Target sees the Redskins end game

[MHS831]

Any reference to skin color is offensive.   If you have a thick skin about what other races should and should not tolerate, good for you.  That makes you a bigot.

 

"But a comedian once said...."  good argument.

[Growl]

Any reference to skin color is offensive.

This is without challenge the stupidest most naive sentiment I have ever seen on this website.

Time to grow up and join reality.

[Frizzy350]

Any reference to skin color is offensive.   If you have a thick skin about what other races should and should not tolerate, good for you.  That makes you a bigot.

 

"But a comedian once said...."  good argument.

 

A visual description of a person is offensive?  I'd argue it's less offensive than the term "Indian" (Cleveland Indians).  American Natives were incorrectly given this name when settlers came to the Americas thinking they landed in India.

 

Heck the term African American is pretty damn misleading and is used to describe any black person in America.

White people are born in Africa, why is it that if they legally migrate to America they aren't African American?

What do you call a black person who lives in the UK?

This term also assumes all black people who live in the United States have lineage back to the continent of Africa, despite the fact that black people come from many different places like Haiti, Jamaica, the Caribbean, Trinidad, etc.

 

Offense is derived from context.  Constantly bickering about the proper nomenclature is a power grab utilized to manipulate and distract people from participating in discussion on actual problems in the US (and elsewhere).

 

In fact forcing a name change sounds an awful lot like the assimilation Native Americans were forced through.  When we had Natives attend English speaking schools, gave them English names, forced our religion(s) upon them and tore them from their previous way of life. 

[Growl]

A visual description of a person is offensive? I'd argue it's less offensive than the term "Indian" (Cleveland Indians). American Natives were incorrectly given this name when settlers came to the Americas thinking they landed in India.

Heck the term African American is pretty damn misleading and is used to describe any black person in America.

White people are born in Africa, why is it that if they legally migrate to America they aren't African American?

What do you call a black person who lives in the UK?

This term also assumes all black people who live in the United States have lineage back to the continent of Africa, despite the fact that black people come from many different places like Haiti, Jamaica, the Caribbean, Trinidad, etc.

Offense is derived from context. Constantly bickering about the proper nomenclature is a power grab utilized to manipulate and distract people from participating in discussion on actual problems in the US (and elsewhere).

In fact forcing a name change sounds an awful lot like the assimilation Native Americans were forced through. When we had Natives attend English speaking schools, gave them English names, forced our religion(s) upon them and tore them from their previous way of life.

It's okay for us libs to try and paint the world over though to every passing fart of a desire we pick up, because unlike those evil religious folk setllrs back then, we are truly enlighteneed with our progressiveness and our science and our elitist attitudes.

how is this irony lost on so many lefters

[Stroupe-a-loop]

Nah, trust me, redskin is offensive. Because you people don't call them redskins, you call them indians or native americans.

[Stroupe-a-loop]

In fact forcing a name change sounds an awful lot like the assimilation Native Americans were forced through. When we had Natives attend English speaking schools, gave them English names, forced our religion(s) upon them and tore them from their previous way of life.

Haha, that's the funniest thing I've ever read. Is that too many characters for a signature?

[Mol3m4n]

Any reference to skin color is offensive. If you have a thick skin about what other races should and should not tolerate, good for you. That makes you a bigot.

"But a comedian once said...." good argument.

The Washington Thickskins

Sent from my SCH-R970 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[Chimera]

Call 'em the Washington Orangeteeth so we can argue "but not ALL trailer trash have teeth"

[MHS831]

This is without challenge the stupidest most naive sentiment I have ever seen on this website.

Time to grow up and join reality.

 

Refer to the tribe, the name, but to refer to any group of people by skin color is racist.  Now, maybe the people at your rally will agree with you, but I doubt you are in a position to call anyone stupid.  You are just a narrow-minded moron who thinks football tradition, albeit bigoted, is more important than the dignity of a race of people. 

 

Call a native American "Red" or "hey redskin" and tell me about reality.  Until then, better to keep your mouth shut about what should and should not offend people in races you are not part of.  You personify bigotry with your response, but most never see it, because they are too busy telling people what reality is-as if they actually know.

 

 

[MHS831]

A visual description of a person is offensive?  I'd argue it's less offensive than the term "Indian" (Cleveland Indians).  American Natives were incorrectly given this name when settlers came to the Americas thinking they landed in India.

 

Heck the term African American is pretty damn misleading and is used to describe any black person in America.

White people are born in Africa, why is it that if they legally migrate to America they aren't African American?

What do you call a black person who lives in the UK?

This term also assumes all black people who live in the United States have lineage back to the continent of Africa, despite the fact that black people come from many different places like Haiti, Jamaica, the Caribbean, Trinidad, etc.

 

Offense is derived from context.  Constantly bickering about the proper nomenclature is a power grab utilized to manipulate and distract people from participating in discussion on actual problems in the US (and elsewhere).

 

In fact forcing a name change sounds an awful lot like the assimilation Native Americans were forced through.  When we had Natives attend English speaking schools, gave them English names, forced our religion(s) upon them and tore them from their previous way of life. 

The people had a name--Cherokees or Navaho- but to classify them as a skin color is bigoted--It was probably not meant to be a negative comment, but it was a stupid one (even 100 years ago or whatever).  I agree that the Cleveland Indians is also disturbing, but not because they were misnamed, because that logo is demeaning.

 

I do not see how misnaming a race is more offensive than classifying it by skin color.

 

I didn't coin the term "African American" but I tend to agree that it is misleading. However, I don't know of any black people not of African origin to be offended if called it.  I do, however, think they would be offended if we called them blackskins--as they should.

[PhillyB]

It's okay for us libs to try and paint the world over though to every passing fart of a desire we pick up, because unlike those evil religious folk setllrs back then, we are truly enlighteneed with our progressiveness and our science and our elitist attitudes.

how is this irony lost on so many lefters

 

please answer the following question: would you call a native american "redskin" to his face?

 

like if you saw a native american walking by, would you say "hey redskin!" and wave? if someone did that would you consider it appropriate?

[TheRed]

It's a shame Growl doesn't post in the tinderbox more often, I think he would give MadHatter a run for his money.

[TheRumGone]

i'm just waiting for the "only 40% of native americans find it offensive" post and then this will wrap up quite nicely.

[Frizzy350]

The people had a name--Cherokees or Navaho- but to classify them as a skin color is bigoted--It was probably not meant to be a negative comment, but it was a stupid one (even 100 years ago or whatever).  I agree that the Cleveland Indians is also disturbing, but not because they were misnamed, because that logo is demeaning.

 

I do not see how misnaming a race is more offensive than classifying it by skin color.

 

I didn't coin the term "African American" but I tend to agree that it is misleading. However, I don't know of any black people not of African origin to be offended if called it.  I do, however, think they would be offended if we called them blackskins--as they should.

 

You do realize the term "redskin" isn't even related to the color of their skin.  It was used to describe native american warriors that wore red war paint. Regardless, on we go.

 

I like that you point out that there were at least two native american tribes (of course there were way more than that, and in the interest of time I understand why you wouldn't list more) that had actual names and as such should be represented through one of said names because placing them all under one umbrella term that physically describes the color of their skin is "offensive".

 

Why is it then that we don't refer to actual African Americans by the name of the African tribe they hail from?  Or heck just AN African tribe?  They have names too.

 

This is a cyclical political power grab. The politically correct term for African Americans at one point was *****(spanish for black), at another point was colored, at another point was black, etc.  Somebody wants to get attention, they pick race and point out flaws in the current nomenclature, then lobby for a new term.  Quick way to get your name on the map (and oftentimes be labeled a "hero").

 

Us dumb sheep sit here and back them up saying "ohh but its offensive and because you say the word it makes you a racist/bigot despite your context".  I don't get offended when people call me white despite the fact that I'm a Croatian.  That would be because it is an indisputable fact that my skin is white; just like the sky is blue and grass is green.

 

I've wasted 15 minutes of my day logically raping the huddle over this.  How much of your time are you going to spend harping on this?  This is time that could be used to:

1. Find a better job.

2. Cook a kick ass meal.

3. Have sex.

4. Spend time with your family.

5. Give a poo about real issues that effect your ability to do the above.

 

Have a wonderful Monday everyone : ).