Warthog wrote:My two cents is that this is blown way out of proportion and has become ridiculous. "Redskins", to me, is just a way to identify a person as being a Native American. What is wrong with that? My employer has NUMEROUS programs about diversity. And I see this whole Indian (or other so-called derogatory nickname) as sort of a diversity issue. We are told that we need to be aware of people's differences, but we are not allowed to talk about those differences. If you see a handicapped (should I say handicaple? ) person, you need to recognize the handicap, but you shouldn't talk about it. I need to recognize someones ethinicty, but I can't talk about it. Its a fine line and I find myself on the wrong side of it most of the time.
In my mind, the single most politically incorrect nickname is Notre Dame's "Fightin' Irish". Firstof all, it singles out an ethnic group. Which in this day and age is wrong. Second, it identifies that ethnic group in a negative way by associating them with being a group of people that is hard to get along with. Why not just call them the Drunken' Irish? Third, this nickname is used by a Catholic university. You would think any religious institution would error WAY on the side of caution. Yet one of the biggest religions in the world finds it ok to use the term "Fightin' Irish". How can that be.
I think that "Redskins" is worse. It seems equivalent to something like "Fightin' Micks".
) person, you need to recognize the handicap, but you shouldn't talk about it. I need to recognize someones ethinicty, but I can't talk about it. Its a fine line and I find myself on the wrong side of it most of the time.
