What about the Mormons using Moroni an American Indian as their symbol.
I usually don't comment over here in sports but the following comment
caught my eye "The redskins will always be the Redskins just like the Utes
are always the Utes. " Yes, but the Utah Utes were once the
"RUNNIN' REDSKINS." Yes, it's true. The "U" wisely
dropped the skin pigmentation reference (I think in part at the request of the
tribe). Unfortunately in commenting here I show how old I am - ouch.
Littlestream- Officially more offensive that Redskins ever thought of being.
Senators? Ha!Kaladin- That is my fantasy football team name. Look, I get it. A FEW people of Native heritage get offended by the term
Redskin. If you look hard enough, you'll find people offended by even the
most vanilla term. Heck, maybe by saying vanilla, I just offended my fair
skinned brother in law? Anyway, aren't there bigger problems in America
than a football team name? Maybe all these people who are jumping on the
bandwagon, could all get involved in Indian (my Grandfather, part Ute, hated the
term NA) affairs and charities. The real "offense" to Indian people are
stealing their land and putting them on "reservations". Maybe let's
help the people who need real help first and maybe if we have time and energy
left over, we'll help those with political incorrectness syndrome later.
The Utes weren't always the Utes. They were the Redskins prior to 1972 and
I am glad they changed.In my mind, none of the concerns about sports
teams choosing "Indians," "Chiefs," "Braves," or names
of specific tribes mean much as long as there is a prominent team in Washington
DC calling itself the Redskins. If any name could lead to an offense, it is to
name something after the color of somebody's skin.That said,
sporting teams don't choose mascots to denigrate the choice. Animals and
humans of a variety of stripes are selected because they are seen to have
characteristics that the team wants to emulate.I have heard for
decades about how such choices denigrate Native Americans. I have had activists
(all in my experience and there have been many, were white--Native Americans I
know reject their efforts) tell me that only Native Americans are used for
mascots. I then point out Irish, Scotsman, Vikings (Scandinavians), Celtics,
Saxons, Swedes, Gaels, Vandals, Cajuns, Norsemen, Highlanders, Trojans,
Spartans, Orangemen (Dutch or Northern Irish), as well as Kings, Dukes, Knights,
Farmers, Cowboys, Aggies (agricultural workers), etc, are also people.
What about all the condescending white mascots: Cowboys, Packers, Steelers,
Raiders, etc. Let's ban them all. And while we are at it, the high
schools in Utah with Farmers, Beetdiggers, etc. need to be banned.
As has been pointed out above there is evidence that reflects that the term is
not offensive to the vast majority of Native Americans. The condescension of the
political left is beyond belief. The libs will just be offended for them until
the Native Americans come around and see it their way? Furthermore, the same
liberal syncophants who demand that the Washington Redskins change their name
are some of the same people who sit in power and watched the blizzard ravage the
Dakotas a few weeks ago doing ACTUAL damage to the Sioux nation and have done
nothing about it.
@LittleStream;The Washington Senators are now the Minnesota Twins and have
been since the 60's.
The Washington Thinskins
They could change their name to the Washington Senators?
I have to agree with bradleyc;Change the mascot to a potato, apple, or
other reference that has a redskin and move on.Once the Native American
mascot is no longer being referenced the word "redskins" no longer has
any derogatory connotations that can be associated with the team.
In a survey done by Annenberg Research Institute (University of Pennsylvania)
the vast majority (almost 90%) of American Indians are not offended by the
name.in fact many schools that are largely tribal use Redskins as their own
name, because they view it as an honor. Local tribes around DC also support the
name. Hail to the Redskins!
Here in Texas, some rodeo cowboys want Dallas to change their mascot.The humane society wants the Longhorns, and Horn Frogs to change theirs also.
Don't these people have better things to do? The name had been around since
the 1930s, all of a sudden it became offensive, when did that happen?
I can understand why they are wanting the Redskins to change their name, and
mascot. As for the Utes, or Seminoles etc. they are using the proud names of
their tribes, and it is a very positive way to look at the tribe in general. As
Redskins is more of a derogatory slang word to describe Native American
Indians, I think they should change it to a more local Indian Tribal name with
their approval of course. I am a Caucasian, married to a Native American Indian,
and I understand their point of view.
Once again it is much ado about nothing. Once again a problem has been created
where none existed just so someone could feel pod about themselves. This is a
To me... The redskins will always be the Redskins just like the Utes are always
the Utes. Maybe the redskins could just choose a bird as their mascot?