Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Great Wall of china was built with forced labor yet you’d never begrudge folks a smiling photo atop it. The Colloseum in Rome was the site of people being fed to lions for entertainment and gladiators forced to fight for their lives. The pyramids were built with slave labor. I mean there’s hardly a place on earth where something hasn’t taken place that doesn’t meet with our current standards. At some point you gotta let go.

No one is getting married at any of these places.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see the issue. It's history.

Do you also not tour houses like Mount Vernon?

Mount Vernon is a museum. And they talk a lot about slavery there. Similarly, former concentration camps are now essentially museums.

Not all museums are appropriate for weddings.

Barely, they barely mention slavery at Mt. Vernon. In fact, they don't want to talk about it at all, if they had their way, the older generation there. How often do you hear that George dearest had over 150 slaves in a regular tour?

Huh? Outside of the house tour, almost all the outbuildings are slaves' quarters or work buildings.

Are you sure that you've been to Mt Vernon?

Seriously -- They have a whole exhibit about the slaves he owned and the conditions in which they worked.

Now the plantation we visited outside Charleston was very different and we left regretting giving them money because they told us the slaves had good lives there ...

This must be a new development. Usually slave life tours are offered only during certain months. Until few years ago, they avoided the word slave, and called them servants. Heck even now they say enslaved butler, etc...When I went none of that was mentioned, in winter. I am curious now as to how did they represent the life of slaves? Did they mention that Washington would not write about births of slave children in his ledger of possessions until they were older, cause they were not important as they were likely to die young? Do they
"show the ledger where cows and slaves are numerated next to each other? Notice it says "majority of enslaved laborers" hence giving it not such a strong connotation as "majority of slaves..." This is sugar coated version, never doubt that. Why did he not free them right away?? Does it say his cook ran away? Does it say Martha did not free any of her own slaves?

If by "new", you mean in the last 30 yrs, then yes. But they were talking about this the FIRST time I went to Mt Vernon in 1985. Wait...that was HOW long ago?

I think your idea of talking about it is very different from mine. Sugar coated for white people. Nobody is telling it with any authenticity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love it. It's history.

Disgusting and rude. I would judge and then decline invite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love it. It's history.

Disgusting and rude. I would judge and then decline invite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People still get married in Catholic churches.

Oh Lordy Lord,

Let us be patient with stupid DCUM posters as they don't know what they are talking about.

Please prevent me from reminding them that it was Protestant Democrats who owned ALL slaves back in the day.

That would be rude.

Point being the child abuse that happened i Catholic churches. Abuse of vulnerable people. Why is it ok to get married there? Why is it kto pretend that didn't happen? But then admonish someone who wants to be marriedin a plantation house ?

Did child abuse happen at THAT church?

Anonymous wrote:I guess by this logic all Farmers are racist, please stfu

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly not romantic *because* it's on a plantation. A plantation is not an inherently romantic place, unless you are into Scarlett O'Hara cosplay nonsense. The romantic image of the Old South is a lie.

A wedding at a home that used to be a plantation might nonetheless be romantic, but it would not be because of the history of the house as a plantation.

Seriously. I don't understand why people have any romantic notions about places where human beings were owned, whipped, raped, children taken from them, etc.

So, we can't be romantic about anywhere, because that stuff happened everywhere. Too bad, I guess. We have to spend our lives wallowing in guilt and misery because people we don't even know had a hard time over 150 years ago. Why? Because shut up, raciss.

By the way, everyone throw away your Regency and Victorian romances because the British were being mean to people while conquering and ruling their Empire!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see the issue. It's history.

Do you also not tour houses like Mount Vernon?

Mount Vernon is a museum. And they talk a lot about slavery there. Similarly, former concentration camps are now essentially museums.

Not all museums are appropriate for weddings.

Barely, they barely mention slavery at Mt. Vernon. In fact, they don't want to talk about it at all, if they had their way, the older generation there. How often do you hear that George dearest had over 150 slaves in a regular tour?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see the issue. It's history.

Do you also not tour houses like Mount Vernon?

Mount Vernon is a museum. And they talk a lot about slavery there. Similarly, former concentration camps are now essentially museums.

Not all museums are appropriate for weddings.

Barely, they barely mention slavery at Mt. Vernon. In fact, they don't want to talk about it at all, if they had their way, the older generation there. How often do you hear that George dearest had over 150 slaves in a regular tour?

Huh? Outside of the house tour, almost all the outbuildings are slaves' quarters or work buildings.

Are you sure that you've been to Mt Vernon?

Seriously -- They have a whole exhibit about the slaves he owned and the conditions in which they worked.

Now the plantation we visited outside Charleston was very different and we left regretting giving them money because they told us the slaves had good lives there ...

This must be a new development. Usually slave life tours are offered only during certain months. Until few years ago, they avoided the word slave, and called them servants. Heck even now they say enslaved butler, etc...When I went none of that was mentioned, in winter. I am curious now as to how did they represent the life of slaves? Did they mention that Washington would not write about births of slave children in his ledger of possessions until they were older, cause they were not important as they were likely to die young? Do they
"show the ledger where cows and slaves are numerated next to each other? Notice it says "majority of enslaved laborers" hence giving it not such a strong connotation as "majority of slaves..." This is sugar coated version, never doubt that. Why did he not free them right away?? Does it say his cook ran away? Does it say Martha did not free any of her own slaves?

If by "new", you mean in the last 30 yrs, then yes. But they were talking about this the FIRST time I went to Mt Vernon in 1985. Wait...that was HOW long ago?

Anonymous wrote:The Great Wall of china was built with forced labor yet you’d never begrudge folks a smiling photo atop it. The Colloseum in Rome was the site of people being fed to lions for entertainment and gladiators forced to fight for their lives. The pyramids were built with slave labor. I mean there’s hardly a place on earth where something hasn’t taken place that doesn’t meet with our current standards. At some point you gotta let go.

Anonymous wrote:I would love it. It's history.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m personally ok with it but you have to decide how you feel.

We are all living on land we violently took from Native Americans and we don’t let that bother us enough not to do it.

This is the truest statement in this entire thread. If you complain about plantations, you better complain about every inch of soil you step on day to day. Cause guess what, you’re just as guilty.

This

You honestly don't see the difference in someone *choosing* to hold a wedding on a plantation? Seriously? And considering it "romantic"? Come on.

No, I honestly do not. Do you view the Native Americans as lesser than everyone else or something? Because you seem to have no qualms about sticking your head in the sand about the land you live on.

First, don't tell me how I live my life. Of course I don't see American Indians as lesser, and I stand up for them a hell of a lot more than I see many do (people who wear Washington football team gear, I'm looking at you).

Second, I didn't choose to be born in this country. I did choose where to hold my wedding, though, and it sure as hell wasn't going to be on a plantation.

So again, just to be clear, you’re totally cool with living your life on stolen land. You libs are absolutely hysterical the way you talk out of both sides of your mouth. The horrors perpetrated on the Native Americans aren’t the trendy issue du jour for lib America so apparently it just doesn’t matter. “But look at me! I heart the blacks! Equality for everyone!” You have zero credibility. #whatindians #hypocrite

You are pretty disconnected from reality. Issues of decolonization and repatriation have been happening in politics and academia for many years now. Almost every talk I attend includes acknowledgement of Indigenous lands and calls for decolonization. Educate yourself on what people are actually doing about Native rights about before you start sound off like a triggered Fox News personality.

DP. Acknowledgement of Indigenous lands and calls for decolonization? Really?

I've seen some of that but didn't realize it was mainstream. Serious talk of decolonization.

It's "mainstream" in cultural heritage fields. Canada's more ahead of the United States. It's about as serious as it can be during this administration, meaning we mostly talk about it and museums are working closely with Indigenous tribes to better contextualize or repatriate objects, but the administration continues to cause more harm.

How does this administration "continue to cause harm"?

Oh hi there. Guess you just landed from Mars? We have these things called newspapers. Read one.

Enlighten me with your superior knowledge since I read multiple sources every day, and haven't heard anything about harm to Native Americans.

For starters: https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Technology/story%3fid=4596197&page=1

I have friends at this org. It’s politically motivated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m personally ok with it but you have to decide how you feel.

We are all living on land we violently took from Native Americans and we don’t let that bother us enough not to do it.

This is the truest statement in this entire thread. If you complain about plantations, you better complain about every inch of soil you step on day to day. Cause guess what, you’re just as guilty.

This

You honestly don't see the difference in someone *choosing* to hold a wedding on a plantation? Seriously? And considering it "romantic"? Come on.

No, I honestly do not. Do you view the Native Americans as lesser than everyone else or something? Because you seem to have no qualms about sticking your head in the sand about the land you live on.

First, don't tell me how I live my life. Of course I don't see American Indians as lesser, and I stand up for them a hell of a lot more than I see many do (people who wear Washington football team gear, I'm looking at you).

Second, I didn't choose to be born in this country. I did choose where to hold my wedding, though, and it sure as hell wasn't going to be on a plantation.

So again, just to be clear, you’re totally cool with living your life on stolen land. You libs are absolutely hysterical the way you talk out of both sides of your mouth. The horrors perpetrated on the Native Americans aren’t the trendy issue du jour for lib America so apparently it just doesn’t matter. “But look at me! I heart the blacks! Equality for everyone!” You have zero credibility. #whatindians #hypocrite

You are pretty disconnected from reality. Issues of decolonization and repatriation have been happening in politics and academia for many years now. Almost every talk I attend includes acknowledgement of Indigenous lands and calls for decolonization. Educate yourself on what people are actually doing about Native rights about before you start sound off like a triggered Fox News personality.

DP. Acknowledgement of Indigenous lands and calls for decolonization? Really?

I've seen some of that but didn't realize it was mainstream. Serious talk of decolonization.

It's "mainstream" in cultural heritage fields. Canada's more ahead of the United States. It's about as serious as it can be during this administration, meaning we mostly talk about it and museums are working closely with Indigenous tribes to better contextualize or repatriate objects, but the administration continues to cause more harm.

How does this administration "continue to cause harm"?

Oh hi there. Guess you just landed from Mars? We have these things called newspapers. Read one.

Enlighten me with your superior knowledge since I read multiple sources every day, and haven't heard anything about harm to Native Americans.

For starters: https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Technology/story%3fid=4596197&page=1

I have friends at this org. It’s politically motivated.