First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Washiington Redskins Trademark
292 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F
Offline
Posted 6/20/14
There is a restaurant chain I have seen called "Cracker Barrel" which seems also rather insensitive.

Where does it end?
14468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / California
Offline
Posted 6/20/14 , edited 6/20/14
I hate the Redskins anyway so I'm glad they're having a hard time!

GO COWBOYS

16598 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / NC
Offline
Posted 6/20/14 , edited 6/20/14

edge1143 wrote:

I hate the Redskins anyway so I'm glad they're having a hard time!

GO COWBOYS



Hell Yes!
30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 6/20/14
Of course it's racist.
If they wanted to honor the native american indians with naming they could have called them selves NAI
94 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Solitude,Skyrim
Offline
Posted 6/20/14 , edited 6/20/14
They should absolutely be forced to change the name...to The Washington Tomahawk Chukker`s...
17191 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 6/20/14

GreatLordBalzak wrote:

Once again I will reiterate that this shouldn't be about the any word itself but the intent behind the word, identify the intentions.
I didn't intend to be racist when I said that racist thing therefore it's not racist and I can kept saying the racist thing I was saying, just sayin'
Posted 6/20/14
what's ah redskins? does it taste good?
32372 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / Connecticut
Offline
Posted 6/20/14 , edited 6/20/14

severticas wrote:

what's ah redskins? does it taste good?


Well...truth be told if they changed their logo to a bunch of potatoes I suppose their current name would be fine xD.
Posted 6/20/14

Jsybird2532 wrote:


severticas wrote:

what's ah redskins? does it taste good?


Well...truth be told if they changed their logo to a bunch of potatoes I suppose their current name would be fine xD.


such options
Rohzek 
15004 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/14

FlyinDumpling wrote:


GreatLordBalzak wrote:

Once again I will reiterate that this shouldn't be about the any word itself but the intent behind the word, identify the intentions.
I didn't intend to be racist when I said that racist thing therefore it's not racist and I can kept saying the racist thing I was saying, just sayin'


You're presuming a word is inherently racist, which is the absolute most ridiculous thing ever. Words change meaning over time. Why do words change meaning? Precisely because of the intentions behind them. So yes, red skins doesn't have much of a positive connotation these days, but what is the intention behind it in this context? It would be ridiculous to assume that a team would call itself a disparaging remark. Clearly, they aren't intending it that way. Your argument is logically flawed and doesn't stand.
14468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Houma
Offline
Posted 6/20/14 , edited 6/20/14

FlyinDumpling wrote:


GreatLordBalzak wrote:

Once again I will reiterate that this shouldn't be about the any word itself but the intent behind the word, identify the intentions.
I didn't intend to be racist when I said that racist thing therefore it's not racist and I can kept saying the racist thing I was saying, just sayin'


I am going to contradict myself, by definition it IS a racist term since in this particular case it is acting with the positively perceived prejudiced idea that Native Americans were strong, courageous, and tenacious. The definition of racist itself is in flux as it has built over time strong connotations that all racism is negatively charged is still active today.

At this point we must decide how we will define racist within the topic. Is it the neutral and original definition or is it the newer definition with its attached negative connotations? Either way that isn't a real world solution as people will hold on to their own preferred definition.

Now based within my own logic and philosophy I will now break it down.

The intent behind the name was to associate with the positive connotations of native warriors in the past.
The name was not chosen with the intent to offend.
They are aware that the word itself is offending people but not the intent.
At this point they must make a choice...


With the course of action I would take I maintain my stance that I believe that this should be a non-issue because my belief is that people shouldn't take offense to their intentions however I will REVERSE my stance on what action should be taken.

On one side there is the offended people and on the other is the fans of the franchise who own recently purchased merchandise and those who value it's past. The past will not be unwritten. The best course of action would be to change the name to something with similar meaning and slightly altering the logo to have a natural skin tone while keeping the uniform color scheme.

I had gone a bit off topic and started debating whether or not they should be offended. (which I don't think they should be but the fact is that they are offended) Ideally no change should have to be made and that words only have the meaning we give it.
17191 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 6/20/14
Do you have intentions on being racist?
14468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Houma
Offline
Posted 6/21/14
Absolutely yes, I do... I acknowledge that there are shared genetic traits that make up these lines we call races and while not inherited there are also some cultural/social tendencies that exist. I think it's silly to always think within these lines and I want to blur them as much as possible. Let's get all creole on this, the negative always fades while the positive will always shine through. We should strive for more diversity by not "tolerating" other races but rather by completely obliterating the concept itself.

Taking pride in something you had no control over is a little silly and when in the context of race it is absolutely racist as well. Don't discriminate among races, share those genes, and share that rich culture.
Rohzek 
15004 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 6/21/14 , edited 6/21/14

FlyinDumpling wrote:

Do you have intentions on being racist?


Why are you even asking me this? It's the most blatant gotcha question out there. If you read my previous posts, I think you can figure it out yourself. The answer is no. I'm not even the issue here though. Seriously, it's the Redskins. And I don't think it takes a rocket-scientist to figure out that they have no racist intentions behind the use of the word. The whole reason why people have cried like little girls over this issue is because they are under the mistaken and completely illogical belief that a word is inherently racist. If they believe otherwise, but genuinely think that the team has racist intentions behind the word, then they must be living in nightmarish land. No self-respecting team or person calls themselves a name with the intention of it being disparaging.

Besides, you've conveniently side-stepped my point that a word isn't inherently racist. I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at if you can't even answer the most fundamentals.

Posted 6/21/14
funny i just remembered OP had that showdown with that... i forgot the username.. on the gender thread xD. such change
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.