But I Wanna Be A Descendant of Whitey Too!!

Marxist

Literotica Guru
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Posts
18,322
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29905-2002May3.html


Begs the question, why don't the mean Black people just leave those nice White people alone and with their mind blinders intact?





By Leef Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 4, 2002; Page B01


For three years, the descendants of slave Sally Hemings have attended family reunions at Thomas Jefferson's Monticello plantation, touring the historic grounds outside Charlottesville alongside Jefferson's acknowledged kin, mingling at often contentious white-linen luncheons and waiting to be recognized as bona fide family.

That seems ever more unlikely now.

A 24-page report being presented today by a committee of the Monticello Association -- a group representing more than 700 lineal descendants of Jefferson and his wife, Martha -- recommends that Hemings's offspring be denied a place in their select ranks.

Citing a "lack of universally acceptable information" regarding Jefferson's alleged paternity of one or more of Hemings's children, the report says it would be inappropriate to embrace her clan without more evidence. One of the privileges of being a proven Jefferson descendant is burial at Monticello.

"Only further historical and scientific research which discloses new facts could give a different and more definitive answer to the question," states the Membership Advisory Committee report, which was three years in the making. "Therefore we believe that there is not sufficient evidence for descendants of Sally Hemings to meet the criteria . . . for membership."

Monticello Association members are holding their annual retreat this weekend in Charlottesville and could vote on the membership question as early as tomorrow. Shay Banks-Young, a descendant of Hemings's son Madison, said no one is surprised by the recommendation.

"I just wonder why it took them three years to get to the decision we always knew they'd come to," Banks-Young said. "It would have been nice [to be accepted], but you can't lose something you never had. They've spent time and money to disprove who we know we are. We've been patient, and now we'll just move on."

Association officials declined to comment on the report before it is voted on.

In 1998, DNA tests confirmed a link between the male line of Jeffersons and some descendants of Hemings. Combined with historical evidence, the test results prompted many Jefferson scholars -- including those at the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, which owns and runs Monticello -- to publicly conclude that Jefferson likely fathered one if not all of Hemings's six children.

The Monticello Association resisted taking a formal position, instead forming a committee in 1999 to study the issue to help members decide whether to amend their admissions criteria.

Since then, the debate has been loud and rancorous, dividing family members.

While the new report says it is not the association's job to "re-invent history," it suggests that members "give credit where credit is due" by organizing a group to highlight the contributions of the slaves and other workers who helped build Monticello. Tentatively called "Families of Jefferson's Monticello," the group would be open to descendants of all who lived or worked at the estate during Jefferson's time. The report also suggests consideration of a second graveyard at Monticello for members of the new group.

That prospect has infuriated Hemings's descendants.

"I can't imagine anyone would want to be buried in a separate cemetery for blacks only," Banks-Young said.

Julia Westerinen, ofStaten Island, N.Y., a white descendant of Sally Hemings's son Eston, said: "They're acting like a crowd of us are standing at the bottom of a hill with our hands outstretched begging to be buried there. I don't know of any Hemings descendants that want to buried at Monticello. What we want is for them to recognize us as lineal descendants of Thomas Jefferson."

Talk of a Jefferson-Hemings liaison was rife in some circles even before the third president's death in 1826, and historians have debated the subject ever since. But it was the DNA tests that set scholars on fire with new theories.

The tests compared the Y chromosome in males who trace their ancestors to Jefferson with that of male descendants of Hemings. Researchers said the scientific data matched the descendants of Eston Hemings with the male line of Jeffersons. And when historical evidence was factored in, the researchers said, it all but confirmed a relationship between Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings.

Critics of the DNA tests note that the science proves only that someone in the Jefferson family fathered Eston Hemings. One of the most vocal groups has been the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society, which was founded in 2000 by John H. Works Jr., a former Monticello Association president.

The group commissioned its own examination by 13 scholars. In their April 2001 report, the examiners were nearly unanimous in concluding that Jefferson's paternity was "almost certainly untrue." The report went on to theorize that Jefferson's brother Randolph fathered Hemings's children.

Works called the questioning of Jefferson's character "tragic" and said that most of Jefferson's acknowledged family agrees with the conclusions presented in the scholars' report. Those who do not concur, he said, are riding a wave of "political correctness."

The Hemings descendants "can't create the link back to Thomas Jefferson probably because it doesn't exist," said Works, whose Heritage newsletter has criticized the idea of a second graveyard at Monticello.

"This is not a black-versus-white issue," he said. "This is not a racial issue. The Hemings descendants simply don't meet the criteria" for membership.

Association member Lucian K. Truscott IV has been one of the most vocal proponents of welcoming in the Hemings family. He said it is unfair for the association to require a genealogical paper trail when the laws governing slavery prohibited such documents. "Jefferson scholars agree that the book is closed on this now," Truscott said. "The DNA was just the capper in a long chain of quasi-circumstantial evidence that strongly indicates Jefferson fathered those children. . . . The rest of the world has moved on. The Monticello Association has to move on."
 
Hmmm....Liveing in denial...not suprised at all,it's a typical american problem.








CH
 
Why these people actually care that much whether the Hemings are decendants of Jefferson is beyond me. They aren't an elite group, they're just a buncha morons capitalizing on someone that they've never even met.
 
This is pathetic. What's all the fuss about being related to Jefferson anyway? Are there some 300 year old perks that I don't know about? WTF is the membership criteria?

The fact that there was an association made to refute the DNA evidence shows how backward and warped these people are. Why Hemmings descendants want to be declared related to these people is beyond me.:confused:
 
I think the Hemmings descendents aren't really pushing for recognition to gain anything materially, just to shit on those nice White people's parade.

Doesn't every man have the right to sip whiskey on his ancestor's lawn secure in the fact that his ancestor DIDN'T take a slave as his second wife?
 
Mona,

There are perks. I remember from when I was applying to college, there is good scholarship money available to descendants of signers of Founding Fathers. Also, since burial is a major expense for most people, having a family burial plot available would be a nice perk. Finally, I can relate to wanting to be accepted by your white family, particularly after generations of being excluded. The descendants of Sally Hemmings and Thomas Jefferson have done well. One is a Professor at my alma mater, Johns Hopkins University. I wish them well in their endeavors.

~EP
 
Marxist said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29905-2002May3.html


Begs the question, why don't the mean Black people just leave those nice White people alone and with their mind blinders intact?


Unacknowledged bastards, are unacknowledged bastards. That's why the term 'unacknowledged bastard' is used.

The Europeans have practiced that tradition for centuries. Unacknowledged bastards DON'T get the name, or the perks. 'Might have's' and the opinions of a few historians just don't cut it when it comes to unacknowledged bastards.

And I thought this thread was about something interesting and important, like Whitey Ford.

Ishmael
 
Let's see, what other traditions are there.

Ishmael said:
The Europeans have practiced that tradition for centuries.
That's an interesting arguement. Wonder what other traditions shouldn't be overturned?

Slavery? Wife beating? Totalitarianism? Ooh, ooh! Imperialism--that one's still doing well.

Just my opinion, as a semi-acknowledged bastard.
 
Whoa

Ethiopian Prince,

I was totally unaware of the benefits that one can get simply from being of a certain bloodline. It's kind of gross if you think about it 'cause bloodline doesn't really shape character. From that point of view, I can see why the Hemmings would want their piece of the pie, even if it's unfair to the rest of us.

If the Jeffersons are getting, then why should they be denied? For centuries, that family has been accumulating status (which is why their heads are so swelled now) and wealth, since they receive stuff like free college money and burial plots. They don't have to shell out cash like us regular joes.

I am now inspired and I'm going to research my family tree to see if I have some ties to the Founding Fathers. I need some scholarship money, the name of thread "But I Wanna be a Descendant of Whitey Too!" .:)
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: But I Wanna Be A Descendant of Whitey Too!!

Ishmael said:


Unacknowledged bastards, are unacknowledged bastards. That's why the term 'unacknowledged bastard' is used.

The Europeans have practiced that tradition for centuries. Unacknowledged bastards DON'T get the name, or the perks. 'Might have's' and the opinions of a few historians just don't cut it when it comes to unacknowledged bastards.

And I thought this thread was about something interesting and important, like Whitey Ford.

Ishmael

"Bastard" is your word, it was not used in the article nor by me. Why don't you go peddle your camel elsewhere and leave the discussion to the grown-ups.
 
Used in this context, the term 'Whitey' could be considered a racial slur. I consider it to be one.

Is this acceptable?
 
sch00lteacher said:
Used in this context, the term 'Whitey' could be considered a racial slur. I consider it to be one.

Is this acceptable?

LOL

Never seen a fight break out over "Whitey," but if you'd like to take your turn being offended, I APPOLOGIZE.
 
Personally, Marxist, I think "Cracker" is more politically correct.

The white descendents of Jefferson should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, and some are. Most though seem quite content to manufacture history to maintain their stupidly pristine image of a complex man.
 
sigh said:
Personally, Marxist, I think "Cracker" is more politically correct.

The white descendents of Jefferson should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, and some are. Most though seem quite content to manufacture history to maintain their stupidly pristine image of a complex man.

I think that's what hurts the White Jeffersons the most. Americans love their heroes as mythical cherry tree choppers like Washington, not sexual creatures who had desires for companionship outside of the "normal" channels.
 
Re: Re: Re: But I Wanna Be A Descendant of Whitey Too!!

lavender said:


And this is appropriate behavior why exactly? Why is it appropriate to totally deny the rights of Jefferson's heirs? Under the present state of the law, "unacknowledged bastards" have rights. Why should this not apply to the descendants of Jefferson's affairs with a slave? Is it because she was a slave? Is it because she was black and the descendants are black? What is your fucking point?



Ditto what Kotori said.



You've made some rather unenlightened comments on the board, but for this, you win the grand fucking prize.

Go check your case law on this. It goes back centuries. Generally speaking without the benefit of the name there are no enurring benefits to the children, or their survivors. The exception being the responsibility of child support.

Now, I said nothing beyond what the facts of the matter are. I really don't care whether you agree with them or not. For that matter, it doesn't even matter whether I agree with them or not. Does it?

This as been a recurring problem over the centuries. And has been settled. Race has nothing to do with it. Nothing at all.

Ishmael
 
Back
Top