|
|
|
|
I've given a lot of thought to whether or not I really wanted to reply to the commentary started by the Mammy posting. My initial reaction was "I'm not opening more cans of worms there." The vast majority of you took it in the spirit in which it was meant, as a joke, and didn't seem to be offended by it. But there have been a lot of sub-topics opened up in the discussions that I think I can add to, and perhaps help other guys understand how this particular younger Southerner views the issue of race, and especially guys from other countries. There have been some comments made regarding the treatment of slaves, and other aspects of Southern history that deserve to have another viewpoint presented. I have taken time to give this matter a lot of thought. I've talked to Jon about it, and he felt a reply of some sort was needed.
Anyone who read the post I did, and who had ever watched Gone With The Wind immediately recognized the character of Mammy, as played by Hattie McDaniel. Throughout the movie, Mammy repeatedly scolds Miss Scarlett for her behavior and lack of ladylike decorum. Curtis is a Southern boy like Jon and I, and I knew he would understand the humor I was trying for when I "scolded" him in the style of a Southern mammy-type. The only character I could think of was Miss McDaniel's portrayal, and so I used that. Actually I thought I was being honest and open in posting the picture of Miss McDaniel in her costume and persona of Mammy, and what I wrote under her portrait was genuine and from my heart.
Was I putting words in Miss McDaniel's mouth? I really don't think so, and since she's been gone for fifty years, I think it's a dead issue. We see pictures of the Pope with balloons and captions of him saying all kinds of outrageous things, and we see pictures of the President and the Queen saying things they never said, and wouldn't dream of saying, but we see those as funny too. We don't worry about how Catholics and republicans and monarchists feel. So I don't understand how "Mammy" scolding a gay boy in fun can upset anyone. Do you get upset seeing black people on cereal boxes like "Rastus" on the Cream of Wheat carton? Or the "Aunt Jemima" on the pancake mix? Or how about "Uncle Ben" on the rice box? These are all "black stereotypes" who, like "mammy," have become American icons.
Let's be realistic here. Hattie McDaniel chose a career on the stage and in film knowing that the roles she would have would be stereotypically Negro for those days. But she chose to play those roles anyway. She could have refused the role of Mammy, but she decided to accept it, and it turned out to be an Academy Award winner for her. Having such a long theatrical career, from vaudeville through the stage and on to Hollywood, it is inconceivable that Miss McDaniel didn't know quite a few gay lads along the way. She is reputed to have had a broad sense of humor, and I honestly can't see her taking exception to my gentle parody of her lines from Gone With The Wind. Incidentally, if you remember the things she said in the movie, you'll know that what I wrote were nearly verbatim take-offs. Would Hattie McDaniel have been offended by "scolding a gay boy" and saying the lines I gave her? I don't think so.
So we come to the question of whether the things I wrote for "his Mammy" to say to "Massuh Curtis" were or are inflammatory to black people today. Well, I'm sure there are some blacks who would be offended. Just as there are some Catholics who are offended by pictures of the pope saying outrageous things, and just as there are Right Wing Christian Fundamentalists who would get offended if they saw the church signs we all had some fun with a while ago on this Forum. The dialect and speech patterns I used in the posting were from my own experience. Where I live, that's how black people of a certain age and educational level speak. I have had black teachers who slip and speak like that. I don't see how anyone can listen to the latest garbage black rappers spout, with all the obscenities and "cultural african-americanisms" and think that it is acceptable, while thinking my posting is "stereotyping black people." Black people stereotype themselves, just like poor white trash people stereotype themselves as racists by running around in sheets and pointy hats, and "elitist white Southern gentlemen" like me stereotype ourselves.
Am I insensitive? Am I a closet racist? I don't know. That's a hard thing to judge about yourself. Maybe if you knew more about "where I'm coming from" it would help understand my attitudes towards race relations, people of color, and Southern society in general. Timmy's friend was correct when he said that anything touching upon the issue of slavery immediately inflames the black population. As a race they need to preserve the idea that "they are victims" and anything that even hints that "the struggle" was anything less than catastrophic for black people as a whole is swiftly swept under the carpet. The myth seems to be that the Negroes were plucked out of this Nirvanah-like existance in Africa, hauled across the Atlantic and then whipped and bludgeoned and abused and half starved by maniacal and sadistic owners and overseers until they died, while their womenfolk were systematically raped and outraged and forced into a life less than that of a prostitute. The facts of the matter are somewhat different. Slavery was widely practiced in Africa, and the Negroes were sold to slavers by members of their own race, but of a different tribe. Yes, the transatlantic transport was a bit barbaric, but generally once here life settled down to a better existance than they knew in Africa. I know that's not politically correct to state that, but it's the truth. They were Stone Age people living a hunter-gatherer life, and at least in this country, as slaves, they were taken care of. Another greatly unpopular fact is that large numbers of free Negroes in the Southern states owned slaves of their own, as did large numbers of Native Americans. There was money to be made in plantation agriculture, and free blacks and American Indians wanted a piece of the pie like everyone else. Unfortunately, plantation agriculture was labor intensive, and the profits were realized because the labor was "free." But was it free? I explain this in a few paragraphs down.
We are a British family, originally from Yorkshire. There have always been a majority of us with blond hair and blue eyes, and my father insists it's because we were probably Danish, and got to England via one of the numerous Viking invasions. We've always married into English families, once or twice into Swiss families from down New Bern way, and even a few times into Jon's family, making him not only my best friend, and my boyfriend, but a second or third cousin too. I grew up with a firm sense of who I am, where my family came from, our history and perhaps a slight or not-so-slight sense of entitlement and superiority.
My family were slaveholders, Jon's family were slaveholders, and Curtis told me his family were slaveholders. I go to school with people who are black, and two or three have the same surname as I do, and it's an unspoken truth that "my people owned their people." It doesn't confer any special status on me, and it doesn't demean them. It's just the way things are in the South. It's the way things always have been. My family owned slaves from 1710 until 1865, and that's a long time. I wish I could say "I have black friends," but I can't. I have black acquaintances, and I treat everyone with dignity and respect, but I don't have any close friends who are black. We no longer live in a society that is officially and legally segregated according to a person's race and I believe that is a good thing. But yet, but yet we do. In some ways Southern society today is more stratified than it was during segregation times. It's a hard thing to understand much less put into words. There is still, in the South, the idea that "we are happier with our own kind." It isn't just a black and white issue either, but an economic one too. People tend to stay with people like themselves. I just would never think of asking my parents, much less my grandparents, to entertain black people in their home. Jon's family is different in that regard. His father is a physician, and because of his professional associations has all types of people at parties and gatherings. Indians, Pakastanis, Chinese, Nigerians, it's like the United Nations there sometimes. I accept that I live in a plural society, but "they" are over their with "their" cultural heritage and "we" are over here with "ours." Neither Jon or I or any of our friends "sag" our pants, we don't greet each other with "Hey, ma nigga" and we don't listen to rap or urban or gangsta music. We acknowledge that "they" are entitled to "their" culture, but we prefer our own, thanks just the same.
Because of my family and my heritage, I believe that I have a different perspective on the South's "Peculiar Institution" of slavery. I believe with all my heart and mind that slavery was an evil from which this county might never fully recover. This is the viewpoint held by all persons of breeding and education in the South, and was a viewpoint largely held even before The War for Southern Independence. Robert E. Lee, our great military leader wrote to his wife in 1856 that slavery was a moral and political evil, but that he could see no practical way to end it. The trouble was that by 1860 and the secession crisis that precipitated the conflict, the institution of slavery was so neccessary for the continuance of the national life of the South we couldn't see any way beyond it. In retrospect of course wiser and cooler heads should have been able to work out some form of paid abolision of slavery, and the return of the majority of the slave population to Africa. I also belive that with the advances in mechanization in agriculture, and the development of agricultural technologies, slavery would have died out on it's own by the turn of the twentieth century. I know this is all a little simplistic, and the questions are large and complex, but I don't have the time to write a textbook on sectionalism, the economics of slavery, and the Civil War.
In the antebellum period, and continuing to this day, various stereotypes arose about white slaveholders that are largely incorrect and sensationalistic. Were there abuses of slaves? Of course. Slavery was a human institution, and human institutions are prone to abuses. There were and are abuses in Congress, the White House, Parliament, the churches. The Abolisionist press in the immediate antebellum years concentrated on "worst cases" and outright fabrications to inflame Northern and European public opinion about slavery. The stereotype of the slaveowner as a ravening beast with a whip in one hand and a bottle of bourbon in the other, lusting over nubile young slave girls certainly did happen, but it was certainly not the norm.
In one posting Timmy wrote that slaves were "abused" while they were slaves. Some slaves were certainly abused. I'm sure there were slaveowners who were fools, or sadists or both. I'm sure that there were slaveowners who forced their female slaves to have sexual relations with them, and mullatto children listed in the slave rolls attests to this, but I don't believe it was as common as is believed.
But I'd like to point out one very important fact that people tend to lose sight of in all the anti-slavery propaganda, and when they see horrific pictures of the scared backs of a few mutinous and rebellious slaves.
Slaves were VERY expensive.
And I don't mean a little expensive. I mean for the times they were major capital investments. Only a fool would mistreat a piece of personal property that cost what a slave cost or was worth. To give you an example from my personal knowledge, the last slaves bought by my family were purchased in 1857. A "23 year old Negro Woman a Midwife and general Nurse and Good with Children" cost $750.00, and "a 26 year old Negro man a good Carpenter and Cooper and together with his Son of 4 yrs." cost $2000.00 together. The man's wife and infant daughter had died during childbirth and my g-g-g-great grandfather couldn't bear to separate them, so he bought them both. Using standard U.S. Government inflation tables these slaves cost $16,250.00 and $43,317.00 in today's Dollars. If you had that level of investment in personal Negro property, would you abuse them? Of course not. Beating a slave would be like taking a sledge hammer to a Lexus. In 1865 when the last records of slaves were kept, our family owned 45 people. I took into account that there were seven household slaves (like mammy) and the rest were outside hands. I estimated that the AVERAGE value of a slave was $1000.00 in 1865 so it comes to $45,000.00 more or less. Now that translates into $990,000.00 in todays currency. Let's just say a million dollars and be done with it. Also for the record, I personally consider that figure to be the amount the Federal Government illegally and unconstitutionally stole from my family through the Emancipation Proclimation of 1862. Jon did a quick calculation, and he believes the figure for his family's slaves in today's currency is about two and a half MILLION dollars.
I would also like to point out that those 45 persons were the TOTAL number of slaves, and included "slaves too old to work" and "children not yet in the fields or otherwise employed." So the costs of slave ownership not only included the purchase price, but for slaves born on the plantation six or seven years of idleness before they could be used as labor, and perhaps twice that length of time after they grew too old for labor. Slaveowners were legally obligated, and we felt morally obligated, to care for slaves after their working life was over even though the slaves were not saleable.
It is a fact that slaves were disciplined. Most slaveowners, my family included, viewed their slaves like children who needed a firm hand and guidence in addition to care and feeding and clothing and housing. In the 155 years of our slave ownership, there are four recorded instances where slaves were lashed. I'm sure there were more, but for some strange reason the records begin at 1781 for slave infractions. In 1787 a male slave named Peter received five lashes for "stealing the Property of another Slave and also his Knife," in 1809 one male slave named Shem received five lashes "for stealing My Horse Nola and riding to see his Paramour at -------'s farm and for being ther four Days and for causing me great Trouble," in 1817 one slave named Toby received twenty lashes "for the Murder and killing by a Knife of my Slave Uriah and I did allow Uriahs brother the whipping" and it is recorded that the whipping was "particular dreadful and terrible the mans Wife wailing and screaming and the others rolling their Eyes and shrieking," and in 1836 one slave named Elisha received ten lashes "for running away and for causing Me the expense of having him captured and also for his Return." On our properties most slave discipline was done by the slave being put into stocks, just like you see in places like Williamsburg, or in a sort of small prison building and being placed on short rations for a time. It is ironic that on our farms the punishments given slaves were less severe than the punishments commonly given white people through the courts for the same crimes.
While slave marriages were not considered legal and slaveowners were under no legal obligation to keep families together, there is no recorded instance of my family ever selling slaves where the sale would break up a recognized family unit. It was a known fact of slave economics that having a "wife" and a "family" kept the slaves docile and relatively happy, and slave men, who were the majority of "runners," were less likely to try to escape from the farm and thus abandon their loved ones if they were in a family relationship. Slave women who were pregnant were allowed light work before and after their delivery, slave births on our farms were always attended by a Negro or white midwife, the mistress of the plantation, and a white doctor if needed. Slaves were valuable, and were treated as such.
A statement was also made that when the slaves were freed, they were let go with nothing more than the skills they had managed to aquire while in bondage. These skills I would beg to point out were frequently better than the skills of the white population, who at the time were largely illiterate and unskilled themselves. The majority of slaves actually refused to leave the plantations after emancipation since they had no other homes, and were fearful of change. Our slaves went from being slaves to being sharecroppers, and then got confused when our family stopped feeding, clothing, and housing them. They had to be educated about having money, and how to save and buy things for themselves. Eventually it worked out, and it worked out because families like Jon's and Curtis's and mine accepted their responsibilities.
If you are interested, there are three books I would like to reccommend. Black Slave Owners: Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860 by Larry Koger; Time On The Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery by Robert W. Fogel and Stanley L. Engleman, which is perhaps the best and most objective study of the subject ever written; and Without Consent or Contract: The Rise and Fall of American Slavery, also by Fogel. I have used all of them at various times and in various classes.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
From Eldon, a reasoned response.
|
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: Cameron on Thu, 31 January 2008 04:19 |
|
 |
Thank you Eldon ...
By: JimB on Thu, 31 January 2008 05:12 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
|
|
|
Thank you, Eldon
By: JFR on Thu, 31 January 2008 07:58 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: timmy on Thu, 31 January 2008 08:54 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: Nigel on Thu, 31 January 2008 09:42 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: marc on Thu, 31 January 2008 12:10 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: saben on Thu, 31 January 2008 16:17 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: Benji on Thu, 31 January 2008 15:30 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: saben on Thu, 31 January 2008 16:43 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: timmy on Thu, 31 January 2008 18:34 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
|
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: saben on Thu, 31 January 2008 21:17 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: JL on Thu, 31 January 2008 21:50 |
|
|
I have a challenge
By: timmy on Thu, 31 January 2008 22:21 |
|
|
Re: I have a challenge
By: JL on Fri, 01 February 2008 03:45 |
|
|
Re: I have a challenge
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 07:34 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: Nigel on Thu, 31 January 2008 23:02 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: JL on Fri, 01 February 2008 03:53 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 07:48 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: Nigel on Fri, 01 February 2008 09:01 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: JL on Fri, 01 February 2008 14:47 |
|
|
Terminology
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 16:51 |
|
|
Re: Terminology
By: JL on Fri, 01 February 2008 17:25 |
|
|
Re: Terminology
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 21:13 |
|
|
Re: Terminology
By: Scott on Fri, 01 February 2008 21:36 |
|
|
Re: Terminology
By: JL on Fri, 01 February 2008 21:53 |
|
|
Re: Terminology
By: Scott on Fri, 01 February 2008 19:47 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: Nigel on Fri, 01 February 2008 16:52 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: NW on Fri, 01 February 2008 10:49 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: Nigel on Fri, 01 February 2008 16:54 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
|
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: JL on Fri, 01 February 2008 04:09 |
|
|
Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
|
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: saben on Fri, 01 February 2008 13:30 |
|
|
A tonal challenge
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 14:54 |
|
|
Re: A tonal challenge
By: saben on Fri, 01 February 2008 23:19 |
|
|
Re: A tonal challenge
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 23:21 |
|
|
Re: A tonal challenge
By: saben on Sat, 02 February 2008 14:12 |
|
|
Re: A tonal challenge
By: timmy on Sat, 02 February 2008 14:15 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: marc on Fri, 01 February 2008 14:09 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: JL on Fri, 01 February 2008 14:53 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 15:09 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: Nigel on Fri, 01 February 2008 17:07 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 18:45 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: marc on Fri, 01 February 2008 18:49 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
By: Nigel on Fri, 01 February 2008 20:30 |
|
|
Re: Perhaps my racism isn't so closeted.
|
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: saben on Fri, 01 February 2008 23:14 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
|
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: saben on Sat, 02 February 2008 14:38 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
|
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: JL on Sat, 02 February 2008 15:54 |
|
 |
I just deleted something
By: timmy on Fri, 01 February 2008 14:51 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: acam on Fri, 01 February 2008 16:02 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: acam on Fri, 01 February 2008 16:06 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: M on Sat, 02 February 2008 00:05 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: crzypunx on Sun, 03 February 2008 06:56 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: timmy on Sun, 03 February 2008 11:12 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: saben on Sun, 03 February 2008 11:40 |
|
|
A Little Civil War
By: unsui on Sun, 03 February 2008 21:56 |
|
|
A Little War
By: Nigel on Mon, 04 February 2008 09:45 |
|
|
Re: A Little War
By: JFR on Mon, 04 February 2008 12:34 |
|
|
Re: A Little War
By: Nigel on Mon, 04 February 2008 14:19 |
|
|
Re: A Little War
By: JFR on Mon, 04 February 2008 14:46 |
|
|
Re: A Little War
By: Nigel on Mon, 04 February 2008 18:45 |
|
|
Re: A Little Civil War
By: timmy on Mon, 04 February 2008 13:18 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: crzypunx on Mon, 04 February 2008 14:54 |
|
|
Re: From Eldon, a reasoned response.
By: acam on Sun, 03 February 2008 16:17 |
|
|
Interestingly enough........
By: marc on Sun, 03 February 2008 22:40 |
|
|
Pardon me, but I'm due back on Earth.
|
|
|
Re: Pardon me, but I'm due back on Earth.
By: timmy on Mon, 04 February 2008 13:07 |
|
|
The Wonders of Google
|
|
|
Re: The Wonders of Google
By: timmy on Mon, 04 February 2008 13:26 |
|
|
Re: The Wonders of Google
|
|
|
Re: The Wonders of Google
|
|
|
Re: The Wonders of Google
By: timmy on Tue, 05 February 2008 07:20 |
|
|
Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
 |
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: crzypunx on Wed, 06 February 2008 06:27 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: acam on Wed, 06 February 2008 11:26 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: crzypunx on Wed, 06 February 2008 14:31 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: acam on Wed, 06 February 2008 15:54 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: timmy on Wed, 06 February 2008 07:48 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: timmy on Wed, 06 February 2008 13:58 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Well.......
By: marc on Fri, 08 February 2008 11:22 |
|
|
Where does the south stop and tghe north start?
By: timmy on Fri, 08 February 2008 07:21 |
|
|
Re: Where does the south stop and tghe north start?
By: saben on Fri, 08 February 2008 08:45 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: crzypunx on Wed, 06 February 2008 16:32 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Twisters
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: crzypunx on Wed, 06 February 2008 17:49 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Commendable?
By: timmy on Thu, 07 February 2008 07:52 |
|
|
Indians.....
By: marc on Thu, 07 February 2008 12:08 |
|
|
Re: Indians.....
By: timmy on Thu, 07 February 2008 17:56 |
|
|
Re: Indians.....
By: Benji on Thu, 07 February 2008 18:10 |
|
|
Re: Indians.....
By: kupuna on Fri, 08 February 2008 00:02 |
|
|
Americans from the South
By: Nigel on Wed, 06 February 2008 22:18 |
|
|
Re: Americans from the South
By: saben on Thu, 07 February 2008 04:56 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: Benji on Wed, 06 February 2008 15:34 |
|
 |
No, I don't mince words.
|
|
|
Re: No, I don't mince words.
By: crzypunx on Wed, 06 February 2008 17:52 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Wed, 06 February 2008 18:21 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Maybe its a drug problem!
|
|
|
Re: Maybe its a drug problem!
By: JimB on Thu, 07 February 2008 14:51 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Thu, 07 February 2008 05:01 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Wed, 06 February 2008 18:38 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: Benji on Wed, 06 February 2008 18:50 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Thu, 07 February 2008 04:40 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: Benji on Thu, 07 February 2008 14:25 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
|
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: Nigel on Wed, 06 February 2008 21:54 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: JL on Wed, 06 February 2008 20:01 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: Nigel on Wed, 06 February 2008 22:05 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: JL on Wed, 06 February 2008 22:18 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: Nigel on Wed, 06 February 2008 22:20 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: JL on Wed, 06 February 2008 23:50 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Thu, 07 February 2008 04:48 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: JL on Thu, 07 February 2008 22:01 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Fri, 08 February 2008 02:42 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Fri, 08 February 2008 02:46 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: Nigel on Thu, 07 February 2008 08:27 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: JL on Thu, 07 February 2008 21:44 |
|
|
Re: Expansions, clarifications, arguments, further thoughts.
By: saben on Thu, 07 February 2008 04:50 |
|
|
Re-establishing my priorities.
|
|
|
Re: Re-establishing my priorities.
By: saben on Thu, 07 February 2008 04:38 |
|
|
Re: Re-establishing my priorities.
By: acam on Fri, 08 February 2008 11:52 |
|
|
Re: Re-establishing my priorities.
By: saben on Sat, 09 February 2008 00:53 |
Goto Forum:
[  ] |
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
