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.
Isn't east state with its subregions viewed that same way outside of the state? You seem to place more importance on a specific California coastal culture versus the rest of California culture and even separate a northern versus southern coastal culture..."but to someone from Ohio they are Californians". In Texas, you seem to pay close attention to the different cultural sections of the state and carefully place them in 4 different cultural regions..."but to someone from Ohio they are Texans".
this has to do with population density. california and texas have a lot of people, therefore cultural changes can happen more quickly over a shorter land distance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeaconJ
Every state in the U.S. is JUST as culturally diverse as Florida, Texas, and California and all have more than one VERY different cultures within their boundaries. If you're going to recognize some, then you should recognize all...and not diminish their uniqueness or importance.
so the state of iowa has huge differences wthin its state? because we all know northern iowans look down on those southern iowans, "those southern iwoans are so backwards. thank god we live in northern iowa!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeaconJ
I can tell you from experience that the Piedmont region of Virginia/NC/SC/Georgia is completely different from the coastal plains and Applachian regions - different enough to warrant its own separate region under your philosophy. These areas are as different from one another as many of the small areas you designated as separate regions in other parts of the country.
how? how is it different? what is so different? please tell me of the drastic changes that occur when traveling southwest through north carolina. please tell me why west-central north carolinia is so different from east-central north carolinina to the point where we can find nothing in common with them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeaconJ
My vote would be for larger defined regions based on geographical location, then smaller subregions within those large regions. Then you don't end up giving more recognition to some cultural differences while ignoring others that are just as pronounced.
you'll notice that on my map "southern appalachia" is a subregion of the south, "great lakes region" is a sub region of the midwest, and "coastal pacific northwest", "coastal northern california", and "coastal southern california" are subregions of the west (indicated by an indentation on the map key)
Agreed. The Mid-Atlantic region on this map seems to be intended to represent the urban Washington-NYC corridor, but this area is a lot different from sparsely populated upstate NY. Maybe combine the upper half of NY state that is now listed as Mid-Atlantic with New England and call it "New England-Adirondack" or make it its own region, although its culture is not that distinctive.
Also agree with the Michigan UP and most of the LP being classified as part of the Midwest.
...with this; make upstate NY link up with either New England, or put it with the Great Lakes, but it shouldn't be Mid-Atlantic.
this has to do with population density. california and texas have a lot of people, therefore cultural changes can happen more quickly over a shorter land distance.
so the state of iowa has huge differences wthin its state? because we all know northern iowans look down on those southern iowans, "those southern iwoans are so backwards. thank god we live in northern iowa!"
how? how is it different? what is so different? please tell me of the drastic changes that occur when traveling southwest through north carolina. please tell me why west-central north carolinia is so different from east-central north carolinina to the point where we can find nothing in common with them.
you'll notice that on my map "southern appalachia" is a subregion of the south, "great lakes region" is a sub region of the midwest, and "coastal pacific northwest", "coastal northern california", and "coastal southern california" are subregions of the west (indicated by an indentation on the map key)
I have no intention of walking you through any cultural differences anywhere with that attitude. Your response was very sarcastic and confrontational, and I don't care enough to get into with you. You don't appear to have a mind open to new ideas...it's already made up.
I have no intention of walking you through any cultural differences anywhere with that attitude. Your response was very sarcastic and confrontational, and I don't care enough to get into with you. You don't appear to have a mind open to new ideas...it's already made up.
because i am right, and you are wrong. and you know that. if you would like me to make a map of your state's cultural regions i will make you one.
Your "South" extends too deep into western Oklahoma and Texas. In my opinion OKC is the westernmost city that could be classified as a "southern" city and that is ONLY because of the conservative religious climate there. Immediately west of OKC you get into territory that is clearly Great Plains. Instead, your "south" should extend farther up into Missouri. The I-44 corridor and southward are the Ozarks and they are clearly Southern culturally.
I don't agree with that at all. The Ozarks are not entirely culturally Southern. They have strong Midwestern influences, and sweet tea and grits are pretty hard to find north of that blotted out area in red. My father is from Joplin and considers himself to be a Midwesterner, not a Southerner. The I-44 corridor is definitely not Southern. Springfield, Joplin, and Rolla are not really definitively Southern or Midwestern. In the St. Louis area, there is nothing culturally Southern about that area. The Ozarks are a blended region. They have both Southern and Northern settlements and were settled by many Germans in addition to people from Southern Appalachia. The Missouri Ozarks are much less culturally southern than most places in Kentucky, Virginia, and southern West Virginia. The Arkansas Ozarks are much more culturally Southern than most of the Missouri Ozarks, which are a transition between the Midwest and South.
Being from Minneapolis I might be biased or parochial, but I think the Midwest needs further subdivision. The northern tier was predominately settled in the late 19th century with various Scandinavian & Eastern European influences to a base German population. Its just a different vibe from the southern areas whose populations were established earlier in the 19th century and have English and southern influences which are totally lacking in the upper midwest. The northern areas were also settled at a time when Europe as a whole was more fully transitioning towards democratic governance and immigrants carried a different political ideation, which still carries through in voter participation rates.
because i am right, and you are wrong. and you know that. if you would like me to make a map of your state's cultural regions i will make you one.
Oh-My-God...that's about what I would expect from your previous posts. What an ignorant response...you are FAR from being definitively correct, my friend.
I don't NEED you to make any maps for me, thank you. There are plenty of cultural maps available that are made by people who know something about cultures and regions.
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.