Doesn't mean they can't continue to use it but interesting. My own view is that a commercial name should never be offensive no matter what the history. It's bad business.

Is this logo still trademarked?



Also, this seems offensive, too:

I'm gonna start a bootleg t-shirt business in DC.

Ruh roh!

I find this offensive on behalf of all bears.

I find this offensive to all good taste.

sycasey;842325838 said:

---

I find this offensive to all good taste.

---

I'm offended, on behalf of eyes everywhere.

ColoradoBear1;842325816 said:

---

Is this logo still trademarked?

Also, this seems offensive, too:

---

Nah, needs to feed the most negative stereotype to be most offensive. Should really ask the British what they call the Irish.

When folks have to try this hard to be offended, we've just about solved the racism problem in this country...

CalZebra2012;842325880 said:

---

When folks have to try this hard to be offended, we've just about solved the racism problem in this country...

---

You are nearly a caricature.

CalZebra2012;842325880 said:

---

When folks have to try this hard to be offended, we've just about solved the racism problem in this country...

---

Yeah, we're ready for the San Francisco Chinamen and the San Jose Yellowskins.

CalZebra2012;842325880 said:

---

When folks have to try this hard to be offended, we've just about solved the racism problem in this country...

---

New challenge: walk up to a Native American man and call him a Redskin.

sycasey;842325890 said:

---

New challenge: walk up to a Native American man and call him a Redskin.

---

Q: What's black, white, and red all over?
A: CalZebra2012 after performing your challenge.

sycasey;842325890 said:

---

New challenge: walk up to a Native American man and call him a Redskin.

---

Well that would be just about anyone in my family so....try harder. My favorite line in this mock PC issue is the folks stating that "Redskin" is the new "N" word, which is refuted by the fact that you can say "Redskin" and not the other.

CalZebra2012;842325923 said:

---

Well that would be just about anyone in my family so....try harder. My favorite line in this mock PC issue is the folks stating that "Redskin" is the new "N" word, which is refuted by the fact that you can say "Redskin" and not the other.

---

It's not as bad as the N word, but it is still a racial slur.

GB54;842325812 said:

---

Doesn't mean they can't continue to use it but interesting. My own view is that a commercial name should never be offensive no matter what the history. It's bad business.

---

So all these decades the patent office never did a damn thing and then all of a sudden the most PC president in American history is elected and complains about the name and now the trademark is revoked? Did I get all that?

hanky1;842325954 said:

---

So all these decades the patent office never did a damn thing and then all of a sudden the most PC president in American history is elected and complains about the name and now the trademark is revoked? Did I get all that?

---

Actually they did. They ruled against the Redskins in 1999 but it was overturned on appeal. This case was refiled in 2006. Did you get all that?

GB54;842325957 said:

---

Actually they did. They ruled against the Redskins in 1999 but it was overturned on appeal. This case was refiled in 2006. Did you get all that?

---

Nope, sorry. I watched fox and they said Obama did it. Get out of here with your facts. Now I'm going back to my Fox news, gotta find out Terry Bradshaw's opinions on Benghazi.

GB54;842325812 said:

---

Doesn't mean they can't continue to use it but interesting. My own view is that a commercial name should never be offensive no matter what the history. It's bad business.

---

I guess the Cleveland Indians will be next.

Golden One;842325961 said:

---

I guess the Cleveland Indians will be next.

---

For me Indians is not a derogatory word; neither is Chief or Brave or Blackhawks.

Golden One;842325961 said:

---

I guess the Cleveland Indians will be next.

---

Their logo will be.

sycasey;842325929 said:

---

It's not as bad as the N word, but it is still a racial slur.

---

...that a substantial number of the members of that race don't sense.

What's really a concern for many Native Americans is the extreme poverty, alcoholism and illiteracy on reservations. But concentrate on a team name that at least intended on honoring that community because that's "progress," you feel better and best of all, it's easy. You're helping.

Isn't it curious that the Senate Democrats only circulated the NFL/Redskins petition to members of their own party? While they appear to be serving the Native American community, they are really using it as a political football.

GB54;842325962 said:

---

For me Indians is not a derogatory word; neither is Chief or Brave or Blackhawks.

---

What about the name Oklahoma? I don't understand why Obama and others don't want to change the name of the state of Oklahoma. It's clearly as offensive as any Native American term out there.

GB54;842325962 said:

---

For me Indians is not a derogatory word; neither is Chief or Brave or Blackhawks.

---

Because you aren't hysterical or a lemming.

Redskins may be bad, and probably should be changed, but then "Washington" is the most offensive part of that team name.

CalZebra2012;842325970 said:

---

What's really a concern for many Native Americans is the extreme poverty, alcoholism and illiteracy on reservations. But concentrate on a team name that at least intended on honoring that community because that's "progress," you feel better and best of all, it's easy. You're helping.

---

I didn't realize that I could only do one or the other. And yes, changing a team name is easier to do than fixing poverty and alcoholism. That's why it should be done quickly.

Also, the idea that the team name was created to honor Native Americans is ludicrous.

Finally: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/redskin?s=t

GB54;842325962 said:

---

For me Indians is not a derogatory word.

---

Tell that to the administration at Furd.

falseintellect;842325960 said:

---

Nope, sorry. I watched fox and they said Obama did it. Get out of here with your facts. Now I'm going back to my Fox news, gotta find out Terry Bradshaw's opinions on Benghazi.

---

Don't waste your time. Get to MSNBC before they switch over to "Caught on Camera" or some other sensationalist entertainment show and you can see Rachel Maddow bringing the latest "news" on Chris Christy and Bridgegate. I'm dying to finally find out who closed a lane of traffic a year ago!

June 2014 Brookings and Public Religion Research Institute: MSNBC least trusted news source, FOX most trusted.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/randy-hall/2014/06/10/poll-msnbc-least-trusted-tv-news-source-fox-news-most-trusted.

I wouldn't offer this thread as a reason to go to Cal. Nothing special about being a bear in any of these posts.

"Also, the idea that the team name was created to honor Native Americans is ludicrous."



If you're leaning left. You DO realize that the name was given in 1933, in part, to honor Coach Lone Star Dietz and several players, right? Is it conceivable that someone might have had good intentions 80 years before they knew that you and the lemmings would be marching?

I don't use a dictionary (published 2014) to dictate my morality. Do you?

socaliganbear;842325840 said:

---

I'm offended, on behalf of eyes everywhere.

---

To mother nature and the environment. Burn baby burn.

CalZebra2012;842325983 said:

---

"Also, the idea that the team name was created to honor Native Americans is ludicrous."



If you're leaning left. You DO realize that the name was given in 1933, in part, to honor Coach Lone Star Dietz and several players, right? Is it conceivable that someone might have had good intentions 80 years before they knew that you and the lemmings would be marching?

I don't use a dictionary (published 2014) to dictate my morality. Do you?

---

How 'bout we use an image of your mom as a mascot? I'm just trying to honor her.

What's wrong with a sunburn?

OdontoBear66;842325973 said:

---

Redskins may be bad, and probably should be changed, but then "Washington" is the most offensive part of that team name.

---

Makes you wonder what all those guys working for the federal government must be thinking when the buy their season tickets.

CalZebra2012;842325983 said:

---

"Also, the idea that the team name was created to honor Native Americans is ludicrous."



If you're leaning left. You DO realize that the name was given in 1933, in part, to honor Coach Lone Star Dietz and several players, right? Is it conceivable that someone might have had good intentions 80 years before they knew that you and the lemmings would be marching?

---

I don't realize that because it isn't remotely proven. I know that Dan Snyder is trying to claim that this is where the team's name comes from, but a little bit of research reveals that the claim is questionable at best:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/1933-news-article-refutes-cherished-tale-that-redskins-were-named-to-honor-indian-coach/2014/05/28/19ad32e8-e698-11e3-afc6-a1dd9407abcf_story.html

I also know that it is provable that the owner who originally coined the name was a racist and white supremacist.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/01/the-racist-redskins.html

So now I'm a lemming too? What if I say that I also agree with GB54, who said that names like Indians, Braves, Chiefs, are not derogatory? Am I still a lemming? You said he wasn't.

CalZebra2012;842325983 said:

---

I don't use a dictionary (published 2014) to dictate my morality. Do you?

---

I use dictionaries published in 2014 to help determine what words mean in 2014. Even if you want to claim that the term "Redskin" was not a slur at the time the team was named (a dubious claim indeed), it definitely is now. So why shouldn't it be changed?