Can we suggest new names? I think the Washington Nationalists would be a great name.
"It was not meant to be derogatory."
Oops:
When George Preston Marshall [owner of the team] died in 1969, he left some money to his children but directed that the bulk of his estate be used to set up a foundation in his name. He attached, however, one firm condition: that the foundation, operating out of Washington, D.C., should not direct a single dollar toward "any purpose which supports or employs the principle of racial integration in any form."
Think about that. This was not 1929 or 1949. Even in 1960 such a diktat might have been, well, "understandable" in a Southern city such as Washington then was. But 1969; "in any form."
This is the man who gave the Washington Redskins their name. He was one of the most despicable racists in the American sporting arena of the entire 20th century.
He thought Redskins was funny, just as he thought the war paint and feather headdress he made the head coach wear were funny....
Marshall had made a fortune in the commercial laundry business when he purchased the Boston Braves football team in 1932. His second coach was a man whose mother was thought to be part Sioux. Not known to be--thought to be.
And on that flimsy basis, Marshall changed the name, in this coach's "honor" (even though Marshall fired him after two seasons), from Braves to Redskins. It seems telling that "Braves" was somehow not authentic enough for Marshall.
Telling, but not surprising. This is a man who proposed to his wife against the backdrop of a group of black performers he'd hired to croon "Carry Me Back to Ol' Virginny" as he popped the question ("Massa and Missus have long since gone before me / Soon we will meet on that bright and golden shore"). Who ordered the Redskins marching band to play "Dixie" right before "The Star-Spangled Banner" prior to every game--up into the 1960s. And who probably instigated the banning of black athletes from the NFL from 1933 until 1946.
(I feel compelled to note that my beloved Phils have one of the worst track records in baseball on racism, but at least we don't have a racist NAME.)
The Washington Defense Contractors.
The Washington Taxation Without Representations
The Washington Pentagons. (Yeah, technically in Virginia, whatever.)
Or the Washington Military-Industrial Complexes (logo: cross with one arm a rocket, one a smokestack.)
But they'd never score because they're always playing in the middle of the field.
The Washington Beltway Bandits
The Washington Gridlock.
(Also, I think 5 is great.)
The Washington One-Droppers.
But honestly, I think Dicks is the best. Simple, clear, descriptive.
A few more George Preston Marshall nuggets:
In the early '60s when the Kennedy administration was trying to force his hand: "All the other teams we play have Negroes; does it matter which team has the Negroes?"
And he knew who the true racists were:
[Jim] Brown's domination on the field was so thorough that all questions about the skills of black players were erased--except in the nation's capital, whose team, Marshall said, would "start signing Negroes when the Harlem Globetrotters start signing whites."
From Bobby Mitchell first black player signed in 1962:
"surprised at one point in the luncheon everybody stood up to sing Dixie and he was standing up and George Preston Marshall was standing behind him and I guess the song started and Mitchell was standing there looking shocked and he felt a tap on the shoulder. It was Marshall, who bellowed, 'Bobby Mitchell sing!'"
But Chief Dodson, "a full-blooded American Inuit chief originally from the Aleutian Tribes of Alaska" representing "more than 700 remaining tribe members" says it's okay! Daniel Snyder shows his talent evaluation skills again.
In all seriousness, Washington Braves would be a good name.
Thanks for the pointing to the material on Marshall, Witt. I was somewhat aware of his reputation, but did not realize the full extent of his behavior (not just the racism*). Here's a Sports Illustrated article on him from 1961.
*He did have some more endearing traits such as his irreverence on the way up the social ladder: When a bridge-playing dowager affixed him with her lorgnette and asked archly who he was, he replied, "Madam, the name is Marshall, and I'm in the laundry business. Can I get your work?"
27: Pwned, but yours was actually on-topic.
My friend teaches at a nearby high school, whose mascot is the Rebels, and they were having a problem with racist vandalism, particularly targeting black teachers. The principal called a town hall meeting to address the problem. Tensions running high, etc. His opening statement is: "I'd like to start off this meeting by saying that any discussion of changing the mascot is completely off the table."
Okay then!
These are brilliant. I've also been appreciative of the newspapers who refuse to print the team's name, and use descriptions like "DC's NFL team" instead.
From the OP:
Also, there's some evidence that changing it might undermine support from some of the team's most ardent backers.
Sports fans are just weird. Are we to suppose that the team's most ardent backers are resolute in their racism?
I go for Washington Monuments, per SP. They can be referred to as the "Mons". Heh.
Ooh, I know! "The Washington Mutts"!
I see from Wikipedia that D.C. actually slipped below 50% black for the first time in 2011. Huh. Here. That's kind of surprising.
My high school was and is still the Indians even though there have been perennial efforts to change it- given the name of the school there is a much more logical alternate name.
In "honor" of their current owner: the Washington Foreskins.
News of a plane crash at SFO is pretty disturbing. Looks like the passengers are mostly okay, though? At least from preliminary reports, most of which seem to be sourced to Twitter.
It is very depressing that we honkies have killed so many Native Americans that for most Americans they don't even exist enough to feel guilty about.
I'd find it less depressing to be disputed, teo.
I'm sure, but I'm afraid I can't help you there.
[Sad expression of white privilege.]
40, 41: Although I've encountered that sentiment stated quite obnoxiously: "You killed yours"--My FIL's South African friend and business associate.
45: I hate that one. Are we in mass-murderin' kindergarten?
I don't know -- are we? Jesus Christ, that's not a GoGurt--it's a knife!
Drop the knife, Whitey! No one else has to be genocided.
39: Varying reports of 1-2 dead and 20-30 injured.
The Washington Amendments. The Washington Taxi Zones. The Washington Descendants. The Washington Delawares.
I yearn for this tragically.
How about the Washington Dry Cooters. Washington DC, get it? Huh? Huh?
And then there was the manager who nicknamed a pitcher "Chief" because his name tangled the manager's tongue, and that drove him - naturally! - to ask "Are you Native American?"
The year was 2011; the pitcher was Venezuelan.
56: Washington isn't in a state, but rather is in the District of Columbia (DC).
56: Washington isn't in a state, but rather is in the District of Columbia (DC).
Perhaps the Columbia Exchange, then?
But if I have to suggest something else, I'll go with the Washington Wonks.
The Washington Squares. No, again, wait...
58/59: I know that. What's the point?
66 god such a hypocrite, 58 59 those are double posted, why these are counted as if separate precious when mine all get deleted, unfair moderating
if you dont like the redskins, the washington native americans or whatever tribe inhabited there would do just well, though i really dont get you all finding anything racist as if you all can be bothered with that like genuinely, but thank gods they seem dont count anybody's cows for now
If they could adopt a new name by next summer, Washington Flames would have a commemorative ring.
(That was free association from David Byrne, for what it's worth.)
These are all great. I think I like Walt's 52 best.
5 and 52 are the best.
The Washington Metonymies
If you want to say fuck you to the racists, could go with the Booker Ts or the Washington Carvers.
Or the Washington W.E.B. DuBoises
57: :-(
When I was 4, I had a turtle named Joaquín Andújar. My parents were racist and we were not multicultural, but it's a name pronounceable to an illiterate child if he throws a shutout the day she adopts a turtle.
I was always more of a Paul Tudor fan, but Wakeen Andoohar does have a nice rhythm.
79: Those of you old enough to remember that there was an attempt to create a national chess league during the 1970s will doubtless also recall that the Washington DC team was named the Washington Plumbers.
This is weird to me -- I've been a Washington Redskins fan for pretty much all my life. Well, except that I've hardly watched a professional football game for the last 25 years. I do support changing the name of course, but I don't have problem relating to people that oppose it -- it's idiotic, but people get attached to names.
Washington Lobbyists/K-Streeters hasn't been suggested?
DC Gentrifiers? (Still racist, huh?)
Washington Districts
Washington not-States
Washington False Teeth
Washington Kickbacks
Washington Slush Funds
Washington Bundlers
Washington Do-Nothings
Washington Earmarks
Washington Logrollers
Federal Triangles
Washington Pork BarrelsBarrels
Washington Solons
Washington Fat Cats
Washington Smoke-filled Rooms
Washington Sunset Clauses
Washington Sequesters
Washington Shutdowns
DC Comics? If they could work ou the licensing issues, the uniform possibilities are unlimited.
I think the best are
1. Washington Insiders
2. Washington Logrollers
3. Washington Amendments
4. Washington Filibusters
5. Wasington Villagers
6. Washington Consensus
7. Washington Quagmire
I enjoy 3. in this list particularly for the potential for irony
Does anyone who's not a Washington insider, or someone who lives there just because their work must be based in D.C., support the Washington team? I mean, like, the people who live in Anacostia, which was, as of the 2000 census, 92% black.
All these government-playful alternative names are funny (I kind of like Washington Villagers), but there are still a lot of people in D.C. who have nothing to do with that, right? Though apparently there are fewer and fewer of them.
97: Plenty of black people support the redskins. What are you on about?
I think what parsimon is saying is that no black people are washington insiders.
I think she's saying that Redskins are black people.
I recognize that this makes me a horrible person, but I grew up a Redskins fan, continue to be quite fond of the name, and am very much opposed to changing it. 500 years of tragic history isn't going to be reversed by bullying Washington sports fans out of our team name.
DC already went through something similar with their basketball team, when the Bullets changed their name to the Wizards. Today, basically everyone I know agrees that Wizards is a stupid name and wants the old name back. Changing the name didn't solve any real-world problems, it just made people all-the-more embittered about political correctness.
Washington remains a pretty segregated city, but the Redskins are the one thing that brings everyone together. Those folks in Anacostia are some of the biggest Redskins fans of all, and, in that, they are able to find common cause with the reddest of affluent Republican military contractors from the Northern Virginia suburbs.
I would I guess revise my comment at 98: there is no shortage whatsoever of local fans of the Redskins; there is no great lack of fans among the black populace in the Northern Virginia, DC, and near adjacent Maryland areas. The Marylanders, though, do seem to tend towards the Ravens, if any.
Changing the name didn't solve any real-world problems, it just made people all-the-more embittered about political correctness.
Spike, so I can understand your thinking better, what do you think is the "real-world problem" that people are trying to solve in this current discussion?
500 years of tragic history isn't going to be reversed by bullying Washington sports fans out of our team name.
I don't think anyone who thinks the name should be changed attributes magical powers to the change.
Note to self: amend petition to exclude the words "and unicorns for everybody".
You aren't allowed to trademark disparaging or contemptuous names. There was a lawsuit trying to remove trademark protection for 'Washington Redskins' that made it to the Supreme Court, which ruled that the plantiffs had waited too long to complain.
There's a new lawsuit with a bunch of 18 year olds.
101: 500 years of tragic history isn't going to be reversed
Yes, I don't believe the question is "will history be reversed," but rather "will we acknowledge both the historical and contemporary oppression at work against Native peoples?"
Of course there are people of color who don't think this is a big deal, or who actively support retaining the name. Their existence doesn't prove them right. If white people really want to end racism and white supremacy, the choice has to be made to do the right thing whether or not there's a crowd of angry people of color demanding it.
If white people really want to end racism and white supremacy, the choice has to be made to do the right thing whether or not there's a crowd of angry people of color demanding it.
Such, indeed, is our burden.
(Despite 109, I actually agree that the existence of native americans who don't care or actively support the name doesn't prove that they're right and all; I just couldn't resist.)
Spike, so I can understand your thinking better, what do you think is the "real-world problem" that people are trying to solve in this current discussion?
With reference to the Bullets to Wizards name-change, the justification was that Washington was too violent a city to have a name like "Bullets". But renaming the Wizards didn't actually have much effect on inner city violence. It just made everyone shake their head about the silly, miss-applied priorities of liberal do-gooders.
In terms of what the current renaming issue... well, you tell me... what do you hope that the renaming of my favorite football franchise would accomplish?
Well, the other alternative, which would have my full support, is some kind of pro-melanin tailored virus that kills all the white people.
In terms of what the current renaming issue... well, you tell me... what do you hope that the renaming of my favorite football franchise would accomplish?
It could lead to the realization among Redskins fans that there are Native Americans who find the name to be hurtful and trivializing, as Paennim suggests.
This would only happen if the people complaining about the name were Native Americans, though. Otherwise it would lead to resentment, as you suggest.
112: I have TV here and can see, multiple times every evening, that Native Americans are well-fed and prosperous, own casino/hotel/resort complexes, and just love other ethnic groups to visit with them. So, what's the big fuckin' deal?
(Which kinda does suggest one reason the name's a bit atrocious.)
Cultural representations are powerful, and shouldn't be underrated. Also, "where are the PoC complaining about this" is kinda dumb given there's obvious groups of PoC who are complaining about this.
Of course, a final part of it is that simply disrupting the hierarchy of power to the minor extent required to make it clear that native americans deserve more consideration for their horrific experience of genocide, and ongoing racism etc, than sports fans deserve for a sentimental attachment to a team name, is valuable in and of itself.
I have no opinion on the Bullets/Wizards issue, FTR.
Potential outcomes from the other:
1. Some people don't need to hear an ethnic slur towards their ethnic group used routinely and without acknowledgement in the mass media.
2. Some people don't need to utter an ethnic slur as part of their jobs (sportscasters, etc.)
3. Some people who are working toward greater equity and recognition feel greater momentum in their efforts.
There is even the outside chance that a handful of people would take the renaming story as an opportunity to talk with their children or colleagues about larger issues.
But you don't need to take my word for it. Here's a whole book of essays about why Native American team names and mascots can be highly problematic, to say the least.
And here's an essay by the editor of that book (himself a Chicago Blackhawks fan):
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the Indian logo tradition is context. This type of Native American sports iconography, clearly developed to serve a largely white population for a recreational purpose, despite virtually nothing to do with the experiences of Native Americans emerged almost precisely during the era in the late 1800s and early 1900s, when white America vigorously denied Indian peoples their rights to speak Native languages, to worship Native religions, and even, to participate in Native forms of dance and ritual.
As such, Indian mascots and logos represent the exercise of power, in so far as Native people were stripped of their many forms of expressive culture while at the same time, white people and their institutions appropriated and often distorted the symbols of "Indianness" to inspire athletes and spectators. In a sense, these images allowed white people to "play Indian."
That Wizards was a dumb choice -- and I agree with this -- says nothing about the wisdom of changing the name.
IIRC, the "Washington Sea Dogs" was an option when they changed the name of the Bullets. Which was so great because (a) grizzled old sailor (b) nothing says Washington DC (city with no port) NBA team like "grizzled old sailor."
121: Whereas it's a world-renowned center for wizardry.
Teo likes to tempt fate. Alaska's not that far from DC, kid.
Everyone knows it's short for "Wizard Cocksuckers".
Alaska's not that far from DC, kid.
I dunno, it sure feels pretty far.
||
Crossing my fingers that this big gray clouds actually turn into something. Oh please please storm.
(It's already dropped 12 degrees, but I'm greedy and want the full cool-off.)
||>
Some people don't need to hear an ethnic slur
Well, there's a lot of the disconnect, right there. Most Redskins fans don't actually consider the name an ethnic slur. No Washingtonian would think to insult a Native American by calling them the name of their favorite football team.
I don't think anyone else would either. Its not like the term "redskin" is in common use outside of football circles these days. Lately its been built up as some kind of horrible ethnic slur, but I don't think the history of the word actually supports that. Its more like "Warriors", "Braves" or "Indians". While I understand some people feel those teams names are problematic, they aren't "moral equivalent of the n-word" problematic, which is how it seems the word "Redskins" is being portrayed. People shouldn't be surprised that Washingtonians have reacted against that.
Most Redskins fans don't actually consider the name an ethnic slur.
And yet, it is one.
129: No, if you're going to insist on precision, be precise. It's perceived as an ethnic slur by some people, a tribute by others, and an I-don't-give-a- nanofuck by yet others.
Biohazard, by that account of precision, nothing is an ethnic slur. There are only things that are perceived as ethnic slurs by some people.
Redskins fans do not have the sole power to make that determination.
An essay by one of the young women suing to overturn it.
Tapping out now because it's delightfully cool and rainy, and I'm taking a break from my hot, cranky day of Arguing on the Internet.
a tribute by others
See, I have nothing but respect for those people!
131: Right. It's a noise we assign various meanings and emotions to, and there's nothing fixed and absolute about it. Like "Brit" is apparently okay but "Jap" isn't, and to a Martian they're probably just abbreviations.
But you know this already.
This is not The Greatest Ethnic Slur in the World, no.
This is just a tribute.
Couldn't remember The Greatest Ethnic Slur in the World, no, no.
This is a tribute, oh, to The Greatest Ethnic Slur in the World,
I think 130 sums up the problem. What is being asked of Redskins fans is that they take a word that has always had the most positive of connotations to them, and redefine it in their minds to be something horrible. That's a hard sell.
No what's being asked of the fans is that they stop using a word which causes pain to a group of people who are the victims of genocidal policies (in some cases within living memory) that were often formulated in the very city that is using that word.
I mean, christ, this is totally analogy ban-ish, but really, cf a supposed "Berlin Yids".
I don't get why "Wizards" is worse than "Bullets." They're both just things you call a basketball team to differentiate it from the other team.
Actually, I guess you could do that by calling the team by the name of its home city. So in fact they're just names that are used to give sports radio guys more flexibility in describing the results of games.
But I don't see bullets being any better at basketball than wizards; in fact, probably the reverse.
What if they had a big advertising campaign that made things very clear to football fans in DC: "You know those guys who used to be called the Redskins? Well, they're the exact same team, but now they're called the ____s. Really. Same team. You can still cheer for them."
I swear I would become an even bigger fan of the team than Spike is if they became the Washington Cauliflowers.
It's a noise we assign various meanings and emotions to, and there's nothing fixed and absolute about it.
Oh, hello, Humpty-Dumpty; it's been a long time.
I mean, obviously there is nothing fixed about the meaning of the sound represented by "gift", since, e.g., in German, that means "poison", and it could have meant something other than it does in English, too. But you won't go very far acting as if you can mean whatever you like by whatever sounds you like since, after all, the sounds in themselves are meaningless. It's also exceptionally facile to talk about the our "assign[ing] various ... emotions" to phrases (Spike appears to join you in this, though), as if one day I sat down and decided that I'd react negatively if someone called me a kike and thus it was thenceforth. That isn't to say that it might not be ok from an anthropological point of view to say "over there they assign a negative emotional connotation to '…'", but that isn't something each of us does individually, or even something we all did by a collective choice.
What is being asked of Redskins fans is that they take a word that has always had the most positive of connotations to them, and redefine it in their minds to be something horrible
On the contrary, the fans of the team needn't come themselves to associate anything negative with its current name, nor are they being asked to. They are being asked to recognize the significance of the current name to other people, and to be decent and empathetic enough to respond to that.
When I was very much younger than I am now, and even more ignorant, I, not really knowing its significance, mouthed a well-known ethnic slur in my mother's presence, and she rightly told me that it wasn't a nice thing to say and I shouldn't say it. Even though in my mouth it was basically innocuous and one could have said of me, as Biohazard apparently wants to say of DC sports fans, that it was (though no one would have put it this way) basically an I-don't-give-a-nanofuck. That didn't matter; something can be a slur even though the utterer didn't mean anything particularly bad about it. (Though I think in the DC case it's more that the utterer never really bothered to think about it.) A slur is a kind of hurtful term, isn't it? It wouldn't be used, it would lose its force as a slur, if no one minded it. You can—I'm sure Spike and Biohazard would agree—hurt someone without meaning to, and if you want to be a grownup, you should consider whether something you're doing hurts or will hurt others, even if you don't intend for it to do so.
What if they had a big advertising campaign that made things very clear to football fans in DC: "You know those guys who used to be called the Redskins? Well, they're the exact same team, but now they're called the ____s. Really. Same team. You can still cheer for them."
'It's long,' said the Knight, 'but very, VERY beautiful. Everybody that hears me sing it--either it brings the TEARS into their eyes, or else--'
'Or else what?' said Alice, for the Knight had made a sudden pause.
'Or else it doesn't, you know. The name of the song is called "HADDOCKS' EYES."'
'Oh, that's the name of the song, is it?' Alice said, trying to feel interested.
'No, you don't understand,' the Knight said, looking a little vexed. 'That's what the name is CALLED. The name really IS "THE AGED AGED MAN."'
'Then I ought to have said "That's what the SONG is called"?' Alice corrected herself.
'No, you oughtn't: that's quite another thing! The SONG is called "WAYS AND MEANS": but that's only what it's CALLED, you know!'
'Well, what IS the song, then?' said Alice, who was by this time completely bewildered.
'I was coming to that,' the Knight said. 'The song really IS "A-SITTING ON A GATE": and the tune's my own invention.'
The argument in 128 may be more applicable to those teams with names that refer to Native Americans but are fairly neutral in connotation as words (e.g. Braves, Indians, Chiefs; there's no shortage of these in use). "Redskins" isn't like that. AFAIK the term isn't used widely these days for anything except the team, but it certainly sounds derogatory and it's hard to imagine it being used as a neutral term for actual Native Americans. More importantly, though, is the fact that some people actually are offended by it, and they're the ones pressuring the team to change it. That, I think, should ultimately determine whether it's a slur or not.
Really, all of sports is just a proxy for racial war, isn't it? Men of one color, destroy the men of the other color for the sole reason that they are of the wrong color!
I think I've mentioned before that a relative of my wife went through her whole life using the phrase "chew me down" to mean someone who was trying to argue about a price, never knowing that the actual phrase was a slur.
144: it's hard to tell because my comment isn't very coherent.
And I guess this argument isn't any more likely to be productive than the one in the other thread, so maybe I should bow out here too.
145: I found it quite coherent, actually.
Lately its been built up as some kind of horrible ethnic slur, but I don't think the history of the word actually supports that. Its more like "Warriors", "Braves" or "Indians".
I'm reading _Railroaded_ at the moment, and am in the long depressing stretch in which a number of settled, farming, newspaper-publishing, Native American tribes are having their treaty lands handed over to the railroads. The railroads benefited a lot by the suddenly popular imagery of (oh look!) the redskinned braves, the noble savages, the feathered warriors. Any word that marks an outgroup can make a serviceable slur, and these have. (See also Witt's 119.)
142: IIRC, "Redskin" was never (or at least very, very rarely) used by the White Hats in the Thirties & Forties Westerns. It was either clearly derogatory if used by a Black Hat or a not-so subtle sign of ignorance if used by some bumbling cavalry corporal or deputy sheriff.
Now, the question is, do I care enough about this argument to look at what Netflix has available and wade through some of those oldies, or not? I think not.
Shorter neb: Social constructs are social constructs.
I recognize that this makes me a horrible person, but ...
Rarely does anything good follow in a sentence like this.
Bullets -> Wizards is somewhat interesting. The team started in Baltimore* and was briefly the Capitol Bullets after it moved. The owner pushed for the name change, The final straw was the assassination of his longtime friend, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. nd then *that* was a bit controversial because of the association with the Ku Klux Klan.
*Originally named fora shoe.
The Baltimore Fora Shoe is an unusual name for a sports team.
Redskins was regularly used as a slur in the latter portion of the nineteenth century, when the wholesale dispossession of Native peoples was still ongoing and a topic of discussion for many Americans. By the beginning of the twentieth century, it's not clear that most Americans thought about Native peoples very frequently, except as icons of this or that (usually of a vanished race).
That said, I'll be happy to acknowledge that, for the elder George Allen at least, the name Redskins was no more a slur than the word Macaca is for the younger.
Leaving all of that aside, the Wizards name annoys people because the Wizards suck. They suck a lot. If they start to win as the Wizards, as they once did as the Bullets, people will discover that the name has a nice ring to it. Or at least that's my theory, and I'm sticking to it.
the Wizards suck. They suck a lot
Paradoxically, this seems to mean the opposite of "they are wizard cocksucker".
I suppose it's possible that this isn't obvious, so here goes. From where I sit, the main reason to support the people who want to see the name changed is that one of the central thrusts -- maybe THE central thrust -- of Native activism since the late 1960s has been the fight for sovereignty: political, cultural, economic, etc. This fight has, I think, most often boiled down to a struggle for self-determination. And it seems pretty clear to me that controlling the iconography surrounding Indians, particularly when that iconography is, no matter what a small minority of nay-sayers might claim, derogatory, falls under the heading (in an admittedly very small, but nevertheless high-profile way) of self-determination.
153: The shoe was the Bata Bullet. (Bata seems to have been an interesting company back in the day--built lot of "Batavilles."
148: R/ichard W/hite gave a talk to a group of secondary school teachers who participated in a seminar I led a couple of weeks ago. It was really a stupendously good talk that made me re-think a bunch of things I didn't like very much about the book. It's always so much fun watching total pros give talks.
Re-think them, as in, now you like those things? Or re-think them, as in, now you can better say what they should have been?
Re-think them, as in, I think I may have focused too much attention on those points while reading the book, as they may have mattered less to the author than it originally seemed to this reader.
Oh, ha, not having looked up to refer to 148, I assumed that the seminar and W/hite's talk was about your book.
If R/ichard has read my book, he was very careful to pretend otherwise. I mean, the man has cholera.
145, 147: Must be some Jewskin thing.
141 is my FAVORITE part of that book. Ooh, or maybe the Anglo-Saxon attitudes....
I would support the Redskins changing their name to the Bullets.
Compromise- the RedBulls? Oh wait, that's taken. How about the Skinlets then? No need to even change the name for the cheerleading squad.
Wizards really is a poor choice for a pro team name. One suspects it only narrowly beat out the Unicorns, the Neeners, and the Melvins.
Frankly any word that isn't pluralized is a bullshit team name. It used to be a trivia question to name professional sports teams that don't end in S (two of which were technicalities, the two baseball Sox.) But now there's all this bullshit Heat, Jazz, Magic, not to mention the lesser known women's teams (Shock, Dream, Spark, Sun, Flash, and my favorite horrible product placement and now defunct MagicJack). It sounds stupid when a player can't say "I'm a Yankee/Mariner/Net/Celtic" and instead says, what, "I'm a Heat/Jazz/Magic"?
I guess that doesn't apply to European football teams where it's often just the city name.
What about the damned children? Name the teams with the Zipcode of their home office and be done with it. If some numerologist gets bent out of shape along the way there are ways to handle that.
I guess that doesn't apply to European football teams where it's often just the city name.
Very often indeed. (Exceptions: Glasgow Rangers, Wolverhampton Wanderers, West Bromwich Albion, and the geographically confusing Plymouth Argyle, the US equivalent of which would be the New Orleans Hoosiers or something.)
instead says, what, "I'm a Heat/Jazz/Magic"?
A Heater? A Jazzman? A Magician?
all of sports is just a proxy for racial war
Or religious war. "We must support the team wearing green, because they represent our religious beliefs; the team wearing blue and its supporters are heretics and our enemies."
"I'm a Celtic" sounds really absurd to me. (For more reasons than one, but.)
Very often indeed.
More exceptions than you imply, Aside from clubs like Spurs, Juventus, Ajax, Orient (who have admittedly reverted to Leyton Orient lately), Crewe Alexandra, etc., there's all the cities with two or more clubs: Bristol City/Rovers; Manchester City/United; Sheffield United/Wednesday; Real/Atletico Madrid; AC/Internazionale Milano...
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away strip.
172: true, but a lot of those are really just city names - Man City, Atletico Madrid, AC Milano.
Spurs (Tottenham Hotspur) is the only one I can think of that's named after a Shakespeare character. Pity that trend didn't take off. I'd cheer for Liverpool Falstaff or Leyton Dogberry.
170: The US equivalent you're looking for is Utah Jazz.
174: Or, indeed, the LA Lakers.
157: herr doktor professor husband x is probably wearing some bata shoes right now. bata shoes are all over the place in narnia. the wizards should change their name back to the bullets because "wizards" is just a stupid fucking name for a team. only dumber name? the raptors. also the bullets had a killer fucking logo. also, tradiTION! I thought that when baltimore got a franchise back indianapolis should have to ah...bite the bullet as it were, and give back the 'colts' name. edgar allen poe? pshaw. yes the redskins should change their name, what the fuck. we can keep the colors, the jersey designs, the logo on the helmet will be different. if the patriots can win with that fucking 'my brother-in-law airbrushed tom paine onto the side of my van' shit they had on their helmets we can still win. let's be the senators! we missed that chance when we got a baseball team, right? but that would imply we were geriatric men whose faces, like that of rupert murdoch, were made entirely of scrotum, maybe we don't want that. whatever, we'll work it out.
as for DC native redskins fans, I lived in DC from 6th grade till the end of HS, which was a lot of football, and a lot of redskins kicking ass. plenty of normal people that live in and around DC love the redskins, sure. but the racial politics are not so blithe as implied above; in the 80s and 90s, black DC residents were often dallas cowboys fans. I know, right?! baltimore residents also. the redskins' most hated rival, constant conference foe, and america's most-justly-loathed team. it was the integration thing, the redskins were perceived as a racist team. I remember when the 5 or 6 black girls in my class of 60 showed up in full-on cowboys gear at some point in the year and I was like 'my world is crumbling around me!' RFK stadium was in a pretty epically shitty neighborhood for a while, and you saw a lot of white people going into those stands, leaving their cars all nervous. if we looked at the tapes now I'm damn sure it wouldn't reflect the chocolate city of the time. ta-nehisi coates came up as a cowboys fan; it was difficult for me to look past that at first. I'm willing to bet plenty of black DC residents just changed their allegiance to the ravens. not that there are no black skins fans, I'm just saying it was not all hugs and kisses from the fan-side, either. I think they got the message that they weren't wanted.
Or Memphis Grizzlies (started in Vancouver).
Or the Tennessee Oilers (moved from Houston, became the Titans after two seasons).
176:
also the bullets had a killer fucking logo.
I see what you did there.
Or the LA Dodgers (although I guess LA had streetcars too so it wasn't that absurd when they moved.)
Well, surely one can dodge things other than streetcars.
I guess that could have been an alternative for the Bullets.
I'm confused by 156. Other sovereign nations don't control the use of their iconography, or the way people refer to them, outside their territory.
I understand why Native peoples would care about this a lot - but what does it have to do with self-determination?
Many of the early baseball team names were organic nicknames that were only later adopted by the club. For example the Dodgers were officially only the "Brooklyn Baseball Club" through I think the late 1930s, and cycled through a set of sportswriter or fan-given nicknames, including the Dodgers but also including the Robins and the Superbas, before the "Dodgers" was officially adopted.
164 - I'm fairly convinced by Richard Smullyan's throwaway point that the only proper way for the White Knight to communicate what the song is is to sing it.
170/172: you forgot Arsenal! (Not to mention Young Boys and Grasshoppers.)
I'm surprised that "The Washington Bribes" or "The Washington Graft" haven't been suggested (or maybe I missed them).
152: Capitol s/b Capital Bullets.
Opens up new possibilities. Capital Ideas, Capital Jokes, Capital Grilles, Capital Capitols, Capitol Records, Capitol Domes. Or they can mismatch them and give the pedants something to get huffy about.
you forgot Arsenal!
Arsenal is a geographic indicator like Liverpool, though - it was originally for workers at the Woolwich Arsenal. (It's nowhere near there now, which makes it the equivalent of the Tennessee Oilers, had they moved to Tennessee but kept calling themselves the Houston Oilers.)
Heart of Midlothian is probably the only football team named after a best-selling novel.
The Washington Shades of Grey!
185: No, Alice can only hear what the song sounds like.
The redskins shared a stadium with the Boston braves baseball team. When they moved to Fenway with the redsox they changed their name to the redskins. Sort of clever in a racist way. The owner did not change the name just to be all "fuck those Indians, they are not so brave". He just didn't want people to go to the wrong stadium.
190: The Washington Shades of Grey!
A recent tweet from my daughter:
Getting paid to throw a pizza party for kids tonight! Library work is great except for the paycheck & seeing who is reading 50 Shades of Grey.
Arsenal is a geographic indicator like Liverpool, though - it was originally for workers at the Woolwich Arsenal.
Yeah but it wasn't for *everyone* who worked or lived near the Royal Arsenal, just for the workers in the Dial Square workshop. It's like Metallist Kharkiv.
Anyway I think more football clubs should take naming lessons from the Bolivian league. Jorge Wilstermann! Blooming! The Strongest!
192 -- And GPM should have changed them to the Gryphons when they came to DC.
It's like Metallist Kharkiv.
but evidently with better taste in music.