"Commodes" thinking about returning to REDSKINS !

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Status
Not open for further replies.

VegasRam

Give your dog a hug.
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
3,941
Name
Doug
You’re welcome.
Anytime.

(Virtue gonna signal)
 

gogoat1

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
1,289
Name
Troy
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #62
To be fair, if all Native Americans were polled and 1/3 of them voted against it, that’s actually a large enough percentage of the population to not bring it back.
That is just a rough estimate from me. It does not mean a thing. Might be more or less in some areas.
And since when do we have to agree on anything ? Polls/votes can be swayed.
We all need to stop taking ourselves so seriously. If someone wants to buy a team and give it a native name, go for it. As long as it is done respectfully.
I dig the Blackhawks logo. Never did like the Cleveland logo.
I have Yurok, Tolawa and Choctaw in my veins.
Its OK fellas, everyone needs to be proud of who they are.
Even if you are as white as a sheet of paper.
You know what ? Natives had slaves. To buy a bride in Not Cal Native culture you were a indentured servant to her family for a time.
No one is any better than the other.
 

Antonius

Pro Bowler
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
1,844
They should have just kept “Washington Football Team” as their name! It was unique, and sounded boring (in a governmental type of way) which totally fit with Washington DC. It’s what the Feds would call a football team if they named a football team: “football team”. That was perfect. Then you could have eventually brought back the old logo for throwback or alternate uniforms. You wouldn’t have had to even worry about using the redskins name. You could have busted out the old decal and still been “football team”.
 

Merlin

Damn the torpedoes
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
40,352
Y’all are making my point for me.

Congratulations, you played yourselves
I'm just fuckin around. Felt like you got a bit worked up there bro.
 

RamsOfCastamere

I drink things, and know nothing
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
8,155
That is just a rough estimate from me. It does not mean a thing. Might be more or less in some areas.
And since when do we have to agree on anything ? Polls/votes can be swayed.
We all need to stop taking ourselves so seriously. If someone wants to buy a team and give it a native name, go for it. As long as it is done respectfully.
I dig the Blackhawks logo. Never did like the Cleveland logo.
I have Yurok, Tolawa and Choctaw in my veins.
Its OK fellas, everyone needs to be proud of who they are.
Even if you are as white as a sheet of paper.
You know what ? Natives had slaves. To buy a bride in Not Cal Native culture you were a indentured servant to her family for a time.
No one is any better than the other.
I don’t disagree with what you said or this as well. I was just saying hypothetically if the entire population voted how they felt about the name.

Personally I still slip and call them the Skins, and think the affected people should be ones to determine if it’s offensive. I’m black and can say we did not care about Aunt Jemima or Uncle Ben’s rice lmao.
 

XXXIVwin

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2015
Messages
5,001
My take:
If the majority of Native Americans find the name offensive, I'd say keep it gone.

If the majority of Native Americans are cool with the name, I'd say bring it back.

The problem? The data on this is murky and can seem contradictory.

As usual, things are a bit complicated-- so enough of the "holier than thou" bullshit on BOTH sides of the political spectrum. From my perspective, the left has too much "woke" smug bullshit. AND the right has too much "anti-woke" smug bullshit.

From Wikipedia, some of the contradictory polling stats:

Two national political polls, the first in 2004 and another in 2016, were particularly influential. When a respondent identified themselves as Native American, these polls asked, "The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or doesn't it bother you?". In both polls, 90% responded that they were not bothered, 9% that they were offended, and 1% gave no response. These polls were widely cited by teams, fans, and mainstream media as evidence that there was no need to change the name of the Washington football team or the names and mascots of other teams.

But academics noted that standard polling methods cannot accurately measure the opinions of a small, yet culturally and socially diverse population such as Native Americans. More detailed and focused academic studies found that most Native Americans found the term offensive, particularly those with more identification and involvement with their Native cultures.

HOWEVER:


In 2020, researchers from the University of Michigan and UC Berkeley published a journal article on the results of an empirical study analyzing data from 1,021 Native Americans, twice the size of previous samples. It included Native Americans from all 50 states representing 148 tribes.... The researchers found that 49% of self-identified Native Americans found the Washington Redskins name offensive or very offensive, 38% found it not offensive, and 13% were indifferent. In addition, for study participants who were heavily engaged in their native or tribal cultures, 67% said they were offended, for young people 60%, and those with tribal affiliations 52%.[25][26]



So yeah.... as is often the case in our divided world, your opinion can depend on which data you'd "prefer" to believe. Which data do you find more persuasive? The poll where 90% said they WEREN'T offended? Or the poll where 67% said they WERE offended?

 

XXXIVwin

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2015
Messages
5,001
I’m black and can say we did not care about Aunt Jemima...
The Aunt Jemima logo originated in 1888, and yeah, of course back then it was racist as fuck.

I get the anti-woke sentiments. But I sure as hell understand that as a society it's good that we adapt to the times, too.
 

HE WITH HORNS

Hall of Fame
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
4,068
My take:
If the majority of Native Americans find the name offensive, I'd say keep it gone.

If the majority of Native Americans are cool with the name, I'd say bring it back.

But that's not how these things work. All it takes is a very tiny percentage of people being offended by something for it to become a huge issue and cancel something.
Even if 95% of the people are okay with something, the offended party will make their outrage known, and the media amplifies it until they get their way.
 

Kupped

Legend
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
8,770
Name
Kupped
But that's not how these things work. All it takes is a very tiny percentage of people being offended by something for it to become a huge issue and cancel something.
Even if 95% of the people are okay with something, the offended party will make their outrage known, and the media amplifies it until they get their way.
Totally.
Kinda like the outrage over transgender athletes and which restrooms transgender individuals use.

I mean.. who cares? Right?
 

Selassie I

H. I. M.
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
18,300
Name
Haole
It's unfortunate that threads like this cannot stay on topic. I honestly believe that it's done on purpose... but whatever the reason is... it's childish and disappointing.

Locking this up for now. I may consider reopening and just banning members from the thread who "somehow" cannot stay on topic. Maybe that's a better approach than locking it up. I'm gonna sleep on it.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,971
Name
Stu
WHY. IS. THIS. SHIT. ALLOWED????

Every time someone wants to say something from a right wing perspective, it’s allowed until someone complains or responds and the thread then gets locked with the inference that as long as no one complains, the right wing shit is fine.

Its not fine if the rules mean a single damn thing.

i don’t bring my left wing shit here, so seriously what the fuck???

Keep your right wing positions, takes, opinions and the rest and read the fucking sign.

okay-no-politics-please.gif
This is horse shit Mac. You don't see the stuff we remove. And what you don't see, you can't know. I can tell you that I remove far more "political content" that would be considered right leaning than I do left. I have left some of each on occasion where I didn't really feel it went far enough to break the rules. Don't try and get high and mighty here.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,971
Name
Stu
The only reason I'll be okay with the name change back is because the mods will finally, FINALLY acknowledge the travesty that is editing the word "comm - ander". There is no reason it should've been turned to "commode". None. It is a common fucking word, and there is no reason that my complaints on that should've been ignored for about two fucking years.

Again, I have no issues with "49ers" being rebranded as "69ers" or "Seahawks" to "Seahags" or "Patriots" to "Cheatriots", or Sean Asshole Face to Asshole Face. That all is perfectly fine. But the editing of a common word that I often use is irksome.

You know who you are.

@RamFan503 @Selassie I @CGI_Ram

EDIT: I apologize for being short-tempered. I just feel like that complaint was ignored; nobody talked to us about it.
serious joe pesci GIF

Come on Mems. How often do you want to type com-manders on this forum? It's not even close to being a common word that anyone would use on a sports board unless they are talking about one team in DC. I think you need to let it go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.