US patent office cancels Redskins trademark registration

[Caliskinsfan]

This has got to be the biggest bunch of bullshit in history!!!!
Just goes to prove that as a society this country is becoming more and more pussywhipped!!!
Land of the free my ass, seems anymore you can't do or say shit without offending one fuckin panty waist or another. I mean come on.... and God forbid you have a talk with someone in private and happen to throw out a slang or a word some overly sensative asshole finds offensive. Because dear Lord someone is going to drag you and your name through all the shit and mud they can find. And for what, to make yourself feel better??? Who gives a fuck, we are all human beings and this constant pissing and moaning about names is rediculous.... case and point

The Washington Redskins have been known as such since 1937 and before that they were the Boston Redskins... It is just now that people feel offended by this???? Get the fuck out of here!!!! Hell every frigin day we are all faced with racist terms and words. Crying like a little bitch makes you something special???? No!!! It just puts you in the category with every other crybaby bitch. Why don't you try STFU and showing whomever your the better person!!!

Leave the damn sports alone.... With a country in termoil youd think this stupid ass government would have better things to frigin do!!!

Hail to the Redskins!!!!

You rock, Psyche!

 

[Caliskinsfan]

I have decided that if Snyder IS forced to change the name, I am most comfortable with dropping the 'red'. And being named the 'skins'. Use the spear logo. That is IF, it has to change. I call the team skins more than I use redskins already.

 

[Stymietee]

i noticed when i brought up robert e lee he brings up reagan as if that has anything to do with the point which is if you find something distasteful simply stop supporting it reagan being a domestic terrorist (laughable ) has nothing to do with it

he doesnt get that either you stand against a wrong or you dont . supporting the team even if you find the name racist means the racism doesnt bother you much

Tell that nonsense to Bobby Mitchell.

 

[bigdeal701]

I'm a cowboy fan and have always hated the Redskins, but not because of their name. I say to hell with this PC bullshit. I will always refer to your team as the Redskins, and think it would be a travisty to change the name. This country has it's priorities all screwed up.

 

[skinsdad62]

Tell that nonsense to Bobby Mitchell.

i will right after you talk to ernie davis

 

[Stymietee]

i will right after you talk to ernie davis

Thanks...you're making my points for me!!

 

[Sportster 72]

It seems in an effort to prove your point right you took up an entirely different angle and rewound 50 years to another man who we all know was a racist to prove your point for today.

Of course if you want to believe the teams name is racist you are entitled to that. What you aren't entitled to is to call all of us racist. I come from as multi-cultural as anyone. Because I like my teams name and view it in a different light than you do does make me George Preston Marshall nor a racist.

I see Bobby Mitchell as a Redskin icon. I in know way see Bobby Mitchell, Charley Taylor or Brig Owens as any kind of link to the teams name other than they were great players for this team.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

 

[Stymietee]

It seems in an effort to prove your point right you took up an entirely different angle and rewound 50 years to another man who we all know was a racist to prove your point for today.

Of course if you want to believe the teams name is racist you are entitled to that. What you aren't entitled to is to call all of us racist. I come from as multi-cultural as anyone. Because I like my teams name and view it in a different light than you do does make me George Preston Marshall nor a racist.

I see Bobby Mitchell as a Redskin icon. I in know way see Bobby Mitchell, Charley Taylor or Brig Owens as any kind of link to the teams name other than they were great players for this team.

Sometimes you have to take a circuitous route to deliver a point and that depends entirely on who you're delivering the point to and their ability to see through a less narrow lens.

Of course I do know that the historical reflections that the team name conjures is based on it's intent to destroy a nation of people. The current use (team common name) is intended as a source of pride, I get that, but how is it possible that those who see it as a source of pride, cannot see that others view it through historical eyes?

Please review all of my posts relating to this topic and show me where I have ever called anyone a racist. If you find it, I'll retract that assertion and apologize to its' intended target.

What's also at issue here is the charge from others that two things cannot be true in this regard, namely that one cannot be a loyal fan and object to the team name. Further, they suggest that I find another team because of my views. The irony is that I fully accept and respect their perspective without denigrating myself in a similar yet questionable manner.

In that same vein this was delivered to me by another................
Originally Posted by skinsdad62
he doesnt get that either you stand against a wrong or you dont . supporting the team even if you find the name racist means the racism doesnt bother you much.

I responded: "Tell that nonsense to Bobby Mitchell." because Bobby Mitchell and others played DESPITE the racism they faced. It didn't mean that, as the poster suggests, "the racism doesn't bother you much." just that we don't run from it instead we stand against it where it lives.

 

[Stymietee]

As a follow-up it has been suggested to me to tell that to Ernie Davis, a man who when drafted by Washington, was immediately traded because of the racist views of the team owner.

 

[skinsdad62]

Sometimes you have to take a circuitous route to deliver a point and that depends entirely on who you're delivering the point to and their ability to see through a less narrow lens.

Of course I do know that the historical reflections that the team name conjures is based on it's intent to destroy a nation of people. The current use (team common name) is intended as a source of pride, I get that, but how is it possible that those who see it as a source of pride, cannot see that others view it through historical eyes?

Please review all of my posts relating to this topic and show me where I have ever called anyone a racist. If you find it, I'll retract that assertion and apologize to its' intended target.

What's also at issue here is the charge from others that two things cannot be true in this regard, namely that one cannot be a loyal fan and object to the team name. Further, they suggest that I find another team because of my views. The irony is that I fully accept and respect their perspective without denigrating myself in a similar yet questionable manner.



In that same vein this was delivered to me by another................
Originally Posted by skinsdad62
he doesnt get that either you stand against a wrong or you dont . supporting the team even if you find the name racist means the racism doesnt bother you much.

I responded: "Tell that nonsense to Bobby Mitchell." because Bobby Mitchell and others played DESPITE the racism they faced. It didn't mean that, as the poster suggests, "the racism doesn't bother you much." just that we don't run from it instead we stand against it where it lives.

what you failed to realize is that ernie davis refused to play for the skins because of a racist owner . he didnt wait to start earning paychecks and then after the fact cried racism . he didnt say well the redskins are my home team so damn my principals i will play anyway he put his principles ahead of money in a time when there was virtually no options for a black man

you interjected bobby mitchell into this but i havent seen any statements yet by mitchell saying he is against the redskins name . bobby mitchell was traded to the redskins , he had to go because he played in a time when players had no options . bobby mitchell is on record as saying that marshall treated him well while he was owner .

my beef with bailey and slchereth gannon is where were they with this when they were earning a paycheck for the skins ? its one of several possibilities . 1) they were cowards 2) they really dont think it is racist but they want to look like good guys now 3) their outrage had a price

where i come from stymie , if you are outraged by something you give up support for them . you dont invest a dime in them just because they are the "home : team " even though you say you cant utter the name . to me that is a simple cop out

the bullets changed their name to wizards i was outraged by the PC BS of abe pollin . i withdrew my support because my principals overruled they home team cop out

 

[Sportster 72]

As a follow-up it has been suggested to me to tell that to Ernie Davis, a man who when drafted by Washington, was immediately traded because of the racist views of the team owner.

The first black player signed by Washington was Ron Hatcher, an 8th round draft pick. Bill McPeak made the trade Ernie Davis for Bobby Mitchell. The year the Redskins drafted Ernie Davis they drafted several black football players. We all know that would not have happened if it were left to Marshall's decision. McPeak the coach did not feel the same way that Marshall felt.

I am not going to argue your right to feel however you want about the teams name but excluding a race of people from playing on your team is no where near the same thing as the current debate on team name. There is no arguing that Marshall was a blatant racist.

I have my own feelings about native Americans and how they have been treated in this country. All that being said I see the name as positive vision of Indians. We all have a right to view things how we want to and as long as I live in this country I hope we never lose the right to our freedoms. If a majority of native Americans want the name changed then I will support it. Until then it is just a matter of opinion by all of us who are not Indian.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

The first black player signed by Washington was Ron Hatcher, an 8th round draft pick. Bill McPeak made the trade Ernie Davis for Bobby Mitchell. The year the Redskins drafted Ernie Davis they drafted several black football players. We all know that would not have happened if it were left to Marshall's decision. McPeak the coach did not feel the same way that Marshall felt.

I am not going to argue your right to feel however you want about the teams name but excluding a race of people from playing on your team is no where near the same thing as the current debate on team name. There is no arguing that Marshall was a blatant racist.

I have my own feelings about native Americans and how they have been treated in this country. All that being said I see the name as positive vision of Indians. We all have a right to view things how we want to and as long as I live in this country I hope we never lose the right to our freedoms. If a majority of native Americans want the name changed then I will support it. Until then it is just a matter of opinion by all of us who are not Indian.

Couldn't agree with ya more.

 

[Stymietee]

what you failed to realize is that ernie davis refused to play for the skins because of a racist owner . he didnt wait to start earning paychecks and then after the fact cried racism . he didnt say well the redskins are my home team so damn my principals i will play anyway he put his principles ahead of money in a time when there was virtually no options for a black man

you interjected bobby mitchell into this but i havent seen any statements yet by mitchell saying he is against the redskins name . bobby mitchell was traded to the redskins , he had to go because he played in a time when players had no options . bobby mitchell is on record as saying that marshall treated him well while he was owner .

my beef with bailey and slchereth gannon is where were they with this when they were earning a paycheck for the skins ? its one of several possibilities . 1) they were cowards 2) they really dont think it is racist but they want to look like good guys now 3) their outrage had a price

where i come from stymie , if you are outraged by something you give up support for them . you dont invest a dime in them just because they are the "home : team " even though you say you cant utter the name . to me that is a simple cop out

the bullets changed their name to wizards i was outraged by the PC BS of abe pollin . i withdrew my support because my principals overruled they home team cop out

Your lack of historical understanding is stunning!!! Buffalo from the old AFL had also drafted Ernie Davis two days prior to DC drafting him, though it was known the Davis had no desire to become the next Jackie Robinson in Washington he awaited contractual offers before deciding which team to play with. J.P. Marshall on the day of the draft traded Davis to Cleveland. He couldn't refuse to play in DC because no contract was ever offered nor signed. Further his rights belonged to Cleveland (Buffalo if he opted to sign there)

So, Bobby Mitchell was reportedly to have been treated well by a racist owner, I guess that rendered him no longer a racist. Good call on this one.

BTW: What new form of nonsense are you trying to conjure up with respect to your three points on Bailey, Schlereth, Gannon et. al. If you are able to understand that there are racists in every walk of life, then and now, then how is it possible to not understand that there are plenty of people working for others with racists attitudes as we speak? It is not cowardice, posturing, nor silence for a price. It IS their current, public, evolved position.

Do yourself a favor, take a look at our avatars and tell me if it is possible that we come from differing backgrounds. Outrage is a response for the weak minded, determination and purpose make far better responses to objectionable stimuli. To paraphrase, don't get mad......get even. BTW: where you come from is not remotely comparable to where I come from.

It only cost me my time to watch a football game....my free time, which is mine to do as I please. It is a cop out to insinuate that I believe as you do or I have no merit.

You had every right to withdraw your support from the Bullets/Wizards but don't fool yourself into believing that principle......not principal as you continue to write had anything to do with it. Because I take you at your word, you stopped supporting them....the main (principal) reason being they changed, and not because of some set of moral values (principle) that you object to.

 

[Stymietee]

The first black player signed by Washington was Ron Hatcher, an 8th round draft pick. Bill McPeak made the trade Ernie Davis for Bobby Mitchell. The year the Redskins drafted Ernie Davis they drafted several black football players. We all know that would not have happened if it were left to Marshall's decision. McPeak the coach did not feel the same way that Marshall felt.

I am not going to argue your right to feel however you want about the teams name but excluding a race of people from playing on your team is no where near the same thing as the current debate on team name. There is no arguing that Marshall was a blatant racist.

I have my own feelings about native Americans and how they have been treated in this country. All that being said I see the name as positive vision of Indians. We all have a right to view things how we want to and as long as I live in this country I hope we never lose the right to our freedoms. If a majority of native Americans want the name changed then I will support it. Until then it is just a matter of opinion by all of us who are not Indian.

Skinsdad bought up Ernie Davis not I, Washington drafted Davis 1st overall and Marshall not McPeak immediately traded him to Cleveland.

We will agree to disagree on how we view your point of excluding a race vs. the team name. I totally respect your right to see it that way..........I just happen to see it as injustice vs. injustice, so we agree on respecting each others right to our own views.......refreshing!!! Thanks!!!

Otherwise I have no issues with your last post.

 

[Sharkinva]

Guys,


Linking the fact that Marshall was racist against blacks and thus the team name was chosen as a racist act is a tenuous connection at best. Its like saying well I dont eat pork, there for I must be either a muslim or a vegetarian. Marshall didnt like blacks, we get it. The word redskin may or may not have originally had racist undertones. We get that two. But as i have stressed all along, its NOT used in that context any more. So those that are upset or offended by the word are only that way because THEY choose to be.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Guys,


Linking the fact that Marshall was racist against blacks and thus the team name was chosen as a racist act is a tenuous connection at best. Its like saying well I dont eat pork, there for I must be either a muslim or a vegetarian. Marshall didnt like blacks, we get it. The word redskin may or may not have originally had racist undertones. We get that two. But as i have stressed all along, its NOT used in that context any more. So those that are upset or offended by the word are only that way because THEY choose to be.

It's a logical fallacy

A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. Logical fallacies are like tricks or illusions of thought, and they're often very sneakily used by politicians and the media to fool people. Don't be fooled! This website has been designed to help you identify and call out dodgy logic wherever it may raise its ugly, incoherent head.


For entertainment purposes
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com

 

[Stymietee]

Guys,


Linking the fact that Marshall was racist against blacks and thus the team name was chosen as a racist act is a tenuous connection at best. Its like saying well I dont eat pork, there for I must be either a muslim or a vegetarian. Marshall didnt like blacks, we get it. The word redskin may or may not have originally had racist undertones. We get that two. But as i have stressed all along, its NOT used in that context any more. So those that are upset or offended by the word are only that way because THEY choose to be.

Your corollary is well founded and noted, however, because we have discussed context before and how the many use it today, it also doesn't hold that everyone sees it in that context. The word itself conjures up historical images and deeds in and out of current context. So, to rephrase your final quote, those who do not see it in its' historical negative context and are not offended by the word are only that way because THEY choose to be. (see what I did there?)

 

[Stymietee]

It's a logical fallacy

A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. Logical fallacies are like tricks or illusions of thought, and they're often very sneakily used by politicians and the media to fool people. Don't be fooled! This website has been designed to help you identify and call out dodgy logic wherever it may raise its ugly, incoherent head.


For entertainment purposes
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com

Wanna bet that both sides agree with you?

 

[Sharkinva]

Your corollary is well founded and noted, however, because we have discussed context before and how the many use it today, it also doesn't hold that everyone sees it in that context. The word itself conjures up historical images and deeds in and out of current context. So, to rephrase your final quote, those who do not see it in its' historical negative context and are not offended by the word are only that way because THEY choose to be. (see what I did there?)

I see what you attempted to do. But lets face it, even Mrs Harjo has likely never actually experienced a time when the word redskin was used in a negative way. So while she choose to dwell on what she thinks is a slur from the past, I accept what i have always KNOWN the word to mean in my life time.