Rape Colored Skin

[OldLady]

I just don't know that her opinion trumps all others' opinions.

I don't believe her opinion should trump all other opinions.

By the way, Beyonce is light skinned.......was her great-great grandma rapped also?

I don't know. Since interracial marriage wasn't a "thing" until recently, probably, yeah.

Ms. Williams assumes that all the white/black sexual encounters in her family tree were rape. She may very well be correct, but there is no way to know for sure that some cases were not consensual.

There can't be a "consensual" relationship between two people with such disparity of power. At least not in the sense we think of consensual.

 

[OldLady]

This is a very powerful essay, and by a direct descendant of Edmond Pettis. Her story adds to history rather than erasing it.

Help me understand how removing a monument adds to history. Her perspective surely does and it should be included when history is taught. But I am not understanding how making a confederate general a non entity adds to history.

Again, the monuments are lies – symbols of racism, fear, and hate.

The monuments’ historical significance is that of relics of a hateful, brutal past – their appropriate place is in museums and other private venues that display such manifestations of evil, not public lands.

View attachment 357884

View attachment 357903

FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

A widely circulated list of historical "facts" about slavery dwells on the participation of non-whites as owners and traders of slaves in America.

www.snopes.com

Snopes pretty much said it was all true lol haha

Some of it. That's why you can rely on Snopes. They tell the truth. Some of those "facts" are misleading by being taken out of context and some are not true. Just thought the poster would like to know what he's spreading around.ii

They were all true except they argued about how many slaves Ellison bought .. Ellison was a know breeder.. something many white slave owners were against .. take a hike loser

Nope. They most certainly were not. Do I have to cut and paste them for you?

 

[JoeMoma]

I just don't know that her opinion trumps all others' opinions.

I don't believe her opinion should trump all other opinions.

By the way, Beyonce is light skinned.......was her great-great grandma rapped also?

I don't know. Since interracial marriage wasn't a "thing" until recently, probably, yeah.

Ms. Williams assumes that all the white/black sexual encounters in her family tree were rape. She may very well be correct, but there is no way to know for sure that some cases were not consensual.

There can't be a "consensual" relationship between two people with such disparity of power. At least not in the sense we think of consensual.

I disagree, but I'm good at thinking outside of the box.

Could a hot looking slave woman seduce the young son of a slave owner........I believe it's possible. Fit's my definition of consensual.

 

[OldLady]

I just don't know that her opinion trumps all others' opinions.

I don't believe her opinion should trump all other opinions.

By the way, Beyonce is light skinned.......was her great-great grandma rapped also?

I don't know. Since interracial marriage wasn't a "thing" until recently, probably, yeah.

Ms. Williams assumes that all the white/black sexual encounters in her family tree were rape. She may very well be correct, but there is no way to know for sure that some cases were not consensual.

There can't be a "consensual" relationship between two people with such disparity of power. At least not in the sense we think of consensual.

I disagree, but I'm good at thinking outside of the box.

Could a hot looking slave woman seduce the young son of a slave owner........I believe it's possible. Fit's my definition of consensual.

I disagree.

 

[daveman]

I just don't know that her opinion trumps all others' opinions.

I don't believe her opinion should trump all other opinions.

By the way, Beyonce is light skinned.......was her great-great grandma rapped also?

I don't know. Since interracial marriage wasn't a "thing" until recently, probably, yeah.

Ms. Williams assumes that all the white/black sexual encounters in her family tree were rape. She may very well be correct, but there is no way to know for sure that some cases were not consensual.

There can't be a "consensual" relationship between two people with such disparity of power. At least not in the sense we think of consensual.

Of course there can. A consensual relationship is by definition agreed to by both parties.

If one party doesn't consent, it's not a consensual relationship.

 

[Redcurtain]

This is a very powerful essay, and by a direct descendant of Edmond Pettis. Her story adds to history rather than erasing it.

Help me understand how removing a monument adds to history. Her perspective surely does and it should be included when history is taught. But I am not understanding how making a confederate general a non entity adds to history.

Again, the monuments are lies – symbols of racism, fear, and hate.

The monuments’ historical significance is that of relics of a hateful, brutal past – their appropriate place is in museums and other private venues that display such manifestations of evil, not public lands.

View attachment 357884

View attachment 357903

FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

A widely circulated list of historical "facts" about slavery dwells on the participation of non-whites as owners and traders of slaves in America.

www.snopes.com

Snopes pretty much said it was all true lol haha

Some of it. That's why you can rely on Snopes. They tell the truth. Some of those "facts" are misleading by being taken out of context and some are not true. Just thought the poster would like to know what he's spreading around.ii

They were all true except they argued about how many slaves Ellison bought .. Ellison was a know breeder.. something many white slave owners were against .. take a hike loser

Nope. They most certainly were not. Do I have to cut and paste them for you?

Paste what? White slave breeders? Did I say they didn’t exist ?? What are you going to post? You can’t put words in my mouth you pos turd lol I said many white slave owners were against IT . YOU TURD LOL

 

[l.todd]

I am Libertarian leaning. I do not see the need to have monuments and statues in this country celebrating people who were determined to keep our fellow Americans in chains. Yes, it is history, and should not be erased. However, it also should not be celebrated. Do not put them out on the courthouse square as something to be admired (and I know. We have a statue commemorating native sons who fought for the confederacy right on our courthouse lawn, just across the sidewalk from a statue of Frederick Douglass, also a native son of my county). I also see no need to pay, or right to be owed reparations. I see no need to celebrate something from our past that is nothing to be celebrated, and I also see no need to pay people off because of what their ancestors may have suffered. We most likely all have ancestors who have suffered. There is no way to calculate that, and almost everyone is better off here than they would have been in their native lands.

 

[Redcurtain]

I am Libertarian leaning. I do not see the need to have monuments and statues in this country celebrating people who were determined to keep our fellow Americans in chains. Yes, it is history, and should not be erased. However, it also should not be celebrated. Do not put them out on the courthouse square as something to be admired (and I know. We have a statue commemorating native sons who fought for the confederacy right on our courthouse lawn, just across the sidewalk from a statue of Frederick Douglass, also a native son of my county). I also see no need to pay, or right to be owed reparations. I see no need to celebrate something from our past that is nothing to be celebrated, and I also see no need to pay people off because of what their ancestors may have suffered. We most likely all have ancestors who have suffered. There is no way to calculate that, and almost everyone is better off here than they would have been in their native lands.

You don’t have to live here

 

[OldLady]

I just don't know that her opinion trumps all others' opinions.

I don't believe her opinion should trump all other opinions.

By the way, Beyonce is light skinned.......was her great-great grandma rapped also?

I don't know. Since interracial marriage wasn't a "thing" until recently, probably, yeah.

Ms. Williams assumes that all the white/black sexual encounters in her family tree were rape. She may very well be correct, but there is no way to know for sure that some cases were not consensual.

There can't be a "consensual" relationship between two people with such disparity of power. At least not in the sense we think of consensual.

Of course there can. A consensual relationship is by definition agreed to by both parties.

If one party doesn't consent, it's not a consensual relationship.

I know what consensual means. I also know that in a relationship BOTH parties need to be free to choose their actions toward one another. When a man OWNS a woman, has owned her since birth and will own her 'til she dies, is her absolute lord and master, can sell her, beat her to death without legal penalty, and take her whether she is in the mood or not, that is NOT a relationship that can be consensual.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I am Libertarian leaning. I do not see the need to have monuments and statues in this country celebrating people who were determined to keep our fellow Americans in chains. Yes, it is history, and should not be erased. However, it also should not be celebrated. Do not put them out on the courthouse square as something to be admired (and I know. We have a statue commemorating native sons who fought for the confederacy right on our courthouse lawn, just across the sidewalk from a statue of Frederick Douglass, also a native son of my county). I also see no need to pay, or right to be owed reparations. I see no need to celebrate something from our past that is nothing to be celebrated, and I also see no need to pay people off because of what their ancestors may have suffered. We most likely all have ancestors who have suffered. There is no way to calculate that, and almost everyone is better off here than they would have been in their native lands.

Last sentence is complete bigotry and ignorance.

Read this.

From the Magazine: ‘It Is Time for Reparations’ (Published 2020)

Nikole Hannah-Jones explains the history of economic injustice and argues that if black lives are to truly matter in America, the nation must finally pay its debts.

www.nytimes.com

 

[JoeMoma]

I just don't know that her opinion trumps all others' opinions.

I don't believe her opinion should trump all other opinions.

By the way, Beyonce is light skinned.......was her great-great grandma rapped also?

I don't know. Since interracial marriage wasn't a "thing" until recently, probably, yeah.

Ms. Williams assumes that all the white/black sexual encounters in her family tree were rape. She may very well be correct, but there is no way to know for sure that some cases were not consensual.

There can't be a "consensual" relationship between two people with such disparity of power. At least not in the sense we think of consensual.

Of course there can. A consensual relationship is by definition agreed to by both parties.

If one party doesn't consent, it's not a consensual relationship.

I know what consensual means. I also know that in a relationship BOTH parties need to be free to choose their actions toward one another. When a man OWNS a woman, has owned her since birth and will own her 'til she dies, is her absolute lord and master, can sell her, beat her to death without legal penalty, and take her whether she is in the mood or not, that is NOT a relationship that can be consensual.

That is quite a box you constructed. There are lots of possibilities outside of that box. Also, you keep using the word "relationship". A consensual sexual encounter does not have to be a relationship.

Who is to say the white dude the slave girl had sex with was her master. She may of had a crush on the poor white share cropper's son.

Also, even within that box you constructed, the slave girl could be the one to initiate a sexual encounter without being coerced by her "master".

Note, lots of things are possible that are not probable.

 

[Redcurtain]

I am Libertarian leaning. I do not see the need to have monuments and statues in this country celebrating people who were determined to keep our fellow Americans in chains. Yes, it is history, and should not be erased. However, it also should not be celebrated. Do not put them out on the courthouse square as something to be admired (and I know. We have a statue commemorating native sons who fought for the confederacy right on our courthouse lawn, just across the sidewalk from a statue of Frederick Douglass, also a native son of my county). I also see no need to pay, or right to be owed reparations. I see no need to celebrate something from our past that is nothing to be celebrated, and I also see no need to pay people off because of what their ancestors may have suffered. We most likely all have ancestors who have suffered. There is no way to calculate that, and almost everyone is better off here than they would have been in their native lands.

Last sentence is complete bigotry and ignorance.

Read this.

From the Magazine: ‘It Is Time for Reparations’ (Published 2020)

Nikole Hannah-Jones explains the history of economic injustice and argues that if black lives are to truly matter in America, the nation must finally pay its debts.

www.nytimes.com

No one is stopping you stupid fucking white people from giving reparations lol pool it,, give up your property YOU STUPID SOB LOL

 

[EvilCat Breath]

You don't find the hulking football players or the fast and lanky basketball players crying about slave breeding. They are the beneficiaries of the selective breeding of the breeders. They kept careful records of champion bloodlines

 

[OldLady]

This is a very powerful essay, and by a direct descendant of Edmond Pettis. Her story adds to history rather than erasing it.

Help me understand how removing a monument adds to history. Her perspective surely does and it should be included when history is taught. But I am not understanding how making a confederate general a non entity adds to history.

Again, the monuments are lies – symbols of racism, fear, and hate.

The monuments’ historical significance is that of relics of a hateful, brutal past – their appropriate place is in museums and other private venues that display such manifestations of evil, not public lands.

View attachment 357884

View attachment 357903

FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

A widely circulated list of historical "facts" about slavery dwells on the participation of non-whites as owners and traders of slaves in America.

www.snopes.com

Snopes pretty much said it was all true lol haha

Some of it. That's why you can rely on Snopes. They tell the truth. Some of those "facts" are misleading by being taken out of context and some are not true. Just thought the poster would like to know what he's spreading around.ii

They were all true except they argued about how many slaves Ellison bought .. Ellison was a know breeder.. something many white slave owners were against .. take a hike loser

Nope. They most certainly were not. Do I have to cut and paste them for you?

Paste what? White slave breeders? Did I say they didn’t exist ?? What are you going to post? You can’t put words in my mouth you pos turd lol I said many white slave owners were against IT . YOU TURD LOL

The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.

Actually, the case involved an indentured servant named John Casor, who the court found Johnson had the rights to for Casor’s life. It was not chattel slavery.



North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.

False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.



In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.

True. But what Snopes doesn’t mention is that many (not all) of those free black people owned a husband or wife or child(ren). In some slave holding states, freed slaves had to leave the state. So therefore, after they were bought by family to protect them and so that they could live together as a family, they weren’t freed.



Many black slaves were allowed to hold jobs, own businesses, and own real estate.

Somewhat true. There were exceptions, but generally speaking — especially after 1750, by which time slave codes had been entered into the law books in most of the American colonies — black slaves were not legally permitted to own property or businesses.


Most slaves brought to America from Africa were purchased from black slave owners.

Sort of true.

to simply say that Europeans purchased people who had already been enslaved seriously distorts historical reality. While there had been a slave trade within Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans, the massive European demand for slaves and the introduction of firearms radically transformed west and central African society.


FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

 

[Redcurtain]

This is a very powerful essay, and by a direct descendant of Edmond Pettis. Her story adds to history rather than erasing it.

Help me understand how removing a monument adds to history. Her perspective surely does and it should be included when history is taught. But I am not understanding how making a confederate general a non entity adds to history.

Again, the monuments are lies – symbols of racism, fear, and hate.

The monuments’ historical significance is that of relics of a hateful, brutal past – their appropriate place is in museums and other private venues that display such manifestations of evil, not public lands.

View attachment 357884

View attachment 357903

FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

A widely circulated list of historical "facts" about slavery dwells on the participation of non-whites as owners and traders of slaves in America.

www.snopes.com

Snopes pretty much said it was all true lol haha

Some of it. That's why you can rely on Snopes. They tell the truth. Some of those "facts" are misleading by being taken out of context and some are not true. Just thought the poster would like to know what he's spreading around.ii

They were all true except they argued about how many slaves Ellison bought .. Ellison was a know breeder.. something many white slave owners were against .. take a hike loser

Nope. They most certainly were not. Do I have to cut and paste them for you?

Paste what? White slave breeders? Did I say they didn’t exist ?? What are you going to post? You can’t put words in my mouth you pos turd lol I said many white slave owners were against IT . YOU TURD LOL

The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.

Actually, the case involved an indentured servant named John Casor, who the court found Johnson had the rights to for Casor’s life. It was not chattel slavery.



North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.

False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.



In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.

True. But what Snopes doesn’t mention is that many (not all) of those free black people owned a husband or wife or child(ren). In some slave holding states, freed slaves had to leave the state. So therefore, after they were bought by family to protect them and so that they could live together as a family, they weren’t freed.



Many black slaves were allowed to hold jobs, own businesses, and own real estate.

Somewhat true. There were exceptions, but generally speaking — especially after 1750, by which time slave codes had been entered into the law books in most of the American colonies — black slaves were not legally permitted to own property or businesses.


Most slaves brought to America from Africa were purchased from black slave owners.

Sort of true.

to simply say that Europeans purchased people who had already been enslaved seriously distorts historical reality. While there had been a slave trade within Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans, the massive European demand for slaves and the introduction of firearms radically transformed west and central African society.


FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

You’re arguing about William Ellison who breeded fucking slaves you stupid fucking retarded *}^%\%%]%{^|

 

[OldLady]

I just don't know that her opinion trumps all others' opinions.

I don't believe her opinion should trump all other opinions.

By the way, Beyonce is light skinned.......was her great-great grandma rapped also?

I don't know. Since interracial marriage wasn't a "thing" until recently, probably, yeah.

Ms. Williams assumes that all the white/black sexual encounters in her family tree were rape. She may very well be correct, but there is no way to know for sure that some cases were not consensual.

There can't be a "consensual" relationship between two people with such disparity of power. At least not in the sense we think of consensual.

Of course there can. A consensual relationship is by definition agreed to by both parties.

If one party doesn't consent, it's not a consensual relationship.

I know what consensual means. I also know that in a relationship BOTH parties need to be free to choose their actions toward one another. When a man OWNS a woman, has owned her since birth and will own her 'til she dies, is her absolute lord and master, can sell her, beat her to death without legal penalty, and take her whether she is in the mood or not, that is NOT a relationship that can be consensual.

That is quite a box you constructed. There are lots of possibilities outside of that box. Also, you keep using the word "relationship". A consensual sexual encounter does not have to be a relationship.

Who is to say the white dude the slave girl had sex with was her master. She may of had a crush on the poor white share cropper's son.

Also, even within that box you constructed, the slave girl could be the one to initiate a sexual encounter without being coerced by her "master".

Note, lots of things are possible that are not probable.

I've explained what I mean and I'm not going to go off the topic entirely arguing whether the author is correct that her ancestresses were all raped. It's not that important to the argument, which is the reason she hates Confederate statues.

 

[OldLady]

This is a very powerful essay, and by a direct descendant of Edmond Pettis. Her story adds to history rather than erasing it.

Help me understand how removing a monument adds to history. Her perspective surely does and it should be included when history is taught. But I am not understanding how making a confederate general a non entity adds to history.

Again, the monuments are lies – symbols of racism, fear, and hate.

The monuments’ historical significance is that of relics of a hateful, brutal past – their appropriate place is in museums and other private venues that display such manifestations of evil, not public lands.

View attachment 357884

View attachment 357903

FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

A widely circulated list of historical "facts" about slavery dwells on the participation of non-whites as owners and traders of slaves in America.

www.snopes.com

Snopes pretty much said it was all true lol haha

Some of it. That's why you can rely on Snopes. They tell the truth. Some of those "facts" are misleading by being taken out of context and some are not true. Just thought the poster would like to know what he's spreading around.ii

They were all true except they argued about how many slaves Ellison bought .. Ellison was a know breeder.. something many white slave owners were against .. take a hike loser

Nope. They most certainly were not. Do I have to cut and paste them for you?

Paste what? White slave breeders? Did I say they didn’t exist ?? What are you going to post? You can’t put words in my mouth you pos turd lol I said many white slave owners were against IT . YOU TURD LOL

The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.

Actually, the case involved an indentured servant named John Casor, who the court found Johnson had the rights to for Casor’s life. It was not chattel slavery.



North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.

False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.



In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.

True. But what Snopes doesn’t mention is that many (not all) of those free black people owned a husband or wife or child(ren). In some slave holding states, freed slaves had to leave the state. So therefore, after they were bought by family to protect them and so that they could live together as a family, they weren’t freed.



Many black slaves were allowed to hold jobs, own businesses, and own real estate.

Somewhat true. There were exceptions, but generally speaking — especially after 1750, by which time slave codes had been entered into the law books in most of the American colonies — black slaves were not legally permitted to own property or businesses.


Most slaves brought to America from Africa were purchased from black slave owners.

Sort of true.

to simply say that Europeans purchased people who had already been enslaved seriously distorts historical reality. While there had been a slave trade within Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans, the massive European demand for slaves and the introduction of firearms radically transformed west and central African society.


FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

You’re arguing about William Ellison who breeded fucking slaves you stupid fucking retarded *}^%\%%]%{^|

I didn't actually expect you to absorb the correction. But I'm not the one who is stupid fucking retarded here.

 

[Redcurtain]

This is a very powerful essay, and by a direct descendant of Edmond Pettis. Her story adds to history rather than erasing it.

Help me understand how removing a monument adds to history. Her perspective surely does and it should be included when history is taught. But I am not understanding how making a confederate general a non entity adds to history.

Again, the monuments are lies – symbols of racism, fear, and hate.

The monuments’ historical significance is that of relics of a hateful, brutal past – their appropriate place is in museums and other private venues that display such manifestations of evil, not public lands.

View attachment 357884

View attachment 357903

FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

A widely circulated list of historical "facts" about slavery dwells on the participation of non-whites as owners and traders of slaves in America.

www.snopes.com

Snopes pretty much said it was all true lol haha

Some of it. That's why you can rely on Snopes. They tell the truth. Some of those "facts" are misleading by being taken out of context and some are not true. Just thought the poster would like to know what he's spreading around.ii

They were all true except they argued about how many slaves Ellison bought .. Ellison was a know breeder.. something many white slave owners were against .. take a hike loser

Nope. They most certainly were not. Do I have to cut and paste them for you?

Paste what? White slave breeders? Did I say they didn’t exist ?? What are you going to post? You can’t put words in my mouth you pos turd lol I said many white slave owners were against IT . YOU TURD LOL

The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.

Actually, the case involved an indentured servant named John Casor, who the court found Johnson had the rights to for Casor’s life. It was not chattel slavery.



North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.

False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.



In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.

True. But what Snopes doesn’t mention is that many (not all) of those free black people owned a husband or wife or child(ren). In some slave holding states, freed slaves had to leave the state. So therefore, after they were bought by family to protect them and so that they could live together as a family, they weren’t freed.



Many black slaves were allowed to hold jobs, own businesses, and own real estate.

Somewhat true. There were exceptions, but generally speaking — especially after 1750, by which time slave codes had been entered into the law books in most of the American colonies — black slaves were not legally permitted to own property or businesses.


Most slaves brought to America from Africa were purchased from black slave owners.

Sort of true.

to simply say that Europeans purchased people who had already been enslaved seriously distorts historical reality. While there had been a slave trade within Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans, the massive European demand for slaves and the introduction of firearms radically transformed west and central African society.


FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

You’re arguing about William Ellison who breeded fucking slaves you stupid fucking retarded *}^%\%%]%{^|

I didn't actually expect you to absorb the correction. But I'm not the one who is stupid fucking retarded here.

 

[CremeBrulee]

Oh, who knows. I'm just a northern Yankee who has pride in her ancestors and where she's from, and I know how I would feel if someone wanted to tear down my ancestor's statue (not that any have a statue)

You're from Maine right? I am sure we could find some Cajuns in Louisiana that are still hopping mad about their ancestors being ethnically cleansed from Acadia. Once you go down that road everybody has cause to seek redress for how people were treated in the past.

 

[OldLady]

This is a very powerful essay, and by a direct descendant of Edmond Pettis. Her story adds to history rather than erasing it.

Help me understand how removing a monument adds to history. Her perspective surely does and it should be included when history is taught. But I am not understanding how making a confederate general a non entity adds to history.

Again, the monuments are lies – symbols of racism, fear, and hate.

The monuments’ historical significance is that of relics of a hateful, brutal past – their appropriate place is in museums and other private venues that display such manifestations of evil, not public lands.

View attachment 357884

View attachment 357903

FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

A widely circulated list of historical "facts" about slavery dwells on the participation of non-whites as owners and traders of slaves in America.

www.snopes.com

Snopes pretty much said it was all true lol haha

Some of it. That's why you can rely on Snopes. They tell the truth. Some of those "facts" are misleading by being taken out of context and some are not true. Just thought the poster would like to know what he's spreading around.ii

They were all true except they argued about how many slaves Ellison bought .. Ellison was a know breeder.. something many white slave owners were against .. take a hike loser

Nope. They most certainly were not. Do I have to cut and paste them for you?

Paste what? White slave breeders? Did I say they didn’t exist ?? What are you going to post? You can’t put words in my mouth you pos turd lol I said many white slave owners were against IT . YOU TURD LOL

The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.

Actually, the case involved an indentured servant named John Casor, who the court found Johnson had the rights to for Casor’s life. It was not chattel slavery.



North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.

False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.



In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.

True. But what Snopes doesn’t mention is that many (not all) of those free black people owned a husband or wife or child(ren). In some slave holding states, freed slaves had to leave the state. So therefore, after they were bought by family to protect them and so that they could live together as a family, they weren’t freed.



Many black slaves were allowed to hold jobs, own businesses, and own real estate.

Somewhat true. There were exceptions, but generally speaking — especially after 1750, by which time slave codes had been entered into the law books in most of the American colonies — black slaves were not legally permitted to own property or businesses.


Most slaves brought to America from Africa were purchased from black slave owners.

Sort of true.

to simply say that Europeans purchased people who had already been enslaved seriously distorts historical reality. While there had been a slave trade within Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans, the massive European demand for slaves and the introduction of firearms radically transformed west and central African society.


FACT CHECK: 9 'Facts' About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know

You’re arguing about William Ellison who breeded fucking slaves you stupid fucking retarded *}^%\%%]%{^|

I didn't actually expect you to absorb the correction. But I'm not the one who is stupid fucking retarded here.

View attachment 357982

Yes. Now go back and see what it says in the MEME. Like most of the rest of the statements on the MEME, they are partially or technically right without being an accurate reflection of the situation.