Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Daniel Snyder Again Defends Redskin Team Name

24 posts in this topic

Posted

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9797628/dan-snyder-defends-washington-redskins-name

 

His statement:

"I've listened carefully to the commentary and perspectives on all sides, and I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name," Snyder wrote. "But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington Redskins family, but among Native Americans too."

That's much softer than what he told USA Today Sports in May: "We'll never change the name. It's simple. NEVER -- you can use caps."

 

Insert other racial epithet here in same comment:

"I've listened carefully to the commentary and perspectives on all sides, and I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name," Snyder wrote. "But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington N***** family, but among other n****** too."

That's much softer than what he told USA Today Sports in May: "We'll never change the name. It's simple. NEVER -- you can use caps."

 

Is it because the Native American population doesn't threaten to burn down buildings and riot across the country that nobody seems to understand how many people it offends, but the fact that it does offend- period? Because the Native American population is so small, it's okay to offend such a sub-segment of this country's population?

 

It's a symbol, my ass. The swastika is a symbol as well, so is a burning cross...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Somehow this sort of thing was deemed acceptable in the 1930's when the name originated. The fact it is about to be 2014, and the name still exists, baffles me. Not to mention the owner that came up with the name was a known racist. This should have happened long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

this is really pretty simple, and is not comparable to the Braves or the Indians...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The overall opinion that all Native Americans are offended by the name is false. There are Native's that don't find it offensive at all and actually are proud of it.  

 

It's always funny when a race is overly offended for another one.

 

Comparing it to the N word is laughable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yeah genocide and slavery are on two entirely different levels

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The overall opinion that all Native Americans are offended by the name is false. There are Native's that don't find it offensive at all and actually are proud of it.  

 

It's always funny when a race is overly offended for another one.

 

Comparing it to the N word is laughable.

 

So I take it that you have spoken with literally every single Native American to get this "overall" opinion then, correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't see what the big deal is. I never have considered it offensive or racist and I still don't get it. We call white people white, black people black, Indians red, Asians yellow.

 

Changing the name will damage the history of the team and the league. It's also not profitable. Snyder will lose money changing the name.

 

The US government or a Indian financial group should compensate the Redskins for their financial losses for changing the name. Only then would I support the name being changed. Someone has to pay to design a new logo, someone has to pay to put it on the stadium, someone has to pay to create new merchandise to replace the old.

 

Snyder is a Jew and he did not name the team. He is a businessman and he'd be a really poor businessman if he supported changing the name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

it is implicitly offensive and therefore the only excuse to keep it is if literally no one cares

 

....but a lot of people do, and given the historical context their voices should carry more weight than their mere numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

some paleface doesn't think redskin is offensive.   nothing to see here guys.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

it is still a racist name regardless if it offends people or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If there was a team called the Washington Blackfaces there would be an uproar. Just change it to the Washington Warriors and get it over with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9797628/dan-snyder-defends-washington-redskins-name

His statement:

"I've listened carefully to the commentary and perspectives on all sides, and I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name," Snyder wrote. "But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington Redskins family, but among Native Americans too."

That's much softer than what he told USA Today Sports in May: "We'll never change the name. It's simple. NEVER -- you can use caps."

Insert other racial epithet here in same comment:

"I've listened carefully to the commentary and perspectives on all sides, and I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name," Snyder wrote. "But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington N***** family, but among other n****** too."

That's much softer than what he told USA Today Sports in May: "We'll never change the name. It's simple. NEVER -- you can use caps."

Is it because the Native American population doesn't threaten to burn down buildings and riot across the country that nobody seems to understand how many people it offends, but the fact that it does offend- period? Because the Native American population is so small, it's okay to offend such a sub-segment of this country's population?

It's a symbol, my ass. The swastika is a symbol as well, so is a burning cross...

The Nazi Swastika IS a symbol. The Third Reich ripped off Buddhists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites