The term originally characterized farmers that had a red neck, caused by sunburn from long hours working in the fields. A citation from 1893 provides a definition as “poorer inhabitants of the rural districts … men who work in the field, as a matter of course, generally have their skin stained red and burnt by the sun, and especially is this true of the back of their necks”.[12] Hats were usually worn and they protected that wearer’s head from the sun, but also provided psychological protection by shading the face from close scrutiny.[13] The back of the neck however was more exposed to the sun and allowed closer scrutiny about the person’s background in the same way callused working hands could not be easily covered.

By 1900, “rednecks” was in common use to designate the political factions inside the Democratic Party comprising poor white farmers in the South.[14] The same group was also often called the “wool hat boys” (for they opposed the rich men, who wore expensive silk hats). A newspaper notice in Mississippi in August 1891 called on rednecks to rally at the polls at the upcoming primary election:[15]

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    4 months ago

    Whatever you call the kind of bigotry your comment represents it’s no better. Thank you for reminding us all that it’s still around.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Being “bigoted” against racists is infinitely better than being racist. Moral-relativist false equivalences can fuck all the way off.

      • kbal@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I am talking about being bigoted against “rednecks” who are mostly no more racist than everyone else. I grew up in redneck territory and support those who reclaim it as a label of pride.