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

[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?

This

[Anonymous]

OMG plantation shutters , teardown the house

[Anonymous]

I can’t with the slavery apologists here. Slavery is America’s original sin. Holding a wedding on a plantation that was designed to hold enslaved Africans against their will and work them to the bone is in extremely poor taste. It’s like dancing on their graves.

For anyone interested, Henry Louis Gates new PBS series on Reconstruction is really informative. Many new freedoms for black people were rolled back, they were terrorized, their communities were burned to the ground, and many had to go back to work for their old masters. These events, along with laws put in place to disenfranchise black Americans, had lasting effects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would a black couple ever do it? I'm AA and I just can't imagine doing something like this.
And yes, I'd tour Mount Vernon, pp; this seems completely different.

My brother and SIL had their wedding at a plantation house here in MD. It might help to note that in MD and DE (both slave states), these properties were typically called estates and the “Big House” was called a mansion. Anyway, I felt that it was a beautiful, but insensitive setting. Through the entire day, people made jokes about the “Massa” turning over in his grave at all these black folks partying on his property.

+1. I’ve been to a number of AA big house weddings with massa jokes. It’s not insensitive to me, just a big FU to the history that said AAs couldn’t vote, marry, or even enter the big house.

[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?

This

+2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Yup.

It is funny to see that the most aggressive posters here are often the most ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t with the slavery apologists here. Slavery is America’s original sin. Holding a wedding on a plantation that was designed to hold enslaved Africans against their will and work them to the bone is in extremely poor taste. It’s like dancing on their graves.

For anyone interested, Henry Louis Gates new PBS series on Reconstruction is really informative. Many new freedoms for black people were rolled back, they were terrorized, their communities were burned to the ground, and many had to go back to work for their old masters. These events, along with laws put in place to disenfranchise black Americans, had lasting effects.

This is also not just historic. Google 3 black churches set on fire and burned to the ground in the past week or so 2019. White terrorism against black people continues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Yup.

It is funny to see that the most aggressive posters here are often the most ignorant.

Wait... those articles don’t say that modern natives’ ancestors stole the land. Only that they came later. It seems much, much later. No invasions with military forces like the English, Spanish, and Portuguese. Not concerted efforts through legislation or the courts to deprive an existing population of their land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t with the slavery apologists here. Slavery is America’s original sin. Holding a wedding on a plantation that was designed to hold enslaved Africans against their will and work them to the bone is in extremely poor taste. It’s like dancing on their graves.

For anyone interested, Henry Louis Gates new PBS series on Reconstruction is really informative. Many new freedoms for black people were rolled back, they were terrorized, their communities were burned to the ground, and many had to go back to work for their old masters. These events, along with laws put in place to disenfranchise black Americans, had lasting effects.

No one is a 'slavery apologist'. Plantations were not 'designed' to enforce slavery - not in the way concentration camps were 'designed' to hold victims. The support of slavery was far more pervasive and systematized through law, culture and custom. While, for you, the plantation/estate may personify and represent slavery. Not everyone feels that way. Having an event at a plantation/estate is not glorifying slavery or whitewashing what happened at a particular place over 150 years ago. You are looking for outrage where none is needed.

Of course, I'm also someone who can recognize the great contributions made by people like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson while at the same time note their hypocrisy and cruelty. Life is not black and white / all or nothing. I have have been to many historical sites for events and no one has ever made inappropriate remarks about the history of the place or the people that lived there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t with the slavery apologists here. Slavery is America’s original sin. Holding a wedding on a plantation that was designed to hold enslaved Africans against their will and work them to the bone is in extremely poor taste. It’s like dancing on their graves.

For anyone interested, Henry Louis Gates new PBS series on Reconstruction is really informative. Many new freedoms for black people were rolled back, they were terrorized, their communities were burned to the ground, and many had to go back to work for their old masters. These events, along with laws put in place to disenfranchise black Americans, had lasting effects.

No one is a 'slavery apologist'. Plantations were not 'designed' to enforce slavery - not in the way concentration camps were 'designed' to hold victims. The support of slavery was far more pervasive and systematized through law, culture and custom. While, for you, the plantation/estate may personify and represent slavery. Not everyone feels that way. Having an event at a plantation/estate is not glorifying slavery or whitewashing what happened at a particular place over 150 years ago. You are looking for outrage where none is needed.

Of course, I'm also someone who can recognize the great contributions made by people like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson while at the same time note their hypocrisy and cruelty. Life is not black and white / all or nothing. I have have been to many historical sites for events and no one has ever made inappropriate remarks about the history of the place or the people that lived there.

Wft, the plantations where made to separate whites from their slaves. White privilege at it’s finest

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Yup.

It is funny to see that the most aggressive posters here are often the most ignorant.

Wait... those articles don’t say that modern natives’ ancestors stole the land. Only that they came later. It seems much, much later. No invasions with military forces like the English, Spanish, and Portuguese. Not concerted efforts through legislation or the courts to deprive an existing population of their land.

Don’t want to derail this thread, but this made me laugh. Yes, forensic anthropology has a difficult time isolating and identifying prehistoric legislation and pre-iron-age battle tactics, it’s true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Yup.

It is funny to see that the most aggressive posters here are often the most ignorant.

Wait... those articles don’t say that modern natives’ ancestors stole the land. Only that they came later. It seems much, much later. No invasions with military forces like the English, Spanish, and Portuguese. Not concerted efforts through legislation or the courts to deprive an existing population of their land.

Don’t want to derail this thread, but this made me laugh. Yes, forensic anthropology has a difficult time isolating and identifying prehistoric legislation and pre-iron-age battle tactics, it’s true.

[Anonymous]

I believe any time we speak English we honor colonialism and slavery.

We should only speak Dothraki.

[Anonymous]

People in the South love to romanticize the past, they think it was a better time. For some people it wasn't. To tear down old buildings like they hold the guilt of slavery is useless, we can't deny the past like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People in the South love to romanticize the past, they think it was a better time. For some people it wasn't. To tear down old buildings like they hold the guilt of slavery is useless, we can't deny the past like that.

There’s a lot of room between not feeling like holding our wedding on a plantation and wanting to tear the plantation down. I think they should exist as museums for teaching about slavery and Reconstruction. No one has weddings at the sites of Nazi death camps.