Huffy Flounce

Sometimes it seems like most of it happens in the Deep South, but maybe that's just because I'm primed to think most of it happens in the Deep South. Truth be told, though, fucked up stuff happens all over. It's not always Alabama. Sometimes it's Wisconsin or Florida. Sometimes it's the Czech Republic. Whatever the case, I thought there also ought to be a place to collect fucked-up stories about places that happen in areas that aren't Alabama. I'll make this that place.

Here's the first story:

Florida Man Has Sex with Pit Bull in His Yard as Neighbors Beg Him to Stop

I'm a little disappointed that they don't go into more detail. I mean, if he was just jerking the pit bull off, is it that bad a thing? Really?

(I should point out that I'm the one who capitalized most of the words in the title. The original only capitalized "Florida." Their version makes it clearer that the Florida man wasn't fucking Pitbull. Pitbull is, incidentally, also from Florida.)

The article also doesn't tell us whether or not the dude "finished."

Florida Man has his own Twitter feed full of awful headlines.

I was just made aware of this Twitter feed earlier in the day--as a result of the above article, in fact.

I'm going to try not to abuse having access to it and endeavor only to relate the news items that I find through more conventional channels.

So what exactly is it with the South? Sociologically, genetically, historically WTF is it with that part of the States??

I'd like to say it all goes back to the slave-owning mindset, the huge class divide, and incredibly low standards of education, but you'd think these things would have affected more than just the South.

I suppose a person could argue that the media is just dead set on making the South out to be laughable. I've actually heard Southerners use this defense the same way I've heard conservatives talk about the "liberal-controlled media."

Maybe I'll look into it.

Here are the autocomplete results I got when I started to type "why is the south" into Google:



Just for fun, I tried it with "why is the north," and I got this:



Clearly, this wasn't specific enough. I tried "why is the north us," and I got this:



When I tried "why are the northern united states," there were no autocomplete results. Too specific, I guess.

I don't think it's fair to lump Florida in with the South in any way other than geographically. As far as the people, Florida is it's own special blend of fucked up. I feel like the issues with the rest of the South (Alabama, Arkansas, Texas, etc.) can be summed up by saying that religion>education in those parts.

I think Coastal Florida is its own special blend of fucked up, but Rural, Inland Florida is pretty much the South.

Religion > Education doesn't quite cover it. If the major religion were Judaism or Catholicism, the educational standards might be higher.

There are probably some who would say that it's not the case that religion trumps education in the South. They might say that there's a strong drive to educate kids but that the education, itself, is faulty. They might blame religion for this in part, or they might not. They might blame No Child Left Behind, or they might blame the Common Core.

There's also the question of *why* religion is greater than education in the South--if, that is, it is greater there. It's a question that likely has a number of answers, and it's a question that likely raises more questions.

I think there are a lot of places up north where someone could argue that the religion/education relationship is the same as it is in the South. I feel this is especially true of Rural America. Most of America--geographically, at least--is rural. Why aren't more places gaining fame for being as fucked up as the South?

I mean, I guess there's Oklahoma.

When I look at the drop-down options for "why is the south," I notice that the top two results are "so poor" and "republican." Maybe this unique combination has something to do with it. The Republican party has managed to remake itself in the last half century. The Democratic party used to be the party that most appealed to the poor. This is still the case, I think, for minorities.

The remaking did have to do, somewhat, with a stronger identification with Protestantism. Maybe JFK's Catholicism had something to do with this. I'm not sure. Maybe it looked to Southerners like you couldn't trust the Democrats to be hell-fire-and-brimstone protestants after that.

Maybe that's all there is to it. Republicans are for Big Business, and the South is notoriously impoverished. Maybe that's the one-two combo that does it. Then again, rural areas outside of the South are similarly poor and tend to vote Republican. Maybe the appeal of the idea of trickle-down economics also appeals to the impoverished.

Are they right or wrong, from a capitalist's point of view, to embrace Republicanism/Big Business? I dunno. It's not like the Democrats aren't capitalists.

Maybe it has something to do with the South having fewer big cities. Maybe the southern states' economies don't get big boosts from big cities the way northern states do.

I'm clearly out of my depth when it comes to talkin' politics. Spacey, Dalty, and Mal might have some more to say on the matter--though I recognize that all these guys are outsiders looking in where the South is concerned. Jedi Magnum is the only other HF member, as far as I know, who grew up in the Deep South. He might have some insight. (I know spammityspam was in Texas, but most people exclude Texas from the Deep South.)

There's a documentary I keep meaning to track down called What's The Matter With Kansas? which tries to analyze, from my understanding, why the majority of Kansans continuously vote against their own economic interests by voting Republican. As you say about the South in general, Kansas is largely rural and small business-centric, yet they vote for trickle down every. single. time.

The two biggest reasons why the South flipped from Democrat to Republican were Roe v. Wade and...well...the Civil Rights movement. Republicans exploited racial tension very very well and gained a LOT of disgruntled, poor, religious white voters in return.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Thanks for the link, Adam.

I know that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats won Alabama in '68. That was the year George Wallace went rogue. He ran for the American Independent Party. He won Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, and Louisiana. There was also a faithless elector who cast a vote for Wallace despite Nixon having won his state. I think it was a North Carolina elector, but I'm going to be bold and resist looking it up.

My grandmother likes to tell a story about how she held a mock election in her history class in '68. Every single student voted for Wallace, and they all got excited. They were sure this meant that Wallace would win the election. My grandmother had to explain to them that a small-town classroom in Wallace's home state did not speak for the nation.

Four years later, Wallace would go on to win five bullets in his body. Paraplegia wasn't quite the kind of segregation he was looking for, but it's what he got.

The only time since the sixties that a Democrat running for president has won Alabama was in '76, when the majority of Alabamans voted for Jimmy Carter. That's the year Carter beat Ford. Did it help that Carter was from Georgia? Probably.

Alabama didn't even go for Clinton? That's mildly surprising to me. Not shocking, but mildly surprising.

Nope. Bush and Dole.

I just went to look it up. Bush & Dole each won Alabama by ~7%. Huh.

The Swollen Goiter of God wrote:Most of America--geographically, at least--is rural. Why aren't more places gaining fame for being as fucked up as the South?

Because they have an extra four months of the year when they're not frozen/snowed in/clinically depressed to do stupid shit.

New Mexico has this. I don't think of New Mexico as being famous for crazies and stupids. They have their crazies and stupids, sure, but they're not really famous for it.

They also have less cover, I guess. You can do all sorts of crazy and stupid shit under cover of forest.

I could overflow this thread with Rob Ford shenanigans.

Man Smothers His Infant Son to Death So He Can Keep Playing Video Games

Hello, Florida!

Does anyone else find it weird that you have to get a licence to raise livestock, own a gun (in the UK), drive a car, practice all sorts of careers etc. etc. yet you can just have kids and become responsible for another human being with nothing?

I realise this goes down a very dark path, civil liberties wise..... But still!!!

I've made mention of this weirdness a number of times in conversation with Jubbers.

It weirded me out a little that the hospital just up and sent us home with the kid the day after she was born. I mean, what the fuck? Did they honestly trust us to keep the thing alive all on our own?

When we took our son home 20 years ago, we had one of those birth to 50 pounds car seats, and it took us 20 minutes to figure out how to put him in it. We looked at each other and said, " they're just going to let us walk out of here with a baby? We don't know what the hell we're doing!"

Our hospital showed us a video on proper car seat installation, and it was their policy not to release us into the wild until we had brought in our car seat for an inspection. I appreciated that.

There should at least be a multiple choice questionnaire or something before anyone is allowed to be a parent.