Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The geographic argument, honestly, can be left out, because when categorizing areas with macro-scale regions like East or South Texas, you are including wide swaths of land, which end up having several distinctions of geography in themselves.
No, geography can't be left out. It's the first thing looked at when determining a region, and Houston can fit both regions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Houston/SE Texas is indeed its own region, but leans more towards East Texas regarding culture than South Texas. While Houston has a high Hispanic population, it isn't largely of the Tejano demographic typical of South Texas, and it didn't have as strong historical roots/fabric in the Hispanic culture. On the other hand, Houston, at least, has a commonality with East Texas, regarding strong historic roots and rural distribution in black culture.
Sure, the hispanic population isn't completely the Tejano found in South Texas. I've already stated that in the "do you consider Houston East Texas" poll. And how there's plenty of nationalities outside of Mexican in Houston's latin community (i.e. Central American countries, Venezuelan, Colombian, Cuban, Puerto Rican, etc.). But there's still a very large population that does have that "Tex-Mex" culture. And since you want to use black culture as your East Texas criteria, just like not all of the hispanic population in Houston is part of the Tex-Mex culture, not all of the black population in Houston is part of the "southern creole" culture. The culture is neither South or East, it is its own but it favors South Texas. Not only in people culture but other things as well such as architecture, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
For climate:
The Houston area has a wet, humid climate, with the vast majority of the metro seeing 50+ inches of rain yearly on average. This is more in line with East Texas, which has similar rainfall amounts, whereas in South Texas, most areas (even down to the coast) average totals no higher than 30 inches. However, Houston also has decently high/frequent summer rainfall totals that neither South nor inland East Texas have; only SE Texas locations (i.e. Beaumont, Port Arthur, etc) are similar to Houston in this.
The Houston area also has mild winter temperatures. In this regard, it fits South Texas more than inland East Texas, but then again, such weather is a constant all over the Texas Gulf Coast, including Beaumont and Port Arthur.
Landscape/environment:
The only reason pine trees aren't covering Houston to its entirety is due to differences in soil type; there are no climate controls to the distribution within the metro area. In fact, Houston actually has a better climate for tree/vegetative grown than even the Piney Woods forest inland in East Texas. So, while "half of Houston" isn't loaded with pine trees, make no mistake, there is still a strong degree of lushness to the vegetation nowhere in South Texas can match (without significant irrigation, of course). SE Texas cities like Beaumont, again, stand out as similar to Houston in this regard.
Yes, Houston has a humid climate and that's one of the things it has similar to East Texas. Pine trees not growing due to soil type, this doesn't matter. If the soil changes in Houston, that just raises the dispute. Half of the metro still naturally has them (East Texas) and have doesn't (South Texas).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
In conclusion, no, Houston is not South Texas, but rather, Southeast Texas. But because Southeast Texas is a sub-region of East Texas, Houston, therefore, also is in East Texas.
Just to clear things up, Houston is East Texas the same way Los Angeles is Southern California. Houston is SE Texas the same way Los Angeles is South Coast California.
Okay, get the "LA being southern california is the same to Houston being East Texas". That's obviously not true, because if it were, there wouldn't be a dispute. Every person in the world knows LA is Southern California, and in Houston, a lot of people think it is East Texas, a lot of people don't. So it's not the same situation at all. More than 50% in the poll said "No, Houston is not East Texas", so obviously it's not the same thing.
No, geography can't be left out. It's the first thing looked at when determining a region, and Houston can fit both regions.
It depends on what you are defining as geography, as well as to the specific detail you are categorizing these regions. If you are using the term to refer to topography, setting, landscapes, etc, and if we are classifying these regions on a macro-scale level (i.e. East Texas, South Texas, etc), then, yes, it can be left out, without much impact to the quality of debate. Next:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Sure, the hispanic population isn't completely the Tejano found in South Texas. I've already stated that in the "do you consider Houston East Texas" poll. And how there's plenty of nationalities outside of Mexican in Houston's latin community (i.e. Central American countries, Venezuelan, Colombian, Cuban, Puerto Rican, etc.). But there's still a very large population that does have that "Tex-Mex" culture. And since you want to use black culture as your East Texas criteria, just like not all of the hispanic population in Houston is part of the Tex-Mex culture, not all of the black population in Houston is part of the "southern creole" culture. The culture is neither South or East, it is its own but it favors South Texas. Not only in people culture but other things as well such as architecture, etc.
I didn't say that Tejanos were the only types of Hispanics found in South Texas, I said that they were the Hispanic demographic typical of the region, to a degree that aligns the region together in a way Houston does not match. Houston may have Tejanos, but the population isn't such that it is rooted deep in city history (not as deep as in South Texas communities).
I didn't even refer to just the Creoles when I was mentioning black culture for Houston; I was just talking about the general African-American presence on the land, whether Creole or not. Both Houston and East Texas have deep African-American roots in their cultural history, South Texas does not.
Nothing in the architecture of Houston favors South Texas. None whatsoever.
Yes, SE Texas that Houston is in is it's own distinct (sub)region, but no, it does not favor South Texas at all, but, rather, East Texas:
Quote:
Southeast Texas is a subregion of East Texas located in the southeast corner of the U.S. state of Texas.
Yes, Houston has a humid climate and that's one of the things it has similar to East Texas. Pine trees not growing due to soil type, this doesn't matter. If the soil changes in Houston, that just raises the dispute. Half of the metro still naturally has them (East Texas) and have doesn't (South Texas).
Not necessarily, because the reasons for their lack of growth in "half of Houston" vs South Texas are completely different; whereas it is simply a matter of soil in "half of Houston," South Texas has severe climactic challenges that prevent that type of tree growth from taking form. Also, the soil in Houston might differ from East Texas, but it won't be the same as South Texas either. Plus, pine trees grow all over Houston in actuality, just that half the area has more sparser coverage.
Even in the event of disputes being raised, I've already mentioned places like Beaumont and Port Arthur that also have the same situation. Houston, together with these cities, makes up the SE Texas region, which favors East, rather than South Texas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Okay, get the "LA being southern california is the same to Houston being East Texas". That's obviously not true, because if it were, there wouldn't be a dispute. Every person in the world knows LA is Southern California, and in Houston, a lot of people think it is East Texas, a lot of people don't. So it's not the same situation at all. More than 50% in the poll said "No, Houston is not East Texas", so obviously it's not the same thing.
Yes it is the same thing, that people are voting "no" doesn't change these simple facts of city-region, city-subregion. Southern California includes the South Coast, where LA is located, and, in the same way, East Texas includes Southeast Texas, where Houston is located. Simple as that.
It depends on what you are defining as geography, as well as to the specific detail you are categorizing these regions. If you are using the term to refer to topography, setting, landscapes, etc, and if we are classifying these regions on a macro-scale level (i.e. East Texas, South Texas, etc), then, yes, it can be left out, without much impact to the quality of debate. Next:
No, geography can't be left out. Geography is the whole issue when defining a region. A region is a geographical term. It doesn't matter what you're mostly basing a criteria of wether culture, etc. Houston can be considered both East Texas and South Texas geographically and that's that. The decision on who to group it with comes from other things such as culture on that note.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
I didn't say that Tejanos were the only types of Hispanics found in South Texas, I said that they were the Hispanic demographic typical of the region, to a degree that aligns the region together in a way Houston does not match. Houston may have Tejanos, but the population isn't such that it is rooted deep in city history (not as deep as in South Texas communities).
You're quoting me wrong. I said Houston doesn't only have Tex-Mex, as it has people of various nationality and non "Tex Mex" Mexicans. In other words, that would help your argument. But what I was saying is that while Houston's Latin community is a lot more diverse than you Tex Mex in South Texas, its still there, and the presence is bigger than the ones that represent East Texas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
I didn't even refer to just the Creoles when I was mentioning black culture for Houston; I was just talking about the general African-American presence on the land, whether Creole or not. Both Houston and East Texas have deep African-American roots in their cultural history, South Texas does not.
Okay, then if you're not referring to the black population in Houston for being creole, then the argument makes no sense because a black population isn't sole to East Texas, nor the Southern United States. New York has a large black population to, so what are we going to start calling Houston the Northeast now? If we were only talking about
Also, your argument is very hypocritical because if the blacks don't have to be creole in Houston to be considered akin to East Texas then why do the hispanics in Houston have to be Tejanos to be akin to South Texas? Again, very hypocritical.
If you go by racial make up, East Texas doesn't have Houston's latin population, and South Texas doesn't have Houston's black population. So that's vice versa. If you're talking about culture, Houston's latin population is more similar to South Texas latin population than East Texas black population to Houston. But again, it is very hypocritical as to you the form of hispanic culture matters but not black culture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Yes, SE Texas that Houston is in is it's own distinct (sub)region, but no, it does not favor South Texas at all, but, rather, East Texas:
^How much clearer does that need to be?
It is very clear, that's not the problem. The problem is that it is flat out wrong. Something can be very clear and be wrong. Just like in your case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Not necessarily, because the reasons for their lack of growth in "half of Houston" vs South Texas are completely different; whereas it is simply a matter of soil in "half of Houston," South Texas has severe climactic challenges that prevent that type of tree growth from taking form. Also, the soil in Houston might differ from East Texas, but it won't be the same as South Texas either. Plus, pine trees grow all over Houston in actuality, just that half the area has more sparser coverage.
Even in the event of disputes being raised, I've already mentioned places like Beaumont and Port Arthur that also have the same situation. Houston, together with these cities, makes up the SE Texas region, which favors East, rather than South Texas.
It doesn't matter what the exact reason is. The soil changes, and so does the region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Yes it is the same thing, that people are voting "no" doesn't change these simple facts of city-region, city-subregion. Southern California includes the South Coast, where LA is located, and, in the same way, East Texas includes Southeast Texas, where Houston is located. Simple as that.
[/quote]
No, it's not the same thing. Because Los Angeles being southern California is accepted by nearly everybody. Find one person who says LA isn't southern California? A LOT of people say Houston isn't East Texas. So its not the same situation at all.
Now, if you want to say if you split Texas in half then yes, LA is officially in the southern side of its Cali half just as Houston is East of the Texas half. But Houston is also in the Southern half of Texas, just as LA is in the Western half of California.
Exactly, not the same situation. once its undisputed and generally accepted, it won't be the same situation
No, geography can't be left out. Geography is the whole issue when defining a region. A region is a geographical term. It doesn't matter what you're mostly basing a criteria of wether culture, etc. Houston can be considered both East Texas and South Texas geographically and that's that. The decision on who to group it with comes from other things such as culture on that note.
Then what are you defining under the term "geography?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
You're quoting me wrong. I said Houston doesn't only have Tex-Mex, as it has people of various nationality and non "Tex Mex" Mexicans. In other words, that would help your argument. But what I was saying is that while Houston's Latin community is a lot more diverse than you Tex Mex in South Texas, its still there, and the presence is bigger than the ones that represent East Texas.
I know what you said, and I already addressed how it doesn't entail Houston being closer to South Texas:
Quote:
Houston may have Tejanos, but the population isn't such that it is rooted deep in city history (not as deep as in South Texas communities).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Okay, then if you're not referring to the black population in Houston for being creole, then the argument makes no sense because a black population isn't sole to East Texas, nor the Southern United States. New York has a large black population to, so what are we going to start calling Houston the Northeast now? If we were only talking about
Actually, it does make sense. Pay attention to what is being said.
In my first post, I stated that the black culture in Houston had strong historic roots and rural distribution, much like East Texas. Nowhere outside of the South, including NYC, has a significant population of blacks outside metropolitan-urban settings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Also, your argument is very hypocritical because if the blacks don't have to be creole in Houston to be considered akin to East Texas then why do the hispanics in Houston have to be Tejanos to be akin to South Texas? Again, very hypocritical.
It's not hypocritical at all, just simple knowledge of the types of groups that played role in developing each region. The East Texas blacks "don't have to be Creole" because most weren't Creole at all; they were just "typical" Southern blacks. On the other hand, South Texas, all around, is unified specifically by a historic Tejano presence, to the point that they played significant role in developing the fabric in the cities of the region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
If you go by racial make up, East Texas doesn't have Houston's latin population, and South Texas doesn't have Houston's black population. So that's vice versa. If you're talking about culture, Houston's latin population is more similar to South Texas latin population than East Texas black population to Houston. But again, it is very hypocritical as to you the form of hispanic culture matters but not black culture.
No, the Southern black population in Houston is pretty much identical in background to that of East Texas. Meanwhile, Houston's latin population isn't even close to being the same as in South Texas. Therefore, Houston aligns with East Texas over South Texas. Simple fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
It is very clear, that's not the problem. The problem is that it is flat out wrong. Something can be very clear and be wrong. Just like in your case.
Saying it so doesn't mean it's incorrect. Try harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
It doesn't matter what the exact reason is. The soil changes, and so does the region.
Not if we are arguing on macro-terms, with large-scale regions like South/East Texas. These regions cover wide regions, and a wide variety of soil types within each one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
No, it's not the same thing. Because Los Angeles being southern California is accepted by nearly everybody. Find one person who says LA isn't southern California? A LOT of people say Houston isn't East Texas. So its not the same situation at all.
This is simply about fact of categorization, not about what people want to believe. Los Angeles is in the South Coast, subregion of Southern California, Houston is in Southeast Texas, subregion of East Texas, fact.
I know what you said, and I already addressed how it doesn't entail Houston being closer to South Texas:
It doesn't matter what you addressed. Houston is still on the Southside of Texas as well as the Eastside of Texas, so look at geography how you want it's still the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Actually, it does make sense. Pay attention to what is being said.
In my first post, I stated that the black culture in Houston had strong historic roots and rural distribution, much like East Texas. Nowhere outside of the South, including NYC, has a significant population of blacks outside metropolitan-urban settings. "
I paid very well attention, you're just either not paying attention yourself or your
First of all, if rural distribution is the case, Houston isn't applied. Because most of the people living in Greater Houston (the large larger large large majority and percentage) don't live in rural areas. In other words since you are now changing to rural blacks, go ahead and take all the blacks living in the third Ward out, the Sunny Side, etc etc etc.
Now, a point that you can make is that in the rural outskirts of Houston there is blacks, but again, in the North and East outskirts, yes there is. But in the South and West rural outskirts there isn't. In other words, by this definition one side of the metro defines East Texas in that regards and the other side doesn't. Try again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
It's not hypocritical at all, just simple knowledge of the types of groups that played role in developing each region. The East Texas blacks "don't have to be Creole" because most weren't Creole at all; they were just "typical" Southern blacks. On the other hand, South Texas, all around, is unified specifically by a historic Tejano presence, to the point that they played significant role in developing the fabric in the cities of the region.
No, the Southern black population in Houston is pretty much identical in background to that of East Texas. Meanwhile, Houston's latin population isn't even close to being the same as in South Texas. Therefore, Houston aligns with East Texas over South Texas. Simple fact.
The black population in Houston isn't identical to the population in East Texas, just like the hispanic in Houston. They both have a lot of similarities. Houston has more to itself than just Tex-Mex, but the hispanic culture in Houston is a lot more similar to that of South Texas than the black culture is to that of East Texas. You can convince yourself otherwise all you want but it isn't true.
By the way the "white population" of Houston doesn't resembles the South Texas white population more than it does the East Texas population. So, since you're going by demographic comparison, there's another one. Again, this doesn't matter, but since this is what you're going by, also factor that in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Saying something is incorrect it so doesn't mean it's incorrect. Try harder.
Doesn't matter, it still is incorrect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Not if we are arguing on macro-terms, with large-scale regions like South/East Texas. These regions cover wide regions, and a wide variety of soil types within each one.
This is simply about fact of categorization, not about what people want to believe. Los Angeles is in the South Coast, subregion of Southern California, Houston is in Southeast Texas, subregion of East Texas, fact.
The South Texas and East Texas argument is disputed in many factors. You think its so lopsided and that its far more East Texas, but it's not. And you're either too hard headed or you're not smart enough to see the many ways Houston favors South Texas to East Texas. If you think its so lopsided, go tell the hundreds of Houston businesses labeled "South Texas" in the name that they're wrong. How come I rarely see an East Texas?
Because this isn't the same case as Southern California, that is undisputed. Houston belonging East or South Texas is disputed.
It doesn't matter what you addressed. Houston is still on the Southside of Texas as well as the Eastside of Texas, so look at geography how you want it's still the same.
Duh! That's why its Southeast Texas!
But... Southeast Texas is a sub-region of East Texas, therefore, Houston is East Texas. Simple facts mate, learn them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
First of all, if rural distribution is the case, Houston isn't applied. Because most of the people living in Greater Houston (the large larger large large majority and percentage) don't live in rural areas. In other words since you are now changing to rural blacks, go ahead and take all the blacks living in the third Ward out, the Sunny Side, etc etc etc.
Now, a point that you can make is that in the rural outskirts of Houston there is blacks, but again, in the North and East outskirts, yes there is. But in the South and West rural outskirts there isn't. In other words, by this definition one side of the metro defines East Texas in that regards and the other side doesn't. Try again.
Of course I am not talking about inner city Houston when I refer to rural, you nitwit; it's obviously about the outskirts of land not within any of the urban/suburban divisions.
You are flat out incorrect about southern/western rural outskirts not having black populations; Fort Bend county alone shows just how off you are with that statement. And while areas like 3rd Ward, Sunny Side, etc, are now enveloped within Houston's developing urbanity, the culture in those areas grew out of traditions from the rural blacks; thus, there is no need to take anything out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
The black population in Houston isn't identical to the population in East Texas, just like the hispanic in Houston. They both have a lot of similarities. Houston has more to itself than just Tex-Mex, but the hispanic culture in Houston is a lot more similar to that of South Texas than the black culture is to that of East Texas. You can convince yourself otherwise all you want but it isn't true.
For southern blacks, the populations are largely identical between the two areas. It is simple fact, and no amount of your incessant babbling will change that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
By the way the "white population" of Houston doesn't resembles the South Texas white population more than it does the East Texas population. So, since you're going by demographic comparison, there's another one. Again, this doesn't matter, but since this is what you're going by, also factor that in.
Thanks for finding yet another way Houston is like East Texas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Doesn't matter, it still is incorrect.
Keep dreaming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
The South Texas and East Texas argument is disputed in many factors. You think its so lopsided and that its far more East Texas, but it's not. And you're either too hard headed or you're not smart enough to see the many ways Houston favors South Texas to East Texas. If you think its so lopsided, go tell the hundreds of Houston businesses labeled "South Texas" in the name that they're wrong. How come I rarely see an East Texas?
Anyone who has done their research properly would know that all the evidence is "lop-sided" in favor of East Texas. Of course, there are nitwits like yourself who think a Hispanic population is all that it takes for it to be South Texas (with no consideration as to the nature of said population as it relates to the makeup and relation of the city).
As for businesses being labelled "South Texas," it's obviously in different context.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Because this isn't the same case as Southern California, that is undisputed. Houston belonging East or South Texas is disputed.
Only by nitwits like yourself who haven't done their research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detachable arm
Lots of talk about blacks and Mexicans here, but what about whites?
My experience growing up near Alief (when it was decent) was the German and Anglo last names were the most common. Also lots of Polish sounding names too. And there were 2-3 Heberts and Fontenots... enough I know how to pronounce them. I give the edge to Central Texas here.
Anglos and Germans all came in through Galveston anyways, so their presence in Central Texas is really just a consequence of Southeast Texas influence.
But... Southeast Texas is a sub-region of East Texas, therefore, Houston is East Texas. Simple facts mate, learn them.
Southeast Texas wether it is a subregion of East Texas or South Texas is also a dispute. There's no official government defining these regions stating what is what. Now, the government does define the state with regions including North Central Plain, Great Plains, Gulf Plains and the Mountain and Basins region. But it has no official definition of East nor South nor Southeast Texas so you're nobody to decide where it begins and ends.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Of course I am not talking about inner city Houston when I refer to rural, you nitwit; it's obviously about the outskirts of land not within any of the urban/suburban divisions.
You are flat out incorrect about southern/western rural outskirts not having black populations; Fort Bend county alone shows just how off you are with that statement. And while areas like 3rd Ward, Sunny Side, etc, are now enveloped within Houston's developing urbanity, the culture in those areas grew out of traditions from the rural blacks; thus, there is no need to take anything out.
Okay you "nitwit" (since you've gone to the point that you're giving names as well as false information), Fort Bend County is not rural. It is suburban. There are plenty of blacks in Missouri City, yes. As there are in other suburban cities in Fort Bend County. Blacks have lived in the suburbs for a while now from coast to coast. And some towns that begin to get into the rural category may have up to an 8% black population such as Orchard, Texas. But that's few towns that are in extreme proximity to Houston. Not the case. In the Northwest side, there are rural towns waaaaaay out of the way with 30 and 40% black population. For the West and Southwest suburbs, you may catch a rural town with 8% or so with a black population but no more than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
For southern blacks, the populations are largely identical between the two areas. It is simple fact, and no amount of your incessant babbling will change that.
Again, the black population in Houston and East Texas are no more identical to that of the hispanic population of Houston and South Texas. Try again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Thanks for finding yet another way Houston is like East Texas?
The "doesn't" doesn't belong there. A common mistake when dealing with someone as either hard headed or unintelligent (one or the other) as you. Or should I say a nitwit
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Keep dreaming.
Wake up
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Anyone who has done their research properly would know that all the evidence is "lop-sided" in favor of East Texas. Of course, there are nitwits like yourself who think a Hispanic population is all that it takes for it to be South Texas (with no consideration as to the nature of said population as it relates to the makeup and relation of the city).
As for businesses being labelled "South Texas," its obviously in different context.
No, first of all I never said Houston resembles South Texas more than East Texas. Culturally, yes most definitely. Now, since you love the word nitwit think of how much of that you are one to not even put the hispanic culture in Houston that doesn't exist in East Texas. You don't have a magic button that either puts away the hispanic population in Houston and takes it away from Texas. It's there, and if you choose to ignore it, that explains a lot, as you seem to ignore everything. The hispanic population while it is a big deal, it isn't even the only deal. There's countless cultures that exist in Houston that exist also relatively largely in South Texas that don't have the a big presence as they do in East Texas. Let me say a small one: the Filipinos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texyn
Only by nitwits like yourself who haven't done their research.
Again, with your sole way of defending, since your ignorance is costing you, there is a dispute. There's no official borders for these regions defined by the government, so that leaves it to the general public to decide what is what. Southern California is also not officially defined by the government, but that is a generally undisputed area. Houston's position does not have that acceptance to which region. If you're too much of a "nitwit" to understand that, I can't help you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
