On October 11, 2015, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a legislation that would ban the term "Redskins" from being used as a mascot, eventually eliminating all Native American mascots by January 1, 2017; a win for the National Congress of American Indians. This law was aimed at the four teams in Merced, Calaveras, Tulare, and Madera counties that bear Native American mascots. Although this law seemed to get quite a bit of support, it also received some criticism from those who wished to keep the name because it was tradition. One supporter of the tradition, Daniel Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins, refuses to change the team's name because he claims that instead of focusing on the racial slur, America should focus upon the much substantial issues concerning Native Americans.
Questions: Do you think that using "Redskins" as a mascot is a tradition that should be kept or eliminated? What are your opinions of Snyder's argument against changing the name of his team? Should all teams with Native American or other racially suggestive mascots change them?
I believe that using "Redskin" as a mascot should be eliminated from use. It is a racial slur that we should no longer be using in today's society. Understandably, Snyder would not want to change the name of his franchise as it would cost incredible amounts to order new uniforms, gear, change the website, etc; a lot of effort and work that he does not want to do so he uses "tradition" as an excuse to not change the name. However, traditions that are racially insensitive and represent a negative part of our past should not be continued, leading me to believe that all teams with racially suggestive mascots should change them. It could be a funny joke for a small local, pickup sports team to have suggestive names, but professional, college, high school, etc. teams should not be supporting and promoting such language.
ReplyDeleteI believe that using "Redskin" as a mascot should be eliminated from use. It is a racial slur that we should no longer be using in today's society. Understandably, Snyder would not want to change the name of his franchise as it would cost incredible amounts to order new uniforms, gear, change the website, etc; a lot of effort and work that he does not want to do so he uses "tradition" as an excuse to not change the name. However, traditions that are racially insensitive and represent a negative part of our past should not be continued, leading me to believe that all teams with racially suggestive mascots should change them. It could be a funny joke for a small local, pickup sports team to have suggestive names, but professional, college, high school, etc. teams should not be supporting and promoting such language.
ReplyDeleteI think that the term "Redskins" should be eliminated. Although some people argue that it has preserved the traditions and values from past times, it has solemly become an offensive term. The argument Synder is presenting is invalid because he is acknowleding that the name is a racial slur and is changing the focus toward the issues Native Americans are faced with, one being called a derogatory term. All teams should help progress society by modifying the offensive mascots.
ReplyDeleteWhile the logo and name Redskins is very offensive, some people believe in traditions and changing the name of a school mascot is very hard. I do believe that this was a step forward for equal rights and that this was a great bill to be pass, but i see why some people are arguing why it should be kept because of tradition. I personaly think that all teams with racsit names should change because it is offensive to the people it puts down but it is offensive to American Society because we believe that everyone is free under the law and this is unfair. I think that his argument is invaild because it is racialy offensive and should not be ok.
ReplyDeleteWhile the logo and name Redskins is very offensive, some people believe in traditions and changing the name of a school mascot is very hard. I do believe that this was a step forward for equal rights and that this was a great bill to be pass, but i see why some people are arguing why it should be kept because of tradition. I personaly think that all teams with racsit names should change because it is offensive to the people it puts down but it is offensive to American Society because we believe that everyone is free under the law and this is unfair. I think that his argument is invaild because it is racialy offensive and should not be ok.
ReplyDeleteThere is a very good Daily Show clip on this - check it out if you have a chance. http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/videos/watch-controversial-daily-show-segment-on-washington-redskins-20140926
ReplyDeleteI think it is incredibly offensive to use the term "red skins" as a mascot. The "tradition" is outdated, racially insensitive, and overall unnecessary. I understand that it will cost money and take time to change every Native American related mascot, but it is worth all of the time and all of the effort. Native Americans and their history are not benefiting from their name being the mascot of a sport's team, they are being offended. I agree with Snyder's stateent that there are much more pressing Native American issues, but this outright racial insensitivity needs to stop.
ReplyDeleteRedskins is a derogatory term that is offensive towards Native Americans. Snyder believes that using the name is not a large issue, however it is an ongoing issue that must be changed. Obviously, Snyder wants to protect the franchise so he does not want to change the name. He does not care whether the term is offensive or not. Traditions are sacred but if it offends racial groups, it must be changed.
ReplyDeleteAlthough using native american team names may be tradition, it is an offensive tradition that Americans have adapted. Snyder's argument is invalid because he agrees with the fact that his team name contains "a racial slur" and refuses to acknowledge that it offends a percentage of the population. Also, he does not define what the "substantial issues concerning native Americans" are, and is blatantly avoiding answering the question.
ReplyDeleteAlthough using native american team names may be tradition, it is an offensive tradition that Americans have adapted. Snyder's argument is invalid because he agrees with the fact that his team name contains "a racial slur" and refuses to acknowledge that it offends a percentage of the population. Also, he does not define what the "substantial issues concerning native Americans" are, and is blatantly avoiding answering the question.
ReplyDeleteI think the owner saying that "it's a tradition" doesn't have any affect on the decision. Basically he's saying if it's a tradition to be racist, then it's okay. Does that mean it's okay to discriminate against African Americans because it was a tradition in the past? Yes, traditions are important, especially in sports, but they need to be looking at the bigger picture. It seems like a small things, but a lot of small problems will hinder an end to racism
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that using the term "Redskin" as a team name and mascot is not acceptable because it is racially insensitive. Snyder is most likely more concerned with the business and financial aspect of changing the team's traditional name, rather than the effect the name has on certain groups of people. I believe that all teams with racially suggestive mascots should chang these mascots and the team name.
ReplyDeleteI think this issue has received too much attention and Native Americans and the media alike should focus on more pertantent issues that affect the remaining population. Native Americans one of the poorest groups in America and they are also more susceptible to becoming addicted to drugs and alcohol. The real question about the name "Redskins" is: who cares? The football team in Washington have been called the Redskins for over 70 years dating back to the years of the great QB Sammy Baugh. Why does everyone care so much now when they haven't for the past 70 years? In my mind, this issue has been overblown and is not that important relative to other problems the Native Americans face and the United States face
ReplyDeleteI think this issue has received too much attention and Native Americans and the media alike should focus on more pertantent issues that affect the remaining population. Native Americans one of the poorest groups in America and they are also more susceptible to becoming addicted to drugs and alcohol. The real question about the name "Redskins" is: who cares? The football team in Washington have been called the Redskins for over 70 years dating back to the years of the great QB Sammy Baugh. Why does everyone care so much now when they haven't for the past 70 years? In my mind, this issue has been overblown and is not that important relative to other problems the Native Americans face and the United States face
ReplyDeleteI believe that this law is a step in the right direction because the misrepresentation of Native Americans across the nation extremely hurts their culture. The school would be encouraging ignorance as well as discrimination with keeping the mascot. Hopefully other states follow California's lead and the Native American people will be correctly represented and respected. I think that a "tradition" shouldn't matter when it is hurting a whole nation.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that this is even a debate is ridiculous. It's like having a team called the "Blackies". Tradition is an idiotic excuse because slavery and using leeches to cure a fever were also traditions, but we got rid of them because we became a better society. Of course any team with a racist name should change it, that's just common sense.
ReplyDeleteWhile use of the name is a tradition, the name and mascot itself is racially charged. The genocide of Native Americans is not something that should be used for a sports team. Synder is reluctant to change it because that would mean an overhaul of much of the team's merchandise and facilities, costing a lot of money. In this day and age, what might have been acceptable in the past is no longer ok and we should change these names to reflect that.
ReplyDeleteWhile use of the name is a tradition, the name and mascot itself is racially charged. The genocide of Native Americans is not something that should be used for a sports team. Synder is reluctant to change it because that would mean an overhaul of much of the team's merchandise and facilities, costing a lot of money. In this day and age, what might have been acceptable in the past is no longer ok and we should change these names to reflect that.
ReplyDeleteI personally believe that using Redskins as a mascot should be eliminated on the basis that it is deemed inconsiderate to Native Americans. However, I agree with Snyder that Native Americans are mistreated and should be aided, but the name does not help that cause at all. Lastly, I feel that teams should steer away from using any racial slurs as mascots as they just cause conflict and there are an infinite amount of better names to use.
ReplyDeleteI think that this issue has been over exaggerated and over analyzed for way too long. The Washington Redskins have been around since the late 1930's and have stuck with that name since the beginning. In the past the name was never an issue and before a few years ago no one even questioned the name "Redskins". Seeing that this has become so problematic all of a sudden I think that it would be in the best interest of the NFL as well as the Washington Redskins organization to change the name in order to satisfy the public and silence those complaining and protesting the so called harshness of the name.
ReplyDeleteKeeping discriminatory mascots for the sake of tradition is inhumane and inconsiderate. Native Americans have very little support and representation, and the elimination of the Redskins is a great way to show more respect to them. Their culture has been targeted and used as satire, and removing mascots is a step in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteI think that using the Redskins as a mascot should be eliminated because it is offensive to the Native Americans and their culture. Although I understand that Snyder does not want to change it, the mascot needs to be changed because it is misrepresenting the Native American culture. I think if they were to get rid of the racial slur, people would be even more focused on the team itself and other problems related to Native Americans.
ReplyDeleteThe name Redskins and the logo that goes along with it should be banned, as it is racially insensitive and offensive to the Native American culture. Snyder does not realize that the Redskins mascot is an outdated tradition, in modern times these racial slurs are not tolerated. The Native American culture are being poorly represented.There is something wrong with the fact that this mascot has been around long enough to be labeled a tradition.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the banning of the name Redskin may seem extreme, it is something that should happen. First, it is offensive. It is like having a team called the Crackers, that is wrong. Next, people and society are trying to get rid of these stereotypes and offensive terms. They reflect outdated opinions and continue the idea that Americans are racist(which we still are). Lastly, it is a necessary step because it starts a trend that will make America more equal and will open new for to eliminating other offside ideas or institutions. Although Snyders argument of the money and effort it requires to rid of the name, it is a necessary thing. The idea of tradition is a facade he is playing. In reality he does not want to put in the effort. Also the tradition, reflects racism. We are trying to improve Americas racism not continue it. It is something that should be banned.
ReplyDeleteThe Redskins logo is obviously racially insensitive and should be banned. The name and logo stereotype an entire group of people and should not be used under the excuse that it's a "tradition". Imagine if there was a basketball team called the "Crackers" and the logo was a stereotypical white guy.
ReplyDeleteI firmly believe that any team using "redskins" as a mascot should stop immediately. This is obviously a racially insensitive phrase that is offensive to an entire culture. It is just like any other derogatory term used to describe other races. Why should it be accepted just because it is "tradition?". Many other racially discriminatory "traditions" have been banned, and this should be added to the list. If the entire Native American people have made it clear that they disagree with this and want it banned, then it is obviously something that is seen as highly offensive and should not be allowed. With that being said, all teams with racially suggestive mascots such as the "redskins" should change their names and mascots as soon as possible. We are already in 2015, it's sad we still have to prove that things like this are wrong.
ReplyDelete