Judge Sides With Redskins in Team Name Suit

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by rypper11

It's not that the term "redskin" is offensive as much as it is another example of the majority using the culture of a minority for profit without comprehension of it's meaning. Putting on headdresses, doing a tomahawk chop while chanting or calling oneself a "brave" is rude and demeaning.

From the poll Schneed posted earlier, 90% of Native Americans do not find the Redskins name offensive, which would include "rude & demeaning". I believe that percentage probably holds true for "braves" or "fighting Sioux" or Seminoles".

Not sure in this case how the majority is using the minority for profit, these teams could chose any other name/mascot with little effect on their profitability. They would actually see short term profit gains by changing their name/mascot in a spike of new jerseys, hats, t-shirts sales.

The "majority" is not the only group concerned with profits. If you have any knowledge of government contracting or Native American casinos, you will find that there are several government programs that give specific advantage to Native Americans in these areas and Native Americans are certainly taking advantage of them, for a great deal of profits. (Profits are not a bad thing, no matter if it is the "majority" or "minority" making them)

As for the meaning, most on this site know the history of the team name (from the article):
"The franchise began in Boston as the Braves but was purchased in 1932 by George Preston Marshall, who changed the name to honor head coach William “Lone Star” Dietz, an American Indian. The team kept its monicker after moving to the nation’s capital in 1937."
Not sure how this is rude or demeaning or "using the minority for a profit".

However, is it any more so than suburban kids listening to rap music? The difference is that Johnny lives in a cul-de-sac while promoting himself as a straight up gangsta with all of the vernacular and actions associated with another culture every day while he is spending his parents money and giving it to the industry that is fed off of his ignorance and stupidity.

Are you saying that suburban kids who listen to rap are ignorant & stupid? Or that their behavior is "rude & demeaning?" Whatever you're saying, I'm sure the rap artists and record labels sure appreciate the behavior....all the way to the bank.

[rypper11]

Are you saying that suburban kids who listen to rap are ignorant & stupid? Or that their behavior is "rude & demeaning?" Whatever you're saying, I'm sure the rap artists and record labels sure appreciate the behavior....all the way to the bank.[/quote]
That is exactly what my point was. If an American Indian had any ownership of any of the sales and they were benefiting from the mascots, I think there would be no problem at all. That was my attempt at comparing the two.

[jgalecpa]

Originally Posted by rypper11

If an American Indian had any ownership of any of the sales and they were benefiting from the mascots, I think there would be no problem at all.

Following the death of JKC, the skins were put up for sale.

If it were such a big deal, how come there were no casino owning tribes that stepped up to bid?

They could've changed the name themselves.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by jgalecpa

Following the death of JKC, the skins were put up for sale.

If it were such a big deal, how come there were no casino owning tribes that stepped up to bid?

They could've changed the name themselves.

For some reason, I'm thinking that casino owners wouldn't have $800 million...

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by jdlea

For some reason, I'm thinking that casino owners wouldn't have $800 million...

???

Casino owners are some of the richest people in the world. Donald Trump? Steve Wynn? Terry Benedict?

OK, so that last one was for the Ocean 11 fans out there.

It's a silly point though, to say that "if Native Americans didn't like it, why don't they buy the team and change the name themselves." So I'm definitely not going to argue in favor of that logic.

But I was just struck by the casino owners thing. Perhaps you were being sarcastic and I'm just out to lunch.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

???

Casino owners are some of the richest people in the world. Donald Trump? Steve Wynn? Terry Benedict?

OK, so that last one was for the Ocean 11 fans out there.

It's a silly point though, to say that "if Native Americans didn't like it, why don't they buy the team and change the name themselves." So I'm definitely not going to argue in favor of that logic.

But I was just struck by the casino owners thing. Perhaps you were being sarcastic and I'm just out to lunch.

It was a pretty weak attempt at sarcasm...it was more just because I didn't want to address just how flimsy the argument is.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by jdlea

It was a pretty weak attempt at sarcasm...it was more just because I didn't want to address just how flimsy the argument is.

Word.

[rypper11]

Originally Posted by jgalecpa

Following the death of JKC, the skins were put up for sale.

If it were such a big deal, how come there were no casino owning tribes that stepped up to bid?

They could've changed the name themselves.

Nobody who owns a casino or other gambling venture is allowed ownership of an NFL team.

SPORTSbyBROOKS » Casino Owner Forced To Sell His Share Of Texans

[jgalecpa]

Originally Posted by rypper11

Nobody who owns a casino or other gambling venture is allowed ownership of an NFL team.

SPORTSbyBROOKS » Casino Owner Forced To Sell His Share Of Texans

Good point.

Thanks.

J-Dawg.

PS Go Skins.