Pioneer1

Very interesting conversation.......... I've been trying to follow it but it's like a Grand Prix race with so many twists and turns...lol. I know the conversation has moved on past people making bad choices on what to eat but I just want to say... Mel You sound like you don't want to hear any excuses for why poor people are obese or make bad decisions. You also sound like high achiever. One thing I advise high achievers to understand is that they are EXCEPTIONAL and it's unreasonable for them to expect others to be able to do what THEY did. If I'm speaking before a city or county board, most of them are highly educated and self driven high achievers.....which is how they got to their positions in the first place. I tell them that when they make laws or decisions, don't think of THEMSELVES and whether or not THEY will be able to manage and operate under those laws; but think of less intelligent lower achieving people on the slow end of society. Because THOSE are going to be the people most impacted by those laws. I'm saying THAT to say, when people are blessed with high intelligence or a high drive for success......they have a responsibility NOT to expect the same from others, even if it's their own children. You have to understand that a lot of people CAN'T or WON'T make the correct choices even if you try to tell them and so we need to protect them from their own doom sometimes. This is why certain drugs are made illegal or regulated to the pharmacy. Sometimes you have to just take the junk food away and FORCE them to eat right for their own good, because giving them a choice is like giving a loaded gun to a baby to play with. Troy I noticed the same thing about a lot of White kids also. How so many of them used different types of designer drugs to get high. Infact I heard either Bill Gates or Steve Jobs did acid ! It's interesting.....even suspicious....to me how as much as they claim that drugs destroys the brain, so many White men could get stone drunk every weekend and do so much drugs in college yet still manage to get good grades and become high achievers. Asian kids have to study night and day to get good grades. White kids get drunk 5 nights out of the week, take a few pills and drop some visine in their eyes in the morning and...and STILL manage to graduate! What gives?

Delano WOW That's the same thing I said when you claimed you grew up in the Bronx but didn't use judgement when it came to people......lol. Troy The question is what was Time's motivation for creating and publishing this unflattering image of Viola. I called it racist because a Black person would have selected a nicer image. It was absolutely racist. White supremacy at it's finest and most subtle. Our people really need to be sharper when it comes to noticing things like this, but perhaps this is yet ANOTHER example of how men and women differ. Notice how the women on the board are so quick to defend ANY image of a Black woman that even a clearly unflattring and almost insulting one is defended. While the men on the board step back and say, "Whoa ho hoooo.....waaaaaiiit a damn minute....they could have done better than THAT!" It's like this in real life! I was out with a sister.....a pretty conscious sister....a few days ago when I first noticed this picture and SHE didn't think anything was wrong with it either! She was so quick to defend Viola and any image of Black women put out by the media that she didn't take time to analyze the expression and colors they decided to use and most of all the REASON Time decided to use that particular image. It only took me a half a second to realize something was wrong. And when I sent emails to a couple of my boys, they BOTH agreed that it was "mammyish". I remember Farrakhan said that Black people are so happy to just SEE themselves on television on in the movies not caring HOW they're depicted. At the time I first heard it....I didn't understand how right he was. But the older I get the more I understand. Can we agree that Time has a sensibility that is not optimized for presenting Black women, and that sensibility is rooted in white male dominance? I'll almost certainly take a survey and see how the results pan out both in general and by gender. You have MY agreement, and I eagerly await the results of that survey. It's probably split down gender/sexual lines....lol. Black women....rightly so....are angry and tired of people "bashing" the way they look. However a lot of our sisters...our of anger and confusion....have taken this "I don't give a fuck what nobody thinks of me" attitude that says they can dress and act anyway they like and no one has the right to critique them let alone correct them. White racist males can easily take advantage of that by encouraging them to dress and act as crazy as they want to and then put them on display as a mockery and insult to Blacks in general...and many don't have enough sense to realize it . Leslie Jones' performance on SNL is a GREAT example of the digraceful offspring born from Black ignorance mating with White racism. Gangsta rap is another even more powerful example. Silly negroes just to happy and excited to be seen....they don't care HOW they're portrayed. 　 　 　 Cynique What I said about Black women weren't "criticisms" so much as they were....well.....to be honest I'm not sure of the right word to use. But my point was Black women are VICTIMS of a society that hasn't engineered products designed specifically for them, and out of ignorance and lack of options have been forced to either use products designed for White women or invent products of their own in order to groom themselves.....and through trial and error hope to be successful. TIME magazine, in its systemic racism, apparently thinks that black people are at their best and most typical when they are smiling broadly. So they didn't think Viola was grimacing. it's all in the eye of the beholder. It's not ALL in the eye of the beholder. As I was telling Delano, some perceptions are UNIVERSAL among human beings and will be seen as the same. You can argue from one culture to the next whether or not it's appropriate for a dark brown woman to wear bright red lipstick. However when I woman smiles with her upper lips curled back and crimpled bearing her entire upper teeth and gums.....that's universally seen as frightening. It's like a vampire without the fangs. Mel Dang, those words contain some strong hate right there... whew! Naaaaah nah....... That ain't HATE.....that's LOVE. I LOVE my people and hate it when racist try to demean them, insult them, or otherwise make a mockery of them in the eyes of the world. Like a good friend. You know you have a good friend she loves you enough to tell you the truth about how you look in a particular dress of if you got a booger hanging out of your nose. But what would you think of such a friend who would let you walk out of the house looking like a FOOL or let you run around town with a booger hanging out of your nose so that everyone points at you and laughs? I'm the type of Black man who loves my sisters so much that I want to see them look there BEST, not let some racist encourage them to look like a clown so that they can be mocked and ridiculed.

Mel I think I understand what you're saying now.......... You're saying proof has nothing to do with the evidence YOU BRING but whether the person you're presenting that evidence to ACCEPTS it or not. It's a shame they made the "experience" definition obselete, because in my opinion it's just as valid as the first definition if not MORE. A little child can ACCEPT that Santa Claus exists simply because she was told so, does that now mean that there's PROOF that Santa exists because that belief has been ACCEPTED? There has to be a better way of defining proof than even what Webster has....lol. Perhaps there should be 2 versions of PROOF: 1. The first type would be solid evidence establishing absolute fact....regardless to what any one individual BELIEVES or ACCEPTS. 2. The second type (more to Websters) would be ANY evidence that the person BELIEVES and ACCEPTS, regardless as to how strong or weak that evidence is. In one definition the onus is on the CONVINCER and on the second the onus is on the CONVINCEE.　 As I stated an experience can't not be verified. I can search for the Library of Congress because someone said it exists on this plane...I could experience through observation that it exist but as soon as the experience is over so does the LOC. Experience can absolutely be verified, especially if I use the definition out of that very same dictionary: VERIFY 1 : to establish the truth, accuracy, or reality of verify the claim It just depends upon the INDIVIDUAL on whether or not they want to ACCEPT that verification. If I had a video of you sitting in the Library of Congress, as long as I ACCEPT that the video is true and hasn't been doctored, your experience has been proven and verified. In another example............ Let's say you and I visit D.C. together. 10 people tell us about the Library of Congress. I believe it exists.....you don't. I convince you to atleast GO to the area those people told us it was located. We both get there, I see it, and I walk in and walk YOU in and we both sit down in a chair inside. Now...... As far as I'm concerned, it has been VERIFIED and the proof ACCEPTED that it indeed exists. If you want to sit there not believing that you're sitting inside the LOC..... If you don't want to ACCEPT that fact...... Your unbelief and lack of acceptance doesn't cancel my verification and proof of our experience. Applying this same logic to the Akashic Records................ Ofcourse I can't verify an experience YOU may have had. However you CAN prove that it exist to my liking by showing me how to get there so I can see for myself.

Mel LOC is only real in your presence. For everyone else who is not present, it's an idea... While it may be real when you visit, once you leave it you cannot prove it exists... Using someone's verification, such as asking directions, and purchasing a plane ticket, that LOC exist is based on trust and faith. Sure I can prove it.....lol. And I'm not talking about "second hand" knowledge like pictures of it, but PROOF! Whoever is asking for proof, all they have to do is get on the phone with me and I can step-by-step walk them through the directions on how to get there until they have arrived and are sitting comfortably in seat with a book in their lap. That's absolute proof. Now ofcourse when it comes to HISTORICAL events or places that no longer exist....no...you CAN'T absolutely prove them any more. You can find other people who HAVE seen them or experienced them along with you and they can be used as witnesses to verify that which HAPPENED or that which ONCE EXISTED...but atleast on this plane of existence you won't be able to prove it. If it's a FABRICATION or HALLUCINATION...(and I'm definitely NOT calling the Akashic Records a fabrication) you'll have a hard time trying to "prove" it...lol. But when it comes to REAL things that still exist, the possibility to prove it should also exist. Now we may not know HOW to prove it...that's where ignorance comes in...but the proof is there because the object is there and the proof exists in it's very being.

Del It is not possible for me to answer your question.Up until the last year or so I didn't judge people. You come from the Bronx, but you didn't "judge" people? Lol...... Man, if you were born in New York and didn't have enough sense to make judgements about people you wouldn't have made it past 14. Infact, if you were a Black man in the United States PERIOD and didn't know how to make judgements about people and your situation atleast on SOME level there's a good chance you wouldn't have made it past 20. So in the first section you are saying only Lesbian women and straight men can judge a woman's attractiveness. Then you say common sense and instinct allows judgement of a woman's attractiveness. So if I put these two sentences together then Gay men and Straight Woman lack common sense and instinct. Which is the logical albeit nonsensical conclusion drawn from your statements.Since you are defining abilitiy along sexual orrientation to the object. Does the woman's sexual orientation matte. Or is all about the person looking. Either it's nonsensical.....OR....your mind isn't analytical enough to comprehend the difference between those two statements. Yes, BOTH sexes of ALL FOUR sexual orienations can...with common sense....make SOME BASIC judgements about the appearance of a person i There are certain physical markers that most human beings with common sense INSTINCTIVELY KNOW will make a person somewhat attractive or unattractive like: -Nice smooth unblemished skin -Strong healthy white teeth -Firm well defined musculature among males -Well defined curves and hip-to-waist ratio among females -As well as a balanced psyche or personality when it comes to interacting These are traits that most people across racial or cultural lines tend to universally find attractive and you don't have to seek the person as a sexual partner or find them attractive YOURSELF to know that they.....or atleast those features...are attractive. If see a man running up and down the street and see a man who runs out of a house naked with gobs of fat and flabby skin hanging off of him, patches of eczema all over his body, no teeth in his mouth, and a penis that looks like a second naval......I don't have to be a woman to JUDGE that this man probably isn't considered very attractive to women. However, when it comes to the OBJECT OF YOUR ATTRACTION....meaning WOMEN (if you are a straight man) or MEN (if you are a straight woman).....you are far more qualified than other demographics to judge the attractiveness of an individual. Other's can do it to a CERTAIN EXTENT....but we tend to do it better. I think nature put it in most people to be able to judge others who aren't a target of our attraction atleast on some level in order to gage our COMPETITION. In other words, I have to be able to atleast do SOME sort of estimation about how attractive another man is in order to know whether or not I should compete with him. Cynique Stop playing.....lol. You KNOW that woman don't look right in that picture! They made that girl look like Wanda from In Living Color: Also you keep talking about the many ways Black women wear their make-up as if all of them are fine. So what if a lot of them are doing it, there are a lot of Black women overweight and theirs a lot of Black women with acne too.....doesn't mean either of these physical conditions are ok or attractive. As as people we should be IMPROVING ourselves, not incorporating a culture of being deviant, dysfunctional, and down right freakish and calling it "individuality" expecting others to embrace it. The plain fact is many Black women in the United States.....because so many were born and raised around White people and/or in White culture....don't know HOW to properly beautify themselves. They don't know HOW to make themselves look better and more appealing. So they imitate White women as best they can and many end up looking WORSE than nature intended for them to be because they're using products and methods that were not intended FOR them. Red lipstick is but ONE. Blue eye shadow is another. Vaseline based products which aren't very good for Black skin is yet another example that both Black women AND Black men tend to use mistakenly. The fact is, despite individual successes, as a people we haven't been taught how to BEST groom and beautify ourselves because we haven't had access to the science that Whites have had to know what works best for us. Most Black women and men have to find out what works best for them by trial and error, there hasn't been too much scientific or lab work done to develop products specifically designed uniquely for our physique. Now don't get me wrong, there've been products marketed TOWARDS Black people and sold as "ethnic" care products. But on a deep scientific level that involves matching our chemical make-up and what reacts best to accentuate our natural beauty....cocobutter and sheabutter are about the only products I can think of right now.

Troy Pioneer, you are looking for proof of something that will never be provable, at least to your level of satisfaction. The answer can't be recorded on a video camera or measured in a lab. It sounds like you don't have a lot of confidence in their ability to answer the question.....lol. Remember, my criteria for proof doesn't just lay in observation alone but either OBSERVATION OR EXPERIENCE. So even if they can't point to and show me the Akashic Records, if they can tell me how to get there to see them for myself then that would suffice. Mel I'm still not sure I totally understand your answer. To make it clear, I'm asking 2 questions: The first is about YOUR experience....whether or not you can verify it to me is immaterial. Have YOU verified the existence of the Akashic Records or some other grand cosmic system of information retrieval? Then the second question....which is to you or whoever can answer..... Does anyone know a SURE way to access this system? Del I can only tell you what you already believe. Lol...If you started telling me what I already believed, you'd be humiliating yourself. Facts are reality and their existence doesn't depend on a person's belief or skepticism. The Library of Congress exists. It's real. It's in Washington D.C.....whether I believe it or not. If I want to go there, all I have to do is get the directions and a plane ticket and I can be there by tommorow....nothing strange or mystical about it. Now either the Akashic Records exist and you know how to access them....or you don't.

Troy I'm glad you posted those Essence pictures of her. We know how "dimed up" Viola can look....and "they" know it too, but when Time did that photo-shoot, making her look good wasn't their intention. Our people need to be wiser about these little tricks and games racists play in order to make themselves look good and make our people look bad. Another game racists like to play in the media is putting attractive White women next to unattractive Black women. It doesn't matter the context or program, it could be the news a movie a show or even a magazine article. Like you said in another thread, there are plenty of fat unhealthy White people, but how many of THEM do you see on television, in the movies, or even on the cover of magazines? We all know how the news will often pick the crazies negro with no teeth in his mouth they can find in the neighborhood and interview HIM on what went down that evening. But they also love to find a White women with clear skin, smiling and in shape and put her next to an overweight loud relatively unattractive Black woman. No need to say anything, just put them together and let the viewers observe the glaring difference so that it sinks into their subconcious. And some of these dumb negroes are so silly and want attention so bad that they don't mind hopping up infront of the cameras looking like a mess and talking even worse.....not realize they're being made a fool out of and just being used to make White people look superior. Cynique Well for one thing, she's not "grinning" on there...she's GRIMACING. She looks like she just stubbed her toe walking around the house barefoot! I didn't say dark skinned Black women shouldn't wear bright red lipstick because it draws too much attention to their dark skin. Dark skinned women shouldn't wear bright lipstick because of subliminal sexual reasons. A woman's lips are a reflection of her vagina. It's really quite simple..... White women tend to have pinkish (most of them anyway) vaginas and red lipstick subconciously draws a man's attention to this fact. I've seen more than a couple Black women's vaginas and I have YET to see a bright red one....and don't care to. Black women's vaginal lips are various shades of brown and her facial lips and lipstick should REFLECT that! But hey, in my book a woman has the right to where whatever the hell she wants. Just don't get mad if people point and laugh at you and call you a clown because you're wearing make-up that is unflattering and totally not designed for you. How many White girls do you see running around with coco-puffs chocolate lipstick on? Delano It sounds like you can only judge someone's attractiveness if they are a potential sexual partner. No, common sense and instinct allows you to have SOME perception of how physically attractive people are perceived by the public. For example.... You don't have to be a woman or a gay man to tell that a sloppy made dude with speckles all over his skin and deformed features may to be considered very physically appealing to most women. But when it comes to judging females I'd be less than honest if I said that the sexual aspect wasn't atleast a factor. How did YOU use to judge people back when you were having sex?

Mel or Del If one of you know a SURE way to access the Akashic Records, I wish one of you could let me know. Mel during your experience, were you able to verify if such a "grand library" or system exists?

Troy if your husband got horny and hired a hooker cause he just wanted to be serviced, do you view that the same engaging in an on going extramarital relationship? I hope ou do because there is a world of difference between to the too. The former is no different than masturbating--you are just not doing it yourself. I don't know if most of the women who read this "caught" the real meaning of what you said or the point you were trying to get across. To many men, especially young men.....sex is biological need and a "game". It's not about love so much as it's about quenching a thirst and scoring points to establish status. When I got older I found out that women tend to attach more feeling or emotion into sex than men do, which is why so many don't understand how their husbands can have sex with other women and not love them yet ONLY love his wife. Mel It's true that many Black people choose to eat garbage because it tastes good, even if it's not good for them. However, much of this garbage is specifically designed and marketed towards Black people. Something is being put in this food to not only attract Black and Brown people but also affect their bodies by disrupting their natural hormones and chemistry. Have you noticed how so many Black and Native American/Latino young people are this fat "puffy" shape today? I don't remember seeing so many Black youth....male and female....who look "stuffed" like an egg roll or pepperoni roll. No shape, no muscularity...no butt...no hips....just a roundish puffy blob at 17. This can't be from simply over eating or eating too many potato chips, there MUST be something in the food that is disrputing their hormones.

Hmmm................ Is it ME, or is this picture of the otherwise attractive Viola Davis on the cover of Time magazine a bit unflattering and even slightly "unnerving"? There are 2 directions we can go with this: 1. The most obvious is that her lips are curled back and it looks like she's showing her fangs. It looks a bit monsterous. No person....male or female...naturally shows that much of their teeth and gums in an attempt to smile. Whoever it was back at Time did that shit on purpose to make her look scary or clownish. 2. The less obvious but still pretty good point that I don't hear enough Black women discussing is the fact that dark skinned women SHOULD NOT wear red lipstick! Some may ask why in the hell would a MAN have the nerve to sit up and tell women what kind of make-up they should or shouldn't wear? For me it's simple....... Unless you're lesbian, you aren't able to judge the attractiveness of a woman and how flattering her make-up is on her as good as a man (straight man) can. Black women are the most beautiful when they wear make-up flattering to THEIR tone/color....the browns and earth tones. Not wearing make-up designed to beautify White women....like bright red lipstick and blue eye shadow. That red lipstick on Viola clashes with her dark skin and makes her look almost cartoonish or "mammy-ish".

I KNOW I wouldn't have lasted too long out there. I tend to be too much of a "thinker" for strenous manual labor. Not saying that I'm some genius or "deep thinker".....I mean that when it comes to working, rather than "just doing" something, I'll often sit for a while and think of different easier ways to do it.....especially when it comes to sweating and heavy laboring. I would have constantly been in trouble with not only the White folks running the plantation but probably the other slaves too because I would have spent much of the time trying to figure out a way to get all the work expected of me done by noon so I could go somwhere and hide and take a nap...lol. And I've always been that way, even as a teenager mopping floors, bussing tables, and laying carpet. I used to have battles with some managers because I'd always find easier ways to do whatever jobs they gave me. In MY mind, you're paying me to get the job done....not sweat....so if I can get the same thing done with half the effort then what's the big deal? But as I got older I learned that a lot of them were more concerned with seeing you sweat and staying busy than the actual amount of work you got done. In the service industry, mediocre workers who "stay busy" are often treated better than high producers who slack off.

Troy If two people chose to only have sex with each other and actually accomplish it over a lifetime, and it makes them happy--that is great. To expect most humans to enthusiastically embrace and conform to this behavior is woefully naive and unrealistic. Logical, natural, and well said! 　 Del I remember a friend told me i should hook up with a woman who was checking me out. He couldn't comprehend me not sleeping with her. This is a testimony to the OTHER extreme that seems to be pervasive among too many Black males.....atleast when I was coming up. Not only did we have the dominant middle class White society that was sexually immature and somewhat timid who tried to force their morals on sexually confident Black men..... But on the opposite extreme it was part of AfroAmerican male culture...especially among young men....that you were supposed to sleep with ANY woman who showed sexual interest in you! I never did understand the thinking of some brothers. We'd go to a party or a club and the first drunk "hood rat" that smiled at them, they'd jump all over her and take her off into a room somewhere, and later claim he really didn't find her that attractive! Same thing in school, half of the boys lining up to bang that ONE girl who was known as a "freak" for anybody. If you didn't bang every girl who gave you an opportunity to, they'd look at you like you were crazy. According to some of them, you're aren't supposed to turn down ANY coochie! No discretion what so ever. Mel I hear what you're saying about the deception part of cheating. Certainly the lying is wrong and cowardly. However most of these men know that no amount of "re-negotiating" and explaining is going to convince their significant other to OK them having sex with other women, so they figure why even go there. I mean, even if your ex promised to be very considerate and use protection...would you honestly have given him the go ahead with other women? I personally believe the best thing to do if you know you like multiple partners is not even get into a relationship at all. But a lot of relationships today aren't based on love or sex, but one sharing the bills.... A lot of couples rely on eachother just to survive economically, which is another reason why people just go ahead and CHEAT rather than risk breaking up their "business partnership" by being honest. It's also another reason why a lot of women who KNOW their men are cheating on them continue to stay with them....it's a financial decision.

Troy 　 I had a job when I was 14 working in Central Park, pulling weeds and stuff like that. It was exhausting work--I can't image a life of that drudgery... Now see..... You were jumping all over me in the other thread accusing me of being a house slave, but here YOU are ready to fall out after pulling up a few dandelions in the park! Man, if you couldn't handle picking weeds in Central Park no way in the WORLD could you have handled picking cotton on a Mississippi plantation, lol. Just about the only thing you could have done was find one of those coats with the split tail in the back and gets to being the BEST house negro you could be.....lol.

　 who used to be a skeptical young chick. Debbie Downer. Speaking of a sly sense of humor..... I can think of SEVERAL good jokes out of that one line. But it would be neither sly nor appropriate for me to utter them.....lol. BTW, it's my pleasure to share this board with you too.

The feds issued that report years ago but even before the official report we already knew that a lot of White Supremacists have infiltrated law enforcement agencies around the country. I remember one of my cousins who had a spotless record AND a degree and wanted to become a Detroit Police officer during one of thier hiring sprees but complained that he was passed up for the job, but months later he saw a bus pull up full of police recruits in training and almost all of them were White men with shaved heads and red faces.....had that Marine Corp look about them. White cops to patrol a Black city. We WERE making a lot of progress with law enforcement and racism 30 or 40 years ago. When Coleman Young took office back in the early 70s he made it so that not only did they hire more Black police officers but those police had to actually live inside the city! On top of that, in most cases 2 White police officers weren't allowed to ride together. It was either a White and Black cop or 2 Black cops. He also hired a lot of women to the force. We had more Black cops on the force and police brutality went down. Another mayor came in and they gradually got rid of those rules and now police brutality has gone up. 　 Instead of releasing prisoners (many who seem to have mental problems), Obama should have made it one of his priorities to launch a major investigation to root out the racist infiltration before he left office. It's hard to believe that if the feds released a report that Muslim terrorists were infiltrating the police agencies around the nation that the DOJ or even the state and local agencies would just let that report slide without taking some sort of affirmative action.

Viola Davis I can understand. Leslie Jones....I don't know WHO the hell she's "influencing". I think her disgraceful and vulgar behavior on Saturday Night does a huge disservice to AfroAmericans in general and AfroAmerican women in particular. Being bold, vulgar, and brash aren't attributes most "ladies" aspire to so I'm not sure why Time is rewarding her with that type of publicity UNLESS it is their aim to: 1. Make mockery of Black women by putting a vulgar one on display 2. Use Leslie Jones to "influence" Black girls to behave as she does

Del Pioneer you can not imagine a situation where a person can do something that you can not. Or do something that you can not conceive. I can think of a least two situatuons where you can ride a bike without being able to fully identify a bike. Lol @ "fully identify". No one said anything about "fully" identifying anything, because it's an objective concept and we all have diferent OPINIONS on how much of a thing must be identified until it's considered "fully" identified. Nor did I say a person had to know what a bike was simply to RIDE it. Hell, a FOOL can hop on a bike and play around with it without realizing what it is or it's purpose. I said you had to know what a bike was to LEARN HOW to ride it. You don't have to know what a bus is to ride IN one. But you DO have to know what a bus is to learn HOW to drive one. person could be shown how to ride a bike wearing shutters. I don't know about "shown"....lol....but sure a person can be taught how to ride wearing shutters. There are blind people who can ride bikes. But they still first KNOW what a bike is....using their other senses....in order to learn. BTW....Einstein was a physicist and mathematician so he ABSOLUTELY accepted facts. He just didn't stop at the facts he already knew but continued learning more.

　 You have to KNOW it to IDENTIFY it. Facts/Knowledge comes first.....it's the framework for indentification. If you have no knowledge of what a bike is, you wouldn't be able to ID it even if one were standing in your living room. * I didn't say have a thorough knowledge of it or know "all about" it....I said simply KNOW it.

Troy Still, unless something has changed dramatically Black men should err on the side of caution when it comes to joking around in the office. I would never have said something like that to any woman in the office unless I knew her well enough to know she would not go to the man and sell me out. I would have cautioned my man to exert more discretion You're absolutely right, and I did. I'm certainly not advocating for Black men to go around making sexually provocative statements to the women they work with . However I also know that despite the supposed professional codes (this WASN'T a corporate environment but many places try to hold their employees to corporate and professional ethical standards)...I know that the work place is one of the best and THE most common place to find a compatible mate. Mostly because you get to see that person for an extended period of time through a wide range of emotions and conditions which allows you to make a much better judgement about their suitability. Infact, one of the weapon I had at my disposal was the fact that atleast 2 of the men there MET their wives on the same job and atleast a half dozen others are dating eachother so they must not have kept with the code 100 percent.....lol. But as I've gotten older and have seen so much drama that has resulted from co-workers dating and the tension it causes in the work place not only between the parties involved but also among the "haters"......I find myself increasingly telling brothers "don't shit where you eat" and keep it by the book.

Pioneer we have a different style of communication and thought process. Breaking news.......lol. Pioneer when you use the words true and false I think of them they way a logician philosophers or computer programmer would. So there cam be things that are true and wrong . Veracity only means that if I accept your assumptions and follow your thinking I can come to the same conclusion. Personally most assumptions are opinions. I would say that there are no facts. And if i can think of a situation no matter how far fetched that fact is no longer solid. I am not wedded to any idea or belief. Except that i eant to know and figure stuff out. It would be rather hard to know things and figure them out if you don't believe that facts exist, don't you think? When I say facts I'm simply talking about ACCURATE (and current) information. False doesn't necessarily carry an immoral connotation to it, it could just mean inaccurate information that doesn't line up with verifiable reality. But in order to figure out something you have to start off acknowledging certain FACTors involved in the process. You want me to teach you how to ride a bike, you must first be taught what a bike is and then accept it as a FACT. If you refuse to do so....how could any further learning take place? You're liable to grab a broom and try scooting down the street on IT instead.

It appears on the surface that society is better in Canada and these other nations because of universal healthcare and other social services, but I found out: 1. The only reason Canada and Europe can provide free health care and so many other social services for it's citizens is because the United States DEFENDS THEM...so they don't have to spend much on military defense. If the U.S. weren't around to protect them they wouldn't have nearly the amount of free social services for their citizens. And vice versa.... If we didn't spend so much on our military to police the world then we'd have more money for UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE and other social services. And as proof of what I'm saying, you see austerity rising up in Canada and Europe today. They're raising taxes and cutting social services left and right because America's military is being spread so thin that these other nations are being forced to boost THEIR military spending. Which leads me to another issue.....TAXES. 2. Canada and most European nations take way more taxes out of your income than in the United States to pay for many of these services. Now I wouldn't mind paying UP TO 25% of my income in taxes if I were guranteed universal healthcare and free college tuition and clean safe streets. But many of these places take far higher percentages than that which makes it almost to the point that you get PUNISHED for generating great wealth and it kills ambition. If I were poor with no income, I'd love the fact that wealthy people were taxed to help me. However if I were wealthy or even upper middle class earning a decent living, I wouldn't want to live in a nation that takes 75% of the money I worked hard to earn and just "spread" it around to the disadvantaged. 3. A huge factor in why these nations seem to be doing so well has less to do with thier economic system and more to do with their DEMOGRAPHIC. Canada, Denmark, and Australia.....although having people of color...are OVERWHELMINGLY WHITE nations! They want to see their own people living clean safe and civilized. In the United States you have too many racists in office who have a vested interest maintaining a racial heirarchy and keeping poor and mostly Black and Brown neighborhoods underdeveloped. This has nothing to do with Capitalism vrs Socialism....but more to do with racism. Again, this system isn't the best ever....... But we can still make it work better for us if we were more organized and aggressive. Black people have been here long enough and have enough financial power COLLLECTIVELY to make ourselves the 4th or 5th richest nation on this planet! I've heard it only takes $250,000 to start a credit union. There should be atleast ONE Black owned credit union in nearly every major city in this nation. Why don't we have ONE major Black hospital in this nation? No Black owned barber shop or soul food chains nation wide? It's not Capitalism's fault.....it's lack of unity and mental laziness! If this nation turned socialist overnight Black folks would still be in the SAME condition and social status.....or maybe even worse...... because many would actually QUIT the jobs they do have believing they'll be taken care of.

Del Pioneer the question is what happens in your mind. What you have decscribed is the outcomes and your mental process. If you ask someone how they think then it IS about their mental processes. However if you're asking where do people get their IDEAS from then maybe you're talking about INTUITION and INSPIRATION where thoughts just pop up in a person's mind without them making any effort to ponder it or the factors related to it. Most great artists have this type of thinking, called a "creative imagination". I'm not sure if this type of spontaneous thinking comes from the subconcious of the individual, or the superconscious of the collective. Troy Piecing together what both of them said....... He was sitting behind a desk and she had to reach behind him to get a coat off the wall that she had left. As she was reaching she said, "I'm sorry to put my big butt in your face but I just gotta grab my jacket." He told her, "Don't worry about it, you can put your butt in my face anytime you want to." Honestly, I've made similar comments to women on the various jobs I'VE had not to mention things I've said in regular life. I've gotten so many dates and sexual opportunities from women from making similar comments! But I can understand how in a sterile work environment and depending on the woman you make it to (she was a young "half-Korean" woman) how somone can take offense to comments like that. I knew if a White man made the same comment she wouldn't have become as offended. I also knew that if HE had made the same comment to MOST Black or MOST White women they wouldn't have been nearly as offended either. Knowing this was probably the case pushed me to fight it harder just on the principle of not allowing another Black man be punished for simply being a man. It goes back to what I've been saying for the past few weeks, a lot of the problems Black people have in this society are "invited" by them not standing up for themselves. BTW..... Weeks after that not only did they become "friends" but they started going to Friday's and other spots with other co-workers after work....lol.

*Ofcourse money won't solve all of your problems, but whatever problems you have.....being broke will make them THAT MUCH worse! (now that WAS an original...lol) 　 Troy At the end of the day, it is more profitable to capitalize off a weak, insecure, and ignorant people than it is to profit off those who are strong, conscious and informed (woke). As a result, corporations have no incentive to uplift us--even if they are an educational institution (think Trump University). You're absolutely right! And you know what? As far as I'm concerned corporations and private businesses HAVE NO OBLIGATION to uplift the public! Their only responsibility or obligation is for whatever the original founders started them for or the current owners maintain them for; which is presumably to MAKE MONEY. And in principle I don't have a problem with that goal in and of itself, as long as they aren't harming other people to do it (which far too many of them are doing) That's why we have a GOVERNMENT. The GOVERNMENT should be the ones we hold responsible for looking out for the general wellbeing of the public, not private businesses. If the government were doing IT'S job in the way of making sure everyone had decent housing, enough food, and proper healthcare.....then there wouldn't be so much need to pressure private firms to provide many of these basic necessities. As a direct consequence governments, who do the bidding or corporations, don't do anything to stop them and often HELP corporations exploit people as in the case of Amazon, who is thriving wildly under capitalism, while people become increasingly less well off. This is true. These past 40 years it appears that this nation has grown less CAPITALISTIC and more FEUDALISTIC. Feudalism being an extreme form or end result of unregulated Capitalism. 　 　 　 The system is broken, and to suggest there are no other better alternative makes no sense, when history demonstrates that there are. In no way am I saying that this is the best system the world has EVER known. What I'm saying is I haven't found any CURRENTLY OPERATING alternatives to the system we have in the United States that are BETTER. If you know of any being PRACTICED RIGHT NOW that yield better results then let me know.....because I'm looking for a way to improve my socio-economic status too! And certainly we can MAKE a better system than the one we have today but it would take collective effort.

This is off topic but........... Troy you want to know how and why I've arrived at some of my conclusions when it comes to racial classification? Just look at the so-called "Black" women represented in this commercial. Every one of them (I counted 3) are lighter than a brown paper bag and look mixed. But if you dare raise a complaint to Amazon about there not being any Black women in their ads they will just point to these women, look back at you with their arms folded, and most people will consider the case closed. Girls who grow up not seeing themselves in society or atleast not seeing women who look like them being portrayed in a positive light (ofcourse you can see plenty of dark skinned "nappy" head women for the first 5 minutes on your local 10 oclock news) they often grow up with severe psychological problems. The White women (and man) look clearly White and unmixed. The Asian women looks clearly Asian and unmixed to me. Out of 3 presumably "Black" women they chose for this ad, does anyone believe it's just a coincidence that they couldn't find atleast ONE who was a shade darker than a brown paper bag.

Lol...... It's specifically aimed @ Troy and Cynique....but it's "open to anyone". I'm a strong proponent of accuracy and truth. Not necessarily "judgement" or deciding what is "right" or what is "wrong"...but more so what is TRUE and what is FALSE. So when I go to solve a problem I try to factor in as much truth or accurate information about the issue as I can. For example...... A few years ago one of the employees under me was accused by an employee from another department of sexual harassment. The upper management wanted to immediately write him up and some even wanted to let him go citing "zero tolerance" for sexual misconduct. One employee who wasn't even in management offered to call the police and he barely even knew the facts of the case, but he was a known trouble maker and racist. Sex is a natural thing and I know it's natural for young men to hit on women and try to have sex with them, so I wasn't emotional or angry about it I just knew he was a good worker and I wanted the FACTS about what he did to see how best to defend him. The first thing I did was sit the brother down and ask him to tell me EXACTLY what happened, not what he thought I wanted to hear. After apologizing and grinning and embarrassment on his part I got him to finally admit what he did, which was a bit different from what he was accused of and DEFINATELY didn't fit under what's commonly considered sexual harassment. I tried to have a sit down with the accuser before we all went to the office but she wasn't having any of it and her manager kept pushing her on to pursue the matter even further. This young brother was a good worker and I was ready for battle to keep him clean so I prepared myself with the FACTS of what he did....her reaction....and the company's official policy on matters like this. Most of all I refused to let him apologize for what he did! He kept wanting to (and eventually did apologize to her later on against my advice) but I told him that this was business and they didn't want to hear any apologies because that would admit that you did something wrong. My defense of this brother rested on 2 things: 1. What he did was indeed flirtatious but NOT sexual harassment. 2. I charged the accuser with CULTURAL DISCRIMINATION and being ignorant of how people from other cultures interact with eachother. To make a long story short the meeting ended with the brother NOT being written up and a few weeks later one of the district managers who happened to be there and decided to drop by and listen in on the case heard me speaking so well and presenting the FACTS so plainly and directly that he was impressed and offered me a temporary training position! Now if we had went in there dealing with FEELINGS and OPINIONS and what she PERCEIVED his behavior to have meant.....he probably would have gotten written up if not let go. But I wasn't going to let them manipulate the rules based on flimsy opinions and perceptions, when it comes to threatening a man's livelihood you better come with the FACTS. The biggest lesson a person can learn from this story is that it pays to stand up for one's self. But the second biggest is that it pays to have the FACTS!