Reply With Quote
Well my last name is Brown, and I'm offended.
It's called sarcasm, get a clue.
the Browns were named after someone whose last name was Brown.
Thanks for continuing to verify you really have no clue.
Well my last name is Brown, and I'm offended.
It's called sarcasm, get a clue.
The Redskins are named in honor of a Native American. And I'm the clueless one.
that's nothing more than a rumor.The Redskins are named in honor of a Native American. And I'm the clueless one.
Yes, you are the clueless one.
Prove it.
Price, S. L. (March 4, 2002), "The Indian Wars", Sports illustrated: 66, retrieved on 2008-06-142002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of those Native Americans surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name.
Last edited by manufan10; 05-21-2009 at 05:23 PM.
Can't say it bothers me. He's a goofy looking Indian. So what? Does Elmer Fudd offend white people?
A change to the name has been a long time coming. It's time the change is finally made.
Re-name them the Washington Bullets.
Circle of life.
where are you getting your numbers becuse i know more than a select few who thaink its offensive
red skin was ment to be derogatory. maybe not the team name but in the old west it was used like the n word was to discribed blacks
The people who are suing were never in the 'old west', nor were the vast majority of people living today. Even if it was a derogatory reference then, as you admit the team did not mean it in that manner.
I like to "play" with my "penis" and my penis is offended by the University of South Carolina mascot and nickname.
Doesn't matter how it's meant if it's derogatory.
prove what? that it's a rumor? It's on you to prove it's a fact.
either way, this is your ownpost jeenyus:
what percent does it take to make it offensive?Price, S. L. (March 4, 2002), "The Indian Wars", Sports illustrated: 66, retrieved on 2008-06-14
seriously, you are a clueless idiot.
There is no team called the Whiteskins owned by Native Americans that uses Elmer Fudd as a logo.
fail.
If there was, would you be offended?
If 75% of them don't find it offensive, why should you? It's not offensive. The majority of Native Americans say it's not offensive. Give me a break. Majority rules in this country, and the majority say it's not offensive. Just because there are a select few who think it is doesn't make it so. If they majority of Native Americans don't find it offensive, why should you? Why do you get to dictate what is offensive? Are you Native American? Get over it. Redskins won, and they're not changing their name. Get off you high horse. It's a team name. It's only offensive if you're a dumbass. You sir, are a dumbass.prove what? that it's a rumor? It's on you to prove it's a fact.
either way, this is your ownpost jeenyus:
what percent does it take to make it offensive?
seriously, you are a clueless idiot.
a team named the Whiteskins owned by a group of Native Americans?
that's offensive enough to never get approved to begin with.
offensiveness isn't based on a vote.
If one Native American says it's offensive to them and comes up with legitimate reasons why it's offensive, then that's all it takes to be offensive.
if a number of them find it racially offensive with good reason, then I'm offended that a white man that owns the rights to the team name doesn't see the need to change it.Just because there are a select few who think it is doesn't make it so. If they majority of Native Americans don't find it offensive, why should you?
they won on a technicality.....not because anyone decided that it wasn't offensive.Why do you get to dictate what is offensive? Are you Native American? Get over it. Redskins won, and they're not changing their name.
so the other 25% of Native Americans that are offended at the racial undertones of the word "redskin" are dumbasses?Get off you high horse. It's a team name. It's only offensive if you're a dumbass. You sir, are a dumbass.
No, you are clearly the clueless dumbass.
If people really want to move past all the racial divisiveness they need to develop thicker skins. If you try to feel slighted even by things that were not meant to be derogatory, you will find an endless supply of things to about. Grow up a bit. 75% of American Indians have.
It doesn't matter if only 25% of the people polled took offense as opposed to 75%....taking offense for ignorance is still justified. Much of them may be desensitized to the stupidity at this point, seeing what Native Americans are regularly subjected to, and they might also feel that fighting one of America's past-times is a losing battle....doesn't mean it's any less of a good cause to help eradicate ignorance. The skin Native Americans have had to develop is thicker than whale blubber, they have every right to call out any industry/organization that casts them in a "less than favorable light", exploits their culture, or refers to them in derogatory fashion whether avertently or seemingly inadvertently.
at this point, what's a few more dead indians...
just kill the one's that are offended and problem solved.
go ahead and ask them one last time if they find it offensive before pulling the trigger though...
it's the right thing to do.
I played softball against a buncha guys who called themselfs the s, people need to grow up & stop being so sensitive... !!!
& why now after 76 yrs., why?
Cuz its the "PC" thing to do cuz everyone else is doing it, GTFOa here conformist s get your own spine!!
LEAVE THE NAME!!!!
Not sure where you get off, Blake...you say Native Americans find the Redskins offensive, but when a Native American says it would be offensive to remove it, you act like a child. The name was given as the Redskins in HONOR of a Native American...and these people say it's an insult? Jeez...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
