Posted Monday 06/01/2009 1:30 PM in
NFL by Fatpickle
Filed under: washington redskins, chief zee, native americans
Thanks to a court ruling last week, I'm still a fan of the Washington Redskins. Not the Washington Presidents, or the Washington Johnny Rockets, or some other name that I could never imagine.

I (like most of you) have spent a lifetime bleeding burgundy and gold, singing the words "braves on the warpath" and rooting for my Skins. I've never once in my 30 years as a fan thought of the name "Redskins" as being offensive or racist. I've never heard nor said an off color or racist remark about the name. I've never heard one of the 90,000 drunken fans at Fedex field say anything derogatory about the name...even when the Redskins have a sucky day or a bad loss. In fact, I am proud of the name, proud of the team, and proud of the history and heritage of Native Americans. But who am I too voice my opinion? I'm just an ordinary white guy who can't jump and can't dance (especially when I think I can dance, usually around beer 8 or 9).
Well, I happen to be a part of a large group of people that believe that the Washington Redskins are a tribute to Native Americans. That group of people happens to include the Native Americans themselves. Yes that's right, 90% of American Indians do not find the term "Redskins" offensive in any way. Lets stop and think about this for a minute. Do you think 80 years ago the Redskins chose their team name to personally offend an entire race? Is that really how team names are chosen? No, they are chosen as a tribute to something. And without those teams that honor the American Indian, how often would we be reminded of our Native American history? I think that the people that bring on these lawsuits are only interested in what the root of all lawsuits boil down to...$money$ and notoriety.
I've been a fan of many of the names that have graced the backs of the jersey's. Monk, Riggins, Green, and Cooley to name a few. But, the names on the back of the jersey's change quite often. However, the Redskins name and the burgundy and gold is a lifetime relationship for me (and for you). Rooting for another team, or even the same team with a different name just wouldn't be right. I have to give Dan Snyder props for fighting in court and spending loads of cash to keep the tradition and history of the Redskins intact.

So hip,hip, hooray to Chief Zee, that guy on the side of the helmets, and the Indians getting to mix it up twice a year with those Cowboys. And if you find that offensive, spend the day surfing the Internet...I think there's a lot worse things you could focus on.
Cheers and Hail
| MOST RECENT COMMENTS | |
| Posted by DC on 06/02/2009 8:59 AM | report abuse |
|
Thank God that there is still a voice of reason in the court system. Of all of the things that are wrong with America, I think that Native American team names are the least of our worries.
I'm a big time Atlanta Braves fan and I dont think I could still be a fan if they were forced to change their name.
Political Correctness is getting way out of hand these days.
|
|
| Posted by HulkSmashNow on 06/02/2009 10:22 AM | report abuse |
|
Yeah, it's not racist...how about a basketball team called the Harlem Jigaboos or a baseball team called the El Paso Wetbacks? "Redskins" is an offensive term to American Indians!
|
|
| Posted by Q on 06/10/2009 2:05 AM | report abuse |
|
Anyone who thinks a reference to someone's skin isn't offensive is an idiot. Obviously the Native Americans being asked this question are under the age of 21. Any Native American born before 1965 would fight you if you called him one. A Chief can be anything, so I don't see how that's offensive, but a Brave is a North American Indian tribe warrior per Webster's Dictionary. So, if someone calls themselves something that is almost exclusively from my heritage, I can see the disrespect in that. Saying someone IS brave is different than calling someone a Brave. That's like a white guy calling himself a brotha although that term is generally associated with black guys. It's not offensive, but it can be deemed as disrespectful in the sense that "who are you to call yourself a name of my people?". But, that's reaching on those points. Redskins, definitely offensive, Braves/Chiefs are disrespectful. As for the court system, if the people who ruled over this were Native American, then I'll let it be. But no white man can ever tell anyone Redskin isn't offensive being that they gave them the name to begin with.
|
|
| Posted by me on 06/15/2009 5:55 PM | report abuse |
|
Is the name racist? Yes. But they've been the Redskins since 1933 - they won't be changing their name - get over it.
|
|
| Posted by Evo on 09/15/2009 10:14 AM | report abuse |
|
I don't know wtf I am doing reading a Maxim article and expecting it to be reasonable or thoughtful by any stretch of the imagination. This failed big time. A white dude does not get to decide what is or is not offensive to a group of people who were nearly wiped off the face of the earth by white people. Period! This article is offensive as hell. The name is offensive as hell. DC changed the Bullets to the Wizards but can't change the Redskins? I call racist bullshit.
|
|
|
|
|