"Symbols of Prestige?" huh?
From: wildbill4dixie@yahoo.com
To: wjones@timesdispatch.com
Re: http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/local/article/SLAV27_20090226-221626/217069/
Mr. Jones,
Financial shenanigans are only half the story of the Slavery Museum in Fredericksburg. How could you expect anything else from a bunch of people who make the outrageous claims that they do on their website? Here’s one such quote which is actually part of a lesson plan for kids! Essentially it claims that any slavery except European slavery was ‘ok’  because slaves in non-European systems were "symbols of prestige" rather than laborers! When I originally read it a few years back, I couldn’t believe my eyes! 
Ok everybody, raise your hands. How many of you would prefer to be "symbols of prestige, luxury and power" as opposed to simply being a "source of labor"? Before you answer, note my highlighting and capitalizing of the quoted text below. Then ask yourself why NO ONE except a few malcontents like myself ever questioned such claims?
.."Only in the New World that slavery provided the labor force for a high-pressure profit making capitalist system of plantation agriculture producing cotton, sugar, coffee, and cocoa for distant markets. Most slaves in Africa, in the Islamic world, and in the New World prior to European colonization worked as farmers or household servants, or served as CONCUBINES or EUNUCHS. They were SYMBOLS OF PRESTIGE, luxury, and power rather than a source of labor…"
I wonder how many guys would prefer being a EUNUCH to being a laborer in a cotton field?
Bill Vallante