Friday, May 8, 2015
What's in a Name?
Read the article located at the following link:
What's in a Name?
After reading the article, take a minute and really think about this issue? In fact, ask yourself, "What is the real issue?". What is the debate here? What are your thoughts on the matter?
After you have thought about it for a few minutes, read at least 1 "Yes" argument and at least 1 "No" argument. You can find these listed below the main article. Does looking at opinions from both sides of the issue affect your own thoughts and feelings?
We are going to "debate/discuss" this topic as a class. Please feel free to continue your own independent research on the topic to prepare yourself. You can also spend this time formulating a solid argument of your own.
Closing:
After we have completed our class discussion, please respond to this post with your own comments. Your response should be no shorter that 1 well-crafted paragraph (and will probably be longer) stating your feelings and giving your thought-process on the matter.
Please feel free comment on the the responses of your peers, but remember, this is an academic discussion and all comments must be thoughtful, respectful and interesting!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wow! Difficult conversation today. I had no idea that this topic would get such a reaction from Wave II. Even though I think some of the arguments about native americans not being offended by the name were well intended, I am still steadfast in my feelings that we should support empathy wherever and whenever possible. Bottom line...the team name is racially offensive. Change it. be respectful of both culture and history and move forward.
ReplyDeleteAs I stated earlier in the conversation, I don't care about this issue all too much. As far as I'm concerned, a word is a word is a word is a word is a word. If they change their name, that's their choice. If they don't, that's their choice. Maybe it's just because I've never been the target of racial epitaphs, but I don't completely understand how they can be so offensive.
ReplyDeleteWell, like Mr. T and Ethan said, it is a racial slur, and it probably should change. We could sit here till the sun goes all Nova on us, and we could still argue this point. but it does mean something in a negative way. Kinda like in the 40's when they called the Germans "Krauts" as a derogatory term. I'm not saying they didn't deserve it for what they were doing, but it still holds weight as an offensive term. Same thing where I come from, in Scotland, they would sometimes call the Scots "Orangemen" because of supporting this one ruler...I forgot the name but it had orange in it, and because the scots had, like I do, more or less, orange hair. (I don't really but you get my point.) They really hated that, so why should it be any different for the N-word or Redskins, for that matter? The same thing happened (REFERENCE ALERT) in the Cold War with the Russians. Because they had a red banner, they were called Reds. So basically, what I'm saying here, is that it's probably a bad idea to keep that. And really, the name doesn't keep the memory, the fans do.
ReplyDeleteThe Washington football team name is an offensive racial slur. That is an obvious point that needs to be written down. However, based on a recent survey, 90% of Native Americans actually do not mind this name. Relating to this, the name 'Redskins' is not meant to be derogatory as the title of a football team - it's supposed to be an iconic name that brings back memories from a rich 81-year history. Adding on to this, a business (in this case, the ownership of the team) has the right to the freedom to name their team. The name 'Redskins' is not right. That is a fact. However, in this day, it is not supposed to discriminate as it was 80 years ago, it is supposed to bring back history, such as the memories of greats such as Sonny Jurgensen and John Riggins. Therefore, I believe that it is racially valid to change the name, but I do not believe that it is a necessary duty.
ReplyDeleteI personally believe that the team SHOULD NOT have to change their name.
ReplyDeleteFootball is an important part of American culture, and while I don't generally care about football or anything related to it, I believe that the business should be allowed to decide what they name their team.
The media is attacking the Redskins in particular, but why aren't they attacking the (I think this is what they're called) Indians (The ones with the red heads and blue/white feathers sticking out of their heads. I'm pretty sure that they're from Ohio.)? Or the Seminoles (I know that the tribe supports the team, but still)?
We have to have consistency in who we attack, or we're just as bad as the League of Nations in relation to Greece.
I agree. Nice reference. BTW, doesn't the media attack everything? I mean, all it takes is one greedy reporter who wants attention and a raise for getting a good story to basically, in Lincoln's terms, "Divide the house(Country in this case.)"
DeleteThe term Redskins is used to describe Native Americans. It is also a football team in the NFL, that recently has had controversy. Native Americans are offended by this term and asked for a name change, I agree with this statement. This does not take a lot of effort, for nothing will change with this effect. As declared in the Declaration of Independence states you are not allowed to take away someones pursuit of happiness. These people are unable to pursue that right when the Redskins is jeopardizing this pursuit. This is just an unfair way of singling out a group/individual because of racial biased.
ReplyDeleteThe term "redskins" has been put out there as a derogatory term, primarily for its history. However, the team name has been around for a long time (~80 years), and throughout that time no one complained about it. Statistically, around 70% of people do not think the team name should be changed, for one reason or another. Additionally, the business has its own rights to do whatever they want, especially in terms of increasing their business and profit. Also, the cost to change all of the existing and produced merchandise, team gear, fan bases, and stadiums are very expensive and time consuming for the team.
ReplyDeleteOverall the name change would be a major cost for the team, in terms of fans and money.
The term "Redskin" is an offensive word. In the dictionary, it says the term Redskin is "a contemptuous term used to refer to a North American Indian." Also, the founder of the Washington Redskins actually changed his teams name from the Boston Braves to the Washington Redskin. The founder was a widely known racist. This shows that even though many people are claiming that there is no intentional racial slur there, there actually was supposed to be a slur.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the name 'red skis' is offensive to those who have a harsh background. The name 'red skins' is associated with the color pigment and it is just as offensive as calling someone by their color. The history of this name is very harsh as it is related to paying bounties for killing native americans. The team does have the right to decide whether they should change their name or not but out of respect and morality I think they should change their name. I realize that they do have a good history as a team but to know that you are RELATING a happy thought with a painful thought is difficult. Overall I think that this team should change their name.
ReplyDeleteI am on the fence between both sides
DeleteI believe that, although it may not be morally right to keep the name Redskins, it is legal. The company can choose to have whatever name they would like. I think this controversy should be solved democratically. If majority of Indians find it offensive and majority of people, including fans, are ok with the change and understand it, then the name should be changed. However, at this time, that is not the case. Only 10% of Native Americans found the term offensive. Also, only 18% of polled people thought the name should be changed. Another poll showed that 18-29 year olds, the youngest group, were the most accepting to change. This proves many thoughts that the new generation is the most empathetic. So, although the name should not change now because there are less people wanting change then for it, there is a good chance that it will as time goes on because the upcoming society and generation might empathize more.
ReplyDelete-Alexa Twibell
I feel that the name of the football team should not be changed. I believe this because even though I am Polish (targeted for stupidity), Mexican (targeted for being border crossers and other stuff), and Native American, it should not effect the way people feel about a sports team. For example, cowboys aren't offended by the team name and the team fans actually have fun dressing like real cowboys when getting ready for a game. I think that a name should allow people to have fun and dress for their team, rather than being something offensive. Also, if younger people are okay with the name, that should be all that matters because the younger generation is the one that will be living in 30 years. I don't believe that the team should have to change its name if they don't want to.
ReplyDelete~ Gigi Ruiz
Redskin is a racial slur just as bad as any other, it is connected to a long history of awful events. It is extremely offensive to native americans and should not be used in any way shape or form. The Washington red skins need to change their name. It may legally be ok but it is morally wrong in every way.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Washington Redskins should not change their name because it is morally incorrect and offends part of America's population.
ReplyDeleteI do not even know why we distinguish races now other than for biological purposes, since the wonderful event were all races were brought equal in America. I have grown very uncomfortable with distinguishing races or even stating a races name (even if it is my own race) because I do not believe that races should be distinguished.
Finally, I believe that the name wrongfully brings bad memories to a portion of America, and that the Washington Redskins should recognize that.
My personal feelings on this topic are mixed. I believe that the term redskins is offensive to Native Americans, but I also feel that the team has the right to keep it that way if they choose. The people have the right to be offended by the term and have a very good reason too. To Native Americans, the term Redskins is equally as hurtful as the N-word or the W-word. They have every right to be offended and to request a change in the name. On the other hand however, the team also has the right to ignore these requests. They have the right to keep the name how it is even if it is hurtful to other people. The team listens to the requests to change the name, but they choose to ignore it.
ReplyDelete~Sophia Kimble
Redskin is a racial slur! Just as derogatory as any other racial slur! Should be changed now no matter what the circumstance! There should never be a team named with any other racial slur and even if there was it wouldn't be an issue because it would have already been changed by now. There is now reason to back up those who think that this name is not a problem.
ReplyDeleteI think that the redskins should definitely change their name. While the first amendment does allow the freedom of speech, having this name is infringing the rights of other people. I am sure it will be argued, but at my old school, I was bullied by a black boy who was 2 years older than me. Many of his insults included calling me the n-word an amount that i lost track of. Even though the term didn't actually apply to me, I was still hurt by this. Before reading these articles, I could not have cared less about this issue, but now knowing that tis word is the social equivalent of the n-word, I know that even if there are less people opposing it, I know that there are people even more offended than I was. While I agree with Ethan Grosso and Hannah that the meaning of the word comes from the intent, but I found many articles similar to what Ryan stated where the person who named the redskins did have racial intents. The polls that stated that many people didn't care were biased. The poll that Meredith gave said that they interviewed people who stated that they were native american. this means that they are not at all ashamed of their race and consequently the insults tied to it. the ones who were offended were accepting their race because they figured they had to.
ReplyDeletesorry, my comment may not have made sense because i was just typing without really tying it together
ReplyDeleteI think that this is the team's decision. They get to decide what to do with their name. They will decide based on what the word means to them, and how they will benefit or suffer from their actions. If you do not like the name then don't support the team. Not changing the name might hurt you, but changing the name might hurt others. Most people who this word actually applies to do not feel affected by this. Changing the name will not directly affect them much economically, but it might in the long run. They could lose a major portion of their fans by changing it, and the fans are the ones who actually pay their bills. They are not losing many fans by not changing it, and that is the safer option for the team. If something works well you do not you the opposite. You can change, and tweak it, but completely doing the opposite of what has a good outcome can change the outcome to a negative one. If they feel that it needs to change they will change it. This is only racist if you perceive it as so. There are other teams with this problem, but the fans don't mind, so it is not an issue. If this does not affect the people who it refers to, then it should not even be a problem. When someone says what are the redskins most people would say a football team. Only a few would say it is a term to separate native americans from others. The name does not have that meaning anymore. If someone makes a team name with a racist background then after time people will not want to change it. It does not have a racist meaning because it is attached to the team. The wrong people are arguing against it. If you are not affected personally, and you think it affects them stop arguing. Native Americans that are offended can stick up for themselves. Our job is to recognise it if they complain, not to start the complaining on our own. If people are making it public that they are hurt by this then you have to respect them, but the people who would be offended are not offended so why should we be.
ReplyDeleteMy personal opinion on this issue is that the term "Redskins" is somewhat offensive, and if the name was changed, there is a good reason behind it. People should not love a team for a name. If that's why you are attached to something, find something else that you really do enjoy, whatever name it has! Think about the quote from Shakespeare: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." A team by any name would play just as well.
ReplyDeleteThere is another side that I can see, but I don't agree with this. If we look from a business standpoint, sure, it cost $15 million to rename a team. However, do you think that the money is worth racial offense? Are you going to save a little but of money but constantly keep a level of segregation based on the color of skin?
Another view: the history. Yeah, we associate this name with some success. Still, are you going to support a racist owner to keep a little bit of success? The player will still have the same record and then combination of skill will be the same.
Thinking about my favorite team, The Florida State Seminoles, they are shaped after an Indian tribe. However, they have consent from the tribe. They have some base to use this name. The tribe wanted them to follow traditions: the spear, the chief, the horse. They can use this name. I don't see it a racist. I see it as a continuation of tribal routines.
If you love a team, it should be because of the people, not the name. If they change the name to be less racially offensive, why would you fight that?