Sounds like the family believed Strom’s blather.
A. the term “sexual harassment” was not in vogue back then, so I doubt that it would have been termed thusly.
B. We have less than zero knowledge if the encounter (s) were consensual - however
C. If it was anything other than “wow what a man” type of consensual, we can look at what the reasonable result would have been for a black maid during that time, to have found work had she had less than stellar recomondations from her prior employer so
D. If the encounter is/was a case of “I want to have sex w/you”, and the maid did not have a safe option to say “no” then, “rape” is indeed the correct term (note that I am saying “IF” I make no claim that it was or was not consensual). Even if she submitted. (it would be more like ‘date rape’ in todays lexicon, but still ‘rape’, IMHO).
What gets me is that according to this article, rumors of Thurmond having a bi-racial daughter were all over South Carolina for years. The Washington Post even reported the rumor in 1992. Why did this not blow up into a huge scandal sooner? Was Ms. Washington-Williams unwilling to press for recognition until after his death? It still seems strange that reporters didn’t try to dig into the story further, especially in the last 20 years or so.
If Strom wouldn’t admit it, and neither would Essie Mae, and Essie Mae’s mother were dead, then it is basically impossible to print it as anything more than a rumor. Plenty of sources printed the rumor, including in an unauthorized biography and Slate. Lots of reputable publications require fact checking that would preclude printing rumors as news.
It only becomes big news when she admits to it. The newsy-ness probably was helped by the Trent Lott-Strom controversy earlier in the year, which brought back to attention Strom’s segregationist past.
Back then, the age of consent probably would have been 14:
http://www.lpitr.state.sc.us/sess112_1997-1998/bills/1000.htm
— In fairness to Strom’s family, how would you have preferred that they react?
I hope the family moves towards reconciliation over the next several months.
I hope they grow to see Ms. Washington-Williams’ late-life disclosure as an opportunity; I hope they welcome their new family member. Letters, followed by visits, would be nice. (The article said that some had met with Ms. Washington-Williams, BTW).
I hope they honor Ms. Washington-Williams’ grace and steadfast loyalty to her father while he was still alive.
That’s the quote that gets me. THIS is the first time you’ve felt shame? You weren’t ashamed about him before? You weren’t ashamed to be related to one of the leading segregationists of the last century? Not even a little?
Some media supression was probably covered by Strom’s contract with Satan…
Yeh, Sam H., that’s the quote that got me, too. Says a lot about the mindset of the speaker, doesn’t it?
Can’t speak to the servant issue, but Strom Thurmond himself ceased to be a segregationist several decades ago. Since he’s the only member of the family with significant political pull, I think we can rule out recent segregationist leanings.
Hell, Strom Thurmond was honored by the Urban League several years ago for his efforts in race relations. I don’t think they would have done so had he still been a ranting segregationist.
Am I the only one who thinks the woman deserves at least a little scorn for keeping her parentage a secret while her father was saying thinks like
Surely her decision to stay out the way probably was a very tough one, but does anybody think it was best that she did so?
I first saw Ms. Washington Williams interviewed on the Today show and was very impressed with her. There is no sign of bitterness or anger or greed. She has great dignity.
Her attorney spoke at the end of the interview about how kind and warm and open the Thurmonds have been to her and that they apparently want to see that she benefits financially as his daughter. (Ms. Washington-Williams, however, had said during her part of the interview that she wasn’t interested in money.)
Then I watched the Dan Rather interview that I had taped from the night before. Wow! What a difference!
Ms. Washington-Williams showed all of the dignity that she was to show the following day on the Today show, but there was a little touch of extra pride. She said that the Thurmonds had said that they would welcome her to the family, but she said that she felt a little funny about that since she was his daughter a long time before they came around. 
I liked her spunk.
It became my impression, then, that the attorney on the Today show had been trying to “smooth things over” regarding her out-spokenness about the family. Guess he wants to get his cut. I certainly would hate to see him try to abuse her dignity in order to get money for himself.
The attorney also talked about the loving and close father-daughter relationship between Senator Thurmond and Ms. Washington-Williams. That left me slack-jawed! Having your daughter visit your office to get money from time to time is not a close and loving father-daughter relationship.
She loved him and kept his secret because she didn’t want to ruin him. She also said that he wasnt a racist in his heart and that he just took the segregationist stand that he did to further his career. (Good grief! Think of the damage he did when he was in a position where he could have done some good – and he didn’t even do it out of his beliefs???)
I am even disgusted with CBS News for referring to this segment as “Essie Mae.” I don’t know what the tradition is in the North, but in the South, as a whole, we don’t call 78 year old women by their given names unless they are family friends.
I think I heard on the news that she had promised to keep the secret while he lived. And how is it up to us to decide what she should have done about it? The whole thing was a personal decision between the two of them. If anyone deserves scorn, it would be the father who thought it was okay to keep a child of his a secret, so it wouldn’t interfere with his career. If he asked her to keep the secret, then he was wrong, if she volunteered, I’d say she was misguided. Either way, I can’t fault her for keeping a promise.
I, too was struck by Ms. Washington-Williams’ statement that her father made all those racist statements just to further his political career. Her tone suggested that was all right with her. To me it suggests instead the most cynical disregard for morality, the thought that truth doesn’t matter as long as the constituency is satisfied.
But why should anyone expect otherwise of the Senator? He was only following the example of the august Massa Tom (Jefferson, that is), who had children by a slave woman while he touted the equality of all human beings. There’s nothing new here.
Oh, well, if you’re looking for an argument, you better pick another statement. Even if Thurmond did change his mind on segregation, I think everyone agrees that the whole “schtup the teen maid and keep the daughter a secret” thing was a bit de trop.
Maybe, but now she’s apparently looking for a movie deal?
I hope you’re being cynical. I’ll probably get blasted for being too PC, but I’m surprised the moderators didn’t pick up this one.
Geezer, while DNA evidence proves that someone in TJ’s family sired Sally Hemmings’ kids, it does not prove that TJ did it. (While sans the DNA evidence Cecil’s column on the matter indicates there’s a good chance some of TJ’s relatives were responsible.)
The link to the Master was interesting, TF, but scandal is more fun. I’ll mull this over before repeating the story again.
So far, the only blatantly racist statements in this thread are from Eonwe.