SHAME
#1


This commercial is supposed to shame the Washington Redskins into changing their name.

I know a lot of Native Americans and I've yet to encounter a single one who is bothered by the name. They. Don't. Care.

[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#2


I'd just like to add - white people shouldn't get to determine what's offensive to other races. Mind your own fuckin' business.
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#3
(06-11-2014, 05:49 AM)Duchess Wrote:

I'd just like to add - white people shouldn't get to determine what's offensive to other races. Mind your own fuckin' business.



Amen!
Carsman: Loves Living Large
Home is where you're treated the best, but complain the most!
Life is short, make the most of it, get outta here!

Reply
#4
(06-11-2014, 05:43 AM)Duchess Wrote:
I know a lot of Native Americans and I've yet to encounter a single one who is bothered by the name. They. Don't. Care.
(06-11-2014, 05:49 AM)Duchess Wrote:
I'd just like to add - white people shouldn't get to determine what's offensive to other races. Mind your own fuckin' business.
This position seems exceedingly one sided and closed minded.
"Change the Mascot is a national campaign to end the use of the racial slur “redskins” as the mascot and name of the NFL team in Washington, D.C. Launched by the Oneida Indian Nation"

It's not about white people determining what's racist. Obviously one tribe has said it's racist. Maybe they're the only tribe that cares. What if only 10% of Black Americans found the term Nigga offensive, and the other 90% felt it was a rap lyric? Should we offend the 10% by claiming the 90% don't care? (I can tell you from personal experience, in that example it only takes that one person of 10 in the group to get you in trouble.) It's going to be a grey area and extremely open to debate.

Ultimately, white people have taken the stance that we're going to push equality for everyone despite being the majority of America. As a nation we've decided that all types of isms are all bad. If white people don't argue for or against changes... they don't happen. Because as equal as we make shit, America is still almost 80% white. Congress and Senate are a bunch of white folks. NFL Owners and the commissioner - white folks.
I'm not saying it should be changed or shouldn't... but I think it's definitely worthy of conversation.
Reply
#5


Look mister, logic doesn't work with me when I'm attempting to display a snotty attitude in order to get people fired up enough to post their displeasure at my unfairness. Shhh.
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#6
Personally, I think its stupid
Reply
#7
(06-11-2014, 08:58 AM)Duchess Wrote:
Look mister, logic doesn't work with me when I'm attempting to display a snotty attitude in order to get people fired up enough to post their displeasure at my unfairness. Shhh.
Oh. Well in that case.

You're Wt racist who likes Furious from Soapbox to The_Villagers pretending Angel but Becoming evil Diablo to Guns the Indian
Reply
#8


Nah, I never pretend to be an angel, I'd never be able to pull it off and sitting on my high horse keeps me above white trash.
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#9


...and you couldn't know this like some of the others but I'm more than a little familiar with an injun.
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#10
Obviously your background is why you feel strongly about the controversy. It's offensive to you for Native Americans to be 'given' offended attitudes by Caucasians claiming the term is racist. When in fact, from your perspective, they don't find it offensive, and for White people to speak for them is condescending and thereby offensive itself. My emoticon post was entirely sarcastic, hence the emoticons.

The flip side of the coin is that there are Native Americans that find it offensive and all they want a Football team's name changed. They're not suing for money or damages. It's not up to the government to enforce any decision, but the NFL brass should certainly consider it. Even if the group is a minority of the minority, I imagine racial pride and camaraderie will increase the support they have among NA tribes in coming years.
Reply
#11
(06-11-2014, 09:07 AM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: Personally, I think its stupid

Agreed.
Devil Money Stealing Aunt Smiley_emoticons_fies
Reply
#12
What if the Redskins was really an attack on fair skinned people who sunburn easily. hey? What about that?

what if the Redskins is really referring to alcoholics that drink too much and have broken capilliaries on their face? Hey? What about that?
Reply
#13


I'd be cool with that too.
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#14
Well, I am fair skinned and I gotta say, all I give a shit about, is not getting sunburned. Others should adopt the same attitude.
Reply
#15


Would you be offended if someone commented that you burn easily because you're so white?
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#16
I would say, 'tell me about it!' I take offence at stupidity,not stating the obvious.
Reply
#17
(06-11-2014, 04:07 PM)aussiefriend Wrote: What if the Redskins was really an attack on fair skinned people who sunburn easily. hey? What about that?

what if the Redskins is really referring to alcoholics that drink too much and have broken capilliaries on their face? Hey? What about that?

hah

Well, I'd think that was odd, but not entirely insensitive. People elect whether or not to expose themselves to too much sun and booze.

Now, if Redskins were a reference to unfortunate people who are plagued with acne or Rosacea, that would just be mean. And, I think the guy or girl depicted on the helmets might be a little off-putting to the more shallow sports fans. I'd consider it a bad business decision by the NFL.
Reply
#18
That's not true HoTD, sometimes you are in situations, especially when you are younger where there wasn't the strong emphasis to wear 30+ sunscreen. It's difficult to protect yourself from the sun all the time. We have high incidence of skin cancer in Australia, and the Ozone layer is thinner where I am.

Alcoholism is a disease, not a choice.
Reply
#19
Well, okay then.

I would be highly offended and protest the NFL if it turned out that "Redskins" was really a derogatory reference to innocent acne-sufferers, the Rosacea-inflicted, or those sporting a sunburn through no fault of their own!

As for the offense being taken by some Native Americans (and others) to the term "Redskins" being applied to Native Americans -- I can respect that. But, intent matters to me, too. If it wasn't considered offensive when the team got their name, it's an established brand, and most Native Americans have no problem with it (I don't know that to be true, just an "if"), then does it really make sense to change it? IDK.

Some people are offended by less, but I don't think things need to be changed every time they are unintentionally offensive to some (even if I understand the feelings of offense). IMO, people get offended too easily these days for that to be a practical or logical solution.

(ETA: not all people who drink til they're red-faced are alcoholics with a diseases, aussie -- some just like to drink too much because it's fun or they wanna escape reality for a while.)
Reply
#20
Aussiebitch is onto something here a kinda fringe insanity that nips at your heels.
He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
Reply