Skip to content

Houston schools stop using “Redskins” and other insensitive names

Washington Redskins v Tennessee Titans Getty Images

As the NFL team in Washington continues to defend its use of the name Redskins, the franchise often points out that many high schools use the name. What the team doesn’t point out is that many schools are dropping the name, too.

Despite the team’s claim that “70 different high schools” use the name Redskins, several reports have indicated that the number is actually lower than that, and the Redskins are counting high schools that have already stopped using the name. The latest school to drop the name is Lamar High School in Houston, which announced this week that it will stop going by the name Redskins and start calling its teams the Texans.

That decision was part of a new policy announced by the Houston school district, preventing schools from using team names that are viewed as insensitive. Teams called the Indians, Warriors and Rebels are also changing their names.

The Washington Redskins, however, say they will never change.

Permalink 84 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
84 Responses to “Houston schools stop using “Redskins” and other insensitive names”
  1. mykpfsu says: Apr 16, 2014 5:47 AM

    I get them not using Redskins, but the other names are generic non-derogatory names.

  2. britishraven says: Apr 16, 2014 5:57 AM

    I’m not sure why Warriors or Rebels is offensive to anybody?

  3. gloryfromheaven46 says: Apr 16, 2014 6:14 AM

    Not sure why Orlando Magic isn’t offensive either, there’s no such thing as magic? Totally offensive…

  4. northshorejag says: Apr 16, 2014 6:54 AM

    To bad no one is offended by graduation statistics.

  5. titansbro says: Apr 16, 2014 7:00 AM

    Rebels? Warriors? Seriously?

  6. fatcamper says: Apr 16, 2014 7:35 AM

    If there weren’t teams such as the “Braves” and “Seminoles” I probably wouldn’t know these tribes existed. Blatantly offensive names and logos should change, but I hope it doesn’t come at the cost of awareness that these groups of people existed.

  7. packattack1967 says: Apr 16, 2014 7:46 AM

    How long before the Saints will have to change their name? Separation of church and state. Political correctness run amok in every aspect of our lives.

  8. cvdt57 says: Apr 16, 2014 7:50 AM

    Redskins I understand. Indians I understand. But if you are offended by the name warriors then other people aren’t being insensitive. You’re just being insecure. Unless you object to your ethnic heritage being associated with sports. In which case the “Why is the fighting irish offensive?” argument is valid.

  9. Dolphinatic says: Apr 16, 2014 7:50 AM

    Warriors and Rebels…offensive?

    This is why PC is a slippery slope. Where IS the line, exactly?

    Ask fifty different people, get fifty different answers.

  10. dartwick says: Apr 16, 2014 7:55 AM

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the name “Warriors” – even if you mean American Indian warriors.

    Im tired of stupid over reactions.

  11. citiciti says: Apr 16, 2014 7:57 AM

    This is getting out of control!!

  12. drwbrsdmndsnxplntn says: Apr 16, 2014 7:58 AM

    I’m offended that Warriors is deemed offensive.

  13. nonetruerthanblue says: Apr 16, 2014 8:07 AM

    Depends on the logos associated with the team names

  14. pf1977 says: Apr 16, 2014 8:10 AM

    when i was in high school they had just started making all the schools in the district drop redskins and indians as mascots. my high school was the redskins, about a year or two after i graduated they became the redhawks.

    all the schools who used warriors changed from using a depiction of an indian for the mascot to using a spartan for the depiction of the warrior.

    the schools who were the rebels switched from using a southern colonel design to a american revolution looking design that looked similar to the patriots old logos.

  15. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Apr 16, 2014 8:17 AM

    Meanwhile Cleveland’s baseball team wont change either. And the Braves chop isn’t offensive

  16. tjacks7 says: Apr 16, 2014 8:24 AM

    I see my aggressive letter campaign is paying off. Next up Golden State and Ole miss. How dare you use those offensive names like Warriors and Rebels!

  17. primenumber19 says: Apr 16, 2014 8:36 AM

    I’m down to change racist names, but warriors and rebels?

  18. gregmorris78 says: Apr 16, 2014 8:48 AM

    Let’s change the name to “team #24″ that won’t offend anyone.

  19. officialmiamidolphinsspokesperson says: Apr 16, 2014 8:57 AM

    Warriors and Rebels i thought were good alternatives for the NFL Redskins. Neither is a slur, im not sure why they would view them as insensitive. Maybe they have questionable mascots/logos?

  20. rg3sus says: Apr 16, 2014 9:04 AM

    Warriors is offensive? Ok? I will say (and as a skins fan I may be titled a jerk) the name is not viewed as a slur by any fans and we would be distraught if the name is changed. The name is a source of pride here in the DMV. If the name is changed, you can bet fans will continue to buy Redskins gear, especially because it will have lost trademark protections and will be easy to find. Just a thought.

  21. skoldier612 says: Apr 16, 2014 9:09 AM

    This country is too sensitive .

  22. crystalmethane says: Apr 16, 2014 9:34 AM

    Fun fact: Lamar High School is Brian Orakpo’s alma mater

  23. tomthumbsblues says: Apr 16, 2014 9:40 AM

    Redskins originated with Native Americans.

    “The term “red” was adopted by French and English by the 1750′s after the reference to “red man” was made in 1725 by a Taensa chief. According to the French (1725), the Taensa referred to themselves as “Red Men.” Three chiefs of the Piankashaws wrote (1769), “…You think that I am an orphan; but all the people of these rivers and all the redskins will learn of my death.” In 1807 French Crow (Wahpekute, Santee Sioux) said, “I am a redskin…”

  24. johnodocks says: Apr 16, 2014 9:45 AM

    The Vikings logo depicts the warrior caricature of people of Scandinavian descent. Anyone objecting to that?

  25. black43gold says: Apr 16, 2014 9:52 AM

    crystalmethane says:
    Apr 16, 2014 9:34 AM
    Fun fact: Lamar High School is Brian Orakpo’s alma mater
    _________________________________

    Funny, I would’ve guessed Lamar Houston. Made too much sense…

  26. tictoccpthook says: Apr 16, 2014 9:59 AM

    Call the ‘Tinmen’, Brassmen’, or ‘Leadmen’, and we’ll have a good time with them. Go Steelers !

  27. kwjsb says: Apr 16, 2014 10:10 AM

    “Houston schools stop using “Redskins” and other insensitive names”

    I am Lumbee, it is not insensitive.

    1) Redskin term came from the use of red clay on the face before battle.
    2) Nothing honors you more than to have a symbol of our people being used as a symbol of strength that brings an entire community together to cheer or cry as one.
    3) Native Americans are not part of the easily offended class you whites suffer from.

  28. ShimSham says: Apr 16, 2014 10:13 AM

    For the comment about Vikings being a caricature of Scandinavians. While a valid point, U.S. history is absolutely filled with violence and heavy discrimination against particularly Native Americans and African Americans. The same is not true of immigrants northern/western Europe, which is why there’s more controversy concerning the use of images related to those people, opposed to the Vikings.

  29. tinbender2000 says: Apr 16, 2014 10:27 AM

    Danny won’t change the name because he wants it to be equally offensive to the product on the field.

  30. jbaxt says: Apr 16, 2014 10:38 AM

    That’s it, I’m changing my name to REDskins!

  31. jbaxt says: Apr 16, 2014 10:42 AM

    Changing from Redskins to Texans is a wash. They’re both overhyped and typically suck.

  32. randomcommenter says: Apr 16, 2014 11:00 AM

    But high schools are not dropping the name because they think it’s offensive. They are being strong armed into dropping it by political groups.

    It’s the same situation as small towns being forced to take down Nativity scenes because the socialist organization (that’s their founding mission statement, look it up) the ACLU, ties these small towns up in red tape, they don’t have the resources to fight it, so they get bullied into taking down a Nativity scene that the vast majority of their people want.

  33. monkeesfan says: Apr 16, 2014 11:03 AM

    Give me again the case why the Redskins name is insensitive. No one else has made any credible case. Redskins is legitimate.

  34. dirtydrynn27 says: Apr 16, 2014 11:05 AM

    The same ones that find the name Redskins offensive are the same ones that are quick to call a black man a n….. However they won’t do it face to face

  35. pdixon920 says: Apr 16, 2014 11:11 AM

    Warriors & Rebels? Seriously? This country’s super sensitive, political correctness kick is getting out of control. Ridiculous.

  36. beavertonsteve says: Apr 16, 2014 11:19 AM

    For the record I have heard the term “Cougar” used as a derogatory term for a female of advanced age who tries to attract younger aged males. This can be documented by doing a quick search on the internet. I just hope the University of Houston takes a cue from local high schools.

  37. bobzilla1001 says: Apr 16, 2014 11:21 AM

    ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith continually calls Washington, D.C., `Chocolate City.” Should the city’s pro football team then be nicknamed the “Chocolate Drops”? Just wondering.

  38. mogogo1 says: Apr 16, 2014 11:23 AM

    Welcome to the slippery slope. I guess we can forget about the “Colt 45s” ever making a comeback. And it won’t be long before “Texans” and “Cowboys” are deemed offensive to somebody.

  39. SeenThisB4 says: Apr 16, 2014 11:24 AM

    The University of Notre Dame needs to find another nick name as well! The Fighting Irish is so insensitive, that it boggles the liberal mind!

  40. braceyourselffor12 says: Apr 16, 2014 11:31 AM

    My high school mascot was the Scott’s. But the dude looked like a Japanese guy with a bag pipe and a kilt, it was weird.

  41. rrthomasxyz says: Apr 16, 2014 11:44 AM

    The average person would not use the term “redskin” in conversation with a native american. Doesn’t that tell you something about the proper use of the word? Those who bring up “warriors” or “rebels” are simply distractors who want to perpetuate this offensive term.

  42. skinsrock says: Apr 16, 2014 11:44 AM

    That’s fine… They don’t own a trademark that is worth 1.8 Billion dollars.

  43. baltimoresnativeson says: Apr 16, 2014 11:53 AM

    I demand the Tampa Bay Bucs change their logo. My Great Grand father was a Pirate.

  44. cchicinfan says: Apr 16, 2014 11:57 AM

    My usual test is if I am walking down the street and see a person the word would apply to (like a native American) that I don’t know, and call out to him “Hey Redskin” and feel it necessary to run, then it probably is inappropriate to use the word in any sense. I was never offended with the name Redskins until I applies this test.

    The problem with the term Rebel though is situation based. My rule doesn’t apply, but a team in Canada called rebels wouldn’t necessarily be offense as it lacks the civil war history. A team in the US, and especially any where near the south, would undoubtably use a “Johnny Reb” image as a mascot, and rightly be alienating and offensive to any black person and any white northern person who lost family in the civil war. Yes, very inappropriate and divisive.

    Warrior , however is the biggest stretch I have seen of any kind. Period.

  45. RE LEE says: Apr 16, 2014 12:00 PM

    The way the liberals demonized the tea party, I’m wondering how soon they will turn against the Patriots. Our country has changed so much. Christianity is getting booted out of classrooms and the military, our flag is considered offensive to some in our own country, and now there are free speech zones. It’s telling that now we have to self-censure even names of sports team. We are losing our collective spines.

  46. pftcensor1 says: Apr 16, 2014 12:11 PM

    If a change in Washington comes what does the NFL do with NFL films footage?

    Grey dots, Black bars, voice overs? No one discusses how the name change should be retroactively applied to ensure maximum non-hostility.

    After all if someone is offended watching the Redskins on Sunday at 1:oo surely they would be offended watching reruns of classic games.

  47. humpofdc says: Apr 16, 2014 12:15 PM

    HTTR!!!

  48. philgrek says: Apr 16, 2014 12:17 PM

    For the record, the Warrior reference in question here was actually an Indian. The mascot and logo was an Indian chief, so it was technically an Indian warrior. The rebel was a reference to the confederate rebels and the mascot was a confederate holding the confederate flag. These weren’t just vague references to ANY kind of warrior and ANY kind of rebel. Just FYI

  49. justintuckrule says: Apr 16, 2014 12:17 PM

    Faux News crowd out in droves this morning I see.

  50. inallsincerity says: Apr 16, 2014 12:18 PM

    But nobody in H-Town has a problem with the name of America’s most prestigious golf tournament, “The Masters”???

  51. ravenssuggskoch says: Apr 16, 2014 12:19 PM

    rrthomasxyz says:
    Apr 16, 2014 11:44 AM
    The average person would not use the term “redskin” in conversation with a native american. Doesn’t that tell you something about the proper use of the word? Those who bring up “warriors” or “rebels” are simply distractors who want to perpetuate this offensive term.
    ____________________________

    I’d happily use the term Redskin. It isn’t offensive.

  52. 302baller says: Apr 16, 2014 12:20 PM

    Redskins Redskins Redskins Redskins……sounds like a team name only.

  53. eleventyeight says: Apr 16, 2014 12:23 PM

    Context.

    Why would any competitive team in a very physical sort call themselves anything weak, negative, derogatory, divisive or in any other way indicative of anything other than powerful, successful, skillful, respected, dignified, honorable and pride-inducing.

    If that were the case why aren’t there teams named the “French Army”?

  54. tomthumbsblues says: Apr 16, 2014 12:25 PM

    Did Dan Snyder call someone a ” redskin ” when he visited those 26 reservations last fall/ Probably not.

    Did he use the name ” Redskins ” and Washington Redskins ” while on the reservations?

    Yes, of course he did.

    Get it now?

    Hail to the Redskins !

  55. metalman5150 says: Apr 16, 2014 12:26 PM

    my butt hurts too

  56. politicallyincorrect says: Apr 16, 2014 12:36 PM

    LOL at the Texans! What a bunch of cowards.

    Hail to the REDSKINS!

  57. nowillrepeat says: Apr 16, 2014 12:42 PM

    As a Southerner, I am highly offended by the use of the term New York Yankees.

  58. duece5 says: Apr 16, 2014 12:45 PM

    Unbelievable!

  59. justintuckrule says: Apr 16, 2014 12:56 PM

    Any of you claiming that you’d call a Native American a redskin to their face are lying their rear ends off.

  60. wantcheesewityourwhine says: Apr 16, 2014 1:04 PM

    A large group of people find Redskins offensive.
    A larger group does not… That doesn’t mean its not offensive!
    In 1861 A large group thought slavery was not good.
    A larger group thought it was great. It was not!
    If someone finds another team name offensive this is America get a large group together & fight for a change or to stay the same. These people are passionate & put in work for their change & do not just sit around & complain about how bad the country is, but try to make it better for their pacific group

  61. dallascowboysdishingthereal says: Apr 16, 2014 1:08 PM

    University of Houston is still called the Cougars which is offensive to some middle age women who prey upon younger men in clubs. Just sayin’

  62. wareagle1961 says: Apr 16, 2014 1:10 PM

    Now that they’re taken care of that …. on to trying to break the Mendoza line for graduation rates

  63. tmkelley1 says: Apr 16, 2014 1:22 PM

    I’m a life-long Redskins fan, and will die as one. But here’s the one I really don’t get: The Golden State Warriors have a bridge as a logo.

    A bridge. How does one cheer for a bridge?

  64. channer81 says: Apr 16, 2014 1:34 PM

    Still waiting for Peter King and Bob Costas to start their tour of Native American reservations to bring up awareness and help to those who need it. Oh wait, they just want to see an NFL team change their name. I guess fight the battle that’s more convenient, and less hassle for you.

  65. Go-Hawks! says: Apr 16, 2014 1:50 PM

    NOBODY, I repeat, NOBODY uses the word Redskins as a derogatory slur! I always hear people say, “well can you imagine walking down the street and calling a native american a ‘redskin’?”

    That is such garbage. No one uses the term to a people. It is no where near the same issue as the N word or any other racial or ethnic slur. Why? Because no one uses it as a racial or ethnic slur. I live in a community with a fairly large tribal population, and no one uses “redskins” as a slur. There are plenty of other slurs to throw around, but that one is just not hard enough for today modern A-holes to use.

    And I’m going out on a limb here to suggest that the Warriors and Rebels could have simply changed the logo and/or mascot without changing the name.

  66. jackofnotrades says: Apr 16, 2014 1:55 PM

    redskins…awesome name/awesome logo/awesome colors..i look at it as a sign of respect not derogatory..get over it.

  67. iceburgskin202 says: Apr 16, 2014 1:58 PM

    A Raider and Buccaneer are offensive given we know what pirates did to people. Also a Patriot is a Rebel that won the war on his land against an oppressive force. The name Redskins will change and is offensive but anyone can be offended by a multitude of things depending on where you’re from. IMO

  68. condor75 says: Apr 16, 2014 2:28 PM

    The word itself is a slur, there is no positive meaning to the word, sad that you can’t comprehend that. Could someone refer to you mother or wife or daughter with the C word but in a nice way?

  69. condor75 says: Apr 16, 2014 2:33 PM

    The Vikings logo depicts the warrior caricature of people of Scandinavian descent. Anyone objecting to that?
    No because the term Viking is not and never has been derogatory, there is not positive spin on Redskin, no matter how u and others try. It is in and of itself derogatory

  70. cbgbs21 says: Apr 16, 2014 2:34 PM

    Couple hundred years too late to be shedding crocodile tears for the indigenous peoples of this country. We’d all be watching futbol somewhere in Western Europe if those calling the shots actually, ya know, genuinely cared about the plight of the Native Americans.

  71. bitw44 says: Apr 16, 2014 2:37 PM

    Just because you are offended does not mean you are right.

  72. tk1966 says: Apr 16, 2014 2:49 PM

    Now if we could get Notre Dame to change its name – its it not the same argument to imply that all persons of Irish descent are short tempered and pugilistic?

  73. bunkmcnulty says: Apr 16, 2014 2:57 PM

    Just because you are not offended does not mean you are right, either.

  74. hotdog113 says: Apr 16, 2014 3:00 PM

    My ancestors were invaded and looted by the vikings and then smacked around by the Irish. The names Vikings and Fighting Irish offends me.

    Oh and my father died in a plane accident, so the name Jets offends me.

    And I once got sick eating a bufflo burger, so the name Bills offends me.

  75. bunkmcnulty says: Apr 16, 2014 3:09 PM

    Sadly, the pendulum swings too far. However, if the poster stating the “context” for banning Warrior and Rebel is correct, then I applaud someone for using fact, rather than opinion to say why the actions in Houston are right or wrong.

    I personally don’t like Redskins (the name), yet at the same time, I respect that it may not need to change. My issue with these discussions are the idiots that come out trying to invoke pretend offense to Vikings, and every other totally inappropriate comparison to that that offends based on one’s skin color specifically used in the name.

  76. mikejune says: Apr 16, 2014 3:17 PM

    “To bad no one is offended by graduation statistics.”

    No kidding. It’s “Too” bad.

  77. politicallyincorrect says: Apr 16, 2014 3:22 PM

    Hail to the Redskins!

    Shame on PC crowd.. you guys are a disgrace with your ignorance.

    LOL at Texans!

  78. buffalodiehard says: Apr 16, 2014 3:25 PM

    Come on people…if you come on a message board and claim to be, in this case, a Native American I can’t take you seriously. It’s just too easy to claim you are anything in order to make your point under the guise of anonymity.

  79. eleventyeight says: Apr 16, 2014 3:30 PM

    What seems to be missing is the fact that American Indian warriors intentionally colored their skin red during war and raiding party’s, and they proved such fearsome and powerful and courageous and skillful and selfless warriors that even those who fought against and *feared* them spoke of those warriors with awe and respect, going so far as to -honor- them by elevating their memory to the level of other great and powerful warriors of history and legend.

    Only a few people and small groups are fussing about the matter, while those same few people and groups just happen to be getting money and publicity from their complaints; not exactly the actions of those with honorable and selfless intent.

  80. n8ivtxn says: Apr 16, 2014 3:47 PM

    Change the name all you want… we will still be the “Redskins” in our hearts… notable Lamar H.S. REDSKIN alums:

    Brian Orakpo
    Josh Gordon
    Brandon LaFell
    Gerome Sapp

  81. wydok says: Apr 16, 2014 4:05 PM

    Warriors could be offensive if the mascot is a Native American. Although it’s not nearly as bad as Redskin.

  82. seanb20124 says: Apr 16, 2014 4:32 PM

    Were coming after you next Golden State Warriors

  83. defscottyb says: Apr 17, 2014 3:22 PM

    RED in Redskins is a reference to Red war paint worn in battle and NOT skin color. A tiny few just see Red and Skin and automatically assume it just has to be racist. Oh yeah I am 1/2 Cherokee and my whole family are Redskins fans. We see it as an honor and not in the least disrespectful. I was reading a story about Susan Harjo that activist against the Redskins first court battle in 1992. She was actually a Redskins fan and was at a Skins game in DC when she felt “harassed” for some reason for being Native so she went on a life long mission against them. Talk about being totally insecure. The other day I was battling some guy on twitter who claimed to be part native (he looks like a blonde white guy) he was telling me about how he tried to harm himself and self-mutilated over being called a Redskin so he made it his mission to fix the team name. I call total BS on that. NO one uses the word Redskin to put down a Native person they use real slurs. People are too damn insecure, sensitive and some are just lairs to support their cause. Some need therapy instead of trying to change the name of a ballteam. Redskins is not a slur or offensive, it’s all fake outrage and media driven. HTTR!

  84. politicallyincorrect says: Apr 22, 2014 8:16 AM

    LOL at Texans… Hail to the Redskins!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!