Finding my family's African roots

I've been looking into my family's genealogy for a couple of decades now so it was a bit of a surprise when my brother took a DNA test and found our ancestry 99% from Northwest Europe and 1% Western Africa.  The Europe part was expected.  I've been able to research most of my ancestors back to the year 1800, or about 5 generations.

Was it on Dad's side of the family?

The African part was unexpected but not totally unexpected.  Growing up my brother, sister and I always assumed we had African roots from my paternal grandmother who had very curly hair and darker skin than my other grandparents.  A DNA test from my Dad disproved our childhood theory entirely.  His DNA results came showed him more British than the Queen of England, proof that looks can be deceiving.

Was it on Mom's side of the family?

That left only one possibility but to prove it, I had my Mom take the test.  Like my brother, it also came back 99% European and 1% West African.

I expected it to be 2% but there are lots of reasons for this result.  These are very small numbers and so her percentage could be 1.4% and his 0.7%.  Rounding would make both 1%.  In fact basic math would prove this out.

If a person had one European parent and one African parent we can assume their child will have 50% European DNA and 50% African DNA.  If you assume their offspring had nothing but European ancestry after that the next generation would be 1/4, the 1/8, then 1/16, then 1/32, and finally 1/64.

If my Mother is 1/64, she'd have 1.56% African DNA.  The thing is DNA isn't always handed down 50/50.  Sometimes it is handed down 55/45 and once you've lost that portion of that DNA it's gone.  It is easily possible my Mom's African DNA is lower than 1.5% which is why she and my brother both showed at 1%.

Getting this information gave me a starting point and with my family tree in hand I was pretty sure I knew the answer.  We'd been told from a young age that we had Cherokee heritage on my maternal grandfather's side of the family.  Once I started looking into genealogy, I found this story is common in many families, especially in the South.  Most times when people look into the details they find this story was a cover to hide African roots.

Isabel Roberts

Unlike most families I had been able to find the person who it is claimed was native American.  Her name is Isabel Roberts, born in 1832 close by the Shawnee Reservation near Indian Lake in Logan County, Ohio.  As of now, I haven't been able to find out much other than her name and the fact she is supposedly the child of Arthur Roberts.  We know nothing definitive of her mother which certainly added to my suspicions.

As i looked into slavery, I found out many uncomfortable truths of how it was handled as a legal matter of course.  The laws were sometimes different by jurisdiction but the chains of bondage passed through the maternal line.  If a white man had a child with a black woman, their offspring was a slave to the black woman's owner.  If a black man had a child with a black woman, their offspring was a slave to the black woman's owner.  If a black man had a child with a white woman, their offspring was free.

The assumption was white women would never do this willing and many unexpected pregnancies of consensual intercourse ended with a lynching.  I haven't researched what happened to most of these children but I'd guess it depended on the 'mercy' of the girl's father.

Isabel claimed to be white in every census and having no other obvious subjects, I made an assumption Isabel was our most likely ancestor of African descent on my mother's side.  I later figured out this assumption was wrong.

The Leeds Method

I don't have a lot of experience working with the DNA side of genealogy but it has helped me clear a few roadblocks.  For instance, it helped me match back 4 generations from my Dad's DNA to his 2xgreat-grandfather and find the father of his grandmother.  It really is a great help.

One of the ways of arranging DNA information that helps adoptees is called the Leeds method.

When you get your results back from the DNA service you get a list of other people who have taken the test and match to you.  The services take this one step further and will let you know if that person is related to someone else on your list.

It's a little bit confusing so here's a simple example:

• Paternal Grandfather A
• Paternal Grandmother B
• Maternal Grandfather C
• Maternal Grandmother D

You are related to all 4 of the above.  Your father's sister and her children would be related to the A family and the B family.  They would not be related to the C and D.  A second cousin would only be related to one of the above.

The Leeds method has you separate all your matches so you put them into 4 catagories, depending on the relation to your grandparents.  A first cousin would appear in 2 categories.  My brother would appear in all four for my Mom.

I did this for my Mom and then took it a step further to match to her great grandparents.  I wanted to see if I could find a pattern.  The next thing I was see how many of my Mom's matches had any African ancestry.  Unsurprisingly, many did.  Surprisingly, none of them were descendants of Isabel Roberts.

Here is the breakdown of West African DNA results matched to my Mom's 8 great-grandparents:

• Bennett - 14/33
• Bable - 1/29
• Boutwell - 1/37
• Frankenberry - 0/6    (I want my cereal royalties!!!)
• Keezer - 1/14            (this person also has Bennett DNA)
• Peters - 0/17
• Reed - 3/51
• Trout -  0/25

The fact that I could do this shows how little families of different races mixed during the last 200 years.  I'm sure this is especially true of my family who were mostly rural white farmers living in Ohio.  All it would take is one descendant of one ancestor to marry outside their race over this entire span and it would easily add 1%.  You see the results above and because of them, I think it is safe to say the Bennett tree is the place to look.

(If you are wondering why the Bennett line isn't 33/33, the numbers are so small that every generation makes it less likely to find enough DNA to call it a match.  When results go under 0.5%, these services probably wouldn't show anything at all.  I suspect if my brother's kids took the test, they wouldn't get a West African result.)

Mom's family tree

To break this down a little further we need to see a simple family tree from my Mom's dad.

This tree goes back five generations and if you follow the Bennett-Boutwell-Boutwell-Roberts line you'll find Isabel.

I broke down my Mom's DNA comparison by those who connected to the Bennett-Keezer line and the Boutwll-Bable line.

All her matches who had African ancestry were in the Bennett-Keezer line.

This means the ancestor could be a Bennett or a Keezer if not for an unfortunate yet I'm sure scandalous happy event.  

Jenny Keezer died at age 52 and James Bennett being a spry man of 49 years, decided to remarry a 1st cousin, 19 year old Rennie Bennett.  They had four children and I found quite of few of their ancestors matched to Mom.  All of them had twice as much African ancestry as her.

This proves the African ancestry came from this Bennett line and not the Keezer line.  If it came from the Keezer line, they'd show no West African DNA.  As it is, the Bennett-Bennett descendants have twice as much West African DNA as the Bennett-Keezer kids because of the cousin marriage.

My theory is further proved by the fact that none of my Mom's Keezer-only relations have any African ancestry (there were 3 of them who've take a DNA test at the time of writing).

Bennett-Linnabary

I am fairly confident my ancestor with African heritage comes from the Bennett-Linnabary line.  Can we go further?

Yes we can but it's at this point the evidence become a little more spotty.  I found two Linnabarry-only ancestors and neither of them showed any African ancestry but that's not enough evidence to use as proof.  When you are talking about 1% amounts of DNA, it isn't uncommon for the tests to show no result at all.  

Relying on the Bennett-only names is problematic because they could be from just about any generation.  Still, we do see many of them with African ancestry adding to a suspicion it came further back on that line.

To prove it definitive with DNA you'd need to find someone on the maternal line - daughter to daughter and have them take a specialize DNA test.  As we don't even know the person's name we'd need to test, that's a problem (and it is difficult to find living ancestors due to privacy laws).

Luckily there's another option - investigating the stories of the Bennett-Linnabary ancestors.

But first, a little bit of math

At the start of this story, I did some math to show how my Brother and Mom could both have 1% African DNA.  To do this I showed my Mom most likely is 1/64th.  If you work that backwards, her father would have been, 1/32.  Her grandfather Jacob Budd 1/16.  Her great-grandfather James Bennett (mentioned above) would have 1/8.  I am 99.999% confident this is true.

That brings us to Jacob Bennett and Lucretia Linnabary, one of whom would have had 1/4 African ancestry.  If my math is correct, one of their parents has 1/2 African DNA.

We're really close.  We need to look at their parents.

The Linnabary's

Andrew Linnabary was born in 1813 in Delaware, Ohio, the child of a family that came to Ohio from Luzerne, Pennsylvania going back at least three generations.  Before that the family likely came from New Jersey and possibly Germany as some researchers thing the name morphed from Linnaburger.  With this information I'd say it is unlikely he'd have any African heritage.  

During the Civil War, Andrew joined the 38th Ohio Infantry as a Corporal of Company F.  He served from August 1861 to April 1862 and died at home from sickness acquired in the war.  He is buried in Little Auglaize Cemetery in Paulding, Ohio.

Sarah Young was born in 1816 in Pennsylvania and her family moved to Delaware as she married Andrew there in 1836.  The name on the marriage certificate says Sarah Young though oddly, her name is listed as Sarah Jones on all her children's death certificates (remarried?).  

Her father is said to be a man named George Young of Kentucky who moved to Pennsylvania.  This information is dubious but listed for completeness.  Sarah died in 1901 and like her husband is buried in Little Auglaize Cemetery.

The Bennett's

William Bennett was born in 1812 and the 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880 census all agree he was born in Ohio but nothing specific.  We do know he moved around a lot as three census where in different Ohio counties - Hardin, Putnam, and Paulding.  

The Bennett family moved to Paulding County sometime before 1870 and stayed there for the next 3 generations, some still live there today.

William died in 1881 and is buried in Potter & Klein Cemetery in Paulding County.

According to the above census records William's wife, Nancy Clark, was born in Virginia in 1809.  Her children's death certificates all list her maiden name as Clark so we can be pretty confident that is correct.  She died in 1887 and is buried in Potter & Klein Cemetery in Paulding County, Ohio and her gravestone is what gives us her birthdate and death date.  Beyond that we have little concrete evidence.

So who is the source of our African roots?

Given the information we have right now there is no way to know for sure.

I am pretty confident the Linnabary's aren't the source as neither of the Linnabary-only matches on my Mom's DNA showed any West African DNA.  Also, the information the details we have on their lives makes it unlikely.

The Bennett's on the other hand are much more likely.  There are rumors about both of them though not enough proof for me to mention at this time.

What we do know if the family moved around a lot, probably as 'for-hire' farm work.  In addition to the census data we see above, the birth certificates for their kids show them living in Union County in 1832, Hardin County in 1841, back to Union in 1843, to Hardin in 1845, Union in 1848, and eventually to Putnam and Paulding.  To be fair, all of these counties are near one another so it wasn't like they were moving far.

The census records for both recorded them as white.

The question is what is most likely and as William listed his birthplace as Ohio and Nancy as Virginia, Nancy is the obvious candidate.  Of all my Mom's ancestors, Nancy is the only one who was born in a southern state as far as I've been able to determine. 

If this is true it raises all sorts of questions.  Was she the product of a master-slave?  If that is true and it happened in Virginia, she too would have been a slave.  How did she get to Ohio?  Was she the daughter of a freedman?  I hesitate to go further on this topic as it isn't one beneficial for too much speculation.

What is true?

Based on all the data I've seen, I'm 99% sure a Linnabary ancestor or a Bennett ancestor was a slave and I suspect that person was Nancy Clark's mother or father.

I did not do this exercise to prove anything.  I suspect 1/128th of me has West African DNA.  It's not much.  This doesn't suddenly give me black cred or anything beyond a little more knowledge of my ancestry.

However, as a son of rural Ohio, it does give me a sort of obstinate pride.  If Nancy is indeed the source of this DNA, I am quite aware that many of her progeny would be horrified to hear of the truth of their past.

I wish I could tell each and every one.

Tweet

Does Hell Exist?

My Mom is extremely religious and the best description of my beliefs is a skeptic.  That doesn't stop us from having many back and forth conversations around religion.  About a year ago we had a conversation about Hell and she sent me an email with the attached from a mailing she gets from a newsletter called 'Eternal Life With Jesus'. 

Eternal Life With Jesus

Revelation 21:1-5

Some people question whether hell actually exists. They wonder, How could someone in heaven have no sadness while realizing loved ones are suffering eternal punishment?

Humanly speaking, it’s hard to understand. We know that in the afterlife, those who have rejected Jesus will mourn (Matt. 13:41-42). But Scripture makes it clear that eternity in Christ’s presence will be pure joy. We are reassured that “He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death ... mourning, or crying, or pain” (Revelation 21:4).

But notice the beginning of that verse. Before entering heaven, believers will shed some tears as well. You see, even Christians will undergo judgment, but not to determine where they will spend eternity. Rather, God will bring to light His children’s pure and impure actions, thoughts, and motives (1 Corinthians 4:5). We’ll no doubt be grieved to see what opportunities were missed and where we failed to act in a godly fashion. Yet the Lord will dry our eyes and bring us into His glory, where we’ll experience no sadness or pain.

Once we enter eternity with Him, we will not long for anything. Even if we are able to sense the absence of unsaved loved ones in heaven, there will be no discontent. At that point, our desires will perfectly align with His, and He will fulfill each one—anything we lack will no longer be something we want.

Eternity is a long time, and heaven will be indescribably wonderful. Trusting Christ as Savior is the only way to guarantee it will be your destination beyond this life.

I found the points raised interesting and felt I had to respond.  My replay was long but contains a summary of my beliefs.

*****

((The stuff below in italics is a quote from the above newletter))

I missed this newsletter when you sent it but I'm sure it relates to our last conversation and my statement that if the Bible claims that heaven will be a place of overwhelming joy yet I'll be in hell -- how would it be possible for you to find everlasting happiness?  The question in the newsletter you sent asked essentially the same thing:

"Some people question whether hell actually exists. They wonder, How could someone in heaven have no sadness while realizing loved ones are suffering eternal punishment?"

I want you to know I do enjoy our conversations and I also know you get frustrated with me and my hardheadedness around this subject.  I know you send me these things because you love me but I wish you'd also consider the words you send.  Think about what it is saying:

We know that in the afterlife, those who have rejected Jesus will mourn (Matt 13:41-42).  But Scripture makes it clear that eternity in Christ’s presence will be pure joy. We are reassured that “He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death ... mourning, or crying, or pain” (Revelation 21:4).

One of my issues with the Bible is it is easy to cherry-pick different verses then reform them through the bias of the teller.  I think you also know that I reject any claims from Revelation as it was written more than fifty years after the death of Jesus by an unknown man named John who lived on the Island of Patmos.  To me, the Book of Revelation is little more than early Christian fan fiction.  This book was only included in the finalized Bible (200+ years after Revelation was written) because some sects of early Christianity liked its message which gave it enough votes.  Votes!  It makes me wonder if JK Rowling lived in 1st century AD that we would also worship the book of Gryffindor and fear of being sent to the evil Dementors. ((Sorry, I know you hate it when I say things like this.  I know it isn't productive to meaningful discussion but I can't help myself.))

So let's assume Revelations is true. :P  What is the newletter you sent telling us these words mean?

... notice the beginning of that verse. Before entering heaven, believers will shed some tears as well.  You see, even Christians will undergo judgment, but not to determine where they will spend eternity. Rather, God will bring to light His children’s pure and impure actions, thoughts, and motives (1 Corinthians 4:5). 

We’ll no doubt be grieved to see what opportunities were missed and where we failed to act in a godly fashion. Yet the Lord will dry our eyes and bring us into His glory, where we’ll experience no sadness or pain.

((Sorry again)) --- but before I speak to newsletter's contents, I should also add that part of this argument is from Corinthians, words written by a talented man named Saul who by his own pen admits he never met Jesus in life.  Instead, Saul renamed himself Paul after meeting Jesus in death, an act which would draw laughs and possible institutionalization if made it today.  However, this claim would very useful in the 1st century AD if you weren't a disciple of Jesus yet you want to take over his fledgling religion.  It has always bugged me that fourteen of the books in the New Testament were attributed to Paul meaning more than half the chapters in the Bible were written by a man who isn't relaying Jesus' words nor has he ever heard a single word spoken from Jesus' mouth.  Bible scholars now believe some of Paul's fourteen chapters weren't actually written by Paul but written in Paul's name which makes the whole thing even less believable.

But let's assume Corinthians is true. :P

The newsletter has interpreted Paul's words to mean that when you pass into heaven you'll first feel grief and sadness then pass into glory where we'll feel no pain.  There will be no discontent and your desires will match perfectly with the Lord as you will lack nothing and feel nothing.

Think about what is being said here -- while I'm being roasted by hellfire, your humanity will slowly be stripped away until nothing is left but a robotic shell.  I'm sure you will dispute my interpretation but if there is one fact that I have no doubt, it is that you love me.  You are the mother who bandaged my knee and always answered my call when life brought me disappointment.  Yet somehow I am to believe that you could stand at ease while one of your children's flesh is slowly roasted on another plane.  The only way that is possible is if your memory is muted or your humanity stripped meaning the mother I knew longer exists.  I would rather be in hell than be forced to forget you.

I did fear hell at one point in my life.  It is hard not to fear hell as a Christian.  Sunday school was filled with stories of Jesus' salvation but also the reminder of hell just below the surface.  That memory remained even after I stopped believing.  I feared to call myself an atheist for years, preferring the word agnostic instead as if that were some sort of protection against eternal damnation.  I won't lie - during that time, anger grew in my heart for the church.  The church instilled in me a belief in heaven that turned out to be a lie but worse it also threatened me with a nagging fear of hell that wouldn't go away.

I longed to find something to fill that hole and I'm sure you'd say its because I wanted to come back to the church but that is missing the point.  I didn't want to forget.  I wanted to understand.

I understand why people believe in religion.  It's funny to think about the little events you remember from your childhood but I was about six and at a family reunion when I heard one of my uncles say, "Life sucks and then you die".  I still remember my shock when he made this comment.  I'm sure it sounds silly now but I hadn't faced much adversity in my life at that point beyond the occasional goldfish death and the comment swirled in my head for weeks afterward.  How could he think that?  Life was awesome! - filled with puppies, school recess, pizza day, and hugs.  Obviously, that memory has stuck with me over the years and it's funny to think back about my naivety.  Life is hard and for most, it gets harder every year.  It's nice to think there's something at the end of all that hardship.  It's nice to think there is a heaven.

But I can't.  My brain doesn't work that way and I struggled for years to fill the hole the church created in my heart.

I suspect many people that go to church aren't really devout believers.  There is more than enough evidence that the Christian Bible was written by men trying to provide answers in an era that didn't have many.  Since that time, science has filled in many of the gaps and helped bring humans to a prosperity only dreamed about two thousand years ago.  But science doesn't have all the answers.

Here's my theory of the universe:

• In the beginning, there was a Big Bang.  

• What started it?  We don't know but this event created the universe and in time our solar system.  Light shown from the Sun onto the 3rd planet which had the right conditions to sustain life.  

• How was that life created?  We do not know even though we do understand most of the building blocks.  We know everything on Earth is made from stuff created in the heart of stars like our Sun.

• Fast forward four billion years and modern humans appear on the scene.  Ten thousand generations later you had me, the latest in a much longer line of evolution.

• You and I are certainly an insignificant blip when compared to the expanse of the universe.  Our actions in life will have little impact beyond a few generations, a mere speck in a cosmos that measures time on a scale beyond our understanding.  

• In death, our bodies will decay but our atoms, our star stuff, will live on.  In that way we are eternal.

I'm sure some of this will sound as funny to you as the Bible sounds to me.  The difference is all my beliefs are based on scientific facts and that gives me comfort.  Remember the words in the message you sent?  If you read my words carefully you'll see our beliefs are not so dissimilar.  Mine is just missing a hell.

We’ll both no doubt be grieved to see what opportunities we missed in life and where we failed to act in a godly fashion. 

Yet the Lord will dry our eyes and bring us into His glory, where we’ll experience no sadness or pain.

Regret at the end of life is common and after death, we feel nothing.  Aren't we saying similar things?

Once we enter eternity with Him, we will not long for anything. Even if we are able to sense the absence of unsaved loved ones in heaven, there will be no discontent. At that point, our desires will perfectly align with His, and He will fulfill each one—anything we lack will no longer be something we want.

The molecules that made us will exist even after our death.  As our bodies fall to decay and the continents continue to move, the elements that were once part of us will mix with each other.  In time we will join with every person we ever met, every pet we ever loved, and every piece of property we ever owned.  Time and want is meaningless in death and therefore to those that join its embrace, the transformation will be as if it happened overnight.  In a few billion years, the sun will run low on hydrogen and when it explodes it will send it's bounty, including us, into the cosmos as the process starts again.

You may find this weird but this concept is what filled the hole in my heart after I left the Christian church.  It ended my existential dread and gave me the comfort of meaning we all seek.

Of course, I won't be aware of anything in my heaven because I'm fairly confident human consciousness dies at death.  But compare my beliefs to the ones claimed in the email you sent to me.  They aren't so different - we both join with the universe and no longer want.  The only real difference is the ever-present threat that lives at the core of Christianity.  The newsletter you sent ends with it:

Eternity is a long time, and heaven will be indescribably wonderful. Trusting Christ as Savior is the only way to guarantee it will be your destination beyond this life.

I used to be scared of words like this but I am no longer a child and its words no longer control me.  I do not fear hell because it doesn't exist and even if it did, I'm not sure I could find comfort in a universe where some of the people I knew are left behind.  If I am to be deluded, I prefer to be deluded there is an afterlife that will be spent with ALL my friends and family.  That is true under my beliefs.

The bottom line for me is I believe one day we will both have an afterlife among the cosmos and it brings me peace to know you will be there with me.

Sent with all my love,

Your Son

Tweet

#MeToo and the girl that got away

I know that title sounds a creepy but I promise it's not that bad.  It's going to be a bit before I get to that part of the story but the Tara Reade story made me think about it.

You may have heard of Tara Reade's allegations against Joe Biden as they have gathered steam in the last month.  They were first reported in early March with a blurb in most publications and then quickly forgotten except those with political axes to grind.  The prime driver were news sites with leanings to Bernie Sanders who wanted Joe to drop out of the race to allow their candidate to take the nomination.  The more moderate news sites are/were holding off to gather information in order to report facts and not a she said/he said.

As the story has gathered steam, we've seen sites dedicated to Donald Trump pick up the charge too.  Trump himself hasn't said much at this point and it's a smart choice considering his own history with the #MeToo movement.  Twenty-five women have accused Donald of raping them and it's a little difficult to think at least a few of them aren't true considering his "grab them by the pussy" tape.

Reade's charge is that when she worked for Biden he made inappropriate comments along with several unwanted advances, the most serious was pinning her to a wall and doing to her what Trump alleged in his infamous tape.

#MeToo has been around for a lot longer than most realize.  Tarana Burke started using the hashtag on MySpace in 2006 as a way for women to share their stories of sexual abuse and as a way to show these women they weren't alone.  #MeToo never entered popular culture until 2017 when the New Yorker published a series of articles against Harvey Weinstein.  These articles spark set off a long-simmering firestorm in Hollywood and it spread to the media, politics, and the business world.  The effect is still reverberating now and will for a very long time.

I'm not sure why it took so long and I'm sure sociologists have written papers why many remain quiet until a single person stands up giving others the courage to join the cause.  With Weinstein, it was certainly because he was not shy at ruining the careers of people that didn't cater to his whims.  

I do think one spark was the election of Donald Trump.  In 2016, the United States elected a man who'd almost surely raped a woman though he'd never claim it as such.  His election led many women to redirect their anger into things like a women's march and others to run for office.  In 2017, Weinstein finally got called out.  I doubt these situations are unrelated.  

Sometimes the world changes fast.  Sometimes it changes so fast that you don't have time to consider what you really want to achieve.

With the whirlwind came the phrase 'Believe all women'.  The theory was that as studies showed 90% of women reporting a rape/assault were telling the truth, we needed to believe them all to give them a safe space.  It made sense as men like Weinstein and Trump rely on their reputations when they call women liars.  No one who has been abused wants to relive that experience.  It takes a very strong person to go to the authorities and studies show a minority of women actually do this.  So hence we should 'Believe All Women'.

The hope is if we 'Believe All Women' more women might feel comfortable coming forward. 

After Weinstein, a tidal wave of allegations against powerful men flowed into media outlets though most of the stories focused on famous actors, politicians, and media personalities.  Many people, mostly men, had abused their positions of authority and many were promptly fired.

Yet in blanket statements lays a danger.

My concern from the beginning has been a statement like 'Believe all Women' is ripe for abuse.  I'd personally change to this phrase to 'Support All Women, Investigate their Claims, and Prosecute the Guilty'.  Unfortunately, it's not as catchy but I do think it would yield better results but if consistently applied.

Either way, the #MeToo movement was cathartic and I've cheered the cause.  It has caused many men, including me, to think back on their actions of a lifetime.  I'm sure this included Joe Biden.  What about Tara Reade?  Did Biden abuse his position of authority?  Are we supporting her?  Have we investigated her claim?  Can we prosecute?  What is true?

I will get back to Tara Reade/Joe Biden but here's where I get to my own #MeToo story.

*****

Early in my career, I was hired as a manager for a company with a staff of twelve.  I was young for the position but knew I could handle my primary duties which revolved doing the books and meeting with corporate management to explain the monthly financials.

As it was, I had only women on my clerical staff.  This was almost always the case in offices back and mostly true today.  I once wondered why this happened and it's two-fold.  The first reason is working in an office isn't considered manly and the male ego can't handle it.  The second reason is money.

The average wage of my employees back then was around $10/hr and the minimum wage was $4.25/hr.  As a point of comparison, our salespeople made around $20/hr at the time, our distribution drivers around $25/hr, and our warehouse people around $20/hr.  About 90% of the other departments were staffed by men*.  All of the other managers were men.

  * I could write a book on the reasons why women weren't in the other departments but I want to stay on topic.

Why would any man apply to be an office worker when they could make more money by moving to a different department?  Women, on the other hand, were limited to office and secretarial work and it had been that way since women started entering the workforce in great numbers after World War Two.  At my location, we had about 30 women working there while we had about 300 men.  We were skewed heavily to men as it was a production facility and the physical nature of the work probably discouraged women from applying (and our managers from hiring those that did apply).  Expand that type of hiring practice to society as a whole and you'll find the law of supply and demand meant even as overall pay for workers increased, the overabundance of women wanting clerical work meant clerical wages remained low.

I never thought much about it when I first started working.  I never questioned it until I did a review with an especially outspoken employee who asked me something that has stuck with me to this day:

"Every day, I pay out millions of dollars of the company's money in invoices.  So why do I make less in salary than the janitor?  He pushes a broom all day."

When I first started, my feeling was a person's salary was between them and their employer.  You negotiate a wage and that's the end of the discussion.  If an employee isn't happy, they can leave but when you think about the relative importance of both jobs in her complaint, it's silly to compare.  My payables clerk had a responsibility many more times of most managers in the company, let alone the janitorial staff.

I'm sure the unskilled male laborers of that time expected this to continue.

In truth, the American economy thirty years ago was going through the last stages of shedding high paying physical labor jobs for today's information-based jobs.  It's one of the reasons men, and particularly white men, are so angry today.  They saw their father able to pay their bills without a college degree or needing their wife's help.  That world has become less and less available to them.

But I digress...

Thirty years ago, I was a young manager in charge of an office of females, and looking back I think I did a good job considering my inexperience.  Luckily for me, most of them knew their job and didn't need my help.  That allowed me to get involved in other departments.

One area that needed my constant assistance was inventory control.  Every month we'd lose tens of thousands of dollars in inventory which led to countless loud conversations between our distribution and warehouse managers.

It took me a single conversation to realize that neither man was good at math or good at their job.  Both men had been sales managers for decades but customers had grown tired of them.  When I asked the general manager why they were put there, he said he didn't want to fire them for fear of an age discrimination lawsuit.  He 'promoted' both to a position where he thought they'd cause less trouble, then got me involved when his decision made a bad situation worse.

*** I'm sure you are starting to wonder what this has to do with #MeToo but I'm getting there ***

In theory, inventory control isn't hard in a distribution warehouse as you have a finite number of ways the product enters and exits a building.  At the beginning of a month, you have a beginning inventory.  It is adjusted in the following ways:

(+) Inventory warehouse employees unload trucks that arrive from the production location.
(-) Inventory warehouse employees load on trucks which is taken by drivers to customers.
(+) Warehouse employees who unload returns that come from customers.

The formula is simple - Beginning inventory +/- the above adjustments give you an estimated ending inventory.  You compare that number to your actual count and get a difference.  Ideally, that number is zero.

This is not a hard process unless you have bad management and we had bad management.

Every month the general manager would call me into his office and ask why inventory was out of control.  Every month I gave the same answer -- our managers and employees aren't taking it seriously.  The GM would then yell at the managers.  In turn, the managers yell at their employees and send out pointless memos.  Eventually, everyone would end up at my desk asking for help.  

((FWIW we all knew the real truth was people were stealing but you can't prove it with bad controls))

As enforcing company controls was part of my job responsibility I had to get involved and found myself spending the majority of my 'free time' trying to find solutions to our inventory problems.  The issue wasn't so much these things were hard to figure out but they took time, patience, and follow-up.

It was hopeless until the day our inventory clerk quit.  I wasn't too upset when I learned she had turned in her notice.  I'd told her bosses she was part of the problem soon after I arrived.  I think the General Manager saw my enthusiastic response as an opportunity.  He told me since I'd wanted her gone, perhaps I should hire the new person.

That's when I first met Wendy.

I hadn't hired many people at the time but one thing you realize when you interview entry-level positions is many times hiring comes down to choosing the least bad option.  It's impossible to know if a hire is going to work out until you've worked with them for a couple months.  Wendy is one of the few who I knew would do well within five minutes of our interview.

She was a college student.  She was willing to work a split shift -- meaning early morning and then come back in the afternoon.  It worked for her because she could work, take morning/noon classes, then work again.  She sounded excited because I told her it was ok if she used the inventory office for homework after she clocked out.

The reason I liked Wendy right away was her answers to my questions were concise yet formed a complete thought.  She was dressed in an understated manner, somehow knowing either by luck or design, this job was not going to be glamorous.  Getting dirty was part of the job. 

I came away from the interview confident Wendy was the one.  First, she showed clear intelligence and drive.  Second, she spoke well and had a self-confidence that I hoped would get others to take her seriously. The only downside I saw was ... Wendy was cute.

As a boss, you aren't supposed to notice things like a person's attractiveness.  As a human, it is impossible not to notice.  In a warehouse where the ratio of men to women is 10:1, I knew it could be a problem.

Men are pigs.  Young men are even bigger pigs.  You can't trust any of them.  Not even the 'straight-A student, looks clean-cut, he's so nice' type.  I know because that's how most people described me back then.  I also remember some of the thoughts running through my head that day.

My first thought when I saw Wendy was to wonder if she had a boyfriend.  I'm sure if we met in a bar and had a conversation we might have hit it off and this would be a different type of article.  Instead, I met her in an interview and while my 'pig-man brain' occasionally would interject a stray thought from time to time, my 'nice-guy' who 'knows he's a manager' side would push them out.

I once worked with an office manager who would only hire ugly girls for that reason.  His reasoning was ugly girls rarely become a distraction.  His reasoning was sexist and misogynist and sadly true.  Have I mentioned men are pigs?  We all know women should be judged on their competence and nothing else.  Every person should be given the same treatment.  Most men know that.  A few act on their pig-man brain influences.

I forwarded Wendy's resume to the warehouse manager with my recommendation.  A week later she was hired.

It's so much fun working with an employee that 'gets it' right away.  On Wendy's first day, I sat down with her to go over her job duties.  I explained how our inventory system worked and she didn't just nod but asked good challenging questions that let me know she understood.  I was overjoyed to know we might finally be able to fix things.

The GM grilled me hard when our results didn't improve in the first month.  He made it clear, the responsibility for the inventory was now mine.  I told him progress would take time but I was sure we had turned the corner.  I'd met with Wendy in her office a couple times a week and she came to my office whenever she had questions.  I saw her just about every day.  I could see a clear improvement in the process even if the results didn't show on the bottom line right away.

I enjoyed going to her office in the afternoons.  She worked in the back of the warehouse, a hive of activity in the morning, but quiet seclusion when our drivers were still out making deliveries.

Where once sat a jumble of papers, she had created a filing system, color-coded charts, and Excel tracking spreadsheets.  She got the basics almost immediately but that didn't mean she wasn't bombarding me to improve things even more.  Every time we met in her office, I'd see an occasional warehouseman walk in, take orders from her, and walk out.  All my fears about them bothering her were groundless.  She had it completely under control in a couple of months.

We made a good team.  As a newly hired manager, it was nice to realize I had the ability to fix problems that had plagued the facility for years.  Wendy and I had worked hard to fix things and inevitably our work brought us closer together.  It didn't take long until I sensed she might feel something more.  I've always been a little clueless at taking hints from women, but with Wendy, I was pretty sure.  We had flirty discussions.  Her leg accidentally brushed against mine under the table more often than could be written off as mere coincidence.  

I wouldn't have dared to start anything while she was still employed with us.  At that point, I was too naive.  I thought companies would fire a manager caught in dating an employee but that didn't stop my pig-man brain from chattering in my ear.  

The rumors started about us started about the third month.

By then, our inventory improvements began showing up on the financials.  My boss was happy.  My boss' boss was happy.  I was happy too and it showed.  I was living four hours drive from anyone I knew.  I was working 80 hours a week and had felt alone for months.  It was nice meeting someone and feeling a connection.  One day my boss smiled as he said that all the time I was spending in the inventory office was paying off.  He didn't say anything specifically but I knew by the smirk on his face what he meant.  He'd heard the rumors.  The sales manager was blunter.  'Is it true you're hitting that?'

In truth, I was spending too much time in inventory.  Wendy didn't need my help anymore and the office had a lot of other problems that needed my attention.  I called the warehouse manager and Wendy into a meeting.  I explained the review process Wendy and I had developed and explained it would now be his responsibility to work with her to keep inventory under control.  I would be available any time they had questions and would meet with them on a monthly basis from that point forward.

 

I saw Wendy wasn't happy with the change.  It was only later I understood the reason.

The warehouse manager's name was Joe.  As I mentioned earlier, he'd once been a sales manager but he'd fallen out of favor with customers.  I didn't know all the details but most likely, it was the same reason I didn't want him in the warehouse position.  Joe wasn't especially smart.

The one thing Joe did have in abundance was a salesperson's charisma.  He was the type that could go into any room and by the time he left, not only know every person's name in the room but their wife and kids as well.  I genuinely envied that trait.

Joe and I got along well once his inventory issues were fixed but I challenged him on the importance of followup with Wendy so he understood her process.

* I'm sure some people who read this are thinking of my earlier comment where my employee pointed out that she was making less than a janitor.  In this situation, Wendy was making $320/week part-time and had fixed the problem.  Joe was making about $50,000/yr.

I could see Wendy continued to streamline the process over the next couple of months.  I was happy to see she didn't need my help -- she understood how to fix problems.  I don't remember the first time she told me she thought Joe was 'gross'.  I'm sure she said it a couple of times and I remember agreeing with her.  I'm sure I mostly blew it off.

I did miss seeing Wendy every day.  She stopped by my office from time to time to ask questions but I blew her off.  Part of the reason was I've never been good at multi-tasking and I don't like interruptions.  Another part of the reason was I knew I'd grown to like her more than a manager should.  

This wasn't the only time it happened in my career.  When you work closely with someone it's hard not to develop feelings of some sort.  It's important to shut them down -- to not act -- to not react.  This was my first experience of this type and I'm sure I pushed too hard with Wendy.  It must have confused her.

I did have a lot of negative feelings towards Joe.  He tried to get involved with inventory for a month or two but couldn't understand it and backed off.  Thankfully Wendy was handling it for him but that didn't make it right.  Wendy was the one answering all the inventory questions at my meeting, at the meeting with my boss and with my bosses boss.   Joe was clueless.  

Joe was a nice guy.  He'd developed a habit during his years of being a salesperson on meeting you with a huge smile, a warm handshake, and what felt like over-enthusiastic banter if you didn't see him talk to everyone the same way.  In all the time I knew Joe, I don't think I ever saw him greet someone with less than unbridled joy.  With people he especially liked, the handshake would turn to a hug and sometimes into a backrub.  I don't like being touched so this annoyed me.  I mentioned it to my boss and he said it was Joe's idiosyncrasies.  It was Joe being friendly.  I never got used to it and never once considered how they might affect a twenty-year-old girl working in a secluded back office.

Wendy had worked for the company for about six months when she shut my office door.  I could tell by the look on her face it was serious.  I assumed it had something to do with a big inventory discrepancy.  I was wrong.

"I want to file a sexual harassment claim."

She took me completely by surprise.  I'm sure I sat silent for a couple of seconds but it felt like a minute.  A tinge of guilt came over me.

As I recall, my response wasn't very profound as I uttered something like "Ohhh?"

I didn't dare say anything else.  Wendy and I weren't working very close by that time.  She was practically running the department.  She didn't need my help.  I wasn't sure why she'd come to me.  It took me until halfway into our conversation before I realized she'd come to me because according to the company's org chart, I was on-site Human Resources.

At that point, I'd never had any HR training nor much in terms of actual experience.  Most people went straight to the GM with their HR concerns.  The other complaints were mostly about medical bills which I took to my payroll person handled.

Wendy had come to me with an actual HR issue because she trusted me.  It was something I had to address.  I asked, "What happened?"

Wendy told me the problem began just after she started.  Joe would come into her office and lean down close over her shoulder as she explained to him her system.  Many times he'd put both hands on her shoulder and start a massage.  She said she told him to stop over and over but he kept doing it.

There are memories in your life when you say or do something and they replay in your brain from that point forward and cringe every time.  The next minute is one of those times for me.

My immediate thought was one of relief.  I don't remember my exact words but it was something like "That's Joe being Joe.  He does that to everyone."

Wendy started crying.  She shouted at me through her tears.  "It's creepy and it's weird and I want him to stop."

I am proud to say I knew I'd fucked up.  I knew I needed help.  I also knew what my boss would say if I took Wendy's complaint to him.  My next move was the smartest thing I'd do during the entire ordeal though it took me many years to realize it.   I called a corporate HR staff lawyer, a lady named Theresa.  We'd worked closely together in the past and I trusted her.

Theresa answer was firm, "You need to file a sexual harassment form."  She gave me the form number so I could copy one from the company handbook.  I asked if we had to go that route as I knew the shitstorm it would cause.  Our policy at the time was if you filed a sexual harassment complaint against a manager, it notice of the complaint be copied to everyone in the company including the company president.

Theresa proceeded to give me the nicest ass-chewing I've ever received.  She never raised her voice but made it clear that once I called her it couldn't be undone.  The only way she wouldn't take it forward is if Wendy rescinded the complaint.  I asked Wendy if she wanted to proceed and through tears she said yes.

It took Wendy a couple minutes to complete the form, sign it, and hand it back to me.  The tears had dried on her face by this time and I wanted to say something to make her feel better.  I knew that was impossible but I was feeling so many things.  I wanted to apologize for leaving her alone with Joe.  I also wanted to give her a hug which I knew would make a bad situation infinitely worse.

As she passed me the paper, she asked if I thought she was doing the right thing.  

I knew I couldn't help her.  I said, "Only you know that."  I'm sure she expected more from me.

Wendy turned and left without a word.  I signed my part of the form before faxing it to corporate.  As soon as I hit send I made another copy and headed to the GM's office to tell him the bad news.

I don't remember his exact response but ...

"What the fuck where you thinking?"  

... was the general message.  His next message was just as clear.  "I want to talk to her."

I knew Wendy wasn't in any shape to talk to anyone.  I started to object but my boss wasn't in the mood to argue.  Wendy's office was a good five-minute walk from the front so I had plenty of time to think about the situation but I couldn't think of a good solution.  As I walked her to the GM's office she asked, "Am I in trouble?"  I tried to reassure her she was not though in truth I had no idea what my boss was going to do.

I can clearly remember the look on her face when the GM told me to step outside so he could talk to her alone.  No fear.  No hint of tears this time.  I doubted I would have looked as brave.

One thing I didn't realize at the time is HR departments aren't set up to protect employees.  They are there to protect corporations from having problems with their employees.  Sometimes the two goals intersect but many times they don't.

In this case, the General Manger convinced Wendy to take back the form.  He convinced her we could take care of it in house.  When she agreed the he called the company's lead HR attorney and together they made sure the form never made it to the Vice President of HR.

I found the whole process disappointing.  Had they realized how much guts it took for her to file that form?

When I first started working as a manager I thought everything was black or white.  Yes or no.  Right or wrong.  A sexual harassment claim against Joe would have gone in Joe's file but as it was later explained to me, it also would have gone in the GMs and mine too.  Not in any physical sense.  If the form had gotten filed, we would have been branded as managers that couldn't handle our problems in-house.  It would have been a chit higher-up managers would hold against us if they needed at some point in the future.

This was when I learned that management is a game where many times companies pretend to follow certain rules as pawns get sacrificed along the way.  I also learned company culture is almost as important as a company's salary structure if you want to attract and retain the best workers.

The next day, I asked Wendy if she really did willingly rescind her complaint form.  She claimed she did.  She said the General Manager said he would talk to Joe and make sure it didn't happen again.  Theresa in HR was pissed when I called her to talk about it.  Her boss had given her a similar tongue lashing as the one I'd gotten from my General Manager.

Joe came to me and looked genuinely hurt when he found out.  That didn't stop him from later making mocking comments around me hoping he hadn't gotten too close.  Joe never gave me a backrub or a pat on the back from that day forward, the only good outcome from the whole enterprise.  

As for Wendy, I'm sure he told everyone in the warehouse to watch out for her because she was trouble.  I'm also sure most of the people ignored him because everyone knew Joe was a bad manager.  Wendy complained to me about it and I mentioned it to the General Manager.  He rolled his eyes at me when I told him.  I have no idea if he ever said anything to Joe.

A month later Wendy turned in her notice.  On her last day, I asked her to come to my office but she claimed she didn't have time.  I went to her office which I saw was covered in balloons with a cake on her desk.  In the two years I worked at that facility, this was the only time the warehousemen ever pooled together money to give someone a party.  Everyone was sad she was leaving.

I told Wendy I was sorry.  I told her I wished things had turned out different.  I told her I was going to miss our conversations.  I knew I was going to miss her in more ways than I could say out loud but to say more would risk making me look like a creep and she didn't deserve that.  She thanked me for my help and we shook hands.  I never saw her again.

I heard through the grapevine she graduated from college a few years later.  They said she got a really good job at a Fortune 500 company working in Human Resources.  I've always wondered if her job of choice was because of her experiences with us.  The thought haunts me sometimes but I will never know the answer.

Our inventory problems returned within a couple of months of Wendy's departure.  Within a year, Joe was pushed out of his warehouse job.  They moved him back to sales.

*****

This story may seem quaint in comparison with Tara Reade's allegations or the stories about Harvey Weinstein's rapes.  Wendy wasn't shoved against a wall or forced to have sex but she was put in an uncomfortable situation.  She was forced to endure something she asked to stop.  She went to someone to ask for help and was met with disappointment.  Wendy left the company a little sadder and a little less innocent.  We took that from her.

Like Tara Reade, the situation I described above is from my memories but memories fade over time.  Time has a way of distorting our memories.  Tara Reade has changed her story many times over the years.  Joe Biden says it didn't happen.  Who is telling the truth?

Is my story above true?  It's the way I remember it but it is human nature to make ourselves the heroes of our of own journey.  I wonder how others might feel.  I'd bet the General Manager wouldn't remember it.  Wendy almost surely would.  Would Joe?  It's doubtful.

I've thought a lot about Wendy since the #MeToo movement started.  I always did my best to separate work and personal life but that doesn't mean I didn't use my position to wrong someone.  Perhaps I turned a blind eye when I should have spoken up.  Am I the boss in another person's story?  Then I wonder how Joe be viewed if it happened today?  What would a company today do when faced with the same situation?

Nothing is ever black and white.  Everything should be viewed on a sliding scale.  A single backrub isn't the same as dozens of backrubs after being told no.  Is a dozen unwanted backrubs worse than a 'grab of the pussy'?  At what point should a man be written up?  At what point should a politician drop out of a race because of allegations of rape?  These are impossible questions because every situation is different yet #MeToo requires us to deal in absolutes.

Is Tara telling the truth?  Is Joe Biden?  They are the only two that really know the answer and I doubt the rest of us ever hear the truth.  In that case, there are no good answers.  Only questions that will never be fully resolved.

Tweet

Stopping at a red light

Have you ever found yourself sitting at a red light late at night?  It's 2AM.  You can't see a car in any direction and you're just sitting there.  Waiting.

It's times like that my head gets a spinning.  It's silly to just sit there.  No one would ever know if I ran the red light.  When you think about it, it's a little stupid to just sit there.  You could take 2 minutes off your journey and be in bed that must faster.  It's more productive to run the red light.  When you think about it, it's more beneficial to society as a whole to run the red light.

You can come up with all sorts of justifications in your mind at 2AM when you are tired and want to get to bed.

So let's say you run that red light.  Let's say work a night job and that red light is waiting for you every time you go home.  So you run it.

Now let's say a cop sees you running the red light and he pulls you over.  You know you were in the wrong but you explain that there wasn't anyone around and it didn't hurt anyone.  You explain its late for the cop too.  Do they really want to do paperwork at 2AM in the morning?  

Your sob story works.  The cop lets you off.  You wave to them the next day when you do the same thing.

You tell your friends about this new strategy.  You tell them how you're excited to add 2 whole minutes to your day.  It doesn't take long until they are doing the same thing when they drive at night.  Eventually, it becomes common for the townsfolk to do this.  The cops don't mind.  They have better things to do with their time than to hassle people that run red lights that don't matter.

One night you get off work early.  It's 11PM and there's still no one on the road.  You see your buddy the cop and you wave as you run the red light.  It's ok, you just got off work early.  You pause to explain and they wave.  You nod your understanding.  After all, it's just a red light, there's no traffic and he'd have to do paperwork.  You tell your friends.

A few months later you get a promotion.  You're working new hours.  You now come home from work at 8PM but you still want to save that 2 minutes.  There's moderate traffic coming from both directions but there are places you could cross if you are careful.  You wait for a moment when the coast is clear then slam your foot on the gas, shooting through the gap and running the red light without a problem.

Your buddy the cop sees this and pulls you over.  He asks why you ran the red light.  You explain how you got the new job at an earlier hour and how you still want to save those 2 extra minutes.  The cop explains that while it is a tradition in town that people can run red lights after 11PM, 8PM is much too early.  You confound him with logic - 'Is it fair to those of us that drive earlier in the day are the only ones who cannot run red lights?  Isn't that discrimination?'  The cop thinks for a moment and you add, 'I was sure to look both ways before going' then a final plea, 'and after all, it's a lot of paperwork.'

Your buddy the cop lets you off with a warning.  The next day you come to the red light and face the same situation.   You wait for the perfect moment then hitting the gas pedal, easily crossing the busy street.  You wave at your friend the cop and he waves back.  You tell your friends about it.

Some time later you get another promotion.  You now leave work at 5PM and on your first day, you see traffic backed up all the way to your parking lot.  You cut down side streets and across alleyways to make up the time.  You even drive on a few sidewalks just to get to your traffic light.  You see traffic stopped in each direction caused by cars that ran red lights.  

You pull your car off of the sidewalk and back onto the pavement, carefully making your way through the smashed cars so as not to damage your own.  It takes a while but you make it and on the other side of the road you see your buddy the cop.  You wave but he doesn't notice, he's busy taking incidents reports that will keep him busy most of the night taking statements and surely will be filling out paperwork well into the next day.  

You racing off down the road leaving the jumbled mess of cars behind.  You look at the clock and see your trip is going to take 20 extra minutes.  Perhaps it's time to move.

--------

These are the kind of thoughts that pop into my head when waiting at 2AM for a red light with no cars in sight.  Waiting makes no sense when you think about it, but to run it surely leads to anarchy as I've clearly shown.  I think there's a morality tale in there somewhere as well.

Tweet