Slur or NOT a Slur?

Is the Washington NFL franchise moniker "Redskins" a racial or ethnic slur?

Perhaps I have been naive or even ignorant, but I never recognized "Redskins" as a racial slur.  Sure, if you called a person with a red complexion "Redskin" it would be, perhaps, a bit rash or awkward...but far, far from a "slur".  Mark Randazza recently wrote a story about this topic on CNN.com, stating "If Native Americans believe that "redskin" is offensive to them, then it it is."  Offensive?  Maybe, but only in that context.  As a logo for a proud, strong NFL franchise, it seems a bit more glorified then demeaning.  So is it still a slur?

A racial or ethnic slur is defined as a word used to reference a race or ethnicity in an derogatory or insulting manner.  How the word is used plays a major factor in it's definition, though.  For instance, take for example the word "Apple".  It seems harmless, and in fact, many believe that eating one a day will "keep the doctor away".  Did you know it was a racial slur?  In Wikipedia's list of Ethnic Slurs the word "Apple", when used to refer to Native American's, is a racial slur.  Even "Apple" seems more offensive then "Redskin" when used in the same context, referring to Native Americans.  Should we be talking about renaming the apple?  "Redskin" did not make Wikipedia's list of ethnic slurs.

1935 Boston Redskins Uniform - Look into the Turk Edward, Great story.

In 1933, when choosing a new name for a young Boston Braves franchise, co-owner George Preston Marshall chose "Redskins" to replace "Braves", mainly to reduce confusion with the Atlanta Braves of MLB.  It is also well known that it was looked upon as an honor by many Native American players and coaches, including then head coach William "Lone Star" Dietz, who was part Native American.  At that time, the owner's chose to stay with a Native American logo, when they certainly did not have to.  All parties involved looked at "Redskins" as a strong, proud logo and team name.  The Boston Redskins would later move and become the Washington Redskins.  The Washington Redskins, in over 80 years, have never had an animated logo or used the image of Native American's in a derogatory way.  In fact, post WWII, the Redskins had moved away from Native American imagery, until approached by Walter Wetzel, on the behalf of Native Americans, to bring that imagery back.  The current logo image was introduced in 1972 and was co-created by Wetzel, who is a former president of the National Congress of American Indians and Blackfoot Indian.  At that time, it was commonly known that Native American players, coaches and leaders recognized "Redskins" used by the Washington NFL franchise, in the context of a football team logo, as an honor, not a disgrace.

If you happen to live near or in Oklahoma, you have have heard of Anadarko, which boasts to be "The Indian Capital of the Nation".  Anadarko is also home to the historic and treasured Redskins Theater.  If the "Indian Capital of the Nation" has no issues with "Redskins", should we?

There are other monikers or slurs that do not seem to offend folks anymore.  Though not exactly a racial group and more of a cultural group, the country folk referred to as "Rednecks" seemed to have embraced their slur, in recent years.  "Redneck" was certainly a derogatory slur originally.  In a similar fashion, "Hillbilly" is also more well received now, then in the past.  Sometimes slurs transition into a "terms of endearment".  After all, the word "redefine" exists solely because redefining does happen.

One team name or moniker that no one seems to be talking about, but is definitely defined as a ethnic slur, is "Yankee".  On the same list of ethnic slurs that did not include "Redskins" did include "Yankee".  Certainly, the same rules and laws apply to "Yankee", but the one difference is no one north of the "Mason Dixon Line" is calling for it to be changed.  Instead, New Yorkers chose to embrace and love the name, or be a Mets fan, but either way, they do not let it offend them because, as my friend Tony's from New York says, "It ain't like they are calling ME a Yankee, personally."  Sure, if someone did walk up to Tony and call him a "Yankee" he would get all "New Yorker" on them, but outside of that context and in a sport-team's-name context, it was not offensive.

A word is defined by what context it is used in and is open to interpretation.  For something to be a slur or offensive, one must be offended by it.  "Redskins" is not a term derived from hate, like the "N" word.  "Redskins", at one time, in the correct context, was close to a slur, but was more a mildly insensitive thing to call a Native American.  "Redskin" is not nearly the worst thing you could call someone.  In 80 plus years of service, the name "Redskins" has been proudly cheered by millions of fans and supported by one of the most successful franchises in all of professional sports.  "Redskins" is represented on Championships, Superbowl Trophies, and in the NFL Hall of Fame.  In what better context could the word possibly be used?

Potatoes?