re: Slaves didn't have enough time to smoke their meats

quote:

---

Yeah. It literally mentions the British and German also had methods to smoke meat.

---

Not really. It is saying that the British and German (they call them masters in quotations) adapted the form from Native Americans and Africans.

quote:

---

It never once claims that blacks inventing smoking meat.

---

No, it doesn't. But it is HEAVILY implying that smoking meats was something invented by black and native american culture. Your a reasonable person, surely you can see how this article could have been written accurately and about the food, instead of injecting a subtle agenda.

quote:

---

It seems obvious to me that African methods of smoking would have influenced the methods of smoking meat in the South though, no?

---

I would contend that native americans had a greater impact on smoking than africans, and that the process of smoking meats in the US started long before Africans arrived here.

quote:

---

and yeah, chitlins are considered "soul food", do you disagree?

---

The article states that chitlins (chitterlings) are representative of poor black people enslaved by whites. Literally NO ONE, references slavery with chitlins. It's considered poor food. Yes it is more aligned with poor blacks in the south, but has NOTHING to do with slavery. Lest you forget, slavery ended 150+ years ago. Several generations of people have died off from that time period to even reference food as being "for the slaves".

quote:

---

Errbody knows that this guy invented Fried Chicken.

---

quote:

---

Use of that term in the context of the article has a pejorative meaning.

---

the article that ends with this quote?

quote:

---

”Part of the Southern culture is eating well, without shame,” Twitty says. “The pleasure of eating food is a part of our heritage.”

---

also this quote

quote:

---

The blend of Native American, African, and European cultures is unique to the South, which is evident in the foods of the region. “The more that all three cultures shared something, the more likely it was to be preserved, touted, and endemic,” Twitty says.

---

quote:

---

What? No it doesn't.

---

“The British and German culture of smoking was more convenient [for the master],” Twitty explains. “They [enslaved Africans] didn’t have a lot of time on their hands.”

quote:

---

No. It implies that the smoking methods used in the South in heavily influenced by the methods of blacks and native americans. And then Europeans expanded on those methods.

---

Yeah, that's not mentioned either. This statement is made, "The blend of Native American, African, and European cultures is unique to the South, which is evident in the foods of the region. “The more that all three cultures shared something, the more likely it was to be preserved, touted, and endemic,” Twitty says." then the only reference to Europeans is the German/British slave master thing. Mentions no contribution to smoking meats from Europeans.

quote:

---

I have no idea either way. You are more than welcome to provide evidence though.

---

Jerky/Pemmican, smoked fish. It's really not hard to find articles or information on it. Considering they lived here prior to any Europeans or Africans, and that they worked together with the European pilgrims who founded the lands, i'd say their contribution to smoking meats is much greater than any other tribe or peoples.

LINK

quote:

---

Yeah. It never argues otherwise.

---

And the point of the response to this article, is that this article is poorly written, and is very subtle at trying to promote an agenda. I'm not denying Africans or Indians didn't smoke food. They did. And as i stated earlier, damn near every early civilization smoked meats and as mentioned earlier, our influence early on, was more greatly driven from the Native Americans on the land. The way this article is written, is that it was only due to the Indians and slave labor of Africans, did smoking meats become a thing. Which is demonstrably false. This article is nothing more than unwarranted pandering. It omits facts on purpose, and is left vague to leave an impression. Considering today's climate, why is that hard to believe?

Food should not be political. This asshat, and the same asshats at bon appetite magazine have been bending over backwards begging to make food a political issue. Why? Because if every other market can do it, and receive positive SJW points, why can't they?

In short, don't you think this article would have been better written if it actually explored the genesis of smoking meats, and the commonality between ALL CULTURES, and how it was one of many methods that changed civilization?

quote:

---

Errbody knows that this guy invented Fried Chicken.

---

Fairly certain Ms. Peachez did.

LINK

Yes, if he's Scottish.

quote:

---

the article that ends with this quote?

---

OK, so the person quoted doesn't agree with the author.

quote:

---

“At one point eating yellow corn was considered unacceptable because it was used as animal feed. In South Carolina, there are festivals celebrating okra and chitlins. In France, chitlins are considered a delicacy, but when you come to the South, it’s associated with poor Black people who were enslaved by white people.

---

African's brought some of the best food with them to this country.
Italians/Germans/Brits/Scots/Irish/Asians/Mexicans did the same.

quote:

---

Now do golf

---