Monday, June 6, 2011

I Ain’t Saying She’s A Gold Digger . . .

The image of the black woman as a Gold Digger has evolved along a strange and peculiar path in the black community. The Gold Digger has only recently joined the Jezebel, the Mammy, the Mule, and Sapphire in the pantheon of stereotypes which are inflicted on black women; but the Gold Digger is unique in one way: her image is almost entirely the creation of black people.

Arguably traceable to hip hop (the gift that keeps on giving to the “community”), the Gold Digger is a woman (almost always a black woman according to black people) who seeks material and economic rewards in exchange for sex. She is a conniver, who only pretends to care about a man for who he “really is,” when she is actually only interested in his money and what he can give her; if the man she is with did not have money, then she would not be with him. The Gold Digger is dishonest and disloyal; she claims to be in love when she is not; and when the well runs dry, she immediately moves on to the next sucker. While the Gold Digger combines qualities of the whorish Jezebel and the evil Sapphire, it is her greed that distinguishes her. The Gold Digger is after the deep pocket, and she will do anything to empty it. The most infamous Gold Digger is, of course, Robin Givens; but popular wisdom says that any (black) wife/babymama of a professional athlete or entertainer fits the bill, or really any black woman who has any financial expectations of a man at all.

What I find most peculiar about the vehemence and timing of the rise of the Gold Digger image is its intimate tie to both the increase in poverty of black men and their absence from the black community. It is black men who the Gold Digger supposedly targets; but it is black men who have the least gold to dig. Perhaps, the Gold Digger’s detractors might argue, black men are the only men the Gold Digger can get. That still doesn’t explain why Gold Diggers would suddenly be so prevalent at a time when AIDS, imprisonment, unemployment, and hostility to black women have decimated the number of black men available to target. Shouldn’t Gold Diggers be disappearing, like bison, along with their prey?

I don’t think that it is an accident that the rise of the Gold Digger image has closely paralleled the real-life explosion of single motherhood in the black community. As more and more black women raise children alone, with the sole relationship between themselves and the fathers of their children (if any relationship exists at all) being mediated through courts which mandate the distribution of meager child support payments, black men grow ever more resentful and detached from their children and the mothers of those children. The woman who was initially nothing more than a sexual object becomes nothing more than an outstretched hand. Essentially, the Gold Digger image arose from this detachment and resentment—black men who were “unable” and unwilling to play the provider role insist that the problem is not their irresponsibility, but black women’s greed. Thus, black women have been demonized for doing what any and all women must—seeking support for their children and families.

An additional testament to the power of the Gold Digger image can be found in how many black women have embraced it, and seem invested in policing other black women for signs of inappropriate greed and interest in black men’s wealth. Their anger runs the gamut from seething with rage at the fripperies of the “Basketball Wives” or Tamar Braxton, to expressing disgust with the avarice of friends, sisters, or cousins who pursue “too much” child support or only date “certain” men. These women have embraced the idea that men do not have any particular obligation to provide for their families—not because men and women are “equals” (these are hardly fire-breathing feminists—they generally have nothing but contempt for other women); but based on the premise that if a woman “opens her legs” for a man, she should be held solely responsible for any result—such as a child. Implicit in their beliefs is the idea that it is outrageous, unseemly and bizarre for a black woman to be cared for or supported by a man. It is sadly obvious that many black women have never witnessed the spectacle of a man providing for a black woman and her children, and therefore find it easy to accept that a woman seeking such a provider is somehow deviant, even evil.

Such critics are passionate in declaiming their own selflessness in relationships and worry a great deal about the suffering that the Gold Digger’s “victims” either are or will experience. Their unstated assumption is that these “victims” would be better off with “good sisters” like them. But rarely do these “good sisters” question why the “victims” have chosen the Gold Digger over women such as themselves, who seem to ask so little from a man.

This is a stark contrast to how women and men of other cultures view what Evia repeatedly refers to as the “vetting” process for choosing a mate–which includes, in part, what he will contribute materially to the union. I found an article by the writer Bene Viera, author of the blog “Writing While Black,” that she published in response to the random ignorant ramblings about the alleged gold-digging tendencies of black women by someone calling himself Slim Thug. She contrasted the real-life forced financial independence and lack of expectations of black American women with the normative values of other cultures, solicited from readers, when it comes to judging what makes a man worthy as a potential mate:

Riya Anandwala from Mumbai, India said: From the standpoint of the Indian tradition, a family, even today, would want a very well-settled man for their daughter. The definition of well settled may differ from caste to caste, but the man has to earn well enough to feed the wife. Even if the woman's family is not that settled, they would want a guy better than what they are.


German Vigil a Latino male from El Salvador added: In my culture it is very necessary to provide for your family. It is the man's sole responsibility. Ask yourself what woman does not want a man that can or has the means to take care of them.


Linshan Li from China also weighed in: Most Chinese women are under a lot of economic pressures and they are looking for a man who can provide them with some semblance of financial security...It is common that a Chinese man has to provide a house/condo/apartment for the marriage before the girl he wants to marry says yes.


Lastly, Andrew Anderson from Sheffield, England commented: The concept of a woman marrying for money is far more prevalent, and I don't think it is viewed in a negative light. If someone had come up to me in the street and said "which group do you most associate with gold-digging?" I would have said White, middle class women...or Jewish women.

If a black American woman dared to articulate an expectation that a man should be “better than what she is” financially, or assert that it “is the man’s sole responsibility” to provide for the family, she would probably be facing a lynch mob within the black community. This is one of the main reasons that intelligent black women need to detach from the black community.

Not because your goal is to lay about eating bonbons, dripping in diamonds, while your husband toils thanklessly day and night–I am not advocating the “princess” lifestyle that I have discussed previously. The point is that if you want a life of health and growth, you need a partner–and a partner must be at least an equal. No matter how wonderful a man purportedly is “on the inside,” if he brings nothing tangible to the table he needs to take his wonderful insides to his equal, and partner with her. Remember, all those people telling you to “date the garbage man,” or “smile at the brother with a broom” are basically telling HIM to date up. This is a concept that is almost unheard outside of the black community, but it has become the norm in America between black men and black women. This is where the irony of the Gold Digger image comes into play: to whom does it most appropriately apply?

But that’s the good news about the Gold Digger label: since it is a creation of the “community,” it is probably the one label that is easiest shed. All you have to do is walk away from it.

47 comments:

Anonymous said...

Aimee I still subscribe to your blog hoping for new posts. Whenever I see one, I'm excited. As usual, this is right on the mark.

Aimee said...

Aimee I still subscribe to your blog hoping for new posts. Whenever I see one, I'm excited. As usual, this is right on the mark.

June 8, 2011 10:06 AM

___________________________________

Glad to see you too! I'm thrilled by all of the BWE sites out there now--so many of them on are right on the money that I usually find that whatever I am thinking has been beautifully and eloquently expressed before I ever get the chance. I only feel the need to publish something if there's the rare or random issue that I haven't seen much discussion of at the very moment that I actually have the time to sit down and be thoughtful; that convergence is rare these days!

Aimee said...

I think that the term “gold-digger” is a misnomer attempting to describe the level of materialism that many black women bring to relationships and the conflicts such materialism causes in these relationships. Black women are no more likely to seek men for their income and wealth and are probably less likely. But black women have been shown to be more likely than any other group to spend above their means as well as spend on depreciable items and such women tend to expect their men to contribute to their spending habits. Black men are mistakenly labeling this as “gold-digging” . . .

A white woman, for example, will hook up with a top level college athlete in anticipation of him becoming a professional athlete whereas a black woman will show such a guy attention only after he has gotten his contract. While both instances can be described as “gold-digging”, the white woman is viewed as having hooked up initially with a broke college student while the black woman is seen as actively pursuing a wealthy man. Combine this with the common image of a black woman dating a known drug dealer (which indicates dating totally based on money and not character) and it is understandable how black women inaccurately get the label of “gold-digger”.


Sigh. I see that I have been away too long and need to make some things clear from the outset: anyone who has come here for the purpose of waxing poet about black women's alleged hunger for "ballers," drug-dealers, Versace, Gucci, crazy Lucci—you can stop right now and start contriving something more constructive to do with your time. I'm not sure why I have to periodically repeat something that the blog's name itself should make clear, but here it is for the cheap seats: if you are not a black woman and/or someone who loves black women, there is no reason for you to be here. Does that mean you can't be critical or disagree with my opinions? Of course not, as anyone who has ever visited this site already knows well. I welcome intelligent, constructive debate. But trollery must at LEAST be creative--don't bore me or anyone else with tired, transparent manipulations.

Anonymous said...

I see nothing trollery nor unconstructive about my post. I reference the popular IMAGERY of black women dating drug dealers, I didn't alledge that black women do so. I stated how this imagery, whether accurate or false, contributes to the "gold-digger" stereotype. I based my other points on obsertion and professional research.

I'm trying to clarify the basis for the false stereotype and you label my post as trolling? I'm so very disappointed after all of this time that you would pull the troll card.

Aimee said...

I'm trying to clarify the basis for the false stereotype and you label my post as trolling? I'm so very disappointed after all of this time that you would pull the troll card.

My post explained the basis for the false stereotype and it has nothing to do with black women. It is about the fatal dysfunction of a dying community.

The "black community" has no idea what it means to be a man or a woman; thus, it has no idea what a healthy male/female relationship should look like. Since the community is lost, it looks for guidance about appropriate conduct among outliers and deviants, like professional athletes and the rare drug dealer who actually makes an income sufficient income to move out of his mother's apartment. These males and the women who flock to them are supposed to tell us what a man is supposed to be, what a woman is supposed to be, and how they should behave towards each other. They don't.

I might have been disappointed at one time that you would not only resort to the same tired tropes, but that you would rely on them in response to a post that completely deconstructs them. But I'm not now, because I know you're just doing what you know how to do, and saying what you know how to say. It's unfortunate, but this is the exact mentality that black women need to detach from, so in that sense I hope your response is at least illustrative.

trish said...

It's sad when the only people within your community with financial resources are the ballers, (c)rapers and drug dealers.
What a wonderful break down about the meaning behind this sudden gold digger image.
I personally believe that black men ascribe real femininity to non-black women. They do not believe black women deserve love, protection and financial security of any kind. They claim black women use child support payments to pay for own personal welfare; yet, they never step up and care for the child themselves.
Any thinking black women would detach from all aspects of the black community. The goals of the community are governed solely by the immediate needs and desires of black men. This is the reason why they are in full support of interracial relationships involving black men but are not supportive of black women in interracial relationships. They consider child support payment to be a burden to black men. They consider marriage to be something that’s not necessary. They don’t think black women and girls should be protected from rape and savagery if the perpetrator is black. I could go on and on.

Faith said...

So glad to find out you have a new post up! Hope you'll continue adding your wisdom to the 'net!!

Aimee said...

trish said...
It's sad when the only people within your community with financial resources are the ballers, (c)rapers and drug dealers.

Yes, it is extremely sad. It's even more sad when your community has deteriorated to the point that it can't even recognize that this is unhealthy, and stigmatizes the young women who succumb to their glamorization, while simultaneously lionizing the men and celebrating their often DBR behavior.

What a wonderful break down about the meaning behind this sudden gold digger image.
I personally believe that black men ascribe real femininity to non-black women. They do not believe black women deserve love, protection and financial security of any kind. They claim black women use child support payments to pay for own personal welfare; yet, they never step up and care for the child themselves.


True again. The shortest distance between two points is always a straight line: DBRBM who are worried that their precious $25 per week in child support is being squandered on "depreciable items" like food and electric bills are always free to invest in some depreciable items of their own like legal advice on securing primary custody of their children. Interestingly enough, however, black men don't seem to be much of a presence in the "Father's Rights" movement that has recently evovled, especially considering that they are more likely than any other group of men to be living apart from their children, and grumbling about every cent they are made to provide for them.

Any thinking black women would detach from all aspects of the black community. The goals of the community are governed solely by the immediate needs and desires of black men. This is the reason why they are in full support of interracial relationships involving black men but are not supportive of black women in interracial relationships. They consider child support payment to be a burden to black men. They consider marriage to be something that’s not necessary. They don’t think black women and girls should be protected from rape and savagery if the perpetrator is black. I could go on and on.

Unfortunately you could, but luckily you don't have to since your first sentence summed it up brilliantly: "Any thinking black women would detach from all aspects of the black community." Thank you very much trish!

Aimee said...

Faith said...
So glad to find out you have a new post up! Hope you'll continue adding your wisdom to the 'net!!

And I'm so glad to see you, Faith--I hope all is well with you and yours! I'm just happy I had some insights to share, and got to hear from some of you ladies (and gentlemen) as well.

arthur said...

Hi Aimee, glad to see you back. Hoping all is well with you and yours :)

Aimee said...

arthur said...
Hi Aimee, glad to see you back. Hoping all is well with you and yours :)

Hey Arthur! Glad to see you! All is well with hubby and I, as well with the family. I hope the same for you!

Work is another story, very hectic; but I've always known how to keep a cool head in hot times, so that knowledge is definitely standing me in good stead. Onward and upward!

Anonymous said...

I personally believe that black men ascribe real femininity to non-black women. They do not believe black women deserve love, protection and financial security of any kind. They claim black women use child support payments to pay for own personal welfare; yet, they never step up and care for the child themselves.

http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=socs_fac

”Encouragingly, a number of recent studies on so-called ''absent'' fathers have indicated that lack of marriage to the mother does not necessarily indicate non-involvement as a parent. For instance, Danziger and Radin (1990) and Wattenberg (1993) found that unwed minority teen dads are more involved than unwed white teen dads in their children's lives. Rivara, Sweeney, and Henderson (1986) found that the majority of single black teen fathers were living with the mother or having daily or weekly contact, which included feeding, playing, and diapering, with the mother and child. Lerman (1993) found that black unwed fathers were more likely to live close by and visit their children than were Hispanic and white fathers, and they had a higher frequency of paying child support (though the amount was less). Similar findings have been echoed in Seltzer (1991), Stier and Tienda (1993), and Taylor et al. (1990).”

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_go2877/is_2_25/ai_n28889704/

”Apparently, black non-resident fathers have a higher rate than white and Hispanic non-resident fathers of visiting their children and partaking in primary care duties. In addition, they are more likely to give child support payments, though the payments tend to be lower.”

Any thinking black women would detach from all aspects of the black community. The goals of the community are governed solely by the immediate needs and desires of black men.

http://scienceblog.com/37935/black-men-among-most-disadvantaged-least-helped-in-u-s/

”Among disadvantaged people in the United States, the most needy and least helped are probably African-American men, according to a new book from the University of Chicago’s School of Social Service Administration.

Most African-American men do not fit the popular stereotype and fulfill their responsibilities to their families and society, but the stereotype persists, fueled in some ways by media images, Johnson said. But the problems they face are real, and social workers should feel challenged to put the tools and resources of their profession at work to help black men in need, he said.

Despite their problems, few programs are designed specifically to help black males, and social workers may not view them as part the families and communities that the workers serve, with the result that black males’ individual needs go unaddressed.”

Halima said...

I've soooo missed you aimee (sobs into her tissues).

There are only two BWE writers who occupy the position of deeper level theorists and you are one of them!

As ususal breaking it down with such depth and insight that cant be argued with.

You know i count my blessings at being part of BWE even at times i get a headache from the work lol and it is simply because of the depth of analysis that we present as opposed to tired and worn out analysis.

yesterday I was again reminded of this by a situation that showed me clearly, the huge chasm between the analysis and insight of BWe and the general black 'wisdom' out there. one of the 'black' papers in my area had on its front page, the headlines 'should women learn to share men?', and there was the obligatory picture of a bm surrounded by scores of women!

i shook my head and thought 'wow so folks are still caught up in these uproductive, time warp arguments that would be better placed in the 1950's'. it struck me how so far behind the black community and their media portals are.

no wonder bp have fallen behind so much so that they not even able to lend a hand to 'survive' the institutions and organisations that worked for their equality!

i felt a shock of revulsion seeing that title and just thinking of all the backward discussions and responses that would ensue. i felt so glad to be part of a new breed of warpspeed thinking bw to who such 'discussions' are shockingly backwards.

trish said...

I am not going to address your nonsense or look at your links.

Aimee said...

Halima said...
I've soooo missed you aimee (sobs into her tissues).

There are only two BWE writers who occupy the position of deeper level theorists and you are one of them!

As ususal breaking it down with such depth and insight that cant be argued with.

You know i count my blessings at being part of BWE even at times i get a headache from the work lol and it is simply because of the depth of analysis that we present as opposed to tired and worn out analysis.
___________________________________

Halima--first of all, I hope all is wonderful and well with you!

I haven't had the chance to miss you because even when I haven't been blogging, I have ALWAYS continued to follow you, Evia, and many of the other BWE writers who spread so much wisdom out there. Even when I get frustrated by the "worn out analysis" from others that you describe, I still feel blessed that you are out there spreading so much wisdom and light and really sharing of yourself with young sisters in particular. Indeed, having the BWE and you especially has allowed be to do what I have tried to encourage ladies here to do as well--block out and ignore the foolishness, and focus on the intelligent and constructive. When those alternatives exist, they are literally life-saving. Thank you girl--and stay strong! And if you ever need me, just to talk or for any other reason, email directly at espirtaimee@gmail.com.

Aimee said...

Anonymous said...

"I personally believe that black men ascribe real femininity to non-black women. They do not believe black women deserve love, protection and financial security of any kind. They claim black women use child support payments to pay for own personal welfare; yet, they never step up and care for the child themselves."

http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=socs_fac

Encouragingly, a number of recent studies on so-called ''absent'' fathers have indicated that lack of marriage to the mother does not necessarily indicate non-involvement as a parent . . .

"Any thinking black women would detach from all aspects of the black community. The goals of the community are governed solely by the immediate needs and desires of black men."

http://scienceblog.com/37935/black-men-among-most-disadvantaged-least-helped-in-u-s/

Among disadvantaged people in the United States, the most needy and least helped are probably African-American men. . .
___________________________________

I'm not going to presume to speak for trish; but I think I have a good idea of why she didn't even bother to respond to you or your links.

First, I think it's both interesting and telling that you didn't even bother to dispute or address her arguments about BM's contempt and hostility for black WOMEN. You focus on data purporting to support BM's alleged lack of poor support and dedication as fathers. But even a BM-defender won't pretend that BM love BW. For that at least, I can give you credit.

Second, I can walk out of my office right now and get in my car and drive to Paterson, Newark, or cross the bridge into the South Bronx, Washington Heights, or Harlem, and see exactly what role black men are, and are not, playing as fathers in the "black community." I can see who is getting up early each morning to take children to school, and then heading off to work. I can return in the evenings to see who is there to retrieve children from after-school programs after a hard day's labor, and maybe drop them at home safely and head to a second job. I know exactly how all those so-called "good fathers" who everyone puts on a pedastal get down: they pick the kids up once a week or so and drop them at their mama's house, while they go about their business or let their latest babymama play house, until they're done with her. I know who does the laundry. I know who helps with the homework. I know who cooks the meals. I know who goes to the parent-teacher meetings. I know who the CONSISTENT presence is. Above all, I know who feeds, clothes, shelters, and PROVIDES for those kids all day every day, 365 days a year. So please, don't link me a report by some bourgeois researcher where some 16-year old is self-reporting about what a "good father" he is because he claims to have changed a diaper or "spent time" with his child. Trish knows, I know, and every BW here knows what that is worth.

Third, the agenda of the "black community, and the agenda of public welfare agencies may well be distinct. Public welfare agencies, which base their policies on the values of society as a whole, operate on an implicit assumption that able-bodied adults with non-dependent children should not need and should not get public welfare services and resources. You may disagree with that assumption, but that is inarguably their animating principle; which thus means that able-bodied black men without dependent children are not going to be significant recipients of aid from such agencies. While the black community has invested a great deal of its political capital and energy into efforts to re-focus public efforts on programs that will be primarily beneficial to black men, this general public policy agenda has not changed.

Anonymous said...

I'm not going to presume to speak for trish; but I think I have a good idea of why she didn't even bother to respond to you or your links.

I think that it is quite simple. She didn't like the information, yet couldn't dispute it. So she openly disregarded it.

First, I think it's both interesting and telling that you didn't even bother to dispute or address her arguments about BM's contempt and hostility for black WOMEN. You focus on data purporting to support BM's alleged lack of poor support and dedication as fathers. But even a BM-defender won't pretend that BM love BW. For that at least, I can give you credit.

Well your mind reading is flawed. I chose to present data to dispute one assertion. The other assertion of how black men feel about this or that (mind reading) is no more than her alleged perception and her perception would be her reality. The only thing that I could respond with is my opposite perception which turns into a "no they aren't, yes they are" back and forth.

But if you want my opinion or perception, to say that black men as a group have contempt and hostility for black women is absurdity in its highest form and completely false.

Second, I can walk out of my office right now and get in my car and drive to Paterson, Newark, or cross the bridge into the South Bronx, Washington Heights, or Harlem, and see exactly what role black men are, and are not, playing as fathers in the "black community." I can see who is getting up early each morning to take children to school, and then heading off to work. I can return in the evenings to see who is there to retrieve children from after-school programs after a hard day's labor, and maybe drop them at home safely and head to a second job. I know exactly how all those so-called "good fathers" who everyone puts on a pedastal get down: they pick the kids up once a week or so and drop them at their mama's house, while they go about their business or let their latest babymama play house, until they're done with her. I know who does the laundry. I know who helps with the homework. I know who cooks the meals. I know who goes to the parent-teacher meetings. I know who the CONSISTENT presence is. Above all, I know who feeds, clothes, shelters, and PROVIDES for those kids all day every day, 365 days a year. So please, don't link me a report by some bourgeois researcher where some 16-year old is self-reporting about what a "good father" he is because he claims to have changed a diaper or "spent time" with his child. Trish knows, I know, and every BW here knows what that is worth.

I can do and have done the exact same thing right here in Houston, Texas and see the exact opposite of what you claim to see. I can't substatiate your claimed observations and can't help but to see your observations as shaped by personal bias and what appears to be your "contempt and hostility for black MEN".

Truth P. said...

Hi Aimee.Fact is black men are the real golddiggers in the "black community".

I believe they have been for a while.
Black men have made it clear for many years before my time that they DON'T HAUL NO COAL.

Black women as a collective have NEVER been golddiggers.Black men have always required black women that they are with to have a job.

They reserve the life of kicking back and eating bon bon's for their other non black women whom they perceive as being more worthy of such a lifestyle because they believe these women simply look better and will give them better looking i.e less black children.

Black men are so mentally ill that they often accuse black women of doing things that black women collectively have never had the luxury of doing.

I've seen black men go off on a tangent saying women wanted equal rights so that they could work and now they have it and they are mad but the fact is WHITE women fought so that they could work.Black women were ALREADY working.

I now understand why Khadija and many other BWE bloggers have told us not to argue with these people.It is because they are LIARS.You cannot get anywhere with a liar.

Aimee said...

Anonymous said...

I think that it is quite simple. She didn't like the information, yet couldn't dispute it. So she openly disregarded it.

Well readers can peruse trish's comment and your respnse and let come to their own conclusions. Mine stands.


I chose to present data to dispute one assertion. The other assertion of how black men feel about this or that (mind reading) is no more than her alleged perception and her perception would be her reality. The only thing that I could respond with is my opposite perception which turns into a "no they aren't, yes they are" back and forth.

But if you want my opinion or perception, to say that black men as a group have contempt and hostility for black women is absurdity in its highest form and completely false.


Everyone reading this blog knows better than this. I think even you know better than this if you are honest with yourself; otherwise you would have provided just as complete an argument supporting this claim as you did supporting your other claims beyond your "opinion." After all, whether black men are getting their share of welfare or how many diapers teen-age sperm donors are changing is really neither here nor there. The real, bottom line issue HERE is how black women can free themselves from a hostile, hopelessly dysfunctional construct dedicated to the promotion of the self-destructive self-interests of a single element of a "community" operating at the expense of every other population in that community.

In other words, how do you save yourself from a sinking ship when you recognize that it is not only sinking, but that there are rats swarming the lifeboats, actively chewing holes in the floorboards and trying to feed on your hide? If those rats are really lions in disguise who are there to love and fight for their prides, and you have the evidence to prove this, why not say so?


I can do and have done the exact same thing right here in Houston, Texas and see the exact opposite of what you claim to see. I can't substatiate your claimed observations and can't help but to see your observations as shaped by personal bias and what appears to be your "contempt and hostility for black MEN".

DBRBM in Houston or the NYC metro or anywhere else certainly have less to fear from me than from each other despite the supposed "hostility" emanating from me and others in the BWE blogosphere. All we want is to be far, far away from them and to warn other black women who may be confused to also move far, far away from them. I think it would be a wonderful thing if they would take more constructive roles in their communities, families, and the lives of their children. I commend you if you are working with such men to encourage that behavior.

But in the meantime, any smart capable black woman needs to be getting the hell out of dodge and as far away from all of these allegedly wonderful, black-woman loving BM in the 4th Ward and other 'hoods as fast as she can. If she needs to work two or three jobs, move cross country or to Copenhagen, cut off contact with debilitating family and friends--whatever she needs to do in order to save herself, she needs to be doing it to save herself now. That's my message and my focus, and it's not changing unless circumstances drastically change. This blog is for and about those women, and BM are mentioned to the extent that they impinge on the lives of those women.

Aimee said...

Truth P. said...

Hi Aimee.Fact is black men are the real golddiggers in the "black community".

I believe they have been for a while.
Black men have made it clear for many years before my time that they DON'T HAUL NO COAL.
___________________________________

LOL. Hi, Truth P. We all know this is true. The idea that the mass of BM are out there sweating to support BW's profligate spending habits is almost too laughable and bizarre to address, except that BM are now actively promoting this propaganda in order to undermine BW's image not only within the "community," but to the larger society as well. This is the real danger of the goldigger stereotype--that it is serving a larger agenda that I have seen emerging among DBRBM of "If I can't have you, nobody will." This is illustrated by a comment I saw recently when I was researching a completely separate issue (an article on reductions in force, or mass layoffs) which led me to a story at Black Voices, a site I usually avoid like the plague that it is.

The article discussed educated black professionals experiencing layoffs, and focused on an experienced corporate manager with an MBA who had been laid off mid-career. Essentially, the article discussed her job search, whether her education and experience helped or hindered her, etc.

The comments after the article were typical BV, full of negativity and hostility fueled by the "ni--ers ain't shit" mentality that animates most black websites. But one comment in particular set off a long string of "Dat's right," and "Uh huhs!" when the poster stated "See, a lot of these black women thought they could get a degree and a job and leave us behind, but now they see they can't! Ha Ha!"

This man was thrilled that this woman was unemeployed and struggling to provide (of course) on her own for herself and her children, because it meant that she was right back where he was and was content to stay. He was enraged by her temerity in having the nerve to seek higher education and well-paid employment, and he was glad that she had suffered a set-back that put her in her place--with him.

If these DBRBM can't move up, and they can't manipulate capable BW anymore into being lifelong hosts for their parisitism, then they will just do everything in their power to ensure that those women are completely undesirable to anyone else as partners for healthy, mutual relationships. After all, part of the struggle faced by the woman in this story was that, in her late 30's, she was still sole income in her home. I would bet money that she is holding out for her "black prince," while a whole series of princes have likely passed her up because she's a "dark butt" or wears a scarf to bed, or some other nonsense. Now she's lost her job, and has no soft place to fall.

When I fell ill, I had a job with private income replacement insurance. But more importantly, I had a husband who is the primary provider in our home. I was worried about my health, and about how time away from work would affect my career. But I was never worried about keeping a roof over my head, or food on the table. I knew that if I never went back to work, my life would in no way change materially. This is a function of our frugality and the simplicity of our lives; but it is also a practical function of marriage, of partnership. Too many black women are allowing themselves to be convinced that they don't "need" this, while the rest of the world is being convinced that BW aren't fit for this. A whole lot of sisters better WAKE UP.

Aimee said...

Truth P. said...

They reserve the life of kicking back and eating bon bon's for their other non black women whom they perceive as being more worthy of such a lifestyle because they believe these women simply look better and will give them better looking i.e less black children.
___________________________________

There are some wealthy and affluent BM for whom this is certainly true; but increasingly, I am seeing white, Latina and Asian single mothers of biracial children, fighting for child support, working while some DBRBM sits up in their house eating their food and dropping them off at work while they drive their car all day, wasting their money on bail, etc.--in other words, the same old mess. A lot of these BM have promoted the canard that if they could just get with these "better" women they would magically become better men for so long that some of them started to believe it; and they certainly convinced many of these "better women" that the only problem they had was those "mean" BW.

But reality is slowly proving otherwise, and many of these "better" women are proving, surprisingly, to be just as "mean" as BW, as they become enraged at men who can't keep a job, can't stay out of jail, won't parent, etc.
___________________________________
Truth P. said...

I now understand why Khadija and many other BWE bloggers have told us not to argue with these people.It is because they are LIARS.You cannot get anywhere with a liar.
___________________________________

Especially if the liar is delusional and emotionally invested in his lie.

Anonymous said...

"After all, whether black men are getting their share of welfare or how many diapers teen-age sperm donors are changing is really neither here nor there."

Some of the black sperm donors are teenagers but many more are adult black MEN.

Let me explain. I used to work for the dept. of job and family services here in Ohio: I'm now retired. I discovered that MOST of the teenaged baby mamas are being impregnated by ADULT men, not teenaged boys. Many, if not most of these teenaged girls are looking for the "father" they never had. Needless to say, it's pretty hard for a teenaged black girl (or ANY girl) to look up to a teenaged boy as a "father figure". This is where older black men, often in their twenties (and sometimes older), come in. These older men take advantage of these teenaged girls intense desire for a father figure (and male approval in general). I discovered this accidently years ago when I was working with a 15 year old black teenaged mother of two. I happened to look at the birth certificates of the mother and the childern and then looked at the birthdate of the father and discovered that the father was 26 years old and the mother was about 13 years old when she got pregnant by this man the first time. She was about 14 when she became pregnant the second time by this same man. I discovered this was the tip of the iceberg. There is an EPIDEMIC of STATUTORY RAPE in so-called "black communities" and NO ONE is doing anything about it.

Aimee said...

Anonymous said...

Some of the black sperm donors are teenagers but many more are adult black MEN . . . There is an EPIDEMIC of STATUTORY RAPE in so-called "black communities" and NO ONE is doing anything about it.

Sadly, I believe you. I only referred to the teen-aged sperm donors because the previous Anon was arguing that these teen-agers specifically were such wonderful and involved parents.

I don't know what is going on in Ohio or if Ohio is unique (I suspect that, unfortunately, it is NOT) but I have a relative who was an official in the legal system there for a time and had exactly the type you describe appear before him for failure to pay child support. There was little my family member could do on a practical level to force this individual to materially provide, because this person, though he made a decent income of approximately $40k a year as a municipal employee, had THIRTY-SIX children (I am in no way exaggerating this number). There was no way he could "provide" in any meaningful sense for any of these children, or be a real presence as a father in any of their lives--of the diaper changing dropping 'em off at mama's house variety, let alone the day-to-day, living in the home, married to and loving the mother, taking them to school, supervising home work variety.

I remember reading a story in a book some time ago about a young man who ended up going to Stanford though he had been a mediocre student throughout most of his schooling. He was especially poor at math; so his father, who was an extremely busy successful professional, took it upon himself to supervise the son's homework and utilize family meal times for months to drill the young man with flash cards on basic math skills until he became proficient. This was a child who was in no way of superior intellect. He did not have impressive standardized test scores and he was in no way intellectually special. But his father MADE him special by investment of time and force of will. And this young man ended up at Stanford and, of course, became the success in life that such investment typically yields.

This person's 36 children will likely have no one fighting for them. Their mothers will be overwhelmed simply putting food on the table, and if they are teen-agers with no fathers of their own they likely are completely unprepared to parent, especially on their own. The children's "father" is non-existent. Their schools are likely worthless, or even detrimental. There is no one to fight for them, and they need advocates more than anyone. There is no father coming home every night after practicing law or medicine or managing a Fortune 100 company and reviewing algebra flash cards with them. There isn't even a father coming home from managing a shift at McDonalds to do the same--which is all that a child needs. Wealth helps, but parenting is the key. These kids are being left to drown. Yet the "community" will argue that the "father" shouldn't be held accountable in any real way for his criminal irresponsibility, because then it's just another "brother" in jail. They'll criticize the failures of the schools and the teachers, but are silent about the failures of "men" like this. If you point out the obvious--the obvious hostility animating the destructiveness of such "men," YOU are accused of being hateful.

What a disgrace.

Bellydancer said...

I also think these so called good brothers need to be put on blast. The ones who go to school and have a little job but do nothing else for their women and children.
They take more than they give,live at somebody's house rent free, run up bills, make extra work, spend little time with their kids, whine about what little they do around the house, drive out your gas, and think they have the right to cheat and act out if they feel like it sometimes violently. But it is okay they are a good brother trying to get ahead even if it is at everybody else's expense.
Chile these lil men children give me a headache.

trish said...

“I think that it is quite simple. She didn't like the information, yet couldn't dispute it. So she openly disregarded it."
LOL

@Aimee
That thing that made the comment can be found on other BWE blogs using the same specious statistics.
Someone else said that the biggest evidence against black men is the behavior of the men themselves.
It can quote as many onerous sources as it desires but the facts on the ground speak for themselves.

Halima said...

If these DBRBM can't move up, and they can't manipulate capable BW anymore into being lifelong hosts for their parisitism, then they will just do everything in their power to ensure that those women are completely undesirable to anyone else as partners for healthy, mutual relationships. After all, part of the struggle faced by the woman in this story was that, in her late 30's, she was still sole income in her home. I would bet money that she is holding out for her "black prince," while a whole series of princes have likely passed her up because she's a "dark butt" or wears a scarf to bed, or some other nonsense. Now she's lost her job, and has no soft place to fall.


Like I said Aimee, no one writes it like you do! The state of brotherhood that many bw assume exists between them and black men is largely a figment of their imagination. If they bother to do a very small check in reality, they would actually see that bm are launching missles at them for their utter destruction. that aint no brother by any stretch of the imagination. they believe that bm are brothers at their own peril!

Anonymous said...

Everyone reading this blog knows better than this. I think even you know better than this if you are honest with yourself; otherwise you would have provided just as complete an argument supporting this claim as you did supporting your other claims beyond your "opinion."

I’m sorry, but the burden of proof lies with the person making the assertion, not with the person disputing the assertion. It is not I making the “claim”, but rather it was I disputing her claim. It’s just like a court of law. No one has to prove innocence of a particular charge. The one making the charge has to prove guilt. And what everyone alleges to know better on this agenda based blog is far from what most know in the real world.

After all, whether black men are getting their share of welfare or how many diapers teen-age sperm donors are changing is really neither here nor there.

Well, for one, your attempt to alter terminology really doesn’t work well. For one, if we were talking about “welfare” (a word I don’t recall being mentioned in the article), then that would mean that white men receive welfare to a greater extent than black men, a notion that you would probably take offense to. But of course, the article doesn’t discuss “welfare”, but rather overall social support from any and all. That includes community as well as government support. Same goes for the repeating of “changing diapers” in order to simplify the study’s findings that these young men are active participants in the lives of their children. Do you consider Gabriel Aubry to be a sperm donor?

And yes, it is neither here nor there save for the fact that it is a point that you brought up with your common allegation that all social support goes to black men and not black women. The study shows this to be false as is so many of the clich├ęs expounded by those purporting involvement with “Black Women’s Empowerment”.

The real, bottom line issue HERE is how black women can free themselves from a hostile, hopelessly dysfunctional construct dedicated to the promotion of the self-destructive self-interests of a single element of a "community" operating at the expense of every other population in that community.

Again, this is a made up notion regarding the “promotion of a single element”. The assertion is repeatedly made, yet never substantiated. The burden of proof is on you. I have already provided a study for you and you very much turn a blind eye to the dysfunction of the other major element. I’m quite sure that when you ride around NY, you see plenty of dysfunctional black women.

In other words, how do you save yourself from a sinking ship when you recognize that it is not only sinking, but that there are rats swarming the lifeboats, actively chewing holes in the floorboards and trying to feed on your hide? If those rats are really lions in disguise who are there to love and fight for their prides, and you have the evidence to prove this, why not say so?

No, the better question is why not provide evidence that there are rats actively chewing holes in the floorboards while “trying to feed on your hide” and prove that you yourself are not among the rats?

Aimee said...

Bellydancer said...

I also think these so called good brothers need to be put on blast. The ones who go to school and have a little job but do nothing else for their women and children.

They take more than they give,live at somebody's house rent free, run up bills, make extra work, spend little time with their kids, whine about what little they do around the house, drive out your gas, and think they have the right to cheat and act out if they feel like it sometimes violently. But it is okay they are a good brother trying to get ahead even if it is at everybody else's expense.
Chile these lil men children give me a headache.


Girl, don't let 'em make your head hurt, lol! I know EXACTLY what you're talking about: the standards have fallen so far for BM in the "community" that as long they aren't being criminally predatory they are labeled "good men" who deserve all kinds of accolades and tributes.

It reminds me of that commercial for the Wayans brothers movie where the man knocks on the door and annouces "I'm here to see my son." He then enters, picks up the baby, looks at him, puts him down, then exits the apartment. The black babymama then happily announces to her white friend "he's such a good father!"

When the worst is expected of you (and accepted from you), delivering even minimally will make people around you jump for joy. But that's almost a more dangerous trap for BW to get caught in; they start investing in something that will provide minimal returns, but never bring them the kind of life that they really deserve, simply because it's better than everything else they see around them. This is the biggest reason to escape these "communities" altogether: because until you are entirely free of them, you can't really understand just how warped and undernourished they and their expectations are. You can't see how much better your life can be.

Aimee said...

trish said...

@Aimee
That thing that made the comment can be found on other BWE blogs using the same specious statistics.
Someone else said that the biggest evidence against black men is the behavior of the men themselves.
It can quote as many onerous sources as it desires but the facts on the ground speak for themselves.


Of course. While he was clearly very impressed by his own "arguments," there was nothing so new or particularly challenging about them as to command your response--just more of the same "who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" The idea that you "couldn't" respond is amusing.

Aimee said...

Anonymous said...

I’m sorry, but the burden of proof lies with the person making the assertion, not with the person disputing the assertion.

Yes, and you're the one who made the assertion that BM as a group are not contemptuous and hostile to BW. If you are going to hold others to their "burden," then hold yourself to yours.

Well, for one, your attempt to alter terminology really doesn’t work well. For one, if we were talking about “welfare” (a word I don’t recall being mentioned in the article), then that would mean that white men receive welfare to a greater extent than black men, a notion that you would probably take offense to. But of course, the article doesn’t discuss “welfare”, but rather overall social support from any and all. That includes community as well as government support.

Tomato, tomahto. My focus was on the agenda and energies of the black community, which are exclusively invested in the interests and empowerment of black men; that has nothing to do with whether black men have managed to reap the benefits of the largesse of society as a whole. Your focus was on whether black men were getting their share of "social support," government support, welfare, entitlements, pats on the back, or whatever else you feel deprived of. I simply pointed out that those provding such "social support," who are not primarily the agenda-makers of the black community, likely do not share the black community's "reclaiming the black man's manhood" agenda, and that would explain why you aren't getting the lion's share of "support."

Same goes for the repeating of “changing diapers” in order to simplify the study’s findings that these young men are active participants in the lives of their children. Do you consider Gabriel Aubry to be a sperm donor?

I don't know what Gabriel Aubry is or isn't doing in his child's life, though he appears to be an active parent. It's amusing that for some reason he sticks in your craw to such an extent and you assume he has the same symbolic resonance for me that he clearly has for you; but I don't know the man or the intimate details of his relationship with his daughter. I do know that if Halle Berry went bankrupt and died tomorrow he clearly has more than sufficient resources to provide for his child, and had a successful career before he ever met Halle Berry; a career that he continued throughout their relationship and since it has ended. So in that sense, he's bringing just a tad more to the table as a father than the 16 year olds who seem to impress you so much. Since you consider the claims of these teen-age boys to be proof of "active parenting," I imagine you consider Gabriel Aubry to be an "active parent" as well based on what you see and read in "People" and "Us."

No, the better question is why not provide evidence that there are rats actively chewing holes in the floorboards while “trying to feed on your hide” and prove that you yourself are not among the rats?

I'm not on your ship. And my goal is not to meet the "burden of proof" in some apocryphal court case of "Black Men vs. Black Women"; again, that's the black "community's" racio-misogynistic agenda. I don't have to cite "studies" in order to prove to any black woman what your very presence and every word here, and their life experience, has amply illustrated. They know that you hate them, that you want the worst for them, that you are their enemy. All I need to do is continue giving you the rope to hang yourself, and continue showing sisters the exit. YOU want to argue and comb the Internet for studies and engage, because you can see that the best of us are either already gone or on our way out and all you will have left are the "dysfunctional black women" who can't do anything for you. And that is exactly as it should be--like with like.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Aimee said...

Anonymous said...

Again, I DISPUTED an assertion and you asked for evidence to support the dispute as opposed to evidence to support the assertion. Clearly, you are not an attorney.

Clearly, you are not literate. You initially never even ADDRESSED, let alone disputed, trish's arguments discussing BM's
contempt and hostility for BW. After I pointed out the fact that you weren't even capable of facing the essence of trish's contentions, which was founded on BM's anti-BW sentiment, you responded by presenting your "opinion" that she was incorrect (in lieu of another slew of links to "studies" of the self-reported diaper-and-wipes purchasing habits of 27 babydaddies in North St. Louis).

You demanded "evidence" for trish's arguments, but presented none for yours, because you have none. And I didn't "ask for evidence" from either of you--I simply pointed out that while YOU were demanding evidence from her, you were unable to present any of your own--and you won't be presenting such evidence, becase none exists.

And please don't further humiliate yourself by presuming to know what professional status I do or do not hold. You are clearly and pathetically inadequate to make such a judgment. You cannot (or will not) even accurately read and quote statements with which you disagree; instead you construct the arguments that you would prefer to dispute, and then proceed to attack those statements instead of dealing with the actual ideas with which you disagree. I'm not going to further entertaim that childishness.

Aimee said...

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but the rants and alleged life experiences of the miniscule number of commenters on BWE blogs don’t define anything factual. You can throw the word “misogyny” around all day (while ignoring your own racio-misandry)

Misandry is the hatred of men. We LOVE men, and healthy, positive, constructive men get nothing but the greatest affection and respect here. One of the main reasons we've come together is out of our love of real men and our enjoyment of their companionship. Refusing to tolerate DBR behvaior does not = "hating men." You can whip mules and sister soldiers back into line with this little scare tactic ("don't call us on our bullshit, or we'll call you 'manhaters!'",) but no one else is buying it anymore. However, it is simultaneously sad and humerous that, just as you feed off of black women in every other way, you even have to feed off of the language we've crafted to communicate with each other. You can't even come up with your own words! LOL!

the truth is evident and no amount of personal emotion fueled rhetoric can change that.

This is the truth.

And what “best of us” are gone or on their way out? I’ve haven’t noticed.

It appears that you have noticed since you've followed us here and won't leave.

Anonymous said...

Misandry is the hatred of men.

I wrote "racio-misandry", which is derived from your assertion of "racio-misogyny". You proclaim that black men hate black women while ignoring what is most evident; that being your hatred of black men.

Interesting that you deleted the studies that didn't limit to teenagers. Why is that? Good old censorship I suppose. Your inability to provide no evidence beyond your own flawed perceptions (or alleged perceptions) is quite telling and is a common trend in such hate blogs.

And please tell me what makes you "the best of us" because I don't see it. It seems that your hostility is the result of you NOT being viewed among the best of us.

Aimee said...

Anonymous said...

Misandry is the hatred of men.

I wrote "racio-misandry", which is derived from your assertion of "racio-misogyny".


Of course it is. As I noted, you share the weakness common among DBRBM of needing to feed off of BW in every way, including in the very language you speak. Halima identifid and defined the phenomenon of "racio-misogyny"; and lacking the courage to face this phenomenon within yourselves and the even more difficult challenge of actually struggling to overcome this failing in yourselves, you simply did what you always do: attempted to co-opt the value of a BW's intellectual labor, while neatly positioning yourselves, as always, as the eternal "victim."

You proclaim that black men hate black women while ignoring what is most evident; that being your hatred of black men.

Projection is a hell of a drug. I "proclaim" that you are here attacking me and other black women. The BW here are peacefully living our lives, communicating with each other and men who love us, completely detached from you and others like you, other than in our efforts to encourage those BW women who are still enmeshed in your dysfunctional "community" to leave it by pointing out the clear and present danger to their health and well-being that you present. Anyone who can read can see what is actually "most evident": I'M not on YOUR blog, repeatedly posting, begging for your attention in a futile effort to divert focus from BW and those who love BW onto (yet another) discursion on "de black man."

Interesting that you deleted the studies that didn't limit to teenagers. Why is that? Good old censorship I suppose.

Good old disinterest I suppose. No one here cares about your studies. Every sentient being in this country, especially BW, knows what the condition of the black "community" is, and how you and your ilk are contributing to its rapid demise. You can spend your time searching for studies that reassure you otheriwse all you want. In the meantime this community you claim to love so much is half-dead and dying more each day. Normal people would be fighting to save something they supposedly "loved"; but you would rather feel better about your own failures and inaction than actually DO something to rescue it. Oh, well.

Your inability to provide no evidence beyond your own flawed perceptions (or alleged perceptions) is quite telling and is a common trend in such hate blogs.

I have neither an obligation to, nor an interest in, providing evidence of anything to you. You're the one supposedly invested in your "community." I'm invested in getting as many BW as I possibly can out of it. My suggestion to you would be to put less time and energy into desperately scraping up random studies to make yourself feel better and put more time into keeping some of these DBRBM out of prison and from slaughtering each other in the street. You know, in between all those diaper changes.

And please tell me what makes you "the best of us" because I don't see it. It seems that your hostility is the result of you NOT being viewed among the best of us.

As repeatedly noted, you wouldn't be here if you didn't recognize what was already lost and what you are about to lose. No, I am certainly NOT the best of YOU. No one here is that, nor aspires to that. We are something else altogether.

Truth P. said...

"However, it is simultaneously sad and humerous that, just as you feed off of black women in every other way, you even have to feed off of the language we've crafted to communicate with each other. You can't even come up with your own words! LOL!"

"As I noted, you share the weakness common among DBRBM of needing to feed off of BW in every way, including in the very language you speak. Halima identifid and defined the phenomenon of "racio-misogyny"; and lacking the courage to face this phenomenon"

Yes at the above.You are right Aimee.They also stole Faith Black Women blow the trumpet writer and Khadija's intellectual property when they started telling black men to DIVEST and to boycott black women.These are not ideas that they came up with on their own.They did not have these ideas until they listened in on conversations held at Khadija's former site.

Khadija stated that the majority of black men were already AWOL and were not supportive of black women and said that black women needed to keep their funds out of the pockets of black men that are not for or about us such as Russel Simmons and many others.Black men are currently on the net telling other black men to boycott black women.

The only thing these a-holes don't seem to understand is that they had ALREADY started the so called boycott against us long ago.I also never looked at DIVESTING as a boycott.A boycott is something that can end but we should leave the so called black community/all black residential areas and not look back.So technically disassociating forever is NOT a boycott.

These men have been on the net making empty threats to black women about them leaving us.Many of them were ALREADY gone.We have absolutely nothing to lose.This is why it never fazed me.

I did however feel bad for one particular sister who was the one who made me aware that black men were saying these things through her blog that I lurk at.She is not aware that these silly sons of dbr deadbeat daddies only start saying this after they heard Khadija,Faith,and Rev.Lisa say these things or similar to them first.She is not aware that it is a game they are playing with her and other black women

I thought to share this information but it seems some of them still actually care about black men. I'm not one to argue with anybody.I'll let them figure it out on their own.

PioneerValleyWoman said...

Hi, Aimee, glad to see you. I haven't been blogging as much, I'm doing other things. Here is an interesting note, the WSJ had an article, an Interracial Fix for Black Women, a black male law professor arguing black women should be dating interracially....

But it really isn't about black women's needs, it is about black women dating out to spur black men "to do the right thing..." Ho hum:

Interracial Fix for Black Marriage
Black women could find more partners across the race line—and it might just spur more black couples to wed, WSJ 8/6/11...

Regards!

trish said...

"The only thing these a-holes don't seem to understand is that they had ALREADY started the so called boycott against us long ago." Correct! Also, people without resources cannot make viable threats.

"But it really isn't about black women's needs, it is about black women dating out to spur black men "to do the right thing..." Ho hum:"

It aggravates me that he thinks we need his permission to date out. If large numbers of black women begin dating out I believe black women will be gone for good.

Aimee said...

Truth P. said...

They also stole Faith Black Women blow the trumpet writer and Khadija's intellectual property when they started telling black men to DIVEST and to boycott black women.These are not ideas that they came up with on their own.They did not have these ideas until they listened in on conversations held at Khadija's former site.

If you ever see an idea being spouted by one of that ilk that seems even vaguely creative or potentially effective, keep digging until you find the black wom(en) who actually produced the seed from whence it evolved. One of the main factors that attracted me to the BWE blogsosphere was not only that they were black women who, like myself, were interested in dating/marrying IR, but that they held some of the most interesting, intellectually innovative (and funny!) conversations to be found on the WWW. Let's face--we are fascinating. And the best of us are survivors par excellence. That's why they can't stop following us around and watching what we do.

Khadija stated that the majority of black men were already AWOL and were not supportive of black women and said that black women needed to keep their funds out of the pockets of black men that are not for or about us such as Russel Simmons and many others.Black men are currently on the net telling other black men to boycott black women.

Boycott black women by withholding WHAT? When the black community of Montgomery, Alabama refused to patronize the city bus system, the two parties had a reciprocal relationship. Black people depended on the Montgomery Bus Line for transportation and the MBL depended on black Montgomery for patronage. There was an exchange. It was an unbalanced exchange, with black people giving more and MBL taking more, which is why the boycott was necessary; but the exchange did exist.

Today, black men depend on black women for support, but black women cannot depend on black men for much of anything. BM can no more conduct an effective "boycott" of BW than deer ticks can conduct an effective "boycott" of deer.

I also never looked at DIVESTING as a boycott.A boycott is something that can end but we should leave the so called black community/all black residential areas and not look back.So technically disassociating forever is NOT a boycott.

True. What BW must do is completely detach from the wreckage, not as an expression of protest or to get BM or the "community" to do anything in particular, but simply in the same way as one would detach a cancer from one's otherwise healthy body. Generations of BW have given their lives trying to hold together a construct that has been irretrivably broken by others, and it's past time for that energy to be more productively invested. I think Khadija's only point is that on our way out the door we have to be sure to keep every discretionary cent in our pockets that might unconsciously slip through our fingers from falling into any of these DBR hands, especially the hands of these so-called "entertainers."

Aimee said...

PioneerValleyWoman said...

Hi, Aimee, glad to see you. I haven't been blogging as much, I'm doing other things. Here is an interesting note, the WSJ had an article, an Interracial Fix for Black Women, a black male law professor arguing black women should be dating interracially....

But it really isn't about black women's needs, it is about black women dating out to spur black men "to do the right thing..." Ho hum:

Interracial Fix for Black Marriage
Black women could find more partners across the race line—and it might just spur more black couples to wed, WSJ 8/6/11...

Regards!


Hey PVW! As always, best to you and yours!

Why doesn't this surprise me? It reminds me of the sole justification that the legal community seems to have accepted for affirmative action: that diverse educational experiences are good for white students. How shocking then that a law professor thus thinks that BW and WM should be dating each other for the "good" of black marriage, i.e., the "good" of the black community, i.e., the "good" of black men (we all know that "black community" = "black men.")

It isn't his logic that I challenge--you quickly learn in law school that law professors rarely make errors in reasoning (ha ha--and you certainly better not question them unless you want a serious Socratic dressing-down). I am sure he is right: if more BW start dating and marrying out, I can guarantee you that more BM will be more willing to marry BW. A good % of BM take their psychological marching orders from WM. If WM in particular increasingly decide that BW are marriagaeble, than many BM will suddenly realize that--surprise!--BW are marriageable. So Prof. Banks and I agree and not for entirely different reasons though I am sure he wouldn't like how I phrased it.

What I question is why his reasoning would lead him to rest on such a conclusion in the first place--i.e., the relevant issue here is "black marriage." If BW start dating and marrying out in sufficient numbers to satisfy their need/desire for healthy, happy, loving relationships, what difference does it make whether some eventually end up with black men? Why is that even relevant? Perhaps he would argue that as a BM this is relevant to him; but I would argue that as a BM it should be relevant to him (1) why, as he noted, so many BM are in jail and (2) why, as he noted, so many BM who aren't in jail still aren't interested in marrying BW? Why did he talk to all these sad-sack BW holding out for their Black Kang, (trivializing their anxieties by focusing on how often they wash their hair, wearing scarves to bed--a concern that seems primarily to obsess their Kangs, who use it as a handy short-hand for rejecting women with "bad hair"--and being mistaken for the nanny) but not to any of his brothas about why they refused to marry their Black Queens? Isn't it interesting that NONE of these "Po' Po' Black Women Jus' Cant Find No Man" stories NEVER question BM about why they won't marry BW (even though they often slip in a line about how purportedly undesirable BW are to the general male public)?

Aimee said...

trish said...

It aggravates me that he thinks we need his permission to date out.

It genuinely amuses me at this point when this type seems to sincerely believe that they can either forbid us to do something, or grudgingly permit us to do it. The presumption is breathtaking.

If large numbers of black women begin dating out I believe black women will be gone for good.

Oh yeah. They are gone baby gone. Which is why his blather about "saving black marriage" is so delusional and out of touch with the priorities of the very BW he claims to be advocating for. I forget who coined the phrase "pain porn," but the fim "Waiting to Exhale" and just about everything else that Terry McMillan produces have always been shining exemplars of the concept in my mind.

But there is a line in the film where Whitney Houston's character notes "Once you get used to being treated well you can't go back to bullshit." This completely sums up the bottom line about why those sisters who date out are gone for good. Because once they experience how a man is supposed to conduct himself as a man; how he is supposed to treat a woman; how he is supposed to parent his children; how a relationship is supposed to work; how life is supposed to be lived--there's no going back. Because it would be just that: going backward. And no one with good sense and options ever voluntarily goes back to bullshit.

This isn't about non-BM being perfect or life outside the "community" being utopian. It's simply about how much easier and pleasant even normal life--with all of it's problems and flaws--is once BW manage to escape this poisonous cocoon. Even day to day struggles becoming easier to cope with. Yes--you can finally breathe. Something so simple, so basic, other women take it for granted.

Anonymous said...

It's interesting that another more prominent IR blogger is celebrating this WSJ article:

http://www.beyondblackwhite.com/wsj-black-man-admits-black-women-should-swirl/#comments

Anonymous said...

It's simply about how much easier and pleasant even normal life--with all of it's problems and flaws--is once BW manage to escape this poisonous cocoon. Even day to day struggles becoming easier to cope with. Yes--you can finally breathe.

And then boredom sets in. Struggles become easier once you kick a drug addiction. But before one kicks the addiction, that drug is all that they want and black women are addicted to drama.

sharonkay said...

Hello. I came across your blog by way of Evia's and Halimas blog. I really liked your article about "gold diggers". It seems that as Black women, we can never do anything right. You are right when you said that most black men have very little "gold" to dig. I personally know some whilte ladies that are married/living with black men who do not provide for them. Almost all of these ladies work full-time, sometimes 2 jobs just to make ends meet. I have personally seen black men walk their wives/girlfriends to the bus stop or drive them to work, while he sits at home doing nothing. The women in these relationships earn most of the income and pay most, if not all of the bills. This is true for Black and white women involved with black men. In most cultures, it is a disgrace for a man to be lazy and shiftless. I live in the Midwest and I have seen many blue-collar white guys who were unemployed start their own home improvement/handyman business, with a pick up truck and a few tools. Most white men that I know of aren't content just sitting around doing nothing for months/years at a time. I have also seen many black men who will run the streets and sponge off of their mothers and othe females for many, many years, and then wait till they are in their 40's to get serious about getting a real job and settling down. It is a disgrace and smart Black women should have nothing to do with such low class worthless men.

mary said...

I just wanted to say that this article is pretty insightful and somewhat disheartening. I grew up in the suburbs in a pretty sheltered life.Lately I've been mildly obsessed with reading bwe and bwir blogs and lot of these stereo types I've only encountered recently when i discovered sites MTO and Bossip (which i had to stop viewing) and even in sites like madamenoire. I was surprised about the level of hate a lot of the bm commenting had for bw, and the idea that a woman looking for a man's help in raising their child(ren) is looked upon as a form of scheme to get at a man's resources. I really wish men wouldn't throw around a term as hurtful as this as a way of avoiding to take responsibility for their children or a way of publicly shaming bw for something that they need to help provide for their offspring.

taylor-sara said...

All I can say is wow! Aimee.
Nobody ever sums it up all well as you do! The term "Magniloquent" really does not even do you justice. You're a fantastic orator whose insights are always spot on! You summed up the gold dig. principle in a neat little bow, as well as it's origin and objective....

And as for bm boycotting bw, I can't thnk of a greater gift they could give to us! This would unprecedently benefit multitudes of bw with more resources, more time, more money,and higher self esteem. These women could then use this time and energy to focus on men who could provide them with real relationships- instead of parisitical user-ships...