming from a bunch of people who behaved towards them like the Norse did to the Saxons. So you should also change their name. As another CL said "we should learn from history"
The scenario that you are describing is not analogous to the one under discussion. If the team that are the subject of this thread were called something along the lines of the 'Washington Pilgrims/Colonists/Settlers', then I could see your point. Equally, if 'viking' were a pejorative term used to describe women or Christians, I could see your point. As it is, I'm just slightly baffled by your argument.
So are any people here that are offended by the Redskins label actually "Redskins" or can we assume they are "offended on behalf other people"
Madness
I have no desire to read back through the entire thread, so I could be wrong, but I'm not sure anyone on here has said that they are personally offended by the label. What people have argued is that, if the group of people to whom the label has been applied find it offensive, then perhaps its use as a name for a sports team is inappropriate.
Aye. And my understanding as a child - at least from half the kids in my class and more than half their parents - was that 'coon' and 'half caste' were acceptable.
So are any people here that are offended by the Redskins label actually "Redskins" or can we assume they are "offended on behalf other people"
Madness
I have no desire to read back through the entire thread, so I could be wrong, but I'm not sure anyone on here has said that they are personally offended by the label. What people have argued is that, if the group of people to whom the label has been applied find it offensive, then perhaps its use as a name for a sports team is inappropriate.
Actually one person was offended, and they were Native American so that pretty much settles it.
Chizz, in rugby the Exeter Chiefs supporters wear headdresses and do that tomahawk thing whilst making a supposedly native american noise in the form of a chant. Or they did when I saw them play at Leeds!
I don't know what if anything they adopt on the logo but does your friend find that offensive? Doesn't seem to me all that far removed from the business of dressing up as a Golliwog or whatever in the sense that it mimics a perception of an ethnic minority. The term redskin does not as far as I know feature in their rituals.
Genuine question so no flags please. Perhaps it doesn't matter because there aren't any native americans in Exeter? Dunno.
They were called Red Indians because of the red dye they put on their bodies (and black faces). A good book to read on the early interaction between the English and Native Americans is Savage Kingdom by Benjamin Woolley.
I just can't understand why people are so indignant that they are being asked to change such a small unimportant thing in their lives that they have been asked to do because it offends some people. I doubt any of us would go out of our way to cause offence in our daily lives. In fact if we found out we were unknowingly doing so we would be mortified.
Chizz, in rugby the Exeter Chiefs supporters wear headdresses and do that tomahawk thing whilst making a supposedly native american noise in the form of a chant. Or they did when I saw them play at Leeds!
I don't know what if anything they adopt on the logo but does your friend find that offensive? Doesn't seem to me all that far removed from the business of dressing up as a Golliwog or whatever in the sense that it mimics a perception of an ethnic minority. The term redskin does not as far as I know feature in their rituals.
Genuine question so no flags please. Perhaps it doesn't matter because there aren't any native americans in Exeter? Dunno.
Comments
I'm pleased to hear that you have Moved on.
Here are some of the things she told me, after reading this thread:
That is way more civilized than comments I generally see. One thing I'd like to add is this: calling a team Braves or Indians isn't problematic in itself because they aren't slurs. That being said, their mascots are a big problem because having a bunch of white people wearing fake headdresses and making hatchet gestures and whooping sounds makes most of us want to [object, strongly].
We are STILL being killed, displaced, saddled with disease (now in the form of pollution by way of toxic waste dumping on sacred lands, etc), and worse. The genocide is SOOOOOOO not over, so the tantrums white people pitch just being asked to please change the name of their sports team are completely off the map and really, really galling.
What strikes me as being so dumb about all of it is that teams often leave cities and, for the most part, fans adjust. I have faith that white America could somehow survive their sports team coming up with a new name and mascot that isn't a shitty slur. That there is even a fight about it wears me out inside.
Bottom line: if your club isn't Native (owners/players/city) the name has to change. Period.
So, thanks to everyone for commenting (and for being "civilised" - that's a first!). I thought it would be interesting to see the views of someone who is directly effected by this topic.
Thanks for sharing Chizz, as she said there are bigger issues for native Americans but that doesn't mean they shouldn't raise it, especially as the solution would be so simple and quick if the owner wants to act.
The Saxon Sun spoke a load of Boloc**
Didn't thank me :-(
British Museum - Vikings
http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/cultures/europe/vikings.aspx
The Viking period began in AD 793 with a raid on the monastery of Lindisfarne by pirates from Scandinavia. In the following centuries their swift sailing ships ...
The point I'm trying to make is using the name Vikings is celebrating a bunch of murdering rapist who populated the north of England at the expense of the native population, and could be very offensive to women, and Christians. In the same way Redskins is offensive to native Americans coming from a bunch of people who behaved towards them like the Norse did to the Saxons.
So you should also change their name. As another CL said "we should learn from history"
Incidentally please read the link I posted. It clearly states that Vikings by name and society existed.
Sounds like he comes from a background and family as erudite and educated as my own.
Madness
That was my understanding as a child
I don't know what if anything they adopt on the logo but does your friend find that offensive? Doesn't seem to me all that far removed from the business of dressing up as a Golliwog or whatever in the sense that it mimics a perception of an ethnic minority. The term redskin does not as far as I know feature in their rituals.
Genuine question so no flags please. Perhaps it doesn't matter because there aren't any native americans in Exeter? Dunno.
A good book to read on the early interaction between the English and Native Americans is Savage Kingdom by Benjamin Woolley.