THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, June 13, 1996 TAG: 9606110125
SECTION: NORFOLK COMPASS PAGE: 02 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: Joan Stanus
LENGTH: 70 lines
I have suffered being the only Southerner in a family of Midwesterners.
I've endured good-natured teasing about my drawl, the lackadaisical work habits found below the Mason-Dixon line and the ``oppressive'' steamy summer weather.
Even though I've tried to fit in, at times I've had trouble understanding. I've watched in amazement as guests routinely arrive at ``Northern'' social gatherings at least a half-hour early. At these gatherings, dinners turn into contests of who will finish eating first. And barbecue is served without coleslaw.
My mother-in-law even went so far as to tell me that I was from a ``totally different culture'' and, therefore, had no understanding of ``Northern hospitality.''
Northern hospitality?
Southern ways, she implied, were not only different but somehow more primitive, less industrious. There must be something wrong with people who sit idly on their front porches, wave to passing cars and eat grits.
But now, from a couple of Midwestern psychologists, comes the worst sling of all. Southerners, they say, are more prone to violence than Northerners. The ``culture of honor'' is alive and well in the South and responsible for the region's higher murder rate.
``Southerners believe that violence is appropriate for purposes of self-protection and . . . in response to an insult,'' one said.
The professors - one from Michigan and the other from Indiana - trace all this to Scottish and Irish immigrants ``from the fringes of Britain'' who settled the South from the late 17th to the early 19th century. Because much of the South was then ``a lawless frontier region settled by people whose economy was originally based on herding,'' the immigrants needed to be ``tough guys'' so people wouldn't ``take their wealth in an instant,'' the professors write in their book, ``Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the South.''
In the more densely populated North, people had sheriffs and police to protect their property, the scholars figure.
Well, I do have some Scotch-Irish ancestry. I don't remember ever hearing about any herds, although there were a few beloved dogs in our family.
Still, this whole idea of violence being a symptom of a regional people leaves me confused. I thought watching bloody shootings and explosive car chases on television and in the movies was supposed to contribute to our culture's propensity toward violence. Now they tell us it's a herding instinct?
To tell you the truth, I'm pretty sick of being trashed for my Southern heritage. I'm sick of those Shake n' Bake imitations, the ``Hey, Vern'' commercials and rednecks who are always portrayed as stupid or villainous. We're not all directly descended from the Hatfields and McCoys.
I'm not saying the South doesn't have some shameful moments in its history, but should those moral missteps color an entire people for eternity?
Today, in our largely homogeneous, crime-ridden country, the propensity for racism, violence, dishonesty and other character flaws is not just limited to certain regions of the country. Does an ancestral ``herding instinct'' contribute more to violence than, say, an individual's values, upbringing and circumstance?
How can a tendency toward violence be more prevalent in Norfolk or Atlanta, than in Chicago, Detroit or New York City?
Maybe I'm too defensive or naive, but I don't think so. I'm not, after all, a diehard flag-waver of skeet shooting, the Southern code of honor or lynching. I'm for gun control, against capital punishment and don't even discipline my children by spanking. I know plenty of Southerners who feel the same and Northerners who don't.
Like most Southerners I know, I just happen to be an American, living peacefully in the South. So what if my ancestors herded? I don't even have a dog.
Much less a gun. by CNB