Redskins Trademark cancelled

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

The name is debatable but I really don't get why the logo would be objectionable to anyone. I think it represents Native Americans as confident and proud. That's a good thing, right?

I think that Amanda Blackhorse's opposition is that the logo represents a frozen stereotype which doesn't represent most dynamic 21st century Indians. But I am just surmising this from the rest of her argument - she didn't flat out say this when I was listening. And I am not offering my agreement, just summarizing her voice.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I think that Amanda Blackhorse's opposition is that the logo represents a frozen stereotype which doesn't represent most dynamic 21st century Indians. But I am just surmising this from the rest of her argument - she didn't flat out say this when I was listening. And I am not offering my agreement, just summarizing her voice.

She's gotta understand that many mascot names/logos of the NFL and other leagues represent times in history. Why does the logo have to represent the 21st century Native American? The Patriots' logo does not represent the 21st century Patriot. The Vikings logo most certainly doesn't. The 49er's mascot name represents the gold rush back in the 1800's for Pete's sake. These names are often created from a piece of this country (and that general area's) history, and doesn't have to be updated to reflect modern culture. Progressive thinking doesn't mean tossing history aside like a worn out pair of shoes.

In my opinion, I think it's great having historic names and symbols used in professional sports - especially if your children are watching the games with you. It gives you a chance to teach them about where the names came from and history itself. Because Lord knows, there are plenty special interest groups like this one who's sole purpose is to revise history and leave out parts that might "offend" someone. Please! History isn't all roses and ice-cream. Much of it is quite bloody - just like football.

Anyway, the point I'm making is that when you see the Cowboys and Redskins on the field, they are going into "battle" against each other. It's almost like going to a reenactment of a historic war battle. Most of these NFL names represent some type of warrior or solider - whether human or animal (Patriots/Bears), and most represent a specific time period. Heck, the way people keep revising history, the NFL might be the only place to get a history lesson from.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

1.Progressive thinking doesn't mean tossing history aside like a worn out pair of shoes.

2. In my opinion, I think it's great having historic names and symbols used in professional sports - especially if your children are watching the games with you. It gives you a chance to teach them about where the names came from and history itself.

3. Most of these NFL names represent some type of warrior or solider - whether human or animal (Patriots/Bears), and most represent a specific time period.

You make some excellent points. I parsed your post a little in order to comment on certain points you made.

1. Unfortunately, many progressives do want to toss aside any part of history that they don't like. I remember when many inner city public schools were taking down portraits of past U.S. Presidents to get rid of "the old white guys". Feminists call those of the feminine gender "women" and diminish those of the masculine gender by calling them "males". Today, there are schools in California that fly the Mexican flag. Radicals are all about manipulating others through symbolism and word usage. They are not concerned with the things we have in common that reinforce our unity.

2. I have often told my children and grandchildren about the historical meaning of some NFL nicknames.

3. Few sports teams have ever been named after doves or bunnies.

[mitch e]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

She's gotta understand that many mascot names/logos of the NFL and other leagues represent times in history. Why does the logo have to represent the 21st century Native American? The Patriots' logo does not represent the 21st century Patriot. The Vikings logo most certainly doesn't. The 49er's mascot name represents the gold rush back in the 1800's for Pete's sake. These names are often created from a piece of this country (and that general area's) history, and doesn't have to be updated to reflect modern culture. Progressive thinking doesn't mean tossing history aside like a worn out pair of shoes.

In my opinion, I think it's great having historic names and symbols used in professional sports - especially if your children are watching the games with you. It gives you a chance to teach them about where the names came from and history itself. Because Lord knows, there are plenty special interest groups like this one who's sole purpose is to revise history and leave out parts that might "offend" someone. Please! History isn't all roses and ice-cream. Much of it is quite bloody - just like football.

Anyway, the point I'm making is that when you see the Cowboys and Redskins on the field, they are going into "battle" against each other. It's almost like going to a reenactment of a historic war battle. Most of these NFL names represent some type of warrior or solider - whether human or animal (Patriots/Bears), and most represent a specific time period. Heck, the way people keep revising history, the NFL might be the only place to get a history lesson from.

I couldn't agree more, your making a great point!

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

She's gotta understand that many mascot names/logos of the NFL and other leagues represent times in history. Why does the logo have to represent the 21st century Native American? The Patriots' logo does not represent the 21st century Patriot. The Vikings logo most certainly doesn't. The 49er's mascot name represents the gold rush back in the 1800's for Pete's sake. These names are often created from a piece of this country (and that general area's) history, and doesn't have to be updated to reflect modern culture. Progressive thinking doesn't mean tossing history aside like a worn out pair of shoes.

In my opinion, I think it's great having historic names and symbols used in professional sports - especially if your children are watching the games with you. It gives you a chance to teach them about where the names came from and history itself. Because Lord knows, there are plenty special interest groups like this one who's sole purpose is to revise history and leave out parts that might "offend" someone. Please! History isn't all roses and ice-cream. Much of it is quite bloody - just like football.

Anyway, the point I'm making is that when you see the Cowboys and Redskins on the field, they are going into "battle" against each other. It's almost like going to a reenactment of a historic war battle. Most of these NFL names represent some type of warrior or solider - whether human or animal (Patriots/Bears), and most represent a specific time period. Heck, the way people keep revising history, the NFL might be the only place to get a history lesson from.

While I am not supporting Amanda Blackhorse, there's a hidden difference in your argument. Time-wise real Vikings are gone, 49ers are gone, Paul Revere-type patriots are gone. They are historical. But Native Americans continue and would like to be appreciated for who they are now, not frozen in amber in images from the past.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Lotus

While I am not supporting Amanda Blackhorse, there's a hidden difference in your argument. Time-wise real Vikings are gone, 49ers are gone, Paul Revere-type patriots are gone. They are historical. But Native Americans continue and would like to be appreciated for who they are now, not frozen in amber in images from the past.

I would say that the flaw in your argument is that present day soldiers consider themselves patriots, just like the patriots of the Paul Revere days, and could also be appreciated for who they are now in terms of looks and uniform. So why represent the Paul Revere Patriot and not the "Desert Storm" Patriot?

In terms of the Redskins logo, again, it was not whitey who created the logo - it was a Native American artist. Obviously, the artist understood the concepts of many NFL logos, which goes back to my previous point. The logos represent history and was meant to honor the Native American's history much like the Native Americans do when their tribes get together for ceremonies and dances (I have a Native American friend who's family attends these Indian tribal dances every year.)

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

I would say that the flaw in your argument is that present day soldiers consider themselves patriots, just like the patriots of the Paul Revere days, and could also be appreciated for who they are now in terms of looks and uniform. So why represent the Paul Revere Patriot and not the "Desert Storm" Patriot?

In terms of the Redskins logo, again, it was not whitey who created the logo - it was a Native American artist. Obviously, the artist understood the concepts of many NFL logos, which goes back to my previous point. The logos represent history and was meant to honor the Native American's history much like the Native Americans do when their tribes get together for ceremonies and dances (I have a Native American friend who's family attends these Indian tribal dances every year.)

1) I have no problem with New England representing modern day patriots. But in their logos, they don't. They represent patriots who are dead, unlike Indians who have a continued existence.

2) To say, "it was not whitey who created the logo," is a little disingenuous. Yes, a native artist did the rendering, and this is a point that I don't think Amanda Blackhorse has considered. But it was created for a white owner of a football team, so "whitey" was involved.

3) I have participated in the ceremonies of which you speak. You are right that they honor history and heritage. But it is also true that real, living people in the present seek real, living experiences of the present through those dances. They are not just museum pieces but a living, ongoing source of spirituality. Our logo, however, represents a dead past and that's all.

Again, I am not personally arguing against the logo. But I can understand the arguments of the people who have a problem with it.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Lotus

1) I have no problem with New England representing modern day patriots. But in their logos, they don't. They represent patriots who are dead, unlike Indians who have a continued existence.

2) To say, "it was not whitey who created the logo," is a little disingenuous. Yes, a native artist did the rendering, and this is a point that I don't think Amanda Blackhorse has considered. But it was created for a white owner of a football team, so "whitey" was involved.

3) I have participated in the ceremonies of which you speak. You are right that they honor history and heritage. But it is also true that real, living people in the present seek real, living experiences of the present through those dances. They are not just museum pieces but a living, ongoing source of spirituality. Our logo, however, represents a dead past and that's all.

Again, I am not personally arguing against the logo. But I can understand the arguments of the people who have a problem with it.

I wonder if Danny would compromise on the logo in order to maintain the Redskins name? Maybe update the side of the helmet, eliminate the old "buffalo nickle" indian head. I would be for that.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Lotus

1) I have no problem with New England representing modern day patriots. But in their logos, they don't. They represent patriots who are dead, unlike Indians who have a continued existence.

But Patriots have never died out. Patriots still exist, they just don't dress in colonial garb anymore. Patriots are simply soldiers who fight for the country they represent.

Originally Posted by Lotus

2) To say, "it was not whitey who created the logo," is a little disingenuous. Yes, a native artist did the rendering, and this is a point that I don't think Amanda Blackhorse has considered. But it was created for a white owner of a football team, so "whitey" was involved.

So there would be no issue if the owner back then was a different race?

Originally Posted by Lotus

3) I have participated in the ceremonies of which you speak. You are right that they honor history and heritage. But it is also true that real, living people in the present seek real, living experiences of the present through those dances. They are not just museum pieces but a living, ongoing source of spirituality. Our logo, however, represents a dead past and that's all.

I'm not sure what you mean by seeking real, living experiences of the present through those dances. What does that mean?

All what is past is dead. The question is, where is the offense in representing what was in the past? Secondly, if Blackhorse wishes for the logo to better represent present day Indians, have a Native American create another logo.

Originally Posted by Lotus

Again, I am not personally arguing against the logo. But I can understand the arguments of the people who have a problem with it.

I'm just trying to understand the logic behind what they argue. What I'm finding is, there isn't much logic.