Re: Washington Redskins Still more Political Correctness gone amuck. As a modest suggestion, a law should be passed that demands the death penalty for anyone who thinks like the Washington Post's editors on this issue. Remember the crusade to outlaw the word "squaw"? Actually this campaign is still current -a lot of people have not gotten the message. Supposedly squaw is an insult and supposedly refers to the private parts of female Native Americans. Actually the word is, if I recall but maybe I have the exact tribe wrong, a Pequot word that was adopted by early frontiersmen which then traveled West; there is nothing insulting about it, and the crusade eventually drew fire from the Pequot because it, the crusade, was disrespectful of the Pequot. This controversy is similar with the proponents of the football name change basing their argument on PC ideology rather than facts. "Redskins" is no more offensive than calling someone white, or black, and can be interpreted to indicate pride, not prejudice. If some lesser lights are offended, so what? Some people will be offended at almost anything. It really doesn't matter if they are. Billy ----------------- "Redskin" was used throughout the English-speaking world (and in equivalent transliterations in Europe) throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a common term of reference for indigenous Americans. However, the more commonly used term from early colonization through the twentieth century was "Indian", perpetuating Columbus' error. The first use of red-skin or red indian may have been limited to specific groups that used red pigments to decorate their bodies, such as the _Beothuk people_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beothuk_people) of Newfoundland who painted their bodies with _red ochre_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_ochre) . Redskin is first recorded in the late 17th century and was applied to the Algonquian peoples generally, but specifically to the Delaware (who lived in what is now southern New York State and New York City, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania). Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Delaware, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint. The indigenous peoples of the continent had no common identity, and referred to themselves using individual tribal names, which is also preferred to the present day. Group identity for Native Americans only emerged during the late 18th and early 19th century, in the context of negotiations between many tribes signing a single treaty with the United States. ...a 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of those American Indians surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name. The results of the poll have been criticized by American Indian activists due to Sports Illustrated's refusal to provide polling information (i.e. how participants were recruited and contacted, if they were concentrated in one region, if one ethnic group is over represented and the exact wording and order of questions). But in 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the prior poll's findings, concluding that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions. _________________________________________ W Post September 13, 2013 Roger Goodell calls an audible on the Washington Redskins name
By _Editorial Board_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-posts-view/2011/12/07/gIQAoEIscO_page.html) , < NATIONAL FOOTBALL League Commissioner Roger Goodell defended the Washington Redskins’ name three months ago to members of Congress who had urged that it be changed. “The Washington Redskins name has thus from its origin represented a positive meaning distinct from any disparagement that could be viewed in some other context,” _Mr. Goodell wrote June 5_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2013/06/12/roger-goodell-defends-redskins-nickname-in-a-lette r-to-congress/) . “For the team’s millions of fans and customers, who represent one of America’s most ethnically and geographically diverse fan bases, the name is a unifying force that stands for strength, courage, pride and respect.” It therefore was a welcome development to hear this recent and more thoughtful response from Mr. Goodell: (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2013/09/11/roger-goodell-on-the-redskins-name/) “We have to do everything that’s necessary to make sure that we’re representing the franchise in a positive way . . . and that if we are offending one person, we need to be listening and making sure that we’re doing the right things to try to address that.” It’s unclear if Mr. Goodell’s nuanced pivot was directed toward team owner _Daniel M. Snyder_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/on-washington-redskins-name-its-time-the-grown-ups-talk-sense-into-daniel-snyder/2013/ 02/13/867b1ace-7610-11e2-95e4-6148e45d7adb_story.html) , but we hope Mr. Snyder was listening. We hope, too, that Mr. Snyder finally understands that the team’s name — no matter its storied tradition or importance to many fans — is a _racial slur of Native Americans_ (http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/06/11/nfl-commissioner-tells-congress-redskins-positive-name- 149843) so offensive that it should no longer be tolerated. Imagine, as _we wrote in 2006_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/10/AR2006091000894.html) advocating a name change, Mr. Snyder, or anyone else for that matter, sitting in a room with Native Americans and calling them “redskins.” Not likely. The name is offensive to a great many more than Mr. Goodell’s hypothetical one person. Mr. Goodell’s most recent comments, in an appearance on WJFK-FM, made clear that any decision to change the team’s name ultimately lies with Mr. Snyder, who has been unequivocal about _his opposition to a name change_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/05/09/snyder-says-reds kins-will-never-change-the-teams-name/) . “Never — you can use caps,” Mr. Snyder told USA Today in May. If that’s the case, Mr. Snyder should be prepared for the controversy never to end. The clamor for change only grows with time. _In addition to the letter from the aforementioned members_ (http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/05/28/members-of-congress-urge-redskins-to-change-name/) of the Congressional Native American Caucus urging a change, some noted sportswriters — _Sports Illustrated’s Peter King_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2013/09/06/peter-king-will-no-longer-use-redskins-on-mmqb/) and _USA Today’s Christine Brennan_ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2013/09/11/christine-brennan-washington-nfl-team/2802075/) — have announced they will no longer use the name. Members of the _Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin plan a protest_ (http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/redskins-face-protests-at-lambeau-during-packers-home-opener-b9995200z1-223176631.html) at Sunday’s game with the Green Bay Packers. We understand that changing the name is not a trifling matter. There is a cost (estimated by some to be _as high as $20 million_ (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/42640844/) ), but surely the owner of the NFL’s _third-most valuable_ (http://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/) franchise can afford it. There is a recognition of the importance of tradition to many fans who mean absolutely no offense. Perhaps there is even a fear that fans will desert or turn against the team if it changes its name. We think that underestimates Washington fans and their deep feelings for this team. We urge Mr. Snyder to have more faith than that in his fan base and to listen more carefully to those who love the team and hate the ethnic slur. -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
