Sally Hemings’s room (1809- ), pictured above, has been “discovered” at Monticello, the house of Thomas Jefferson. She was a slave who likely gave birth to six of his children. The room was built adjacent to Jefferson’s bedroom in 1809, the same year Jefferson returned to Monticello after serving as the third US president.
In 1941 it was made into a men’s bathroom for tourists.
“Discovered” is in quotes because there is, so far, no physical evidence or written record that it was in fact her room. All we have to go on is what one of Jefferson’s grandsons said – and he has been wrong before. But given the fact it was used for house slaves and is close to Jefferson’s bedroom, it seems likely.
Restoration: Carefully taking apart the bathroom they found some of the wooden floorboards from the early 1800s, a brick fireplace and a place for a stove. It had no windows! It was 13 feet wide and 14 feet and 8 inches long (3.9m x 4.5m), making it 191 square feet.
In 2018 it should be ready for the public to see. They will add period furniture along with ceramics and other objects found on the Monticello estate.
Mountaintop Project: The restoration is part of the $35-million Mountaintop Project. Its aim is to restore Monticello to how Jefferson knew it and to tell the story not just of Jefferson himself but also of:
Black Monticello: Most of the people who lived on the 5,000-acre estate were Black. At any one time Monticello had about 150 slaves. So the Mountaintop Project is also restoring some buildings along Mulberry Row where slaves lived and work: a cabin, a textile shop, stables and an iron workshop (Jefferson made money selling the nails his slaves made).
Mia Magruder Dammann, a spokeswoman for Monticello, said:
“For the first time at Monticello, we have a physical space dedicated to Sally Hemings and her life. It’s significant because it connects the entire African-American arch at Monticello.”
In the course of his life Jefferson owned 607 slaves. In 1776, when he famously wrote “all men are created equal,” he owned 175 slaves.
Sally Hemings’s children had been rumoured to be his since 1802. He neither confirmed nor denied it. In 1998 a DNA test showed that her son Eston was his. Given that Jefferson freed him along with her other children, something he did for no other slave, they were all likely his children. She may have been the half sister of his dead wife.
Gayle Jessup White, whose great-great-great-great aunt is Sally Hemings, is now Monticello’s Community Engagement Officer. She said:
“I’m appreciative of the work that my colleagues are doing at Monticello because this is an American story, an important story. But for too long, our history has been ignored. Some people still don’t want to admit that the Civil War was fought over slavery.
“We need to face history head on and face the blemish of slavery and that’s what we’re doing at Monticello.”
– Abagond, 2017.
Sources: mainly NBC News (images), Smithsonian magazine, Atlanta Black Star, Huffington Post.
See also:
543
So, that’s where “the magic happened”, to use an overused Cribs cliché.
LikeLike
I’m curious on how they are going to restore a room when they have no clear idea of what it actually looked like.
LikeLike
It’s all well and good to acknowledge and include this part of the Monticello story, but it does seem a bit gratuitous and self-serving to “restore” this room if there is uncertainty about it, just because the “restored” space adds drama and strengthens what is now known about TJ and SH. Rather than a “restoration” it would show more historical integrity if they presented it as a possibility and left it in a more raw, untampered form with some narrative and illustrations. The same point would be made and it would give people a chance to see what the excavation reveals, no more or less.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever: that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.” – Thomas Jefferson (circa 1781)
Huh, … as opposed to fearing for your countrymen, you should’ve been fearing for yourself and praying to God to have mercy upon your very soul for being a certificated pedophile. Indeed, a troubled man!
https://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2011/12/the-civil-war-book-1/249689/
LikeLiked by 1 person
In an absolute sense, all that has been determined is that the male Hemings descendants are descended from a male Jefferson. It is hard to believe that it could be anyone but Thomas, but still the DNA by itself does not prove which one. I have been around and around with someone on this topic at least once. The DNA at this point is just another element in a circumstantial case regarding Thomas specifically. But the case is very strong. It had to be someone, and not just any someone, but someone who was a male Jefferson.
According to my sources, it would not be possible anymore to get full DNA from Thomas’s remains. But if any marker unique to him but not other Jeffersons was found and the same marker found in any of the Hemings descendants that would close the case beyond the need for any speculation or interpretation of character. I would say, nevetheless, don’t make it into something cosmic. Powerful and prominent men always have had mistresses and common law wives. Usually, these come from a social strata lower than the one the man himself belongs to. Based on the imputed relationship, I would put Hemings into the territory of a common law wife relationship, not a mistress.
Jefferson, in my estimation, was a very inconsistent man. He idealized the yeoman farmer, in the early American context, the white farmer who worked his own land with his own family’s labor, and hired free labor if any more was needed. But he lived his entire life on a slave plantation. He said he wanted to follow Washington’s example and free his slaves upon his death. But he was unable to do so because he lived the last two decades of his life on a sort of homemade reverse mortgage and died deeply in debt. Virginia law forbid persons who were in debt from freeing their chattel.
LikeLike
In the course of history, slavery in the United States is a very small period.
Misunderstanding, exaggeration, lies, and little truth will be found, when discussing the period. Sally Hemming went to Paris, France with Jefferson and chose to return to this nation with him. In France she was a free person.
It is likely she slept in his bed with him!
The room was probably a storage room or private room for her to conduct her daily routine.
It seems to be impossible for anyone to believe they loved each other, because, after all she was a mixed blooded slave and he was white man.
There was a lot of conversation about Jefferson’s affair during that day. It was publicized and written about by other leaders. I do not believe Jefferson ever denied it.
One of these days people are going to wake up and realize that two people can become attached to each other regardless of their race.
All through the history of the United States the combination of racial mixing and slave ownership has existed. To those who mixed, owning slaves was a matter of business and the interpersonal relationships they had, had nothing to do with slavery. To others it was a matter of power to have sex with a person with no personal feeling other then sexual gratification.
Yes, Jefferson wrote these famous words. They had nothing to do with the time at hand , they had everything to do with the hopes and dreams of the future.
Some of us today still cling to the believe that we will arrive at the goal ‘that all men are created equal”.
Is this article a story of history or another attempt to spread hate?
LikeLike
“One of these days people are going to wake up and realize that two people can become attached to each other regardless of their race.” – Allen Shaw
Oh please, save me the horseradish! A fourteen year old?? Allen, are you on drugs or do you merely have the urge to be an apologist today??
LikeLiked by 5 people
MLK mentioned the Declaration of Independence in his “I had a dream speech”.
“when the architects of our Great Republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.”
I don’t believe Jefferson viewed Blacks as men. He certainly didn’t view Blacks as equal with whites. He wrote those words pointed at the British aristocracy.
It took MLK some 150 years later to drive home the point that “all men are created equal”. Those words still ring hollow for most POC today.
The age of “consent” during the colonial times was 12 years old. That said its hard to imagine a 14 year old enjoying sex with a middle aged man.
Their relationship was in no way in equal terms.
I don’t see Jefferson as a pedophile in the modern sense. But a good case could be made against him for rape.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thats harsh
LikeLike
@blakksage lol nomen deae fortuna est
LikeLike
“In the course of history, slavery in the United States is a very small period.”
That is a curious statement to make. Oddly enough, you are comparing U.S. slave history to all of history which is misleading and with a blanket statement such as that, most experiences in history would fit into that context.
The appropriate comparison would be comparing it to the history of the U.S.. Of our 398yrs going back to the colonies, slavery was 246yrs of that (62%). If we are being technical, going back to our founding, out of our 241yrs, slavery was 89yrs of that (37%).
It is fine if you want to acknowledge in learning about slavery we shouldn’t let the past become stuck in is to the point of using it as a tool of division or hatred. Yet we shouldn’t diminish it’s impact just for the sake of moving on.
“Misunderstanding, exaggeration, lies, and little truth will be found, when discussing the period.”
Misunderstandings and exaggerations yes. Lies, litter our history, that is part of the benefit of studying history to correct the lies that history tell. Little truths? While I believe that there are some contexts in history to which may be forever lost to us, if we want to correct those lies, I am sure we will need more than little truths.
“Sally Hemming went to Paris, France with Jefferson and chose to return to this nation with him. In France she was a free person.
It is likely she slept in his bed with him!
The room was probably a storage room or private room for her to conduct her daily routine.
It seems to be impossible for anyone to believe they loved each other, because, after all she was a mixed blooded slave and he was white man.
There was a lot of conversation about Jefferson’s affair during that day. It was publicized and written about by other leaders. I do not believe Jefferson ever denied it.
One of these days people are going to wake up and realize that two people can become attached to each other regardless of their race.”
To focus only on race clouds the perspective. You have to take into context Sally was his wife’s half sister, whether or not she had a choice in sleeping with him (being a slave in all), that fact that he never acknowledge or denied their relationship, and that he did not free her, his sister did. Sure they could have become attached, though we have every reason to doubt if Sally had a choice in that “attachment.”
“All through the history of the United States the combination of racial mixing and slave ownership has existed. To those who mixed, owning slaves was a matter of business and the interpersonal relationships they had, had nothing to do with slavery. To others it was a matter of power to have sex with a person with no personal feeling other then sexual gratification.”
Considering that slavery is the business of owning people and the power differential between the master and the slave, how could you separate the interpersonal and the business? It seems the implication here is that if an owner had an interpersonal relationship with a slave, that somehow was a separate relationship from the “business of slavery” until you remember that in a authentic relationship we normally don’t hold the power to force a person to respect us, like us, love us or control their fate. No matter the nature of their relationship, even if Sally made the best of the situation that she found herself in, the fact remains he was property of Jefferson.
“Yes, Jefferson wrote these famous words. They had nothing to do with the time at hand , they had everything to do with the hopes and dreams of the future.
Some of us today still cling to the believe that we will arrive at the goal ‘that all men are created equal”.
Surely those words were written for his present, given the British climate of elitism from which they came and the fact they were laying the foundation for a country. Ideals are guiding principles even if Jefferson could not fully live up to them. To claim he didn’t mean it in his time, just to avoid the inherent contradiction in the fact of Jefferson owing slaves does him a disservice. There is context and complexity here and we shouldn’t just gloss over it.
“Is this article a story of history or another attempt to spread hate?”
It seems like this was the underlining tone of your post and it is one that I appreciate. History shouldn’t be used to create a barrier between us and the past or between us in the present. Critical thinking, expanded awareness, lessons and future directions are the benefit of learning the truth about history. Not everyone is ready or can handle learning the truth about historical situations especially when it comes to slavery. Sure some will use this story to spread more hate, but the truth stands on its own.
LikeLiked by 4 people
@ PF Thought
A well phrased set of rebuttals.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Hey michaeljonbarker,
““when the architects of our Great Republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.”
Yup. Now can you remind the rest of our fellow citizens and those politicians of that?
“I don’t believe Jefferson viewed Blacks as men. He certainly didn’t view Blacks as equal with whites. He wrote those words pointed at the British aristocracy.”
Yeah, that perception of Africans and African American’s has been one of the driving forces behind the idea of white supremacy and many of our founders perpetuated it. We cannot not forget that they were British citizens who came from a monarchy/elitist society so to think it would be easy for them to totally drop this way of life is naïve. Culture greatly influences us and the culture of that time was at it’s height of benefit to a white male, let alone a founder.
“It took MLK some 150 years later to drive home the point that “all men are created equal”. Those words still ring hollow for most POC today.”
The beauty in that statement is that it should transcend race.
“I don’t see Jefferson as a pedophile in the modern sense”
In the modern psychological sense, he still wouldn’t be considered a pedophile unless more of history reveals that he had sexual orientation toward young girls (normally age 13 and under), with no interest in an adult female. When it comes to rape well, a man his 40’s having sex with a teenager shouldn’t really be debated, even if the laws of the time allowed it. She was a child when it started, slave or not (and no her age is not the defining feature for rape).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks
LikeLike
@ michaeljonbarker
“The age of “consent” during the colonial times was 12 years old. That said its hard to imagine a 14 year old enjoying sex with a middle aged man.”
The age of consent did not change for a very long time and the history of this nation had many marriages of old men and children
@PF Thought
You included quite a bit of thought into my comment so I have placed it in word so I can completely break it down. Following are some of my thoughts. Others may follow:
“the appropriate comparison would be comparing it to the history of the U.S.. Of our 398yrs going back to the colonies, slavery was 246yrs of that (62%). If we are being technical, going back to our founding, out of our 241yrs, slavery was 89yrs of that (37%).”
History is history, you cannot parse it into convenient parts to make a case.
Many black owned slaves, therefore you cannot claim it as racial even if the majority of owners were white. it was still an economic thing. Many individuals owned one slave and the slave lived in the home with the family. The majority of stories about cruelty were on large plantations.
The history of the world is full, loaded, absolutely polluted with cruelty by one person over others. Study European peasantry or serfdom before you discount the treatment of people. Watch the treatment of individuals in African tribes. In China and Russia 10’s of millions of people have starved to death in the last 100 years, long after US slavery and almost at the end of Jim Crow which to me is a far more grievous period then slavery, due to power grabbing and poor governance. Over 60 million people died in the World War II period.
My point is prepare the proper history of slavery, without attempting to make it somehow different then the balance of the world. Make certain that the history is placed in the history books in some form that those who do not read will be able to obtain the information.
I read Gone With The Wind in 1939 so I know the history was not hidden.
I suppose in an attempt to dodge what I am saying a new 1000 word editorial will be presented; however it is not helping the young black children feel empowered to go forth and seek a decent livelihood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation_complexes_in_the_Southern_United_States
“the vast majority of plantations did not have grand mansions centered on a huge acreage. These large estates did exist, but represented only a small percentage of the plantations that once existed in the South.[2] Although many southern farmers did own slaves prior to emancipation, few owned more than five. These farmers tended to work the fields alongside their slaves.[citation needed] Of the estimated 46,200 plantations known to exist in 1860, 20,700 had 20 to 30 slaves and only 2,300 had a workforce of a hundred or more, with the rest somewhere in between.[4]”
https://www.google.com/search?q=Number+of+Plantations+1850&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=plantation+owners+names
https://www.geni.com/projects/American-slave-owners/people/11457
“Sure they could have become attached, though we have every reason to doubt if Sally had a choice in that “attachment.”
If you read history a little you will discover that while in Paris Sally was offered the opportunity to stay and let Jefferson return without her; however, she chose to return.
“Surely those words were written for his present, given the British climate of elitism from which they came and the fact they were laying the foundation for a country. Ideals are guiding principles even if Jefferson could not fully live up to them. To claim he didn’t mean it in his time, just to avoid the inherent contradiction in the fact of Jefferson owing slaves does him a disservice. There is context and complexity here and we shouldn’t just gloss over it.”
I do not consider Jefferson wrong because he own slaves anymore than I blame a McDonald franchise owner today. Why, when a person was complying with the law of that time, would he be considered to be wrong, is the question.
You are applying your principles and ideas to yesterday. Many people today cannot comply with our current principles and ideas, whatever they may be.
I would suggest you go back to the library and read the story of the meetings they had in Philadelphia when they developed the Constitution and of course the Declaration of Independence. You would then appreciate how forward thinking they were. Of course they though of themselves; however they were planning the future. Since more of the people in those groups were from slavery states, you have to at least know that the freeing of the slaves was not on their minds at that time. When it came time to divide the voting in the electoral college the northern states did not want any slaves counted; therefore, they came up with the 3/5 apportion to satisfy the south.
LikeLike
“I don’t believe Jefferson viewed Blacks as men.”
Correct, to him they were no better than animals: “A black, after hard labour through the day, will be induced by the slightest amusements to sit up till midnight, or later, though knowing he must be out with the first dawn of the morning. They are at least as brave, and more adventuresome. But this may perhaps proceed from a want of forethought, which prevents their seeing a danger till it be present. When present, they do not go through it with more coolness or steadiness than the whites. They are more ardent after their female: but love seems with them to be more an eager desire, than a tender delicate mixture of sentiment and sensation. Their griefs are transient. Those numberless afflictions, which render it doubtful whether heaven has given life to us in mercy or in wrath, are less felt, and sooner forgotten with them. In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection. To this must be ascribed their disposition to sleep when abstracted from their diversions, and unemployed in labour. An ANIMAL whose body is at rest, and who does not reflect, must be disposed to sleep of course. Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous. It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed. It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, and from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad. The Indians, with no advantages of this kind, will often carve figures on their pipes not destitute of design and merit. They will crayon out an animal, a plant, or a country, so as to prove the existence of a germ in their minds which only wants cultivation. They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory; such as prove their reason and sentiment strong, their imagination glowing and elevated. But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never see even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch (* 2). Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved…”
“Is this article a story of history or another attempt to spread hate?” Are you saying we should love Jefferson? Why, what did he do to deserve your love?
“Yes, Jefferson wrote these famous words. They had nothing to do with the time at hand , they had everything to do with the hopes and dreams of the future.
Some of us today still cling to the believe that we will arrive at the goal ‘that all men are created equal”.
“The time at hand was the era when Denis Diderot and Raynal wrote against slavery, six years prior to 1776. In 1791 the slaves of St-Domingue (present day Haiti) rebelled against slavery and started the destruction of the slave system on the island. On 02/04/1794 France abolished slavery and made all former slaves French citizens. In 1801 Toussaint L’Ouverture abolished slavery on the rest of Hispanola and declared slavery banished forever on that island. What prevented Jefferson from doing what France did on 02/04/1794, except his desire to continue to live as a parasite, off the labor of slaves? In 1802, Napoleon, with the support of Jefferson, began his campaign to re-enslave the peoples of St-Domingue and Guadeloupe. That’s the age Jefferson lived in so no more lame excuses for him.
LikeLiked by 3 people
@gro jo
I am confused. I believe you are saying that none of the people of Africa, the Caribbean Islands or all of Americas have ever produces a single piece of art.
No one is asking anyone to care about Jefferson. You were correct when you described him as a man seeking pleasure; however, he was a very good writer and they gave him the task of writing the first draft of the Declaration. When he presented it there were changes made. It was a group effort.
Your 1000 words or more are to much for me to comprehend. I cannot even make judgements about living people; so, for to you to have the insight to see people who have been dead for almost 200 years, I must “tip my hat”.
He was a fairly decent President.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_presidents_of_the_United_States
“Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington are most often the three highest rated presidents among historians. The remaining places in the top 10 are often rounded out by Theodore Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, Harry S. Truman, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Andrew Jackson, and John F. Kennedy.”
In this world, you cannot make speculative judgments about different historical events. When one studies the history of Haiti all of the history must be accounted for.The citizens of the other part of the Island seemed to have found a different path and have had a much less painful history (Dominican Republic).
No President has ever had the power that most people think they have. The constitution of this nation gives the power to the Congress, not the President. Since the majority of power existed in the hands of the southern political forces, it would have been impossible for any president, including Abraham Lincoln to stop slavery. Slavery was stopped because the south attempted to leave the union.
One thing we need to remember. In this world nations make treaties and agreements. In time of trouble nations call on other nations to honor those treaties. Haiti and Vietnam are two times that the United States responded to the demands and needs of France. There would not have been a United States of America without the help of France. That is why Jefferson and Sally were in Paris.
I believe without me doing the research you can read about the trip Sally and her son took to Paris. It will not change your mind; however you might get a different thought. In your mind White man = bad – Black women = victim. Black man = fool – white women equals advantage taker.
LikeLike
Sally hemings half-sister to bull’s wife? By the dad? That’s twisted. Badly.
LikeLike
Jefferson was a POS, plain and simple.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am reading in one of my reference books they had a long sexual relationship that produced four children who survived into adulthood. It began in 1787 when Hemings served as caretaker to one of Jefferson’s daughters at his household in Paris, where he was U.S. ambassador to France. At that time Jefferson was 44 and Hemings was about 14 years of age. She was pregnant when she returned to Virginia in 1789, although the child probably died in infancy.
There is evidence that Hemings and her children enjoyed special privileges on Jefferson’s Monticello plantation. But, by modern standards, their relationship began with statutory r@pe, and Hemings unfree status and that of her children limited her ability to resist sexual advances. Source: African American Odyssey, Authors : Darlene Clark Hine, William C. Nine, Stanley Harrold.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hey Louis2decaro
Yes it does seem gratuitous to play up the drama of the room, with so much uncertainty surrounding it, but drama drives media.
The restoration is ok as long as the presentation of the room and its background isn’t disingenuous. I’m not sure the same point would be made because experience period pieces of history gives greater context and character to their time. Kind of like watching a period movie, not the same as seeing pictures from that time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Herneith: I wholeheartedly agree.
LikeLike
Sorry, but ‘it was the times’, doesn’t cut it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hate these damned apologist when it comes to exploitation of black women’s bodies especially during the time of slavery. This “It was the times” b.s. doesn’t cut it. The brutalizations of any woman’s body at any time is unacceptable. I am learning that r@pe culture is a real thing. Jefferson was a swine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Allen Shaw, I love ya, you never fail to amuse me with the nonsense you write.
michaeljonbarker wrote: “I don’t believe Jefferson viewed Blacks as men. He certainly didn’t view Blacks as equal with whites. He wrote those words pointed at the British aristocracy.” I agreed with him and quoted Jefferson’s words from his 1785 pamphlet, Notes on the State of Virginia. How you managed to think that Jefferson’s words were mine is beyond me!
Are you surprised that your hero wrote: “…In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection. To this must be ascribed their disposition to sleep when abstracted from their diversions, and unemployed in labour. An ANIMAL whose body is at rest, and who does not reflect, must be disposed to sleep of course. Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous…”
You wrote:
“No one is asking anyone to care about Jefferson. You were correct when you described him as a man seeking pleasure; however, he was a very good writer and they gave him the task of writing the first draft of the Declaration. When he presented it there were changes made. It was a group effort.”
I did not describe Jefferson as a man who sought pleasure, I was quoting Jefferson’s description of Blacks: “…A black, after hard labour through the day, will be induced by the slightest amusements to sit up till midnight, or later, though knowing he must be out with the first dawn of the morning…”
Allen Shaw, where did you learn to read? I ask because I wouldn’t want anybody I know to go there.
Allen Shaw wrote: “In this world, you cannot make speculative judgments about different historical events. When one studies the history of Haiti all of the history must be accounted for.The citizens of the other part of the Island seemed to have found a different path and have had a much less painful history (Dominican Republic).”
Please, wise one, tell me what that different path was? I suspect, no, I know you are writing nonsense. There wouldn’t be a Dominican Republic if Haiti hadn’t given its support to Dominican generals Cabral and Sanchez who were resisting attempted Spanish annexation of the Dominican Republic in 1861. Spanish admiral Rubalcava extorted a $200,000 ransom and 21-gun salute from Haitian President Fabre Nicholas Géffrard, because of his support for the Dominicans who didn’t want Spain back on their side of the island. In 2016, the relative value of $200,000.00 from 1861 ranges from $4,330,000.00 to $800,000,000.00.
Anyway, this is a digression, let’s get back to your boy, Jefferson.
Shaw wrote (sigh):”One thing we need to remember. In this world nations make treaties and agreements. In time of trouble nations call on other nations to honor those treaties. Haiti and Vietnam are two times that the United States responded to the demands and needs of France. There would not have been a United States of America without the help of France. That is why Jefferson and Sally were in Paris.”
My, your stupidity knows no bounds. I dare you to name the treaties that obliged the USA to agree to resupply the French attempt to reestablish slavery on St-Domingue in 1802 or to intervene in Vietnam after the French were defeated in 1954. A guy with your tenuous grasp of history should keep quiet, instead of flagrantly demonstrating his ignorance. For your information, the USA double crossed Boney by doing the bare minimum for his forces. Do you want me to tell you why? Because, they knew that after crushing St-Domingue, the French army was headed to New orleans, something the USA did not welcome.
Shaw, I deal in real history, not the hero worshiping nonsense and excuse making you go for. I don’t give a rat’s ass what went on between Jefferson and Hemings, hence my joke about her room. Jefferson was an evil pos.
LikeLike
@ Allen Shaw
“History is history, you cannot parse it into convenient parts to make a case.
Many black owned slaves, therefore you cannot claim it as racial even if the majority of owners were white. it was still an economic thing. Many individuals owned one slave and the slave lived in the home with the family. The majority of stories about cruelty were on large plantations.
The history of the world is full, loaded, absolutely polluted with cruelty by one person over others.”
Actually, a person can and should parse history to make a case. Historians do it all the time to make their points or submerge inconvenient facts.
The whole “Black people owned slaves” argument is classic “Thief-Thief” reasoning. Abagond sliced that argument into shreds on this post:
Moreover, there is no evidence that a single slave in a family home was treated with less cruelty than groups of slaves on
slave labor campslarge plantations. If I recall, you and I have both read the book “Bullwhip Days”. The former slaves in that book did not describe plantation slavery as any better or worse than household slavery, maritime slavery or urban skilled worker slavery. It was all slavery. All slaves faced their share of horror.LikeLiked by 1 person
anonymike said:
“Powerful and prominent men always have had mistresses and common law wives. Usually, these come from a social strata lower than the one the man himself belongs to.”
Allen Shaw said:
“The age of consent did not change for a very long time and the history of this nation had many marriages of old men and children.”
I don’t see how either of these historical facts makes Jefferson’s actions better.
All it means is that women and girls historically (and still today in some places) have had few choices and little control over their own lives and bodies.
All it means is that millions of girls and women throughout human existence have lived miserable lives where they were bound to, controlled by, and sexually used by old men.
LikeLike
@Solitare: Exactly read my comment up thread about this statement. The patriarchy in this society causes many men to have blind spots when it comes to the subject of empathy for women’s bodies being exploited.
LikeLike
Typo: Women and girls bodies being exploited.^^^^^^
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Mary Burrell
Yes, I absolutely agree with everything you wrote.
Sally Hemings was in a worse bind than many other girls and young women of her time because she was enslaved. But the fact that free girls of her same age were being married to old men doesn’t mean it was okay, just that the practice was societally accepted in a patriarchal culture where old men wrote the rules.
LikeLike
Allen Shaw,
“History is history, you cannot parse it into convenient parts to make a case.?
You cannot parse out history? Allen you don’t believe that and you told me so yourself. Later in your post you accuse me of judging the idea of rape by the standard of my time, history-parsed…
And of course one parses out history to study it. That is research/stat 101. Otherwise we potentially have unfair and misleading information without a reference point. Now we shouldn’t parse out history to fit our agenda w/out presenting context or worse just presenting our parsed version of history.
“Many blacks owned slaves therefore you cannot claim it as racial even if the majority of owners are white.”
Your panoramic view of history is causing you to miss important details. It is not just that the majority of owners were white, though that is a hugely relevant point considering who setup the system and who benefited the most. The inference that you are missing is when black people became slave owners, and all products (humans) being equal (because it was a business correct), what groups of people were the one’s enslaved? Where are all of the white products (humans) who could also provide benefit to the black slave owners and the white slave owners? Not race based, C’mon.
“The vast majority of plantations did not have grand mansions etc…”
Your quantitative approach is informative and it reveals much. First, the 20,700 x30 would give us 621,000 slaves. We don’t even have to address the rest of the numbers. Grand manisons or not, that is 621,000 enslaved people who won’t become legally free until 5 years later, (not counting juneteenth) and this is before you take into account the racially oppressive future facing them. Numbers are descriptive, we need inferential stats to be able to appreciate the qualitive nature of those numbers. It’s like saying the avg income in a middle class neighborhood is 100K, but you are taking into accoutn the incomes of a billionaire who happens to own a home there. That will skew things greatly.
“My point is to prepare the proper history of slavery, without attempting to make it somehow different than the balance of the world.”
As you accurately point out, one way to read history is through it cruel nature. That cannot be doubted. And slavery in general and slavery in context exist along that spectrum. But the, “there were all sorts of cruelty” argument, downplays the impact of all these events. Mostly with the intention to move on from them. But if we can’t authentically accept them, moving on will be difficult.
“If you read history a little, you will discover that while in paris Sally was offered the opportunity to stay and let Jefferson return without her; however, she chose to return.”
Then I ask you why do you think she returned? There are many levels implicated in that offer namely “freedom and family”. Let us consider family as Sally’s son madison writes in his memoir, that Sally at one point refused to return unless Jefferson agreed to set her children free, to which Jefferson agreed.
http://www.womenhistoryblog.com/2011/04/sally-hemings.html
Or lets speak of what freedom may have meant by way of her brother James Hemings:
http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/10/17/449447335/behind-the-founding-foodie-a-french-trained-chef-bound-by-slavery
“I do not consider Jefferson wrong because he owned slaves anymore than I blame a McDonald franchsie owner today”
Just why…….
“Would he be considered to be wrong is the question?”
Besides that fact that hindsight tends to be 20/20 and the fact I have not passed judgment on Jefferson as it pertains to the right or wrongs of him owning slaves; the zeitgeist of his time argument is a weak one given that slaves resisted, ranaway, fought back and many of his peers spoke against the ownership of slaves. So when you reference his time, remember whose perspectives you view those times through to support that. I accept owning slaves was considered normal enough that it was a part of society, but you have to also accept another perspective existed that went against those who made the laws. So how COULD he be considered as wrong; well if he was a part of the establishment that made the laws of which he benefited, which subjugated those who sought freedom, this conflict of interest makes the law hollow and Jeffersons actions open to scrutiny and criticism. My attempt isn’t to vilify Jefferson, I know just waking up one daying and freeing slaves wasn’t as simple as it sounded, but I do want to point out that the laws are created by people and if we only judge history by the laws created or not created, you will also have to ask yourself, if slavery was just “business” akin to owning Mcdonalds, why the eventual laws outlawing this type of business?
Yes many people cannot comply with our principles and ideals (thinking different cultures), but freedom is not a cultural debate. Remember, our Revolutionary war was Britians civil war and Jefferson wrote one of the greatest pieces of literature in our history. He understood freedom, he just didn’t expand it further.
“You would then appreciate how forward thinking they were…. freeing slaves was not on their mind.”
Forward thinking is an understatement. How could anyone read the DOI and not be awe struck of its importance and relevance to our future. We agree here. No, freeing slaves was not on their mind, anymore than Lincoln actions were strictly about freeing slaves (not condeming him), it was always about the UNION. The Jefferson group was about starting the Union and Lincoln group holding it together.
Though as a I said before, Jefferson knew of freedom and his thoughts/words on slavery even spoke against the “zeitgeist” of his time, no wonder why it was redacted from the DOI:
http://www.blackpast.org/primary/declaration-independence-and-debate-over-slavery
Jefferson knew freedom, Jefferson knew slavery, Jefferson was human. Please don’t relegate him to a product of his environment, that diminshes his legacy and misrepesents the environment; we call them Founders for a reason. Even John Adams agreed that he was the only one who could write the DOI and have it stand the test of time and history has proven him right.
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform#United_States
United States
Over the course of American history, the most commonly observed age of consent was 10 years. In 1880, 37 states had an age of consent of 10 years while 10 states kept an age of consent at 12, and Delaware maintained its age of consent at seven years, having lowered it from 10 in 1871.[31][32]
LikeLike
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/in-fight-over-child-marriage-laws-states-resist-calls-for-a-total-ban/
LikeLike
@ Allen Shaw
So what is your point?
A child, whether 7, 10, or 12, is simply not capable of fully informed consent for sexual relations or marriage.
Reading that the age of consent was 7 doesn’t normalize what Jefferson did for me. It makes me sick to my stomach.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Jefferson knew freedom, Jefferson knew slavery, Jefferson was human. Please don’t relegate him to a product of his environment, that diminshes(sic) his legacy and misrepesents(sic) the environment; we call them Founders for a reason.”
Jefferson knew how to defend the system that made him one of the richest men of his time, slavery, so he invented racist justifications for it. The biggest one was the “fear” that Blacks would seek revenge for what was done to them. A strange claim, given the fact that slaves rarely killed their masters for keeping them in bondage, and at odds with his claim that “…In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection. To this must be ascribed their disposition to sleep when abstracted from their diversions, and unemployed in labour. An ANIMAL whose body is at rest, and who does not reflect, must be disposed to sleep of course. Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous…” His legacy was that of a consistent racist and enemy of black freedom.
“Yet such contradictions between thought and action apparently had little place in Jefferson’s view of Haiti, known as “Saint-Domingue” (the French name when it was France’s colony) or “St. Domingo” (what Anglo-Americans often called it) before its independence in 1804. From the outset, Jefferson hoped that the slave uprising there would be crushed, eliminating a potential precedent for southern bondpersons. As Douglas R. Egerton writes in the chapter on Jefferson’s racial views in the recently published Cambridge Companion to Thomas Jefferson, “If Jefferson was resolute on any point, it was regarding his fear that slave rebelliousness in the Caribbean might spread to the southern mainland.” (3) This obsession caused him to instigate congressional embargoes against Haiti, first on U.S. arms sales in 1805 and a year later on all trade with Haiti, both contraband and noncontraband, a ban lasting from 1806 to 1809. In July 1801, at the outset of his presidency, he went so far as to blunderingly assure France’s charge d’affaires in the United States, Louis-Andre Pichon, that he would join First Consul Napoleon Bonaparte in “starv[ing] Toussaint” (that is, Toussaint Louverture, the great black leader of the revolution in Saint Domingue and its governor-general at the time), facilitating France’s reconquest of the rebellious colony. But Jefferson reversed himself when he ascertained that France intended to reoccupy Louisiana, a territory (especially its port of New Orleans) vital to the trade and expansion of the United States. Almost too late, Jefferson concluded that only Bonaparte’s defeat in Saint Domingue, the fulcrum of his projected revived New World empire, would lead him to abandon his scheme and sell the region to the United States. Consequently, Jefferson allowed U.S. merchants and arms traders to ship their goods to Saint Domingue’s rebels. He obviously cared more about the future of the United States than the fate of Saint Dominguans. (4) ” https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-255492680/jefferson-s-cannibals-revisited-a-closer-look-at
The Louisiana purchase was a “gift” to the USA and Jefferson from the “Cannibals of the terrible republic”, the free people of St-Domingue, as Jefferson contemptuously referred to them. History is full of ironies, the heroic resistance to enslavement ended up making one of the biggest slave owning nations a continental power! Allen Shaw’s simpleminded view of history deprives him of the capacity to appreciate the unintended consequences of actions. Mr. Shaw, next time you feel like contradicting me, do your homework first.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Allen Shaw: What in the seven rings of h3ll does it matter about 7, 10, 12 year old children being the age of consent it’s still disgusting. This says a lot about you. You are disgusting and a deplorable. Get out of here.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Solitaire: Allen Shaw’s post are disgusting to me about young children being of the age of consent. There is nothing normal about exploitation and the sexualization of young children.
LikeLike
@ Mary Burrell
Right, and although sexual exploitation is the ickiest part, there’s more to it. Back in those days, it was legal for a man to “physically chastize” his wife. So a child married to a grown man might also be subjected to frequent beatings, be expected to do the manual labor of a grown woman, and have multiple pregnancies while her own body is still in the process of growing (which can cause irreparable harm to her health).
This is exactly the type of life being lived by female children today in countries and cultures that still normalize such practices. When their stories come to light, they often report being physically abused on a regular basis by their husband and sometimes by other members of his family.
When female children and young teens from these countries are asked what they want, they don’t say they want to marry men two or three or five times their age. They generally say they want to go to school. They might also dream of having a particular toy to play with.
I don’t know why it is so hard for some men to make the cognitive leap to understand this is not something a young girl with options and freedom would choose for herself.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Solitaire: Like the Loch Ness monster and the Bigfoot no lies could be found in your comments. Patriarchy in is very dominant in many cultures and that is why women need to be allies to help educate young women to become educated and independent so a million up votes to your statements. I am learning that there are blind spots in many men in regard to women and their bodies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That PBS article Allen Shaw linked to says there are still underage girls in the U.S. being legally married to men as old as 60s and 70s. The woman whose story begins the article said her family was pressuring her into her marriage but no one in the legal system, including the judge who allowed it, ever asked her if this was what she wanted.
I have personally known college-age women who were being forced into marriage by their parents. I helped one to escape her physically abusive parents who were beating her and threatening to kill her if she didn’t marry the man they’d chosen for her. If young women of legal age find such pressure difficult to resist, how much harder must it be for a dependent minor child?
LikeLike
Gro Jo, PF Thought, and Solitaire
Greatly enjoy the information you guys have brought to this thread.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you my dear.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“United States Over the course of American history, the most commonly observed age of consent was 10 years. In 1880, 37 states had an age of consent of 10 years while 10 states kept an age of consent at 12, and Delaware maintained its age of consent at seven years, having lowered it from 10 in 1871.” – Allen Shaw
Allen, what in the world is going on with you? Is there something you’d like to tell us in regards to your personal feelings relative to Amerika’s historically dubious “age of consent” laws? Why do you keep harping on this subject matter?
For goodness’ sake! Don’t you see anything wrong with a middle-age man, such as your apparent hero Thomas Jefferson putting his rod between the legs of a 7, 9, 11 or even a 14 year-old such as Sally Hemings? Just because the law supported this type of behavior, does not mean it’s morally or socially correct.
Even further, to show you just how sick the collective white man is/was, slave boys were raped just as much if not more so than little girls. Here, most people would ask WHY would a boy been more susceptible to rape during slavery than a girl by a middle age white slave master. Well, the last time I checked, little boys do not get pregnant. Therefore, with a boy being the subject, the extreme low level of morality and sexual deviant act to a certain extent is forever concealed.
The evidence will then only manifest itself of these wicked slave masters through the continual act of slave a boy having been sexually violated repeatedly, is subsequently interested primarily, if not only, in middle age white men for both of their sexual gratification as opposed to being interested in a girl at the proper age. These deviant and immoral acts perpetrated by white men usually results in a social and biological construct that we refer to contemporarily as an African American homosexual (smh).
Moreover, the types of trauma that we as so-called African Americans have collectively suffered on physical and metaphysical levels are damaging enough. However, when one looks at what has happened to us on either a generational or a cellular level, lo and behold, this is where the epicenter of slavery is still most evident.
This is due to the instructions of our DNA forever being altered by the trauma of slavery, thereby, sending questionable instructions through our cells and then onto our off-springs, from one generation to the next.
Personally, and after conducting a little research, this is why I believe that this is the reason why we have so many homophobic African American men today. Most of them see only personal benefits in bending to the whims of predatory white males and perhaps ignore the power dynamics involved on a social and cellular level, since the days of slavery.
Allen, I also suggest that you conduct a little research on “epigenetic inheritance” at these two links as well. So yes, the genocidal and deviant acts committed by your slave holding forefather still has lasting effects even today, so says Darron T. Smith, PHD a black Professor at the University of Memphis, amongst many others as well.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/darron-t-smith-phd/the-epigenetics-of-being-_b_4094226.html
http://grandmotherafrica.com/study-group-african-americans-finds-trauma-slavery-passed-childrens-genes/
https://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/7/22/1225706/-Black-Homophobia
“Black historian sociologist Thomas Foster writes in a recent book that white molesters of black men represent sexual predators whose convoluted ignorance or invested racism is nefariously obsessed with a black males skin, hair and sexual organs. It should be understood most that adolescent sexual predators are heterosexual. The American Freedmen Inquiry Commission of 1863 reported that some heterosexual white men got a homoerotic charge from the brutal whipping of black male slaves. The media has shown a double standard when reporting on the contrasting manipulation between the racism and religious dimensions that describe physical consent for blacks and volatile violations for whites.” By Thomas Jasen, Dailykos (July 2013)
The raping of little boys by your forefathers is even biblically documented or prophesied as well. Here we go: Joel 3:3 “And they have cast lots for my people; and have given a boy for an harlot, and sold a girl for wine, that they might drink.”
A boy for a harlot? Really!
And, as to the sexual pervertedness of the collective white man, here we go: Hebrews 12:16 “Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau (white people), who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.”
Even after writing this post and coming to my own conclusions about you, I’d still rather have you stick around here at this blog. Why? Because personally, I see a whole lot of value in your posts and I hope others see the same value and come to the same denouement as well.
Selah!
LikeLike
Solitaire,
It seems Allen’s point is that if the law allows it, to some degree how can we judge wrongness and/or since the law allowed it how could we call it rape. His point is heavily rooted in the “law of the time” as it pertains to “right or wrong.” From an absolute technical and pure logical standpoint, there exists a KERNEL of truth in his perspective. And it seems that is enough for him.
But technicalities and pure logic will always be limiting because a lived life is complex and requires critical thinking not cause and effect thinking.
I think Shaw wants to point out that calling Jefferson a rapist based on our current law potentially biases us to his other contributions and may completely distort our view of him and again to a small degree he is correct. But he does this at the expense of appreciating a comprehensive view himself.
If laws are the barometer for behavior then that is the bare minimum of ethical actions. And one has to also ask, who in power makes the laws, is it fair, who benefits, who doesn’t benefit and who and what has been the impact of the law.
LikeLike
I have nothing to add. But what an interesting thread. Thanks everyone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the post Abagond. I saw this in the news the past few days and having doing a little reading on what was known about Sally.
Don’t understand why there is still a discussion of who the baby daddy is. Jefferson was a hypocrite who wrote about freedom for all and then went home to his big mansion on the hill where he kept raping his slave and owning human beings. Said one thing and did another.
If some people can’t face what Jefferson did than they will never take responsibility for the country’s history. There is NO justification.
Sally didn’t DECIDE to return back to the US from Paris. She was held hostage, her brother was with her in Paris plus her sisters and brothers were back here inthe US slaving away at the Corporate Plantation. If she ran away Jefferson would have split up her family and sold them all. She was Not in an “arrangement” she was trying to survive.
I feel that sometimes when people think of Black people they disable their human compassion program.
Turning lurk mode back on! Thanks!
LikeLike
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/in-fight-over-child-marriage-laws-states-resist-calls-for-a-total-ban/
The above article is my second attempt to reach you much higher educated and way more moral individuals then I.
I have provided you with current laws and information. What this article is about is taking place NOW!
Do something about the current laws and failures to comply with the current (NOW) laws instead of talking and grandstanding about a dead man.
Read the article!
As for anyone’s opinion about dead people it is their choice. That is why we have President Trump. People hated President Obama and Mrs Clinton.
LikeLike
@ Allen Shaw
Your last comment is classic goal post shifting which Abagond described in this hidden gem of a post:
Come to think of it, you have pulled all of those maneuvers out of your hat in this thread.
LOL!
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
How do you get those little pencils into your comments?
LikeLike
@ Abagond
I use a an iMac that has a full range of characters such as emoji, bullets, stars, symbols and pictographs built into the OS. On my computer they can be accessed in the character viewer that is in the menu bar of the desktop.
This article shows several methods for inserting special characters on a Mac:
https://www.tekrevue.com/tip/insert-emojis-mac/
LikeLike
One last thing there is an awful commercial on televison from Ancestor.com. There is a black man looking foolish and blathering on about how he is so proud of his nose because he inherited it from Jefferson and the camera pans in on him looking goofy and admiringly at the portrait of Thomas Jefferson. That is such a WTF moment for me.
LikeLike
Blakksage,
“The deviant and immoral acts perpetuated by white men usually results in a social and biological construct that we refer to as an African-American homosexual.”
Wait a minute, did you just blame, specifically African-American homosexuality on rape during slavery? And then double down on it by correlating that with, again specifically African-American homophobia. Besides the implication that causality of homosexuality is somehow different between races, which you would have to resolve with the myth of biological racism, you make some amazing logical leaps. Not wanting to take this thread into a different topic:
I will just say when it comes to trauma and stress study the diathesis-stress model as it relates to expressions of traumatic symptoms. At face value genes predispose us, we need the “right” kind of environment to activate and potentially express these predispositions hence the epigenetics.
And epigenetic influence works in the positive as well so this forever altering of our DNA would also mean that the “effects of slavery,” can be altered. And this is before we even get into heritability of genes.
All this, and before you would even start attempting to reconcile homosexuality in other ethnic groups, and/or in people who have not faced equally traumatic generational trauma.
PF-T
LikeLike
Sally Hemings was the property of Jefferson. She was his chattel. The type of slavery practiced in this country was chattel slavery. Jefferson could do whatever he wanted with his property whenever he wanted: rent her, sell her, trade her, beat her, use her to reproduce other slaves, use her as a nurse maid, kill her, etc. She was his property. Sally Heming’s age and/or gender was of no consequence other than to satisfy the wishes of her owner(s). She was his property. Slaves were actual property. Slaves could be bought, sold, traded, inherited, rented, etc. Slave owners were taxed. If Jefferson wanted, he could have made Sally Hemings a eunuch. Sally had two choices and the word ‘NO’ was not one of them. In other words, Sally had to submit or die.
LikeLike
Allen,
“Do something about the current laws.”
Truth. At the minimum we could all contact our reps in our states if/when bills are introduced. The article was informative.
LikeLike
@PF Thought made the following statements regarding my previous post:
“Wait a minute, did you just blame, specifically African-American homosexuality on rape during slavery? And then double down on it by correlating that with, again specifically African-American homophobia.” – PF Thought
Uhmmm, …YES, this took place after reading the provided links. If you extrapolated something different from the articles, so be it. And if you dissent with what was written, take it up with the Professors who wrote it, … not me!
“You make some amazing logical leaps. Not wanting to take this thread into a different topic:” – PF Thought
Thank you! I surmise that one could make “amazing logical leaps” when one possess a heightened sense of discernment. However, not so much when one truly lack understanding.
“Besides the implication that causality of homosexuality is somehow different between races, which you would have to resolve with the myth of biological racism.” PF Thought
Pardon me, I never stated or even insinuated anything about the other races with regards to homophobic desires or what may be or entail their causative factor(s). Moreover, when I wrote that post, I had no concerns whatsoever about the other races as it relates to the subject at hand. In fact, here it is twenty four hours later and my level of concern for the “other races” that you speak of remains hovering at level zero.
I state unabashedly and emphatically that I am not concerned about the other races because they aren’t concerned about us. It’s sort of like Malcolm X’s “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a head for a head and a life for a life” statement.
“And epigenetic influence works in the positive as well so this forever altering of our DNA would also mean that the “effects of slavery,” can be altered.” – PF Thought
LOL, smh and doodling! Again, I never stated that the trauma of slavery/epigenetics couldn’t be reversed. How could we as a people even begin to contemplate the rolling back of inherited genetics when the environment of Black people as a whole isn’t that much better than when we as a people were supposedly emancipated? Most certainly the social gradient has been lessened but nonetheless, we are still an oppressed people in dire straits, whether you fail to recognize it or not.
“And this is before we even get into heritability of genes.” – PF Thought
Even further, epigenetics under traumatic conditions/environment are actually inherited when “continued into the fourth generation.”
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/inheritance/ On average or in most instances, so-called African Americans are either four, five, six generations removed from slavery depending on whether one utilizes 25 or 30 years factor to calculate. Additionally, it will also depend upon how far back an individual could trace their lineage as well.
Hard bondage in Amerika covered the time period from approximately 1619 to around 1865, when Lincoln’s so-called Emancipation Proclamation was announced. Hell, …this time period alone is sufficient enough for the daily psyche ache and environmental trauma of slavery to have so greatly impacted our genes that the genes are now heritable, hence, “epigenetic inheritance.”
“All this, and before you would even start attempting to reconcile homosexuality in other ethnic groups, and/or in people who have not faced equally traumatic generational trauma.” – PF Thought
Perhaps you misunderstood me, therefore, I’ll repeat and be frank once again: I AM NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE OTHER RACES! Had I been interested, the links provided would’ve mentioned them as well, but it didn’t and that’s exactly why I chose those specific links because they weren’t mentioned. Besides, the other races weren’t enslaved and if they were, the social order was much different and the period of enslavement was much shorter and perhaps something much less than hard bondage.
Hey, just because you comprehended something different from the above mentioned articles that were authored by seasoned Professors, nonetheless, don’t push your nonsense onto me!
Whew, … rolling my eyes in a state of disgust!
LikeLike
Epigenetic imprinting sounds fascinating, and sexuality is mentioned as a trait influenced by this part of embryonic development, but purely physical traits being modified like this are still in the hypothesis stages, from what i can tell.
Do animals have innate behaviors? Yes? Is there a psychic imprint on an embryo? Through epigenetic tags? Uhh….
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/imprinting/
It’s interesting but somewhat technical.
LikeLike
Blakksage,
“If you dissent with what was written, take it up with the Professors.”
This issue was not the articles it was your interpretation of them. Your self professed interpretation, and I quote:
“Personally and after conducting a little research, this is why I beleive that this is the reason why we have so many homophobic African American men today… and “These deviant and immoral acts perpetuated by white men usually results in a social and biological construst that we refer to contemporarily as an African American homosexual (smh).”
And about, “Your heightened sense of discernment.”
You convey a passionate and caring dispositon toward our people. That is admirable and much needed. Yet, in this instance you’ve shown a racial filter that biases your perspective of which you state, you are okay with. We all have biases, but if you are okay with them then you aren’t doing empirical research, it is only self-serving.
So I will allow your “heightened sense of discernement,” to decide if there is any truth to that statement.
“I have no concerns whatsoever about other races.”
That is apparent. Herein lies your “research” issue as it pertains to homosexuality. If you state a cause in African-Americans at the expense of other ethnic groups, you would have to explain the difference in causation between ethnic groups (we are one species remember).
This doesn’t account for the causation of homosexuality prior to Amerian Slavery or the fact that what WE would describe as homosexual behavior being exemplified in other species or how women become lesbians. But I digress….
“I never stated that trauma of slavery/epigentics couldn’t be reversed.”
No you didn’t, you just left it ambiguous enough to be open to interpretation, while still using it to support your perspective. I presented information that would challenge your perspective which gave clarification.
And yes we are still an oppressed people and many of us are still in these survival environments. Yet another big influence on epigenetics is how an individual responds to these environments. Or to quote the article from your link:
“Researchers face the added challenge that epigenetic changes are transient by nature. That is, the epigenome changes more rapidly the the relatively fixed DNA code. An epigenetic change that was triggered by environmental conditions may be reversed when enviromental conditions again change.”
If I grow up to move out of said environment and have a individual disposition that doesn’t trigger the activation of these epi-tags, then my offspring may not even be predisposed to them or new tags are created that predispose a more resilient and positive influence that is then passed on generationally. Intriguing and exciting, but the science is still in its infancy so we have to temper our logical leaps.
You stated: “Even further, epigenetics under traumatic conditions/environment are actually inherited when “continued into the fourth generation.”
Blakksage, your bias is shoooowing again. Correlation doesn’t equal causation. It isn’t just a catch phrase, it is meant to be a barrier to our research biases.
The part that you selectively quote, is actually part of the section in YOUR link whose headlines reads: The Challenges of Proving Epigentic Inheritance.”
Researchers state: [They need] to show that the epigentic effect can pass through generations to rule out the possibility of direct exposure… In order to provide a convincing case for epigentic inheritance, an epigenetic change must be observed in the 4th generation.”
That is the challenge, your present it as proof in your post.
PF-T
LikeLike
@PF-T,
Ok, thanks for the reply! (intermittent chuckles while still doodling)
LikeLiked by 1 person
@PF Thought: I enjoy your commentary. I hope you continue to contribute to this forum.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@PF Thought
Detailed and well thought out; a pleasure to read.
P.S. Ditto what Mary Burrell wrote above.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks. I will. I guess I’ve been a “lurker” for a while but that’s partly because I like to observe and learn first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@PF-T said: “If I grow up to move out of said environment and have a individual disposition that doesn’t trigger the activation of these epi-tags, then my offspring may not even be predisposed to them or new tags are created that predispose a more resilient and positive influence that is then passed on generationally.” PF-T
PF-T, that’s a pretty clever response, however, your reductionist response went way too far. For exemplification, even if so-called African Americans during slavery had the opportunity to escape the slave master’s whip, sexual and other physical abuses on the plantation, you’d still have to consider how many previous generations of his family line were impacted by the traumatic environment of slavery prior to the escape. His or her genetic markers aren’t erased simply because the offspring is in a better environment.
And for argument’s sake, let’s say a group of them did in fact escape the horrors of the plantation. The event of escaping the plantation still doesn’t clear or relieve them in any way of not having been biologically predisposed to already being epi-tagged. Therefore, it’s not as clear cut as you put it, “then my offspring may not even be predisposed to them or new tags are created that predispose a more resilient and positive influence that is then passed on generationally.”
LOL! You may continue to sell this skeletal argument but personally, I’m not buying it.
“Intriguing and exciting, but the science is still in its infancy so we have so we have to temper our logical leaps.” Here, I will not curb my logic or critical thinking and here is why:
“Dr. Rachel Yehuda, professor of psychiatry at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, has conducted a depth of research into epigenetics and the intergenerational transmission of trauma. In layman’s terms, she is researching how serious incidents of trauma (i.e. slavery, holocaust, etc.) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can be passed down through generations in shared family genes. Her research has revealed that when people experience trauma, it changes their genes in a very specific and noticeable way, so when those people have children and their genes are passed down to their children, the children also inherit the genes affected by trauma.” http://www.teenvogue.com/story/slavery-trauma-inherited-genetics
Here, you may as well discard your anecdote above because Dr. Yehuda just stated the very opposite of what you were hoping for. Even further, it’s not that your child will potentially be reared in a more hospitable environment and therefore, not subjected to being epi-tagged. But more importantly, it’s the genetic markers that you and your partner subsequently pass onto the child through genetic chimera, not the more accommodating or amenable environment that you place the offspring within.
Even if I was to accept your individualistic anecdote above, you must still answer the following question: How long were you in the traumatic environment; your parents; your parents’ matriarch and patriarch and so on and so forth?
You stated: “Even further, epigenetics under traumatic conditions/environment are actually inherited when “continued into the fourth generation.”
Huh, … if I was to be standing near a railroad and heard some rumbling, personally, I wouldn’t assume that a Volkswagen Beetle is about to pass by, but would automatically assume that more than likely, it’s a locomotive train that hasn’t come into view as of yet.
I believe somewhat of the same thing is happening here, such as it was with the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis where 399 Black men were intentionally infected and the North Carolina Eugenics Board where over 7,00 so-called African Americans were needlessly sterilized.
My point being, any subject matter that clearly brings forth and reveal the mean spirited nature that involved any medical, biological or eugenics study, that will tend to shine a spot light on Amerika’s brutal history against us as a people, the system proceed cautiously and repeatedly attempt to downplay any wrongdoing and thereby, avoid liability.
Researchers state: [They need] to show that the epigentic effect can pass through generations to rule out the possibility of direct exposure… In order to provide a convincing case for epigentic inheritance, an epigenetic change must be observed in the 4th generation.” That is the challenge, your present it as proof in your post.
However, the researchers you speak of are from only one of the provided link. There are tons of data that say unequivocally that epigenetics does pass downward from generation to generation.
Indeed, I posted three links in my previous post and one additional reference on this post regarding epigenetics, but apparently, you only referred or read only one. You appear to be an educated person and I’m quite certain that you were taught to provide at least three references regarding your research topic. Therefore, conduct some more research and before reaching a premature or erroneous conclusion.
Moreover, the vast majority of those in almost lily white academia are notoriously trepid when the subject of slavery in Amerika comes up. Therefore, you must read a balance of liberally written and those that would be considered conservatively written when considering the subject of epigenetics as is the case with any subject matter, especially when considering this country’s draconian behavior.
North Carolina Eugenics Board
Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment
LikeLike
@blakksage I read your comment and I believe you are saying that the conditions I am living under now will be passed on to my family.
If my children are born when I am young and inexperienced, how do I pass these “genes on”?
I would like to know if this only applies to slavery or does it apply to all humans?
If it applies to all humans are the studies being conducted taking into account all of the human tragedy that has existed all over the world?
Has a study been conducted of such tragic life or is it a fact that slavery in the period 1490 to 1865 in the Americas was vastly different then any other living conditions all over the world in the past?
What happens as we mix the blood of individuals and slowly do away with the so called white blood, which It appears may not be impacted by such tragedies?
I would not normally read such articles as yours because they are far above my level of comprehension. So forgive me for asking what might be a dumb question.
LikeLike
Blakksage,
“That’s a pretty clever response, however, your reductionist response went way too far.”
Not sure how you interpreted that as a reductionist perspective, it was a counterbalance to the idea that trauma, epitags and generational inheritance only flows one way.
My argument was not that it is erased, it was that these gene mutations can be altered in the positive; say promoting factors that foster resilience thus passing those particular tags to successive generations.
Or as this study on resilience and epigenetics states:
These findings underscore the view that resilience is not simply the absence of maladaptive changes that occur in vulnerable individuals; rather, it is mediated by a unique set of adaptive changes…
And:
Behavioral variability is generated in individuals, better preparing the species for a host of possible environmental challenges. According to this scheme, random epigenetic changes that drive resilience would promote survival during periods of extreme duress, whereas those associated with vulnerability would generate animals that cope better in times of plenty.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2833107/
Or maybe a clinical perspective would be more salient., “If the intergenerational transmission of trauma can help scientists understand the mechanics of risk and resilience, they may be able to offer hope not just for individuals but also for entire communities as they struggle to cast off the shadow of the past.”
https://newrepublic.com/article/120144/trauma-genetic-scientists-say-parents-are-passing-ptsd-kids
One more, I couldn’t resist :-). You appreciate Dr. Yehuda so maybe her words will move you:
“The message is straightforward: mothers who are stressed during pregnancy can program the stress response of their offspring, in utero, and the offspring accommodates somehow to the level of stress hormone. That has become a very important issue also in our intergenerational studies. It has become one viable mechanism through which mothers may “transmit” different vulnerabilities (or RESILIENCE) to their offspring.
http://blogs.plos.org/blog/2016/06/08/cortisol-the-intergenerational-transmission-of-stress-and-ptsd-an-interview-with-dr-rachel-yehuda/
You said: “Here, you may as well discard your anecdote above because Dr. Yehuda just stated the very opposite of what you were hoping for.”
No she did not. In fact she has not compared the opposite . She is showing the connection between trauma, biology and gene-environment interactions. That cannot not be misunderstood or overly-misinterpreted. The work she does is needed, admirable, and complex on it’s own without bringing in erroneous correlational theories of homosexuality (of which you have moved on from, thankfully) or things such as Post-traumatic slave syndrome.
You said: “You must still answer the following question: How long were you in the traumatic environment; your parents; your parents’ matriarch and patriarch and so on and so forth?”
To my knowledge and in reading up on Dr. Yehuda, traumatic predisposition isn’t predicated upon the length of generational transmission (GT). Taking it back as far as we could trace our parental or ethnic lineage may offer cultural, social, individual and family explanations and understanding. Biologically speaking, one generation removed would be enough to raise the predisposition (30-35% twin studies) for the development of PTSD. But remember predisposition cannot be undervalued because as Yehuda states:
“… Once there was a body of literature that showed that a lot of people are trauma exposed and only a smaller subset of those people get PTSD, the field could start speculating that perhaps low cortisol signals an abnormality that helps explain why recovery has not occurred.”
You said: “LOL! You may continue to sell this skeletal argument but personally, I’m not buying it.”
Lest you forget, my position wasn’t attempting to prove a particular point, it was to challenge yours and reign in your interpretive overreach. I did read your other articles (and learned from them as well), and I see that evidence is building (for a mechanism that I believe happens and is relevant). The reason I presented my argument as such (in that post) is because at face value that thread did not mention the other posts so again, it could have been easily interpreted as proof.
It is pertinent to understand that Dr. Yehuda is studying the correlations of cortisol levels, trauma, PTSD and GT. PTSD and trauma have specific psychological definitions/meanings and that directly relates to the evidence Dr. Yehuda presents. Generalizing can be misleading. In her follow-up study on Holocaust victims, it was shown that lower cortisol excretion in offspring was dependent upon both parents being affected by PTSD.
And I agree with you about white Academia’s response to studies such as these. And I hope it smashes their worldviews and makes them uncomfortable. But I mean come on, you start talking evidence of generational trauma they probably starting thinking blame and reparations, but that’s political.
On the individual, social and ethnic front, that teen vogue article you linked to has a tag line that states, “You can get PTSD from your ancestors.” To which I state, HELL NO, do not pass go, do not collect $200.00, go straight to jail.
Historically speaking we seek/need to understand ourselves (our people), but it is at worst dangerous and at best irresponsible to imply/promote the idea of determinism (think social Darwinism), potential learned helplessness or that we are slaves to our genes. We need informed empowerment. Intergenerational transmission can provide that when used in context and properly understood.
And I even met the three reference quota, LOL.
PF-T
LikeLike
Allen Shaw,
You stated: “What happens as we mix the blood of individuals and slowly do away with the so called white blood, which It appears may not be impacted by such tragedies?”
and
“If it applies to all humans are the studies being conducted taking into account all of the human tragedy that has existed all over the world?”
Tragedies are tragedies. The impact of these tragedies is what is being study as it pertains to vulnerabilities to trauma (genetic and psychological) and our response to these tragedies with respects to expression of trauma symptoms or lack there of. It should be noted that the majority of people who have faced tragic situations (all of us have to some degree) do not develop symptoms of trauma or PTSD (psychologically speaking).
Now I don’t know that the heck this white blood, black blood stuff is and maybe that was meant in jest (damn electronics blunting sarcasm) , but if it was meant with any ounce of seriousness then the answer would be no. Biologically (Yehuda study about cortisol level and stress response) and conjecturally.
@Blakksage can answer the rest.
PF-T
LikeLike
@PF-Thought “Now I don’t know that the heck this white blood, black blood stuff is and maybe that was meant in jest (damn electronics blunting sarcasm)”
Now we do have some believe that after one of the waves of individuals moved north from Africa they were impacted with some serious living conditions and they also may have merged with the Neanderthal who were an even earlier and maybe less evolved specie. So there is a difference in the blood (white or whatever you choose to call it) They are no longer sure about the development of the Neanderthal.
I believe sickle cell is an African trait and not very common or in existence in Europeans (about 1 in 13 African American babies is born with sickle cell trait. About 1 in every 365 black children is born with sickle cell disease.)
Denial is not a part of any study!
LikeLike
Hey Allen,
I’m don’t think merged with the neanderthal would be accurate. Neanderthal would have evolved from prior human species with common ancestor to us modern humans. There is no question in development of Neanderthal, some of homo sapiens still carry traces of their dna considering we interbred.
Sickle cell not an African trait. It is find in Asian, Mediterranean as week as area like Greece. The common link is the presence of malaria.
The only “difference” in blood is carrying of the gene or gene trait.
PF-T
LikeLike
@blakksage I read your comment and I believe you are saying that the conditions I am living under now will be passed on to my family.
Yes Allen, you are correct, from what I’ve read, any type of environmental stress or trauma that the parents were greatly impacted by are eventually passed to their offspring through biological material.
Allen Shaw asked: If my children are born when I am young and inexperienced, how do I pass these “genes on”?
Genes are passed on through or at the point of sexual reproduction via a process called genetic chimera. In other words, a small portion of genetic makeup from both mating partners involved, are then passed on to the children.
Allen Shaw asked: I would like to know if this only applies to slavery or does it apply to all humans?
I believe the process of epigenetics is universal and applies to all human beings. We as human beings/races, were all forced to live under traumatic experiences at one point or another, some of us, more so and for a longer periods than others. I believe scientists use America’s slavery period because as an excellent model due to its longitudinal length, approximately 400 years to study the altering of genes due to the brutality exacted against so-called African Americans, including the intensity of our traumatic experience and how future generations are biologically and emotionally impacted.
Allen Shaw asked: If it applies to all humans are the studies being conducted taking into account all of the human tragedy that has existed all over the world?
Yes, it applies to all people who have been through traumatic experiences. For example, scientists conducted a study on the Dutch Famine. This traumatic environmental lasted merely from November 1944 – May 1945, a mere six months. Research was subsequently conducted on the health of children who was born during this time period and they found that the children were in fact epi-tagged or that their genes had been altered for such a short period of trauma when compared to America’s slavery time period. The study revealed that the children born under these conditions were much more susceptible to developing diabetes and cardiac arrest at some later point in their life when compared to other children not born during this time frame.
“Rations were as low as 400-800 calories a day; less than a quarter of the recommended adult caloric intake” and thus, low birth weight thereby, gene expression resulting in the diseases mentioned above. /// http://www.dutchfamine.nl/index_files/study.htm
Allen Shaw asked: Has a study been conducted of such tragic life or is it a fact that slavery in the period 1490 to 1865 in the Americas was vastly different then any other living conditions all over the world in the past?
Yes, the Dutch Famine mentioned above and that lasted merely six months, but yet, the offspring that suffered utero or “in the womb” stress were clearly sufficient enough to affect the offspring at birth, but not manifest themselves until later in life (Diabetes and Cardiac arrest).
Allen Shaw asked: What happens as we mix the blood of individuals and slowly do away with the so called white blood, which It appears may not be impacted by such tragedies?
First and foremost, I am by no means an expert, but what I could glean from studying the subject is this: During sexual reproduction, genetic material or genetic chimera from both individuals involved are passed to the offspring(s). Therefore, if either one of the parents of the involved mates suffered some type of intergenerational, traumatic/social environmental, it only seems logical that some genetic markers from previous generations were passed down from the single parent that was originally epi-tagged in the first instance.
Allen Shaw asked: I would not normally read such articles as yours because they are far above my level of comprehension. So forgive me for asking what might be a dumb question.
No, these are not what I would consider dumb. I consider this to be the case with people who read only one article pertaining to the subject matter and subsequently pretend to be an expert.
@PF-T said: “it was a counterbalance to the idea that trauma, epitags and generational inheritance only flows one way.”
OMG, by reading only one article, this is what you term a “counterbalance”? OK, I’m fine with that, therefore suit yourself.
Not once did I state that inheritance flows in one direction. To me, the problem here is that you continue to put “other races” into the equation but for me, my responses have always rested with only the concerns of so-called African Americans. I am quite certain that you UNABLE point to a single incident that would necessarily reverse entirely the impact that the traumatic effects of 400 years of slavery have completely wiped-out and therefore, reversed the consequences thereof as a group.
Selah!
LikeLike
@blakksage Thank you for your response. The use of the 400 years of slavery is based on the total human mistreatment of slaves. My understanding of that 400 years includes mainly the people living in the Caribbean Sea Area and Central and South America, since slavery in the United States began in 1621 and ended in 1865.
Most of my reading of the US period show a variation in treatment with many slaves living in the homes of the owners. My latest reading was there were far less plantation owners then their were owner of a few slaves. There were black slave owners in some number and there history has not as yet been totally documented as to the treatment they meted out.
I lived in England for 3 years and my landlord often explained to me the relationship of the land owners and gentry and the peasants who lived on the land. I wonder if the studies that are being conducted have considered the peasants (poor) of Europe and Asia since their treatment was the bases for the way slaves in the US were treated.
I will be long gone before this study is complete, however I offer the thought that the narrative of the American slave has been well documented; however the balance of the world has been ignored. Using a small period (Dutch Famine) as the comparison of treatment instead of the long term treatment of serfs and peasant and other humans, at the bottom of the barrel, of the world seems odd.
Once again, I have read many article and remember very few; however my sum total of reading has left me with the opinion that as horrible as slavery was, it is no different than man has been doing for thousands of years.
Joe Biden “It all depends on whose ox is being gored”!
LikeLike
Blakksage,
“I consider this to be the case with people who read only one article pertaining to the subject matter and subsequently pretend to be an expert.”
You are amusing, you have me over here smiling in amusement.
@PF-T said: “it was a counterbalance to the idea that trauma, epitags and generational inheritance only flows one way. OMG, by reading only one article, this is what you term a “counterbalance”? OK, I’m fine with that, therefore suit yourself.”
One article? I’m sure I linked to at least 3 articles in the last post-if we are counting. Your presumption here rests in that you know your own level of education in this area, but assume mine; you know that old saying about making assumptions right?
Let me be clear, I am not an expert in the area of genetics. The exact processes and mechanisms within genetic study can be overwhelming. I do have education on the subject matter of epigenetics and intergenerational trauma prior to your post, academically and autodidactly. It is a fascinating subject.
“I am quite certain that you UNABLE point to a single incident that would necessarily reverse entirely the impact that the traumatic effects of 400 years of slavery have completely wiped-out and therefore, reversed the consequences thereof as a group.”
Now that truly was a sly attempt at shifting the burden of proof.
Remember this started with you bringing up IGT and the effects of it as it relates to African-American homosexuality and African-American trauma today. I will take the bait, though not before pointing out:
First your statement is illogical. You are asking for a single incident to reverse all trauma for a group of people in its entirety. It would be like me stating a single session of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), will reverse all PTSD for all Vietnam Vets, not only in experience but genetically speaking as well. Seems like an overreach doesn’t it?
Secondly, your statement reveals that you still conflate predisposition to trauma with experience of trauma. Furthermore, if prior traumatic experience and IGT, only accounts for say 30% predisposition to PTSD, That means 70% of similar cases did not develop PTSD? But I digress.
And now the bait:
As I mentioned in a previous post and aforementioned above, this field and its secrets are still revealing itself, so you are correct I cannot provide EXACTLY what you ask. We both know IGT has taken a long time to be accepted, so studies on if/how to reverse the effects or protective factors are going to take sometime to catch up (research tends to be pathological focused).
But,
If you only need a single incident pointing to a proposed mechanism:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160623120307.htm
To summarize, “This is the first evidence that positive environmental factors can correct behavioral alterations which would otherwise be transmitted to the offspring. The symptoms and their reversal are associated with epigenetic regulation of the glucocorticoid receptor gene.”
Blakksage, guess what hormone the glucocorticoid receptor gene regulates? That would be cortisol, of which Dr. Yehuda has been researching.
@Blakksage stated: “To me, the problem here is that you continue to put “other races” into the equation but for me, my responses have always rested with only the concerns of so-called African Americans.”
When referring to causation of homosexuality within African-Americans, it would be alogical not to refer to other “races.” This has a direct influence on your hypothesis (same species remember). In this regard your concern does not supersede the needed explanation, plus your theory was lacking in coherent explication.
Unless of course you dichotomize it and go with the choice option, which would poke holes in your theory as well. Or I guess you could try mental illness or anxiety disorder (given the experienced trauma) but the APA in 1973 and 1987 (DSM) may have an issue with that too.
When referring to trauma in African-Americans, well your personal concerns are noted and dare I say okay. Who will care about us more than ourselves?
Let me be clear, slavery, Jim crow era, religious justifications, the continuing fight for civil rights have dealt our people a unbelievably tough hand; now throwing in, it’s in our genes without truly clarifying and appreciating what that means for the past and the future, well lets just say that is irresponsible. No matter who you want to blame for it.
PF-T
LikeLike