NEW Anti REDSKINs Commercial (NFL)

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Aug 31, 2003
5,551
3,189
113
www.ebay.com
#41
I don't understand why this is even up for debate. No way would you use the word redskin in any kind of conversation other than football. And to the dude earlier in the thread that said he talked to some native americans while wearing redskins gear, why didn't you say you talked to some redskins? Or be like what's up redskins?

I'd guess everyone citing fandom traditions would never in there life call another man/woman redskin because it's highly offensive. If you admit that you wouldn't use that word towards a native american, then there's no argument that can be made for keeping the name.
 
Apr 20, 2003
4,132
1,767
113
43
#42
I don't understand why this is even up for debate. No way would you use the word redskin in any kind of conversation other than football. And to the dude earlier in the thread that said he talked to some native americans while wearing redskins gear, why didn't you say you talked to some redskins? Or be like what's up redskins?

I'd guess everyone citing fandom traditions would never in there life call another man/woman redskin because it's highly offensive. If you admit that you wouldn't use that word towards a native american, then there's no argument that can be made for keeping the name.
Cuz thats not a word I SAY.... Just like talking to a white person, I don't say hey whitey or redneck. Just like speaking to a fellow mexican, I don't go and say frijole or mojado, so on and so on. If they had a problem with what I'm wearing don't you really think they would have told me something right there and then? Like I said if they change the name well so be it, change it!
 
Sep 20, 2005
26,006
58,916
113
FUCK YOU
#45
Native American group plans to file a $9 billion lawsuit against the Cleveland Indians over Chief Wahoo




I think my record on the Chief Wahoo thing is pretty clear by now. I’m quite obviously not a fan. But there’s a big, big difference between thinking something is offensive and should be banished to history and thinking that thing actually entitles people to billions of dollars in legal damages. Some folks to whom I’d otherwise be sympathetic are going to learn that pretty quickly.

From Paul Kiska at ABC5 in Cleveland, brought to our attention by Big League Stew:

Robert Roche is the director of the American Indian Education Center and one of the plaintiffs planing to file a federal lawsuit in late July against the Cleveland Indians. The group says the team’s name and the Chief Wahoo logo are racist. The group wants a lot of money to help Native Americans with education, job training and housing.

“We’re going to be asking for $9 billion and we’re basing it on a hundred years of disparity, racism, exploitation and profiteering,” Roche said.

Normally it’s folks who support things like Chief Wahoo or the Redskins name who fail to grasp what does and what does not violate one’s rights. One need only search “Redskins” and “freedom of speech” to get a taste of that sort of baloney. Here, however, Roche and the American Indian Education Center are the ones who are missing the point of how things work in this country.

The Cleveland Indians are a private corporation. They, like any other private citizen, can be as offensive as they want to be. They can do more than put a Wahoo patch on their caps and jerseys, in fact! They could have a “We really, really hate Native Americans Day” at Progressive Field and hand out racist literature stamped with “The Cleveland Indians heartily endorse this message because, oh my god, we really hate racial minorities.” Now, I know some people who work for the Indians and know they wouldn’t choose to do that, but legally speaking, they totally could. That sort of freedom — and the corresponding freedom of baseball fans all over to boycott/ostracize them into the Stone Age if they did — is one of the beauties of America.

But do you know who could sue the Indians if they did that? No one. Well, some employees could based on a hostile work environment theory. And Major League Baseball could do whatever it wanted to up to and including any litigation it might choose that is consistent with the team’s and the league’s franchise agreement. But ordinary citizens couldn’t. They don’t have any more right to sue the Indians over Chief Wahoo than they’d have to sue the organizers of a Klan march on the statehouse, a jackwagon yelling things at people on a street corner or your racist uncle who had too many beers last Memorial Day and decided to tell you what he really thinks of that ethnic minority family who moved in down the street. Maybe those folks have some unpopular views, but our legal system protects their rights for good reason.

Of course Robert Roche and the American Indian Education Center likely know this. And I presume they are merely seeking out some headlines in order to draw attention to their cause. But ultimately this sort of stunt is counterproductive as a means of swaying public opinion. A lot of people hate Chief Wahoo and a lot of people love him. But a lot MORE people hate lawyers and litigiousness and are immediately suspect of someone who files — or, in this case, threatens to file — lawsuits against their beloved institutions. Especially ones with little if any legal merit.

Put differently: you’re not helping, dudes. Keep up the protests and the public pressure. Even think about narrow, focused legal action with actual merit such as the trademark challenge the Redskins just lost. But cut it out with the billion dollar damage claims.
 
Sep 20, 2005
26,006
58,916
113
FUCK YOU
#46
Plaintiff in Redskins patent case urges Chiefs to change their name | ProFootballTalk



The Washington Redskins aren’t the only NFL team whose name bothers some Native Americans.

The Kansas City Chiefs should also change their name to avoid giving offense, according to Amanda Blackhorse, the lead plaintiff in the case that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office just decided against the Redskins.

“I’m not sure there’s anything the [Chiefs] can do at this point other than look for another name,” Blackhorse told the Kansas City Star. “They could be the team that says, ‘You know what? We understand the issue and we don’t want to be Dan Snyder and fight this in court forever. We want to do the right thing and move forward and avoid this entire battle.’ I’m sure fans will be upset, but still, that’s doing the right thing. If they want to be sensitive to Native American people, that’s the thing to do.”

Blackhorse’s sister, Kristy Blackhorse, is part of a group of Native Americans in Arizona who plan to protest at two Cardinals games this season — not only when the Redskins come to town in October, but also when the Chiefs come to town in December.

There are fundamental differences between the Chiefs and the Redskins, especially that dictionaries define “chief” as a term of respect and “redskin” as a slur. The Kansas City Chiefs have kept a low profile during the debate, hoping that they can continue to use their team name without the controversy that has swirled around the Redskins. If Blackhorse has her way, the Chiefs won’t avoid controversy for long.
 
Feb 3, 2014
746
1,640
0
#47
people are all of a sudden offended after YEARS of these teams being around? get outta here..the world we live in now people are always looking for a new way to feel offended and a new way to make a quick buck
 
Feb 14, 2004
16,667
4,746
113
40
#50
people are all of a sudden offended after YEARS of these teams being around? get outta here..the world we live in now people are always looking for a new way to feel offended and a new way to make a quick buck
This has been going on for a long time now. This isn't brand new shit.

People are going to voice their opinion, regardless. That shit isn't going to change. Just like the team names, logos & mascots most likely won't change either. Nobody gives a flying fuck about us indigenous people, at least not enough to change that shit up.