Anonymous wrote:Maybe she used her charms on him...she may have gotten to sleep in his bad and not work.....like a sahm.

Yup! Husbands of SAHMS are well satisfied...unlike the poor husbands of WOHMs!

Quite proud of my prowess that got me an attentive and indulgent alpha male husband, who makes enough dough and does not need his wife's salary to make ends meet!

Next!

Anonymous wrote:He didn't just simply remarry another white because he was already in love. It was taboo at the time, his affinity for a black woman, but that doesn't mean it wasn't sincere. Goes to show despite whatever cultural traditions and ethical practices society puts in place to determine who can/should be with whom, love supersedes all policies and protocol.

Soap opera much?

There's nothing to support your fictional delusion. My guess is that he wanted sex. Who cares?

Maybe she used her charms on him...she may have gotten to sleep in his bad and not work.....like a sahm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is ridiculous to characterize this as a romance. It might have been, but it is far more likely that it was not.

She was a teenager who looked like his wife and was his property. That isn't dating.

Likely isn't actually.
Probably isn't definitely.
Possibly isn't precisely.
Reasonably isn't really.
Conceivably isn't conclusively.
Presumably isn't positively..

Are you getting any of this?

Not the poster you quoted and what the ever-loving fuck are you going on about?

I am the poster that she was quoting, and I also don't get what the hell her post was supposed to mean. It is actually (not likely - so glad she taught me that distinction ) unintelligible.

Anonymous wrote:Jefferson didn't remarry cause white broads are a headache - period.

I am 16:54 and ignore me, you answered my question and are just trying to be offensive and not add anything to the conversation- got it

Anonymous wrote:There are many jealous white women on this board.

It seems as if this thread really touched a sore spot

how are they jealous? I am confused by this post... and in terms of touching a sore spot, it seems the people most up in arms are those who think it is disgusting to equate this to a romantic relationship- I honestly think there is one poster here who wants to believe this romanticized version of events and does this often here. Why the need to generalize about jealous white ladies, what does that add to the conversation? Unless it was your point to rile people up...

Jefferson didn't remarry cause white broads are a headache - period.

There are many jealous white women on this board.

It seems as if this thread really touched a sore spot

If you are stuck on gone with the wind, slavery was not a happy time for enslaved black people. There were no happy negroes, happily nursing white babies.

Anonymous wrote:In the context of slavery, why on earth would you refer to this as a romantic relationship? And she was a teenager when this began. Yuck.

That said, it is believed that Sally was his wife's half sister, and that she bore a resemblance to his late wife.

1000 plus. It started w rape of her mother, which is why she was light skinned. It started with enslaved people being forced to do things that repulsed, traumatized and scared them. Watch 12 years a slave and come back here and ask such an ignorant question.

I love the Ask a Slave series. It's based on the actresses experiences as a historical interpreter/actress at Mt. Vernon.

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHPZR1lUMS47BA-N2Ihrtlg

Anonymous wrote:Didn't he promise his wife she would never remarry?

Well, there you go. Sounds legit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it have to be one or the other? Yes I could have been legal rape, but who's to say she wouldn't have consented if she even had that choice?

ugh, the point is that she didn't have a choice- we don't get to live in some magical world where slavery and the owning of people might not have been so bad - It was and constructing or supposing this "romance" involving a woman who had no choice is just re-writing history to make you feel better, it is gross.

Not rewriting history or trying to debate it. Just thinking of all the possibilities of what could have been... the human behavior element. There's no denying she had no rights and what happened was wrong but that was times she was living in.

show some empathy for the dead and stop supposing she enjoyed her station in life..mmmmkay

she had health insurance and good bone structure

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it have to be one or the other? Yes I could have been legal rape, but who's to say she wouldn't have consented if she even had that choice?

ugh, the point is that she didn't have a choice- we don't get to live in some magical world where slavery and the owning of people might not have been so bad - It was and constructing or supposing this "romance" involving a woman who had no choice is just re-writing history to make you feel better, it is gross.

Not rewriting history or trying to debate it. Just thinking of all the possibilities of what could have been... the human behavior element. There's no denying she had no rights and what happened was wrong but that was times she was living in.