Hive thoughts: CC, Sunday School

[Grace Hopper]

If it were me, I may have said something about the mug… with a genuinely curious (nonsuspicious) tone, “Interesting mug! This symbol looks familiar but I can’t place it.”

His replies could run the gamut and be very telling:

”Oh I just think it looks neat.”

”I’m a real history buff! Loved studying early American history in college!”

”My buddy in our local militia group gave it to me.”

For situations like this, simple conversation can be revelatory. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but do pay attention to their words and actions. 
 

I would be disappointed with the lack of diversity in the group. That can be a geographical more than political thing, depending on where you live. If you can find a more diverse group that will still have proximity to allow you to be involved in supportive relationships (the whole point of small groups, imo), imo that’s worth looking for.

Agreeing with others, though, that the small group isn’t your larger issue. You should find a place where your kids feel valued. 

 

For  those of you defending the Gadsden flag’s modern use, here’s a wiki link. Even for those who choose not to follow politics, imo, no matter what part of the political spectrum on which you fall, a rudimentary understanding of our current cultural moment is essential for a well educated mind. Sticking one’s head in the sand kinda removes the ability to engage in an authentic discussion of certain issues (again, no matter where you stand politically). 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsden_flag

 

[Heartstrings]

6 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsden_flag

 

Interesting!  I knew it was popular with libertarians but I didn’t know it was used by the left in the 70s.   
 

Which just shows that symbols change, their meaning doesn’t stay static. It helps no one to pretend otherwise.  

[Grace Hopper]

5 hours ago, lauraw4321 said:

I don’t have a relationship with him for that conversation to be anything other than a failure. He is a stranger. And I disagree re:the flag. 

Not sure what you mean by a failure. Innocuous questions in your specific circumstances would be simple info gathering. You’d just be expressing interest, and giving him the opportunity to tell on himself. No need to express your opinion or judgment at that time. You should not feel compelled to engage in a debate (unless you actually find yourself in a perfect spot to do so - and I agree that a small group meeting as you describe would not be the right place for that).

Edited August 30, 2023 by Grace Hopper

[wathe]

9 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

If it were me, I may have said something about the mug… with a genuinely curious (nonsuspicious) tone, “Interesting mug! This symbol looks familiar but I can’t place it.”

His replies could run the gamut and be very telling:

”Oh I just think it looks neat.”

”I’m a real history buff! Loved studying early American history in college!”

”My buddy in our local militia group gave it to me.”

For situations like this, simple conversation can be revelatory. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but do pay attention to their words and actions. 
 

I would be disappointed with the lack of diversity in the group. That can be a geographical more than political thing, depending on where you live. If you can find a more diverse group that will still have proximity to allow you to be involved in supportive relationships (the whole point of small groups, imo), imo that’s worth looking for.

Agreeing with others, though, that the small group isn’t your larger issue. You should find a place where your kids feel valued. 

 

For  those of you defending the Gadsden flag’s modern use, here’s a wiki link. Even for those who choose not to follow politics, imo, no matter what part of the political spectrum on which you fall, a rudimentary understanding of our current cultural moment is essential for a well educated mind. Sticking one’s head in the sand kinda removes the ability to engage in an authentic discussion of certain issues (again, no matter where you stand politically). 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsden_flag

 

And this is why allies are so important.  Someone who feels less threatened/personally endangered can engage.

Edited August 30, 2023 by wathe

[Pawz4me]

I understand the point of those urging engagement, but I'm also thinking some of the people urging that perhaps don't realize their privilege.

 

[Heartstrings]

6 minutes ago, Pawz4me said:

I understand the point of those urging engagement, but I'm also thinking some of the people urging that perhaps don't realize their privilege.

 

I think they also don’t realize how dangerous those guys have the potential to be, especially if they are somewhere where they have control or some sort of power.  

[Grace Hopper]

50 minutes ago, Danae said:

The organized co-opting of Revolutionary War symbols goes back (at least) to the Tea Party movement in 2009. 

Yes, this is where I first started seeing it (apart from school and uni history lessons). The Bonnie Blue flag - a confederate symbol- was also resurrected by the Tea Party. 
 

 

Re: engagement, I’ll reiterate that I see a distinction between debate and simple info gathering. The latter can be done by most; the former best done by those well prepared to do so (with accurate info and wise measured temperament).

[ktgrok]

29 minutes ago, kirstenhill said:

 I once bought my DH a shirt at a thrift store that I thought just looked cool.  It turned out it was advertising a kind of alcohol (Fireball whisky) and I had no idea because it didn't actually say "whisky" anywhere in big enough letters to read.  He knew and didn't really want to wear it because he is not an "advertising whisky on a shirt" sort of a guy.  

I guess I think people should be slightly slower to jump to conclusions about someone just from a mug or t-shirt they have. 

So, my DD13 won't buy ANY shirts with logos/writing on them for the most part, because of this exact thing, lol. She saw some she seemed to like in a store and I asked her why she wasn't getting it. She said, 'because I'm culturally clueless and have no idea if there is some meaning I'm missing". And I had to admit I also was fairly culturally clueless and couldn't help her, lol. 

I was also the kid who grew up so sheltered I had never heard most ethnic slurs until I got to college and had a BIG awakening, lol. Between my boyfriend at the time's roommate and my boyfriend's grandparents I learned a LOT of new terms. Not good ones. To be clear, my boyfriend didn't use them, and neither did his roommate other than a long running joke about the italian roommate being a WOP. I said I had no idea what that meant, (without papers or without passport - referring to Italian immigrants and implying they came illegally), they looked at me like I was crazy, and then proceeded to "educate me" on all the racial slurs they knew so that I at least could recognize one when I heard one. Ex's grandparents...they used them on purpose, sigh. I'm so glad I divorced that family!

Anyway, yeah, I get being clueless culturally, but I think as adults we sort of have an obligation to keep up with some of this, unless our mental health just totally precludes it. Or have people in our lives that can point it out for us - like if I had a coffee mug that said something suspicious my husband would tell me. 

That said, unless they live in say a state that uses the Gadsden flag as part of it's symbolism or something, in New England, I'd suspect right wing white nationalist.  Especially in a church that just voted to disaffiliate with their denomination over LGBTQ rights issues. Context matters. 

[ktgrok]

Can I also say, I HATE that the Gadsen flag was taken over this way? I used to really like it, but the people claimiing they are being trod upon are the same ones claiming they are being persecuted for being Christian. They are not being persecuted nor trod upon. 

I may end up getting one of these out of frustration: 

[Heartstrings]

8 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Can I also say, I HATE that the Gadsen flag was taken over this way? I used to really like it, but the people claimiing they are being trod upon are the same ones claiming they are being persecuted for being Christian. They are not being persecuted nor trod upon. 

I may end up getting one of these out of frustration: 

I wish I knew how to “take it back”.   I really do.  I hate that all of our national symbols are being used to express hatred and violence.  I hate that one side “owns” patriotism, and has proceeded to twist it in such a manner. I hate it and wish it were different.  

[QueenCat]

As to the church question... If you believe that all should be welcome & accepted, it sounds like you need to change churches. And remember that tolerance is NOT acceptance.

[BronzeTurtle]

Has no one here seen the rainbow version of the gasden flag? There's also a feminist version where the snake is in the shape of a uterus/ovaries. It's a symbol against tyranny from the revolutionary war that has nothing to do with white supremacy or the confederacy, even if some people who fall into those groups also happen to fly it. The "no step on snake" thing is not just some niche dog whistle,...my goodness. Isn't this an education board born out of a history curriculum of all things? The meaning of the flag has actual historical origins that can't be changed. Can we stop just letting the nazis claim everything??? They want to put a flag on their truck, ok, that doesn't make it their flag, nor does it make it mean something it actually doesn't.

Then again I know people who assume that anyone who flies the American flag is part of some white supremacy movement so none of these replies should be surprising.

I just don't understand why people cede these things over to groups they don't like. Oh well it means racism now because the racists say so. 

 

[Lecka]

To go on about my experience…..

 

What are your churches articles of incorporation going to be?  Or whatever they are going to be called?

 

Who will be able to make decisions?

 

Will it be the pastor?

 

Will it be a church board of some kind?  Or possibly deacons?

 

How will members be nominated, appointed, or voted on to join the board?  

 

Who will choose the next pastor?  Will it be the current pastor, or will it be the church governance board (or deacons or whatever).  
 

Can the church board fire the pastor?

 

Can the pastor kick people off of the church board?

 

How much are you going to pay the church staff?  How are you going to fund their retirements?  
 

How much of your church’s money should go to missions, and what missions?  Will your church send money to different mission groups than it does now?  
 

Will your church send kids to church camps?  What church camps?  What denomination will the church camps belong to?  If they are independent, what is their doctrine? 
 

To me, these are all things I don’t have to worry about anymore.  
 

In case anyone is wondering — yes, I did attend a church that had the board of deacons (I’m not sure if this is what it was called) voted to fire the pastor.  
 

A main issue was that the pastor would say yes, yes to spending on missions, but to the point that spending needed for the church was not being set aside.  There was dispute over too much money being spent on utilities or things like that, but there still have to be utilities and those bills have to be paid.  It was much more than this though, it was really about the direction of the church.  Accusations of “people not caring if bills are paid,” vs “people not caring about missions.”  But it was more complicated and there were real disagreements about the direction of the church.  
 

The pastor ended up leaving and starting his own church, for a second time — he founded the church he was fired from!!!!!  The deacons (or whatever) hired a new pastor.  They got to keep the name of the church and the church building.  
 

I have gone to a church where once a year the church budget is published (aka copies are available) and then once a year church members vote to approve the budget.  A budget committee proposes the budget.  Any raises have to be approved — awkward.  The cost of the health insurance is discussed.  There is discussion of, if health insurance is going up, should the staff also receive a raise?  Does some repair “really” need to be made?  What about replacing the audio equipment?  I have been to a church where this is discussed in a church meeting, and members of the budget committee explain their thoughts when they drafted it, and then people vote on changes.

 

My husband has attended a church where the church didn’t have a budget for people to look at, it wasn’t allowed.  It was seen as disrespectful to ask.  
 

These are all things I don’t worry about.  I have an awareness of the committees, but I don’t worry about them.  I don’t think there’s going to be something contentious.  
 

I have said this before and had people say “no, it can still get contentious!!!!!!!!”  But in my mind, I don’t think it could get too bad.  
 

If you have never attended an independent church — there are some things that are different, and there are things that can change.  Change can happen more quickly.  How could the church make some major change?  The pastor decides?  The deacons or church council voted?  The membership votes?  Whatever is said is how it will be, and changes can sometimes happen without the church membership really being aware until the changes are already underway.  I don’t think that’s common but it’s possible.  It can happen.

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, QueenCat said:

As to the church question... If you believe that all should be welcome & accepted, it sounds like you need to change churches. And remember that tolerance is NOT acceptance.

This. And just accepting is not the same as affirming. The church I was at was accepting...sort of. The church I am at now is affirming and there is a huge difference. 

45 minutes ago, Lecka said:

To go on about my experience…..

 

What are your churches articles of incorporation going to be?  Or whatever they are going to be called?

 

Who will be able to make decisions?

 

Will it be the pastor?

 

Will it be a church board of some kind?  Or possibly deacons?

 

How will members be nominated, appointed, or voted on to join the board?  

 

Who will choose the next pastor?  Will it be the current pastor, or will it be the church governance board (or deacons or whatever).  
 

Can the church board fire the pastor?

 

Can the pastor kick people off of the church board?

 

How much are you going to pay the church staff?  How are you going to fund their retirements?  
 

How much of your church’s money should go to missions, and what missions?  Will your church send money to different mission groups than it does now?  
 

Will your church send kids to church camps?  What church camps?  What denomination will the church camps belong to?  If they are independent, what is their doctrine? 
 

To me, these are all things I don’t have to worry about anymore.  
 

In case anyone is wondering — yes, I did attend a church that had the board of deacons (I’m not sure if this is what it was called) voted to fire the pastor.  
 

A main issue was that the pastor would say yes, yes to spending on missions, but to the point that spending needed for the church was not being set aside.  There was dispute over too much money being spent on utilities or things like that, but there still have to be utilities and those bills have to be paid.  It was much more than this though, it was really about the direction of the church.  Accusations of “people not caring if bills are paid,” vs “people not caring about missions.”  But it was more complicated and there were real disagreements about the direction of the church.  
 

The pastor ended up leaving and starting his own church, for a second time — he founded the church he was fired from!!!!!  The deacons (or whatever) hired a new pastor.  They got to keep the name of the church and the church building.  
 

I have gone to a church where once a year the church budget is published (aka copies are available) and then once a year church members vote to approve the budget.  A budget committee proposes the budget.  Any raises have to be approved — awkward.  The cost of the health insurance is discussed.  There is discussion of, if health insurance is going up, should the staff also receive a raise?  Does some repair “really” need to be made?  What about replacing the audio equipment?  I have been to a church where this is discussed in a church meeting, and members of the budget committee explain their thoughts when they drafted it, and then people vote on changes.

 

My husband has attended a church where the church didn’t have a budget for people to look at, it wasn’t allowed.  It was seen as disrespectful to ask.  
 

These are all things I don’t worry about.  I have an awareness of the committees, but I don’t worry about them.  I don’t think there’s going to be something contentious.  
 

I have said this before and had people say “no, it can still get contentious!!!!!!!!”  But in my mind, I don’t think it could get too bad.  
 

If you have never attended an independent church — there are some things that are different, and there are things that can change.  Change can happen more quickly.  How could the church make some major change?  The pastor decides?  The deacons or church council voted?  The membership votes?  Whatever is said is how it will be, and changes can sometimes happen without the church membership really being aware until the changes are already underway.  I don’t think that’s common but it’s possible.  It can happen.

I THINK most of the churches leaving the UMC are becoming part of a new denomination called the Global Methodist church or something like that. So if that is the case, won't be an independent church, just part of a different denomination. But still good questions to ask as the answers may be very different than in the UMC. 

[ktgrok]

Also, IF the child who is most effected by this stance is the one who wants to stay and is aware of why the church left the denomination I can understand not wanting to force her to leave. But I would discuss checking out some other churches and their youth groups to see what other options there are, so she truly knows there ARE options if she does decide to leave. I would want her to truly experience that other churches have different stances on these issues. Knowing and experiencing are different. 

[KSera]

1 hour ago, wathe said:

And this is why allies are so important.  Someone who feels less threatened/personally endangered can engage.

Right. I'm more familiar with the flag than I might otherwise be because of a distant acquaintance who flies one. Due to other things about my family, knowing this about them means we don't have any personal discussions with this person. Is it possible the person is just unaware that the flag may be making certain groups of people who pass by feel threatened? It is. Is it likely? Well, for this specific person, no. Based on other things, it's pretty clearly the intent. For someone else, maybe they are unaware, but a person at risk can't afford to ring the doorbell and ask. (please don't quote this section)

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

Can I also say, I HATE that the Gadsen flag was taken over this way? I used to really like it, but the people claimiing they are being trod upon are the same ones claiming they are being persecuted for being Christian. They are not being persecuted nor trod upon.

So much this! The person I am acquainted with who flies one is actually so privileged, financially and otherwise, it's ridiculous for them to suggest they are being trod on.

42 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

Has no one here seen the rainbow version of the gasden flag? There's also a feminist version where the snake is in the shape of a uterus/ovaries. It's a symbol against tyranny from the revolutionary war that has nothing to do with white supremacy or the confederacy, even if some people who fall into those groups also happen to fly it. The "no step on snake" thing is not just some niche dog whistle,...my goodness. Isn't this an education board born out of a history curriculum of all things? The meaning of the flag has actual historical origins that can't be changed. Can we stop just letting the nazis claim everything??? They want to put a flag on their truck, ok, that doesn't make it their flag, nor does it make it mean something it actually doesn't.

Then again I know people who assume that anyone who flies the American flag is part of some white supremacy movement so none of these replies should be surprising.

I just don't understand why people cede these things over to groups they don't like. Oh well it means racism now because the racists say so. 

 

Yes, I've seen all of these. It doesn't change the fact that currently, people who make a deliberate choice to fly a Gadsden flag are more often than not doing so to advertise a particular set of beliefs and those beliefs are going to make a difference in some of the choices those around them might make. It might be ideal to ask the person if they subscribe to those beliefs, but as said above, that's not always a reasonably available choice. It's not so much a matter of ceding a symbol to another group as it is picking up potentially important signals being broadcast by others. Going back to the Confederate flag, some people might say they fly it because of Southern Pride or whatever thing they make up to justify it, but it's not ceding a symbol for a person of color to decide they aren't going to knock on the door of a house with a Confederate flag if they find themself in trouble and needing help.

[Terabith]

I am glad to know about the pineapple thing. I thought it just meant you were a fan of the tv show Psych. 

[chiguirre]

2 hours ago, TexasProud said:

Honestly.  I love all things American history.  Before seeing this, I might have bought the mug.  Now that I know, I obviously wouldn't. But if I wasn't on this board, I would have had no idea at all.  I hate to thing what someone would have assumed about me... 

We're living through an epochal era in American history. I can't say I'm loving it, but I do think it's important to pay attention even when it's painful. I'm sure that Americans in 1860 or 1940 or 1973 weren't enjoying their bits of American history either, but they paid attention, fought back and made it through to brighter days. We can't do less.

It's a shame that we've allowed the Insurrectionists to coopt symbols that should belong to everyone, but that's the reality of what's happened. Once something becomes popular with that crowd and they display it everywhere, that's what it references for most people.

[TexasProud]

1 minute ago, chiguirre said:

We're living through an epochal era in American history. I can't say I'm loving it, but I do think it's important to pay attention even when it's painful. I'm sure that Americans in 1860 or 1940 or 1973 weren't enjoying their bits of American history either, but they paid attention, fought back and made it through to brighter days. We can't do less.

It's a shame that we've allowed the Insurrectionists to coopt symbols that should belong to everyone, but that's the reality of what's happened. Once something becomes popular with that crowd and they display it everywhere, that's what it references for most people.

Ok and that is fine for me.  I am here on the board. But as I said before, I don't see any of this in my real life.  I don't hang around anyone that espouses these views.  I guess my point was that I could see several of the men having this mug just like I have an Andersonville Prison mug (I collect mugs from all of the places we go.)  So now I am wondering if I should hide the Andersonville mug...  Anyway.  Yes, we on the board are fairly well educated.  But here in my little corner of the world, we are so far behind the times.  I learned about so much I had never heard of like Spoken Word poetry and stuff. 

And again, it is all fine and dandy and you guys can get me riled up about a ton of things on here.  But me being angry at these people who took the symbol... I mean, ok...but there isn't anything I can do about it.  It is why I avoid all news Trump related.  I mean, sure I can vote.  

I choose to believe the best of the people I meet and change what I see in my world. Though I am leaving my world on Friday for a trip.  YEah!

[ktgrok]

1 minute ago, TexasProud said:

Ok and that is fine for me.  I am here on the board. But as I said before, I don't see any of this in my real life.  I don't hang around anyone that espouses these views. 

Honestly, I'm not sure if we always know if we are around people who espouse these views. They don't always come up in say, Bible Study or whatever, you know? 

[pinball]

5 minutes ago, chiguirre said:

We're living through an epochal era in American history. I can't say I'm loving it, but I do think it's important to pay attention even when it's painful. I'm sure that Americans in 1860 or 1940 or 1973 weren't enjoying their bits of American history either, but they paid attention, fought back and made it through to brighter days. We can't do less.

It's a shame that we've allowed the Insurrectionists to coopt symbols that should belong to everyone, but that's the reality of what's happened. Once something becomes popular with that crowd and they display it everywhere, that's what it references for most people.

This thread is allowing the co-opting! LOL

The major thrust of the thread re the flag is: *it is a symbol of racist white supremacy. Now that you know it is, unless you now reject the flag, and anyone owning it…then you too are a racist white nationalist.*

 

[Heartstrings]

1 minute ago, chiguirre said:

It's a shame that we've allowed the Insurrectionists to coopt symbols that should belong to everyone, but that's the reality of what's happened. Once something becomes popular with that crowd and they display it everywhere, that's what it references for most people.

I think it’s a phenomenon we see a lot with names.  Mallory or Ashley used to be boys names.  Then parents started using it for daughters and now no one wants to risk giving their son a “girls” name, and so those are exclusively thought of as girls name.  Did we “let” girls co opt those names, or “cede” the names to girls?  Not really.  Free association came into play, on both parts.  Boy parents didn’t want to associate with feminine names.   
 

Once racists and nationalists start using a symbol the people who find racist ideologies to be abhorrent will distance themselves from those symbols.   If the racists eventually abandon these symbols they might return to having a neutral connotation, but that will take time.   Some symbols will be associated so strongly being that ideology that it will never return to neutral though.  The confederate flag for example probably cannot be extricated from its connection to racism at this point.  Only time will tell which way the Gadsden Flag will go.  

[chiguirre]

3 minutes ago, pinball said:

This thread is allowing the co-opting! LOL

The major thrust of the thread re the flag is: *it is a symbol of racist white supremacy. Now that you know it is, unless you now reject the flag, and anyone owning it…then you too are a racist white nationalist.*

 

Carrying this argument to its logical end point, someone could display a swastika and say that they're honoring its original meaning as a symbol of the sun. How many of us would accept that at face value?

[KSera]

3 minutes ago, chiguirre said:

Carrying this argument to its logical end point, someone could display a swastika and say that they're honoring its original meaning as a symbol of the sun. How many of us would accept that at face value?

I was thinking the same, but decided against invoking Godwin's Law...

 

[pinball]

5 minutes ago, chiguirre said:

Carrying this argument to its logical end point, someone could display a swastika and say that they're honoring its original meaning as a symbol of the sun. How many of us would accept that at face value?

The swastika is so well known as a symbol of Nazism that there is no comparison. Show me where people are using it today as a symbol of the sun.

As evidenced by the thread…people today do not know of any negative associations of the Gadsden flag. 

 

 

[QueenCat]

34 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

This. And just accepting is not the same as affirming. The church I was at was accepting...sort of. The church I am at now is affirming and there is a huge difference. 

 

True! 

[Heartstrings]

5 minutes ago, KSera said:

I was thinking the same, but decided against invoking Godwin's Law...

 

Are we going to pretend that an eggplant doesn’t mean a male part? Does a peach not represent a booty?  Just because it’s being used that way doesn’t mean we can change the meaning, right?
 

 

Does cool exclusively refer to temperature?  Does hip only ever mean the joint where the thigh bone connects?  We can’t change the meanings of things, after all.  
 

Language, and in this case symbols, change and evolve. Insisting that all words and symbols must freeze in meaning at some point in time is simply absurd.  

[pinball]

Anyhoo…I’m not going to keep derailing this thread 

if anyone starts another flag thread, maybe I’ll deign to pop in 

or not

[Lecka]

In my state, it turns out that most churches aren’t joining the Global Church (I’m also unsure of the name).  It’s unexpected.  They were expected to join that church.  But it turns out they mostly are not.  
 

I don’t know what the future will hold, but one large church is saying their current pastor will just stay on.  
 

It is turning out that churches made a decision to disaffiliate, and then it’s a totally different question and next step, to decide if they will join again.  
 

Right now what I am hearing is — one, they are two different questions.  Two, some people are disappointed with how hard it’s been to disaffiliate and all the requirements, and it doesn’t make them want to rush to get into it again.  
 

What I am also hearing is, for this one church, the pastor said he will leave the UMC and stay at this church.  
 

For other churches, they don’t really know what they are going to do when their pastor leaves.  
 

I have been at churches with pastor search committees, and I’ve been at churches where they bring in some people as guest speakers and it’s know they are being considered.  I’ve been at churches where the associate pastor is widely known to be the next in line to be the head pastor.  
 

From what I can tell — at my church now, people are like — “pastor search committee?  What’s that?”  

[Heartstrings]

14 minutes ago, pinball said:

The swastika is so well known as a symbol of Nazism that there is no comparison. Show me where people are using it today as a symbol of the sun.

As evidenced by the thread…people today do not know of any negative associations of the Gadsden flag. 

 

 

There is naturally going to be a period of time between a group adopting a symbol and that symbol becoming universally associated with that group.   That we’re in the middle of that process, at the point where some people know and some don’t seems fairly obvious. Even 911 had to have awareness campaign at its conception. Things start out new and novel then knowledge of them grows and grows.  Nothing just poof! becomes universal knowledge.  

All of this insisting that this flag hasn’t been co-opted and isn’t associated with racism, etc. just adds to the plausible deniability these groups have.  Which is why they rotate through symbols.  These arguments give them cover.  

Edited August 30, 2023 by Heartstrings

[BronzeTurtle]

19 minutes ago, KSera said:

I was thinking the same, but decided against invoking Godwin's Law...

 

The reason Godwin's Law is a thing is because equating everything with the nazis makes the comparisons meaningless and ends all discussion of any issue. It is what people do when they want to shut down a discussion. The fact that people here on an education board do it in all seriousness is sort of humorous in it itself. 

The swastika was popularized and displayed in contemporary history as a symbol of everything Hitler stood for from the final solution to total world domination, etc., etc. It has never been a symbol of the sun to anyone since the 1930s. Being reductionist about it is silly. That is not the case with the gasden flag which was popularized an flown as flag warning the British to go away. This nazi-washing of history to align it with white supremacy isn't a positive or progressive development. It's actually extremely regressive.

Equating a revolutionary war symbol with the confederacy is a homogenization of history that makes people ignorant.

I would prefer there are actually some symbols that the white supremacists don't get to take for themselves.

Equating people who are ostensibly against tyranny (because that's what the flag means) with racists by default, without talking to them, making them an immediate "other" that is in fact not worth talking to and worth leaving an entire organization over with no questions asked is a sort of toxic purity culture* that eventually eats its own and is extremely polarizing at best.

[Grace Hopper]

46 minutes ago, pinball said:

The swastika is so well known as a symbol of Nazism that there is no comparison. Show me where people are using it today as a symbol of the sun.

As evidenced by the thread…people today do not know of any negative associations of the Gadsden flag. 

 

 

As evidenced by this thread… many people do. 

[Catwoman]

16 hours ago, lauraw4321 said:

DH and I tried a class. The people were kind. We even knew some folks. The lesson was fine. But. A guy had a coffee mug with the Gadsden Flag (don’t tread on me) on it. He was a long-standing member of the class. And a white man. The class was entirely white. 
 

I said that I don’t want to go back because of him. DH is fine going to a different class but thinks I’m stereotyping him. 
 

What say the Hive?

Sometimes a mug is just a mug.

I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I think your dh is right. You are stereotyping the guy. 

I'm not saying you are wrong, because I don't know the guy, but if he's a long-standing member of the class and the people you met in the class were nice people, maybe he's nice, too. I'm not sure why you're letting a single mug drive you away before you've ever even talked with the guy. You are making some pretty serious allegations about this guy, and it seems pretty unfair.

Several people have posted that they didn't know about the negative connotations surrounding the Gadsden flag, so why would you assume that this guy isn't one of them? Maybe he just likes the mug. Maybe he got it as a gift years ago and it's sentimental to him for some reason.

Honestly, as I read this thread, I can't help but wonder how we will ever unify this country if people are able to judge vilify a person based on nothing more than a mug. 

Hey, maybe the guy is a racist jerk. It's certainly a possibility. But to judge him based on one item seems pretty ridiculous. If you liked the class other than the thing with the mug, why not go back and see what the guy is really like? I wouldn't let a single mug determine your future with the class unless you attend for a while and it turns out that your classmates really are racist white supremacists.

 

 

 

[BronzeTurtle]

32 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

Are we going to pretend that an eggplant doesn’t mean a male part? Does a peach not represent a booty?  Just because it’s being used that way doesn’t mean we can change the meaning, right?
 

 

Does cool exclusively refer to temperature?  Does hip only ever mean the joint where the thigh bone connects?  We can’t change the meanings of things, after all.  
 

Language, and in this case symbols, change and evolve. Insisting that all words and symbols must freeze in meaning at some point in time is simply absurd.  

Your examples sort of prove the opposite point.

You can't erase the history of something and say it doesn't exist. Sometimes when people say peach, they actually mean the historical thing...the fruit. Someone using it extremely contemporaneously as 'butt' doesn't mean that's the only meaning and all the rest of it is thrown out. If I go to a fruit stand and someone asks if I want a sample of their peaches.... I don't assume they are sexually harassing me and write them off as creeps and then decide the whole farmer's market isn't worth going to anymore.

The exact point is that words and symbols don't don't freeze in time. They aren't frozen as white supremacist symbols now like everyone here wants to for some reason wants to believe. They have a historical meaning that can be studied from actual primary source documents, just like how you can pick up a peach and know it's a peach, emojis notwithstanding.

 

[Catwoman]

4 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

The white nationalist change symbols frequently.  It gives them deniability and requires that they stay active in the groups to keep up, sort of a gamification.  It also helps them stay a step ahead of law enforcement.  It’s purposeful.  

I think the problem with this is, if a person isn't a white nationalist, they may not recognize the current symbols. 

I know that I don't live in an area where there is much blatant white nationalism (as far as I know,) so I would probably miss symbols that other people here would recognize immediately.

I think that's why I'm not judging the Mug Guy... yet. I wouldn't opt out of a class that I otherwise thought I would like, until I attended a few times and got a better feel for the people. Laura said the people seemed nice and that this guy is a longstanding member of the class, so I think I would give him the benefit of the doubt rather than immediately condemning him. It would be easy enough to drop out of the class later on, if Laura starts seeing other red flags.

 

[lauraw4321]

5 hours ago, ktgrok said:

All this.

Attending a church where your child has to either consider the church wrong or her own feelings wrong almost always leads to either self hate or turning away from the church. Or both. 

Can I ask why you are staying with the church if they voted to leave the denomination you were aligned with, and became something you disagree with? Would you stay if they say, refused to marry interracial couples? Many Christians in history have said interracial marriage is against the Bible, so similar idea. 

Ugh, I screwed up some responses. So, let's be clear on the timeline. Church disaffiliated many months prior to child coming out. Church made clear that staff members didn't all agree on the issue of marriage equality but nonetheless all supported leaving due to chaos in denomination, lawsuits against other churches, etc. We decided to stay because pastor made clear those with differing views were welcome to stay and we believe that no church is perfect. Further, more impact can often be made from the inside than the outside.

Later child came out. Child is aware of all of this but has continued wanting to go to church. I don't believe the church's stance is that homosexual attraction is a sin. I realize that's a fine hair to split. 

So yes, we will be having conversations with her regarding moving forward. The church isn't a culture wars church. The pastor confided in me some of his political views, for example, and they don't align with the majority of mainstream white evangelical church.

[Heartstrings]

4 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

They have a historical meaning that can be studied from actual primary source documents, just like how you can pick up a peach and know it's a peach, emojis notwithstanding.

 But if I text you eggplant peach, you would be obtuse to think I meant I wanted to head to the farmers market on Saturday.  Pretending that flying a Gadsden Flag on January 6 meant that they were historians would be the same.   
 

Context matters.  
 

I don’t think anyone is saying that nationalists using it erases its history.  I know that I am saying that it is currently being used by right wing radicals and that’s an thing people ought to know.

 If your son comes home with PePe the Frog on his backpack you might want to chat with him about that, not just assume it’s a cartoon.  If your parents have an upside down pineapple lamp, maybe don’t ask about that.  

[BronzeTurtle]

42 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

There is naturally going to be a period of time between a group adopting a symbol and that symbol becoming universally associated with that group.   That we’re in the middle of that process, at the point where some people know and some don’t seems fairly obvious. 911 even had to have awareness campaign at its conception. Things start out new and novel then knowledge of them grows and grows.  

All of this insisting that this flag hasn’t been co-opted and isn’t associated with racism, etc. just adds to the plausible deniability these groups have.  Which is why they rotate through symbols.  These arguments give them cover.  

WHere is the tinfoil hat emoji when you need it, or the gif of the guy at the bulletin board with all the strings. plausible deniability.......of people who use swastikas pretty openly to say what they mean, lol. Like they want people accidentally being a white supremecist with a sticker on a mug. That's how they plan to take over, is slowly co-opting all of American historical symbols and having them stuck on mugs of unsuspecting American history buffs in churches around the nation. And then people freak out and let them. Yes I am falling right into their trap by...studying history and rejecting their premise.

 

if we're in the middle of this time with the gasden flag then why not take it back to mean anti-tyranny? 

[Heartstrings]

2 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

we're in the middle of this time with the gasden flag then why not take it back to mean anti-tyranny? 

Sure.  What’s the plan?  

[TexasProud]

1 hour ago, Heartstrings said:

Are we going to pretend that an eggplant doesn’t mean a male part? Does a peach not represent a booty?  Just because it’s being used that way doesn’t mean we can change the meaning, right?

What????  I have never, ever heard of this.  Really????

 

8 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

 But if I text you eggplant peach, you would be obtuse to think I meant I wanted to head to the farmers market on Saturday.  

Ok, honestly.  That is what I would think....   Our area is known for peaches, LOL...  So I often text about them...

[TravelingChris]

8 hours ago, lauraw4321 said:

The flag is closely associated with the confederacy. There are plenty of anti-federal government and racist people in NH. It’s a dog whistle and wouldn’t be hospitable to my Black neighbors.  I would never fly it or have it. 

I am not flying it.  But it is a Revolutionary War flag and if some idiot would think that our small desk flag- they are the ones who are mistaken.  I am just so mad about moronic idiots taking all kinds of non-racist symbols and decrying them as racist.  I happen to like the song "Back off Boogaloo" by Ringo Starr, and then some evil, moronic people in CA who were racists started using Boogaloo as some racist term.  

And no, we didn't get it in a racist place in NH.  We got it in a historic place. 

I am not one of those who deny that racism exists---the fact that my older daughter married a man from MS who has plenty of racist relatives (which is why they have little to do with them) and I have heard bad stories two of my kids recounted plus another by a friend of mine who is Chinese ancestry and have heard racist innuendos in public myself-  the few I have heard were by older and less educated. 

[lauraw4321]

Replying to several questions: Church is independent and has chosen not to join a denomination, but instead simply note it is part of the "Wesleyan tradition." I came from a history of SBC and I know the problems with this. I LIKE denominations because of the oversight, and raised that issue when this was being debated. 

[BronzeTurtle]

Just now, Heartstrings said:

 But if I text you eggplant peach, you would be obtuse to think I meant I wanted to head to the farmers market on Saturday.  Pretending that flying a Gadsden Flag on January 6 meant that they were historians would be the same.   
 

Context matters.  
 

I don’t think anyone is saying that nationalists using it erases its history.  I know that I am saying that it is currently being used by right wing radicals and that’s an thing people ought to know.

 If your son comes home with PePe the Frog on his backpack you might want to chat with him about that, not just assume it’s a cartoon.  If your parents have an upside down pineapple lamp, maybe don’t ask about that.  

Yes! Context matters! Exactly my point! This is so great that we can agree on this. There are many people in my life right now who could send me an eggplant emoji and mean produce list at the grocery store. They have no idea it has any other meaning. I wouldn't even mention to them that it could mean something lewd.

Somone can, in context, use the gasden as a symbol of anti-tyranny depending on the context! This is exactly what I've been saying and people keep saying, no the only thing it could possibly mean is racism or white supremacy. Your examples are very helpful in elucidating why this isn't true.

Some other things don't require context. There are plenty of example of this as well, like the swastika or KKK emblems and hoods because of their contemporary historical meaning. Or if someone sends you, not an eggplant emoji, but an actual nude. Easy. No context needed. Meaning is clear as day.

As it happens we have no context for mug guy. People here are saying not that he is right-wing, but that he is a white supremacist racist  because he has a flag on his mug that actually, historically, means nothing of the sort and many people who aren't racist (I gave examples of it earlier) use variations of this particular flag as it was originally intended...anti-tyranny, anti-colonization, etc.

There are many people in my life right now who could send me an eggplant emoji and mean produce list at the grocery store. They have no idea it has any other meaning. I wouldn't even mention to them that it could mean something lewd.

Context is key, as well as historical meanings and usage. This is very helpful.

[BronzeTurtle]

12 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

Sure.  What’s the plan?  

To not assume anyone who might have it on their mugs is a racist, for step one.

[Catwoman]

1 minute ago, BronzeTurtle said:

To not assume anyone who might have it on their mugs is a racist, for step one.

I agree.

I mean, if it raises a red flag, that's fine, but to condemn a person you've never even talked to, and make horrible accusations that the man is a racist white nationalist based on nothing more than the fact that he had a mug with a particular image on it... I'm sorry, but I think that's wrong.

And in this case, it was in a church Sunday school class where the people all seemed nice. It's a pretty safe environment to feel things out a little before passing judgment. 

[ktgrok]

32 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

Honestly, as I read this thread, I can't help but wonder how we will ever unify this country if people are able to judge vilify a person based on nothing more than a mug. 

I agree it would be silly to vilify him. But I'd take it as a potential red flag, and it would make me keep my ears and eyes open. It by itself in this context wouldn't mean the guy is definitely an insurrectionist...but it would be enough to make me wonder. 

24 minutes ago, lauraw4321 said:

Ugh, I screwed up some responses. So, let's be clear on the timeline. Church disaffiliated many months prior to child coming out. Church made clear that staff members didn't all agree on the issue of marriage equality but nonetheless all supported leaving due to chaos in denomination, lawsuits against other churches, etc. We decided to stay because pastor made clear those with differing views were welcome to stay and we believe that no church is perfect. Further, more impact can often be made from the inside than the outside.

Later child came out. Child is aware of all of this but has continued wanting to go to church. I don't believe the church's stance is that homosexual attraction is a sin. I realize that's a fine hair to split. 

So yes, we will be having conversations with her regarding moving forward. The church isn't a culture wars church. The pastor confided in me some of his political views, for example, and they don't align with the majority of mainstream white evangelical church.

Welcome to stay, yes. Welcome to be married in their church to a person of the same sex? I'm guessing not, and the reason would be because they feel it is a sin. Being nice and friendly about that view is better than being antagonistic, but the view is still there, and something that may be internalized. Have you discussed all this with her? What were her thoughts? Like I said, I'd want her to know there are other, more affirming options, and not let her perhaps internalize the idea that she can't be bisexual and Christian. Because if so, at some point she will choose, and it is unlikely she chooses Christianity, in my experience. 

10 minutes ago, TexasProud said:

What????  I have never, ever heard of this.  Really????

 

Ok, honestly.  That is what I would think....   Our area is known for peaches, LOL...  So I often text about them...

@TexasProud, this made my day. This is hysterical - and I mean that in a laughing with you way, not at you. But um...be careful what you text from now on 🙂

[TravelingChris]

6 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

It has been co opted, like upside pineapples, tiki torches, frogs, or Hawaiian shirts.   Is a pineapple inherently sexual? Of course not, that’s exactly why having one turned upside down is a *signal* to others in the know.   If I have tiki torches around my pool, that’s functional.  A tiki torch coffee mug might mean that I hate mosquitoes, but it could be being used to signal that one is part of a certain group.  
 

A Gadsden flag could mean that you like flags, like history, or that you are signaling that you are part of a group.  That can’t just be ignored.  

 

 It’s a little like rainbows.  What’s wrong with rainbows? Nothing.   Little girls like rainbows.  Noah’s ark stuff has rainbows.   They are also *currently* something that represents LGBT or ally ship.   Pretending otherwise is just silly.  
 

If I have a rainbow mug, it can be reasonably assumed in 2023 that I’m an ally to LGBT, or part of the community.  In 2023 a Gadsen flag mug can be reasonably assumed to mean one is part of or sympathetic to Christian Nationalism.  Are some people out there with rainbow mugs or shirts completely unaware of its connection? Sure.  Same with a Gadsen flag, I’m sure.  But it’s still a reasonable assumption. 

Okay, what is with tikie torches and Hawaiian shirts?  And no, I have no mugs with either of those nor upside-down pineapples- which I just learned about last year.

[catz]

After the images of January 6, it should be no surprise why this symbol might set off alarm bells for some.  People have a choice to buy and display the gadsen flag.  Other people may make assumptions based on your choice to embrace a symbol like that.  Especially if you're willing to wear or prominently display it.  That's life.  

[lauraw4321]

2 minutes ago, catz said:

After the images of January 6, it should be no surprise why this symbol might set off alarm bells for some.  People have a choice to buy and display the gadsen flag.  Other people may make assumptions based on your choice to embrace a symbol like that.  Especially if you're willing to wear or prominently display it.  That's life.  

Yes, this is kind of how I feel. It was probably the second-most popular flag at 1/6, second to the Trump flag.  It was all over. So to me, they are bringing politics into the classroom (something which I work VERY hard not to do, since I know my views will be unpopular).

Which makes me wonder whether I really can go to Sunday school at all.

[Catwoman]

3 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I agree it would be silly to vilify him. But I'd take it as a potential red flag, and it would make me keep my ears and eyes open. It by itself in this context wouldn't mean the guy is definitely an insurrectionist...but it would be enough to make me wonder.

Oh yes, definitely!

I don't think Laura should ignore any red flags, just that maybe she shouldn't jump to such harsh and damning conclusions about the guy based on zero actual conversation with him. I don't fault her in any way for noticing the mug, and it's also fine that it raised some suspicions. I just think it's a bit extreme to leave a church Sunday school class that she otherwise thinks she would enjoy, just because some random classmate uses a particular mug. I feel like she might want to wait and see how things go for a while first. 

Also, if she really suspects that this guy is a racist white nationalist and he's also a respected longstanding member of this church, it might be worth staying in that Sunday school class to find out for sure, because maybe it will turn out that it's not the right church for Laura.