Also to add on to my point that some southern slaves kept their slaves as a way of protecting them until the war ended where then they finally freed them. It was still incredibly risky as the south was just plain awful during this time. There are layers to this if you want to argue with me please do so not ignorantly
One big problem is he’s not doing out of charity he’s doing cuz his dad want to keep a good start of the family he didn’t to war bc he was invested in it it’s bc his dad asked him too and Jaxx did weird stuff throughout the chapter for example not giving slave side character interacting with the mc faces while the white msn talking to him did have one and also that last line probably was for the fetish of racism where the mc is the usual white saviour and is superior
I meant statu instead of start
Again if you read my post. Many Union soliders initially joined to preserve the Union only to come out as slave abolishonists, advocating for the end of slavery after the war. Also it's a drawing? On ch 1 to a side character? Just a drawing? That's seems a little too absurd this early. And lastly we don't know male leads history or character yet? I didn't see that as a fetish but rather as the male lead understanding the power imbalance which we don't know yet which direction will go.
Yes but he did just free them without care
My guy or girl? It's just ch1 we'll get more story and if you're basing this on simply 1 ch just read something else.
I personally saw it that he couldn’t give less of a care about the civil war and slaves because he’s only thinking of his family or I could be wrong we’re mad the the main event is the civil war since it should of never been a smut bl topic
Just a drawing but based on real life so i dont know whats your point.
From what I saw he gave the now free slaves money to be with their family because he lost his. To disregard that is simply just reading with a narrow view. It's post civil war not the civil war
Gng why we getting upset im not saying we should cancel Jaxx but if the story goes on with that weird fetish of white saviour feeling well that’s clearly weird and that there’s a lot of other things said I won’t say it again because I didn’t make it but you should read thru the comments we aren’t mad that we’re talking about the civil war it’s what all it’s bringing it into
It’s still goes in the topic civil wars
You should read what everyone's saying, it's just ridiculous all on ch 1? That's crazy, I hope there were reasonable people but it seems not based on others comments in the comment section, but it is what it is. No hate to you personally though, I get everyone worry which is why I also hope jaxx does this well without disregarding it based on ch 1 on stupid assumptions being made too early
I don't see your point
Of course it all goes to the same topic, but the setting is established in post civil war which if you know your history is a different time from The Civil War, there's a reason why factually post civil war and post in the title is referred to as such by historians because this was a time where changes were happening as things were being established.
Yes yes I’m just worried she’s being racist and it isn’t a misunderstanding it’s not sure but what she has done yet isn’t really going easy on me but that’s how I personally view it
Yes I know but it is still a sensitive topic for the community affected by it since it still impacts social interactions nowadays and how there is superior races,genders, etc
I don't see the racism, but I know my history and from what I read so far, I don't see the racism? Have you been to the Jim Crow museum, what a terrible place, the museum itself is great in collecting all true racist pieces but God the collections they find are really appalling
Nooo it’s on my list of history museums right behind the holocaust museum it’s really heart warming to see how well kept the things are
It is I agree, but simply being ignorant and playing victim only accepting one side of history defeats the purpose of what we as people should advocate for when it comes to what's right. By some people's logic we'd be like dictators or former oppressors simply only accepting one side of history
The racism I see is like I said her not giving slaves faces even if they interacted with the mf but the white man getting one maybe it’s bc they aren’t gonna affect the story so I’m sure if it’s made on purpose
This is only Chapter 1. We don’t have the full picture yet, so it’s too early to judge the whole story based on one chapter.
People are calling the MC a “white savior” type, but that doesn’t match what I’m seeing at all. I’m actually glad he’s a Union soldier, if he were Confederate, the story would feel very different.
As someone who loves history, I really don’t understand the backlash. It’s literally the first chapter. The story is set after the Civil War, not during it, and wartime experiences change people. There were plenty of prominent Union soldiers (and many who initially fought for the Union) who went on to do notable things and became abolishonists of slavery, advocating to end slavery. Jumping to strong conclusions this early seems really performative and ignorant as people seemingly are jumping to conclusions too quickly. We dont even know MC or ML's background so we dont know clearly what their stance is. Seeing as how MC was a union solider, he did free the slaves after the war. Yes we can say its weird that his family still owned slaves but there just isnt enough context to really form a conclusion. We know his dad had him join the union army, but the south still had laws that made slavery permanent, as we have history of runaway slaves who were set free being caught and sold again and again. Theres history. If you choose to be historical, then do it accurately instead of playing victim and disregarding the true stories of the war to feed some ignorant agenda. I'm with you guys I want this to be good, but I'm seeing a lot of just plain stupidity in the comments. Yes, slavery didn't end after the war, but that's not the point of the BL. It has a historical setting, post Civil War. And it's a BL about a Union solider and an half native. I'd agree with you all if he chose to still own slaves but he literally set them free after the war ended? There are even records of slave owners who chose to keep their slaves because the South was so dangerous at the time the risk of being caught sold and killed or tortured was far worse. There are literally historical textbooks on this subject matter.
Yes things like this should be handled with care, but to dismiss it simply with "the Union soliders only did it to preserve the union!" Sounds incredibly ignorant. Accepting history is to accept that the union originally did start simply because if that, but also you cannot define each individual soliders beliefs simply as a whole.
All these comments literally coming into conclusions simply scream they were interested in the first place. It's ok to tackle sensitive situations in a factual way, NOT in a victimized way. Like some people seem to act in this 1 ch alone.
Here are some notably things from the unions side of the Civil war:
-Historian Chandra Manning's research shows that many white Northern soldiers, who initially fought only to "preserve the Union," became fierce abolitionists after marching into the South. Encountering the horrific physical realities of plantations and seeing escaped slaves (referred to as "contrabands") flee to Union camps completely transformed their worldviews. They began writing letters home refusing to act as "slave catchers" and demanding total emancipation
-Many white officers took commands specifically to fight slavery. Colonel Robert Gould Shaw, commander of the all-Black 54th Massachusetts Infantry, was a staunch abolitionist who died alongside his men fighting for Black liberation
‐ David Hunter famously organized the first regiments of former slaves in South Carolina well before the Emancipation Proclamation officially allowed it.
- John Brown and His Raiders: Before the Civil War formally began, radical abolitionist John Brown led a raid on Harpers Ferry to spark a slave revolt. Brown did not just pity enslaved people; he lived among them, ate with them, and treated them as social equals. His provisional army included free Black men and escaped slaves like Shields Green and Dangerfield Newby. They lived as close-knit comrades and died fighting side-by-side.
-Charles Nelson Golding and the "Contrabands": Many Union diaries record profound personal relationships. White soldiers frequently befriended the escaped slaves who worked as cooks, teamsters, or laborers in their camps. Soldiers shared their rations, taught escaped slaves how to read and write in secret, and protected them from Southern slave-catchers who entered Union camps looking to reclaim "property"
I could literally go deeper here, there's records to this
Like you, if there will be mentions of slavery I hope jaxx does tackle this well. But Simply coming into conclusions on ch 1? Just seems like you're ignorant and only focusing on the evils of history. History is complex as slavery did take a long time to literally be free. There were many challenges, but as a reader I almost must remind myself that this is a BL with a post Civil War historical setting where each character isn't real and has a history of their own within the story. I want jaxx to do this well, but people seem to have a narrow sided view which honeslty is diengenuine to the importance the history itself.