The Washington _________

Slate ^ | 08/08/2013 | David Plotz

[Responsibility2nd]

Why Slate will no longer refer to Washington’s NFL team as the Redskins.

This is the last Slate article that will refer to the Washington NFL team as the Redskins.

For decades, American Indian activists and others have been asking, urging, and haranguing the Washington Redskins to ditch their nickname, calling it a racist slur and an insult to Indians. They have collected historical and cultural examples of the use of redskin as a pejorative and twice sued to void the Redskins trademark, arguing that the name cannot be legally protected because it’s a slur. (A ruling on the second suit is expected soon; the first failed for technical reasons.) A group in the House of Representatives also recently introduced a bill to void the trademark. The team has been criticized from every different direction, by every kind of person. More than 20 years ago, Washington Post columnist Tony Kornheiser, no politically correct squish, urged the team to abandon the name. Today, the mayor of Washington, D.C.—the mayor!—goes out of his way to avoid saying the team’s name.

Why, then, has nothing changed? Because the choice of the team’s name belongs to one person, Washington owner Daniel Snyder. He has brushed off the controversy with arm waves at “tradition,” “competitiveness,” and “honor.” He recently told USA Today, “We’ll never change the name. It’s that simple. NEVER—you can use caps.”

[marron]

asking, urging, and haranguing the Washington Redskins to ditch their nickname, calling it a racist slur and an insult to Indians

Its not a slur if you're proud to be a redskin.

[Steve_Seattle]

You are mostly correct - from Wikipedia's Washington Redskins page:

"Initially, the new team took the same name as their landlords, the Boston Braves, one of the two local baseball teams at the time. The Braves played their first game on October 2, 1932, under the leadership of coach Lud Wray, against the Brooklyn Dodgers, to whom they lost 14–0.[10] The next week, the Braves recorded their first win, beating the New York Giants, 14–6.[11] Despite the presence of two rookies; halfback Cliff Battles and tackle Glen "Turk" Edwards — the new franchise's losses during the first season reached $46,000 and Bendix, O'Brien, and Doyle dropped out of the investment, leaving Marshall the sole owner of the Braves.[12][13] The team moved to Fenway Park[14] (home of the Boston Red Sox) the next year, and Marshall changed the name to the "Redskins" apparently in honor of then-coach Lone Star Dietz,[15] a Native American (he claimed to be part Sioux, but his actual ancestry has been challenged)."

The hidden gem here is that the name was changed to "Redskins" in honor of their then-coach, Lone Star Dietz, who claimed to be Native American.

[Benito Cereno]

I am terribly offended by this school's mascot and I demand it be replaced with something more appropriate.

There, fixed it.

[dsrtsage]

“What’s next, the Cleveland “Native Americans”?”

Nah, they were forced to go all PC a few years back and had to change the name to the Cleveland Drunken Indians

[Terry L Smith]

The Washington Redskins shall forever be named so, by me, in all of my 55 years of watching football games.

That predates “the pre-conception gleam in the eye of the daddy of the author of that story.

[JimRed]

Eff those so-called Indian activists. If they’d had a bigger defense budget, they’d still own this place!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Responsibility2nd.

Why Slate will no longer refer to Washington’s NFL team as the Redskins.

Oh no, this is going to be a hell of a blow to the millions who rely on Slate for sports coverage.

[Berosus]

What an idjit the author of that article is. I heard once that back when the team was known as the Boston Redskins, the guy who named them was thinking more of Boston redskin beans than he was of Indians. But that led to so many bad jokes the team management decided they couldn’t put a bean on the helmets for their logo, so they went with an Indian head logo instead.