Troy

@Pioneer1, the science is clear. There is only one race and the world is an oblate spheroid not flat. This is not "my word" or "your word." These are just facts man. Again, this is my point: you have no problem disputing facts based upon your own limited knowledge and intuition. The only saving grace in our conversation is that you now know the truth. Now if you continue to reject that reality and form conclusions based upon this falsehood, that is up to you. But once someone makes it clear to me that the will reject facts in favor of their opinion I try not to pursue the argument any future. I did previously present you with a lot of information, but I guess you missed, ignored, or failed to understand it. At this point you can simply look it up on your own.

@Pioneer1 you continually assert there is a Black race, a white race, as well as a few others.

I'm not familiar with this Brother, but he has a nice website, a book, and a documentary film (trailer below). He apparently grew up in a housing in project, like myself. Black civilization predates and informs Judaism

The following is excerpted from a Harvard Business Review article, "When Do Company Boycotts Work?" Customers must care passionately. For customers to participate in a boycott they must passionately care about an issue. The main driver is moral outrage. Examples are violation of human rights, firmly held religious beliefs (e.g. the boycott over Danish products in Muslim countries after a controversial cartoon in a Danish newspaper), discrimination, betrayal, and so forth. The cost of participation must be low. Smart activists make it easy for customers to participate in a boycott. They target a single company so that customers have plenty of alternatives or a single product. This is one reason why retailers and oil companies make good boycott targets. It is easy for customers to shop somewhere else. Entertainment companies (e.g. Disney) are much harder to boycott successfully, especially if their products are unique. The issues must be easy to understand. Activists often fail to effectively communicate their objectives in a simple manner. PETA’s McCruelty campaign, for example, has had limited impact in part because the underlying issues are complex and not intuitive. Boycotting fur, however, is easy to understand. The mass media is still essential. While social media platforms have made it easier for activists to gain support, activists need coverage in the mass media for a boycott to be successful. Such coverage can then steer viewers to the relevant social media sights. Media coverage requires strong audience interest and a connection to an issue that the audience passionately cares about. Publicity stunts, such as occupying a building or involving celebrities, generate audience interest, but they must connect to a bigger topic. Greenpeace succeed in its campaign in large part by framing the issue about disposal of the Brent Spar as a recycling issue, a passionate topic among the German public.

OK @Cynique, it has been 5 days of back and forth mansplaining, manslain and we have gotten no where. Did you forget that it was you you started this? I wrote; "Well one of y'all please mansplain "Wednesday Thursday Friday" to me 'cause I did not get it." and you replied; "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." Your reaction to my statement and your ongoing defense of it, is why I thought you took this seriously. If you did not care, why didn't you just let my statement slide? The lady doth protest too much, methinks (since you love the British and their dictionaries so much )

LITTLE MAN, LITTLE MAN is James Baldwin's, first and only book, for children. He described it as a “celebration of the self-esteem of black children.” In the book's new introduction it is suggest that audiences at the time the book was originally published feel audiences were not ready for Baldwin's perspective, which might explain the book’s initial reception.

The only thing fueling this conversation was you rejecting my use of the word and me defending my position. I see you won't even concede that the word is not in M-W. Rather you've scoured the Earth and found a definition a British dictionary: mansplain VERB [WITH OBJECT] informal (of a man) explain (something) to someone, typically a woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing. Here too, there is no requirement that the the target of the manspliation has to be a woman. While that is "typical" it is not a requirement. I will continue to use the word in the fashion that I have been (mansplaining to a man), for it is correct usuage. Look the use of an informal word or a very malleable. Indeed the use of the English in information conversation is. Remember when "gay" meant "happy?" Today no man would not describe themselves as "gay" unless they were homosexual, no matter how happy they were. Maybe I'd describe myself as mansplaining to a guy I wanted to disparage because one only typically mansplains to a woman. Or maybe, one would request a mansplaication to highlight the idiocy of the request or the expected definition. Sorry Cynique the word has evolved just as quickly as it was coined.

It looks like I may be missing a couple of Ghettoheat titles in my database. Please post the ISBNs.

Allow me to mansplain; what you keep describing as a definition from Merriam Webster is NOT a definition. As you wrote it is described as a word "we are watching" for potential inclusion in their dictionary. Understand, or do I have to mansplain further? @Cynique, if you actually read the entire text for understanding, rather than cherry picking it to support an erroneous position, you would have included the thesis statement from the article (the very first paragraph, emphasis mine): We haven't seen adverbial use yet, but we're keeping our eyes open. The word's death knell has been sounded—it's so broadly applied that some say that any time a man opens his mouth he's accused of mansplaining—but mansplain is clearly not going to be dropping out of use any time soon. Clearly, at least to anyone actually interested in understanding, it does not seem likely that they will be including the word in their dictionary any time soon. This is just reading comprehension. Accusing me of refusing to use Google is a silly and disingenuous. I'd already found, via Google, and read the article from Merriam Webster before you posted the broken link to it the first time. It fact, I used it to support my argument. Astonishingly, you tried to use the very same article to support an opposing position?! Also, pointing out my typos is an unnecessary diversionary tactic. You obviously understood what I meant. I was going to ask more than one question but changed my mind and never changed questions to question... If something is unclear ask for clarity. Another weak tactic is ignoring the facts I've presented and accusing it of being "emotional thing" with me. You know me better than that. Besides you are as fully engaged in this debate as I am, but I have not accused you of being "emotional." I don't have to my position is much stronger. Yes the term is derogatory, for the reason Merriam Webster described in the quote above. If you read the linked article, "death knell has been sounded," you'll find more reasons.

This is so very deep. Cynique the idea that we can't, while sitting in front of a computers, even agree on whether a word is in the dictionary is exasperating to the point of being "Pioneeric." I have the MW app on the cell phone app; mansplain is not coming up there either. I showed you a reference from the MW website where they explain why the word is not in their dictionary. Still you want to insist the work is there, with only your word and broken link to back you up. I guess that is what they mean by alternate facts. Will any amount of mansplaining get you to see reality? @Del Cynique must be a fixed Sun sign like Taurus or Leo huh? OK @Cynique I have a simple questions for you. Would you want to see a journalist use the word in a new story? For example; "The Minnesota congressman mansplained the new legislation to group of educators at the Association of American Educators conference on Thursday." Yes or No?

LOL, being accessed of mansplaining is what drives men to cheat. I beg to differ with you on many points @Cynique; It is women, not men, who initially perverted the term by misuse it in the ways that I described earlier. Mansplain is not in the Merriam Webster dictionary. The link you provided is broken. Here is a article describing Merriam Websters's stance on the "word." The "Urban Dictionary" is not a formal dictionary. Sure, mansplain can be considered an idiom, but that does not make it a real word; one that is found in a proper dictionary and is appropriate for formal communication. You may love language, but surely you must appreciate that the use of words like "mansplain" distorts language. There are much better, and clearer, ways of expressing oneself. Naa'mean?

Found at the top of my Facebook feed the other day.

Cynique, do I have to mansplain "mansplain" to you? I gave you a definition of Mansplaining which you have either ignored or rejected. My use is not unprecedented: Beside this is not really a word. It is like arguing about the definition of "troysplain." The word does not appear in the word in the Merriam Webster dictionary. The Atlantic defines it as "explaining without regard to the fact that the explainee knows more than the explainer, often done by a man to a woman" In the vast majority of the "definitions" I've read, there is no requirement for mansplaining to be done by a man to a woman as you asserted. Generally qualifier "often or "usually" is used. @Cynique, why insist upon "proper use" of a word that has no official definition?

Well I was correct “…one, and only one, of these titles to win.” I, however, was wrong about the book that would win. I discounted Jesmyn's book simply because she'd previously won a National Book Award. In fact, Jesmyn is the only Black writer to win two National Book Awards in any category. She may be the only author to have won the award twice of any color, but I only track the Black authors. Her first win was for Salvage the Bones. Perhaps my picking Rita's children's book to win was wishful thinking. Still there have only been four Black winners of a National for Children's Literature in 68 years, which stands in stark contrast Jesmyn Ward who, by herself, has already won half of that many in just 7 years!

Yes that would be my goal Cynique. Since you first used the word I looked it up. There are many variations on the theme including the phase womansplain that you mentioned. Mansplain is often used by a woman to preemptively reject something a man says. The man's intentions are irrelevant. The accuracy of what he says does not matter. It is a just a way for a woman to shut a guy down when they can't articulate why they disagree and hurl the sexist epithet "mansplain" in frustration.. Sure there are probably a few women who use the world in the manner you've defined, but most don't. It is just a derogatory term whose meaning has already been smeared through misuse. I can understand why some women don't want it added to the dictionary and feel it is a silly term. The word is not in all dictionaries. The word is not "universally" accepted. I do not, nor have I ever asserted ,that I speak for all men. Troysplaination complete.

The Talented Ribkins by Ladee Hubbard Wins 2017 Ernest J. Gaines Award for Literary Excellence In the process of researching Ladee's books, to update her content, I discovered this video, an interview with on Late NIght with Seth Meyers. Now I never watch the late night shows but I was very surprised to see a relatively obscure debut Black author being interviewed on a National TV program. She is does even have any of the bonuses that get Black folks more attention; she is not LGBT, from Africa, an ex-con, a celebrity, athlete, nor displays any outwards sign of dysfunction. She does have the a multiracial look working, but still... This defies everything I know about TV and White supremacy. My worldview has been cast askew. Have I become that so jaded by racism over the years that I can't even conceived of this type of interview even taking place? I could see if it was James Patterson or JK Rowlings... Well no matter what I think this is a good look for Ladee and I need to know who her publicist is!

Reuters reports Lead Poisoning in New York City, at levels worst that Flint Michigan! In some areas of New York City, children tested high for lead at double the rate in Flint – the latest finding in a Reuters investigation that has identified 3,800 such lead hotspots nationwide. Until now, many have remained hidden. Maybe @Pioneer1's conspiracy theories have merit.

Today the Black voice has far less power than it has in past say 50 years. The fact of the matter is that we no longer own the platforms to wield any power. We have fewer magazines, newspapers, radio stations, websites. The few platforms that remain carry very little weight or influence amongst our people. When was the last time anything substantive was quoted, from a Black owned platform, in anything you have read? Our voices are heard solely due to largess or greed of white folks. They tell us who and what is important, and therefore how to think. This is the reason we support their businesses and not our own. It really is that simple. Unless white folks substantiate what we do; it is unimportant to us, and they do not substantiate anything unless it will make them some money. I refer this as the "white-cosign."

Well Cynique, men have flipped the script on women who would insult us for simply opening our mouths. We have coopted the term for our purposes. It is not universally accepted as a word, how can you impose a such a firm definition? That is like trying to shove your definition of "nigga" down my throat. Need I mansplain further? Del be careful next you be believing there are multiple races too.

We should start behaving as if we are one, because we are.

Cynique, you should already by now you can be honest with most people. Lipstick Alley (LSA) reminded me of AALBC.com back its hey-day. The owner of the site is a sister, whose avatar is a photo of Condi Rice. Everyone on LSA is anonymous, from my limited view so far, even the moderator. I did not hide my identity however, cause I'm too busy making sure people know AALBC.com. My first post was met with skepticism, gratitude, flirtation, and even few thumbs down. That was how i was welcomed and I enjoyed it. One person welcomed me to: They are off the chain over that LSA But our course most people would have taken the negative comments to seriously and left--assuming they would even post at all. At the end of the the Black owned site has a thriving community which is almost impossible in our Facebook dominated world.

@Cynique get outta here! LOL! Allow me to mansplain, the term is also used to describe men talking to each other in a way that only two men would understand uncut, raw, use of jargon and colloquialisms are fine too. For example; "Will one of y'all please mansplain "Wednesday Thursday Friday" to me 'cause I did not get it?" "WTF" Question answered or "mansplained." My aunt used to say Sugar Honey Iced Tea. I guess that would be easy to figure out now. If not, I'll mansplain it to you

Well there are billions of use Cynique and I think are all part of the universe, not a reflection of it, not a product of it we are it. The distinguishing ourselves as individual apart from the whole is how we perceive reality, but I'd don't that is the way it is. Del keep in mind just because Pioneer clarified my statement does not mean that he did it correctly--surely you must know this I needed to confirm that for you. The distinction I made was important because it explains the different between my statement and Cyniques last one

Lipstick Alley is one of the best discussion forums. It is currently #20 on my list of the best Black owned websites!