Since I am a tad wary of adding substantive discourse to this conversation (due to lack of nuance in many serious internet threads) can I just give you a hearty slap on the back and a guffaw? I had forgotten about that image, and it just focuses everything so well.
I kinda wish there was one for a fictional Oregon Crackers.
Youâre intentionally conflating contexts so you can enjoy your racist sports team without having to worry about it being titled after the common, epithetical usage of the word.
Your problem is that you pretend that context doesnât matter, and youâre either playing dumb here and/or attempting to actively deceive.
I donât think anyone here is saying that the word should NEVER be used. However, refusing to use it to refer to that team is a form of protest â a way of pointing out that the teamâs ongoing usage of it, despite long and loud and justified protests, is racist.
And making excuses for racism, enabling it further is itself participating in racism.
Thatâs not the world anyone should want to live in. And again, not something someone should pass off to their kids.
Itâs not necessarily wrong or offensive for the N-word to appear in a court document, depending on the context. For example, a court case revolving around Randall Kennedyâs 2002 book Nigger: The Strange Career of a Troublesome Word.
It would be pretty darn offensive for that word to appear in ten-foot-tall lettering on the side of a sports stadium and emblazoned on uniforms. Thatâs the kind of âcontextâ weâre talking about here.
Worth noting that the Guardian has referred to that team solely as Washington for some time. Not sure if any other media/sports sites do that.
Itâs pretty damn racist. And the part that confounds me is that there is no face lost in retiring a word or symbol.
Most native Americans I know donât have a problem with Seminoles, or the Willamette valley, or a million other actual names of tribes. But redskins? Come on.
Well, actually, hereâs a very high-profile (and pretty wonderful) moment:
Too long; wonât watch? Hereâs the highlight: "Think for a moment about the term âRedskinsâ and how it truly differs from all the others. Ask yourself what the equivalent would be, if directed [at] African-Americans. Hispanics. Asians. Or members of any other ethnic group. When considered that way, âRedskinsâ canât possibly honor a heritage, or a noble character trait, nor can it possibly be considered a neutral term. It is an insult, a slur, no matter how benign the present-day intent.â
That was spectacular, and spot on. Ty.
âRacistsâ have problems with shame. Accepting that something is wrong is taken as a personal attack on themselves. Therefore they will not under any circumstances back down or do right by someone else. Their heads are so fixated on the idea that they âcanât be racistâ that they will refuse to analyze any situation, just react with hostility.
I mean, itâs some brutal honesty to accept that ones ideas arenât always pure, and that thereâs a lot of work to eradicate societal programming. But Iâd rather acknowledge when my ideas are terrible than continue kneejerk being an asshole about race, class, gender, etc.
Also, sports seems a special focal point for regressivism, for whatever reason.
Yeah. Itâs not as if spectator sports usually engage our higher faculties.
But that is precisely where my head gets whipped around. There is no shame!
I sincerely believe supporters of the Washington team donât actually have a racist bone in their bodies. I suspect it is more a generalized Us vs Them (a la sports) mentalityâi.e. the name is a game.
But I dunno. Just change your damn name to the Washington Chehalis.
I agree! Or at least, that thatâs a big part of the problem. MANY of the supporters of the Washington teamâs name and logo, as with those of similarly racist names and mascots and logos, see the efforts to change them as part of âthe whole political correctness thing thatâs just taking over this country!â Fighting to keep things that THEY donât see as racist becomes one way of fighting back against politically correct librul pussies and such.
We know more than enough about Ruprecht, thanks.
[quote=âjaphroaig, post:57, topic:66631â]
But that is precisely where my head gets whipped around. There is no shame!
I sincerely believe supporters of the Washington team donât actually have a racist bone in their bodies.[/quote]
I disagree, in that weâre all fucked-up to some extent with history and latent bad ideas.
The âshamelessnessâ comes from ways we deal with what would otherwise shame us, compartmentalized away and hidden and with big teeth and traps when we try to approach it. Thatâs why we see all this dishonesty and kneejerk protection of dumb ideas.
If we accept and release these ideas, we introduce the idea that we âsee raceâ and have some regressive ideas bouncing around.
Sure is a coincidence, I guess!
Oh, you know I put that in there on porpoise.
Ugh, âpolitical correctnessâ! Why donât we call it what it really is, âconsidering a different point of view, for just one fucking second?â
Just mentally substitute âempathyâ for PC whenever you see people whining about how itâs destroying society, and how they âcanât say anything anymoreâ.
And speaking of Fall being a (not) great season to be Native â what are you going to say in a month or so, when you see another white woman appropriating a bit of the old exotic to tart herself up like this?
