PDA

View Full Version : Redskins name change?


The_Joker
02-10-2013, 12:16 AM
Say it ain't so. My vote goes to NO. It'll always be the Redskins, why change it because a handful of whiners don't like it. (Fact, Redskins was a term invented by the Natives themselves to distinguish themselves from Whites.)

I live in DC so this is pretty big new here.

aa14
02-10-2013, 12:34 AM
Say it ain't so. My vote goes to NO. It'll always be the Redskins, why change it because a handful of whiners don't like it. (Fact, Redskins was a term invented by the Natives themselves to distinguish themselves from Whites.)

I live in DC so this is pretty big new here.

Many native american "whiners" find it very offensive as it has been used as a derogatory term against them for a long time. I honestly don't know what it's origins are but I grew up in Saskatchewan, Canada and I witnessed a boy fight another boy in school for being called that exact name. He was being bullied and it lit a fuse. It is a sore spot and for you to write them all off as "whiners" is quite frankly ignorant.

aa14
02-10-2013, 12:34 AM
double post

Lady Steel
02-10-2013, 12:54 AM
I don't care what they do. Doesn't affect my team.

aa14
02-10-2013, 12:57 AM
I don't care what they do. Doesn't affect my team.

Exactly. It doesn't affect anyone except, albeit understandably, Redskins fans. If a little more education and discussion was made more public I don't think many people would get defensive over what they perceive to be over-sensitive minorities.

Lady Steel
02-10-2013, 01:03 AM
Exactly. It doesn't affect anyone except, albeit understandably, Redskins fans. If a little more education and discussion was made more public I don't think many people would get defensive over what they perceive to be over-sensitive minorities.

What are you dribbling about? It's "all be it." AHHHHH! I CAN'T GET THROUGH! :banging:

:laughing:

aa14
02-10-2013, 01:04 AM
What are you dribbling about? It's "all be it." AHHHHH! I CAN'T GET THROUGH! :banging:

:laughing:

You're asking for it!!!

:mad::mad::mad:

Lady Steel
02-10-2013, 01:06 AM
Just havin' some fun with ya, aa. :laughing: :hug:

GoFor7
02-10-2013, 01:10 AM
It is rather hypocritical by the NFL that they get pissed off no black GMs or head coaches are hired, yet they continue to ignore the issue about the Redskins.

So teams should feel ashamed that the guys they feel are right for certain jobs happen to be white, but it's okay to offend Native Americans? :noidea:

The_Joker
02-10-2013, 01:24 AM
It is rather hypocritical by the NFL that they get pissed off no black GMs or head coaches are hired, yet they continue to ignore the issue about the Redskins.

So teams should feel ashamed that the guys they feel are right for certain jobs happen to be white, but it's okay to offend Native Americans? :noidea:

:banging:

HOW IS IT ANYMORE OFFENSIVE THAN THE CLEVELAND BROWNS?

Or what about the Chiefs! That's a Native name! Or how about the Jets? 9/11?

90% of natives don't care about the name, look it up. As many Natives care as white people.

No way a team older than us changes their name.

aa14
02-10-2013, 01:34 AM
:banging:

HOW IS IT ANYMORE OFFENSIVE THAN THE CLEVELAND BROWNS?

Or what about the Chiefs! That's a Native name! Or how about the Jets? 9/11?

90% of natives don't care about the name, look it up. As many Natives care as white people.

No way a team older than us changes their name.

"Chief" does not have a negative connotation. "Redskin" has a very negative connotation to many native americans. Sorry you can't empathize. I don't understand your reference to the Browns at all. Maybe if you spent thirty seconds researching the origin of the "Brown" name you wouldn't spout off drivel in all-caps. I guess I'll help you out, the team is named after head coach Paul Brown. I can't believe you don't understand the differences between the examples you listed. Pulling stats out of your butt and telling US to look it up is a joke. How about you cite this study you refer to? Ninety percent? Embarrassing.

harrison'samonster
02-10-2013, 01:58 AM
"Chief" does not have a negative connotation. "Redskin" has a very negative connotation to many native americans. Sorry you can't empathize. I don't understand your reference to the Browns at all. Maybe if you spent thirty seconds researching the origin of the "Brown" name you wouldn't spout off drivel in all-caps. I guess I'll help you out, the team is named after head coach Paul Brown. I can't believe you don't understand the differences between the examples you listed. Pulling stats out of your butt and telling US to look it up is a joke. How about you cite this study you refer to? Ninety percent? Embarrassing.

of course a fan of the Baltimore Browns would know very well the origin of the Cleveland Browns name :drink:

Buddha Bus
02-10-2013, 08:00 AM
.......

There is nothing I could say to counter the sucking black hole of ignorance that this thread is.


Bayz, can we get a stupid filter installed for the board?

vasteeler
02-10-2013, 08:12 AM
.......

There is nothing I could say to counter the sucking black hole of ignorance that this thread is.


Bayz, can we get a stupid filter installed for the board?

if they did that i believe the majority of these threads would be blank pages:chuckle:

Buddha Bus
02-10-2013, 08:13 AM
if they did that i believe the majority of these threads would be blank pages:chuckle:

At least they'd match the brains of some of the ones who start them then. :wink02:

The_Joker
02-10-2013, 09:13 AM
*Sigh*

It is inevitable, isn't it?

Then what do you guys suggest changing it to?

Warriors? Pigskins?

Atlanta Dan
02-10-2013, 09:54 AM
*Sigh*

It is inevitable, isn't it?

Then what do you guys suggest changing it to?

Warriors? Pigskins?

"Deficits" ... "Taxers" ... "Bureaucrats"

The_Joker
02-10-2013, 10:03 AM
Damn Liberal Hippies?

aa14
02-10-2013, 10:43 AM
*Sigh*

It is inevitable, isn't it?

Then what do you guys suggest changing it to?

Warriors? Pigskins?

Let's get this straight. Are you asking because "it is inevitable" or are you conceding the name might be offensive to more than a few "whiners"? I'm curious why you'd *sigh* after your not even facile arguments were disposed of.

The_Joker
02-10-2013, 10:49 AM
Let's get this straight. Are you asking because "it is inevitable" or are you conceding the name might be offensive to more than a few "whiners"? I'm curious why you'd *sigh* after your not even facile arguments were disposed of.

I'm saying because everyone won't stop complaining we might as well think of a new name. My opinion doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of things.

Also, didn't I tell you not to talk to me? No one gives a fuck about you around here.

aa14
02-10-2013, 11:03 AM
I'm saying because everyone won't stop complaining we might as well think of a new name. My opinion doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of things.

Also, didn't I tell you not to talk to me? No one gives a fuck about you around here.

Oh, so now it's everyone? Not a few over sensitive "whiners"? Where did that ninety percent you were talking about go? You may not like me but it doesn't change my arguments. Abandoning the original purpose of the thread because you now admit your opinion doesn't matter is pretty funny.

stb_steeler
02-10-2013, 11:17 AM
I'm saying because everyone won't stop complaining we might as well think of a new name. My opinion doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of things.

Also, didn't I tell you not to talk to me? No one gives a fuck about you around here.

They wont let him play on the Ravens board anymore.....

aa14
02-10-2013, 11:18 AM
They wont let him play on the Ravens board anymore.....

Oh look, the guy who was calling people "retarded" in another thread. Here to add more substance to the conversation, I see. :blah:

The_Joker
02-10-2013, 11:23 AM
10 out of 100 Natives find offense to the name "Redskins." In this day in age, that is more than enough. Still a minority, but the loudest minority.

Buddha Bus
02-10-2013, 11:30 AM
10 out of 100 Natives find offense to the name "Redskins." In this day in age, that is more than enough. Still a minority, but the loudest minority.

:link: :link: :link: :link: :link: :link:

The_Joker
02-10-2013, 11:33 AM
:link: :link: :link: :link: :link: :link:

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100624200030/zelda/images/thumb/9/9d/Link_Artwork_1_%28Twilight_Princess%29.png/250px-Link_Artwork_1_%28Twilight_Princess%29.png

Oh, wrong Link :chuckle:

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/6093796/

stb_steeler
02-10-2013, 11:55 AM
Oh look, the guy who was calling people "retarded" in another thread. Here to add more substance to the conversation, I see. :blah:

It was "person" not people Mr. hey look at me i need attention! :wink02:

aa14
02-10-2013, 12:01 PM
Oh, wrong Link :chuckle:

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/6093796/

Most Americans are okay with the name for several reasons, most notably they realize the name isn't sustained by the organization to be an insult to Native Americans. The team has been around for a very long time and the moniker's racist roots are obscured through time and desensitization. Just because most people are complacent does not make it okay. The few "whiners" you refer to are estimated to be over half a million people, discounting people like me who are not part of the Native American minority. If you walked around my hometown calling native men on the street "redskin" you'd get your ass beat. The anecdote of my classmate fighting over being called the name isn't an isolated incident. Maybe it doesn't happen often but it is something people like him will remember and hurt over for much of their lives. He didn't last at that school for much longer after that. He was a pariah, perpetually anxious and irritable because he knew at any time one of several kids in the class could whip a slew of racist slurs towards him. I see why he is probably in that small minority of "whiners".

aa14
02-10-2013, 12:13 PM
It was "person" not people Mr. hey look at me i need attention! :wink02:

The plurality of the word isn't what made it offensive and it is hilariously ironic you're arguing the discrepancy in this particular thread.

Blacksburg Zach
02-10-2013, 03:13 PM
While it would be admittedly strange to have a Washington-based football team not be known as the Redskins, in the end they are not my team, and whatever decision the organization makes would not bother me in either case.

The_Joker
02-10-2013, 04:49 PM
While it would be admittedly strange to have a Washington-based football team not be known as the Redskins, in the end they are not my team, and whatever decision the organization makes would not bother me in either case.

It would. They're my home team, and as such, I will support them second only to the Steelers.

SteelerEmpire
02-10-2013, 05:32 PM
Say it ain't so. My vote goes to NO. It'll always be the Redskins, why change it because a handful of whiners don't like it. (Fact, Redskins was a term invented by the Natives themselves to distinguish themselves from Whites.)

I live in DC so this is pretty big new here.

They party so darn much over there, the team should take off the "Redskins" and replace it with "Firewater".

SteelersCanada
02-10-2013, 05:34 PM
If people really gave a shit and wanted change, they wouldn't be discussing this in the offseason. It's, yet again, another article that has to be written for headline purposes so we have something to talk about until the draft and/or training camp. It's bullshit, and if 90% of Native Americans don't care about the name then why should it be changed? So the 10% can change a name that a) has absolutely no effect on their day to day life and b) has been around as a sports team for over 80 years?

No. It won't and shouldn't be changed.

Vis
02-10-2013, 06:18 PM
George Preston Marshall:

Marshall has gained infamy for his intractable opposition to having African-Americans on his roster. According to professor Charles Ross, "For 24 years Marshall was identified as the leading racist in the NFL".[3] Though the league had previously had a sprinkling of black players, blacks were excluded from all NFL teams just one year after the then-Boston Braves entered the league.
While the rest of the league began signing individual blacks in 1946 and actually drafting blacks in 1949, Marshall held out until 1962 before signing a black player. Along with his own personal views, Marshall refused to sign African-American players because of a desire to appeal to Southern markets. For most of his tenure as owner, the Redskins were the southernmost team in the NFL.[4] His intractability was routinely mocked in Washington Post columns by legendary writer Shirley Povich, who sarcastically used terms from the civil rights movement and related court cases to describe games: for instance, he once wrote that Jim Brown "integrated" the end zone, making the score "separate but unequal".
Finally, in 1962, Interior Secretary Stewart Udall and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy issued an ultimatum — unless Marshall signed a black player, the government would revoke the Redskins' 30-year lease on the year-old D.C. Stadium (now Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium), which had been paid for by government money and was owned by the Washington city government (which, then and now, is formally an arm of the federal government). Marshall's chief response was to make Ernie Davis, Syracuse's all-American running back, his number-one draft choice for 1962. Davis, however, demanded a trade, saying, "I won't play for that S.O.B." He got his wish, as the team sent him to Cleveland for All-Pro Bobby Mitchell. Mitchell was the first African American football player to play a game for the Redskins, and he played with the team for several years, initially at running back, but he made his biggest impact at wide receiver.


That man gave the team it's racist name. There's one hell of a point of pride for its fans.

charlesk
02-10-2013, 07:37 PM
If people really gave a shit and wanted change, they wouldn't be discussing this in the offseason. It's, yet again, another article that has to be written for headline purposes so we have something to talk about until the draft and/or training camp. It's bullshit, and if 90% of Native Americans don't care about the name then why should it be changed? So the 10% can change a name that a) has absolutely no effect on their day to day life and b) has been around as a sports team for over 80 years?

No. It won't and shouldn't be changed.

Same issue came up when I was in college. I went to the U of Minn and our main sport was hockey and our main rival was the N.Dakota Fighting Sioux. A few people complained who were not Native American and they complained loud. Easy to protest and complain when you do not have a job to go to. Some shakedown attempts followed and the NCAA which delves into politics far more than I believe they should (politics and sports should be separate) threatened severe action. ND ceased using the logo (despite have the support of the majority of tribes in the area) and also ceased some financial support for programs and aforementioned Tribes. But the logo which never hurt anyone was changed so that was all that mattered. Nothing to help the Native American population of North Dakota; of whom many many suffer in abject poverty in one of the most prosperous states in the Union was ever discussed. Onto the next cause of the week. Bottom line is if you care enough about this type of stuff to protest and sue and threaten action and so on then you need to get a job. People like this (and I made this argument on campus once) are just morons. I said that one needed to pick one's battles very carefully and make sure whatever you were fighting in support of was important because if all you do is protest and complain all the time no one cares about anything you have to say. That's what happened to the Occupy groups. Screaming, yelling, and protesting about everything and very soon no one cared anymore. Peace

BlaZeQuietly
02-10-2013, 10:09 PM
It would be like having a team called the "Birmingham Black Skins" or the "San Fransisco Homosexuals" Big deal.

BlaZeQuietly
02-10-2013, 10:10 PM
Wasn't someone whining about the Cleveland Indians a few years back then everyone got over it?

Bane
02-10-2013, 11:15 PM
Say it ain't so. My vote goes to NO. It'll always be the Redskins, why change it because a handful of whiners don't like it. (Fact, Redskins was a term invented by the Natives themselves to distinguish themselves from Whites.)

I live in DC so this is pretty big new here.

I'd like to see your sources on this "fact". I've read otherwise, that it was a term used by Brits to distinguish the Native Americans from the Indians from, well, India.

I live in D.C. as well. I don't care for the name because I think it just sounds stupid. I don't have the least bit of Native American heritage, but I can't help but feel like "Redskin" has a very offensive connotation to it.

*Sigh*

It is inevitable, isn't it?

Then what do you guys suggest changing it to?

Warriors? Pigskins?

Senators or Presidents. Either name would easily fall in line with with two of the other major teams here (Capitals and Nationals). There's even history behind the names:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Senators_%28NFL%29

Buddha Bus
02-11-2013, 04:32 PM
*Sigh*

It is inevitable, isn't it?

Then what do you guys suggest changing it to?

Warriors? Pigskins?

How about "Pasty-Ass Crackers"?

MACH1
02-11-2013, 04:34 PM
Foreskins

Buddha Bus
02-11-2013, 04:35 PM
Foreskins

I've been calling them that for years already. :chuckle:

JeromeBetties63
02-11-2013, 10:19 PM
Many native american "whiners" find it very offensive as it has been used as a derogatory term against them for a long time. I honestly don't know what it's origins are but I grew up in Saskatchewan, Canada and I witnessed a boy fight another boy in school for being called that exact name. He was being bullied and it lit a fuse. It is a sore spot and for you to write them all off as "whiners" is quite frankly ignorant.

No they don't. I lived and worked on a reservation in Arizona. The sports fans there rooted for every team named after Native Americans. It was a source of pride to them. Don't spout or swallow liberal propaganda. :blah::blah::blah:

BleedPurple
02-12-2013, 12:15 AM
Must be an inside joke

aa14
02-12-2013, 12:28 AM
No they don't. I lived and worked on a reservation in Arizona. The sports fans there rooted for every team named after Native Americans. It was a source of pride to them. Don't spout or swallow liberal propaganda. :blah::blah::blah:

You used to work on a reservation in one part of one state of one country in North America. With that experience you know Native American's collective attitude and experience with this particular moniker? That is gold. The boy growing up on the reservation in Arizona isn't going to have the same experience as a girl in an affluent suburb of Salt-lake city. He isn't going to have the same experience as the lone Native American boy that was in my class in the mid 90's. The kid in my class wasn't part of a collective or reservation. There was no exuded Native American pride. He sure as hell wasn't going to show up in a Redskin's coat or jersey or winter hat. I am relatively sure he would have believed that was the worst thing he could've done. I alluded in a previous post this boy's experience was probably not happening often and not the norm. That doesn't mean we should write him and this ten percent off as an outlier or "whiners". "Redskin" was used against him in a hateful way more than a few times. Just because everything is swell where you come from doesn't mean it's swell everywhere. Maybe "Redskin" is rarely used as a slur in most areas of North America but it was used as one where I grew up. The vernacular and lexicon of a population has huge variations with contrasting populations, even in North America. To label my personal experience as "liberal propaganda" is asinine and ignorant. Maybe I'm wrong and no one outside my hometown has been called "Redskin" in a derogatory manner and the 10% really are a bunch of over-sensitive "whiners" but nothing I've said comes from a political agenda. You don't know my political affiliation but everyone now knows the skewed angle you're coming from. Flame-bait political bullshit is incredibly insipid, try something else.:coffee:

Fire Arians
02-12-2013, 01:06 AM
do native americans take offense to the Red Man brand chewing tobacco?

i'm sure african americans would have a problem if someone made a product called black man chicken wings or something lol

who am i to say, but i can see how the name could be considered offensive

PhantomJB93
02-12-2013, 02:03 AM
I hate the Redskins but I will be pissed if they change their name. It's been around forever. People are too easily offended. Most of the people who complain about it are just looking for something and anything to complain about and have no actual Native American heritage or reason to feel so strongly toward the name. The Native Americans made up the term to distinguish themselves from whites anyway, it wasn't a derogatory name given to them by others.

The_Joker
02-12-2013, 06:14 AM
Hey, Neo-Cons, I'm a Liberal and I support the Redslins name. Don't bring that BS in here.

ricardisimo
02-12-2013, 07:00 AM
*Sigh*

It is inevitable, isn't it?

Then what do you guys suggest changing it to?

Warriors? Pigskins?
"Your Fascist Overlords"

For the record, the time has long passed for these race-based team names. There are no "Honky" teams in the NFL for a reason (several reasons, actually :chuckle: ) and it's time to extrapolate and move along. The Redskins are an embarrassment to themselves and to the league, and a name change might give them a fresh start. That they are the team from the nation's capital - rather than from Oklahoma City - just underscores what a backwards people we really are.

tony hipchest
02-12-2013, 11:44 AM
do native americans take offense to the Red Man brand chewing tobacco?

i'm sure african americans would have a problem if someone made a product called black man chicken wings or something lol



:chuckle: yeah... probably so.

MasterOfPuppets
02-12-2013, 02:43 PM
"Your Fascist Overlords"

For the record, the time has long passed for these race-based team names. There are no "Honky" teams in the NFL for a reason (several reasons, actually :chuckle: ) and it's time to extrapolate and move along. The Redskins are an embarrassment to themselves and to the league, and a name change might give them a fresh start. That they are the team from the nation's capital - rather than from Oklahoma City - just underscores what a backwards people we really are.
the name is taken....:noidea:

http://img0014.popscreencdn.com/13593929_live-in-memphis-from-the-nouveaux-honkies.jpg

how about the washington bribes....
heres a logo...
http://www.sicklycat.com/wp-content/uploads/1-bribery%5B1%5D.jpg

WVABE
02-12-2013, 03:05 PM
The Washington Martials, that name will fit perfectly, we'll just have to see.

The_Joker
02-12-2013, 08:12 PM
I like this article. Remember, according to NBC 90% of Natives do not mind the Redskins name.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/37942-redskins-racism-or-easy-target

If they were the Savages or Scalpers I would understand those who are offended, but Redskins was a term USED BY NATIVES to refer to themselves, or by whites the same way you would just say "Blacks" or "Whites". Redskins is NOT a racist term. Is Black offensive? Is white? It's as offensive as "Chiefs". Would the New Orleans Cajuns be offensive? Would the Mexico Aztecs be offensive?

Go Steelers, but I am not afraid to support my hometown and say Hail to the Redskins.

The_Joker
02-13-2013, 06:01 AM
MYTH: The Redskins abuse the Native American people and use them as tools and savages for a stupid sports game!

TRUTH: Uh, have you ever seen how the Redskins treat the Native image? Let's look at their fight songs lyrics. "Hail to the Redskins" implies they are worthy of honor. "Hail victory, braves on the warpath, fight for old DC" implies they are victorious warriors fighting for their hometown. I could go on. The original lyrics mentioned scalping, something false and slanderous to the Native image, and was removed very shortly. Every mention of Redskins implies a brave warrior, not a savage.

MYTH: Native Americans find offense to the name Redskins!

TRUTH: Uh... no they don't. According to NBC http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/6093796/ 90% of Natives do not mind the term Redskins, or the football teams name. I think they don't mind.

MYTH: YOU'RE RACIST, JERK!

TRUTH: Actually I am a bleeding heart liberal, who has friends of many races and a fascination of Native American culture. I simply think the Redskins team is fine. Nice try though. Look I'd be pretty fucking pissed too if my land was destroyed and my numbers crushed, but I'd also root for a team named the Washington Europeans as well. There is no harm meant, the opposite in fact.

Go Steelers and HTTR.

*PS I wrote this wearing a Steelers jersey, don't say I am not loyal to my favorite team either...*

The_Joker
02-13-2013, 07:18 AM
do native americans take offense to the Red Man brand chewing tobacco?

i'm sure african americans would have a problem if someone made a product called black man chicken wings or something lol

:toofunny: I laughed more than I should.

JeromeBetties63
02-18-2013, 05:24 PM
You used to work on a reservation in one part of one state of one country in North America. With that experience you know Native American's collective attitude and experience with this particular moniker? That is gold. The boy growing up on the reservation in Arizona isn't going to have the same experience as a girl in an affluent suburb of Salt-lake city. He isn't going to have the same experience as the lone Native American boy that was in my class in the mid 90's. The kid in my class wasn't part of a collective or reservation. There was no exuded Native American pride. He sure as hell wasn't going to show up in a Redskin's coat or jersey or winter hat. I am relatively sure he would have believed that was the worst thing he could've done. I alluded in a previous post this boy's experience was probably not happening often and not the norm. That doesn't mean we should write him and this ten percent off as an outlier or "whiners". "Redskin" was used against him in a hateful way more than a few times. Just because everything is swell where you come from doesn't mean it's swell everywhere. Maybe "Redskin" is rarely used as a slur in most areas of North America but it was used as one where I grew up. The vernacular and lexicon of a population has huge variations with contrasting populations, even in North America. To label my personal experience as "liberal propaganda" is asinine and ignorant. Maybe I'm wrong and no one outside my hometown has been called "Redskin" in a derogatory manner and the 10% really are a bunch of over-sensitive "whiners" but nothing I've said comes from a political agenda. You don't know my political affiliation but everyone now knows the skewed angle you're coming from. Flame-bait political bullshit is incredibly insipid, try something else.:coffee:

Well, let's see, my experience: hundreds of male and female Natives Americans of all ages over a several year period. You: one kid in your class. I stand by my experience....it was a widespread sense of pride. It's only a few pc people or some lib needing a cause that make this an issue. You are wrong. "redskin" is not a negative epithet that is used by bigots. Maybe you're just sensitive cause you did grow up in some pocket of racial bigotry. If that's the case, I will give you some latitude for being surrounded by prejudice jerks for your formational years. But for the most part, this stuff is born in the freshman classroom of some liberal prof who tapped into you and others "white guilt" and convinced you that this is some noble, redemptive cause. Again, I INTENTIONALLY AND SPECIFICALLY have asked numerous Native Americans I taught and worked with whether this was an issue. I can honestly say I never encounter a single one who was bothered by it...just the opposite. My guess is that less than 10% of the NA population cares about this at all....its just another case of a few angry people or someone who thinks they're gonna save baby seals and purge the language. And you clearly don't know where I am coming from....since I chose to work with, among and for Native Americans to increase education, reduce poverty, deal with social issues, etc. I remain friends with many of my former Native students and co-workers even though it has been several years since I left the area. They don't agree with your tenth grade classmate and neither do I.