[jeffersondem]

“Furthermore – and here it sounds scandalous – most Southern slaves were treated materially well by their “owners.” The average slave consumed more calories and lived longer than the average, white, Northern city-dweller. Contrary to popular myth, slave families were rarely divided up — only about 3% were — and slave-owners rarely used their slaves for sexual indulgence, with only about 2% of slave births being by white fathers."

This is going to rub some fur the wrong way, especially among liberals.

[DoodleDawg]

This is going to rub some fur the wrong way, especially among liberals.

If true. And why is "owners" in quotation marks? Is the author implying that slaves weren't really owned? That it was really some sort of partnership?

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

The average slave consumed more calories and lived longer than the average, white, Northern city-dweller. Contrary to popular myth, slave families were rarely divided up — only about 3% were — and slave-owners rarely used their slaves for sexual indulgence, with only about 2% of slave births being by white fathers."

Yeah, slavery was awesome! That's why no slaves wanted to be free, runaways were unheard of, and there was no need for laws about sending back escapees.

[BroJoeK]

jeffersondem quoting the article: " 'Contrary to popular myth, slave families were rarely divided up — only about 3% were — and slave-owners rarely used their slaves for sexual indulgence, with only about 2% of slave births being by white fathers.'
This is going to rub some fur the wrong way, especially among liberals."

According to this source on average European ancestry in African Americans runs from 20% to 30%, depending on the study.
This suggests your 2% of white fathers is a bit... ah... understated.