Is a wedding at a 'plantation' bad form? or romantic?

[Anonymous]

I live in Charleston where we obviously have lots of plantations and weddings at these venues happen daily.

The thing is, so do other events. They are where oyster festivals happen, where you take the kids to the pumpkin patch or for hayrides, where there are concerts and Spartan races and color runs, and forth.

In a way I think it's kind of nice that places with awful histories have been transformed into important parts of the community and local culture. But at the same time, these things are all expensive and we're an area that's horribly racially segregated as a consequence of being socioeconomically segregated. There's some conversation to be had about how while the plantations have taken on a "new" role, it's mainly the privileged Whites who attend things at them. I feel conflicted.

[Anonymous]

My black DH won't even stay in a hotel or AirBnB complex or go anywhere with "plantation" in the name.

[Anonymous]

By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DP. Not analogous. In all your examples, the negative events were purely happenstance. In the case of plantations, their express purpose was forcing human beings to toil as slaves for the enrichment of the plantation owners.

Which, at the time, was perfectly legal, and had been for centuries...

What does legality have to do with it? It's a huge, immoral stain on our country's history, and I wouldn't want to give the appearance of celebrating that "bygone era." People that do make themselves look either clueless or racist.

At the time, slavery was considered neither illegal nor immoral. The claim that "it's a huge, immoral stain on our country's history," is entirely retroactive. You are projecting today's values back on past centuries where they have no relevance or application. The idea that we, today, should feel guilty for things we did not do, and for which the actual perpetrators neither did nor should (remember: neither illegal nor immoral) feel any guilt, is absurd and insane. Get over it.] [/b]My Mom who is not black was not allowed in white stores in Texas because of Jim Crow. My husband’s family Holocaust survivors, I guess his grandmother should get over it. [Interesting you should mention that. My grandparents are Holocaust survivors. Do I think that any German born after 1945 has any guilt or owes me anything? NO, NO, NO. They wouldn't even owe my grandparents anything if they were still alive.]

Must be nice to not be affected by racism. Talk about white privileged. [You know who else is privileged? Blacks who live in America today instead of in Africa.]
A) you still benefit from it [No, I do not benefit from white privilege. Eff off. My family are all dirt-poor peasants. My parents were the first ones to go to college. Great grandparents were getting their butts kicked by Cossacks in the Russian Empire. ] and B)you trot out the same ridiculous contextual morality every time somebody mentions something that God knows and anybody else knows Is wrong, WAS wrong, WILL ALWAYS be wrong. [You need to read some books. Slavery was not considered "wrong" before the early 1800s. It existed in every culture for thousands of years.]
You need Jesus, a conscience, and a better group of friends than those fools you hang around with on Stormfront , not necessarily in that order. [Jesus didn't say a word against slavery. My conscience is totally clean of any guilt -- again, I did not own slaves, and bear ZERO responsibility for the acts of long-dead people. I don't think I'd be welcome on Stormfront, given my subhuman ancestry. I'm not the least bit interested in your efforts to guilt trip me, especially because such efforts are always the precursor of a money grab.]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

Just stop it. You sound absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

Nowhere, since the "Indians" stole the land from the pre-Indians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in Charleston where we obviously have lots of plantations and weddings at these venues happen daily.

The thing is, so do other events. They are where oyster festivals happen, where you take the kids to the pumpkin patch or for hayrides, where there are concerts and Spartan races and color runs, and forth.

In a way I think it's kind of nice that places with awful histories have been transformed into important parts of the community and local culture. But at the same time, these things are all expensive and we're an area that's horribly racially segregated as a consequence of being socioeconomically segregated. There's some conversation to be had about how while the plantations have taken on a "new" role, it's mainly the privileged Whites who attend things at them. I feel conflicted.

“We’re not racist any more we’re just socioeconomically segregated” is...quite a take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We could tear down all the old plantation houses. Or we could use them for something better.

I truly don't see the problem with tearing them down.

Bury the past?

Do you like confederate memorials too?

I’m black and think that it isn’t a par but od history that’s should be preserved so that it is never forgotten. Or repeated.

[Anonymous]

Think about the children who may be born of this union. Is this something they’re going to be embarrassed to know about you? What about their children?

Personally, I prefer to be on the right side of history. I think it’s little consolation that you’re currently able to find people who are willing to excuse “racist lite” behavior. Your plantation wedding photos are going to be like nazi ball photos from a German Grandma. Nobody cares that she didn’t personally kill anyone and she was a clueless nice lady who liked dancing.

Your plantation wedding photos are going to be shameful for future generations. Period. If it’s your children or many more generations down the line depends only on how entrenched racism is in your family.

[Anonymous]

*it is a part of history that*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

If your lineagae and ancestry was linked to being oppressed on a plantation, of course you may take offense there. Or you may not. No one is talking about wvey single building in America. They’re talking about the land that made other white men rich by your ancestry’s blood, sweat, and tears.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

Nowhere, since the "Indians" stole the land from the pre-Indians.

Dear God, you are ignorant. Do you really believe there were some mythical white people here before the Indians?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

Nowhere, since the "Indians" stole the land from the pre-Indians.

Dear God, you are ignorant. Do you really believe there were some mythical white people here before the Indians?

NP here. Be careful calling people ignorant if you yourself aren’t up to date on archaeological discoveries.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dna-12000-year-old-skeleton-helps-answer-question-who-were-first-americans-180951469/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

Nowhere, since the "Indians" stole the land from the pre-Indians.

Dear God, you are ignorant. Do you really believe there were some mythical white people here before the Indians?

NP here. Be careful calling people ignorant if you yourself aren’t up to date on archaeological discoveries.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dna-12000-year-old-skeleton-helps-answer-question-who-were-first-americans-180951469/

And also this — https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/science/prehistoric-humans-north-america-california-nature-study.html

In short, modern native Americans certainly share ancestry with the earliest settlers, but there may have been multiple groups of humans and Neanderthals here, dating back to 130,000 years ago.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/science/prehistoric-humans-north-america-california-nature-study.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By this logic it's offensive to get married in almost any historical venue. Glen Echo Park? Nope, it was segregated until the 60s. The Willard Hotel? Good luck getting a room there if you were black or Asian back in the day. How about anywhere in the continental 50 states since we stole all this land from the Indians. Wheres does the madness end?

Just stop it. You sound absurd.

Help me understand this. Georgetown U was built on the backs of slaves. Do you think that campus is inappropriate for weddings because of that stain on its history. Now that the students will be paying reparations, is that sufficient penance? I honestly am trying to understand this logic because you can take any venue and dig a little to find some event in its history that is incongruent with contemporary values.