Yeah, the people who cry the loudest against interracial marriage, and also coincidentally tend to cry out loudly against sex outside of marriage, somehow never seem to have any problem with having sex with black women (usually rape).
Wait… so they’re NOT blessed?
It’s not clear if he raped her or he persuaded her to have sex consensually. In any case, it was statutory rape because she was underage. He paid all his daughter’s college tuition, for instance. He gave her over $100,000, possibly much more. It wasn’t just occasional help. If you have any sources contradicting any of this, please cite them. In any case, he was an utter hypocrite.
Your take on this is completely disgusting. He objectively raped her. Full stop. He didn’t sufficiently support the daughter and I, obviously, can’t prove a negative.
Bit of a broad brush there, there have probably always been unscrupulous producers around, but England used to have a big range of cheeses, soft, hard, semi-hard, blue. Many of the traditional recipes- like traditional Lancashire- were just developed by farming families trying to preserve the excess for winter, they weren’t trying to skimp on good ingredients. It was the wars, especially WWII where the rationing system only allowed cheese made to an approved, efficient, boring cheddar recipe, that destroyed most of them.
Some bigger producers switched to the official recipe, but most of the smaller producers just closed; supposedly the UK went from around 3500 commercial cheese producers to only around 100 over the period from 1918 to when the cheese rationing finally ended in 1954. Then of course imports became available, so any cheesemakers trying to get back to old recipes had to compete with those, and not many bothered (cite). It’s only been in the last few decades that there’s been enough
I literally had this discussion with an overseas friend a while back when he was confused as to why we didn’t have more local cheese variation in a country that clearly likes cheese and has been keeping cows, sheep and goats for centuries…
Rapist. He was a rapist. There’s nothing hypocritical about not wanting to recognize black people having relationships with white people, while still wanting to stick your dick in a black woman (or girl, in this instance).
The first is about acknowledging a black persons worth as a human, the other is limiting their worth to something you use for pleasure.
I would accept the daughter’s word as to whether the support was sufficient. She wrote a book about the situation: what does she say there?
I don’t give a crap if she was magnanimous in her book. Her mother was raped when the mother was a child. He treated the daughter like garbage.
It’s possible to be both a rapist and a hypocrite. Thurmond was both. He spent most of his life telling his supporters that he believed in segregation, which included the rule that there could be no sexual relations between blacks and whites. He then had sex with an underage black woman who had a baby girl because of this. He never publicly acknowledged that he had a black daughter during his life. He privately gave her money though. She was born in 1927, which means that she entered college in 1949. He gave her at least $100,000 over his lifetime. $100,000 in 1949 is the equivalent of well over $1,000,000 in 2026. Some sources say that he gave her as much of $1,000,000 (in U.S. dollars at the time of each of his gifts) over his lifetime.
During his lifetime (1902 to 2003), the support of segregation slowly disappeared and the laws against it went away. By 2008, a President was elected who was the son of a black man and a white woman. He thus had no long-term effect on the existence of segregation. Rape has apparently always been around during the existence of the human race. There’s no good statistics if it’s more or less now than in the past.
He may have been garbage, but he didn’t treat his daughter as garbage.
He had a gigantic effect on keeping it in place for decades longer though. More than nearly everyone else who ever lived. The man was pure evil (I think we agree on that).
Not acknowledging her and treating her as less than his other offspring is objectively treating her like garbage regardless of the funds he gave her.
Paying hush money to cover up a crime is not atonement for the crime. Rather the reverse.
Veering into Great Debates territory here, but was all white male- black female sex pre-Loving rape by the power dynamic definition of the term?
So your feelings in the matter are worth more than those of the woman herself? Good to know.
I think it’s pretty clear that the parents could not have had a relationship of equals for at least four reasons (race, family of employmer vs employee, age, gender), so yes, Essie Mae Washington-Williams was incontrovertibly the product of rape, and her father was famously and publicly horrible for the rest of his long life, too. But she still knows more about her own life than we do.
She was 15 years old
Oh, boy, hat to hijack the hijack on Ole Strom, but getting back to the OP. . .
There are behind the scenes photos of the filming of ‘Creature from the Black Lagoon’ (1954) showing an underwater camerawoman. Women camera operators were uncommon in the 1950s, so it’s even more extraordinary that she was doing the photography underwater. I looked around but could not find a name for her
Where the fuck did I claim that my feeling were worth more than hers? Study up a little on what happens to people who are brought up with institutional racism. There are plenty of accounts of house slaves saying that their life was a good one. You should be ashamed of yourself.
In the balance of your post, where you implied that if she didn’t consider herself oppressed that was proof that she’d internalized her victimhood.
Proof? This is unprovable.
Given the facts that we know, I think he treated her like garbage.
-He never acknowledged her existence
-He publically said that the circumstances of her birth should be make illegal
-He gave her less than her half siblings
-He actively tried to pass many laws that would specifically give her fewer opportunities than white people.
There’s a weak argument in there that it could have been worse but it’s not unreasonable to call that treating her like garbage.
Are you and @Dr.Drake really claiming that he treated her well?
I am not claiming that he treated her well: I think it’s pretty clear that he did not. That is a moved goalpost, though.
The question was whether he supported her sufficiently. All I said is that the woman herself should be consulted on that point before a conclusion was reached, and asked about her book. I don’t know whether he did or didn’t; my low opinion of the man doesn’t influence the facts of his support for her. At a guess, he provided zero emotional support and far less financial support than he provided his other children. What I don’t know is whether what he did provide was sufficient or not.
I haven’t read her book of course. If we are only talking about whether his financial support was sufficient, then if it was less than the “legitimate” kids, I’d say it wasn’t.