No thank you, I don't like digging in the Stormfront section of the internet. I would say the fact that there isn't any modern mainstream references to the term except the NFL team proves the point- in polite society that term was shunned decades ago. If it was still an acceptable word for Native Americans it would be used.
Are you really going to attempt (and fail) to speak for all Native Americans on this issue?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tim-giago/native-american-mascots_b_1907486.html
So, while you may not know anyone personally who is offended by this, big surprise there, it doesn't mean there aren't any.
How soon till the Cracker Barrel trademark is removed so I can start opening up my own Cracker Barrel restaurants? Or how abut Cracker Jack?
Apple is a racial slur for Native Americans who wanted to be white. Will Apple get its trademark removed so I can start creating Apple phones?
Think of any word and I bet you can find its a slur for something
http://www.rsdb.org/
Everything offends someone, everything. There's some point at which it offends enough people (raw numbers) or enough of the right people (% of a group) something should be done about it.So, while you may not know anyone personally who is offended by this, big surprise there, it doesn't mean there aren't any.
He did say he never seen anyone complain, so how the hell do you know what he has seen. Are you one of those magicians? Did you buy your beans from the same person Jack bought his beans from?
Everything offends someone, everything. There's some point at which it offends enough people (raw numbers) or enough of the right people (% of a group) something should be done about it.
What I have never seen demonstrated is how many native americans are offended. There's a lot of bullshit on both sides. I'd like to know some real numbers here, but I don't think they are available.
Not surprising. With the current administration failing so spectacularly at nearly everything they do, you have to know we are going to see more pointless crap like this while they try to put more checks in their "win" column.
-KeithP
you aren't seeing numbers because there aren't any. the large majority of native americans are not offended at all by the redskins team name. the people who claim to be offended are rich white people.
What I find so ironic is all the white people here defending the use of an offensive word. What a shock that is... I'm stunned I tells ya.
How do you know what a large majority of Native Americans are offended by?
Maybe you aren't seeing numbers because Native Americans are such a small percentage of the population and as such they really don't have much of a voice.
There are Native American schools that call their teams Redskins. The term is used affectionately by some natives, similar to the way the N-word is used by some African-Americans. In the only recent poll to ask native people about the subject, 90 percent of respondents did not consider the term offensive, although many question the cultural credentials of the respondents.
During the entire history of America until the turn of the twentieth century, Indigenous Americans were hunted, killed, and forcibly removed from their lands by European settlers. This includes the paying of bounties beginning in the colonial period with, for example, a proclamation against the Penobscot Indians in 1755 issued by King George II of Great Britain, known commonly as the Phips Proclamation. The proclamation orders, “His Majesty’s subjects to Embrace all opportunities of pursuing, captivating, killing and Destroying all and every of the aforesaid Indians.” The colonial government paid 50 pounds for scalps of males over 12 years, 25 pounds for scalps of women over 12, and 20 pounds for scalps of boys and girls under 12. Twenty-five British pounds sterling in 1755, worth around $9,000 today —a small fortune in those days when an English teacher earned 60 pounds a year. Since the proclamation itself does not use the word, citing it as the origin of "beloved patriot" as another word for scalp has also been called "revisionist history". However, a historical association between the use of "beloved patriot" and the paying of bounties can be made. In 1863, a Winona, MN newspaper, the Daily Republican, printed among other announcements: "The state reward for dead Indians has been increased to $200 for every red-skin sent to Purgatory. This sum is more than the dead bodies of all the Indians east of the Red River are worth."
because there have been polls done on it.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/how-many-native-americans-think-redskins-is-a-slur/
there aren't many polls, but the ones that there are say the large majority are not offended.
you keep playing the strawman argument though and are not providing any links.
OK, where's the numbers to show they aren't offended? The couple studies I looked at a while back (I believe ones was from the late 90s) seemed flawed at best with the group taking the poll looking for a specific result.you aren't seeing numbers because there aren't any. the large majority of native americans are not offended at all by the redskins team name. the people who claim to be offended are rich white people.
http://newspaperrock.bluecorncomics.com/2012/12/annenbergs-redskins-survey.htmlbecause there have been polls done on it.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/how-many-native-americans-think-redskins-is-a-slur/
you aren't seeing numbers because there aren't any. the large majority of native americans are not offended at all by the redskins team name. the people who claim to be offended are rich white people.
NCAI Resolution 93-11 represents the views of a substantial composite of Native Americans. NCAI consists of member tribes from across the United States and they voice their collective opinion through the Executive Council by resolutions. A resolution from the oldest Native American organization composed of tribes from across the United States and structured in a manner to represent the collective opinion of its membership through resolutions is strong evidence of the views of Native Americans. The NCAI members throughout the relevant time period represent approximately 30 percent of Native Americans.
...
The record establishes that, at a minimum, approximately thirty percent of Native Americans found the term REDSKINS used in connection with respondents services to be disparaging at all times including 1967, 1972, 1974, 1978 and 1990. Section 2(a) prohibits registration of matter that disparages a substantial composite, which need not be a majority, of the referenced group. Thirty percent is without doubt a substantial composite. To determine otherwise means it is acceptable to subject to disparagement 1 out of every 3 individuals, or as in this case approximately 626,095 out of 1,878,285 in 1990. There is nothing in the Trademark Act, which expressly prohibits registration of disparaging terms, or in its legislative history, to permit that level of disparagement of a group and, therefore, we find this showing of thirty percent to be more than substantial.
Respondent has introduced evidence that some in the Native American community do not find the term beloved patriot disparaging when it is used in connection with professional football. While this may reveal differing opinions within the community, it does not negate the opinions of those who find it disparaging. The ultimate decision is based on whether the evidence shows that a substantial composite of the Native American population found the term Redskins to be disparaging when the respective registrations issued. Heeb Media LLC, 89 USPQ2d at 1077. Therefore, once a substantial composite has been found, the mere existence of differing opinions cannot change the conclusion.
In view of the above, petitioners have shown by a preponderance of the evidence that a substantial composite of Native Americans found the term REDSKINS to be disparaging in connection with respondents services during the relevant time frame of 1967-1990. Accordingly, the six registrations must be cancelled as required under Sections 2(a) and 14(3) of the Trademark Act.