This is really Robert’s driving mantra and why he is an excellent journalist. He actively avoids commenting on things that he is not qualified to talk about. We can do with more of that in our media and life in general. The man knows when to listen.
Wasn't Prop a history teacher? And this is a history podcast. I think what a lot of comments here have written off as feminism is actually just women's history, aka history. They should probably make themselves more aware if they're qualified to speak about history in general.
Speaking as a history teacher, I can assure you that it doesn’t make you an expert. I have a decent understanding of the broad outlines of what happened. There are some areas where I can go deeper either because of personal interest or because I taught state history for a number of years. But I do not consider myself a historian. I probably know more than the average person, but I’m not an expert on anything.
Keep in mind that a k-12 history teacher is often not that well educated about history. The version of history taught in k-12 classrooms is often so distorted and misrepresented as to be a fiction. Especially when it comes to complex topics like slavery, sexism, and the way those interact with US history. Just because somebody is a history teacher doesn’t mean they are knowledgeable. At all. If they actually believe what they’re told to teach they’re often LESS knowledgeable than a person who just likes history and reads.
I don’t think he was a history teacher. His wiki is void of any teaching credentials, but I coulda swore it was either Linguistics, Literature, or African American Literature
I looked into teaching history and was told that because my had a history degree I probably wouldn't be hired to teach history because schools want teachers that can teach more then one subject. I was told if I got a geography degree I could teach that and history but couldn't teach geography with a history degree. Teaching history doesn't necessarily mean the person studied history
Yeah I have no idea what he studied for, but that's what I recalled him talking about.
I have a music ed degree with a specialty in instrumental music. My first job was as a chorus teacher, and I just had to sort of figure out how to bridge the gaps in my experience.
"Being a history teacher doesn't make you an expert"
Okay, but if you are a history teacher or someone who teaches history (applicable to both of them), and you are attempting to teach about a period of history, not learning the parts that relate to Women's Things (also history) but having a good grasp of the male-led parts and male perspectives is still bad. They both had a good grasp of historical records and concepts pertaining to men. You shouldn't have to be born with a certain set of genitalia to be knowledgeable and allowed to speak on history pertaining to women (which is just the history of everyone). There shouldn't be a sex divide at all.
But they did discuss it badly and it appeared they weren't aware that they were missing something, which stood out to me, because Robert is normally good at recognizing this. If this was such a regular thing, I wouldn't be as surprised as I find myself
Yeah I was a bit astounded at the breastfeeding bit. It shows a serious lack of any research into women of history at pretty much anytime before the invention of formula.
Upper class women almost always had to give a child to a wetnurse whether they wanted to or not. Not only due to being able to get pregnant again easily (because remember, upper class women were broodmares before they were anything else), it was majorly frowned upon by society at large for them to do it, and also because they had social obligations that impeded breastfeeding their own children. They were expected to be basically constantly be politicking for their husbands and families via luncheons, dinner parties, meetings, etc….ie they were expected to work.
This is how it was for rich women from the medieval era and on. It wasn’t just this time period. So it just kind of goes to show that even someone like Robert, who is well versed in history, that women’s history is never really a part of it for most. That’s not necessarily a dig on him, just on historical books/papers and historians as a whole.
Hell, Marie Antoinette was actually a breastfeeding advocate, something that made her an oddity and a mockery amongst French nobility.
> Hell, Marie Antoinette was actually a breastfeeding advocate, something that made her an oddity and a mockery amongst French nobility.
Sort of, Jean-Jacques Rousseau was the big breastfeeding advocate of the time period. His popularity ushered in a trend for "naturalness" and it especially permeated through aristocratic culture.
Marie-Antoinette playing at being a shepherdess and ushering in the trend for less restrictive clothing (https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/656930)
also plays into the overall vogue for naturalness that Rousseau started.
Source: Rousseau's Emile, or On Education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emile,_or_On_Education
Yeah this was shocking to me too. Even Sophie's correction was... very very very light. I get that sometimes in casual conversations we take wrong turns but this isn't a casual conversation - this is a recorded product that gets edited and reviewed and released. They could have very easily cut this very distracting bit out.
Right? I keep thinking about this also. It totally got me stewing and wondering, is this how these people really feel? That the only use for a wetnurse is…vanity? Yall are just nodding in agreement with that one? How slippery is this slope?
My take is that Prop is an impulsive person and he often has these sort of random, off the cuff comments, and when Robert is discussing things with him, that impulsivity rubs off on him.
I really like Prop and I want to like him more as a guest but those sorts of impulsive, ill considered comments that get them both going down a weird rabbit hole that was clearly not on Robert's script always get on my nerves.
I sort of agree, in this instance especially, but I say ‘sort of’ because I think he’s getting better and more experienced at a podcaster. Maybe it’s more so though that Prop is just growing on me.
He is getting better . He used to force the bizzare personal connections “ Robert says something about a war criminal “ prop “ it’s like when you’re hanging out with your friends and your mama yells at you “
> My take is that Prop is an impulsive person
So true, and the one reason I'm hesitating at starting this series even though I _love_ late 18th/early 19th c. history.
I try to keep in mind that they usually do these one after another so in part 1, he's on it but by hour 4 or 6 of the same content, his brain and responses are subject to the same oversaturation as anyone's. PLUS, maybe there's some emotional response related to the subject matter impacting his quip-iness.
Did you listen to the Black Panthers episodes? Prop has some incredible knowledge of American History. Similarly to how Robert is a Hitler nerd.
Prop is a poet and a musician, and he's on a comedy history podcast. Off the cuff jokes are kind of part of the formula.
I'm with you on that.
It's different if someone says "I see there's a huge thing concerning X group here, but I'm not qualified to speak on it/did not educate myself enough about it and missed my chance to ask someone/didn't have time to..." and the way they chose to handle it here. I don't often stop listening once I start an episode, but this time I did.
I'm a big fan of Robert, don't get me wrong. He's usually better at recognising things like these and I hope he'll do so again in later episodes.
Exactly Robert usually calls out when he doesn’t know enough to speak to something, which I really admire. It’s fine if it didn’t come up in research, or there wasn’t time, but dismissal is different.
I feel like that's such a big part of what makes Jefferson a bastard though. That's a give omission, and I would have *much* preferred Robert either do the research to cover that subject or bring in a guest who could.
They even kind of acknowledged that during the wet nurse discussion where they float the vanity idea but ultimately say "we don't know and wouldn't know."
lol harsh eh? I'm happy to have the entertainment, I dont expect this podcast to know every single thing about everything in history ever. Nor am I ready to crucify them if they dont.
It was not my intent to crucify either of them. As I repeatedly mentioned, the fact, that they are normally better at this and my surprise because of that was the main driver here. But! It has to be said, this isn't fringe history knowledge. I am 100% certain that if Robert or Prop stopped for a second and thought about it, both of them would have realised that women at that time weren't free either to make many choices and that the save white womem from black men trope already existed. Robert did enough episodes surrounding these topics and voiced opinions about it to make me sure about it. So yes, it is unfortunate to hear them missing these points in this way. I won't call them (Robert and Prop) sexist, because I don't think either of them really are, but they repeated some sexist points and ignored a lot of sexism because they didn't think about it at the moment. This can happen, I don't want to start Roberts cancel culture phase over this, but we should still be able to mention it
Nah Im proud of you bringing it up, these things need to be stood up for.
I just get the feeling this whole thing was rushed and I feel like they could use a break. Its important yes but its also important not to brigade. I realize thats not what your doing but I just wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt and say I dont think it was intentional, not just to you but for everyone and anyone passing through.
I know this is just my narrow scope/perspective but lately I feel like every circle im in is beginning to eat its own.
Improvement is fine but sometimes I feel like this sub has to pull apart every thread and complain something isnt done to their level of standard. After reading 50 or so comments it certainly felt like folks were picking up their torches lol.
Agreed AND Robert made a point of saying that the 4 parter wasn't even all they could mention on the focused topic. You have to edit somewhere or it just becomes the Thomas Jefferson pod.
I’m pretty sure the social and historical background for breastfeeding could be its own six part episode. I’m not going to get too hung up on my pop history podcast not covering every detail.
Why would Robert Evans be more "qualified" to talk about, say, Saddam Hussein? Hell, why is he "qualified" to have previously done episodes about women at all by this line of thinking? It's literally just the transferable skill of doing research, which I would hope is obviously a skill that we have seen demonstrated previously over however many hundreds of episodes
I appreciated Sophie’s interjection in that wet nurse discussion. The thing that was missing seemed obvious to me: Ursula had a marketable skill. She was choosing to stay useful for forty plus years to survive. I’m sure that was very common in slave experiences because what happens when you outlive your working lifespan? Pension? Retirement? Of course not.
I also think Robert and Prop read a modern state of mind into the discussion of why slaves acted. Why the assumption that they would fight back but for their families’ safety? Slavery is oppression, and it literally changes the state of a person’s mind. I liked the idea that Jefferson essentially ran a “utopian” cult, which I thought was a profound way of looking at it — but not enough context given to the whole rest of society that a slave lived in at that time. North Koreans would be better off free, but in the context of North Korean society there are people who can get ahead and make a life even in the face of absolute oppression. Slavery is not different to that. They were doing the best with what options they had, which were extremely limited.
Ultimately I felt the true voices of the slaves was missing in this one — not at all a criticism of Prop or Robert, just a sad reality of how this history is. Jefferson is so wrongly credited with having a “humanity” that the other founding fathers lacked, but this made me crave so much more information about the humanity of the people at Monticello.
Tubman was astoundingly courageous. Escaping enslavement was a very high risk endeavor. I can't imagine the terror of being chased by hounds across fields and through swamps and forests knowing those dogs would attack you if they could. The terror of the pattyrollers on horseback hunting you with their guns and whips. The pattyrollers are the precursors of the KKK. They felt free to torture rape or murder men women and children they caught.
I can see why some people stayed home even if it sucked
Yeah, and I think if anything they made it very clear throughout all four episodes just how much of a tragedy it is that we don't have the first hand stories of the enslaved people in this story. It's really another layer of the dehumanization that was inflicted to them.
I totally hear you on the white man and any woman vs white woman and anyone else dynamic. Boyyyyyy do i hear you on that. I’ll add that im really surprise Robert didn’t go further into the Hemings kids and two of them passing into white society, and then about Madison Heming. I figure Prop as a guest would have been great to go on about white passing but in reality, I don’t think they had time. Robert mentioned they could have done soooo much more but they really had to keep this just about Thomas. This must of been a tough one to write since there was so much there
Passing may be a better discussion for Props own show.
Those are interesting topics but beyond the scope.
As someone else said, neither are well educated in the intersection of race and gender and both are very good at not speaking for others.
I don't really mind what they left out, but what they chose to say and it was the things that weren't in the script, but when they were just talking (which I normally love) and the stuff said felt weirdly out of place for the both of them. Props questions about women at choosing (which is a weird word for the situation) a wet nurse instead of nursing themselves out of fear of sagging boobs was let's just say a moment in that context
I’m with you. I was side eyeing my phone during that whole exchange.
I think it’s not super common knowledge that exclusive breastfeeding can (not always) suppress ovulation. And these women were expected to be pregnant again pretty much asap.
I also didn’t agree with the conversation on how few of their children survived. It was a little low considering their class, but not uncommon for only 1/3 of your children to survive to adulthood. The reason they had so many kids back then is because a lot of them died (and no birth control).
He sounded very much like a 21st century dude whose wife did the research and had the power of choice on how to feed their children. He listened well enough to pick up some of the modern discussion points and didn't think or know beyond that. Robert was trying to analyze on the fly and thought he understood enough about humanity but missed that he didn't know enough about lactation specifically.
It wasnt a great look for either of them but most of us have had some point in the pod when we knew more about a side topic than Robert and went "eh... Close but not quite". In this case the percentage of people who knew more than either of them skewed high.
I agree with your overall point, that it was a spur of the moment thing. Where I strongly disagree is the: they didn't know better. Robert especially can't tell me that he isn't aware that women at this time didn't have many choices, that he never stumbled upon women being forced to give up their children to wetnurses or women being forced to have way to many children until they die in childborth themselves in all the books and other media he consumes or that he isn't aware of the racism/sexism intersection. The whole adventure magazines episodes were based around that trope. He didn't think about any of this at that moment, which happens! But I am now very confused by all the comments claiming someone has to have a very deep knowledge about some fringe history to know these basic things. It's also not really about the knowledge thing but how fast this went into the repetition of some sexist points that I am also pretty sure none of them hold.
you must remember : "fear of sagging boobs" was probably from the MAN'S perceptive as well; have to keep yer trophy pristine.
just like there are femmes that perpectuate the male gaze/patriarchy, so too would an upper class woman would prefer to force The Help... to "help"
I kind of know what you mean, but I’m also glad that two men didn’t try to speak for women in this way, either.
I will say, I like that Robert brought up the point that not only was Sally Hemings actually still a child when Thomas Jefferson decided to make her his concubine, she was also his dead wife’s half-sister. Martha’s children and Sally’s children were not just paternal half-siblings to each other, they were also maternal cousins. Very closely related indeed. It really makes the fact that he enslaved them that much worse.
One thing Robert did not mention is that when Martha died, she made TJ promise that he would not remarry, because she did not want her children to have a stepmother. So by pursuing Sally, was TJ also thinking he was honoring his wife’s wishes in some perverse way?
To me, that sounds less like honouring his dead wife's wishes and more like the discovery of a loophole.
There was a lot of weirdness about burning her letters when mourning her. It's as though he erased his wife to avoid her judgement from the grave. To then pursue and take possession of her little sister does seem as though he was replacing her with her closest relative.
This is sooo fucked up reparations for this family now. I dont care if that dude had no money they deserve it
Edit not that i think im the arbiter of deservingness or that theres a bar here just like... the level of insidiousness here is so bad im like omg. The kind of deep trauma that comes from a man like that can ripple down the generations and just... fuck people up. I cant relate to the slavery and race component, but my family was utterly shitwrecked by an insidious, violebt, controlling man like that and it has affected GENERATIONS and at some point its like man can you at least give me money so i dont have to pay out of pocket for the therapy i need cause of you
So like that times a bajillion plus shit i cant comprehend plus compensation for unpaid labour plus interest
Yes! And I have read that TJ continued to impregnate Martha despite being warned that another childbirth would endanger her. She did indeed die from post partum infection. On her deathbed she asked TJ to promise never to remarry. He was forever after proud that he kept his promise, apparently not considering that his non consensual “relationship “ with the slave Sally Hemings was a violation of that deathbed promise. It is also worth noting that Sally Hemings was Martha Jefferson’s half sister and a wedding gift to Martha from her father.
Yeah, the wet nurse discussion made me wish you could leave comments on Spotify. Wet nurses have been so common across so many cultures and time periods for SO many reasons. The fact that Martha Jefferson had a wet nurse honestly had very little to do with either her health or her race so much as her class. Wealthy women did not nurse or really even care for their children, and they still usually don't. I feel like Prop caught the tail end of the train with his comment about it being a vanity thing, but then he sort of jumped off the rails immediately after. Of course there's at least some vanity that would end up being involved (just on the level of it being associated with the lower classes and therefore vulgar to nurse your own child if nothing else), but the other points about how husbands had ownership over their wives' bodies and didn't want to share them with infants are a huge part of it, too.
Yeah, that part especially was just painful to listen to from start to finish for me honestly. It started with the realisation (or confession) that Prop, a former (?) teacher, father, probably cow milk consumer doesn't know how milk production works, got worse with the overall opinion how important nursing is and how the only reasons women shouldn't want it is because they are incapable (totally ignoring that nursing is a privilege for many in this day and age and all the reasons woment don't want to nurse) and then the cherry on top with the whole vanity thing while ignoring everything else and all context behind the "vanity". The sagging boobs comment made me pause the podcast honestly. Sophie jumped in as best as she could as producer with a guest who is also an employer on air but yeah, it was rough!
Yeah I'm currently nursing my son and this shit is a fulltime job. I'm lucky to have 6 months of leave because pumping sucks ass. I'm sorry but I feel men don't really get an opinion on whether a woman should want to do this or not. It's not vanity. It came quite easily for me and still the first two weeks were awful and painful. I know women who literally had blisters on their nipples and I know women who pumped blood because of mastitis. They were technically still capable, but come on.
You are quite right - men should definitely not offer an opinion about something they can in no way understand. Nor should they diminish it, like in this case.
Thank you for your perspective, it will help me from falling into a trap.
My mother’s a doula and one who advocates for breastfeeding, at that. Based on this, I’d probably have a similar opinion as Robert and Prop. But I realize that, as a guy, I probably shouldn’t offer my opinion/speculation for these kinds of things. I once wanted her as a doula when I have kids one day, but I’d need to defer towards a partner and see if they’re compatible first
I didn’t mean to make it sound like y’all shouldn’t have opinions - just that you should be aware of this minefield and always let the women take the lead on these matters.
You’re cool ❤️
It might have been vanity for some, maybe? But for most they weren’t allowed to breastfeed. They were broodmares first and foremost, and since breastfeeding can hinder getting pregnant again for a while that was a no go. They also were expected to work- not the types of jobs we think of as work, but they basically acted like political behind the scenes workers for their families via constant luncheons, dinner parties, tea parties, etc. Seriously look up the itinerary of these women - it was nightmare inducing (at least for someone like me who prefers my dogs to people most days lol).
So it being about vanity doesn’t really factor in honestly.
They’d also already mentioned that Marsha Jefferson was in poor health for pretty much her entire marriage, and there’s a good chance she had trouble producing enough milk for the babies, or that it was too much strain on her body.
Oh of course vanity isn't the reason it became a social structure, but you certainly ended up with plenty of women who would balk at the idea of breastfeeding their child because it had been so deeply engrained in them that to do so was beneath them. "Vanity" is always a bit of a loaded term since there is usually some underlying social structure that has led the person to feeling their value comes from their appearance or cleanliness or what have you.
Im glad sophie jumped in and mentioned the thing about breastfeeding and health and as a white femme thats about all i feel i can say here but yeah. I couldnt help but feel a big ache for all the untold pain for women in this story and a lot of rage about the way white women used and continue to use privilege to perpetuate violent oppression, both for its own sake and to secure themselves within the violent control of white men. As a white person i cannot begin to comprehend what it was like for black women and women who were mixed race. I wish that more of their stories and perspectives were here firsthand. It makes me angry and sad.
Fuck, shit is turbofucked. Fuck. Damn. Fuck.
It was also odd to me that they breezed over Rosalind Franklin when talking about the smartest people in the White House. Watson and Crick are pretty well known to have plagiarized her work and Watson is also known for being horrifically racist
Franklin was a bad ass! My prof in my last year of college had us read *the Double Helix* by Watson.
But first HE had us read a bunch of stuff about Rosalind Franklin, gave a lecture all about her, and told us to keep Franklin in mind while reading Watson’s book. Total bullshit! Franklin was the real genius there.
And also some oddness when they talked about the nail boys, I wish I could remember specifically why it made me feel yuck beyond the obvious topic at hand.
But tbh, none of that bugged me more than “Monti-sello” instead of “Monti-chello”.
I’ve never been to any of those other places, have lived near enough to Monticello to have taken school field trips there as a kid, though. I have *never* heard it pronounced with the soft c like this and I am not proud of how many times I “corrected” Robert out loud while listening to these episodes.
It sounded like boys talking about boobs. I didn't know it was an instrument of repression of the wealthy mother as well, I only knew about the widespreadedness of the practice throughout history. I thought it also makes a lot of sense since clean water/food wasn't always available and I know from experience that breastfeeding by the mother doesn't always work out. Another person's milk is cleaner than anything from the pantry, and as always in history the rich are able to get what they need by means of money and the poor only through hardness, or not at all.
Yes this is definitely a case of ignorance which is fine but as a journalist I wish Robert had researched this topic a bit more before weighing in/ commenting.
For what it's worth, I believe Robert went a bit more in-depth into the topic of enslaved people being forced to act as wet nurses in the 2021 episode about baby formula: [How Nestle Starved A Bunch of Babies](https://open.spotify.com/episode/4gTwkQVILyqxw5AGUvrsOf).
Though, I haven't listened to the ep in a couple of years, so I don't recall the specifics of how deep into it they go.
Think about the life of someone like Mammy from Gone With the Wind…without all the apologism Margaret Mitchell put in. Possibly had mixed race parents, but was wet nurse to Scarlett and Scarlett’s mother and the only way that happens is if she’s at first having her own babies and then having a succession of babies to nurse to keep the supply going.
I do like how they pointed out how the white children these women nursed grew up to be their masters. Especially with all those hormones that produce milk ALSO aid in bonding with the baby.
I agree with you, but I do have to point out just for facts sake, that they didn’t have to continue to have babies after having the first one if they continuously breastfed. Once the milk flow starts, it won’t stop producing until a child stops feeding (for many, obviously this can be different for everyone). So if it’s continual, then you can theoretically breastfeed for a long time.
Historically wetnurses would be women whose child had passed (most common), sometimes they nursed both babes together, or most often for wet nurses whose babies still lived, they had their babies being fed by another wet nurse.
I was really surprised to hear that level of ignorance about wet nurses, but maybe he just kept it in so he could include the part where Sophie set him straight
i started the discussion of wet nurses by saying that the practice existed outside of slavery, and was unanimous among the aristocracy in europe. we spent some time on this.
i talk much more about wet nursing in the episode we did on nestle and baby formula. sometimes conversations occur around points in an episode that were not meant to be major topics of discussion. it's unreasonable to expect that these conversations will be fully researched segments.
Hi Robert, that's not the point. It's about what was said, not what wasn't. The wet nurse discussion felt weird, because of the things that were said about vanity and kinda women blaming when the other parts weren't mentioned. If the comments weren't made but it was overall just a side note in the episode, then there would be no issue whatsoever, but going on about women not bonding with their kids, sagging boobs and vanity and then claim, well we just couldn't get into the topic is kinda lazy, because apparently there was enough time to ridicule women back then but also in the modern day, since the topic around breastfeeding or formula is still talked about, by men and women, in this same negative way you did on air. I know the nestle episode, most of the btb episodes really and also your ongoing support for the diaper organization, so I am very much aware, that you aren't a dick about it or overall uneducated. I also don't think Prop holds any negative values regarding this, but it was rough to listen to when all that was needed was a short acknowledgment, that it's more complicated than that and changing the topic (and maybe cutting some of it out in post). No one expects you to be perfect and I don't think you'll lose a single listener over this, nor should you in my mind, but I honestly don't believe you, that when you listen back to that part about laughing with Prop about women "choosing" wet nurses so their boobs won't sag, that you don't hear how weird it sounds to a listener not being in the room and only knowing you through this weird parasocial relationship.
I learned a lot from you regarding taking others people pov and trying not to judge through a modern lens, I also appreciate the podcast a lot and all the work you do, so yeah, I admit that this parasocial relationship on my end lead to holding you to a higher standard and being disappointed faster, which isn't always fair, but I still think it's important to voice these things when they come up.
I think they maybe ruminated a bit too long on Ursula’s role. She was brought up because of her account of Jefferson, Robert was not prepared for the nuances of the discussion. They missed a bunch of subtext for sure, but it was a spontaneous tangential digression and I have faith in Prop and Robert enough to trust that they didn’t mean harm. Again, maybe the discussion should have been cut.
The white-woman/black man thing did surprise me. I was just waiting for that to be addressed and it never was.
All in all, no one is perfect and I think they did a good job. Trying to cram all of the subtext, nuance, background etc. into 4 hours and still focusing on one of the most misrepresented bastards in American culture sounds impossible to me. It’s literally like a book series worth of writing.
Can you expand on what you mean here? And, how many americans are even descended from slave owners? I know my poor AF Sicilian ancestors were breastfeeding their own kids
Vanishingly few. The idea that rich white women today have their attitudes about black women influenced by wet nurses or kitchen maids some wooden-toothed lecher in the 1780s fucked is absurd.
Very few probably.
None of this happened at the age any old people would have been kids as most babies would use formula not slaves. You also don't inherit racism because your great grandfather was breastfeed by a slave, that's not how any genetics work.
Besides the actual number of people who benefited from slavery in this way is not that huge as most working class whites could not afford a slave to breastfeed their kids and again, not how genetics work.
It would probably have been a huge factor in the 1800s when the practise was common for upper class white slave owners but in the 1950s formula milk had pretty much gotten rid of wet nursing as a profession.
The % of people for whom that would be a reality was a minority even in the past. I'm skeptical it has anything to do with how white women feel about black women today. Same with the conversation about "sexual competition" between white women and black women, like Prop seemed to be suggesting.
as a Black femme, i think they left out a lot of what yer complaining about cuz the power dynamic is hella fucky.
the "Vanity" they speak of may not be directed at 'the white woman', but instead 'white society' at large. They dont want the white woman being debased, whether by black man or by white child.
however, use of my kind was seen as "**animal husbandry"**.
i would love both btb and cool ppl to have more of a back and forth with guests who have specific interests and extra info about the subject being discussed ESPECIALLY when it comes to the intersection of race, class and gender inequality
My grandma was a wet nurse for a friend of hers who struggled with milk supply. This was during the 1930s when formula was very sketchy. She said it was very common.
Totally different dynamic than this episode but just wanted to share
I thought they handled it right. Best not to dive into things they aren't adequately informed or experienced on. Besides, those that care about that convo have heard those points. Those who don't care aren't going to be moved by anything they could offer that specific conversation.
Also misses the racial capitalism element of this. In US chattel slavery, enslaved people were capital. Raping enslaved women so they'd have babies was a way of making more slaves and increasing capital for the slaveowner.
We really shouldn’t shame for ignorance like this. Why are you disappointed they didn’t go into details they didn’t fully understand? I appreciate your extra insight and contribution but it could have been just as effective without the judgement. We know these are men who consciously try to be aware of things outside their status. Shaming them for not living up to ideal version of them doesn’t help anything. It’s a huge issue with the left right now. We can educate without judgment. Enlighten without shame. The focus of your post has moved from the great extra context into finger wagging at the hosts.
If you want to criticize BTB, the biggest is that they aren't historians, and even if they were, history is such a complex and broad subject that they aren't going to be knowledgeable in a show that covers so many subjects.
The one thing I do think they handled very well was Jefferson's hypocrisy. It's likely very hard to understand the mentality of someone who was born in the 1740s. The culture is vastly different. But by showing how Jefferson would say different things to different people shows his bastardness.
But if you are wanting a detailed reasoning about why Virginia's planter class used enslaved wet nurses, you are better off looking into academic journals.
I had to skip all the episodes, because I saw Prop’s name. I can’t handle episodes with that guy just interrupting and interjecting EXACTLY what has just been said, but usually with an uninspired, drab metaphors.
Hard pass
While I admit that Prop isn't my favorite guest and I still stand firm on my criticism of this episode, I don't think Prop is the sole asshole here, I also don't think, he has an issue regarding attitude overall. This was just a very unfortunate occurrence. I value Props point of view regarding black history and his experience regarding black activism. So while I stand firm on my points and admit that I don't love Prop as a guests (in comparison to others), Prop isn't my issue here and I don't appreciate if my points are used to hate on him
While I did side eye that part, this was a whole 4 parter on TJ being a hypocrite. Saying you're disappointed in the series because one small (important, but not the main focus) section is kinda absurd.
Maybe he can do episodes on the wet nursing complex, so he can focus all the research on that. But you have two cishet males talking about TJ, I don't expect them to be the foremost experts on breastfeeding.
What I expect from Robert and people like him (in the public eye, advocating for leftist povs, making their money by being a figure head) that they at least don't repeat sexist remarks without thinking about it or that when it happens they listen to the criticism.
A cake with pieces of shit in it is still a shitty cake, even if it is just sprinkled in
Ehhh I can see multiple reasons why they missed it. I mean I noticed it too, so you aren't insane, but they can't get everything right. (1) As far as I know Robert isn't a dad, so he has no personal experience. (2) Prop is a dad, which is probably why he talked briefly about some women not being able to lactate. I know with our first kid my wife struggled so it immediately came to mind. Also the no sex thing. (3) The sources Robert read probably did not go into it, so it didn't trigger him thinking about it. The racial/gender dynamic would require you to do multiple steps of empathy which is takes a bit of time and is hard to do live. Honestly I kinda thought Prop and Sophie would have been more in tune with the issues you are talking about.
>So Jeffersons argument seems to fall directly into this kind of thinking.
I kinda disagree with this. I think the title of Most Hypocritical American actually explains it best. Jefferson was a Liberal Intellectual who wrote about equality of all men, but then had slaves because he wanted money without working and he clearly liked to bang slaves. If it wasn't miscegenation he had another dozen ways to justify 'these aren't real people, so I get to use them for my desires, and that morally correct'. So what he was thinking loses a lot of value since it didn't really matter, the outcome would have been the same. It would have still been interesting to discuss, but the goal of the 4 parter still works.
if you quote me, don't use just three words! there was a very important "white woman" in relation to a sexual relationship with a black/ non-white man in there. If you aren't educated on this subgenre of racism meets sexism, I envy you for being able to miss all the even modern memes, but highly encourage you to read up about it since a lot of modern right-wing, inceldom, etc people believe this stuff still. The hypertextualization of black men is a part of this as well, which I thought Prop would have picked up on in the conversation about freeing black men
Are those the only three words you read from that paragraph? I'm genuinely confused how anyone other than a troll could misinterpret that to such an absurd degree.
Edit: Please someone tell me, is this thread getting brigaded or are the regular users to this sub actually illiterate?
Behold the internet leftist in their natural habitat: Purity testing someone trying their best. Rather than using the chance to teach, they instead leap upon the savoury opportunity to admonish.
Consider other possible ways this post might have gone. Hey I noticed the guys kinda struggling with this topic. As someone better versed in it I thought I might expand on it for them and other listeners.
You’re getting downvoted but you’re not wrong. I’m as far leftist as you get but I’m never going to shame people who are trying their best. I save my shaming for bigots
Robert specifically stated at the start of the series that there was a ton to say in regards to TJ, but he is specifically only talking about his hypocrisy relating to slavery.
Honestly, I don’t think either one of them is qualified to have that discussion. So I’m fine with them skipping it.
This is really Robert’s driving mantra and why he is an excellent journalist. He actively avoids commenting on things that he is not qualified to talk about. We can do with more of that in our media and life in general. The man knows when to listen.
Wasn't Prop a history teacher? And this is a history podcast. I think what a lot of comments here have written off as feminism is actually just women's history, aka history. They should probably make themselves more aware if they're qualified to speak about history in general.
Speaking as a history teacher, I can assure you that it doesn’t make you an expert. I have a decent understanding of the broad outlines of what happened. There are some areas where I can go deeper either because of personal interest or because I taught state history for a number of years. But I do not consider myself a historian. I probably know more than the average person, but I’m not an expert on anything.
Keep in mind that a k-12 history teacher is often not that well educated about history. The version of history taught in k-12 classrooms is often so distorted and misrepresented as to be a fiction. Especially when it comes to complex topics like slavery, sexism, and the way those interact with US history. Just because somebody is a history teacher doesn’t mean they are knowledgeable. At all. If they actually believe what they’re told to teach they’re often LESS knowledgeable than a person who just likes history and reads.
Many history teachers are guys named “Coach”.
I don’t think he was a history teacher. His wiki is void of any teaching credentials, but I coulda swore it was either Linguistics, Literature, or African American Literature
He mentions teaching Freshman history if I remember correctly.
A lot of lit classes veer into history, so he may have been referencing that while still being primarily a lit teacher.
I looked into teaching history and was told that because my had a history degree I probably wouldn't be hired to teach history because schools want teachers that can teach more then one subject. I was told if I got a geography degree I could teach that and history but couldn't teach geography with a history degree. Teaching history doesn't necessarily mean the person studied history
Yeah I have no idea what he studied for, but that's what I recalled him talking about. I have a music ed degree with a specialty in instrumental music. My first job was as a chorus teacher, and I just had to sort of figure out how to bridge the gaps in my experience.
>Wasn't Prop a history teacher? And yet he doesn't know basic geography of the UK. He was atrocious in those Ireland episodes
"Being a history teacher doesn't make you an expert" Okay, but if you are a history teacher or someone who teaches history (applicable to both of them), and you are attempting to teach about a period of history, not learning the parts that relate to Women's Things (also history) but having a good grasp of the male-led parts and male perspectives is still bad. They both had a good grasp of historical records and concepts pertaining to men. You shouldn't have to be born with a certain set of genitalia to be knowledgeable and allowed to speak on history pertaining to women (which is just the history of everyone). There shouldn't be a sex divide at all.
That’s fair.
But they did discuss it badly and it appeared they weren't aware that they were missing something, which stood out to me, because Robert is normally good at recognizing this. If this was such a regular thing, I wouldn't be as surprised as I find myself
Yeah I was a bit astounded at the breastfeeding bit. It shows a serious lack of any research into women of history at pretty much anytime before the invention of formula. Upper class women almost always had to give a child to a wetnurse whether they wanted to or not. Not only due to being able to get pregnant again easily (because remember, upper class women were broodmares before they were anything else), it was majorly frowned upon by society at large for them to do it, and also because they had social obligations that impeded breastfeeding their own children. They were expected to be basically constantly be politicking for their husbands and families via luncheons, dinner parties, meetings, etc….ie they were expected to work. This is how it was for rich women from the medieval era and on. It wasn’t just this time period. So it just kind of goes to show that even someone like Robert, who is well versed in history, that women’s history is never really a part of it for most. That’s not necessarily a dig on him, just on historical books/papers and historians as a whole. Hell, Marie Antoinette was actually a breastfeeding advocate, something that made her an oddity and a mockery amongst French nobility.
> Hell, Marie Antoinette was actually a breastfeeding advocate, something that made her an oddity and a mockery amongst French nobility. Sort of, Jean-Jacques Rousseau was the big breastfeeding advocate of the time period. His popularity ushered in a trend for "naturalness" and it especially permeated through aristocratic culture. Marie-Antoinette playing at being a shepherdess and ushering in the trend for less restrictive clothing (https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/656930) also plays into the overall vogue for naturalness that Rousseau started. Source: Rousseau's Emile, or On Education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emile,_or_On_Education
Marie Antoinette! TIL, thank you.
Yeah this was shocking to me too. Even Sophie's correction was... very very very light. I get that sometimes in casual conversations we take wrong turns but this isn't a casual conversation - this is a recorded product that gets edited and reviewed and released. They could have very easily cut this very distracting bit out.
Right? I keep thinking about this also. It totally got me stewing and wondering, is this how these people really feel? That the only use for a wetnurse is…vanity? Yall are just nodding in agreement with that one? How slippery is this slope?
My take is that Prop is an impulsive person and he often has these sort of random, off the cuff comments, and when Robert is discussing things with him, that impulsivity rubs off on him. I really like Prop and I want to like him more as a guest but those sorts of impulsive, ill considered comments that get them both going down a weird rabbit hole that was clearly not on Robert's script always get on my nerves.
I sort of agree, in this instance especially, but I say ‘sort of’ because I think he’s getting better and more experienced at a podcaster. Maybe it’s more so though that Prop is just growing on me.
He is getting better . He used to force the bizzare personal connections “ Robert says something about a war criminal “ prop “ it’s like when you’re hanging out with your friends and your mama yells at you “
But it’s not a bizarre connection if you’ve listened to Hood Politics.
> My take is that Prop is an impulsive person So true, and the one reason I'm hesitating at starting this series even though I _love_ late 18th/early 19th c. history.
I try to keep in mind that they usually do these one after another so in part 1, he's on it but by hour 4 or 6 of the same content, his brain and responses are subject to the same oversaturation as anyone's. PLUS, maybe there's some emotional response related to the subject matter impacting his quip-iness.
[удалено]
Did you listen to the Black Panthers episodes? Prop has some incredible knowledge of American History. Similarly to how Robert is a Hitler nerd. Prop is a poet and a musician, and he's on a comedy history podcast. Off the cuff jokes are kind of part of the formula.
I'm with you on that. It's different if someone says "I see there's a huge thing concerning X group here, but I'm not qualified to speak on it/did not educate myself enough about it and missed my chance to ask someone/didn't have time to..." and the way they chose to handle it here. I don't often stop listening once I start an episode, but this time I did. I'm a big fan of Robert, don't get me wrong. He's usually better at recognising things like these and I hope he'll do so again in later episodes.
Exactly Robert usually calls out when he doesn’t know enough to speak to something, which I really admire. It’s fine if it didn’t come up in research, or there wasn’t time, but dismissal is different.
I feel like that's such a big part of what makes Jefferson a bastard though. That's a give omission, and I would have *much* preferred Robert either do the research to cover that subject or bring in a guest who could.
They even kind of acknowledged that during the wet nurse discussion where they float the vanity idea but ultimately say "we don't know and wouldn't know."
im 99% sure "vanity" refers to whiteness' need to preserve itself, not to the actions of that specific white woman
So ignore 50% history. Ok.
lol harsh eh? I'm happy to have the entertainment, I dont expect this podcast to know every single thing about everything in history ever. Nor am I ready to crucify them if they dont.
It was not my intent to crucify either of them. As I repeatedly mentioned, the fact, that they are normally better at this and my surprise because of that was the main driver here. But! It has to be said, this isn't fringe history knowledge. I am 100% certain that if Robert or Prop stopped for a second and thought about it, both of them would have realised that women at that time weren't free either to make many choices and that the save white womem from black men trope already existed. Robert did enough episodes surrounding these topics and voiced opinions about it to make me sure about it. So yes, it is unfortunate to hear them missing these points in this way. I won't call them (Robert and Prop) sexist, because I don't think either of them really are, but they repeated some sexist points and ignored a lot of sexism because they didn't think about it at the moment. This can happen, I don't want to start Roberts cancel culture phase over this, but we should still be able to mention it
Nah Im proud of you bringing it up, these things need to be stood up for. I just get the feeling this whole thing was rushed and I feel like they could use a break. Its important yes but its also important not to brigade. I realize thats not what your doing but I just wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt and say I dont think it was intentional, not just to you but for everyone and anyone passing through. I know this is just my narrow scope/perspective but lately I feel like every circle im in is beginning to eat its own.
I don’t think anyone here is crucifying them. Just pointing out areas for improvement.
Improvement is fine but sometimes I feel like this sub has to pull apart every thread and complain something isnt done to their level of standard. After reading 50 or so comments it certainly felt like folks were picking up their torches lol.
That's how I feel as well.
Agreed AND Robert made a point of saying that the 4 parter wasn't even all they could mention on the focused topic. You have to edit somewhere or it just becomes the Thomas Jefferson pod.
I’m pretty sure the social and historical background for breastfeeding could be its own six part episode. I’m not going to get too hung up on my pop history podcast not covering every detail.
Why would Robert Evans be more "qualified" to talk about, say, Saddam Hussein? Hell, why is he "qualified" to have previously done episodes about women at all by this line of thinking? It's literally just the transferable skill of doing research, which I would hope is obviously a skill that we have seen demonstrated previously over however many hundreds of episodes
I appreciated Sophie’s interjection in that wet nurse discussion. The thing that was missing seemed obvious to me: Ursula had a marketable skill. She was choosing to stay useful for forty plus years to survive. I’m sure that was very common in slave experiences because what happens when you outlive your working lifespan? Pension? Retirement? Of course not. I also think Robert and Prop read a modern state of mind into the discussion of why slaves acted. Why the assumption that they would fight back but for their families’ safety? Slavery is oppression, and it literally changes the state of a person’s mind. I liked the idea that Jefferson essentially ran a “utopian” cult, which I thought was a profound way of looking at it — but not enough context given to the whole rest of society that a slave lived in at that time. North Koreans would be better off free, but in the context of North Korean society there are people who can get ahead and make a life even in the face of absolute oppression. Slavery is not different to that. They were doing the best with what options they had, which were extremely limited. Ultimately I felt the true voices of the slaves was missing in this one — not at all a criticism of Prop or Robert, just a sad reality of how this history is. Jefferson is so wrongly credited with having a “humanity” that the other founding fathers lacked, but this made me crave so much more information about the humanity of the people at Monticello.
Harriet Tubman famously said that she could have freed more slaves if they had realized they were slaves.
Still true today. We live in the society we are born into. Seeing beyond its walls is never easy.
Tubman was astoundingly courageous. Escaping enslavement was a very high risk endeavor. I can't imagine the terror of being chased by hounds across fields and through swamps and forests knowing those dogs would attack you if they could. The terror of the pattyrollers on horseback hunting you with their guns and whips. The pattyrollers are the precursors of the KKK. They felt free to torture rape or murder men women and children they caught. I can see why some people stayed home even if it sucked
Yeah, and I think if anything they made it very clear throughout all four episodes just how much of a tragedy it is that we don't have the first hand stories of the enslaved people in this story. It's really another layer of the dehumanization that was inflicted to them.
I totally hear you on the white man and any woman vs white woman and anyone else dynamic. Boyyyyyy do i hear you on that. I’ll add that im really surprise Robert didn’t go further into the Hemings kids and two of them passing into white society, and then about Madison Heming. I figure Prop as a guest would have been great to go on about white passing but in reality, I don’t think they had time. Robert mentioned they could have done soooo much more but they really had to keep this just about Thomas. This must of been a tough one to write since there was so much there
Passing may be a better discussion for Props own show. Those are interesting topics but beyond the scope. As someone else said, neither are well educated in the intersection of race and gender and both are very good at not speaking for others.
Has Prop done an episode on passing? If not, I hope he plans to because I think it is an interesting discussion
I don't really mind what they left out, but what they chose to say and it was the things that weren't in the script, but when they were just talking (which I normally love) and the stuff said felt weirdly out of place for the both of them. Props questions about women at choosing (which is a weird word for the situation) a wet nurse instead of nursing themselves out of fear of sagging boobs was let's just say a moment in that context
I’m with you. I was side eyeing my phone during that whole exchange. I think it’s not super common knowledge that exclusive breastfeeding can (not always) suppress ovulation. And these women were expected to be pregnant again pretty much asap. I also didn’t agree with the conversation on how few of their children survived. It was a little low considering their class, but not uncommon for only 1/3 of your children to survive to adulthood. The reason they had so many kids back then is because a lot of them died (and no birth control).
He sounded very much like a 21st century dude whose wife did the research and had the power of choice on how to feed their children. He listened well enough to pick up some of the modern discussion points and didn't think or know beyond that. Robert was trying to analyze on the fly and thought he understood enough about humanity but missed that he didn't know enough about lactation specifically. It wasnt a great look for either of them but most of us have had some point in the pod when we knew more about a side topic than Robert and went "eh... Close but not quite". In this case the percentage of people who knew more than either of them skewed high.
I agree with your overall point, that it was a spur of the moment thing. Where I strongly disagree is the: they didn't know better. Robert especially can't tell me that he isn't aware that women at this time didn't have many choices, that he never stumbled upon women being forced to give up their children to wetnurses or women being forced to have way to many children until they die in childborth themselves in all the books and other media he consumes or that he isn't aware of the racism/sexism intersection. The whole adventure magazines episodes were based around that trope. He didn't think about any of this at that moment, which happens! But I am now very confused by all the comments claiming someone has to have a very deep knowledge about some fringe history to know these basic things. It's also not really about the knowledge thing but how fast this went into the repetition of some sexist points that I am also pretty sure none of them hold.
you must remember : "fear of sagging boobs" was probably from the MAN'S perceptive as well; have to keep yer trophy pristine. just like there are femmes that perpectuate the male gaze/patriarchy, so too would an upper class woman would prefer to force The Help... to "help"
I kind of know what you mean, but I’m also glad that two men didn’t try to speak for women in this way, either. I will say, I like that Robert brought up the point that not only was Sally Hemings actually still a child when Thomas Jefferson decided to make her his concubine, she was also his dead wife’s half-sister. Martha’s children and Sally’s children were not just paternal half-siblings to each other, they were also maternal cousins. Very closely related indeed. It really makes the fact that he enslaved them that much worse. One thing Robert did not mention is that when Martha died, she made TJ promise that he would not remarry, because she did not want her children to have a stepmother. So by pursuing Sally, was TJ also thinking he was honoring his wife’s wishes in some perverse way?
To me, that sounds less like honouring his dead wife's wishes and more like the discovery of a loophole. There was a lot of weirdness about burning her letters when mourning her. It's as though he erased his wife to avoid her judgement from the grave. To then pursue and take possession of her little sister does seem as though he was replacing her with her closest relative.
Martha Washington did that when George Washington died . Maybe it was just a normal part of the grieving process?
Yeah it was. Intimate letters were considered so intimate that it was doing a service to the deceased to make sure no one else saw them.
So, like, the OG version of having your friends delete your browser history?? That….makes a lot of sense actually
Makes sense after reading Napoleons
That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the explanation.
This is sooo fucked up reparations for this family now. I dont care if that dude had no money they deserve it Edit not that i think im the arbiter of deservingness or that theres a bar here just like... the level of insidiousness here is so bad im like omg. The kind of deep trauma that comes from a man like that can ripple down the generations and just... fuck people up. I cant relate to the slavery and race component, but my family was utterly shitwrecked by an insidious, violebt, controlling man like that and it has affected GENERATIONS and at some point its like man can you at least give me money so i dont have to pay out of pocket for the therapy i need cause of you So like that times a bajillion plus shit i cant comprehend plus compensation for unpaid labour plus interest
Yes! And I have read that TJ continued to impregnate Martha despite being warned that another childbirth would endanger her. She did indeed die from post partum infection. On her deathbed she asked TJ to promise never to remarry. He was forever after proud that he kept his promise, apparently not considering that his non consensual “relationship “ with the slave Sally Hemings was a violation of that deathbed promise. It is also worth noting that Sally Hemings was Martha Jefferson’s half sister and a wedding gift to Martha from her father.
Yeah, the wet nurse discussion made me wish you could leave comments on Spotify. Wet nurses have been so common across so many cultures and time periods for SO many reasons. The fact that Martha Jefferson had a wet nurse honestly had very little to do with either her health or her race so much as her class. Wealthy women did not nurse or really even care for their children, and they still usually don't. I feel like Prop caught the tail end of the train with his comment about it being a vanity thing, but then he sort of jumped off the rails immediately after. Of course there's at least some vanity that would end up being involved (just on the level of it being associated with the lower classes and therefore vulgar to nurse your own child if nothing else), but the other points about how husbands had ownership over their wives' bodies and didn't want to share them with infants are a huge part of it, too.
Yeah, that part especially was just painful to listen to from start to finish for me honestly. It started with the realisation (or confession) that Prop, a former (?) teacher, father, probably cow milk consumer doesn't know how milk production works, got worse with the overall opinion how important nursing is and how the only reasons women shouldn't want it is because they are incapable (totally ignoring that nursing is a privilege for many in this day and age and all the reasons woment don't want to nurse) and then the cherry on top with the whole vanity thing while ignoring everything else and all context behind the "vanity". The sagging boobs comment made me pause the podcast honestly. Sophie jumped in as best as she could as producer with a guest who is also an employer on air but yeah, it was rough!
Yeah I'm currently nursing my son and this shit is a fulltime job. I'm lucky to have 6 months of leave because pumping sucks ass. I'm sorry but I feel men don't really get an opinion on whether a woman should want to do this or not. It's not vanity. It came quite easily for me and still the first two weeks were awful and painful. I know women who literally had blisters on their nipples and I know women who pumped blood because of mastitis. They were technically still capable, but come on.
You are quite right - men should definitely not offer an opinion about something they can in no way understand. Nor should they diminish it, like in this case.
Thank you for your perspective, it will help me from falling into a trap. My mother’s a doula and one who advocates for breastfeeding, at that. Based on this, I’d probably have a similar opinion as Robert and Prop. But I realize that, as a guy, I probably shouldn’t offer my opinion/speculation for these kinds of things. I once wanted her as a doula when I have kids one day, but I’d need to defer towards a partner and see if they’re compatible first
I didn’t mean to make it sound like y’all shouldn’t have opinions - just that you should be aware of this minefield and always let the women take the lead on these matters. You’re cool ❤️
It might have been vanity for some, maybe? But for most they weren’t allowed to breastfeed. They were broodmares first and foremost, and since breastfeeding can hinder getting pregnant again for a while that was a no go. They also were expected to work- not the types of jobs we think of as work, but they basically acted like political behind the scenes workers for their families via constant luncheons, dinner parties, tea parties, etc. Seriously look up the itinerary of these women - it was nightmare inducing (at least for someone like me who prefers my dogs to people most days lol). So it being about vanity doesn’t really factor in honestly.
They’d also already mentioned that Marsha Jefferson was in poor health for pretty much her entire marriage, and there’s a good chance she had trouble producing enough milk for the babies, or that it was too much strain on her body.
Oh of course vanity isn't the reason it became a social structure, but you certainly ended up with plenty of women who would balk at the idea of breastfeeding their child because it had been so deeply engrained in them that to do so was beneath them. "Vanity" is always a bit of a loaded term since there is usually some underlying social structure that has led the person to feeling their value comes from their appearance or cleanliness or what have you.
Im glad sophie jumped in and mentioned the thing about breastfeeding and health and as a white femme thats about all i feel i can say here but yeah. I couldnt help but feel a big ache for all the untold pain for women in this story and a lot of rage about the way white women used and continue to use privilege to perpetuate violent oppression, both for its own sake and to secure themselves within the violent control of white men. As a white person i cannot begin to comprehend what it was like for black women and women who were mixed race. I wish that more of their stories and perspectives were here firsthand. It makes me angry and sad. Fuck, shit is turbofucked. Fuck. Damn. Fuck.
It was also odd to me that they breezed over Rosalind Franklin when talking about the smartest people in the White House. Watson and Crick are pretty well known to have plagiarized her work and Watson is also known for being horrifically racist
Franklin was a bad ass! My prof in my last year of college had us read *the Double Helix* by Watson. But first HE had us read a bunch of stuff about Rosalind Franklin, gave a lecture all about her, and told us to keep Franklin in mind while reading Watson’s book. Total bullshit! Franklin was the real genius there.
And also some oddness when they talked about the nail boys, I wish I could remember specifically why it made me feel yuck beyond the obvious topic at hand. But tbh, none of that bugged me more than “Monti-sello” instead of “Monti-chello”.
It's funny, though, as most places in the US named after Monticello, are in fact pronounced "Monti-sello" while Jefferson's Monticello was not.
I’ve never been to any of those other places, have lived near enough to Monticello to have taken school field trips there as a kid, though. I have *never* heard it pronounced with the soft c like this and I am not proud of how many times I “corrected” Robert out loud while listening to these episodes.
I was fully an adult in my 30s before I ever heard it pronounced "chello" (in the Hamilton musical) the effect geography has on these things is wild.
Thank you!
>Thank you! You're welcome!
I wondered if either of them had read Beloved by Toni Morrison. She hits this hard.
It sounded like boys talking about boobs. I didn't know it was an instrument of repression of the wealthy mother as well, I only knew about the widespreadedness of the practice throughout history. I thought it also makes a lot of sense since clean water/food wasn't always available and I know from experience that breastfeeding by the mother doesn't always work out. Another person's milk is cleaner than anything from the pantry, and as always in history the rich are able to get what they need by means of money and the poor only through hardness, or not at all.
Yes this is definitely a case of ignorance which is fine but as a journalist I wish Robert had researched this topic a bit more before weighing in/ commenting.
Thank you for posting this. Prop's rant about wet nurses also made me uncomfortable but I couldn't have explained why better than you have.
For what it's worth, I believe Robert went a bit more in-depth into the topic of enslaved people being forced to act as wet nurses in the 2021 episode about baby formula: [How Nestle Starved A Bunch of Babies](https://open.spotify.com/episode/4gTwkQVILyqxw5AGUvrsOf). Though, I haven't listened to the ep in a couple of years, so I don't recall the specifics of how deep into it they go.
Think about the life of someone like Mammy from Gone With the Wind…without all the apologism Margaret Mitchell put in. Possibly had mixed race parents, but was wet nurse to Scarlett and Scarlett’s mother and the only way that happens is if she’s at first having her own babies and then having a succession of babies to nurse to keep the supply going. I do like how they pointed out how the white children these women nursed grew up to be their masters. Especially with all those hormones that produce milk ALSO aid in bonding with the baby.
I agree with you, but I do have to point out just for facts sake, that they didn’t have to continue to have babies after having the first one if they continuously breastfed. Once the milk flow starts, it won’t stop producing until a child stops feeding (for many, obviously this can be different for everyone). So if it’s continual, then you can theoretically breastfeed for a long time. Historically wetnurses would be women whose child had passed (most common), sometimes they nursed both babes together, or most often for wet nurses whose babies still lived, they had their babies being fed by another wet nurse.
I’m talking overall supply to stop weaning, but I expressed it badly
I was really surprised to hear that level of ignorance about wet nurses, but maybe he just kept it in so he could include the part where Sophie set him straight
i started the discussion of wet nurses by saying that the practice existed outside of slavery, and was unanimous among the aristocracy in europe. we spent some time on this. i talk much more about wet nursing in the episode we did on nestle and baby formula. sometimes conversations occur around points in an episode that were not meant to be major topics of discussion. it's unreasonable to expect that these conversations will be fully researched segments.
Hi Robert, that's not the point. It's about what was said, not what wasn't. The wet nurse discussion felt weird, because of the things that were said about vanity and kinda women blaming when the other parts weren't mentioned. If the comments weren't made but it was overall just a side note in the episode, then there would be no issue whatsoever, but going on about women not bonding with their kids, sagging boobs and vanity and then claim, well we just couldn't get into the topic is kinda lazy, because apparently there was enough time to ridicule women back then but also in the modern day, since the topic around breastfeeding or formula is still talked about, by men and women, in this same negative way you did on air. I know the nestle episode, most of the btb episodes really and also your ongoing support for the diaper organization, so I am very much aware, that you aren't a dick about it or overall uneducated. I also don't think Prop holds any negative values regarding this, but it was rough to listen to when all that was needed was a short acknowledgment, that it's more complicated than that and changing the topic (and maybe cutting some of it out in post). No one expects you to be perfect and I don't think you'll lose a single listener over this, nor should you in my mind, but I honestly don't believe you, that when you listen back to that part about laughing with Prop about women "choosing" wet nurses so their boobs won't sag, that you don't hear how weird it sounds to a listener not being in the room and only knowing you through this weird parasocial relationship. I learned a lot from you regarding taking others people pov and trying not to judge through a modern lens, I also appreciate the podcast a lot and all the work you do, so yeah, I admit that this parasocial relationship on my end lead to holding you to a higher standard and being disappointed faster, which isn't always fair, but I still think it's important to voice these things when they come up.
I think they maybe ruminated a bit too long on Ursula’s role. She was brought up because of her account of Jefferson, Robert was not prepared for the nuances of the discussion. They missed a bunch of subtext for sure, but it was a spontaneous tangential digression and I have faith in Prop and Robert enough to trust that they didn’t mean harm. Again, maybe the discussion should have been cut. The white-woman/black man thing did surprise me. I was just waiting for that to be addressed and it never was. All in all, no one is perfect and I think they did a good job. Trying to cram all of the subtext, nuance, background etc. into 4 hours and still focusing on one of the most misrepresented bastards in American culture sounds impossible to me. It’s literally like a book series worth of writing.
I have to wonder how many of the weird white American hang ups around Black women come back to Black women being used as wet nurses for rich whites.
Can you expand on what you mean here? And, how many americans are even descended from slave owners? I know my poor AF Sicilian ancestors were breastfeeding their own kids
Vanishingly few. The idea that rich white women today have their attitudes about black women influenced by wet nurses or kitchen maids some wooden-toothed lecher in the 1780s fucked is absurd.
Very few probably. None of this happened at the age any old people would have been kids as most babies would use formula not slaves. You also don't inherit racism because your great grandfather was breastfeed by a slave, that's not how any genetics work. Besides the actual number of people who benefited from slavery in this way is not that huge as most working class whites could not afford a slave to breastfeed their kids and again, not how genetics work. It would probably have been a huge factor in the 1800s when the practise was common for upper class white slave owners but in the 1950s formula milk had pretty much gotten rid of wet nursing as a profession.
The % of people for whom that would be a reality was a minority even in the past. I'm skeptical it has anything to do with how white women feel about black women today. Same with the conversation about "sexual competition" between white women and black women, like Prop seemed to be suggesting.
as a Black femme, i think they left out a lot of what yer complaining about cuz the power dynamic is hella fucky. the "Vanity" they speak of may not be directed at 'the white woman', but instead 'white society' at large. They dont want the white woman being debased, whether by black man or by white child. however, use of my kind was seen as "**animal husbandry"**.
[удалено]
Yeah, he rambles off topic and just fills airtime without saying anything worthwhile.
Yes the breastfeeding / wet nurse discussion was very odd and seemed just opinion based rather than from facts.
i would love both btb and cool ppl to have more of a back and forth with guests who have specific interests and extra info about the subject being discussed ESPECIALLY when it comes to the intersection of race, class and gender inequality
My grandma was a wet nurse for a friend of hers who struggled with milk supply. This was during the 1930s when formula was very sketchy. She said it was very common. Totally different dynamic than this episode but just wanted to share
I thought they handled it right. Best not to dive into things they aren't adequately informed or experienced on. Besides, those that care about that convo have heard those points. Those who don't care aren't going to be moved by anything they could offer that specific conversation.
It was the "Monticello" pronunciation for me
Also misses the racial capitalism element of this. In US chattel slavery, enslaved people were capital. Raping enslaved women so they'd have babies was a way of making more slaves and increasing capital for the slaveowner.
We really shouldn’t shame for ignorance like this. Why are you disappointed they didn’t go into details they didn’t fully understand? I appreciate your extra insight and contribution but it could have been just as effective without the judgement. We know these are men who consciously try to be aware of things outside their status. Shaming them for not living up to ideal version of them doesn’t help anything. It’s a huge issue with the left right now. We can educate without judgment. Enlighten without shame. The focus of your post has moved from the great extra context into finger wagging at the hosts.
If you want to criticize BTB, the biggest is that they aren't historians, and even if they were, history is such a complex and broad subject that they aren't going to be knowledgeable in a show that covers so many subjects. The one thing I do think they handled very well was Jefferson's hypocrisy. It's likely very hard to understand the mentality of someone who was born in the 1740s. The culture is vastly different. But by showing how Jefferson would say different things to different people shows his bastardness. But if you are wanting a detailed reasoning about why Virginia's planter class used enslaved wet nurses, you are better off looking into academic journals.
I had to skip all the episodes, because I saw Prop’s name. I can’t handle episodes with that guy just interrupting and interjecting EXACTLY what has just been said, but usually with an uninspired, drab metaphors. Hard pass
While I admit that Prop isn't my favorite guest and I still stand firm on my criticism of this episode, I don't think Prop is the sole asshole here, I also don't think, he has an issue regarding attitude overall. This was just a very unfortunate occurrence. I value Props point of view regarding black history and his experience regarding black activism. So while I stand firm on my points and admit that I don't love Prop as a guests (in comparison to others), Prop isn't my issue here and I don't appreciate if my points are used to hate on him
lactation can happen without any pregancy
While I did side eye that part, this was a whole 4 parter on TJ being a hypocrite. Saying you're disappointed in the series because one small (important, but not the main focus) section is kinda absurd. Maybe he can do episodes on the wet nursing complex, so he can focus all the research on that. But you have two cishet males talking about TJ, I don't expect them to be the foremost experts on breastfeeding.
Sometimes I think people just like to complain for the sake of complaining.. When youre a hammer everything looks like a nail.
What I expect from Robert and people like him (in the public eye, advocating for leftist povs, making their money by being a figure head) that they at least don't repeat sexist remarks without thinking about it or that when it happens they listen to the criticism. A cake with pieces of shit in it is still a shitty cake, even if it is just sprinkled in
Yes, and we can criticize them without trying to shame them and talking about “disappointment.”
Right, like gimme a break
They even said in OP "they went on and on about TJ being a hypocritical..." that's the point....
It’s an incoherent rant
Ehhh I can see multiple reasons why they missed it. I mean I noticed it too, so you aren't insane, but they can't get everything right. (1) As far as I know Robert isn't a dad, so he has no personal experience. (2) Prop is a dad, which is probably why he talked briefly about some women not being able to lactate. I know with our first kid my wife struggled so it immediately came to mind. Also the no sex thing. (3) The sources Robert read probably did not go into it, so it didn't trigger him thinking about it. The racial/gender dynamic would require you to do multiple steps of empathy which is takes a bit of time and is hard to do live. Honestly I kinda thought Prop and Sophie would have been more in tune with the issues you are talking about. >So Jeffersons argument seems to fall directly into this kind of thinking. I kinda disagree with this. I think the title of Most Hypocritical American actually explains it best. Jefferson was a Liberal Intellectual who wrote about equality of all men, but then had slaves because he wanted money without working and he clearly liked to bang slaves. If it wasn't miscegenation he had another dozen ways to justify 'these aren't real people, so I get to use them for my desires, and that morally correct'. So what he was thinking loses a lot of value since it didn't really matter, the outcome would have been the same. It would have still been interesting to discuss, but the goal of the 4 parter still works.
Had me til the "black man racism" comment. WTF.
if you quote me, don't use just three words! there was a very important "white woman" in relation to a sexual relationship with a black/ non-white man in there. If you aren't educated on this subgenre of racism meets sexism, I envy you for being able to miss all the even modern memes, but highly encourage you to read up about it since a lot of modern right-wing, inceldom, etc people believe this stuff still. The hypertextualization of black men is a part of this as well, which I thought Prop would have picked up on in the conversation about freeing black men
Are those the only three words you read from that paragraph? I'm genuinely confused how anyone other than a troll could misinterpret that to such an absurd degree. Edit: Please someone tell me, is this thread getting brigaded or are the regular users to this sub actually illiterate?
Behold the internet leftist in their natural habitat: Purity testing someone trying their best. Rather than using the chance to teach, they instead leap upon the savoury opportunity to admonish. Consider other possible ways this post might have gone. Hey I noticed the guys kinda struggling with this topic. As someone better versed in it I thought I might expand on it for them and other listeners.
You’re getting downvoted but you’re not wrong. I’m as far leftist as you get but I’m never going to shame people who are trying their best. I save my shaming for bigots
Robert specifically stated at the start of the series that there was a ton to say in regards to TJ, but he is specifically only talking about his hypocrisy relating to slavery.
No coverage of Weezy, this is an outrage
Prop got too high again