Here's the litmus test: if it's something you wouldn't say to the face of someone in the class, then it's probably offensive. In the case of Cleveland and Atlanta, the logos were the big issues. Caricatures can easily be insulting. In Washington's case, it's the name. I think the Braves quietly retired the Indian-faced logo they used in the 70's-80's. The names, though, aren't inherently pejorative, unlike Washington's. And one does not need to be a member of a suspect class in order to be offended by derogatory terms applied to that class. I'm certainly not equating the offense of hearing it with being the recipient but to assert that if you're not a member you shouldn't be offended is silly. And it's also weak to assert that because some members of that group have no problems with the name doesn't mean you can't argue its offensiveness. But I don't think the cases against Cleveland or Atlanta (if/when it happens) are on the same ground as Washington's.
