Sons of Rich Blacks Fare No Better than Working Class White Sons - but different finding for Women

[Intricate Guh]

pertaining to this study
i don't believe that these issues are because of black women .
institutional racism is clearly the issue here. and i think thats what the study is saying.
there's obviously something happening to black boys and not black girls for these disparities in outcomes

I agree. But it’s not because black Women are comparable to white Women, it’s because racially charged intersectionalities. That’s what made me laugh and even reply. I guess that guy was a troll.

To answer the thread..which I didn’t do in the first place.. my reasoning would be

• White men teach their sons about legacy. Their money is way longer than Black people’s because of you know..slavery and the fact black people were considered akin to cattle less than 200 years ago. Therefore they (white males) can afford to slack off because if daddy doesn’t save him, uncle, grandpa or cousin Neil will..at the very least they’ll know who can.
• Women do a Grade A job at infantilizing their sons while being harsh on their daughters. Fathers, however dote on their girls and instill fear into their boys. We don’t have fathers like that so there is no balance, the girls come out headstrong and hard working.. boys come out mentally feeble and with skewed views of the world. Usually finding comfort in meaningless things like attention, sex, and respect from other lost male peers.
• Tyler Perry, Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Russell Simmons, Tiger Woods, Kanye West, Lavar Ball (well kinda), are all examples of rich black men that could’ve kept money in the black community but had children with white women and gave up that chance. I see it EVERY DAY. I live on the west coast. I see black men trying their hardest to fit in and they all keep a Kardashian lite on their arms trying to be somebody they’re not. They literally SEND white women after black athletes (being a woman.. when white women open up to you with ‘Girl talk’ youll learn ALOT about all of them) because they know that a brotha marrying a black woman and keeping the wealth black is dangerous. What if they build school? Teach black love and peace? They can’t have that so they promote c00nskin and white women as the ultimate prize. nikkas fall 80% of the time.

 

[Jhoon]

man this is so disheartening..........like whats the fukking point if ill probably just end up poor because of factors beyond my control

as an immigrant, it’s the American “can do” spirit. That is real. The problem is when you’re so beaten down, you’re not going to see the bigger picture.

 

[Mr Hate Coffee]

The issue is too many middle class brothers want to be street dudes. Hell a black man from a middle class area is clowned for it sometimes.

Yes, this is THE issue.

Tired of hearing about these Ivy League studies they do nothing to fix. Whole thing reeks of....


They consistently present the issue to the public as if to rub it in your face (POC)....


What's the point of addressing it if your not gonna do anything to solve it? Cacs won't implement anything...

The study presents data. fukk your feelings, data over everything. If anything this should wake some people up to what we're fighting against. Plus, studies like this can be used on our side when we need to fight to have policies changed or other government action. I'll never understand someone shytting on an educational study with thorough and legitimate research.

So you gonna let these "studies" and cacs stop you? That's what they want you to do....quit and not be shyt. Refuse to give them the satisfaction. We are used to always having to do more than our counterparts. shyt ain't nothing new. Education is something NO ONE can take away from you...take advantage of it and treat it seriously in your household. And truth be told, companies DO like having diversity. Now when it gets to those higher positions, it's definitely something that is harder, but it's not impossible.

Look at all the brothers throughout history who found a way to be successful in times much worse than we have today. fukk all that defeatist attitude and mentality shyt.

I feel you bruh but this shyt is A LOT to go up against. I can see how nikkas can be defeated. Because real talk, things aint getting better. And no amount of us individually stepping our game up can fight the fact that there are large systemic factors fighting against us.

I don't have the answers but it's not as simple as a mindset change on an individual or even family level. We legit need entire communities on the same page.

 

[Mr Hate Coffee]

If you not becoming a lawyer or doctor there is zero reason to get a degree

I dapped you up but this stance is a bit extreme. I'd throw STEM majors in finance in there as well.

I'd also add that black girls tend to be trained, while black boys are loved. That is, in our community we tend to be harder on our girls and demand more from them while we don't push our boys as hard academically. We accept B's from our son's. Too many black boys have "A+" brains but we accept "B-" level results.

I think this is an over generalization. I think that it's just easier to parent a young girl than a young boy. Especially if the father isn't around. These single moms don't have a clue what to do with their sons. Even if the dad is around, a lot of the time he takes a more hardlined "you'll figure it out" approach. But those are just generalizations as well.

 

[Rekkapryde]

I feel you bruh but this shyt is A LOT to go up against. I can see how nikkas can be defeated. Because real talk, things aint getting better. And no amount of us individually stepping our game up can fight the fact that there are large systemic factors fighting against us.

I don't have the answers but it's not as simple as a mindset change on an individual or even family level. We legit need entire communities on the same page.

It's definitely a lot but nikkaz before us dealt with much worse regarding the system and Cac shenanigans. My Point is that you can't quit.

 

[Mr Hate Coffee]

I agree, but the problem is how can older people guide younger people, when the older people have no clue what's going on? Or the younger person doesn't want to hear what you have to say?

Most have no idea of the wealth disparity, the gig economy that is straight foul for working americans, the new redlining that is happening, and so much more. I was watching Queenzflip show on youtube, and these nikkas was saying there is no more racism, and "the white man aint holding you down". People are fronting for each other, and not telling the truth about their financial status, so its nearly impossible to guide a child because he will think its just you. I know because i went through this exact thing. I don't think I can do it again, all i did was argue with the kid because everyone around him was fronting on social media, the older people living off credit beyond their means, but are not being honest about it, and no one is enforcing using money to make money EXCEPT when bitcoin started getting big.
!

I'll say this, I can only be an effective mentor for a kid older than 15, that is already on the track for college (at least 3.0 gpa) and maybe comes from a bad situation and needs some guidance. These are the kids I can best share my experience and resources with.

I've mentored A LOT over the years and it's tough to mentor boys from 10-14 because their minds are all over the place and they're too young to really soak up the wisdom. Anything younger than 10 is babysitting to me and I don't have the personality for it. lol

I have FOUR nephews aged 7-12. When I keep them for the weekend I try to lace them with jewels but honestly the best influence is coming from their homes. I can't fix what they're being taught on a daily basis. The fact that my sister is a single mom who doesn't have her shyt together makes the task nearly impossible.

Now I'm trying to do this as a 34 year old, first generation college kid, making six figs and carving my own path in this world. shyt is a lot to take on.

 

[paperbag]

to the bolded. I didn’t think anybody that posts here would know what this meant. Kudos to you. You are absolutely right. A matriarch means women rule, your last name is your mother’s, your sister is more important than you and is seen as the family’s successor, your wife’s values and tradition become your own. nikkas don’t even be trying, just throwing and seeing what sticks.

As to the rest, pertaining to what? I do know majority of black male’s issues are a direct result of the white man.. not us, but a lot of our issues are a direct result of both of y’all. Nobody makes y’all beat us, rape us, and pimp us at alarming rates. You fear the white man will take you away, we fear YOU will take us away. We don’t kill y’all like y’all kill us, and anybody that wants to bring up abortion I will bring up common sense that says MOST women don’t want to abort, a mixture of the male’s influence and knowing you can’t provide weigh the decision. Out of ALL the women I know who have had abortions...over 15 in my personal life including family.. ONE ..that’s right ONE uses it as a form of birth control. My ratchet 2nd cousin. Idk about y’all’s case studies.

The black woman is the best thing y’all got going for y’all. We rally. We donate. Even when y’all don’t do it for yourselves. LSA is not a good indicator of what black women think no more than the Coli is a good indicator of what black men think. If all black men in real life thought no p*ssy like new p*ssy, GMB, and PAWG life I’m sure there would be no Obama’s, Johnson’s, or Howroyd’s. It’s for play play

This wasn't the thread for this. If you read the article and your reaction was to come here and post a nikkas aint shyt diatribe, you're really lost. Go hug your father, brother, cousin, husband and ask them if they are okay.
Get it together

 

[Supper]

I didn’t read past the first few paragraphs, then scrolled/skimmed down only to see that you’ve posted yet another 100,000 word blah blah essay that I’m not going to read. This “talk you to death” shyt just isn’t going to work. I could break your shyt down point by point as I usually do but I really do t have the time.

You'll have to forgive me if I don't buy this claim one bit, especially seeing as you seem to spend a lot of time on here. Sounds more like a desperate intellectual cop out to me.

But, sure.

We can make this simple or you can just stop quoting me. This began with you claiming that your NRA right wing position on guns is really a tenet of liberalism. You’ve then went on and on and on and on and on in an attempt to reconcile that obvious contradiction.

Well, I would think that advocating for LIBERAL gun laws would being a tenant of liberalism would be quite self-evident. But, if not in your case, then there it is.

Government authoritarianism in the form of infringing on citizen rights to bear arms sure isn't. That's the anti-thesis of individual LIBERTY.

And you quoted me first, and continue to do so. You can bail out of the discussion at point you please. You don't need to use my comment length as an excuse for a cop out or request that I bail you out by not responding to you.

I’m saying be consistent. If you think that it’s so necessary for people to have unlimited freedom to own any kind of firearm that they want for their protection/defense then why stop at firearms? Why shouldn’t you also fight for the right to own any kind of weapon that you want? You talk about hezbollah, Afghans, Bangladeshis, and all that, well that had access to more than firearms. They had the rockets, tanks, grenades, etc. They had all the military shyt to fight off the respective militaries trying to occupy them. You’re not even serious with it. You’re going to need a lot more than just firearms to hold off an America military or even a local police force. Even the police got robots to come blow your ass up.

Crew manned or area-weapons have little to no use for personal self defense, thus are not in the same class as firearms as it pertains to citizens rights to the defense of LL&P, so civilians owning them can't be argued for as an inalienable right enshrined in the constitution as the right to bear firearms can. Though, personally in an ideal system where there wasn't racial discrimination, I wouldn't have anything against a those weapons being placed in a "just-cause" category of ownership as apposed to being an inalienable right as are firearms.

Neither Hezbollah nor the mujahadeen in Afghanistan had any tanks, aircraft, or naval capabilities, let a lone nukes and drones, as their enemies did. Just explosives & rocket/missile launchers for neutralizing armored vehicles, like tanks & aircraft and more than anything, good old fashion firearms for everything else, including also neutralizing aircraft. Same as the Chechens in the vast majority of their engagements with the Russian military. In fact tanks would be a liability for a highly mobile guerrilla force where flexibility and the ability to out maneuver the enemy is tantamount.

Local police units aren't equipment with explosive land drones, like that used against Micah Johnson. That was deployed by the SWAT team once they arrived after multiple hours of negotiations. But, before that Micah Johnson utterly DECIMATED the dpd force on the scene by himself. Assata Shakur and the BLA held off MULTIPLE police in shootouts, killing many of them.

Firearms on their own are MORE than sufficient for a guerrilla force to resist against lower level government agents like law enforcement. Especially seeing as guerilla engagements are typically of an amush 'hit-&-run' nature, where the goal is to simply inflict damage or harassment on the enemy and escape to fight another day. Not standing your ground to defend territory. This maneuverability allows ones to blend in with the general populous, including amongst members of the enemy force within the enemies territory itself. And in the event where the government escalates their force to a full scale military use, then yes, weapons such as missile launchers and and explosives probably should be procured, but only as vehicle neutralizing weapons, and luckily you don't need that many of them to get the job done. Thus, going through black market to get missiles wouldn't be that much of a challenge and explosives can be easily built in-house. Firearms would still be the bred and butter of the physical engagement part of the resistance. And that's not to mention the aspects that don't involve direct physical engagement such as politics, intelligence, espionage, deception, sabotage, and foreign support(see Cuba granting multiple BPP and BLA members asylum) which are just as, if not more, important.

 

[Supper]

As to the rest, pertaining to what? I do know majority of black male’s issues are a direct result of the white man.. not us, but a lot of our issues are a direct result of both of y’all. Nobody makes y’all beat us, rape us, and pimp us at alarming rates. You fear the white man will take you away, we fear YOU will take us away. We don’t kill y’all like y’all kill us, and anybody that wants to bring up abortion I will bring up common sense that says MOST women don’t want to abort, a mixture of the male’s influence and knowing you can’t provide weigh the decision. Out of ALL the women I know who have had abortions...over 15 in my personal life including family.. ONE ..that’s right ONE uses it as a form of birth control. My ratchet 2nd cousin. Idk about y’all’s case studies.

Now, FILICIDES(parents killing kids) is an area where black women have to take primary responsibility, as they commit most of it. A study done by researchers in Michigan who collected data on women in state prisons throughout the country found that of female filicide(parents killing children) offenders black women despite being %12 of the female population committed %71 of the filicides done by women, the most common victims were black boys.
When mothers kill their children


Most victims of single person committed filicide are boys.
Breaking the Science: 71% of Children Killed by One Parent are Killed by Their Mothers; 60% of Victims are Boys

Men, on the other hand, reported higher rates than women of sexual misconduct by staff members (most of which is committed by staff of the opposite sex),3 and in juvenile detention, boys reported much higher rates of abuse by staff than girls did—most, again, committed by women.

As is the case in adult facilities, blacks in juvenile detention are more likely than whites to report staff sexual misconduct, and whites are more likely than blacks to report inmate-on-inmate sexual abuse. Unlike the National Inmate Survey, the new National Survey of Youth in Custody asked respondents to identify the race of inmates who had sexually abused them. Although there are more blacks than whites in juvenile detention, more whites abused their fellow inmates.

The Shame of Our Prisons: New Evidence

Grown women coercing & forcing vulnerable underage juvenile black and latino boys into sex-slavery.
https://nypost.com/2017/08/30/teen-says-juvenile-detention-center-used-inmates-as-sex-slaves/

#BlackWomenSoInnocent

 

[Taadow]

This wasn't the thread for this. If you read the article and your reaction was to come here and post a nikkas aint shyt diatribe, you're really lost. Go hug your father, brother, cousin, husband and ask them if they are okay.
Get it together

No, this is the right thread for that...this is what they think of us.
Some of y'all won't even believe it when they'll tell you plain as day like that...

 

[Gravity]

You'll have to forgive me if I don't buy this claim one bit, especially seeing as you seem to spend a lot of time on here. Sounds more like a desperate intellectual cop out to me.

But, sure.

I couldn’t care less about what you “buy” you sassy ass fakkit. I don’t even know how much time you spend on here. I wouldn’t doubt that you’re one of these geeks with multiple names/aliases. You seem like the type.

Well, I would think that advocating for LIBERAL gun laws would being a tenant of liberalism would be quite self-evident. But, if not in your case, then there it is. Government authoritarianism in the form of infringing on citizen rights to bear arms sure isn't. That's the anti-thesis of individual LIBERTY.

That’s not evident in anyone’s case but yours. That’s why liberals don’t share your position while right wing conservatives do. I know what it is tho, everybody else has it wrong and you are the 1 who’s right.

Crew manned or area-weapons have little to no use for personal self defense, thus are not in the same class as firearms as it pertains to citizens rights to the defense of LL&P, so civilians owning them can't be argued for as an inalienable right enshrined in the constitution as the right to bear firearms can.

This is a lie. It can certainly be argued that weapons other than firearms are needed for protection, especially from a potentially corrupt government which is the foundation of the 2nd amendment. 240 years ago when weaponry was far less advanced, a public armed with firearms might’ve been enough to keep a potentially rogue military in check. Obviously that ship has long sailed and my point remains. You’re trying to paint yourself as some kind of constitutionalist who’s just defending the 2nd amendment when the whole spirit of the 2nd amendment is for the public to be in a position to keep the military in check. So if you were really all about defending the freedom/liberty supposedly granted by the constitution, then you’d actually be advocating for the 2nd amendment to be expanded beyond firearms since firearms alone doesn’t grant the public with the freedom/liberty to keep the military in check.

Though, personally in an ideal system where there wasn't racial discrimination, I wouldn't have anything against a those weapons being placed in a "just-cause" category of ownership as apposed to being an inalienable right as are firearms.

You’re full of shyt. Again, the purpose of giving citizens the inalienable right to possess firearms was to secure a free state not under the thumb of the government and it’s military. Here in 2018 firearms no longer secure a free state in the advent of a corrupt government.

You can’t build your whole bullshyt position around defending the 2nd amendment while ignoring the spirit/intent of the 2nd amendment. If you were serious about defending the freedom/liberty that the 2nd amendment supposedly grants, then you’d be arguing for its expansion to include all weapons with no restrictions as an inalienable right for all citizens on the strength of the spirit/intent of the 2nd amendment.

Neither Hezbollah nor the mujahadeen in Afghanistan had any tanks, aircraft, or naval capabilities, let a lone nukes and drones, as their enemies did. Just explosives & rocket/missile launchers for neutralizing armored vehicles, like tanks & aircraft and more than anything, good old fashion firearms for everything else, including also neutralizing aircraft. Same as the Chechens in the vast majority of their engagements with the Russian military. In fact tanks would be a liability for a highly mobile guerrilla force where flexibility and the ability to out maneuver the enemy is tantamount.

The point remains The point was that those rebellion forces had access to weaponry beyond firearms. Those examples don’t support your position that firearms would be enough to keep a government military(let alone the most powerful military in the world) in check.

Local police units aren't equipment with explosive land drones, like that used against Micah Johnson. That was deployed by the SWAT team once they arrived after multiple hours of negotiations. But, before that Micah Johnson utterly DECIMATED the dpd force on the scene by himself. Assata Shakur and the BLA held off MULTIPLE police in shootouts, killing many of them.

Local police forces are equipped with explosives, land drones, etc. SWAT is part of local police. Gotdamn bruh.

Holding off a police force in an isolated stand off for a limited amount of time is not keeping a government in check. Micah Johnson was a military trained officer with military assault rifles and he didn’t make it out of the night. Assata Shakur is living in exile outside of the country on the threat of being jailed for life or put to death. These are not examples of citizens keeping the government in check on the strength of possessing firearms. These are examples of how citizens have no shot to go up against the government just bearing firearms.

Firearms on their own are MORE than sufficient for a guerrilla force to resist against lower level government agents like law enforcement.

No they aren’t and you can’t give one example of this being true.

You’re also movin the goal post because obviously the government consists of more than just lower level law enforcement. You know good and damn well that law enforcement on all levels are connected to a certain extent. In any event of a “guerilla force” engaging in combat against a local police force, other levels of law enforcement will automatically be deployed to neutralize said guerilla force.

 

[A1aaa]

the latent ire toward black men in non sports/entertainment fields is unlike any demographic. from a systematic level down to day-to-day interactions.

from our entry in the educational system, we're rarely placed in nurturing environments but more so punitive/degrading ones. i think this molds the psyche of black men at a young age toward carving a niche outside of a system that offers little encouragement and more so obstacles.

even in attaining success in the traditional pathway, our mere presence elicits so much insecurity from many non-blacks that our interactions are masked with curiosity/uneasiness at best and downright hostility at worst. as if we're 'uppity' for trying to achieve in this life. look at obama. again, a lack of nurturing from this society. being a wealthy black can offset that psychological trauma only so much.

just even think about how groups of blacks congregating together in many settings is perceived as hostile... yet when say, indians or chinese do so, not many eyelashes are batted. being black in many places is akin to being born on probation... being born with two strikes. sick

 

[Ya?]

the latent ire toward black men in non sports/entertainment fields is unlike any demographic. from a systematic level down to day-to-day interactions.

from our entry in the educational system, we're rarely placed in nurturing environments but more so punitive/degrading ones. i think this molds the psyche of black men at a young age toward carving a niche outside of a system that offers little encouragement and more so obstacles.

even in attaining success in the traditional pathway, our mere presence elicits so much insecurity from many non-blacks that our interactions are masked with curiosity/uneasiness at best and downright hostility at worst. as if we're 'uppity' for trying to achieve in this life. look at obama. again, a lack of nurturing from this society. being a wealthy black can offset that psychological trauma only so much.

just even think about how groups of blacks congregating together in many settings is perceived as hostile... yet when say, indians or chinese do so, not many eyelashes are batted. being black in many places is akin to being born on probation... being born with two strikes. sick

I can attest to this. It's unfortunate this is why I always make an effort to smile and be welcoming to black people. I feel no uneasiness with being in company of people who like me. But sometimes it is an uphill battle being in environment that encourages black people to assimilate.

 

[ozzy]

No offense but some of these are black men fault instead of going to school to learn and further their future but no they wanna be on the street, be a rapper or do all the stupid stuff some of them even think working at the office is working for a white men. We have thread on here telling people if you work at the office you are not a man that is not a real man's job and how you should always be on your feet jobs like plumbing. You have black men celebrities marrying out giving their money back to white people. You have people encouraging people not to get marriage so more fatherless child in black community

 

[BigMan]

I agree. But it’s not because black Women are comparable to white Women, it’s because racially charged intersectionalities. That’s what made me laugh and even reply. I guess that guy was a troll.

To answer the thread..which I didn’t do in the first place.. my reasoning would be

• White men teach their sons about legacy. Their money is way longer than Black people’s because of you know..slavery and the fact black people were considered akin to cattle less than 200 years ago. Therefore they (white males) can afford to slack off because if daddy doesn’t save him, uncle, grandpa or cousin Neil will..at the very least they’ll know who can.
• Women do a Grade A job at infantilizing their sons while being harsh on their daughters. Fathers, however dote on their girls and instill fear into their boys. We don’t have fathers like that so there is no balance, the girls come out headstrong and hard working.. boys come out mentally feeble and with skewed views of the world. Usually finding comfort in meaningless things like attention, sex, and respect from other lost male peers.
• Tyler Perry, Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Russell Simmons, Tiger Woods, Kanye West, Lavar Ball (well kinda), are all examples of rich black men that could’ve kept money in the black community but had children with white women and gave up that chance. I see it EVERY DAY. I live on the west coast. I see black men trying their hardest to fit in and they all keep a Kardashian lite on their arms trying to be somebody they’re not. They literally SEND white women after black athletes (being a woman.. when white women open up to you with ‘Girl talk’ youll learn ALOT about all of them) because they know that a brotha marrying a black woman and keeping the wealth black is dangerous. What if they build school? Teach black love and peace? They can’t have that so they promote c00nskin and white women as the ultimate prize. nikkas fall 80% of the time.

Agree on the first point. I disagree on the second and third. There are many other racial and ethnic groups that treat girls and boys different and they are not suffering as bad as black men in this country. I also think the black men are mentally weak argument is lazy and disrespectful because of what it implies

And realize that you’re on the west coast where y’all love mixing ma
The “all black men” date out argument is tired and wrong. The black actors/atheletes you name are a statistically irrelevant cohort and even so the majority of black athletes and actors have black wives, just like the majority of black men. This can be verified by several statistics.

I swear everytime I hear this argument it’s from someone from the west coast