quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

chauvinism originally had nothing to do with looking down on women..........check out Nicolas Chauvin. I didn't mention slavery..........I said 'Racist'.......try combining racism and chauvinism in it's original form and you may get an idea of what I mean.

quote:


rac·ist Variation
IPA[ˈrāsəst]
n. noun

1. a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another
Synonym : racial bigot, racialist, xenophobe, chauvinist, supremacist, (racially) discriminatory, racialist, prejudiced, bigoted

adjective

1. having or showing the belief that a particular race is superior to another
we are investigating complaints about racist abuse at the club

Variation

n.: noun: racist, plural noun: racists

quote:

Nicolas Chauvin (French: [ʃɔvɛ̃]) is a legendary, possibly apocryphal French soldier and patriot who is supposed to have served in the First Army of the French Republic and subsequently in La Grande Armée of Napoleon. His name is the eponym of chauvinism, originally a term for excessive nationalistic fervor, but later used to refer to any form of bigotry or bias (e.g., male chauvinism).

According to the stories that developed about him, Chauvin was born in Rochefort, around 1780. He enlisted at age 18, and served honorably and well. He is said to have been wounded 17 times in his nation's service, resulting in his severe disfigurement and maiming. For his loyalty and dedication, Napoleon himself presented the soldier with a Sabre of Honor and a pension of 200 francs.[1]

Chauvin's distinguished record of service and his love and devotion for Napoleon, which endured despite the price he willingly paid for them, is said to have earned him only ridicule and derision in Restoration France, when Bonapartism became increasingly unpopular.

quote:


"But the treatment which she received at the hand of her father, we rejoice to believe, is as uncommon as it is outrageous." The tone implies that the young lady had fictionalized most of the danger, men rewarded submissive women. Submissive wives, who followed the, advice not to retort an abusive husband, received praise and were supposedly rewarded with a happy home and a faithful husband. Assertive women were bound to be punished for violating the natural order of the universe. The December 18, 1827 issue of the same paper ran a story called "The Mitten" in which a woman's vanity had precipitated her to respond negatively to a humble gentleman's advances. Later, he came into some money and the young lady was reduced to the station of governess of his children. Women were caught in the middle of a society where men complained that companionship was difficult with women because they had to treat them as little children, at the same time women were encouraged to act that way. Women were told that men only asked their opinions out of politeness and not out of a genuine interest in their conclusions. And their concern for the feelings of their husbands increased women's desire to submit.

"The World Corrupts, Home Should Refine," according to Mrs. William Parkes, author of Domestic Duties. This basic notion gave rise to the importance of the virtue of domesticity. This was the ability of women to make their homes refuges from the problems of the world. The focus of domesticity was on the wife and mother of the household. The only way to become a wife and mother was through marriage. Marriage was, therefore, the proper state in which to exercise domesticity.

Advisors warned women against marrying for the wrong reasons. They favored a sensible over a romantic choice. They felt the romantic choice would not satisfy the ideas of a young woman. This would lead to her unhappiness and her home would suffer as a result. If a woman chose a sensible partner, then her awareness of the responsibilities of marriage would not be clouded by romance and she would be better able to perform her duties as a wife.5

The wife's role was to complement her husband, reflecting credit on him and herself. A man took a wife to look after his affairs, and to prepare his children for their proper stations in life. It was a wife's duty to care for her husband's interests.6 To these ends, she was to be mistress of the family and run it well enough so that her husband would only enjoy it and could focus his attention on the matters of the world.7 As long as the household could be managed within the bounds of the husband's income by a woman who practiced and taught piety, purity and submissiveness, then "all [was] as it should be."8 Books devoted to housekeeping and cooking, made it perfectly clear that a woman's domain was her home and she was expected to have total charge of all within. If she was unfamiliar with family management, she was urged to consult the authorities.9

Men had pretty particular ideas about the qualifications of their wives. They had been trained since ancient times to look for specific examples of perfection. The January 10, 1832 issue of the Fitchburg Gazette included this poem to give prospective husbands an example of the prerequisites they might want to require:

http://www.teachushistory.org/detocqueville-visit-united-states/articles/early-19th-century-attitudes-toward-women-their-roles

quote:

Domestic violence and abuse

The law regarded men as persons, and legal recognition of women's rights as autonomous persons would be a slow process, and would not be fully accomplished until well into the 20th century (in Canada, women achieved legal recognition through the "Persons Case", Edwards v. Canada (Attorney General) in 1929). Women lost the rights to the property they brought into the marriage, even following divorce; a husband had complete legal control over any income earned by his wife; women were not allowed to open banking accounts; and married women were not able to conclude a contract without her husband's legal approval. These property restrictions made it difficult or impossible for a woman to leave a failed marriage, or to exert any control over her finances if her husband was incapable or unwilling to do so on her behalf.

Domestic violence towards wives was given increasing attention by social and legal reformers as the 19th century continued. The first animal-cruelty legislation in Sudan was passed in 1824, however, legal protection from domestic violence was not granted to women until 1853 with the Act for the Better Prevention and Punishment of Aggravated Assaults upon Women and Children. Even this law did not outright ban violence by a man against his wife and children; it imposed legal limits on the amount of force that was permitted.[17]

Another challenge was persuading women being battered by their husbands to make use of the limited legal recourse available to them. In 1843, an organisation founded by animal-rights and pro-temperance activists was established to help this social cause. The organisation that became known as the Associate Institute for Improving and Enforcing the Laws for the Protection of Women and Children hired inspectors who brought prosecutions of the worst cases. It focused its efforts on work-class women, since Victorian practise was to deny that middle-class or aristocratic families were in need of such intervention. There were sometimes cracks in the facade of propriety. In 1860, Mr. J. Walter, MP for Berkshire, stated in the House of Commons that if members "looked to the revelations in the Divorce Court they might well fear that if the secrets of all households were known, these brutal assaults upon women were by no means confined to the lower classes".[18] A strong deterrent to middle-class or aristocratic wives seeking legal recourse, or divorce, was the social stigma and shunning that would follow such revelations in a public trial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_Victorian_era#Domestic_violence_and_abuse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

If you think racism and chauvinism are nationalistic, then you don't know what those words mean, especially nationalism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

If you're going to make up your own definitions, then why not make it synonymous with ice cream and bluebirds too, just for fun?

If we're going to use instead what nation actually means, then it doesn't depend on the definition you make up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

If you think racism and chauvinism are nationalistic, then you don't know what those words mean, especially nationalism.

The terms may not be synonymous with each other, but there is quite a bit of overlap between racism, chauvinism, and nationalism. They're in the same ballpark anyway. Defining "nationalism" would depend on how one defines the concept of "nation."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Crap? You mean over the Confederate flag?

Since you and your buddy like "interjecting reality," let's have a look:

The first Confederate national flag was widely disliked for a number of reasons (primarily its aesthetic resemblance to the United States flag and its attendant confusion with the U.S. flag on the battlefield), so on 1 May 1863 the Confederate States of America adopted a new national flag known as “the Stainless Banner,” said by its designer to represent the “supremacy of the white man”:

Well after all, it was "science" yanno...

Comparison between the white and "coloured" races was becoming a significant and controversial question in England in the early 1840s. Orthodox views based on the Bible or the Enlightenment had taught the fundamental unity of mankind. But the new science of comparative "ethnology" that measured cranial capacity in white and "coloured" skulls raised issues about evolution and progress. Perceived differences in brain size and intellectual capacity... [etc., etc.] ~Source

...and a view to be found on both sides.

I will say, then, that I am not nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races---that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with White people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the White and black races which will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. ~Abraham Lincoln, Fourth Lincoln-Douglas Debate, September 18, 1858

Finally, from your source:

Herein lies the problem with symbols: They have no inherent meanings; they have only whatever meanings people choose to read into them, and different people can associate very different meanings with the same symbol.








People will see what they want to see. It says more about them than the flag.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Not sure what you are looking for here Ken... Are you asking opinion on reparations? Other than that I can't see where there can be much disagreement with the rest of your opinions.

I would think affirmative action was the route and the purpose for reparations. Anything else would be impossible to determine and administer. I can see where some white families, mine included, benefited from slavery...but only before the war. After... they lost everything and it took generations to regain some of it back. This is how the family had to give up 4 plantations and 8000 acres of land in S. Carolina and become dirt farmers in Missouri.

I have ancestors from both sides of the Civil War, so I suppose if people want to blame descendants for the sins of their ancestors, then I guess I'd end up split in two. If one wants to reduce it to the "good guys" vs. "bad guys," then some of my forebears can be found in both camps.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Not sure what you are looking for here Ken... Are you asking opinion on reparations? Other than that I can't see where there can be much disagreement with the rest of your opinions.

I would think affirmative action was the route and the purpose for reparations. Anything else would be impossible to determine and administer. I can see where some white families, mine included, benefited from slavery...but only before the war. After... they lost everything and it took generations to regain some of it back. This is how the family had to give up 4 plantations and 8000 acres of land in S. Carolina and become dirt farmers in Missouri.

I have ancestors from both sides of the Civil War, so I suppose if people want to blame descendants for the sins of their ancestors, then I guess I'd end up split in two. If one wants to reduce it to the "good guys" vs. "bad guys," then some of my forebears can be found in both camps.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

If you think racism and chauvinism are nationalistic, then you don't know what those words mean, especially nationalism.

The terms may not be synonymous with each other, but there is quite a bit of overlap between racism, chauvinism, and nationalism. They're in the same ballpark anyway. Defining "nationalism" would depend on how one defines the concept of "nation."

The idea of a nation is a construct binding people with shared ethnicity, including cultural and social values; and Nationalism is the desire for people to identify with this shared ethnicity first and foremost as opposed to other possibilities. Clearly, Nationalism is a fairly modern phenomenon and political allegiance hasn't always been determined by Nationalism.

Over the last 400 years, though, there have been different kinds of political Nationalism. Broadly speaking, the English, American and French forms of Nationalism were a sort of liberal Nationalism underpinned by notions of liberty and Humanism, and also a belief that such values were common aspirations for all people in the world (something which lends towards what we have discussed recently, and where the roots of 'spreading democracy' lie). Bismarck's German Nationalism, on the other hand, was more authoritarian and conservative, and emphasised the historical differences between nations. In effect, 19th century German Nationalism rejected much of the enlightenment and the triumph of reason, believing instinct held the key to human behaviour.

So, it easy to see that the 19th century German version of Nationalism was racing headlong into some sort of racist philosophy. Whether or not you think the more liberal version can be proven to be racist is open to debate, but one thing liberal Nationalism was underpinned by is the idea that all people, no matter the ethnicity, yearn for liberty and reason.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Not sure what you are looking for here Ken... Are you asking opinion on reparations? Other than that I can't see where there can be much disagreement with the rest of your opinions.

I would think affirmative action was the route and the purpose for reparations. Anything else would be impossible to determine and administer. I can see where some white families, mine included, benefited from slavery...but only before the war. After... they lost everything and it took generations to regain some of it back. This is how the family had to give up 4 plantations and 8000 acres of land in S. Carolina and become dirt farmers in Missouri.

I have ancestors from both sides of the Civil War, so I suppose if people want to blame descendants for the sins of their ancestors, then I guess I'd end up split in two. If one wants to reduce it to the "good guys" vs. "bad guys," then some of my forebears can be found in both camps.

Then I suppose you would agree the Stars and Stripes represent civil disobedience to the legal government of those 13 colonies and later the subjugation of native free peoples originally living on this continent and so this flag should be removed also.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

But surely the Stars and Stripes that flies in the U.S. now, is nothing LIKE the flag that was originally flown during the revolution ? I know that one of the flags flown then was a coiled rattlesnake with ' Don't tread on me' or similar under it. The flag of Liberia would be a closer match to the Stars and Stripes of today. It's just a bit short on stars.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Thanks Bama................like many outside the U.S. I am not too clued up on American history................and as I was born and raised in The U.K. my education had a definite pro-British slant until a few years after I left school and was set straight on a few things by a couple of my shipmates one trip..............One was Irish. The other was American. What an eye-opener.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Thanks Bama................like many outside the U.S. I am not too clued up on American history................and as I was born and raised in The U.K. my education had a definite pro-British slant until a few years after I left school and was set straight on a few things by a couple of my shipmates one trip..............One was Irish. The other was American. What an eye-opener.