The National Football League Washington Redskin's (based in Washington D.C.) mascot is a Native American Brave.
There are Native American schools that call their teams Redskins.
The term is used affectionately by some natives, similar to the way the N-word is used by some African-Americans.
In a recent poll to ask native people about the subject, 90 percent of respondents did not consider the term offensive, although many question the cultural credentials of the respondents.
A 2013 USA Today poll found widespread support for the redskins name. The poll indicated that 79 percent of Americans believe that the Redskins should keep their name.
What's more offensive the NFL Washington Redskin's Native American Brave Mascot or Dan Pfeiffer, a senior adviser to President Obama tweeting the N word.
Where in the Constitution does it say you have the right to not be offended? Every skin color - culture white, black, red, yellow has derogatory stereotypes about them. I think you can guess most of them.
Activist Suzan Shown Harjo, who has filed a lawsuit seeking to strip the "Redskins" trademark from the football team, said the polls neglected to ask some crucial questions:
"Are you a tribal person? What is your nation? What is your tribe? Would you say you are culturally or socially or politically native?" Harjo asked. Those without such connections cannot represent native opinions, she said.
According to Forbes Magazine, the Redskins are the third most valuable franchise in the NFL, behind the Dallas Cowboys and New England Patriots, and were valued at approximately $1.6 billion as of 2013.
Do you really think this is about being offended of the mascot or is it winning millions in a lawsuit?
Are you offended?