Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Cynique


    @TroyTalk about cherry picking! You only responded to the comments that you had a "retort" for. The other things i pointed out to you, you ignored. And when you cast yourself as being an authority on "good journalism", then you invited the "diversionary" comment i made about your lack of proofreading. And to add insult to injury you proceed to mansplain - oops, i mean critique my "debate" tactics as if yours were any better. Sheeze! First you said that mansplaining was not a word. Now you say Merriam Webster didn't give a definition of what you have apparently reconsidered to be a word, but you refer to M-W's definition of this word in trying to make your point. What is your definition of a definition?? Just because a word doesn't appear in a dictionary doesn't mean that it has no definition. And what does the phrase "it's not going to be dropping out of sight any time soon" convey to you? When will this word which, for some reason M-W is watching, disappear? In 5 years, 10? 20? And why will it disappear? When people decide to acquiesce to Merriam Webster's decree that they should stop using it? This was an article about a very fluid subject. Not hard science which is what you are so devoted to. Finally, what did i say that contradicted this article? I surmised there was a possibility that M-W might add this pop culture word to their dictionary at a later date. They left the door slightly ajar in regard to their doing this. Since you completely ignored my reference to Oxford Dictionary, a reference book which is on a par with Merriman Webster, here is an excerpt from Huff Post: This week, Oxford Dictionaries announced some new additions to their online database. Listed alongside “clickbait,” “douchebaggery” and “side boob” is everyone’s favorite uncomfortable experience — “mansplaining.”The etymology of “mansplain” can be traced back to 2008, when Rebecca Solnit wrote an essay titled “Men Explain Things To Me.” The author touched on the idea that being talked down to and corrected — primarily by men — was a common occurrence in almost every woman’s life... I really am not sure what is fueling your persistence in discussing this word. i keep saying that mansplaining is a word Feminists came up with and it was meant for the exclusive use of women but its original usage has been neutered by those who took it upon themselves to now apply it to anyone who patronizingly explains a subject to another person. What about this is buggin' you?? Other than that you personally find the word mansplaining offensive. What is it that you are disagreeing with me about??

    @TroyYes, braced in quotation marks. But a good journalist wouldn't compose that kind of a sentence; a good journalist would use the word in a context that would make its meaning clear, especially if what the congressman said was obvious to the educators if they were all women. Google the phrase: "definition of mansplaining" and Merriman-Webster, will come up on the list of what is referred to as dictionaries supplying definitions for this word. If you click on to the Merriman-Webster headliner, it will take you to a site which is entitled "words we are watching" which features an interesting article about the etymology of the word. At least this is the case on my new desktop Dell computer! (BTW, since "questions" is used in the singular, you shouldn't have pluralized it. But you should've pluralized "news". You also should've used a colon(:), not a semi-colon(;). tsk-tsk Answer yes or no. Would a good journalist make these oversights and errors?) And I did not insist that word is in the dictionary. This is what i said: Not only are you not accurately quoting what i said, but you are apparently refusing to utilize Google because of your personal prejudices against it. So we will just have to remain at an impasse. i don't understand why this is such a sticking point with you. it's like it's an emotional thing with you because it's derogatory to poor "misunderstood" men - who mansplain.
  3. Niggers and flies

    The Republican Party neglected blacks during the Reconstruction era that ushered in Jim Crowism which was just another form of slavery. When FDR took office during the Depression, blacks began streaming into the Democratic party because it spoke better to their needs. During the height of the Civil Rights movement, southern Democrats were so horrified by the possibility of equality being granted to negroes that they bolted their traditional party and formed the Dixiecrats who subsequently infiltrated and took over the Republican party. Clarence Thomas was an affable ol colored guy, but he betrayed his people by aligning himself with the Right Wing Conservatives on the Supreme Court, and voted against everything that could benefit blacks, and this included the affirmative action and social programs that he and Uncle Ben Carson both benefited from. Are you suggesting that blacks just stop voting and wait around for one of these parties to address their problems? What we do know is that as flawed as the Democratic party is, the Republicans are even worse and they couldn't care less about blacks coming over to their side

    @TroyIf you Google mansplaining, Merriman-Webster comes up, and supplies its definition of the word, and in its article on the subject, notes that the word is not going to go away, - which means it just might be inducted into the actual dictionary at a later date, as is often the case with pop culture words. And just because women misuse this word, doesn't justify it being misused. i reject your notion that it is not a "real" word. It conforms to the definition of a word, which includes describing it as a synonym for "term". BTW, Language covers a broad spectrum of communication and urban dictionaries are very legitimate because they are an acknowledgment of how slang contributes to language. Again, the word "mansplain" was coined by militant Feminists and was intended solely for the use of women. It has been bastardized by men who are offended by it, and by women who have inadvertently gone along with the mansplained perversion of it.

    @TroyMansplaining does have an official definition which does, indeed, appear in the Merriam Webster dictionary: https://www.merriam-webster.com/.../mansplaining-definition-history. As well as the dictionary of idioms: /idioms.thefreedictionary.com/mansplaining The urban dictionary also defines it in street slang. So it's absurd of you to say that mansplaining is not really a word, especially after you supply a definition of it, yourself, in order to bolster your argument. I have valid reasons to stand by my argument that women/feminists originated this word, and men, as you previously stated, co-opted and tried to flip it because it was an unflattering put down of them. In spite of this admission by you, it doesn't seem to register with you, that the purity of this word was diluted by men. At its core, mansplaining is about men being patronizing to women. i insist on the proper usage of ''mansplaining" because of my love for language, and mansplaining loses its impact when not true to its original definition. As far as i am concerned, when men interact and discuss why they cheat, this is not an exercise in mansplaining but rather a "bull session"; a very apt term. And women certainly don't need to have men explain to them why men are "dogs".

    @TroyYou certainly were not mansplaining in your response because you didn't recycle what i said but instead expressed your opinionated interpretation of what the word implies which, according to you, can involve hostility or hysteria. But these types of confrontations can occur between 2 people of the same sex, which is why what you contend is more about explaining than mansplaining. And why didn't you include one of the definitions that supported your argument? "Mansplaining" is a rather recent addition to the popular vernacular and it originated with women. Men should come up with their own term to counteract mansplaining, instead of trying to tailor this word to fit their views. And who in the universe would reject the intrinsic meaning of a word made up by women, except people who are prone to mansplaining and co-opting, - people also known as men.
  7. Who knows?

    The meme in this post, which is only a speculation, conveys with illustrations that humans have physical counterparts of the universe. Which would further suggests that we are replicas of it. Everybody has their own theory and when it comes to the truth, who knows?
  8. Who knows?

    A whole reality exists outside the boundaries of language. Maybe words, rather than defining, are instead, confining?

    @TroyYour co-opting and flipping the word "mansplain" completely diffuses it, takes away its impact and makes it redundant. Why would mansplain be used in a general sense to replace the word "explain" without a reason? What are some of the other definitions of which you speak? You skewed the definition of mansplain by saying the word is applied by women every time a man opens his mouth. And this is not the case. It's only when he smugly states the obvious. That definition i supplied was from a dictionary, and the meaning of this word made up by women is universally accepted. i don't think you speak for all men.
  10. I'd be interested in seeing "Lipstick Alley's comments posted on the "me, too", movement. Black women seem to be less hysterical about this topic perhaps because they're experienced in standing up for themselves.There was a little local demonstration against harassment on TV yesterday here in Chicago, and i didn't see any black faces among the participants. i made the comment on a FaceBook thread about this subject, and i was unfriended by the black woman who started it because i posed a tongue-in-cheek, truth-seeking question wondering why since, dating back to the "bra-burning" 1960s, Feminists have been touting women as being equal to and on a par with men, how come this strident message didn't inspire women to prove this when it came to dealing with sexual predators? Because i didn't want to appear being too sympathetic toward dirty ol men and perverts, i refrained from further observing that some mention should also be made about the rash of female teachers seducing their underage male students. I guess the idea of women preying on boys for sex is a little hard to fathom. It's also interesting that so many of the men accused of sexual harassment are Jewish. Which kinda reinforces the idea that harassment is really about exerting power, and who has more power, particularly in the entertainment world, than Jews?

    @Troy Women coined the term "mansplain". It's actually a put down, and is originally the exclusive domain of women, reacting to men who think they know everything. That's the reason for not simply saying "explain". Here's a definition: to comment on or explain something to a woman in a condescending, overconfident, and often inaccurate or oversimplified manner:
  12. Who knows?

    We could all be particles of the big bang, and each particle could be a miniature universe; a microcosm. Just like we are star children, because we are made up of the same elements as stars are.
  13. End of Poverty?

    ??? Are there actually white college graduates serving hot meals to drug addicts in the ghetto? This is why i can't groove with you, Pioneer. What you say sounds so unlikely. I'm trying to imagine a scenario where ghetto drug addicts are being served hot meals by anybody, because these people are on the street focused on quick ways to get their next fix, unless of course they are in rehab where i still have a hard time believing that they would be waited on by anyone other than blacks who are routinely relegated to this type of menial labor. But, - that's just me...

    A man can't "mansplain" to another man. Mansplaining involves a man regurgitating what a woman has already said, or a man cluelessly attempting to clarify what a woman has figured out for herself. Maybe Mel can womansplain what Del means by "Wednesday, Thursday and Friday" means. i would guess that it's slang for "everyday".
  15. Who knows?

    Since there are millions of us, we can't all be the universe. We can be the spawns of the universe; each of us a miniature one unto ourselves.
  16. @Pioneer1Would you be specific about all the white men i am putting a lot of "praise and power on"? The men that Mel and i exchanged information about in our posts following your complaint, were black men as is Colin Kaepernick. We both give due credit to Barack Obama, as well as our own Troy Johnson. Name some white men who are heroes of "Afro American" women in this society?? You are the one who looks upon white men as being omnipotent. You imagine that on this board your persona is "forceful and dominant". But not to me, especially with all of your pouting about how my and Mel's "rejection" makes you "jealous", and how you mope about my not sharing your adoration for certain people. This leaves me wondering why you don't you stop craving approval. Why do you need my validation? i don't need yours. i don't care if you are put off by all of my new age spirituality and pondering about truth and reality. Why should it make a difference to you if i don't agree with you? Man up! Since you choose to guard your identity and professional resume, all i can go on is the impression you make here on this site, and you come across to me as a font of preposterous pronouncements, opinions that you pull out of your ass; someone who dwells on subjects i have lost interest in. You're good at that. BTW, you spelled "independently" wrong.
  17. Who knows?

    Or, that we are microcosms of the universe.

    In the twilight of my years, there are a lot of things about which i've been trying to not let my baser instincts prevail. But lately, i have become inundated with current events that i am just not compatible with or sympathetic about. In my ongoing search for the truth, i have begun to look inward and if i am to be honest, i have no choice but to confess that i am descending into a state of "i don't give a damnism". i am not proud of this but the truth is not always pretty and, in my case, there are many things that have neutralized my humanity and no longer inspire my concern. Where to begin? What don't i give a damn about? Well, i don't care about the plight of Muslim immigrants or Hispanic illegals. i don't care about feminists and their shrill complaints about sexual harassment. i don't care about the ambiguous Black Lives Matter movement. i don't care about the opioid epidemic. i don't care about the Las Vegas mass murders. i don't care about manipulation of corporate America. i don't care about anything pertaining to celebrities. i don't care about any black actor or author who has an African surname. i don't care about the america flag or the country that it flies over. More specifically, why should i care about clannish Muslims, hovering in their little enclaves, their women claiming to not be submissive while dutifully wearing head coverings? Why shold i care about hard-working Mexicans speaking Spanish and implicitly scorning lazy blacks. Neither one of these group have ever bonded with black people in their struggle but instead just want to avail themselves of a better life they hope America will provide. Why should I care about this "me too" mania of white women and their phony newly-found male supporters who formerly looked the other way and shrugged, all jumping on the bandwagon pointing their fingers as if dirty ol men haven't always been around propositioning females, many of whom took them up on their offers. Not to mention the ambitious aggressive seducers using their wiles to get what they wanted from men. None of this is new to long-suffering black women who are not held in high esteem like fragile, intimidated white women. Why should i care about the floundering BLM movement which has been taken over by inept self-serving leaders putting out a message that is being blatantly ignored? Why should i care about the opioid crises and its white suburban victims any more than whites cared about the crack epidemic that devastated black ghettos. Why should i care about the Las Vegas terrorist shootings, white-on-white crime instead of white-on-black killings at the hands of police terrorism? Why should i waste time caring about Amazon and FaceBook and other mega capitalists who exploit the powerless masses of every color? Why should i care about the baby bumps and hook-ups and excesses in the shallow ranks of the rich and famous? Why should i rejoice about the success of Africans living in this country who reap all the benefits that American-born blacks fought and died for, smug pervasive late comers with strange names who haven't paid their dues? Why should i care about that star spangled rag that is the symbol of red genocide, black enslavement, and white entitlement. Or about the BS country that this besmirched banner represents. Why should i care indeed? i have better things to occupy myself with. Do i sound like a bitter black woman, lacking in compassion? Can i regard life as a big joke and be bitter at the same time?

    LOL Whose post was Virginia's comment directed at? The one immediately preceding hers, or the dissertation before that?
  20. @Pioneer1 So you think that because Mel and I defended ourselves against what you, yourself, conceded may just be your imagination, and which you subsequently didn't refute because you couldn't come up with a rebuttal that held water, except to say in effect, that we are picking on you because we don't share your interests. And it's presumptuous of you to get indignant because we don't. Are you in any way guilty of bringing on yourself what you accuse us of doing? As far as i'm concerned, my disagreeing with your opinions does not necessarily make you wrong. it's more about your interpretations just not grabbin me and i don't feel the need to humor you by saying they do. I'm sure both lurkers and posters find many points of disagreement with me. But i don't require everybody to defer to my cynical opinions and observations and - don't care if they don't. You might consider toughening up your skin and stop trying to dictate what i should be engrossed in at this stage of my life. I am not Afro-centric and i'm sick of wasting my time dwelling on the entrenched white power structure and how it affects black people; your favorite subjects.
  21. i didn't say i didn't like the man. i just wasn't blown away by what he had to say. He was like a slick-tongued minister, moreorless preaching to the choir, - to people like you who eat up that all that pseudo science and black exultation. i'm past that. It doesn't expand my mind. It is funny how i never agree with you. But it's not deliberate. You just say things and makes claims that naturally invoke my skepticism. Whatever.
  22. @Pioneer1What a lame rebuttal. Maybe you should do a little listening, yourself. You sulked about what you falsely perceived as Mel and i being enamored of white men, and we gave you answers to debunk your notion. She and i subsequently exchanged information about black men who are prominent in the esoteric disciplines that we are interested in and it goes over your head. Because you are mired down in tired ol theories of your own making about the black mystique and white dominance, you think we have an obligation to align our interests with yours, accept your gospel, and abandon our pursuit of what appeals to and stimulates our imaginations. Speaking for myself, this ain't gonna happen.
  23. Heads Up, Antonio

    LOL. If you think the arguing and debunking that has been going on here from day one will suddenly reverse itself, Antonio, and everybody is going be of one mind, you're in for a rude awakening. Like Troy suggests, this is an open forum where a lively exchange of ideas prevails, and nobody is encouraged to defer to another person just for the sake of harmony. Different opinions are the name of the game here, because this broadens the perspective and keeps things interesting. The regulars here routinely argue and feud with each other and then move on. We don't really take each other that seriously and "insults" roll off our backs. There does, however, seem to be a consensus here among all of us, who unlike you, are not Millennials. Black unity will remain elusive because the black community is not a monolith; it is diverse. And diversity is not necessarily a bad thing. You're input is welcome, however, because as a Millennial you represent a new interpretation on existing points of view. But don't expect to have your opinions go unchallenged. For instance, your opinion about the Black Panthers being one of the greatest movements we ever had. i don't agree. They were on a collision course with disaster from the beginning because they were ill-prepared revolutionaries more about style than substance, not to mention their abusiveness toward women. As you say, the FBI had its sites on them, and they weren't going anywhere, except to the morgue after being mowed down. In spite of their bravado about the government being able to "kill the revolutionary but not the revolution', they both died. Panther co-founder, Bobby Seale, is today a member of the mainstream and seemingly looks back, almost with detachment, at this organization which lacked viability. The greatest accomplishment of the Black Panthers was their aggravating J. Edgar Hoover, head of the FBI back then.