Troy

LOL. A regular wiseguy eh? I'll continue to assert that race is an artificial construct developed diminish our humanity. Keep in mind @Pioneer1 there is not such thing as race there is indeed a Black culture. Needless to say, I recognize we live in America where the vast majority of people won't let go of the fiction of race, so I'm forced to deal with the negative consequences of nonsense as a so called "Black man." So while our culture, or "race" for those stuck in the 19th century, is under constant assault, I'm inclined to defend myself. When the 1st Black President actively choose to ignore the Black press I'm offended. Check out the statement made by Obama in 2007 when he was courting the Black vote: Naming three Chicago black newspapers —the Defender, the Crusader and the Citizen — Obama said that when he served in the Illinois legislature, those papers would cover issues he was working on that the mainstream press would not. "My attitude is that if you were covering me when nobody wanted to cover me, then they should cover me when everybody wants to cover me. That attitude will continue when I'm in the White House," Obama said. Now can someone explain to me why Obama has not given a Black newspaper an interview? Obama gave a white guy, in his garage, an interview for Christ's Sake!? You may read the full report of then Senator Obama's appearance at the National Association of Black Journalists convention in Las Vegas in 2007 on Richard Prince's Journal-isms™ at the Maynard Institute.

The following is a comment made, in 2014 by George E. Curry then editor of the NNPA News Service, bemoaning the fact Obama had not granted a single interview with the Black press. As far as I can tell, with Obama's presidency coming to an end he still has not spoken with the Black press. I ran a Huria Search and can find no evidence that he has. Obama has given interviews to Ebony and Tom Joyner, but again not to a single owned Black owned newspaper. If someone can prove that this is wrong please post a link to the article—thanks George E. Curry editor of the NNPA News Service, complained last week that President Obama was disrespecting the black media, too. “There is a disrespect for the black press that we have not seen in recent years. For example, we have requested — every year — an interview with the president. He can ignore 200 black newspapers and 19 million viewers but he can give one to every stupid white comedian there is on TV, the black ones and the white ones, and has time for all types of buffoonery but they will not respect the black press enough to give us an interview,” Curry said on TVOne’s NewsOneNow with Roland Martin. —from Richard Prince’s Journal-isms™ Some will argue that Obama does not need the Black press to reach Black folks. To that I can only say; then we don't deserve Black newspapers. Sure, white owned platforms can indeed reach Black voters, but that reach is not the same thing in terms of presentation, context, sensibility... You see, the idea that Obama has not given an interview to a Black newspaper is news. White owned platforms would have of course ignored this, because to them, it is of no consequence, and they quite happy continuing to control our narrative. Judging by our collective behavior we quite happy allowing them to do so.

I read an article the day of the incident, and skimmd the comments section. Everyone to a person said things, like this is why we need trump. trump will care of this and the like. I was like whoa what website am I on? Is was Fox News... I wonder if ISIS actually wants Trump in the Whitehouse. I guess that way it will be clearer, that deep down inside, we are really not very different that they are.

Here, Richard Prince reports on issues important to Black journalists and newspapers, discussed during a countable discussion held late last year. I have strong opinions about all of the issues raised in Richard's article. The fact that this article was not on one of the independent, Black-owned newspapers websites, which many of the participants work for is just a start. I'll give you one guess where I found this article... We have a loooong way to go.

Thanks for sharing your event information here Eric. I just added it to our events calendar: http://aalbc.it/rmbpf

Cynique, you might be surprised how often old threads are read. The old Thumper's Corner is still read. These conversations may be old to us, but to new visitors, they are brand new. Speaking of monogamy here is a book out which came out earlier in the year, The Wait: A Powerful Practice for Finding the Love of Your Life and the Life You Love, in which the subjects say they waited and have apparently found bliss. But of course, real life never matches the finely crafted narratives created by celebrities selling products. In fact, the real lives of many of these celebrities, often turn out to be something completely different even extreme by present day standards.

Hi Lisa, one could argue that a strong loving family exists because men cheat. Cheating, in and of itself, does not cause damage to the family structure and illegitimate children. Lack of birth control causes this. As far as arguments and jealousy, getting caught and lack of discretion is usually the culprit. Stating that monogamy is the "right" thing makes assumptions that I'm not willing accept so easily. What makes monogamy right? I don't ask the question lightly: Sapiens have been running around on this planet for about 200K years. When did monogamy become right? If there was a start, when did it happen and who decreed it to be right? Is this a permanent rule? I understand our cultural standards completely, but I can also observe our collective behavior as well. The cultural standard is that people are only supposed to have sex with one other person, of the opposite gender, that we are married to. Again one will argue this is the right thing to do, but I'm not so sure. Given the almost complete failure of anyone to do this should be a clue. Also who says monogamy has to be limited to men?

Glad you had a good time at the Prince party Cynique. I just read over this exchange between you and Sara. While you both apparent dislike each other, I can't help but believe you both get some type of perverse pleasure dissing each other. Otherwise why would either of you invest the time and energy doing it? This is why I originally thought you too were just talking smack and not taking it seriously and definitely not personally. If either of you were sincerely interested in it stopping the back and forth, you would just ignore the other. It the one constantly attacked the other without provocation or retaliation, they would be a troll. I always ban trolls.

I seem to recall seeing this book, Black Fathers: An Invisible Presence in America These types of books never really resonate with me, as this is not my experience. All of the men I know raise their children, lament that fact that they can't raise them and are raising other men's children. I also know the stats about kids not knowing their biological fathers, or kids born out of wedlock generally don't factor in the fact that there is often a man in the house helping to raise and support these children. From the publisher: This book offers a broader, more positive picture of African American fathers. Featuring case studies of African-descended fathers, this edited volume brings to life the achievements and challenges of being a black father in America. Leading scholars and practitioners provide unique insight into this understudied population. Short-sighted social policies which do not encourage father involvement are critically examined and the value of father engagement is promoted. The problems associated with the absence of a father are also explored. The second edition features an increased emphasis on: the historical issues confronting African descended fathers the impact of health issues on Black fathers and their children the need for therapeutic interventions to aid in the healing of fathers and their children the impact of an Afrikan-centered fathering approach and the need for research which considers systemic problems confronting African American fathers community focused models that provide new ideas for (re)connecting absent fathers learning tools including reflective questions and a conclusion in each chapter and more theory and research throughout the book. Part I provides a historical overview of African descended fathers including their strengths and shortcomings over the years. Next, contributors share their personal stories including one from a communal father working with underserved youth and two others that highlight the impact of absent fathers. Then, the research on father-daughter relationships is examined including the impact of father absence on daughters and on gender identity. This section concludes with a discussion of serving adolescents in the foster care system. Part II focuses on the importance of a two-parent home, communal fathering, and equalitarian households. Cultural implications and barriers to relationships are also explored. This section concludes with a discussion of the struggles Black men face with role definitions. The book concludes with a discussion of the impact of adoption and health issues on Black fathers and their children, and the need for more effective therapeutic interventions that include a perspective centered in the traditions and cultures of Afrika in learning to become a father. The final chapter offers an intervention model to aid in fatherhood. An ideal supplementary text for courses on fathers and fathering, introduction to the family, parenting, African American families/men, men and masculinity, Black studies, race and ethnic relations, and family issues taught in a variety of departments, the book also appeals to social service providers, policy makers, and clergy who work with community institutions.

Gimme a few to watch the video and reply. I really don't know enough about how Lyft works to speak to them specifically outside of the of the fact they are not peer to peer which, on that basis, makes them similar to Uber. What distinguishes ebay from Amazon is that Amazon is the seller and their goal is to sell everything. ebay provides an effective platform for people to sell directly to other people (peer-to-peer). Sure Amazon also offer their marketplace, but this is not their focus and may simply be offered as a way to keep the ebays of the world from growing or even launching (again the real problem with monopolies). If you are saying that ebay is now selling things directly that way amazon does (storing, shipping, manufacturing products), then you are telling me something I was not aware of. Also, ebay and paypal are two separate different companies. As an aside: I'm really liking Square much better than PayPal and am transitioning the new site to use Square exclusively.

Photo Credit: Regina Brooks African-American women hit the books because it’s a way to spark a conversation, and to learn, validate, and share, says Lloyd-Sgambati: “You have to remember that not so long ago, it was punishable by death for an African-American to read, mainly because white society feared the spread of knowledge. Now many readers think, ‘I am doing this for my ancestors.’ My mother had eight children, but she ended every day by reading a book. It’s a large part of the African-American tapestry of their lives. It’s a myth perpetuated that they don’t read.” It’s not just African-American women who are reading, says Johnson. The men are also hungry for something that speaks to their lives. “It is not clear to me that men are reading less, but they are reading differently,” he says. “Women are more likely to get together and talk about books and go to readings. Those types of things are more visible, but that doesn’t mean men aren’t reading and exploring as well.” Read the complete article at Publisher's Weekly.

The Carter G Woodson Awards has recognized the most diverse set of books for young readers than anyone.

Man you should know me better that this by now :-) I related my personal experience, as you did, primarily to show that I understand the appeal from the rider's perspective. But trust I was wearing my MBA/Entrepreneur hat when looking at Uber's business model. Also keep in mind asking a bunch of drivers question is not much better than our experiences, they are just more anecdotes. We can also make different assumption of the expenses (for example, I would argue most cars would not get 40 miles per gallon in city driving). The fundamental question I'm really asking/ however; is society better off with Uber/Lyft, with the previous model or something else (true peer to peer)? Again we both attest to the benefits from the rider's perspective. But is that trade off worth the resulting negatives to society? Again, if white women can get dresses that cost less because enslaved Africans are picking the cotton is society better off? Chris you should check out The Harvard Business review of how Uber managers drivers, you might be surprised by certain aspects of the how the business actually works. This is one of the reasons asking drivers what they think, though interesting, is not very valuable in understanding Uber's model--the primary reason is that the driver may simply be ignorant of these issues or not sophisticated to appreciate them. Man peer to peer model is realistic, is in use today, and I believe the future. ebay, for example, it is doing very well; this is just is not resulting in the fantastic numbers that makes headlines. Closer to home, the digital revolution has made it possible for more Black people to publish books, but Amazon's model, which dominates the Black book ecosystem, is all about "extraction," revenue generation. So despite the plethora of Black books Amazon is not helping in the process of getting the best books to the readers most likely to enjoy them. This opens up opportunities for other businesses to reap financial reward by compensating for Amazon's deficiencies. Of course Amazon will do everything in their power to crush any competition, but they can't succeed, because at the end of the day, you'll make a little less money when you are unwilling to exploit people and that is a tradeoff facebook, Amazon and Uber are unwilling to make--despite what the billionaires who own these companies say. The actions of their companies reveal the truth.

"They did their own thing within the confines of their communities and managed to find a way to survive and even enjoy themselves." That is an interesting point Cynique, do you think this is true today? It seems much of what we do is dependent upon folks outside the Black community--especially online, but increasingly off.

When I was in Chicago a few weeks ago I used Uber for the first time; it was actually the only way I got around in the 36 hours I was in the city. I must have taken 6 Uber rides. The experience was definitely positive, and the entire transaction was handled via my cell phone. But again the devil's in the details. I spoke to one driver who works 6 days a weeks and drives 12 hours a day, to make a living. I'm not sure people understand how difficult that is to do. I was in the car about 25 minutes (southside to the convention center and the ride cost just under $10. When you factor in Uber's cut, gas, wear and tear on the car, taxes, bottled water, whatever, the hourly wage is not very good particularly when you factor in the work required. Of course the riders are happy; they are getting cheap, convenient transportation. Of course the owner of Uber is happy, he is a multi-billionaire. Again, these companies are exploitative. Sure they are providing needed services or optimizing and old ones, but the problem, as discussed in the video, is the pressure for these companies to show growth. The result is increased downward pressure in driver revenue. But again as long as the passengers and investors are happy workers will continue to be exploited. Competition from Lyft only increases this pressure. @CDBurns, as a result it will be much more difficult for anyone to operate their own car services in the world of Uber/Lyft. Again the optimization would benefit us more if it were peer- to-peer rather than controlled by a single entity hell-bent on making an ever increasing amount of money.

Pioneer just because a countless people experience something, does not make it reality. You may recall all the descriptions of near death experiences of people who see a bright light, these perceptions can be explained and have been replicated in the laboratory. What do you think about all of the experiences we have when we dream? Do you think they are real too? Do you ascribe meaning to dreams as well? Some people believe they can use used to tell the future. Maybe people close to death are having a dream, in which they see loved ones. I have heard these stories too, but again that does not mean that those love ones were actually present, or that the ones close to death can now perceive things healthy people can not--i'd think as one draws closer to death they would actually perceive less as their body breaks down... Maybe the comforting visits by loved ones is our bodies natural reaction to ease the transition to death. A biological adaptation to prevent the mortally ill from being a drag on the community longer than necessary. Besides, it just does not seem likely that on a spiritual plane that we would retain the same identities we have on earth where we are limited by a our physical bodies. I would not worry about you trying to "prove" you spiritual experiences, you can't prove these thing. I just think it would be interesting to read. Maybe I'd share a spiritual experience to two of my own ;-)

Pioneer, if you took away all of Prince's musical talents, celebrity, and money I'm not convinced women would be all that attracted to the way he looks. I stood next to the man, he looked a older than his photographs, he was really petite, and had a ton of makeup on. But again, and as Cynique suggests, it was the whole man, that that attracted women. Women were sexually attracted Luther Vandross too, in fact Eddie Murphy joked about the appeal of these Brothers.

I don't think Ali was joking about his looks either :-) Pioneer, I believe men and women define sexiness differently. Men rank a woman's looks higher up on the set of characteristics they consider; while women rank what a man does higher. This is why a physically unattractive, or feminine looking man, can easily score highly desireable women. While a physically unattractive, or masculine looking women, would have more difficulty attracting highly desireable men. So while Prince would not be what one considers, a "Man's Man," he was da Man.

I understand @Mallah-Divine, increasingly many authors starting out don't have a web site, instead opting to go with Amazon and social media as their main web presence. Ultimately however, you'll need to establish your own web presence. This will make it easier for you to communicate and control the engagement with your audience. Simple things like building a mailing list is much easier from your own. And of course your website is not limited to people who have accounts on Facebook. If you are interested, I can help you get started. Would you be willing to share a sample chapter from your book here? The main reason I ask is that it is will give potential readers and book reviewers a sample of your writing style. This is really important because you are not a known author and this is your debut novel (as far as I can tell). Also, and please take this as a critique intended to help, your bio on Amazon while filled with superlatives, communicates nothing substantive to demonstrate a skill in writing (i.e. awards, education, workshops, etc). This is another reason why an excerpt from your book is important in your case. I also suggest your register a domain name; both mallahdivine.com and mullah-divine.com are both available. Once you register a domain name, you can easily setup a website, or I can show you how to associate it to pages on AALBC.com.

Of course corporate greed is nothing new. Corporations will pursue profits over anything else including human suffering. What struck a chord with me is that I watched the WWW transition from a platform where people were able to exchange value directly with each other and reap the financial benefits of these exchanges; to a platform where only the biggest corporations now control the exchange of value between people and only those corporations reap all the benefits. So today, it truly is harder to make a living. For example, will the economy be better off, in the long run, in the world of Uber? What are we gaining in exchange for what we are giving up? Will the pressure for an Uber to show constant growth result in drivers making more money or less? Of course regulation is an big issue as companies like Amazon operate in an environment that small business do not, including exploiting tax loopholes facilitated by their Washington lobbyists and ownership of the Washington Post, all the while funded by the capital markets fuel by Wall Street. Are we collectively better off with an Amazon? Chiraq was the first release from Amazon's movie division. Da Sweet Blood of Jesus (which didn't even make Sara's list) raised $1.5M on Kickstarter and did nothing at the box office Are we getting better movies as result of Kickstarter or Amazon? Again, the goal is not better movies but money Kickstarters got paid, Amazon got paid. Spike got paid, what do we get? I dunno....

Pioneer, if you actually saw the film you would have to agree that it actually tries to show how senseless the violence in Chicago has become. Unfortunately it was just done in an inaccessible and unentertaining way. The last time I was in Chicago the violence subject came up in several conversations with native Chicagoans. I was told over the Mother's Day weekend, 45 Chicagoans were shot, this was on the heels of a campaign, to stop the violence. I did not hear this on the news, I heard this directly from Chicagoans themselves. Another Chicago native told me his loved Chicago, but his only complaint is the violence. I know what it is like to live in a violent neighborhood, to be literally concerned about your well being when going outside. I also know the government can turn things around tomorrow if they wanted to, because today, 40 years later, I live in the very same neighborhood. While it is not perfect it is like paradise compared to when I grew up. Chicago has a very serious problem, but it is not unique. To fix it, the government will need to do what is necessary. Chicago really is, and should be, the Black mecca of America--and this is a Harlemite writing.

@Pioneer1, have you ever considered that seeing past relatives is just one mind playing tricks on them? Also the experience is not universal. Why don't you hear stories of those about to be executed being visited by relatives to help them transition, or those who are about to die from an accident or heart attack? Surely we don;t have to be dying a slow death for them to know we are about to transition, right? Would you care to relate a personal spiritual experience? This is a situation where the phrase, "playing the devil's advocate" seems particularly apropos

Celebrating the Best in Black Literature (May 31, 2016 Newsletter)

@Pioneer1 Spike Lee's film CHIRAQ did not glorify violence or gangster lifestyle in Chicago, in fact it did the exact opposite. Did you see the film? @Sara, Spike's film bombed because it just was not very good. Interesting stats, basically what is says is that Spike has not made a commercially successful film in over a decade. That term "Super Predator," was a evil; turning Black men into nonhuman entities such that no one cared about locking them up and throwing away the key for minor crimes. I believe even Black people have internalized this depiction. Which is why I refuse to vote for Hillary as the so called "lessor of two evils;" a voting strategy that still makes no sense to me. @Cynique, I would not put a Jay-Z, Tyler Perry, Oprah, Bob Johnson, or a Dre in the same category as a typical entertainer/athlete. The individuals have power. Jay_z had sufficient power to start Tidal, in an effort to wrest more revenue from his music. Whether is is successful or not that is a show of power, but again who benefits... But to answer @Xeon's original question there is no Black African country in 2016, that leads the world in technological, medical and scientific development. But so what? What does that mean? African countries are European constructs that have nothing to do with the people that lived there. Still, do you know how many brilliant Nigerians there are? Where is that brilliance applied--who benefits from it--the West does. In fact what happens to all of the brilliant Black people in the United States, do they build their own companies, or do they go work for someone else? Do they create wealth for their own people or do they enrich someone else? What If every Black basketball player stepped off the court? What if every Black actor refused to work? What if readers stopped buying books from Amazon? The potential is limitless, but the reality is clear; NBA owners will call the shots over their "Million Dollar Slaves;" Black actors will continue to gripe about not being recognized, and and the limited stereotypical roles offered; and Amazon will continue to dominate, because individually we are too greedy to care about anything other than ourselves. So the questions I asked and the one posed by Xeon are not relevant because they presuppose conditions that don't exist to answer affirmatively.

@Mallah-Divine, do you have a website? Please share it here, I'd like to check it out.