Talk:History of sexual slavery in the United States

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of sexual slavery in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article evaluation The very first sentence is a little confusing, and should use some clarification on what they mean by the definition of sexual slavery.

Another main thing is that the introduction should be more leading as an improvement.

The article is neutral there isn't just one point of view on the article there is evidence to support the information that is typed out.

The links work for citations each source is appropriate.

There was one conversation about a source but it was just added on information to increase the evidence of the article. overall it was very informative Napaul (talk) 19:48, 14 February 2019 (UTC).[reply]

This article is misleading and has inaccurate information in it.[edit]

Christopher Columbus wrote a letter in which he mentioned that women and young girls were being sold. He did not say that he was doing the selling, nor that they were being used for sex. Someone decided to pull a sentence out of his letter and suppose that he was doing such things. This article refers to that slanderous lie. It refers to Snopes and Huffington Post as its sources. Neither of the sources share the entirety of the letter. They simply spread the lie.

I tried to change the false info here, but the watchdogs, who desire to continue to spread this false information, immediately undid my change. I simply said that the words of Christopher Columbus were taken out of context, and I shared a link to an article discussing the context. For some reason the moderators of Wikipedia do not want the truth to expose this lie. It they did then they would reference the letter itself, rather than two articles that take words from the letter out of context.

To the moderators who believe that Christopher Columbus was selling children into sexual slavery, can you please provide the proof? Referring to Snopes or Huffington Post is not sufficient. To spread slander of such magnitude, especially about a dead person who cannot defend themselves, is outrageous.

Here is a link to an article which discusses the letter referred to in context.

https://wallbuilders.com/columbus-and-sex-slavery/

Here is a link to the actual letter Columbus wrote describing what others were doing.

http://www.americanjourneys.org/pdf/AJ-067.pdf

--76.214.183.198 (talk) 02:36, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the entire letter https://archive.org/stream/christophercolu02thacgoog#page/n447/mode/2up you should find the article you link doesn't get the entire context either. A larger section of text reads: "I should know how to remedy all this, and the rest of what has been said has taken place since I have been in the Indies, if my disposition would allow me to seek my own advantage, and if it seemed honourable to me to do so, but the maintenance of justice and the extension of the dominion of her Highness has hitherto kept me down. Now that so much gold is found a dispute arises as to which brings more profit, whether to go about robbing or to go to the mines. A hundred Castellanos are as easily obtained for a woman as for a farm, and it is very general, and there are plenty of dealers who go about looking for girls: those from nine to ten are now in demand and for all ages, a good price must be paid. I assert that the violence of the calumny of turbulent persons has me more than my services have profited me; which is a bad example for the present and future. I take my oath that a great number of men have been to the Indies, who did not deserve baptism in the eyes of God or men, and who are now returning thither".

It seems to me Columbus is concerned with the mutiny of his men which partly arose to disagreement on how to make the most money. Nothing indicates that he takes moral issue with the capture of slaves. The site Wallbuilders clearly has a political and religious bias and fails to meet a reasonable standard for a reliable or verifiable source WP:RS. It is also worth mentioning that original research of primary sources (such as reading and interpreting a letter) does not meet Wikipedia's standards; articles should be based on reliable secondary source material. The Skeptical Ham (talk) 02:50, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


READ THE LETTER IN ITS ENTIRETY @ http://www.americanjourneys.org/pdf/AJ-067.pdf

You should read the entirety of the letter and be more "skeptical" about what is being insinuated. Nowhere is there evidence that he established any kind of sex-slave trade, as this article insinuates. In the letter, he says of the miners, "It is true that they keep Indians, but the business is in the hands of the Christians." He was assuring the King and Queen that He and his people (The Christians) were not participating in the vile acts, and that those who were accusing him of such had ulterior motives to get the gold for themselves. Columbus was there to take treasure back to Spain. The commander, who imprisoned him, was taking the gold for himself and accusing Columbus of what others were doing. Columbus did not have the power or authority to stop the miners or the commander's men from enslaving Indians. After investigation, Columbus was completely vindicated and all the charges were dropped. No one could read this letter and come away with the idea that Columbus established a sex-slave trade. It is ludicrous.

http://www.americanjourneys.org/pdf/AJ-067.pdf

Even if you are of the opinion that he takes no "moral issue with the capture of slaves," his letter is not evidence that he "established trade in sex-slaves as young as 9 years old," which this article clearly says that he did. The letter in its entirety expresses that he was not a participant in such behavior. It also reveals he was not the commander and had no authority over the commander.

He was a "Christian" explorer and a Zionist. His mission in life was to convert the world to Christ. In the process, He traveled and worked with "commanders" and other authorities, many of which were not so "Christian." Columbus often questioned the Christianity of harsh men. In this very letter, he expresses his anger against the commander while saying that he was "determined to not touch a hair of anyone's head." He said that the wicked commander was making him want to violate his determination.

You said, "It seems he is concerned with the mutiny of his men... ." They were not even his men which he spoke of. He was imprisoned when he wrote this and the paragraph is about defending himself.

He wrote, "I should know how to remedy all this, and the rest of what has been said has taken place since I have been in the Indies, if my disposition would allow me to seek my own advantage, and if it seemed honourable to me to do so,... ." A modern translation would be "I wish to know how to remedy my false imprisonment and the false accusations made against me, and the rest of the slander concerning what has taken place since I have been in the Indies, If my disposition (my current false imprisonment) would allow me to defend myself and speak well of my own character, if it is honorable to do so... ."

He was a very pious Christian who believed that no man should glory in himself. It was "unchristian" to speak well of one's self. It was humiliating and embarrassing for him to go against his own humble code, but he felt it was only necessary because he was in prison, falsely accused. Whether he was a pompous ass or sincere is beside the point. The letter he wrote to defend his character does not establish him as a participant in the sex-slave trade.

--76.214.183.198 (talk) 03:53, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Columbus may have described himself as a pious Christian, but he can't be regarded as a reliable narrator of his own history. Likewise, Wallbuilder is not a reliable source. Snopes is a sufficient source for this. We can include a link to the letter itself, though, in case anyone wants to see it for themselves. Mobi Ditch (talk) 02:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You must be joking. What "other narrators" are their then to dish up allegations against him? His competitors, haters? Snopes a reliable source, are you serious? 105.8.1.106 (talk) 21:07, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_sexual_slavery_in_the_United_States&oldid=1206467034"