(July 28, 2020 at 9:56 pm)SUNGULA Wrote:

(July 28, 2020 at 9:53 pm)Huggy Bear Wrote: First of all, who the hell are you quoting and why should I care for their opinion?

You quoted a meme and your scalding me for sources . But of course you can't offer up any actual objections to the post

Quote:I'll address your actual question about this 'buck breaking' practice first, though.

To get to the heart of the matter from the outset: no, the practice described in the article you linked to did not exist. This is literally the first that I have ever heard of this practice supposedly existing, and when I went digging around to try and see if I could figure out its origin story, I essentially found two versions of the story: the one that you've linked to, which is the milder of the two, and another which is more overtly homophobic and black nationalist in its rhetoric. Like most of these memes that go around the internet, there are absolutely grains of truth to the story, but the practice of "buck breaking" they're describing simply did not exist. I have never seen any evidence for it, I know of no-one who studies the dynamics of sexual abuse in slavery who has mentioned it and the idea of it being a wide-spread phenomenon is really quite ludicrous when you consider the wider historical context.

Quote:That is not say that male-on-male sexual abuse did not occur. It absolutely did - and the very fact that we have historical records testifying to it in a period so hostile to same-sex activity is quite significant. Though they are fleeting, we do have references to the sexual abuse of male slaves by white male owners in the historical record; a handful of slave narratives (including Harriet Jacobs' Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl) contain references that seem to clearly refer to non-consensual, exploitative same-sex activity; at least one study of abolitionist rhetoric has identified how some strands of abolitionist thought tried to imply that there was an inherently homoerotic component to the exploitation of male slaves that could and did culminate in sexual abuse. Indeed, abolitionists went to great lengths to highlight sexual abuse as a particular, masculine act of depravity in general. Plantation owner Thomas Thistlewood quite notably made explicit reference to the practice in Jamaica even in the 1700s, when he briefly drew attention in his diary to news that another slave owner had been accused of committing sodomy with one of his male domestic servants. Sexual abuse was a defining feature of the institution of slavery, and though the vast majority of victims were women, the abuse of men by other men - as well as the abuse of men by women, and women of women - certainly occurred as well.
Fundamentally though, sexual exploitation in slavery was about more than physical gratification: it was about power. Rape and sexual assault were tools of violence, humiliation and dehumanisation just as much as the whip or the fist were. They were used both to realise and to express the power of the white slave owner over his or her black slaves. Male on male sexual violence was a means by which the incredible power of the slave owner could be demonstrated; to its victims living in a profoundly gendered society (and slave communities were strongly gendered even if in different ways to white society), it was a uniquely and profoundly humiliating act of violence that directly assaulted their masculinity and their dignity.

(July 28, 2020 at 9:46 pm)SUNGULA Wrote:

Quote:State and local governments followed suit: bars catering to gay men and lesbians were shut down, and their customers were arrested and exposed in newspapers. Cities performed "sweeps" to rid neighborhoods, parks, bars, and beaches of gay people. They outlawed the wearing of opposite gender clothes, and universities expelled instructors suspected of being homosexual.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_...%20Village

Quote:Once a week a police officer would collect envelopes of cash as a payoff known as a gayola, as the Stonewall Inn had no liquor license. It had no running water behind the bar—dirty glasses were run through tubs of water and immediately reused. There were no fire exits, and the toilets overran consistently. Though the bar was not used for prostitution, drug sales and other "cash transactions" took place.

(July 28, 2020 at 10:19 pm)Huggy Bear Wrote:

(July 28, 2020 at 9:56 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: You quoted a meme and your scalding me for sources . But of course you can't offer up any actual objections to the post

I asked you to name your source... anyways your "source" is just one big contradiction.

Quote:I'll address your actual question about this 'buck breaking' practice first, though.

To get to the heart of the matter from the outset: no, the practice described in the article you linked to did not exist. This is literally the first that I have ever heard of this practice supposedly existing, and when I went digging around to try and see if I could figure out its origin story, I essentially found two versions of the story: the one that you've linked to, which is the milder of the two, and another which is more overtly homophobic and black nationalist in its rhetoric. Like most of these memes that go around the internet, there are absolutely grains of truth to the story, but the practice of "buck breaking" they're describing simply did not exist. I have never seen any evidence for it, I know of no-one who studies the dynamics of sexual abuse in slavery who has mentioned it and the idea of it being a wide-spread phenomenon is really quite ludicrous when you consider the wider historical context.

Your source claims to have never seen evidence for buck breaking, yet goes on to say.

Quote:That is not say that male-on-male sexual abuse did not occur. It absolutely did - and the very fact that we have historical records testifying to it in a period so hostile to same-sex activity is quite significant. Though they are fleeting, we do have references to the sexual abuse of male slaves by white male owners in the historical record; a handful of slave narratives (including Harriet Jacobs' Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl) contain references that seem to clearly refer to non-consensual, exploitative same-sex activity; at least one study of abolitionist rhetoric has identified how some strands of abolitionist thought tried to imply that there was an inherently homoerotic component to the exploitation of male slaves that could and did culminate in sexual abuse. Indeed, abolitionists went to great lengths to highlight sexual abuse as a particular, masculine act of depravity in general. Plantation owner Thomas Thistlewood quite notably made explicit reference to the practice in Jamaica even in the 1700s, when he briefly drew attention in his diary to news that another slave owner had been accused of committing sodomy with one of his male domestic servants. Sexual abuse was a defining feature of the institution of slavery, and though the vast majority of victims were women, the abuse of men by other men - as well as the abuse of men by women, and women of women - certainly occurred as well.
Fundamentally though, sexual exploitation in slavery was about more than physical gratification: it was about power. Rape and sexual assault were tools of violence, humiliation and dehumanisation just as much as the whip or the fist were. They were used both to realise and to express the power of the white slave owner over his or her black slaves. Male on male sexual violence was a means by which the incredible power of the slave owner could be demonstrated; to its victims living in a profoundly gendered society (and slave communities were strongly gendered even if in different ways to white society), it was a uniquely and profoundly humiliating act of violence that directly assaulted their masculinity and their dignity.

---

(July 28, 2020 at 9:56 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: You quoted a meme and your scalding me for sources . But of course you can't offer up any actual objections to the post

Here's the second part

---

---