Rosenthal: Mayor wants to discuss changing Redskins nickname

[STBonecrusher21]

The "Washington Peaceful People."

???

[Skinsguy1]

I always thought that if we had to change the name, the best option was to just call them "skins." I also don't think "pigskins" (which the City Paper uses) is all that bad. You could easily keep the fight song, signage, and the name has a an obvious link to the Hogs and football, itself.

[Skinsfan In NM]

I get ya mentallyinept. It's just going to be hard in this day and age to come up with a name that isn't going to offend someone. So to those that are offended by our teams name it's simple root against us. Become cowboy fans or a midgets fan.

[redskinss]

im on board with changing our mascot to a potato, but maybe thats just me

[DM72]

What's offensive about it? I've never heard the term used in a derogatory sense. People associate the term with the color of skin or scalping or some other wives tale that spread like gossip, but it is not.

According to the Smithsonian Institute, the tern "redskin" refered to smearing red clay or red paint on one's face during war or for ceremonial purposes. A badge of honor so to speak.

That might be another use for the term Redskin, but in this case, it's to describe the color of indians. It's hard to argue considering the Redskins logo is an indian.

Again, I'm not offended, but I'm not an indian.

[Predicto]

Wouldn't bother me if the name it gets changed.

It's still my team.

[respectgibbs]

I would rather this franchise be stuck in the muck and mire of another 30 years of mediocrity and bad football than change the name. I'm not passionate about much, but this is one thing I'll fight to the death on. Un****ing believable how sensitive some people are. They love being offended, it's in their blood. They LOVE it. If it's not this, it's something else that offends them. You know what offends me? People that are so easily offended by a name.

[Larry Brown #43]

Regardless of your feelings on the team name, there are several problems with the article. For instance:

"I think that if they get serious with the team coming back to Washington, there's no doubt there's going to have to be a discussion about that, and of course the team is going to have to work with us around that issue," Gray said on Wednesday via The Washington Post.

Mayor Gray, there's been a lot more talk about the team coming back to DC from the DC Council and mayor's office than there has been from the Redskins organization.

Can you imagine any other ethnic group being a nickname/mascot for a team?

Hmmm....if I try really, really hard I can imagine a world in which there are teams called the Celtics, the Fighting Irish, the Eskimos, the Saxons, the Canadiens, the Seminoles, the Ragin' Cajuns, the Scots, the Quakers, the Gaels, etc...

Gray is in position to make the nickname a political and financial issue. If the Redskins don't change the name, they may not get a new stadium.

Other than rumor, is there any indication that the Redskins are even interested in moving back to the District? There seems to be a lot more interest in that from the DC side than from the Redskins. And "Gray is in position to make the nickname a political and financial issue?" Really? The mayor who has been urged repeatedly to resign and who is unlikely to even run for a second term?

Again, putting one's feelings about the name aside, the article as it is written is a complete non-story.

[bobbi3stix]

When is he up for re-election? We have quite a lare enough fanbase to sway voting.... Just saying.

[mentallyinept]

What's offensive about it? I've never heard the term used in a derogatory sense. People associate the term with the color of skin or scalping or some other wives tale that spread like gossip, but it is not.

According to the Smithsonian Institute, the tern "redskin" refered to smearing red clay or red paint on one's face during war or for ceremonial purposes. A badge of honor so to speak.

There is a general distaste for color based racial terms.

History, American history included, is filled with these terms being used to disparage groups of people that are perceived as the "other".

So when people with an exposure to other color based racial terms see "Redskin", they automatically recoil. They assume that the name must carry with it a negative connotation of the subject.

That's it really.

Edit: For clarification, I'm not advocating the use of color based racial terms only that, like in all things, each word must be considered independent and evaluated as such.

[Tweedr01]

That might be another use for the term Redskin, but in this case, it's to describe the color of indians. It's hard to argue considering the Redskins logo is an indian.

Again, I'm not offended, but I'm not an indian.

Uh, nope, redskin is what Native Americans were called when they put red paint on their face when they went to war. Redskins was never meant as a deragatory name, it was used to describe the war paint Native American's used, not their skin color.

[Predicto]

What's offensive about it? I've never heard the term used in a derogatory sense. People associate the term with the color of skin or scalping or some other wives tale that spread like gossip, but it is not.

According to the Smithsonian Institute, the tern "redskin" refered to smearing red clay or red paint on one's face during war or for ceremonial purposes. A badge of honor so to speak.

I've learned to doubt these kind of statements about these issues. A lot of "made-up" facts out there.

Fact is, the word "Redskin" is kind of insensitive in modern times. Maybe not a huge deal in the abstract, but the fact that the owner of the team back then was a virulent racist, the worst in NFL history, makes it even more awkward.

I don't think we need to change everything about the team and logo, but maybe there is a better word to describe a team with a Native American motif than the one we currently use.

---------- Post added January-9th-2013 at 02:17 PM ----------

I would rather this franchise be stuck in the muck and mire of another 30 years of mediocrity and bad football than change the name. I'm not passionate about much, but this is one thing I'll fight to the death on.

That seems silly to me.

---------- Post added January-9th-2013 at 02:18 PM ----------

Uh, nope, redskin is what Native Americans were called when they put red paint on their face when they went to war. Redskins was never meant as a deragatory name, it was used to describe the war paint Native American's used, not their skin color.

Yeah, maybe. But I doubt it.

[Btubes18]

That might be another use for the term Redskin, but in this case, it's to describe the color of indians. It's hard to argue considering the Redskins logo is an indian.

Again, I'm not offended, but I'm not an indian.

Do you think if we change the logo it would suffice? Leads to another question would people rather keep the logo or the team name?

Personally, I would rather see the name changed.

[Heavy Jumbo]

First, the indigenous people of America are not called "Indians". They are called Native Americans. I find it ironic that people get offended by the name Redskins but then proceed to use an "offensive" name themselves.

Secondly, as previous posters have stated we are not moving back to D.C anytime soon no matter how much some want to. What Mayor Gray thinks about our "nickname" is irrelevant.

[Predicto]

Hmmm....if I try really, really hard I can imagine a world in which there are teams called the Celtics, the Fighting Irish, the Eskimos, the Saxons, the Canadiens, the Seminoles, the Ragin' Cajuns, the Scots, the Quakers, the Gaels, etc...

None of those are really the same, are they? The name isn't "Native Americans" or "Powhatans" or something. Its Redskins.