"What do you mean by *certainly*?" - "You don't know how to say, 'Yes, Sir'?"

[kpete]

... breaking from protocol could get people like George killed. Under Jim Crow, only white people could sit in judgment of a colored person on trial. White hearsay had more weight than a colored eyewitness. Colored people had to put on a show of cheerful subservience and unquestioning obedience in the presence of white people or face the consequences of being out of line. If children didn't learn their place, they could get on the wrong side of a white person, and the parents could do nothing to save them. [p.50]

George was seeing the world in a new light after being in Detroit. The three of them had gotten used to fair wages for their hard work up north and walked with their backs straight now. George, in particular, never had the constitution to act subservient, and his time up north, where colored people didn't have to step off the sidewalk, only made him more impatient with the role the southern caste system assigned him.

He had gotten used to carrying himself in a different way, talking to white people as equals in Detroit. Now that he was back in Eustis, he made a point to do whatever he could to keep from addressing white people as "sir" or "ma'am". "They'd say, 'So and so and so, boy'" he said. I would never say 'Yes, sir' or 'No, sir.' I'd say, 'That's right.' 'Sure.' 'Certainly.'"

"What do you mean by *certainly*?" would come the indignant reply. "You don't know how to say, 'Yes, sir'?" [p.135]

George and two friends tried to organize their fellow workers in the orange groves for better and more honest wages. One day a man who worked for one of the white grove owners came to him.
The yard man said he heard mention of a cypress swamp eighteen miles out from town.

"They talking 'bout taking y'all out to Blackwater Creek", he said. "They talking 'bout giving y'all a necktie party. They gon' take y'all out there and hang y'all in one of them cypress trees."
...

Men had been hanged for far less than what George was orchestrating. And there would be no protecting him if he stayed. In Florida and in the rest of the Deep South, "the killing of a Negro by a white man ceased in practice even to call for legal inquiry," a white southerner observed in the early 1940s. [p.156-57]

That quote is from The Mind of the South by W.J. Cash, who then writes:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/114560.The_Mind_of_the_South

But wherever and whenever the forms were still observed, the coroner or jury was all but sure to call

it "self-defense" or "justifiable homicide", and to free the slayer with celerity.

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2012/03/faulkners-past-and-trayvon-martin.html

[seabeyond]

1. very good point, the angle this comes from. women are also expected to talk to men

Last edited Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:42 AM - Edit history (1)

in a manner men find acceptable. it may be the area i live in.

living here in texas i have seen some (not many, just some and generally when in service for a job) talk with us like we are the 'master" and both hubby and i are thoroughly disgusted about it. we have had conversation about it. i use to run a business and a black employee would address my aunt (an owner of business) as Miss Alice. (i had moved from calif and never heard this address in real life). hated it. asked her why she did and and please dont. she replied how she was raised and they do things differently here.

i have often found/find SOME men cannot handle how i address them. they do not like a woman (unconsciously i believe) who talk to them like fellow men and does not have a submissive attitude. that has been a trip for me.

but this is an example that shouts bigotries are still alive though many dont recognize. especially those in the position of expecting to be addressed in certain manners.

[MrsBrady]

14. I don't feel subjugated as a female in Texas.

I've been called Miss ______ a lot.
And I use it too.
Some things are just cultural. Sometimes is an affectionate/respectful term.

I certainly don't put up with bigotry or sexism near or around me.
Sometimes I say something, sometimes I don't.

I do hate it when men call a group of women girls, though.
I don't hear it as much as I used to, but still get that every once in a while.
A male parent used that with a group us preschool teachers the other day.
Not much I can do about that.

When a male cousin calls a group of his female cousins 'girls' it doesn't bother me.
"hey girls!"

I used to have a boss that would call us 'babe', but he wasn't creepy or smarmy at all.
He was a good guy.

I had another boss who was a prick and mean to his employees, and he was completely professional
in his verbiage.

Sometimes it's not worth it to say anything, and context is also key.

[seabeyond]

16. i thought for sure i had put some, but i see i didnt, so i added it.

it is absolutely not a whole. it is surprising when i do come up against it and it is not that often, but i do.

here and there i have had situations when dealing with a man i will ask questions, he looks over my head and answers husband, totally ignoring me. like hiring someone to do crown work on the house or something. and there are times i just tell hubby to make the call cause i dont want to deal wth the possibility of the whole male/female thing. establishing an equal level before i am heard.

i have been here over two decades and maybe it is that these some men would be found anywhere, it is just that i was in 20's when moving here so i may not have recognized it younger seeing it just as the way the world is.

[eridani]

40. I only get offended by not sticking to parallel expressions

It's "men and women" or "boys and girls," not "men and girls."
"Ladies and gentlemen," not "men and ladies."

And obviously, "boy" in reference to an adult black male is appalling.

[baldguy]

2. "If Trayvon Had Only Answered In an Appropriate Manner There Would have Been No Problem"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002455364

[noiretextatique]

15. infuriating

to hell with geraldo and all the other assholes who are trying to blame Trayvon. he did nothing wrong. it was his misfortune to walk down a street in front of a murderous racist asshole. the racist asshole is to blame.

[Edweird]

3. So where does a Hispanic with a Jewish sounding name fit in?

I've got some bad news for you - Zimmerman isn't going to be invited to join the Klan.

[MineralMan]

5. Since when is Zimmerman necessarily a Jewish name?

I've known a number of people with that last name, including my high school girlfriend. None of them were Jewish.

It's a German surname, meaning Carpenter, it's based on an occupation, as are many German surnames.

[Edweird]

7. Perhaps you need to re-read my post. I did not say it was Jewish.

I don't know anything about the guy.

[MineralMan]

9. You said it was Jewish-sounding.

How is it Jewish-sounding? What sounds Jewish about that name? It sounds like a German name to me.

[Edweird]

12. Yes I did.

http://wiki.name.com/en/Zimmerman

http://genealogy.about.com/library/surnames/z/bl_name-ZIMMERMAN.htm

[NOLALady]

18. I read somewhere that his Mother is Hispanic,

his Father is White.

[Edweird]

23. My point is that Zimmerman wasn't any more likely to be able to join the Klan than the kid he shot.

That's it. This is a story about a corrupt small town looking out for the family of a former judge that has been transformed into whatever those with an agenda need it to be.

[pscot]

4. Gee. Why do you hate the South?

Let me count the ways...

[baldguy]

6. Recalling Southern history in an accurate manner is hating the South, now?

[Aerows]

8. I live in the South

and I have all of my life. I am white. It is in no way "hating the South" to speak of our history. In fact, it is doing the South a favor - those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it. And it was repeated in Sanford.

We need to confront racism and prejudice in our society.

[seabeyond]

11. +1.

and i will be the first to point out that bigotry is far from only being in the south. we can point out the bigotries of states in the north like wisc, right now. and the highest number of hate groups being in calif. having grown up in calif, i lived in the most conservative area of calif (bakersfield) in the most liberal state. it was interesting. and the bigotry was a reality. separating of blacks and whites was more prevalent than i find here in amarillo texas. something else i find interesting. yet the manner in which women and blacks are treated in texas is also different than what i found in calif.

to talk about this stuff openly is not a matter of dissing. though i have seen the southern dissing threads and think it is lazy discussion.

[Aerows]

36. My cousin lives in Bakersfield

You might remember him from the BP disaster Congressional hearings, where he was a representative for them as a VP at the company.

He's part of my family, and I have my own opinions of him, which are less favorable than they are of BP.

[seabeyond]

37. wow. really? ooosh. nt

[SunSeeker]

19. I lived in the South too, it's worse than people know.

I spent 5 formative years in the South in the mid to late 1970s, mostly my middle school years. The suburb of New Orleans I lived in was horribly segregated. The whites (me) lived in one part with green lawns and freshly paved roads, and then there was what all my neighbors referred to as N*****ville, which consisted of tins shacks and dirt roads. Even though my school was on paper integrated, it seemed all the black kids were shunted off into "their own" classes. I now realize they all were probably in some "special ed" classes, because they were nowhere to be found in any of my science lab classes or what the school called "gifted" (i.e., advanced--and all white) Literature classes, etc. There were race riots at least once or twice a year in my middle school. It always started at lunch, the only time the kids mingled, by necessity, because we were all lined up to get lunch at the cafeteria. Someone would throw food or hurl a slur, and all of a sudden chairs were flying and I was running for the door. I would come home early, as at that point the school would shut down. It was hell on earth. I was so glad when my family moved to Los Angeles. I'm not saying there's no racism in California, but it's nothing like it is/was in the South.

[SemperEadem]

27. once California came into the union

they passed more jim crow laws than the southern states:

Outside the South, California passed more Jim Crow laws (17) than any other state in the country.

http://www.jimcrowhistory.org/resources/lessonplans/hs_es_jim_crow_laws.htm

[SunSeeker]

31. I'm not saying there's no racism in California, but it's nothing like it is/was in the South.

Which is what I said in my post. Are you disagreeing with me?

[SemperEadem]

32. google "zoot suit riots"

I think the severity is in the experience of those who were or weren't targeted.

[SunSeeker]

35. google "slavery"

I wasn't "one of those targeted" in the South nor in California. But I have eyes, ears and a brain. Are you saying that because I wasn't "targeted" I cannot have a valid opinion on the "severity" of racism in a place I lived?

[SemperEadem]

38. did I say that you did not have a valid opinion about anything? If so, link it.

What I'm saying is what I typed. YOU are reading way more into that than is required.

Your experience is non sequitur to me imparting some information with regards to jim crow laws and california.

and for the record, seeing that I'm African American, I don't NEED to google slavery. Come down off your high dudgeon already.

[SunSeeker]

39. "dudgeon"? I had to look that up! LOL

And for the record, I did know about Jim Crow laws in California and the Zoot Suit Riots; your instructions to me to google Zoot Suit Riots suggests you believed I didn't know about these things, which is a touch insulting, particularly since you are talking to a DUer in CA. Buy hey, you did get me with "dudgeon"!

And of course you don't NEED to google slavery. No one does, regardless of their color. My point was that the legacy of slavery in the South puts racism in the South on a whole different level than the Zoot Suit Riots or now unenforceable land restrictions in CA (yup, I know all about the deed restrictions against "Abyssinians," etc.). I was using a sarcastic play on your "google 'Zoot Suit Riots'" line; too bad smilies won't appear in Reply titles (I should have used the sarcam one).

And I'm not saying all Southerners are racists. Just that the level of racism in the South is way worse than in CA; an observation that, up to now, I would not have expected anyone to disagree with. Seriously, do you disagree with that observation?

[SemperEadem]

28. I think there is a difference

between speaking the truth about the history of the south and making denegrating comments about all people who live in the south.

and I'm no fan of the south's ugly race history; neither am I fan of broad-brush generalizations.

[malthaussen]

10. Yeah, this is "hating the South"

... in exactly the same way that stating facts in a political interview is "hating the Republicans."

Of course, if the facts are hateful, I can see why they might cause confusion...

-- Mal

[noiretextatique]

17. +1000...i will add this: jim crow laws were passed in all 50 states

so it was not JUST the south. the laws were active and enforced in the north, east and west...not just the south.

[malthaussen]

21. Can you cite a source for this assertion?

Jim Crow laws, so far as I am aware, were lagely confined to southern states, especially the states of the former Confederacy. Jim Crow practices existed everywhere. There is a difference.

Anecdotally, my childhood from 1956 to 1964 was spent in the Pittsburgh suburbs. There were no "separate but equal" facilities present where I lived, which is what Jim Crow laws are about.

And for most of the Jim Crow period, there were only 50 states. I wonder that Hawaii and Alaska would have passed such laws between the time they achieved statehood and the time such laws were prohibited in 1964.

-- Mal

[noiretextatique]

29. but, of course...and you are completely wrong. jim crow laws existed in 49 states, including PA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jim_Crow_law_examples_by_State


Hawaii is the only exception. But Alaska and Hawaii did not enact harsh laws like the rest of the states. And you are correct in that the most egregious laws were enacted in the south, however Jim Crow laws were passed in the lower 48...every single one.

Pennsylvania

1869: Education [Statute] Black children prohibited from attending Pittsburgh schools.
1956: Adoption [Statute] Petition must state race or color of adopting parents.

http://www.jimcrowhistory.org/geography/outside_south.htm

Alaska

Jim Crow Laws: Alaska
1905: Education [Statute]
Schools provided for the education of white children and "children of mixed blood who lead a civilized life." Statute unclear as to whether only mulatto children would be allowed to attend or if a "pure" black child would also be admitted.

1923: Voting [Statute]
In April 1925 the seventh Alaska Territorial Legislature enacted into law a measure requiring that voters in territorial elections be able to read and write the English language.

1925: Voting [Statute]
The only law passed concerning minorities related to school admission. Children of mixed blood who led a "civilized life" would be allowed to attend school with white children. No specific mention of black children was made. Public accommodations segregation was barred in 1949.

Alaska was far more progressive than the rest of the states.
1935: Barred school segregation [Statute]
An act establishing the University of Alaska contained a provision outlawing discrimination because of color.

1949: Barred public accommodation segregation [Statute]
Citizens entitled to full and equal public accommodations. Unlawful to display signs indicating racial discrimination. Penalty: Misdemeanor; $250, 30 days imprisonment, or both.

[malthaussen]

41. Ah useful web site

But as the site makes clear, while many non-Confederate states passed Jim Crow laws, particularly in respect of educational access, they tended to repeal them rather quickly. Whereas the laws in Southern states largely persisted into living memory. Hence, when one speaks of Jim Crow nowadays, they are usually referring to laws that were in effect within recent memory, and not laws that were 50 years dead when our final states were admitted.

After all, slavery was at one point legal in all the colonies, so that by that argument, one could argue that there is no difference between slavery in say, Massachusetts, and, say, Mississippi.

I'm not sure that the adoption petition law counts as Jim Crow, unless it was used as a test to discriminate against adopters. I'd be willing to bet it was, because as I said, Jim Crow practices were much more prevalent than Jim Crow laws.

I figured Hawaii would be an exception, because it always was a much more multi-cultural state than the rest of the country, although I have the thought that when we took over the place and gave it the benefit of our enlightened rule, we did enact some laws to discriminate against the natives. It would be in character.

I think, however, that when most people consider Jim Crow laws, they think something along the line of this: when I was 6 years old in Pennsylvania, black kids and I drank out of the same fountain. But if I had gone to Virginia, we would not. That kind of reality is much more in-your-face than the historical truth that for 3 years almost 100 years earlier, black kids could not go to my school.

-- Mal

[Igel]

33. A lot of the JC laws were transient.

They were passed just after the Civil War and rescinded in the 1870s or '80s. Some holdout laws continued for decades after that. They could be prohibiting miscegenation or mandating school segregation, making cross-racial adoptions illegal or easily challenged.. It wasn't so much a case of which states passed a law as when various states changed them.

In other cases there weren't laws per se but customs or owner-imposed mandates. I'm not sure that there was a law mandating that blacks had to be at the back of the bus or not eat at the white-only diner counters.

I grew up in Maryland. Not exactly a state in the confederacy. It went with the north, but about 1/3 of its troops went Southern. It was split.

After I'd grown up I was telling my wife about the few memories I have of my childhood before about age 8. I was sorting through them and told her about the polar bear that the local mall had on display. (I imagine the fake ice in the display wasn't very comforting in a Baltimore August.) That was tied up with my asking my mother why there were two water fountains so close to each other and she told me not to use one but to use the other. I somehow thought it had something to do with the bear. My mother didn't explain. That was in the mid-60s. 1964 or '65, maybe '66.

[noiretextatique]

34. i grew up in california...in compton to be precise, a so-called "model city"

because black people moved there and white people moved out. i believe it was one of the few suburbs where black people could buy homes in the 50s and 60s. my mom and dad were from texas, so we'd drive there every summer for vacation, loaded down with food and beverages. we'd stop along the roadside to pee, because my dad would not allow us to use "colored" restrooms. we brought our own food because my dad would not go to anyone's back door to be served. rip, dad...you taught us self-worth

[SemperEadem]

26. info

Illinois had no Jim Crow laws and banned racial segregation. However, staring in the 1920s restrictive covenants were used to segregate housing.

Iowa did not have Jim Crow laws and in fact banned segregation of public places starting in 1884.

Michigan banned segregation, but in 1957 required that race be made a consideration in adoption.

Minnesota barred segregation, however it did deny voting rights to Indians living on reservations.

New Jersey barred segregation, and passed no Jim Crow laws.

Pennsylvania passed a school segregation law in 1869, but quickly overturned it in 1872 and passed several anti-segregation laws.

Vermont had no Jim Crow laws, and banned segregation in public accommodation in 1957.

Wisconsin also barred segregation, but also denied voting rights to Indians who had not severed ties with the tribe.

Several other states barred segregation, or at least passed no laws mandating it, but did bar intermarriage, or restricted voting rights.

It is important to note that in the West racial laws were as likely to target Native Americans and Asians as Blacks.

Alaska, as a territory, did in fact have Jim Crow laws. I don't know if Hawaii had Jim Crow laws, but Hawaii was a multi-ethnic society that practiced quite strict segregation.

Of course, merely because a state did not have Jim Crow laws does not mean that racial discrimination and segregation did not occur, as private property owners were free to enforce such rules, unless, as in Iowa, they prohibited from doing so by law.
Source(s):
http://www.jimcrowhistory.org/home.htm

[noiretextatique]

30. thanks for the info

10 out of 50 states did not embrace jim crow = 40 that did, and not just in the south.

[Chorophyll]

20. "Gee. Why do you hate our freedoms?"

This isn't "hating the south" anymore than protesting the Iraq invasion was "hating America."

It is about prejudice and the laws that existed (and in some cases still do) to protect it.

[stonecutter357]

24. Why

Why do you hate the South? Do you hate me?

[Major Hogwash]

13. Good post.

I'm going to have to check that book out.

[1monster]

22. In 1974, I moved to a small town in Florida that had been a large participant in

the Civil Rights movement during the '60s. I came from farm country in Pennsylvania where we had very few people of color. We were mostly descendants of the various German, Irish, and English waves of immigration. I can't say that I'd never been exposed to racism... there was an older guy I worked for who used ethnic terms to refer to other ethnic groups. Never the N-word. That was socially unacceptable, period, stop. But other milder words for those of color and for those of different ethnic groups. He was a equal opportunity ethnocentric guy.

And then there was the time when I was in seventh grade, there was the time the school powers placed an eighth-grade girl in my seventh-grade gym class because she was being bullied in her gym class, apparently becaus she was black. She was a member of one of the two black families in our school district. Her name was Angie W. When I was six, the nuns in our Sunday school told us how honored we were in our church because the members of the W. family had chosen OUR church to join. That made us really special. And Mrs. W. would walk down the sidewalk on Sunday mornings, back straight, head up, nod and smile graciously to all she met on the way into church. To my six-year-old eyes, she was a queen. And I was awed at having her daughter in my gym class and her gym locker in my block.

With that incrediby naive background in race relations, I came to Florida in 1974 and encountered culture shock. People of color seemed to be employed only in menial positions, maids, janitors, garbage collectors, kitchen workers, etc. with only one exception: two black detectives on the sheriff's department.

They rarely raised their eyes to meet those of a white person. Especially those who were twenty-five and up. It was looser and freer with the younger people. Mostly.

I used to babysit for a family on the lower end of Washington Street, near the lake. I would walk several blocks out of my way to get there because those were the directions I'd been given. One day, I was running late, so I decided I'd take a short cut and go down behind the newspaper building where Washington Street began.

One block down, Washington Street became a whole different world. The paved street no longer had a small pothole or ragged part here and there. It had a small patch of pavement here and there that hadn't yet worn away. The buildings were in bad shape, although efforts to keep them in some kind of repair were noticable. I realized then that I had ventured into a part of town that I was told not to go in. It was part of a defacto "Black Town." But since I was already there, I decided to continue on. There was no one on the street this early.

Then an older black man came out of one of the buildings. He glared at me in anger and outrage and watched every step I took. I tried smiling and nodding at him, but there was no change in his demeanor.

For the first, and only, time in my life, I was scared because my skin was white and his was black -- and I was on his territory where I'd been told not to go. I kept walking steadily as the street became better cared for into the slightly shabby formerly fashionable neighborhood.

Thirty-eight years later, I'm happy to tell you that things have changed drastically. Kids today have no idea of the attitude and atmosphere their parents lived through and I'm happy that is true.

There is still some discrimination against people of color in employment (I've seen it) but the place where change seems to be the slowest is in the area of Justice. That is changing now too. Unfortunately, not because the just and fair treatment of black people is rising, but because the fair and just treatment of others is going down...

[SemperEadem]

25. good thing I was born when I was born

nothing would ever make me answer "yes, sir" to anyone but my male relatives. Eff what you heard or thought.