The reality, is that like the "N" word, and its association with an era of slavery, this label is associated with an era of genocide.
It's an issue of sample.BS. Problems of self-reporting are only known by people with experience in such things. People with experience in such things also know that credible pollsters account for this problem in its methodology (which is why there is a MOE for every poll conducted). For instance, I can equally make the opposite claim that the number should be larger because it is common knowledge that people who are angry (in this case, those who oppose the name) are more likely to reply than one who is not.
When the target population is both under sampled by 50%, and unreachable in a ridiculous out of norm manner... then you have a problem. But hey, the poll tells the story you want to hear, so why dig into the details.Nope. No internet there! lol I mean, all surveys are now irrelevant too, because homeless people and those without home phones (many use cell exclusively, like me) do not get polled! The horror!
This line of thinking demonstrates a comic level of unawareness...You tell me. It is a good question, because it is about the time they became the redskins. Again, your logic dictates that the owner meant to label his team with racist/negative characteristics. No other team in history, to my knowledge, has done so but you know seem to know better.
the original Owner (George Preston Marshall) was an admitted racist.... he worked his *** off to keep african americans out of the game. He openly courted the southern market (that lacked an NFL team) with a openly racist agenda.
anyways, having racist characteristics didn't matter back then...
It's origin is completely without prejudice. It means "little circle", which is what the Jews signed at Ellis Island instead of the Christian cross looking "x".... they signed "o"....But it's meaning changed with it's use didn't it....None. It is irrelevant because it has never had a positive connotation, like "redskin" has.
yes it did...Quit the yoga. That is ridiculous. Oklahoma, like a million other words from foreign languages, is an adaptation due to the Choctaw not historically having a written language. People also have difficulty pronouncing foreign languages and they then spell how they pronounce. Hence, "Okla Humma" became "Oklahoma."
and Redskin became derogatory
I've read it. I don't dispute that much of its early history and origin was not racist....Nonsense. It can be traced back. Smithsonian Institution senior linguist Ives Goddard did just that. The WaPo has an entire fairly written article on it.