Is being possessive in a black mans 'nature'?

andreboba said:
It's still fucked up to generalize that if a BM pursues a relationship with a WW, it's because he has unresolved issues of self worth.

That's stupid.

That's about on par as saying WW who date BM have low self-esteem.

How are you big upping him that post, Mikey???
Click to expand...


Because to him it sounds like logic and when one has no experiences or personal interactions to go by then you rely on what sounds like rational thought even if it isn't. Easier to dismiss common sense and actual interactions of others that are presented as well.
 
andreboba said:
It's still fucked up to generalize that if a BM pursues a relationship with a WW, it's because he has unresolved issues of self worth.

That's stupid.

That's about on par as saying WW who date BM have low self-esteem.

How are you big upping him that post, Mikey???
Click to expand...

With all due respect, I didn't generalize. I didn't say all, I said some, many, and etc. and that has been my experience. I was offering her a possibility of why her man was behaving in that manner. And that's exactly how you get he likes of Michael Jackson . The truth is painful, but it's still the truth . Attack me if you will, but don't care about your sacred cows. I call them like I see them. To pretend otherwise is obtuse.
 
andreboba said:
It's still fucked up to generalize that if a BM pursues a relationship with a WW, it's because he has unresolved issues of self worth.

That's stupid.

That's about on par as saying WW who date BM have low self-esteem.

How are you big upping him that post, Mikey???
Click to expand...
Well, I don't think he was making a generalization. I think he was explaining that there was a underlying concern which just unfortunately happens to be there. That's not something that any of us want, but it's just there. And think about it beyond the scope of this site. If two BM make it clear that they're gay and like each other, they'll obviously face prejudice (from nearly everyone) because it's that kind of relationship. If a BM dates interracially, they'll face predjudice (according to Salmon) because of societal norms created hundreds of years ago and because of some divisions that linger between people today. It's almost like there's not a lot of difference between gay relationships and interracial relationships. Both were forbidden in the past, and people had to fight to make it legal.

Eye of Ra said:
Because to him it sounds like logic and when one has no experiences or personal interactions to go by then you rely on what sounds like rational thought even if it isn't. Easier to dismiss common sense and actual interactions of others that are presented as well.
Click to expand...
Right, I don't. I haven't been in a relationship with a woman yet. However, I have plenty of friendships with women, mainly White and Asian. So, explain to me how what Salmon's saying isn't "rational thought"?

Salmon23 said:
With all due respect, I didn't generalize. I didn't say all, I said some, many, and etc. and that has been my experience. I was offering her a possibility of why her man was behaving in that manner. And that's exactly how you get he likes of Michael Jackson . The truth is painful, but it's still the truth . Attack me if you will, but don't care about your sacred cows. I call them like I see them. To pretend otherwise is obtuse.
Click to expand...
I don't know too much about Michael Jackson, but I'd like to know what preempted him to change his skin and his hair around? Those things probably took place before I was born, so if possible could you elaborate?
 
Mikey said:
Right, I don't. I haven't been in a relationship with a woman yet. However, I have plenty of friendships with women, mainly White and Asian. So, explain to me how what Salmon's saying isn't "rational thought"?
Click to expand...


You have a bad habit of co-signing anything you perceive as "rational thought" even at times ignorant bullshit from known trolls. Nuff Said.
 
Eye of Ra said:
You have a bad habit of co-signing anything you perceive as "rational thought" even at times ignorant bullshit from known trolls. Nuff Said.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't think I agreed with Alexis89 in this thread.

Would you say she's a troll, immature, or a combination of both?

And Salmon said he travels all over the world (perhaps for his career), so he probably has more real-world experience than all of us.
 
Mikey said:
Well, I don't think I agreed with Alexis89 in this thread.

Would you say she's a troll, immature, or a combination of both?

And Salmon said he travels all over the world (perhaps for his career), so he probably has more real-world experience than all of us.
Click to expand...

Mistake no 1: Just because you have not traveled over the world, you assume nobody else here haven't???? We have an extremely large group of people on here that have extensive experience in traveling all over the world. And you should know that by now. Also, sometimes OPer are not honest about their experience as well so you cant take posters for their word at times.

You really do have a tendency to co sign brand new suspect posts if they can express themselves well. You often seem to think new suspect posters have something that nobody in the already established group dont have. I can think of so many new posters you have endorsed that turned out to be deeply disturbed people or trolls. You could really do yourself a favor to not fall for everything that is well written and have references. Not all references are legit and the ref source should always be considered

Its like if they make it sound like it makes sense, you buy it. Critical thinking is always pertinent, regardless on how well something is written - there is a lot of well written garbage out there.

While we are at it - look up the word "psychosis" and then apply that to the post you cosign.
 
Last edited:
FG said:
Mistake no 1: Just because you have not traveled over the world, you assume nobody else here haven't???? We have an extremely large group of people on here that have extensive experience in traveling all over the world. And you should know that by now. Also, sometimes OPer are not honest about their experience as well so you cant take posters for their word at times.

You really do have a tendency to co sign brand new suspect posts if they can express themselves well. You often seem to think new suspect posters have something that nobody in the already established group dont have. I can think of so many new posters you have endorsed that turned out to be deeply disturbed people or trolls. You could really do yourself a favor to not fall for everything that is well written and have references. Not all references are legit and the ref course should always be considered

Its like if they make it sound like it makes sense, you buy it. Critical thinking is always pertinent, regardless on how well something is written - there is a lot of well written garbage out there.

While we are at it - look up the word "psychosis" and then apply that to the post you cosign.
Click to expand...




THIS. TIMES INFINITY.
 
Mikey said:
Well, I don't think he was making a generalization. I think he was explaining that there was a underlying concern which just unfortunately happens to be there. That's not something that any of us want, but it's just there. And think about it beyond the scope of this site. If two BM make it clear that they're gay and like each other, they'll obviously face prejudice (from nearly everyone) because it's that kind of relationship. If a BM dates interracially, they'll face predjudice (according to Salmon) because of societal norms created hundreds of years ago and because of some divisions that linger between people today. It's almost like there's not a lot of difference between gay relationships and interracial relationships. Both were forbidden in the past, and people had to fight to make it legal.


Right, I don't. I haven't been in a relationship with a woman yet. However, I have plenty of friendships with women, mainly White and Asian. So, explain to me how what Salmon's saying isn't "rational thought"?


I don't know too much about Michael Jackson, but I'd like to know what preempted him to change his skin and his hair around? Those things probably took place before I was born, so if possible could you elaborate?
Click to expand...


Mikey,


Sorry for all the grief you're catching, because you agreed with what some have taken as a controversial post. If you can't debate without ad hominem attacks, there's a lack of emotional maturity on the board. I didn't mean to offend anyone, just stating what is true for me in my experience.
 
FG said:
Mistake no 1: Just because you have not traveled over the world, you assume nobody else here haven't???? We have an extremely large group of people on here that have extensive experience in traveling all over the world. And you should know that by now. Also, sometimes OPer are not honest about their experience as well so you cant take posters for their word at times.

You really do have a tendency to co sign brand new suspect posts if they can express themselves well. You often seem to think new suspect posters have something that nobody in the already established group dont have. I can think of so many new posters you have endorsed that turned out to be deeply disturbed people or trolls. You could really do yourself a favor to not fall for everything that is well written and have references. Not all references are legit and the ref source should always be considered

Its like if they make it sound like it makes sense, you buy it. Critical thinking is always pertinent, regardless on how well something is written - there is a lot of well written garbage out there.

While we are at it - look up the word "psychosis" and then apply that to the post you cosign.
Click to expand...

Psychosis is very broad and general and fits the context of my narrative. Full stop:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis
 
Salmon23 said:
Mikey,


Sorry for all the grief you're catching, because you agreed with what some have taken as a controversial post. If you can't debate without ad hominem attacks, there's a lack of emotional maturity on the board. I didn't mean to offend anyone, just stating what is true for me in my experience.
Click to expand...




Pssst. It would probably help your case in not looking so suspect if this were not the only thread that you seem to have taken any interest in. That would be the intellectually mature thing for you to do if you have any legitimate interest in actually debating issues and topics. Food for thought.
 
Eye of Ra said:
Pssst. It would probably help your case in not looking so suspect if this were not the only thread that you seem to have taken any interest in. That would be the intellectually mature thing for you to do if you have any legitimate interest in actually debating issues and topics. Food for thought.
Click to expand...

Just like someone else we know. :???:
 
JordanC said:
Just like someone else we know. :???:
Click to expand...


Doesn't help either when anyone challenges their opinions (especially if the opinions are coming across in a negative way to multiple people) they immediately go into "obviously these people are intellectually/emotionally/socially lacking in some regard" mode to justify said opinion. :-?
 
george-bush-gif.gif
 
Salmon23 said:
Mikey,


Sorry for all the grief you're catching, because you agreed with what some have taken as a controversial post. If you can't debate without ad hominem attacks, there's a lack of emotional maturity on the board. I didn't mean to offend anyone, just stating what is true for me in my experience.
Click to expand...
Ok. Ra is right about the other guys, because I did it for the sake of doing it. You're very different from them, so in this particular case it makes far more sense. We shouldn't be vilified on here for discussing realities that we have to confront with. It doesn't make us trolls or suspects for doing so. I checked your other posts out and I guess you're on a business trip so maybe it makes sense that you can't post everywhere on the forum often in a day, so don't worry too much about the discrediting that you get on here, the users tend to be pretty defensive, and maybe that's just human nature. I can tell that you reflect a sense of intellect and rationale within your posts. Nobody/no one person can please everyone on this forum, so my posts are a reflection of that.

Today, our class had research paper presentations to serve as a final exam for African-American Studies, which just ended today for the semester. One of the presenters wrote a paper on how Hollywood/the movie industry deliberately creates externalities with relationships between black men and non-black women. Hollywood "uplifts" them, while "injuring" black women in the same movie. Here is the site where the presenter obtained some of her citations from the research she carried out. Now, we're gonna cut the PC-ness and just say things the way they should be expressed.

This is the site:
http://sistahwise.wordpress.com/

"Please read my posts dated April 22 – April 30. They contain examples of Black male movie characters smiling at white females, Latinas, etc., and Black males verbally and/or physically assaulting Black females in the same film."
Click to expand...

When I viewed the site on my laptop from her research, I was shocked that this was even prevalent in movie industries within America. I don't watch movies often so that's why I felt like I didn't know and it was such a shock to me to find that she picked up 30 or 40 movies which create a rift between black women and black men with a non-black partner in the movie(s) as well. I actually have a slightly different perception of this site and its users now (and no that doesn't make me a troll).

I believe this probably occurs because our country was founded on principles of competitiveness and war with another group over land, resources, etc. Ie - we ran the Native Americans and the Mexicans off their land in order to expand westward, because the United States felt "entitled" to expand after they defeated England and the country gained independence in 1776. So, in these types of movies you see the same kind of concept, just with racial groups instead. The movie industry designs the movies in a way as if a war against BW is waged when BM are with a non-black partner within the movies and it's a shame.

Here's an examples of two movies she cites on her website.
Wild Hogs

A white woman holds the arm of Black man as she sways to music at a festival. The Black man appears to SMILE at her.

Another Black man sits next to a white woman on a picnic bench and he SMILES at her and they HUG.

Contrast: (Foreground) A Black woman SCOLDS her Black husband in public and she tells him to get his “ass” in the car.

The Brothers

A Black man takes a white female karate instructor on a lunch date to a restaurant. They converse, laugh and he SMILES at her.

Contrast: The same white woman flips a Black woman in the restaurant causing her to violently crash into a table.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom