REDBLACKS

At first the name bugged me but it is growing on me. Slowly.

wprager wrote:

spader wrote:Worst name ever.

Yeah, why is "Redskins" and "Braves" offensive and not RedBlacks?  By the way, what of "Chiefs" -- I've heard that word used plenty in a derogatory way.

P.S. Did Stephen Fry really actually say this?

"Redskins" is racially charged. "Redblacks" is not.

When the team was formed, the name Redskins had no negative connotations (same as Chiefs, Blackhawks, and so on). I have *never* heard anyone call a Native American "redskin" (I had a few friends living in Chateaugay, so I spent a bit of time there and heard plenty of other disparaging remarks, just not "redskin"). I'm not sure at what point in time this word took on a negative connotation -- it wasn't at its inception, and I haven't heard it in use since then. Maybe it's different in the US.

wprager wrote:When the team was formed, the name Redskins had no negative connotations (same as Chiefs, Blackhawks, and so on).  I have *never* heard anyone call a Native American "redskin" (I had a few friends living in Chateaugay, so I spent a bit of time there and heard plenty of other disparaging remarks, just not "redskin").  I'm not sure at what point in time this word took on a negative connotation -- it wasn't at its inception, and I haven't heard it in use since then.  Maybe it's different in the US.

Sorry, no. It's always had that connotation. It would be like calling a team the Ottawa Slant Eyes. Whether you heard it or not doesn't change the fact that this term has been in use for literally hundreds of years and has never been anything but negative.

As a general rule, using an adjective that points out a physical feature of a people as a noun (like "darkie" or "hooknose") is poor form. I've never heard anyone called hooknose personally. That doesn't mean it doesn't have a terrible connotation though.

Ottawa Slant Eyes wouldn't make sense. Vancouver Slant Eyes is better

How did I know you would have something to say on the matter?

What does that mean?

Sorry, I'm not overly sensitive to these things. I like a good racial joke every now and then.

Do I agree with naming a team Redskins today? No, but it was named years ago and has serious tradition. Personally I wouldn't have changed it. I also think naming your team after a group of people is an honour, they're not being disrespectful.

What's the difference between Redskins and Canucks?

Ev wrote:What does that mean?

Sorry, I'm not overly sensitive to these things. I like a good racial joke every now and then.

Do I agree with naming a team Redskins today? No, but it was named years ago and has serious tradition. Personally I wouldn't have changed it. I also think naming your team after a group of people is an honour, they're not being disrespectful.

What's the difference between Redskins and Canucks?

The difference is that one term is used as a racial slur. The Seminoles are named for a people. The naming was done respectfully (they asked permission). You must see the difference between using the actual name and using a racial slur.

This article does a good job of pointing out the problem: http://www.theonion.com/articles/redskins-kike-owner-refuses-to-change-teams-offens,34292/

Agreed that there is a difference there, but I don't know, I guess I side more with tradition.

I think what you aren't realizing is that the term has a much longer tradition of being a racial slur than the team name has.

The Indians called the settlers White Man and I'm sure that was not meant in disrespect. Like REDACTED said, naming a team after a certain person/race/tribe/whatever is a huge sign of respect. This isn't the Washington Generals (a joke team).

wprager wrote:The Indians called the settlers White Man and I'm sure that was not meant in disrespect.  Like REDACTED said, naming a team after a certain person/race/tribe/whatever is a huge sign of respect.  This isn't the Washington Generals (a joke team).  

Naming a team the N-Words would be similar. If you think that's an honour, more power to you. There is no race called the redskins. The team took a racial slur and used it as a name. Like it or not, that's what happened. I was proud to play for the Barrhaven Redskins as a kid. I'm far more proud that they've changed the name. As a white person living in a FN community, I watched that unfold and many of my students were quite pleased that they made the change. Some didn't care. That's their call to make.

This is the last I'll say about it. We don't have to agree.

  

How about them RedBlacks?

Mmmmm...

spader wrote:

wprager wrote:The Indians called the settlers White Man and I'm sure that was not meant in disrespect.  Like REDACTED said, naming a team after a certain person/race/tribe/whatever is a huge sign of respect.  This isn't the Washington Generals (a joke team).  

Naming a team the N-Words would be similar. If you think that's an honour, more power to you. There is no race called the redskins. The team took a racial slur and used it as a name. Like it or not, that's what happened. I was proud to play for the Barrhaven Redskins as a kid. I'm far more proud that they've changed the name. As a white person living in a FN community, I watched that unfold and many of my students were quite pleased that they made the change. Some didn't care. That's their call to make.

This is the last I'll say about it. We don't have to agree.

  

Have you seen the wire? Of course it would be!

C'mon boys.

Sens win!

shabbs wrote:Sens win!

Phew, finally. If they had gone 0-3 that would have been close to disastrous. But the Argos were missing quite a few players, and this was soooo close.