Talk:House slave: Difference between revisions
Cantaloupe2 (talk | contribs) vesey |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
== Removal of section on the US == |
== Removal of section on the US == |
||
I feel like this section has very little to do with House slavery and more to do with slavery in general or sexual abuse in slavery. this section needs to fixed or removed. |
I feel like this section has very little to do with House slavery and more to do with slavery in general or sexual abuse in slavery. this section needs to fixed or removed. |
||
:Yes. It makes references to scholars as if we have just been reading about them, when in fact it is the first reference to them - possibly the section is just a cut and paste from a larger piece. "Stampp, without contesting Genovese's assertions....." Who the hell are Stampp and Genovese !!!- [[Special:Contributions/124.191.144.183|124.191.144.183]] ([[User talk:124.191.144.183|talk]]) 14:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC) |
|||
==Vesey== |
==Vesey== |
||
Revision as of 14:32, 6 May 2013
 | Sociology Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Merge
So, this article should be merged wiht slavery. This article doesn't really give any additional info. Editing Maniac 03:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
no it is good to categorise just put a link on the slavery page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewr2572 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Changes and improvement
Citations have to be given. Simply giving three references at the bottom isn't enough. Also, the article completely lacks historical specifics. The point about the white mistress sometimes educating house slaves is both interesting and important, but it's far too simple. It was not illegal, at all times and places in the US South, to teach slaves to read. In the 19th century, such prohibitions became near universal in slave states, but the article should give some sense of the variation across time and space. Interlingua 15:08, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
HOUSE SLAVES were light skinned, light brown. FIELD SLAVES were dark brown skinned. This was a way to build animosity between the light and dark skinned slaves. A divide and conquer method.Thy did not grow up in the best places and sometimes did not get to see there familys :( so sad But not all slaves were light brown,or dark brown that did not matter it was sometimes were they came from and there family history
Removal of section on the US
I feel like this section has very little to do with House slavery and more to do with slavery in general or sexual abuse in slavery. this section needs to fixed or removed.
- Yes. It makes references to scholars as if we have just been reading about them, when in fact it is the first reference to them - possibly the section is just a cut and paste from a larger piece. "Stampp, without contesting Genovese's assertions....." Who the hell are Stampp and Genovese !!!- 124.191.144.183 (talk) 14:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Vesey
He is named as winning $1,500 in lottery, but in the sentence it is mentioned in, it implies his owner permitted him to keep. I can't find anything that says so. Was he at the time entitled to it or did his owner let him keep it? Cantaloupe2 (talk) 20:31, 17 November 2012 (UTC)