On the left side, that’s Alexandre Coste and his mother Nicole Coste
Middle: Prince Albert and his wife, Charlene
Top right: Prince Albert’s children Jazmin Grace and Alexandre
Bottom right: Alexandre and Nicole Coste
For years, Prince Albert of Monaco denied he fathered Jazmin and Alexandre. When Tamara Rotolo gave birth to Jazmin in 1992, he denied that he was her father. In fact, he was sued by Jazmin’s mother back in 1997 because he was neither acknowledge nor supporting her financially.
Flash forward to 2003, the year Alexandre Coste Grimaldi was born, Albert’s father, Prince Rainier changed the constitution to decree that only the legitimate offspring of Albert or his sisters, Caroline and Stephanie, could inherit the royal title. This ensured that, should Albert die childless(which he didn’t because he had two out of wedlock kids at the time), Caroline or her children would ascend to the throne. So Prince Rainier changed the rules to ensure that Alexandre doesn’t ascend to the throne of Monaco.
When Prince Albert finally acknowledge both Jazmin and Alexandre as his children back in 2005, they were outraged. They were outraged at the mothers, not the Prince. Hypocritical double standards, esp. when the race component is added. They were especially hard on Nicole Coste, calling her all kinds of hateful, racist things under the sun. They were less harsh on Jazmin’s mother but they were still hateful.
Regarding royal succession. According to Wikipedia:
“Out-of-wedlock children are not in the line of succession to the Monegasque throne according to Article 10 of the Constitution of Monaco, which specifies that only “direct and legitimate” descendants of Monaco’s monarch (or of the monarch’s siblings) may inherit the throne. Because her mother’s divorce proceedings were not finalized by the time of Jazmin’s birth, Jazmin is legally the product of adultery and cannot be legitimated through the subsequent marriage of her biological parents.”
In 2011, “Prince” Albert married Charlene Wittstock in a lavish ceremony after five years of courtship. Neither of his children attended the wedding. The citizens were happy about this development now that the man has an excuse not to parent his two children.
In 2014, “Princess” Charlene gave birth to twins, boy and a girl. Now the deadbeat prince has an excuse to exclude his children from his previous relationships. He treated his children as if they don’t exist.
Starting today, I’mdoing a series on the least talked about deadbeat father: White men and their abandoned multiracial children. The media loves to talk about Black fathers and their supposed failings while ignoring other groups of men who are even more guilty of the same thing they accused Black men of doing. Ari Nagel, Strom Thurmond, Prince Albert of Monaco, among many others. Let’s discuss the other side instead of burying it under the sand and letting it fester to a serious problem.
The history of interracial sex: It’s much more than just rape or romance.
When South African comedian Trevor Noah takes over as host of “The Daily Show” on Monday night, he’ll probably introduce his new audience to his family biography. Born in Johannesburg to a black South African mother and a white Swiss German father in 1984, when apartheid was still firmly in place and interracial marriage was illegal, Noah made his parents’ struggles the subject of his widely acclaimed stand-up routine “Born a Crime.”
Their story represents an exception to one of apartheid’s harshest realities: White men sexually violated black women with impunity. But neither is it a romantic tale of racial transcendence. Noah has been frank about how his Xhosa mother paid the greater price for her relationship with a white man. Not only did she face social stigma and arrest, she was also left to raise Noah alone when his father exercised his white male privilege and left South Africa.
In my academic research, I grapple with stories like the one Noah tells, of interracial sexual relations that resist neat labels. They’re not uncommon. Yet when power dynamics are so profoundly unequal, there’s a strong incentive to deny the possibility of complexity or murkiness by falling back on binaries like rape or romance.
Take, for example, the recent controversy that erupted after the New York Times published an obituary for the iconic civil rights leader Julian Bond, in which Bond’s great-grandmother, Jane Bond, was called a “slave mistress.” We know that Jane Bond was enslaved, but as Shaun King and many other readers rightly pointed out, that very fact means she could not refuse a sexual relationship with the Kentucky farmer who owned her, a fact elided by the term “mistress.” The New York Times was right to apologize for suggesting otherwise.
Consider the polarized views that many Americans have of the nearly four-decade-long relationship between Thomas Jefferson and his bondwoman, Sally Hemings. For some, it’s a love story; for others, a lifetime of sexual slavery. Yet the details of their relationship suggest a more complicated set of familial, financial and affective ties than either scenario allows.
The same could be said for Richard Mentor Johnson, vice president to Martin Van Buren, and his slave Julia Chinn. For two decades the couple lived openly as common-law husband and wife, jointly raising their daughters in a life of privilege. During Johnson’s long absences in Washington, Chinn presided over the affairs of his Kentucky estate. After she died in 1833, Johnson cast his eyes on one of Chinn’s enslaved nieces, who reportedly rebuffed his advances, leading him to sell her. Was Johnson a caring husband and father or a predatory and ruthless slave owner? Perhaps he was both.
Historians rightly worry that by portraying women like Hemings and Chinn as partners of the men who owned them, we risk obscuring the obscene degree to which enslaved women could not exercise control over their own sexuality. We also fear that apologists will tout such examples as proof that rape wasn’t endemic to slavery. Despite more than two decades of black feminist scholarship that has proved otherwise, the refrain “slavery wasn’t so bad after all” persists.
But women who were able to strategically confront the violent sexual economy of slavery were not lesser victims because of it. Their distinctive wounds merit our consideration too.
What did an enslaved woman feel when she acquiesced to her owner’s sexual demands in the hope that the loss of her dignity might someday gain her a measure of comfort and her children’s freedom, if not her own? What kind of trauma did famed abolitionist Harriet Jacobs experience as a young woman when she “gave” herself to an older white man of her choosing to stave off her owner’s sexual predations?
While the master-slave dynamic stands apart because of its gross inequality, we should take a similarly subtle approach to interracial relationships under Jim Crow in the United States, apartheid in South Africa and elsewhere.
Long before he became a prominent Dixiecrat, Strom Thurmond impregnated his family’s 16-year-old black maid, Carrie Butler, under circumstances that both he and Butler took to their graves. It’s difficult to fathom what consent could have looked like, but neither do the scant details of their encounter confirm coercion. He was a segregationist whose flawed but enduring relationship with his biracial daughter was more of an open secret than a well-kept one. No simple label can account for that.
Whether in the United States or in Noah’s South Africa, we need to find ways to communicate the unsettling history of interracial sex that aren’t so black and white.
Carina Ray is associate professor of African and Afro-American Studies at Brandeis University and the author of “Crossing the Color Line: Race, Sex, and the Contested Politics of Colonialism in Ghana.”
Note from BW of Brazil: Another day, another example of why Brazilians are not “all equal”. It’s just funny that perhaps millions of people around the world wouldn’t assume that such blatant, open displays of racist sentiments occur in a place like Brazil. Well, how much more evidence is necessary? And for all of those Brazilians who continue to insist that “somos todos iguais” (we are all equal), I would LOVE to know why someone would refuse the service of a black woman in a restaurant and prefer to be waited on by a blond, I mean, if you, in fact, DO believe that we are all equal? As bad as the blatant prejudice in this case was, that’s not even the worst part. That lies in the fact that the victim of discrimination didn’t seem to realize that had been discriminated against and didn’t want to take any action!
“Such a surprise. Once colleges and universities started down this road, they find that it never ends anywhere. In the bad old days, segregated housing on campus was a definite No-No. The first crack in that wall was “Athletic Dorms”, which were originally intended to separate the semi-professional sports pets from actual students…..later these became All-Negro Rape Crisis Centers for white co-eds.
North Carolina is an unusual state in many ways. Being from Wilmington, I am allowed to say that. Unlike many states, North Carolina does not have two races, but three……black, white, and red. Now with the Hispanic invasion, North Carolina can claim to have a fourth…..brown. Since, half of the Hispanics quit school before they graduate high school, the Hispanic dorm will probably come later.
Like I said, there is no end to housing segregation. First, by race and gender. Next they will demand separate housing for homosexuals and cross dressers. Are Nerds a separate ethnic group? Chinese students are numerous enough these days. Plenty of Rednecks in North Carolina too. Perhaps, the few serious white students will rate their own housing, separate and apart from the pets.”