KK Writes| Mike Wise Asks RG3 About the Name "Redskins"

[justice98]

This.

Wise has always been arrogant and ridiculous. He has bounced around because he is more interested in advancing his agenda than covering sports. Even when he is on the right side of an argument, he manages to undermine it.

I don't know if that's really accurate considering he's been at 2 papers in almost 20 years, 10 at the NY Times and 8 at the Post. That doesn't seem like bouncing around to me.

But he is arrogant, but I don't know too many columnists that aren't.

[KingGibbs]

Now that I think about it, I think Wise is an ahole for putting RGIII on the spot. Fortunately, RGII is much more intelligent the Mike "Not So" Wise and deflected the question because he is not qualified to answer the question.

You're desperate Wise. I suggest you choose another career.

[Rocky21]

Just agreeing with other poster here. Nice writing Kevin. Keep up the good work.
(I have added pate to my vocabulary now so thanks for that too.) :-)

[justice98]

"I don't know what native americans think" is actually an acceptable response. Nobody seems inclined to use it though.

[RFKFedEx]

Anyone that says the name is disparaging or racist needs to be beat over the head with the fact that 90% of NATIVE AMERICAN DO NOT FIND IT OFFENSIVE!

The public knows more today than we knew in the 1930s when the name was coined to be honorary to Natives. The NA scholars I've met here in DC do not fall in that 90% category you speak of. I place a little more credibility with their words than I do with a bunch of (mostly white) dudes on a football message board.

[redskins4ever28]

**** it, I'm going deep!!

LOL
hahaha
Seriously, that made me lol extremely loud at work. Now Im sure my boss knows I aint working after that one. But that was the funniest thing Ive read all week, lol, nice one!

[Diss]

Again, if you, Wise or anyone else has a problem, the best way to send a message is to not support and/or cover the Washington Redskins. I'm not saying that to be rude. I'm simply stating the obvious -- by letting your feet do the talking, you're making it clear that this is no longer acceptable to you. If enough people follow suit, change is possible. Otherwise, acts like what Wise did during Griffin's press conference yesterday simply come across as a pathetic "hey, look at me" stunt from a guy who just had his poorly-rated radio show cancelled.

I disagree with this strongly.

First, let me state that I don't have a problem with the name "Redskins," and I think the logo is majestic and powerful. I've studied Native American cultures and tribes since I was a kid (probably what led me to being such a big Redskins fan). I also am not a big Mike Wise fan. I've occasionally found him funny, but more often than not I sit in my car and think, "Idiot."

But I fully support his right to ask that question, especially framed against the backdrop of the whole Rob Parker fiasco. The timing made complete sense, whether that made people uncomfortable or not. This is what makes America a great country, the ability to question publicly something you consider to be a societal injustice or wrong. I don't agree with him, but anyone who knows Wise obviously knows that he is passionate about this issue, and there ARE many others who find the name offensive. Just because a question makes you uncomfortable doesn't make the timing or the question itself wrong. It was totally legitimate.

The notion that his best way to protest the name would be to simply stop covering the team is just silly. He's a journalist. He feels that gives him a power others don't have to "educate" people about something he feels he can help change. And look - he's got the issue back in the public eye again. If he didn't take that opportunity when it presented himself, I would have LESS respect for him. Again, I don't agree with him, but I fully support his right to ask the question. Very few people are going to know or care about his "cause" if he simply disappears from Redskins coverage. Besides, you commented on what he said here in a public forum. By your logic, wouldn't your disapproval of Wise be more powerful and obvious if you just simply decided to stop talking about him and ignored anything about Mike Wise? No, it wouldn't be. You felt passionate enough about a topic to express your opinion in a public forum. That's all Wise did.

The article in this post was indeed well-written, but the whole vibe comes off as, "Damn, that Wise question made me uncomfortable." If it was such a non-issue, it shouldn't make anyone uncomfortable. And to be honest, Griffin's politically correct response isn't going to help make the issue any less inflammatory for some.

[SkinsWarrior81]

The public knows more today than we knew in the 1930s when the name was coined to be honorary to Natives. The NA scholars I've met here in DC do not fall in that 90% category you speak of. I place a little more credibility with their words than I do with a bunch of (mostly white) dudes on a football message board.

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/langu...es/002961.html

Not meaning to spam or anything, but I think it bares repeating. Just because some people decide it is offensive, does not mean it is, or was ever meant to be. If that were the case, we should be rallying against the affronts to the Irish (Fighting Irish), Catholics (Demon Deacons), and people with gigantism.(The NY Football Giants) to name a few. The concept remains the same. a team name like the Blackskins would have an immediate racist connotation to it, especially considering the history of slavery in this country. At no point in the formation were blacks from Africa treated as equals, bargained with, or respected in a way that the Natives were by anyone. This is not to say that Natives were universally treated well and with respect, obviously, but there were plenty of actually offensive terms used against them. Redskin was not one of them.

[RFKFedEx]

If it was such a non-issue, it shouldn't make anyone uncomfortable.

True dat. If recent history is any indication, the battle to keep the name and logo will grow increasingly uncomfortable with time.

Personally, I love the name and logo, but I understand the need to evolve as a society.

How much longer do we want to fight this battle?

[2cents]

The public knows more today than we knew in the 1930s when the name was coined to be honorary to Natives. The NA scholars I've met here in DC do not fall in that 90% category you speak of. I place a little more credibility with their words than I do with a bunch of (mostly white) dudes on a football message board.

Liberal think tanks in DC may not be the most unbiased source you can find. Remember, they get their money by keeping the controversy about our name alive. Something to consider.

---------- Post added December-20th-2012 at 08:43 AM ----------

Oh and for the record, I was an Equal Opportuinty Asvisor while I was in the Army, and I had a full blood Apache Indian invite me to the Native American month celebration on my post and he asked me to wear my Redskin gear to it because he was a fan of the team and the logo. As I said earlier, wanting one answer to this question and wanting to change everything because some people don't like something is just folly. A country is never going to have one hundred percent agreement on anything.

[Forehead]

I don't care either way to be honest. The "Redskins" part of the name has never been that important to me, it's the "Washington" part that I support. My city's team. They can call themselves whatever the hell they want, though if this name change ever gets legs, I think they'll eventually become the Washington Warriors. Just a gut feeling; you can keep the same indian head logo with that name.

On another note, I am glad that Mike Wise was cancelled on the radio. His cadence was annoying and it seemed like he rarely had anything useful to say.

[RFKFedEx]

there were plenty of actually offensive terms used against them. Redskin was not one of them.

I formed my opinion on the views of NA scholars in Washington with whom I've spoken. They've universally disagreed with your view.

[Kindred]

Mike is a real life troll on a quest to actually MAKE "Redskins" as a team name offensive.

[PortisBetts]

Anything for a click. Nice article KK

**I meant Wise, not KK. Genuinely good article on a terrible writer.**

[Diss]

True dat. If recent history is any indication, the battle to keep the name and logo will grow increasingly uncomfortable with time.

Personally, I love the name and logo, but I understand the need to evolve as a society.

How much longer do we want to fight this battle?

I'm not fighting the battle at all. As I say, I don't find the name or logo offensive and it's part of my personal tradition.

HOWEVER ... I have to weigh the metaphorical scale. On one side is my love of the name, the logo, the jerseys, etc. because of how I grew up watching the team and what the team meant to me. On the other side of the scale are people who feel demeaned by the name and feel like it's an insult to their entire culture.

I don't know how many people constitute that group, but if it ever gets to the point where it's clearly a vast majority who DO feel that way, I would not stand in the way of the name being changed. I wouldn't actively campaign FOR it to be changed, but I would accept the fact that their grievance holds more weight than my personal love for all things Redskins. But I haven't seen that yet. I was at the opening of the Native American museum in Washington D.C., and I remember seeing a full-blooded Native American there with a Redskins shirt on, logo on full display. So I leave that for them to sort out. If they can grow their numbers big enough to effect the change, so be it. That's the way the country should work. If not, I'm happy to keep rooting for the team.

Btw, here's a great article everyone should read on the origins of the name "Redskin" and how Indians referred to THEMSELVES in this manner in colonial times.
http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf