Conquer Club

I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Sorry, I deleted my post because - on reflection - I decided I wasn't really all that interested after all.

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Sorry, I deleted my post because - on reflection - I decided I wasn't really all that interested after all.

Sure

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Like the opposite of nonplussed, perhaps?

Metsfanmax wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Like the opposite of nonplussed, perhaps?

I think that might have been what he was going for.

Symmetry wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Like the opposite of nonplussed, perhaps?

I think that might have been what he was going for.

No, I try not to end sentences with prepositions.

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Sorry, I deleted my post because - on reflection - I decided I wasn't really all that interested after all.

Why? It's important and relevant.

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Sorry, I deleted my post because - on reflection - I decided I wasn't really all that interested after all.

Why? It's important and relevant.

Hey, it may not be up their with your posts about third-rate Tolkien that you have to hide, but at least I'm able to post without having to use spoiler tags for wanking fantasists.

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Sorry, I deleted my post because - on reflection - I decided I wasn't really all that interested after all.

Why? It's important and relevant.

Hey, it may not be up their with your posts about third-rate Tolkien that you have to hide, but at least I'm able to post without having to use spoiler tags for wanking fantasists.

"their"?

Works every time.

What, this thread again? I thought this died ages ago!

Ray Rider wrote:What, this thread again? I thought this died ages ago!

I think you might be thinking of T-Jeff rather than the thread.

Symmetry wrote:

Ray Rider wrote:What, this thread again? I thought this died ages ago!

I think you might be thinking of T-Jeff rather than the thread.

Hardy har har

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I don't dismiss this as rape, I condemn it as such.

I don't think a 14 year old girl held as a slave in a man's house has freedom or ability to consent to sex with her slave master. That constitutes rape. Would you consider it rape if it had happened more recently?

To be sure it's an interesting question. I'm slightly more interested, though, in why Symmetry is so much more plused by this than the current members of the Hemings family themselves, like Shay Banks-Young, etc.

"plused"?

Sorry, I deleted my post because - on reflection - I decided I wasn't really all that interested after all.

Why? It's important and relevant.

Hey, it may not be up their with you're posts about third-rate Tolkien that you have to hide, but at least I'm able to post without having to use spoiler tags for wanking fantasists.

Fixed

Ray Rider wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Ray Rider wrote:What, this thread again? I thought this died ages ago!

I think you might be thinking of T-Jeff rather than the thread.

Hardy har har

*Takes a bow*

Symmetry wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:This is part of what makes Sally Hemmings truly remarkable and the story of such note, that it WAS an exception and did happen despite all of the "mores" of the time. When you call Jefferson a rapist, you diminish not just Jefferson, but Sally as well. And, I would say many other women as well.

Part of what always distinguishes women of note versus men of "note" historically is how they are able to find ways to break the bounds that very much existed. Ironically, the fact of slavery would have provided Sally far more of a "cover" and protection than if she were white. If she were white, the dalliance would have been looked far more askance thant it was, because a white woman "visiting" Jefferson would have been "noticed", even if done in secret. With Sally, there was no need for any such pretense.

I'm genuinely amazed that you're now arguing that slavery was a good thing. Also, "Hemings".

Oh PLEASE. I specifically did no such thing.

Ironically, the fact of slavery would have provided Sally far more of a "cover" and protection than if she were white.

Care to walk that back?

Not even close. I very much stand by what I have said.
And no.. I am not the one being obtuse and ignorant here. You want to look at a label and pretend that this explain everything to do with th e situation. That is not understanding, it is the epitomy of prejudice and misunderstanding. Yep... I DID say prejudice against slavery!

See, the fact that something is overall bad, not something we wish to have today doesn't mean that it never had a purpose, that it never had any positive consequences. Slavery happened. We don't want to go back to those days.

BUT... your comments about women and freedom in this context are disturbing because right along with your pretenses that things back then were bad, you are also indicating that things today are a great deal better than they actually are.

You can pretend that questions like Johns about whether a worker can truly object to a boss' demands or my statements that women had no real freedom back then are each irrelevant, but that is just pretense.

Symmetry wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

You've equaled the conditions of slaves with those of free women several times in this thread, do you truly not see a difference?

Probably better than you. I ALSO understand the difference between lliving in the 1700's and 2000's, something you clearly do not.

The point here is not whether Jefferson deserves sainthood for his actions. Of course, he does not. The question is whether his actions merit the term "rapist", a crime on the par with murder when it comes to penalties. I have no idea why you think there is some gain in labeling accomplished people from the past with derogatory labels, but I have been hearing this garbage all my life, AND I have heard the contrary arguments. Your "point" is nothing more than back-handed justification and anger. It is not reality, nor truth.

Keep believing that condemning others unreasonably makes you a better person, I won't.

I don't understand this line of thinking. You've fallen back on the idea that on the idea that things cannot be judged morally right or wrong, or even criminal if they occurred in the past. I thought we'd dismissed that line of argument.

I don't think you've shown any evidence to suggest that Hemings was free to consent, so I'm baffled as to why you think sex without free consent is not rape.

I and others have shown evidence that she was treated well, have shown accounts indicating that there was real caring between her and Jefferson.

Further, just look at how her children were treated. You think manumition -- freeing her -- would have made her life better. I (and others) have explained over and over that her life would NOT have been better, and she further would NOT have been free to have had this relationship if she were free. That is the true irony you ignore. Caring for Jeffersion meant she had to stay in slavery...to stay with him.