Texas being excluded from the South (Houston, San Antonio: gated, to live, vs)

[kemahkami]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

Differences don't make it not the south. But it's banging one's head against the wall at this point to say otherwise. There is an arrogance in some Texans that is both compelling and off putting at the same time. This refusal to say they aren't southern and just "Texas" is bordering on the off putting side.

It's not arrogance, just telling it like it is.

[tcualum]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

Exactly this. South Carolina to Louisiana is deep south. That doesn't mean places like Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia aren't southern. But they don't have the deep south feel that those places have. And then you have the Mississippi delta regions of Tennessee and Arkansas that are much more akin to Mississippi deep south feel than Appalachian regions of Georgia, Alabama and the Carolinas.

I think we forgot the hallowed place that high school and college football hold that anchors Texas deeply with its fellow southern brethren. It is not experienced on this level in any other part of the country. Don't know if anyone mentioned that.

Differences don't make it not the south. But it's banging one's head against the wall at this point to say otherwise. There is an arrogance in some Texans that is both compelling and off putting at the same time. This refusal to say they aren't southern and just "Texas" is bordering on the off putting side.

Texas is also bigger in population, GDP, and square miles than many countries. Furthermore, multiple Southern states could easily fit in Texas at the same time. Why can’t we view ourselves as our own region?

[MustermannBB]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

Differences don't make it not the south. But it's banging one's head against the wall at this point to say otherwise. There is an arrogance in some Texans that is both compelling and off putting at the same time. This refusal to say they aren't southern and just "Texas" is bordering on the off putting side.

Not sure why it would be off putting to you. Do you get offended by it?
Anyways as big as Texas is, I think it is only normal for some people to not consider it a southern state.
And if one lives in San Antonio or El Paso for example, who could blame them?

[Ben Around]

Originally Posted by RJ312

Maryland is a much smaller state than Texas. I'm surprised that parts of Maryland would have a Southern feel. Washington DC has a similar feel to New York City, Philadelphia, and Boston, which are parts of the Northeast.

Texas is just so large geographically that it is impossible to fit into one geographic region if there are only 4 choices. A model with about 7-8 distinct regions is better.

You do know that Baltimore and Washington had long histories of Jim Crow laws, right up until the 1960s, right?

[TxStorm72]

I'm late to this thread, oh well. Here's my .02:

Texas IS south! It don't get more south than Texas unless you go to Key West. Texas is more south than what is normally considered south. Being south is not a bad thing at all. It is what it is. In the same token, Maine or Alaska shouldn't be ridiculed for being North. Texas and Florida is south. It is what it is. No need to get all worked up over geographical facts. And stuff that took place in this war or that war won't change a thing when it comes to geography as long as the current borders of the US remain a constant. South is south, north is north, east is east and west is west. Have a nice day!

[CookieSkoon]

To those of you saying Texas is not southern because of minor differences like some foods or cowboy hats, I am going to repeat myself once again.

Texas is still more like other southern states than it is anything else around it. So there are some differences, well, no other southern states are exact twins either.

Let's take a look at New England for comparison. Maine versus Connecticut. They are both New England states, their commonalities arguably outweigh their differences, and yet they are still nearly nothing alike when isolated.

So are either of them now no longer part of New England because they don't feel exactly the same?

Why don't we extend that to the entire northeast? How similar do you think Massachusetts and Pennsylvania truly are? Or how about New Hampshire and New Jersey?

If you aren't getting the point, I'm saying that splitting hairs is pointless. Texas is southern, it is not exactly like Georgia, but so what? It's still more like Georgia than it is Wisconsin, or Nevada, or New York, sooooooo... southern it be.

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by CookieSkoon

To those of you saying Texas is not southern because of minor differences like some foods or cowboy hats, I am going to repeat myself once again.

Texas is still more like other southern states than it is anything else around it. So there are some differences, well, no other southern states are exact twins either.

Let's take a look at New England for comparison. Maine versus Connecticut. They are both New England states, their commonalities arguably outweigh their differences, and yet they are still nearly nothing alike when isolated.

So are either of them now no longer part of New England because they don't feel exactly the same?

Why don't we extend that to the entire northeast? How similar do you think Massachusetts and Pennsylvania truly are? Or how about New Hampshire and New Jersey?

If you aren't getting the point, I'm saying that splitting hairs is pointless. Texas is southern, it is not exactly like Georgia, but so what? It's still more like Georgia than it is Wisconsin, or Nevada, or New York, sooooooo... southern it be.

Great post. 100% agree.

Some regions have even starker contrasts. Utah and Colorado are both part of either "The West" or an even smaller sub-region called the "Mountain West" and no one is arguing that just because Colorado has Legal pot and Utah has a large Mormon population that they don't belong in the same region.

[Frustratedintelligence]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

Oh come on. I didn't say that grits were terrible in every single nook and cranny of Texas. It's just that bad grits are a lot more common in Texas than they are in most of the south, and they are not a staple like they are in most of the south either. But since I am not making the grits when I order them, I don't know how they are messing them up - I just know that they are - generally watery, lumpy, or sometimes both.

It's not just the grits though - I gave a list of other elements as well. Oh, and don't even get me started on the Cowboy Churches - which are prolific in Texas and less and less common the further east you go in the South.

Texas is part of the South - it's just not part of the Deep South. It's Texas flavored South, which personally I really like in spite of the lack of good grits.

I'm a native Texan who's never seen or heard of a cowboy church. No idea what those are about. All I know is the Baptist churches I grew up attending here are the same ones I've attended in GA, LA, SC, etc

The thing about the deep south is I don't think it includes the entirety of any state, so of course it wouldn't include all of Texas. However I don't see how southeast TX at the very least wouldn't be included. If Beaumont ain't the Deep South then nothing is.

[Ivory Lee Spurlock]

Texas is considered a Southern State as much as South Carolina is, but located opposite sides of the South. Just as North Dakota is considered as much a Midwestern State as Ohio is, but located on opposite sides of the Midwest. Amarillo might actually feel more like Colorado Springs or Albuquerque than it feels like Augusta or Savannah, but it's still part of the South, just like Williston might feel more like Butte than it feels like Steubenville, but it's still In the Midwest. Pennsylvania may feel more Missouri than Maine but it's still considered a Northeast state.

We only have 4 regions in the Lower 48 and each region covers enough area to be a fairly large country.

[homeinatx]

Originally Posted by CookieSkoon

To those of you saying Texas is not southern because of minor differences like some foods or cowboy hats, I am going to repeat myself once again.

Texas is still more like other southern states than it is anything else around it. So there are some differences, well, no other southern states are exact twins either.

Let's take a look at New England for comparison. Maine versus Connecticut. They are both New England states, their commonalities arguably outweigh their differences, and yet they are still nearly nothing alike when isolated.

So are either of them now no longer part of New England because they don't feel exactly the same?

Why don't we extend that to the entire northeast? How similar do you think Massachusetts and Pennsylvania truly are? Or how about New Hampshire and New Jersey?

If you aren't getting the point, I'm saying that splitting hairs is pointless. Texas is southern, it is not exactly like Georgia, but so what? It's still more like Georgia than it is Wisconsin, or Nevada, or New York, sooooooo... southern it be.

No, you keep missing the point. These are not minor differences. Texas is not demographically southern. Name one southern state that is 40% Latinx. Texas is demographically much more like California and New Mexico than it is like Georgia... Florida has one city, Miami, which is majority Latinx. Texas has San Antonio, Corpus Christi, El Paso, and its biggest urban conglomerations: Houston and DFW are both over a third Latinx. What southern state has anything like these numbers?

Once you are beyond the pine certain, Texas is not remotely topographically southern: more than half of it is semi -arid? What southern state comprises a large chunk of the Chihuahuan desert, high plains and arid mountains? Texas is topographically as similar to Chihuahua, Nuevo Leon, Coahuila, and Tamaulipas, New Mexico and Kansas as it is to Georgia.

No one would deny that Texas has southern elements and influences, but its status as a majority/minority state, its history as a Spanish possession, a Mexican province and an independent republic along with its ongoing status as the U.S. state with the longest border with Mexico and the continuing movement of people, culture and goods across that border make it unique. Texas is indeed too southern to be southwestern. It is also too Mexican to be southern. What is so hard to understand about that? These two factors, along with the very strong sense of state identity that many Texans of all races exhibit make a a compelling case for why Texas should be considered its own region. Neither essentially southern, nor essentially southwestern, just Texas.

There were times in its history when Texas was more culturally southern than it is now, but cultures evolve and if anything Texas is getting less southern... What is at stake for people who, in spite of all the topographical, cultural and demographic evidence, keep insisting that Texas is southern?