Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

this might interest you

July 13, 2020 07:46PM
Quote
alyoshamucci
And it's not about it being offensive. It's about ignorance.

When I was a kid I thought the name was cool. When I learned it was basically a bounty I almost threw up.

It's like a team name that is something like the Atlanta Lynchers being a thing. It's not close. And it's not defensible.

The reason I am speaking up is that in our country we have erased the actual history. Mount Rushmore is shown as a giant edifice in elementary schools, when it's actually the ugly tiny end of a beautiful mountain that was a native heritage site dedicated to passed elders.

Thing is? I learned that LAST WEEK. It evaded me my whole life because our school system erased it.

Erasing history to comply with our entitled comfort is weak.

I'm not offended by the name. I'm offended by American willingness to erase the history of others and profit off of it while continuing the erasure indoctrination at every level of public schooling.

It makes us weak. We don't challenge our elders or question their behavior. I am not a fan of weakness, not a fan of lacking accountability, and not a fan of glorifying horrors, and in this case it was all 3.

Well put. You can't erase history but you can LEARN it, as you did with Rushmore. And REAL history when it comes to the word "redskin"--whether it offends a non First Nations person or not--is that whether we like it or not, it came to be regarded more and more as offensive.

I looked up "redskin" in 7 online dictionaries. I stopped at 7 because 7 is enough.

dictionary.com. "Redskin: a contemptuous term used to refer to a North American Indian."

The Free Dictionary "an old-fashioned informal name, now highly offensive, for a Native American"

Collins Dictionary. "(ˈredˌskɪn) NOUN slang, derogatory, often offensive, a Native American"

MacMillans. "a word used in the past to refer to a Native American, now regarded as very offensive"

Websters "A common appellation for a North American Indian; - so called from the color of the skin. It is now considered pejorative by persons of North American Indian heritage."

Mirriam-Websters Learner's Dictionary "informal + offensive : native american ◊ The word redskin is very offensive and should be avoided"

Oxford Dictionary: "​a very offensive word for a Native American"

Times change. This little blurb says something about that. It's from 2013:

Quote

from [law.marquette.edu]

the meanings of descriptive adjectives, especially those with racial or ethnic connotations, do change over time. In my childhood, spent in the rural South during the final years of the Jim Crow era, we were taught that African-Americans preferred to be called “colored” or “Negroes,” and that to refer to such a person as “black” to his or her face would be insulting.

...

while it is difficult to pinpoint exactly when the meaning of “redskin” moved from innocuous to offensive, there is little reason to doubt that the general meaning of the term has changed



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 07/13/2020 07:52PM by zn.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

  Washington officially changing team name

LMU93621July 13, 2020 04:39AM

  Re: It will be tough but can be done

Speed_Kills293July 13, 2020 07:08AM

  Re: It will be tough but can be done

zn239July 13, 2020 07:21AM

  Re: I like the Washington Cherry Blossoms :)

oldschoolramfan253July 13, 2020 11:56AM

  How about just the Cherries? (nm)

RockRam175July 13, 2020 12:20PM

  just to back that up

zn238July 13, 2020 12:43PM

  Re: just to back that up

Rampage2K-265July 13, 2020 01:35PM

  Re: just to back that up

AlbaNY_Ram169July 13, 2020 02:30PM

  Re: just to back that up

Rampage2K-220July 13, 2020 02:56PM

  I vote for Washington Chickens.

RockRam265July 13, 2020 09:48AM

  that 's one poll, contradicted by others

zn309July 13, 2020 10:30AM

  Which tells you what?

RockRam247July 13, 2020 12:10PM

  that your favorite poll is not authoritative

zn208July 13, 2020 12:45PM

  Re: that your favorite poll is not authoritative

Ekern55189July 13, 2020 03:20PM

  Re: that your favorite poll is not authoritative

zn185July 13, 2020 03:47PM

  Actually it was 49

PHDram198July 13, 2020 05:58PM

  not what the poll says

zn384July 13, 2020 06:11PM

  nope

PHDram178July 13, 2020 06:26PM

  you have to read it

zn276July 13, 2020 08:29PM

  Re: you have to read it

PHDram392July 13, 2020 09:17PM

  Re: you have to read it

zn184July 13, 2020 09:53PM

  I usually don't speak up on this stuff ... but polls are irrelevant.

alyoshamucci202July 13, 2020 06:30PM

  Re: I usually don't speak up on this stuff ... but polls are irrelevant.

PHDram219July 13, 2020 06:38PM

  this might interest you

zn238July 13, 2020 07:46PM

  why does one supersede the other? NM

PHDram189July 13, 2020 12:16PM

  Sorta tosses the 5 year rule out the window, eh?

Ramgator265July 13, 2020 11:00AM

  Re: Sorta tosses the 5 year rule out the window, eh?

Ekern55180July 13, 2020 03:21PM

  IF........The price is right! nm

Ramgator169July 13, 2020 04:17PM

  They could change their name to the "mask mandates"

alyoshamucci422July 13, 2020 11:14AM

  Re: They could change their name to the "mask mandates"

Ekern55175July 13, 2020 03:22PM