Prescott -> RE: Vikes Water Cooler Thread (6/1/2014 10:35:55 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JT2 quote:
ORIGINAL: unome First, let me say that I would never name a team Redskins and do not like the name one bit. However, my Native American friend is a big Redskins fan BECAUSE of the name/mascot. The Raiders are the most popular team for Natives in the area I grew up in, but the Redskins are probably the second most popular team and I would assume it is the name and mascot they like. Also, I have never heard Redskin used as a slur. It is nothing even vaguely like the N word, at least in my experience. When people would put down Natives, I would hear words like "drunk lazy Indian", but the word Indian was not a slur, it was obviously the adjectives preceding it that were the slams. The driving force behind wanting the name Redskins changed is political correctness. This is fine by me as I think it is a very politically incorrect name, but lets not pretend that most Natives are all broken up about this name, because I really do not think that is accurate. Many actually like it. [:-] Beat a group of people down, over and over. Steal their land and break treaties that you authored. I'm not at all surprised that the remaining Native Americans don't give a shit about the name of a football team. Quite likely they have more important things to worry about. How can right vs. wrong be so cloudy? How can our history be so selectively recalled? As a nation, we have a relatively short history. Some of our history is great, and we should be proud. Some of our history is shameful. Time to move on and if we have to error, lets error on the side of right. The side of human beings. If only all of us could spend just one day in the shoes of our enemy. Exactly. When I was a kid, I thought 'honest injun' and 'indian giver' were perfectly ok. And not because I didn't think about it. I hated the story of what 'we' did to the Indians, but I thought those terms were fitting, as the Indians were the honest ones, and we were the liars. And 'indian giver' meant that 'we' pretended to give, but took it back. Then I spent some time around actual native Americans. And you realize it doesn't matter what my personal intent was. What mattered was their feelings, and using throw away terms like put me in the category of someone who thought of them as lesser, even if that wasn't my intent. So I stopped right quick. I didn't try to explain my intent so I could keep using them around them, debate them into submission so I could feel good about calling them 'injuns'. Now, you might find native Americans that don't care, or even 'like' redskin, that wouldn't surprise me. "****" is a term an entire people took back and made popular. But I know for a fact that a fair number of the ones I know hated it. Most because they had been subjected to 'dirty ****ing redskin' racism too many times. No one came up to them and said 'you're a proud, noble redskin, I respect you'. That wasn't reality for them. It was 'want some firewater you dirty redskin, go the **** back to your reservation' with sneers. I also know that there are many native Americans that have been actively trying to get these names changed for decades now. They're not made up, they are fake, they're not a product of white guilt. They're small because we almost exterminated them, and they do have better things to do with their time, but the National Congress of American Indians has made their position clear. Dozens of tribes have officially asked for the name to change. As the fighting Sioux showed, if you're willing to spend money, which Snyder certainly is, you can fight and wear down and make people mostly give up. But that doesn't make it right.
|
|
|
|