What's In A Name?
This column was written by Michael Tomasky.
Though a liberal, I am not and never have been a devotee of political correctness. I think "black" and "Indian" work just fine most of the time and consider "African American" and "Native American" to be superfluous mouthfuls. I think it's more important that disadvantaged schoolchildren memorize their multiplication tables than have their self-esteem preserved.
And I can't quite get behind the idea that people who choose to change their sex should be grouped, rights-securing wise, with people who were born gay.
So I don't usually go in for this sort of thing. But as the new football season approaches, enough is enough: Washington Redskins is a horrendously racist name.
Where do I start? I suppose by saying that this fact should be so obvious to absolutely everyone that the need to change the name at this point, now no longer the "innocent dawn" of the 21st Century, should be beyond debate. I mean … Redskins! Just sit with that word for a while.
These next three paragraphs contain a few offensive words, but using them (or some of them) is the best way to make the point.
Let's start with the mother of all racist pejoratives — you know the word I mean. This one I won't put it in print; it's too lurid. Obviously, no one would name a team the Washington N-----s, and anyway, I don't think Redskins is equivalent to that. We white folk (this includes not just the United States, but pre-U.S. colonialists) may have killed far more native people, but what we did to black people occupies a more prominent place in our national memory, and I think probably rightly so. So the N-word, so fully associated with that history, is a special case, and it has no equal.
But as we know, alas, there are several pejoratives for black people that are one or two ticks down from the big one. And here, we start to see very clear parallels with redskin. The closest one is "spade." Both refer specifically to pigmentation (the latter a metaphor drawn from a deck of cards). Both mock and categorize entire races explicitly because of pigmentation. So if you think Washington Redskins is OK, then you believe that Washington Spades would be fine, too.
And there is more: Because of the nature of the historic conflict between white man and Indian, the word redskin carries another, more implicit meaning — it marks the people described as a different, hence exotic, hence somehow threatening tribe. Here, the equivalency is with Jews. Could we imagine the Washington Hebes?
Obviously, we could not. But Redskin is no better. And an examination of the history of the franchise seals the argument.
The Washington Redskins began life as the Boston Braves. The team played in Braves Field, home of the baseball Boston Braves (later the Milwaukee Braves, today the Atlanta Braves). In 1933, one year after joining the National Football League, the football Braves moved over to Fenway Park. A name change seemed in order. Head Coach William "Lone Star" Dietz was allegedly of part-Sioux descent. Hence, Redskins, in his "honor" (let's consider it a happy accident that Brother Dietz wasn't a quadroon). The team moved to Washington in 1937.
The ignominious roots in the North's most racist city should tell us something. And I just love that notion that the name was meant to honor Dietz. I'm sure it was, but this only reinforces the fact that times and mores change. In 1930s America, it was also an "honor" for Hattie McDaniel to have to act out humiliating mammy stereotypes in order to win her Oscar (after having been pointedly disinvited from Gone With the Wind's world premiere in Atlanta).
The American Prospect Though a liberal, I am not and never have been a devotee of political correctness. I think "black" and "Indian" work just fine most of the time and consider "African American" and "Native American" to be superfluous mouthfuls. I think it's more important that disadvantaged schoolchildren memorize their multiplication tables than have their self-esteem preserved.
And I can't quite get behind the idea that people who choose to change their sex should be grouped, rights-securing wise, with people who were born gay.
So I don't usually go in for this sort of thing. But as the new football season approaches, enough is enough: Washington Redskins is a horrendously racist name.
Where do I start? I suppose by saying that this fact should be so obvious to absolutely everyone that the need to change the name at this point, now no longer the "innocent dawn" of the 21st Century, should be beyond debate. I mean … Redskins! Just sit with that word for a while.
These next three paragraphs contain a few offensive words, but using them (or some of them) is the best way to make the point.
Let's start with the mother of all racist pejoratives — you know the word I mean. This one I won't put it in print; it's too lurid. Obviously, no one would name a team the Washington N-----s, and anyway, I don't think Redskins is equivalent to that. We white folk (this includes not just the United States, but pre-U.S. colonialists) may have killed far more native people, but what we did to black people occupies a more prominent place in our national memory, and I think probably rightly so. So the N-word, so fully associated with that history, is a special case, and it has no equal.
But as we know, alas, there are several pejoratives for black people that are one or two ticks down from the big one. And here, we start to see very clear parallels with redskin. The closest one is "spade." Both refer specifically to pigmentation (the latter a metaphor drawn from a deck of cards). Both mock and categorize entire races explicitly because of pigmentation. So if you think Washington Redskins is OK, then you believe that Washington Spades would be fine, too.
And there is more: Because of the nature of the historic conflict between white man and Indian, the word redskin carries another, more implicit meaning — it marks the people described as a different, hence exotic, hence somehow threatening tribe. Here, the equivalency is with Jews. Could we imagine the Washington Hebes?
Obviously, we could not. But Redskin is no better. And an examination of the history of the franchise seals the argument.
The Washington Redskins began life as the Boston Braves. The team played in Braves Field, home of the baseball Boston Braves (later the Milwaukee Braves, today the Atlanta Braves). In 1933, one year after joining the National Football League, the football Braves moved over to Fenway Park. A name change seemed in order. Head Coach William "Lone Star" Dietz was allegedly of part-Sioux descent. Hence, Redskins, in his "honor" (let's consider it a happy accident that Brother Dietz wasn't a quadroon). The team moved to Washington in 1937.
The ignominious roots in the North's most racist city should tell us something. And I just love that notion that the name was meant to honor Dietz. I'm sure it was, but this only reinforces the fact that times and mores change. In 1930s America, it was also an "honor" for Hattie McDaniel to have to act out humiliating mammy stereotypes in order to win her Oscar (after having been pointedly disinvited from Gone With the Wind's world premiere in Atlanta).
- no previous page
- next
1/2
Why are they offended? It's what they did, it's part of their culture and heritage. I've always had respect for Native American culture, frowing up thats why i liked the Skins. I own several pieces of Native American artifacts and weaponry, if i was truly racist why would i support thier culture with my capital? I suggest this: if someone made a team, for example: Arkansas Whiteskins, i for one would support it. It would be fine with me. Now, why dont we take it a step further and get rid of Affirmative Action so we're all on a level playing field? People complain about being treated differently, but when it comes to getting a leg up in life, you complain your not getting special treatment (ie-getting treated differently). Make up your mind. Do you want "equality" or a crutch so that there can be a percieved equality. So, it's only equal if the minorities get a boost? How so? I for one wouldnt want a free pass, it diminishes my accomplishments to know that the only reason i got there in the first place was because someone made an exception for me. I'm of Viking decent, i see no problem with the Vikings, even though romanticism has made it synonymous with raping, pillaging, and overall horror, not to mention barbarianism and a heathen lifestyle rejecting the Christian "God". Do i find it offensive? Not in one bit. It's what my ancestors did. It's how they lived, how they supported and fended for their land and family. Times truly were simpler back then. Everyone saw everything for what it was at face value. No one whined. And if you had a problem with it you did something about it. Now, in present times, everyone wants to complain about everything and subsequently get handouts. Racism truly disappears when both sides get it right. When the racists see past the flesh AND when the offended stop wanting preferential treatment because of the same flesh they say they get offended about.
Take into account too: black people use the word n__er more now, than most white people in the same urban areas. Why? Why do they insist on calling each other something that they deem so offensive? If they truly wanted it to go away and the handouts to go away, they wouldnt be making the word more prevalent within their own society themselves! It has to work both ways. Stop picking stupid things to fight over, imagine if everyone who complained about this tried to fight world hunger instead?!
Have any of you ever felt belittled? Have any of you ever been objectified just for being you, a native? Do you see a false stereotype of you and your people displayed around the country as %u2018REDSKINS%u2019? It's easy to make a comment on the outside looking in, but when you see injustice it is imperative you look closely at both sides. To some on lookers it may seem a cry for some silly name to be changed, to others it may be seen as fight for the rights insured to every American citizen. It%u2019s a fight to make things right and until you know the full story of why Native Americans like Suzan Harjo and company are specking out, Please refrain from commenting. Ignorance can only take you so far.
Have any of you ever felt belittled? Have any of you ever been objectified just for being you, a native? Do you see a false stereotype of you and your people displayed around the country as %u2018REDSKINS%u2019? It's easy to make a comment on the outside looking in, but when you see injustice it is imperative you look closely at both sides. To some on lookers it may seem a cry for some silly name to be changed, to others it may be seen as fight for the rights insured to every American citizen. It%u2019s a fight to make things right and until you know the full story of why Native Americans like Suzan Harjo and company are specking out, Please refrain from commenting. Ignorance can only take you so far.
Have any of you ever felt belittled? Have any of you ever been objectified just for being you, a native? Do you see a false stereotype of you and your people displayed around the country as %u2018REDSKINS%u2019? It's easy to make a comment on the outside looking in, but when you see injustice it is imperative you look closely at both sides. To some on lookers it may seem a cry for some silly name to be changed, to others it may be seen as fight for the rights insured to every American citizen. It%u2019s a fight to make things right and until you know the full story of why Native Americans like Suzan Harjo and company are specking out, Please refrain from commenting. Ignorance can only take you so far.
Have any of you ever felt belittled? Have any of you ever been objectified just for being you, a native? Do you see a false stereotype of you and your people displayed around the country as %u2018REDSKINS%u2019? It's easy to make a comment on the outside looking in, but when you see injustice it is imperative you look closely at both sides. To some on lookers it may seem a cry for some silly name to be changed, to others it may be seen as fight for the rights insured to every American citizen. It%u2019s a fight to make things right and until you know the full story of why Native Americans like Suzan Harjo and company are specking out, Please refrain from commenting. Ignorance can only take you so far.
No! I really do understand what you are saying, but those who spend time in the mire in order to find what is wrong there also find it hard to define enjoyment in life which has no mire.
I know where you are coming from however, I would probably find you to be a dull conversationallist when discussing the things that I enjoy. I like the Redskins name and there was a time when all teams were racist but there are none now and the coach certainly isn't.
I vote to keep the name "Washington Redskins". Those who live and think in the mire, please go crawl back in your hole.