Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Troy

Malcolm X Debates Evie Rich (1961) - This is Deep

Recommended Posts

Del
 

Let me know if any of that is incomprehensible to either @Troy @Pioneer1 or@NubianFellow

I am awaiting your responses.


My response:

 

Elijah Muhammad was one of the greatest Black men to have been born in the United States.

I don't give a shit IF he banged 10,000 young secretaries and was smiling to himself while he was doing it!

...that's between him-them-and The Supreme Being who is the Ultimate Judge.

When no one else gave a damn about helping Black men...HE DID.
For over 40 years!


I don't agree with everything Elijah Muhammad said or did, but as far as I'm concerned the GOOD he's done for Black America outweighs the bad.
That's my man.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Delano said:

Troy you think Black Men  protect Black Women. Mel and Cynique don't agree with you. 

 

Again you are speaking for both Mel and Cynique.  @Mel Hopkins gave us a beautiful anecdote about a Brother who stepped in front of a speeding car to protect her. On an individual level, many Brothers will lay down their lives to protect women. Why you reject this is beyond me.  I can only suspect this is not something you would do and you are projecting.

 

On a collective level however I'm inclined to agree.  But I don't think Black men are any more protected than Black women.  Indeed on a number of levels from incarceration rates, to educational attainment, to life expectancy one could make a strong case that Black men are LESS protected that Black women.  The bottom line is that we can all do a better job of protecting each other.

 

11 hours ago, Delano said:

You think I am speaking for the women. Yet both Mel and myself say we are not.

  

There you go speaking for the Mel again -- allow her to retain her agency please 😉 

 

Again, yes, you continually speak for them.  I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with that, because I think you are trying to be supportive of them. The issue I have is your dismissal of the male perspective, while you are doing it.

 

11 hours ago, Delano said:

The founder of any organisation having sex with teenagers that he is not married to is a big problem. So in my head women and especially young women are not safe. When their leader is preying not praying. 

 

So says you Del.  You are not in the NOI, you do know know the circumstances, you don't know their code of behavior.  It is presumptuous of you to arrive at a conclusion based upon so little knowledge.  The NOI are their own group and they handle their business the way they -- not you -- see fit.  Besides, five minutes ago you were calling Malcolm X a pimp.  

 

Do you really expect me to say that the NOI does not protect their women simply because of what you think about the behavior of one man who died over 40 years ago? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Discovering that Elijah Muhammad had a harem of young girls, many of whom he impregnated, was what drove Malcolm to leave the NOI and start his own sect. I personally knew a girl in my hometown who was fathered by Elijah Muhammad and was later adopted by a local minister of the Church of God and Christ, and his wife. Also, according to Malcolm's biography by Alex Haley, Malcolm was a pimp in his days before he went to prison and converted to Islam. Of course, Alex has proved to not always tell the truth in his books. Recently there have been reports that in 2010 Farrakhan became interested in Scientology and began to explore its concepts and encourage followers  to study the disciplines of Dianetics in order to become coverts and learn the "auditing" procedures utilized to recruit  and monitor others.   i also read where Farrakhan has converted to Christianity, accepting Jesus Christ as his savior.  

 

I read about the Muslims and Dianetics in Wikipedia, which of course, draws criticism from certain people on this board.  But i have always found well researched information there, and since the living people and the heirs of the dead people it profiles have an option to challenge and correct information about themselves or their works, i assume that what i read there is as good a source as any for information.  

 

As far as what i believe about black men automatically defending their women, i don't think doing so is a priority of theirs or something they do as a custom. Individual ones may do so in the course of protecting their families, the same way they would do if it came to their car or any property they valued.  It's not something i dwell on. i remember a while back when one night my husband and i were awakened by a noise that made him wonder if someone was trying to break in.  He immediately got up with the intention to go down stairs and see.  i protested, asking him what did he think he could do?  He continued out the room, saying he didn't know but would think of something when he got there. While i had my hand on the phone, i think he grabbed  an object before he made it down the stairs where it proved to be a false alarm.  So i guess "situational ethics" can trigger impulses. 😏   

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Delano said:

@Pioneer1 that was Elijah Muhammed's rational. The good out weighs the bad. 

 

Ofcourse!

And that's how men ARE to be evaluated!

You're supposed to use REASON and LOGIC and take a wholistic approach in determining someone's value to their community and not make snap judgements based on emotion or contemporary moral standards.

 

Now you're going to ignore all of the good that man did for Black America and for Black men in particular and label him "predator" just because he's accused of having sex with girls.


Come on man.

See this is one of the reasons I said you can be counted on to take the sides of the women.
Because that's how women think.
They tend to base a man's entire worth....not on all of his accomplishments together....but on who he had sex with .


"Sure he came up with the cure for cancer, the cure for AIDS, and he prevented World War 3 and saved millions of lives....but I still don't like him."

Why not?

:angry:"Because he CHEATED ON ME!!!"



A man can do all types of good and his wife will STILL be ready to put honey on his windshield or burn his clothes because he had sex with someone else besides her, lol.

Not saying that cheating on your wife or sex with young ladies you're not married to is ok to do....but hell....put things into perspective when you're dealing with a person.


Like Troy said, it's an INTERNAL issue that people inside that organization must grapple with.
One of the reasons Malcolm strongly reacted to the accusations against Elijah Muhammad was because he thought Elijah was divine....sent by God.
If a man you thought was divine commits what you think is a sinful act.....it often times ignites a moral crisis in your psyche.

That's what religion tends to do.
I don't have the same problem because I believe Elijah Muhammad was a human being who could and did make mistakes.

If they came out tomorrow with some shit on Marcus Garvey it wouldn't phase me one bit because IF I believed it....I'd say the good he did for AfroAmericans far outweighted that bad.

Again, when I evaluate people I take ALL of their accomplishments (that I know about) into consideration, and not just the bad or most condemning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 9:48 PM, Delano said:

The founder of any organisation having sex with teenagers that he is not married to is a big problem. So in my head women and especially young women are not safe. When their leader is preying not praying. 

 

Wow

On ‎12‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 10:09 AM, Troy said:

The bottom line is that we can all do a better job of protecting each other.

 

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it asking too much for women to expect men to have good character and integrity? There's no excuse for accomplished husbands choosing to let their penises supplant their brains especially since no man cherishes an accomplished wife who engages in promiscuous behavior. An extra-marital affair can be forgiven but ongoing perversion and predatory harassment are not cancelled out by public acclaim. Bill Clinton will always be condemned for his shenanigans with Monica Lewinsky, and Donald Trump for his lewd behavior in spite of both having achieved the office of the presidency; and rightfully so.   Esteemed married men should be role models worthy of being emulated, not sneaky pussy-mongers. There have to be standards. And it's perfect;y legitimate for a woman to not like a renowned man who was unfaithful to her, something he would likewise resent if she cheated on him.  (Anybody who criticizes such a woman is totally lacking in insight.)  Unfortunately, the double standard is alive and well as ego-centric men routinely meander through life adhering to the "don't do as i do, do as i say do" code. 

 

Elijah Muhammad was an unscrupulous lecher and nothing can erase that blot from the meager contributions he made to the world-at-large.  Yes, "doggish" tendencies are in a man's DNA but for a husband to have the discipline and good judgment and moral compass to rise above lust by considering its negative possibilities, is an accomplishment that truly inspires admiration.  Of course, people are free to behave anyway they want, but they shouldn't demand to be respected when their indiscretions come to light. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

You're supposed to use REASON and LOGIC and take a wholistic approach in determining someone's value to their community and not make snap judgements based on emotion or contemporary moral standards.

 

6 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

put things into perspective when you're dealing with a person.

 

On 12/3/2018 at 1:43 AM, Pioneer1 said:

I don't give a shit IF he banged 10,000 young secretaries and was smiling to himself while I was doing it!

 

On 12/3/2018 at 2:09 AM, Troy said:

So says you Del.  You are not in the NOI, you do know know the circumstances, you don't know their code of behavior.  It is presumptuous of you to arrive at a conclusion based upon so little knowledge.

 

On 12/3/2018 at 2:09 AM, Troy said:

Besides, five minutes ago you were calling Malcolm X a pimp.  

I no longer try to win arguments here or try to change anyone's position. 

 

I post a link and later I state my position and I ask questions. I also don't define what your position is or should be.

 

I think our respective positions are clear. I don't have a masculine or feminine perspective.

 

With the exception of Bill Cosby I think about an issue. I also will do a quick search about the issue. 

 

I think the Viola Davis thread is a perfect example of my approach. I wasn't any side. And I was able to answer the question that was posed by Mel.

 

Live and learn or not.

4 hours ago, Cynique said:

Is it asking too much for women to expect men to have good character and integrity

The comments have already answered this. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Cynique said:

  Of course, people are free to behave anyway they want, but they shouldn't demand to be respected when their indiscretions come to light. 

 

Let the church say “Amen”...

 

@Cynique I’m so glad you posted this! Thank You!  I’m  beyond finished with this thread especially after reading that “let boys be boys” sentiment. 

 

 OMG... I can’t believe anyone would think it’s ok to use young women jack up their lives and let them raise up “bastard” children in a religious sect -because they were the top seller of  some bean pies. 

 

I Just can’t. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The defense of women doesn't apply if it is damaging to a  famous black Man.

 

Troy and Pioneer you have truly illuminated your positions, Kudos.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it asking too much for women to expect men to have good character and integrity?


Yes, because depending on the woman asking...THEIR idea of "character" and "intergrity" may be perverted by contemporary society.

A man's over all WORKS are the clearest examples of his character and integrity, not who he's having sex with.

If pay a contractor to build a house for me, the last thing I'm concerned about is how that man (or woman) has slept with last night, whether or not he cheated on his wife, or whether or not he's a virgin who masturbates 10 times a week.
All of that is IRRELEVANT to me.

I want to know can he do the job I hired him to do and HOW WELL will he do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

If pay a contractor to build a house for me, the last thing I'm concerned about is how that man (or woman) has slept with last night, whether or not he cheated on his wife, or whether or not he's a virgin who masturbates 10 times a week.
All of that is IRRELEVANT to me.

All well and good as long as the man in question doesn't think that just because he has a skill or has done something famous that this gives him a license to be a philanderer if he's married, or a perverted sexual predator if he's single,  or any these combination of these offenses.  What we're talking about is behavior in a personal relationship between a man and woman, not you and an auto mechanic. The point is that men should not think they deserve blind respect just because they have expertise in some area.      

 

And, once again, until a man can tolerate promiscuous behavior in his significant other who has a talent or skill, then he needs to stfu.  The traits that constitute integrity are universal and constant, and will always be about doing the honorable thing - except to a slippery creep like you, apparently.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 4:28 PM, Delano said:

I no longer try to win arguments here or try to change anyone's position. 

 

Yeah @Delano you spend too much time trying to "win" arguments.  So you aren't always forthright, for fear it will weaken you argument.  This is the reason you rarely answer direct questions that I pose for fear it will weaken you case.  @Pioneer1 always answer questions.  He is not so much concerned about winning -- thought he can be less rigid and more willing to change his position with new and better information 😉

 

Often Del there is no winning position -- just differences of opinions on subjective matters.

 

On 12/3/2018 at 4:28 PM, Delano said:

I post a link and later I state my position and I ask questions. I also don't define what your position is or should be.

 

In terms of telling others what their position should be we all do this to a certain extent including you.  You were involved in the fruitless effort to help Pioneer understand the "help" and "assist." If you were not trying to tell Pioneer what to think, what were you trying to do? (Not sure why I bothered to ask that question you will not answer it... )

 

5 hours ago, Cynique said:

The traits that constitute integrity are universal and constant

 

No, this is certainly not true. The very fact that we are so often in disagreement about what constitutes integrity should be proof enough.  We often don't have enough information to make the determination about who has integrity. We can about the integrity about of specific behaviors of people, but assessing the whole person is much more difficult and well can reasonably disagree.

 

Neil Degrasse Tyson I heard recently has been caught up in #MeToo.  He seemed like a nice guy until we learned more about him...

 

It was considered perfectly reasonable to prevent women from voting until less than 100 years ago. It was concerned a bad thing to kill a baby, now it is considered a woman's right (not a man's).  It still is perfectly legal to marry your 16 year old cousin in some jurisdictions while many people find that gross

 

There will never be universal traits for anything relating to human beings. These are culturally defined and cultures change over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Troy said:

No, this is certainly not true. The very fact that we are so often in disagreement about what constitutes integrity should be proof enough.  We o

i meant the definition of the word is constant.  Has  it changed?  If people don't conform to that definition for whatever reason that doesn't mean the meaning of the word has changed.  It just means that the word doesn't apply to that person and another word should be used  in reference to that person. i could make the argument that a woman who is described as being "short" in stature doesn't change the meaning of the word "short" just because she puts on high heel shoes and becomes tall.  Integrity means being honest.  So if a woman is honest about her reason for wanting an abortion,  her integrity is in tact because she is not being a deceitful liar.   

 

@Troy  On November 30th on another post you said to Pioneer:  "As far as this trivial debate about the your failure to recognize that Help and Assist are synonymous is nothing more than that - trivial.  What I find surprising is that after all these years you will never change your stance on any issue -- even when you are demonstrably wrong, like now.The question you really be considering is why?  Why are you so rigid?" 

On December 4th  you said to Del:   "Pioneer always answer questions.  He is not so much concerned about winning -- thought he can be less rigid and more willing to change his position with new and better information..."  @TroyThe word "integrity" certainly wouldn't apply to your 2 different opinions.  I think "inconsistency" would be the appropriate word to define your waffling,  or maybe even "expediency" since you decided to side with Pioneer when disagreeing with Del.  🤨    

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy comprehension is key. I haven't argued any points. I have stated my opinion ask other members what they thought without imputing motive.

 

Let me remind you that you said I was speaking for Mel. I  didn't think so, and asked her she said no. So you may not be objective. 

 

You asked what I meant and I clearly demonstrated what I meant. And then you responded like I personally insulted you. 

 

That is how Elijah Muhammed is referred to by the NOI or is that also news to you. 

 

Cynique gave first hand evidence. Yet you wonder about the veracity of my statements. 

 

Lately you seem to not notice or acknowledge when I answer your questions.  At one point Cynique had to point out to you that I had answered your question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 5:25 PM, Mel Hopkins said:

OMG... I can’t believe anyone would think it’s ok to use young women jack up their lives and let them raise up “bastard” children in a religious sect -because they were the top seller of  some bean pies. 

 

I Just can’t. 

 

yeah, that is too much for me.

 

23 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

I want to know can he do the job I hired him to do and HOW WELL will he do it.

 

@Pioneer1 But, if that man was banging young girls and you had a young daughter, you expect me to believe that you would  have no problem letting that contractor work on your house around your daughter in your absence? So, it wouldn't matter if he was banging your young daughter, --along with other young girls--just that he did a good job as a contractor working on your house?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chevdove said:

 

yeah, that is too much for me.


@Chevdove  I hate to use such cliche terms but here's two. The sentiment  cut like a knife  - but as they saying goes if someone shows you who they are "believe them"... 🤔

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Troy said:

Yeah @Delano you spend too much time trying to "win" arguments.

I  was going to respond, but I don't know what you are trying to say. 

On 12/3/2018 at 1:43 AM, Pioneer1 said:


I don't give a shit IF he banged 10,000 young secretaries and was smiling to himself while I was doing it!

So protecting Black Girls from a Black Minister is a non-event. Yet Black Men protect women?

 

@Troy and @Pioneer1 if that's the male perspective than I am embarrassed at our manhood. 

 

I have thought that each of us represents a segment of the Black Population. The lack of response from @Troy and @NubianFellow tells me that unity is not possible. Since respect ,empathy and the ability to simply hear and feel someone's experiencial pain is missing. 

 

I don't have to try and win arguments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Chev

 

So, it wouldn't matter if he was banging your young daughter, --along with other young girls--just that he did a good job as a contractor working on your house?


Great question.

Yes, his behavior as it relates to my daughter WOULD be a concern of mine....it it were brought up.

I seriously doubt a subject like that would be brought to my or any other customer's attention unless that contractor's competitors or enemies were trying to launch a smear campaign against them.

However, even with all of that......

If he was good enough at his job and wealthy enough, depending on my daughter's age I just MIGHT consider whether or not he'd make a good HUSBAND and PROVIDER for my daughter!

In the old days, men actually LOOKED to marry their daughters to successful accomplished men with the understanding that they liked sex and would be having sex with them.

I'm sure you remember that in the older days some of our grandmothers and great grandmother's were being married BY THEIR FATHERS to older men at 15 and 16 years of age!
I don't advocate that, however from their perspective I'm sure they were looking out for their and their children's interests by trying to pair them with men they thought would take care of them.


We all must understand something.....

In historic Caucasian society sexhas been condemned as nasty and filthy and the worse thing you can do to a person; which is some of the worst insults revolve around giving peope the finger and saying "f-you".
This is why historically they have had so many sexually dysfunctional societies.


We need to define OUR OWN codes of morality.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Troy said:

 

On 12/5/2018 at 7:59 AM, Cynique said:

The traits that constitute integrity are universal and constant

 

No, this is certainly not true. The very fact that we are so often in disagreement about what constitutes integrity should be proof enough

Yes it is true it's called mores or morals. 

Which are universal for any given culture and and time. However you can't compare across cultures and temporally it can break down over time. 

31 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

We need to define OUR OWN codes of morality.

You have your own code of what you consider ethical. We clearly inhabit different world's. 

I think you and Troy are confusing a masculine perspective with domination

34 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

We need to define OUR OWN codes of morality.

You have your own code of what you consider ethical. We clearly inhabit different world's. 

I think you and Troy are confusing a masculine perspective with domination

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1 I have to comment on what you said here because frankly, this was a bad example:

 

"I'm sure you remember that in the older days some of our grandmothers and great grandmother's were being married BY THEIR FATHERS to older men at 15 and 16 years of age!
I don't advocate that, however from their perspective I'm sure they were looking out for their and their children's interests by trying to pair them with men they thought would take care of them."

 

These practices happen in dark nations today and in all cases it's sad. When a parent makes a child marry someone to achieve a certain position or higher standard of living they are not looking out for the child's interest. They are looking out for their own and though this exists throughout our world, it's terrible culture. In some cultures they practice bride kidnapping which is just as deplorable. White people came into their land and kidnapped and raped these people's wives and they adapted it as culture. Same thing with Africa. Many of these "traditions" were created out of being tormented by white people. Yet we celebrate these things and refer to these things as positive culture, which it is not. White publications point out how backwards these things are as if they are so advanced, but fail to mention the existence of white people are the reason many of these "traditions" exist in the first place. Because their ancestors and them have had and still have a hell of a time raping our people and killing us off. I love my African identity - don't get me wrong. But I can't cosign bs. As a people, we must not.

 

Arranged marriages destroy lives and many of these women actually commit suicide and become exposed to the most diseases. It's a form of slavery and it should not be our way. Do we have to become chattel slaves again before we learn that slavery is wrong, on all fronts?

 

@DelanoThe Black woman is the most unprotected woman on the planet, but not due to the Black man not protecting her to his best ability individually. The problem is systemic in that there is a system put in place to keep us powerless. And do I blame the Black man? Absolutely! One hundred percent. Its only because I see the Black man as a god, which means we don't have the luxury of excuses. But our collective behavior is low vibration. And we need to vibrate higher and become effectively more organized, unified and militant in our behavior. But today, our behavior collectively, is the opposite of militant.

 

We've become used to mediocrity and the men always are supposed to lead. But where are we leading our women too? We are messing up. If you are talking about protecting the Black women to the best of our ability - collectively, then the Black man has not only failed the Black woman, but he has failed his race, the kids and hope for our future. And I put everything that's wrong with Black people on the shoulder and back of the Black man. It's our job to repair what we have allowed to become destroyed. And if we don't do that, who the hell are we not to accept accountability, even if that means our own extinction, from which it appears, we will be the biggest participants of.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Del

 

Yes it is true it's called mores or morals.

Which are universal for any given culture and and time. However you can't compare across cultures and temporally it can break down over time.


Mores and morals are NOT "universal" across cultures.
Different cultures have different ethical and moral codes.

Hell, even the SAME culture often will change their morals over time as they advance or decline.
Homosexuality was once illegal and condemned in Western culture, now it's generally accepted.

 

 


You have your own code of what you consider ethical. We clearly inhabit different world's.


You're absolutely right about this.
As you said I have my OWN code, and you don't. You seem to be using SOMEONE ELSE'S code for your ethics instead of using the brain that The Supreme Being gave you to define your own ethics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nubian

As I said earlier, I don't advocate for arranged marriages or marrying girls off to older men, it was more of an attempt to put things into historic perspective; however look at the people who come from those nations and compare the stability and productivity of THEIR families to the stability and productivity of the average AfroAmerican family.

Do we have any room to criticize them and how they are doing things?

Since integration AfroAmericans collectively have ATTEMPTED to model our family structure after the Caucasian families we see around us hoping it will work for us the same way it has worked for them. It's only led to 50 years of failure, broken families, and dyfunction.

You can criticize arranged marriage and the suppression of women in African cultures all day long but African families are in a heck of a lot better shape that most Black American families.
Their divorce rate is much lower, their households make more money, and the children function better in school than the average AfroAmerican family.


The nuclear family structure CLEARLY doesn't work for us.
I personally think was as a people need to sit down and intelligently design a brand new family structure specific to our people and our unique circumstance here in America.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, most Black men I know are good dads, they support their wives and children, they protect their families and most of the Black mothers I know personally strive to be the best mothers they know how to be. In the age of us waking up, of course they are not perfect parents, but they love their children and do their best. As a whole, my opinion of Black people is that we are unique, highly intelligent (in our own special way), have the best genes and the most soul out of anyone else.

 

I don't buy the b.s. narrative that Black men are too effeminate or that Black women are thots and other bad words. But these people have an agenda and they have mastered the ability to make us turn on ourselves. The solution is simple.

 

If you go to any ghetto on the planet, you will see that the crime rate is high and the property value is low. However, take any borough in NYC; the properties are valued at about 150k and up. However, if you change the mindset of those who inhabit these areas, the property values would shoot to the millions of dollars. If our thinking changes to a certain extent, we will have already increased our wealth without doing anything else.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1 I disagree implicitly with all you have said brother. Most African families aim to be American families or some other European nation at the end of the day. Yes, there are wealthy Africans but their wealth does not compare to ours. You are referring to less than 1 percent of African wealth.

 

You pointed out their divorce rate is low. Perhaps the divorce rate would be lower if a woman knew her penalty for divorcing her mate was death. Enough said on that patriarchal system.

 

You said their households make more money. This is fiction. I would love to know where you got this information from. Most countries in Africa are third world countries and our brothers and sisters over there are adamant about us "coming home" to help them build. Slavery hurt Africa in the worst way imaginable and they have never recovered from that poor decision of their corrupt governments.

 

Finally, you said they outperform us in school. This is part is true. We have the highest dropout rates and we celebrate behavior that keeps us from excelling as a collective. African kids are more ambitious about learning than our kids and retain much more information and this needs to be addressed more heavily in the Diaspora. American Black kids reject knowledge while other races of children are thirsty for it. We also lack the discipline that exists within African societies. The sad part is that our children are super smart and intelligent but there is a problem embedded deep within our social structure that produces poor results.

 

I don't say these things to put my African brothers and sisters down because they are me, but let's not be influenced by things that are propagandized and totally false information.

 

As far as following the European model, the only thing I disagree with is doing things in the name of their god or jesus, which is a fictitious and mythical character that was stolen from our history books, ironically, because Egyptian mythology actually makes sense, unlike Greek mythology which is dumb in my opinion. If white people are saying that forced marriages are wrong then I can't argue with that perspective. If they think it's shameful that people are setting their brothers and sisters on fire and exhibiting cannibal behavior, I won't argue with that either.

 

I love Africa and I dream of going back home someday, to the motherland. However, wrong is wrong and right is right. We know enough to call out the bs and we should. We need to stop praising tribal behavior and end the fascination of primitive rituals and cultures that keeps our people the most far behind on this planet. I'm for the ascension of the Black race. I'm for African empowerment. I will not cosign backwards behavior, simply because I love home.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Delano said:

So protecting Black Girls from a Black Minister is a non-event. Yet Black Men protect women?

 

Yes, because ALL Black Men are not defined by the actions of an individual or group that you dislike Del

 

14 hours ago, Delano said:

Yes it is true it's called mores or morals. 

Which are universal for any given culture and and time

 

No, they are not. Look at how divided the American culture is and aways has been. NOTHING is "universal" when it comes to people.

 

14 hours ago, Delano said:

I think you and Troy are confusing a masculine perspective with domination

 

You seem to know a lot more about the feminine perspective. Stick with that.

 

And stop grouping everone who disagrees with you in the same buckets. It shows you are not reading and understanding what is being written and more ficused on winning.

 

5 hours ago, NubianFellow said:

Arranged marriages destroy lives and many of these women

 

I'm not so eager to say this is true. It is a practice that many cultures follow for a far longer period of time. Than we have practiced our form of mate selection based upon superficial things like physical attractiveness. Given our abysmal rates of successful marriages, Americans really should be quiet.

 

Most of the Brothers i know, know their children and raise them. But this sample set is very biased, as is ours im sure. We simply don't surround ourselves with Brothers would not take care of their children

 

5 hours ago, NubianFellow said:

...the Black man not protecting her to his best ability individually. The problem is systemic in that there is a system put in place to keep us powerless.

 

'Nuff said.

 

You can condemn one gender for a problem neither gender is addressing very well. We are FAR too dependent on those who have created the hostile environment we live in -- their media and businesses.

 

15 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

We need to define OUR OWN codes of morality.

 

This would be ideal, but it can never happen in system were the acquisition of wealth is the primary objective. This makes people too focused on themselves rather than yourselves collectively. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Troy said:
17 hours ago, Delano said:

Yes it is true it's called mores or morals. 

Which are universal for any given culture and and time

 

No, they are not. Look at how divided the American culture is and aways has been. NOTHING is "universal" when it comes to people.

 

@Troy Give an example of how the word "integrity" has been corrupted.  The definition of the word has not changed. There are enough words out there to describe specific traits and this makes it unnecessary to distort the meaning of one word and apply it to something or someone that doesn't fit its definition. The meanings of certain words are intrinsic. And there are things that are universal when it comes to people!  A smile  and laughter indicate the same thing universally, and so does frowning and crying. Verbal communication via language is also universal as is walking up right.    

 

This disagreement between you and me, represents the tone of this whole thread because each poster sees the world through their own lens. All opinions are fixed and one person's truth is another's delusion  Black folks seem forever destined to be at odds and this is because they are rarely in control of their environment be it physical or political and this makes it difficult to formulate solutions except in the sphere of their skulls.  Such is life.

 

 

  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cynique I would not judge the the future of Black folks inability to exert control over the environment based upon this thread or our disagreement. 

 

I'm definitely open to changing my opinion as a result of what I've read on these forums and have done so. 

 

52 minutes ago, Cynique said:

@Troy Give an example of how the word "integrity" has been corrupted.  The definition of the word has not changed.

 

Allow me to clarify: I'm not saying  -- nor did I ever say -- that the definition of "integrity" has changed or has been corrupted.  What I am saying is that what constitutes integrity is a function of culture and time. 

 

200 years ago owning another human being was a sign of success and did not impinge one's integrity at all.  It was perfectly acceptable to impregnate your slave and sell off your own children. Of course today most people would this repugnant.

 

Surely, you understanding the distinction I'm making.

 

I tend not to judge people based upon their cultural  -- regardless of what I think about it personally.  The only time I have an issue with this is if they try to shove their value systems onto me.

 

The problem we have is that ALL of our values were stripped away from us when we were enslaved. Many of us reject the value system thrust upon us by our oppressor, but we have not clue what to replace it with. SO we either up inventing something out of whole cloth (like Kwanzaa), embrace the value system of the oppressor, or trying to rediscover an ancient African culture.  

 

The other problem that we have, one which has gotten FAR worse over the last 50 years, is the fact that were have rapidly lost all of the platforms that we once owned that could possibly help define a Black culture.  The vacuous majority culture taking it's place is doing us FAR more harm than good.  

 

This is why I can't watch TV, have deleted my Facebook account, and find adult Black people doing a Wakanda salute depressing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cynique said:

Black folks seem forever destined to be at odds and this is because they are rarely in control of their environment be it physical or political and this makes it difficult to formulate solutions except in the sphere of their skulls.  Such is life.

I Love your Mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About Black people destined to be at odds with each other, I think that in the context of discussion, there is nothing wrong with having different viewpoints. It doesn't mean Black people are at odds if discussion is happening. This is how we arrive to the most effective solutions. Viewpoints change throughout our lives. If I was having this conversation a few years ago or perhaps maybe even a year ago, my opinions could be a lot different than the opinions I possess now. I actually appreciate when I don't see eye to eye with my people because it means that I will either learn something or educate someone or perhaps both.

 

Besides, without reasonable discourse, how would we agree on which point of view is the correct one?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Troy said:

And stop grouping everone who disagrees with you in the same buckets. It shows you are not reading and understanding what is being written and more ficused on winning

Sorry Nubian this is addressed to Troy and Pioneer. 

How's that @Troy

 

1 hour ago, Troy said:

@Cynique I would not judge the the future of Black folks inability to exert control over the environment based upon this thread or our disagreement

I would and said so. There's an inability to listen to other viewpoints. Acknowledgement and agreement need not be linked. 

35 minutes ago, NubianFellow said:

Besides, without reasonable discourse, how would we agree on which point of view is the correct one?

Pov is generally an opinion. Opinions can be misinformed but are not wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Troy said:

You can condemn one gender for a problem neither gender is addressing very well. .

Farrakahn had a Millon Man March. 

Patrisse Cullors Co founded Black Lives Matter. 

In your mind which has been more effective. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Troy said:

m not so eager to say this is true. It is a practice that many cultures follow for a far longer period of time.

How would you know, @Troy ? Are you a woman having your agency snatched? 

 

Your statement here is similar  to Kanye’s “400 years Slavery was a choice.”  

 

Longevity doesn’t make it right...and definitely not right when old ass men are marrying children.  :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NubianFellow said:

Besides, without reasonable discourse, how would we agree on which point of view is the correct one?

 

This has been my case. Not that I will say a POV is right or wrong  - but another perspective helps me to sharpen my view. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mel Hopkins Absolutely and without a doubt on the arranged marriages. I have family from parts of Africa and this is a big problem there. The girls are thrown into marriage before they are able to finish their childhood and this causes a lot of depression and even suicide. It is also the cause of the spread of many diseases, such as a case where a "Hyena" (a man who is requested to have sex with little girls to bring them into adulthood) has infected his victims with AIDS and when asked about it, he replied that it was tradition. I was so disgusted at this. He did finally face charges once western nations put pressure on the incident after a journalist bought the story to light.

 

https://tv.nubianplanet.com/watch/sexual-cleansing-custom-in-malawi-on-spotlight-following-039-hyena-039-s-039-arrest_qLCmIeBGwWKbyhp.html

 

Some things are just not right regardless of tradition or beliefs and there is no way to justify what we describe legally as child abuse in this country. Many of the traditions and beliefs of various societies in Africa should be viewed as history and left behind.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, NubianFellow said:

Many of the traditions and beliefs of various societies in Africa should be viewed as history and left behind.

 

@NubianFellow I’m in agreement.  Sometimes, I wonder if those traditions are true African or from the Colonized African.  There have been so many perverted folks who have enter the African countries with their “bibles” ... it makes me wonder how people who once lived in nature - turned on what’s natural. <-[The latter thought came from watching a video of the  “Prince of Wales” in Ghana and a group were performing a dance around him... One commenter said, “those dancers as graceful as they birds they’re imitating.” They were! They looked like birds in their movement. 

 

 I cried because - I had asked the Universe to show me how our ancestors were before all colonizing and pillaging Then when I saw those dancers everything I had studied made sense- from how we hunted, how we raise crops - to how we lived. I believe it was all in accordance with nature.  

 

So sad to read this about “Hyena” - it breaks my heart that these young lives are cut short and genocide ensues.  

 

While men can impregnate many women in a year - a women can only have one child maybe two in that same year. Impregnate a child give her a disease and we lose our future.  

 

 I hope Africans and Africans in the diaspora can find the way back to our true roots. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Troy said:

Allow me to clarify: I'm not saying  -- nor did I ever say -- that the definition of "integrity" has changed or has been corrupted.  What I am saying is that what constitutes integrity is a function of culture and time. 

 

200 years ago owning another human being was a sign of success and did not impinge one's integrity at all.  It was perfectly acceptable to impregnate your slave and sell off your own children. Of course today most people would this repugnant.

 

Surely, you understanding the distinction I'm making.

 

 

@Troy Repugnant behavior meant the same thing during slavery as it does now. That's why the Civil War was fought.  Northerners thought slavery was repugnant, and slaveholders did not use the word repugnant to describe slavery  because they would have to admit how owning slaves  tainted their integrity,  -  not because back then repugnant  and integrity meant something different.  You expect me to see where you're coming from, so you should do likewise, when you implore me to acknowledge the distinction you are making. Words are something we always clash about so, i'll just leave it at that. 

   

@ all of you who refuted my remark about black folks always being at odds: I hate to keep bringing up what it is that inspires my cynicism about black folks always being at odds, but how long i've been around is what influences my reason for saying this.  The dialogue on this thread is one that i have been hearing for over 50 years and is a conversation that has changed very little. So pardon me if i'm not impressed with this exchange of ideas as being a sign of better things to come.   What this thread mostly amounted to was a typical conversation between 4 black men shooting the breeze about a perennial subject they never tire of.  What can always be distilled from these conversations is a yearning for black unity, the lack of which can conceivably be attributed to blacks always being at odds. But, carry on.  Doing so is probably therapeutic.   

 

5 hours ago, Mel Hopkins said:
6 hours ago, NubianFellow said:

Many of the traditions and beliefs of various societies in Africa should be viewed as history and left behind.

 

@NubianFellow I’m in agreement.  Sometimes, I wonder if those traditions are true African or from the Colonized African.  There have been so many perverted folks who have enter the African countries with their “bibles” ... it makes me wonder how people who once lived in nature - turned on what’s natural

I also agree.  I have always thought the African diaspora in American cobbled together what they wanted to emulate about the Motherland. We should do what comes natural to us in this country, and simply defer  to what our DNA instinctively spawns.     

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cynique It's interesting you say that because I have been looking for this NBC special about slavery that came on and I didn't get a chance to watch the whole thing. But the part I saw did describe men who called themselves slave masters would train the slaves to behave like barbarians. Many were raised as children to become savages. They would have them kill and fight each other, or whatever they chose for their own entertainment or amusement, and when they were done with them they took them back to Africa. These were people who probably started civilizations in coming years built on these particular experiences they went through. I can imagine the practices they and their children would dream up from this starting point, so it makes you wonder.

 

In Central Asia there is a country called Kyrgyzstan where the people were once terrorized by enemies who would kidnap and rape their wives and make them new wives. Astonishingly enough, the people adopted this behavior eventually as tradition and to this day they suffer a crisis in which they kidnap wives as custom. Many of the women suffer from great depression and sometimes kill themselves because they could have been planning on going to school or starting their futures, which become ruined when they get kidnapped and are forced by their own families to marry the men who kidnapped them. It's customary. 

 

When people are terrorized throughout history, it seems, they adopt the behavior of the people who mistreated them or their ancestors. We do it in the US and call it "keeping it real." In Africa, if you steal something, you could have your arms or legs cut off in the Congo. These are the same people who endured the wrath of Leopold who cut off the limbs of children merely to impress his soldiers in which his small army is rumored to have killed over 10 million of the native people.

 

So I definitely agree about them being influenced by outsiders. This seems to follow historically similar behavior patterns.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

@Cynique we'll have agree to disagree. you don't believe in moral relativism. I do.

 

@Mel Hopkins see arranged marriages as taking away the womans agency, but using your reasoning the mans agency is being taken away too. I actually know people, you probably do too, whose marriages were arranged. They are happier than all the divorced people who picked their mates.

 

The obsessive belief that the way Europeans do things is the right way is also disappointing -- especially when you look at our abysmal divorce rates. 

 

The failure to even consider that arranged marriages might have benefits or even be superior is narrow minded but typical of Americans who believe everything they do is best, while lagging the world in education...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Troy said:

we'll have agree to disagree. you don't believe in moral relativism. I do.

We are coming from 2 different places.  i am talking about semantics, and you are talking about sociology.  i can embrace word purity without rejecting moral relativism.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×