DC Council may push Washington Redskins into 'Washington Redtails'

[Archer]

Apparently Archer is a professional comedian since nobody can figure out he's joking here. 

 

Yeah, I thought it was funny to throw out a much more offensive term than Redskin.  But, much like in my own home, my attempt at humor fell flat...

[Archer]

yellow belly isn't in reference to Asians

 

Let's just go with the term "lily-liver" instead, just to avoid accidentally offending any Asians.  Of course, we could offend flower enthusiasts...

[LockeDown]

The baseball team is the Nationals, so the football team should be the Americans.  The Washington Americans since native Indians are considered  native Americans.

[Poster X]

I think if they are going to rename the team you go with something that fits like the Washington Shanahanigans, or Snyders/spyders. Then put one of their faces on the helmet.

[scousecolt]

Doesn't seem too racist until its put in to context other things the Redskins have done. Their owner wouldn't sign black players, them being the last team to do so, and were threatened to be kicked out of Washington of they did not do so.

http://touch.washingtoncitypaper.com/wcp/#!/entry/the-last-allwhite-redskins-team,50e9f0bdd7fc7b5670d99a56

[smittywerb]

It's funny that most of the people that are referring to the native Americans as Indians are the ones that don't see anything wrong with te name or logo. Lol

[ruksak]

It's funny that most of the people that are referring to the native Americans as Indians are the ones that don't see anything wrong with te name or logo. Lol

 

ONE LAST TIME

 

American Indians don't mind being called Indians. They call themselves Indians. 

 

There are numerous Indian councils and resource groups, headed by tribal leaders, adopting the moniker of American Indian. 

 

"Native American" is actually the improper usage. That title would refer to anyone native to America  Which is you. Which is me. Which would be anyone whom was born here, in North America. 

[DILLIGAFER]

Oh get over it ya bunch of Whiners..  :heh: 

[Fx Stryker]

ONE LAST TIME

 

American Indians don't mind being called Indians. They call themselves Indians. 

 

There are numerous Indian councils and resource groups, headed by tribal leaders, adopting the moniker of American Indian. 

 

"Native American" is actually the improper usage. That title would refer to anyone native to America  Which is you. Which is me. Which would be anyone whom was born here, in North America. 

 

Way to ruin the fun by being all logical and junk.

[Björn Werner 92]

If you don't like the name of the team because it offends you. DON'T LOOK AT IT OR DONT WATCH IT. FREAKING >.

If you don't like the concept of owning a slave, don't own a slave! Flawless logic!

[Björn Werner 92]

It's funny that most of the people that are referring to the native Americans as Indians are the ones that don't see anything wrong with te name or logo. Lol

Yeah, somewhat notable. I find it odd that so many consider "Indian" a byproduct of colonial ignorance. There's a strong chance "Indian" derives from the Spanish phrase En Dios.

[Steve]

If you don't like the concept of owning a slave, don't own a slave! Flawless logic!

 

This is probably the most ignorant thing I've ever seen on this forum. You're a classy one  

[Björn Werner 92]

This is probably the most ignorant thing I've ever seen on this forum. You're a classy one

Whoosh, please refer to the post I quoted.

[Vance]

Yeah, somewhat notable. I find it odd that so many consider "Indian" a byproduct of colonial ignorance. There's a strong chance "Indian" derives from the Spanish phrase En Dios.

 

Actually it derives from the Indus river soooo.

[Björn Werner 92]

Actually it derives from the Indus river soooo.

There is no universally agreed upon etymology.

[Vance]

There is no universally agreed upon etymology.

 

Well it definitely wasn't Spanish, since it didn't even exist when the Persians and Greeks were throwing around words like Hindus and Indoi, respectively

[Björn Werner 92]

Well it definitely wasn't Spanish, since it didn't even exist when the Persians and Greeks were throwing around words like Hindus and Indoi, respectively

This seems pretty trivial to argue. It's well known the first major colonists of the new world used that phrase when referencing the people they came into contact with. You can read about it. How would the Greeks or Persians describe a group they never even knew existed? I'm talking about Native Americans, not Indians.

[T Y Goodbye]

Many simply prefer to be called black because African-American seems to imply that an individual came to America from Africa. And then of course there are the blacks who have mixed ancestry rather than just African ancestry, so they might as well be called Irish-British-African American if the government wants to refer to ancestry when categorizing people.

 

The term African-American is also not correct..A young girl where I worked, (whom by the way is Caucasian). was born in Africa, lived there for most of her life..Her family moved to California a few years back for her father to open a business. When she checked the box for African-American on her college application, during her college scholarship interview, she was told that she is not African-American because she was Caucasian. She showed all the paperwork, birth certificate, etc and they laughed at her, said she did not qualify, again told she was not African-American., and basically was asked to leave. To the school, African-American is considered a black student..no matter if they came from Africa or not. So I guess all of the black islanders such as from the Virgin Islands, Haiti, Jamaica  etc are African Americans..yet few of them would state that they are. Do you think that Pierre Garcon considers himself an African-American. He is an American that was born in Haiti...Why not just call all people American's..If you are a citizen of the US, you are American..period...I have no problem with embracing the heritage of your ancestors, but to continue to separate, and to constantly harp on the subject is ludicrous, and still causes problems and issues even to this day.

 

I found it funny Saturday, when they were talking about the Kentucky Derby, about Kevin Krigger possibly becoming the first "African-American" to win the race since the 1800's, yet the trainer of Krigger's mount Trainer Doug O'Neill and the jockey of Frac Daddy, (who was in the same race) was Victor Lebron..are also from Saint-Croix..Go figure...

 

I just wish we could all stop this politically correct stupidity, wasting valuable time and resources that could be used more wisely for more important things.

 

 

LOL

 

BttF Quote-

 Everybody everywhere will say, "Clint Eastwood is the biggest yellow-belly in the west."

 

I didn't know that Clint Eastwood was a tuna...you learn something new every day  

[Qwiz]

The term African-American is also not correct..A young girl where I worked, (whom by the way is Caucasian). was born in Africa, lived there for most of her life..Her family moved to California a few years back for her father to open a business. When she checked the box for African-American on her college application, during her college scholarship interview, she was told that she is not African-American because she was Caucasian. She showed all the paperwork, birth certificate, etc and they laughed at her, said she did not qualify, again told she was not African-American., and basically was asked to leave. To the school, African-American is considered a black student..no matter if they came from Africa or not. So I guess all of the black islanders such as from the Virgin Islands, Haiti, Jamaica  etc are African Americans..yet few of them would state that they are. Do you think that Pierre Garcon considers himself an African-American. He is an American that was born in Haiti...Why not just call all people American's..If you are a citizen of the US, you are American..period...I have no problem with embracing the heritage of your ancestors, but to continue to separate, and to constantly harp on the subject is ludicrous, and still causes problems and issues even to this day.

 

I found it funny Saturday, when they were talking about the Kentucky Derby, about Kevin Krigger possibly becoming the first "African-American" to win the race since the 1800's, yet the trainer of Krigger's mount Trainer Doug O'Neill and the jockey of Frac Daddy, (who was in the same race) was Victor Lebron..are also from Saint-Croix..Go figure...

 

I just wish we could all stop this politically correct stupidity, wasting valuable time and resources that could be used more wisely for more important things.

 

 

 

I didn't know that Clint Eastwood was a tuna...you learn something new every day  

Exactly...it's insanity. And leads to a lot of confusion smh...And depending on which black people you call African-American, when they have no ties to Africa at all,  you could end up getting in some serious fights. Same thing with some Asian races and misidentification with them as well. I suppose it would be better if people just learn to keep their mouths shut

[Vance]

This seems pretty trivial to argue. It's well known the first major colonists of the new world used that phrase when referencing the people they came into contact with. You can read about it. How would the Greeks or Persians describe a group they never even knew existed? I'm talking about Native Americans, not Indians.

 

You do realized the Spanish called them Indians because they thought they were in India, right?

[Vance]

Exactly...it's insanity. And leads to a lot of confusion smh...And depending on which black people you call African-American, when they have no ties to Africa at all,  you could end up getting in some serious fights. Same thing with some Asian races and misidentification with them as well. I suppose it would be better if people just learn to keep their mouths shut

 

African-American was probably made up by some bleeding-heart white person that is hopefully dead now.

 

The best is when I hear news reporters say "African-American" and then use "white people" in the same sentence.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Exactly...it's insanity. And leads to a lot of confusion smh...And depending on which black people you call African-American, when they have no ties to Africa at all,  you could end up getting in some serious fights. Same thing with some Asian races and misidentification with them as well. I suppose it would be better if people just learn to keep their mouths shut

 

Indeed-

 

The tongue. Double edge sword.

[YellScreamGoColts]

Words are what people make them..  Just as George Carlin used to say..  Redskins4Life

[Björn Werner 92]

You do realized the Spanish called them Indians because they thought they were in India, right?

Did you not read anything I wrote, or are you a blatant troll? There is no universally agreed upon etymology.

[-JJ-]

Did you not read anything I wrote, or are you a blatant troll? There is no universally agreed upon etymology.

Well one thing for sure...they migrated from northern asia via land/ice strip across the Barents sea (when it was connected) and settled N. America some 8000 years BC ago

 

So in reality they are of the Mongoloid race;) Or Paleo-Mongoloid sub-race for the Indians in America .

[Vance]

Did you not read anything I wrote, or are you a blatant troll? There is no universally agreed upon etymology.

 

Did you not read anything *I* wrote?

 

Well it definitely wasn't Spanish, since it didn't even exist when the Persians and Greeks were throwing around words like Hindus and Indoi, respectively

[Björn Werner 92]

Did you not read anything *I* wrote?

Persians and Greeks had nothing to do with Native Americans. How is that even relevant?

[Björn Werner 92]

Well one thing for sure...they migrated from northern asia via land/ice strip across the Barents sea (when it was connected) and settled N. America some 8000 years BC ago

So in reality they are of the Mongoloid race;) Or Paleo-Mongoloid sub-race for the Indians in America .

Yup yup, land bridge.

[Vance]

Persians and Greeks had nothing to do with Native Americans. How is that even relevant?

 

You have to be trolling.

[Andy123k]

wow it`s funny when somebody takes a name from a player ( Björn Werner) to post here!

 

Oder bist du der der du bist dann können wir ja zusammen auf deutsch schreiben und über unsere schöne Hauptstadt sprechen.

[Björn Werner 92]

You have to be trolling.

I'm sure you are. Indians have always been called Indians. It's disputed why Native Americans have been called the same. Can't you agree with that? There is no universally accepted etymology for the term when referring to Native Americans. The grade school reason you may have learned is not the only idea as to why. Seriously.

[Vance]

I'm sure you are. Indians have always been called Indians. It's disputed why Native Americans have been called the same. Can't you agree with that? There is no universally accepted etymology for the term when referring to Native Americans. The grade school reason you may have learned is not the only idea as to why. Seriously.

 

ITS BECAUSE COLUMBUS THOUGHT HE WAS IN INDIA OMG. That is not "grade school". That is the reason.

[Yehoodi]

ONE LAST TIME

 

American Indians don't mind being called Indians. They call themselves Indians. 

 

There are numerous Indian councils and resource groups, headed by tribal leaders, adopting the moniker of American Indian. 

 

"Native American" is actually the improper usage. That title would refer to anyone native to America  Which is you. Which is me. Which would be anyone whom was born here, in North America. 

 

Not to be a wet blanket but you have this backwards . . . Native Americans refers to those people who draw their linage to the people who were here when we, the Europeans, got here and named these two continents the Americas, and hence the people who were here when we got here, were native to this land and hence Native Americans . . . Alas, everything is from the European perspective, even the term Indians as the Europeans thought they landed in India and called the natives - Indians . . . and even the principle that this land was discovered, as if the natives here were lost or something . . .

 

Getting back to who we are . . . those of us who were born here or naturalized in this country are citizens of The United States of America, not America, although the official name of our country has be shortened by some as it is easy to say and converse, but does not change the actual name of the country and what/who we are . . . we are technically natives of The United States of America . . . or The United States of America natives . . . but I think the former seems more grammatically correct . . .

 

On the other hand the Native Americans are the ones who draw their linage to the native tribes and who still live on reservations which maintain a certain degree of autonomy and are treated differently with respect to the federal government.  Basically are like their own states . . . and these collection of people are the Native Americans . they can do things we cant do, like build large casinos for example

 .

I know we have word America in the name of our country but we are not Native Americans, no more than people who were born in Canada or any other country in the western hemisphere are Native Americans. even thought they too were born on the two American continents . . .

 

I only bring this up as I have gone over this a great deal with a friend of mine . . . . so I have been down this road before . . .

[Yehoodi]

"Native American" is actually the improper usage. That title would refer to anyone native to America Which is you. Which is me. Which would be anyone whom was born here, in North America.

As a side note, here is a ballad covered by one of my favorite singers:Johnny Cash , , , its called "The Ballard of Ira Hayes" . . . Ira Hayes was a Pima Indian that was one of the famous flag raisers on Mount Suribachi on Iwo Jima . . . only to come back to the reservation to see unemployment and alas died in 1955 partly due to his alcoholism . . . . . forgive me for being a tad touchy about a loose usage of native americans . . .

[pacolts56]

You Earthlings crack me up.

[Yehoodi]

I don't mind the name Redskins, I am not bother by the name and would be surprise if many native americans would be too . . . the same goes for Braves, Chiefs or Indians, or even the tomahawk chump which is used mostly with the Braves, and as braves are generally the fighter arm of the tribes, there is nothing wrong, in my opinion, with glorifying the fighter arm of the tribes with the chop . . . altho I am a bothered with the Indians do it . . .

 

Interesting, Red Tails refers to the Tuskegee Airman, who are now in fashion, but were the black airman who had to fight in the army airforce before it was desegregated . . . so the name red tails refers to a period in our history if segregation . .. true the name is okay now and we are proud of their accomplishments, even made a movie about them, but what happens if that name go south, do we have to change the name even though when it was invoked it was a proud name . . .

[Björn Werner 92]

ITS BECAUSE COLUMBUS THOUGHT HE WAS IN INDIA OMG. That is not "grade school". That is the reason.

Wow. Once more, the etymology of the word is not universally accepted. Seriously. I promise. You can read about it. There is discrepancy, that's irrefutable. You cannot argue the etymology isn't disputed, because it is. A popular idea is that while Columbus realized his mistake in calling the Native Americans "Indians", it stuck and stayed relevant through "En Dios". It us not 100% agreed on either way.

[Vance]

Wow. Once more, the etymology of the word is not universally accepted. Seriously. I promise. You can read about it. There is discrepancy, that's irrefutable. You cannot argue the etymology isn't disputed, because it is. A popular idea is that while Columbus realized his mistake in calling the Native Americans "Indians", it stuck and stayed relevant through "En Dios". It us not 100% agreed on either way.

 

Are you talking about this?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_name_controversy

 

 

Here's a snip from it, pretty much sums it up.

 

Europeans at the time of Christopher Columbus's voyage often referred to all of South and East Asia as "India" or "the Indias/Indies," sometimes dividing the area into "Greater India," "Middle India," and "Lesser India."^[2] The oldest surviving terrestrial globe, by Martin Behaim in 1492 (before Columbus' voyage), labels the entire Asian subcontinent region as "India".^[3]

Columbus carried a passport in Latin from the Spanish monarchs that dispatched him ab partes Indie ("toward the regions of India") on their behalf. When he landed in the Antilles, Columbus referred to the resident peoples he encountered there as "Indians" in the mistaken belief that he had reached the Indian Ocean.^[4] Although Columbus' mistake was soon recognized, the name stuck; for centuries the native people of the Americas were collectively called "Indians." This misnomer was perpetuated in place naming; the islands of the Caribbean were named, and are still known as, the West Indies.

[ruksak]

Not to be a wet blanket but you have this backwards . . . Native Americans refers to those people who draw their linage to the people who were here when we, the Europeans, got here and named these two continents the Americas, and hence the people who were here when we got here, were native to this land and hence Native Americans . . . Alas, everything is from the European perspective, even the term Indians as the Europeans thought they landed in India and called the natives - Indians . . . and even the principle that this land was discovered, as if the natives here were lost or something . . .

 

Getting back to who we are . . . those of us who were born here or naturalized in this country are citizens of The United States of America, not America, although the official name of our country has be shortened by some as it is easy to say and converse, but does not change the actual name of the country and what/who we are . . . we are technically natives of The United States of America . . . or The United States of America natives . . . but I think the former seems more grammatically correct . . .

 

On the other hand the Native Americans are the ones who draw their linage to the native tribes and who still live on reservations which maintain a certain degree of autonomy and are treated differently with respect to the federal government.  Basically are like their own states . . . and these collection of people are the Native Americans . they can do things we cant do, like build large casinos for example

 .

I know we have word America in the name of our country but we are not Native Americans, no more than people who were born in Canada or any other country in the western hemisphere are Native Americans. even thought they too were born on the two American continents . . .

 

I only bring this up as I have gone over this a great deal with a friend of mine . . . . so I have been down this road before . . .

You cannot escape the meaning of the term, no matter how you dice it. A Native American is someone whom is Native to the continent of America (Be it North or South).

 

I feel the term is misleading. American Indians crossed the land bridge to arrive here from Siberia/Asia. So, according to your definition, American Indians aren't Native Americans either. I guess nobody is if we're going to go that route. Unless they can claim "firsties" and say they are Native Americans and "we" aren't because they were here first?

 

If we're gonna slice-n-dice it like that, I'll just go ahead and call every human being on this planet a Native Pangean. Their lineage predates habitation of the North American continent, just like ours. 

[Yehoodi]

You cannot escape the meaning of the term, no matter how you dice it. A Native American is someone whom is Native to the continent of America (Be it North or South).

 

I feel the term is misleading. American Indians crossed the land bridge to arrive here from Siberia/Asia. So, according to your definition, American Indians aren't Native Americans either. I guess nobody is if we're going to go that route. Unless they can claim "firsties" and say they are Native Americans and "we" aren't because they were here first?

 

If we're gonna slice-n-dice it like that, I'll just go ahead and call every human being on this planet a Native Pangean. Their lineage predates habitation of the North American continent, just like ours. 

 

you are still mixing and mashing your words . . . the word native is an adjective not a proper name . . . the word native when used in Native American is a proper name and there in lies the difference . . . you are trying to use an adjective and force feed it into a proper name for every person in every country in the western hemisphere when in reality the name is used as a proper name once and only once and is used to described the groups of Indians who live on reservations . . .

 

Let me give you an analogy that I have used in the past that clears this all up as it does have the a word than can be used in two different ways and melt together by some . . . present day western Europe (France, etc.) was once the land of the Gauls . . . and for brevity sake (so we don't have to go into the history of Western Europe) we used word "they" to describe all of the people who have fought and took over Western European and specifically the region once occupied by the Gauls  . .. the first they were the Romans and for kicks let say they decided to not take over the entire region but to set aside a say 100 square mile region (which happens to be say 20 miles southwest of present day Paris)  and they heard some of the remaining Gauls after the war into this region.  These Gauls are under the rule of the Romans but are given a degree of autonomy and are called Gauls by the Romans to distinguish them from the normal Roman citizens.   Then the following theys honor this region treating them the same way as the Romans all they way up to the present day French government.   The people still living in this reservation are Gauls not French and a person who was born in France and lives in his home town which is 5 miles outside the reservation is French and a French citizen . . . he is NOT a Gaul, no matter how you slice it . . .

 

Now we can assume that the Gauls were not the first one in this region, but are the last ones in the region when the reservation was set up and thus is why they have this name . . .

 

Fast forwarding to the present day USA, it is the exact same thing, the only difference is the proper name given to the people on there reservations is Native American, not Gauls, and the people outside the reservation are citizens of the US or just plain Americans . . . I can not claim that I am an Native American . . .

 

Native American is a proper name and frankly a legal name for these people . . . it is a way for the present day government to distinguish this group of people from the rest as they stand in different standing as the rest of us . . . as this group is separate a proper name can be given to them and we use the proper name of Native American. . . . again everything all goes back to my point is that everything is from the European perspective . . . these people are different and what separates them from us is that they, like the Gauls, predate the establishment of the present day government, which in our case is 1789  . . . and given that they did not have a collective name for themselves we game them one . .. and given that we look at history from a European perspective, and that these people were here before we were and specifically before our government was establish, calling them native (i.e. native to this country when we crashed into Plymouth Rock) seem like a logical proper name . . .

 

No one who lives 5 miles outside of the Gaul reservation should call themselves Gaul just as no one who lives 5 miles outside of an Indian Reservation should call themselves Native Americans . . . it is that simple . . .