WaPo: Why Do Black Fans Love The Redskins Despite History?

[casmith07]

I know it isn't Cowboys related news, but I thought this was a very interesting read. I know Hostile will enjoy this one...might provide some information for that primer in a few weeks?

And why not - it's somewhat related...it's an NFC East Rivalry Week!

:eagles: :giants: :skins:

* * *

Black fans have grown to love the Redskins

By Dan Steinberg and Chris L. Jenkins, Published: October 26

Fifty years ago this fall, civil rights groups protested the opening of D.C. Stadium, whose most important tenants — the Washington Redskins — were the last National Football League team to remain segregated. A half-century after many area sports fans boycotted the team for racial reasons, the Redskins have an unrivaled hold on Washington’s black community.

The affinity for the team is seen at Mount Ephraim Baptist Church on fall Sundays, when the Rev. Joseph Gilmore Jr., dismisses his parishioners at 12:30 so he can get situated in his “man cave” before kickoff.

Read More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/black-fans-have-grown-to-love-the-redskins/2011/10/26/gIQA8q7EKM_story.html

[zrinkill]

It is the Dukes of Hazard General Lee effect.

[The Emperor]

I can't open the link. It says the page isn't found.

[casmith07]

I can't open the link. It says the page isn't found.

Link is fixed.

[The Emperor]

Link is fixed.

I think I dislike Kevin Durant.:puke:

[StylisticS]

Read it this morning. Interesting article. Loved seeing so many Cowboy fans in DC when I lived there. 2009 was especially fun. 2005 wasn't though.

[Boyzmamacita]

I bet a lot of people, black and white, don't even know the history of the Redskins and the dubious distinction of being the last team to segregate. Anyway, I know for a fact that lots of African-Americans in the DMV are staunch Cowboys fans. You can see it just by watching a Dallas at Washington game.

[JonJon]

I wish I knew the answer to that. It could be a number of factors. One guess is that the Redskins are in an area where the Afro-American population is larger, mainly the Maryland and the DC area. Before the Ravens arrived and after the Colts departed, the Redskins were the only team in the region, so naturally the population drew to the Redskins despite the history (which I am sure most people have no idea about).

Another guess is a more psychological one. Afro-Americans can relate to the Native Americans in which the Caucasians, using deception, stole their heritage, deprived their land, and ravaged there women. So their is an indirect correlation there. So now Afro-Americans are naturally drawn to sympathize with Native Americans. Also, the Indian on the helmet in skin tone more closely resembles an African American male. Then you have the Cowboys with the "America's Team" label being the rivals of the Redskins. Since a lot of Afro-Americans have a grudge against "White America," and rightfully so, because of that history, they are inclined to side with Redskins than the Cowboys. And the Burgundy and Gold is an appealing color.

Edit: And also, having a black QB play in the Super Bowl may have swayed the interest in some Afro-American fans eyes.

Those are my thoughts...hope that doesn't spark a race war as this was not the intent.

[hornitosmonster]

I know it isn't Cowboys related news, but I thought this was a very interesting read. I know Hostile will enjoy this one...might provide some information for that primer in a few weeks?

And why not - it's somewhat related...it's an NFC East Rivalry Week!

:eagles: :giants: :skins:

* * *

Black fans have grown to love the Redskins

By Dan Steinberg and Chris L. Jenkins, Published: October 26

Fifty years ago this fall, civil rights groups protested the opening of D.C. Stadium, whose most important tenants — the Washington Redskins — were the last National Football League team to remain segregated. A half-century after many area sports fans boycotted the team for racial reasons, the Redskins have an unrivaled hold on Washington’s black community.

The affinity for the team is seen at Mount Ephraim Baptist Church on fall Sundays, when the Rev. Joseph Gilmore Jr., dismisses his parishioners at 12:30 so he can get situated in his “man cave” before kickoff.

Read More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/black-fans-have-grown-to-love-the-redskins/2011/10/26/gIQA8q7EKM_story.html

Long time ago. How many people are still alive?

[Manwiththeplan]

Honestly, despite their racist past, neither George Marshall nor any family member of his has anything to do with the Redskins today. When the NFL really started to take off, after the AFL/NFL merger Marshall was dead. JKC who was a minority owner, became the majority owner in 74'.

At this point, any racist policies were no longer in affect, and there's no reason to believe the JKC was a racist.

Compare his the JKC foundation's mission statement

"The bulk of Cooke's $825 million estate went into establishing the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation to help selected students of modest means attend college. The stated mission of the foundation is to "help young people of exceptional promise reach their full potential through education."

to that of George Preston Marshall's foundation

"His legacy includes the George Preston Marshall Foundation which serves the interests of children in the Washington, DC area. The $6 million he left had the qualification that none of it could be used for any purpose which supports or employs the principle of racial integration."

[zrinkill]

Edit: And also, having a black QB play in the Super Bowl may have swayed the interest in some Afro-American fans eyes.


That is a very good point.

[Boyzmamacita]

I wish I knew the answer to that. It could be a number of factors. One guess is that the Redskins are in an area where the Afro-American population is larger, mainly the Maryland and the DC area. Before the Ravens arrived and after the Colts departed, the Redskins were the only team in the region, so naturally the population drew to the Redskins despite the history (which I am sure most people have no idea about).

Another guess is a more psychological one. Afro-Americans can relate to the Native Americans in which the Caucasians, using deception, stole their heritage, deprived their land, and ravaged there women. So their is an indirect correlation there. So now Afro-Americans are naturally drawn to sympathize with Native Americans. Also, the Indian on the helmet in skin tone more closely resembles an African American male. Then you have the Cowboys with the "America's Team" label being the rivals of the Redskins. Since a lot of Afro-Americans have a grudge against "White America," and rightfully so, because of that history, they are inclined to side with Redskins than the Cowboys. And the Burgundy and Gold is an appealing color.

Edit: And also, having a black QB play in the Super Bowl may have swayed the interest in some Afro-American fans eyes.

Those are my thoughts...hope that doesn't spark a race war as this was not the intent.

You actually make some good points, but Burgundy and Gold....:puke: ....:D

[newlander]

I wish I knew the answer to that. It could be a number of factors. One guess is that the Redskins are in an area where the Afro-American population is larger, mainly the Maryland and the DC area. Before the Ravens arrived and after the Colts departed, the Redskins were the only team in the region, so naturally the population drew to the Redskins despite the history (which I am sure most people have no idea about).

Another guess is a more psychological one. Afro-Americans can relate to the Native Americans in which the Caucasians, using deception, stole their heritage, deprived their land, and ravaged there women. So their is an indirect correlation there. So now Afro-Americans are naturally drawn to sympathize with Native Americans. Also, the Indian on the helmet in skin tone more closely resembles an African American male. Then you have the Cowboys with the "America's Team" label being the rivals of the Redskins. Since a lot of Afro-Americans have a grudge against "White America," and rightfully so, because of that history, they are inclined to side with Redskins than the Cowboys. And the Burgundy and Gold is an appealing color.

Edit: And also, having a black QB play in the Super Bowl may have swayed the interest in some Afro-American fans eyes.

Those are my thoughts...hope that doesn't spark a race war as this was not the intent.


....mirrors some of my thoughts. Is 'afro americans' still used these days? Just wondering, not nit picking.

[Double Trouble]

Why shouldn't they love their home town team?

Black people in the DC area love the Redskins because people love football.
None of the Redskins recent management, players, coaches, or owner had anything to do with what happened 50 years ago, so I don't get why anyone would harbor resentment towards them because of segregation in the 60s.

[JonJon]

....mirrors some of my thoughts. Is 'afro americans' still used these days? Just wondering, not nit picking.

I think most use black people nowadays, but I know some even take offense to that, so I was trying to stay as politically correct as possible. BTW, I am black and it doesn't bother me.

[BraveHeartFan]

It's an interesting read. I enjoyed it. But, really, couldn't they do a story very similiar to this with just about every single team in the NFL? I mean I know the whole racism angle wouldn't be in there, with other teams simply having black players and not being forced to, but outside of that this whole thing seemed like an exercise that could be done, and said, for just about every team in the NFL.

[JonJon]

Why shouldn't they love their home town team?

Black people in the DC area love the Redskins because people love football.
None of the Redskins recent management, players, coaches, or owner had anything to do with what happened 50 years ago, so I don't get why anyone would harbor resentment towards them because of segregation in the 60s.

That's a great point as well. My family is from Kentucky, and there are plenty that LOVE the Kentucky Wildcats, despite Adolph Rupp not wanting to play Afro-American players. If I'm not mistake, the University of Kentucky was one of the last to allow Afro-Americans to play basketball for them. But like you said, that happened years ago before many of the current fans had any interest or were even born.

[BraveHeartFan]

I think most use black people nowadays, but I know some even take offense to that, so I was trying to stay as politically correct as possible. BTW, I am black and it doesn't bother me.

How about just people? I mentioned black players in my above post, simply because it was the direct position of the article, but I don't know why people don't just describe people as people. I've never understood the whole hang up on skin color or the need to point out a race by said color.

[DallasEast]

Time has helped erase the negative stigma of how African-American fans view the Washington Redskins. Change occurred. The franchise has progressed from being anti-black to being as inclusive as any other NFL franchise.

Nonetheless, it is a good article. Or, it was as good an article as any I have read before the auto-subscription page popped up. :o: What the Washington Post can progressively do towards questioning ethnocentrism in the NFL is to apply concerted focus upon topics which time has not eased or erased.

In the Washington Redskins case, it is their mascot. While its defenders will point out "data" which "validates" their stance that it does not required change, the fact remains that it is a symbol which has remained intractable since day one of its inception.

The argument for keeping the status quo is that not much noise is made for ending its existence. That is only because the dissenting voice is small and is overwhelmed by the uncaring masses. That's enthrocentrism in its most fundamentally unquestionable sense. And it is the reason why retaining the name will forever be the wrong decision.

[JonJon]

How about just people? I mentioned black players in my above post, simply because it was the direct position of the article, but I don't know why people don't just describe people as people. I've never understood the whole hang up on skin color or the need to point out a race by said color.

I share your same view. Some will never buy into that concept though. I brought up race only because it is relevant to this topic.

[bbgun]

Why shouldn't they love their home town team?

Black people in the DC area love the Redskins because people love football.
None of the Redskins recent management, players, coaches, or owner had anything to do with what happened 50 years ago, so I don't get why anyone would harbor resentment towards them because of segregation in the 60s.

Yep, time heals all wounds. Two generations of fans have been born since the Skins were segregated, so the race angle is ancient history. If anyone has a legitimate beef with the Skins, it's Native Americans.

[BraveHeartFan]

I share your same view. Some will never buy into that concept though. I brought up race only because it is relevant to this topic.

I hear ya. I knew it was in relation to the article and what it was about. I just thought it was a good moment to ask that question, about the topic at hand here and then just in general of course, about something that I've just never understood.

[DallasEast]

Yep, time heals all wounds. Two generations of fans have been born since the Skins were segregated, so the race angle is ancient history. If anyone has a legitimate beef with the Skins, it's Native Americans.
"Ancient history" is more cliché than not, but I otherwise agree with everything said.

[erod]

Articles like this do far more to slow progress than to further it. Race is big business, I understand, but the media in particular just can't seem to let things evolve. Most of us are well past the idiocy of racism. It's boring, frankly.

This same writer might as well question why black Americans don't root for the Browns.

How about this reason, Einstein? There's a pretty large population of black people in the DC and surrounding area, and they root for the local team like most PEOPLE do. You do understand they're just people, don't you?

[Dallas]

Race is really only relevant to our black communities because of the past. We MUST be bound to repeat it thus we need to constantly throw it in peoples faces and use it as a reminder in all that we do.



Good story...but really can't everyone n DC love the Redskins? Why does it have to be shown that because of history the black community of DC love the Redskins that much more?

:horse:


Also...being a card carrying Cherokee/Choctaw, the Redskins have never once offended me because of thier name or logo.


So yeah...articles like this one....don't help much.

[Fmart322]

At some point people just have to let what happened in the past go. The current owner isn't a racist and has no association with them. No reason to hate them for having a racist owner in the past. If that were the case all of the blacks in dixie should hate their states.

[DallasEast]

Danger... danger... topic... wavering from... OP... lock thread... impending...

[Dallas]

Danger... danger... topic... wavering from... OP... lock thread... impending...

The story is about RACE and the history of the Redskins organization and its racially incensitive past.

What kind of discussion are you actually thinking is going to take place from this story?

[CCBoy]

I know it isn't Cowboys related news, but I thought this was a very interesting read. I know Hostile will enjoy this one...might provide some information for that primer in a few weeks?

And why not - it's somewhat related...it's an NFC East Rivalry Week!

:eagles: :giants: :skins:

* * *

Black fans have grown to love the Redskins

By Dan Steinberg and Chris L. Jenkins, Published: October 26

Fifty years ago this fall, civil rights groups protested the opening of D.C. Stadium, whose most important tenants — the Washington Redskins — were the last National Football League team to remain segregated. A half-century after many area sports fans boycotted the team for racial reasons, the Redskins have an unrivaled hold on Washington’s black community.

The affinity for the team is seen at Mount Ephraim Baptist Church on fall Sundays, when the Rev. Joseph Gilmore Jr., dismisses his parishioners at 12:30 so he can get situated in his “man cave” before kickoff.

Read More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/black-fans-have-grown-to-love-the-redskins/2011/10/26/gIQA8q7EKM_story.html

Sid Blanks was the very first black player introduced into the Southland Conference by Gil Steinke. When I was a youth, I recall going to my Dad's Chemical Production Plant, Celanese at Bishop, to watch a game film of the Javelinas. It highlighted the running of that same Sid Blanks. We were just a neighboring town, but supported the sporting venue of that area. Sid was later the very first draft pick by the then newly formed Houston Oilers.

For a disenfranchised adult, sports was an immediate identity as well a form of expression. For youth, it was a channel for social acceptance as well as accomplishment. The Negroe Leagues gave vent to a quality athlete, and with Jackie Robinson the tide was started.

Acceptance became paramont to showing off the winning of the right. Then the sport itself stimulated the spirit and love. The sport itself easily stimulated emotions and satisfaction in merely participating as a fan. After winning was added to the equation, the pride was a base element. That drives everyone.

After both gates of participation and acceptance were opened, to not follow that route, one merely has to pick up a listing of Pulitzer Prize winners in areas such as South Philadelphia to gain alternative perspective.

[BraveHeartFan]

Danger... danger... topic... wavering from... OP... lock thread... impending...


What?

I don't see anything, at all, in this thread that would warrant locking it.

[DallasEast]

The story is about RACE and the history of the Redskins organization and its racially incensitive past.

What kind of discussion are you actually thinking is going to take place from this story?Understood.

What?

I don't see anything, at all, in this thread that would warrant locking it.Understood.

[Dallas]

Understood.

Understood.


You do a great job here DE and we understand the direction you were meaning. ;)

[BraveHeartFan]

You do a great job here DE and we understand the direction you were meaning. ;)


Agreed.

Sorry if it came off any other way.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

people who won't cheer for them due to a racist former owner would be like people saying they will not go to disney world as it is in a former slave state.

Ancient history.

I always thought it was cool the guy wearing the indian headress is a black guy

[DallasEast]

You do a great job here DE and we understand the direction you were meaning. ;)

Agreed.

Sorry if it came off any other way.
Thanks fellas. And no problemos. :)

[CCBoy]

DallasEast, perhaps you might comment about my posting on the original OP...:cool:


I don't have any problem listening to established authority...

[DallasEast]

DallasEast, perhaps you might comment about my posting on the original OP...:cool:


I don't have any problem listening to established authority...
Nah. Everyone should post what they want as long as they believe it fits within forum guidelines. If anything does not pass the acid test, it won't.

:)

[ThreeSportStar80]

I hate the Redstinks for this reason...

[ThreeSportStar80]

I bet a lot of people, black and white, don't even know the history of the Redskins and the dubious distinction of being the last team to segregate. Anyway, I know for a fact that lots of African-Americans in the DMV are staunch Cowboys fans. You can see it just by watching a Dallas at Washington game.

I'm sure you meant desegregate... A lot of old school Cowboy fans here in the Virginia/D.C./ Maryland areas became fans of Dallas for this VERY reason..

It factored in my reason to cheer on the Cowboys as well.

[juck]

I know it isn't Cowboys related news, but I thought this was a very interesting read. I know Hostile will enjoy this one...might provide some information for that primer in a few weeks?

And why not - it's somewhat related...it's an NFC East Rivalry Week!

:eagles: :giants: :skins:

* * *

Black fans have grown to love the Redskins

By Dan Steinberg and Chris L. Jenkins, Published: October 26

Fifty years ago this fall, civil rights groups protested the opening of D.C. Stadium, whose most important tenants — the Washington Redskins — were the last National Football League team to remain segregated. A half-century after many area sports fans boycotted the team for racial reasons, the Redskins have an unrivaled hold on Washington’s black community.

The affinity for the team is seen at Mount Ephraim Baptist Church on fall Sundays, when the Rev. Joseph Gilmore Jr., dismisses his parishioners at 12:30 so he can get situated in his “man cave” before kickoff.

Read More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/black-fans-have-grown-to-love-the-redskins/2011/10/26/gIQA8q7EKM_story.html

U live in VA U should know DC and baltimore are 99.99998% black.

[bbgun]

U live in VA U should know DC and baltimore are 99.99998% black.

Not really. Everything West of Connecticut Avenue is pretty white. As for Bmore, I seldom stray far from Camden Yards.

[juck]

Not really. Everything West of Connecticut Avenue is pretty white. As for Bmore, I seldom stray far from Camden Yards.
Baltimore aint no joke lol i got lost a few times there and was like damn haha

[DallasEast]

U live in VA U should know DC and baltimore are 99.99998% black.
Something tells me that I'm gonna regret this, but I got this thing for truth, justice and good old-fashion American common sense.

Your exaggeration is just that:

District of Columbia (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/11000.html)

Baltimore (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/24/24510.html)



And now who is helping to lock this thread?

Why, it's you, DE!

Shame on ME??? :eek: :banghead:

[CCBoy]

Something tells me that I'm gonna regret this, but I got this thing for truth, justice and good old-fashion American common sense.

Your exaggeration is just that:

District of Columbia (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/11000.html)

Baltimore (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/24/24510.html)



And now who is helping to lock this thread?

Why, it's you, DE!

Shame on ME??? :eek: :banghead:

:lmao: One has to love it when a plan comes 'together.':)

[tyke1doe]

Why shouldn't they love their home town team?

Black people in the DC area love the Redskins because people love football.
None of the Redskins recent management, players, coaches, or owner had anything to do with what happened 50 years ago, so I don't get why anyone would harbor resentment towards them because of segregation in the 60s.

Agreed.

I grew up in the Washington, D.C.-Maryland area and was a Redskins fan until the Cowboys drafted Tony Dorsett. I knew nothing of the Redskins history. I just liked the team because it played football (a sport I enjoy) and they were my home team.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Baltimore aint no joke lol i got lost a few times there and was like damn haha

When I was child we used to drive to Florida from Montreal for holidays. On the way back, my dad often got us up way too early to start driving so my mom and me fell asleep in the car. We woke up in the rough part of Baltimore and my dad said, I don't know what happened, I was on the 95 and a lane took me here. We high tailed it out of there quickly.

[Mansta54]

I bet a lot of people, black and white, don't even know the history of the Redskins and the dubious distinction of being the last team to segregate. Anyway, I know for a fact that lots of African-Americans in the DMV are staunch Cowboys fans. You can see it just by watching a Dallas at Washington game.

You're dead on point!!! It's a ton of black Cowboy fans in the DC/MD/VA area but its just a overwhelming number of Cowboy fans in this area too, all races. When I go out on game day when we play the Foreskins, it feels like I'm in BIG D. There's sooooo many Cowboys jerseys and hats everywhere. It's a awesome feeling...

[casmith07]

U live in VA U should know DC and baltimore are 99.99998% black.

That's not true.

[Hostile]

First of all, I applaud the author for daring to write this. It seems to me that if more sports writers considered the racist past an issue the racist mascot name would finally get changed.

I cannot and will not separate the two. I would have no issue with the team if they would change their mascot name because as many pointed out, 2 generations removed from the times when this was truly disgusting.

It has always troubled me that more players do not take a stand against playing for that team. Yes, I am being serious. Ernie Davis was the first Black Heisman Trophy winner. When he was drafted by the Redskins it was ONLY because the Kennedy Administration put pressure on George Preston Marshall to integrate his team. Had it not been for that pressure, he would not have.

Ernie Davis said, "I will not play for that racist, son of a *****." Kudos. He was traded for Bobby Mitchell who became the first Black to play for the Redskins.

Note, I do not hold it against Mitchell or any other player who has played there. I just wish more would take a stand like Ernie Davis did.

Very few of the current generation know anything about the racist History of the team and in truth it is a cultural thing not to know. I can name every state and their capitals. I am quite proud of that. I know members of my own family who couldn't do it. That's embarrassing to me in a lot of ways.

We have a forum member who recently posted when he became an American Citizen. It always brings a tear to my eyes when that happens for someone because I know what they have to learn and do in order for it to happen. Meanwhile there are kids running around this country who have no concept of the sacrifice of this country.

Bobby Mitchell is not honored enough for the barrier he broke. That is my honest opinion. I think the mascot name is hideous. As big as my dream was to play in the NFL I have said it before and I will say it again, I would not have played for that team while they have that mascot name because of the racist History they are attached to.

That is why it troubles me that more players of all colors don't refuse like Ernie Davis did. They could have a positive affect for change and they decline for the almighty dollar. I understand, but it disappoints me. I won't lie.

Perhaps if more and more writers addressed the topic like this author dared to, it could let some of these current young men know. I doubt many of them do know this History. Several years ago a study was done and most then current baseball players did not know who Jackie Robinson was.

In the immortal words of the great Washington sportswriter Shirley Povich, "Jim Brown, who was born genetically incapable of playing for the Redskins..."

He will always be one of my favorite sports writers because he understood he could matter. Sports writers today don't want to matter. It's a shame.

[casmith07]

You're dead on point!!! It's a ton of black Cowboy fans in the DC/MD/VA area but its just a overwhelming number of Cowboy fans in this area too, all races. When I go out on game day when we play the Foreskins, it feels like I'm in BIG D. There's sooooo many Cowboys jerseys and hats everywhere. It's a awesome feeling...

There's nothing that fires me up more than going to Target, or Chipotle, or wherever and seeing a guy with that star on his ballcap. It's a nationwide brotherhood -- and it's even more of a brotherhood in this area where the sworn enemy seems to out-number the home team :)

[casmith07]

First of all, I applaud the author for daring to write this. It seems to me that if more sports writers considered the racist past an issue the racist mascot name would finally get changed.

I cannot and will not separate the two. I would have no issue with the team if they would change their mascot name because as many pointed out, 2 generations removed from the times when this was truly disgusting.

It has always troubled me that more players do not take a stand against playing for that team. Yes, I am being serious. Ernie Davis was the first Black Heisman Trophy winner. When he was drafted by the Redskins it was ONLY because the Kennedy Administration put pressure on George Preston Marshall to integrate his team. Had it not been for that pressure, he would not have.

Ernie Davis said, "I will not play for that racist, son of a *****." Kudos. He was traded for Bobby Mitchell who became the first Black to play for the Redskins.

Note, I do not hold it against Mitchell or any other player who has played there. I just wish more would take a stand like Ernie Davis did.

Very few of the current generation know anything about the racist History of the team and in truth it is a cultural thing not to know. I can name every state and their capitals. I am quite proud of that. I know members of my own family who couldn't do it. That's embarrassing to me in a lot of ways.

We have a forum member who recently posted when he became an American Citizen. It always brings a tear to my eyes when that happens for someone because I know what they have to learn and do in order for it to happen. Meanwhile their our kids running around this country who have no concept of the sacrifice of this country.

Bobby Mitchell is not honored enough for the barrier he broke. That is my honest opinion. I think the mascot name is hideous. As big as my dream was to play in the NFL I have said it before and I will say it again, I would not have played for that team while they have that mascot name because of the racist History they are attached to.

That is why it troubles me that more players of all colors don't refuse like Ernie Davis did. They could have a positive affect for change and they decline for the almighty dollar. I understand, but it disappoints me. I won't lie.

Perhaps if more and more writers addressed the topic like this author dared to, it could let some of these current young men know. I doubt many of them do know this History. Several years ago a study was done and most then current baseball players did not know who Jackie Robinson was.

In the immortal words of the great Washington sportswriter Shirley Povich, "Jim Brown, who was born genetically incapable of playing for the Redskins..."

He will always be one of my favorite sports writers because he understood he could matter. Sports writers today don't want to matter. It's a shame.

:clap2:

[Hostile]

:clap2:Thanks. Hopefully I didn't get into the discussion too late for everyone.

[bbgun]

people who won't cheer for them due to a racist former owner would be like people saying they will not go to disney world as it is in a former slave state.

Ancient history.

I always thought it was cool the guy wearing the indian headress is a black guy

Yeah, I'm struggling to discern the author's point. Virginia was once a slave state, yet blacks reside there. The U of Alabama was once a segregated school, yet blacks are enrolled there. Jews and Catholics were ruthlessly discriminated against at Harvard, yet they matriculate there. Now, if the Skins had a substantial Native American fan base, then that would have made for a much more interesting and relevant article. Conversely, the Skins long ago atoned for Marshall's sins.

[casmith07]

Yeah, I'm struggling to discern the author's point. Virginia was once a slave state, yet blacks reside there. The U of Alabama was once a segregated school, yet blacks are enrolled there. Jews and Catholics were ruthlessly discriminated against at Harvard, yet they matriculate there. Now, if the Skins had a substantial Native American fan base, then that would have made for a much more interesting and relevant article. Conversely, the Skins long ago atoned for Marshall's sins.

It's a little bit (see also: a metric ton) different when the mascot of the team was conceived out of racist thought.

University of Alabama, for example, has always simply been the University of Alabama. Their mascot is an elephant wearing a sweatshirt.

The Redskins' name and mascot were done out of bigotry. The representation is still there despite the ideology having passed.

It's kind of the same beef that many people have with the Confederate flag.

The Skins can finally atone for his sins by changing the name, or at a minimum, getting rid of the face logo.

[bbgun]

It's a little bit (see also: a metric ton) different when the mascot of the team was conceived out of racist thought.

University of Alabama, for example, has always simply been the University of Alabama. Their mascot is an elephant wearing a sweatshirt.

The Redskins' name and mascot were done out of bigotry. The representation is still there despite the ideology having passed.

It's kind of the same beef that many people have with the Confederate flag.

The Skins can finally atone for his sins by changing the name, or at a minimum, getting rid of the face logo.

That's why I said it would have made more (contemporary) sense to focus on the NA angle, not black fans who are supposed to hold a grudge or something.

[Hostile]

That's why I said it would have made more (contemporary) sense to focus on the NA angle, not black fans who are supposed to hold a grudge or something.I disagree with you. I know you won't faint. I think the article is attempting to reveal History where people might not know in the hope that someone will think about it.

I'm not naive enough to think anyone is going to leave the Redskins fandom, but if more know the links to the past it can only be a good thing.

[CCBoy]

It's a little bit (see also: a metric ton) different when the mascot of the team was conceived out of racist thought.

University of Alabama, for example, has always simply been the University of Alabama. Their mascot is an elephant wearing a sweatshirt.

The Redskins' name and mascot were done out of bigotry. The representation is still there despite the ideology having passed.

It's kind of the same beef that many people have with the Confederate flag.

The Skins can finally atone for his sins by changing the name, or at a minimum, getting rid of the face logo.

I kind of chuckle when 'today's' cosmopolitan intellectuals want to be proven through disjointed reasons why to even care.

They don't realize that whole generations had to endure time in fields where temperatures exceeded 120 on a daily basis. In a cotton field, they were paid a whopping sum ov $.16 a pound for picking, not pulling cotton out of a boll. That cut up fingers, leaving them numb and raw. Then pulling up to a hundred pounds in a long sack around, getting enough fine fiber cotton to make top dollar for the owner. One, if very good at this, could accumulate from 200-300 pounds in a whole and long day. Thus a whole day's pay might be $3-4, total.

As a young teenager, I picked cotton. After three days, I succumbed to heat stroke and had to be packed in ice for three days. The remedy back then. My Junior High football coach thought I was just trying to get out of early two a days, when I missed the first day of fall practice. He put me on the B-team, and that was the only time in my sports career, that was not at first tryout, a starter on the traveling squad. And I wasn't even a minority as such.

To ignore the actual and human side of what is being neatly swept under the carpet is just plain wrong. Out of sight/out of mind is a convenience of the conceptual entitled, not of those in contact with the real human drama and emotions that hit the real world. Those just can NOT be swept out of sight and dignity retained.

And that applies to the platform of a sporting venue, and even the economic and iconic image in a team's name. I agree with Hos, with all my heart as well. Perhaps, if one supported dog bite scars about one's knee for showing peaceful support, one would be a believer as well. And the item of sterotyping IS the issue. And when descrimination hit the playing field, there is direct association implied. As we are an American peoples...and responsible for all smaller and racial groups as well.

[bbgun]

I disagree with you. I know you won't faint. I think the article is attempting to reveal History where people might not know in the hope that someone will think about it.

I'm not naive enough to think anyone is going to leave the Redskins fandom, but if more know the links to the past it can only be a good thing.

Well, the team's racist past is hardly a well-kept secret in this town, so I'm not sure this article constitutes a teachable moment. The column would have made much more sense had it been published a year or two after the Skins desegregated, when the wounds were still fresh in everyone's minds.

[Hostile]

Well, the team's racist past is hardly a well-kept secret in this town, so I'm not sure this article constitutes a teachable moment. The column would have made much more sense had it been published a year or two after the Skins desegregated, when the wounds were still fresh in everyone's minds.
As I said, I doubt the younger generation knows. In fact, I've lost count of how many times I have met a Redskins fan who has no clue about any of that stuff.

[bbgun]

As I said, I doubt the younger generation knows. In fact, I've lost count of how many times I have met a Redskins fan who has no clue about any of that stuff.

I doubt they had the "younger generation" in mind in terms of readership. Young people avoid newspapers like the plague, online or otherwise.

[CCBoy]

As I said, I doubt the younger generation knows. In fact, I've lost count of how many times I have met a Redskins fan who has no clue about any of that stuff.

In the hills of Kentucky, before the Federal Government got into legislation and control of crops and production levels in the country. Sorgham was an all day affair, from dawn to dusk. They would cut, and then boil the sugar cane stalks...condensing it into sweet sorgham. That might bring a whole $20 bucks for school clothes or supplies.

Or, come fall, and tobacca' was harvested, one would cut, strip, and then hang the tobacca' from the ceiling of barns. That would be about a 36 hour and non-stop job. The tobacco would hang until about December, when after drying out, it would go 'in case,' re-moisturize, and then be auctioned off. Then one was paid, and received one's Christmas monies.

Well, they had a 'hill's' song:

:mule: A mule is an animal, with long-pointed ears...and kicks up his heels at all he hears. So, child beware, when you go to school. Remember, you too can be a mule!

[Hostile]

I doubt they had the "younger generation" in mind in terms of readership. Young people avoid newspapers like the plague, online or otherwise.Fair point, but the Redskins fans I have told this stuff to were all ages.

[SilverStarCowboy]

Many of the before mentioned Redskins Fans are under the impression that the term Cowboy is racist.


LOL

[bbgun]

Many of the before mentioned Redskins Fans are under the impression that the term Cowboy is racist.


LOL

Well, Rowdy does look like a cracker.

[CCBoy]

Many of the before mentioned Redskins Fans are under the impression that the term Cowboy is racist.


LOL

They would take that slant about as soon as it took to fully train seven range horses to work a ranch. And when one went into a Tavern, his horse stayed fully saddled until that Cowboy returned...to teach him that all responded upon when the Cowboy called upon him to give his all. That string of horses was necessary to protect the cattle as well as his life always on the line.

[The Emperor]

Well, Rowdy does look like a cracker.

Close. Rowdy looks like he's on crack.

[The Emperor]

I bet a lot of people, black and white, don't even know the history of the Redskins and the dubious distinction of being the last team to segregate. Anyway, I know for a fact that lots of African-Americans in the DMV are staunch Cowboys fans. You can see it just by watching a Dallas at Washington game.

The black security guards at my federal building I worked at earlier this year were all Cowboys fans. In fact, one of them shared the same name as a prominent Cowboys legend.

[kristie]

Close. Rowdy looks like he's on crack.

:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

[DallasEast]

Close. Rowdy looks like he's on crack.
:lmao2:



But seriously, that is SO true. :(


:lmao2:

[Double Trouble]

Who gives a flip? Seriously.

If we found out Clint Murchison named the team the Cowboys because it gave him fond memories of being a kid, playing Cowboys and Indians, and he loved pretending to kill Indians, would it really change how we feel about our favorite team?

Nothing wrong with young fans learning their teams' history, but thinking it should be some sort of mechanism for social change because their name is racist is just weak. It was 50 years ago. 50. Years. Ago. Get a life if this offends you. No one on the current team or in the organization had anything to do with it. I seriously doubt there are a great # of American Indians who are offended by the teams name. I'm sure there are some, but then there is no name that could be chosen that wouldn't offend someone in some way.

People need to grow a pair and learn to not be offended by everything.

[CCBoy]

Who gives a flip? Seriously.

If we found out Clint Murchison named the team the Cowboys because it gave him fond memories of being a kid, playing Cowboys and Indians, and he loved pretending to kill Indians, would it really change how we feel about our favorite team?

Nothing wrong with young fans learning their teams' history, but thinking it should be some sort of mechanism for social change because their name is racist is just weak. It was 50 years ago. 50. Years. Ago. Get a life if this offends you. No one on the current team or in the organization had anything to do with it. I seriously doubt there are a great # of American Indians who are offended by the teams name. I'm sure there are some, but then there is no name that could be chosen that wouldn't offend someone in some way.

People need to grow a pair and learn to not be offended by everything.

Now that defines maturity there...grow a pair and it didn't involve what? YOU?
Naw, it's called what it is...as if thinking burn barrell excitements justify your own stances now. Hey, you go fifty years ago....as if the current owner didn't fall straight down from that same team image today. Yep, clarity in sight now. One of the first things he did, was to fire stadium employees just to satisfy is own angers one day.

For sure, pass that Ripple...and strut with pride. But if that were your father who had his life crushed by former policy, it would be hitting much closer to home, NOW.

And that was the cause for the article, as those same cause and effects just can't yet be swept under your own carpets today. They are still parts of people's lives that had to walk through that so that you can laugh and put down those same sacrifices today. :mule:

[CCBoy]

When youth is not able to cast a label of old and worn out excuse aside, and grasp that human dignity is at the core of issue, then it is time to dust off and move on. As there's no intelligable lifeform there to relate with....'beam me up, Scottie!':cool:

[DallasEast]

Cultural relativism is a concept which humans have mostly rejected in favor of ethnocentrism throughout known history. The reason being is that it is "easy" for a majority to artificially morph and partition a minority's group ideology to agree with its own. In contrast, it is "hard" for a majority to accept and integrate a minority's differing perspective.

Thus, it is deemed "okay" by a majority to determine whether something is right or wrong on behalf of a minority regardless of whether that something is actually right or wrong. This is one of the main examples why humanity as a whole still has so far to go in its own multi-cultural development.

[tyke1doe]

Well, Rowdy does look like a cracker.

:laugh2:

[CCBoy]

Cultural relativism is a concept which humans have mostly rejected in favor of ethnocentrism throughout known history. The reason being is that it is "easy" for a majority to artificially morph and partition a minority's group ideology to agree with its own. In contrast, it is "hard" for a majority to accept and integrate a minority's differing perspective.

Thus, it is deemed "okay" by a majority to determine whether something is right or wrong on behalf of a minority regardless of whether that something is actually right or wrong. This is one of the main examples why humanity as a whole still has so far to go in its own multi-cultural development.

Or, as it relates to being an American, it can be seen as equal from both ends...above as well as below. And race/ethnecity is more a means to a whole, than a divergance. Dignity for all is then preserved, and not just an award for the largest group.

[tyke1doe]

Cultural relativism is a concept which humans have mostly rejected in favor of ethnocentrism throughout known history. The reason being is that it is "easy" for a majority to artificially morph and partition a minority's group ideology to agree with its own. In contrast, it is "hard" for a majority to accept and integrate a minority's differing perspective.

Thus, it is deemed "okay" by a majority to determine whether something is right or wrong on behalf of a minority regardless of whether that something is actually right or wrong. This is one of the main examples why humanity as a whole still has so far to go in its own multi-cultural development.

I'm a bit confused by your point.

Are you saying that the majority (white Americans) is trying to determine what is right or wrong on behalf of minorities by concluding there's not anything wrong with the Redskins mascot?

Or are you saying the majority is trying to determine what is right or wrong on behalf of minorities by advancing the argument that they, minorities, should be offended by the Redskins mascot based on its history?

[CCBoy]

I'm a bit confused by your point.

Are you saying that the majority (white Americans) is trying to determine what is right or wrong on behalf of minorities by concluding there's not anything wrong with the Redskins mascot?

Or are you saying the majority is trying to determine what is right or wrong on behalf of minorities by advancing the argument that they, minorities, should be offended by the Redskins mascot based on its history?

Now there is some primetime burn barrell real estate...surely ranks up there with the 29 year run by Tom Landry, and probably co-equal to seven sacks by a player in a game...much less even know why the receiver by the name of Hudson was relevant. Back when players played against players, not schemes. But you probably believe in 26 consecutive losses by an entering Bucaneers team. But there, it took Saints to change history.

So, you see, why a fan follows a team doesn't matter to anyone, unless he is able to assimilate actual concepts and facts and just figures it out for himself. But maybe you can clear things up for us all...would there have been Farve and his streak without McKowski? Don't even bring up Farve's broken thumb in the middle of that stringer...much less Farve pushing fomer Super Bowl MVP to NFL Europe first, and later the quarterback for both the 'greatest show on turf' and the Cardinals...oh, look up his name yourself.

[tyke1doe]

Now there is some primetime burn barrell real estate...surely ranks up there with the 29 year run by Tom Landry, and probably co-equal to seven sacks by a player in a game...much less even know why the receiver by the name of Hudson was relevant. Back when players played against players, not schemes. But you probably believe in 26 consecutive losses by an entering Bucaneers team. But there, it took Saints to change history.

So, you see, why a fan follows a team doesn't matter to anyone, unless he is able to assimilate actual concepts and facts and just figures it out for himself.

:huh:

[CCBoy]

:huh:

Clue, the first three letters of the quarterback begin:War...:rolleyes:

[bbgun]

:huh:

You're not alone in your confusion. There are two great, unresolved mysteries in the world: how the pyramids were built, and how CCBoy constructs his posts.

[CCBoy]

You're not alone in your confusion. There are two great, unresolved mysteries in the world: how the pyramids were built, and how CCBoy constructs his posts.

Principals of early engineering are actually easy to apply...instead of a mystery deserving Disney developments, one should first figure out the why's for their construction. That provides mechanism for use, including a whole class of labor that received monetary protections similar to today's union classes of workers....but those elements of fact are lost in your sight as well.
But the Army delivered applications of engineering and weren't just a consderation in a transitionary art form in something such as Deliverance, also of literary relevance. Just ask Moses...

as not being able to see records that won't be beaten are as hard to figure out, with one's head in the 'sand.' They are as hard to see as are the driving elements in eary Armies were stimulus for both war and society's improvements. But Kurt Warner's name was missed as well by the both of you.

Perhaps you two could serve as Chinese Guards and have Confucius stumble into your station, and capture him as a prisoner until he provides you with the Confucian Standards of life....

[DallasEast]

I'm a bit confused by your point.

Are you saying that the majority (white Americans) is trying to determine what is right or wrong on behalf of minorities by concluding there's not anything wrong with the Redskins mascot?

Or are you saying the majority is trying to determine what is right or wrong on behalf of minorities by advancing the argument that they, minorities, should be offended by the Redskins mascot based on its history?
The former. It is not the latter since neither the majority nor the minority need assistance in formulating their own individual thoughts. What was relevant yesterday, today and/or tomorrow is whether any group, in this instance Native Americans, organize to object any symbol which they find offensive.

The next two questions which should then be answered are, "Do we, the majority, consider those who have a differing perspective, the minority, as equals"? If the answer is yes, then the discussion is aided by mutual cultural relativism and it can advance toward (hopefully) a logical resolution. An example of this can be found in the OP's article. Over time, the minority's point of view was slowly accepted by the majority and a resolution was achieved.

If the answer is no, then real discussion stops. Ethnocentrism has been a stumbling block for people throughout time. The sub-issue of this thread (which I am helping to derail, unfortunately) is not that Native Americans find Diamondbacks, Dodgers, Rockies, Padres, Giants, Pirates, Cubs, Astros, Brewers, Cardinals, Reds, National, Mets, Marlins, Philles, Mariners, Angels, Athletics, Rangers, Royals, Tigers, White Sox, Twins, Orioles, Blue Jays, Red Sox, Yankees, Rays, Timberwolves, Kings, Clippers, Warriors, Jazz, Suns, Grizzles, Hornets, Trailblazers, Nuggets, Thunder, Mavericks, Lakers, Spurs, Raptors, Wizards, Nets, Pistons, Bobcats, Bucks, Pacers, 76ers, Knicks, Hawks, Magic, Celtics, Heat, Bulls, 49ers, Rams, Seahawks, Saints, Buccaneers, Falcons, Panthers, Packers, Lions, Bears, Vikings, Cowboys, Eagles, Raiders, Chargers, Broncos, Colts, Jaguars, Texans, Titans, Steelers, Bengals, Browns, Ravens, Dolphins, Patriots, Jets, Bills, etc., intolerable.

Their issue is what they find offensive to their own identity and heritage. In varying degrees of visual depictions and/or titles associated with professional team sports, that can be confined to Redskins, Indians, Braves and Chiefs.

This issue has not always met a dead end because of the majority. Non-professional teams at the college and high school level have gained cultural relativist insight and acknowledged what is wrong for some is relevant to all. This has promoted schools and organizations to adopt new mascots and titles to replace offensive ones, so there is precedent in opposition to majority refusal.

I feel for Native Americans. Their population constitutes less than 1% of the nation's. Their voice is small, but their cause is just. History has witnessed change for the better. It has also watched stagnation. How this will all turn out? Only time will tell.

EDIT: When I stated "the former", I should have been more specific to the question being asked. The majority does not belong to only one subset of people. The majority constitutes ALL non-Native Americans.

[BraveHeartFan]

Who gives a flip? Seriously.

If we found out Clint Murchison named the team the Cowboys because it gave him fond memories of being a kid, playing Cowboys and Indians, and he loved pretending to kill Indians, would it really change how we feel about our favorite team?

Nothing wrong with young fans learning their teams' history, but thinking it should be some sort of mechanism for social change because their name is racist is just weak. It was 50 years ago. 50. Years. Ago. Get a life if this offends you. No one on the current team or in the organization had anything to do with it. I seriously doubt there are a great # of American Indians who are offended by the teams name. I'm sure there are some, but then there is no name that could be chosen that wouldn't offend someone in some way.

People need to grow a pair and learn to not be offended by everything.


lol.

Wow.

You're so cluelessly ignorant that it has to be painful.

[dreghorn2]

Principals of early engineering are actually easy to apply...instead of a mystery deserving Disney developments, one should first figure out the why's for their construction. That provides mechanism for use, including a whole class of labor that received monetary protections similar to today's union classes of workers....but those elements of fact are lost in your sight as well.
But the Army delivered applications of engineering and weren't just a consderation in a transitionary art form in something such as Deliverance, also of literary relevance. Just ask Moses...

as not being able to see records that won't be beaten are as hard to figure out, with one's head in the 'sand.' They are as hard to see as are the driving elements in eary Armies were stimulus for both war and society's improvements. But Kurt Warner's name was missed as well by the both of you.

Perhaps you two could serve as Chinese Guards and have Confucius stumble into your station, and capture him as a prisoner until he provides you with the Confucian Standards of life....



http://www.flickr.com/photos/brewbooks/3321040062/

[Gibby!]

I think now its just football. Maybe then it meant something to hate the team because of this, but now; meh, they are a multicultural, multinational, multifaceted, football organization. No one there today is connected in any way to that ugly past other than the organizations name on their paychecks. Any links to that stupidity have long since been broken... That includes their logo and name.

You are now free to hate them because they are a divisional rival, have ugly uniforms, have a crass and crude fan base and oh yeah 'cause the suck :eek:.

[tyke1doe]

You're not alone in your confusion. There are two great, unresolved mysteries in the world: how the pyramids were built, and how CCBoy constructs his posts.

:lmao2:

[tyke1doe]

The former. It is not the latter since neither the majority nor the minority need assistance in formulating their own individual thoughts. What was relevant yesterday, today and/or tomorrow is whether any group, in this instance Native Americans, organize to object any symbol which they find offensive.

The next two questions which should then be answered are, "Do we, the majority, consider those who have a differing perspective, the minority, as equals"? If the answer is yes, then the discussion is aided by mutual cultural relativism and it can advance toward (hopefully) a logical resolution. An example of this can be found in the OP's article. Over time, the minority's point of view was slowly accepted by the majority and a resolution was achieved.

If the answer is no, then real discussion stops. Ethnocentrism has been a stumbling block for people throughout time. The sub-issue of this thread (which I am helping to derail, unfortunately) is not that Native Americans find Diamondbacks, Dodgers, Rockies, Padres, Giants, Pirates, Cubs, Astros, Brewers, Cardinals, Reds, National, Mets, Marlins, Philles, Mariners, Angels, Athletics, Rangers, Royals, Tigers, White Sox, Twins, Orioles, Blue Jays, Red Sox, Yankees, Rays, Timberwolves, Kings, Clippers, Warriors, Jazz, Suns, Grizzles, Hornets, Trailblazers, Nuggets, Thunder, Mavericks, Lakers, Spurs, Raptors, Wizards, Nets, Pistons, Bobcats, Bucks, Pacers, 76ers, Knicks, Hawks, Magic, Celtics, Heat, Bulls, 49ers, Rams, Seahawks, Saints, Buccaneers, Falcons, Panthers, Packers, Lions, Bears, Vikings, Cowboys, Eagles, Raiders, Chargers, Broncos, Colts, Jaguars, Texans, Titans, Steelers, Bengals, Browns, Ravens, Dolphins, Patriots, Jets, Bills, etc., intolerable.

Their issue is what they find offensive to their own identity and heritage. In varying degrees of visual depictions and/or titles associated with professional team sports, that can be confined to Redskins, Indians, Braves and Chiefs.

This issue has not always met a dead end because of the majority. Non-professional teams at the college and high school level have gained cultural relativist insight and acknowledged what is wrong for some is relevant to all. This has promoted schools and organizations to adopt new mascots and titles to replace offensive ones, so there is precedent in opposition to majority refusal.

I feel for Native Americans. Their population constitutes less than 1% of the nation's. Their voice is small, but their cause is just. History has witnessed change for the better. It has also watched stagnation. How this will all turn out? Only time will tell.

EDIT: When I stated "the former", I should have been more specific to the question being asked. The majority does not belong to only one subset of people. The majority constitutes ALL non-Native Americans.

They was a rather lengthy way to answer my question, but thanks.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you've said. It wouldn't matter one way or the other to me if the Redskin name were changed. But I thought the topic of this thread was the article's focus on why blacks aren't offended by the Redskin mascot. I answered with respect to my experience as an African-American growing up in Maryland and being a Redskins fan. I didn't know the history behind the mascot.

But, again, thanks for answering my question. :)

[DallasEast]

They was a rather lengthy way to answer my question, but thanks.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you've said. It wouldn't matter one way or the other to me if the Redskin name were changed. But I thought the topic of this thread was the article's focus on why blacks aren't offended by the Redskin mascot. I answered with respect to my experience as an African-American growing up in Maryland and being a Redskins fan. I didn't know the history behind the mascot.

But, again, thanks for answering my question. :)
Just covering all my bases. :)

[CCBoy]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brewbooks/3321040062/

Now that looks like a very intrigueing read...but obviously beyond the simple nature of reasonable honesty.

[SilverStarCowboy]

We were here first, well we killed all the people who were here first so they don't count.