In general, I'd have to say that when someone tells you something you say or name is offensive to them, and this is a fairly widespread belief among the people who feel offended, you have to listen. And you probably need to do something about it.

This isn't a case for analysis: in other words, no historical, linguistic, or even "constitutional" appeals to "individual freedom" are appropriate here. It's not your argument. If a group—not an individual or two but a significant number of the named population—feels offended, we need to change up the language. Because that is how we roll as liberals: we are sensitive to the needs of minority or oppressed or disenfranchised people. And when they are telling you a term like "Redskins" makes them uncomfortable, then it does. And it's best to change it. (Same for the "c" word, boyz. You don't get to decide whether it's offensive or not; the people who are offended do.)

Was the epithet 'redskins' ever used affectionately toward native Americans? The answer *should* put an end to all further discussion, but instead we see apologists contriving all manner of excuses for continued use of a term that was coined during an American genocidal frenzy.