Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:Would these names offend anyone?

 

Atlanta Black Crackers

Washington Black Senators

Indianapolis Ethiopian Clowns

Zulu Cannibal Giants

The Zulu Cannibal Giants would be sweet  :whistling:

This would be hilarious if true.

So, are we going to have to refer to it as the "R" word?


If I scream out "What's up my redskin?" Are people going to give me that dirty look?

Quote:Would these names offend anyone?

 

Atlanta Black Crackers

Washington Black Senators

Indianapolis Ethiopian Clowns

Zulu Cannibal Giants

 

Not me.

 

However it might offend Ethiopian clowns...

Quote:Not me.

 

However it might offend Ethiopian clowns...

Those Ethiopian clowns have such thin skins.

Quote:Would these names offend anyone?

 

Atlanta Black Crackers

Washington Black Senators

Indianapolis Ethiopian Clowns

Zulu Cannibal Giants

i know this kinda just an attempt to be funny and make a point thats been made a million times, but i do agree with your point and i think its more simple than that.... if u changed simply the color in REDSKINS to black, white, yellow, brown, the name would probably have been deemed racist and changed a long time ago.

 

problem is, racism isnt just referring to skin color, it's definition is the belief that one race has superiority over another... so a reference to skin color is technically not racist, not to mention racism is NOT illegal... morally wrong? absolutely, should it be cultural taboo? definitely,  but not illegal.... discrimination , which is often a result of racism, is the part that is illegal, whole other conversation in its self .... what im getting at is, calling a team the redskins is not actually being racist since you are not claiming redskins are inferior of superior to any other race, its just a reference/ label.... imo, the choice is on Dan and i think he will have support either way he goes... but i think there are certainly compelling arguments for both sides.

Quote:i know this kinda just an attempt to be funny and make a point thats been made a million times, but i do agree with your point and i think its more simple than that.... if u changed simply the color in REDSKINS to black, white, yellow, brown, the name would probably have been deemed racist and changed a long time ago.

 

problem is, racism isnt just referring to skin color, it's definition is the belief that one race has superiority over another... so a reference to skin color is technically not racist, not to mention racism is NOT illegal... morally wrong? absolutely, should it be cultural taboo? definitely,  but not illegal.... discrimination , which is often a result of racism, is the part that is illegal, whole other conversation in its self .... what im getting at is, calling a team the redskins is not actually being racist since you are not claiming redskins are inferior of superior to any other race, its just a reference/ label.... imo, the choice is on Dan and i think he will have support either way he goes... but i think there are certainly compelling arguments for both sides.

 

 

 

:blink:

 

 

Sheldon?

Quote: :blink:

 

 

Sheldon?

LOL, had a few beers fishing today and felt like i could argue anything.... dont hate  :thumbsup:

 

edit: this also may have been the reason for me shredding david lahm in sidelines section.

Quote: .... what im getting at is, calling a team the redskins is not actually being racist since you are not claiming redskins are inferior of superior to any other race, its just a reference/ label...

 

well, it used to be.  I dont know that "redskins" had quite the same pejorative degree that other slurs do... such as the n-word.  But in essence it was used the exact same way.  So I would argue it was much worse than just a reference or a label.

 

The interesting thing to me though is that negative meaning of "redskins" has kind of disappeared.  There are offensive words for black folks, hispanics, jews, etc... and when you hear those offensive words, that is your first thought.  But when you hear redskins now, I dont believe most people think the pejorative word, but instead they think the football team.  In fact, I don't know that I've ever heard the word redskins used as a slur.  And I've lived out West in area's where a significant percent of the population is native american.  You just don't hear that word used that way anymore.  Which is the interesting part of this to me.  Hypothetically there may be a word that once was used as a slur to describe Scottish people.  And maybe that word has become part of common vernacular but not as a slur.  But because it was once used a slur, should all people of Scottish heritage be offended and should the word be banned?  Even if no one uses it as a slur anymore?  The meaning of words evolve as time evolves.  

 

Clearly the word redskins offends some people still.  But it wouldnt surprise me if in another 100 years the pejorative definition is almost completely gone from memory.  And it no longer is considered something too offensive.