Not only that, but the "masters" had sex with the female slaves, and had children by them. It just goes to show the hypocrisy, denial, and insanity that come from an evil institution such as slavery. It served their purposes to view them as "less than human", so that they could justify enslaving a group of people, yet at the same time, it's obvious they didn't really believe it, al least not on a very basic level. The contradiction is insane.
If they REALLY viewed these people as "animals", why did they have sex with them? What does THAT say about them? Again, it was nothing but hypocritical justifications.
2007-03-27 10:20:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by wendy g 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Actually, Mammy, Mom, Mommy, etc are the universal name for a Mother figure.
Many white people were virtually raised by their Mammies. White women couldn't be bothered to breastfeed their own children--it might 'ruin' their figures. This was true until the 1950s.
Imagine the confusion for the children of both races. Also, it makes one wonder how much indoctrination the little white kids had to have to ensure that they disrespected and talked down to their Mammies , instead of loving the mammy, as would be natural.
The whites in the South conveniently ignored what didn't suit them. In many ways, that's still true.
Good luck
2007-03-27 13:02:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Croa 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
You're close. They raised the children, & often their children played with each other. It's not right, but it's sort of how rich people treat illegal aliens now.
2007-03-27 10:02:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by shermynewstart 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
This is a rather ugly explanation, but...
They viewed these women as animals. Just as you'd give your child milk from a cow, you'd let your servant (or slave) provide milk.
2007-03-27 10:04:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jay 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
doble sttandered.
2007-03-27 09:59:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Apocalipce Industries 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Hahaha, I don't know what it means, but its my sister's name. :)
2007-03-27 13:48:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by *Jenn* 2
·
0⤊
2⤋