U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Montana
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-31-2017, 09:08 AM
 
990 posts, read 1,672,617 times
Reputation: 923

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by USMC1967 View Post
No offense to any Bozemanites but from my personal experience I find Bozeman to be one of the most pretentious cities in the entire state. Both Bozeman and Missoula are college towns, supposedly open-minded and liberal, but the "snobbiness" in Bozeman is palpable.



I've had to spend lots of time in Bozeman and Missoula for work. Usually looked forward to Missoula but Bozeman... not so much. Especially in the summertime when it's thick with tourists and you can't get a room.


I think the people in Missoula seem way different. More easy going, more trusting. I've been doing what I do for a lot of years now, and the people I worked with in Bozo always looked at me like I was full of it, whilst my coworkers (engineers, architects, and leadership) in Missoula always gave me a thumbs up and let me do my thing.


And granted, I'm not big into being around leftists and hippies, but at least in Missoula they're laid back, you can hit up the Stockman or a local restaurant and folks are friendly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-01-2017, 12:02 PM
 
Location: North Dakota
7,662 posts, read 8,952,951 times
Reputation: 10938
Quote:
Originally Posted by MT-HI Travelin View Post
In WF it's mostly Canadians with a CA attitude.
I have heard that about Whitefish. Personally, I just didn't like the mix in western Montana. Extreme conservatives and extreme liberals are a lethal combination.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2017, 12:10 PM
 
Location: United State
427 posts, read 241,132 times
Reputation: 343
My Ancestors have been here (or started coming) in 1885. My Great-Great Grandfather was born here in 1894. I don't have problems with newcomers (Because without them there be no Growth, etc, and we would be like Wyoming today if it wasn't for them) but I have to kind of chuckle now when I see the slogan "The Last Best Place" and I think to myself "It was was until the Californians showed up"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2017, 02:54 PM
 
726 posts, read 921,889 times
Reputation: 1319
Don't forget that Southern California was ruined not by Californians but by out-of-state people who became Californians. When my family moved there in the 30s, it was paradise. When I was born there, it was pretty darn sweet for 20 years or so. Then 1.5 million people moved into my county in my lifetime, and it pretty much sucks now due to overcrowding, overbuilding, traffic, cost and pace of life.

The thing is, people moving in have no idea how bad it is compared to how good it was, so there's a sort of ignorance is bliss effect that keeps them coming. Ironically, in 20 years many of those people will consider California ruined.

Even if everyone arrives and attempts to conform to the Montana lifestyle, at some point there are simply too many hunters, hikers, rafters, fishermen.

Even the Sistine Chapel sucks on a crowded day.

My advice is: savor it while you still have it, try to encourage newcomers to appreciate and preserve what is precious and unique about it, and buy yourself a big plot of land you can retreat to when the inevitable hordes arrive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2017, 11:36 AM
 
Location: East of the Sun, West of the Moon
15,483 posts, read 17,637,856 times
Reputation: 30658
Home State Self-Identification Threshholds

Tier V -In New York City, if you can manage to somehow secure yourself an apartment and walk a city block without the urge to look up, you are a New Yorker.

Tier IV -In California, if you move to the state before the age of 40, you are a bona fide Californian with all the entitlement that entitles.

Tier III -In Colorado, as long as you and your parents were born there you can call yourself a 'Native Coloradan', put a sticker on your car and wave your fist angrily at people with foreign license plates.

Tier II -In Vermont, you have to be a descendant of Ethan Allen, the Green Mountain Boys, or at least have an ancestor who removed stumps by hand while wearing a tri-corner hat to be considered native. Being born in the state means nothing. As they say in Vermont, "Just because a cat has kittens in the oven, doesn't make them biscuits."

Tier I -In New Mexico, you are not considered a native New Mexican until your family has been here for more than 500 years; several thousand would be even better (who do those Johnny-come-lately Navajos think they are?). If you are at 400 years, you occupy a sort of middle tier, and if your ancestors came after the Civil war era you are a newcomer; and probably speak a foreign language like English to boot.


So where does Montana fit into this spectrum of state-identity gatekeeping?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2017, 12:20 PM
 
Location: United State
427 posts, read 241,132 times
Reputation: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict View Post
Home State Self-Identification Threshholds

Tier V -In New York City, if you can manage to somehow secure yourself an apartment and walk a city block without the urge to look up, you are a New Yorker.

Tier IV -In California, if you move to the state before the age of 40, you are a bona fide Californian with all the entitlement that entitles.

Tier III -In Colorado, as long as you and your parents were born there you can call yourself a 'Native Coloradan', put a sticker on your car and wave your fist angrily at people with foreign license plates.

Tier II -In Vermont, you have to be a descendant of Ethan Allen, the Green Mountain Boys, or at least have an ancestor who removed stumps by hand while wearing a tri-corner hat to be considered native. Being born in the state means nothing. As they say in Vermont, "Just because a cat has kittens in the oven, doesn't make them biscuits."

Tier I -In New Mexico, you are not considered a native New Mexican until your family has been here for more than 500 years; several thousand would be even better (who do those Johnny-come-lately Navajos think they are?). If you are at 400 years, you occupy a sort of middle tier, and if your ancestors came after the Civil war era you are a newcomer; and probably speak a foreign language like English to boot.


So where does Montana fit into this spectrum of state-identity gatekeeping?
According to Some Cree and Flathead (and others), Indians if you Native American. That is what some of my Nativ Relatives would probably tell you. But all my Native Americans Ancestors came from Canada starting in 1885. I have no Native Ancestors that were from the Tribes that originated in Montana prior to 1864.

But I think in general it is if you have at least one great-grandparent who was born here is what people would consider a Native Montanan here. 6 of 8 of My great-grandparents were born here. Personally, I think a person can call themselves a Native Montanans depending on how long their family been here (meaning when their earliest Ancestor arrived or was born here) so if they had parents, grandparents, etc, who was here in the 1930s and 1940s they can say are a Native of Montana.

Up to the 1980 or 1990 Census, most of the people who lived here were 3rd or 4th generation Descendants who had at least one grandparent and great-grandparent who was born here.

Last edited by NorthwestResident; 06-23-2017 at 12:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2017, 06:55 PM
 
4,641 posts, read 3,964,996 times
Reputation: 9716
In western Montana, it is if your ancestor was there for the gold rush--preferably at Bannack (1860). Eastern Montana, it is if your ancestor was there for (or before) the second Homestead Act (1909).

I think it is more a way of thinking & having common MT experience during formative years....so if you attended elementary school in Montana, you are mostly definitely full-fledged.

In my experience those who worry most about it are those of limited means who feel economically threatened & need feel important for something. Ancestors on both sides of my family were recorded in what became MT by 1860 & one had a 1/2 Salish 1/2 French wife. I only bring it up when someone is pontificating to a newcomer about their ancient MT roots from greatgrandfather & it has become ridiculously tiresome.

It makes no difference when you arrived. Are you a good citizen? Do you respect the land (air & water) and the wildlife? And your neighbor? That'll do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2017, 03:32 PM
 
Location: 406
1,423 posts, read 1,535,991 times
Reputation: 1407
Quote:
Originally Posted by historyfan View Post
In western Montana, it is if your ancestor was there for the gold rush--preferably at Bannack (1860). Eastern Montana, it is if your ancestor was there for (or before) the second Homestead Act (1909).
My earliest ancestors in this part of the country arrived in Western Montana before the year 1900, that's all I know...oh, and that I'm a 5th generation Montanan on my father's side. If it weren't for their history in Butte, I don't think that fact would even be very interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by historyfan View Post
I think it is more a way of thinking & having common MT experience during formative years....so if you attended elementary school in Montana, you are mostly definitely full-fledged.


See, now this introduces a good discussion topic: What is the common experience shared by Montanans in the year 2017? Or more broadly, in the 21st century? Hell, how about even since the latter half of the 20th century?

My answer? It depends on which bubble they've lived in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by historyfan View Post
In my experience those who worry most about it are those of limited means who feel economically threatened & need feel important for something. Ancestors on both sides of my family were recorded in what became MT by 1860 & one had a 1/2 Salish 1/2 French wife. I only bring it up when someone is pontificating to a newcomer about their ancient MT roots from greatgrandfather & it has become ridiculously tiresome.

It makes no difference when you arrived. Are you a good citizen? Do you respect the land (air & water) and the wildlife? And your neighbor? That'll do.
Nailed it twice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2017, 11:24 PM
 
Location: North Dakota
7,662 posts, read 8,952,951 times
Reputation: 10938
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict View Post
Home State Self-Identification Threshholds

Tier V -In New York City, if you can manage to somehow secure yourself an apartment and walk a city block without the urge to look up, you are a New Yorker.

Tier IV -In California, if you move to the state before the age of 40, you are a bona fide Californian with all the entitlement that entitles.

Tier III -In Colorado, as long as you and your parents were born there you can call yourself a 'Native Coloradan', put a sticker on your car and wave your fist angrily at people with foreign license plates.

Tier II -In Vermont, you have to be a descendant of Ethan Allen, the Green Mountain Boys, or at least have an ancestor who removed stumps by hand while wearing a tri-corner hat to be considered native. Being born in the state means nothing. As they say in Vermont, "Just because a cat has kittens in the oven, doesn't make them biscuits."

Tier I -In New Mexico, you are not considered a native New Mexican until your family has been here for more than 500 years; several thousand would be even better (who do those Johnny-come-lately Navajos think they are?). If you are at 400 years, you occupy a sort of middle tier, and if your ancestors came after the Civil war era you are a newcomer; and probably speak a foreign language like English to boot.


So where does Montana fit into this spectrum of state-identity gatekeeping?
I think in Montana if you moved there before you were in the upper elementary grades, at least in the region I lived in. My family moved to southwest Montana the summer after I was in 3rd grade and while there was a little bit of an adjustment in 4th grade since it was a small elementary school, I was pretty much accepted as a local not long after. It doesn't seem like it took my parents all that long to be accepted either. When I moved to western Montana I was similarly accepted as I was from Montana, although people spoke of anywhere east of the Divide as if it were some sort of vast wasteland, and "back east" seemed to mean any out of state person who wasn't from the West Coast. When I lived in Wyoming, Tier III seemed to be the norm. People would talk to you but you never got into the inner circle and got passed over for jobs if you didn't fit that description. Now that I'm in North Dakota, I guess it's somewhat between California and New York City. Hard to categorize that one. Sorry for taking it slightly off topic, but it is an interesting tier system you have there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2017, 06:28 AM
 
Location: Billings, MT
9,523 posts, read 7,779,851 times
Reputation: 13259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraven View Post
Apparently not, if our democrat candidate for the U.S. House and his cronies are to be believed.
The republican candidate has lived in Bozeman since 1994, but is still referred to as "That New Jersey millionaire", even though he grew up in Philadelphia, PA, not New Jersey.
I was brought to Montana by my mother in 1948. I don't know if that is enough time to become a "real Montanan" or not. Based on what I see in political ads these days, I'm guessing NOT!
It is a shame, really, that us out-of-state migrants can't truly be accepted.
Oh, yes, the "Old Guard" (those who are 3rd, 4th, 5th etc generation native born Montanans) will put up with us, and they are glad to have our work and our money, but apparently we can never be "REAL Montanans", no matter how firmly we embrace the Montana lifestyle.
Something to think about for those who want to move to this state.
It doesn't really bother me, because long ago I embraced the philosophy of "Illegitimati non carborundum". Loosely translated, that means "Do not let the Bas***ds grind you down!"
It worked for me. It even saved my sanity in the face of the school yard bullies.
then again, perhaps it didn't. perhaps I am insane, but don't realize it...
Whatever.
The attitudes I was referring to were brought to the fore during the late, greatly lamented, entirely too long, election cycle. It was purely politics, mostly from out-of-state PACs trying to tell us Montana residents how to think.
Some interesting points have been made in this thread. I thank all who have posted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Montana
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:04 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top