Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You're responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it--details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums' policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it's understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users' profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses -- Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it's related to a horse for sale, regardless of who's selling it, it doesn't belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions -- Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services -- Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products -- While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements -- Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be "bumped" excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues -- Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators' discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you'd rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user's membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

Confederate Symbology in Contemporary American Foxhunting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #81
    Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
    I guess my response is due to feeling like people are going overboard trying to find things to be offended about, and then trying to make everyone change things to their liking, rather than changing themselves. Like if the color of a certain hunts clothes offends you, then join a different hunt, or don't hunt, if there are no alternative hunts. Everything out there can be found to be offensive to SOMEONE. You are responsible for your own feelings. If a hunt's colors bother you, change hunts. If it bothers enough people then they will make a change. If it doesn't bother anyone else, then you changed hunts and no longer will be bothered by it.

    jetsmom, I disagree with you. Right now many hunts are actively trying to recruit younger members in order to maintain healthy membership and ensure that the sport of fox hunting is something that can be enjoyed by generations to come and that land for hunting can be preserved. Hunts are also trying to maintain community support and develop a positive public image, both of which have ties to crucial landowner support. Having a "take it or leave it" attitude is an old way of thinking that has not been good for the sport of fox hunting. I think now is a time for hunts to carefully take a look at what they can do to make themselves more welcoming and maintain a positive public image.

    I've been mulling this entire conversation over since it was first posted. I'm not "offended," and a few years ago I wouldn't have even noticed something like a hunt's colors being called "confederate" this or that. As a white person, it just seems like a distant, historical reference at first glance. But you know what, this season I have been excited to be helping a good friend with a longtime family equestrian tradition prepare to fox hunt. And a couple members of my hunt have recently been posting stuff on Facebook that could be construed as racist. And this person that I'm bringing out to hunt is not white. And this situation has given me pause, and an opportunity to put myself in the shoes of my friend, and what factors might make her feel more (or less) welcome. If, speaking hypothetically, a hunt were to have a couple prominent members posting racist material on social media, have a homogeneously white membership, and have confederate colors as their hunt colors...well, that really isn't a welcoming look, is it?

    As a white person it's really easy for me to not be offended by much--none of this stuff actually affects me. But saying "Eh, that's kinda wrong but it doesn't affect me so I'm going to walk away, or the people it does affect can just stick up for themselves" is not a great moral compass. Obviously it is okay to pick our battles, nobody has to fight every battle and I'm overall against social media drama. But overall it is morally correct to strive to make the institutions and organizations you belong to better for everyone, vs. just walking away.

    If our sport truly is just about the sport, the hunting, the hounds, the horses, and the beautiful natural world that we inhabit, then I don't think it should be difficult for a hunt to rename their colors if they represent or honor something not in line with the hunt's values.

    Comment


      #82
      Originally posted by BeeHoney View Post


      jetsmom, I disagree with you. Right now many hunts are actively trying to recruit younger members in order to maintain healthy membership and ensure that the sport of fox hunting is something that can be enjoyed by generations to come and that land for hunting can be preserved. Hunts are also trying to maintain community support and develop a positive public image, both of which have ties to crucial landowner support. Having a "take it or leave it" attitude is an old way of thinking that has not been good for the sport of fox hunting. I think now is a time for hunts to carefully take a look at what they can do to make themselves more welcoming and maintain a positive public image.

      I've been mulling this entire conversation over since it was first posted. I'm not "offended," and a few years ago I wouldn't have even noticed something like a hunt's colors being called "confederate" this or that. As a white person, it just seems like a distant, historical reference at first glance. But you know what, this season I have been excited to be helping a good friend with a longtime family equestrian tradition prepare to fox hunt. And a couple members of my hunt have recently been posting stuff on Facebook that could be construed as racist. And this person that I'm bringing out to hunt is not white. And this situation has given me pause, and an opportunity to put myself in the shoes of my friend, and what factors might make her feel more (or less) welcome. If, speaking hypothetically, a hunt were to have a couple prominent members posting racist material on social media, have a homogeneously white membership, and have confederate colors as their hunt colors...well, that really isn't a welcoming look, is it?

      As a white person it's really easy for me to not be offended by much--none of this stuff actually affects me. But saying "Eh, that's kinda wrong but it doesn't affect me so I'm going to walk away, or the people it does affect can just stick up for themselves" is not a great moral compass. Obviously it is okay to pick our battles, nobody has to fight every battle and I'm overall against social media drama. But overall it is morally correct to strive to make the institutions and organizations you belong to better for everyone, vs. just walking away.

      If our sport truly is just about the sport, the hunting, the hounds, the horses, and the beautiful natural world that we inhabit, then I don't think it should be difficult for a hunt to rename their colors if they represent or honor something not in line with the hunt's values.
      Is your friend bothered by Confederate gray, as a color?
      No excuse for racist remarks from fb hunt attendees. That would seem like more of an issue for the hunt club than hunt colors, to me.

      Comment


        #83
        Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
        Is your friend bothered by Confederate gray, as a color?
        No excuse for racist remarks from fb hunt attendees. That would seem like more of an issue for the hunt club than hunt colors, to me.
        Blatant vs Latent racism is not really the issue, is it?.

        Racism, whether outright and admitted, or held as an unspoken "history" (and for that supposed "reason" is thought of to be "OK") has not been, for many people, and now will no longer be for many others, tolerated by decent human beings in the U.S.

        Human rights are not a difficult subject to comprehend for most people in the United States, though god knows we are far behind other first world countries in purging our government and judicial system of systemic racism.

        Comment


          #84
          So did you ask your friend what she thinks? Its condescending, IMO, to assume thoughts of a race. Kind of like the black protester that was talking to a black cop and a white SJW came up to her and interrupted telling her that she shouldnt talk to him, and started answering for her.

          Comment


            #85
            Originally posted by skydy View Post

            Blatant vs Latent racism is not really the issue, is it?.

            Racism, whether outright and admitted, or held as an unspoken "history" (and for that supposed "reason" is thought of to be "OK") has not been, for many people, and now will no longer be for many others, tolerated by decent human beings in the U.S.

            Human rights are not a difficult subject to comprehend for most people in the United States, though god knows we are far behind other first world countries in purging our government and judicial system of systemic racism.
            In the celebration of your self-righteousness, one of the most dangerous results is the sanitizing of thought, history, and expression. From your words, I could assume that you could very well be a rioter defacing a statue of Robert E. Lee and probably be proud of it. I question in the other direction as to what did made Lee a man worthy of the various monuments, so I've challenged myself not to dismiss, but to actually learn about this person. Not from the revisionists of today's society, but from works earlier in the last century. That's how we learn about our society and it's various political, social, and economic conflicts. Sanitizing as you demand leads to ignorance. For example, the not politically correct history of the American Civil War would show that slavery still existed in states aligned with the Union well after the Emancipation Proclamation and still existed in two Union states after the war ended. If one wants to fast forward as to the effects of the War on today's society and racism, one should note that today's South is much more integrated than the regions (Northeast, upper Midwest, West Coast) who roundly criticize the former existence and recognition of the Confederacy.

            Comment


              #86
              jetsmom, no, I'm not going to ask my friend her opinion on this subject. First of all, I don't think it is good manners to ask people if they are "offended" by things. Secondly, even if my friend is "fine" with sporting organizations using confederate colors, the fact that she is not white does not somehow make her a spokesperson for any group or anyone but herself. Thirdly, many polite people often decline to admit that they are offended, simply in order to get on with their day in a pleasant manner.

              Lastly, I don't think my friend's opinion is relevant to the decision of whether or not a hunt should rename their hunt colors. A hunt should make a decision about their own identity on their own terms and take responsibility for their own image. Potential hunt members should not be invited to criticize the hunt they are considering hunting with (how terribly awkward).

              On the Farm, I don't think that renaming hunt colors = sanitizing history. We can as a society be selective about who and what we choose to honor, at the same time as we enjoy learning about history to defend our choices. I agree with you that many historical figures had complicated lives with both good and bad deeds intertwined, as well as many deeds that were simply a part of daily life in the society they lived in at that time. Obviously, there are some choices that are very complex. However, there is no doubt that in modern times confederate symbols are widely perceived as racist.

              Comment


                #87
                Why can't Confederate symbols be viewed as what they are: symbols of surrender at Appomatox Court House, death of a segment of American society beliefs, and a reason to stop fighting the Civil War against the South in this century? Even Civil War surviving soldiers, North and South, celebrated in unity together until they passed away. Maybe they knew something modern society doesn’t. And as for a colour of hacking jackets being censored is beyond understanding.
                Last edited by rubles; Aug. 8, 2020, 02:22 PM.

                Comment


                  #88
                  It is not the color per se, it is the use of the word confederacy. You cannot be unaware to the atrocities that have been committed to those who ancestors were once enslaved by those waving the confederate flag and treated as second class citizens once "freed". How can this be a discussion?
                  and by the way, white privilege doesn't mean thing don't suck for some white people, it just means they don't suck due to the color of their skin. There are plenty of injustices to go around.
                  and confederate symbols these days have been taken by the white supremacists. that is what they mean.
                  A man must love a thing very much if he not only practices it without any hope of fame or money, but even practices it without any hope of doing it well.--G. K. Chesterton

                  Comment


                    #89
                    Originally posted by On the Farm View Post

                    In the celebration of your self-righteousness, one of the most dangerous results is the sanitizing of thought, history, and expression. From your words, I could assume that you could very well be a rioter defacing a statue of Robert E. Lee and probably be proud of it. I question in the other direction as to what did made Lee a man worthy of the various monuments, so I've challenged myself not to dismiss, but to actually learn about this person. Not from the revisionists of today's society, but from works earlier in the last century. That's how we learn about our society and it's various political, social, and economic conflicts. Sanitizing as you demand leads to ignorance. For example, the not politically correct history of the American Civil War would show that slavery still existed in states aligned with the Union well after the Emancipation Proclamation and still existed in two Union states after the war ended. If one wants to fast forward as to the effects of the War on today's society and racism, one should note that today's South is much more integrated than the regions (Northeast, upper Midwest, West Coast) who roundly criticize the former existence and recognition of the Confederacy.
                    Wow. I have no idea why you think anything I've posted has anything to do with riots or defacing statues.That came from inside your head, not mine.

                    Comment


                      #90
                      It's amazing how people who claim the word "confederate" in this context has no meaning or importance are simultaneously extremely dedicated to its continued use and indignant that anyone might want it to change.
                      If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                      Comment


                        #91
                        Originally posted by DQ Foxhunter View Post

                        By all means though let us know how woke and offended you are by the word Confederate.
                        Jetsmom is right , horse sports are elitist, and they have ( and still do) a long history of exploiting poor people and slaves for cheap or free labor.
                        So why are you still riding, much less hunting?
                        Most people are trying to untangle the elitism in horse sports. You are advocating that we embrace it. We don’t ride to prove how elitist we are. We ride because we love it, and understand that bringing all people to enjoy and love it too will ensure it’s future. To do this, you must call out the warts where you see them.

                        Comment


                          #92
                          Interesting how many people how are posting in this thread, I assume based on the title, with no knowledge of hunting conventions. It's not the color of the *jacket*; it's the strip of color on the collar of member's jacket's, traditionally black for non-staff women and scarlet for men. Some hunts do require colored jackets, one NoVA hunt has dark blue ones, but tradtional hunt livery has "colors" just on the collar of a traditional black or scarlet coat.

                          Janet, can you message me and either tell me the other hunts with "confederate" in their colors or provide a link to where you found that information? I was not aware it was that common.

                          I do know of one hunt with "confederate grey" as part of their colors; and I believe the symbology was intentional. When I hunted with them, many years in the past, they could not be described as welcoming or diverse.
                          The plural of anecdote is not data.

                          Comment


                            #93
                            Originally posted by McGurk View Post
                            Interesting how many people how are posting in this thread, I assume based on the title, with no knowledge of hunting conventions. It's not the color of the *jacket*; it's the strip of color on the collar of member's jacket's, traditionally black for non-staff women and scarlet for men. Some hunts do require colored jackets, one NoVA hunt has dark blue ones, but tradtional hunt livery has "colors" just on the collar of a traditional black or scarlet coat.

                            Janet, can you message me and either tell me the other hunts with "confederate" in their colors or provide a link to where you found that information? I was not aware it was that common.

                            I do know of one hunt with "confederate grey" as part of their colors; and I believe the symbology was intentional. When I hunted with them, many years in the past, they could not be described as welcoming or diverse.
                            I took it that the OP meant a jacket color not the hunt colors because they mentioned "color" and not "colors". I could certainly be wrong in that assumption.

                            Comment


                              #94
                              Originally posted by McGurk View Post
                              Interesting how many people how are posting in this thread, I assume based on the title, with no knowledge of hunting conventions. It's not the color of the *jacket*; it's the strip of color on the collar of member's jacket's, traditionally black for non-staff women and scarlet for men. Some hunts do require colored jackets, one NoVA hunt has dark blue ones, but tradtional hunt livery has "colors" just on the collar of a traditional black or scarlet coat.

                              Janet, can you message me and either tell me the other hunts with "confederate" in their colors or provide a link to where you found that information? I was not aware it was that common.

                              I do know of one hunt with "confederate grey" as part of their colors; and I believe the symbology was intentional. When I hunted with them, many years in the past, they could not be described as welcoming or diverse.
                              I was referring to "hunt colors" - i.e. the color of the collar on the jacket.

                              You can find it by googling MFHA "hunt roster" confederate.
                              For instance
                              https://issuu.com/ecovertside/docs/huntroster_2019issuu

                              Belle Meade
                              Bull Run
                              Commonwealth
                              Deep Run
                              Goshen
                              Rappohanock
                              Shakerag
                              South Creek
                              Stonewall
                              Thornton Hill

                              Also Sugarfoot Beagles
                              Janet

                              chief feeder and mucker for Music, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now). Spy is gone. April 15, 1982 to Jan 10, 2019.

                              Comment


                                #95
                                At least some of your information is wrong or outdated. I have my colors with Rappahannock Hunt from a couple of decades ago mounted on my wall and they are not confederate gray but are blue.
                                A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

                                Comment


                                  #96
                                  Originally posted by FitToBeTied View Post
                                  At least some of your information is wrong or outdated. I have my colors with Rappahannock Hunt from a couple of decades ago mounted on my wall and they are not confederate gray but are blue.
                                  According to the hunt roster:
                                  "Evening attire: Scarlet with Confederate grey collar and Old Gold lapels"
                                  Janet

                                  chief feeder and mucker for Music, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now). Spy is gone. April 15, 1982 to Jan 10, 2019.

                                  Comment


                                    #97
                                    Originally posted by Janet View Post

                                    According to the hunt roster:
                                    "Evening attire: Scarlet with Confederate grey collar and Old Gold lapels"
                                    And what I am saying is the info is wrong. I looked at that entry and there were several things out of date with it.
                                    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

                                    Comment


                                      #98
                                      Bottom line, these are private hunt clubs who set their own requirements and use their own verbiage. If they want to require that members ride only bay TB geldings, they can. If they want to require that members ride only in full bridles, they can. If they want to call to the color on a hunt coat collar Confederate Grey or Damn Yankee Blue, they can. If members don't like it they can speak up or leave. If members leave the hunt would fold so this probably isn't a big deal for the hunts who use the color since they haven't folded.

                                      Comment


                                        #99
                                        skydy,

                                        The vast majority of hunts do not have colored jackets; they stick to the conventional black and scarlet. There are notable exceptions: Aiken wears dark green jackets with tan/beige colors, a handful of others have green jackets and some have dark blue. I think I saw one in the hunt roster that Janet posted a link to that DID have grey jackets. But that's a 8 or 9 hunts out of ~140. So, when one someone refers to a hunt's color or colors, I assume they're talking about the color of the collar and lapel (sometimes piping too if it's a racy outfit. ;-) ) unless otherwise specified.

                                        That *may* be because I hunted for years with one of the hunts on Janet's list, and have never hunted anywhere where the colors included a different color jacket.

                                        And yes, I think the choice/symbology is intentional. You can describe the color as blue gray, dove grey, West Point Grey, French Grey or just plain grey. If you specify "confederate grey", I think there's a reason.
                                        The plural of anecdote is not data.

                                        Comment


                                          Would you demand they change the name if it were “Nazi Grey”? I think they used grey on their uniforms.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X