BF Marie Antoinettes & Special Snowflakes = Sista Soldiers & Mammy Mules

This is a follow-up to the post, For All Practical Purposes, Most Self-Proclaimed Good Black Men™ = Pookie And Ray-Ray. Consider it a 201-level course in BWE.

One of the introductory, basic concepts of BWE is for African-American (AA) women to clearly identify the primary categories of people who are doing great harm to AA women and girls. And to do so without mincing words. Let’s review the 101-level basics:

Damaged Beyond Repair Black Males (DBRBM) do great harm to AA women and girls. They’re the ones who beat, rape, molest, and/or kill BW and girls. They’re the ones who create and support the “Radio Rwanda”hip-hop/(c)rap that celebrates violence against BW and girls. They’re the ones who support calling BW b*tches and h*es. Even though the common image of DBRBM is Black underclass “Pookie” and “Ray-Ray,” there are plenty of DBRBM doctors, lawyers, judges and so on. DBRBM create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

Active DBRBM kill BW and Black girls. Passive DBRBM get BW and Black girls killed.

The vast majority of self-proclaimed Good Black Men™do great harm to AA women and girls. Because Good Black Men™ consistently refuse to accept any responsibility whatsoever for protecting and providing for AA women’s and children’s physical safety. This is why many AA neighborhoods are totally lawless, free-fire zones. Good Black Men™ also refuse to protect Black women and girls from being publicly denigrated by DBRBM (c)rappers or nonblack racists (see Don Imus incident). Good Black Men™ are accomplices who aid and abet DBRBM. Good Black Men™ create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

Good Black Men™ get BW and Black girls killed.

BW who are Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules get other BW and Black girls killed. Because they aid and abet DBRBM. Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules act as guard dogs who protect and enable DBRBM. Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules will gladly sacrifice any and every BW or Black girl if doing so serves to protect a single DBRBM. These were the BW who are busy making excuses for R. Kelly the serial pedophile and Chris Brown the violent, woman-beating brute. BF Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

BF Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules get BW and Black girls killed.

Well, there’s another category of BW who engage in behavior that creates an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible: the BF “Marie Antoinettes” and “Special Snowflakes.”

BF Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes get BW and Black girls killed.

Much like the historical Marie Antoinette, modern-day BF Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes don’t pay any attention to the prevailing conditions that surround them. They don’t pay attention because Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes are too invested in believing that anything that affects other BW can’t possibly affect them. Because these women think they’re above it all. Even while the number of physical fatalities and spirit-murders suffered by other AA women and girls keeps increasing.

BF Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes get BW and Black girls killed.

MA/SS go so far as to pretend that matters which clearly impact BW don’t exist. The same way the Sista Soldiers and the Mammy Mules are never able to see or perceive any DBRBM-committed violence against BW is the way the Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes never see or perceive anti-BW racism. Whether that anti-BW racism is coming from BM or from nonblacks.

BF Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes get BW and Black girls killed.

Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes take great pleasure in announcing that had no idea that BW are under physical, verbal, emotional, spiritual attack from DBRBM. They had no idea that many other BW have been brainwashed into being BW-sacrificing guard dogs for DBRBM.

The Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes make the point that they had no idea that any of this was going on until they read about these matters on various pioneering BWE blogs. You know, because they’re so above ever having those sorts of concerns. Which is why these women are often annoyed when other BW mention or do any consciousness-raising about these matters. Because, you know, hearing about such things puts a crimp in the Marie Antoinettes’/Special Snowflakes’ day. By trying to shut down any mention of these matters, these women help create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

BF Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes get BW and Black girls killed.

Many Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes think that as long as they have a nonblack boyfriend, then that one fact—by itself—means that they’re empowered. Meanwhile, just like the Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules, these women are spending their money to support BM (and others) who HATE them. day. By doing so, these women help create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

These Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes are also spending their money to support people who NEVER give them reciprocal support. Just like the Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules, these Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes financially support anti-BW movie mess from anybody who either p*sses on BW (Tyler Perry, Steve Harvey) or erases BW from their own history (Red Tails) or pimps BW consumers for their money while lifting up nonblack women (Michael Ealy, Jamie Foxx—who has been in the closet about his non-BW-only dating policy, etc., etc.). By doing so, these women help create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes have no idea that anti-BW racism exists among certain segments of the nonblack population. Even when racist insults are overt and “in their faces.” Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes have no idea that paying a WM movie director to be verbally assaulted almost non-stop with the n-word is a problem. By taking this position, these women help create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible .

They take this position because apparently, many of the Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes have become so-called desensitized to the n-word.* The same way the Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules became “desensitized” to being referred to as b*tches and h*es. By doing so, over time the Sista Soldiers and Mammy Mules helped create an atmosphere that gets BW and Black girls killed.

Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes have no idea that a WW tennis player making Venus Hottentot-style public mockery of Serena Williams’ body is a problem.** By taking this position, these women help create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes have no idea that somebody crafting a Hoodrat Barbie-type doll is a problem. By taking this position, these women help create an “anything goes” atmosphere in which any and all attacks on BW are permissible.

BF Marie Antoinettes and Special Snowflakes get BW and Black girls killed.

Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes don’t notice the “small” acts of anti-BW aggression as they accumulate. The historical Marie Antoinette didn’t take heed of the public hatred being whipped up against her and her family until it was too late for her to escape a violent death. Similarly, the modern BF Marie Antoinettes don’t notice any anti-BW aggression or problems until they’re at the point of (figuratively) having their heads chopped off.

Comedian Sunda Croonquist apparently didn’t recognize there was a problem with her racist in-laws. She didn’t understand that her White husband’s failure—for years—to police his racist relatives, and protect her from their racist behavior was a problem. Her husband basically did what most Good Black Men™ do when BW are under attack: nothing. She seemingly didn’t recognize this as a problem until after these racist in-laws sued her.

Glenda Moore (and her White husband) apparently didn’t recognize there was a problem with moving into a neighborhood filled with a high percentage of racists. She didn’t recognize this as a problem that could affect her—and her small, half-Black sons—until after these same racist neighborsignored her cries for help during Hurricane Sandy. Her sons drowned.

Many of the Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes have often learned how to parrot the terminology of BWE (“vetting” and “reciprocity”).But they have no clue as to what these concepts look like in practice. They don’t understand that the point is for more AA women to cultivate a mutually supportive network of people who actually give reciprocity. The Marie Antoinettes/Special Snowflakes think that having an nonblack boyfriend or husband automatically means that they’re empowered. They don’t understand that being closely affiliated with nonblacks who do nothing when these BW come under attack is the same as having an equally useless Good Black Man™ around. Either way, that unsupported and unprotected BW is in a lot of danger.

---------------------------------

*What’s fascinating (in a car-wreck sort of way) is how the Marie Antoinettes’ kneejerk reflex of responding to anti-BW aggression by saying “What’s the big deal? It’s only a song/movie/fill-in-the-blank.”is an EXACT replay of what most AAs did when that self-denigrating hip-hop/(c)rap garbage started up decades ago. Slaves used those same specious arguments to “justify” why they spent their money to subsidize being dehumanized in public:

“What’s the big deal? It’s only a _________.”

“It’s not what you call me, it’s what I answer to.” [In response to those who objected to BW being called b*tches and h*es.]

And so on. Well, AAs have been collectively reaping the rotten fruit of making/accepting these “What’s the big deal?” responses. Unopposed aggression ALWAYS escalates. Just look at the rotten fruit that AA women have been reaping after becoming “desensitized” the the use of b*tch and h*e in reference to BW. Those of us with common sense can see the rotten fruit that’s coming every Black person’s way due to so many slaves choosing to become so-called “desensitized” to the public use of the n-word. And now the slaves have essentially given nonblack outsiders permission to publicly denigrate Black people with the public use of the n-word???!!!

[I call them slaves because such persons are slaves. A slave has no dignity---therefore, a slave can't be insulted or take offense at anything. Anything and everything is permissible when it pertains to slaves. Because—to paraphrase the ruling in the Dred Scott case—AA slaves have NO boundaries that anybody is required to respect. And the modern-day slaves are okay with that state of affairs. Except when they're busy being "perpetually surprised" (as Evia calls it) by the utterly predictable consequences of their choice to support their own dehumanization.]

**Bonus BWE Level 301 Discussion: A friend and I had a long conversation about that incident with Serena Williams. We both agreed that it wouldn't have served Serena's interests to get off into some open conflict with that White heifer. As was discussed during this post, when a woman has to fight her own battles, she’s usually already lost. For women, it’s much more effective to have men fight for them. A lot of WW know these dynamics. Because of the protection they receive from WM, WW generally have a free hand to engage in overt racist aggression against BW. Meanwhile, BW's responses to racist aggression from WW usually have to be muted. That is, until more BW have Wendy Deng-level marriages and alliances with influential WM who will put a stop to that mess (as pertains to their wives and daughters).

Asian women don’t have to face these sorts of problems. Not with the frequency that BW are confronted with. Because there are enough Asian women married and otherwise connected to WM who will police other (White) folks’ behavior regarding publicly denigrating Asian women.

All of which makes one wonder about the sort of support network (or lack of such) that Serena Williams has been building. At this point in her career, why hasn’t she developed sufficient contacts and affiliations with some of the influential WM in her profession that at least one of them was close enough to her to speak out on her behalf? Apparently, she’s as unprotected and as Sunda Croonquist. Which is unfortunate. And dangerousfor the BW involved.

It’s not enough to get out around nonblacks. You have to cultivate reciprocal, mutually supportive relationships with some of the nonblacks around you. So that when something like the Serena Williams incident goes down, at least one nonblack ally is speaking out on your behalf. Best of all is to have the type of connections with influential nonblacks to ensure that nobody even feels safe “going there” with you in the first place. Because they know your nonblack allies will retaliate.

“And The Band Played On,” 21st Century Edition—The Triumph of Sexual Liberation Ideology Over Common Sense & Sometimes Over Life Itself

Former blog readers often send me links to various online discussions going on among African-American women. That’s how I became aware of the controversy surrounding the ideas expressed in this blog post. I don’t see anything that warrants genuine controversy. After all, the normalization of casual sex and promiscuity among African-Americans has created an absolute disaster for the (AA) collective over the past 50 years. I won’t bother to repeat the obvious connection between casual sex, out-of-wedlock childbearing (oow), fatherlessness and the deadly violence that currently exists in the dead AA “community.” Anybody who refuses to see the connections between all of this is choosing to remain deaf, dumb and blind. Which is their free and voluntary choice. God respects free will, and so do I.

Casual sex generally does not work to women’s benefit or long-term interests. Casual sex also generally does not work to the benefit of children who are born as the result of casual sex. The exceptions don’t nullify the rule. As I read various pro-casual sex comments, I had the nagging feeling that I've heard this catastrophic level of foolishness before. But I couldn't immediately remember the context.

And then I remembered where I had heard of such controversies before: this type of Ideology Over Common Sense played a large role in the mass AIDS die-off of American gay men in the 1980s and early 1990s. That's the context in which I had heard of Sexual Liberation Ideology Over Common Sense controversies before. I remembered reading interviews in papers like the Village Voice with the handful of sensible gay male activists who were imploring their fellow gay men to reduce their promiscuity and change some of their sexual practices in order to save their own lives. And these sensible White gay male activists were often viciously condemned by other White gay men as a result.

The ruined AA collective is one of two recent examples of what happens when a group of people disconnect sex from binding commitments to each other. The other example that most folks have forgotten about was the mass die-off of American gay men during the AIDS plague years of the 1980s and early 1990s.

The same way that many new-school AAs refuse to see the connection between casual sex, oow, and the death and destruction in AA areas is the same way many gay men from that era refused to see the connection between their promiscuity and their own deaths from AIDS. Even as their friends and lovers were dropping like flies all around them.

Much of this history (among other things) was discussed in the excellent book And The Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic by Randy Shilts (a gay WM reporter who later on died from complications of AIDS). The book doesn’t emphasize this point, but there were a lot of unnecessary gay male deaths caused by gay male activists who put Sexual Liberation Ideology Over Common Sense.

This (conservative) article gives a concise summary of what happened. Ignore the right-wing talk about Reagan in the article. My point is that the incidents mentioned in the article---instances in which gay male activists put ideology over gay men’s lives---happened. And people paid the ultimate price for that ideology. People paid with their lives. I’m going to repeat a few incidents mentioned by the right-wing article, and give links to the pages in the Randy Shilts book that document these incidents.

The National Gay Task Force and the Lambda Legal Defense Fund threatened to sue Abbott Laboratories to stop them from making the first HIV-screening test available. [And The Band Played On, pg. 521.]

Gay male activists denied the connection between promiscuity and AIDS/HIV infection among the first waves of infected persons:

“Nathan Fain, who wrote in the Advocate in 1984 that“there is no proof that even one of the 3,775 cases of AIDS tallied by the Centers for Disease Control had involved sexual transmission,” rebutted his own argument by appearing on the AIDS Quilt a few years later. [And The Band Played On, pg. 443]

Charles Jurrist’s “In Defense of Promiscuity” in the New York Native posited that sex transmitting the deadly disease was pure conjecture, “that’s all it is—a theory. It is far from scientifically demonstrated. It therefore seems a little premature to be calling for an end to sexual freedom in the name of physical health.” [And The Band Played On, pg. 210] The “theory” withstood Jurrist’s challenge to it. Jurrist did not.

Konstantin Berlandt, co-chair of San Francisco’s gay pride parade, maintained, “I didn’t become a homosexual so I could use condoms.” Berlandt, too, became a martyr of sexual liberation.”

Doesn’t all of this sound similar to the “marriage is just a piece of paper,” “Oow childbearing is not the problem”-type of reality-defying nonsense?

A lot of gay men from that era didn’t survive. During that era, I recall feeling that every time I looked around, some other distant gay male acquaintance or gay male entertainer that I enjoyed watching was dead from AIDS.

Heavily-subsidized, modern-day HIV medications have lulled folks into amnesia about all of that. Who knows how much longer these medications will remain subsidized or affordable for anybody except the rich? Most new-school, young AAs have never seen what HIV/AIDS really looks like without all these modern medications. I was in high school when AIDS/HIV first emerged. I remember the beginnings of this epidemic. Let me tell you: that genuine “AIDS look” is not nice. If you Google photos of AIDS sufferers from that era, you’ll see what I mean.

I'm not just (or even primarily) talking about literal disease and death in this post. There are emotional and assorted other costs to casual sex for most women, and the children born as a result of casual sex.

Fools can repeat history if they want to. If you value yourself, you won’t let any kind of ideology damage your quality of life.

Stop Getting It Twisted - Pay Attention To The Money And Resource Trail

Former blog readers often send me links to various online discussions going on among African-American women. This is how I became aware of recent blog discussions about a Black male actor named Michael Ealy's recently-revealed secret marriage to a nonblack woman (from her looks and name, she's probably Pakistani, Indian or Afghan). Since I don't support or watch African-American-oriented "coon show" entertainment products, I previously had no idea who Michael Ealy is.

Some other questions came to me when reading some of these conversations. Why are so many African-American women still reading anything put out by Messence? Haven't they figured out by now that Messence is not a friend or ally to Black women?  Why do so many Black women persist in spending their money to support African-American-oriented "coon show" entertainment products like Think Like A Man? Why do so many Black women invest emotionally into becoming fangirls for the Black male actors involved in these flicks? Haven't they figured out by now that most of the Black males involved in such projects aren't checking for Black women--and never were?

It seems to me that most of the African-American women's online conversations about this deliberately skip over the only thing I find significant about any of this: the money and resource trail. African-American women are in the collective condition they're in because they use their money and other resources to support people and entities that don't support them. It's very simple: You suffer when you support people and things who don't and won't support you.

I agree that when a person is happy they're better equipped to be happy for others' good fortune. I agree that the mostly self-imposed "Black men are my only romantic option" mental prison is what's underlying some Black women's venomous reactions to (yet another) prominent African-American man marrying a nonblack woman. I agree that African-American women shouldn't even be paying that kind of attention to what Black males are doing. I believe that more African-American women should take a page from African women (and Asian women), and pay attention only to those people, places and things that are adding value to our lives. Among other things, this means paying attention to how we spend our money.

Which brings me back to the current online discussions about Black women consumers' reactions to Michael Ealy's marriage to a nonblack woman. Instead of talking about the vast sums of money foolish African-American women consumers invest into people and businesses who will never support them, a lot of folks are focusing on Black women's "jealousy." To frame the conversation this way is to deliberately miss the point. As far as I'm concerned, the point is that too many Black women persist in investing money and emotional energy into non-reciprocating persons, products and businesses.

If Mr. Ealy really did hide his marriage to the Pakistani/Indian/Afghan woman, the odds are that he did so to protect his ability to continue receiving money from Black female consumers. He probably knows that as a Black male actor, a lot of his potential income depends on African-American women consumers. He's not worried about Black women's emotional "jealousy," he's worried his continued access to Black women consumers' money.

Because he knows that in general, Pakistani/Indian/Afghan women like his wife don't and won't spend their money to sustain his acting career. He knows that Pakistani/Indian/Afghan women:

• didn't and won't spend their money to support his role in Barbershop
• didn't and won't spend their money to support his role in Barbershop 2
• didn't and won't spend their money to support his role in Think Like A Man
• didn't and won't spend their money to support any particular project he's involved in!

The same way Asian women didn't, don't, and won't spend their resources on supporting or worrying about Wesley Snipes. And so on. Black male entertainers aren't totally brain dead. They know a large portion of their money---past, present and future---comes from Black women consumers. Everybody pays attention to the HUGE money trails flowing from Black women consumers. Everybody that is, except Black women themselves.

These issues have been discussed in the past. Here are some gems from other bloggers that are worth pondering.

First, a comment that Evia made to an earlier post at this blog:

Khadija, I had never heard of Van Jones either until I heard bw talking about him a few days ago, saying he was being attacked by "de evil wm." The second I heard what his position was, I would have bet a very huge amount of money that he either dated non-bw exclusively or that he was married to a non-bw.

There IS a pattern here, yet so many bm think they're duping others by claiming they just "fell in love" with a non-bw. Well, they actually are duping the masses of AA women, but no one else. So many gaslighted bw will go around like zombies saying, "Well, love is just love" or "You can't help who you love," when it comes to AA men. That's another form of bm protection. I mean, if that's TRUE and bm can't help who THEY love, then why is it that so many AA obviously can stop themselves from loving wm?

PREDICTION: I want any bw reading this to just know that virtually ANY bm who she knows who is upwardly-mobile IS on his way to a non-bw if it's at all possible. He may be your son, your brother, cousin, young man at your church, but IF he's upwardly mobile, he more than likely is going to share his upward mobility with a non-bw. I'm not talking about those "struggling" or defeated bm; I'm talking about the ones who more than likely are going to do okay.

Knowing this, you, as an AA woman, need to decide how much you're willing to invest in creating a non-bw's comfortable lifestyle because whatever you do to help him, he's going to share it with her--if it's within his environment to do so.

It's not the non-bw's fault though; it's mainly bw's fault for not demanding reciprocity from bm and for continuing to invest in the well-being of others while her own daughters perish.

You may not care about that, but don't act surprised about any of this because it doesn't make bw look smart--since other folks can clearly see the pattern. If you haven't seen this pattern, ask yourself why you haven't.


This is not about bw's "attitude" and nothing to do with bw having "too much education," or any of the usual excuses that AA males give.

These males PREFER non-bw, which is their perogative as long as they don't get any investment, support, or protection from bw. That's the critical piece here: the MONEY TRAIL. Bw--GET SHREWD! Always follow the money trail! Do not invest in lifting up a bm unless he knows there are strings attached and only if you're going to be able to collect.

If we were to look into this man's past, we would see where it was mainly countless bw's time, energy, money, guidance, and protection that put him in his position. We definitely know that it wasn't any other group of women who lifted him up.

As an aside, regarding the complaint that many bm give these days that bw have/pursue too much education, isn't it just obvious that there are PLENTY of AA women who have never set foot in a college? Just google the stats. Yet these male do NOT pursue those women to marry EITHER. I never hear bw rebut that paper-thin excuse by pointing that out.

Also, there are PLENTY of AA women who like to cook and would love to be stay-at-home-moms. They would not be fighting any man over a job. These women WANT to play the woman's traditional role as long as the man can and will play the male's traditional role. Yet AA males constantly complain that AA women don't know how or won't cook and/or don't want to play the traditional role. Bw never rebut that paper-thin excuse either.

From my viewpoint and experience, AA women don't ask for much AT ALL compared to other groups of women I've lived among. Just talk to wm and African men about what ww, African women, and other groups of women require from them.

September 13, 2009 2:07 PM

And second, this deep and nuanced post Reinterpreting Wesley Snipes from Black Girls Rule! Among other things, she notes:

One of the main reasons that black women have often reacted with such knee-jerk resentment to IRRs is precisely because, too often, black men’s preference for non-black women is expressed in terms of such women possessing a “lightness” and “ease” that black women do not—a lightness that, to the extent it exists, comes at least in part from not having the same kind of struggles with our society that black men try to escape by pursuing non-black women, and, of course, from having a level of support as women from their men that black women have not enjoyed. To be rejected not only because you bring the same involuntarily shouldered burdens to the relationship as the man, but also the additional burdens of his neglect, hostility and exploitation, has often been too much for black women to bear.

 

It's well worth reading in its entirety.

 

At the end of the day, it's up to each individual African-American woman to decide how much of her various resources she will invest into supporting people who don't support her. I prefer to support the people who support me.

A Response To A Former Reader's Question About BWE And Mass Movements

A former blog reader recently asked me the following question. Since it's an important question that I've seen come up in more than a few discussions, I decided to post my response here.

QUESTION: Why aren’t BWE bloggers interested in creating a mass movement with thousands of women marching in the streets?

Speaking for myself only (other BWE bloggers’ mileage may and probably does vary):

My Reason #1-Because in 21st century America, those sorts of activities tend to reflect extreme powerlessness. They also tend to keep AA women powerless in the long run. At this point in time, it’s become a trickbag that diverts AA women from strategies that would make a lasting difference in their lives.

AA women put on their marching shoes, and then come back to the same inadequate life circumstances they had before they went to the march. They come back from the march as unsupported and unprotected as they were before. Marching becomes a substitute for finding and making personal connections to people who will actually support and protect their interests. Marching becomes a substitute for discarding the self-limiting beliefs and practices that keep AA women tethered to unsupportive people and places.

In this era, real and enduring progress―the type of progress that changes an individual’s or group’s life circumstances―tends to be quiet. And operates by stealth. Behind the scenes. Without fanfare. Usually as the cumulative result of many individual choices.

I think some of the most important questions that modern-day AA women need to ponder are:

How is it that AAs are still stuck in the weak position of having to do protest marches while other nonwhites in the US are increasingly able to wield White privilege?

How did these people go from being supposedly stuck in oppression alongside us to being positioned over us? How did THAT happen?

Any AA woman who's doesn’t want to be permanently stuck in reenacting 1950s Selma, Alabama protest marches needs to take a close look at how large numbers of other women individually got themselves (and their children) in a position to access large portions of White privilege. I’ve watched many AA women get angry with the Common Sense blogger Evia because she did some podcasts about how her husband’s White privilege benefits her. That’s a silly reaction. A silly reaction that other women of color (including many non-AA Black women) don’t share. They’re too busy acting in their own best interests.

Let’s look at a few examples from current events, starting with the slaying of Trayvon Martin. How did it come to be that Latinos…a group of people that our African-American(AA) misleaders have told AAs are our so-called allies… in a “Rainbow Coalition”…became considered “White enough” to wield White privilege?

What long-term process made it possible for the very mestizo-looking George Zimmerman to be treated with White-privilege-based deference by local law enforcement?

Mr. Zimmerman is not the only example of how other so-called “people of color” have positioned themselves to access White privilege. He’s just the latest example (and one that happens to not even be a police officer). Going back at least to the 1980s, there have been cases of “White” Latino police officers shooting unarmed Blacks.

The calm aftermath of the Virginia Tech massacre is another example of how AAs’ so-called “people of color,” so-called “allies” have positioned themselves to access White privilege.

In the aftermath of that massacre, I was amazed (and pleasantly surprised) to see that there wasn’t a pogrom of sorts against Asian students on American campuses. This didn’t happen because Asians have become considered “White enough” to wield White privilege. One aspect of White privilege is that dysfunctional, destructive Whites are looked upon as aberrant individuals. Not people who are representative of their entire group.

The Korean male Virginia Tech mass murderer was considered to be ONE deranged individual. His atrocity was not held against all Asians in general or all Asian college students in the US. Other Asians in the US didn’t suffer any consequences because of what he did. That’s a big difference from what most likely would’ve happened if an immigrant Muslim student or AA student had killed over 30 people on a White campus. How did Asians become “White enough” in America that one of them could commit an atrocity of this magnitude without creating a backlash against the rest of them?

Here’s how Asians and Latinos became “White enough” to wield large pieces of White privilege: While AAs have remained frozen in time reenacting Deep South protest marches from almost FIFTY years ago, Asians and Latinos have spent those same fifty years making personal inroads and connections to White America. A large chunk of these inroads were created through the cumulative effect of Latina and Asian women’s marriages to White men. The so-called “White” Mr. Zimmerman (who has been able to wield White privilege) is the product of a Latina woman’s marriage to a WM.

For reasons that I've discusssed at length in other posts, I don't expect White Americans to start viewing AAs as "White enough" in the same way many of them apparently perceive Asians and Latinos. Nevertheless, AA women don't have to remain permanently frozen in 1950s Selma, Alabama. There are ways for AA women to use the "female card" in order to access some of the benefits of White privilege. More AA women can do what other women of color (including non-AA Black women) have done to access these benefits.

Latinos, Asians and other non-AAs rode the coattails of the AA civil rights movement and AA civil rights martyrs. After AAs knocked down the barriers, these other people rushed into White work and other settings that had previously been closed to many of them. But unlike so many AA women, once these other nonwhites got through the door, they took the time to effectively mingle with Whites. That’s a large part of why fifty years later, the AA masses are still on the outside looking in―and having protest marches―while other nonwhites have MOVED ON into enjoying the privileges of the majority-White mainstream.

Any AA woman who wants to live well will have to make personal inroads and connections to the outer, mainstream world. And get back in touch with the normal, human practice of forming families. Families bound together by marriage. Stable immediate and extended family ties are the best and most enduring support network for women and children.

Why is marriage important? A few years ago, another blogger made an extremely insightful comment about this. In response to a guest post at What About Our Daughters, the regular blog host said the following:

I'm supporting Single Mothers TOO... by giving them permission to feel ENTITLED to a co-parent. We aren't doing single mothers any favors by reinforcing the idea that it is normal or acceptable to be forced to raise a child on our own. Black women are NOT superwomen.

I feel like I am in Episode of Star Wars where Senator Palpatine has convinced everyone that he has their best interests at hears and is "looking out for them" when in fact he's manipulating them for their own purposes.

All medicine doesn't taste good and a whole lot of things that "go down easy" are horrible for your health.

Sure it feels GREAT to have a slick PR campaign called "Raising Him Alone", but you're gonna end up with a cavity.

When we've gotten a OOW birthrate of 98% where exactly will these "families" making up the village be?

MARRIAGE is the tie that binds families together. Many of you are relying on families being held together by a marriage that occurred 3 generations ago. What about 3 generations from now?

This all feels great NOW, but look down the road three generations later. You're depleting the "village." There are going to be entire SWATHS of society where there won't be an adult male in sight because everybody's Raising Him Alone.

If the village was a forest and families were trees, what are y'all going to do when you get through chopping all the trees in HALF? You're wearing the HELL out of "the Village." If the Village were a spotted owl, environmental activists would be chaining themselves to trees right about now. The beloved "Village" is about to become an endangered species. The "village" doesn't crop up by osmosis.

I support single mothers. I support single mothers by telling them to REJECT this propaganda that Black women aren't entitled to HELP- from the father's of their children, not some "village" she had to cobble together.

Everybody wants to talk about the village, but nobody wants to maintain the Village. Nobody wants to pay property taxes in the Village. Nobody wants to do strategic planning for the Village. Everybody LOVES the village, but don't want any ordinances in the Village. They don't want any zoning in "the Village." The don't want the Village to have a homeowners association that enforces "The Village"'s rules and regulations. They don't want police to patrol the Village or enforce the laws of the village or throw those who commit violence against the Village in jail.

You take for granted that "the Village" will always be intact. When in fact MY GENERATION is living in the Village our Great Grand Parents and Grand Parents built and we're unwilling to make any investments in the infrastructure of the village.

One day, this all important "Village" will collapse on itself and the people who will pay the HEAVIEST price will be the people who rely on the "Village" the most.

Yeah, it take a "village" unfortunately there won't be a village in about three generations, why? because three generations of Black children won't know how to build a freaking Village. We have a Village because somebody fought to create maintain and preserve it. They were so good at constructing the village that despite our best efforts to burn it to the ground, the Village has some ever dwindling huts intact. They really knew how to build things back in the day. They built their village with STONE. We're building our modern village with particle board.

Ironically, I don't need "the village" (I have a tribe called a FAMILY) yet I appear to be the most concerned about it.

The blog host was absolutely correct in the common sense observation that marriage is the tie that binds families together; and why it matters. I couldn’t have said it any better myself.

My Reason #2-Not every problem or issue can be solved with protest marches or protest organizations. What’s the saying? When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Furthermore, I believe AAs have a tendency to turn various activities into cargo cults. Voting is one example of this. Protest marches and protest organizations are other examples.

AAs have made the idea of voting an object of unreasonably excessive reverence. Many of us are as deluded as the Iraqis proudly holding up their purple fingers after voting under an occupation-imposed puppet government. Their purple-stained fingers did not magically convert occupied Iraq into a functioning democracy. Iraq still is not a functioning democracy. Millions of people around the planet have voted while still living under the heels of brutal tyrants.

Much more than simply voting is required in order to have a functioning democracy. A functioning democracy needs to have a combination of practices in place. These practices are often referred to as "the rule of law."

Some concepts associated with "the rule of law" include: The principle that governmental authority is exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws. The principle that these laws are adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedural steps. The idea that everyone is equal before the law. The idea that nobody is above the law. The idea that people who have been arrested have the right to be told what crimes they are accused of, and to request that their custody be reviewed by independent, judicial authority.

Keep in mind that none of this guarantees that the laws will be just. This only guarantees that there will be a PROCESS other than following the whims of a tyrant, or following mob rule. Having a process is extremely important. Having a real process in place makes it possible for people to work toward having just laws.

In a similar way, AAs have made the idea of protesting an object of excessive reverence. Since most of us don’t bother to study our own history, we don’t understand the unromantic ingredients that helped make the civil rights movement successful. Most of us have no idea about the huge role the Cold War played in the movement’s success.

To put it plainly, Uncle Sam was locked in a serious competition with his European cousin Soviet Ivan. By the 1950s, both of them were competing for influence among the newly-independent nations of the third world. Uncle Sam was deeply afraid that large portions of the planet might join an alliance with Soviet Ivan. Every time photos and news film leaked out of Uncle Sam mistreating his disenfranchised AA citizens, Soviet Ivan would publicize this to people in third world countries. Soviet Ivan would say, “Look at how racist Uncle Sam is! Look at how badly he treats his own Black citizens! That’s how Uncle Sam will treat you if you join his alliance.”

And so, Uncle Sam felt some external pressure to make concessions to the civil right movement because failure to do so was seriously undermining his foreign policy goals. During the Cold War, Uncle Sam had pragmatic reasons to care about how foreigners felt about him. Uncle Sam only cared because he had a serious, equally armed enemy who was courting these foreigners.

The Soviet Union collapsed just over twenty years ago. There’s no Cold War. Uncle Sam has no reason to care about how he or his actions look to anybody. The protest marches that worked in the earlier context of the Cold War generally aren’t effective anymore.

My Reason #3-In the AA “programmed slave” context, securing abundant life has to be an individual, self-directed process for most AA women. For the reasons that I mentioned in another recent post, mass cooperation among large numbers of AA women is simply not possible. It’s certainly not sustainable.

Please understand that the vast majority of African-Americans (AAs) are incapable of giving reciprocal support to any Black person or Black-led movement that supports them. It’s very similar to Black consumer dynamics. The vast majority of Black consumers are incapable of responding appropriately to any Black-owned business.

Here’s why: Because most AAs have deeply embedded slave programming on top of the everyday collection of human frailties shared by all humans. Most AAs have been successfully programmed to sabotage anything that could possibly enhance or save their lives. Most AAs will take any and everything and twist it around into something destructive. AAs take new ideas and superimpose their same old, dysfunctional thought patterns onto the new idea. In the end, the new idea become merely a new slogan that’s used to justify the same old dysfunctional behavior.

This is why AAs have turned every past solution into a new catastrophe. There are almost endless examples of this. We collectively did the “bait and switch” with many past solutions. We took desegregation and turned it into a pretext for engaging in a permanent, undeclared boycott against all Black-owned businesses (with the partial and dwindling exception of barbershops and hair salons).

We took the language of multiculturalism and turned it into a pretext for maintaining our racial self-hatred and internal colorism.

Even among healthy people, creating a protest movement or organization automatically creates unnecessary hierarchy. Which creates unnecessary conflict because various individuals will compete for various offices within the movement/organization. Factions will form around each candidate for each office. Various individuals with differing visions will fight over the charter or rules for the organization. Factions will form around each proposed rule. These conflicts are multiplied by a factor of 50 if there’s money involved (fundraising, salaried positions, expense accounts, etc.).

Among AAs, the only structure that avoids most of this type of conflict is the permanent “one person show” such as Rev. Jackson’s or Rev. Sharpton’s organizations. But that’s exchanging one set of organizational problems for another (everything dependent on one “big boss”).

The massive amount of energy AA women participants would need to invest in struggling to keep any AA protest movement moving in a productive direction would be better spent in feathering their own individual nests. As I noted during the final post at Sojourner’s Passport blog, each individual AA woman’s personal victory creates powerful ripple effects that spread success outward.

As I said at the beginning, these are just my thoughts in response to the reader’s question. Other BWE bloggers’ mileage may (and probably does) vary.

And with that, I'm going back to enjoying my online silence and retirement from blogging! LOL!

An Education Is A Terrible Thing to Waste

Former blog readers often send me links to the most . . . peculiar . . . conversations that are taking place in online African-American-Rwanda Zones. Even though intellectually I know better than to be surprised, I’m still amazed at how the vast majority of African-Americans are totally out of touch with human norms. And instead have normalized—for themselves only—the deathstyles of the dead African-American collective. This deathstyle existence applies across all economic classes among AAs. When the typical modern AA goes to college the end result is usually an educated fool who uses the big-word-terminology they learned in college and grad school to justify mass AA dysfunction and deathstyles.

The relatively few normal and thriving AA women that exist (that I refer to as “sojourners”) can immediately tell that these Rwanda Zone conversations are crazy, but don’t understand the warped thinking that underlies these discussions. Here’s a quick guide for perplexed sojourners.

Asexual Mammy Is Just As Deviant As Hip-Hop Video Vixen; She’s Just At The Opposite End of the Promiscuity Scale

Nobody in their right mind admires Asexual Mammy. No matter how much women who identify with Asexual Mammy complain about the fact that nobody admires (or even really values) Asexual Mammy. Sane people who are in touch with human norms can recognize that Asexual Mammy is just as deviant as Hip-Hop Video Vixen. She's simply at the opposite end of the promiscuity spectrum. Neither image reflects or projects healthy, attractive womanhood.

If Viola Davis has any sense at all, she’ll stop playing Asexual Mammy roles. If she has a piece of a clue, she’ll use her current buzz to get herself cast as an alluring, desirable woman. She's not getting any younger. If she’s really smart, she’ll form her own production company and cast herself in lead roles as a desirable, alluring woman. Her shelf-life for being relatively young enough to be cast as a desirable woman (as opposed to being cast as the desirable woman's mother) is ticking down. She should look at what happened to Angela Bassett (who took too long to wake up, and wasted her prime female leading actress years).

If AA female slaves had any sense, they would stop celebrating Asexual Mammy. And stop lifting her up as an example for young AA girls. That’s crazy, Rwanda Zone thinking. That’s deathstyle thinking, and it’s totally out of touch with human norms.

Those women who are in touch with human norms understand that it’s a competitive world. Sensible women have no problem with caring about the so-called “male gaze” because attracting a quality, loving husband is a preliminary building block to marriage and wholesome family life. The relatively few normal and thriving AA women who exist understand that advertising matters. Images matter, whether or not the images are consciously intended to serve as advertising. “Brands” matter. Personal brands matter.

Sojourners know that sensible people aren’t careless or negligent about projecting an attractive image for their collective “brand.” That’s why, as other bloggers have noted, White lesbians such as Ellen DeGeneres and Rachel Maddow were required to soften and feminize their images in order to have their own tv shows. That’s why White lesbian actresses (such as Amber Heard and Portia de Rossi) who want to be employed have the common sense to conform to feminine norms in terms of their self-presentation. Sensible women know what time it is. For those who don’t, an education is a terrible thing to waste.

I Don’t Want Any Biopics About Closeted, Asexual Mammies—I Want Biopics About Desirable Black Women Who Openly Lived Well

I don’t want a biopic about Barbara Jordan. Here’s why. While following the links from the Wikipedia entry about her, I ran across this passage:

"On page one and throughout the rest of his slim, fawning biography, Barbara Jordan: The Biography (which ought to be called Barbara Jordan: The Panegyric), Teutsch refers to Jordan as a lesbian. Page one states in part that "[Jordan] stood up for the underdog, constantly opposed prejudice against race, religion or sexual orientation, which was commendable considering the fact that Barbara was gay and her lifetime companion was a white woman, Nancy Earl." Nancy Earl shows up in Rogers' biography, too -- she shares a house with Jordan and is one of two people allowed by Jordan to know the full extent of her tragic illnesses -- but she comes off more like a friend, a particularly close one."
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/vol18/issue24/books.VSBR.html

It’s a competitive world. I can see how this would likely play out in any movie: the WW partner would be portrayed as conventionally attractive and feminine, while Ms. Jordan would be portrayed as an asexual mammy at best. Or as a "butch"-looking lesbian at worst. Thereby continuing to lift up WW’s collective “brand” while tossing BW’s collective “brand” under the bus. I don’t want to see some mess about Closeted, Asexual Mammy.

For me it’s not about homophobia. It’s about AA women’s collective “brand.” If there’s going to be a biopic about a closeted, civil rights era AA lesbian who dated White women, I’d rather see one made about Lorraine Hansberry, who carried herself with feminine grace and glamour.

What I’d really like to see are some biopics about AA women like Lena Horne and Gloria Ray Karlmark (one of the Little Rock Nine who moved to Europe, married a European man, and has lived very well). I want to see biopics of AA women who lived well in the outer world.

Sensible women know what time it is. For those who don’t, an education is a terrible thing to waste.

Educated Tunnel Vision: The Outer World Of Normal Human Lifestyles Is Invisible To Indoctrinated AA Women

One often hears the strangest comments from many AA women. Strange, convoluted statements that have equally strange underlying assumptions. It’s as if they have no idea that women who live outside AA Rwanda Zones and away from AA social circles are enjoying normal lives. Educated and indoctrinated AA women don’t understand or see that:

WW don’t live with deadly, literally life-threatening street harassment.

WW don’t live like that because WM protect and provide for them.

WW don’t have to give up the benefits of 21st century freedoms in order to be protected and provided for by WM as a collective.

WW and White girls don’t suffer like so many AA women and girls because WM protect and provide for WW and White girls.

AA women and girls—who live in Black residential areas—live under deadly, literally life-threatening street harassment.

AA women and girls live under deadly street harassment—in Black residential areas—because BM refuse to protect and provide for them.

BM refuse to protect and provide for AA women and girls because Black males don’t care about AA women and girls.

As a collective, BM will never protect and provide for AA women and girls. No matter how much AA women whine about it.

Nonblack residential areas don’t have Rwanda-style, life-threatening street harassment of women because WM won’t tolerate it.

Any AA woman who wants to live in safety needs to flee Black residential areas, and live in an area that WM keep safe for women and children.

Sensible women know what time it is. For those who don’t, an education is a terrible thing to waste.

Sojourners need to understand that, at this point in time, most educated AAs with advanced degrees are just as out of touch with human norms as the Black underclass. So, despite their sophisticated-sounding theories and vocabularies, it's usually a waste of time trying to communicate with them.

It's a strange thing because, unlike the Black underclass, educated and professional AAs are in contact with the normal outer world everyday when they go to work. However, their minds are stuck in "Rwanda" because of their indoctrination-based mental filters and blinders. It's best to simply step over and around them as you enjoy normal human life in the outer world.

ADDENDUM

Ahh, I see that I've hit a nerve with this post. Good. Hopefully, more AA women will question these "okey-doke" snares that are celebrated among AA slaves and among nobody else. This celebration of Asexual Mammy images is something that more AA women need to question.

Some of the hysterical, shrill responses to this post reveal that a lot of AA women have been groomed from waaaay back to be Asexual Mammies. It's an AA-cultural-dsyfunction "okey doke" trap for so-called "good girls" who are also smart. Especially a trap for "church girls." Consider how out of touch this is with human norms:

Throughout the ages, girls from around the world are encouraged to daydream of being clever AND pretty---like the lead female characters in almost all of the Disney cartoons. Growing up to be a princess of some sort who's smart AND pretty AND loved/married by a good man is a universal (heterosexual) human girl's daydream. Normal and healthy girls don't daydream about growing up to be (or look like) an Asexual Mammy. Normal and healthy adults don't encourage the girls in their orbit to emulate Asexual Mammy.

Those of you who were groomed since girlhood to celebrate, emulate and identify with Asexual Mammy are perfectly free to continue doing so. That's your free and voluntary (and dysfunctional) choice to sabotage yourself and your own interests. But no matter how much you scream and howl and shriek, sensible Black women are not going to join you in your various suicide-martyrdom missions. Including the suicide-bomber mission of encouraging AA girls to celebrate and emulate Asexual Mammy images.

Women from other ethnic and racial groups who are looking to eliminate all potential competition will encourage you to sabotage yourselves. But they're not going to join you in that. Neither will those AA women who know better than that. Those of us who know better are also not going to spend much time debating with you about your various suicide-martyrdom missions. Let the dead bury the dead.

Human Frailties, Mixed Motives And Victory For Those Few Who Dare

Thank You, Lynn!

Lynn, I saw this comment you made over at Faith’s blog. You said:

Here's a few thought towards these chicks who have been reading these blogs for years, yet are constantly going around the blogosphere bleating about the evils of BWE:

Some of those 'empowerment' ladies are constantly berating BWE, yet using a lot of those beauty tips Khadija would post on Fridays

Some of those ladies are over there, purchasing and using Evia's vetting series, not to mention the free advice she gives liberally, and still berating BWE.

Some of them have read Faith's inspirational quotations, using them as a guide in real life, and guess what! Still berating BWE.

I bet just about everyone of these so called "I have concern for the next generation" chicks has tried one of Faith's healthy recipes, using cinnamon to counteract high blood pressure, bought the book joynousnerd has to grow their hair, tried P90X after Khadija blogged about it, utilized one or more of the dating websites linked to BWE websites, and/or developed additional streams of income....all the while insisting BWE is all about “worshipping white men!”

Some of those ladies use the new vocabulary Halima has thoughtfully and accurately supplied (hellooo, virulent racio-misogny, anyone), when describing bw/bgs unique stituation, and yep; still berating BWE. (Thank you so much Halima for one the crowning achievements of BWE!)

Some of them are commenting on Sarah's latest posting about lewd actions of young bgs and how they are not being trained to do better,.....and still berating BWE.

Some of them are busy getting a free education by utilizing the free educational internet links and courses, the free motivational links and courses, links to little known, uplifting entertainment by going to non mainstream media forums depicting bw in a healthy way, everything 'old skool' BWE has provided so generously to any bw with the gumption to use it!.…...and still berating BWE!

They will insist upon their dying breath they cannot get behind BWE. All the while benefitting in at least one area in their lives from the information! Poisoning the well for the next generation. Way to show concern for our daughters. Well, I'm insisting BWE is life-saving, life-enhancing, uplifting, and a true blessing for bw/bgs.

Lynn, I hear you. And I truly appreciate how you showed reciprocity by standing up in the middle of a hostile crowd at What About Our Daughters to support the movement that (overall) has supported you and other Black women. THANK YOU, and may God bless you.

Human Frailties, Mixed Motives And Victory For Those Few Who Dare

Please understand that the vast majority of African-Americans (AAs) are incapable of giving reciprocal support to any Black person or Black-led movement that supports them. It’s very similar to Black consumer dynamics. The vast majority of Black consumers are incapable of responding appropriately to any Black-owned business.

Here’s why: Because most AAs have deeply embedded slave programming on top of the everyday collection of human frailties shared by all humans. Most AAs have been successfully programmed to sabotage anything that could possibly enhance or save their lives. Most AAs will take any and everything and twist it around into something destructive. AAs take new ideas and superimpose their same old, dysfunctional thought patterns onto the new idea. In the end, the new idea become merely a new slogan that’s used to justify the same old dysfunctional behavior.

This is why AAs have turned every past solution into a new catastrophe. There are almost endless examples of this. We collectively did the “bait and switch” with many past solutions. We took desegregation and turned it into a pretext for engaging in a permanent, undeclared boycott against all Black-owned businesses (with the partial and dwindling exception of barbershops and hair salons).

We took the language of multiculturalism and turned it into a pretext for maintaining our racial self-hatred and internal colorism. And there’s usually a sophisticated and fundamentally dishonest discourse surrounding each “bait and switch” episode. All of this leads to sincere people being confused about these events, and about what’s driving these events.

So, instead of talking in code, I’ll try to say some things the plain way.

It’s good to be as compassionate as possible (without enabling self-destructive behaviors), and keep human frailties―including our own―in mind.

This post at What About Our Daughters served as a tacit invitation for everybody who’s ever had some type of personal grudge or gripe against various BWE bloggers (and some BF-IRR bloggers) to come and vent.

The post conflated several separate issues into one. Basically, the post did a “bait and switch.” It took legitimate objections that have been raised about opportunists trying to hijack the BWE social justice movement and used these objections as a pretext for encouraging African-American women to rally around “fat acceptance” ideology. Despite the growing numbers of African-American women who are dying early from obesity-related ailments.

The post also characterized desire for marriage as “mancatchin.” Despite the growing numbers of African-American children who suffer due to the lack of marriage and stable families among African-Americans.

I’ll note that on a practical level, it’s even harder to lose weight (by several orders of magnitude) when you remain tethered to the same people, places and practices that led to your weight gain in the first place! It’s very difficult to move forward on any level while carrying a rotting corpse. It’s very difficult to dance while handcuffed to a rotting corpse. What is commonly referred to as the African-American community is a dead and rotting corpse. It’s been dead for a long while. The vast majority of the inhabitants are dead or dying. They have tunnel vision, and can’t see or envision anything other than the death that has become normalized among them.

Here's an example of what I mean by tunnel vision. In a comment to this post, I strongly suggested that―for their own physical safety―African-American women stay away from public gatherings where there are large numbers of African-American males. Much of the blogger’s reply centered around “…I’m not becoming a recluse subject to the whims of these ignorant predators…”

As if becoming a recluse is the only alternative to attending AA gatherings where one is subject to enhanced risk of being assaulted. As if there’s nobody else on this planet or in this country for African-American women to socialize with other than AA males.

This is a good example of the points of disagreement I’ve had at times with the advocacy at WAOD. Any advocacy that does not actively support African-American women fleeing the dead Black community is a literal dead end for Black women. Because at the end of the day, that type of advocacy leaves Black women and girls remaining among the same people, places and practices that are destroying them.

If you want to make progress, you almost always have to let go of the people, places and practices that held you back in the first place. So, yeah, I would expect it to be very, very . . . VERY hard for any given Black woman to lose weight while she’s living among, going around, and socializing with AAs who subject her (and other Black women) to a never-ending stream of denigration and downright physical danger.

Many folks with long-term, pre-existing gripes used the comment section to that recent WAOD post to vent their gripes. Some of them were readers who had fallen out with various bloggers because they were unable to get the bloggers to change their positions.

One blogger who commented has a multiple-year grudge against Evia. I don’t know how it started; but it’s been going on for years. You can never really tell looking in from the outside. But it appears to me that whenever there’s an opportunity to take a swipe at Evia or anything that’s been discussed on Evia’s blog, she often takes it. It appears to me that her criticism of BWE and BF-IRR blogs is sincere, legitimate criticism mixed with this long-standing grudge against Evia in particular.

Another (now retired) blogger who years back had written an absolutely brilliant series of essays about political strategy took the “bait” dangled by this post. She wasn’t able to resist the temptation of doing something that undermines the long-term interests of the Black women and girls she clearly cares about. She chose to publicly vent the disappointment she apparently felt when private discussions showed her that various BWE bloggers have human frailties. Human frailties in BWE bloggers. Imagine that! {smile}

There were women who took the opportunity to vent their gripes from years ago about “The Mammy Chronicles” (TMC) conversations that were held at Evia’s blog. It was so long ago that I don’t remember the exact details of this incident. Here’s what I do (vaguely) recall. Years ago, an extremely witty and talented commenter at Evia’s blog submitted a series of comments (or were they guest posts? I don’t recall) called “The Mammy Chronicles.”

From what I recall, TMC was a biting satire. Satire that highlighted the contrasting fictional experiences of an overweight, self-sacrificing and totally indoctrinated AA woman versus a slim, self-actualizing AA woman.

Oh, many AA women were outraged at the time. And, by God, they’re still angry to this day about TMC. If I gambled, I’d be willing to bet money that many of these same Black women who are still outraged about TMC have no problem with spending their money to see Tyler Perry’s Madea flicks.

Because very little of AA women’s outrage is based on principles they apply across the board. Instead, most AA women’s outrage is based on how any given stimuli intersect with their comfort zones and (often dysfunctional) coping mechanisms.

Ahh, . . . human frailties. We all have them. I’m often reminded of Sting’s song “Fragile:”

If blood will flow when flesh and steel are one
Drying in the colour of the evening sun
Tomorrow's rain will wash the stains away
But something in our minds will always stay
Perhaps this final act was meant
To clinch a lifetime's argument
That nothing comes from violence and nothing ever could
For all those born beneath an angry star
Lest we forget how fragile we are

On and on the rain will fall
Like tears from a star like tears from a star
On and on the rain will say
How fragile we are how fragile we are

On and on the rain will fall
Like tears from a star like tears from a star
On and on the rain will say
How fragile we are how fragile we are
How fragile we are how fragile we are

Indeed.

Rejoice To Be Among The Living!

The behavior pattern Lynn described in her comment goes way back among AAs. There’s nothing new or even unexpected about that particular equation.

Slave Programming + AA Female Self-Sacrificing Indoctrination + Normal Human Frailties = Anti-BWE Backbiting Behaviors

At this point in time, there’s also nothing new about the obesity-related, premature health problems and death among the masses of African-American women. This has become normalized over the past 25 or so years.

What IS new is the success of the BWE social justice movement. Before BWE, AAs were on track to have nothing but casualties among AA girls and women. A lot of you thought I was exaggerating when I spoke of AAs falling into the abyss and becoming a permanent underclass. A lot of you thought I was exaggerating when I said most AAs are already dead for all practical purposes.

I hope this little episode has lifted the scales from your eyes. It’s not just the AA underclass that’s dying and dead. The AA middle class (which is transitioning back into poverty) is also dying and dead. The educated AA class is also dying and dead. This includes AA professionals. You see this in how many of them use their advanced educations to come up with sophisticated slogans in support of Suicide By Food. So, one might ask, “What about our daughters?” They’re mostly dying and dead.

The AA women that some of you thought were alive and thriving (because they went to grad school, or are articulate, or go to church, or scrounged up a non-supportive, inadequate Negro to marry) are also dead. The “good girl” daughters these dead women are raising are also dead. When you scratch the surface of these church/mosque-going, studious young ladies’ mindsets, you discover that they’re also dead. The support these women and girls give to R. Kelly, Chris Brown, Steve Harvey, Tyler Perry, and so on lets you know that they’re dead.

Many of the AA women that some of you assumed were alive because they married nonblack men are also dead. The support some of these women gave to erasing Black women from their own history via Red Tails lets you know that they’re dead. In short, the vast majority of AA women and girls are casualties. They’re dead.

These women are dead because tinkering around the edges of the Black community’s racio-misogyny is insufficient. Tinkering is not enough. Trying to reform the dead Black community by cyber-protesting each notorious instance of anti-Black woman hate speech is insufficient. Reform is not enough. Mindlessly repeating BWE terminology without internalizing BWE values is insufficient. Slogans are not enough.

If you’re not willing to undertake a complete transformation of harmful personal traits, then you’re not going to thrive. In this era, you probably won’t even survive to live (what used to be) a normal life span. The odds are that you’ll join the high blood pressure/dialysis/insulin/cholesterol medication crowd, and fast track your way into the afterlife.

Transformation is never easy. It’s often quite painful. But the rewards for those who dare to reach for it are significant. Personal transformation increases your odds of being among the handful of AA women who are not only surviving to live a normal life span, but are thriving.

BWE has been able to significantly increase the number of surviving and thriving AA women (or “sojourners” as I call them). BWE has increased the numbers of Sojourners by popularizing some life-enhancing and life-saving ideas for AA women. I talked about this at length during my final post at Sojourner’s Passport. For here, I’ll mention an abbreviated version of an Overton Window:

Unthinkable → Radical → Acceptable → Sensible → Popular

Just think about all the various self-actualizing ideas for Black women the BWE movement has pushed along this path. In just a few short years, the life-saving ideas promoted by BWE have gone from being perceived as unthinkable. . .

. . . to being seen as acceptable . . .

. . . to being seen as sensible . . . and some are even becoming popular among many so-called “mainstream” African-American women.

Considering how deeply entrenched the slave programming and assorted other indoctrination is, BWE’s victory is truly a miracle. All praise is due to God!

Conversations With Christelyn Karazin

History has shown that whenever a social justice movement becomes successful, there’s often an incoming rush of latecomers who run in with the sole purpose of profiting from that movement’s success. This is what has happened with the Black Women’s Empowerment social justice movement. There’s been a crowd of latecomers who want to wrap themselves in the BWE banner, yet refuse to practice BWE values.

I believe Christelyn Karazin is one such individual. Up to now, I’ve remained publicly silent in my reactions to her inappropriate behavior. I strongly disliked the idea of taking up space with this type of thing at my other blog, The Sojourner's Passport. Unfortunately, Christelyn seemingly has taken my public silence as an invitation to continue engaging in inappropriate behavior. This is why I’m finally speaking out about this. And why I'm speaking about it here. Enough is enough.

Christelyn has done a number of inappropriate things to various BWE bloggers, but I’ll only focus on what she’s done in terms of me. And since---unlike Christelyn---I don’t publish other people’s private emails without their permission, I’ll only publish my reply emails in response to the hysterical emails Christelyn sent me. Christelyn has also chosen to misrepresent and try to "spin" what has been happening behind the scenes.

Here’s what has actually been going on:

Christelyn Karazin engaged in a pattern and practice of sitting back and passively allowing BWE opponents to use her forum to denigrate BWE bloggers’s work. Here's one of several examples of this.

If you’re going to let people use your forum to snipe at BWE bloggers behind their backs, don’t call yourself a BWE "sister." Letting BWE opponents use your platform to denigrate BWE bloggers is contrary to the core BWE values of reciprocity and solidarity with Black women’s interests.

Christelyn seemingly didn’t (and doesn't) care about BWE bloggers being denigrated on her forum. But she does care--a lot--if she sees anything that could possibly be construed as criticism of her actions.

Christelyn was apparently very upset about a comment I made at my own blog expressing my displeasure with her choice to let individuals use her forum to backbite BWE bloggers. I was also not pleased about the segment of BWE readers who are happy to reap the benefits of BWE bloggers’ work, but were comfortable silently watching while BWE opponents denigrate BWE bloggers. I said the following to one such commenter (who was vigorously arguing in defense of a White male blogger, but had said nothing during at least one conversation at Christelyn’s house when BWE bloggers were being denigrated),

". . . Well...now that you've brought it up...I don't recall you defending any of the BW bloggers who were being trashed at one particular conversation over at Christelyn's house. Certainly not the way you're actively jumping to Jonathan's defense here, and trying to scold me with the Word of Allah (I could be wrong about the attempted scolding angle, but that's what it feels like).

And all because I'm not inclined to take seriously the "never get a job and live your dream" preachings from 20-somethings who fit into the category I described in my initial earlier comment about them. You're entitled to defend him against what you feel is an attack if you wish (I'll get to that angle later in this reply). That's fine. None of that changes my views about his "live your dreams" preaching. Which is also fine.

I'm just fascinated by the marked contrast between what you're doing here for Jonathan and what you did during that other conversation.

You know...the conversation in which you were a participant where Christelyn passively sat back and---without saying anything in response---allowed individuals to use her forum as a platform for denigrating her BW blogger colleagues. The same BW colleagues who actively helped her (out front and behind the scenes) with her NWNW campaign. Once it was brought to my attention, I found all of that quite fascinating to watch.

Let me emphasize that this is NOT about agreement. I'm NOT looking for agreement---I'm interested in reciprocity. There were a couple of readers during that conversation who demonstrated reciprocity by noting the benefit they got from some of the BW bloggers who were being trashed. That's all I'm talking about.

When somebody benefits and helps ME in some way, then I don't let anybody denigrate that person in MY presence without at least speaking the truth about how that person helped ME. That doesn't mean that whatever criticism of the person who helped me is necessarily wrong or incorrect.

It just means that I'm going to add my truthful, positive testimony to the conversation about that person. So that the picture being painted during that conversation of the person who helped me is full and complete. As opposed to lopsided and distorted because the benefit that person brought to me was never mentioned when they were under attack.

Anyhoo, that's all I'm going to say about that little episode at this point.]… This conversation is the one I had in mind. And I recall thanking [another reader] in particular at the time for the decency and reciprocity she (and some other readers) demonstrated during that particular conversation. I’ve heard about people being allowed to use that platform to launch attacks on Evia during another conversation at that same blog, but I hadn’t read that particular conversation. If you did as you described during that conversation, then I applaud and commend you for demonstrating decency and reciprocity.

Bottom line: The cowardly snipers who launch their backbiting attacks while hiding behind the shield of another blog host’s forum need to find the courage to take their gripes directly to the bloggers they’re angry with.

I only linked to the conversation above because you said that you didn’t know what conversation I was talking about. At this point, I’m done with talking about any of that—I’m not going to make any further comments about that during this conversation. Expect Success!"

This is the point at which Christelyn started sending me hysterical emails. She claimed not to comprehend why any BWE blogger would take issue with her pattern of letting BWE opponents use her blog to take potshots at BWE bloggers. She also claimed not to understand why I was not interested in producing written content for use in her ongoing self-promotion projects. This is what I finally told her:

"Christelyn,

I thought it was clear from our previous communications that I don't want any further involvement with you. As far as I'm concerned, you're an unprincipled, self-promoting opportunist who's looking to pimp the BWE social justice movement for your own financial gain.

You got over on BWE before. You previously used many of the BWE bloggers and our support of your NWNW campaign when it was convenient. And then later on, when it was convenient, you passively allowed individuals to use your blog to denigrate and take verbal potshots at BWE bloggers---without challenge or comment from you. You apparently think that sort of behavior on your part is okay. And now, you're asking me and others to do your homework (i.e. answer a series of questions and contact Evia on your behalf) as if I have nothing better to do and with less than two weeks notice at that. Homework that is in active support of your ongoing self-promotion.

Since it apparently didn't register with you the first time, let me repeat what I told you the last time you emailed me:

'Christelyn,

Did Dr. King allow people to publicly use his microphone . . .

at his pulpit . . .

in his church . . .

to denigrate his colleagues in the SCLC?

Or to denigrate his colleagues in the struggle in the NAACP Legal Defense Fund?

Or to denigrate any of his colleagues in the overall civil rights struggle?

That's exactly what you did as far as I'm concerned. And since you apparently feel that this sort of behavior would have been/is appropriate, it's not my place to try to dissuade you from it. It's not my place to try to tell other people how to run their pulpits/blogs.

Furthermore, I don't have to know the intimate details of a dispute to take a principled stand with commenters who have gripes against other BWE bloggers. I'm not talking about so-called "taking sides," or fighting other BWE bloggers' battles. I simply tell the commenters who have gripes with So & So Blogger to take their gripe to So & So Blogger. I won't let people use my microphone, at my pulpit, in my "church" to launch attacks against my BWE colleagues. They need to create their own platform for that, or better yet find the courage to take their problem to that particular blogger.

I'm not a rapper who's involved in some petty "beef" with anybody. I'm involved in a social justice movement in support of African-American women. Perhaps you don't see BWE blogs as being part of a social justice movement. But I do. However you see it, with all due respect, you're not a neutral bystander in terms of what you allow to go on at your pulpit in your "church." What you let happen without challenge in your pulpit and "church" IS an endorsement of that behavior. Similar to how people are responsible for what they knowingly permit to go on in their houses.

And since in front of your thousands of readers---you let people publicly use your pulpit to launch public sniper attacks against women I (perhaps mistakenly) thought you saw as colleagues in the BWE struggle, then it's perfectly appropriate for the reaction (whatever it might be) to also be in public.

You let them use your forum as a launching pad for attacks against BWE bloggers in the context of a public conversation, so the reaction should also be in the context of a public conversation. It's all about reciprocity.

. . . This is my final rotation with you about this, because obviously you don't get it and you believe that sort of behavior is appropriate. I don't.

You're trying to reframe the issue as being about "criticism." That's not what I'm talking about. I don't care about that.

My issue is your betrayal of some people who helped you. The betrayal by your choice to freely allow others to use your platform/resources to take sniper shots at some of the people who helped you---without comment or challenge. People who are engaged in a social justice movement (BWE) that you purport to be in solidarity with. However mild those sniper shots may be is not the point for me.

The point for me is you freely allowing people to use your resources to make those attacks in the first place. As far as I'm concerned, that's unprincipled behavior on several levels. It's unprincipled in the context of a solidarity with a social justice movement. And it's unprincipled on a personal level.

I don't let folks use my platform or resources to take shots at people who are colleagues in a struggle that I'm participating in. I haven't let people use my platform to take shots at you---no matter whether those shots were mild or harsh. Correct or incorrect. Because that's not the point for me. The point is about solidarity and reciprocity. Reciprocity means that I don't let people borrow my resources to attack colleagues in a struggle. I also don't let folks freely use my platform or resources to take sniper shots at anybody who has helped me in the past.

That doesn't mean that I automatically engage in some debate or conflict with the wanna-be snipers. Many times I simply tell them to take their issue/gripe directly to the person they're upset with. And to stop trying to use my platform or resources to work through their gripe with somebody else. I believe that this is common courtesy for: (1) the people I'm in solidarity with; and (2) the people who have helped me. But if you don't feel that way, you just don't feel that way. And like I said before, it's not my place or assignment to try to dissuade you from behavior that you think is appropriate.'

Christelyn, I have neither time nor interest in dealing with someone who continues to demonstrate a lack of reciprocity. I thought I had already made myself clear the last time we had this issue of reciprocity. Obviously, you still do not understand and that is fine, just don't bother me with your requests.

Sincerely,
Khadija Nassif"

This was the point at which Christelyn went into emotional overdrive and had a series of public tantrums. Without my permission, she published a highly-edited (edited by her) portion of my private reply email. I got reports that she was whining about me on various social media. Throughout her public whinings, Christelyn chose to misrepresent what had actually happened. Nevertheless, I said nothing in public. Faith ultimately had to respond to Christelyn’s series of destructive antics with this post.

Christelyn never apologized for publishing edited portions of my private reply email without my consent. And she only took down that particular post because several of her readers told her to do so.

Recently, Christelyn went into emotional overdrive--yet again--in reaction to this post at Halima’s blog. She sent in a hysterical comment in response to this conversation over there. Then Christelyn started bombarding me (along with some other BWE bloggers) with a series of unwelcome, hysterical emails. I replied as follows:

"Christelyn,

You are irrational. And you're engaging in revisionist history. I would suggest that you seek professional counseling. Because your public (and private) hissy fits demonstrate an extreme lack of emotional discipline.

You seem to have forgotten about how you published a portion---a portion that was highly edited by you---of a private email conversation we had. And you did this without my consent. You never apologized for that utterly inappropriate behavior on your part. And you only took down that post after some of your readers told you to do so. This episode was after you had engaged in a pattern and practice of allowing BWE opponents to use your comment section to denigrate various BWE bloggers. We had a private email conversation about how your choice to let trolls use your forum to denigrate other BW bloggers---accompanied by silence from you---demonstrated a lack of solidarity and lack of reciprocity on your part. You blew off the concerns I raised about this behavior of yours---talking to you directly did not help---at all.

All of the above-described behavior on your part (plus your attempts at recruiting various BWE bloggers to produce written content to promote your personal projects and interests) is what Faith responded to. And this behavior pattern of yours speaks to another long-term problem with what you've been doing: You want to wrap yourself in the BWE banner when it's obvious that you have zero comprehension of core BWE values. And you refuse to honor BWE values.

What you did when you chose to let trolls use your blog to denigrate other BW bloggers showed that you don't understand the concept of reciprocity. Your little tantrum over at Halima's house about Red Tails being so-called just a movie shows that you don't understand the concept of putting BW's interests first and foremost. That flick was so-called "just a movie" in the same sense that it was "just a seat on a bus" that Rosa Parks got arrested over.

And any Black person who continued to finance that bus system after Ms. Parks was arrested was not acting in any kind of solidarity, sisterhood, or anything else positive with other Black folks. Any BW who financially supports the erasure of BW from their own history (the latest example being Red Tails) is not acting in any kind of solidarity, sisterhood, or anything else positive with BW's interests. These basic concepts of reciprocity and putting BW's interests first are not rocket science.

You presume too much. I don't care about you; and I'm indifferent to the fate of your projects. I noticed that your tantrum-comment over at Halima's house centered around your personal projects and prospects; and not about furthering the BWE movement. As I told you before, I would prefer not to receive any future communication from you. However, I do care about the BWE social justice movement. I don't like to see it being sabotaged from within by individuals who want to wrap themselves in the BWE banner (mostly for personal financial gain) while refusing to practice BWE values. Good riddance to bad trash."

I truly hope Christelyn will cease and desist from seeking to involve me in her drama. I’ve repeatedly told her that I don’t want to receive any future communications from her. I’ve also told her that I don’t want any involvement with her. Enough, already.