Umm... Birth Control?
Devil Anse Hatfield had 13 and Randall McCoy had 16 children!
1)I do not think they had birth control in those days.
2)People had a lot of children back then.
"What say there, Fuzzy Britches? Feel like talking?"
In that period everyone had a lot of children, at least in the south. The more kids you had, the more help you had with the land. Besides, there was no birth control. The purpose of marrying was to reproduce.share
"The more kids you had, the more help you had with the land."
LOL weren't there slaves for that? I mean both families had them. So there's that.
Weren't there slaves for that...
Yet another mental giant.
A, in the last 35 years of the 19th century (when these events took place) slavery had been abolished by the Emancipation Proclamation.
B, even if slavery did still exist, not many people in that region were prosperous enough to afford slaves.
You have no idea about slavery in America. Let me educate you!
Less than 2% of whites owned slaves back in the day and the ancestors of over 95% of today's Americans came to this country AFTER slavery ended(including my own), yet, even my family are made to feel guilty.
Slavery is nothing new to mankind. Its been around since pre-history. Politicians like to blame Western Europeans for the evils of slavery, but the fact is they were the last to get involved in human trafficking, and the first to abolish it.
The biggest slaver in history were the Islamic moors. They controlled the slave trade from the 7th to the 15th centuries, and were responsible for over 112 million deaths. Many millions more died before even becoming a slave, as the moors castrated African boys between the age of 8 and 14, to be pressed into service in Harems as Eunuchs. The women were not used for manual labor, but as sex slaves.
Long before any white man took a slave, the Moors enslaved over a million Europeans along the coasts of Europe. Thomas Jefferson's first Muslim problem was that of Barbary Coast Pirates capturing ships and pressing their captives into slavery. Europeans did not become involved in slavery until the 1500's, and in 300 years, they signed a treaty abolishing slavery in all Western European nations.
No, contrary to all the lies we are told, whitey not only didn't begin enslaving Africans, he actually abolished it. According to "The Slave Trade" by Hugh Thomas, approximately 4 million (35.4%) went to Portuguese controlled Brazil, 2.5 million (22.1%) went to the Spanish Nations of South and Central America, 2 million (17.7%) to the British West Indies (mostly Jamaica), 1.6 million (14.1%) to French West Indies, half a million to Dutch West Indies, and a half a million (4.4%) to North America. Those who went to America, were considered valued property, and were treated far better then the Irish and Italian Indentured Servants. Over a million immigrant Irish were sold into slavery in the Americas, before any black man was enslaved.
Its easy to blame the white man in America for all the evils of history, but the facts are these:
1.4% of white people owned slaves in America.
5% of Latinos in South America owned slaves.
African slaves were expensive (50 lbs. Sterling) while Irish were cheap (5 lbs. Sterling) and were treated accordingly.
American Indians owned slaves before the white man even got here, and many continued to own slaves into the 1800's.
White men never went into Africa to capture slaves. They were standing in chains at the docks when their boats pulled up...already captured and shackled by their own people, and the Arab slavers.
Many Africans survived slavery in America, and prospered, and owned businesses. Almost no Africans survived Moorish slavery, as the men were castrated as Eunuchs, and the women were raped and discarded when they became to old to satisfy their Arab masters.
Most of Europe and Asian was enslaved at one time. And in the African nations, slavery is still a common practice. Slavery is not fundamentally a race issue. It was a power issue. Race is used as a tool against the populace today, for political gain. The truth behind slavery is actually very different then some politicians, blacks and liberal groups today would have you to believe. They must demonize those they wish to control, just as the wealthy Democrats enforced slave patrols in the South, forcing the middle class and poor to patrol the streets looking for runaway slaves, with threat of escalating fines for not performing such duties. Once again, the wealthy government elitists, causing the misery, under color of law.
They also established Statutes that restricted or prohibited the right of an owner to manumit slaves. Slaves could not buy their freedom, and owners could not manumit (or liberate) their slaves in a last will and testament.
Always it is elitists working to divide the people and keep us fighting with each other, while they are the propagators of injustice and oppression.
Nicolas Augustin Metoyer(a black man) of Louisiana and his family members collectively owned 215 slaves. There were a lot of black slave owners(the original inventors of slavery), back in the day.
The following chart shows the Black slave owners and their slaves in Charleston, South Carolina area alone, between the years 1790-1860.(Yes, they kept records of slaves and who their owners were)
Year - Black Slave Owners - Slaves
1790s - 49 - 277
1800s - 36 - 315
1810s - 17 - 143
1820s - 206 - 1,030
1830s - 407 - 2,195
1840s - 402 - 2,001
1850s - 266 - 1,087
1860s - 137 - 544
The black population in 1860 was 4.5 million, with about 500,000 living in the South. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in the New Orleans area. In New Orleans over 3,000 blacks owned slaves, about 28 percent of the free Black population in the city.
This was just two areas of the country during those times.
Try educating yourself for a change!
Also, infant mortality was very high. You had as many children as you could, hoping that at least half of them would survive to adulthood (IF that). My father-in-law was raised on a farm in the north woods of Minnesota and there were nine of them, five boys and four girls. I do believe that all but one of the girls died in infancy, if not all four.share
Yeah... Holy ship, how is it possible for a woman to survive 13/16 births, especially at that day and age?
Boycott movies that involve real animal violence! (and their directors too)
Giving birth is not _that_ hard for a healthy woman.
Women walked a lot in those days, giving them more flexible pelvises.
Also, the babies were smaller then.
EXACTLY!! Why didn't they just pop over to Walgreens to fill that Ortho-Novum script, condoms, diaphragms and/or spermicidal lubricant? Or go to one of those hundreds of gynecologists for an I.U.D? But I shouldn't be so sarcastic/critical of your lack of brilliance as from your picture you would appear to be about 6 years old. In case you're not aware, which clearly you are not, the only birth control that existed in 2nd half of the 19th century, aside from some VERY primitive, terribly ineffective condoms that were made, literally, from the intestines of sheep, was withdrawal. Not only that, people intentionally had many children in those days for a couple of reasons. One, as someone pointed out below, was to have more able bodies to help with farming. Another was because in those days, mortality rates were much higher. If you wanted to have 2 children who would actually survive to adulthood, you needed to have 5 because chances were very good that 3 out of 5 would die in infancy or childhood.share
Shut up Pootshare
Sometimes the p u s s y felt SO good, U forgot to pull out in time! That's all there was, withdrawal, so please spill your seed outside of me, I can't bare the thought of anymore children, yeah nice wife, real warm, she was like a corpse or something.
Spoiler alert for them spoil sports out there! Y'all like spoiled milk, stop crying over it!
Yeah, but they still fed their own. They didn't have their hands out for food stamps, Welfare checks, etc.share
And thanks to the lack of birth control, your ancestors were born, directly leading to you being born.
Think of it that way... People used to reproduce exponentially, with each generation, while nowadays, people are happy having a single kid.
Over only 3 generations, a grandfather who had 10 kids, each of whom also have 10 kids leads to that grandfather having 110 direct descendants. Meanwhile, with birth control, a grandfather who only had 1 kid, which also only has 1 kid leads to that grandfather having 2 direct descendants.
Furthermore, life expectancy was much shorter and child mortality rates were much higher back in the day, and since people lived mostly in rural areas, they needed as large a family as possible to contribute to the workforce.
Ironically, this is also why this feud got so out of hands. In between in-breeding and large families, virtually everyone was related to everyone else in a way or another, which means grudges would last a long time. This is demonstrated by Nancy (Johnse's wife, Roseanne's cousin), who did everything she did in the series for the sole purpose of getting back at the Hatfields for killing her father at the beginning of the story.
I see some of that inbreeding today, at least in Russian and Eastern European Jewish population, if U marry one, better get a DNA test and a mental health evaluation it's no joke, but nobody talks about it and I've also noticed a large number of the white population kids have some sort of autism. Yep stuff is getting real out there.
Spoiler alert for them spoil sports out there! Y'all like spoiled milk, stop crying over it!