CBS NFL writer Mike Freeman said only “Uncle Tom” Native Americans would not be offended by the Washington Redskins name and challenged fans in “Chocolate City” Washington, D.C. to accept a team called the “Washington N-Words.” Recently, a former Native American chief said he would be offended if the Redskins changed their name.
Mike Freeman, who is part black and Native American, wrote:
“Sure, there will be some Uncle Tom American Indians who will say Redskins honors them, just like there were some Uncle Tom blacks who once didn’t mind being called colored.”
So, fine. OK, then. The city of Washington, D.C., my birthplace, is approximately 50 percent black, according to the U.S.Census Bureau. We used to call it Chocolate City.
The team shouldn’t be called the racist name Redskins. There is no significant population of American Indians. The percentage of American Indians in D.C., the Census states, is 0.6 percent.
Thus the more correct correlation for a team name is the Washington N-Words.
If we’re going to be bigots, why not go big? Or, actually, why not get more realistic?
Instead of a stereotypical Indian wearing war paint, the mascot can be a Sambo-like dude smacking his lips on some watermelon. Or maybe take Sergio Garcia’s suggestion and have it be fried chicken.
Freeman then said if the Redskins were called the “N-Words,” then “hypocritical African-American Washington fans” may take offense:
Also, if the Redskins were called the N-Words, then all of these hypocritical African-American Washington fans, who back the use of Redskins, would suddenly understand if the team was called the Washington N-Words.
So, from now on, let’s call them that, and pull from our rectums that the word is used to honor blacks.
Freeman said the word “Redskin” has only been used in a derogatory manner and is a “slur.”