Is the name "Washington Redskins" in any way insulting, derogatory or offensive?

[whatthehey]

35. To some of course it is. To others it isn't. The dividing line is the question

Notre Dame offends some (usually far-removed) people of Irish descent. Minnesota likewise for usually similar scions of Scandinavia. Does Redskins offend more or less of the eponymous demographic? Hard to say. How many is enough? Only one decent survey done showed vast majority not bothered, but obviously some native groups are indeed offended.

There are a couple of potential approaches, both sensible and both problematic.

1) Go with the majority. Until a decent poll shows 50%+ offended, no reason to change. Democratic and reasonable. Problem there is you offend anything from a few affected people to 49.9% of them.

2) Change if you offend anyone with enough backing to make their complaints known. Sensitive and safe. Problem there is it's nigh impossible to find a name that evokes any emotion that excludes any offense to all. Some even object to animal nicknames.

An analogous point here is in what to call black people in America. The word I just used may offend some. It's obviously false for a start, even for full blood Masai, and the word has negative loading that predates blacks in America and has continued since. But African American offends those who feel no kinship to Africa and abjure implications of divided loyalty, as well as being fuzzy in regard to first generation immigrants from Africa who are not of the same ethnic group. I use it based on siilar polls that showed a plurality if not majority of blacks prefer it. If I use the same standard for the team, I'd have to support the majority who see it as no issue. It's not a word I use myself or would choose myself for a team though.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/how-many-native-americans-think-redskins-is-a-slur/