I read a Jefferson biography where it mentioned his genteel, timid, respectful attitude towards the opposite sex, contrasting sharply with his dynamic and vocal presence around other men. All classic behaviour for the breed, of course.
This never fit with the image of the big massa throwing the nappy ho on her back in the slave quarters to satisfy his lusty desires. I would not do such a thing and I believe I share more than a few character qualities with Jefferson. It is hard to conceive of such a sharp student of human history acting like little more than a swaggering primate himself, especially given his constantly asserted revulsion at the institution of slavery. Was this man really a loud mouthed braggart like any Homo Sapiens who never meant a word he said about anything? I don't think so.
I think Jefferson was a stone cold Amud Neanderthal with a genetically fixed attitude of absolute harmlessness towards females. A half a million years of fossil evidence shows these creatures were incapable of behaviour that Sapiens does so naturally he barely even realizes he is doing it. The Neanderthal female and child were not only never struck by any males they knew, they never died at the hands of Neanderthal males they didn't know. Anthropologists are so terrified of even speaking the truth about this species they have recently taken to branding them "sadomasochistic," to imply that a man who doesn't beat women to death must have something wrong with him. So if Superman doesn't drop Lois from a couple stories up while he is carrying her in his arms, according to Homo Sapiens he is either gay or a masochist - because Sapiens kills more females and children in any given conflict than he kills opposing males, without exception. I guess he is the normal one and the Neanderthals then must have been self-hating leather gimps who liked to be dominated. This is called Sapiens scienmajistics.