|
Post by cindra on Jul 6, 2020 20:49:12 GMT -5
I guess Washington can’t be part of the name because Washington owned slaves? That reminds me, the State of Washington should be renamed. And Washington DC, and University of Washington. You get the idea. Redskins is offensive, I agree. But I think we’re going a little overboard with statues, renaming things. Most of the founding fathers were slave owners. Hamilton bought and sold slaves for his father in law. Guess that show should be boycotted? It’s a nasty part of our history. No matter how many statues are torn down, it's still a part of our history. Our treatment Native Americans and blacks was horrible. Then the government made it worse with the welfare system. I think we can start with the confederates and the Redskins, but people seem opposed to even that.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 6, 2020 21:10:41 GMT -5
I guess Washington can’t be part of the name because Washington owned slaves? That reminds me, the State of Washington should be renamed. And Washington DC, and University of Washington. You get the idea. Redskins is offensive, I agree. But I think we’re going a little overboard with statues, renaming things. Most of the founding fathers were slave owners. Hamilton bought and sold slaves for his father in law. Guess that show should be boycotted? It’s a nasty part of our history. No matter how many statues are torn down, it's still a part of our history. Our treatment Native Americans and blacks was horrible. Then the government made it worse with the welfare system. I think we can start with the confederates and the Redskins, but people seem opposed to even that. Right. It's easy enough to not use a derogatory and insulting word as a football team name. Let's start with that instead of insisting we can't do anything unless we address the entire history of the world first.
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jul 7, 2020 8:41:06 GMT -5
I think we can start with the confederates and the Redskins, but people seem opposed to even that. Right. It's easy enough to not use a derogatory and insulting word as a football team name. Let's start with that instead of insisting we can't do anything unless we address the entire history of the world first. Statue of Columbus is being removed, Columbus Ohio thinking of changing its name, Thomas Jefferson memorial is in danger. There are calls to have BYU change its name, etc, etc. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say anything named Washington is now fair game. Maybe I should move this to the Columbus thread?
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,098
|
Post by trojansc on Jul 7, 2020 9:53:10 GMT -5
Right. It's easy enough to not use a derogatory and insulting word as a football team name. Let's start with that instead of insisting we can't do anything unless we address the entire history of the world first. Statue of Columbus is being removed, Columbus Ohio thinking of changing its name, Thomas Jefferson memorial is in danger. There are calls to have BYU change its name, etc, etc. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say anything named Washington is now fair game. Maybe I should move this to the Columbus thread? Columbus being removed actually helped Americans learn history. Reading some FB comments and articles were jaw dropping.
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Jul 7, 2020 11:51:02 GMT -5
The Redskins were founded in 1932 in Boston as the Boston Braves and the name was to honor all the Native American tribes in the New England states. They changed their name to the Redskins in 1933 because there was already a Baseball Boston Braves and there was confusion with the same name in the same city in different sports. In 1937 the Boston Redskins relocated to Washington DC and became the Washington Redskins.
There have been several polls with the Native Americans regarding the use of the name Redskins and over 90% are not offended by by the term... in fact they like American sports teams using Braves, Chiefs and Redskins because using those names is a sign of respect for the fierce and brave characteristics of the Native American tribes. During the last polling the majority of the Tribal Elders complained that changing the Redskins name was more about the "White Man" Government wanting to do that to sell the idea of being sensitive toward Native Americans and believing that was a big win for the Native Americans instead of changing the laws regarding mineral rights on reservation lands. Native Americans have rights to the land, but do not own the land; it is still considered federal land. The laws in place today on reservation land make it too expensive to drill for oil or mine on reservations. This is why the Tribal Elders, Tribal Councils, etc., feel the Redskins name change is always brought up and discussions are started by the "white lawmakers" so they can act like they are doing good while ignoring the reservation land use laws (Alaska is the only State that Native Americans get compensated for oil rights). Many reservations are not surrounded by populated areas so casinos aren't always a money maker, but making oil and natural gas drilling affordable and competitive with the private sector could make a tribe wealthy and not dependent on US subsidies.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 7, 2020 11:54:59 GMT -5
Statue of Columbus is being removed, Columbus Ohio thinking of changing its name, Thomas Jefferson memorial is in danger. There are calls to have BYU change its name, etc, etc. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say anything named Washington is now fair game. Maybe I should move this to the Columbus thread? Columbus being removed actually helped Americans learn history. Reading some FB comments and articles were jaw dropping. Good point. Columbus was systematically built up and literally placed on a pedestal by the Italian-American community. Most people my age were taught that 1) Columbus discovered the American continents, 2) Columbus proved the world was a globe. We were not taught that 1) Columbus never saw the American continents 2) the Vikings had already been to Canada 3) Columbus thought the world was much smaller than educated people of his time understood, and so was lucky because his ships never would have made it to Asia 4) Pretty much the first thing Columbus did when reaching the Caribbean was to rape, kill, and enslave the people he found there Similarly, the history of the Confederacy had been systematically distorted almost since the war ended. The "Lost Cause" movement spent 100 years denying that the Confederates were a bunch of people who fought a war to preserve their ability to enslave other people.
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jul 7, 2020 12:37:10 GMT -5
What I/we were taught in history class was sanitized, for sure. The bad needs to be taught along with the good. The Founding Fathers did a lot of things right, but they weren’t saints. Wonder how our nations history is taught in reservation schools?
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jul 7, 2020 12:37:25 GMT -5
The Redskins were founded in 1932 in Boston as the Boston Braves and the name was to honor all the Native American tribes in the New England states. They changed their name to the Redskins in 1933 because there was already a Baseball Boston Braves and there was confusion with the same name in the same city in different sports. In 1937 the Boston Redskins relocated to Washington DC and became the Washington Redskins. There have been several polls with the Native Americans regarding the use of the name Redskins and over 90% are not offended by by the term... in fact they like American sports teams using Braves, Chiefs and Redskins because using those names is a sign of respect for the fierce and brave characteristics of the Native American tribes. During the last polling the majority of the Tribal Elders complained that changing the Redskins name was more about the "White Man" Government wanting to do that to sell the idea of being sensitive toward Native Americans and believing that was a big win for the Native Americans instead of changing the laws regarding mineral rights on reservation lands. Native Americans have rights to the land, but do not own the land; it is still considered federal land. The laws in place today on reservation land make it too expensive to drill for oil or mine on reservations. This is why the Tribal Elders, Tribal Councils, etc., feel the Redskins name change is always brought up and discussions are started by the "white lawmakers" so they can act like they are doing good while ignoring the reservation land use laws (Alaska is the only State that Native Americans get compensated for oil rights). Many reservations are not surrounded by populated areas so casinos aren't always a money maker, but making oil and natural gas drilling affordable and competitive with the private sector could make a tribe wealthy and not dependent on US subsidies. Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by joetrinsey on Jul 7, 2020 12:47:40 GMT -5
There have been several polls with the Native Americans regarding the use of the name Redskins and over 90% are not offended by by the term... in fact they like American sports teams using Braves, Chiefs and Redskins because using those names is a sign of respect for the fierce and brave characteristics of the Native American tribes.
Source?
|
|
|
Post by joetrinsey on Jul 7, 2020 12:51:54 GMT -5
Columbus being removed actually helped Americans learn history. Reading some FB comments and articles were jaw dropping. Good point. Columbus was systematically built up and literally placed on a pedestal by the Italian-American community. Most people my age were taught that 1) Columbus discovered the American continents, 2) Columbus proved the world was a globe. We were not taught that 1) Columbus never saw the American continents 2) the Vikings had already been to Canada 3) Columbus thought the world was much smaller than educated people of his time understood, and so was lucky because his ships never would have made it to Asia 4) Pretty much the first thing Columbus did when reaching the Caribbean was to rape, kill, and enslave the people he found there Similarly, the history of the Confederacy had been systematically distorted almost since the war ended. The "Lost Cause" movement spent 100 years denying that the Confederates were a bunch of people who fought a war to preserve their ability to enslave other people.
I don't know if you've seen any of Charles Mann's books, but "1491" in particular adds a lot to any perspective of American history. "1493" has a lot of good information as well, but it's drier to me. (I have both on audio though, so it could just be the different narrator.)
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 7, 2020 13:01:53 GMT -5
The Redskins were founded in 1932 in Boston as the Boston Braves and the name was to honor all the Native American tribes in the New England states. They changed their name to the Redskins in 1933 because there was already a Baseball Boston Braves and there was confusion with the same name in the same city in different sports. In 1937 the Boston Redskins relocated to Washington DC and became the Washington Redskins. There have been several polls with the Native Americans regarding the use of the name Redskins and over 90% are not offended by by the term... in fact they like American sports teams using Braves, Chiefs and Redskins because using those names is a sign of respect for the fierce and brave characteristics of the Native American tribes. During the last polling the majority of the Tribal Elders complained that changing the Redskins name was more about the "White Man" Government wanting to do that to sell the idea of being sensitive toward Native Americans and believing that was a big win for the Native Americans instead of changing the laws regarding mineral rights on reservation lands. Native Americans have rights to the land, but do not own the land; it is still considered federal land. The laws in place today on reservation land make it too expensive to drill for oil or mine on reservations. This is why the Tribal Elders, Tribal Councils, etc., feel the Redskins name change is always brought up and discussions are started by the "white lawmakers" so they can act like they are doing good while ignoring the reservation land use laws (Alaska is the only State that Native Americans get compensated for oil rights). Many reservations are not surrounded by populated areas so casinos aren't always a money maker, but making oil and natural gas drilling affordable and competitive with the private sector could make a tribe wealthy and not dependent on US subsidies. That finding came from 2016. There is some dispute about what it means and how good of a poll it really was. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Redskins_name_opinion_polls#Washington_Post_2016_pollThere is also a larger question of whether a name that is generally considered derogatory (unlike "Braves" or "Chiefs") should be used at all.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 7, 2020 13:11:09 GMT -5
The Redskins were founded in 1932 in Boston as the Boston Braves and the name was to honor all the Native American tribes in the New England states. They changed their name to the Redskins in 1933 because there was already a Baseball Boston Braves and there was confusion with the same name in the same city in different sports. In 1937 the Boston Redskins relocated to Washington DC and became the Washington Redskins. There have been several polls with the Native Americans regarding the use of the name Redskins and over 90% are not offended by by the term... in fact they like American sports teams using Braves, Chiefs and Redskins because using those names is a sign of respect for the fierce and brave characteristics of the Native American tribes. During the last polling the majority of the Tribal Elders complained that changing the Redskins name was more about the "White Man" Government wanting to do that to sell the idea of being sensitive toward Native Americans and believing that was a big win for the Native Americans instead of changing the laws regarding mineral rights on reservation lands. Native Americans have rights to the land, but do not own the land; it is still considered federal land. The laws in place today on reservation land make it too expensive to drill for oil or mine on reservations. This is why the Tribal Elders, Tribal Councils, etc., feel the Redskins name change is always brought up and discussions are started by the "white lawmakers" so they can act like they are doing good while ignoring the reservation land use laws (Alaska is the only State that Native Americans get compensated for oil rights). Many reservations are not surrounded by populated areas so casinos aren't always a money maker, but making oil and natural gas drilling affordable and competitive with the private sector could make a tribe wealthy and not dependent on US subsidies. That finding came from 2016. There is some dispute about what it means and how good of a poll it really was. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Redskins_name_opinion_polls#Washington_Post_2016_pollThere is also a larger question of whether a name that is generally considered derogatory (unlike "Braves" or "Chiefs") should be used at all. Shouldn't Fighting Irish also be in this group or derogatory nicknames?
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Jul 7, 2020 13:20:24 GMT -5
Shouldn't Fighting Irish also be in this group or derogatory nicknames? Fighting Irish is in reference to a Civil War Irish Brigade that an early president of ND fought in, and was solidified after a visit by Eamon de Valera in the early 1900s. Notre Dame has played in Ireland a handful of times in recent years and was always well-received. Unlike the Redskins (and Braves and Chiefs to a lesser extent) the name originated directly from the Irish origins of the team as opposed to a bunch of white guys just choosing the name of another race.
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Jul 7, 2020 14:06:30 GMT -5
The Redskins were founded in 1932 in Boston as the Boston Braves and the name was to honor all the Native American tribes in the New England states. They changed their name to the Redskins in 1933 because there was already a Baseball Boston Braves and there was confusion with the same name in the same city in different sports. In 1937 the Boston Redskins relocated to Washington DC and became the Washington Redskins. There have been several polls with the Native Americans regarding the use of the name Redskins and over 90% are not offended by by the term... in fact they like American sports teams using Braves, Chiefs and Redskins because using those names is a sign of respect for the fierce and brave characteristics of the Native American tribes. During the last polling the majority of the Tribal Elders complained that changing the Redskins name was more about the "White Man" Government wanting to do that to sell the idea of being sensitive toward Native Americans and believing that was a big win for the Native Americans instead of changing the laws regarding mineral rights on reservation lands. Native Americans have rights to the land, but do not own the land; it is still considered federal land. The laws in place today on reservation land make it too expensive to drill for oil or mine on reservations. This is why the Tribal Elders, Tribal Councils, etc., feel the Redskins name change is always brought up and discussions are started by the "white lawmakers" so they can act like they are doing good while ignoring the reservation land use laws (Alaska is the only State that Native Americans get compensated for oil rights). Many reservations are not surrounded by populated areas so casinos aren't always a money maker, but making oil and natural gas drilling affordable and competitive with the private sector could make a tribe wealthy and not dependent on US subsidies. The actual history of the name is slightly different - the team was moving from the home of the baseball Braves to Fenway Park, and wanted something more aligned with Fenway’s primary tenant, the Red Sox. Ergo, “Redskins.” As an aside, the Redskins were owned by the openly racist and staunch segregationist George Preston Marshall. The Redskins were the last team in the NFL to allow Blacks on the squad (1962), and that only happened because Robert F. Kennedy threatened to pull their lease if Marshall didn’t desegregate, as the stadium was built on federal land.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jul 7, 2020 14:16:00 GMT -5
Good point. Columbus was systematically built up and literally placed on a pedestal by the Italian-American community. Most people my age were taught that 1) Columbus discovered the American continents, 2) Columbus proved the world was a globe. We were not taught that 1) Columbus never saw the American continents 2) the Vikings had already been to Canada 3) Columbus thought the world was much smaller than educated people of his time understood, and so was lucky because his ships never would have made it to Asia 4) Pretty much the first thing Columbus did when reaching the Caribbean was to rape, kill, and enslave the people he found there Similarly, the history of the Confederacy had been systematically distorted almost since the war ended. The "Lost Cause" movement spent 100 years denying that the Confederates were a bunch of people who fought a war to preserve their ability to enslave other people. I don't know if you've seen any of Charles Mann's books, but "1491" in particular adds a lot to any perspective of American history. "1493" has a lot of good information as well, but it's drier to me. (I have both on audio though, so it could just be the different narrator.)
1491 is an exceptional book. Incredibly interesting read.
|
|