• angrymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year 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
      ·
      1 year 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
          ·
          1 year 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
            1 year 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.