Think About It Laugh Of The Day...
- Thread starter Scataphagos
- Start date
I guess all of those have to be changed to something that sounds white?
You realize those are names of tribes and famous people and Redskins is a derogatory name.
Also the Redskin objection is not coming from the government but the public.
Also the Redskin objection is not coming from the government but the public.
The Tomahawk is a tribe or famous person? This is a new take on history.
Of course, all these lefties are offended about the Tomahawk Chop at college and professional sport games.
A tomahawk is like a small hatchet.
I'm surprised the native American community finds offense with the names of our weapons. Should be rejoicing the acknowledgement.
Fine..tomahawk is a weapon..you get the point though, they are either weapons, tribe names or people, not a derogatory remark for them.
The Tomahawk Chop is not the same thing as calling a missle a tomahawk which is a throwing axe.
It is not that hard to see the difference.
You can have a street named Martin Luther King or call a mission Zulu but you are not going to have a football team called the Washington Darkies.
More proof of leftist brainwashed victims.
***
A new survey has found that Native Americans are more likely to be proud than offended by the name of the Washington Redskins.
The survey, as reported by the Washington Post, asked 500 people who identify as Native American to pick from a list of words which one best described their feelings about the Redskins name. The word most picked was “proud.”
Following “proud” came “indifferent,” “annoyed,” “content,” “satisfied” and “disappointed.”
The Washington Post did not publish the full results of the survey, so we do not know what percentage of respondents offered each response, but regarding the word “proud,” the Washington Post reports that “most of the survey’s respondents felt that way.”
These results echo those of a 2016 poll that found that only 9 percent of Native Americans described themselves as offended by the Redskins name, while 90 percent said it did not bother them.
Of those polled for the study, 57% who strongly identify with being Native American and 67% of those who frequently engage in tribal cultural practices were found to be deeply insulted by caricatures of Native American culture.
Overall, the results suggest the controversy over the use of Native representations, such as chief headdresses, war cries and the tomahawk chop, is far from over.
“We keep seeing clear examples of Native people speaking up and protesting these problematic team names and mascots. Yet, public opinion polls, with little methodological transparency, say that Native people are not offended. Things just don’t add up,” said study co-lead author Arianne Eason, a UC Berkeley assistant professor of psychology.
Eason and University of Michigan psychologist Stephanie Fryberg launched the study last fall in response to what they deemed as “yet another questionable opinion survey” about the Redskins’ name.
For example, a 2019 web-based survey of 500 self-identified Native Americans that was reported in The Washington Post found that 68% of those polled were not offended by the Washington Redskins’ name. Among other things, it asked respondents to identify whether the Redskins’ name made them feel proud, disappointed, empowered, embarrassed, appreciative or hopeless.
Moreover, a 2016 Washington Post survey found that nine in 10 Native Americans polled claimed not to be bothered by the moniker. It was a telephone survey of 504 self-identified Native Americans, and the results are said to have influenced the decision of team owner Daniel Snyder to retain the Redskins’ name.
“The data from previous opinion polls is often used to silence Native people,” said Fryberg, a member of the Tulalip Tribes of Washington, in Washington state. “But our study, which captures a broad diversity of Native peoples and experiences, shows high rates of opposition. As researchers and consumers of information, we need to be very careful about whose voices we claim to be representing.”
Overall, the results suggest the controversy over the use of Native representations, such as chief headdresses, war cries and the tomahawk chop, is far from over.
“We keep seeing clear examples of Native people speaking up and protesting these problematic team names and mascots. Yet, public opinion polls, with little methodological transparency, say that Native people are not offended. Things just don’t add up,” said study co-lead author Arianne Eason, a UC Berkeley assistant professor of psychology.
Eason and University of Michigan psychologist Stephanie Fryberg launched the study last fall in response to what they deemed as “yet another questionable opinion survey” about the Redskins’ name.
For example, a 2019 web-based survey of 500 self-identified Native Americans that was reported in The Washington Post found that 68% of those polled were not offended by the Washington Redskins’ name. Among other things, it asked respondents to identify whether the Redskins’ name made them feel proud, disappointed, empowered, embarrassed, appreciative or hopeless.
Moreover, a 2016 Washington Post survey found that nine in 10 Native Americans polled claimed not to be bothered by the moniker. It was a telephone survey of 504 self-identified Native Americans, and the results are said to have influenced the decision of team owner Daniel Snyder to retain the Redskins’ name.
“The data from previous opinion polls is often used to silence Native people,” said Fryberg, a member of the Tulalip Tribes of Washington, in Washington state. “But our study, which captures a broad diversity of Native peoples and experiences, shows high rates of opposition. As researchers and consumers of information, we need to be very careful about whose voices we claim to be representing.”
Native Indians love that sports teams are named after them. Not too many years ago I went to a baseball game with our local team playing the Cleveland Indians. Gobs of Native Indians were in the crowd beating on some type of Indian drums and shouting like lunatics. It was quite disturbing.