Senators Urge N.F.L. to Act on Redskins' name

[The Breeze]

Just quickly before I have to run off:

I think the main point of the deeper thinking Natives, Sherman Alexie for example, isn't so much that the name is a racial slur as it is that the whole sentiment, the native in headdress with the name redskin, helps to marginalize and bind native culture to some kind of cartoonish past. The very fact that there are native schools using that team name is proof of what they are speaking about.

There are no more bands of painted and feathered warriors riding their ponies on the plains. There are huge problems with domestic violence, alcohol and drugs on just about all reservations...much of it is believed to be a symptom of an entire culture of people being completely marginalized and depicted as some wooden indian cartoon character.

The concern is about role models for young native men of which the is an extremely high suicide rate. I see a helmet with feathered native, bearing the name Redskin more as a trophy on some rich on white mans mantle rather than some honorable tribute to some misguided pride.

Much in the same way that many afro-american people are concerned about the proliferation of the n-word in hiphop culture there is a group of forward thinking natives, who don't and can't speak for their entire culture , that are tired of and concerned that the only real examples of positive cultural pride amongst their peoples are a set of terms and depictions set forth by a group that violently oppressed them for a long long time.
They see the name "redskin" as a continued unconscious oppression. And I lament that it has to be a government making it illegal rather than a hopelessly rich individual putting compassion over fear of losing some money for anything to change. Because that's not really change, it's just another body of "
authority" telling people what they should and should not do.

but it is what it is.......laterz

[Mothman]

Man, the board is giving me fits today! Pages don't want want to load.

I can't speak from a Native American standpoint either ... so I'm making the same assumption I make when approaching any racial slur; if enough people say it's offensive I take their word for it. I'm not sure how one chooses to find something offensive ... it either is offensive to you or not, I suppose.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that, other than physical reflexes, we choose how we react to things. Words have the power we allow them and even the dreaded "N" word's ability to offend seems entirely based on context (ie: who is saying it, how they are using it, etc.).

Honestly, I'm not one to be easily offended by most things or anyone ... but I feel like I can understand why having a million/billionaire decedent of people that killed your ancestors in droves and pushed the rest of your people off of their land now making millions of dollars from what you consider to be a racial slur against your ancestors could be a sore spot.

I can too!

It seems like the terms "Savages" and "Red Skin" would be used by the same kind of people and be just as negative as each other. According to wikipedia the earliest use of the term "red skin" the person quoted saying it uses "savages" earlier in his writing;
Heck, even the first sentence in the article it talks about how modern dictionaries describe it as "insulting" among other things.

The history of the word is complex and I think that's yet another reason why this issue is somewhat complex (or at least I see it that way).

The problem with the "Fighting Irish" trademark is that, in order to be "disparaging, scandalous, contemptuous or disreputable" a person actually has to think that it is. That's the difference. There are quite a few people out there who see "Red Skin" in those terms. Could you find one that thinks "Fighting Irish" is?

I'll bet it wouldn't be hard. There's no shortage of people looking to be offended by something.

I understand why the team wouldn't want to for sure (money more than anything). I can understand why fans wouldn't want to as well (tradition). My problem comes in when I consider other minorities and how the country would react to an African American racial slur or Jewish racial slur being a team name. It doesn't feel fair.

I understand and honestly, even though I don't really care if the name is changed I think they should just work with Native Americans to find a name that will suit everybody and that they can all view as a source of pride.

[Cliff]

Man, the board is giving me fits today! Pages don't want want to load.

Hmm ... that's weird. I don't seem to have the same problem. Let me know if it keeps up, could be something going on.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that, other than physical reflexes, we choose how we react to things. Words have the power we allow them and even the dreaded "N" word's ability to offend seems entirely based on context (ie: who is saying it, how they are using it, etc.).

I definitely agree with that on a personal level ... but I might feel differently if my ancestors weren't the ones to come out "on top", if that makes any sense. I just don't know ... and that ends up making me more sympathetic, I think. Who knows, maybe it's just "white guilt" on my part.

The history of the word is complex and I think that's yet another reason why this issue is somewhat complex (or at least I see it that way).

It certainly isn't a clear cut issue ... but at the end of the day a decision has to be made to keep the name or not ... and after weighing both sides it seems like changing it is for the best. Even if a person doesn't actually consider it offensive and think the people who do are silly ... if only to keep it from continuously coming up and being a distraction to the game.

I'll bet it wouldn't be hard. There's no shortage of people looking to be offended by something.

It wasn't! If you check my post I found a facebook page dedicated to it with 38 likes!

I understand and honestly, even though I don't really care if the name is changed I think they should just work with Native Americans to find a name that will suit everybody and that they can all view as a source of pride.

I agree with you but at the end of the day my opinion is probably more worthless than most on the matter.

Like you, I don't really have a dog in this race. I'm not Native American (or part of a minority), I'm not a Red Skins fan, and my personality type doesn't necessarily understand "offended" all that well. Still, it seems like a double standard when measured against the strives our society seems to take to make sure other minorities aren't offended.

[dead_poet]

I don't really have a dog in this race

Oh, so now Native Americans are "dogs", huh?
#offended

[Cliff]

Just quickly before I have to run off:

I think the main point of the deeper thinking Natives, Sherman Alexie for example, isn't so much that the name is a racial slur as it is that the whole sentiment, the native in headdress with the name redskin, helps to marginalize and bind native culture to some kind of cartoonish past. The very fact that there are native schools using that team name is proof of what they are speaking about.

There are no more bands of painted and feathered warriors riding their ponies on the plains. There are huge problems with domestic violence, alcohol and drugs on just about all reservations...much of it is believed to be a symptom of an entire culture of people being completely marginalized and depicted as some wooden indian cartoon character.

The concern is about role models for young native men of which the is an extremely high suicide rate. I see a helmet with feathered native, bearing the name Redskin more as a trophy on some rich on white mans mantle rather than some honorable tribute to some misguided pride.

Much in the same way that many afro-american people are concerned about the proliferation of the n-word in hiphop culture there is a group of forward thinking natives, who don't and can't speak for their entire culture , that are tired of and concerned that the only real examples of positive cultural pride amongst their peoples are a set of terms and depictions set forth by a group that violently oppressed them for a long long time.
They see the name "redskin" as a continued unconscious oppression. And I lament that it has to be a government making it illegal rather than a hopelessly rich individual putting compassion over fear of losing some money for anything to change. Because that's not really change, it's just another body of "
authority" telling people what they should and should not do.

but it is what it is.......laterz

Good post. I just want to comment on what you said in reference to how the change is being made (not liking that it's basically government mandated). I'm really just not sure how it could have happened otherwise. Even if the team's ownership was sympathetic in an age where money talks (Hmm ... was there an age when it didn't?) I'm guessing the decision would have come down to the bottom line which is that it's much cheaper to keep the name the way it is.

[Cliff]

Oh, so now Native Americans are "dogs", huh?
#offended

Ha!

[Mothman]

Hmm ... that's weird. I don't seem to have the same problem. Let me know if it keeps up, could be something going on.

It's still happening. In a nutshell, the problem is that when I click on a thread to read it or click "quote" or "reply", the next page up doesn't finish loading and I have to reload it a few times to get it to work. It's odd.

I definitely agree with that on a personal level ... but I might feel differently if my ancestors weren't the ones to come out "on top", if that makes any sense. I just don't know ... and that ends up making me more sympathetic, I think. Who knows, maybe it's just "white guilt" on my part.

It probably has more to do with empathy than white guilt and I think it's healthy.

It certainly isn't a clear cut issue ... but at the end of the day a decision has to be made to keep the name or not ... and after weighing both sides it seems like changing it is for the best. Even if a person doesn't actually consider it offensive and think the people who do are silly ... if only to keep it from continuously coming up and being a distraction to the game.

Agreed. It seems clear that "critical mass" on this issue has been reached and Snyder might as well concede and, if possible, work with Native Americans to come up with a better name and new branding (if that kind of cooperation even remains possible at this point).

It wasn't! If you check my post I found a facebook page dedicated to it with 38 likes!

I knew there would be someone out there worked up about it.

I agree with you but at the end of the day my opinion is probably more worthless than most on the matter.

Like you, I don't really have a dog in this race. I'm not Native American (or part of a minority), I'm not a Red Skins fan, and my personality type doesn't necessarily understand "offended" all that well. Still, it seems like a double standard when measured against the strives our society seems to take to make sure other minorities aren't offended.

... and that's definitely a relevant point.

[PurpleMustReign]

Oh, so now Native Americans are "dogs", huh?
#offended

My girlfriend is Asian, so your yellow smiley offends me!!!
I demand that the smiley colors be changed!!! I'm starting a Facebook page!!

[The Breeze]

Good post. I just want to comment on what you said in reference to how the change is being made (not liking that it's basically government mandated). I'm really just not sure how it could have happened otherwise. Even if the team's ownership was sympathetic in an age where money talks (Hmm ... was there an age when it didn't?) I'm guessing the decision would have come down to the bottom line which is that it's much cheaper to keep the name the way it is.

This is where my idealism hits the wall, cause you are speaking about what really happens and I'm am desiring that people just "do the right thing". Whether it's Snyder reversing his position or supporters of the team withdrawing support until it becomes an economic no-brainer for Snyder.

It's part of the obvious larger more systemic issue in our culture where the bottom line is the highest branch on the tree. If people "voted" with their dollars, (where they spend them) the general population could actually assume much more control over many aspects of it's own governance by default. But that would require massive upticks in education(not the kind taught in schools), collaboration and unity in general rather than just when we are facing a collective crisis. And maybe there is a crisis here but it's too subtle to grasp fully.

I don't think it's fair or just for a government entity to make Snyder change the name (freedom of expression and all)....it would be awesome if the "people" forced his hand through his wallet. But, like you, I won't hold my breath.

In any event, if more people are moved to delve into what the deeper reasoning is behind the Native complaint then it's a positive step IMO. I think and feel that many people feel marginalized and typecast within our culture and are seeking different aspects of tribalism and genuine expression beyond the slow march of mindless consumption. Makes me think of 'Joe Vs The Volcano'

It's a very interesting topic to me and I appreciate the discussion you guys are having around it. My favorite thing about this board.

[Cliff]

This is where my idealism hits the wall, cause you are speaking about what really happens and I'm am desiring that people just "do the right thing". Whether it's Snyder reversing his position or supporters of the team withdrawing support until it becomes an economic no-brainer for Snyder.

It's part of the obvious larger more systemic issue in our culture where the bottom line is the highest branch on the tree. If people "voted" with their dollars, (where they spend them) the general population could actually assume much more control over many aspects of it's own governance by default. But that would require massive upticks in education(not the kind taught in schools), collaboration and unity in general rather than just when we are facing a collective crisis. And maybe there is a crisis here but it's too subtle to grasp fully.

I don't think it's fair or just for a government entity to make Snyder change the name (freedom of expression and all)....it would be awesome if the "people" forced his hand through his wallet. But, like you, I won't hold my breath.

In any event, if more people are moved to delve into what the deeper reasoning is behind the Native complaint then it's a positive step IMO. I think and feel that many people feel marginalized and typecast within our culture and are seeking different aspects of tribalism and genuine expression beyond the slow march of mindless consumption. Makes me think of 'Joe Vs The Volcano'

It's a very interesting topic to me and I appreciate the discussion you guys are having around it. My favorite thing about this board.

I think people want to do the right thing more often than not. In this case it seems like an issue where the majority of people just don't see it as a problem. People are very "group minded". In general, if an issue doesn't impact their group, they're not very interested in thinking about it. Considering Native Americans are reported at less than 1% of the country it's no surprise an issue like this (where not even the entire population agrees!) isn't considered "important" in the eyes of many.

I put the one part in bold because I find that tidbit the most interesting of all. The government isn't making them change the team name, they're simply disallowing the team name to be trade-marked. It will 'cause the team to lose out on money from any businesses or persons using the team logo for a profit (clothing, hats, etc).

So we kind of get to see exactly how much the "tradition" of the name actually matters to the team ownership. Enough to keep it and forgo the money they would earn? It'll be interesting. Or ... I could be misunderstanding what the ruling actually meant, that's quite possible too.

[The Breeze]

I think people want to do the right thing more often than not. In this case it seems like an issue where the majority of people just don't see it as a problem. People are very "group minded". In general, if an issue doesn't impact their group, they're not very interested in thinking about it. Considering Native Americans are reported at less than 1% of the country it's no surprise an issue like this (where not even the entire population agrees!) isn't considered "important" in the eyes of many.

I put the one part in bold because I find that tidbit the most interesting of all. The government isn't making them change the team name, they're simply disallowing the team name to be trade-marked. It will 'cause the team to lose out on money from any businesses or persons using the team logo for a profit (clothing, hats, etc).

So we kind of get to see exactly how much the "tradition" of the name actually matters to the team ownership. Enough to keep it and forgo the money they would earn? It'll be interesting. Or ... I could be misunderstanding what the ruling actually meant, that's quite possible too.

Yeah, I was getting ahead of myself as far as Snyder being literally forced to do anything. I was referring more to the title of this thread and senators getting involved in urging a name change. There probably is no precedent for making someone change a name they have had for decades....so, it probably can't legally come to that.

I think the copyright ruling is like an economic sanction and will be interested in how the owner reacts. Evidently a prior native group got a similar ruling in the past but a judge overturned the decision. My feeling is that Snyder is the type of guy that would rather be "right" than free.


To me, the point Vahalla raised about the Seminole team name is the obvious win-win solution. If Snyder were to re-name his team after a specific tribe with their blessing, perhaps one common to the region or one he admires for some reason other than TV and movie depictions, it could go a long way to helping heal the bigger rift caused by the wooden indian stereotype.

While it's true that they make up a very small % of the nations population it's worth noting that they are vastly different from region to region culturally, compared to the way most people might think. There is a great strength in that diversity in spite of their numbers and I believe part of what worries people about the team name and depictions how the stereotype threatens the foundation of that diversity.

I think there is a lesson in that for everyone, but I can't say exactly what that is.

[Mothman]

I put the one part in bold because I find that tidbit the most interesting of all. The government isn't making them change the team name, they're simply disallowing the team name to be trade-marked. It will 'cause the team to lose out on money from any businesses or persons using the team logo for a profit (clothing, hats, etc).

Not for a long time (or at least probably not much more than they allow bootleggers to get away with selling unauthorized merchandise now). I think this move is really more of a grand gesture to try to push Snyder toward changing the name.

The team name and past logos (from 1967 to 1990) were involved in the yesterday's decision but it didn't include the team's current logo and the the TMs from '67-'90 will "will no longer be protected under federal law if the NFL and the Redskins lose an appeal to the U.S. District Court."

As this Washington Post blogger points out, Today’s ruling does not mean you can open your own Redskins merchandise shop.

Even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) seems to think that anyone can sell merchandise without potential legal consequences, but that’s not quite right. The Redskins, who may appeal the decision, retain their federal trademark registrations until all appeals have been exhausted. That process could take years, as it did after the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board canceled the team’s trademark registrations in 1999.

The registrations will be canceled only if the team exhausts all of its appeals and loses on appeal. At that point, the team could continue to use Redskins name and still take legal action against anyone selling Redskins merchandise by exercising its common law rights to the name and logo. In other words, you should think twice about launching that Redskins merchandise business.

This move applies pressure to the Redskins and the NFL to change the team name but probably not much more than that, at least at this point.

[Mothman]

Yeah, I was getting ahead of myself as far as Snyder being literally forced to do anything. I was referring more to the title of this thread and senators getting involved in urging a name change. There probably is no precedent for making someone change a name they have had for decades....so, it probably can't legally come to that.

I think the copyright ruling is like an economic sanction and will be interested in how the owner reacts. Evidently a prior native group got a similar ruling in the past but a judge overturned the decision. My feeling is that Snyder is the type of guy that would rather be "right" than free.


To me, the point Vahalla raised about the Seminole team name is the obvious win-win solution. If Snyder were to re-name his team after a specific tribe with their blessing, perhaps one common to the region or one he admires for some reason other than TV and movie depictions, it could go a long way to helping heal the bigger rift caused by the wooden indian stereotype.

While it's true that they make up a very small % of the nations population it's worth noting that they are vastly different from region to region culturally, compared to the way most people might think. There is a great strength in that diversity in spite of their numbers and I believe part of what worries people about the team name and depictions how the stereotype threatens the foundation of that diversity.

I think there is a lesson in that for everyone, but I can't say exactly what that is.

I've really been enjoying your posts on this. They've been very thoughtful.

I think the sentence I highlighted in bold is definitely one of the major concerns of Native Americans who are pushing for this name change but since that's the case, I wonder why they didn't go after the KC Chiefs at the same time. I imagine it's because the Washington team's name is viewed as the most racist and egregious and they are trying to get the "easiest" win and then use that as a catalyst, and as legal precedent, for further change. Ultimately, if they're successful, I would think there would be an immediate and much stronger push for other pro teams (Chiefs, Braves, Indians) to change their names.

[The Breeze]

I've really been enjoying your posts on this. They've been very thoughtful.

You might be interested in this book, Jim: http://sundown.afro.illinois.edu/liesmy ... toldme.php

It's where I first caught wind of how damaging it has been for 1st nation peoples to not have had their culture integrated into the larger melting pot. They were basically made to abandon their culture if they wanted to be part of the new america. No black history month or cinco de mayo for them... etc.

There's lots of other interesting little known/taught facts about American history in the book as well.

I've lived on 4 different reservations at different stages of my life and can certainly attest to how impossible it is to suggest that any body fairly represents them all, even in one tribe. Most of my experiences with the friends I have made show a fierce individual independence coupled with complete acceptance of their peers. They have a much more free attitude towards life, generally speaking, but there is a depressing flipside to living on the "Rez" and it's complicated.

I never really put a whole lot of thought into the name of the redskins until I heard Sherman Alexie's take on it and how he spoke to what James Loewen hypothesized in his book about the isolation of the native peoples. And so, after had having lived amongst a few different tribal cultures I saw a lot of evidence supporting what these guys were talking about.

I think the sentence I highlighted in bold is definitely one of the major concerns of Native Americans who are pushing for this name change but since that's the case, I wonder why they didn't go after the KC Chiefs at the same time. I imagine it's because the Washington team's name is viewed as the most racist and egregious and they are trying to get the "easiest" win and then use that as a catalyst, and as legal precedent, for further change. Ultimately, if they're successful, I would think there would be an immediate and much stronger push for other pro teams (Chiefs, Braves, Indians) to change their names.

I know that what Alexie speaks to isn't really understood by the average native (or white guy for that matter)...at least amongst my navajo friends. Most of my friends don't even care about the redskin name. But I agree that it's much easier to make a case against the redskin brand, as it is somewhat the same as the n-word to afro-americans and people can grasp it without too much thought. I know there was and is a lot of dissatisfaction with the Cleveland Indians....but it's less about the name and all about the cartoon character like depiction of an 'indian' on the unis or hats.

Overall, in my travels over the past 6-7 years across the Navajo rez, I came across lots of people of all ages who want little or nothing at all to do with white people and much of it seems to stem from being marginalized and systemically disrespected on a deeper level, regardless of whether they able to express that or not. And I think that's something that people like Joey Browner are fully aware of and would like to see change. It certainly is an old and still festering wound.

Too bad the NFL and other owners haven't stepped in and used this as an opportunity to create some goodwill like they have with sexual orientation.

[Mothman]

You might be interested in this book, Jim: http://sundown.afro.illinois.edu/liesmy ... toldme.php

It's where I first caught wind of how damaging it has been for 1st nation peoples to not have had their culture integrated into the larger melting pot. They were basically made to abandon their culture if they wanted to be part of the new america. No black history month or cinco de mayo for them... etc.

There's lots of other interesting little known/taught facts about American history in the book as well.

I've lived on 4 different reservations at different stages of my life and can certainly attest to how impossible it is to suggest that any body fairly represents them all, even in one tribe. Most of my experiences with the friends I have made show a fierce individual independence coupled with complete acceptance of their peers. They have a much more free attitude towards life, generally speaking, but there is a depressing flipside to living on the "Rez" and it's complicated.

I never really put a whole lot of thought into the name of the redskins until I heard Sherman Alexie's take on it and how he spoke to what James Loewen hypothesized in his book about the isolation of the native peoples. And so, after had having lived amongst a few different tribal cultures I saw a lot of evidence supporting what these guys were talking about.

I know that what Alexie speaks to isn't really understood by the average native (or white guy for that matter)...at least amongst my navajo friends. Most of my friends don't even care about the redskin name. But I agree that it's much easier to make a case against the redskin brand, as it is somewhat the same as the n-word to afro-americans and people can grasp it without too much thought. I know there was and is a lot of dissatisfaction with the Cleveland Indians....but it's less about the name and all about the cartoon character like depiction of an 'indian' on the unis or hats.

Overall, in my travels over the past 6-7 years across the Navajo rez, I came across lots of people of all ages who want little or nothing at all to do with white people and much of it seems to stem from being marginalized and systemically disrespected on a deeper level, regardless of whether they able to express that or not. And I think that's something that people like Joey Browner are fully aware of and would like to see change. It certainly is an old and still festering wound.

Too bad the NFL and other owners haven't stepped in and used this as an opportunity to create some goodwill like they have with sexual orientation.

Maybe they will if outside pressure keeps mounting.

Thanks for the book recommendation (I've added it to my "to read" list) and for the insights drawn from your experiences on and near reservations. I wish I had such experiences to draw upon and provide perspective but hear from someone who does is the next best thing.