BeeR Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 You know it's a slow time of year for the NFL when this BS arises for the zillionth time and is considered a "story" http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/09/two-members-of-congress-writing-letter-to-goodell-urging-redskins-name-change/ I love "“The NFL can no longer ignore this ..." ......well yeah, actually, they can, and hopefully will. I would have thought and hoped these congressmen (OOPS "congresspersons") had something better to do. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Def. Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I know its a "blog" site, but PFT has become too biased in their writing. I can get more actual 'football' news reading ESPN, CBS, or any other big ship vanilla site. If you want to read articles on things like how we're all racists or that grown men need to be protected from themselves because they don't realize the hazards of football, then PFT is the place. Couldn't take it anymore so I've stopped reading there. Guarantee there will be at least 20-25 articles on the Redskins team name during the off-season. Its Florio's campaigning time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sausagekingchi Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) What I would really like to hear is Goddell's response to the question if he would "feel comfortable calling an American Indian a redskin to his face". Since he refused/evaded the question a few weeks ago I think we know the answer and that pretty much tells you everything. Edited February 10, 2014 by sausagekingchi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Def. Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 What I would really like to hear is Goddell's response to the question if he would "feel comfortable calling an American Indian a redskin to his face". Since he refused/evaded the question a few weeks ago I think we know the answer and that pretty much tells you everything. I wouldn't feel comfortable calling an African American a brown to his/her face I wouldn't feel comfortable calling a Gay American a packer to his face Etc... Lets just name them Team 1 - 32 and call it a day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sausagekingchi Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I wouldn't feel comfortable calling an African American a brown to his/her face I wouldn't feel comfortable calling a Gay American a packer to his face Etc... Lets just name them Team 1 - 32 and call it a day. So you think the Packer's are going to draft Michael Sam then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Racist! /thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted February 12, 2014 Author Share Posted February 12, 2014 Lets just name them Team 1 - 32 and call it a day. Number-ist. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Washington Football team Cleveland Baseball team New York / NJ Football team 1 / 2 (or A/B or AFC/NFC) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stethant Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Chainsaw Dan takes it on the chin. Again. Court loss #2 and counting.... http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/judge-upholds-cancellation-of-redskins-trademarks-in-a-legal-and-symbolic-setback-for-team/2015/07/08/5a65424e-1e6e-11e5-aeb9-a411a84c9d55_story.html Pretty sure this issue isn't going away any time soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 So let me see if I understand this trademark stuff. I can be granted a trademark for something since it passes all the tests required many years later some judges and people on the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board can decide that my tradmark is offensive, and therefore shouldn't be allowed (wouldn't pass the test now) and therefore my trademark gets yanked Is everybody ok with that, retroactive revocation of your rights because something is now considered to be offensive? Next up, Braves, Indians, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Seminoles and then plenty of others. Why don't we just give the government the authority to force private busineses to change offensive names, that is where this is headed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 The courts are where we do politics now. Pretty soon we will be ruled by an emporer. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShuckCreations Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 "Number-ist" HAHA This thread is great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReturnToSender Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 The Washington Buck$ see what I did there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 So let me see if I understand this trademark stuff. I can be granted a trademark for something since it passes all the tests required many years later some judges and people on the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board can decide that my tradmark is offensive, and therefore shouldn't be allowed (wouldn't pass the test now) and therefore my trademark gets yanked Is everybody ok with that, retroactive revocation of your rights because something is now considered to be offensive? Next up, Braves, Indians, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Seminoles and then plenty of others. Why don't we just give the government the authority to force private busineses to change offensive names, that is where this is headed. This isn't about rights. It's about not having an name that is offensive to many people. As for the other team names, I don't believe any of those you listed falls into the same category. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 I wouldn't feel comfortable calling an African American a brown to his/her face I wouldn't feel comfortable calling a Gay American a packer to his face Etc... Lets just name them Team 1 - 32 and call it a day. Lol, maybe if it was the Green Bay Fudge Packers that would be a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Def. Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 Lol, maybe if it was the Green Bay Fudge Packers that would be a problem. Slang and symbols are all defined in the eye of the beholder. At this point it doesn't have to be literal or exact, it just has to be interpreted as offensive in the mainstream media. Then its all protesting, shaming, and cries for censorship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 This isn't about rights. It's about not having an name that is offensive to many people. As for the other team names, I don't believe any of those you listed falls into the same category. And who gets to decide what is offensive, and that the team name is related to that offensive term. They may not fall into the same category, but surely some Native American (or whitebread do-gooder) somewhere is offended by it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bad Example Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Slang and symbols are all defined in the eye of the beholder. At this point it doesn't have to be literal or exact, it just has to be interpreted as offensive in the mainstream media. Then its all protesting, shaming, and cries for censorship. However, in the Washington case, it IS literal and exact. So there's that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Def. Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 However, in the Washington case, it IS literal and exact. So there's that. Yes, many now consider Redskins offensive slang. However there is much debate about the terms original meaning (some say skin color, others say it referenced the color of a pigment/paint certain tribe(s) used) and the team was named Redskins over 80 years ago because Marshall wanted to avoid any confusion with the Braves/Indians baseball teams while keeping the native connotations the team was using originally (Braves) after moving to Fenway Park. Listen, if people are offended then they do not have to follow that team or buy its products. That is their freedom and right as a consumer. Forcing a change through government though is only promoting the loss of freedoms/rights and the increase of censorship. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboysDiehard Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 'Redskins' issue = LOOK! SQUIRREL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud29 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 the team was named Redskins over 80 years ago because Marshall wanted to avoid any confusion with the Braves/Indians baseball teams while keeping the native connotations the team was using originally (Braves) after moving to Fenway Park. It's also pretty well-documented that Marshall was a blatant racist. So it wouldn't surprise me at all if he picked a name with racist connotations and didn't think twice about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaconjohn06 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) So let me see if I understand this trademark stuff. I can be granted a trademark for something since it passes all the tests required many years later some judges and people on the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board can decide that my tradmark is offensive, and therefore shouldn't be allowed (wouldn't pass the test now) and therefore my trademark gets yanked Is everybody ok with that, retroactive revocation of your rights because something is now considered to be offensive? Next up, Braves, Indians, Chiefs, Blackhawks, Seminoles and then plenty of others. Why don't we just give the government the authority to force private busineses to change offensive names, that is where this is headed. How about Yankees for people in the South? I know, lets vote on every team name in the country and the majority decides. (to be read with sarcasm) Edited July 16, 2015 by deaconjohn06 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverback Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Actually, "Redskin" comes from the color a native American would turn after he had been scalped. We've taken everthing else from native Americans, might as well take their dignity too. I think, since the team is from Washington, some acceptable names could be: Liars, Thieves, or Politicans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Actually, "Redskin" comes from the color a native American would turn after he had been scalped. Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningMud Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 All the issues in the world and this is what so many decide to care about? A name. Something can't can't actually reach out and hurt anyone. Something that has been there forever. This is definitely an "American" problem. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.