A Pulitzer Prize-winning King biographer has continued his research, and found some very unsettling records.
During ongoing surveillance of King, senior FBI officials called King an “evil abnormal beast” for, among other things, watching, laughing, and offering advice as his friend forcefully raped a girl that had clearly objected.
This was a repeating pattern of disturbing behavior by King.
Will this destroy his legacy?
Will this change how you teach your kids about MLK?
I have read about his affairs in other articles but the news of his watching/encouraging a rape is new to me. It’s stomach churning assuming it is true.
It absolutely changes how I view him.
Wait, is this story confirmed?
I did a quick search (mind you, very quick) on google and couldn’t find additional articles, so I’m hoping it’s not true. Though this is allegedly newly discovered stuff, so it’s possible there just isn’t much info on it yet… but yikes… I really really hope it’s not confirmed. MLKJ is a hero of mine and it definitely changes how I view him. I can’t justify this in my head at all.
The biographer is extremely well respected. He has not seen the source material though, only the FBI notes taken from the source material.
I found articles about an author who read the FBI written files. Hoover was crazy with hate toward MLK and worked steadily to turn the Kennedys against him and even used the FBI to try and push MLK to commit suicide. The actual tapes will not be released until at least 2027. I definitely don’t believe it until I hear it with my own ears. (What kind of agent would listen to a rape and do nothing to stop it?)
A similar example. JFK and RFK are respected and honored for the positive steps they took in the battle for civil rights and that is not diminished by their failings as men. People are not perfect, by any means.
This is one of those stories where I am fine with waiting a week until the “hot takes” die down.
Okay but I feel like there’s a difference from “not perfect” and “sadistically encouraged rape”. It really hurts my image of him. But yeah, as damon30 said, I’m not going to get too worked up yet and just wait a bit.
Unfortunately if this story was about Ronald Reagan or the like it would probably be picked up by mainstream media and widely discussed. Here it is only in news outlets abroad and a few outlets here that carry it. If true it should be widely reported. While I applaud MLK as a great leader especially as one who advocated peaceful protest this would be disgusting and a game changer if true. As said above JFK is still revered in some circles even though he is now known as a serial womanizer which is basically a user of young women who are mislead by fame and power. Even with JFK civil rights support one cannot see him as a good person from a woman’s point of view. Not good.
Reports in the Times of London indicate that many of these incidents are on tape, and that the court imposed seal on the recordings lapse in January 2027. If the tapes back up the reports, be interesting to see if MLK day goes the way of Calhoun College.
I don’t believe anything until there is substantiated proof. People are way to quick to condemn others - lives and reputations ruined in this bizarre age of guilty until proven innocent.
That being said, in no way can a womanizer be compared to someone cheering on a rape.
It really can’t be proven true until the tapes are released and confirmed not to have been doctored. The accused is dead, and I wonder is the victim will come forward. I really don’t believe much coming out of the Hoover FBI. So corrupt and so many abuses of power.
There have been rumors in DC for many years that something along these lines existed.
There are many brilliant and powerful men who have dark sides. This does not take away from his civil rights legacy or his oratory, it just reveals that he too had a dark side. This is part of human nature, especially for “larger than life” characters.
It is fact that King also extensively plagiarized his dissertation, yet his PhD wasn’t revoked.
Many believe he plagiarized the I Have a Dream speech from Archibald Carey.
Maybe womanizing itself isn’t illegal, but the sliminess of it, plus the new allegations… they keep adding up against him.
I think this story is beneath this biographer. Surely he knows that without the the source materials, what the FBI said about MLK, given it’s hostility toward him, should be viewed with at least some skepticism until those are released.
OhiBro, with your bringing up the dissertation allegation and this and the allegations of affairs, this just seems like a broad attack against MLK. I don’t think the guy was a saint but his legacy in moving the civil rights movement forward can’t be denied. Why the antagonism? Just curious.
@suzy100 , the article is very recent. I find it disturbing, But credible.
The other dirt I mention has been around a long time, so the nature of progressively hearing worse things really brings to question who he was. Laughing while your friend rapes someone is worse than “not a saint.”
I’d have to disagree a bit about JFK. Womanizer? Heck yes. Poor, innocent babes-in-the-woods misled by his power? No, I can’t go for that. First, many of his women were high-end prostitutes, and that most certainly is 2 willing partners making a trade.
For many of the others, let’s remember he was a young, good-looking guy that also was President. A young woman might have been in awe of all that he offered, but that doesn’t mean she’s misled into dating. No more than if a guy finds a woman particularly physically attractive- and is desirous of dating her- it doesn’t mean she’s done something wrong.
I see a subtle distinction that not all agree with. I look down on JFK as an adulterer but I don’t see him as a user of women. To me, to be what I think of as a user of women implies the women weren’t happy to be his partner, I think they were. I think they liked the people, the places, the money spent, the gifts received, that dating this guy could bring. I don’t mean they were users, I just think it was a trade. Both parties agreed on the trade, IMO.
When someone of greater power uses someone under this power, it is abuse. There is good reason for discouraging and forbidding fraternization. It’s too easy to become a forced relationship. The one with the power should understand the issues there, part of the responsibilities that come with power.
It remains to be seen the extent this sort of abuse has been occurring and how history and public opinion treats transgressions. It is certainly not in an equitable manner
But if we look at JFK, who had the power? Was it him, given the family money and his job? Because he was a persuasive speaker? Was it her, given her beauty and ability to wrangle gifts from a wealthy man? He isn’t accused of kidnapping or rape, here. Everybody knew he was a married man, my opinion on this one is that all partners were willing trade partners.
I like @cptofthehouse ‘s explanation of the power dynamic. Even though there may be two willing partners in a relationship, there is very good reason so avoid such a relationship, with college teacher/student relationships being a prime example of what to avoid.