Teen Sues Over Confederate Flag Prom Dress

[kenpo tiger]

Why is Lee's mythology and generalship connected to the prom dress?

Precisely because of what this girl was thinking. The concepts, "white pride," and, "the South," and, "the Stainless Banner," and, "Southern history," and "General Lee," are intertwined--and are the sort of thing that legitimates actions like wearing the dress.

It isn't a matter of historical reality at all. It's a matter of what people THINK about history--a matter of what they think happened, of what they think about the story behind events, of what they think about the causes and consequences of events like the Civil War.

One testimony to this is this: note that way that certain concepts and images appear, tangled up together, and are quickly connected to issues such as immigration, affirmative action, etc. An interpretation: the myth of a, "freedom-fighting," South that was beaten only the Northern masses and their superior industry is being used to anchor the notion of, "repressed white men," who were put down after the War, have been kept down by waves of carpetbaggers (intellectuals, liberals, etc., simply become new carpetbaggers in this mythology), and things have gotten so bad that now it is the, "white man," who is oppressed.

Two interesting notes: the role of Southern women tends to be curiously absent from these scenario, though not from associated myth-makings; see, for example, the survivalist genre in science fiction, including John Ringo's, "Gust Front." And second, the claim that the structure of racism has now simply been inverted so that, "white men," are on the bottom (a claim that actually isn't justified by reality, but only by myth) and, "the colored," (never quite said, but clearly meant) suggests stongly a sort of shame-faced recognition of the actual ideological structure that supported slavery.

In brief, that dress represents--as her supporters insisted and still insist--white pride, white Southern history, both grounded on a set of myths about the Civil War.

As, to be sure, are certain ideas about the North, Lincoln, democracy, the Union, etc. However, there's a difference: the set of myths about the North have historically been used to extend democracy, to open up the Constitution to everybody, to remind working-class people that they matter. And the set of myths about the South, historically speaking, have been used to legitimate the Klan, to justify not only the imposition of what boils down to apartheid but the rise of lynchings from 1890-1930, and to allow the doctrine of "State's Rights," to justify everything from attacks on integration to Bible-thumping by judges. Not incidentally, they also play a direct role in the contination of the dumbest myth about the South, that of a happy happyland in which aristocrats ruled over happy slaves and contented white folks.

So--to say something bad about General Lee, whose image is one of the linchpins in this set of myths, is to say something bad about the whole South.

Pickett's Charge wasn't a bad day or a little oopsie or a chance that needed to be taken and mighta worked. It was an arrogant, foolish attack launched by a general who had grossly overextended himself and his men, who found himself (like that fool Custer) hip deep in Indians, and who had absolutely failed to learn from previous battles what modern weapons and a good field of fire dominated by solid, entrenched troops would do to people dumb enough to walk slowly up a hill towards them, out in the open.

And another thing Lee failed to understand--the political character of modern war. Grant got it, early on--which is one of the reasons that the South woulda lost no matter what. They got whupped on the field, and they got out-thought.

But that prom dress' mythology denies all of that. It rests, in fact, upon one of the biggest lies of the last century: the lie that white men in America are oppressed as a group.

One has a hard time understanding what all that self-victimization is about--weird, because guys like Michael Savage make their careers and their wealth claiming to be victims, then turn around and claim that "they," are always whining about how much they've been picked on...

Personally, I think it's a way to avoid recognizing the extent to which working people in this country have gotten screwed. But if you're dead set into the fantasy that Capitalism Is the Greatest, that one's gonna be hard to face.

I can always count on you to 'edumacate' us further. Can I audit one of your classes online?? :idunno:

 

[shesulsa]

Has this girl ever stated what the thinks this flag is supposed to represent? She said she was proud of "her background" I wonder what she thinks that is/means?

BOO-YAH, Tom. Right on.

We might want to remember that she is a teenager and may either not fully understand just what that flag represents (except for the nods from her parents and relatives, of course) or may think it means something it doesn't.

Nevertheless - her parents obviously approved or allowed her to wear it.

Proud of her heritage? Which heritage? That her ancestors fought bravely in a war? or of all the hangings that still continue in the Deep South?

 

[PeachMonkey]

Cant figure how Pickett's Charge makes Lees legacy as a General a failure...dont know of any military leader with a 100% track record of victory.

It doesn't make Lee a failure, but it demonstrates that he was capable of failure, since he ordered the charge.

 

[PeachMonkey]

p.s. The Army of Northern Virginia was never defeated, sir. She was overcome by History.

Spoken like someone who's never studied the Civil War, sir. The Army of Northern Virginia was defeated several times, including at the end of the war, when it *surrendered*.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Robert states that the was over slavery.
I state it was over the enforcement of law.

We are both right, to an extent. Robert missed the fact that the slaves in the Union were not freed until after the war had been over for some time, that during thw war slaves were not freed in conquered territory, and were in fact returned to slavery by federal mandate. He also ignores the role of New England shippers who were the the primary importers of slaves to the US, and key players in keeping the institution alive longer than desired by the Southern governments during the constitutional debates. Also avoided is the reason for the North phasing it out, which was economic, not moral, and the fact that some Northern states such as New Jersey listed slaves in the 1860 census.

But, Robert is right in stating that the institution of slavery was heavily referenced in the various articles of seccession. Texas' was by modern standards, very racially biased. In all honesty, it disgusted me reading it. I am not defending the institution of slavery. I will (when I have a chance) be addressing the myths of American slavery in an extended article.

But as I said, that argument isn't the point here. I will be more than happy to debate him, or anyone on Civil War history, in another thread. Discussion of generals, tactics, etc aren't fitting here. Purhaps a mod can weed out those tangents and combine them into another more focused thread?

The "Battle" flag, of all the various Confederate flags is the symbol most associated with Southern Racism. But this isn't the first time this dress has been seen. It was supposedly in the movie "To Wong Foo Thanks for everything Julie Newmar" worn by RuPaul! Now, is it ok when used in a movie as a prop worn by a black drag queen, but racist when worn by a white teen girl out to get attention for herself?

I think the question is as Georgia stated. "Proud of her heritage? Which heritage? That her ancestors fought bravely in a war? or of all the hangings that still continue in the Deep South?"

If it's a heritage based on racial intolerance, bigotry and hatred, then I honestly can't defend that. If it's a heritage of independence, strong family values and low government influence...well, I can get behind that.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

I have had quite an interesting time, lurking here and reading posts.

My question to all concerned: If you were, say, a chaperone, or the principal of the school, and saw this girl walk in in her besequined glory, what would you have said? To her, and/or to other students.

Just curious.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I would have said nothing, but alerted security to be prepared if needed.

 

[Ceicei]

I have had quite an interesting time, lurking here and reading posts.

My question to all concerned: If you were, say, a chaperone, or the principal of the school, and saw this girl walk in in her besequined glory, what would you have said? To her, and/or to other students.

Just curious.

I would observe carefully to watch the reactions of people. Maybe nothing will happen, but if something does go down, then will have to step in to try to calm things down. As Bob said, have security ready if needed.

- Ceicei

 

[MA-Caver]

Well generally (in my experience with a couple of Prom's I've been to) security meant no more than a couple of teachers willing to volunteer their time. Basically they weren't security just chaperones.
But yeah, I'd probably do the same... just sit and watch and if anyone complains then it's the nature of the complaint. Also I'd hope she wasn't one of the nominees for Prom Queen...

 

[ghostdog2]

"Precisely because of what this girl was thinking" rmcrobertson
"Can I audit one of your classes online?? " Kenpo Tiger

Me too. Preferably the one on mind reading. How, in the name of Grant's ghost, do you know "precisely" what this poor girl is thinking?
Casper the Canine Clairvoyant

 

[rmcrobertson]

Thought, reading, experience, and the arguments put forth by others such as yourself. Well, that and the fact that she apparently felt it an honor to be a special guest at the Jefferson Davis (good to know there is one) ball.

 

[ghostdog2]

Alright, I can accept that. For a second, I thought you were going to say, because of that no neck lawyer with two first names standing next to her.
And the CSA group that's paying part of her legal fees.

 

[Tgace]

Well, I dont know if this is what this girl thinks, but from just a little research, this is pretty close to what most "Southern Pride" types believe....

http://www.siptn.org/updates/feb/heritage.htm

 

[Satt]

Good post. It allways seems to boil down to money somehow. Oh well, I would still go to the prom with her. It's not really about what she was wearing, but what she was wearing underneath. He he. %-} I bet THAT wasn't in the news story was it? LOL.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Tom
Thats pretty much the way I look at it.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Well, gee, thanks for the connection to the Southern Independence Party website...the one with the big picture of Nathan Bedford Forrest on the top, right across from Robert E. Lee. The website, too, with the links to the, "Freinds of Forrest," website, the yahoos who want to build a monument to this Forrest character.

And who was Nathan Bedford Forrest? Well, he was a rather brave and resourceful Southern general, according to Wikipedia, known for his brilliant handling of highly-mobile cavalry.

And oh yes, the was also the man who:

...led several more raids into the area, one of which ended in the controversial Battle of Fort Pillow on April 12, 1864. In that battle, Forrest demanded unconditional surrender, or else he would "put every man to the sword" - language he frequently used to expedite a surrender. Only this time, he meant it, and his men stormed the fort and began killing the men inside. The Confederates especially targeted several hundred African American soldiers inside the fort. These captured solders were crucified on tent frames and then burnt alive. Forrest eventually called off the massacre and accepted the surrender of the survivors, but only 80 of the 262 black troops survived...


...Embittered by the state of his homeland after the war, in May 1866, Forrest became "Grand Wizard" of the Ku Klux Klan, an organization of Confederate veterans. Because of Forrest's prominence, the organization grew rapidly under his leadership. In addition to aiding Confederate widows and orphans of the war, many members of the new group began to use force to oppose the extension of voting rights to blacks, and to resist Reconstruction-introduced measures for the ending of segregation. In 1869, Forrest, disagreeing with its increasingly violent tactics, ordered the Klan to disband. However, many of its groups in other parts of the country ignored the order and continued to function.

But there's no connection between these, "white pride," and "Southern heritage," guys and racism and the Klan. None at all. Nope, not in the least, absolutely not. Nohow, no way. Didn't happen. Wikipedia made it up. Well, OK, they didn't make it up, but other people committed massacres and crucified black soldiers too. OK, well actually, they didn't so much crucify prrisoners because they were black, but Forrest eventually stopped the crucifixions and 80 survived. And anyway Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. Well, yeah. Forrest founded the Klan (that's the Ku Klux Klan, ladies and gentlemen...yes, that Klan) but he left when he thought they got too violent. Anyway, Muslims should reject violence by radical Muslims even if Forrest never...well, did. And anyway the Klan started out just as a political group that had nothing to do with slavery and racism (which explains their large African-American membership...oh wait. Damn.) And they only got violent because of Northern oppression. And if you can have Martin Luther King Day, what's wrong with Nathan Bedford Forrest Day?

What's next? A drive for a national "Take Your Secretary to Lunch, It's Goebbels' Birthday Day?"

Lovely, guys. Really a lot to be proud of there.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I can agree with a statement, without liking, supporting or endorsing the person saying it. On the page linked to, there is nothing there that I disagree with. I can not comment on any other pages linked to by it however, not what they link to.

I do not know much about Forrest, other than he was a Confederate Cavalry general, and founder of the Klan. Robert posted more information than I knew.
So, he founded the group (in response to the terms of reconstruction imposed on the conquered and ruined South), but eventually grew disillusioned with it's increasingly violent attitude. He called for it's disolution and left the group, yet it continued without him.

So, anyone who forms a group, but later leaves should be eternally held responsible for it's actions, even after their involvement ended? Well then, Damn that Lincoln fellow for the Florida election issues in 2000. /sarcasm

I do find it interesting that Harry Turtledove (a renowned author of alternative sci-fi, who happens to be Native American) used Forrest as a hero in one of his books (Guns of the South), which did in fact touch on racism and Southern attitudes.

My problem with Roberts arguments is that they are all black/white. Reality is rarely that way. Forrest may have been the founder of the Klan, but what does his leaving really say? I do find that question interesting, and will have to do some research on it.

 

[Tgace]

I dont think the Confederates and the Nazis were quite in the same vicinity on the evil scale. Sherman and his soldiers did some atrocious stuff too. As did the Japanese during WWII. The US to the Indians etc....I think its important to attempt to understand exactly what these people believe these symbols mean today. Theres obviously a difference between what our countrymen think this flag represents. Just brushing it off as "stupid redneck think" is shortsighted..

 

[Bob Hubbard]

To suggest that those who fought for the Confederacy were only fighting over slavery is an insult to the thousands of brave soldiers and civilians who died in that war. One must wonder outloud at the intensity of the brainwashing that has taken place in the years since the war. Especially in regards to the number of decendents of Confederate veterans, who themselves are of African decent. What evil must it have taken to delude them into fighting to keep their relations in bondage? Confederate flags are racist? We can of course ask Bob Harrison and Dr. Emerson Emory both African Americans and both members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, it's membership is open to all male descendents of any veteran who served honorably in the Confederate armed forces. They do some intense lineage checking to verify such things.

From a related website:

It has been estimated that over 65,000 Southern blacks were in the Confederate ranks. Over 13,000 of these, “saw the elephant” also known as meeting the enemy in combat. These Black Confederates included both slave and free. The Confederate Congress did not approve blacks to be officially enlisted as soldiers (except as musicians), until late in the war. But in the ranks it was a different story. Many Confederate officers did not obey the mandates of politicians, they frequently enlisted blacks with the simple criteria, “Will you fight?” Historian Ervin Jordan, explains that “biracial units” were frequently organized “by local Confederate and State militia Commanders in response to immediate threats in the form of Union raids…”. Dr. Leonard Haynes, a African-American professor at Southern University, stated, “When you eliminate the black Confederate soldier, you’ve eliminated the history of the South.”

So, please, tell me again....if this symbol is so hated, if the war was so much over slavery....why did African Americans then fight and die under that banner, and why do their decendants today take pride in that fact?

Any symbol can and will be misused. Confederate Flag, swastika, Cross and Ol' Glory. The swastika today has been pretty much bound to Arian hate groups. Most of the people you run across today with it, especially the 'skinhead' will fit the stereotype. But I know 1 woman who holds it dear, as it means something sacred to her, and she refuses to abandon it because some closeminded morons have abused and corrupted it. I, and many others see the Confederate Cause, not one of racism, bigotry or a desire to hold other men in bondage, but of freedom, independance, and the deeper meaning of this nation, which today in our Hamiltonian bloated government, we have lost, to our eternal shame.

I despise the bigotry and violence that has been done, by the Klan, the Nazis, and all like them. I can hate the man, but respect his words. Robert mentioned Joseph Goebbels. Goebbels was many things...and stood for many things...almost all of which is repugnant to me. He did however on occation speak great truths. Do we ignore those truths out of contempt for the man, or do we acknowledge them, despite the man?

This girl wore a dress, made to represent a historical symbol of her heritage. That heritage is alternatively longed for, or damned, based on what one believe to be true. If that banner was a symbol of repression, I have to wonder why those it would repress, would fight, and die under it?

As to her intent? Attention-seeking would still be my guess. Teens rarely understand the deeper meanings of things.

 

[kenpo tiger]

"Attention-seeking would still be my guess. Teens rarely understand the deeper meanings of things."

Bob, Looks like you and Robertson do agree on something.

I agree with you. But we'll never know, unless she says what her logic, such as it is, was.

In the meantime, she looks pretty bad.