E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > General Off-Topic

General Off-Topic
Everything not about BMWs. Posts must be "primetime" safe and in good taste. You must be logged in to see sub-forums.
Click here to browse all new posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 06-10-2014, 10:38 PM   #1
saxual328ci
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,508
My Ride: 2004 325ci
Anti Redskins Commercial

This will be airing during the NBA finals

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...mming-national



__________________
Clean
saxual328ci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 12:03 AM   #2
kaput
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 748
My Ride: 2002 M3 SMG
Send a message via AIM to kaput
Already posted in the thread in PoliTalk.

Change the name of the team, then we have to change the name of the state of Oklahoma... Since it literally translates to "Red People".

Next, we go after Obama's Blackhawks, PETA goes after animal names, and soon we are left with teams as colors... Except Red, Black, Yellow, white and brown. So Gray vs more gray.
__________________

2002 M3
kaput is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 12:25 AM   #3
GRIFFIN
NWS
 
GRIFFIN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,700
My Ride: 04 330i zsp,zpp,zcw
Ban commercials
__________________

** Removed - Please stop - Tim330i **
*NWS GIF REMOVED*
*GIF REMOVED*
* Continuing to put animated images in your sig will get you banned - Tim330i *
**You make me so horny.- Tim330i **
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedges View Post
I can honestly say that because of Griffin, i am desensitized to alot of wierd stuff!
GRIFFIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 07:55 AM   #4
Show me
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3
My Ride: 330 Vert
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaput View Post
Already posted in the thread in PoliTalk.

Change the name of the team, then we have to change the name of the state of Oklahoma... Since it literally translates to "Red People".

Next, we go after Obama's Blackhawks, PETA goes after animal names, and soon we are left with teams as colors... Except Red, Black, Yellow, white and brown. So Gray vs more gray.
Racial slur as a team name is a lot different than Oklahoma.

The Blackhawks have been under pressure for years to change their name, just like the Cleveland Indians (although, both mostly for their mascot/logo). This is not some "slippery slope" argument - no other race would have a team named after a slur. No Detroit N**gers. No San Antonio S*ics. No way the nation's capital should have a team using that name.
Show me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 08:14 AM   #5
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 334
My Ride: Beach Cruiser
Send a message via AIM to Act of God
Yawn. no one cares except white people, ironically. Don't forget that we have to change all the Redskins teams on all the Indian reservations as well! They're really broken up about it, obv.
__________________
Gold Medal Recipient: Jimmy Rustling (2014)

“They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet.” - Saul Alinsky, quoting Lenin
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 08:17 AM   #6
bimmerfan08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 4,891
My Ride: Phoenix Yellow M3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Act of God View Post
Yawn. no one cares except white people, ironically. Don't forget that we have to change all the Redskins teams on all the Indian reservations as well! They're really broken up about it, obv.
What if these were phony white people, like black or Indian people in disguise? Or what if minorities were paying white people to make these statements?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SonicBoom
Europeans are stoopid. They keep splitting countries, while being jealous of our powa. Of course the EU is good for them, but does that have any real power?

Not even mentioning the efficiencies of larger countries.

As divided as this country is, at least we are one.
bimmerfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 08:21 AM   #7
217Bimmer
E46Fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: not Illinois
Posts: 146
My Ride: 2001 BMW 330i
can indians just accept the fact that we kicked their ass? nothing new. people have been taking over land and suppressing minorities since the beginning of time. cue deal with it gif
217Bimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 08:29 AM   #8
ImPulSe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NYC & Long Island
Posts: 751
My Ride: Bentley GT
I like the comment - "Washington ******s"
ImPulSe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 08:34 AM   #9
MP0WER
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Tampa
Posts: 175
My Ride: is fun to drive
Quote:
Originally Posted by Show me View Post
Racial slur as a team name is a lot different than Oklahoma.

The Blackhawks have been under pressure for years to change their name, just like the Cleveland Indians (although, both mostly for their mascot/logo). This is not some "slippery slope" argument - no other race would have a team named after a slur. No Detroit N**gers. No San Antonio S*ics. No way the nation's capital should have a team using that name.
It's not a racial slur, it's a racial identification. That's like saying the terms "whites" or "blacks" or "asians" are racial slurs. The term redskin doesn't denote any type of defamation in any way.

One of the earliest recorded uses of the term was quoted from an Native American Chief during initial western colonization where he said "....I turn to all, red skins and white skins, and challenge an accusation against me". The term redskin doesn't even denote the actual color of their skin. It caught on with white skins because early Native Americans used a reddish paint to color their faces and bodies during the times of colonization.

If you do some looking you'll find polls that show it's the outspoken minority of Native Americans as well as white sympathizers who are offended by the term. The majority of Native Americans don't care or are proud that their namesake is perpetuated by sports teams.

A quick Wiki reference on the history of the term:
Quote:
"Redskin" was used throughout the English-speaking world (and in equivalent transliterations in Europe) throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a common term of reference for indigenous Americans. However, the more commonly used term from early colonization through the twentieth century was "Indian", perpetuating Columbus' belief that he had found the Indies. The first use of red-skin or red Indian may have been limited to specific groups that used red pigments to decorate their bodies, such as the Beothuk people of Newfoundland who painted their bodies with red ochre. Redskin is first recorded in the late 17th century and was applied to the Algonquian peoples generally, but specifically to the Lenape or Delaware (who lived in what is now southern New York State and New York City, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania). Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Lenape, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint. The indigenous peoples of the continent had no common identity, and referred to themselves using individual tribal names, which is also preferred to the present day. Group identity for Native Americans only emerged during the late 18th and early 19th century, in the context of negotiations between many tribes signing a single treaty with the United States, where Native American Chiefs referred to themselves and the tribes they represented, as " redskins ". Oklahoma is based on Choctaw Indian words which translate as red people (okla meaning "people" and humma meaning "red").
__________________


"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." — Frédéric Bastiat
MP0WER is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 08:54 AM   #10
Show me
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3
My Ride: 330 Vert
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP0WER View Post
It's not a racial slur, it's a racial identification. That's like saying the terms "whites" or "blacks" or "asians" are racial slurs. The term redskin doesn't denote any type of defamation in any way.
False. It's meaning is not the same in 2014 as it was in 1914. N*gger was perfectly acceptable at one time as well - do you want to argue that's a slur? It's used by black people, so it must be OK for you to say, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MP0WER View Post
One of the earliest recorded uses of the term was quoted from an Native American Chief during initial western colonization where he said "....I turn to all, red skins and white skins, and challenge an accusation against me". The term redskin doesn't even denote the actual color of their skin. It caught on with white skins because early Native Americans used a reddish paint to color their faces and bodies during the times of colonization.

If you do some looking you'll find polls that show it's the outspoken minority of Native Americans as well as white sympathizers who are offended by the term. The majority of Native Americans don't care or are proud that their namesake is perpetuated by sports teams.

A quick Wiki reference on the history of the term:Quote:
"Redskin" was used throughout the English-speaking world (and in equivalent transliterations in Europe) throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a common term of reference for indigenous Americans. However, the more commonly used term from early colonization through the twentieth century was "Indian", perpetuating Columbus' belief that he had found the Indies. The first use of red-skin or red Indian may have been limited to specific groups that used red pigments to decorate their bodies, such as the Beothuk people of Newfoundland who painted their bodies with red ochre. Redskin is first recorded in the late 17th century and was applied to the Algonquian peoples generally, but specifically to the Lenape or Delaware (who lived in what is now southern New York State and New York City, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania). Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Lenape, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint. The indigenous peoples of the continent had no common identity, and referred to themselves using individual tribal names, which is also preferred to the present day. Group identity for Native Americans only emerged during the late 18th and early 19th century, in the context of negotiations between many tribes signing a single treaty with the United States, where Native American Chiefs referred to themselves and the tribes they represented, as " redskins ". Oklahoma is based on Choctaw Indian words which translate as red people (okla meaning "people" and humma meaning "red").
Your argument is that terms from 200 years ago are still OK today... Think about that for a second.
Show me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 09:03 AM   #11
ImPulSe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NYC & Long Island
Posts: 751
My Ride: Bentley GT
Don't even think about calling me White. I'm Caucasian bitch.
ImPulSe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 09:31 AM   #12
MP0WER
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Tampa
Posts: 175
My Ride: is fun to drive
So when did a physical description of someone become derogatory? The terms you are throwing around denote social status or level.

My argument is that the term was used, by whites and Native Americans as a description of people from different ethnicities. I can't recall any time when i heard or saw the term redskin used in a negative connotation. Can you? (Eagles fans don't count)
__________________


"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." — Frédéric Bastiat
MP0WER is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 09:56 AM   #13
217Bimmer
E46Fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: not Illinois
Posts: 146
My Ride: 2001 BMW 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP0WER View Post
So when did a physical description of someone become derogatory? The terms you are throwing around denote social status or level.

My argument is that the term was used, by whites and Native Americans as a description of people from different ethnicities. I can't recall any time when i heard or saw the term redskin used in a negative connotation. Can you? (Eagles fans don't count)
exactly!! just because we call you small penis doesn't mean it's derogatory, it's just an accurate descriptor.
217Bimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:02 AM   #14
Xcelratr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: So Cal - 310
Posts: 958
My Ride: 04 330Ci ZHP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Show me View Post
False. It's meaning is not the same in 2014 as it was in 1914. N*gger was perfectly acceptable at one time as well - do you want to argue that's a slur? It's used by black people, so it must be OK for you to say, right?

Your argument is that terms from 200 years ago are still OK today... Think about that for a second.
Just because n*gger was acceptable doesn't mean it wasn't a racial slur.

And do you think it's use is more or less acceptable today than it was 150 years ago?
__________________
----------------------------------------------
Quote:
As a juror, do you think the trial was a publicity stunt?

Yes
----------------------------------------------
Xcelratr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:04 AM   #15
DylloS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 672
My Ride: nothing
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP0WER View Post
It's not a racial slur, it's a racial identification. That's like saying the terms "whites" or "blacks" or "asians" are racial slurs. The term redskin doesn't denote any type of defamation in any way.

One of the earliest recorded uses of the term was quoted from an Native American Chief during initial western colonization where he said "....I turn to all, red skins and white skins, and challenge an accusation against me". The term redskin doesn't even denote the actual color of their skin. It caught on with white skins because early Native Americans used a reddish paint to color their faces and bodies during the times of colonization.

If you do some looking you'll find polls that show it's the outspoken minority of Native Americans as well as white sympathizers who are offended by the term. The majority of Native Americans don't care or are proud that their namesake is perpetuated by sports teams.

A quick Wiki reference on the history of the term:
Can you tell me more about your native american up bringing? You're obviously not a suburban white kid and can speak on this right?
DylloS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:38 AM   #16
ImPulSe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NYC & Long Island
Posts: 751
My Ride: Bentley GT
ImPulSe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:47 AM   #17
bagher
Registered User
 
bagher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vienna, VA
Posts: 17,862
My Ride: Neocon outrage
Send a message via AIM to bagher Send a message via Skype™ to bagher
language is living. words change meanings. things evolve. (except racists)
bagher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:50 AM   #18
Show me
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3
My Ride: 330 Vert
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP0WER View Post
So when did a physical description of someone become derogatory? The terms you are throwing around denote social status or level.

My argument is that the term was used, by whites and Native Americans as a description of people from different ethnicities. I can't recall any time when i heard or saw the term redskin used in a negative connotation. Can you? (Eagles fans don't count)
Try this for me: walk around Tampa tonight (and not in your gated subdivision - I'm talking about College Hill or even Ybor) with a t-shirt that says "Go Blackskins" and see if adding skin to the end gets you any negative attention/commentary.

As for hearing it with a negative connotation; Yes. Too often. Then again, I might live in an area with a higher number of Natives than others here, so odds of seeing a real live Native would increase.
Show me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:55 AM   #19
DylloS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 672
My Ride: nothing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Show me View Post
Try this for me: walk around Tampa tonight (and not in your gated subdivision - I'm talking about College Hill or even Ybor) with a t-shirt that says "Go Blackskins" and see if adding skin to the end gets you any negative attention/commentary.

As for hearing it with a negative connotation; Yes. Too often. Then again, I might live in an area with a higher number of Natives than others here, so odds of seeing a real live Native would increase.
lol good point. Pretty sure he knows not to do that because he knows how wrong it would sound.
DylloS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2014, 10:55 AM   #20
Show me
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3
My Ride: 330 Vert
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcelratr View Post
Just because n*gger was acceptable doesn't mean it wasn't a racial slur.

And do you think it's use is more or less acceptable today than it was 150 years ago?
Good point on the slur, as it likely always has been. Then again, maybe so has redskin, but because we only have accounts written by white people, there's little to tell us if the target group was offended in the 19th century.

IHMO it's much less acceptable today, as people outside the group will be more likely to be offended by hearing it, vs. 100 years ago when they were more likely to be using it. There are groups within society where it's become the norm, but I'm referring to society as a whole.
Show me is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use