An Ethnic Slur for the Name of a Sports Team?
by Anthony Della Calce
December 19, 2006

Imagine if more professional sports teams had names like the Washington Redskins: the New York Spooks, the Chicago Peckerwoods, the Los Angeles Spics.
Would people allow those team names?  Probably not.  Then why allow a team name like the Redskins?

Redskin is an offensive and derogatory term for an American Indian.  Clearly, this makes it an inappropriate mascot for a professional football team as well as any other sports team.  So why is there such an argument over this issue?

The problem is the term redskin has a highly disputed linguistic origin.  Both linguists and historical scholars debate the development of its original usage.
Those who see redskin as an offensive term say it originated as slang for the scalps and skins of dead Indians.  Bounty hunters seeking money in exchange for killing American Indians used the scalps and skins – redskins – as proof of their kill.

However, there is another viewpoint.  Others argue the term originated among American Indians in the 18th century as a way for them to differentiate themselves from whites and other races.  In this sense, the term is neutral.  It would be the equivalent of referring to an African-American as black or referring to a European-American as white.

This historical debate fuels the present-day debate about whether or not the Washington Redskins should change their mascot.  But it is the recent history of the term that should settle this debate.

The term redskin was used offensively in many western films of the mid-1900s, including “Mohawk” and “Northwest Passage.”  Documents in a case filed against the Washington Redskins within the last few years cited offensive uses of the term in movies by actors Eddie Cantor, Bob Hope, John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, Spencer Tracy, and others.

These types of lawsuits are nothing new for the Redskins, who have faced a variety of different court cases on this issue dating back to the early 1990s.  One such lawsuit was filed earlier this year.  But, none have been successful in getting the team to change its name.

Today, the American Heritage Dictionary, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, WordNet, and Dictionary.com all define the term redskin as an offensive word for American Indians.

After all, if the word was not offensive then people would use it like they use white or black when discussing ethnicity.  But, do people use the term redskin interchangeably with Native American or American Indian?  The answer is no.

However the word redskin came into our language, it is clear that it is used nowadays as an offensive slang term for American Indians.

As another football season winds down, another season will pass with the Redskins remaining the Redskins.  An outcry will be heard from time to time – a lawsuit, an editorial, a person on television, etc. – suggesting that the team change its name.  However, without enough public support, it always seems to fade away, muffled be a lack of empathy, ignorance or both.

But, that is not an excuse.  The Washington Redskins should find a new mascot, perhaps one that celebrates the heritage of American Indians rather than one that demeans it.  Until then, everyone – not just American Indians – should find the team’s name offensive.