LANCASTER, N.Y. - The Lancaster School Board unanimously approved a new nickname -- the "Legends" -- at a meeting on Monday night, marking another step forward for the district following the retirement of the old "Redskins" http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/educa...ends/28719953/
Cause the owner doesn't want to.
BillsImpossible (06-09-2015),Cntrygal (06-10-2015),Jimkelly12203 (06-09-2015),kgun12 (06-09-2015),malvado78 (06-10-2015)
More of the politically correct bull****.
BertSquirtgum (06-09-2015),BillsImpossible (06-09-2015),imbondz (06-19-2015),Jimkelly12203 (06-09-2015),kgun12 (06-09-2015),sdbillsfan2 (06-09-2015)
Just answer this:Originally Posted by Zoneblitser
Why are native Americans the only group allowed to be identified by their skin color? People would be furious if there were teams called the Atlanta Darkies, the Miami Brownskins, the Vancouver Yellowskins or the Minnesota Fightin' Whities.
But for some reason, no one seems to mind calling native Americans "Redskins."
I ask this question every single time this issue comes up and I have yet to get an answer.
DynaPaul (06-11-2015)
Redskins refers to the red warpaint applied to the skin by a specific tribe.
But why let the facts ruin a good whine?
BertSquirtgum (06-09-2015),BillsImpossible (06-09-2015),Generalissimus Gibby (06-13-2015),Jimkelly12203 (06-09-2015),kgun12 (06-09-2015),Yasgur's Farm (06-30-2015)
BillsImpossible (06-09-2015)
This team would instantly become my 2nd favorite team.
BertSquirtgum (06-09-2015),BillsImpossible (06-09-2015),feldspar (06-10-2015),kgun12 (06-09-2015),malvado78 (06-10-2015),Meathead (06-09-2015)
Heres a fact - its still used (no matter the origin) as a racial term that most natives would probably not be in favor of being called.
chernobylwraiths (06-09-2015)
Yeah but it also refers to the scalps of native Americans that were taken as war trophies and it's been used as a disparaging name as well. But let's not let that get in the way of a good whine about someone else's perceived whine.
chernobylwraiths (06-09-2015),trapezeus (06-09-2015)
It's a misconception by ignorant people. And the truth is, survey after survey shows that most natives don't give a ****. In fact many are proud of the Redskins mascot.
BillsImpossible (06-09-2015),Generalissimus Gibby (06-13-2015),Jimkelly12203 (06-09-2015),kgun12 (06-09-2015),Thurmal (06-09-2015)
That NOT what the team was named after. So this is another case of stupid people looking to act like victims, which is especially ironic in that it's mostly white, liberal bereavement enthusiasts who cry so hard about this.
At the end of the day, this is about privately owned property, whose private owner refuses to change the name of HIS property, over a misconception by ignorant people like you, regarding the origin on HIS PROPERTY'S name.
Last edited by WagonCircler; 06-09-2015 at 09:27 AM.
BillsImpossible (06-09-2015),Cntrygal (06-10-2015),Generalissimus Gibby (06-13-2015),Zoneblitser (06-09-2015)
I feel like you shouldn't be able to have these two thoughts.
chernobylwraiths (06-09-2015),OpIv37 (06-09-2015),trapezeus (06-09-2015)
It may not be what the team was named after, but it's what people think of when they hear the name now.
Really? Please elaborate.
If anything, this is a clear illustration of the difference between what is truly offensive and what is an imagined slight, created by people who have an agenda.
Private ****ING property.
Just because people are stupid and misunderstand something doesn't mean the government should be able to step in, as they are trying to do, and force a man to change the name of his business.
BillsImpossible (06-09-2015)
Nothing is "truly offensive"' because what's offensive is subjective.
Ok you just completely changed the topic. I'm simply discussing whether or not the name is offensive. I never said anything about what the government should or shouldn't do.
Facts? That story is apocryphal at best and likely a hoax. In any case, the common understanding of the term is pejorative now.
Here are some facts for you... George Preston Marshall, the original owner, was considered by his contemporaries, in an age of institutionalized racism, as an inveterate bigot and would not sign blacks so as not to offend his de facto market, the deep South. He held out until 1962 when RFK threatened to revoke the stadium lease. Marshall then drafted Ernie Davis who refused to play for Marshall.But why let the facts ruin a good whine?
Lehner's history. He just doesn't know it yet.
We covered this subject at length. Don't expect any of the usual suspects to be changing their minds about it.
A lot of this of course will eventually come down to money as most things do in America. If/when Dan Snyder loses his appeal of the patent case and therefore loses his exclusive right to profit from the racist logo he will relent and change the name. I mean, business is business, right? And after a few days of hub bub about how terrible it is that the racist name had to be changed the right wing will move on to the next reason why they need to stock the bunker with AK47's to protect themselves from the bad old tyrannical government. Dan Snyder will make a bundle on new sales of gear and the rest of us will yawn and move on with our lives. The Washington Hogs will survive.
Did you actually read the topic?
Pretty cut and dry.
If a high school can change it's mascot, why can't an NFL team do the same?
The man doesn't want to change the name of his team because the name was not and is not about the skin color of anyone. Therefore, the man should not have to change the name of his team.
If school boards, which are in large part synonymous with idiocy, lots to change the name of a high school team, that's different. The Washington Redskins are private property.
I didn't change the topic at all.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote