You can judge how worked up I am about the subject by reading my post quoted above. I’m surprised that jetsmom responded with what seemed to be such a vehement post that didn’t give a thoughtful answer to the OP’s question. I thought the question was a little odd, but certainly nothing to rant about.
2 Likes
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.
5 Likes
@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 As a white person, it just seems like a distant, historical reference at first glance.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.
17 Likes
@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.
27 Likes
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.
5 Likes
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.
9 Likes
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.
5 Likes
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.
9 Likes
@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.
17 Likes
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.
10 Likes
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.
17 Likes
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.
6 Likes
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.
30 Likes
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.
20 Likes
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.
6 Likes
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.
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
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.
2 Likes
According to the hunt roster:
“Evening attire: Scarlet with Confederate grey collar and Old Gold lapels”
2 Likes
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.
4 Likes
