Jump to content

Serena Williams Cartoon


Recommended Posts

Del, it does not break down the death rate by income.  That information is missing --- OBVIOUSLY!

 

I was trying to help you understand that if the information were there, that it might reveal that wealthy Black men are murdered at a lower rate that poor ones. One would think this is common sense, but you are so determined to make a point you are being unreasonable.  

 

All I'm saying is that I'd rather be wealthy and Black in American, than poor and white. You clearly disagree and nothing you've written has convinced me otherwise  

 

Have you bothered to look at the death by homicide rates for you white men?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Troy said:

Del, it does not break down the death rate by income.  That information is missing --- OBVIOUSLY!

 

I was trying to help you understand that if the information were there, that it might reveal that wealthy Black men are murdered at a lower rate that poor ones. One would think this is common sense, but you are so determined to make a point you are being unreasonable.  

You are trying t explain statistics to me. But the information that eiukd help you to make your point is missing. 

Why do you believe that I need your help to analyse statistics? @Troy

9 hours ago, Troy said:

I'm saying is that I'd rather be wealthy and Black in American, than poor and white. You clearly disagree and nothing you've written has convinced me otherwise  

Can you quote me where i saud i would rather ve poor and white. You are confusing your position with mine. I said i would not want to  be anyone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Delano said:

Why do you believe that I need your help to analyse statistics?

 

Because of statement like this

 

On 9/16/2018 at 11:48 AM, Troy said:

the leading cause of death for bkack males is homicide. 

 

 

This statement is not supported by the data.  Is my statement true or false @Delano?

 

4 hours ago, Delano said:

Can you quote me where i saud i would rather ve poor and white.

 

No I can't I can only devine your position, based upon your statements  since you have an annoying habit of refusing to answer direct questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The statement was unaccurate. I knew it was true for an age group but i didn't qualify my statement. And you  wree correct to point out it is not the leading cause of death. Yet you persisted with your attack of it as completely wrong. When I included data from the CDC you still doubted its Veracity. I said why not check the source. Instead you continue to argue a point that has been corrected. Your arguments discount bith your intelligence and your vaulted opinion of  science fact and objectivity. 

 

You also conflate issues. You not only cant quote me. I explivitly said despite all the problems i wouldn't change my race. 

On 9/17/2018 at 4:56 PM, Delano said:

Completely wrong.? The chart is from the CDC

@Troy

Screenshot_20180917-085134.jpeg

@Troy is this really arguable, little Brother. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Delano said:

The statement was unaccurate. 

 

Thank you. 

 

6 hours ago, Delano said:

i wouldn't change my race. 

 

Thanks for making this clear. 

 

I know where the chart is from, I was the one who provided it.

 

At the end of the day class and wealth confer benefits on people that far exceed the benefit of race.

 

People of all races with money have leisure time, health care, education, less likely to be catch a stray, or be locked up that a poor person.

 

Again, wealth trumps race.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Delano said:

No i uploaded that one 

 

I'll correct you again @Delano; I posted the link to the complete CDC chart before you posted the small portion that would substantiate your argument.  You may review the post yourself.  Now you may have found it independently but I posted it first (this also tells me you are not reading my replies carefully -- or at all) : 

 

Sure if you want to reach back 100 years to find an exception to reject the general case, be my guest and continue believe what you want. 

 

But your belief alsos require you to reject the overwhelming evidence to counter your belief, like the things I just mentioned that wealth confers on to people regardless of race like; leisure time, health care, education, lower crime, lower incarceration, longer life spans, financial security, and on...

 

Your ability to reject overwhelming evidence in favor of a personal belief is textbook.  It is fascinating that even the knowledge of this mental process will not get you to change your belief.  I now understand completely why you will continue to be a climate denier.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest To be Black and Strong

I am a black woman and this is how we are cast in this world but I have 

Feelings, and am soft, warm, beautiful, argumentative, opinionated, and intelligent.  Is it so wrong to be a black woman who is strong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you not know homicide is the leading cause of death for a segment of Black men. Claim that my inaccurate statement is totally wrong and then say you posted the chart. You  also questioned why the chart was truncated. 

@Troy i said check it yourself then you say you posted it.

Yeah go back you referenced but no table or link  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Delano, OK Bruh, I give.

 

2 hours ago, Guest To be Black and Strong said:

Is it so wrong to be a black woman who is strong?

 

Of course not. We clawed our way out of enslavement because of strong Black women.  Students of the civil rights movement know women were largely responsible, though unsung, for it's success.  Even this website exists because of strong and supportive Black women. 

 

A cartoon, racist or otherwise, can not change that unless we allow it to. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2018 at 11:56 PM, Troy said:

@Delano Yes, your statement was completely wrong!

 

Why don't you show the entire chart?  Instead you cherry pick a 20 year range representing a minority of deaths.  Rather than simply admitting your error and correcting yourself you dig in and attempt to  justify your claim by taking a narrow band of data despite the fact that the chart shows homicide is less than 5% of all Black deaths.

yeah ok @Troy you seem to have amnesia 

Let me explain more p

Black men die of old age or age related disease. But for young Black men homicide is the leading cause of death . The percentage is much higher than death from heart disease even though the aggregate numbers are smaller because more older people die. The larger point is that homicide shouldn't be a leading cause of death for any age group. 

Your statement about death from homicide being small is uncharacteristically insensitive and lacking in reason as well.

3 hours ago, Guest To be Black and Strong said:

I am a black woman and this is how we are cast in this world but I have 

Feelings, and am soft, warm, beautiful, argumentative, opinionated, and intelligent.  Is it so wrong to be a black woman who is strong?

Apparently it is. Strong women in general run into problems. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Be S & B

 

Is it so wrong to be a black woman who is strong?

Most of the time....YES, it is.
And for two major reasons:

1. Ofcourse every woman is different, but generally speaking it's not in the nature of most women to be strong....physically OR mentally.
And when I speak of mental strength I'm not talking about intelligence or smarts which is perfectly fine and welcomed in women, but personality wise.  Few people....including other women...like combative, argumentative, and domineering women.


2. Because a society is built upon BALANCE, and nature divided all societies up primarily between two major sexes; if one sex is strong then the other sex must be weak to balance it.  So if you want the women to be the strong sex, then there is no need for strong men too; so you should settle for weak men and not complain about it.
If both are strong they'll only end up fighting eachother for dominance and destroy the community from the inside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/19/2018 at 6:24 PM, Pioneer1 said:

Is it so wrong to be a black woman who is strong?

Most of the time....YES, it is.
And for two major reasons:

1. Ofcourse every woman is different, but generally speaking it's not in the nature of most women to be strong....physically OR mentally.
And when I speak of mental strength I'm not talking about intelligence or smarts which is perfectly fine and welcomed in women, but personality wise.  Few people....including other women...like combative, argumentative, and domineering women.


2. Because a society is built upon BALANCE, and nature divided all societies up primarily between two major sexes; if one sex is strong then the other sex must be weak to balance it.  So if you want the women to be the strong sex, then there is no need for strong men too; so you should settle for weak men and not complain about it.
If both are strong they'll only end up fighting eachother for dominance and destroy the community from the inside.

@Pioneer1Watta crock.  There you go with a ridiculously generalized  statement that you modify by saying that "every woman is different",  an assertion  you further dilute by  injecting the word "most" into the mix, all of which totally voids the viability of your vacillating statement. - a  statement that doesn't hold up  in its implication that "generally speaking" although "all men  are different", "most" of them are mentally and physically stronger than women.  Men may have brawn, but their superior brain power is not a given. It depends on the area of expertise. Emotionally speaking, maturity remains  elusive in the male  development.     

 

 Biologically speaking, the reason women are the ones who bear children is because they are better-equipped both physically and mentally for this ordeal. Women routinely handle  illnesses better than men, who are big babies.   Women are also pliant, able to adjust to loss and tragedy wherein men are brittle, - hard, but easily shattered .  As for balance, it's not about one sex acting  one way and the opposite sex acting the other way; it's about relationships in which both members do what they are better at in order to maintain a stable working partnership. Roles are no longer assigned to gender in today's world.  The era of hunters and gatherers has gone the way of primitive homo sapiens.  

 

BTW,  nobody likes an individual of either sex who is "domineering, combative, and argumentive".  Nor does nobody respect a male  who is timid, inept,  and wimpy.

 

To my sister who said:  "I am a black woman and this is how we are cast in this world but I have 

Feelings, and am soft, warm, beautiful, argumentative, opinionated, and intelligent.  Is it so wrong to be a black woman who is strong?",  -  I say "no".  You go, Girl! 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Cynique said:

both members do what they are better at in order to maintain a stable working partnership. Roles are no longer assigned to gender in today's world.  The era of hunters and gatherers has gone the way of primitive homo sapiens. 

 

This is true @Cynique, the the gender roles @Pioneer1 speaks of are still strongly embedded in the culture.  This is probably more true for men than women.  Here is a personal anecdote.

 

When I was married I prepared all of the meals for my family.  Other women universally praised me for this (something I don't think my wife appreciated).  Men however would either view this indifferently or would deride me indirectly me for it.  They would boast about how their wives could demonstrate their love for them by having a great meal ready for them when they got home or how their wives would prepare the food when they had their buddies over.

 

I would internalize sometimes feel my wife's love was less because she did not do these things.  To be clear she would prepare meals when I could not, but this was not some she liked doing. The reality was that I was better suited to do the cooking, but the culture still puts pressure on people to conform to gender rules. Now I completely understood the cultural dynamics at the the time, but that does not mean it still does not have an adverse impact when you don;t conform

 

For people, less aware of the psychocultural dynamics (did I just coin a term) they will fight for gender role conformity which makes a working, real world, 21st century relationship virtually impossible. 

 

Again this is a situation where I understand Pioneer's statements concerning gender roles/behavior/nature but disagree with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the year 2018, the whole structure of the family has changed.  It can be made up of same sex partners in addition to female headed households, as well as  ones run by single dads.   Those who say the traditional way is best because it facilitates a balance that creates a better society, are the ones who are stuck in the past. They feel their view is supported by  how much better things were back in the "good old days".  But is this true?  Maybe for men is was.  But women weren't always content being confined to the role of  subservient wife, selfless mother and dutiful homemaker. The way the divorce rate escalated under these circumstances doesn't say much for how great things worked out with society assigning roles to the sexes.   

 

Now that women have broken the mold and are about being equal partners in a relationship, some men want to slap them down and lecture them about how much better things work when women are not strong - something male chauvinist  feel is equivalent to being domineering and argumentative.  Secure men, however, don't have a big problem with smart, strong women.   If a wife, for instance,  is better at handling the finances, and a husband is as good a cook as his wife, then sharing responsibilities makes for a  stable home environment.  "A happy wife means a happy life".  Also, a loving environment, no matter what the sexual orientation of the parents, is an acceptable alternative to a tense hostile atmosphere generated by heterosexual parents constantly at each other's throats.    Time brings change. Those who can't adjust to it are out of touch.  

 

For an unattached man like Pioneer, who has never been married and therefore unqualified to speak on the subject, to advise a single black woman who is "soft, warm, beautiful, argumentative, opinionated, and intelligent"  that she is, in effect, better off if she plays into the role of being emotionally and intellectually weak, in order to enable men to be strong and smart, is something that calls for a rebuttal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Cynique said:

In the year 2018, the whole structure of the family has changed.

 

This is clearly true.  However I'm not convinced that what has replaced it is any better.  Sure people have the freedom to be their true selves but they don't have a good way to find a mate or life partner.  Also, the divorce rates escalated after these new found freedoms became the vogue.

 

As a single man, I see it is really very hard for women to find a suitable long term partner.  The culture does really facilitate this discovery.  It seems to me the the sexual freedom people fought for is the very thing that makes establishing a long term relationship hard to establish. I don't have any answers but while the current situation may be better than what we had previously, it is far from perfect. 

 

The world where large families headed by a man may have been desirable when we were an agrarian nation.  But in a "high tech" gig economy, That type of family does not work today.

 

Relationships have become like a gig economy.  You have a woman to raise your kids, a woman (or 2 or 3) to satisfy you in bed, and a few you can have a decent conversation with.  The women who fulfill these roles change over time. The next women can be found on Tinder or some other social media ap. These types of multiple fleeting relationship is what the culture reinforces.

 

As a married man this was something I was not aware of.  As single man this became immediately obvious.  There is nothing pressuring me to get married again, and lock in with single woman. There are only disincentives to marriage.   So I'm not surprised there are people like @Pioneer1 have never been married or were only married for a short period of time.

 

That said, I would get married again, and no they don't have to be a great cook, but we should be able carry on a decent conversation and be compatible (physically). 

 

Man we are a long way from the Serena Williams cartoon 🙂

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Troy said:

Relationships have become like a gig economy. 

 

That’s the best part! I used to love having men finance my entertainment.  There is no shortage of men willing to take a woman out on a great date.  And I’ve been on a few - my daughter called one of dates a “bae-cation” because we went to Peru for a week.  Another date - was so good it was the end of all dates because I know no man can top it. Further, dating just to date gets old fast.

 

I find that most men bore me for the very reason you’ve expressed @Troy - They can’t shake the hack ... and so to sit across from a shell of a man who has been socially engineered to the point that he doesn’t know who he is - is heartbreaking.  

 

I’ve been single longer than any relationship I’ve ever been in, including my marriage - and I’m good. So, unless,  I meet my wealthy prince charming and marry him -this woman is leaving the planet the same way I arrived.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear you @Mel Hopkins women do have a great advantage in that they are generally not expected to foot the bill especially on a first date.  Curiously that "social norm" has not been replaced.  Shoot, I need someone to treat me to a great date once in a while.  

 

Well this is the longest period of time I've gone without a steady main squeeze.  I know the longer I remain single the harder it will be for me to get married. 

 

I too wanna leave the world the way I came into it, inside some pu--y! (did I go too far with that one?)

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Troy, I kind of feel sorry for you - most likely when you marry again it will be to some PYT and you will have to revisit fatherhood again... That is another thing that hasn’t changed.  Yes,  I’m casting a wide net with my generalizing  but if a woman wants to marry these days it’s for financial asset growth and babies! 

 

As for your comment lol - my mother always says,  “men come into this world through the Pu-C and spend the rest of the life working to get back in it.” 😊 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could easily argue Del that not having to compromise is what actually keeps you sane.  I've lived with someone most of my adult life, not having to compromise is so much easier.

 

70 doing a 25 year old, as in the case of Nelson Rockefeller, seems tantamount to pedophilla. Maybe, in 14 years, I'll feel differently....  😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2018 at 11:05 PM, Delano said:

Living alone doesn't require any compromise

 

I cooperate with others but I don’t compromise.  

 

I think compromise is disingenuous and the injured party will always look for their comeuppance.

 

In an intimate relationship, cooperation is my tool of choice.  For example, I had a lover who was polyamorous.  I’m not.  I love him like cooked food. He loves me and wanted to continue our relationship - but that would mean I’d have to compromise.  I wouldn’t and didn’t.  I let go. 

 

You can compromise your values but you can cooperate them.  

 

In intimate relationships, values match and goals are the same - or yes, partners will compromise themselves - and as @Delano mentioned that’s a soul killer. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on what you're compromising on.  One partner might give up smoking, if the other loses weight.  This is a win-win situation.  Marriage doesn't always have to be a lot of melodrama.  Giving people their space is always a plus.    These are lessons for preserving a marriage.  But nothing can liberate a free spirit except being released from a marriage that has become a prison.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cynique said:

Depends on what you're compromising on.  One partner might give up smoking, if the other loses weight. 

I see this as cooperation.  These partners care for each other and their values are the same and they are working towards shared goal and maybe longevity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, cooperation should be win-win, and should not involve compromising one's values.

 

But you have to know yourself well enough to know when you compromising and be strong enough to stand up for yourself when your values are challenged. Some situations can make not compromising yourself hard or even difficult to know when it is happening. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In every SERIOUS relationship I've been in (and in nearly 50 years I can still only count on one hand all the SERIOUS relationships I've been in so far) the ONLY time I felt like I was compromising was when I made the decision to actually LIVE TOGETHER.

When we lived in our separate homes and met eachother on our own terms or stayed with eachother for a night or two, it's beautiful but when we are force to "mix energies" and share eachother's personal space in the bathroom and kitchen then the funny looks and arguments start.

Which is why I disagree with this religious and historically ethical idea that people should get married BEFORE they have sex and live together.
I personally believe based on not only experience but observation that you should live with a person for atleast 1 year before making the decision to marry them.

Some women are great actresses and it takes atleast 3 good months of living with them before the "crazy" that dwells inside of them began to unveil itself and come out of hiding....lol.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol! Man you will be a batchelor for life -- and I ain't hating on you!

 

Marriage strictly for love is a relatively new concept. Adding the bonus of being a virgin and staying together forever is magical thinking.

 

Personally I like the idea of being on a loving relationship. I fully expect to cooperate but I have a few non negotiables which are not unreasonable. Basically they have to do with respect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 11:33 PM, Cynique said:

@Pioneer1  i sympathize with whomever you temporarily hooked up with.  Must've been stomach-turning experience for her.  

 

If you called up any one of them they'll tell you just like Whitney Houston used to sang.....

"He gives me love........he's all that man that I need"


B)


My girl Whitney said:


 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get real.  You can tell a lot about a man's sexuality by his personality and you could never be anything but a misfiring dud in bed. You are fantasizing about a song that has nothing to do with you.  Go somewhere and inflate your blow-up doll, Skinny Bones.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Cynique said:

Get real.  You can tell a lot about a man's sexuality by his personality and you could never be anything but a misfiring dud in bed. You are fantasizing about a song that has nothing to do with you.  Go somewhere and inflate your blow-up doll, Skinny Bones.  

 

:rolleyes:....think what you want.



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...