Washington Post says Redskins’ name should ‘no longer be tolerated’
— Jules Boykoff (@JulesBoykoff) September 13, 2013
President Obama himself has yet to “evolve” on the issue, but Slate’s decision to not use the R-word to refer to Washington’s NFL team has in the space of a month trickled up to the Washington Post, which has declared that the name should no longer be tolerated.
Editorial board: The team's name is a racial slur that should no longer be tolerated http://t.co/6n6Ag2UCQT
— Washington Post (@washingtonpost) September 13, 2013
We’re not sure if there are any Native Americans on the Washington Post’s editorial board, but it published a piece today declaring that “the team’s name — no matter its storied tradition or importance to many fans — is a racial slur of Native Americans so offensive that it should no longer be tolerated. Imagine, as we wrote in 2006 advocating a name change, Mr. Snyder, or anyone else for that matter, sitting in a room with Native Americans and calling them ‘redskins.’ Not likely.”
The Post did acknowledge that the name is a racial slur in a 2006 editorial, and yet that didn’t stop the paper from printing it a few thousand times since then. To its credit, Slate (which rarely covers sports) settled on ________ as a workaround, while the Post is apparently waiting for the team’s owners to make the decision for them.
Twitter kindly provided plenty of alternative names for the team (like the Washington Lame Ducks). Will the Post insist on one as a condition of covering the team? Do people care?
— Peter Ogburn (@peterogburn) September 13, 2013
A protest is expected at this weekend’s game in Green Bay.