Effort to defend Commanders name continues to backfire

[Idgit]

as has been said, only those looking for a reason to get offended will be. you talk about socially correct- there is no difference between that and PC. No difference at all. Just others trying to say what we should do and say and THINK. Frankly they can stick ANY kind of 'correctness' where the sun don't shine.

There is a difference. Political correctness is perceived discrimination against groups that is frowned on for purposes that are primarily political in nature. Socially enforced rules are not necessarily restrictions on what people should think. They're restrictions on how people are expected to behave in mixed social situations as opposed to how they might behave in the privacy of their own home.

CZ, for example, has guidelines for socially acceptable behavior. They exist so that the largest number of people possible can enjoy the content the site otherwise has to offer. They exist for a good reason.

I think, if you really think about it, burm. There's all sorts of 'correctness' you willingly comply with. You're a human being, and that's what we do in order to get along with other human beings. The fact that you do so is a check you put on your own behavior. It's not the state taking a right or a privilege away from you.

 

[rynochop]

Yep. Wouldn't you?

Sure, if i was looking for a fight. Thats ridiculous and you know it.

 

[Idgit]

Sure, if i was looking for a fight. Thats ridiculous and you know it.

I actually don't have any idea what you're talking about. It's the kind of thing I would, and have said, to people in bars, all the time. If I know just a little about them, they're occupation or whatnot, of course I'd refer to that. I can't imagine you wouldn't, and I can't imagine someone fighting over it, either. And I hang out in mostly dive bars myself, so I don't imagine it's the kind of bars we're likely to frequent, either. I think you're just trying to make something that's not insulting into a comparable insult in order to make an argument, honestly.

But my larger point is, I wouldn't use skin color as a label to a stranger, because it's too easy to misconstrue. Even if it wasn't meant with any animosity at all, the history of using skin color references as pejoratives is too strong to overcome with someone you don't know very well. It's the same reason a skin color reference is a poor choice for the name of a sports team.

 

[Nova]

The Commanders really should have ignored the claims if it weren't such a big deal.

Once you acknowledge that it's become a big enough ordeal that you have to defend yourself, you've already lost.

 

[Idgit]

The Commanders really should have ignored the claims if it weren't such a big deal.

Once you acknowledge that it's become a big enough ordeal that you have to defend yourself, you've already lost.

I should make it clear, I think the name is obviously offensive to a significant minority of people I think it was ill-advised, and I think that franchise has an ugly history when it comes to race in general, but I don't think they should be made to change it. As long as they can live with whatever the relatively minor consequences of the bad PR are, it's their choice. From a nostalgic alls-right-with-the-univers perspective, I'd actually be bummed if they were to change it. It's cool that the best rivalry in the NFL is Cowboys v. Indians, after all.

 

[Nova]

I should make it clear, I think the name is obviously offensive to a significant minority of people I think it was ill-advised, and I think that franchise has an ugly history when it comes to race in general, but I don't think they should be made to change it. As long as they can live with whatever the relatively minor consequences of the bad PR are, it's their choice. From a nostalgic alls-right-with-the-univers perspective, I'd actually be bummed if they were to change it. It's cool that the best rivalry in the NFL is Cowboys v. Indians, after all.

Yeah that's my stance on it, too.

I just think if it's a small minority of people then it really shouldn't be dignified with putting up a fight-- especially with regard to that phony chief they hired. Why so defensive it it's not a big deal?

Somewhere, someone is going to be offended by anything. You just have to pick your battles... or the lack of battles.

It's completely acceptable to say 'sorry' and carry on in some cases. And this may be one of those cases, but WSH just hasn't treated as such.

 

[rkell87]

HAHAHAHA my post just proved my point. I had no clue it was censored out.

But on to the the convo. Point being western society has come to a point where it tries to make everyone feel special in their own right. Newsflash, everyone isn't special. Accept it and live your life the best you can. Nothing wrong with that at all.

Here is the lit miss test....was offense meant to be given? Let's be real and honest with each other. We know if people meant to give offense or not when they are speaking to us. If you truly do not know, then that is your problem and not mine. I think that is one of the things I enjoy about the Caribbean and South America. You can speak plane and no one takes offense. One of the problems we have is we cannot speak plane to each other. By not allowing that it makes problem solving much more difficult.

Example, If I call you indian or native american....it means the same thing....why get offended.

what language do planes speak?

 

[NIBGoldenchild]

Sure.

And many people do not go out of their way looking for a reason to be offended and have something offensive thrown in their face and celebrated.

For me, it's about those people who are offended making a concerted effort to let the world know how offended they are. Where I think it's a slippery slope is when somebody may say something offensive one time, people have some initial outrage but have shown no effort beyond saying they are outrage and that person is fired or their livelihood is damaged in some way.

I know the sentiment on this board was that people were greatly offended when the Atlanta sports radio show made a bad joke in poor taste towards Steve Gleason. I guess it's not a PC issue when it comes to somebody with ALS, but it is a PC issue when it comes to Native Americans.

To me, the difference is that many Native Americans have decried the Commanders name for decades and have done just about everything possible to protest the name. Whereas those that were outraged by the Atlanta radio show were likely going to do nothing in the way of protesting it and the company jumped the gun anyway and fired all 3 radio personalities.

I would like to think the league should be above a team using a term that is a very well known racist term against Native Americans. It's not like a radio show where people actually have to tune into a particular channel on the dial and listen to that very program at that very time. The Commanders name is unavoidable when it comes to discussing the NFL.






YR

What those radio DJs did to Steve Gleason, intentionally making fun of his condition, and a football team being named Commanders are two vastly different things. I don't see how you think they are remotely related. One was causing an offense, and it is undesputable, the other is debatable in it's offense and was never intended to be offensive in the first place.

And please inform me of how Commanders is a "very well known racist term"? Historically, no it isn't. There is well documented evidence that it was never a racist term or used in a racist way, and even evidence debunking the very little documentation claiming it is racist. It is also not a common term to be used in modern society unless refering to the team, and when the overwhelming majority of Native Americans don't find it offensive, I don't see how you come to this conclusion.

 

[NIBGoldenchild]

Yeah that's my stance on it, too.

I just think if it's a small minority of people then it really shouldn't be dignified with putting up a fight-- especially with regard to that phony chief they hired. Why so defensive it it's not a big deal?

Somewhere, someone is going to be offended by anything. You just have to pick your battles... or the lack of battles.

It's completely acceptable to say 'sorry' and carry on in some cases. And this may be one of those cases, but WSH just hasn't treated as such.

I agree with this, especially your last couple of sentences. Snyder took entirely the wrong tact with this with his never-put it in caps" press conference. Maybe he was upset, but cooler heads should've prevailed and prevented that from happening. Even if this is a fake political agenda, with a fake Chief of a tribe he doesn't belong to leading it. When you don't show compassion to how other people feel, and you're presently being charged with having an insensitive team name, a hard-line response isn't going to change things.

Maybe he felt that way because technically, no one can force him to change the name. So he thought he could bully his way into making people back off. Surely, he sees that differently now.

 

[Rockport]

Sure.

And many people do not go out of their way looking for a reason to be offended and have something offensive thrown in their face and celebrated.

For me, it's about those people who are offended making a concerted effort to let the world know how offended they are. Where I think it's a slippery slope is when somebody may say something offensive one time, people have some initial outrage but have shown no effort beyond saying they are outrage and that person is fired or their livelihood is damaged in some way.

I know the sentiment on this board was that people were greatly offended when the Atlanta sports radio show made a bad joke in poor taste towards Steve Gleason. I guess it's not a PC issue when it comes to somebody with ALS, but it is a PC issue when it comes to Native Americans.

To me, the difference is that many Native Americans have decried the Commanders name for decades and have done just about everything possible to protest the name. Whereas those that were outraged by the Atlanta radio show were likely going to do nothing in the way of protesting it and the company jumped the gun anyway and fired all 3 radio personalities.

I would like to think the league should be above a team using a term that is a very well known racist term against Native Americans. It's not like a radio show where people actually have to tune into a particular channel on the dial and listen to that very program at that very time. The Commanders name is unavoidable when it comes to discussing the NFL.






YR

I don't think that's a true statement. In fact, polls show that the vast majority is not offended.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I don't think that's a true statement. In fact, polls show that the vast majority is not offended.

People have been protesting the Commanders name since I was born.

I grew up in a fairly heavily populated Native American region mostly filled with members of the Oneida and Onondaga tribes and they were against the name since I can remember. In fact, the first school I went to had a nickname of the Warriors with a kid dressed up like a Native American as their mascot and after protests, the school kept the nickname but dropped the mascot. The same with Syracuse University which used to have a mascot called 'The Saltine Warrior' who was dressed up in Native American garb. The Native Americans protested because they found it offensive and the school dropped the mascot. Then there was St. John's University whose nickname was the Redmen. After decades worth of protests, they dropped the name and turned it into the 'Red Storm.'




YR

 

[Yakuza Rich]

What those radio DJs did to Steve Gleason, intentionally making fun of his condition, and a football team being named Commanders are two vastly different things. I don't see how you think they are remotely related. One was causing an offense, and it is undesputable, the other is debatable in it's offense and was never intended to be offensive in the first place.

There you go trying to put your standards on what should offend people and what should not offend people.

The real difference between the Gleason incident is that it required people to find a radio, seek out THAT particular station and seek out THAT particular show at THAT particular time.

Was it offensive?

To me, absolutely. But to others it may not have been. And to others it may not have been worthy of being fired.

To me, if you were offended by it...don't pick out that particular radio station and that particular show at that particular time to listen to them.

But if you're offended by the Commanders nickname and you're a NFL fan, the Commanders name is more or less unavoidable.





YR

 

[rynochop]

I actually don't have any idea what you're talking about. It's the kind of thing I would, and have said, to people in bars, all the time. If I know just a little about them, they're occupation or whatnot, of course I'd refer to that. I can't imagine you wouldn't, and I can't imagine someone fighting over it, either. And I hang out in mostly dive bars myself, so I don't imagine it's the kind of bars we're likely to frequent, either. I think you're just trying to make something that's not insulting into a comparable insult in order to make an argument, honestly.

But my larger point is, I wouldn't use skin color as a label to a stranger, because it's too easy to misconstrue. Even if it wasn't meant with any animosity at all, the history of using skin color references as pejoratives is too strong to overcome with someone you don't know very well. It's the same reason a skin color reference is a poor choice for the name of a sports team.

You know exactly what i'm talking about, not trying to make an argument at all, just using your analogy of a stranger in a bar. I hangout in dive bars occasionally as well, one called the Honky Tonk, so you can imagine some of the clientele. If I walked up to a stranger there in a cowboy hat who'd been pounding beers and said 'Hey cowboy' he'd either tell me to blank off or take a swing at me.
I'm in SE Texas, there's a lot of 'rednecks' around here...speaking of which he'd probably buy ME a beer if I called him that, most of those guys are proud of that name. Oh the irony.

 

[WV Cowboy]

what language do planes speak?

Vrroooooom

 

[dogberry]

Some Indians object to names or symbols associated with Indians being used by non-Indian institutions. They assort an intellectual property right to regain control of the word or symbol, and prevent non-group members from using it. The possession of an Indian word or symbol by non-Indians renders it unclean and in need of being taken back and purified.

 

[Rockport]

The acid test I use for these cases is 'would you be willing to call a stranger in a bar by this name?' If so, it's probably not generally considered to be offensive. "Barkeep: two beers, please. One for me and one for my Jewish friend!" No problems. "Barkeep, two beers, please. One for me and one for my red-skinned friend." Honestly, that's just not something I'd be comfortable saying. I have a hard time believing a lot of people *would* be comfortable with it, but, then again, I could be wrong. I'll take you guys at your words if you suggest you collectively would be.

That said, it's not a matter of political correctness. It's a function of what you'd ordinarily be comfortable with saying in polite company. It's Social Correctness. Social correctness, in my opinion, is a perfectly fine reason not to use a term or expression. The goal in a polite discussion, or in a polite society, is to not be needlessly offensive if you can help it. Sure, there are situations where it's more important to illustrate a point than it is to spare feelings, but 'because I thought it'd make a good name for a football team' isn't exactly one of those situations, is it?

Why is this a problem all of a sudden? A bunch of whining types with their panties in a wad

People have been protesting the Commanders name since I was born.

I grew up in a fairly heavily populated Native American region mostly filled with members of the Oneida and Onondaga tribes and they were against the name since I can remember. In fact, the first school I went to had a nickname of the Warriors with a kid dressed up like a Native American as their mascot and after protests, the school kept the nickname but dropped the mascot. The same with Syracuse University which used to have a mascot called 'The Saltine Warrior' who was dressed up in Native American garb. The Native Americans protested because they found it offensive and the school dropped the mascot. Then there was St. John's University whose nickname was the Redmen. After decades worth of protests, they dropped the name and turned it into the 'Red Storm.'




YR

Yea, but none about the Washington Commanders except some woman who has nothing better to do.

 

[Nova]

Why is this a problem all of a sudden? A bunch of whining types with their panties in a wad

One more time... you cannot tell people what they are and are not offended by.

 

[Rockport]

One more time... you cannot tell people what they are and are not offended by.

People aren't offended. Just one desperate, lonely woman with nothing better to do.

 

[Cowboys22]

What those radio DJs did to Steve Gleason, intentionally making fun of his condition, and a football team being named Commanders are two vastly different things. I don't see how you think they are remotely related. One was causing an offense, and it is undesputable, the other is debatable in it's offense and was never intended to be offensive in the first place.

And please inform me of how Commanders is a "very well known racist term"? Historically, no it isn't. There is well documented evidence that it was never a racist term or used in a racist way, and even evidence debunking the very little documentation claiming it is racist. It is also not a common term to be used in modern society unless refering to the team, and when the overwhelming majority of Native Americans don't find it offensive, I don't see how you come to this conclusion.

Pick up a dictionary and look up the word. Words don't get defined as racist and offensive unless they become widely accepted as such. Your history of the word is so far off its ridiculous. The literary study of the word by the Smithsonian showed that while it may not have started as an offensive word, it started to be used in derogatory means as early as the 1870s and became increasingly negative thereafter. It became such a widely recognized slur against Native Americans that it was dropped from the vernacular in the 1960's. You even admit its not a common term in modern society unless referring to teams. Why is that? Could it be because it was deemed too offensive? If its not racist and its complimentary to Native Americans, how come we don't use the word to refer to them? How come no one would dare call a Native American the r-word to their face? These are questions that cannot be answered by those who support the name.

 

[NIBGoldenchild]

Pick up a dictionary and look up the word. Words don't get defined as racist and offensive unless they become widely accepted as such. Your history of the word is so far off its ridiculous. The literary study of the word by the Smithsonian showed that while it may not have started as an offensive word, it started to be used in derogatory means as early as the 1870s and became increasingly negative thereafter. It became such a widely recognized slur against Native Americans that it was dropped from the vernacular in the 1960's. You even admit its not a common term in modern society unless referring to teams. Why is that? Could it be because it was deemed too offensive? If its not racist and its complimentary to Native Americans, how come we don't use the word to refer to them? How come no one would dare call a Native American the r-word to their face? These are questions that cannot be answered by those who support the name.

The study by Ives Goddard, from the Smithsonian, ends at 1826. The 20 page document that I've linked to numerous times on this site does have any research past that time. Certainly not 1870, as you are claiming. Can do you do more than call other people ridiculous, and actually provide documentation for the unfounded, unverified statements you make?

Are you denying that term was created by Native Americans and was used by Native Americans as a term of respect and honor? Please answer the question and not run off on another one of your rants. Because frankly, I will trust the word of a Smithsonian Linguist over you every day of the week.


Also, I love how you tell others what they would and would not do. Would I dare to call a Native American a Commander to his face? You have created this question with a negative connotation in the first place, you would be creating an offense, when there is none. I'm not offended by being called "black", even though I'm mixed. But if someone of a different race addresses me and says," Hey, black guy!", I'm offended that he couldn't just ask me my name and instead of addressing me by what he/she assumes is my race. As like the majority of society, I would call a Native American by his/her name like a real person, in a real situation, and not a fake person, in this fake reality/scenario you've created.