http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4474771
this is probably the most offensive name in all of sports. actually i see very little problem with names like the seminoles, utes, illini, braves, warriors, etc (i have a problem with the over-the-top stereotypical portrayal of them as savages when they are acted out as mascots)... overall without the antics these are group of people but are not offensive (i think). warriors is like knights or cowboys. apaches is more like spartans, irish, celtics, trojans, etc.... to me those makes sense i think. but a formerly defamatory word is not acceptable. they can cry historical significance all they want but i always thought this was strange.
the term redskin is believed to have been originated on the basis of color analogous to way african americans are called black and caucasians are called white. but some historians believe the term redskin dates back to white settlers carrying/referring to the bloody skins of killed native americans.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
They should definitely have to change the name. And the Cleveland Indians should have to also. Some dumbass guy from Italy thought he was in India when he reached what is now the Americas and he named the people Indians. And now there is a team named after this? The Braves is a borderline name, don't know enough about it. The Seminoles are fine because that's an actual tribe that remained in Northern Florida after "settlers" tried to drive them out.
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how a sports team's name is more important than respect for a groups ethnicity.