Can you tell me about upscale southern culture?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all about church. Where you go to church. I was invite to a Welcome Party, given in my honor when I moved to the neighborhood. All they wanted to ask about was church. Finally, for a few of them, I talked about our very urban church ...thinking, gee I guess they really have an interest. Wrong.

I think mostly, the ladies wanted to know -- which of their social circles I would frequent. When there wasn't any overlap, I was unimportant. I don't think it's that they decided, on any deep level, that we had nothing in common. I think it was more - their relationships are shallow and all they cared about was knowing I wouldn't have any affect on their established social circles.

Not for the wealthy! The wealthy southerners typically attend church, but their social lives and conversations rarely have anything to do with church. Trust me, I know. What you are describing is more middle class southern culture in a rural area or exurb.

+1 Social life revolves more around secular clubs than church for this set. Besides the big obvious ones like a country club and junior league, there are millions of other random clubs. My inlaws belonged to clubs related to things like showing dogs, gardens, sorority alumni, bridge, boats, books, and a bunch of other things I can't remember. All of these clubs have some sort of socializing element.

Garden Club. Every wealthy southern woman is in the Garden Club.

+1. And in some places, it's even more specific. The Camelia Club, for example.

Camellia Club?

Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all about church. Where you go to church. I was invite to a Welcome Party, given in my honor when I moved to the neighborhood. All they wanted to ask about was church. Finally, for a few of them, I talked about our very urban church ...thinking, gee I guess they really have an interest. Wrong.

I think mostly, the ladies wanted to know -- which of their social circles I would frequent. When there wasn't any overlap, I was unimportant. I don't think it's that they decided, on any deep level, that we had nothing in common. I think it was more - their relationships are shallow and all they cared about was knowing I wouldn't have any affect on their established social circles.

Not for the wealthy! The wealthy southerners typically attend church, but their social lives and conversations rarely have anything to do with church. Trust me, I know. What you are describing is more middle class southern culture in a rural area or exurb.

+1 Social life revolves more around secular clubs than church for this set. Besides the big obvious ones like a country club and junior league, there are millions of other random clubs. My inlaws belonged to clubs related to things like showing dogs, gardens, sorority alumni, bridge, boats, books, and a bunch of other things I can't remember. All of these clubs have some sort of socializing element.

Garden Club. Every wealthy southern woman is in the Garden Club.

+1. And in some places, it's even more specific. The Camelia Club, for example.

Camellia Club?

Wow.

http://mobilecamellia.org/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gucci is kind of tacky and Eurotrashy, no?

My DH is from a Virginia plantation family. We're one of the original families of this area. Their hobbies are Dog shows, horses, boats, that kind of thing.

Oh...and their other hobby is casual racism.

think of it as an homage to their history

Keep your racist BS to yourself.

How exactly do you think dynastic wealth centered around plantations was created?

This statement shows that you know noting about southern history. There was no dynastic wealth after the war; the region was devastated and did not reach any level of economic growth until well into the 20th century.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w25700?utm_campaign=ntwh&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntwg2

Actually they did quite well after the Civil War. Less than two decades after the Civil War, Southern slave-owning dynasties were back on top of the economic ladder, according to an ambitious new analysis from Leah Boustan of Princeton University, Katherine Eriksson of the University of California at Davis and Philipp Ager of the University of Southern Denmark.

Even after the enslaved people on whom their wealth was built were freed, Southern elites passed their advantages to their children through personal networks and social capital.

Unlike in much of the rest of the South, wealthy white families in Sherman’s path often had their land appropriated, seized or destroyed by Union forces. By 1870, affected families had a staggering 40 percent less wealth than similar folks in nearby counties.

“Yet, even in this extreme case, we find that elite sons completely caught up with or even surpassed the sons of comparably wealthy families in neighboring counties,” Boustan, Eriksson and Ager write.

These white families seem to have drawn upon exceptional social connections, the economists find.

Most notably, they married up. Boustan and her colleagues analyzed sociological indicators such as birth year and name choice to demonstrate that sons of slave owners tended to marry women from families with even more prewar wealth — probably at least in part because of their father-in-law’s network and influence.

[Anonymous]

^^ exactly. Why do you think Juneteenth is a holiday tomorrow?!?! They took that free labor as far as they could take it. Git what you can while you can git away with it.

To that end —- the ideology on cheap/free labor hasn’t shifted much. :/ I’m always so amused by the argument against immigration from people who thrive off of underpaid workers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all about church. Where you go to church. I was invite to a Welcome Party, given in my honor when I moved to the neighborhood. All they wanted to ask about was church. Finally, for a few of them, I talked about our very urban church ...thinking, gee I guess they really have an interest. Wrong.

I think mostly, the ladies wanted to know -- which of their social circles I would frequent. When there wasn't any overlap, I was unimportant. I don't think it's that they decided, on any deep level, that we had nothing in common. I think it was more - their relationships are shallow and all they cared about was knowing I wouldn't have any affect on their established social circles.

Not for the wealthy! The wealthy southerners typically attend church, but their social lives and conversations rarely have anything to do with church. Trust me, I know. What you are describing is more middle class southern culture in a rural area or exurb.

+1 Social life revolves more around secular clubs than church for this set. Besides the big obvious ones like a country club and junior league, there are millions of other random clubs. My inlaws belonged to clubs related to things like showing dogs, gardens, sorority alumni, bridge, boats, books, and a bunch of other things I can't remember. All of these clubs have some sort of socializing element.

Garden Club. Every wealthy southern woman is in the Garden Club.

+1. And in some places, it's even more specific. The Camelia Club, for example.

Camellia Club?

Wow.

http://mobilecamellia.org/

This is not an "old money" group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Quintessential genteel southern family

But we actually consider them Yankees (family not far enough back in the South)

I disagree. My H's family from Alabama thinks Texas is a different animal, not truly Southern. SW is a very very different culture than SE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Quintessential genteel southern family

But we actually consider them Yankees (family not far enough back in the South)

I disagree. My H's family from Alabama thinks Texas is a different animal, not truly Southern. SW is a very very different culture than SE.

Texas is it’s own thing, but it’s basically a hybrid. East Texas is Southern, and West Texas is Southwestern. Most of the settlers in East Texas came from Alabama, Mississippi, & Tennessee.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like you can’t wait for the ink to be dry on the marriage certificate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all about church. Where you go to church. I was invite to a Welcome Party, given in my honor when I moved to the neighborhood. All they wanted to ask about was church. Finally, for a few of them, I talked about our very urban church ...thinking, gee I guess they really have an interest. Wrong.

I think mostly, the ladies wanted to know -- which of their social circles I would frequent. When there wasn't any overlap, I was unimportant. I don't think it's that they decided, on any deep level, that we had nothing in common. I think it was more - their relationships are shallow and all they cared about was knowing I wouldn't have any affect on their established social circles.

Not for the wealthy! The wealthy southerners typically attend church, but their social lives and conversations rarely have anything to do with church. Trust me, I know. What you are describing is more middle class southern culture in a rural area or exurb.

+1 Social life revolves more around secular clubs than church for this set. Besides the big obvious ones like a country club and junior league, there are millions of other random clubs. My inlaws belonged to clubs related to things like showing dogs, gardens, sorority alumni, bridge, boats, books, and a bunch of other things I can't remember. All of these clubs have some sort of socializing element.

+1

No kidding. Whenever you have "certain groups" listed here, you can bet they are gabbing away, instead of actually working/doing the volunteer work that they are supposed to be doing. WTH is the point? Just go to lunch and be done with it - no sense in resume padding, when no one wants you there.

+1. Uh, the socializing is the point with the veneer of volunteering. My MIL is in a garden club and it's exactly this. My sister is in a southern Junior League and our families belonged to one of two respectable country clubs in the city. There was also a yacht club and a few supper clubs as well with some overlap.

No question the Junior League is social, but in many southern communities the JL is frequently the single largest private donor of funds, many times only surpassed by organizations like the United Way.

Yes, I understand (PP here). But it's money not time that you're donating. The money is the easy part!

This isn't correct, at least in any League I'm aware of. Each member has to donate X number of hours per week to a placement that is held for the year. You also pay dues, and serve on committees, in addition to all the fundraisers that are held.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gucci is kind of tacky and Eurotrashy, no?

My DH is from a Virginia plantation family. We're one of the original families of this area. Their hobbies are Dog shows, horses, boats, that kind of thing.

Oh...and their other hobby is casual racism.

think of it as an homage to their history

Keep your racist BS to yourself.

How exactly do you think dynastic wealth centered around plantations was created?

This statement shows that you know noting about southern history. There was no dynastic wealth after the war; the region was devastated and did not reach any level of economic growth until well into the 20th century.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w25700?utm_campaign=ntwh&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntwg2

Actually they did quite well after the Civil War. Less than two decades after the Civil War, Southern slave-owning dynasties were back on top of the economic ladder, according to an ambitious new analysis from Leah Boustan of Princeton University, Katherine Eriksson of the University of California at Davis and Philipp Ager of the University of Southern Denmark.

Even after the enslaved people on whom their wealth was built were freed, Southern elites passed their advantages to their children through personal networks and social capital.

Unlike in much of the rest of the South, wealthy white families in Sherman’s path often had their land appropriated, seized or destroyed by Union forces. By 1870, affected families had a staggering 40 percent less wealth than similar folks in nearby counties.

“Yet, even in this extreme case, we find that elite sons completely caught up with or even surpassed the sons of comparably wealthy families in neighboring counties,” Boustan, Eriksson and Ager write.

These white families seem to have drawn upon exceptional social connections, the economists find.

Most notably, they married up. Boustan and her colleagues analyzed sociological indicators such as birth year and name choice to demonstrate that sons of slave owners tended to marry women from families with even more prewar wealth — probably at least in part because of their father-in-law’s network and influence.

This doesn’t prove what you think it does. There are about four things wrong with this statement on its face. Anyway, all they “prove” is that areas in the South that were raided by Sherman weren’t worse off than “comparably” wealthy areas in the long run. They were “on top of the social ladder?” I think they mean “less poor than everyone else.” I’ve never heard anyone seriously make a case that the economy of the South wasn’t devastated by the Civil War (whether or not they got to meet General Sherman). I used to own a house in a town that Sherman did not touch (it fell early in the war), and the rich landowners in the area were not there pre-Civil War.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the one with the in laws and they have the upper class Southern accent. They like to make fun of the people from the more Appalachian part of the state (SW VA) and their accent.

As they should. That part of VA is anything but upscale.
Can you say Deliverance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My D (graduate student) has met someone she is serious about. They have been seriously dating for about 8 months. We met him for the first time a few months ago and have since seem him 2 other ties. A really wonderful guy, very well spoken, intelligent, well dressed, kind of checked all the boxes. He has told my husband he plans to propose by or on her bday (July).

A few weeks ago we had the opportunity to meet his parents and sister. I was incredible impressed, all very elegant, well spoken, charming and could not have ben nicer or more gracious. I have admittedly not really known many people from the south. His family is a very well known affluent family and I am intrigued.

They almost were like characters from a book (in a good way). impeccably dressed (read expensive, Gucci loafers mom had a Kelly bag, etc..) They were incredibly charming and charismatic. I was impressed with how close they aLL seem and they spoke about a few family traditions of going to a family summer house every summer for 3 weeks, and then a big family trip in the fall.

Maybe I am intrigued because this is so polar opposite of how I grew up. I am fascinated by them, this is almost like a character study for me. I think she will be eventually joining what looks to be a wonderful very close family who has had the good fortune to live the good life. They seemed much more civilized/genteel than their northwest counterparts (or anyone who I might compare them to). I cannot find any fault.

Are proper higher end southern families this way? Just curious if this is the "norm"

Wow, so engaged after only a few months, parents wear very expensive clothing. Nothing else to see there, ticks off all your boxes.

I wish you all luck, because you seem to have virtually no requirements for marriage.

obviously, your daughter is marrying him so quick for money. but how much will she get? Like, are we talking kid has trust fund with $5 to $20m in his name. or is it more like you hope his dad will offer to buy them a mcmansion with cash kind of thing, then maybe 10k here and there. Or maybe nice down payment, but with a mortgage (before parents die). These are things I'd seriously consider before rushing to marry and have a guys baby. It's a big decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gucci is kind of tacky and Eurotrashy, no?

My DH is from a Virginia plantation family. We're one of the original families of this area. Their hobbies are Dog shows, horses, boats, that kind of thing.

Oh...and their other hobby is casual racism.

think of it as an homage to their history

Keep your racist BS to yourself.

How exactly do you think dynastic wealth centered around plantations was created?

This statement shows that you know noting about southern history. There was no dynastic wealth after the war; the region was devastated and did not reach any level of economic growth until well into the 20th century.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w25700?utm_campaign=ntwh&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntwg2

Actually they did quite well after the Civil War. Less than two decades after the Civil War, Southern slave-owning dynasties were back on top of the economic ladder, according to an ambitious new analysis from Leah Boustan of Princeton University, Katherine Eriksson of the University of California at Davis and Philipp Ager of the University of Southern Denmark.

Even after the enslaved people on whom their wealth was built were freed, Southern elites passed their advantages to their children through personal networks and social capital.

Unlike in much of the rest of the South, wealthy white families in Sherman’s path often had their land appropriated, seized or destroyed by Union forces. By 1870, affected families had a staggering 40 percent less wealth than similar folks in nearby counties.

“Yet, even in this extreme case, we find that elite sons completely caught up with or even surpassed the sons of comparably wealthy families in neighboring counties,” Boustan, Eriksson and Ager write.

These white families seem to have drawn upon exceptional social connections, the economists find.

Most notably, they married up. Boustan and her colleagues analyzed sociological indicators such as birth year and name choice to demonstrate that sons of slave owners tended to marry women from families with even more prewar wealth — probably at least in part because of their father-in-law’s network and influence.

This doesn’t prove what you think it does. There are about four things wrong with this statement on its face. Anyway, all they “prove” is that areas in the South that were raided by Sherman weren’t worse off than “comparably” wealthy areas in the long run. They were “on top of the social ladder?” I think they mean “less poor than everyone else.” I’ve never heard anyone seriously make a case that the economy of the South wasn’t devastated by the Civil War (whether or not they got to meet General Sherman). I used to own a house in a town that Sherman did not touch (it fell early in the war), and the rich landowners in the area were not there pre-Civil War.

Try reading the study. I pulled quotes from Washington Post article covering this. We’ll wait until another highly respected Princeton professor develops a study refuting it. I imagine we”ll be waiting quite a while. Oh and the Sherman stuff was to show that even in extreme cases, they recovered and quite quickly. But sure, I’ll bet you can find an anecdote to contrary. you know, that’s why it’s called an anecdote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all about church. Where you go to church. I was invite to a Welcome Party, given in my honor when I moved to the neighborhood. All they wanted to ask about was church. Finally, for a few of them, I talked about our very urban church ...thinking, gee I guess they really have an interest. Wrong.

I think mostly, the ladies wanted to know -- which of their social circles I would frequent. When there wasn't any overlap, I was unimportant. I don't think it's that they decided, on any deep level, that we had nothing in common. I think it was more - their relationships are shallow and all they cared about was knowing I wouldn't have any affect on their established social circles.

Not for the wealthy! The wealthy southerners typically attend church, but their social lives and conversations rarely have anything to do with church. Trust me, I know. What you are describing is more middle class southern culture in a rural area or exurb.

+1 Social life revolves more around secular clubs than church for this set. Besides the big obvious ones like a country club and junior league, there are millions of other random clubs. My inlaws belonged to clubs related to things like showing dogs, gardens, sorority alumni, bridge, boats, books, and a bunch of other things I can't remember. All of these clubs have some sort of socializing element.

Garden Club. Every wealthy southern woman is in the Garden Club.

+1. And in some places, it's even more specific. The Camelia Club, for example.

Middle class and up... every single woman was in a garden club and a homemakers club. Joining the History (Hysterical) Society was also expected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D (graduate student) has met someone she is serious about. They have been seriously dating for about 8 months. We met him for the first time a few months ago and have since seem him 2 other ties. A really wonderful guy, very well spoken, intelligent, well dressed, kind of checked all the boxes. He has told my husband he plans to propose by or on her bday (July).

A few weeks ago we had the opportunity to meet his parents and sister. I was incredible impressed, all very elegant, well spoken, charming and could not have ben nicer or more gracious. I have admittedly not really known many people from the south. His family is a very well known affluent family and I am intrigued.

They almost were like characters from a book (in a good way). impeccably dressed (read expensive, Gucci loafers mom had a Kelly bag, etc..) They were incredibly charming and charismatic. I was impressed with how close they aLL seem and they spoke about a few family traditions of going to a family summer house every summer for 3 weeks, and then a big family trip in the fall.

Maybe I am intrigued because this is so polar opposite of how I grew up. I am fascinated by them, this is almost like a character study for me. I think she will be eventually joining what looks to be a wonderful very close family who has had the good fortune to live the good life. They seemed much more civilized/genteel than their northwest counterparts (or anyone who I might compare them to). I cannot find any fault.

Are proper higher end southern families this way? Just curious if this is the "norm"

Wow, so engaged after only a few months, parents wear very expensive clothing. Nothing else to see there, ticks off all your boxes.

I wish you all luck, because you seem to have virtually no requirements for marriage.

obviously, your daughter is marrying him so quick for money. but how much will she get? Like, are we talking kid has trust fund with $5 to $20m in his name. or is it more like you hope his dad will offer to buy them a mcmansion with cash kind of thing, then maybe 10k here and there. Or maybe nice down payment, but with a mortgage (before parents die). These are things I'd seriously consider before rushing to marry and have a guys baby. It's a big decision.

Can the attitude and judgy comments please move over to their designated posts, i.e., airlines, customer service, schools, politics?