When
American sports teams choose a name, they look for an icon of strength, an
image widely known and recognized as impressive and awesome. No major sports franchise calls itself the
Custers (or the French). If you want an
impressive name, if you want to conjure up and awesome image, pick the Braves,
the Chiefs, the Indians, the Vikings, the Bears, the Diamondbacks, or the Redskins.
Similarly, if folks want to name a city or a state, they
usually pick a name of something that is known to be honorable, pleasant, or
respectable, like Indiana, Indianapolis, Illinois, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
Maryland, St. Augustine, or Sioux City.
Perhaps I’ve missed it, but I don’t recall any American city named after
John Wayne Gacy, Al Capone, Adolph Hitler, John Dillinger, Bernie Madoff,
Charles Manson, or Mark David Chapman. I
don’t know any streets named after James Earl Ray, but I know plenty named
after Martin Luther King. Almost every
major city has one, and rightly so.
The really offensive part of the name “Washington Redskins”
is not "Redskins." Who or what
has ever done more unrelenting harm to Native Americans than Washington? And if you wanted a name that doubled the
infamy, just take the name of the old baseball franchise: “Washington Senators.”
The name “Redskins” now in use comes from an era when the
team had a Native American head coach (which is one way of knowing what the
team thought of Native Americans). Out
of respect and affection for their head coach, they named their team after him
and his background. He appreciated the
affection and good will behind the gesture. He knew it was not a slur at all. Nor did the team change it into one in the
intervening years. The team still holds
the ethnicity of that coach in high esteem, as well as it does those who share
it with him.
The case is the same with the Cleveland Indians. Cleveland used to call its baseball team the
Naps, after Hall of Famer Napoleon Lajoie, clearly not an insult to him. Then it changed its name to honor L.F. Sockalexis,
a full-blooded Penobscot Indian and the grandson of a Tribal chieftain, a team name
clearly not an insult either to Sockalexis or to his grandfather, modern
hyper-sensitivities notwithstanding. When
you name your entire team after the ethnicity of your head coach or after a
great player, you have not denigrated either one. You have honored them by identifying your
entire enterprise with them. Similarly,
Irish folks are not denigrated by Notre Dame, industrial workers by Purdue, or
a different tribe of Native Americans by Illinois.
I don’t know who is advising the government on such matters,
but, clearly, to strip the Washington Redskins of their brand name is simply to
allow anyone who wishes to make money from it to do so, which guarantees to spread
its usage quite widely. Evacuating that
trademark is not suppressing its usage. That’s widening it, which is typical DC
lunacy. Now anyone who wishes can profit
from that brand name and its icon, hardly an outcome likely to limit its usage
or to assuage the alleged insult using it allegedly entails to folks with
reddish skin. And yes, I know that
redskin folks aren’t really red, blacks aren’t really black, and whites aren’t
white. I also know that the politically correct
try relentlessly to foist their overweening hypersensitivities off onto the
rest of us whenever they can.
But I wont accept it. I'll just push back even harder. I've
got an NFL (Redskins) credit card. Now
that the government has taken away their trademark patent, I'm not going to use
any other card, not if my money goes to the Redskins team. I'm also going to the Redskins’ website to
buy lots of their gear. Soon I might have
to go to the University of Illinois website and buy lots of their Fighting
Illini gear, a designation soon to draw critical attention to itself. Then maybe I’ll invest in Notre Dame's Fighting
Irish gear. All of which raises this
question: Do you suppose the government
will make Indiana change its name? Or
Indianapolis? Or the Braves and Chiefs? What
about people of size and the offensive San Francisco Giants? And are Catholic clergy really going to be
happy about the Padres or the Saints?
For the record, I am 1/8 Apache, which
makes me more Indian than Elizabeth Warren.
The Redskin name has no negative impact upon me whatever. I’m also half Swiss. But that doesn’t mean I am insulted because
the Vatican hires Swiss soldiers to be the Pope’s guards or that those guards
feature prominently in Vatican photography.
They do so because for many centuries the Swiss were considered Europe’s
best and most reliable warriors. I’m
proud to have that prowess recognized.
Some of those warriors were my ancestors. Some of that warrior blood still flows
through my veins. I might be a
Protestant, but I’d gladly protect the Pope.
3 comments:
Try doing some research. Believe in the propaganda BS the Redskins organization spreads at your own peril.
"The fact that we have in our head coach, Lone Star Dietz, an Indian, together with several Indian players, has not, as may be suspected, inspired me to select the name Redskins,” Marshall said in the AP report. "
http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2014/05/30/3443168/redskins-founder-i-didnt-name-team-to-honor-native-americans/
Follow your own advice, and do some research:
http://theaxisofego.com/2014/05/30/case-closed/
"For the record, I am 1/8 Apache, which makes me more Indian than Elizabeth Warren. The Redskin name has no negative impact upon me whatever."
Three of my grandparents were part Indian (Cherokee on my father's (*) side and I think Miami on my mother's), and my ancestry works out to about 1/4 Indian (**) ... and what offends me is not Cowboy and Indian movies, nor sports teams named after Indian tribes, nor depictions of Indians as savages (for, after all, we were), but the dehumanizing lies that pretend we were innocent little nature-cildren.
(*) I'm related to this woman, via her second husband and possibly her father, and she was a cousin to this man.
(**) At the same time, it's bound to be less. For example, my mother's grandmother was said to be "full-blooded Indian", but by then, most if not all "full-blooded Indians" left in Indiana had white ancestors. I think what the phrase really means is that her family were recognized by their neighbors as being Indians, and she married outside "the tribe".
Post a Comment