Quote:
Originally posted by AggieSigmaNu361
Confederates did, yes. And i understand that's what she's referring to, and in that sense yes, Rebels is offensive. But, the name Rebels in itself holds no negative connotations. Rebel forces and armies are different the world around. You could go so far as to say that GW and the other patriots of the time were "Rebels" against Britan.
Yes, the stars and bars and Johnny Reb are offensive depictions and should not be used. But not all Rebels = Confederates.
Redskins however, refers to a specific group of people in a derrogatory manner and should not be used.
KS 361
|
Okay, then I think we are mostly in agreement. I agree that "Rebels" is not necessarily offensive -- just as "Warriors" is not necessarily offensive until you add in the Chief Illiniwek-style mascot running around doing his war dance at halftime and the crowds doing the Tomahawk chop and singing "We will, we will scalp you" or whatever it is that such teams do these days. That's what makes it offensive.
It's all about context.
But I think you and I both agree that you don't need context to see that "Redskins" is offensive.
Threaded Mode