Why is ante bellum racist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why then aren't Renaissance Festivals equally or even more politically incorrect? At least half the population, women, should be offended as that period romanticizes a time when women were often essentially treated as property. If the parents decided who they should marry, the woman had no choice in the matter. And after marriage, they were considered the property of the husband and could be treated any way he chose without repercussions. In addition to the degradation of women, the common person could also be and often was treated like dirt.

I hate to bring this up, as now some group may start protesting Renaissance Festivals.

I agree that the concept seems similar, but the arbiters of political correctness (I say that instead of “society” because I do believe in systemic racism) has made the choice that racism is not socially acceptable and, especially over the past year, that things that are associated with it or that seem to glorify, uphold (or in some cases, not actively repudiate), or are reminders of racist history are also racist and shouldn’t be tolerated or perpetuated. So under that framework, antebellum is racist.

We have not, collectively, made that choice about misogyny. We just haven’t. So Renaissance Festivals aren’t seen as worthy of protest and social shaming as antebellum parties.

This is insulting to a lot of people on a lot of levels. Maybe in 20 or 20 years, you'll understand why. Maybe.

In the meantime, I'll give you the pity you feel you deserve for the pitiable difficult life you have led as a constant victim of misogyny and racism.

It wasn't meant to be, so if you think it's insulting, explain why and I'll respond. Otherwise you're just throwing bombs around for kicks, which is fine if that's how you get your thrills, I guess.

I certainly don't feel that I live a pitiable difficult life as a victim of anything, so given that you completely misinterpreted my post on both points, I'm not really sure what you were reading.

Maybe someday you'll understand why your post was insulting to a lot of different people.

So you have nothing substantive to say. Hope you got whatever enjoyment you were seeking.

[Anonymous]

Why is Antebellum racists? Well, gee a party where people dress up in clothing worn at the period that celebrates the lifestyle of the families who owned slaves.

I can't imagine why that would be considered racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Well, you are right and I am wrong on this. I guess at what PP thought and I guessed wrong. I shouldn't have tried, it isn't nice and I didn't have enough information.

But PP does still hold an essentialist view that I am rejecting. PP holds that anyone who dresses in certain clothes is racist regardless of intent. The wearing action is inherently racist. I don't agree with that. It's essentially just clothes, the meaning we attach to the clothes varies from person to person.

The bottom line is that it is incredibly tone deaf to think that it is ok to parade around in the "master's" clothing and not think that it would be at best, insensitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Generally in human society we take people's feelings into account. That's kind of the whole point of society and if we don't then society itself doesn't work. The system as a whole is rational. One tries not to offend others and in exchange others don't try and offend one. By trying not to offend each other we are able to work together more efficiently thereby benefitting each of us.


Also, intent can be imputed by context. The context in this case are traditions started and honors given post-reconstruction and during the civil rights era. They were started to send a message. That message was received, it just took people awhile to feel safe complaining about it. If you think the message was misinterpreted, changed during the intervening years, or wish a do-over then one needs to acknowledge the original message first.

Are you sure about that??

Look of the derivation of the word "society" - literally.