A few weeks ago, I weighed in (lightly, I must admit) on the Great Redskins controversy. Some activists want the name changed because “redskin” is a pejorative, akin to the n-word, though significantly less toxic.
Well, the controversy, as Capt. Miller says to Sgt. Horvath in “Saving Private Ryan,” has “taken a turn for the surreal.”
According to this report, Aris Mardirossian, supposedly a neighbor of Redskins owner Daniel Snyder, has registered the trademark Washington Bravehearts, raising speculation that this will be the team’s new name.
I suppose the team could keep the same logo, since Native American fighting men were known (not pejoratively) as braves. Or the team could whomp up a new design featuring Mel Gibson with his face painted blue, and a tartan motif instead of feathers. Ugh.
I don’t understand why the Redskins don’t come up with a Native American tribal name common to their part of the country. Team names like the Seminoles, Apaches, Vikings, Chiefs, Fighting Irish, Blackhawks, Celtics and Trojans — reflecting aggressive, warlike cultures befitting sports like football — usually are not controversial. Certainly less so than a word widely recognized as pejorative. But Bravehearts? I don’t think fans of the team formerly known as the Redskins would ever fully embrace such a name.
While I’m on the subject (hopefully for the last time), I’m personally a lot more offended by names like Pirates and Raiders than Seminoles or Blackhawks, or even Redskins. That’s because being a Native American isn’t a bad thing. It doesn’t reflect on you as a person. Being a pirate means you kill people, rape women, sink ships and steal other people’s stuff. It very much reflects on you as a person — badly. How about we get rid of names that honor evil, violent people, and stop griping about names that simply recognize indigenous tribes or cultures of long ago?