I wonder what Tom would say?

Genealogy can be very controversial, and of course private associations have total control over their membership, but I rather thought this was over the top. The wife of the head of the Monticello Association (which is made up of [paying] lineal descendants of Thomas Jefferson and controls the cemetary in which Jefferson lies) apparently went onto a Yahoo!Groups message board and pretended to be a black descendant (through a mistress who was a black slave named Sally Hemings). She adopted a persona of an older lady with emphysema. The Hemings clan have been formally excluded from membership in the association. Members of the association have in the past invited members of the Hemings family to the annual reunion, however. With this reunion looming, new rules were being put into place to limit their participation--rules that evolved as the Hemings discussed ways to get more people in. This seems the direct result of this woman's participation.

Many of the association believe the Hemings should be allowed in. DNA points that a Jefferson male (although it cannot definitely say it was Thomas) fathered at least the youngest child of Hemings. From what I can tell, to be a full member in the association you have to be a lineal descendant (but somehow I don't think DNA is used to figure that out!) and spouses and stepchildren, etc., can become associate members. They claim to be investigating the matter of how to determine membership eligibility thoroughly (and have been since 1999).

Okay, I know a private association can pick and choose whom the let in, but...well, last I checked a descendant was a descendant--whether they're black, white, or purple, legitimate or not. If someone produced a child by so-and-so, they're a descendant. Granted, it's probably harder to prove it through standard genealogy than through legitimate lines due to the lack of proper paperwork. But there does seem to be a great deal of evidence on the Hemings' side. So the Monticello Association comes off as a bunch of bigots protecting their idea of Jefferson--and even if her actions were not condoned, it's a public relations nightmare--even though many agree the Hemings should be welcomed in and are just as appalled by these revelations as the Hemings. Still, it seems to me it would be better for all involved to worth through the matter a little quicker so they don't undermine the whole reason for their group. If I were in charge, the wife, if she were an associate member, would be out on her butt quicker than you can say "Thomas Jefferson". And I'd invite a Heming in her place. But that's me. :)