5 Shows After Dark 9/9/13
film / tv / lists / guides / news / love / celeb / video / think pieces / staff / podcasts / web culture / politics / dc / snl / netflix / marvel / cbr

5 Shows After Dark: I Guess if He's RG3sus, the Rest of Them Are Pigskinpostles?

By Genevieve Burgess | Miscellaneous | September 9, 2013 | Comments ()


“Monday Night Football: Philadelphia Eagles at Washington Redskins” on ESPN at 7:10pm ET. 44th season premiere. Now that I’m living in the DC area again, I get to experience the incredibly complicated relationship the city has with their NFL team up close and personal. The biggest issue is, of course, whether or not the name of the team should be changed. I’m rooting for “yes” only because the last time I was living here, the Washington Bullets became the Washington Wizards and that was super fun for everyone involved. You know what one of the losing names was? The Seadogs. It can always get worse, people.

“The Million Second Quiz” on NBC at 8:00pm ET. Series premiere. There was a little online version of this and I played a bit. The trivia’s not much harder (and usually easier) than typical bar trivia but the setup of the show seems designed to add a lot of pressure so I guess that’s what’s going on? Hosted by Ryan Seacrest because I know he’s a real crowd-pleaser in these parts.

“Mistresses” on ABC at 9:00pm ET. First season finale. So far I haven’t heard any news about this being renewed, but then again I haven’t really been looking for it.

“Under the Dome” on CBS at 10:00pm ET.

“Monday Night Football: Houston Texans at San Diego Chargers” on ESPN at 10:20pm ET.

Genevieve Burgess would love to hear some alternate names for DC’s football team if you’ve got em.

John Travolta's Hair: An Investigation | 5 Recent Image Busting TV Performances That Will Trouble Your Mind

Comments Are Welcome, Bigots and Trolls Are Not

  • Milly

    Keep the name, just change the logo to a bowl of potatoes.

    (not sure who said the above originally)

  • Lollygagger9

    I'd love to see Pajiba adopt the policy other sites have in refusing to use the name at all. Our knockout football league just says "the team from our nation's capitol." It really is a horrible name and every time I see it in print it is jarring.

  • DataAngel

    We could always call 'em "The Potatoes" because all I can think of when I see the word "redskin" is those really tasty taters that make awesome potato salad.

  • Helo

    I'm a minority no matter WHERE I am in the world, so maybe my posture on this might be a little unconventional...

    I would be on board with a wholesale name and image change for Washington if and ONLY if it was part of a larger change across the sports names landscape. It's not as if they're only ones; Atlanta's graphical depiction of their MLB team is light years more offensive than Washington, the Cleveland MLB team isn't too far behind. Then you have the University of Illinois, Florida State University, San Diego State University... And the figure on the Chicago NHL team's uniform is a very close cousin of what Washington's got on their helmet.

    Where do you draw the line? I mean, I'm not trying to advocate the "slippery slope" argument here, but targeting ONE team over a prevalent problem across the landscape seems to be a mission of making an example out of a visible target. Why are the other teams exempt?

    However necessary that might be as a first step is a good discussion to have.

    Just my two cents.

  • **I AM** NotTheOne

    I agree. I can tell you, as an "Indians" fan, that Chief Wahoo, Cleveland's embarrassingly racist mascot has put a curse on the team. Until they get rid of him they will never win another series. And I still refuse to buy any team gear that has that damn picture on it.

    You can buy a Cleveland hat that has a "C" on it. But the letter C could be for a lot of things.

  • Lollygagger9

    I'm not sure why we should keep one team from progressing if others won't (e.g. prevent DC from changing because Atlanta refuses to change), which is how I read your comment. But other than that stipulation, I agree with you. Stop using cultures as mascots. Period.

  • Helo

    Hmmm, allow me to rephrase, then.

    I think that the charges levied against Snyder should really be focused on the problem as a whole and not just the most highly visible team.

    One team to get the ball rolling and have others follow suit is obviously a much more pragmatic scenario, but I do feel that a stronger statement is made in an all-or-nothing scenario.

  • Bert_McGurt

    After much debate on how to phrase this, I found the following text on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N... which does a decent job illustrating my thoughts on the issue:

    "To further complicate this issue, many feel that there are varying levels of offensiveness with team names and mascots. The nature and degree of stereotyping varies depending upon the name of the team, the logo, the mascot, and the behavior of fans. The greatest offense is taken when the logo and mascot are caricatures viewed as insulting, such as the Cleveland Indian's Chief Wahoo;[78] the name of the team is often regarded as a racial slur, such as redskins; or the behavior of the mascot or fans is based upon popular images of Indians which trivializes authentic native cultures."

    Though they don't mention it, the last point can certainly be taken to describe the behaviour of Atlanta fans. I think this is what separates Washington, Cleveland, and Atlanta from say, Chicago or the Kansas City Chiefs. There's just a much greater level of offense with the first three teams, in SPITE of repeated attempts to get them to change or at least tone it down.

    Dan Snyder is the perfect example of that willfull and deliberate defiance. Washington's mascot is a (black) man dressed in native costume, complete with headdress. Snyder has even recruited a FAKE CHIEF to advocate for the name: http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...

    He deserves the focus (and he's the most visible) right now because he's one of the worst offenders and he's being a real jerk about it.

  • Helo

    Fair points across the board.

    As with most issues surrounding a certain call to action, there's a certain degree of context to each incidence.

    Not to defend Snyder (lord knows I've laughed at the results of his impatience and meddling over the years), but addressing this issue this vigorously shouldn't factor in his being a jerk. Shifting the attention towards Snyder's douchenozzleosity, IMHO, robs the issue of its real relevance.

    (I do concede that I'm attempting to reconcile society's vulnerability to emotional decisions with my own naively ideal view of how to carry out principled moral advancement.)

  • Bert_McGurt

    Well, consider me a cynical idealist then ;) There's just so, so much casual racism directed towards North American aboriginal people, and so little recognition of it among the general public. So when something like the controversy over Washington's nickname gains traction, it's an opportunity to keep the train moving, so to speak.

    I guess I'm sort of saying that Snyder's assholery could be used to illustrate to the general public just HOW and WHY this casual racism occurs so they're less ignorant when they encounter it elsewhere?

  • Lollygagger9

    Thanks - I think I understand your point :)

  • Wrestling Fan

    I think Snyder should go to the opposite extreme, name the team the Palefaces or the Cracka's or the Rednecks. He strikes me as the kind of person who would do that just to make a point.

  • Lollygagger9

    I kind of like this solution - http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story...

  • drunkenjunk

    maybe you can cry about it some more

  • Lollygagger9

    Aww. Oppression is funny, isn't it?

  • Genevieve Burgess

    Honestly, I'm probably the only one whose content is likely to make mention of it so I've been debating it myself. I doubt the name will be changed, because so far Dan Snyder has reacted to the whole thing like a petulant child instead of making the smart move, which would be saying that the team is taking it into consideration, and in the meantime would be doing their part to raise awareness of challenges faced by Native communities and donating money to organizations working in and among those communities. For real, not just a press release. But very few people have ever accused Dan Snyder of being smart.

    Anyway, I will take your opinion on the name and its use into consideration for future columns.

  • Lollygagger9

    Yeah, Snyder is utterly ridiculous - I just wasn't aware how ridiculous until recently. And thanks for even broaching the subject.

blog comments powered by Disqus