Should the blacc community stop using "suburb nikka" as an insult?

[Indiglow Meta (R$G)]

Funny how nikkas on here shyt on nikkas who grew up in the suburbs do not live in the hood and do not raise their family in the hood. Crazy, how that works. There are even small amounts of black suburbs and so called "hood raised" nikkas would rather live among whites, HB-1 Indian descendants and Asians. Funny how that works. I don't fault them for that. Just their hypocrisy.

I would and I technically live in the hood now.
So does @BmoreGorilla
Carlton just wants to be the face of black people, but he can't be. Sorry.

 

[Indiglow Meta (R$G)]

Suburb nikka =/= rich.
Credit life =/= rich
Naive and self righteous =/= rich.
There are those of us that lived in both.

 

[Indiglow Meta (R$G)]

I think this animus towards cats that live in the suburbs is moreso online than anything. I mean I came from the hood and I had friends that lives in suburbs like Montclair and Maplewood but it never really went past jokes.

I think the more insidious things are hood ans suburbans peoples attitudes toward the poor.

That white attitude toward the poor is purely suburban.

 

[Wild self]

Funny how nikkas on here shyt on nikkas who grew up in the suburbs do not live in the hood and do not raise their family in the hood. Crazy, how that works. There are even small amounts of black suburbs and so called "hood raised" nikkas would rather live among whites, HB-1 Indian descendants and Asians. Funny how that works. I don't fault them for that. Just their hypocrisy.

Indeed that is true. Some of the most people were the ones that did dirt, had hoes chasing them, and were the staple of a "real nikka"

 

[El Bombi]

You still haven't answered the question. What hood in Dallas are you from? I'm funna look at ya bacc ground

I am from Wakanda

 

[Gunz&Butta]

Be proud of living in the ghetto, brehs. B bu but not all everyone in the ghetto is poorFOH.

 

[BrothaZay]

I am from Wakanda

You a clown

 

[King Jae]

Just some divide and conquer shyt...alot of so called "hood" nagas just living off the reputation of their neighborhood...not what they have done personally...yea u from a rough hood but u bytch personally... Why the neighborhood ain't rub off on u? Just really some fragile ego shyt at the end of the day... "I'm better than u cuz I witnessed a murder" ass nagas... great...now u traumatized over someone else's bullshyt...nagas that ain't got shyt going on always find a way to shyt on ppl...this ain't no different

 

[Black Magisterialness]

Proud to be from to the suburbs. Being poor has nothing to do with being black. That is some slave mind shyt.
Like im supposed to be embarrassed that my parents accomplished more than yours

Black shyt is not synonymous with "poor" shyt. I don't know how many times I gotta tell people this.

nah it means your a cornball, generally unhip and removed from the culture.

living in the suburbs does not mean you're rich, in fact you have less opportunities than someone in the city.


People from statan island dont look down at people from manhattan lol.

This post proves the point....you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Does suburbs = oppritunity? Not always. But does it usually include access to healthy food and health care, a better education system and extra curriculars? Usually, yeah it does.

If you are looking at this from a New York City perspective, please shut the hell up...cuz NYCs paradigm is totally different from the rest of the country...an intelligent person would know that.

And trust me there's PLENTY of cornballs from the city...

 

[Supper]

I'm sorry to burst a lot of your bubbles filled with preconceived self-stereotypical notions about our community, but suburban African-Americans do indeed outnumber urban AAs, and therefor deserve more share of representation of the group(African-Americans) as a whole, IF we're only judging by it's proportion of the population alone. And if we're to include merits as a factor in determining which "black archetype" deserves more representation by weighing the sum of each groups benefits and liabilities they present, then that's probably going to bode even worse for the "urban black folk", especially those of the lower class, NOT because of the fact that they are urban and lower class in of itself, but because of the numerous issues present in those sections of the community such as the fact that violent crime in urban black communities is consistently higher than that in suburban or rural black communities regardless of income, and violent crime in lower income black communities is consistently higher across all of development environment(pg. 5). That kind of negative self-destructive behavior should not be held up as the standard or status quo in our community.

According to Kneebone, who compiled data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Surveys from 2010 to 2014, some 39 percent of African-Americans — whether rich, middle income or poor — live in the suburbs, and 36 percent live in cities. The remaining 25 percent are spread across small metropolitan areas and rural communities.

Her analysis shows that 52 percent of African-Americans in the 100 most populous metropolitan areas in the U.S. live in suburbs.

Inside Trump's View of African-Americans and Inner Cities


"But, but that's only because of gentrification. Before that there were more AAs in urban areas"......My answer: So? If we're going to appeal to the past legacies, then why stop there? Let's hold rural black from the south as the standard or face of the black community as a number of decades ago the vast majority of our people lived as such and only moved in mass to urban areas because of violent terrorism, blatantly racist landholder policies, and lack of opportunities for a much longer time than black people were mostly urban, which was only for a few decades at the most.

“The nation’s black people had been overwhelmingly rural and predominantly southern,” wrote Frederic Miller. Seventy three percent lived in rural areas and 89% were Southerners.(in 1920)

Roots of Hypersegregation in Philadelphia, 1920-1930

The days of most AAs being urban are long gone, like the days when most AAs were rural southerners. And we shouldn't live in self denial pretending as if we are. We are a largely, but not wholey, suburbanized people, which btw we've been on course to becoming for a long time now.

By 1980, Blacks had begun to migrate to the suburbs, causing the overall proportion of Blacks living in central cities to decline for the first time (Long and DeAre, 1981). In fact, the percentage of the Black population in the suburbs more than doubled between 1950 and 1980, with a 70 percent increase in the 1970s alone. A great deal of variation exists in the rates of Blacks moving to suburbs, however, by city and by region.

https://www.nap.edu/read/9599/chapter/4#52

^^^^Know thyself.....We are NOT an urbanized people anymore.

So, regardless whether we're judging solely by population size or including merits as a factor, "urban and/or lower income blacks" absolutely shouldn't be allowed to hijack black identity all or even mostly for themselves, while the vast majority of non-urban/lower income AAs are snuffed out and marginalized. But, of course, at the same time, to address the very valid concerns about classism/soft-bigotry, urban and/or lower income segments of our community absolutely should not be shunned, isolated, marginalized, or looked down upon by the greater AA community simply because they are urban or lower income, as they have just as much of a rightful place here as the rest of us. Cultural issues that exist in our community should be the center-point of our criticism, not the income level or development environment, but if there's a disproportionate concentration of said issues in certain income levels or development environments then it should be spoken about so we can have a greater understanding of where we need to focus efforts on improvement.

Though, tbh, I'm all about embracing the plurality of different outlooks and experiences our people bring to the table from their environmental upbringing. All of them are valuable contributions to the whole. And I'm also against pigeon-holing AAs, particular black men, in these overly simplistic generalized archetypal boxes, as if all of our individual experiences & personalities can be reduced down to being "street nikkas", "squares", "nerds" without any of the complexities other groups are afforded. I would take issues with anyone claiming that either of those atomized archetypes should be representative of AAs or black men as a whole.

But, "suburb nikka"?..... lol...............Most "nikkas" are suburban. You can't just hate, insult, or clown that fact away, so they aren't disconnected from shyt, but rather living the experience of most black people, and you'd therefor be insulting most black people. Wouldn't we call that "c00ning" just based off that fact alone?

 

[Black Magisterialness]

I'm sorry to burst a lot of your bubbles filled with preconceived self-stereotypical notions about our community, but suburban African-Americans indeed outnumber urban AAs, and therefor deserve more share of representation of the group(African-Americans) as a whole, IF we're only judging by it's proportion of the population alone. And if we're to include merits as a factor in determining which "black archetype" deserves more representation by weighing the sum of each groups benefits and liabilities they present, then that's probably going to bode even worse for the "urban black folk", especially those of the lower class, NOT because they are urban and lower class in of itself, but because of the numerous issues present in those sections of the community such as the fact that violent crime in urban black communities is consistently higher than that in suburban or rural black communities regardless of income, and violent crime in lower income black communities is consistently higher across all of development environment(pg. 5). That kind of negative self-destructive behavior should not be held as the standard or status quo in our community.



Inside Trump's View of African-Americans and Inner Cities


"But, but that's only because of gentrification. Before that there were more AAs in urban areas"......My answer: So? If we're going to appeal to the past legacies, then why stop there? Let's hold rural black from the south as the standard or face of the black community as a number of decades ago the vast majority of our people lived as such and only moved in mass to urban areas because of violent terrorism, blatantly racist landholder policies, and lack of opportunities for a much longer time than black people were mostly urban, which was only for a few decades at the most.


Roots of Hypersegregation in Philadelphia, 1920-1930

The time of most AAs being urban is long gone, like the time when most AAs were rural southerns. And we shouldn't live in self denial pretending as if we are. We are a largely, but not wholey, suburbanized people, which btw we been on course to becoming for a long time now.


https://www.nap.edu/read/9599/chapter/4#52

^^^^Know thyself.....We are NOT an urbanized people anymore.

So, regardless whether we're judging solely by population size or including merits as a factor, "urban and/or lower income blacks" absolutely shouldn't be allowed to hijack black identity all or even mostly for themselves, while the vast majority of non-urban/lower income AAs are snuffed out and marginalized. But, of course, at the same time, to address the very valid concerns about classism/soft-bigotry, urban and/or lower income segments of our community absolutely should not be shunned, isolated, marginalized, or looked down upon by the greater AA community simply because they are urban or lower income, as they have just as much of a rightful place here as the rest of us. Cultural issues that exist in our community should be the center-point of our criticism, not the income level or development environment, but if there's a disproportionate concentration of said issues in certain income levels or development environments then it should be spoken about so we can have a greater understanding of where we need to focus efforts on improvement.

Though, tbh, I'm all about embracing the plurality of different environments and experiences our people bring to the table from their upbringing. All of them are valuable contributions to the whole. And I'm also against pigeon-holing AAs, particular black men, in this overly simplistic generalized archetypal boxes, as if all of our individual experiences & personalities can be reduced down to being "street nikkas", "squares", "nerds" without any of the complexities other groups are afforded. I would take issues with anyone claiming that either of those atomized archetypes should be representative of AAs or black men as a whole.

"Suburb nikka" lol...............Most "nikkas" are suburban, so you'd therefor be insulting most black people. Wouldn't we call that "c00ning" just based off that fact alone?

 

[BrothaZay]

I'm sorry to burst a lot of your bubbles filled with preconceived self-stereotypical notions about our community, but suburban African-Americans do indeed outnumber urban AAs, and therefor deserve more share of representation of the group(African-Americans) as a whole, IF we're only judging by it's proportion of the population alone. And if we're to include merits as a factor in determining which "black archetype" deserves more representation by weighing the sum of each groups benefits and liabilities they present, then that's probably going to bode even worse for the "urban black folk", especially those of the lower class, NOT because they are urban and lower class in of itself, but because of the numerous issues present in those sections of the community such as the fact that violent crime in urban black communities is consistently higher than that in suburban or rural black communities regardless of income, and violent crime in lower income black communities is consistently higher across all of development environment(pg. 5). That kind of negative self-destructive behavior should not be held as the standard or status quo in our community.



Inside Trump's View of African-Americans and Inner Cities


"But, but that's only because of gentrification. Before that there were more AAs in urban areas"......My answer: So? If we're going to appeal to the past legacies, then why stop there? Let's hold rural black from the south as the standard or face of the black community as a number of decades ago the vast majority of our people lived as such and only moved in mass to urban areas because of violent terrorism, blatantly racist landholder policies, and lack of opportunities for a much longer time than black people were mostly urban, which was only for a few decades at the most.


Roots of Hypersegregation in Philadelphia, 1920-1930

The time of most AAs being urban is long gone, like the time when most AAs were rural southerns. And we shouldn't live in self denial pretending as if we are. We are a largely, but not wholey, suburbanized people, which btw we've been on course to becoming for a long time now.


https://www.nap.edu/read/9599/chapter/4#52

^^^^Know thyself.....We are NOT an urbanized people anymore.

So, regardless whether we're judging solely by population size or including merits as a factor, "urban and/or lower income blacks" absolutely shouldn't be allowed to hijack black identity all or even mostly for themselves, while the vast majority of non-urban/lower income AAs are snuffed out and marginalized. But, of course, at the same time, to address the very valid concerns about classism/soft-bigotry, urban and/or lower income segments of our community absolutely should not be shunned, isolated, marginalized, or looked down upon by the greater AA community simply because they are urban or lower income, as they have just as much of a rightful place here as the rest of us. Cultural issues that exist in our community should be the center-point of our criticism, not the income level or development environment, but if there's a disproportionate concentration of said issues in certain income levels or development environments then it should be spoken about so we can have a greater understanding of where we need to focus efforts on improvement.

Though, tbh, I'm all about embracing the plurality of different environments and experiences our people bring to the table from their upbringing. All of them are valuable contributions to the whole. And I'm also against pigeon-holing AAs, particular black men, in this overly simplistic generalized archetypal boxes, as if all of our individual experiences & personalities can be reduced down to being "street nikkas", "squares", "nerds" without any of the complexities other groups are afforded. I would take issues with anyone claiming that either of those atomized archetypes should be representative of AAs or black men as a whole.

"Suburb nikka" lol...............Most "nikkas" are suburban, so they aren't disconnected from shyt, and you'd therefor be insulting most black people. Wouldn't we call that "c00ning" just based off that fact alone?

@Indiglow Meta (R$G)

 

[Wild self]

It's only an insult to black males. Black females get a pass, even preferred to be suburban.

The unintelligent control too much of black society.

 

[Wild self]

I'm sorry to burst a lot of your bubbles filled with preconceived self-stereotypical notions about our community, but suburban African-Americans do indeed outnumber urban AAs, and therefor deserve more share of representation of the group(African-Americans) as a whole, IF we're only judging by it's proportion of the population alone. And if we're to include merits as a factor in determining which "black archetype" deserves more representation by weighing the sum of each groups benefits and liabilities they present, then that's probably going to bode even worse for the "urban black folk", especially those of the lower class, NOT because of the fact that they are urban and lower class in of itself, but because of the numerous issues present in those sections of the community such as the fact that violent crime in urban black communities is consistently higher than that in suburban or rural black communities regardless of income, and violent crime in lower income black communities is consistently higher across all of development environment(pg. 5). That kind of negative self-destructive behavior should not be held up as the standard or status quo in our community.



Inside Trump's View of African-Americans and Inner Cities


"But, but that's only because of gentrification. Before that there were more AAs in urban areas"......My answer: So? If we're going to appeal to the past legacies, then why stop there? Let's hold rural black from the south as the standard or face of the black community as a number of decades ago the vast majority of our people lived as such and only moved in mass to urban areas because of violent terrorism, blatantly racist landholder policies, and lack of opportunities for a much longer time than black people were mostly urban, which was only for a few decades at the most.


Roots of Hypersegregation in Philadelphia, 1920-1930

The days of most AAs being urban are long gone, like the days when most AAs were rural southerners. And we shouldn't live in self denial pretending as if we are. We are a largely, but not wholey, suburbanized people, which btw we've been on course to becoming for a long time now.


https://www.nap.edu/read/9599/chapter/4#52

^^^^Know thyself.....We are NOT an urbanized people anymore.

So, regardless whether we're judging solely by population size or including merits as a factor, "urban and/or lower income blacks" absolutely shouldn't be allowed to hijack black identity all or even mostly for themselves, while the vast majority of non-urban/lower income AAs are snuffed out and marginalized. But, of course, at the same time, to address the very valid concerns about classism/soft-bigotry, urban and/or lower income segments of our community absolutely should not be shunned, isolated, marginalized, or looked down upon by the greater AA community simply because they are urban or lower income, as they have just as much of a rightful place here as the rest of us. Cultural issues that exist in our community should be the center-point of our criticism, not the income level or development environment, but if there's a disproportionate concentration of said issues in certain income levels or development environments then it should be spoken about so we can have a greater understanding of where we need to focus efforts on improvement.

Though, tbh, I'm all about embracing the plurality of different outlooks and experiences our people bring to the table from their environmental upbringing. All of them are valuable contributions to the whole. And I'm also against pigeon-holing AAs, particular black men, in these overly simplistic generalized archetypal boxes, as if all of our individual experiences & personalities can be reduced down to being "street nikkas", "squares", "nerds" without any of the complexities other groups are afforded. I would take issues with anyone claiming that either of those atomized archetypes should be representative of AAs or black men as a whole.

But, "suburb nikka"?..... lol...............Most "nikkas" are suburban. You can't just hate, insult, or clown that fact away, so they aren't disconnected from shyt, but rather living the experience of most black people, and you'd therefor be insulting most black people. Wouldn't we call that "c00ning" just based off that fact alone?

 

[010101]

suburban nikka in my vocab is not always literally a motherfukker from the burbs

it's a reference to soft white washed out the loop ready to snitch proud to be preppy oreo ass fakkits

*