Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it is not socially acceptable. It is a racist slur.
What if the person wearing it is African-American ?
If worn by an AA person, it is not racist. But it could still be prejudice.
Anonymous wrote:My family and I have supported the Redskins (now Commanders) for years now, and thus have collected quite a few Redskins fan gear (jerseys, posters, etc.). Until recently we featured a bumper sticker/ personalized license plate that featured the Redskins logo and name, and didn’t think anything of it until someone pointed it out that it could possibly be offensive. Is it considered socially acceptable in todays world to be wearing or prominently displaying their former logos?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it is not socially acceptable. It is a racist slur.
What if the person wearing it is African-American ?
Anonymous wrote:I think it is not socially acceptable. It is a racist slur.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it is not socially acceptable. It is a racist slur.
It is not.
It is a racial slur, Honky
No. It is not a racial slur. I will wear my redskin sweatshirt as often as I want. Look the other way if it bothers you
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it is not socially acceptable. It is a racist slur.
What if the person wearing it is African-American ?
If worn by an AA person, it is not racist. But it could still be prejudice.
I just don't understand this narrative that AA people can't be racist.
The logo (and its offensive nature) had nothing to do with AA people.
sorry; should have been more clear:
Redskins clothing is racist when worn by whites. Redskins clothing is not racist when worn by AA people, or other BIPOC.
^^^
Utter Nonsense
No, it’s a fact. Not nonsense.
Hopefully your kids are better informed then you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it is not socially acceptable. It is a racist slur.
It is not.
It is a racial slur, Honky
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So many fallacies here, it’s impossible to name them all
“They had a national poll and the majority said it was ok” = ad populem fallacy. Something is good because the majority of people think it is so.
“Other teams are still named chiefs/braves etc” - appeal to tradition fallacy. Because something has been a certain way for a long time, it’s ok.
Lots of things were “ok” because the majority of the people supported it and it had been around for a long time, like women not being able to vote or bans on interracial marriage. It wasn’t ok, and eventually we changed it. There are things today that are not ok and hopefully we will change them. Like unequal wages for men and women.
Not to get off topic, but this is such a stupid statement that I must comment.
Please name just one job today - currently - that pays unequal wages for men and women, based solely on the issue of the fact that someone wants to pay men more.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it is not socially acceptable. It is a racist slur.
It is not.
It is a racial slur, Honky