• Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Cracker isn’t an epithet that native Americans have ever used though.

        Paleface would be the matching slur to redskin.

        • watson387@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          Me either, but it’s actually meant to be offensive whereas Caucasians is just a classification.

        • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          You would be if they had stolen your home and pranced around in a caricature costume of you through the stadium they built after bulldozing your land

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yes, but that’s the point. They didn’t do that to white people, so white people are in no position to be offended. Including me. Which is why I’m not only not offended, but find that highly appropriate.

            • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              What is happening when white people are like “I’m not offended by this” is to minimize the offense that native Americans feel about the same thing.

              As if to say “I’m not offended, why are they?”

    • remotedev@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think the way it works is someone who is not a member of that group tells you it’s offensive

    • angrymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      The problem with the football teams is that usually the name of team is the name of a group of ppl that was almost exterminated and their descendants still pay the price and nobody cares while their name is used as something cool. Just using the name should not be that offensive.

      • scutiger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Except redskins is offensive. It’s not the name of a group of people, it’s an epithet describing them.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Were you going to show us this poll or were you just going to expect us to believe that quote of yours isn’t one you just made up?

            • smooth_tea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I like to omit the source sometimes just to draw out lazy comments like yours. It really shows that you’re not that interested but just want to argue. It’s the title of an article from one of the most prominent newspapers out there, it’d be the first result if you simply pasted it in Google, but rather than save yourself the embarrassment, you chose this route.

              Swing and a miss.

              The article is even better than the title.

              Among the Native Americans reached over a five-month period ending in April, more than 7 in 10 said they did not feel the word “Redskin” was disrespectful to Indians. An even higher number — 8 in 10 — said they would not be offended if a non-native called them that name.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah the only issue here is “Caucasians” is roughly similar in emotional weight to “native Americans.”

      Shirt should say like, “crackers” or something

    • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The issue is a lot of people would completely fail to get the message and want to buy all three hats.

      • Delphia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, that was my thought too.

        There are dumb right wingers who would wear it “see theres nothing offensive about this” as opposed to “See how fucking weird this is”

  • Red_October@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’m all for it. I want the mascot to be just a normal guy named “Steve.” It’s just some white guy in a cardigan. His catch phrase is “Hi, I’m Steve, nice to meet you.”

    When the players score a touchdown, the fans all chant “Hi, I’m Steve.” The customary celebration is for the player to mime a normal handshake.

  • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I want to make a hockey team equivalent of the Harlem Globetrotters called the Plymouth Palefaces. Instead of being super skilled and making fools of the other team, they obviously cheat and pay off the refs (or just have guys on their team obviously swap out with the ref). Their mascot (a white guy in a pilgrim outfit) could go up and push the other mascot down and walk away, then when the other mascot comes back upset they can act affronted. Then they could have a couple policemen come and beat up the other mascot. Also, any time the other team scores, the players throw a fit and call it cheating.

    Somehow I don’t think Hockey would be the right demographic foelr something like that.

  • sarmale@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Why is caucasian used to refer to the white race, isnt that for georgians or something?

    • namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Misrepresenting the target group is just an added bonus. It’s like referring to all indigenous people as “indians” - even if they were from India (which they’re not), it’s just taking a blanket term and making them all seem like they’re the same. At least that’s why it’s even funnier in this context.

      But generally speaking, when people unironically use the term to refer to all whites, well, that just shows that they don’t really understand the meaning of the term they are using.

    • drathvedro@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah, it’s a term from an outdated racial theory that got into mainstream language. Still keeps weirding me out every time I see it. In Russia where I grew up, actual people from Caucasus region are still often treated and portrayed in media as “black” for being generally slightly darker than slavs. It’s disgusting. But, the populations in Caucasus region are actually very diverse. Like, for example, just talking about the skin color, the Azerbaijanis are generally fairly tan, but then quite a few of them are whiter than snow, and that’s the diversity within just one ethnic group of which there are few dozens. So I find it just as weird to call white people Caucasian (and people of Caucasus just “white”) as it’d be calling them Romanis or Tuaregs (or Jews) for how meaningless that’d be.

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Can we do this? I want this team. It’s gotta be full of burly black guys though. They’re clearly better at football. I would start watching football.