What will the Redskins new name be?

[rhickok1109]

"Redskins" was an old self-identifying term used by Native Americans. I've seen documentation to prove it. They also used the name "whiteskins" for those of European ancestry. I don't buy the notion that it's the equivalent of calling someone a "kike".

If you had grown up in Wisconsin, as I did, you might not feel that way.

Shawano, the small city where I was born, was the market town for the Menominee Indian Reservation. I constantly heard "redskin" being used a a pejoriative term...and, even as a child, I noticed that was never used when a Menominee was around to hear it.

When I went to high school in Green Bay, quite a few of my classmates were bused in from the nearby Oneida Reservation. Bullies frequently attacked them by calling them "redskins," in much the same way that an anti-Semite might call someone a "kike."

To me, the fact that Native Americans have called themselves "redskins" is irrelevant. Many, probably most, young black men are quite comfortable with calling one another the N-word doesn't mean I should feel free to apply it to them. And feminist women commonly call one another "girls," but they don't like it if your or I call them that.

Point taken. Context is everything, but is it so clear cut that this is a pejorative term? If you have sports teams on reservations proudly using the name you're not suggesting that they are ignorant, are you?
Maybe it's a matter of ownership, like the N-word. It can be used within the community but a questionable choice of words from an outsider?

Yes, I'd say that's exactly what it is. It's certainly clear to me that whites have long used it as a pejorative term and that Native Americans have resented it.

I'll give you a small example: My maternal grandfather was hired by the federal government to operate a sawmill on the Menominee Reservation immediately after World War I. His mission was to get the sawmill up and running and to teach the Menominees how to operate it so they could eventually take over.

Just before my grandfather started on this job, the guy from the Bureau of Indian Affairs said to him, "You'll be here for the rest of your life. Those stupid redskins will never learn how to run a sawmill."

My grandfather replied, "I'll teach any Indian to do anything you can do and he'll do it better."

[RyanChristiansen]

The first documented use of the word "redskin" was by the Santee chief French Crow in 1812. He said, "I am a red-skin, but what I say is the truth." Clearly, the term is derogatory and diminishing, and the chief had to ask his audience to look past the color of his skin.

What we need to ask is, "What was George Preston Marshall's intentions when he chose the name "redskin" for his team?" Marshall was an unabashed racist. Why did he choose redskin?

Also, we need to ask, "What are someone's intentions for wanting to support continued use of the name, when it clearly is offensive? What is to be gained by keeping the name?" Is it to gain or preserve power over another people? What good comes from keeping the name? What might be gained by dropping the name?

[lastcat3]

The first documented use of the word "redskin" was by the Santee chief French Crow in 1812. He said, "I am a red-skin, but what I say is the truth." Clearly, the term is derogatory and diminishing, and the chief had to ask his audience to look past the color of his skin.

What we need to ask is, "What was George Preston Marshall's intentions when he chose the name "redskin" for his team?" Marshall was an unabashed racist. Why did he choose redskin?

Also, we need to ask, "What are someone's intentions for wanting to support continued use of the name, when it clearly is offensive? What is to be gained by keeping the name?" Is it to gain or preserve power over another people? What good comes from keeping the name? What might be gained by dropping the name?

Was it because they were moving into Fenway Park where the Red Sox played and wanted his team to have a name that sounded similar to the Red Sox (while still being known as a native american)?

[lastcat3]

To be honest at this point I think it may be better for the team to drop the name. If Washington goes into the next season still being known as the Redskins I think there will be a lot of negativity and probably unwanted distractions surrounding the team.

[RyanChristiansen]

The first documented use of the word "redskin" was by the Santee chief French Crow in 1812. He said, "I am a red-skin, but what I say is the truth." Clearly, the term is derogatory and diminishing, and the chief had to ask his audience to look past the color of his skin.

What we need to ask is, "What was George Preston Marshall's intentions when he chose the name "redskin" for his team?" Marshall was an unabashed racist. Why did he choose redskin?

Also, we need to ask, "What are someone's intentions for wanting to support continued use of the name, when it clearly is offensive? What is to be gained by keeping the name?" Is it to gain or preserve power over another people? What good comes from keeping the name? What might be gained by dropping the name?

Was it because they were moving into Fenway Park where the Red Sox played and wanted his team to have a name that sounded similar to the Red Sox (while still being known as a native american)?

Okay, but why choose redskin when it was a racist term? What if for a different reason he had decided the team should be The Washington Negroes? How would that fly today?

[JohnR]

The first documented use of the word "redskin" was by the Santee chief French Crow in 1812. He said, "I am a red-skin, but what I say is the truth." Clearly, the term is derogatory and diminishing, and the chief had to ask his audience to look past the color of his skin.

What we need to ask is, "What was George Preston Marshall's intentions when he chose the name "redskin" for his team?" Marshall was an unabashed racist. Why did he choose redskin?

Also, we need to ask, "What are someone's intentions for wanting to support continued use of the name, when it clearly is offensive? What is to be gained by keeping the name?" Is it to gain or preserve power over another people? What good comes from keeping the name? What might be gained by dropping the name?

Why would an owner choose a name to represent his franchise if he didn't think it would reflect positively? Marshall probably embraced the nobility stereotype.

[RyanChristiansen]

The first documented use of the word "redskin" was by the Santee chief French Crow in 1812. He said, "I am a red-skin, but what I say is the truth." Clearly, the term is derogatory and diminishing, and the chief had to ask his audience to look past the color of his skin.

What we need to ask is, "What was George Preston Marshall's intentions when he chose the name "redskin" for his team?" Marshall was an unabashed racist. Why did he choose redskin?

Also, we need to ask, "What are someone's intentions for wanting to support continued use of the name, when it clearly is offensive? What is to be gained by keeping the name?" Is it to gain or preserve power over another people? What good comes from keeping the name? What might be gained by dropping the name?

Why would an owner choose a name to represent his franchise if he didn't think it would reflect positively? Marshall probably embraced the nobility stereotype.

That argument/suggestion has proven false, unless you count it as justification for using Native American imagery. The team already had invested in co-opting/appropriating Native American caricatures in its marketing when they were the Braves. It was a business decision pure and simple, just as it will be a business decision to drop the name.

[Terry Baldshaw]

I think Dan Snyder could create much goodwill if he renamed his team the Washington Little Big Horns. It would be a tribute to those Native Americans opposed to multiculturalism, tolerance, diversity and inclusion who massacred over two hundred white supremacists near the Little Big Horn river in Montana. An appropriate logo could be a cavalry officer's hat with a Native American lance thrust through it. The team colors could be changed to blood red and greasy grass green.

[65 toss power trap]

Yikes, the privilege here is white hot.

How about just not appropriating a race for their mascot? Warriors/Indians/Natives/Braves/some other "homage" are just nonstarters. They really have to start from scratch. With the Pentagon nearby, there are military options available, something like Washington Admirals has a good ring to it. (Buy out the stupid quidditch team that has the name.) New colors and everything. Trying to force a link to the old name/look is going to piss off everyone, as opposed to pissing off some, and possibly gaining in the process. While the O.G. will stick to the traditional colors, it will fade away in time. And it will be a bonanza in new gear sales for the league and their partners.

They could give a crap about the disparagement brought on by the color red; they are just looking at the green.

[JWL]

There are plenty of options that will not offend people. The team needs to switch to one of them. It is not that hard and we will survive.