My thoughs on the Redskins name and why it SHOULD NOT be changed!!!

PS5 Pro

PS5 Pro

DC looking a 1/2 seed right about nuh
Hall of Shame
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
32,400
Reputation
-10,641
Daps
22,244
Reppin
The Original Rec Room Gang
Now, I'm not stubborn. If I see a viable reason to change it, cool. But there is a bunch of malarkey being spread around on all sides. And that needs to be addressed if you ever want to get to the bottom of whats even the problem. I'll start off with the name itself. Redskins. Thats not a racial slur, could give a fukk if a Native American says that. If a white person says calling him a whiteskin is now a racial slur I'd be like "Ok Cracka" and then I'd hop into a jiggaboo shuffle :stylin:

So I'm watching the news, and they show Obama, then this guy who I guess is an authentic indian (I know, but writing native american is getting redundant so I'll use "NA" for the rest of this post)
So this authentic "NA" goes "Its a racial slur that hurts.. go look it up in the dictionary"
I have looked it up over the years and it wasn't deemed a racial slur before :wtf: So whats really good?
Lets take a look now... http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/redskin?s=t&path=/
red·skin
[red-skin] Show IPA
noun Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.
a North American Indian.
Origin:
1690–1700, Americanism;
Click to expand...
red1 + skin
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2013.
Cite This Source
|
Link To redskin
Collins
World English Dictionary
redskin (ˈrɛdˌskɪn)
— n
an old-fashioned informal name, now considered taboo, for a Native American
[C17: so called because one particular tribe, the now extinct Beothuks of Newfoundland, painted themselves with red ochre]
Click to expand...
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/redskin?s=t&path=/
Now let me pinpoint the hypocrisy of even the definitions...
Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.
a North American Indian.

Origin: 1690–1700, Americanism; red1 + skin
According to this, it was a racial slur between the year 1690 and 1700. Really bruh :rudy:
Whats worse, its still defined as "North American Indian" but the only reason they are called "indian" is because when the Italians came to America they thought they was from India :gladbron:
They actually practice religion that is identical to what is practiced where? Africa. But not even an "NA" will be quick to tell you all that.

Now the final part of the definition...
an old-fashioned informal name, now considered taboo, for a Native American [C17: so called because one particular tribe, the now extinct Beothuks of Newfoundland, painted themselves with red ochre]
And informal name (sounds more accurate) NOW CONSIDERED TABOO.
My question is how does something that was I guess used for a 10yr period back in 1690 then considered STILL offensive in the mid 1900's even tho nobody uses that term to refer to the "NA"'s that we don't even see
If there are less and less Injuns even around, how does the outcry get louder and louder?

White People :blessed:
I'm black, and over the course of my life I've seen a good 30% of all white people claim THEY INDIAN :laff:
Not joking, not exaggerating. If there was ever a discussion about race, the white people in the convo who are ashamed of there ancestors past will be like "Well I'm 1/245th Sioux Indian bruh :ufdup:"
Last time I seen it happen? Yesterday on Around the Horn where Woody Paige says "I'm 1/16th Indian"

So the name itself.. not racist. People can take offense by creating a new meaning for it. What is the meaning?
Redskin means you have Redskin, how is that offensive? It should only be offensive to white people who have Redskin like Mike Shanahan. An actual Indian "NA" should love his Redskin and not let the white man make them feel like its a racial slur by merely mentioning it. So if the name REALLY was never used as racial slurs for 1,000 out of 1,010yrs. I'm gonna call bullshyt on that. So what is the problem?
I will show that in my next post, BRB...
 
Last edited:
PS5 Pro

PS5 Pro

DC looking a 1/2 seed right about nuh
Hall of Shame
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
32,400
Reputation
-10,641
Daps
22,244
Reppin
The Original Rec Room Gang
So if its not the name itself, what is the problem?

Before I get to the ACTUAL problem, I have to at least speak about the outer layers. The fact lawsuits are involved, and people want to cash in. From all sides. 40acres and the mule
And then there's just human error where people ride for causes just cuz it sounds good :manny:
You see, on some Indian reservations, they have high schools that use the name Redskins :mindblown:
But I thought it was this racial slur, but they gonna name there own H.S. the Redskins?
Once again, the name is not a racial slur if that is real. And at conferences discussing this, 2 leaders of the cause were actually wearing Redskins shirts and hats. Which leads me to whats really going on (and is misunderstood by most)

Indian (Native American) people don't want YOU using them PERIOD. Thats the issue.
They don't want you to use there likeness at all, no Indian, no Chief, none of that.
Why? Nobody seems to want to talk about that part. Part of it (if not most of it) is they don't like other races portraying them which is understandable since the white man has a way of portraying people. Black-Face, big lipped nikkaz is how blacks were portrayed, Indian chiefs is how they are portrayed. Thats not really a bad thing, unless they feel its racist to portray them as fearless warriors who fought to the death trying to protect what was theres.
Heroic imo, but they like "Nope... none of that bruh"

What "NA"s need to do a better job of is letting it be known what they do find acceptable
They also need to be apart of this culture more for that to actually BE.
Malcolm X said Black People need to leave America to ever be free. Indians have achieved that (by force) and the end result is there is a huge disconnect that can never be fixed until they reintegrate into American Society. Just saying "You can't use us period" is not teaching anyone WHY THEY SHOULDN'T. From my own research, they don't seem to have a problem with being called "chief" and they do embrace Redskins like how you'd expect them to
They just don't want YOU calling them that. Kind of like how gay people call each other fakkits but get offended if you were to call a gay person that

Actually, its exactly like that. Only difference is there usually is some negative condemnation when a straight person calls an gay person a fakkit. But that isn't true for the word Redskin
And hasn't been since 1690-1700 :manny:
 
Last edited:
PS5 Pro

PS5 Pro

DC looking a 1/2 seed right about nuh
Hall of Shame
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
32,400
Reputation
-10,641
Daps
22,244
Reppin
The Original Rec Room Gang
yo moms said:
Didnt read.

But I won't knock the :troll: hustle. From a fellow :troll:
Click to expand...
I'm not trolling, your just ignorant :manny:
the cac mamba said:
i wish i could but that shyt was terribly written :beli:

start incoherent bullshyt threads, brehs :heh:
Click to expand...
You wish you could :wtf:
I'm sorry I didnt index my paragraphs the way you like it, but that doesn't mean you couldn't read
It requires more reading than your willing to commit to, so just say that then take your dumbass somewhere else :manny:

I never understood why a dumbass would enter a thread to say "Uh, I'm not gonna partake in this thread"
Like, thanks for the update. I'll make sure to retweet it :salute:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top