Why did one of Johnson's wives throw herself down a well? Or, is that not a fact and just a movie script. Somehow, she must have felt betrayed. Johnson had an ego.......to feed....got caught up in trying to live up to his reputation. It is quite a story however. What did his other wives do? The wife who threw herself down the well must have known something that the other wives did not! I would have never married that guy. His ego was too dominant to really care about another human being. What do you think?

By Roberto (205.188.199.162) on Monday, May 21, 2001 - 09:39 pm:

Kansascity:

I was surprised when I heard your article mentioned on the Micheal Savage's national radio talk show tonight on the way home from class. What this author Dr. David Yeagley (American Indian) was also saying is that the white man in this country is losing this country to illegal immigration in waves after waves and that the people at the lower end of the economic scale (including American Indians) will pay a price as result of it. He was also making the point about "common grounds" between whites and indians in past struggles. Kanasacity, perhaps some cannot see where you were coming from, but it seems the nation as a whole is awakening to the huge wave of change that is coming. You are tied into the national dialogue. What is your source to get this information first hand? ~ Roberto

By Roberto (64.12.105.178) on Sunday, May 20, 2001 - 07:29 pm:

This is the first of three excerpts that will lead up to what I meant in the title of this post. Some of it is dated, but its still applicable to this day.

Excerpt (1) from "The Sexual Life Between Blacks and Whites, Chapter 1, "The Hidden Fear", by Beth Day,World publishing, 1972.

Part One

"Whenever an American black male attempts publicly to assert his manhood by such traditionally masculine behavior as acting aggressively or competitively toward other males (white males), or fighting for what he believes are his rights, white society is apt to react with a psychopathic display of fear and rage that spills over into such apparaently unrelated areas as education, housing, employment, voting rights, and welfare. Black males are allowed to participate in American society and to reap some of the rewards provided that they fall into one of three categories that are comfortable for the white male's view of himself:

1. THE BRIGHT CHILD. This includes all blacks under the age of eight, most actors, comedians, and musicians. the black male may remain a BRIGHT CHILD until any chronological age provided that he does not threaten the status quo. An example of the bright child was the Late Louis Armstrong.

2. THE BLACK EGGHEAD. These are the seemingly sexless, totally cerebral, nonthreatening black scholars, educators, judges, and some ministers (not Adam Clayton Powell), men whose public appearence and behavior are godlike and dignified, such as Ralphe Bunche or Thurgood Marshall.

3. THE BLACK JOCKS. The "all brawn and no brains" athletes. It is acceptable, apparently, for a black male to be an animal provided that he is all animal. One of the best comments on this arbitrary dichotomy is recorded in Jim Toback's book "Jim", on black athlete-cum-actor-cum-businessman Jim Brown, when Brown told Toback, "I'm suppose to be an animal ... a big bad evil spook who can't think and talk. I'm suppose to rely on my size and strength...That's bullshit....All real victories are psychological.

Probably no single single man ever enraged so many people as prizefighter Jack Johnson, who persisted in defeating white challengers and marrying white women (he had four white wives). Laws were created to stop him; a white champion, Jess Willard, was enticed out of retirement to fight (and hopefully kill) him. Johnson was exiled, chased with writs and subpoenas. He was dragged into court on the Mann Act (for traveling across a state line with a known prostitute). He was called a brute for sleeping with a white woman, who announced publicty that he was the best lover she ever had. That the venom against Johnson obtains to this day was attested when white actress Jane Alexander, who starred with James Earl Jones in the Howard Sackler play about Johnson (The Great White Hope), was showered with hate mail and obscenties when the play opened.

On a lesser, but nonetheless indicative level, we find the recent federal harassment of Muhammad Ali (Cassuis Clay) over his religious convictions, which the Supreme Court chose first of all to deny could be sincere, although they later reverse themselves; and FBI director J Edgar Hoover's use of Martin Luther King's extramarital activities as a lever to silence his criticism of the FBI". ~ Roberto

By Roberto (205.188.195.31) on Saturday, May 19, 2001 - 11:56 am:

Hector:

You are a tough mental warrior. Do not let different opposing views no matter what it is cause you to run for cover. Stay. ~ Roberto

By Hectorvelasquez (63.175.46.186) on Saturday, May 19, 2001 - 11:05 am:

The preceding profoudly vulgar text is why I don't really post here anymore. I would probably do best not to look in here as well.

I suppose Noam Chomsky is correct, if Hitler had succeded in conquering Europe young Germans would be running around playing Aryans and Jews right now, just like young American children run around playing cowboys and "Indians."

By Kansascity (209.242.125.177) on Saturday, May 19, 2001 - 10:12 am:

Speaking Of Warriors:

It’s A Warrior Thing. You Wouldn’t Understand.

FrontPageMagazine.com | March 7, 2001

WE INDIANS are supposed to hate the white man. Everyone tells me this. I’ve heard it from whites, blacks and even from Indians.

Well, folks, I hate to disappoint you, but I like white people just fine. To tell the truth, I rather admire them and their fascinating history.


Oh, I know what you’re thinking. "Yeagley! How can you say that? How can you admire a people who slaughtered your ancestors, gave smallpox to those left alive, herded them onto reservations, made them all drunks, and – as the final indignity – sold their turquoise mines to the Japanese?"

Well, the way I figure it, anyone who could whip our Indian behinds like the white man did deserves our highest respect. And anyone who can whip a Comanche (my tribe) deserves the Medal of Honor.

I admire a man who can beat me. I dare say, deep inside all Indians – at least those who are still warriors at heart – there is a special admiration for the white man.

When the Comanches first encountered the white man, his behavior didn’t shock them. They saw that he took what he wanted by force. And they understood. Because the Comanches did the same to their weaker neighbors.

If my ancestors had been strong enough, they would have taken the white man’s land, instead of the other way around. And they wouldn’t have felt guilty about it afterwards. You wouldn’t have seen any defeated white people getting affirmative action from Comanches.

When one general surrenders to another, they salute each other. It doesn’t mean that there’s no bitterness between them. It just means that a warrior respects his foe.

White people understand this, because they too come from a warrior culture. The white man has great respect for the Indian. I’m not saying he always treats us the way we want to be treated. But he respects us for putting up a good fight.

Have you ever noticed how cowboy-and-Indian movies always focus on the same tribes? It’s either the Sioux, the Apaches or the Comanches. White people remember those tribes, because they fought hard and were the last to surrender.

Why does the U.S. military have helicopters named "Apache" and "Comanche" – but none that are named "Arikara" or "Ojibwa?" They name their weapons systems after the fiercest tribes, because they want some of that fierceness to rub off.

Back in the 1930s, the warrior spirit was still strong in Indians and white men alike. At that time, the Oceti Sakowin Hunkpapa Sioux elders of Standing Rock honored the University of North Dakota by giving them permission to use the name "Fighting Sioux" for their sports teams.

At that time, many old people, both whites and Indians, still remembered the last wars. Wounded Knee was more recent for them than World War II is for us.

Yet they saluted each other, warrior to warrior. Because one fighting people understands another.

Today, the leftists tell us that the "Fighting Sioux" name is an insult to Indians, and we must demand that the university change it. I guess that goes for the Apache and Comanche helicopters too.

I’ve written other columns on this issue. Everyone knows where I stand. I’m with the Sioux elders, who believe that a warrior can respect and honor his foe.

Some people get it. Some don’t.

Keith Rushing doesn’t. He’s a black man from Hampton, VA, who wrote to me February 22, in response to my February 13 column, "Don’t Walk the Black Man’s Path."

Mr. Rushing was "shocked" by my attitude.

"I’m sure you realize that the reference to the ‘Fighting Sioux’ is akin to calling Native Americans wild Indians," he lectured me. "I'm a black man but I've never quite understood why white-owned athletic teams have this fantasy about fierce Indian warriors when they unfortunately decimated so many Indian people. There's some sick irony involved there."

In Mr. Rushing’s view, the "fierce Indian warrior" is nothing but a white "fantasy." We were not warriors, he implies, but poor, defenseless victims who were "decimated" without putting up a fight.

Mr. Rushing seems to feel that there is more honor in being pathetic. Perhaps he feels we should think of ourselves as alcoholic, diabetic, suicidal and unemployed.

No thank you.

The white man may have taken my land. But he took it like a warrior, fair and square. Yes, he treated my people harshly. But he never denied their bravery, never besmirched their memory as warriors.

But you did, Mr. Rushing. You did.




Dr. David A. Yeagley teaches humanities and psychology at Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma City. His opinions are independent. He holds degrees from Yale, Emory, Oberlin, University of Arizona and University of Hartford. He is a member of the Comanche Tribe, Lawton, OK. For more information on Dr. Yeagley's initiative to teach patriotism in the schools, click here. E-mail him at badeagle2000@yahoo.com.


View Comments | Make Comments | Email this Article
David A. Yeagley Archive





Horowitz's Notepad | Poe's Notepad | Reality Bites | Shop Online | Encounter Books | CSPC Bookstore

Home | Contact Us | Advertise With Us | Archives | Privacy Policy | Top of Page





Advertise your banner here


Copyright © 2001 FrontPageMagazine.com

By Roberto (205.188.198.152) on Saturday, May 19, 2001 - 12:20 am:

Gentlemen, you both make very good points. It's amazing through this medium by planting a seed of thought what germinates in return. I will get back to each of you. I want to carry this discussion a little further. I have to take my wife out on the town tonight. You both will have to excuse me. The boss (my wife) have a little more pull gentlemen. ~ Roberto

By Modulis (216.249.87.138) on Friday, May 18, 2001 - 01:17 pm:

Roberto,

acceptance of black men in sports, music and entertainment does not amount to acceptance in general life. I think your view is a bit too rosy, though maybe you think mine is too dismal. But you said white males worry because so many white women are attracted to black men. But that's just not true. I remember reading a pool from white women at some college in Oregon where it was asked if they would ever be willing to marry or date a black man I think it was 16% or so. I could be a bit off. Another recent poll showed that 2 out of 3 whites would disapprove of a close relative marrying a black.

The overwhelming majority of WW have no interest in BM at all as relationship material. I think there are some that find this taboo element to be exciting and think black men all have 9 inchers or some shit, and thus have some interest, but to me, that isn't interest, it's just fetish. The rubber meets the road when these women hold out their hand as a BM slips that engagement ring on.

By Frankie (128.164.161.247) on Friday, May 18, 2001 - 11:40 am:

I think you might be overstating the case a bit. While black celebrities have more prominence than they did 30-40 years ago, I don’t think white men view them as a challenge. For one thing, for all of the black man-white woman pairings in celebrity circles, such couples still have to be careful of media coverage. We know that guys like Charles Barkley, Taye Diggs, and James Earl Jones are married to white women, but does anyone know what they look like? No, because it’s still makes many people uncomfortable to see such couples in public. For many people, the OJ trial was their first glimpse into the interracial world of celebrity LA. But celebrities (black or white) have always had their pick of women. Babe Ruth’s womanizing was legendary.

It’s when the ordinary black guy on the subway can get a white girl that he might be a bit concerned. And because average black guys still face some forms of discrimination, such as the glass ceiling, that will cause white women to wonder if an IR relationship is worth it. As a young woman, not ready to settle down, a white woman might be drawn to an IR relationship for the perceived excitement it offers. One thing which we as men forget is that women can be very fickle. They are able to select men based on what they are looking for at the moment. They can select one man for financial security, one man for friendship, another for sex. But as they age, and their ability to attract men diminishes, they become more practical, and will settle down for a man who can provide security, even if he isn’t the most amazing sex partner. Until black men enjoy equality in the labor/job market, white men will not feel too threatened.

By Roberto (152.163.205.56) on Friday, May 18, 2001 - 10:46 am:

MEN ONLY PREFERRED TO RESPOND

Copying as the old saying goes is the greatest form of flattery. White men have been trying to stay with the black male in style, dress, sexual performance, singing, dancing, sports and I can go on and on. From trying to sound like Barry White to outperforming Micheal Jordan, white males have saw that white women are attracted to black males, because they exhibit those attributes and qualities that turn on their women on.

Look at the proliferation of white males in these singing groups who look, act, and talk like black males. Years ago when Jackie Wilson was the rage whites had to find a comparable white male to stay with the black male, he was Elvis Presley. When the white male symbol was threaten in boxing by Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali, they had to find comparable white fighters (Jack Johnson would have no imitators they said).

I invite you silent white brothers out there to chime in on this, and I know you are out there. Do you feel a need to put such pressures on yourself to compete with the black man in many ways, because of your fear of him "taking your women"? This is hardly mentioned among the "silent black men", because they know the truth without speaking it.

In the whole history of this country, white women have been turned on to black men secretly and not so secretly, because we give a little more spice to mix. We can give more, despite all the things that has been thrown at us, like the terminator we keep coming. Is this why you fear us? ~ Roberto