From: williamf@umbc4.umbc.edu (TheBigBopper)
Subject: A followup to the 'Redskins' name change article
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 17:31:00 GMT


From: Kurt Bose "of Biscayzee" <kbos@carina.unm.edu wrote this:
 I attempted to post this, but I think the dc.redskins newsgroup killed it.  
 Please post this to dc.redskins as my POV on the matter.
 
 Oh, and below, I write "It's highly amusing...".  It isn't amusing at all.

In article <1992Sep11.145215.21996@umbc3.umbc.edu> williamf@umbc4.umbc.edu (TheBigBopper) writes:
>
>  ***Exerpted from another article on the net***
>
>>A national coalition of Native American leaders took the first step 
>>yesterday in a process to attempt to get the federal government to cancel 
>>its registration and protection of the trademark term "Redskins" and 
>>ultimately persuade Jack Kent Cooke (the Redskins' owner) to change 
>>the name of his football team.  The term "Redskins" was first registered 
>>in 1967.  Federal trademark law and related case law clearly prohibit
>>trademark registration of words that are offensive or disparaging.
>>
>>Cooke said, "I intend not to do anything about it [changing the name 
>>of the team].  I admire the Redskins name.  I think it stands for bravery, 
>>courage and a stalwart spirit and I see no reason why we shouldn't continue 
>>to use it."
>>
>
>  Nowadays I try to never use the word 'Redskins' when referring to the
>  Washington football team.  While I am a fan of the team I truly believe
>  that the name is derogatory and unfairly trivializes a group of fellow 
>  American citizens.  I have written to the Washington team and after reading
>  of this effort I am going to write the US Patent Office (assuming they are
>  the ones to write to) and I hope some of you folks will join me in conveying
>  to JKC that many native americans know the history of the word and are deeply
>  offended by its continuing use.
>  I'm curious about how others feel about the use of the name.  If you email me
>  with your vote I'll tabulate an informal poll on the results....either vote
>  to keep the name or vote to change it.

****Beginning of Kurt's piece***

Not only am I a Redskins fan, but I also live in a state with a fairly large
and visible Native American population, and I, for one, feel it's a shame that
the coalition feels it needs to showboat like this in order to get "noticed".
It's rather amusing that in a time when the Native American population is
facing terrible social problems such as alcoholism, poverty, and a criminal loss
in cultural identity, the most public crusade led by this coalition that has,
presumably, the best interests of their people in mind is a fight to bully a
sports team into destroying _their_ heritage.

I say this only to help the Native American population recognize their true
problems.  I live in New Mexico, and see Native Americans everyday.  When I
think of what their stereotype means to me, I don't see a "Redskin".  I see an
impoverished, poorly educated, more likely than not intoxicated man.  Now, I
admit that this is only a stereotype, but one must ask, Which is the More
Damaging Picture???  And which one needs to be addressed?
 
***end of Kurt's piece***

  I don't think it is a question of which is 'more damaging' and hence deserves
  attention first.  There are native americans working very hard to reverse 
  and improve the lot of the Nat. Am. pop. as a whole.  The issue of the name 
  is equally important if it serves to undermine and trivialize the efforts
  of those who are trying to raise the profile of the Native American.  Names
  and their meanings do matter (to paraphrase a noontime bigot).  Years ago 
  there *were* sports teams that carried the nickname 'Darkies' and 'Blacks'.
  Those sort of fell away with time and a changing social conscience towards
  African Americans.  The name 'Redskin' as coined meant more than than just
  distinguishing the color of someone's skin.  Bounty hunters coined it so that
  when collecting their money for killing 'X' # of Indians they just needed to
  bring 'X' pieces of redskin in to be paid.  I don't think that THAT ought to
  be preserved in the name of the team.
  BTW, please continue to send me your opinions, pro and con on this matter
  in the form of a vote.  I would to get a feel of how other readers feel.  So
Newsgroups: dc.redskins