Kentucky teen and Confederate flag prom dress

The BBQ Pit
101

Holy Cow! That is a new one on me. Slavery is a wart ?

So, because many cultures have treated segments of the population badly, it’s OK that we did?

Jeebus.

Slavery and the Old South were not Tara and 12 Oaks. Most slave owners were small farmers who owned one or two slaves (half of my heritage from VA and KY–my ancestors always had “one or two darkies about the place”. The other half is New England abolitionist). The huge plantations dominated the “market”, but many many slaves were on small farms.

And they were beaten and raped and whipped and kept illiterate on those small farms. Why else the chains, the dogs, the constant threat of injury or “selling South”? Why, to keep those uppity folk in line! Why else the sermons that preached Sunday after Sunday that Negros were lesser people? Rationalization for a way of life that was known at the time to be evil. It was a crime–a crime-to teach a slave to read!

Frankly, I am wondering why you want to rehabilitate slavery and all it’s inherent evils at all.

This girl needs to get a clue–the school said no, she did it anyway and apparently she is getting away with her genteel racism under the guise of “historic cultural pride”.

this is disgusting, but not surprising. I doubt that her classmates would have “dissed” her choice of outfit. And I’ll bet that most of her classmates feel that a victory of some kind has been won for what exactly? White pride? One in the eye for political correctness?
Nothing could be further than truth, there.

102

Just a wonder - how many in the South who were calling them damned libruls traitors for disagreeing with their President were doing so under the flag of the biggest act of treason ever seen on these shores?

Just a thought.

103

Please don’t play with strawmen. Instead try reading my post #96.

Two of my great-great grandfathers owned slaves. In each case, both the oral history and the historic record indicate that well after the Civil War, their former slaves were still quite loyal to their former owners. One of these men owned about 130 slaves, and after the war he divided up his property among his former slaves where they lived for generations.

Now, holmes, it’s your turn. Show me evidence that* each and every * slave owner beat his slaves, raped their women, and generally treated them cruelly.

104

Now the IQ of thread drops even further. Find where anyone on this thread has said that all slaveowners were cruel and all slaves were beaten and raped. What has been said is that slavery was a cruel institution. If you don’t agree with this basic point, then yes–you are defending slavery and deserve all the negative attention you’re receiving in this thread.

Slavery wouldn’t have lasted hundreds of years if all the slaveowners were kind and generous. Former slaves and their descendants would not have been mired in decades of abject poverty and demoralization if all slaveowners had divvied up their property among their other “property”. Kind and generous former slaveowners would not have exploited their former slaves by share-cropping them to death, or supporting laws that nullified their right to vote and live free, but supposedly a lot of them did. If that’s what kind and generous people do, then I’d hate to see mean and hateful.

You say the “slaveowners were cruel” contingent are basing their belief on stereotypes, not history. But unless you lived back in those days, how are you so certain that your understanding of slavery is any more accurate or less clouded by personal biases? Who would want to admit to having a cruel great-greatgrandfather?

105

It’s a good thing, I never said every one…but I joke.

Sure. Ah yes. Here it is. I have spoken with all the slaves and they do indeed confirm that every single owner, except for your ancestors; did indeed rape, beat and otherwise treat them badly.

I trust you take my word for it. It’s not like family would distort the truth to hide their shame. I’m sure they wouldn’t have sex with the slaves and then hide it. I’m sure your ancestors didn’t sell a slave that didn’t behave…no, not yours.

Of course you have signed and notarized documentation from * each and every * slave that your ancestor owned, that they were never mistreated…right?

Or are you relying on the word of, well slave-owners and people who may be too frightened to tell the truth?

Look if you want absolution, I can’t provide it. If you wish to believe that your family was somehow different and can’t be lumped in with the stereotype, fine.

Hell you may be right. Good for them, they saw the light…what happened before they saw the light?

Of course it’s impossible for me to prove that every slave owner was a beast. So what? They were slave owners and thats the sin. There are no “brownie” points to be given, for not beating to death your slaves. A rapist is a rapist whether he uses a drug or punches you in the face. The result is the same and the contempt should be to.

Do you really think your ancestor would have let their slaves just walk away? You really don’t believe that they would punish a runaway slave? Or do really believe if given a choice between freedom, those slaves would willing remain a slave?

The loyalty of slave is only as strong as the chains that bid him…all chains aren’t made of metal. Too bad those slaves never had the ability to chose to be loyal, before the chains and you’ll never know whether those stories of loyalty were heartfelt or from fear.

sorry.

106

I wasn’t “playing with strawmen”, I was pointing out the inherent flaw in your argument. The everyone does it, so it’s ok argument.

But my bigger and more important point was my asking why you feel the need to rehab slave owners? Talk about revisionist history! Yep, the black man just wanted a place to lay his head, loyal to the last to Massah.

Never mind the dysfunctional and sick relationship that can develope between opressor and opressed. Maybe those “loyal” slaves were more scared of life outside the farm/plantation than happy to “part of the family”.

Holmes’ point is an excellent one. The mere fact of one human OWNING another one is enough to make slavery despicable and worthy of all the contempt heaped upon it. I don’t care if Massah tucked each individual slave in at night after bedtime stories. Show me a person who will take slavery over free will–the burden of proof is not on those who deplore “the peculiar institution”–it is on those who espouse it’s virtues and defend it’s history.

As to your other points, yes, there are many things in American history to be ashamed of. Slavery, the interment of Japanese people in WW2, the fact that women did not get the vote until 1920 something, Jim Crow laws. I could go on, but those will do. We are supposed to be progressing as a culture and a people–people like the girl here who purports to stand for “America” and “Freedom of Speech” prove how far we have yet to go.

107

OK. With that out of the way, I agree that Tinker is not on point, and there’s no SC case that is directly on point. However, Tinker - as modified by Fraser and Hazelwood - remains the key case law for analyzing student free speech cases.

That allegation, if true, may prove fatal to the school district’s case.

In Castorina v. Madison County School Board, 2001 FED App. 0064P (6th Cir. 2001), the Sixth Circuit reversed a summary judgement and remanded for fact-finding on a Confederate flag wearing case.

The Sixth Circuit said:

To prevail, the school has to be able to point to actual disturbance or disruption relating to the display of the Confederate flag.

The school must ban the “X” as it refers to Malcolm X, for example, if it bans the Confederate flag.

The fact that this happens at prom, not school, weakens the school’s case. The key holding in Tinker is predicated on disruption of the educational environment. The prom is not educational; the school’s ability to regulate speech is weakened as a result.

  • Rick
108

sigh

Or, what King of Soup said first.

109

Look dude, face it. Your great-great-grandfathers were assholes who thought they could own another human being. They took people - real live human beings - and forced them to work without pay, no doubt thinking it was a fine thing to do. When you defend them, you look like an asshole too.

Breaking news: a lot of us had ancestors who did or believed despicable or misguided things. My great-grandparents were communists in Russia before they came to America (before the communist revolution). You know what? They were wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Communism in Russia led to millions of deaths. It’s okay, just because my great-grandparents thought it was a good idea doesn’t mean I have to defend it.

110

OK.

I’m not seeing anything there to indicate that the posters can see anything beyond the stereotype. But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe some of these posters will acknowledge that maybe, just, maybe, there were some slave owners who treated their slaves decently.

Where in the world did you get the idea that I don’t see slavery as a cruel institution in and of itself? Are you not paying any attention at all?

None of us lived back then, so that caveat applies to all of us.

Finally I wouldn’t mind admitting to a cruel g-g grandfather one bit. Some of my favorite ancestors are the nuts, ne’er-do-wells and rascallions that pepper my family tree.

111

We White Southerners have much to be proud of and much to be ashamed of. Too few of us have the ability to tell one set of things from the other. This young lady is among that group.

The Confederate flag is regarded by many people to be an American swastika. It does not matter if you or I believe that, many of our friends and neighbors do.

Winston Churchill said a gentleman never causes hurt unintentionally. All of us, whatever our gender, should strive to be gentlemen. This young lady has not yet learned that important lesson.

All in all, she has behaved as a child would at a time when we begin to expect more from her.

On the other hand, it is a nice looking and original design.

112

[QUOTE=bnorton]
Maybe some of these posters will acknowledge that maybe, just, maybe, there were some slave owners who treated their slaves decently.

[QUOTE]

No one including me as said that ALL slave owners were cruel. We were refering to what I believe were common practices and methods of treating the slaves. It’s irrelevant that Mr. Jones doesn’t rape his slaves, because every slave understood that if they displeased Mr. Jones, they would be send to Mr. Smith who did.

You tossing the word ‘decent’, without understanding what it means. A decent act, isn’t the lesser of two evils. If they wanted to treat their slaves decently they would have freed them. It doesn’t get any more decent than that does it? You cannot treat people decently, if you deny them the right to live decent lives, what slave has that right?

Christ man, I can give you all the treasure in the world, but if I deny you the right to chose where to lay your head at night, I’m not treating you decently; just not as cruel as Mr. Smith. Utimately any loyalty you have towards me, is based on the fact that if you don’t please me, I may give you to someone who isn’t has ‘decent’ as me…like Mr. Smith.

Is the act of decent person?

113

And so there we have it don’t we. In your view there was no difference between one slave owner and another, and no way for one to be different from another. Once they owned a slave they became, by definition, monsters no matter how they treated their slaves. The slave owner who had deep reservations about the institution, and treated his slaves decently is the same as the guy who routinely beat the men and raped the women. Keep in mind that George Washington - George fucking Washington - was a slave owner.

Perhaps we’re talking past each other, so let me try to give this some focus. You seem to be saying that all slave owners were the same evil shits. I’m saying that they were as variable as any group of people. Is that what we are debating?

114

Yes, you were. Restating my argument like this:

is textbook strawman.

115

Yes all slave owners were evil shites. The very act of slavery taints them, the way it taints this nation. The way it taints the Constitution. The way it taints the South. Period.

However and this isn’t what we’re discussing, The Constitution, The Nation, even the South doesn’t have to defined by Slavery unless they allow themselves to be…by using the CSA and then claiming that they don’t understand the Hyper-sensitively…you’re gonna get tagged and called on it. No mercy.

So yes, Washington was a evil shite who knew slavery was wrong and did it anyway, his value as an American doesn’t wash away the stain; but allows us to see him as more than just a slave-owner, because he **was[b/] more.

He wasn’t defined by slavery, although it was a part of his life, The CSA is Slavery.

Clearer?

116

Well, now we’re back to the OP. You seem to think that the Confederate flag = racism. While it is true that some people see it that way, and indeed make that kind of statement by displaying the flag; not everyone agrees with that. That’s the thing about symbolism. By its very nature it’s a very subjective thing.

Many people in this thread seem to see what the girl is wearing and think they know what’s in her heart. Myself, I’m not so sure, but I’ll take her word for it that it’s about her heritage and not racism.

117

First off, thanks to Bricker for quoting the relevant part of Castorina in his post, which I was too lazy and squint-eyed to do.

Those posters who have acknowledged that every culture has much to be ashamed of are perfectly correct. But there’s another step involved here. Most people, after all, do not choose to resurrect the icons of the most shameful part of their past for public display and point to them as symbols of pride in their heritage.

My question remains: with almost four centuries of history to pick from, why choose the short-lived, ill-conceived and catastrophically unsuccessful Confederacy’s battle flag as an emblem of pride in one’s heritage? To those who insist that it isn’t a symbol of slavery/racism because they don’t mean it to be so, I concede that I’ll never convince them. Instead, I’ll say the flag is a symbol of treason and bloodshed in defense of those things.

I think the young lady should have been allowed to wear the damned dress. Freedom of speech, at least, is that important (her lawyer’s name actually strikes me as more offensive). Inalienable rights are not subject to tests of wisdom or responsibility. At the same time, “you have a right to say” is not the same as “what you say is right.”

118

I am really wary of controls on proms like this, having seen exactly the same arguments put forward for refusing to allow gay students the right to take their date of choice to the prom. (Not the same arguments by people here, the same arguments by the school authorities).

It gets extremely difficult under the First Amendment to ban some speech (and what she is doing is without a shadow of a doubt speech) and not others. Banning her from wearing this allows those who support her to rally around her, mumblign about their oppression and the attack on their rights. Allowing her to wear it, on the other hand, identifies her for what she is. Her views aren’t going to be beaten by high school bans, they are going to be beaten by her class mates telling her how fucked up she is for wearing it.

I’ll agree its a symbol of hate, but I’ll disagree that banning it is the most effective way of dealing with it. Especially not if we ever want to use the ‘prom is an integral part of school life, you cannot discriminate against other groups’ argument at any time in the future.

119

I will point out that the swastika was the symbol of not only the Nazi party, but Germany for a while, thus it was a national symbol. Not all the Germans supported genocide. And, the swastika is/was also an (east) Indian symbol and an Amerind symbol, and in neither case is it linked to racism.

The rebel flag was ONLY the symbol of a group of “racist traitors”. True, some few weren’t racist, but the CSA was founded on Slavery- whilst Genocide was a bizzare offshoot of the Nazi nation.

Nowadays, true- some dudes who wear the Confed symbol are doing it mainly because they are "good old boys’ and aren’t nessesarily all that racist (although certainly non PC). And now- anyone who wears the Swastika is wearing it either for shock value or because they support some very racist views. So- if I see that CSA symbol I think “redneck” which is several steps above “racist moron”- which you get with the swastika.

120

I guess the question becomes, how far do we have to let other people’s “subjective interpretations” and/or ignorance (or denial) of history go in forming our opinion of the symbols they choose to display. The Confederate flag(s), whatever other baggage they have or have not picked up, surely symbolize the Confederate States of America. And the Confederate States of America (which is not the same thing as “the South”) had as its “cornerstone” the institution of slavery. (Those aren’t just my words; Alexander Stephens, the Vice President of the Confederacy, said so on the eve of the war.) However sincere this young lady and many others who display Confederate regalia may be, they can’t escape the facts of history.