Over My Dead Body

[moklerman]

The fact that you shouldn't give words power doesn't imply that we should be pushing racial slurs as common, everyday names for popular brands. And your second statement is patently untrue - there are tons of white people who are offended by the term "honky," and also by the term "cracker" if used in a racial way (thus things like "Cracker Barrel" are not offensive, because you'd have to be really stretching for some sort of cultural equivalent to the Redskins to take it as a racial slur).

If the Cracker Barrel's logo were a white dude with a whip standing on a barrel, yes, white people (myself included) would be up in arms.

I do not understand the mindset of people who think that we should have a racial slur as a brand in modern America, and who argue that those who are offended - specifically people belonging to the racial group the slur describes/targets - should just get over it.

I think you're reaching by saying white people are offended by honky. As this whole situation illustrates, some people are going to take offense no matter what is being talked about. But I've never met anyone who thought honky was actually offensive. Sure, the intent was understood but it's always been my experience that the word has about as much impact as flapjack or snickerdoodle.

Which is more along the lines of the sense I get from Indians hypothetically being called a redskin. It doesn't really seem to resemble other racial slurs and maybe that's what's throwing me off. I mean, why isn't there "blackskin" or "brownskin" or "yellowskin" or whatever if that's such a cut to the soul?

 

[Zaphod]

Cracker barrel if you look at their picture, is just an old dude sitting next to a soda cracker barrel in front of a general store, which is sort of, you know like what the restaurant is themed after.

Darn them for taking an image like that, meeting at the general store, talking and eating and naming their restaurant after it. They should have had the foresight to see the re-emergence of the term cracker.

Don't even like the place but dang, that's reaching. I don't think it's reaching as much as criticism of the name Redskins, but that's a herd mentality. It would be equally shameful if the owner didn't make money out of the entire fiasco.

 

[Akrasian]

This is just another way for the knuckleheads in congress to not address the real issues! Throw them all out of office and get people in there who care about this country! Putting away my soap box now!

Given some of the things they do, I am all for Congress to allow themselves to focus on non-critical issues. They do less damage.

 

[Ramrasta]

What's the non-racial usage of the term 'redskin,' and does the Cracker Barrel feature an image of a white man cracking a whip?

Edit to add: The 'white person' equivalent of 'Redskin' is probably 'Honky,' not 'Cracker,' because 'Honky' holds nothing but racial connotations. It's also not currently used as the name of anything because it would be insulting and stupid.

Redskin is a term used by the franchise as a symbol of pride much like the term Yankee is used when representing the baseball franchise. Yankee can be taken with negative connotation as well but it is easily understood that franchises name themselves these things not because they are disparaging but because they are honorable and instill pride. To take offense to this is to first identify yourself as the term, reverse what it is intended to do, and then victimize yourself over it's use in a way completely unrelated to race. It's a choice in all three steps.

 

[DCH]

Redskin is a term used by the franchise as a symbol of pride much like the term Yankee is used when representing the baseball franchise. Yankee can be taken with negative connotation as well but it is easily understood that franchises name themselves these things not because they are disparaging but because they are honorable and instill pride. To take offense to this is to first identify yourself as the term, reverse what it is intended to do, and then victimize yourself over it's use in a way completely unrelated to race. It's a choice in all three steps.

Again, the fact that people do not have to accept the negativity conveyed by a racial slur does not mean that we should continue using it prolifically. I feel this way about the 'n' word in rap, and at least that's usually people who are members of the race being slurred using it.

 

[Ramrasta]

Again, the fact that people do not have to accept the negativity conveyed by a racial slur does not mean that we should continue using it prolifically. I feel this way about the 'n' word in rap, and at least that's usually people who are members of the race being slurred using it.

I would love to know how many people actually use the term "Redskin" as a racial slur in conversation. I have never heard it used negatively other than if the football team played a terrible game.

 

[-X-]

I would love to know how many people actually use the term "Redskin" as a racial slur in conversation. I have never heard it used negatively other than if the football team played a terrible game.

I'm not even aware of any racism towards Native Americans. I mean, most people I know love them (and their casinos, lol).

 

[DCH]

I would love to know how many people actually use the term "Redskin" as a racial slur in conversation. I have never heard it used negatively other than if the football team played a terrible game.

A fair point, but when was the last time someone actually used 'tar baby' as a racial slur? Does that mean it's now acceptable to use it as a brand? Historically, 'Redskin' was used as a racial slur, so why would we continue using it as a brand in the NFL?

 

[DCH]

I'm not even aware of any racism towards Native Americans. I mean, most people I know love them (and their casinos, lol).

Part of this is because there are so few of them, and they tend to be clustered around parts of the US that are not Missouri or Massachusetts. We don't live anywhere close to large populations of Native Americans, so when would we be exposed to racism towards them?

 

[-X-]

A fair point, but when was the last time someone actually used 'tar baby' as a racial slur? Does that mean it's now acceptable to use it as a brand? Historically, 'Redskin' was used as a racial slur, so why would we continue using it as a brand in the NFL?

Well, here's my view on that. The term "Redskin" wasn't pejorative at all when it was first introduced into the English language in the 17th century. It became pejorative through pejoration. So what's to stop some group of people from making any other team name pejorative by the same methods? What if Cowboys are all of a sudden offensive because of their murderous reputation? Or the Raiders for obvious reasons. I know that's a pretty big stretch on my part, but is it completely implausible? My issues are twofold. One, this wasn't a big deal a few years ago until it was forced to be a big deal. Two, we really can't empower the government to decide what can and cannot be interpreted as racist, and then unilaterally apply it in order to impose change based on the outrage of a vocal minority. But mine is only one opinion among many. I can't say definitively that anyone is right or wrong. It's all a matter of personal opinion, after all.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I would LOVE to know how many people were opposed to the name around 5 years ago as compared to how many care now.
Because it certainly wasn't any less "offensive" 5 years ago. This is mob mentality in full effect, IMO.

MM effect.
Mob media

 

[-X-]

Part of this is because there are so few of them, and they tend to be clustered around parts of the US that are not Missouri or Massachusetts. We don't live anywhere close to large populations of Native Americans, so when would we be exposed to racism towards them?

I do. There are many, many tribes in South Florida.

 

[Ramrasta]

A fair point, but when was the last time someone actually used 'tar baby' as a racial slur? Does that mean it's now acceptable to use it as a brand? Historically, 'Redskin' was used as a racial slur, so why would we continue using it as a brand in the NFL?

I believe the difference lies in the usage. Saying "tar baby" is to directly try to express a racist view point where as "Redskin" in this circumstance is used to indicate a football team which has chosen to characterize itself as such out of the respect it would give them and the pride they can feel from being able to describe themselves as this. If someone names their child after you, it's done out of honor instead of ill intent.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I do. There are many, many tribes in South Florida.

Obviously i do too.
My very close friend of 25 years is Creek indian from Oklahoma.

 

[Thordaddy]

Acting like words don't wield power is ignorance. It might be too "PC" for some people, but it's a politically correct world nowadays, get over it. I know some people miss the days where they could ridicule and belittle another person because of something out of their control without anybody saying anything, but I sure as hell don't.

Nah dude you get over characterizing people who disagree with you as ignorant

 

[DCH]

Well, here's my view on that. The term "Redskin" wasn't pejorative at all when it was first introduced into the English language in the 17th century. It became pejorative through pejoration. So what's to stop some group of people from making any other team name pejorative by the same methods? What if Cowboys are all of a sudden offensive because of their murderous reputation? Or the Raiders for obvious reasons. I know that's a pretty big stretch on my part, but is it completely implausible? My issues are twofold. One, this wasn't a big deal a few years ago until it was forced to be a big deal. Two, we really can't empower the government to decide what can and cannot be interpreted as racist, and then unilaterally apply it in order to impose change based on the outrage of a vocal minority. But mine is only one opinion among many. I can't say definitively that anyone is right or wrong. It's all a matter of personal opinion, after all.

True, but when the team's name changed from the Braves to the Redskins, the pejorative was established. I think it's a bit harder to argue that a term becoming pejorative after it had already been applied to a sports team or brand should change based on the evolution of the name.

I think this has been a big deal among certain groups for a very long time, it's just gotten more press the past several years. The onset of the Internet has helped a lot of long-running causes get visibility. JMO as always, but that's how I view this particular segment of this particular discussion.

 

[beej]

Things like pc-ism usually work like a pendulum. They'll take it so far that it will backlash and go the other way. It'll be interesting to see how far it goes. I've heard of groups trying to get names like jefferson, Washington, and such removed because they were slave holders. What sounds impossible now is just a mob away.

 

[Oyster]

Problem Solved!

 

[Rambitious1]

True, but when the team's name changed from the Braves to the Redskins, the pejorative was established. I think it's a bit harder to argue that a term becoming pejorative after it had already been applied to a sports team or brand should change based on the evolution of the name.

I think this has been a big deal among certain groups for a very long time, it's just gotten more press the past several years. The onset of the Internet has helped a lot of long-running causes get visibility. JMO as always, but that's how I view this particular segment of this particular discussion.

I don't care about any of that......and I'm part REDSKIN.

 

[DCH]

I don't care about any of that......and I'm part REDSKIN.

OK. Good for you. Do you speak for all Native Americans because you're one person who is part Native American?

"I'm not offended so nobody else should be" is not a viable argument.