Post: #1

I searched to see if there is anything on this topic here. I couldn't find a thread. What does everyone here think about the accusation that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with his slave Sally Hemmings. What does everyone here think of this accusation?

Post: #2

This wont end well.

Post: #3

She was a slave and she was 14.

Post: #4

(07-09-2017 03:24 PM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  She was a slave and she was 14.

So you are saying that Jefferson definitely fucked Sally Hemmings? What evidence is there?

Post: #5

(07-09-2017 03:45 PM)puckerman Wrote:  So you are saying that Jefferson definitely fucked Sally Hemmings? What evidence is there?

Quote:The historical question of whether Jefferson was the father of Hemings' children is known as the Jefferson–Hemings controversy. Following renewed historic analysis in the late 20th century and a 1998 DNA study that found a match between the Jefferson male line and a descendant of Hemings' last son, Eston Hemings, there is a near-consensus among historians that Jefferson fathered her son Eston Hemings and probably all her children. A small number of historians disagree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Hemings

Post: #6

Puckerman, if your goal was to rocket your potential-troll rating from "unlikely" to "bring me my +1 fire sword" then you may consider yourself successful.

Post: #7

Interestingly enough, the one-drop rule didn't exist back then, so the more white looking children integrated into white society (once they were freed of course - despite being 7/8 white, there were still slaves until their father officially freed them).

Post: #8

Jefferson banged his slave, MLK cheated on his wife, Ghandi slept naked with his nephews, Obama bites the heads off at least five kittens a day... at some point you just have to accept that lionized famous people all turn out to have severe character flaws.

Post: #9

I don't really care about the issue, but if he fathered children with his slave, well, so what? Who am I to judge?

DNA evidence like this is pretty fuzzy. So until someone invents a time machine, the best we can say is Jefferson was possibly the father of one or more of her children. That's it.

Is the controversy used to attack Jefferson unfairly? Yeah, probably, even if he did father children on his slave. It both projects modern morality/sentiment on the past, which I've cautioned against before, and ignores the sociosexual reality that some women get off on being slaves. At least, slaves to relatively kind masters. They usually aren't fond of being sex slaves for ISIS, because that's not half as sexy in real life as it seems from a boring bedroom in the UK.

I doubt there's much to be gained by discussing the Jefferson-Hemings controversy at length, though. People who understand what I said above don't need to be convinced and people who don't understand probably can't be. If someone ever tries to use the point against me in an argument, I'll just agree and amplify and see if I can get them to have a stroke from outrage.

Post: #10

(07-10-2017 04:34 AM)weambulance Wrote:  I don't really care about the issue, but if he fathered children with his slave, well, so what? Who am I to judge?

She was 14.

Post: #11

I figured if there was a thread about Lenin and how he died, then why not a thread about this? I am open to hearing from either side on this subject.

Jefferson has often been criticized for not freeing his slaves. But apparently the law in Virginia was that freed slaves had to leave the state. Keeping everyone as slaves was a way to keep families together. It is also true that life for free African Americans could be extremely difficult. I read in one source that John Calhoun freed one of his slaves, and sometime later the slave came back.

One key fact is that the first person to publicize this accusation was Joseph Callender, who was a former political ally of Jefferson's. Callender turned against him when Jefferson didn't give him a job as a postmaster.

Why is it that sexual improprieties (rape, harassment, etc.) are always the political smears of choice? It's likely because they are difficult to prove and difficult to disprove. It's been used against Julian Assange, too. Why not accuse your political opponents of armed robbery or beating up old ladies? The default crime is almost always rape. The only other one that comes up is financial graft.

Post: #12

(07-10-2017 08:21 PM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  

(07-10-2017 04:34 AM)weambulance Wrote:  I don't really care about the issue, but if he fathered children with his slave, well, so what? Who am I to judge?

She was 14.

(07-10-2017 04:34 AM)weambulance Wrote:  I don't really care about the issue, but if he fathered children with his slave, well, so what? Who am I to judge?

DNA evidence like this is pretty fuzzy. So until someone invents a time machine, the best we can say is Jefferson was possibly the father of one or more of her children. That's it.

Is the controversy used to attack Jefferson unfairly? Yeah, probably, even if he did father children on his slave. It both projects modern morality/sentiment on the past

Didja make it that far? Or did you just skim-'til-offended?

Post: #13

(07-10-2017 09:22 PM)weambulance Wrote:  Didja make it that far? Or did you just skim-'til-offended?

In fact, it seems you're the one who is a bit offended that somebody question the legacy of a founding father. Listen, I think Thomas Jefferson is one of the greatest men to ever live. Just because I point out flaws in his character doesn't mean I think otherwise. But let's be honest, he does lose points for in the "morality" column for doing what he did to a 14 year old slave. "Who am I to judge" is a weak cop-out-- we judge everybody all day.

Post: #14

So, no, you didn't make it that far.

Post: #15

In point of fact, all we can say is Sally Hemings was 13-14 when she went to Europe. There's no indication of when a sexual relationship might have begun, and as I already pointed out--which was ignored--the DNA evidence can only say Jefferson was one of the potential fathers of at least one child. She might well have been 17 when the relationship started--if it even did. Seventeen, you might recall, is above the age of consent in half the US.

This DNA stuff is way overrated. Even in modern rape cases it's not ironclad, it's just an indicator. And I'm supposed to believe they can pull DNA from two people, what, six generations removed and say with certainty who a specific direct-line common ancestor is? Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Now, this is from monticello.org, a site run by the Thomas Jefferson Foundation:

Quote:SALLY HEMINGS

Name: Probably Sarah (Sally was the common diminutive form of this name).

Born: 1773 (FB.9)

Parents: Elizabeth (Betty) Hemings (c. 1735-1807) and, according to Sally Hemings's son Madison, John Wayles (d. 1773), father of Jefferson's wife, Martha Wayles Skelton Jefferson. (FB.9, 18; Madison Hemings 1873)

Children (known from Jefferson's records):

Harriet (1795-1797)
Beverly (1798-post 1822)
Harriet (1801-post 1822)
daughter (1799-1800)
Madison (1805-1877)
Eston (1808-1856)

According to the oral history of the descendants of Thomas C. Woodson (1790-1879), he was Sally Hemings's first child; no documentary information has yet been found to confirm this.

Okay, so what do we have here? We have confirmed children by Sally Hemings who were born when she was at youngest 21 years old. Then we have some claim, unverified, that Thomas Woodson was born to her when she was 16-17.

How on earth are you comfortable with the story that Thomas Jefferson was pumping babies into Sally Hemings when she was 14, given the documented evidence of the time?

So some fuckball claimed to be related to a famous founding father. There's documentary evidence of all the other children she had, but... no documentary evidence of the one that would be so problematic. Sounds legit, because people never lie to try to gain status. And politicians certainly never lie to attack their opponents, not those saintly men.

Even if we grant the paternity claim of the descendent of Eston Hemings--the only physical link available--Sally Hemings was 34-35 at the time of his birth. How scandalous. And as for that DNA evidence? The study itself claimed that there were at least 8 people who could've been the father.

Did you guys even research this? This is like a 2 on the [0 - Holocaust] scale in terms of difficulty in finding good information.

Another interesting point is Jefferson brought slaves to slave-free France knowing full well they could, if they wanted to, have petitioned the French government for their freedom and he would not have been able to stop them. Sounds like an awful guy, especially since they didn't bother doing it. No doubt because he kept them chained in the basement to stop them escaping.

So what title do I get to add to my CV this time? Rape apologist, maybe? I'm running out of room, ya know.

Post: #16

(07-10-2017 10:12 PM)weambulance Wrote:  So some fuckball claimed...

Post: #17

Glad you could make it.

Post: #18

Who cares - back then the masters of the households fucked their maids, all their legal servants, every girl opening their legs and likely a good deal of the servants. Even if he did that, then who cares?

I would have done the same. With all I know now then of course I would have freed the slaves, gave them a place to live and re-employed them for some wages. But I still would have fucked any black cuties I could get my hands on.

Post: #19

(07-11-2017 05:01 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Who cares - back then the masters of the households fucked their maids, all their legal servants, every girl opening their legs and likely a good deal of the servants. Even if he did that, then who cares?

Yes. I agree. If something is common enough, it's basically OK. Like rape accusation.

Women making false accusations of rape is now commonplace. Who cares? No big deal.

It's normal.

Same goes for school teachers having sex with their under-aged students, male or female. It happens all the time. No big deal.

Or gay faggot sex. Pretty normal now. Who cares?

Post: #20

(07-09-2017 08:21 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Puckerman, if your goal was to rocket your potential-troll rating from "unlikely" to "bring me my +1 fire sword" then you may consider yourself successful.

I'm loving the D&D references around here lately. I need to figure out a way to get a campaign thread going without people being dishonest about what they roll.

I, of course, will be your humble DM.

Post: #21

(07-11-2017 06:33 PM)Suits Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 05:01 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Who cares - back then the masters of the households fucked their maids, all their legal servants, every girl opening their legs and likely a good deal of the servants. Even if he did that, then who cares?

Yes. I agree. If something is common enough, it's basically OK. Like rape accusation.

Women making false accusations of rape is now commonplace. Who cares? No big deal.

It's normal.

Same goes for school teachers having sex with their under-aged students, male or female. It happens all the time. No big deal.

Or gay faggot sex. Pretty normal now. Who cares?

What was the age of consent?
Did she consent without duress?

The only relevant questions here. Much else on this issue is some sort of bizarre white(black?) knighting based on the assumption that the girl was neither at a culturally/legally accepted age of consent and/or was forced into the act on account of her slave status, because we all know that a woman would never fuck her way to a better position in life, especially not a black woman, right?

Come the fuck on. This thread should have been nuked MINUTE ONE.

It combines race-baiting, contextually dubious pedo-talk and historical figure slander. If someone with 5 posts and zero rep started this thread everyone would have flung shit at them until they were banned five seconds later.

Post: #22

^

I don't know if anyone cares in Australia, but this Thomas Jefferson is a rapist thing has been pushed hard in the US since the late 90s. Hell, there were articles published within the last couple days going on about it. The push has been very successful and most people just assume it's true.

I never really looked into it because I don't waste my time condemning historical figures for things they may or may not have done, but since certain people in this thread were mounting skyscraper-high horses, I took a few minutes to do some basic research. And I'm glad I did, because shockingly it turns out the popular narrative is a bunch of bullshit with no significant supporting evidence. Again.

So, I'm glad the thread was started. And I assume puckerman was coming from that point of view, not trying to troll. He's shown a pattern of questioning the veracity of popular historical claims in other threads recently and I think that's a good thing to do. The truth is rarely taught in schools or mentioned in popular media, and if people are ever going to find it they need to learn to question things and dig for themselves.

Post: #23

(07-11-2017 06:40 PM)YoungBlade Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 08:21 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Puckerman, if your goal was to rocket your potential-troll rating from "unlikely" to "bring me my +1 fire sword" then you may consider yourself successful.

I'm loving the D&D references around here lately. I need to figure out a way to get a campaign thread going without people being dishonest about what they roll.

I, of course, will be your humble DM.

You mean the campaign is entirely in-thread, or part of it is done through some other form of communication like chat?

It's a pretty easy problem to solve, but how to solve it depends on exactly what you're trying to do. And if you're trying to run straight D&D or want a solution for RPGs in general.

Post: #24

I'd be more interested in just running it in a thread here on the forum. Skype, discord, and other things work well for sessions, but something more low investment would be nice here on the forum.

Post: #25

It's interesting you should bring this up. I was just reading up last week on the topic after some commentators were bringing the issue up around the 4th of July (when better to besmirch the Founding Fathers than on Independence Day?)

One thing that the media coverage about this doesn't let on is that the DNA evidence doesn't prove that Thomas Jefferson fathered any children with Sally Hemings -- only that a Jefferson did. Apparently Thomas had a younger brother Randolph who was known to be a bit too friendly with the slaves, who is the most likely candidate.

Ann Coulter's debunking of the Sally Heming's myth

On the other hand, in my reading I also turned up some info that makes the whole issue appear in a completely different light.

First off, Sally Hemings was actually the half-sister of Thomas Jefferson's wife Martha, who died prematurely young at the age of 33. Sally had the same father as Martha -- John Wayles -- while her mother was one of John Wayles's slaves.

So at the very worst what we have is the grieving widower Thomas Jefferson saw the image of his dearly departed wife in Sally, and sought consolation in her arms.

Moreover, Sally Hemings was actually 75% white, since her father was white and her mother, Betty Hemings, was mulatto (half-black, half-white). Accordingly, Sally's children (whichever Jefferson was the father) were by all appearances white and did in fact pass into white society upon their emancipation.

So I would say that even if the story is true, the morality tale the left tries to derive from this situation is false.