ChiefsPlanet
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Football Goodbye Redskins and Indians and Braves and Chiefs (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=276491)

Prison Bitch 09-20-2013 07:56 AM
Goodbye Redskins and Indians and Braves and Chiefs
 
http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=....jpg&w=35&h=48
Rick Reilly, Columnist ESPN


Besides, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said last week that if "even one person is offended" on this issue, we need to "listen."

One person?

Got it. Guess we need to listen to people who are offended by the Kansas City Chiefs' name, too. That's one that offends my father-in-law. "You see some little guy wearing a headdress made of chicken feathers," he says, "painting his face up, making a mockery of us. I hate that. Those are things you earn."
http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2013/0918...fan_b1_600.jpg


Doesn't matter. The 81-year-old Washington Redskins name is falling, and everybody better get out of the way. For the majority of Native Americans who don't care, we'll care for them. For the Native Americans who haven't asked for help, we're glad to give it to them.

Trust us. We know what's best. We'll take this away for your own good, and put up barriers that protect you from ever being harmed again.

Kind of like a reservation.


http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/96...ot-easy-sounds

AussieChiefsFan 09-20-2013 08:00 AM
Quote:
if "even one person is offended" on this issue, we need to "listen."
:facepalm:

And as for the "Chiefs" name. Weren't they named after the Mayor of KC anyway?

bishop_74 09-20-2013 08:03 AM
I can understand the Redskins being offended, but immortalizing the American Indian by proudly naming a team after them seems like a silly thing to be offended by... and yes originally it was named after the mayor of KC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Roe_Bartle

After Bartle helped lure the Dallas Texans American Football League team to Kansas City in 1962, owner Lamar Hunt renamed the franchise the Kansas City Chiefs after Bartle's nickname, "The Chief."

Radar Chief 09-20-2013 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieChiefsFan (Post 10001276)
:facepalm:

And as for the "Chiefs" name. Weren't they named after the Mayor of KC anyway?
Doesn’t matter to the people that want to be offended.

Molitoth 09-20-2013 08:06 AM
So Roger Goodell actually thinks that pleasing absolutely EVERYONE is obtainable?
lol, this guy is a fucking moron.

Oh, and without American Indian references in sports, that whole heritage is going to be affiliated with Casinos and old motorcycles. If that is what they want, then so be it.

blaise 09-20-2013 08:06 AM
The whole "one person" thing is just lip service. What he means is, "If enough sponsors get enough complaints and say we should change we might do something."

Prison Bitch 09-20-2013 08:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001285)
So Roger Goodell actually thinks that pleasing absolutely EVERYONE is obtainable?
lol, this guy is a ****ing moron..
Well Roger Goodell, I am offended if that 1 person is offended. So I cancel him out.

vailpass 09-20-2013 08:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001285)
So Roger Goodell actually thinks that pleasing absolutely EVERYONE is obtainable?
lol, this guy is a ****ing moron.

Oh, and without American Indian references in sports, that whole heritage is going to be affiliated with Casinos and old motorcycles. If that is what they want, then so be it.
Old bikes aren't so bad...but this is lunacy.

blaise 09-20-2013 08:09 AM
On a side note- Rick Reilly sucks.

SPATCH 09-20-2013 08:10 AM
SHOTS FIRED!! Nice


Reilly is 100% right, though. Just another example of "white man's burden".


Edit: are any of you reading the text below the picture? Pretty awesome.

SPATCH 09-20-2013 08:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise (Post 10001295)
On a side note- Rick Reilly sucks.
Yeah but he just went to bat for us there

Rasputin 09-20-2013 08:11 AM
Chiefs beat the Cowboys and Custard had his last stand.

Prison Bitch 09-20-2013 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_spatula (Post 10001298)
SHOTS FIRED!! Nice


Reilly is 100% right, though. Just another example of "white man's burden".


Edit: are any of you reading the text below the picture? Pretty awesome.
He correctly identifies the problem, white liberals who "just want to help" others. It's not the Native Americans calling for this everywhere.

Brock 09-20-2013 08:18 AM
Reilly is a dumbass if he puts the chiefs name in the same category with the team named with a racial slur.

Thig Lyfe 09-20-2013 08:18 AM
This is one of the worst ****ing columns ever written.

And here's how the flow chart should look on this issue:

Is your team name a racial slur?
|
|
Yes
|
|
THEN ****ING CHANGE IT

Jesus Christ, it's that ****ing simple. And all this whining about political correctness and "the white man's burden" (what the **** is this, a soap ad from the 19th century?) is utter bullshit. Historical context matters, whether you and your blinded-by-privilege myopic worldview like it or not.

Idiots.

AussieChiefsFan 09-20-2013 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishop_74 (Post 10001281)
I can understand the Redskins being offended, but immortalizing the American Indian by proudly naming a team after them seems like a silly thing to be offended by... and yes originally it was named after the mayor of KC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Roe_Bartle

After Bartle helped lure the Dallas Texans American Football League team to Kansas City in 1962, owner Lamar Hunt renamed the franchise the Kansas City Chiefs after Bartle's nickname, "The Chief."
Ah there we go. Glad I've got my Chiefs history straight.

But seriously, the PC is going so overboard that the people that should be getting offended in the first place aren't actually offended and aren't even playing a role in this anymore.

Strongside 09-20-2013 08:18 AM
Native American here.

Europeans killed my ancestors and gave them smallpocks while taking their land and raping their women.

Why should I care about a football team named after my people?

Are you white folks offended at the 'Fighting Irish' stereotypical mascot?
What about the Tarheels? There was a time when that term, too, was offensive to some.
What about the gamecocks? We are ok with using a name that is reminiscent of animal cruelty in the cock-fighting game?

As a society, I think we should be less concerned about a few NA's getting their feelings hurt, and maybe use that same energy to provide assistance to the reservation communities across the country that battle poverty, lack of job availability, alcohol and drug abuse and a poor infrastructure every day. If you really care about these people and want to help them, then changing the name of a sports team is not the way to do it.

AussieChiefsFan 09-20-2013 08:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001324)
Native American here.

Europeans killed my ancestors and gave them smallpocks while taking their land and raping their women.

Why should I care about a football team named after my people.

Are you white folks offended at the 'Fighting Irish' stereotypical mascot?
What about the Tarheels? There was a time when that term, too, was offensive to some.
What about the gamecocks? We are ok with using a name that is reminiscent of animal cruelty in the cock-fighting game?

As a society, I think we should be less concerned about a few NA's getting their feelings hurt, and maybe use that same energy to provide assistance to the reservation communities across the country that battle poverty, lack of job availability, alcohol and drug abuse and a poor infrastructure every day. If you really care about these people and want to help them, then changing the name of a sports team is not the way to do it.
^

blaise 09-20-2013 08:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001322)
This is one of the worst ****ing columns ever written.

And here's how the flow chart should look on this issue:

Is your team name a racial slur?
|
|
Yes
|
|
THEN ****ING CHANGE IT

Jesus Christ, it's that ****ing simple. And all this whining about political correctness and "the white man's burden" (what the **** is this, a soap ad from the 19th century?) is utter bullshit. Historical context matters, whether you and your blinded-by-privilege myopic worldview like it or not.

Idiots.
Seems like quite a few Native Americans disagree with you.

DaWolf 09-20-2013 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001322)
This is one of the worst ****ing columns ever written.

And here's how the flow chart should look on this issue:

Is your team name a racial slur?
|
|
Yes
|
|
THEN ****ING CHANGE IT

Jesus Christ, it's that ****ing simple. And all this whining about political correctness and "the white man's burden" (what the **** is this, a soap ad from the 19th century?) is utter bullshit. Historical context matters, whether you and your blinded-by-privilege myopic worldview like it or not.

Idiots.
I read it differently. Reilly seems to be mocking that attitude. His point is that the Native Americans he knows don't really take an issue with this. But because some people have decided that it's something that Native Americans should be offended by, they're going to tell the Native American's what is right or wrong, despite their actual feelings on the matter. He also goes on to point out that anyone can be offended by anything, bringing up the point that in those cases, should we also be changing those names? Reilly seems to be arguing against this...

L.A. Chieffan 09-20-2013 08:29 AM
Lance Armstrong Rick

blaise 09-20-2013 08:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaWolf (Post 10001341)
I read it differently. Reilly seems to be mocking that attitude. His point is that the Native Americans he knows don't really take an issue with this. But because some people have decided that it's something that Native Americans should be offended by, they're going to tell the Native American's what is right or wrong, despite their actual feelings on the matter. He also goes on to point out that anyone can be offended by anything, bringing up the point that in those cases, should we also be changing those names? Reilly seems to be arguing against this...
I'm not sure he actually read it.

vailpass 09-20-2013 08:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001324)
Native American here.

Europeans killed my ancestors and gave them smallpocks while taking their land and raping their women.

Why should I care about a football team named after my people?

Are you white folks offended at the 'Fighting Irish' stereotypical mascot?
What about the Tarheels? There was a time when that term, too, was offensive to some.
What about the gamecocks? We are ok with using a name that is reminiscent of animal cruelty in the cock-fighting game?

As a society, I think we should be less concerned about a few NA's getting their feelings hurt, and maybe use that same energy to provide assistance to the reservation communities across the country that battle poverty, lack of job availability, alcohol and drug abuse and a poor infrastructure every day. If you really care about these people and want to help them, then changing the name of a sports team is not the way to do it.
Should have fought harder.

ChiTown 09-20-2013 08:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vailpass (Post 10001370)
Should have fought harder.
ROFL

Bob Dole 09-20-2013 08:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishop_74 (Post 10001281)
I can understand the Redskins being offended, but immortalizing the American Indian by proudly naming a team after them seems like a silly thing to be offended by... and yes originally it was named after the mayor of KC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Roe_Bartle

After Bartle helped lure the Dallas Texans American Football League team to Kansas City in 1962, owner Lamar Hunt renamed the franchise the Kansas City Chiefs after Bartle's nickname, "The Chief."
And he was nicknamed The Chief because of his affiliation with BSA, which is chock full of Native American references...

Phobia 09-20-2013 09:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Dole (Post 10001410)
And he was nicknamed The Chief because of his affiliation with BSA, which is chock full of Native American references...
So the Chiefs are bigoted against gays? Yet another reason to change the name to The Fighting BBQ Eaters.

Garcia Bronco 09-20-2013 09:07 AM
As long as Dan Synder is the owner of the Redskins, they will continue to be called the Redskins. I like the name, and I am not going to listen to the racist Native Americans clinging on to somthing that no longer exists, was never noble, and really everyone in this country who's generation extend back into the 1600's has Native American blood in their veins.

KCUnited 09-20-2013 09:20 AM
Goodell wants to get out in front of this thing before the league gets siouxed.

Molitoth 09-20-2013 09:22 AM
I dunno, I think I would be totally offended if a team was called the Paleskins.

That shit right there is unacceptable.

loochy 09-20-2013 09:23 AM
I'm offended by Goodell being a douche and trying to ruin football

BIG_DADDY 09-20-2013 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001474)
I dunno, I think I would be totally offended if a team was called the Paleskins.

That shit right there is unacceptable.
I dunno, the fightin whities were really popular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Whites

CoMoChief 09-20-2013 09:32 AM
stupid

rabblerouser 09-20-2013 09:33 AM
I'm an American Indian, and a lifelong Chiefs fan.

I am also not a pussy.

If the Jaguars moved to LA, we could rename them the Los Angeles Crackers and I couldn't care less.

Of course, that wouldn't be very accurate, but still - you get my point.

KC_Lee 09-20-2013 09:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001324)
Native American here.

Europeans killed my ancestors and gave them smallpocks while taking their land and raping their women.

Why should I care about a football team named after my people?

Are you white folks offended at the 'Fighting Irish' stereotypical mascot?
What about the Tarheels? There was a time when that term, too, was offensive to some.
What about the gamecocks? We are ok with using a name that is reminiscent of animal cruelty in the cock-fighting game?

As a society, I think we should be less concerned about a few NA's getting their feelings hurt, and maybe use that same energy to provide assistance to the reservation communities across the country that battle poverty, lack of job availability, alcohol and drug abuse and a poor infrastructure every day. If you really care about these people and want to help them, then changing the name of a sports team is not the way to do it.
I am Irish, and no it does not offend me.

And you are correct on the other two points you make about team names.

Garcia Bronco 09-20-2013 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001474)
I dunno, I think I would be totally offended if a team was called the Paleskins.

That shit right there is unacceptable.
We do. They're called the Vikings.

Chiefs Pantalones 09-20-2013 09:54 AM
F'ing stupid. Insecure much?

DJJasonp 09-20-2013 10:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001324)
Native American here.

Europeans killed my ancestors and gave them smallpocks while taking their land and raping their women.

Why should I care about a football team named after my people?

Are you white folks offended at the 'Fighting Irish' stereotypical mascot?
What about the Tarheels? There was a time when that term, too, was offensive to some.
What about the gamecocks? We are ok with using a name that is reminiscent of animal cruelty in the cock-fighting game?

As a society, I think we should be less concerned about a few NA's getting their feelings hurt, and maybe use that same energy to provide assistance to the reservation communities across the country that battle poverty, lack of job availability, alcohol and drug abuse and a poor infrastructure every day. If you really care about these people and want to help them, then changing the name of a sports team is not the way to do it.
Excellent post.

The problem is, people such as peter king want to SOUND like they care.

Molitoth 09-20-2013 10:04 AM
Another stupid thing:

When brown/black People (born in America) refer to themselves as African-Americans.

JFC, I am not a Swedish American.... I am White, you are Brown, Smurfs are blue... it's just an adjective.


Unless you were born in Africa, and come over to live in America... you are NOT an african American.

Lonewolf Ed 09-20-2013 10:07 AM
I am half Danish and the Vikings offend me mainly because they suck and they wear purple. As a Dane, I realize I am very much a minority, but do my Swedish and Norwegian brothers come and join me in protesting the Vikings? Noooo. :harumph:

Strongside 09-20-2013 10:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001606)
Another stupid thing:

When brown/black People (born in America) refer to themselves as African-Americans.

JFC, I am not a Swedish American.... I am White, you are Brown, Smurfs are blue... it's just an adjective.


Unless you were born in Africa, and come over to live in America... you are NOT an african American.
To be fair...there really isn't a negative Swedish connotation that white people use to belittle your heritage...such as the N-word. If there is...please let me know so that I can start using it among friends.

Molitoth 09-20-2013 10:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001621)
To be fair...there really isn't a negative Swedish connotation that white people use to belittle your heritage...such as the N-word. If there is...please let me know so that I can start using it among friends.
I didn't say the N-word was ok. I said that there is a difference between "African American" and the description of a skin color.

stevieray 09-20-2013 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001621)
To be fair...there really isn't a negative Swedish connotation that white people use to belittle your heritage...such as the N-word. If there is...please let me know so that I can start using it among friends.
curious, you tailgate by Raider Willie?

Strongside 09-20-2013 10:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieray (Post 10001634)
curious, you tailgate by Raider Willie?
SE corner of Lot-A. We're the huge group with a keg and large speakers. American flag above a Chiefs flag above a KU flag. Tell Raider Willie to come find me and I'll give him 2 chops to the throat.

2bikemike 09-20-2013 10:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG_DADDY (Post 10001490)
I dunno, the fightin whities were really popular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Whites
I remember this! Our company had a presence on that university. I wished I would have gotten one of those shirts.

BIG_DADDY 09-20-2013 10:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001322)
This is one of the worst ****ing columns ever written.

And here's how the flow chart should look on this issue:

Is your team name a racial slur?
|
|
Yes
|
|
THEN ****ING CHANGE IT

Jesus Christ, it's that ****ing simple. And all this whining about political correctness and "the white man's burden" (what the **** is this, a soap ad from the 19th century?) is utter bullshit. Historical context matters, whether you and your blinded-by-privilege myopic worldview like it or not.

Idiots.
LMAO

stevieray 09-20-2013 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001642)
SE corner of Lot-A. We're the huge group with a keg and large speakers. American flag above a Chiefs flag above a KU flag. Tell Raider Willie to come find me and I'll give him 2 chops to the throat.
:clap:

by the two guys that wear the striped overalls?

Strongside 09-20-2013 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieray (Post 10001651)
:clap:

by the two guys that wear the striped overalls?
YUP.

BIG_DADDY 09-20-2013 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bikemike (Post 10001648)
I remember this! Our company had a presence on that university. I wished I would have gotten one of those shirts.
Think I will order one now.

http://www.cafepress.com/mf/932070/f...ent=search-pla

Iowanian 09-20-2013 10:23 AM
I'm offended by the historically inhumane treatment of wild equestrian animals. I don't see how this league can continue to support the name Broncos...which celebrates that history of abuse.

stevieray 09-20-2013 10:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001656)
YUP.
awesome..cool to swing by pregame?

9er guy 09-20-2013 10:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001606)
Another stupid thing:

When brown/black People (born in America) refer to themselves as African-Americans.

JFC, I am not a Swedish American.... I am White, you are Brown, Smurfs are blue... it's just an adjective.


Unless you were born in Africa, and come over to live in America... you are NOT an african American.
Are 100% Swedish?

All Black people can trace their roots to Africa to some degree.

I prefer "Black" myself but, I think when an entire group of people an trace their roots to one place, it doesn't seem that out of place.

Strongside 09-20-2013 10:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieray (Post 10001661)
awesome..cool to swing by pregame?
Sure man. Everyone is welcome. Other than Raiders fans, that is...we're trying to stay semi-classy.

9er guy 09-20-2013 10:26 AM
They better not touch my Indians! Go tribe!!

BlackHelicopters 09-20-2013 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise (Post 10001295)
On a side note- Rick Reilly sucks.
Didn't even read the article. Dude is a tool.

Strongside 09-20-2013 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9er guy (Post 10001673)
They better not touch my Indians! Go tribe!!
http://replygif.net/i/600.gif

stevieray 09-20-2013 10:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001671)
Sure man. Everyone is welcome. Other than Raiders fans, that is...we're trying to stay semi-classy.
:thumb:
....energy at the Giants game is gonna be HUGE.

laughsatyou907 09-20-2013 10:30 AM
Chief may refer to:

Quote:
Title or rank

Chief of the Name, head of a family or clan
Chief executive officer, the highest-ranking corporate officer of an organization
Chief Master Sergeant, in the United States Air Force
Chief of police, the head of a police department
Chief petty officer, a non-commissioned officer or equivalent in many navies
Chief of the Boat, the senior enlisted sailor on an U.S. Navy submarine
Chief engineer, the highest senior officer in the engine department on a merchant vessel
Chief officer, the highest senior officer in the deck department on a merchant vessel
Commander-in-chief, the commander of a nation's military forces or significant element of those forces
Editor-in-chief, the highest-ranking editor of a publication
Fire chief, top rank in a fire department
Paramount chief, the highest-level traditional chief or political leader in a polity
Tribal chief, the head of a tribal form of self-government
Warrant officer, in the United States Army
A member of the 'House of chiefs'.
A captain, to which 'chieftain' is etymologically related.
Clan chief, the head of a Scottish clan.
Chiefs of the Name, the recognized head of a Scottish family or Irish clan .
Germanic chieftain, chieftains specifically of the Germanic tribes of Europe.

underEJ 09-20-2013 10:31 AM
I know the Chiefs were named after Bartle, and I don't think at the core it is offensive.

However, as a non-Native American Chiefs fan, I have to say I am completely offended by the head dress and feather wearers and also by the tomahawk chop, not because it has anything to do with race or culture, but because it looks so ****ing stupid.

The Native American image and traditional dress is not something that holds up under cheap imitation. The guy in this picture looks like a joke, not a great fan. And seriously, watch people doing the chop and tell me that that arm swinging and moaning looks even remotely intimidating or supportive. It looks ridiculous. It isn't a tradition, as it is a fairly recent addition to the fan experience. Frankly, I wish the team would be a little more creative than ripping off bad group chants from other teams.

But, I am just one person with my own tastes and all I can do is not do the chant and hope others start to hate it too. It would never occur to me to try to get it banned, even if it would be for the greater good since apparently when you are doing the chop, you are somehow prevented from seeing that it looks like you are jacking off and blowing a giant.

Thig Lyfe 09-20-2013 10:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaWolf (Post 10001341)
I read it differently. Reilly seems to be mocking that attitude. His point is that the Native Americans he knows don't really take an issue with this. But because some people have decided that it's something that Native Americans should be offended by, they're going to tell the Native American's what is right or wrong, despite their actual feelings on the matter. He also goes on to point out that anyone can be offended by anything, bringing up the point that in those cases, should we also be changing those names? Reilly seems to be arguing against this...
No, we read it the same way. I know exactly what Reilly's doing. It's bullshit.

It's the "I have a [Native American] friend" defense. It's "here are some cherrypicked & dubiously conducted polls that don't acknowledge the entire nations of Native people who have very recently asked that the name be changed." It's reducto ad absurdium; comparing the Redskins (a racial slur against a historically oppressed people) to the Saints, Angels, Wizards, Fighting Irish (none of which are racial slurs against historically oppressed people) is idiotic. An atheist would be silly to be offended by the Saints or Angels. But believe it or not, there is a line. And that line is racial slurs used against an historically oppressed peoples.

This column is every single tired old argument against changing the Redskins name all rolled into one big ball of shit. And you people are acting like he's said something new and interesting and (I'm gonna puke) courageous.

Some Native Americans might not have a problem with the word. Fine. That's not why we should be changing it. We should be changing it because it's a ****ing disgusting reminder of our ****ing disgusting treatment of the people who were here before us. And we see fit to honor that disgusting treatment by slapping a racial slur on a football jersey. Jesus ****ing Christ, how is this so ****ing hard for some of you?

9er guy 09-20-2013 10:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by theelusiveeightrop (Post 10001676)
Didn't even read the article. Dude is a tool.
Such a douche.

He was feelin himself because he bought a Chinese baby and he wrote this article about how Kap should seek out his birth mother.

**** OUTTA HERE....

9er guy 09-20-2013 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongside (Post 10001677)
Still got a game and half on your boys.

In all seriousness, I need the crowns to do work tonight against TX.

Molitoth 09-20-2013 10:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9er guy (Post 10001667)
Are 100% Swedish?

All Black people can trace their roots to Africa to some degree.

I prefer "Black" myself but, I think when an entire group of people an trace their roots to one place, it doesn't seem that out of place.
My mom is 100%. I'm 50%.

I happen to work with some scientists who have actually had or have residence in Africa, therefor I will gladly consider them African American... because that term describes them properly.

Other than that, I don't care if you are white/black/Michael Jackson/etc... you are simply an American.

Molitoth 09-20-2013 10:36 AM
Sorry for going all DC on you guys, lol. I typically just stay quiet, dunno what's gotten into me today.

I am however, excited to be 3-0.

9er guy 09-20-2013 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001715)
My mom is 100%. I'm 50%.

I happen to work with some scientists who have actually had or have residence in Africa, therefor I will gladly consider them African American... because that term describes them properly.

Other than that, I don't care if you are white/black/Michael Jackson/etc... you are simply an American.
I feel you. My dad's from Nigeria so I consider him an "African-American".

I'd rather be called "Black" myself.

But at the same time, It's no secret where the black people (Especially in America) came from. So it really doesn't bother me.

I think we can agree that it's not as douchey as the dudes that wear that "Italia" soccer gear.

Like dude, you've never been on out Staten Island.

9er guy 09-20-2013 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001720)
Sorry for going all DC on you guys, lol. I typically just stay quiet, dunno what's gotten into me today.

I am however, excited to be 3-0.
LOL! I was about to type the same thing. Almost got DC'd out (no homo?)

Fish 09-20-2013 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by underEJ (Post 10001693)
I know the Chiefs were named after Bartle, and I don't think at the core it is offensive.

However, as a non-Native American Chiefs fan, I have to say I am completely offended by the head dress and feather wearers and also by the tomahawk chop, not because it has anything to do with race or culture, but because it looks so ****ing stupid.
Stupid=offensive? :facepalm:

I think your post is stupid, and therefore I'm very offended.

Garcia Bronco 09-20-2013 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001694)
No, we read it the same way. I know exactly what Reilly's doing. It's bullshit.

It's the "I have a [Native American] friend" defense. It's "here are some cherrypicked & dubiously conducted polls that don't acknowledge the entire nations of Native people who have very recently asked that the name be changed." It's reducto ad absurdium; comparing the Redskins (a racial slur against a historically oppressed people) to the Saints, Angels, Wizards, Fighting Irish (none of which are racial slurs against historically oppressed people) is idiotic. An atheist would be silly to be offended by the Saints or Angels. But believe it or not, there is a line. And that line is racial slurs used against an historically oppressed peoples.

This column is every single tired old argument against changing the Redskins name all rolled into one big ball of shit. And you people are acting like he's said something new and interesting and (I'm gonna puke) courageous.

Some Native Americans might not have a problem with the word. Fine. That's not why we should be changing it. We should be changing it because it's a ****ing disgusting reminder of our ****ing disgusting treatment of the people who were here before us. And we see fit to honor that disgusting treatment by slapping a racial slur on a football jersey. Jesus ****ing Christ, how is this so ****ing hard for some of you?
The Irish were oppressed. Good grief. The lack of European History education is astounding in this country.

I actually have ancestors that were killed by Native Americans. So I don't give a **** what you say. Like I said, as long as Dan Syder is the owner of the Redskins it will continue to be called the Redskins. He's already won the court case. It's over.

Rooster 09-20-2013 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molitoth (Post 10001474)
I dunno, I think I would be totally offended if a team was called the Paleskins.

That shit right there is unacceptable.
That would be a slow ass football team.

stevieray 09-20-2013 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooster (Post 10001743)
That would be a slow ass football team.
:rolleyes:

Fish 09-20-2013 10:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001694)
Some Native Americans might not have a problem with the word. Fine. That's not why we should be changing it. We should be changing it because it's a ****ing disgusting reminder of our ****ing disgusting treatment of the people who were here before us. And we see fit to honor that disgusting treatment by slapping a racial slur on a football jersey. Jesus ****ing Christ, how is this so ****ing hard for some of you?
The majority of Native Americans are saying "Nah, we're cool. We don't find it offensive." But you don't think that's the point, because it bothers you personally?

Sounds like the problem is with you, bro.....

Thig Lyfe 09-20-2013 10:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 10001738)
The Irish were oppressed. Good grief. The lack of European History education is astounding in this country.
Yeah, I know. But "Fighting Irish" isn't a racial slur. And the anti-Irish thing in this country kinda went away when racists realized there were more pressing matters to be racist about.

Also, I'm not particularly concerned about American education not being Eurocentric enough.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 10001738)
I actually have ancestors that were killed by Native Americans.
Okay. Redskins is still a racial slur.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 10001738)
So I don't give a **** what you say.
Likewise, friend!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 10001738)
Like I said, as long as Dan Syder is the owner of the Redskins it will continue to be called the Redskins. He's already won the court case. It's over.
Okay. Redskins is still a racial slur and the name should be changed.

Prison Bitch 09-20-2013 10:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 10001738)
The Irish were oppressed. Good grief. The lack of European History education is astounding in this country.

I actually have ancestors that were killed by Native Americans. So I don't give a **** what you say. Like I said, as long as Dan Syder is the owner of the Redskins it will continue to be called the Redskins. He's already won the court case. It's over.
yes but, but but.....aren't you forgetting the Peter King influence? Won't that latte liberal be able to overthrow the racist 1-percenter Dan Snyder with his blog?

Thig Lyfe 09-20-2013 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish (Post 10001756)
The majority of Native Americans are saying "Nah, we're cool. We don't find it offensive." But you don't think that's the point, because it bothers you personally?

Sounds like the problem is with you, bro.....
Yeah, my "problem" is being concerned with the historical context of a racial slur.

And again, this perception that the majority of Native Americans are cool with it is dubious at best. Why don't you call up the leaders of the Oneida Indian Nation and ask them how they feel? Or do their feelings on the matter not count because Rick Reilly's father-in-law isn't offended?

Molitoth 09-20-2013 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001758)
Okay. Redskins is still a racial slur and the name should be changed.

Anything could be perceived as a racial slur if someone wants to perceive it that way. Just like anyone could be offended by anything if they want to take offense.

It is impossible to please everyone.

When you hear the term "the pussification of America", this is the kind of shit that defines it. There are more important things in life than getting all bent over a term. Same goes for anything offensive. Move the eff on.

stevieray 09-20-2013 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001773)
Yeah, my "problem" is being concerned with the historical context of a racial slur.

And again, this perception that the majority of Native Americans are cool with it is dubious at best. Why don't you call up the leaders of the Oneida Indian Nation and ask them how they feel? Or do their feelings on the matter not count because Rick Reilly's father-in-law isn't offended?
the term scalp was changed to redskins because....wait for it..women were "offended" by the term used by traders.

Fish is right..this about you and your feelings.

Garcia Bronco 09-20-2013 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 10001762)
yes but, but but.....aren't you forgetting the Peter King influence? Won't that latte liberal be able to overthrow the racist 1-percenter Dan Snyder with his blog?
Dan Synder is the decision maker. Not the league and not King, so unless Dan changes his mind. It'll never happen.

Redskins is no longer a racial slur, and never really was a racial slur. In 2013 it's the name of a football team. It's brand name.

teedubya 09-20-2013 10:55 AM
This is just white guilt in action... let's totally get rid of any names that remind people of Native Americans... then we can act like it didn't happen. Pussification in action.

Garcia Bronco 09-20-2013 10:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by teedubya (Post 10001796)
This is just white guilt in action... let's totally get rid of any names that remind people of Native Americans... then we can act like it didn't happen. Pussification in action.
I am not guilty about it. Espcially when you consider that in the 1600's the Natives here were engaged in genocide.

BIG_DADDY 09-20-2013 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001694)
No, we read it the same way. I know exactly what Reilly's doing. It's bullshit.

It's the "I have a [Native American] friend" defense. It's "here are some cherrypicked & dubiously conducted polls that don't acknowledge the entire nations of Native people who have very recently asked that the name be changed." It's reducto ad absurdium; comparing the Redskins (a racial slur against a historically oppressed people) to the Saints, Angels, Wizards, Fighting Irish (none of which are racial slurs against historically oppressed people) is idiotic. An atheist would be silly to be offended by the Saints or Angels. But believe it or not, there is a line. And that line is racial slurs used against an historically oppressed peoples.

This column is every single tired old argument against changing the Redskins name all rolled into one big ball of shit. And you people are acting like he's said something new and interesting and (I'm gonna puke) courageous.

Some Native Americans might not have a problem with the word. Fine. That's not why we should be changing it. We should be changing it because it's a ****ing disgusting reminder of our ****ing disgusting treatment of the people who were here before us. And we see fit to honor that disgusting treatment by slapping a racial slur on a football jersey. Jesus ****ing Christ, how is this so ****ing hard for some of you?
How's the weather out there on Thig island? I don't see it but I might if you can back up your statement that there are all these nations of Indians standing united in a combined effort to be offended. Please don't refer to Suzan Shown Harjo either as her personal opinion is light years away from the claim you made.

Fish 09-20-2013 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thig Lyfe (Post 10001773)
Yeah, my "problem" is being concerned with the historical context of a racial slur.

And again, this perception that the majority of Native Americans are cool with it is dubious at best. Why don't you call up the leaders of the Oneida Indian Nation and ask them how they feel? Or do their feelings on the matter not count because Rick Reilly's father-in-law isn't offended?
There's been lots of polling done, with pretty clear results. Not my fault if you don't wanna believe it. Native Americans from this very board are saying they're not offended. But go ahead and hop on the white guilt train and see how many fictional victims you can find...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:24 PM.
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.