• Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Cracker isn’t an epithet that native Americans have ever used though.

        Paleface would be the matching slur to redskin.

        • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          You would be if they had stolen your home and pranced around in a caricature costume of you through the stadium they built after bulldozing your land

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yes, but that’s the point. They didn’t do that to white people, so white people are in no position to be offended. Including me. Which is why I’m not only not offended, but find that highly appropriate.

            • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              What is happening when white people are like “I’m not offended by this” is to minimize the offense that native Americans feel about the same thing.

              As if to say “I’m not offended, why are they?”

        • watson387@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Me either, but it’s actually meant to be offensive whereas Caucasians is just a classification.

    • remotedev@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think the way it works is someone who is not a member of that group tells you it’s offensive

    • angrymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The problem with the football teams is that usually the name of team is the name of a group of ppl that was almost exterminated and their descendants still pay the price and nobody cares while their name is used as something cool. Just using the name should not be that offensive.

      • scutiger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Except redskins is offensive. It’s not the name of a group of people, it’s an epithet describing them.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Were you going to show us this poll or were you just going to expect us to believe that quote of yours isn’t one you just made up?

            • smooth_tea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              I like to omit the source sometimes just to draw out lazy comments like yours. It really shows that you’re not that interested but just want to argue. It’s the title of an article from one of the most prominent newspapers out there, it’d be the first result if you simply pasted it in Google, but rather than save yourself the embarrassment, you chose this route.

              Swing and a miss.

              The article is even better than the title.

              Among the Native Americans reached over a five-month period ending in April, more than 7 in 10 said they did not feel the word “Redskin” was disrespectful to Indians. An even higher number — 8 in 10 — said they would not be offended if a non-native called them that name.