Quantcast
Published On: Fri, Oct 11th, 2013

‘Redskins’ must offend the ‘White Man’ because 90% of Native Americans are not

The headlines are sprinkled with renewed outrage over the Washington Redskins name, fueled in part by President Obama comment that the team should change their name.

Redskins offensive? photo Katidid213 via wmc

Redskins offensive? photo Katidid213 via wmc

A CBS article from Thursday asks “How Many Native Americans Think ‘Redskins’ Is s Slur?” but rambles trying to prove their opening assertion: “…it’s unclear how many Native Americans think “Redskins” is a racial slur.”

The article attempts to proclaim there are millions and millions of Native Americans and no polling data to determine their outrage over the mascots of sports teams.

In fact, in 2004 the National Annenberg Election Survey found that 90% of those surveyed didn’t find it offensive.

While the article makes a brief mention of this fact, there is no link to the survey data or date and the implication is that “we just don’t know” how offensive the mascot names really are to this people group.

“Perhaps this uncertainty shouldn’t matter — because the word has an undeniably racist history, or because the team says it uses the word with respect, or because in a truly decent society, some would argue, what hurts a few should be avoided by all,” the CBS writer states.

The naming of the mascot is no secret (quoted here from Wikipedia) so you can determine if it’s truly racist:

“The Washington Redskins were originally known as the Boston Braves. In 1933, co-owner George Preston Marshall changed the name to the Redskins, possibly in recognition of the then–head coach Lone Star Dietz, who claimed to be part Sioux. Dietz’s true heritage has been questioned by some scholars.”

The owner of the team changed the name to honor the Native American heritage of their head coach?

Later former Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke said “I admire the Redskins name. I think it stands for bravery, courage, and a stalwart spirit and I see no reason why we shouldn’t continue to use it.”

From a 2000 letter to the team’s president: “”The team’s name and logo are blatantly derogatory. “Redskin,” as you must know, is a racial slur, invoking a sad history of U.S. treatment of Native Americans. The team’s logo, an attempt to evoke the proud warrior spirit of Native American culture, is a cruel mockery of a culture all but destroyed.”

Yes, you read that right: the evoking of the proud warrior spirit is “cruel mockery” and “blatantly derogatory.”

What appears to be a mockery is this movements “blatant derogatory” and “cruel” abuse of their right to protest.

In other words, they are making protests look bad, so knock it off.

Check out the discussion on Dispatch Radio

 

On the DISPATCH: Headlines  Local  Opinion

Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter

* indicates required
/ ( mm / dd ) [ALL INFO CONFIDENTIAL]

About the Author

- Writer and Co-Founder of The Global Dispatch, Brandon has been covering news, offering commentary for years, beginning professionally in 2003 on Crazed Fanboy before expanding into other blogs and sites. Appearing on several radio shows, Brandon has hosted Dispatch Radio, written his first novel (The Rise of the Templar) and completed the three years Global University program in Ministerial Studies to be a pastor. To Contact Brandon email [email protected] ATTN: BRANDON

Tags
Displaying 6 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Leftists are killing ESPN and the media is defending the politicization of sports | The Global Dispatch says:

    […] Liberal bias has quickly evolved into volatile leftism, reacting hourly to President Trump and the current version of political correctness. One big example was the perspective that the Redskin name is racist, despite being a tribute to history and is supported 90% of Native Americans. […]

  2. FCC: Redskins name is not offensive - The Global Dispatch says:

    […] A survey did point out that most Native Americans were not offended, that and some history – HERE […]

  3. US Patent Office cancels Washington Redskins trademark - The Global Dispatch says:

    […] Do most Native Americans find it offensive, what is the history of the name – read more HERE […]

  4. Two members of Congress call on NFL to pressure Washington Redskins name change - The Global Dispatch says:

    […]  More on that story HERE […]

  5. Native American Legal Struggles | Redskin Potato says:

    […] ‘Redskins’ must offend the ‘White Man’ because 90% of Native Americans are n… (theglobaldispatch.com) […]

  6. CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON says:

    MONTHS AGO, AT Global Dispatch, I TYPED – AS, AN ALUMNUS OF Arkansas State University – THAT I IGNORE REQUESTS FROM THE UNIVERSITY FOR DONATIONS BECAUSE THEY CHANGED THE MASCOT FROM “Indians” TO “Red Wolves;” THEREBY, CAUSING ME TO LOSE AN EMOTIONAL CONNECTION TO MY TIME AT THE UNIVERSITY. AN INDIAN IS A VIOLENT FIGHTER; A RED WOLF IS A SPECIES OF FOX. IN CONTACT SPORTS, WHICH CREATES MORE FEAR IN THE OPPONENT?

    Brandon Jones, SIR YOU TYPE, ” … because the word has an undeniably racist history … ;” BUT “Redskin” IS NO DIFFERENT THAN “Black” OR “White.” IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, POLICE ARE TOLD BY AN EYEWITNESS, “So-and-so is black [or, white,” etc.].

    MY POINT IS, WE LIVE IN A RACIALLY-CHARGED WORLD IN WHICH WE USE THE COLOR OF SKIN TO IDENTIFY THOSE WHO DO NOT LOOK LIKE US, AS INDIVIDUALS.

    CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Sign up for our Weekly Newsletter



Categories

Archives

At the Movies



Pin It