Final Say On The Redskins Name Change Debate

Let me preface this by stating I am a Redskins fan and that I have no Native American ancestry that I know of. I also understand that I cannot possibly fully grasp how it feels to be persecuted because of my race.

There has been a recent surge in the movement to change the Redskins name. For the first time in the history of the franchise there seems to be a legitimate threat of a name change. Respected sports writer Peter King has refused to use the name at all on his website and the Oneida tribe has started add campaigns to increase awareness. Even President Obama shared his thoughts during an Associated Press interview. I originally expected the issue to die down once the season started but every time I think I have heard the last of it a new story comes out. It is clear that there is a vocal group that is

intent on making a change.

The issue is further complicated by the fact that Dan Snyder has publicly stated that he will “never” change the name. He has maintained his stance and most recently sent out a letter to the fans reassuring them that the name will not change. Ultimately, it appears that both sides are going to stand firm and have no intention of giving in. So, with no end to this controversy in sight I’ve decided to share my opinion on the issue and my thoughts on how to solve it.

The most popular argument against the Redskins name, at least in the beginning, was that the term “redskin” originated or was used when referring to the scalps of Native Americans. The biggest issue with this argument is that it is completely inaccurate. As far as I have found the term “redskin” has absolutely no connection to scalping. According to Ives Goddard of the Smithsonian it actually originated from Native Americans. With this information I find it hard to understand those who still maintain that the word is offensive on the basis that there is a perceived relationship with scalping. However, that group is now a minority.

The second issue I take with those calling for a name change is that many have said the problem with the name Redskins is the use of the word “red.” By this logic there are many more changes that need to be made in the US. For example, the word Oklahoma loosely means “red people.” If using the word “red” is the problem then the state of Oklahoma should change its name. Again, this argument is not used as often anymore or at least not among the more respected critics of the Redskins name.

One of the more legitimate arguments that have been made is that “redskin” has been used as a racial slur in the past. If you look it up in any dictionary it will say that it is offensive or derogatory. This is a completely understandable concern but it is important to understand that the term wasn’t originally negative or meant as an insult. The word later became a slur and for a time was on the same level as the “N-word.” My question to those who take this stance is that because “redskin” had the ability to change from harmless to insulting is it not possible for the reverse to happen as well? I admit that I have had very little interaction with the Native American community but I have not met anyone who ever think of calling someone a “redskin” as an insult. I realize that just because I have never experienced this doesn’t mean it doesn’t occur but I am willing to bet it is not often used as an insult in modern day America. It seems reasonable to assume that most Americans hear the term Redskins and instantly think of the football franchise. I see no real reason for the word to be considered offensive at this point just because it once was. That logic doesn’t seem sound especially when the Washington Redskins have never belittled or mocked Native Americans as far as I can tell and have in fact worn the name with pride and respect. It seems to me that the Redskins have taken a once negative word and changed it into a word that is now meant to show pride and respect, even if unintentionally.

The hard part about this is that there are those who find offense in the name and that is cause to at least discuss the issue. I reject the premise that if one person is offended then that makes it offensive but I do accept that a vocal population of Native Americans is not just one person. The problem I have, though, is that there are also many Native Americans who support the name. There are even schools with a majority population of Native Americans that use the name themselves. It is ridiculous that because the offended are more vocal than the supporters their opinion some how weighs more. Those Native Americans who support the name should get just as much say in the name change as those who want to change it.

Ultimately, I do not think the name HAS to change. At this point I think it makes more sense to work on the real problems going on in the Native American community and the US as a whole than to focus this much energy on the Redskins name. However, I also feel there is a very simple solution to keep all parties happy. If the Redskins were to change their name to the Braves they would be able to keep their color scheme and their logo. The name also has historical significance for the franchise. “Braves” doesn’t have the same negative connotation attached to it. It would appease Native Americans who oppose “Redskins” while maintaining a Native American inspiration. It seems like a good way to just keep everyone reasonably happy and avoid the name being changed to something absurd (ie. Redtails).