Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is a term used by people in the sailing community to complement the way their sails are trimmed.
In general it means I like your style.
Thanks for the compliment, TomD. I admit I had to look up the expression on the "urban dictionary" to find out what was being said! LOL
You being from the northeast, here is a little story in turn that you might appreciate and get a chuckle out of as concerns regional vocabulary differences:
Some years back, I had a "blind date" with a girl from Massachussets. Long story as to how and why it was set up, but ended up that we really did hit it off pretty well. And we went out several days running, and spent a lot of time together.
Anyway, one evening we were together alone and she suddenly said "You know what I would really like? A good GRINDER!"
Oh man, thinks me, I hit the mother lode! Must be my Texas/Southern accent that done it!
Hey, how the hell was I to know that she was referring to wanting a damn submarine sandwich??? (or po' boy as some of us down in these parts call them).
If you want to refer to the South as an extended family, in my view you need to include some Midwestern states whose settlers included Southerners. That would include obviously Missouri, also Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana...many Virginians settled these states along with New Englanders.
If you want to refer to the South as an extended family, in my view you need to include some Midwestern states whose settlers included Southerners. That would include obviously Missouri, also Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana...many Virginians settled these states along with New Englanders.
Do I detect a note of facetiousness here, AJ? (just kidding, friend).
Seriously, in my op, I did refer to Missouri as "distant kin" (as it had at least noteable Confederate sympathies during the WBTS as compared to other border states like Maryland and Delaware).
To take it out to areas of the southern Midwestern states like Illinois and Indiana and Ohio would -- I think -- be stretching things quite a bit as to the original and somewhat jocular and light-hearted intention of the "extended family" analogy.
Not in the least dismissing what you say, as certainly the aforementioned states had some Southern settlement. But that is probably true of just about any state in the U.S. In keeping with the analogy, after it passes a certain point, one can't really claim true kinship. I once read something making a case that everyone in the world (if the original parentage was "Adam and Eve") are at least 152nd cousins (or something like that! LOL)
After about 4th cousins or so (which is about Missouri), any real kinship fades, I would think...
[quote=TexasReb;5447925]Do I detect a note of facetiousness here, AJ? (just kidding, friend).
Seriously, in my op, I did refer to Missouri as "distant kin" (as it had at least noteable Confederate sympathies during the WBTS as compared to other border states like Maryland and Delaware).
To take it out to areas of the southern Midwestern states like Illinois and Indiana and Ohio would -- I think -- be stretching things quite a bit as to the original and somewhat jocular and light-hearted intention of the "extended family" analogy.
Not in the least dismissing what you say, as certainly the aforementioned states had some Southern settlement. But that is probably true of just about any state in the U.S. In keeping with the analogy, after it passes a certain point, one can't really claim true kinship. I once read something making a case that everyone in the world (if the original parentage was "Adam and Eve") are at least 152nd cousins (or something like that! LOL) [quote]
Confederate sympathy alone is not enough to classify the South as an extended family, for many Northerners sympathized with the Confederacy as well (ever hear about the term Copperhead?). Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Missouri all had a significant and notable number of Southern settlers...Missouri had more obviously, but you can't simply dismiss the rest...that is pure ignorance. Many of these residents left and fought for the Confederacy...there are even Confederate Memorials in parts of these states. As far as bloodlines and genealogy goes, my definition of the South as an extended family is quite accurate. In any case, the South as an extended family by modern definitions would leave out the historic border states of Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware. Maryland and Delaware are now decidedly Northeastern, Missouri decidedly Midwestern. The Census Bureau's definition of the Mason-Dixon line of the Pennsylvania Maryland border is a flat out lie...historically it once was accurate but that was over 140 years ago.
Confederate sympathy alone is not enough to classify the South as an extended family, for many Northerners sympathized with the Confederacy as well (ever hear about the term Copperhead?). Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Missouri all had a significant and notable number of Southern settlers...Missouri had more obviously, but you can't simply dismiss the rest...that is pure ignorance.
Usually you and I generally agree, but it seems this is getting more "detailed and serious" than I ever intended (which is, of course, the chance one takes when starting threads of this nature! LOL). I mean this in turn light-hearted.
But anyway, yes, I know what a "copperhead" was! Northerners of a certain sympathy for the Southern cause (such as Vallandigham of Ohio). However, it is not "ignorance" (and naturally I take for granted you didn't mean this personally) that causes me to place Missouri in a seperate class (or on a branch of the family tree) as the other states. Missouri did easily have much more of a populace supporting the Confederacy in comparrison and, later, was more inclined to be politically part of the "Solid South". Ohio, Illinois and Indiana have no such real history in that regard.
Quote:
Many of these residents left and fought for the Confederacy...there are even Confederate Memorials in parts of these states.
If there are, and I am not doubting there might be a few somewhere, I would be truly interested and curious as to know exactly where they are. I mean this sincerely, as I am compiling a list of all CSA memorials in the country...
Quote:
As far as bloodlines and genealogy goes, my definition of the South as an extended family is quite accurate. In any case, the South as an extended family by modern definitions would leave out the historic border states of Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware. Maryland and Delaware are now decidedly Northeastern, Missouri decidedly Midwestern. The Census Bureau's definition of the Mason-Dixon line of the Pennsylvania Maryland border is a flat out lie...historically it once was accurate but that was over 140 years ago.
Yes, and we don't fundamentally disgaree on the points you make here. That was why I made a joke out of Maryland and Delaware being part of the "family". And only included Missouri as "distant kin" as you are right. In a modern day analogy it would be something like a 4th or maybe even 5th cousin. Never totally a part of it to begin with, but the family lines over the years being even more "diluted" by Midwestern marriages!
One other thing of note is that the Mason-Dixon line thingy is, as you say, very misunderstood. It was NEVER intended to be a seperation of North and South, but a settlement of boundary lines between Pennsylvania and Maryland along a narrow stretch.
thanks for the compliment, tomd. I admit i had to look up the expression on the "urban dictionary" to find out what was being said! Lol
you being from the northeast, here is a little story in turn that you might appreciate and get a chuckle out of as concerns regional vocabulary differences:
Some years back, i had a "blind date" with a girl from massachussets. Long story as to how and why it was set up, but ended up that we really did hit it off pretty well. And we went out several days running, and spent a lot of time together.
Anyway, one evening we were together alone and she suddenly said "you know what i would really like? A good grinder!"
oh man, thinks me, i hit the mother lode! Must be my texas/southern accent that done it! :d
hey, how the hell was i to know that she was referring to wanting a damn submarine sandwich??? (or po' boy as some of us down in these parts call them).
You also got one that was separated at birth- Alberta Canada. He lives way up yonder in the mountains. Texas is his older brother, though it's unclear if they've met.
Usually you and I generally agree, but it seems this is getting more "detailed and serious" than I ever intended (which is, of course, the chance one takes when starting threads of this nature! LOL). I mean this in turn light-hearted.
No the ignorance was not meant as a personal attack...I was just pointing out that to say only the South sympathized with the South was not true. But anyway, yes, I know what a "copperhead" was! Northerners of a certain sympathy for the Southern cause (such as Vallandigham of Ohio). However, it is not "ignorance" (and naturally I take for granted you didn't mean this personally) that causes me to place Missouri in a seperate class (or on a branch of the family tree) as the other states. Missouri did easily have much more of a populace supporting the Confederacy in comparrison and, later, was more inclined to be politically part of the "Solid South". Ohio, Illinois and Indiana have no such real history in that regard.
If there are, and I am not doubting there might be a few somewhere, I would be truly interested and curious as to know exactly where they are. I mean this sincerely, as I am compiling a list of all CSA memorials in the country...
Yes, and we don't fundamentally disgaree on the points you make here. That was why I made a joke out of Maryland and Delaware being part of the "family". And only included Missouri as "distant kin" as you are right. In a modern day analogy it would be something like a 4th or maybe even 5th cousin. Never totally a part of it to begin with, but the family lines over the years being even more "diluted" by Midwestern marriages!
One other thing of note is that the Mason-Dixon line thingy is, as you say, very misunderstood. It was NEVER intended to be a seperation of North and South, but a settlement of boundary lines between Pennsylvania and Maryland along a narrow stretch.
I thought at one point that I had found a list of these Confederate Memorials on google when I searched it extensively about 8 months ago. I honestly don't have a memory of these links, and it is not because I am making them up, because I KNOW that I had the page at one point, and the reason it's hard to find them is because they are not talked about often. I'm not sure if Iowa has any, I doubt they do. The other three states I'm sure have them at some points. Confederate Memorials also are not necessarily tributes to the Confederacy...many simply honor those Confederate soldiers killed on the battlefield, as the few but notable ones in Missouri do, in additon to the Union Memorials throughout the state. THe other thing I'm not sure I agree with is Missouri later being politically inclined to be more a part of the "Solid South"...Missouri is and has always been a historic swing state, and did not vote for a Southern candidate during Lincoln's first election. Indiana and Ohio have the same swing tendencies Missouri has, and Indiana has voted with the South actually quite frequently (they have conservative tendencies).
I thought at one point that I had found a list of these Confederate Memorials on google when I searched it extensively about 8 months ago. I honestly don't have a memory of these links, and it is not because I am making them up, because I KNOW that I had the page at one point, and the reason it's hard to find them is because they are not talked about often. I'm not sure if Iowa has any, I doubt they do.
The other three states I'm sure have them at some points. Confederate Memorials also are not necessarily tributes to the Confederacy...many simply honor those Confederate soldiers killed on the battlefield, as the few but notable ones in Missouri do, in additon to the Union Memorials throughout the state.
I would seriously doubt Iowa does either, but you are probably right to that some states of the southern Midwest which contained some "copperhead" sentiment probably do. At least to the extent -- as you allude to -- some here and there and probably small and private. This is in contrast with those true Confederate monuments which are widespread and on public grounds throughout the Old Confederate states.
I am sure you are right too, that those which DO exist up there, are not likely tributes to the Confederacy per se, but simply an epitaph for the soldiers. This again, in comparisson to those which exist down here and unabashedly make no secret of the side they were on! LOL (for instance, the huge one on the South Lawn of the Texas Capitol grounds proclaims "Died for States Rights"...or something like that! ) But anyway, there are other threads for arguing the WBTS, that is not my purpose at all, here!
Quote:
The other thing I'm not sure I agree with is Missouri later being politically inclined to be more a part of the "Solid South"...Missouri is and has always been a historic swing state, and did not vote for a Southern candidate during Lincoln's first election. Indiana and Ohio have the same swing tendencies Missouri has, and Indiana has voted with the South actually quite frequently (they have conservative tendencies).
You may have me a bit on this one. Here is the electoral map of the 1860 election:
Missouri was the only border state which went with "Northern Democrat" Douglas. Even Maryland and Delaware supported Southern Democrat Breckenridge (which to me was a bit surprising in comparisson).
In later years, however, following Reconstruction, I am thinking (but could be wrong), that Missouri tended to follow the "Solid South" type pattern. That is, yellow-dog democrat. Yes, true that Indiana, Ohio and such may have voted the same as the Southern states in many elections, but the reasons weren't traceable to the same as existed in the states of the "hard-core" South. That is, bitterness (understandable IMHO) over the vindictiveness and hardships of Reconstruction. If that makes sense.
I would seriously doubt Iowa does either, but you are probably right to that some states of the southern Midwest which contained some "copperhead" sentiment probably do. At least to the extent -- as you allude to -- some here and there and probably small and private. This is in contrast with those true Confederate monuments which are widespread and on public grounds throughout the Old Confederate states.
I am sure you are right too, that those which DO exist up there, are not likely tributes to the Confederacy per se, but simply an epitaph for the soldiers. This again, in comparisson to those which exist down here and unabashedly make no secret of the side they were on! LOL (for instance, the huge one on the South Lawn of the Texas Capitol grounds proclaims "Died for States Rights"...or something like that! ) But anyway, there are other threads for arguing the WBTS, that is not my purpose at all, here!
You may have me a bit on this one. Here is the electoral map of the 1860 election:
Missouri was the only border state which went with "Northern Democrat" Douglas. Even Maryland and Delaware supported Southern Democrat Breckenridge (which to me was a bit surprising in comparisson).
In later years, however, following Reconstruction, I am thinking (but could be wrong), that Missouri tended to follow the "Solid South" type pattern. That is, yellow-dog democrat. Yes, true that Indiana, Ohio and such may have voted the same as the Southern states in many elections, but the reasons weren't traceable to the same as existed in the states of the "hard-core" South. That is, bitterness (understandable IMHO) over the vindictiveness and hardships of Reconstruction. If that makes sense.
Good post though, AJ!
I guess I could somewhat, SOMEWHAT see why Missouri might have had tendencies to vote in with the Solid South at some levels...since the Union's border states of the Civil War suffered a lot more damage than the free states, it makes sense why they might have tendencies to vote in with the "Solid South." And the Union did inflict and kill many innocent Missourians...many of the guerilla fighters like Jesse James and the Younger Brothers fought on the side of the Confederacy only because their families were brutally executed by Union soldiers. So Missouri's voting with the Solid South is not really for the same reasons as the true Confederate states necessarily. The causes for it are different. Not to mention, Missouri's two major cities, St. Louis and Kansas City, never really voted with the rest of rural Missouri. Missouri has supported the winning candidate in almost every election since the end of the Civil War, all but one I believe. So to say that Missouri has voted with the Solid South, is just plain untrue. The border states also did not really play a part of the Reconstruction like the rest of the Solid South. But in any case, I would agree it reasonable to call the border states historically part of the South of the extended family. As to the post Civil War, most of the border states except Kentucky and possibly West Virginia cut most of their ties to the South.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
