The Washington Commanders Thread

They should bring back that beautiful alternate from 2002 assuming they chose a name like the warriors.

Originally posted by 91til:

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
As I grow older, I realized I have to somewhat let go of my past and let the younger generation have their future.

The name needs to change.

I remembered the stupid Hogs in the 80's. I hope the new name is something stupid

What a brilliant statement that is. Wish more of the older generations thought that way

If i was a native American, and had to list all the grievances inflicted on my people since Europeans came to North America 500 years ago, the Redskin nickname would be about 72,854,678 on the list.

Here's an interesting article about the results of a poll that the authors say is an in-depth survey of individuals who are native american and identify with historical native american culture, in practice and daily life.

https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/02/04/native-mascots-survey/

The published research article can be purchased for $37, here: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1948550619898556 -- (DO NOT GET ME STARTED ON KNOWLEDGE FOR SALE BULLSH*T POLICIES AMONG DIGITAL ACADEMIC PUBLICATION SITES).

It's unclear if the study ever specifically asks about the Washington Redskins:

For example, (participants) were asked to agree or disagree with statements such as, "I think the term 'redskin' is respectful to Native Americans," "I find it offensive when sports fans wear chief headdresses at sporting events" and "When sports fans chant the tomahawk chop, it bothers me."

The apparent survey result was that 49% of the respondents were strongly or somewhat offended by the term "redskin" and 51% were not offended or indifferent.

Younger and more liberal respondents had a higher negative reaction.

Hardly the kind of hyper-charged, polarizing term the way many other racially oriented slang names can be. That's reasonable, since no one under the age of 90 uses the term besides referring to the football team.

The issue isn't racial animus per se but cultural slumming -- i.e. a non-Native American institution using Native American symbolism and references to promote it's own commercial purposes which do not economically benefit Native Americans in any meaningful way.

Is this a situation that needs fixing? Native Americans should be asked specifically, about this specific situation.

Non-native Americans, like European-Americans, African-Americans, and Asian-Americans, should stop trying to hijack the grievance train, and listen.

Does this need fixing? Should the team name and mascot be changed? To what?

I bet interesting ideas could emerge, some of which might be surprising.

Personally, i think there are MUCH more egregious examples than Redskin's mascot, who isn't a walking talking 90 minute showcase for gender and cultural stereotyping. Which doesn't seem to draw the attention of very many polls, strangely.

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
redskin is an actual slur, this isn't hard to understand

Is it though? No one currently ever calls Native Americans by Redskins, let alone uses the term Redskins negatively or as a racial slur . Yes, at one time some might have used the term Redskin in a negative way or as racial slur, Some people also would use the term Redskin to refer to Native Americans in a non negative way. The term Redskin itself was not necessarily a negative name . It was just sometimes used in negative/racist context. That is why Native Americans have never had a problem with Washington's football team being named the Redskins. It will always be something with the left. If you give them an inch they will ask for a mile. If they do change the name, I say they should change it to the Washington Whiteskins . Just so we can watch the lefts heads explode and claim the name advocates white supremacy.

Originally posted by Bloodless:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

redskin is an actual slur, this isn't hard to understand

Is it though? No one currently ever calls Native Americans by Redskins, let alone uses the term Redskins negatively or as a racial slur . Yes, at one time some might have used the term Redskin in a negative way or as racial slur, Some people also would use the term Redskin to refer to Native Americans in a non negative way. The term Redskin itself was not necessarily a negative name . It was just sometimes used in negative/racist context. That is why Native Americans have never had a problem with Washington's football team being named the Redskins. It will always be something with the left. If you give them an inch they will ask for a mile. If they do change the name, I say they should change it to the Washington Whiteskins . Just so we can watch the lefts heads explode and claim the name advocates white supremacy.

Head up to some of the reservations in Montana and go around calling the natives "redskins" and you'll find your answer pretty f**king quickly.

Originally posted by JustinMT:
Head up to some of the reservations in Montana and go around calling the natives "redskins" and you'll find your answer pretty f**king quickly.

You don't need to travel to Montana to know if you use the term "redskin" as an insult people will be offended. No one does that or uses the term though.

It's over with anyways. 10 years ago I would of found this silly but it's time to move on from the name. It's not worth the controversy.

I do wonder if the Cleveland Indians will be next though. The PC crew doesn't stop.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by JustinMT:
Head up to some of the reservations in Montana and go around calling the natives "redskins" and you'll find your answer pretty f**king quickly.

You don't need to travel to Montana to know if you use the term "redskin" as an insult people will be offended. No one does that or uses the term though.

Time has come for Snyder to finally get rid of that nickname. It's offensive as they come.

Originally posted by LionHeartofGold:

Originally posted by wailers15:

What about the Chiefs?

The "Chiefs" makes no reference to skin color and although the term has been used in a pejorative manner by some to refer to a Native American person, I'm sure this name is not going to face the same level of scrutiny by the community. We also have the responsibility of assuming good intentions and I don't believe we can conclude that the use of the word Chiefs has racist origins.

It may not face the same level of scrutiny, I fully agree, but it has been catching some serious flack for a good while now. They have been catching hell for a longtime with their pre game ceremony ritual, the hairdresses, etc. my buddy who is a die hard Chiefs fan has mentioned that every year there has been a push to stop the chop, pre game ceremonies and ban the hairdressers. I don't think we hear much because the Redskins is a lot more blatantly disrespectful. The National Congress of American Indians did issue a report to Congress to have sports teams remove all Indian related names in sports and the Chiefs were one of the teams. Heck even at the SB this year there were protests.

Pretty sure it's fair to say " do native Americans like watching non native Americans dress up like Indians on Sundays ?" Imagine if fans supported their team while in blackface ( I know that's crazy but hey some people actually feel that way)

I remember the Braves this past postseason had to change their chant. Indians are slowly making changes. Little changes are happening.

I fully agree that the word is not racist but just given this day in age with society I wouldn't put it past them that eventually a change comes. Will the Tomohawk chop chant be up next?

Originally posted by wailers15:

Originally posted by LionHeartofGold:

Originally posted by wailers15:
What about the Chiefs?

The "Chiefs" makes no reference to skin color and although the term has been used in a pejorative manner by some to refer to a Native American person, I'm sure this name is not going to face the same level of scrutiny by the community. We also have the responsibility of assuming good intentions and I don't believe we can conclude that the use of the word Chiefs has racist origins.

It may not face the same level of scrutiny, I fully agree, but it has been catching some serious flack for a good while now. They have been catching hell for a longtime with their pre game ceremony ritual, the hairdresses, etc. my buddy who is a die hard Chiefs fan has mentioned that every year there has been a push to stop the chop, pre game ceremonies and ban the hairdressers. I don't think we hear much because the Redskins is a lot more blatantly disrespectful. The National Congress of American Indians did issue a report to Congress to have sports teams remove all Indian related names in sports and the Chiefs were one of the teams. Heck even at the SB this year there were protests.

Pretty sure it's fair to say " do native Americans like watching non native Americans dress up like Indians on Sundays ?" Imagine if fans supported their team while in blackface ( I know that's crazy but hey some people actually feel that way)

I remember the Braves this past postseason had to change their chant. Indians are slowly making changes. Little changes are happening.

I fully agree that the word is not racist but just given this day in age with society I wouldn't put it past them that eventually a change comes. Will the Tomohawk chop chant be up next?

Ah, that Tomahawk chop has got to be next.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by JustinMT:

Head up to some of the reservations in Montana and go around calling the natives "redskins" and you'll find your answer pretty f**king quickly.

You don't need to travel to Montana to know if you use the term "redskin" as an insult people will be offended. No one does that or uses the term though.

So you agree that its offensive, but you dont hear people using that term that way anymore so it's cool. Lolwut.

I do think it's funny that Nike has pulled all Redskins gear. Come on Nike most of your products are made by slave labor in China.

Imagine being kept up at night because of a sport teams name?

How much longer until "49ers" becomes offensive to Prospectors?

Originally posted by Aj_hwd954:

Imagine being kept up at night because of a sport teams name?

How much longer until "49ers" becomes offensive to Prospectors?

The two situations bear no comparison at all.

Originally posted by TheGore49er:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by JustinMT:
Head up to some of the reservations in Montana and go around calling the natives "redskins" and you'll find your answer pretty f**king quickly.

You don't need to travel to Montana to know if you use the term "redskin" as an insult people will be offended. No one does that or uses the term though.

So you agree that its offensive, but you dont hear people using that term that way anymore so it's cool. Lolwut.

I agree it can be used offensively, but no one actually does, and no one uses it offensively when talking about the redskins football team.

That's just the way it is. There can be many offensive connotations regarding the term, but the overwhelming majority of users don't intend those connotations in any way.

Here's the NCAI resolution from 2018 regarding the redskin term: http://www.ncai.org/attachments/Resolution_FnsvtagQUdvzMxgrJmzZoXujiqnMLlfwUuBkWVaSAOnPgPLTEJT_DEN-18-044%20Final.pdf

There are two signatures on the document that passed at a national convention in Colorado in the presence of a quorum. I did a little searching but couldn't find out how many members are in the NCAI, and how many vote for administrative positions.

It's true that a lot of dictionaries define the word as offensive, and others define it as slang. Possibly an action which is more probable to occur in relation to number of organizations lobbying the publisher. None of the dictionaries mention in the lead definition that the term has disappeared in use from the social vocabulary, and is overwhelmingly used to refer to a sports team and not Native Americans as a practical matter.

I'll point to the study cited earlier from woke researchers that musters about a 50% level of indignity among Native American peoples at the term.

The pdf is a good read. It's a pretty sharp document that uses the g-word and raises historical issues which make the argument over the r-word appear trivial, honestly.

The document demands the removal of the "r-word" but doesn't offer any suggestions for an alternative term which might be acceptable.

As the position of the council appears to be that all native american imagery be removed from sports teams -- not just the "r-word" -- I am wondering if they have any further position on depictions of native americans in the media in general. I did search for pocahontas in NCAI resolutions but came up empty. Why petition for removal of native american imagery from one portion of the establishment media, but not another?

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by Aj_hwd954:

Imagine being kept up at night because of a sport teams name?

How much longer until "49ers" becomes offensive to Prospectors?

The two situations bear no comparison at all.

My point is how ridiculous this whole controversy is and has been for the last 8 or so years. Especially when it's white people who are more offended by it than actual Native Americans.