I (42F) have been seeing my bf (55M) for six months. Our backgrounds are pretty much polar opposites – he grew up in a wealthy neighborhood, while I grew up the exact opposite, but I did manage to get a good education. Anyway, our relationship has been fantastic so far – we genuinely respect, care for, and consider each other, which is a pretty nice change of pace.
During dinner yesterday the topic of the south and plantations came up as we were discussing Blake Lively’s wedding. My boyfriend claimed that removing Confederate statues was absurd and that it was a part of the South’s history worth honoring. I countered that those statues, like Robert E Lee, symbolize the fight to preserve a grave time in our country. He argued that Lee was a skilled general who made wise decisions, particularly in his surrender, and that although there were massive injustices, the South should be able to commemorate the soldiers who died and had no choice but to fight. He even called Lee a good man. While I believe couples can have differing views, I view Lee as a traitor and I’m having a tough time respecting his opinion on this. Should this moral difference end an otherwise good relationship?
TL;DR I’ve (42f) been dating my boyfriend (55M) for six months. We have differing views, but our relationship has been great. However, our discussion about Robert E Lee was troubling. He thinks his statues are a part of Southern history worth honoring and that he was generally a good man, while I see them as symbols a great stain in our history. Should this moral difference end an otherwise good relationship?
Comments
Dating another person is, in my experience over many decades, all about determining compatibility.
If the two of you can have a respectful discussion about these issues, and remain considerate of each other’s feelings and thoughts, then I personally don’t see any reason why you cannot maintain a relationship.
Ultimately, the question for you, as for everyone else, is what you are willing to tolerate…. whether it’s someone’s spending habits, whether they snore at night, whether they have good table manners, or whether their views on politics and history is acceptable to you.
Ultimately it all boils down too how well two people communicate with each other and how they resolve their differences.
Actual people discuss Blake Lively?
Read him the testimony of Wesley Norris, one of Lee’s slaves. If he doesn’t see Lee as a monster, dump him.
The question of what kind of man Lee was is far more nuanced than can be addressed here. I will say this. He had the respect of leaders on both sides of that war and made it clear that his decision to lead the confederacy had more to do with loyalty to his home state of Virginia more than anything.
His life reflects a man of his time, bound by its contradictions but guided by a personal code of honor. His military service, reluctance to join the Confederacy, ethical conduct in war, and post-war efforts to rebuild demonstrate qualities of integrity and duty. While his association with slavery and the Confederacy complicates his legacy, the evidence of his character, praised by contemporaries on both sides, supports the view that he was, in many respects, a good and honorable man by the standards of his era. To dismiss this outright ignores the complexity of his choices and the historical record.
You can say anyone who owns an iPhone supports slave labor in China. Have you ever looked into that? Do you cut iPhone users out of your life?
Lee said..
“As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated, my conviction is that, however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt would have the effect of keeping open the sores of war… I think it wiser, moreover, not to keep open the wounds of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife…”
To put it bluntly, Lee actively discouraged the building of statues or monuments. He should at least know what he’s talking about if he’s going to push a narrative. If you want to test the theory of if you should stay in a relationship, prove him wrong and see where he goes with it.
>My boyfriend claimed that removing Confederate statues was absurd and that it was a part of the South’s history worth honoring.
I always say it reflects really well on you as a person if you believe that the Confederacy, which explicitly stood for the permanent institution of human slavery, is worth honoring.
You’re really dating a gem, OP!
I HIGHLY recommend reading the book “Robert E. Lee and Me by Ty Seidule”. He’s a West Point professor who grew up in Alexandria, VA and worshiped Robert E Lee as a child. The book is part memoir and part history as he explains how he slowly started to understand how problematic the things he was taught about confederates were. He explains the nuance behind Robert E Lee but ultimately, how he was a traitor to our country and why it’s so important that we don’t idolize people who actively fought against the United States Army or memorialize them. It’s such a well written book with a TON of footnotes and he explains how people like your boyfriend were taught “the lost cause” myth about the civil war, giving them similar views as him.
Maybe read this book together with your boyfriend and have some discussions about it.
He’s 5 years away from being 60. You are in your early 40’s. What exactly do yall have in common? Is he financially stable? You said he grew up wealthy. I’m assuming here but it sounds like you’d need to sacrifice your morals to be happy with this man. I’m a 42 year old male born and raised in Texas. I clearly see how Robert E Lee is a loser traitor. Confederate flags, to me, are a hate symbol. I’m with you on that. If he’s the opposite.. what does that say about him? He can be nice but deep down.. how is he as a person.
That’s because his POV is objectively wrong. dump him. He’s a white supremacist in training and right now, that’s the last thing you or anyone needs
It might be easier to make allowances for Lee than for the defense of the statues. We don’t hear such support for the commemoration of the Nazi era in Germany or Italy.
There’s a pretty good Behind the Bastards two or three parter on him. Kinda kills any of that “he was a good man” narrative. He was an opportunist aristocrat, at best, I think.
His viewpoint is common where I come from, but easily challenged. If you are interested in challenging his beliefs you could bring up two things written by Lee himself. The first is Lee’s opinions on memorials for the Civil War, he wrote, “As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated, my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the country would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment, and of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour,”.
The second is a letter he wrote to his wife, it would be a challenge to the idea that Lee was moral, it’s from a letter to his wife on December 27, 1856, he writes, “In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution is a moral & political evil in any Country. It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it however a greater evil to the white than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly interested in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is Known & ordered by a wise & merciful Providence.”
If you have any interest in seeing if he can be swayed from his beliefs regarding Lee I believe these are the best historical arguments to use, best of luck in deciding how to handle things.
This give me a lot of concern and I’d definitely talk openly about slavery the next time this comes up instead of saying things like, “a grave time in our country”.
Growing up in the south myself, I was taught that the civil war was about state’s rights and how Robert E Lee fought for the south at length. My schooling covered the atlantic slave trade, abolition, and the civil rights movement but really glossed over how the civil war was a fight to end slavery.
I’d check in with your boyfriend and ask him what they taught him in school and what he’s learned since. Does he also think Henrich Himmler, Hitler’s top general, was a good man? I wouldn’t call your boyfriend a nazi outright, but it’s worth investigating.
Lol everyone on the south side was traitors. Like if you are a leader of traitors or in charge or command of traitors. That makes you even bigger piece of shit. If you own slaves and are a leader of traitors. You are absolutely trash. Nothing but a huge pile of steaming shit.
I’m gonna through this out there… there may be a time in the future where history isnt kind to our first black president, who has been praised/idolized by so many. DOJ reports show a significant number of deportations without due process, 4M deportations, detentions camps (mat on concrete floor behind chain link fence). Campaigned to pass federal protection for abortion rights, then he found ‘higher priorities’ & never accomplished it. So, there is going to be nuance to the historic records of our leaders. They will be ppl of their time, even with all the flaws.
Lee, who owned slaves, let’s remember, led an army whose stated goal – that they started a war over – was the right to own other human beings.
Any nuance or other stuff he did is irrelevant. He lost that war, so he’s also a huge fucking loser.
Anyone defending Lee, the confederacy, or suggesting that removing statues that venerate slave owners or confederates somehow erases history is just wrong. There are books, museums, films and plenty of other resources available.
Additionally, anyone who is this soft on the confederacy is probably a little racist if you look under the hood a little bit.
Should probably tell him that those “Monuments” were constructed waaaaayyyy after the fall of the confederacy as an attempt to make them not seem as bad as they actually were.