In Your Words: Who Are The Native Washingtonians?
Most of D.C.’s newcomers hail from far-away locales rather than Washington’s suburbs, according to recent census estimates. Given that, I asked last week whether someone like me, raised in Maryland but now living in D.C., gets to claim any native Washingtonian status — a title that carries weight in this transient city. A number of you chimed in, both in our comments section and on Twitter.
Some have always felt strong ties to D.C., even if they’re technically from Maryland:
E in Rosedale wrote:
I fall into pretty much the same category as you Elahe. I was raised in Bladensburg/Hyattsville before moving on to other parts of the country and finally settling back in DC about 8 years ago. I wouldn’t put myself in the same category as someone that was born in DC and never left, but I’m certainly more connected than someone who moved from Iowa 6 months ago.
Really though, what qualifies you as a Washingtonian for me is getting a license, buying a place and getting a job (in or around DC for the job). In other words, putting down serious roots.
Alice Thornton wrote:
Most “native” Washingtonians don’t even live here anymore (native = having been born here). I stuck around, but most of my family left for other climes. We needed to bring in new people to increase the tax base. I guess with this being the Nation’s Capital it would naturally be transient…
The term “native Washingtonian” can serve as code to distinguish gentrifiers from non-gentrifiers. Mike Madden tweeted that if “native Washington” means “non-gentrifier,” then “your socio-economic status is the only thing that matters.” But, he added, if calling yourself a native Washingtonian is “simply a marker for ‘I’m not totally new here,’ then yes, growing up in the D.C. area counts.”
To that, Clinton Yates tweeted that “there was a time when native/non-native status was not a thing,” and that things changed, to an extent, when ”newcomers chose to self-identify so loudly.”
And then, of course, there were those readers who bucked against the idea that being a “native Washingtonian” should carry any weight at all:
And Shani Hilton over at Washington City Paper wrote:
It’s pretty common for people all over the country to identify with the closest big city. I’ve met lots of people who tell me they’re from L.A. and when I press them, it turns out they mean a city 45 minutes away from L.A. But that doesn’t seem to happen here. But maybe as demographics change, so will the “native Washingtonian” identifier.
Do you think being a “native Washingtonian” should carry a special status? If so, who gets to claim it?
-
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=77308056 Amanda Lee
-
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=4300940 Anne Hoffman
-
http://www.ChellBellz.com/ Elle @ Chellbellz
-
Mike Licht
-
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=77308056 Amanda Lee
-
Coco
-
Coco
-
gtsix
-
Be
-
Sally
-
Ollie Pooeater
-
kelli
-
Jwms922
-
Soulshadow55