the lord god: Rapmaster2000: The Washington Redskins is now a liberal/conservative thing. Stick it to the libs by cheering for a bad football team in Washington.American Political Discourse: 2013.It is? Because I am pretty liberal and think they should ignore these people and keep the name.
rickythepenguin: I've said for a few weeks now -- just as i said with Imus' "nappy headed hos" dustup - the media's double standard on ethnic slurs is laughable. Imus got fired, Riley Cooper is a pariah, yet the same folks calling for their heads on platters have no quarrel with "Redskin".i'm a native american and i don'thave a problem with some names. i think it is cool as shiat that the Army, for example, named its rotary winged assault craft things like "Kiowa", "Apache", "Chinook", etc. i don't have a problem with atlanta braves (the mascot is another thing, though) or the celevaland indians. but, there is a line, as with many things, and it is just unconscionable that the pro team from washington has this name.and before we start in with the "don't you guys have better things to worry about, like alcoholism, literacy, blah blah blah", every issue has its time. and more to the point, that i am indian does not mean that i am stuck in that cycle of destructive behavior. some indians have things called "degrees" and make $125K a year. shocking, innit?
GRCooper: Theaetetus: GRCooper: Theaetetus:The suit has already been filed and won on exactly those grounds. As noted above, it was reversed by the appellate court because the suit had been brought too late, not because it was flawed on the merits. So, yeah, you're wrong.No [but actually yes], it was dismissed [by the district court] on grounds that it was filed too late AND that it was unsupported by substantial evidence. [The appellate court only affirmed the laches finding and reversed and remanded for further proceedings, so when I'm about to say "yeah, you're wrong," I'm using that as code to say that really, I'm wrong]. So, yeah, you're wrongWant to know how I know you're functionally illiterate, and skimmed the Wiki rather than reading either the decisions or what I wrote?Show me where I'm wrong
Theaetetus: Rapmaster2000: Crewmannumber6: I can understand being upset about Redskins and, to a much lesser extent, the Indians. What I don't get is people getting butthurt about Warriors. It's not exclusive to Native Americans by any stretch of the imagination.As someone who is Irish, I am more offended by people who are offended by the Fighting Irish or the Celtics, even though a joo drew the caricature. I'm more proud of the Irish being thick skinned enough to not worry about stupid shiat like that.Well, let's be honest. Like 150 million other Americans, you're "Irish" not Irish. I'm "Irish" too.Instead of being an Ire, you're just Ire-ish?
Crewmannumber6: Actually I was born in Dublin, but let's not split hairs
Rapmaster2000: Crewmannumber6: I can understand being upset about Redskins and, to a much lesser extent, the Indians. What I don't get is people getting butthurt about Warriors. It's not exclusive to Native Americans by any stretch of the imagination.As someone who is Irish, I am more offended by people who are offended by the Fighting Irish or the Celtics, even though a joo drew the caricature. I'm more proud of the Irish being thick skinned enough to not worry about stupid shiat like that.Well, let's be honest. Like 150 million other Americans, you're "Irish" not Irish. I'm "Irish" too.
Theaetetus: GRCooper: No, there's no reason to change one of the most successful/popular brands *in the world* because it offends some people.The bigger question is should the government protect such a successful brand, in spite of the fact that it's a racist slur? Maybe the owners can keep using it if they want, but should they have federal protection on the mark?
GRCooper: Most valuable sports franchises in the world (slideshowy):1) Manchester United2) Real Madrid3) New York Yankees4) Dallas Cowboys5) Washington RedskinsFerrari? Ranked 15th.So, I doubt they're going to throw away the 5th most valuable sports brand *in the world* because of some web page butthurt.Don't like the Skins? Root for the Cowboys. Nobody promised you a world where you wouldn't be "offended".
dittybopper: The other thing to consider is that while the name may be mildly offensive to some, it's actually a kind of compliment.In the United States, we generally name football teams after people and animals that we deem to have great courage and fighting ability. There are some local exceptions, of course, but you don't see the opposite. There is no team called the "North Dakota Milquetoasts" or the "Wyoming Possums".
Willas Tyrell: Trapper439: Just wait until the people in Mumbai and Delhi hear what Cleveland calls its rounders team.They probably won't give a crap, since unlike "Redskins" there is nothing inherently offensive about "Indians." Or Braves, or Warriors, or Seminoles, or Illini, etc.
TheShavingofOccam123: Washington Bureaucrats./that way they'll always win...the bureaucrats always win
UberDave: cman: Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that those who are biatching the loudest about using the "Redskin" name are really damn white?I think so. I do think Native Americans have a problem with the name but I haven't really looked into it...
cman: Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that those who are biatching the loudest about using the "Redskin" name are really damn white?
Want the rest of the Farking story? Try
More threads. More community. More Farking.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: May 21 2018 02:14:46
Runtime: 0.433 sec (433 ms)