Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Beginning of the End For the Redskins?


Recommended Posts

I understand peoples complaints about our country being too politically correct. but what if it was Washington Ni66rs of Washington Pekerw00ds? It's offensive and racist thats all there is to it. Not being a Native American dosen"t  make it ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Washington Disappointments.

It embodies Washington D.C. sports completely. The Redskins have a strong fanbase that gets let down plenty, the Nats at one point swore they had the best pitcher in the game, and he hasn't helped them get over the hump much, and the Caps always find a way to come up just short of being an actual contender for a Stanley Cup.

All my friends are DC sports fans and I love laughing at them when their dreams get shattered every year. Having the wizards and caps lose on the same night was particularly entertaining. And then thinking Paul pierce made that game winner only to have it called back. You can't write this gold lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having your culture mocked and riduculed is a little different, and I don't expect those that haven't been on the receiving end of it to fully understand.

I don't personally lose sleep over it, but I can understand how some can be deeply offended by seeing some white guy wearing "war paint" and feathers riding a horse with a spear into a football stadium.

75-010_1.jpg

What about my ancestors:Celtic Warriors that actually wore war paint.....and hey...they were white.

http://www.infoplease.com/dk/encyclopedia/celts.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

75-010_1.jpg

What about my ancestors:Celtic Warriors that actually wore war paint.....and hey...they were white.

http://www.infoplease.com/dk/encyclopedia/celts.html

 

Quite honestly, I don't have the foggiest idea. Not a clue. I'm totally ignorant of the history, other than what they may have touched on in junior high school, which was that they were warriors fighting in what is modern day Europe a few thousand years ago.

I'm not personally offended by the Boston Celtics mascot because I don't know what your people would find offensive. But if you or someone else came to me and said they were offended by my wearing a Celtic caricature, even if it was just 1 person, then I would stop wearing it. I wouldn't take a poll of black or Hispanic or native american people to get their opinions on what Celtic people should find offensive. I now know first hand that it's offensive to some. And I would respect you and your culture and not deliberately do offensive things. It's just common decency in my book. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He wasn't just some old white dude. He was one of many white men in positions of power and wealth in that era who were vehemently opposed to civil rights.

Maybe instead of making quips and diminishing that, you could do a little research of your own on the matter before wondering aloud how a man like that who would use a racial slur to name his professional football team could possibly be racist. The fact that "Redskins" was even acceptable back then, and could still possibly exist today in the year 2015, speaks to the flawed archaic mindset that still resonates with some of our population.

what? you think im defending the name, in fact, i dont give a fug about it at all! and i know that marshall wasn't too fond of black people (though it was also about the $$$ because the r-words were THE team for southerners back then, as cowboys, falcons etc didn't exist yet).

im just wondering why he named his team after a group of people he supposedly despised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what? you think im defending the name, in fact, i dont give a fug about it at all! and i know that marshall wasn't too fond of black people (though it was also about the $$$ because the r-words were THE team for southerners back then, as cowboys, falcons etc didn't exist yet).

im just wondering why he named his team after a group of people he supposedly despised.

I don't think people are arguing that he despised native americans.

Rather that instead, as a staunch segregationist, he was operating on an old very flawed and bigoted mentality going back to when plantation owners viewed slaves as nothing more than property, which was clearly demonstrated by his well documented unwillingness to have any black players on his team. He didn't view black players as equals to individuals such as himself, and it certainly stands to reason that he didn't view natives much better either, except to be used as property in the form of a caricature for his sports franchise only to further his own financial gain.

The name, and the legacy of the man from which it originated should have been left long ago in the tainted era in which he lived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If something is offensive then it shouldn't protected by free speech or any other GOP right to be a pubic a hole logic.

Here lies the problem. Free speech is supposed to be for EVERYONE, not just those who agree with you. The idea that something shouldn't be protected as free speech because it offends you is the very antithesis of free speech. If you don't like the name or policy behind a private corporation then you have every right to choose not to patronize it. But in no way do you have the right to force that company to change. Offended by the name Redskins? Don't be a fan. Don't buy their merch. Don't go to their games. Protest all you want. Wether you support the name or not, I will say Dan Snyder has earned more respect from me for sticking to his guns than anything he ever did on the field. He is not backing down for the bullies that are trying to force him to concede. It's refreshing to see someone take a stand rather than fold to liberal pundits who are adamant we should never offend anyone. Your self-righteousness offends me. Get over yourself. PS- not a conservative or a liberal. Just tired of these idiots pussifying my country.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here lies the problem. Free speech is supposed to be for EVERYONE, not just those who agree with you. The idea that something shouldn't be protected as free speech because it offends you is the very antithesis of free speech. If you don't like the name or policy behind a private corporation then you have every right to choose not to patronize it. But in no way do you have the right to force that company to change. Offended by the name Redskins? Don't be a fan. Don't buy their merch. Don't go to their games. Protest all you want. Wether you support the name or not, I will say Dan Snyder has earned more respect from me for sticking to his guns than anything he ever did on the field. He is not backing down for the bullies that are trying to force him to concede. It's refreshing to see someone take a stand rather than fold to liberal pundits who are adamant we should never offend anyone. Your self-righteousness offends me. Get over yourself. PS- not a conservative or a liberal. Just tired of these idiots pussifying my country.

Free speech just means that you won't get prosecuted by your government for expressing your opinion. Nobody is arresting Dan Snyder for keeping the offensive name or expressing his opinion,, so the laws are working as intended. Does he deserve the privilege of trademark protection for an offensive logo? Maybe not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh geez, someone always has to come in squawking about free speech.

Funny how they're all about free speech and how it's for everyone until it comes time to rant about the liberals "pussifying my country" with political correctness. Then it's time for those liberals to shut the hell up about racist sports names and caricatures, and the free speech that is supposedly "for everyone" goes right out the window.

Dan Snyder does not deserve anyone's respect for trying to protect his own pockets, and preserving the legacy of a bigot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here lies the problem. Free speech is supposed to be for EVERYONE, not just those who agree with you. The idea that something shouldn't be protected as free speech because it offends you is the very antithesis of free speech. If you don't like the name or policy behind a private corporation then you have every right to choose not to patronize it. But in no way do you have the right to force that company to change. Offended by the name Redskins? Don't be a fan. Don't buy their merch. Don't go to their games. Protest all you want. Wether you support the name or not, I will say Dan Snyder has earned more respect from me for sticking to his guns than anything he ever did on the field. He is not backing down for the bullies that are trying to force him to concede. It's refreshing to see someone take a stand rather than fold to liberal pundits who are adamant we should never offend anyone. Your self-righteousness offends me. Get over yourself. PS- not a conservative or a liberal. Just tired of these idiots pussifying my country.

lol! buncha self-righteous, offensive liberal bullies tellin' me i can't use racial slurs in a public name. what happened to the tyranny of the majority? back in my day you could just choose to not drink out of any water fountain at all if you weren't satisfied with what you had, and now everybody's gotta get all pussified and bring in big daddy government to protect pussies from the "tyranny of the majority" or whatever.

you know what else i hate? people that complain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some truly disturbed people on this board. 

smh 

I agree.  People who think their opinions are so darned enlightened they can shove them down everyone elses throat are the worst, regardless of whether they are religious preachy kooks or PC preachy kooks who think they should be able to bully others into doing whatever they think.  Now that the religious kook crowd is finally losing their grip over those of us who aren't buying what they are selling  they are being replaced in our lives by PC kooks who think they are part of a similarly holy crusade to rid the world of anybody with whom they disagree.  A pox on the houses of the busy bodies in both groups who have much more in common than either group would ever admit..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...