|
|
Post by scrapsotime on Mar 29, 2017 23:48:20 GMT
My paternal grandmother always said we could be members of the DAR if we wanted. I never wanted. I did recently find documents where an ancestor joined the SAR and was able to trace the line back from there.
And
I haven't found any slave owners in my lines yet. Most of them were too poor to even think about owning slaves.
|
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Mar 29, 2017 23:58:49 GMT
I always thought it was an elitist white women's organization. if you want to do community service, there are many groups in your area you can join. As far as the DAR goes, if they mission is to do good works, what does it matter what someone's lineage is? Wow they have black people pictured on their website: www.dar.org/national-society/about-darwww.dar.org/national-society/about-dar/who-we-are/who-we-are"He said the Queens group proved that “not only would black women be able to discover their Revolutionary War heritage, but they would be at some point in time eager to join the D.A.R. and honor their heritage.” Honor seems an odd word choice for a black woman. |
|
|
|
Post by Restless Spirit on Mar 30, 2017 0:06:33 GMT
My daughter is a member. She has lineage through both sides of her dads (my DH) family. She tried to join under her great grandmother ((DH's grandmother -his moms mom) who was a long time DAR member, but was unable to. All I will say about that is that the DAR lineage tracking prior to today's more sophisticated documention tracking left a lot to be desired.
Fortunately, she has not just one ancestor on her dads side, but 5 or 6 revolutionary war ancestors (the DAR volunteer stopped looking after finding that many). Our daughter and my DH are direct descendants of a revolutionary war ancestor with our last name. This same ancestor had a decedent with our last name who was a Union soldier in the Civil War. We are in possession of the Civil War ancestor's discharge papers.
As someone who is interested in genealogy, I found it all to be very interesting. The DAR has access to records I do not have. The documentation they gave my daughter included maiden names, birth dates and marriage names and in some cases, photo copies of records we didn't have. This same volunteer has asked if she can do my lineages, but so far I've declined the offer.
|
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053 
|
Post by Olan on Mar 30, 2017 0:15:47 GMT
My paternal grandmother always said we could be members of the DAR if we wanted. I never wanted. I did recently find documents where an ancestor joined the SAR and was able to trace the line back from there. And I haven't found any slave owners in my lines yet. Most of them were too poor to even think about owning slaves. I've heard this sentiment so much I often wonder who actually owned enslaved Africans! There has been a push to use the term "enslaved" instead of slaves. One is condition and one is a possession. The black woman on the website is the niece of Wilhelmena Rhodes Kelly. She can trace her lineage back to a white man marrying an enslaved woman. I could think of a million and one better ways to honor the memory of her ancestor but eh whatever floats her boat. Has anyone read the book Wench? |
|
|
|
Post by scrapsotime on Mar 30, 2017 0:37:13 GMT
I always thought it was an elitist white women's organization. if you want to do community service, there are many groups in your area you can join. As far as the DAR goes, if they mission is to do good works, what does it matter what someone's lineage is? Wow they have black people pictured on their website: www.dar.org/national-society/about-darwww.dar.org/national-society/about-dar/who-we-are/who-we-are"He said the Queens group proved that “not only would black women be able to discover their Revolutionary War heritage, but they would be at some point in time eager to join the D.A.R. and honor their heritage.” Honor seems an odd word choice for a black woman. There are estimates of 5000 to 10,000 African Americans that served in the Patriot army - free and slave. Why wouldn't they want to honor those ancestors? |
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Mar 30, 2017 1:15:56 GMT
My paternal grandmother always said we could be members of the DAR if we wanted. I never wanted. I did recently find documents where an ancestor joined the SAR and was able to trace the line back from there. And I haven't found any slave owners in my lines yet. Most of them were too poor to even think about owning slaves. I've heard this sentiment so much I often wonder who actually owned enslaved Africans! There has been a push to use the term "enslaved" instead of slaves. One is condition and one is a possession. The black woman on the website is the niece of Wilhelmena Rhodes Kelly. She can trace her lineage back to a white man marrying an enslaved woman. I could think of a million and one better ways to honor the memory of her ancestor but eh whatever floats her boat. Has anyone read the book Wench? I owned up to it for years lol and 18 months ago my uncle sent my DS all the scans of my real lineage. Apparently when I was in high school he made up stories. And 'traced' us back to a Declaration of Independence signer. He had a trail of naked but they were just a mistake at his grandparents level and similar names. so 18 months ago when he had my great grandfather's birth certificate from Ireland I was like WTF. He denied telling the stories when I was a kid - its bizarre. I get making a mistake based on similar names but the stories he had that were supposedly handed down were all made up!!! To top it off I wrote an entire paper in high school based on this mistaken lineage, my famous ancestor and these fake stories!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by txdancermom on Mar 30, 2017 1:18:38 GMT
I have thought about it, but know some of the laide in the local chapter I can't stand them, so for the time being I won't. I have paperwork showing my grandfather was in the Sons of the American Revolution and I imagine I would have to prove my connection to him.
|
|
perumbula
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,439
Location: Idaho
|
Post by perumbula on Mar 30, 2017 16:02:32 GMT
I've heard this sentiment so much I often wonder who actually owned enslaved Africans! There has been a push to use the term "enslaved" instead of slaves. One is condition and one is a possession. The black woman on the website is the niece of Wilhelmena Rhodes Kelly. She can trace her lineage back to a white man marrying an enslaved woman. I could think of a million and one better ways to honor the memory of her ancestor but eh whatever floats her boat. Has anyone read the book Wench? I owned up to it for years lol and 18 months ago my uncle sent my DS all the scans of my real lineage. Apparently when I was in high school he made up stories. And 'traced' us back to a Declaration of Independence signer. He had a trail of naked but they were just a mistake at his grandparents level and similar names. so 18 months ago when he had my great grandfather's birth certificate from Ireland I was like WTF. He denied telling the stories when I was a kid - its bizarre. I get making a mistake based on similar names but the stories he had that were supposedly handed down were all made up!!! To top it off I wrote an entire paper in high school based on this mistaken lineage, my famous ancestor and these fake stories!!!! I totally get it. I have a Hancock line through my father, so of course, we are descended from John Hancock! (And if you're paying attention, this means slave owners.) Nope. Not quite. Dh's family swears there's Native American blood in their line. Not that they can prove, though. I think every family has these stories. People want to connect with their past and have it be interesting. It makes it easy to believe and it only takes one BSer sometime in the past to get these stories started. My father's line is actually quite interesting. One set of grandparents were first generation immigrants from Switzerland. One set could trace their ancestry back to being in North American in the 17th century. Not a typo. (But not to John Hancock!) |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Mar 30, 2017 16:07:11 GMT
My paternal grandmother always said we could be members of the DAR if we wanted. I never wanted. I did recently find documents where an ancestor joined the SAR and was able to trace the line back from there. And I haven't found any slave owners in my lines yet. Most of them were too poor to even think about owning slaves. There has been a push to use the term "enslaved" instead of slaves. One is condition and one is a possession. The black woman on the website is the niece of Wilhelmena Rhodes Kelly. She can trace her lineage back to a white man marrying an enslavetd woman. I could think of a million and one better ways to honor the memory of her ancestor but eh whatever floats her boat. Has anyone read the book Wench? The truth is that most people really weren't slave owners. Or enslavers, if you prefer. Most of the enslaved were in the hands of a few big landowners. |
|
|
|
Post by Sparki on Mar 30, 2017 16:29:41 GMT
I have been talking to some ladies who are working on gaining entrance to DAR using DNA to prove connection. If it works, it will change a lot. No more marriage certificate issues.
Also, almost all of my 'very poor' ancestors owned slaves. In fact, I found that I am descended from a white lady who purchased a mixed heritage enslaved man from a neighbor and married him before freeing him. He actually became a large landowner with white apprentices, and his grandchildren passed as white...this down to me, who glows in the dark I'm so white, but I'm very proud of my African ancestry, although very sad about the conditions that brought it about. Check out "A Stranger and a Sojourner" by Higgins. I am descended from both the Turner's and the Caulder's in North/South Carolina.
|
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on Mar 31, 2017 11:03:55 GMT
I've heard this sentiment so much I often wonder who actually owned enslaved Africans! There has been a push to use the term "enslaved" instead of slaves. One is condition and one is a possession. The black woman on the website is the niece of Wilhelmena Rhodes Kelly. She can trace her lineage back to a white man marrying an enslavetd woman. I could think of a million and one better ways to honor the memory of her ancestor but eh whatever floats her boat. Has anyone read the book Wench? The truth is that most people really weren't slave owners. Or enslavers, if you prefer. Most of the enslaved were in the hands of a few big landowners. Why is there such a rush to diminish what happened? Lucy feel free to use whatever term you'd prefer. |
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on Mar 31, 2017 11:15:18 GMT
I have been talking to some ladies who are working on gaining entrance to DAR using DNA to prove connection. If it works, it will change a lot. No more marriage certificate issues. Also, almost all of my 'very poor' ancestors owned slaves. In fact, I found that I am descended from a white lady who purchased a mixed heritage enslaved man from a neighbor and married him before freeing him. He actually became a large landowner with white apprentices, and his grandchildren passed as white...this down to me, who glows in the dark I'm so white, but I'm very proud of my African ancestry, although very sad about the conditions that brought it about. Check out "A Stranger and a Sojourner" by Higgins. I am descended from both the Turner's and the Caulder's in North/South Carolina. I will! My family is from the Carolinas. Have you ever been to Fort Moultrie? Since turning 30 my goal has been to visit every "Bench by the Road" before turning 40 so this year we went to Sullivan's Island. It was a beautiful trip. There is one in Ohio at Oberlin College(?) that I am heading to after my nieces dedication next month. |
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Mar 31, 2017 12:07:26 GMT
The truth is that most people really weren't slave owners. Or enslavers, if you prefer. Most of the enslaved were in the hands of a few big landowners. Why is there such a rush to diminish what happened? Lucy feel free to use whatever term you'd prefer. I don't think the intention was to diminish it. It still involved the same number of innocent people whether it was many, many people enslaving a few each or less people enslaving many. Either way it was an abysmal example of what humans beings are willing do to one another. I think the intention was simply to answer the earlier posed question about who was actually enslaving others since so many of us can find nothing to indicate that our ancestors had any slaves. A question was asked and an answer was given. Save |
|
|
|
Post by Sparki on Mar 31, 2017 14:32:31 GMT
I have been talking to some ladies who are working on gaining entrance to DAR using DNA to prove connection. If it works, it will change a lot. No more marriage certificate issues. Also, almost all of my 'very poor' ancestors owned slaves. In fact, I found that I am descended from a white lady who purchased a mixed heritage enslaved man from a neighbor and married him before freeing him. He actually became a large landowner with white apprentices, and his grandchildren passed as white...this down to me, who glows in the dark I'm so white, but I'm very proud of my African ancestry, although very sad about the conditions that brought it about. Check out "A Stranger and a Sojourner" by Higgins. I am descended from both the Turner's and the Caulder's in North/South Carolina. I will! My family is from the Carolinas. Have you ever been to Fort Moultrie? Since turning 30 my goal has been to visit every "Bench by the Road" before turning 40 so this year we went to Sullivan's Island. It was a beautiful trip. There is one in Ohio at Oberlin College(?) that I am heading to after my nieces dedication next month. Have you done your DNA? We're probably related.  I have not been to Ft Moultrie, but I intend to visit the Carolinas and see the places my ancestors lived. A TON of them lived in Lumberton, in the Robeson Co. area of NC. Save |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Mar 31, 2017 15:16:41 GMT
The truth is that most people really weren't slave owners. Or enslavers, if you prefer. Most of the enslaved were in the hands of a few big landowners. Why is there such a rush to diminish what happened? Lucy feel free to use whatever term you'd prefer. There was no rush to diminish our history. My intention was to allay your concern that so many people deny having any slave holders in their family tree. Most of them probably didn't (and I'm sure some did and are in denial). That doesn't diminish the fact of slavery in any way. I acknowledge that there were still slave holders (or enslavers) but "ownership" was more concentrated with fewer people each enslaving more other people, that's all. ETA and that also doesn't change the fact that the entire economy of the South was based on slavery. It was a sickness. Do not think I'm trying to diminish that fact. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Mar 31, 2017 21:24:06 GMT
I've heard this sentiment so much I often wonder who actually owned enslaved Africans! There has been a push to use the term "enslaved" instead of slaves. One is condition and one is a possession. The black woman on the website is the niece of Wilhelmena Rhodes Kelly. She can trace her lineage back to a white man marrying an enslavetd woman. I could think of a million and one better ways to honor the memory of her ancestor but eh whatever floats her boat. Has anyone read the book Wench? The truth is that most people really weren't slave owners. Or enslavers, if you prefer. Most of the enslaved were in the hands of a few big landowners. Not to mention that many people's ancestors didn't come over to this country until after slavery was abolished. Both of my parents were first generation Americans because their parents came to the U.S. from Europe as children. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 2, 2017 21:48:21 GMT
Sorry to bump this oldish thread, but I'm just back from spring break. I think it's a gigantic leap to insinuate most members of DAR owned slaves. Very, very few New Englanders owned slaves - and a whole lot of them fought in the Revolutionary War. I can pretty definitively say my father doesn't have any slave owning ancestors as 7 of his 8 great-grandparents came directly from Ireland - his one great-grandparent not born in Ireland was born in Pennsylvania to ancestors from the Palantine region who immigrated during the early 1700s - I've confirmed 3 Revolutionary War soldiers from that line. There are a few offshoots of other New Englanders who married in that line, but none with southern roots. I am actually working on the line for the Mayflower Society - not DAR as one branch goes all the way back. I may choose to join DAR at a later date - but to me it's more about learning the history than belonging to any club.
Now that doesn't mean I'm not realistic about the history of our country. One of my husband's branches goes through the south - and I've transcribed way too many wills listing slaves as property. It's an ugly reality of our past. But we should neither deny it or assume everyone was a slave owner - neither is factual.
|
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on Apr 7, 2017 12:29:25 GMT
Sorry to bump this oldish thread, but I'm just back from spring break. I think it's a gigantic leap to insinuate most members of DAR owned slaves. Very, very few New Englanders owned slaves - and a whole lot of them fought in the Revolutionary War. I can pretty definitively say my father doesn't have any slave owning ancestors as 7 of his 8 great-grandparents came directly from Ireland - his one great-grandparent not born in Ireland was born in Pennsylvania to ancestors from the Palantine region who immigrated during the early 1700s - I've confirmed 3 Revolutionary War soldiers from that line. There are a few offshoots of other New Englanders who married in that line, but none with southern roots. I am actually working on the line for the Mayflower Society - not DAR as one branch goes all the way back. I may choose to join DAR at a later date - but to me it's more about learning the history than belonging to any club. Now that doesn't mean I'm not realistic about the history of our country. One of my husband's branches goes through the south - and I've transcribed way too many wills listing slaves as property. It's an ugly reality of our past. But we should neither deny it or assume everyone was a slave owner - neither is factual. Which is worse though.... Denying the ugly history or even absolving yourself while benefiting from the effects or my wild assumption that someone had to have used the free labor of enslaved Africans? Giant leaps and insinuating? Written word and record keeping happened pretty early on in Americas shitty history. Researching your genealogy as a hobby and joining the DAR doesn't make you an expert on this. It happened. We know who owned slaves and who did not. My original statement was along the lines of "With everyone denying their involvement I wonder who actually did". I love the need to argue any point I make no matter how fact based by adding "but but's". |
|
|
|
Post by myboysnme on Apr 7, 2017 12:58:38 GMT
I've heard this sentiment so much I often wonder who actually owned enslaved Africans! There has been a push to use the term "enslaved" instead of slaves. One is condition and one is a possession. The black woman on the website is the niece of Wilhelmena Rhodes Kelly. She can trace her lineage back to a white man marrying an enslaved woman. I could think of a million and one better ways to honor the memory of her ancestor but eh whatever floats her boat. Has anyone read the book Wench? I owned up to it for years lol and 18 months ago my uncle sent my DS all the scans of my real lineage. Apparently when I was in high school he made up stories. And 'traced' us back to a Declaration of Independence signer. He had a trail of naked but they were just a mistake at his grandparents level and similar names. so 18 months ago when he had my great grandfather's birth certificate from Ireland I was like WTF. He denied telling the stories when I was a kid - its bizarre. I get making a mistake based on similar names but the stories he had that were supposedly handed down were all made up!!! To top it off I wrote an entire paper in high school based on this mistaken lineage, my famous ancestor and these fake stories!!!! This happened to me. We were told we were directly descended from Josiah Bartlett, a signer, and Oliver Wendell Holmes. I did a report in school about OWH being my ancestor. Well Josiah Bartlett and I share an ancestor but we are not directly related and we have no connection to OWH that I've found.
I also don't think anyone should feel all proud about having numerous patriot ancestors like 'I don't have just one ancestor, I have five so I'm five times more legitimately descended than you!" - if you are from the area where there were patriots you likely have more than one ancestor involved in what was going on at the time. Most were in militias and yes, they were on the side of the rebellion and they won. If the outcome had been different they would be traitors. None of which has a thing to do with me in my life now except knowing what my ancestors did.
My son just this week got his SAR approval. The documentation he provided was 100 times more in depth than what I provided 30 years ago for the DAR. Records are available like they weren't even then. One of the documents used in past decades was a book written by a relative and it was used as a primary source and guess what - it's all false! So people could be in the SAR or DAR for generations and not have correct documents.
This organization has outlived its initial purpose. Like Annabella said, there are a gazillion civic organizations to volunteer with or donate to. We can know our ancestors' history without joining an organization with criteria that just doesn't matter. Now if the SAR/DAR wanted to do genealogical searches for people to get documents and info to raise money then that's a good thing. But getting members who happen by luck of the draw to have an ancestor who was a patriot so now you get to pay them so you can be with like people and do civic works - that is elitist and exclusionary thinking.
As for slave owners and who was or wasn't. It doesn't matter. Unless your ancestor was a known abolitionist they likely were racist all their lives and supported the institution of slavery without a second thought. It doesn't matter if they owned other people or not. They may have thought slavery was wrong but they likely accepted it as a fact of life. The Civil War Union States fought to preserve the US as it existed at the time. The right to have and keep slaves was an issue the south wanted to preserve therefore break away and let states decide to allow slavery or not, not the federal govt. The north did not want the south to break away because it weakened the USA. I am positive my CW ancestors who fought for the Union did not answer a call to arms over slavery - they answered to preserve the Union.
|
|
|
|
Post by myboysnme on Apr 7, 2017 13:15:28 GMT
I have been talking to some ladies who are working on gaining entrance to DAR using DNA to prove connection. If it works, it will change a lot. No more marriage certificate issues. Also, almost all of my 'very poor' ancestors owned slaves. In fact, I found that I am descended from a white lady who purchased a mixed heritage enslaved man from a neighbor and married him before freeing him. He actually became a large landowner with white apprentices, and his grandchildren passed as white...this down to me, who glows in the dark I'm so white, but I'm very proud of my African ancestry, although very sad about the conditions that brought it about. Check out "A Stranger and a Sojourner" by Higgins. I am descended from both the Turner's and the Caulder's in North/South Carolina. The DAR is not about whether or not a person is truly descended from a patriot. It is about maintaining an elite and exclusionary group of people. There is a reason they want documented legitimate so called proof. In the case of people, legitimate means born to married parents. Period. They do not want to let people in who can prove a patriot ancestor. If they did they could have done that decades ago. They want to keep people out. Bottom line. White people come together and they can justify their all white civic group by saying, "I'm not racist, I'm just interested in honoring my family history." They probably didn't even have the insight to know they were doing that at the time. I heard it a million times that "black people can join if they can prove they are a legitimate (read legally married all the way up the chain) descendent.
Now the DAR due to rapidly diminished membership may start using DNA to bolster their floundering rolls, but these civic, female oriented groups like the Women's League are dying out and should. 30 years ago the Jaycees abolished their Jaycettes and combined men and women into one organization so their two floundering organizations get bolstered by combined membership.
I really hope that anyone who is under the age of 40 on this board, having been raised after the movements of the 1960's, would look at these organizations like the DAR and talk with your own children about these organizations and discourage them from participation. Make their civic contributions more inclusionary and stop preserving antiquated organizations that developed out of our racist past and discriminatory (against women) past.
|
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Apr 7, 2017 14:09:28 GMT
On a less serious note, I think I may be the only person whose family never claimed that they came from anyone even remotely famous.
On a more serious note, I agree that most people who have family lines within the United States far enough back to have had male ancestors of the right age & ability to join the Revolution probably are sons or daughters "of the American Revolution" without any club membership needed to validate that fact.
Several of my lines (and DH's as well) only arrived in the US a few generations ago. I don't look upon them as being any less just because they didn't come to the US early enough to participate in the Revolutionary War. But, I also don't believe that they had any less capacity to be racist than the ancestors who had been here since the earliest days of US. Anyone can be racist...now or then, Northerner or Southerner, new immigrant or long standing American family, slave owner or not.
|
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on Apr 7, 2017 14:54:27 GMT
On a less serious note, I think I may be the only person whose family never claimed that they came from anyone even remotely famous. On a more serious note, I agree that most people who have family lines within the United States far enough back to have had male ancestors of the right age & ability to join the Revolution probably are sons or daughters "of the American Revolution" without any club membership needed to validate that fact. Several of my lines (and DH's as well) only arrived in the US a few generations ago. I don't look upon them as being any less just because they didn't come to the US early enough to participate in the Revolutionary War. But, I also don't believe that they had any less capacity to be racist than the ancestors who had been here since the earliest days of US. Anyone can be racist...now or then, Northerner or Southerner, new immigrant or long standing American family, slave owner or not. And yet even after all those generations of "better" people. Here we sit. This is in reference to a pea saying the most effective apology would be rearing better children. |
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Apr 7, 2017 15:12:24 GMT
On a less serious note, I think I may be the only person whose family never claimed that they came from anyone even remotely famous. On a more serious note, I agree that most people who have family lines within the United States far enough back to have had male ancestors of the right age & ability to join the Revolution probably are sons or daughters "of the American Revolution" without any club membership needed to validate that fact. Several of my lines (and DH's as well) only arrived in the US a few generations ago. I don't look upon them as being any less just because they didn't come to the US early enough to participate in the Revolutionary War. But, I also don't believe that they had any less capacity to be racist than the ancestors who had been here since the earliest days of US. Anyone can be racist...now or then, Northerner or Southerner, new immigrant or long standing American family, slave owner or not. And yet even after all those generations of "better" people. Here we sit. This is in reference to a pea saying the most effective apology would be rearing better children.  Sorry, I missed whatever you're referencing here and I tried to skim through this thread but just didn't spot it. Was it in this thread or another one? (My vision is crap, so I may have missed it trying to skim the thread posts here.) Save |
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on Apr 7, 2017 15:19:20 GMT
And yet even after all those generations of "better" people. Here we sit. This is in reference to a pea saying the most effective apology would be rearing better children. Sorry, I missed whatever you're referencing here and I tried to skim through this thread but just didn't spot it. Was it in this thread or another one? (My vision is crap, so I may have missed it trying to skim the thread posts here.) SaveSometime last week I posted a thread asking the peas if reparations or a government issued apology was the course of action needed to right the wrongs of slavery and the consistent mistreatment of black bodies. The consensus was no apology but for a host of reasons. Responses varied from "where would the apologies end" to "we apologize by raising more tolerant children". Overall everyone thought black people should just move on and stand up for the pledge! *shrugs* |
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Apr 7, 2017 15:54:25 GMT
On a less serious note, I think I may be the only person whose family never claimed that they came from anyone even remotely famous. On a more serious note, I agree that most people who have family lines within the United States far enough back to have had male ancestors of the right age & ability to join the Revolution probably are sons or daughters "of the American Revolution" without any club membership needed to validate that fact. Several of my lines (and DH's as well) only arrived in the US a few generations ago. I don't look upon them as being any less just because they didn't come to the US early enough to participate in the Revolutionary War. But, I also don't believe that they had any less capacity to be racist than the ancestors who had been here since the earliest days of US. Anyone can be racist...now or then, Northerner or Southerner, new immigrant or long standing American family, slave owner or not. And yet even after all those generations of "better" people. Here we sit. This is in reference to a pea saying the most effective apology would be rearing better children. I'm sorry, I didn't see that thread or at least that portion of whatever thread it was as those remarks are entirely unfamiliar to me. And for a few reasons I'm still confused about how that relates to my post here at all.  A.) I not sure of what you mean by "better" people. (I'm guessing you mean less likely to be racist or to be less racist?) B.) I would never begin to try to label any one generation as "better" than another. C.) I'm not sure about exactly what part of my original post even led to your post. I assume the last paragraph since it is the only one that discusses racism at all, but again, I was pointing out the exact opposite of newer generations being "better" (that is if by "better" we mean less likely to be racist) in saying that a family line only 2 or 3 generations along in the US can be racist just as easily as a branch that has been here for 10 or more generations. D.) And lastly, and most importantly, I certainly try to raise my children to treat everyone with the respect they deserve as fellow human beings. That has nothing to do with my family history, with the country's history, or with apologies owed to and by anyone. That has only to do with my belief that human beings did all future generations an enormous disservice when they first started labeling people by the color of their skin. We're all human beings. End of story. And I believe that the sooner we all embrace that, the better for all of us. (And the same goes for most of the other labels we have decided to foist upon ourselves too. I'll grant you that scientific gender labels do have a place of importance due to medical issues. There are fundamental differences between the female body and the male body that cannot be ignored in terms of medical care. But beyond what a doctor needs to know about a person, slapping prejudices and limits on people based on their gender label is a bunch of crap as well.) We're people. And we should all be treating one another better. If anyone want to talk about being "better", then that's what I would want to see. For people to start treating everyone they meet, everyone they come in contact with, or everyone that they hear and/or comment about online with kindness and respect, no matter how different they may be or in which ways they may be different. That to me is being "better", and that is what I want my kids to do. That is what I want everyone to do. But my kids (and to a lesser degree my DH) are the only lives in which I have any real say on the matter. Save |
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on Apr 7, 2017 16:06:22 GMT
I'm sorry, I didn't see that thread or at least that portion of whatever thread it was as those remarks are entirely unfamiliar to me. And for a few reasons I'm still confused about how that relates to my post here at all. I feel like you are being defensive and perhaps that's why you don't get your quoted comments and the link I made to another peas thoughts. For clarity I made sure to mention what I was referencing and further explained what I meant. Your point: Several of my lines (and DH's as well) only arrived in the US a few generations ago. I don't look upon them as being any less just because they didn't come to the US early enough to participate in the Revolutionary War. But, I also don't believe that they had any less capacity to be racist than the ancestors who had been here since the earliest days of US. Anyone can be racist...now or then, Northerner or Southerner, new immigrant or long standing American family, slave owner or not.
And my point was no matter where you are from or when you came to the United States here we all sit. No matter how many people came before us we seem to be inflicting the same kinds of hurts just changing the group of people affected. |
|
|
|
Post by sierra821 on Apr 7, 2017 16:38:08 GMT
Allegedly we're related to a signer of the Declaration of Independence. I'm not sure if this is ever been confirmed and I won't know where to begin to even look into this.
|
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Apr 7, 2017 16:59:02 GMT
I'm sorry, I didn't see that thread or at least that portion of whatever thread it was as those remarks are entirely unfamiliar to me. And for a few reasons I'm still confused about how that relates to my post here at all. I feel like you are being defensive and perhaps that's why you don't get your quoted comments and the link I made to another peas thoughts. For clarity I made sure to mention what I was referencing and further explained what I meant. Your point: Several of my lines (and DH's as well) only arrived in the US a few generations ago. I don't look upon them as being any less just because they didn't come to the US early enough to participate in the Revolutionary War. But, I also don't believe that they had any less capacity to be racist than the ancestors who had been here since the earliest days of US. Anyone can be racist...now or then, Northerner or Southerner, new immigrant or long standing American family, slave owner or not.
And my point was no matter where you are from or when you came to the United States here we all sit. No matter how many people came before us we seem to be inflicting the same kinds of hurts just changing the group of people affected. I was confused because although you mentioned what you were referencing, I was unfamiliar with the thread and I couldn't find it to read it myself, the reference didn't help me to understand your comment any better. Now that you have explained your point differently, I understand and completely agree. Sometimes it just takes saying something in a different way or going a little more in depth with your remark for someone to understand it more clearly. So thanks for clarifying. Save |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Apr 7, 2017 17:09:12 GMT
Olan, I get that you are pissed off at the world. Whether it's over our history of slavery, current race relations, or other issues, whatever ... all you're doing is attacking people who are trying to interact with you in a rational manner.
I have a feeling I'm the one who derailed this thread, so I will apologize for that. But I'm done with trying to discuss actual history with you.
|
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,053
|
Post by Olan on Apr 7, 2017 17:30:18 GMT
I'm sorry, I didn't see that thread or at least that portion of whatever thread it was as those remarks are entirely unfamiliar to me. And for a few reasons I'm still confused about how that relates to my post here at all. I feel like you are being defensive and perhaps that's why you don't get your quoted comments and the link I made to another peas thoughts. For clarity I made sure to mention what I was referencing and further explained what I meant. Your point: Several of my lines (and DH's as well) only arrived in the US a few generations ago. I don't look upon them as being any less just because they didn't come to the US early enough to participate in the Revolutionary War. But, I also don't believe that they had any less capacity to be racist than the ancestors who had been here since the earliest days of US. Anyone can be racist...now or then, Northerner or Southerner, new immigrant or long standing American family, slave owner or not.
And my point was no matter where you are from or when you came to the United States here we all sit. No matter how many people came before us we seem to be inflicting the same kinds of hurts just changing the group of people affected. I was confused because although you mentioned what you were referencing, I was unfamiliar with the thread and I couldn't find it to read it myself, the reference didn't help me to understand your comment any better. Now that you have explained your point differently, I understand and completely agree. Sometimes it just takes saying something in a different way or going a little more in depth with your remark for someone to understand it more clearly. So thanks for clarifying. SaveRight. I didn't want to link my own thread  . I agree that sometimes taking the time to clarify what you mean makes all the difference. This is especially important if you want people to continue to engage in conversation with you or if you are especially confusing when you are pissed like I am. I wanted to edit my post and say I get where you defense was coming from but thought better of it. I know that is what I'm going to be met with from most peas *shrugs*. I guess as a direct result of my own defensiveness and anger. I was however confused because I was agreeing with what you said just adding my own additional thoughts. |
|
I have not been to Ft Moultrie, but I intend to visit the Carolinas and see the places my ancestors lived. A TON of them lived in Lumberton, in the Robeson Co. area of NC. 
Sorry, I missed whatever you're referencing here and I tried to skim through this thread but just didn't spot it. Was it in this thread or another one? (My vision is crap, so I may have missed it trying to skim the thread posts here.)
. I agree that sometimes taking the time to clarify what you mean makes all the difference. This is especially important if you want people to continue to engage in conversation with you or if you are especially confusing when you are pissed like I am. I wanted to edit my post and say I get where you defense was coming from but thought better of it. I know that is what I'm going to be met with from most peas *shrugs*. I guess as a direct result of my own defensiveness and anger. I was however confused because I was agreeing with what you said just adding my own additional thoughts.