Washington Redskins will NEVER change name

Like architecture? Then this is for you.

Quote:

---

Bjarke Ingels, founder of the architectural firm Bjarke Ingels Group, thinks he can change the NFL. After news leaked this month that his firm, known as BIG, has been tapped to design a new stadium for the Washington Redskins — Ingels not only defended his new client, he also waxed poetic about the power of sport to change society. And he sounded almost utopian in his confidence that smart design could push that evolution forward: “Nothing excites me more than to take active part in the evolution of that sport and its facilities to make football more exciting, more engaging, more inspiring and more safe in the future.”

To understand how strange this pairing of client and architect is, you have to contemplate two things: the deeply embedded social progressivism that has become the standard worldview of international architectural firms such as BIG; and organizations such as the NFL, a private club for 1 percenters that bullies municipalities and treats its own players’ health with indifference.

More...

---

You should read the whole article. Here is the most controversial paragraph..

Quote:

---

And there is almost certainly more coming — in September, pathologists reported that 87 out of 91 former players, now deceased, showed signs of chronic traumatic encephalopathy — and the scandal will probably unfold with the grim, train-wreck clarity of the tobacco giants’ fall from grace. But it is the Redskins’ name that should give anyone pause, including a progressive architect, about doing business with this franchise.

---

That's the same firm doing the new Googleplex. In my opinion, there is about a 70% chance that this architectural firm will break apart as a result of its alliance with Dan Snyder

Other countries are looking at barring Washington from playing in their countries.

Quote:

---

With the Washington Redskins set to play a game in London in 2016, the national controversy involving the team's name is now turning into an international controversy.

More...

---

Quote:

---

"We were shocked to learn the derivation of the term 'R*dskin,' pertaining as it does to the historic abuse of native Americans," the letter said. "The exportation of this racial slur to the UK this autumn, when the Washington team is due to play, directly contravenes the values that many in Britain have worked so hard to instill."

Smeeth also explained that the game could be an issue for the BBC, the publicly funded company that's scheduled to broadcast the game.

"Given it's taxpayer-funded, if we believe it's a racial slur, then that means problems for the BBC in terms of coverage of the event," Smeeth told ESPN. "There is going to come a pressure point. The last thing the NFL wants -- after putting so much behind its brand in the UK -- is a good number of us to begin putting pressure on the BBC in terms of what they're showing and how they're showing it. This is not the image the NFL wants portrayed in the UK."

The game could also create a problem for Wembley Stadium, which "has strict regulations against the use of racial slurs and chanting at its events and is owned by the football association, which has taken a strong stance against racism in sports," the letter states.

---

https://foreverfeeding.files.wordpre...1/img_1806.jpg

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/i...9/redskins.jpg

Found this interesting.

Quote:

---

In a new survey by The Washington Post, nine in 10 Native Americans polled said they are not offended by the Washington Redskins NFL team name. The results were consistent across age, income, political affiliation, and level of education, and are largely unchanged from a similar 2004 poll. Just 9 percent of respondents said the name offends them, while 1 percent said they had no opinion.

---

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/...kins-name.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~

Found this interesting.



http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/...kins-name.html

---

The white guilters are probably saying that it's only because Native Americans just can't understand the turmoil they've been put through by white people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~

Found this interesting.



http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/...kins-name.html

---

Why would the opinion of Native Americans be more important than the opinion of all Americans, among whom a much larger minority believe the name should change? A name change is inevitable. The current owner of the team will primarily be remembered either as the person who changed the name of the person who refused to change the name. Either way, the name is his legacy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

The white guilters are probably saying that it's only because Native Americans just can't understand the turmoil they've been put through by white people.

---

I don't know about "white guilt", but I may have missed why a sports team name is worthy of our interest or our passionate defense? It's a football team. Who cares? Just change the stupid name and move on already. You wouldn't walk up to a native American and call them a "redskin" to their face (unless you're a complete asshole, I guess?). Why would you do it to defend the name of a football team? I guess football is that important? I don't get it. Seems like something we could stop arguing about if people stopped pretending they care what a football team chooses to call themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

Why would the opinion of Native Americans be more important than the opinion of all Americans, among whom a much larger minority believe the name should change?

---

Probably since "Redskins" is a reference to them. If they're not offended by it, then why are you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hightower

I don't know about "white guilt", but I may have missed why a sports team name is worthy of our interest or our passionate defense? It's a football team. Who cares? Just change the stupid name and move on already. You wouldn't walk up to a native American and call them a "redskin" to their face (unless you're a complete asshole, I guess?). Why would you do it to defend the name of a football team? I guess football is that important? I don't get it. Seems like something we could stop arguing about if people stopped pretending they care what a football team chooses to call themselves.

---

If Native Americans (i.e. Redskins) don't give a shit about the name, then why is everyone else offended?

It'd be like a team called the Crackers with a white guy as the logo, except the only people offended by it are black.

In reality, most of the people who are offended by the Redskins aren't truly offended, they just need something to be in an uproar about to feed their victimhood addiction. If they're not being offended by something, they'll create something to be offended by.

TLDR: People are pussies.

Lets not forget, native americans refer to themselves first as "Redskins".

Also.. let's not forget. We need to change the name of Oklahoma and expunge it from all documents and history!!

Quote:

---

"The name Oklahoma comes from the Choctaw phrase okla humma, literally meaning red people. Choctaw Chief Allen Wright suggested the name in 1866 during treaty negotiations with the federal government regarding the use of Indian Territory, in which he envisioned an all-Indian state controlled by the United States Superintendent of Indian Affairs. Equivalent to the English word Indian, okla humma was a phrase in the Choctaw language used to describe Native American people as a whole. Oklahoma later became the de facto name for Oklahoma Territory, and it was officially approved in 1890, two years after the area was opened to white settlers."

---

....

~crickets~

Oh yeah... the left don't want to get up in arms about that.