Two questions on what's offensive

[Sho Nuff 720]

If 5 native americans found the name frank offensive, saying it represents a slur on native americans, even though it doesnt, would you change your name?

Because that...like tje.Packers what if, is ridiculous and not true of the.historical meaning of the word frank or Packers.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,332]

 

It's not an issue of freedom of speech, Ray. Anybody can say whatever they want, even things others find offensive. Nobody has said that Daniel Snyder needs to change the name of his team or else. What you're missing is that just because you're free to say something or name something a certain name doesn't mean you should, particularly if it offends a group of people.

Just because things weren't deemed offensive in the past doesn't mean that people can't or shouldn't come to a realization that perhaps now it is and consider changing.

 

So what is your point then if you don't care if the name is changed or not?

 

My what ifs are relevant because I am asking you directly, if all of a sudden a small group of people found your name offensive, or the name of something else offense, should you change your name particularly if it offends someone?

 

Sho nuff, please read bottom bolded part in the quote. He states that at one point something may not have been offensive in the past, but that doesn't mean people can't or shouldn't come to a realization that perhaps now it is and consider changing. Those are his exact words. Yes my what if is out there, but it is the same principal. Frank and Packers were obviously names nowhere near offensive when they were created. But if someone all of a sudden became offended Frank claims the name change should at least be considered.

 

Not only was the word Redskin not offensive in its creation, it was a word used to describe warriors. At one point, it did start to become more of a derogatory term, but who the hell have you ever heard in your life refer to an Indian as a Redskin meaning to put them down? I have never heard that, and I have heard plenty of racial slurs. Maybe it's more common near a reservation, but I don't remember reading an article that even talks about it being an issue.

 

My other question was how many people have to be offended for there to be a real issue about whether the offense should be taken seriously. Frank is leaving the number open because he will not tell me how many people have to be offended in his opinion for their grievance to be taken seriously. He is basically saying that if any amount of people are offended then the matter should be handled as if a majority are offended, and that is just ridiculous.

 

Last note: The Packers should change their name to the Fudge Packers for a very fundamental reason. Have you ever been to Wisconsin? If you haven't then you haven't seen the women yet.

[Frank M 181]

So what is your point then if you don't care if the name is changed or not?

 

My what ifs are relevant because I am asking you directly, if all of a sudden a small group of people found your name offensive, or the name of something else offense, should you change your name particularly if it offends someone?

 

Sho nuff, please read bottom bolded part in the quote. He states that at one point something may not have been offensive in the past, but that doesn't mean people can't or shouldn't come to a realization that perhaps now it is and consider changing. Those are his exact words. Yes my what if is out there, but it is the same principal. Frank and Packers were obviously names nowhere near offensive when they were created. But if someone all of a sudden became offended Frank claims the name change should at least be considered.

 

Not only was the word Redskin not offensive in its creation, it was a word used to describe warriors. At one point, it did start to become more of a derogatory term, but who the hell have you ever heard in your life refer to an Indian as a Redskin meaning to put them down? I have never heard that, and I have heard plenty of racial slurs. Maybe it's more common near a reservation, but I don't remember reading an article that even talks about it being an issue.

 

My other question was how many people have to be offended for there to be a real issue about whether the offense should be taken seriously. Frank is leaving the number open because he will not tell me how many people have to be offended in his opinion for their grievance to be taken seriously. He is basically saying that if any amount of people are offended then the matter should be handled as if a majority are offended, and that is just ridiculous.

 

Last note: The Packers should change their name to the Fudge Packers for a very fundamental reason. Have you ever been to Wisconsin? If you haven't then you haven't seen the women yet.

 

My point is that the first thing you guys are doing is claiming that all this is is a bunch of PC BS instead of taking a look at whether or not it may be offensive and then considering options to not offend. If someone deems something I say offensive, I'll take a look at what I'm saying to see if there's any validity to it. If there is, I'll consider not saying that thing anymore. If there's not, I'll go on saying it. It's not political correctness run amok, it's being sensitive to other's feelings and heritage, something we seem to have forgotten to do.

 

If it's 5 people or 500 or 5 million, if you hear the complaint, you should take a look at it. Dan Snyder took a look at it and said "meh". The US patent office took a look at it and acted.

[Sho Nuff 720]

At the point the Redskin name was used by the football team, it was already an offensive term to a group of people. Your what if about Frank and Packers has zero relevance.

[cbfalcon 827]

 

My point is that the first thing you guys are doing is claiming that all this is is a bunch of PC BS instead of taking a look at whether or not it may be offensive and then considering options to not offend. If someone deems something I say offensive, I'll take a look at what I'm saying to see if there's any validity to it. If there is, I'll consider not saying that thing anymore. If there's not, I'll go on saying it. It's not political correctness run amok, it's being sensitive to other's feelings and heritage, something we seem to have forgotten to do.

 

If it's 5 people or 500 or 5 million, if you hear the complaint, you should take a look at it. Dan Snyder took a look at it and said "meh". The US patent office took a look at it and acted.

Good post Frank M. I agree with every word of it.

 

I personally am not qualified to claim the term Redskin is or isn't offensive. I have no history with the word in any regard other than football. I am actually surprised so many people here are so confident that the term isn't offensive at all. Native Americans only comprise about 1% of our population, so I would assume most of us don't know enough of them to know how they feel about the term overall.

[JT 137]

A stupid argument?! It is the argument! If it offended 1 person the who gives a flying fock. If it offended 99% of the country then it should be addressed.

 

If you stop doing something because it offends a small group of people then many more things will come to and end for no good reason.

 

And people dying for my countrys freedom does mean we should hold that right in high esteem. I really dont get your angle here.

 

Issues of ethnicity are by and large going to affect a relatively small group of people. Your claim is essentially because there are more other people than Native Americans that the Native Americans forfeit the right to be offended by something. That's ridiculous. You can't name your team "the Kikes" and think it's ok because there are more Christians than Jews in the US.

 

This has nothing to do with free speech and nobody died so you could keep the name of a football team. My guess is they'd be appalled that you equate their sacrifice with something so trivial. Dozens of franchises have changed names, for dozens of reasons.

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/main/photos/1212/team-name-changes-without-relocating/#/main/photos/1212/team-name-changes-without-relocating/1/

 

 

Here's a question I would pose on the topic (and it goes toward your other nonsensical post about "Packers"):

 

Aside from references to the football team or potatoes, can you give other instances in which "redskins" is used in a positive, non-perjorative manner? Last 100 years of American culture.

[Googballz 39]

 

 

Aside from references to the football team or potatoes, can you give other instances in which "redskins" is used in a positive, non-perjorative manner?

 

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=redskin+peanuts&qpvt=redskin+peanuts&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=ECB6EC2EC1B83FABB8C4801F9E2A9425B37C811D&selectedIndex=1