BS: Be Ashamed D.C

Subject: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 01:03 PM

Be Ashamed.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: gnu
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 02:17 PM

I agree but ya know it ain't gonna happen any more than the rednecks in AB are gonna change the name Edmonton Eskimos. I did note that the commercial referred to Innu as Innuit. I hope they edit that although it may be a simple "modern usage" kinda thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 03:12 PM

The Innu live for the most part in Quebec and Labrador. They are an Indian First Nations group. The Inuit (preferred name for Eskimo) are not Indian. I'd think the Inuit setting up the rifle/hide is probably Inuit from Alaska.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 03:12 PM

I am pretty sure I was taught "Innuit" in school.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 03:14 PM

I was told it was more acceptable to call "Eskimos" "Inuit."

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 03:18 PM

It is!

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 03:25 PM

"The Inuit (pronounced /ˈɪnuːɪt/ or /ˈɪnjuːɪt/; Inuktitut: ᐃᓄᐃᑦ, "People") are a group of culturally similar indigenous peoples inhabiting the Arctic regions of Greenland, Canada, and the United States.[5] Inuit is a plural noun; the singular is Inuk. The Inuit languages are classified in the Eskimo-Aleut family.[6]
In the United States, the term "Eskimo" was commonly used to describe Inuit, and other Arctic peoples, because it includes both of Alaska's Yupik and Iñupiat peoples while "Inuit" is not proper or accepted as a term for the Yupik. No collective term exists for both peoples other than "Eskimo."[7] However, Aboriginal peoples in Canada and Greenland view the name as pejorative, so "Inuit" has become more common.[8][9] In Canada, sections 25 and 35 of the Constitution Act of 1982 named the "Inuit" as a distinctive group of Aboriginal Canadians who are not included under either the First Nations or the Métis.[10]
The Inuit live throughout most of the Canadian Arctic and subarctic in the territory of Nunavut; "Nunavik" in the northern third of Quebec; "Nunatsiavut" and "NunatuKavut" in Labrador; and in various parts of the Northwest Territories, particularly around the Arctic Ocean. These areas are known in Inuktitut as the "Inuit Nunangat".[11][12] In the United States, Inupiat live on the North Slope in Alaska and on Little Diomede Island. The Greenlandic Inuit are the descendants of migrations from Canada and are citizens of Denmark, although not of the European Union."

That is from Wiki. You can read more if you wish on the Gov of Canada website.

Last, my apology: a single solitary 'Inuit' is an Inuk.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 03:55 PM

I was taught that the Inuit were called "Eaters of raw meat" by a First Nations tribe (possibly Blackfoot) and those Indians certainly meant it as an insult. The word for "Eaters of raw meat" in that language was Eskimo. Its a little ironic because they did eat raw seal fat. But who wants to labeled with a derogatory but true description in another language.


Is that why "cheese eating surrender monkeys" has not caught on among the French?

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 04:09 PM

It is the Cree that call them raw meat eaters.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Mrrzy
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 05:44 PM

I know that quote!

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: robomatic
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 08:26 PM

Eskimo is not a pejorative in Alaska. It covers the Yupik people of the West coast and the Inupiaq people of the North and Northwest. The inland peoples are Athabaskan Indian and break down into several cultural subunits. When speaking generally (or unsure of a particular local ethnicity), it is customary to use the term "Native" which would cover the Aleuts of the South and Southwest and the Tlingit and Haida of the Southeast as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: LadyJean
Date: 01 Feb 14 - 11:04 PM

A lady from the Eastern Band Cherokee pointed out to me that Native American activist protest things like the name of the Washington team, or the Brave's Tomahawk chop, and ignore the horrible conditions on some reservations. Perhaps priorities are a little skewed.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 02 Feb 14 - 02:11 AM

Good point. I personally think that Dan Snyder is a stubborn jerk for not changing a name that seems to embarrass everyone but him . Given that, when the name is finally is changed, it won't make the world a better place.

Just my opinion again, but it would be really nice if people put their energy in things that actually made a difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Feb 14 - 05:07 AM

An excellent article that speaks to the problems. Please note that it pulls no punches.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: gnu
Date: 02 Feb 14 - 06:13 AM

I stand corrected. Thanks for the edification. My limited knowledge comes from working in Labrador some 35 years ago.

BTW, I began a study of First Nations history a while back beginning with the exploration of NA by Europeans. Thank goodness for the internet! I am simply in awe of the info available. It will literally take me years to gain a simple understanding of where we "are" today as Canada and USA. So far, I am, for lack of a better term, shocked at what I was not taught in "social studies and history" as a lad. Just as shocking is seeing what is going on in Canada on my very doorstep today.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Feb 14 - 06:37 AM

I liked the ad and I think calling the team of the nation's capitol by that name is shameful and disgusting. I can think of only one name that would be worse and that would personally offend 2'3rds of the league.

Yes natives have other problems. In act this isn't their problem. It is ours, as sports fans as citizens as North Americans.

And unless Edmonton moves its team to Alaska, they have a problem too.

How bout them Edmonton Eagles against the Washington Werewolves?

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: Megan L
Date: 02 Feb 14 - 06:42 AM

Once there was two warring tribes, their names do not matter for warring tribes will have names the opposite tribe recognises wherever they are in the world.

One day a war party from each tribe came to patrol their border. They saw each other and rushed to the border to repel each other though neither had encroached on the others territory. However when they reached it, there, sitting right on the large rock they had used to mark the border was an old man.

The leaders of both groups approached him demanding to know his name and which tribe he belonged to. The old man looked at them and sadly shook his head. "I am Me" he said, again they demanded to know which tribe he belonged to. Once again he shook his head before speaking. "None of you recognise me, I could belong to either group but you do not know me."

They were puzzled by what he said but some of the wiser warriors thought deeply on it and knew he was right they did not know everyone in the tribe they were so busy fighting the other tribe they were losing their care for their own people.

The leaders however paid no heed to his words angrily reiterating their demand to be told which tribe he belonged to. The old man knew he would never get through to them so he stood up in readiness to leave.

"If I give myself a name it allows me to declare war on you because you do not bear my name . If I give you a name it allows me to enslave you because your name must be less than mine. I am ME."

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 02 Feb 14 - 08:51 AM

When you consider the Skins history of racism the name change is especially urgent but I suppose Snyder is just too obtuse to see this. From Wikipedia ( Marshall is George Preston Marshall, owner of the Skins from 1932 to 1969):

"Marshall has gained infamy for his intractable opposition to having African-Americans on his roster. According to professor Charles Ross, "For 24 years Marshall was identified as the leading racist in the NFL".[3] Though the league had previously had a sprinkling of black players, blacks were excluded from all NFL teams just one year after the then-Boston Braves entered the league.

While the rest of the league began signing individual blacks in 1946 and actually drafting blacks in 1949, Marshall held out until 1962 before signing a black player. Along with his own personal views, Marshall refused to sign African-American players because of a desire to appeal to Southern markets. For most of his tenure as owner, the Redskins were the southernmost team in the NFL.[4] His intractability was routinely mocked in Washington Post columns by legendary writer Shirley Povich, who sarcastically used terms from the civil rights movement and related court cases to describe games: for instance, he once wrote that Jim Brown "integrated" the end zone, making the score "separate but unequal".

Finally, in 1962, Interior Secretary Stewart Udall and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy issued an ultimatum — unless Marshall signed a black player, the government would revoke the Redskins' 30-year lease on the year-old D.C. Stadium (now Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium), which had been paid for by government money and was owned by the Washington city government (which, then and now, is formally an arm of the federal government). Marshall's chief response was to make Ernie Davis, Syracuse's all-American running back, his number-one draft choice for 1962. Davis, however, demanded a trade, saying, "I won't play for that S.O.B." He got his wish, as the team sent him to Cleveland for All-Pro Bobby Mitchell. Mitchell was the first African American football player to play a game for the Redskins, and he played with the team for several years, initially at running back, but he made his biggest impact at wide receiver."

I'm a lifelong Skins fan and I'd like to see Snyder gone (what is it 8 head coaches in 15 years and lots of high round draft choices traded away for big name players who were over the hill) but you can't trade the owner.

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Feb 14 - 12:44 AM

Go to iceland

Subject: RE: BS: Be Ashamed D.C
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 03 Feb 14 - 01:14 AM

Why your team sucks-2013 Washington Redskins