In the days following the Civil War, many formerly enslaved people began the search for their separated family members in various southern newspapers. They took out ads that “were filled with yearning and despair” over their lost children, parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles. (200). Jones-Rogers specifies that the formerly enslaved people who placed these ads often listed the white women responsible for their family’s separation by name. The author then describes the contrasting views of slavery provided in the firsthand accounts of former slave owners who invented narratives about slavery which left out all the trauma and violence involved. These revisionist accounts painted the picture of slave-owning women as emblems of sacrifice and benevolence who cared for the people they enslaved. This version of slavery was deeply rooted in religious beliefs that purported “God had ordained that their European ancestors buy, rule over, Christianize, and civilize people of African descent” (201). These former slave owners offered three explanations for their support of the institution of slavery: They believed in the power of slavery to civilize African people; they were following a divine plan and calling appointed by God; they were products of their environments and knew no better.

Jones-Rogers offers a fourth reason that she believes white women purposefully avoided confronting in their accounts.