Was Thomas Jefferson a rapist?

[Symmetry]

An interesting trio of posts.

[_sabotage_]

I just can't imagine how this got to 27 pages...

[Phatscotty]

The truth of the matter is, we are missing almost ALL of the most important information concerning the issue, so it's pure speculation to pretend to know one way or the other if it was rape. To this day barely a letter between Jefferson and Hemmings is known (publicly), but we do know that Jefferson wrote all her brothers and they wrote Jefferson, extensively so it's safe to assume many letters went back and forth between Jefferson and Hemmings.

I think it's best looked at, all things considered, as to whether or not they loved each other. The fact that she cried by his side as he took his last breath suggests to me she did have feelings for him. Feelings of love and affection.

And without Jefferson' words "all men are created equal" we wouldn't even be having this conversation, and the East India Company would still be sailing out of Britain to rape and pillage the entire continent of Africa and India and forcing slaves and tea and textiles and opium upon their colonies.

[Symmetry]

I just can't imagine how this got to 27 pages...

Apparently some folk are labouring under the impression that having sex with a 14 year old you own as a slave is not something to be condemned if it's legal at the time.

[_sabotage_]

I think Abraham getting Sarah pregnant at 99, now that should be condemned.

[Ray Rider]

Damn better be, I'm not planning on a divorce.

lol

The truth of the matter is, we are missing almost ALL of the most important information concerning the issue, so it's pure speculation to pretend to know one way or the other if it was rape. To this day barely a letter between Jefferson and Hemmings is known (publicly), but we do know that Jefferson wrote all her brothers and they wrote Jefferson, extensively so it's safe to assume many letters went back and forth between Jefferson and Hemmings.

I think it's best looked at, all things considered, as to whether or not they loved each other. The fact that she cried by his side as he took his last breath suggests to me she did have feelings for him. Feelings of love and affection.

And without Jefferson' words "all men are created equal" we wouldn't even be having this conversation, and the East India Company would still be sailing out of Britain to rape and pillage the entire continent of Africa and India and forcing slaves and tea and textiles and opium upon their colonies.

lol woa, where are you getting all this information about Jefferson writing the Hemmings brothers extensively or Sally crying by his deathbed or TJ spending 234 francs on her in a shopping trip?

[Symmetry]

I think Abraham getting Sarah pregnant at 99, now that should be condemned.

Good for you.

[Phatscotty]

Damn better be, I'm not planning on a divorce.

lol

The truth of the matter is, we are missing almost ALL of the most important information concerning the issue, so it's pure speculation to pretend to know one way or the other if it was rape. To this day barely a letter between Jefferson and Hemmings is known (publicly), but we do know that Jefferson wrote all her brothers and they wrote Jefferson, extensively so it's safe to assume many letters went back and forth between Jefferson and Hemmings.

I think it's best looked at, all things considered, as to whether or not they loved each other. The fact that she cried by his side as he took his last breath suggests to me she did have feelings for him. Feelings of love and affection.

And without Jefferson' words "all men are created equal" we wouldn't even be having this conversation, and the East India Company would still be sailing out of Britain to rape and pillage the entire continent of Africa and India and forcing slaves and tea and textiles and opium upon their colonies.

lol woa, where are you getting all this information about Jefferson writing the Hemmings brothers extensively or Sally crying by his deathbed or TJ spending 234 francs on her in a shopping trip?

The Boyd Papers and Jefferson's own Holland Journal


He also spent 240 Francs to a Dr. Sutton for Sally's smallpox innoculation, set her up in her own home, and gave her a weekly "allowance".

This and a lot more can be found in the letter-index volumes that recorded Jefferson's incoming and outgoing letters for the year 1788. It's a 43 year epistolary record, also indexed by Boyd.

[Symmetry]

Damn better be, I'm not planning on a divorce.

lol

The truth of the matter is, we are missing almost ALL of the most important information concerning the issue, so it's pure speculation to pretend to know one way or the other if it was rape. To this day barely a letter between Jefferson and Hemmings is known (publicly), but we do know that Jefferson wrote all her brothers and they wrote Jefferson, extensively so it's safe to assume many letters went back and forth between Jefferson and Hemmings.

I think it's best looked at, all things considered, as to whether or not they loved each other. The fact that she cried by his side as he took his last breath suggests to me she did have feelings for him. Feelings of love and affection.

And without Jefferson' words "all men are created equal" we wouldn't even be having this conversation, and the East India Company would still be sailing out of Britain to rape and pillage the entire continent of Africa and India and forcing slaves and tea and textiles and opium upon their colonies.

lol woa, where are you getting all this information about Jefferson writing the Hemmings brothers extensively or Sally crying by his deathbed or TJ spending 234 francs on her in a shopping trip?

Francs - According to letter from Jefferson to Madison Hemmings, September 6th 1789 (Boyd Papers) and Jefferson own Holland Journal


He also spent 240 Francs to a Dr. Sutton for Sally's smallpox innoculation, set her up in her own home, and gave her a weekly "allowance".

This and a lot more can be found in the letter-index volumes that recorded Jefferson's incoming and outgoing letters for the year 1788. It's a 43 year epistolary record, also indexed by Boyd.

Given that James Madison Hemings was born in 1805 I find it unlikely that he was the addressee of the 1789 letter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_Hemings

You're with ray and stahr on the fake timeline.

[Phatscotty]

it's not fake. You don't know what you're talking about, and you jumped to an answer that only seems to suit your agenda for the moment. Perhaps if you looked for the truth instead of what you want the truth to be, you wouldn't be doubling down on sticking your foot in your mouth.

Keep looking. You can start with the Boyd Papers....not Wikipedia

You do have a point though. Where as I was giving the source off the top of my head, the source as I have it only reads "Jefferson to Madison" not "Madison Hemmings"

Anything else other than my grammar or a seemingly temporary technicality to edify your opinion on Jefferson?

Question for you, being such an expert on countries that are not your own and you don't understand about a person in the 1700's. Have you read any of Madison Hemmings letters?

[Symmetry]

It's not a letter to the person you claimed it was to? What a shock!

[Phatscotty]

It's not a letter to the person you claimed it was to? What a shock!

It's a journal entry and some letters that show how many Francs Jefferson spent on who or for what. The way I personally describe that letter does not change it's content or it's existence, nor does who it was addressed to or whether I spell the name right. It's not a shock that this is what you're clinging to (nothing to do with the topic or the source), and proves you're trolling.

[Symmetry]

It's not a letter to the person you claimed it was to? What a shock!

the letter I sourced is a real letter and was written. The way I personally describe that letter does not change it's content or it's existence. It's not a shock that this is what your are clinging to (nothing to do with the topic or the source), and proves you're trolling.

I'm not sure how a letter you claim to be from Jefferson to his son, which you indicated justified the rape, is somehow free from scrutiny.

the letter I sourced is a real letter and was written.

Congrats, that's genuinely a higher standard of argument than I expect of you.

[Phatscotty]

It's not a letter to the person you claimed it was to? What a shock!

the letter I sourced is a real letter and was written. The way I personally describe that letter does not change it's content or it's existence. It's not a shock that this is what your are clinging to (nothing to do with the topic or the source), and proves you're trolling.

I'm not sure how a letter you claim to be from Jefferson to his son, which you indicated justified the rape, is somehow free from scrutiny.

the letter I sourced is a real letter and was written.

Congrats, that's genuinely a higher standard of argument than I expect of you.

I said it wasn't to his son.

troll on about how it was

[BigBallinStalin]

And so it resumes.

[Phatscotty]

It's about the Francs, and what they were spent on.

Try to stay focused (that is, if you really care about the topic matter and want to talk about it honestly)

[Symmetry]

And so it resumes.

I'm surprised at how long this has gone on too. PS came back from another one of his bans for trolling though. What can you do?

[Phatscotty]

Damn better be, I'm not planning on a divorce.

lol

The truth of the matter is, we are missing almost ALL of the most important information concerning the issue, so it's pure speculation to pretend to know one way or the other if it was rape. To this day barely a letter between Jefferson and Hemmings is known (publicly), but we do know that Jefferson wrote all her brothers and they wrote Jefferson, extensively so it's safe to assume many letters went back and forth between Jefferson and Hemmings.

I think it's best looked at, all things considered, as to whether or not they loved each other. The fact that she cried by his side as he took his last breath suggests to me she did have feelings for him. Feelings of love and affection.

And without Jefferson' words "all men are created equal" we wouldn't even be having this conversation, and the East India Company would still be sailing out of Britain to rape and pillage the entire continent of Africa and India and forcing slaves and tea and textiles and opium upon their colonies.

lol woa, where are you getting all this information about Jefferson writing the Hemmings brothers extensively or Sally crying by his deathbed or TJ spending 234 francs on her in a shopping trip?

My vacation allowed me some time to get back to reading my books. I picked up a copy of "Thomas Jefferson, an Intimate History" concerning all things personal to TJ. In it are letters to and from Jefferson to all kinds of people, and there are even letters in the Hemmings chapter from Sally's children. They are very telling and offer a unique perspective by the words they use and the way they describe situations. In it are a lot of recordings from Jefferson's personal journal, and lucky for us he made entries virtually daily while he was in Europe, especially in the years 1788-9. As I said in a previous post, there are 40 something volumes of these letters and entries.

In short, there is Thomas Jefferson, and then there is the Thomas Jefferson the the education systems controls the history of. Given that America's culture is and has been under attack all the way from our old white racist greedy rich slave holding slave raping founders to direct attacks on our first amendment freedoms especially of speech and religion and our second amendment rights to bear arms, (the 4th amendment is virtually gone) the attack has to start and be maintained constantly with the bashing our founders and our traditions and our heritage and our history. And that's all Symmetry is pushing.

....she knows Barack Obama has to change our history

[Phatscotty]

Thomas Jefferson/Hemmings Myth Finally Exposed

For those of us who have long contended that this story is a hoax that has never been proven, a hoax being perpetrated to slander our Founders, this book is overdue. Because we know how this game is played: Liberals claim that the Founders of America were evil and that our society is unfair as a result. And thus any scandal that can be propounded about our Founders is echoed in the media for years, decades, centuries. This story about Jefferson/Hemmings has been around since 1802.

How did this myth get started? Here is a revealing excerpt from Monticello.org:

In September 1802, political journalist James T. Callender, a disappointed office-seeker who had once been an ally of Jefferson, wrote in a Richmond (Virginia) newspaper that Jefferson had for many years “kept, as his concubine, one of his own slaves.” “Her name is Sally,” Callender continued, adding that Jefferson had “several children” by her.

So there you go… ‘a disappointed office-seeker who had once been an ally of Jefferson…’

Is any further explanation needed?

And how can this new panel refute evidence, if true, that Hemmings’ children had Jefferson DNA?

By presenting the case that Jefferson’s brother Randolph fathered the children with Hemmings. Twelve of 13 of the scholars on the panel looking at the question agreed that the father was very likely Randolph.

But that is not so simple for the anti-Founders left who make up most of today’s liberal intelligentsia. No, they want to ignore all reality and fact and anything outside the template that Jefferson was an evil white man whose real passion for was his black slave.

First here are a few facts about Sally Hemmings that the media rarely mention: She was only one-quarter black and looked very white. She was said to have been very beautiful but there are no pictures of her. She was the half-sister of Jefferson’s wife who had died and left him a widower. Hemmings had light duties in the house and was not what you might think of typically as a “slave”, which usually connotes very black and working in the fields. Others have suggested that the father of Hemmings’ children were Jefferson’s nephews. John Wayles Jefferson, a grandson of Hemmings, looks 100% white in photos while Hemmings’ descendants often passed themselves off as white.

The review group called the Scholars Commission includes chairman Robert F. Turner, a former professor at the University of Virginia, who said in a statement announcing the release of the book, The Jefferson-Hemmings Controversy: Report of the Scholars Commission:

“It is true that Sally (Hemmings’) sons Madison and Eson were freed in Jefferson’s will, but so were all but two of the sons and grandsons of Sally’s mother Betty Hemmings who still belonged to Thomas Jefferson at the time of his death. Sally’s sons received by far the least favorable treatment of those freed in Thomas Jefferson’s will.”

To understand this situation, you must understand how liberals lie every day. Because liberalism does not believe in absolute truth and most liberals take that to the extreme – that there is no truth whatsoever, and that truth is only what they believe and say. This is how they establish extremist positions on everything from ‘global warming’ to the welfare state.

For instance, a posting on the internet said that Rush Limbaugh once had said that slavery was a good idea. No proof or even evidence was ever produced, but the quote stuck and Limbaugh was denied a chance to become part owner of the St. Louis Rams football team as a result.

So the left never needs proof. They simply say whatever they please like the fake story on CBS before the 2004 presidential election questioning George W. Bush’s National Guard service. It was reported as fact until it was debunked. If it had not been debunked, the story would have stood and Bush would have lost the election.

In Wisconsin, a left-wing judge ruled in Summer 2011 that the Republicans who passed the law challenging union power had acted improperly. The ruling was false – there was no impropriety – and fortunately a higher court overturned the judge. But she blatantly lied to try and derail the legislation. And if her ruling had not been overturned, it would have undermined perfectly legal legislation with a falsehood.

So what can be done?

We conservatives must simply tell the truth and expose them whenever we can. But they have the media to lie for them too. So we are up against an evil multi-headed hydra of an adversary with no regard for the light of truth, decorum or decency.

Thus the Jefferson/Hemmings farce is a perfect candidate for the liberal hoax machine. And with the issue of race thrown in, it becomes even more explosive, as was the Limbaugh incident.

For instance it is important to remember that one of America’s most powerful black leaders Al Sharpton rose to national prominence falsely accusing a group of white men of raping a black teenager named Tawana Brawley.

Does not history repeat itself?

Sharpton actually has been advanced politically for having the audacity to make this charge. He has been made a hero by the black left and by the Media Left who call him “Reverend Sharpton”, which is another lie. That is a fake title. Sharpton is no reverend. And that, friends, is just another liberal lie like the Jefferson/Hemmings myth.

[Symmetry]

so now you're claiming fathership by someone else as an excuse?

[thegreekdog]

If you want to know how he treated his slaves, how about reading some first-hand accounts from his own slaves after his death:

I said this before, and I'll say it again, unless he freed all of his slaves, it doesn't matter to me how he treated his slaves. They remained his slaves in that they were owned and controlled by him.

Knowledge of the treatment of his slaves is essential in deciding the coercive nature of slavery under TJ is it not? Unless you are making the claim that every master/slave relationship was the same.

So long as the master claims ownership over his or her slaves, the relationship is coercive in nature. If the slave is eventually free, then she is no longer a slave and thus there is no coercive relationship. In other words, and as I've said before, slavery, by it's nature, is coercive.

The way he treated his slaves is of no consequence to whether Sally was coerced into having sex with him. We keep having the same argument over and over and over again; namely, that she was either not coerced or that coercion is not rape. We're not getting anywhere because we're not addressing the root of the problem; namely the definition of coercion, the role of coercion in slavery, and the role of coercion, slavery and sex. There is nothing I want more than to admit defeat in this argument, because I do idolize certain aspects of Jefferson. But I cannot escape that this woman was his slave and therefore coercion was a necessary element of their relationship.

This is why the possibility of Sally's freedom in Paris is of paramount importance to the discussion. Actually, according to her son, she was free: "She was just beginning to understand the French language well, and in France she was free, while if she returned to Virginia she would be re-enslaved." This entirely bypasses the question of coercion due to slavery.

Btw, Kudos to Neoteny for stepping out like gentleman. I may soon do the same--perhaps the debate has turned to a personal level from the abstract? However I have a feeling this thread is nearing its natural end anyway.

Then it very well becomes coercion due to something else, which still doesn't excuse what happened before the move to France (and return from France).

I also feel like I should step out, but I've taken the tactic of not responding to stahr directly.

[muy_thaiguy]

I'll just say this;
It's offbase to try and enforce modern day morals and ethics on people and cultures centuries ago, since the morals and ethics of that time were completely different. It's easy to sit in your chair and say "oh, so-and-so was horrible because they did this!" when at the time it was the norm and not immoral or unethical to do so. By today's standards, yes, slavery is a horrible thing (though some into bondage disagree, but that's an entirely different matter) and rape is despicable. Back then, well, although personally I can't approve of such things, it was different times, morals, and ethics. Like it or not, that's historical fact.

[Symmetry]

I'll just say this;
It's offbase to try and enforce modern day morals and ethics on people and cultures centuries ago, since the morals and ethics of that time were completely different. It's easy to sit in your chair and say "oh, so-and-so was horrible because they did this!" when at the time it was the norm and not immoral or unethical to do so. By today's standards, yes, slavery is a horrible thing (though some into bondage disagree, but that's an entirely different matter) and rape is despicable. Back then, well, although personally I can't approve of such things, it was different times, morals, and ethics. Like it or not, that's historical fact.

I don't see why I can't condemn the holocaust simply because it occurred in a different century, and in a society where it was legal and the norm. Your argument doesn't work.

[_sabotage_]

Seems the poll has a clear majority, is it time to choose our sexual slaves? I got dibs on Andy.

[muy_thaiguy]

I'll just say this;
It's offbase to try and enforce modern day morals and ethics on people and cultures centuries ago, since the morals and ethics of that time were completely different. It's easy to sit in your chair and say "oh, so-and-so was horrible because they did this!" when at the time it was the norm and not immoral or unethical to do so. By today's standards, yes, slavery is a horrible thing (though some into bondage disagree, but that's an entirely different matter) and rape is despicable. Back then, well, although personally I can't approve of such things, it was different times, morals, and ethics. Like it or not, that's historical fact.

I don't see why I can't condemn the holocaust simply because it occurred in a different century, and in a society where it was legal and the norm. Your argument doesn't work.

Dammit, I deleted one part. Said things along the lines of that there were exceptions, like Hitler and the Holocaust, but in general, my point still stands.