Amaaaazing, innit?

A poll of Native Americans found that the vast majority do not object to the Washington NFL team’s name.

The Washington Post commissioned a poll with a randomly selected national sample of 504 Native American adults. That poll asked, “The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive, or doesn’t it bother you?”

The result was a strong argument for Dan Snyder’s case that his team does not need to change its name: A whopping 90 percent answered that the name doesn’t bother them. Only 9 percent called the name offensive, with 1 percent having no opinion.

Another question in the poll found that 73 percent of Native Americans do not think the term “Redskin” is disrespectful. That included 75 percent of Native Americans who are members of tribes, and 71 percent who are not members of tribes.

The results of this poll are consistent with previous polls showing that most Native Americans aren’t bothered by the team’s name, nor do they consider it an important issue facing their community.

The SJWs have got themselves wound up into a tizzy on behalf of people who don’t give a shit over the issue.

Quelle surprise.

Actual, real, redskins perhaps being more interested in getting someone to explain why Interior right royally fucked them over for a century perhaps?

32 thoughts on “Amaaaazing, innit?”

  1. “why Interior right royally fucked them over for a century perhaps”
    Perhaps because a majority of Red Indians in the Colonies supported King George III in 1776, having observed that they generally got fairer treatment from the British-appointed governors than from the colonists.

  2. Well, Tim, you’ve completely misunderstood the issue here. The point isn’t that everyone finds the stereotype ‘redskin’ of the team to be an offensive stereotype, but that the use of the stereotype at all is offensive.

    Frankly, I don’t care whether some minority or other feels offended by a stereotype of themselves: it offends me because we don’t promote cartoonish stereotypes of racial difference anymore.

    However, it’s just the name of a fucking football team. Considering we’re talking about a country which still habitually shoots people at traffic stops, you’d think they’d have other things to worry about.

  3. “Well, Tim, you’ve completely misunderstood the issue here. The point isn’t that everyone finds the stereotype ‘redskin’ of the team to be an offensive stereotype, but that the use of the stereotype at all is offensive.”

    According to you and some noisy SJWs. Nobody else gives a toss.

    “it offends me”

    I don’t give a toss that it offends you. (And even you admit it’s not a big deal.)

    “we don’t promote cartoonish stereotypes of racial difference anymore.”

    The term ‘Redskin’ doesn’t promote a stereotype. Nor does the logo. It’s just a drawing of a Native American. Not an up-to-date one, sure, but there’s nothing inherently offensive or cartoonish about it. In fact, it was chosen to represent someone brave and noble, that’s how that team saw themselves.

  4. “we don’t promote cartoonish stereotypes of racial difference anymore.”

    What you mean “we”, white man?

  5. Well, it doesn’t matter what ‘real redskins’ think. At best, they’re just a bunch of the higgerant hoi polloi who need guidance from us people with loftier ideals and more discerning eye. It is inherently wrong, and dangerous to society, to allow such labeling and naming, and so it must be stamped out and resisted at every turn. And once we have educated hoi polloi, they will all agree with us, thus proving we were right.

    Simple enuf, ennit?

  6. All this SJW stuff is about whites attempting to achieve social dominance over other whites.

  7. Bloke in Costa Rica

    As has been pointed out, it’s not derogatory to attach a label like this to a sports team since the emblem is meant to convey athletic prowess and fighting spirit, which is why you don’t see teams called the Minneapolis Limp-Wristed Nancy Boys. Having said that, the idea is rather vitiated by it being the Washington Redskins we’re talking about here. They’re not the most dynamic team in the NFL.

  8. So Much For Subtlety

    Dave – “it offends me because we don’t promote cartoonish stereotypes of racial difference anymore.”

    1. F**k off Dave,
    2. What racial differences? It is a picture of a rather noble looking Native American,
    3. Oddly enough racial differences don’t go away because you don’t like to think about them,
    4. Racial differences are perfectly acceptable to Social Justice Warriors like you if they smear White people.

    This was always about bullying the majority population into silence and compliance. Nothing else.

  9. And then there is Florida State University. They actually license from Nation of Seminoles for the use of the likeness and others. Hell, they even got a full blooded Seminole man riding into their home game to throw a flaming spear on the mid field. The anti-mascot law would do is to cost Nation of Seminoles quite a bit of money.

  10. “Racial differences are perfectly acceptable to Social Justice Warriors like you if they smear White people.”

    Listen to the Black Lives Matter mob on American Campuses. Its hard to tell them from the Stormfront mob…

  11. There’s also Spur Steak Ranch, a tacky casual dining restaurant chain whose logo is a Red Indian chief. As a Native American myself*, I find Spur’s mediocre food and their appropriation of our culture far more offensive than the Washington Redskins.

    (*if it’s good enough for Elizabeth Warren)

  12. ‘Considering we’re talking about a country which still habitually shoots people at traffic stops’

    Have you always been an idiot?

  13. The Inimitable Steve

    My guess is most Red Indians, if they’re honest injuns and not crazy liars like that Warren lady, like having sports teams named after them.

    Because it’s cool and flattering and most people would rather be talked about than not talked about.

    Sort of like how Irish folks tend to have a soft spot for the Celtic/Celtics/Fightin’ Irish branded sports clubs of this world.

    See also: the Apache helicopter, the Jeep Grand Cherokee, etc. All positive associations, and thank goodness British Leyland never got in on that name game.

    Of course, the NFL franchise could go all politically correct and rename themselves the Washington Mighty Whites. But would that make the racial grievance mongers happy? Nooooo…

  14. Well said, Steve.
    The number of sporting events/trophies named after people to honour them is (while finite) beyond counting by any human.
    If they are going to ban “Washington Redskins” then what will happen to “Hibernian” and “Glasgow Celtic”? Shall we be forced to watch Heart of Midlothian playing “Kidney of Midlothian” instead of Hibs and “Sitters v Rangers” at “Sitters Park” in Parkhead?

  15. It’s never been about what American Indians think.

    It’s about what white liberals think. Poll them.

  16. The Redskins mullered Boston Palefaces at superbowl back in the day. That’s why the Yanks celebrate Thanksgiving. As in Thank fuck that’s over.

  17. And yet Americans are told that transgender people can use any toilet changing room they prefer as their rights are more important than people feeling uncomfortable

  18. I wonder what Dave would have made of South African football team Dangerous Darkies?

    Unfortunately, they no longer exist. They merged with Witbank Black Aces to form Mpumulanga Black Aces.

  19. So if for some stupid reason the Redskins name has to go then so do all the other mascots. Vikings, Spartans and Celtics all have to go for ‘ethnic’ reasons. Pirates, Raiders, and the like are gone so we aren’t promoting ‘criminals’. We probably should rid of all of the animal names because that might promote animal cruelty. Good luck being a Crusader, Holy Cross is completely screwed. Colors are useless because the dye had to come from some innocent creature or mineral.

    I could go on but the end result is obvious. Given enough time the only acceptable mascot will be the Shockers*.

    *Read as much into that as you want.

  20. I think the SJW warrior response would be: “What the hell do Native Americans know? They’re only ignorant savages!”

    This storm in a teacup is evidence, if more were needed, that SJW and PoMo are, as Theodore Dalrymple says, an attempt to dull people’s perceptions of reality to the point where you no longer question things because it is too tedious, too complicated, and ultimately too dangerous.

    In short: SHUT UP AND DO AS YOU ARE TOLD BY YOUR BETTERS.

  21. The Alabama Niggerlynchers would be a fantastic name for a team. All those strong manly associations, the iconic white -hooded logo.

  22. No, I like the name. How about, in honour of thay city’s most famous son, ‘The Minneapolis Emaciates’?

  23. Dave

    Is there more than one poster with this name? You haven’t mentioned anti-semitism yet?

  24. I’ve supported the New England Patriots for thirty years but now I’ve decided to be offended at their shocking anti-British bias, and I demand that their flying Elvis logo be replaced by the Beatles wrapped in a Union Jack.

  25. In the TV show Community the college chose as a team name the Humans so as not to offend anyone, sadly some seem to have considered this to be a documentary not satire

  26. So Much For Subtlety

    BniC – “In the TV show Community the college chose as a team name the Humans so as not to offend anyone, sadly some seem to have considered this to be a documentary not satire”

    Peter Singer objects to “specism” – the irrational preference for humans. So it clearly didn’t realise how insane we would all become.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *