Rape Colored Skin

[martybegan]

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.

Monuments or Statues to civil war southern dead are inherently evil?

I question why these monuments and statues were erected in the first place. Who put them there and what were they trying to prove? I can drive to Robert E. Lee's home in 15 minutes, but why would I honor him? I'm of European descent, and I have no reason to honor these folks. I can only imagine how people of African descent feel. I want a clean downtown where we can all meet and do whatever business we are there to do and meet, dine, and drink as we choose to.

Some were erected to honor the war dead. Some as monuments to their failed generals and leaders. Most of them went up when these guys started dying off. Again, part of the healing process between the two halves of the country was allowing each side to remember their cause as they saw fit. So you got somber memorials of war dead and defeated generals in the South, and triumphal memorials of war dead and victorious generals in the North. If you want an example check out Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn. put there the the Grand Army of the Republic, the largest Union Veteran organization there was.

Sorry, but if we let the most sensitive people define what we memorialize, then we might as well tear them all down.

The only monument I agreed that should have been removed was the one in New Orleans that memorialized basically an uprising that established a segregationist government. That's too far.

But that's where I draw the line. Adding into the fact that hard lefties can't even wait for a legal process to go through and are tearing these (and other) statues down puts me firmly into the "leave them be" camp. Taking any of them down now just justifies the SJW anarchy and the backboneless kowtowing progressive local politicians are doing, both destroying the statues, and "removing them in the interest of safety"

 

[WelfareQueen]

It's a good op ed. I like other perspectives.

I'm not sure her feelings warrant pulling down statues; she is not alone living in the South. It is also inhabited by a lot of people who have an entirely different perspective on those monuments, those men. I can understand why she despises those statues and I am sure no one is insisting she honor them in any way. I'm sorry she hates her own blood; I'm sorry she has to.

If the community where she lives agrees with her, fine, vote to remove the statue. Most of the folks pulling down these statues and calling for the renaming and all this other business are in no way intimately connected with the South. It's a political judgment fest and yeah, a move to "airbrush history," as much as she says it's not.

I'm more or less on the movement's side, but I'm not at all convinced on this piece.

Much of history is not clean and neat, particularly when looked through a different cultural and moral compass sometimes centuries removed from when the history took place.

I don't believe in erasing history. Nobody is asking anyone to celebrate these people. But they represent a significant part of our history. None of it should be erased.

 

[WelfareQueen]

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.

Auschwitz is a monument to a "hateful, brutal past." So yeah, lets erase that too.

 

[IM2]

Read this and understand why monuments to confederate generals ought to be removed from public/government property. Museums...fine. But let’s stop this nonsense.

Opinion | You Want a Confederate Monument? My Body Is a Confederate Monument (Published 2020)

The black people I come from were owned and raped by the white people I come from. Who dares to tell me to celebrate them?

www.google.com

Thanks but I can form my own opinions. Does it hurt much? Falling on your martyr's sword of white guilt? Oh the passion and the glory of your fervent zealotry. Tell me, is it rapturous? The fake pain of your self-flagellation?

White guilt is some fake shit made up by racists too weak to face historical fact. The OP is accurate. The confederate symbols need to come down based on the fact that the confederacy was a nation that waged war against America. The confederates were not American once they decided to secede and form their own nation. We do not honor japanese soldiers from WW2, we have not built statues to honor the british who fought in the revolutionary war. The symbols need to be taken from public places.

 

[martybegan]

Read this and understand why monuments to confederate generals ought to be removed from public/government property. Museums...fine. But let’s stop this nonsense.

Opinion | You Want a Confederate Monument? My Body Is a Confederate Monument (Published 2020)

The black people I come from were owned and raped by the white people I come from. Who dares to tell me to celebrate them?

www.google.com

Thanks but I can form my own opinions. Does it hurt much? Falling on your martyr's sword of white guilt? Oh the passion and the glory of your fervent zealotry. Tell me, is it rapturous? The fake pain of your self-flagellation?

White guilt is some fake shit made up by racists too weak to face historical fact. The OP is accurate. The confederate symbols need to come down based on the fact that the confederacy was a nation that waged war against America. The confederates were not American once they decided to secede and form their own nation. We do not honor japanese soldiers from WW2, we have not built statues to honor the british who fought in the revolutionary war. The symbols need to be taken from public places.

They were forgiven by the people they fought, that was part of the peace process.

The Japanese Cherry Trees are still up in Washington.

Even Benedict Arnold has an un-named monument to him for his service before his treason.

 

[IM2]

It's a good op ed. I like other perspectives.

I'm not sure her feelings warrant pulling down statues; she is not alone living in the South. It is also inhabited by a lot of people who have an entirely different perspective on those monuments, those men. I can understand why she despises those statues and I am sure no one is insisting she honor them in any way. I'm sorry she hates her own blood; I'm sorry she has to.

If the community where she lives agrees with her, fine, vote to remove the statue. Most of the folks pulling down these statues and calling for the renaming and all this other business are in no way intimately connected with the South. It's a political judgment fest and yeah, a move to "airbrush history," as much as she says it's not.

I'm more or less on the movement's side, but I'm not at all convinced on this piece.

Much of history is not clean and neat, particularly when looked through a different cultural and moral compass sometimes centuries removed from when the history took place.

I don't believe in erasing history. Nobody is asking anyone to celebrate these people. But they represent a significant part of our history. None of it should be erased.

They don't represent any of our history. They seceded from America and formed their own country. They were not Americans. You can't erase history, but it's funny how we don't see any statues of Nat Turner.

 

[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.

Does that mean that Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky didn't have consensual sex since there was such a large disparity of power? So Bill raped Monica?

 

[IM2]

Read this and understand why monuments to confederate generals ought to be removed from public/government property. Museums...fine. But let’s stop this nonsense.

Opinion | You Want a Confederate Monument? My Body Is a Confederate Monument (Published 2020)

The black people I come from were owned and raped by the white people I come from. Who dares to tell me to celebrate them?

www.google.com

Thanks but I can form my own opinions. Does it hurt much? Falling on your martyr's sword of white guilt? Oh the passion and the glory of your fervent zealotry. Tell me, is it rapturous? The fake pain of your self-flagellation?

White guilt is some fake shit made up by racists too weak to face historical fact. The OP is accurate. The confederate symbols need to come down based on the fact that the confederacy was a nation that waged war against America. The confederates were not American once they decided to secede and form their own nation. We do not honor japanese soldiers from WW2, we have not built statues to honor the british who fought in the revolutionary war. The symbols need to be taken from public places.

They were forgiven by the people they fought, that was part of the peace process.

The Japanese Cherry Trees are still up in Washington.

Even Benedict Arnold has an un-named monument to him for his service before his treason.

Let me know when they put up a statue of Hirohito and Yamamoto.

 

[IM2]

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.

Does that mean that Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky didn't have consensual sex since there was such a large disparity of power? So Bill raped Monica?

False equivalence. Lewinsky wanted to fuck Clinton and she was not owned by Clinton.

 

[martybegan]

Read this and understand why monuments to confederate generals ought to be removed from public/government property. Museums...fine. But let’s stop this nonsense.

Opinion | You Want a Confederate Monument? My Body Is a Confederate Monument (Published 2020)

The black people I come from were owned and raped by the white people I come from. Who dares to tell me to celebrate them?

www.google.com

Thanks but I can form my own opinions. Does it hurt much? Falling on your martyr's sword of white guilt? Oh the passion and the glory of your fervent zealotry. Tell me, is it rapturous? The fake pain of your self-flagellation?

White guilt is some fake shit made up by racists too weak to face historical fact. The OP is accurate. The confederate symbols need to come down based on the fact that the confederacy was a nation that waged war against America. The confederates were not American once they decided to secede and form their own nation. We do not honor japanese soldiers from WW2, we have not built statues to honor the british who fought in the revolutionary war. The symbols need to be taken from public places.

They were forgiven by the people they fought, that was part of the peace process.

The Japanese Cherry Trees are still up in Washington.

Even Benedict Arnold has an un-named monument to him for his service before his treason.

Let me know when they put up a statue of Hirohito and Yamamoto.

Those guys weren't Americans, the Confederates were. None of them were tried as traitors, and most were rehabilitated as citizens after the war was over.

 

[WelfareQueen]

It's a good op ed. I like other perspectives.

I'm not sure her feelings warrant pulling down statues; she is not alone living in the South. It is also inhabited by a lot of people who have an entirely different perspective on those monuments, those men. I can understand why she despises those statues and I am sure no one is insisting she honor them in any way. I'm sorry she hates her own blood; I'm sorry she has to.

If the community where she lives agrees with her, fine, vote to remove the statue. Most of the folks pulling down these statues and calling for the renaming and all this other business are in no way intimately connected with the South. It's a political judgment fest and yeah, a move to "airbrush history," as much as she says it's not.

I'm more or less on the movement's side, but I'm not at all convinced on this piece.

Much of history is not clean and neat, particularly when looked through a different cultural and moral compass sometimes centuries removed from when the history took place.

I don't believe in erasing history. Nobody is asking anyone to celebrate these people. But they represent a significant part of our history. None of it should be erased.

They don't represent any of our history. They seceded from America and formed their own country. They were not Americans. You can't erase history, but it's funny how we don't see any statues of Nat Turner.

Richmond, my old home town and former Capital of the Confederacy is building a monument to Nat Turner. But yeah....America is deeply racist.

 

[miketx]

It's a good op ed. I like other perspectives.

I'm not sure her feelings warrant pulling down statues; she is not alone living in the South. It is also inhabited by a lot of people who have an entirely different perspective on those monuments, those men. I can understand why she despises those statues and I am sure no one is insisting she honor them in any way. I'm sorry she hates her own blood; I'm sorry she has to.

If the community where she lives agrees with her, fine, vote to remove the statue. Most of the folks pulling down these statues and calling for the renaming and all this other business are in no way intimately connected with the South. It's a political judgment fest and yeah, a move to "airbrush history," as much as she says it's not.

I'm more or less on the movement's side, but I'm not at all convinced on this piece.

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.

Sez the head liar and thief who is too stupid to understand they are history examples and those who can't remember history are doomed to repeat it.

 

[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.

Does that mean that Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky didn't have consensual sex since there was such a large disparity of power? So Bill raped Monica?

False equivalence. Lewinsky wanted to fuck Clinton and she was not owned by Clinton.

There is a large power disparity in both cases. Not exactly equivalent, but a very large power disparity never the less. Also, was it impossible for blacks and whites to want to fuck in the 1800s? I don't think so. Sometimes it may have been rape, but sometimes it may have been consensual.

 

[Lysistrata]

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.

Monuments or Statues to civil war southern dead are inherently evil?

I question why these monuments and statues were erected in the first place. Who put them there and what were they trying to prove? I can drive to Robert E. Lee's home in 15 minutes, but why would I honor him? I'm of European descent, and I have no reason to honor these folks. I can only imagine how people of African descent feel. I want a clean downtown where we can all meet and do whatever business we are there to do and meet, dine, and drink as we choose to.

Some were erected to honor the war dead. Some as monuments to their failed generals and leaders. Most of them went up when these guys started dying off. Again, part of the healing process between the two halves of the country was allowing each side to remember their cause as they saw fit. So you got somber memorials of war dead and defeated generals in the South, and triumphal memorials of war dead and victorious generals in the North. If you want an example check out Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn. put there the the Grand Army of the Republic, the largest Union Veteran organization there was.

Sorry, but if we let the most sensitive people define what we memorialize, then we might as well tear them all down.

The only monument I agreed that should have been removed was the one in New Orleans that memorialized basically an uprising that established a segregationist government. That's too far.

But that's where I draw the line. Adding into the fact that hard lefties can't even wait for a legal process to go through and are tearing these (and other) statues down puts me firmly into the "leave them be" camp. Taking any of them down now just justifies the SJW anarchy and the backboneless kowtowing progressive local politicians are doing, both destroying the statues, and "removing them in the interest of safety"

I do not find traitors worthy of honor. there were statues in their honor IN MY TOWN! The town where we all go to socialize and attend to official business; pay our parking tickets. Why have a statue in the middle of town of someone whose face I would spit in if he was standing in front of me?

 

[martybegan]

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.

Monuments or Statues to civil war southern dead are inherently evil?

I question why these monuments and statues were erected in the first place. Who put them there and what were they trying to prove? I can drive to Robert E. Lee's home in 15 minutes, but why would I honor him? I'm of European descent, and I have no reason to honor these folks. I can only imagine how people of African descent feel. I want a clean downtown where we can all meet and do whatever business we are there to do and meet, dine, and drink as we choose to.

Some were erected to honor the war dead. Some as monuments to their failed generals and leaders. Most of them went up when these guys started dying off. Again, part of the healing process between the two halves of the country was allowing each side to remember their cause as they saw fit. So you got somber memorials of war dead and defeated generals in the South, and triumphal memorials of war dead and victorious generals in the North. If you want an example check out Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn. put there the the Grand Army of the Republic, the largest Union Veteran organization there was.

Sorry, but if we let the most sensitive people define what we memorialize, then we might as well tear them all down.

The only monument I agreed that should have been removed was the one in New Orleans that memorialized basically an uprising that established a segregationist government. That's too far.

But that's where I draw the line. Adding into the fact that hard lefties can't even wait for a legal process to go through and are tearing these (and other) statues down puts me firmly into the "leave them be" camp. Taking any of them down now just justifies the SJW anarchy and the backboneless kowtowing progressive local politicians are doing, both destroying the statues, and "removing them in the interest of safety"

I do not find traitors worthy of honor. there were statues in their honor IN MY TOWN! The town where we all go to socialize and attend to official business; pay our parking tickets. Why have a statue in the middle of town of someone whose face I would spit in if he was standing in front of me?

They are not traitors, they may have been rebels during the fight, but they were rehabilitated by the very people that defeated them. You have no standing or place to change that.

How about buckle up, buttercup?. If you get the vapors over a statue I suggest counseling if you already aren't getting it.

 

[Lysistrata]

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.

Monuments or Statues to civil war southern dead are inherently evil?

I question why these monuments and statues were erected in the first place. Who put them there and what were they trying to prove? I can drive to Robert E. Lee's home in 15 minutes, but why would I honor him? I'm of European descent, and I have no reason to honor these folks. I can only imagine how people of African descent feel. I want a clean downtown where we can all meet and do whatever business we are there to do and meet, dine, and drink as we choose to.

Some were erected to honor the war dead. Some as monuments to their failed generals and leaders. Most of them went up when these guys started dying off. Again, part of the healing process between the two halves of the country was allowing each side to remember their cause as they saw fit. So you got somber memorials of war dead and defeated generals in the South, and triumphal memorials of war dead and victorious generals in the North. If you want an example check out Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn. put there the the Grand Army of the Republic, the largest Union Veteran organization there was.

Sorry, but if we let the most sensitive people define what we memorialize, then we might as well tear them all down.

The only monument I agreed that should have been removed was the one in New Orleans that memorialized basically an uprising that established a segregationist government. That's too far.

But that's where I draw the line. Adding into the fact that hard lefties can't even wait for a legal process to go through and are tearing these (and other) statues down puts me firmly into the "leave them be" camp. Taking any of them down now just justifies the SJW anarchy and the backboneless kowtowing progressive local politicians are doing, both destroying the statues, and "removing them in the interest of safety"

I do not find traitors worthy of honor. there were statues in their honor IN MY TOWN! The town where we all go to socialize and attend to official business; pay our parking tickets. Why have a statue in the middle of town of someone whose face I would spit in if he was standing in front of me?

They are not traitors, they may have been rebels during the fight, but they were rehabilitated by the very people that defeated them. You have no standing or place to change that.

How about buckle up, buttercup?. If you get the vapors over a statue I suggest counseling if you already aren't getting it.

They chose to be traitors. You are suggesting that I honor them. What is this about? Memorials to them have no place in the center of town. Museums., yes.

 

[martybegan]

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.

Monuments or Statues to civil war southern dead are inherently evil?

I question why these monuments and statues were erected in the first place. Who put them there and what were they trying to prove? I can drive to Robert E. Lee's home in 15 minutes, but why would I honor him? I'm of European descent, and I have no reason to honor these folks. I can only imagine how people of African descent feel. I want a clean downtown where we can all meet and do whatever business we are there to do and meet, dine, and drink as we choose to.

Some were erected to honor the war dead. Some as monuments to their failed generals and leaders. Most of them went up when these guys started dying off. Again, part of the healing process between the two halves of the country was allowing each side to remember their cause as they saw fit. So you got somber memorials of war dead and defeated generals in the South, and triumphal memorials of war dead and victorious generals in the North. If you want an example check out Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn. put there the the Grand Army of the Republic, the largest Union Veteran organization there was.

Sorry, but if we let the most sensitive people define what we memorialize, then we might as well tear them all down.

The only monument I agreed that should have been removed was the one in New Orleans that memorialized basically an uprising that established a segregationist government. That's too far.

But that's where I draw the line. Adding into the fact that hard lefties can't even wait for a legal process to go through and are tearing these (and other) statues down puts me firmly into the "leave them be" camp. Taking any of them down now just justifies the SJW anarchy and the backboneless kowtowing progressive local politicians are doing, both destroying the statues, and "removing them in the interest of safety"

I do not find traitors worthy of honor. there were statues in their honor IN MY TOWN! The town where we all go to socialize and attend to official business; pay our parking tickets. Why have a statue in the middle of town of someone whose face I would spit in if he was standing in front of me?

They are not traitors, they may have been rebels during the fight, but they were rehabilitated by the very people that defeated them. You have no standing or place to change that.

How about buckle up, buttercup?. If you get the vapors over a statue I suggest counseling if you already aren't getting it.

They chose to be traitors. You are suggesting that I honor them. What is this about? Memorials to them have no place in the center of town. Museums., yes.

They chose to rebel, they were then defeated and allowed to re-integrate into the country, for most of them, no harm no foul. That was decided on to allow for the country to heal and to prevent an underground resistance campaign to extend the war out for decades. It was what the Union side fought for, not conquest, but reconciliation.

I suggest you let the people who want to remember and honor the war dead and the failed leaders do so, and you just suck it up and ignore the statues and the people as you see fit. It's not all about you, snowflake.

And the museum copout is bullshit, because it won't end at the center of town, they removed a statue of Teddy Roosevelt in FRONT OF A MUSEUM because it had an Native American and African standing beside him (both of them proudly I might add) because people like you can't contain your butthurt.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How Progressives do history

 

[IM2]

Today's lesson:

Confederate Monuments

“In fact, most American slaves were not kidnapped on another continent. Though over 12.7 million Africans were forced onto ships to the Western hemisphere, estimates only have 400,000-500,000 landing in present-day America. How then to account for the four million black slaves who were tilling fields in 1860? “The South,” the Sublettes write, “did not only produce tobacco, rice, sugar, and cotton as commodities for sale; it produced people.” Slavers called slave-breeding “natural increase,” but there was nothing natural about producing slaves; it took scientific management. Thomas Jefferson bragged to George Washington that the birth of black children was increasing Virginia’s capital stock by four percent annually.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry​

To be blunt, America had slave breeding “factories” where slaves were forced to breed. I call them factories but in most cases they are described as farms. These “farms” generally had at least a 2:1 female to male ratio. In some states, slave production was the number 1 industry. Virginia led the nation in slave production and PRESIDENT Thomas Jefferson was one of the main producers. The slave breeding industry has been hidden and left out of the annals of American history. This was done on purpose.

After reading how this was done it becomes very easy to see why. There are just some wrongs that cannot be excused by the belief that holding past generations to modern standards is wrong. Basically, the slave breeding industry manufactured human beings to be sold into labor. It is very difficult to read the atrocities associated with such a practice and not get angry. To hear whites today just dismiss the entire enterprise of slavery like it was just some short term inconsequential inconvenience this country experienced for a little while that we as blacks should just forget is for the lack of a better word, crap.

This industry included the first employer-based health care program. Female slaves were the first people in America to get free health care. I do not say this to be funny because the reason why that happened was both sad and simple; after the importation of slaves was made illegal, white dependence on slave labor hinged on the continued births of healthy children. After importation was made illegal, the only way left to maintain the system was by increasing the number of slaves through births. Due to this, a black women’s ability to reproduce was of the utmost economic importance to southern planters and to the slave breeders.

I think we need to understand how depraved things were during these times. The range of sexual abuses black slaves included buck breaking, whereby slave masters would rape enslaved black men. Buck Breaking was used as a method to control slave uprisings. If a male slave was considered a trouble maker, the slave master would give that slave a severe beating. Once the slave was beaten basically unconscious, the slave master made the other slaves lay him over a tree stump where his pants would be taken off and the slave owner would perform sodomy on that slave. Enslaved men were forced to have sex with each other in front of their families and they were also raped in front of their sons. Many of these men would kill themselves or run away after this happened to them. However buck breaking was not only used to stop potential slave rebellions.

Black men were also raped for pleasure. Gay people are not a product of modern “liberals.” Gays and lesbians have always been part of the world community. Gay slave owners existed. Gay slave owners bought male slaves. Gay slave owners raped their slaves. Buck breaking got so good to some that “Sex Farms” were created to breed black men for gay white men to have sex with. Gay white men would travel from plantation to plantation in order to rape slaves. I really do not know any other way to describe this because the black men involved really had no choice in what was happening to them.

Buck breaking was part of the slave breeding industry. As I wrote earlier, breeding factories were in business to increase the population of black people by forcing them to have sex in order to maintain cheap slave labor. In many cases black men had to sleep with their daughters, mothers or sisters. If they refused, they were killed. The derogatory term motherfucker originates from this practice. Conversely, black women were forced to sleep with their sons and brothers. Black women were routinely raped by slave owners who felt they were doing these women a favor.

THAT, is what some of you are fighting to remember.

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016, pg.1

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016, pg. 84

William Spivey, The Truth About American Slave Breeding Farms, June 9, 2019, The Truth About American Slave Breeding Farms

Rashid Booker, Slave Breeding Farms of "Africans in North America", https://www.academia.edu/9864206/Slave_Breeding_Farms_of_Africans_in_North_America_

Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project, 1936 to 1938, Library of Congress, Articles and Essays | Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project, 1936-1938 | Digital Collections | Library of Congress

Solomon Northrup, Twelve Years a Slave, Narrative of Solomon Northup, a Citizen of New-York, Kidnapped in Washington City in 1841, and Rescued in 1853, from a Cotton Plantation near the Red River in Louisiana, Project Gutenberg E-book, May 11, 2014 [EBook #45631], pg.189

Elizabeth Keckley, Behind the Scenes: Or, Thirty Years a Slave, and Four Years in the White House, 1868, New York: G. W. Carleton & Co., Publishers, 1868., pp. 38-39, Keckley, Elizabeth, ca. 1818-1907. "Behind the Scenes, or, Thirty years a Slave and Four Years in the White House",

America’s slaves breeding farms: what history books never told you, February 26, 2020, America’s slaves breeding farms: what history books never told you

Elizabeth Ofosuah Johnson, 5 horrifying ways enslaved African men were sexually exploited and abused by their white masters, October 11, 2018, https://face2faceafrica.com/article/5-horrifying-ways-enslaved-african-men-were-sexually-exploited-and-abused-by-their-white-masters/3#:~:text=Buck Breaking became very popular when slave rebellions,to serve as a warning to other slaves.

Isaac Somto, Buck Breaking, How African Male Slaves Were Raped, July 27, 2020, Buck Breaking, How African Male Slaves Were Raped | Vocal Africa

Jason Kottke, A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry in the United States, Feb 02, 2016, A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry in the United States

 

[Lysistrata]

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.

Monuments or Statues to civil war southern dead are inherently evil?

I question why these monuments and statues were erected in the first place. Who put them there and what were they trying to prove? I can drive to Robert E. Lee's home in 15 minutes, but why would I honor him? I'm of European descent, and I have no reason to honor these folks. I can only imagine how people of African descent feel. I want a clean downtown where we can all meet and do whatever business we are there to do and meet, dine, and drink as we choose to.

Some were erected to honor the war dead. Some as monuments to their failed generals and leaders. Most of them went up when these guys started dying off. Again, part of the healing process between the two halves of the country was allowing each side to remember their cause as they saw fit. So you got somber memorials of war dead and defeated generals in the South, and triumphal memorials of war dead and victorious generals in the North. If you want an example check out Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn. put there the the Grand Army of the Republic, the largest Union Veteran organization there was.

Sorry, but if we let the most sensitive people define what we memorialize, then we might as well tear them all down.

The only monument I agreed that should have been removed was the one in New Orleans that memorialized basically an uprising that established a segregationist government. That's too far.

But that's where I draw the line. Adding into the fact that hard lefties can't even wait for a legal process to go through and are tearing these (and other) statues down puts me firmly into the "leave them be" camp. Taking any of them down now just justifies the SJW anarchy and the backboneless kowtowing progressive local politicians are doing, both destroying the statues, and "removing them in the interest of safety"

I do not find traitors worthy of honor. there were statues in their honor IN MY TOWN! The town where we all go to socialize and attend to official business; pay our parking tickets. Why have a statue in the middle of town of someone whose face I would spit in if he was standing in front of me?

They are not traitors, they may have been rebels during the fight, but they were rehabilitated by the very people that defeated them. You have no standing or place to change that.

How about buckle up, buttercup?. If you get the vapors over a statue I suggest counseling if you already aren't getting it.

They chose to be traitors. You are suggesting that I honor them. What is this about? Memorials to them have no place in the center of town. Museums., yes.

They chose to rebel, they were then defeated and allowed to re-integrate into the country, for most of them, no harm no foul. That was decided on to allow for the country to heal and to prevent an underground resistance campaign to extend the war out for decades. It was what the Union side fought for, not conquest, but reconciliation.

I suggest you let the people who want to remember and honor the war dead and the failed leaders do so, and you just suck it up and ignore the statues and the people as you see fit. It's not all about you, snowflake.

And the museum copout is bullshit, because it won't end at the center of town, they removed a statue of Teddy Roosevelt in FRONT OF A MUSEUM because it had an Native American and African standing beside him (both of them proudly I might add) because people like you can't contain your butthurt.

It's not all about them and the people who wish to honor them, either. Let the town square be neutral and only have memorials to those whom all Americans think should be honored. Erect the Statue of Liberty or a memorial to those whose fought in WWII and faced the guns of D-Day, faced the Nazi bullets from high above the cliffs. Only those who have fought as Americans should be honored in our town squares.

Black military men faced racism to fight in WWII. Where are the statues to salute them?