Washington Redtails? LMAO

Cujo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,701
[h=1]Native Americans Speaking Out In Support Of Redskins[/h]The Washington Redskins have been under tremendous scrutiny over the last couple of months in regard to what some consider an “offensive” and “racist” name. While the group of complainants only make up 9% of the Native American population (according to the latest poll), many have wondered why the other 91% have been left unspoken.


It’s easy to assume the silence means indifference to the name, but you have to consider the repercussions of speaking out against the popular opinion of the Native American Media. Such punishments can range from the removal from the tribe, as well as professions ruined.

With the possible backlash from the powers that be it’s easy to understand why most Native American’s do not speak out, as they are in fear of their reputation, jobs, or even their life. On reservations it is their law, not the law the general public is used to.


Kevin, whose last name we cannot use wrote us a lengthy email on exactly this after seeing Ray’s appearance on “Outside the Lines” defending the Redskins name. He explains why those who support the Washington Redskins, as well as other teams with Native American connections are kept in silence.


“We quietly support you for the following main reasons, which are briefly included below -




  • The obsession with protesting mascots and names like Redskins is an obsession of white Indians. They protest mascots, children dressing up on Halloween and other silly things because it makes them feel Indian. It lets them scream racism. They know no other way of feeling Indian. They are totally disconnected from the real issues that affect mainstream Indians on reservations. They are fully Americanized. They have lost their language, culture, religion and even their skin color.

  • Unfortunately the white Indians have the loudest voices. If we go against them, they hurt us in our careers and lives because they [white Indians] control our media, academia, government jobs, medical clinics, finances, who gets denied federal recognition, even our tribes – everything. They have the money and the power. We have the Indian-ness.

  • Brown Indians on reservations have more important issues to worry about. Like diabetes, how we get our next meal, crime on reservations, lack of electricity, lack of toilets, lack of running water, no heat when there’s snow outside, getting a relative to a dialysis clinic when there is no transport, finding a job when there’s near 100% unemployment, near 100% consideration of suicide among our youth, alcoholism, drug abuse, elder abuse, spouse abuse, land loss, culture loss, language loss, etc. Mascots are a NON-ISSUE to us.

  • The media should be screaming about the real issues. Instead their main focus is on mascots. The focus on mascots and meaningless debates about redskins detract attention from the REAL issues facing brown Indians.

  • When these white Indians offend sports fans or insult a little child who loves Indians and puts on feathers, they alienate the rest of America against brown Indians. Note that the white Indians blend in beautifully into the white society. No one even realizes they are Indian. But when an angered sports fan who is upset about losing his mascot screams “**** you sand ******” or throws a beer can at us from a passing car screaming “MOTHER******, GO BACK TO YOUR ****ING RESERVATION!!” they scream such obscenities at my father, my cousin, my brother and my family members who look Indian.

  • Indians should do an A-B-C analysis and focus on the A-items. Mascots and names like redskin, or debates about whether the right word is Native American and not Indian, are not even C items. They are Z items. Unfortunately the white Indians obsess over these Z-items because that is the ONLY way they know how to feel Indian. If we twist America’s arm and get America to concede on the trivial items, the country will lose patience with us when we negotiate important A-items.

  • We are offending our fan base. That little child who insists on dressing up in a costume and putting on some feathers loves Indians, but when white Indians insult his mom and dad by calling them racists, he grows up to resent those of us who look Indian. Indians were unflappable. Now even a silly word like “costume” that I used above instead of “regalia” raises hackles? Don’t forget, it’s the white Indians who come down and tell the rest of us to be offended. We had someone who made cartoons about this issue and some of them are attached to this email.
  • The vocalizations of these white Indians seem to unite Indian opposition – they find forums and avenues to kindle hatred against Indians and rehash and reiterate negative stereotypes about Indians. They find a common ground under which those who resent and oppose Indians can unify together and gather in strength.
  • White Indians who oppose mascots point to the Halloween “blackface” and ask, “Don’t you find that offensive???” And the answer is yes, some Halloween costumes are expressly intended to mock and degrade. Sometimes it is Mother Mary dressed up voluptuously in revealing breasts, sometimes stupid people dress up as a rabbi with a hooked nose eating a bagel and counting money. Sometimes people put on a black face that portrays African Americans with exaggerated noses and large pink lips. Yes, these are no doubt offensive. But mascots usually portray teams that their fans are proud of. The Washington Redskins are proud of their mascots and will surely never run down their mascot this way.”

In a follow-up, he [Kevin] went on to tell me:


“The American sports lovers are our brothers and sisters. We love them and respect them and also understand they mean us no disrespect for the most part. Please don’t let these clueless, identity-less white Indians drive a wedge between the mainstream Indians and sports loving fans.”


This opens a whole new side to the argument on why those who are Natives and support the Redskins do not speak publicly about it. After all 91% of Native Americans DO support mascots with Native American connections according to the last National Annenberg Election Survey. The Seminoles who support Florida State University, and the Utah Indians who support The University of Utah are prime examples of this.

So you're supporting argument is from one guy, identified only as 'Kevin'. :lol Alrighty then. That's kind of weak, don't you think? Personally, if no Native Americans are offended, or even if they are, that should be up to them, collectively, to decide. Not anybody else. I just doubt that, uh, 'Kevin', speaks for the entire Native American population.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,103
So you're supporting argument is from one guy, identified only as 'Kevin'. :lol Alrighty then. That's kind of weak, don't you think? Personally, if no Native Americans are offended, or even if they are, that should be up to them, collectively, to decide. Not anybody else. I just doubt that, uh, 'Kevin', speaks for the entire Native American population.
We should probably get them all together for a round table.
 

mcnuttz

Senior Junior Mod
Staff member
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
15,803
Good point, LT...maybe only Native Americans should be able to call them Redskins.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
So you're supporting argument is from one guy, identified only as 'Kevin'. :lol Alrighty then. That's kind of weak, don't you think? Personally, if no Native Americans are offended, or even if they are, that should be up to them, collectively, to decide. Not anybody else. I just doubt that, uh, 'Kevin', speaks for the entire Native American population.
I don't think the minority of professional victims and activists who are making up crap about the term Washington Redskins being offensive speak for Native American populations either. In any case, that article wasn't to prove definitely that Kevin speaks for the majority of Native Americans (no, the poll numbers do that instead), but rather to point out the logical arguments against repealing the name Washington Redskins. Namely in his last paragraph, where it states how the Redskins mascot is not depcited in a derogatory manner but rather a respectful one. This seriously undermines the argument that Native Americans can actually be offended by this term.
 
Last edited:

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,468
I would pay American dollars to see Iamtdg and/or Schmitty tell a black guy why they shouldn't be offended by the word nigger.
:lol

That would be an interesting scene, to say the least.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
Consider the legal concept of the hyper-sensitive plaintiff. This is a conception in the area of tort law. The term "battery" means an unwelcome or offensive touching. You can be sued for touching someone in an unwelcome or offensive manner. You can be liable for doing this.

However, giving someone a friendly pat on the back can never, as a rule of law, be a battery. Even if you come across a victim (plaintiff) who has, say, a rare bone disorder where all his bones shatter at the slightest contact. This person could be seriously injured by a friendly tap. In this specific person's unique case, a friendly pat on the back could cause untold damage and would most certainly be both unwelcome and offensive.

Now, I can't tell that injured person that he can't be hurt by the friendly tap. But the law holds that because the victim/plaintiff here is "hyper-sensitive," the offender cannot be liable.

That is the case here. The vast majority of Native Americans aren't bothered by this. There is no demonstrable harm, as has been determined by federal courts.

There is no argument. The term cannot be said to be derogatory in the mainstream even if the lunatic fringe says they are offended by it. They are the equivalent of the hyper-sensitive plaintiff, and they've already been booted out of court once for their meritless arguments.
 

Cujo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,701
I am a little bit drunk. Also, I have some traces of Irish lineage.

According to Schmitty, that means I want to fight.... So bring it on, fuckers!!


Me too. I will fight you. In honor of my heritage.
 

Cujo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,701
Just as early as 5 years ago this would have elicited a response from me that had me blowing up because of the obvious idiocy of the post, but I have grown in my age.

9% of Indians say it's offensive, so that answers whether it is offensive to Indians.

To try to paint me as a supreme racist is a reach and well beneath you.


Sweet Jesus. :lol
 

Cujo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,701
Cool, I'll get on that. You go ahead and let the 9% of Mexicans know that you think it's stupid they think the term Mexican is offensive.


Mexican is a nationality. Right? Surely you see the difference.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,103
Sweet Jesus. :lol
That's probably offensive to well more than 9% of Christians because of the use of the Lord's name in vain.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,103
Mexican is a nationality. Right? Surely you see the difference.
People get pissed about the term Mexican. You may not see it, but trust me it happens.

My point stands.
 

Cujo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,701
I'm sure there can be much stronger arguments made for the word "nigger" being used offensively. When it's not being used offensively, as happens all the time with that word by the way, no one has a problem with it because it's not meant in an offensive way.

Kinda like the team name "Washington Redskins" which a federal court held there was no evidence of disparagement. :lol


Made up entirely of white people, I'll bet. :lol
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,103
Made up entirely of white people, I'll bet. :lol
Damn right. We have made sure to keep only the white people in positions of authority. We feel it's working fairly well.
 

Cujo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,701
Well, the name Washington Redskins caused 0% of Native Americans to be discriminated against, so there's that.



The U.S. Patent and Trademark Board obtained a similar finding about the team name of Washington's professional football team. Neither the general public nor Native Americans are of one mind on the subject. Stapleton (2001, pp.26-27) reported that a survey conducted for the case showed that 46% of the general public (n = 301) and 37% of American Indians (n = 358) found “Redskin”to be an offensive term. Independently, Stapleton (2001) also studied the opinions of fans (n = 28) and Native Americans (n = 32) with Web sites: although 96% of the fans opposed changing the team name, 72% of indigenous peoples favored the name change (pp. 62-64).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_team_names_and_mascots_derived_from_indigenous_peoples
 

Cujo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,701
People get pissed about the term Mexican. You may not see it, but trust me it happens.

My point stands.


Maybe you're right about that. But are you Mexican? :lol I'm 1/4 by the way. And no, I'm not offended.
 
Top Bottom