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

[A Real Human Bean]

I think some folks incorrectly conceive of "Black male privilege" like a math equation. As in, "You're a black male: black people lack privilege, but men have privilege, so that must mean that you're at least half as privileged as white men". But we know that's not the case. In many ways being a black male means we're subject to more oppression under this system of white supremacy, and without the aid of male privilege that white men enjoy.

I was speaking on this years ago. It's just common sense that there are unique disadvantages to being a black man. Disadvantages that even black women don't have.

 

[lotteryplaya]

There it is

 

[Astroslik]

no they don't...white girls are the main chicks chasing athletes in college. BW are simply trying to date all types of BM on campus because most of us know college educated BM are in short supply.

false, college is a microcosim of high school no matter what “tier” school you go to. BW and WW are throwing p*ssy at college athletes.

The average bookworm nikka isn’t getting checked on by bw, this may due to a deeper societal stigma we have in our community where the booksmart black man is considered a lame or week by many bw and bm.These men grew up being stigmatized and bashed for going outside the norm of being a hood nikka or an athelete.

You really think once they get to a pwi where there are few blacks and plenty non bw shyt will just switch up? These non bw are throwing it at them, they grew up getting bashed by their peers and communities for not fitting the norm so there is a lot of resentment towards their own.


Next...

and a pwi does not automatically = elite universities, most schools with high profile athletes aren't elite universities either, and the ones that are (Stanford, Duke, Northwestern (to an extent), UCLA, Cal, Mich, UVA), women care about the smart nikka just as much, if not more, than the athlete.

Ehh hard to refute or validate this...

and not enough BW? as i said, on average, BW outnumber BM in college, altho at the elite schools, it's pretty 50-50

i highely doubt this, bw as a whole are more educated than bm, I highely doubt that shyt is 50/50 at elite universities. You have to pillage and scavage to find nikkas at the university of Chicago. You will most definately spot a black woman more often than a bm.

FYI, the Bay Area is one of the c00n capitals of the us, so maybe your evidence is all anecdotal.

 

[#1 pick]

false, college is a microcosim of high school no matter what “tier” school you go to. BW and WW are throwing p*ssy at college athletes.

The average bookworm nikka isn’t getting checked on by bw, this may due to a deeper societal stigma we have in our community where the booksmart black man is considered a lame or week by many bw and bm.These men grew up being stigmatized and bashed for going outside the norm of being a hood nikka or an athelete.

You really think once they get to a pwi where there are few blacks and plenty non bw shyt will just switch up? These non bw are throwing it at them, they grew up getting bashed by their peers and communities for not fitting the norm so there is a lot of resentment towards their own.


Next...

Ehh hard to refute or validate this...

i highely doubt this, bw as a whole are more educated than bm, I highely doubt that shyt is 50/50 at elite universities. You have to pillage and scavage to find nikkas at the university of Chicago. You will most definately spot a black woman more often than a bm.

FYI, the Bay Area is one of the c00n capitals of the us, so maybe your evidence is all anecdotal.

In fairness, she went to Stanford. The average BM wasn't attending that University. It was the gifted and the exceptional. I think we need to reclassify this to the AVERAGE HS experience. I will say this from previous experiences. Women like desirable dudes. If you a nerd but she finds you attractive, you will eat. Attraction is important and shouldn't be understated.

 

[Astroslik]

In fairness, she went to Stanford. The average BM wasn't attending that University. It was the gifted and the exceptional. I think we need to reclassify this to the AVERAGE HS experience. I will say this from previous experiences. Women like desirable dudes. If you a nerd but she finds you attractive, you will eat. Attraction is important and shouldn't be understated.

Breh I don’t care if she went to Yale, more bw are at these institutions than bm so naturally SOME will be left out.

 

[#1 pick]

Breh I don’t care if she went to Yale, more bw are at these institutions than bm so naturally SOME will be left out.

That's not the point breh, the point is, brehettes at Stanford be choosing on ALL types of brehs and brehs got options because the risk isn't high. If she's at Cal-Northridge, she's probably putting more energy on the Iota or the star athlete if she's attractive for status reasons. But all colleges don't operate like HS. The less successful the school is noted for, the more likely she going for status over tangibles. Like the worse a nikka is at sports, the better looking he gotta be to eat.

 

[Offthegrid]

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.

Everyone from the church to grandma is all about spending money to LOOK like you have wealth, but no one is really understand what's needed to obtain wealth, and keep it. If you bring up getting the government to play their role in making things fair, especially for black people, EVERYBODY becomes deaf. People have really accepted the idea that the government shouldn't help, and see it as handouts, but the same people who started this agenda are the same people who pay politicians to make the laws in their favor!

I hate to say it, but I think the people are gonna have to go through some hard times, before they wake up, and see the trick that was played on them. Right now, credit has allowed people live in a fantasy world, so anyone who talks different from what they see, is seen as negative or complaining. Now, its all about owning a business, yet most businesses fail. And even if your business does succeed, that doesn't mean you will have wealth, especially if you live off a lot of credit. You will just be working even more hours because you aren't sure if you will get a paycheck next week. Plus, everyone can't own a business, if they did who will be the workers!

Facts I had a long talk with my elders in my family n they are totally lost on what us young ppl are going through in this new era it hit me that its grown ppl almost 40 still living off their parents or they can't live off them anymore the money is gone. We all have som

I give America 6 more years before there is a societal fallout. How are people more educated, have a better sense of knowing how money is ran, and work harder, but they live a standard of living worse than their parents?

Mfs playing sleep n stupid and ignore the elephant in the room til shyt gets really bad only care and wanna be assertive when its over. The issue is white ppl control the wealth jobs & industry last time I check black ppl don't make cars guns drugs or print money wtf is black excellence

 

[lotteryplaya]

I don't know if this was posted, but Tone talks broke this article down, and shows why its not a well done study. He even made them change the title, that shows how strong he is with the facts!

The black guy they show is African, and white, he doesn't come from descendants of slaves which is something big when having this discussion since a lot of Africans come from well to do families, and some also have white privilege if they have a white parent. If you are black, chances are you were in debt when you got that big check, so you are paying them loans off. You have family you are helping, since we come from a legacy of being at the bottom due to slavery, and racism.

Whites who are rich usually have a legacy that helps them, so their college is payed for, they don't have to help family members because they come from money already. AND they get loans to build more wealth. All these people we think did things themselves usually came from money, and got huge money to star their business from family.

Tone talks, and Yvette Carnell are the only ones who break down the actual data of how things are, everyone else just talk about theories, and how they THINK things are. Claude Anderson is good to, but he deals mostly with the past, he doesn't go in depth on current situations like those two do.

He breaks all of this down in the video, and touches on things most don't even think about because we just don't want to acknowledge the place we are in right now, as black americans.

Tone made the newspaper bow down using only facts. You will still have people on here pretending to be black and dissing Tone and Yvette. Yvette and Tone back up all their talking points with facts.

 

[Reece]

I think a lot of it is black peoples', or more specifically black people who grew up poor, aversion to nepotism. even after achieving a measure of economic success, black people will still say shyt like, "ain't nobody help me. get out there and help yourself." even I need to check myself about saying that shyt. I also noticed parents in general regardless of ethnicity, will do more to ensure their daughters succeed as opposed to their sons. its frowned upon for a man to live at home after graduating high school. I know mad women who moved back home after graduating college. hell, when i first met my wife she was living with her grandma in a house her mother owned. many a black father has kicked their sons out of the house at 18 or at least threatened to. rarely does that happen to their daughters. that shyt needs to stop if the playing field is to be evened. if you have the means to, you should give your child even leg up you possibly can, even if its just leaving at home while in college and helping pay for books or some shyt. just don't let your children go into crazy debt before they even get their adult life started. that pretty much ensures your family will never have generational wealth. just a bunch of indebted negroes with, "good jobs" at best.

Those same parents expect their kids to take care of them in old age though

 

[The Emperor]

The study is saying what we all have been saying for years on here

America won't let a black man win...At all

Regardless of how rich, which class or which family we comes from.
If we do get rich our boys have no shot at better life still.

This country is not for us no victories will happen here for us we will suffer and we'll die and that's about it.

No shot?

Stop it...

 

[shadowking]

As a Caribbean, I know that my family pressed education as far back as I can remember. I know other Africans do so with their children as well. Both for men and women. There's a persisting idea that Afram women are encouraged to go to college than Afram men. In this idea, Afram men also do not find value in education. Now, I'm not saying this is true. But this idea has been around for awhile now (decades). So I wonder how true it is and if so how much does it contribute to the current issue of generation wealth among black men.

AA men do find value in education.
It's just hard for them for the following reasons:

More likely to be suspended and expelled relative to others

More likely to be placed in the system unfairly. Bm and wm consume drugs at the same rate but only Bm get prosecuted far more and get far more penalties.

Less likely to have mentors. Not necessarily in the home but more in academia/ professional settings..
For now a small solution will be the mentorship program. If you can find just one boy to help, it goes a long way and will cascade in time

 

[shadowking]

It's making me hopeless and want to give up, I was depressed after reading this. Makes me feel like I should of played in the NBA.

Don't lose hope. Your forefathers went through hell to get you this far. Do your part...mentor 1 kid. No one asked you to save the world..just one..

That's all it takes. Singles add up before the inevitable home run

 

[Supper]

I haven’t moved anything. Those are all valid points that refute your argument. You don’t seem smart enough to even understand the points.

And I thoroughly answered all of them in my responses, and you continued to almost completely side step all of it and move the goal post afterwords.

You talk about the freedom to own guns as if that freedom trump’s the freedom of citizens to have freedom of expression.

What? Where did I say that? And please do directly quote me.

Seriously, I'm not trying to be funny or insulting, but you do really seem to have some major reading comprehension issues. You might want to calm down, collect yourself, go back, and re-read what I wrote to gain an actual understand, because right now it just seems you're pulling things you wish I said out from out no where in order to build some ad hoc argument ie a strawman.

The freedom of expression in this country is enshrined in the 1st amendment along with free speech. The nothing about the 2nd amendment right to bear arms infringes on that. You are allowed to express yourself by protesting, rallying, speaking openly, and publishing anything you want. In fact the 1st and 2nd amendment often go hand in hand with using one to defend the other as we see with the open carry protest(hpngc south dallas TX mosque counter protest or nbpp paris TX protest) or using the freedom of speech to defend the freedom to bear arms, as I'm doing now.

Every week now there’s a new terrorist attack committed by someone with a militarized gun who’s aim is to restrict people’s freedoms. Kids are marching in the streets telling the country that they don’t even feel safe in their own schools. So we are seeing that people’s right to bear arms is directly contributing to the restriction of other rights.

Ehh, no. Every so often there's a mass shooting or school shooting, which are statistically very rare, and account for very small amount of total deaths.

And rifles(of which the ar-15 is a small subset) are only used in less than a QUARTER of all mass shootings and %3.4 of the firearm murders and %2.5 of the total homicides(knives, blunt objects and hands/feet account for more homicides).

And the fact that these fact that these kids are free to march up the down the streets protesting, regardless of how uninformed they are, proves their rights to freedom of expression are alive and well.

Again, nobody is trying to take away the right to bear arms. Putting g restrictions in place on the grade of weapons that citizens can own doesn’t take away your right to bear arms. Your position is based on a lie.

No, but, you're trying to limit my rights to bear arms based on what you arbitrarily think I need, based on what you arbitrarily consider to be a "military grade weapon", which is ridiculous to say the least.

And again, the common civilian AR-15 is not a 'military grade weapon'. It's not used by the military. It wasn't designed for use by the military, but specifically as a hunting and defense rifle. And while well made, isn't anywhere close to being the most power rifle even on the civilian market, seeing as it uses the same caliber rounds as a standard .22 handgun. It's just very VERY common, thus an easy target for scrutiny by the media and uninformed individuals.

You say that they you need to have unrestricted access to firearms for “defense/protection” and refuted that bullshyt by pointing out that you don’t need military grade firearms for defense/protection against other citizens and those military grade firearms won’t protect you from the government or even your local police force. So who are you claiming that these weapons are going to protect you from?

Again, I already addressed your "need" argument, which I never made and specifically pointed out as being an illogical red herring.

I never said this issue was about what a person 'needs', because that's pretty subjective and I shouldn't have restrictions to my freedom being decided by someone's subjective idea about what they feel each and every citizen the nation over needs to have in any and all situations(as if there aren't an infinite number of factors that could come into play from person to person when determining that), but about freedom of choice. And I'd like to be able to make that decision myself, not have that decided for me based on your and anyone else's arbitrary assessment of personal necessity. Laws are never passed on the basis of restricting people based on what they "need", only and nothing else, anyway. That fact is that the AR-15 or any other Semi-Auto rifle CAN, has been useful in personal self defense on MANY occasions, and is in fact very sufficient for home defense.

And addressing the point about taking on a rouge government

And if by chance we were in a situation where we had to defend ourselves from a rouge WS government, we certainly wouldn't use conventional warfare like that you would see of to states of comparable militaristic capabilities. We would have to employ irregular guerrilla tactics such as those that were employed SUCCESSFULLY for instance by the Afghans during the Soviet occupation, the bangledeshis during the rebellion from pakistan and the Vietcong during the American occupation.

^You can also add Hezbollah driving out the Israeli military in Lebanon in 2006 to that list.

Again goes back to reading comprehension.

I didn’t ask you were gun restriction laws right wing authoritarianism, I told you that your position is the same as right wing nuts who you initially tried to distance yourself from. You sound like one of these NRA cats.

Actually, you did.

You actually believe that gun law restrictions are a tenet of right wing government authoritarianism? That makes no sense.

http://www.thecoli.com/posts/28780747/
^^You

Again dummy, he point was to refute your claim that you need military grade weapons for defense/protection. The only group that you could argue needing that kind of firearms for is the government, which is the right wing NRA argument that you’re using. I’m sayin that ar-15s and these other assault rifles that saying that you claim to need for protection, wot protect you from the government. So if you’re serious about that “protection” argument, then you should be advocating for there being no restrictions on the weaponry that citizens can own. You should be fighting for the right to have access to everything that the military has access too since you’re so worried about protection from the government.

^^^See previous quotes addressing the "need" and "rouge government" point.

By the way, the M16 is also a firearm, but it’s banned. Matter of fact, from ‘94-04 the ar-15 itself was banned. So clearly the right to bear arms doesn’t guarantee citizens to own any type of firearm that they so desire. Certain firearms are banned in certain states and not others. Come on, you’re dumbing this conversation down.

Actually, that's exactly what the 2nd amendment was originally written for. It guaranteed the rights of citizens(except enslaved and free blacks who weren't considered full citizens) to own ANY type of firearm, including the one's used by the military at the time. Only later would 'gun control' measure be put in place by state & federal legislation and court cases to limit citizens second amendment rights- One of the earliest being those of the 'black codes' of the reconstruction era south.

And btw the "assault weapons" ban that you're referring to, was shown to have no discernible effect on lower gun violence or even mass shootings in the country when it was in place. And one of the reasons was because, like you don't for 'military grade', the congress didn't have a set definition for what it considered an "assault weapon", thus just came up with a ad hoc list of guns to be put on the ban list. The company that manufactured the ar-15 simply designed another model called the 'colt sporter' that essentially had the same specs to be sold for civilian use while the ban was in place.

This is a lie, which I just proved above All firearms are not covered under the 2nd amendment. Like I said, the M16 is currently banned, so is the uzi. I think tech-9s are too. There are plenty of restrictions to what firearms citizens can own already on the books depending on your state and there always has been. You’re embarrassing yourself.

The 2nd amendment doesn't restrict my access to any of those weapons. The National Firearm Act of 1934 and Firearms Owner Protection Act of 1986 does. There's nothing within the 2nd amendment itself that say I can't own an M16. If we repealed the 1934 NFA &1986 FOPA like we did with the 1994 AWB(technically expired) and kept the 2nd amendment, and I would be able to purchase and own all of those guns.

Matter of fact I’m stopping here. I’m not even going to waste my time with the rest of that dumb shyt you wrote. The fact that there has already been provisions to the 2nd amendment that you apparently don’t understand disproves your whole argument.

I don't see how we can continue to have this conversation if you insist on continuing to run away from the points being raised, and then moving the goal post.

 

[L0Qutus]

Against my better judgement I went to see what they were saying over on st0rmfr0nt Alley aka LSA
Sons of Rich Black Families Fare No Better Than Sons of Working-Class Whites

I'm just going to say if anyone EVER tries to insinuate that the Coli and LSA are mirror reflections of each other should be slapped in the mouth

Look at the conversation happening over at LSA compared to this thread

These broads hate black men so much they are "juelzing" their assess off to deflect that under a system of white supremacy, they are viewed as LESS of a threat and are allowed to have a little bit of success comparable to white women.

They are blaming black men themselves saying they don't have the innate drive that black women have on some EUGENICS shyt! They are blaming Black parents saying that boys are coddled while black girls are drilled.
They are talking about how they need to "divest" b/c black men just don't have what it takes.

They won't accept that white people don't feel the need to put their foot on their neck like they do Black men...I wonder why

 

[Intricate Guh]

@Gravity how so? You guys live in your own little bubble and when met with adversity you cannot explain yourself like an adult. Break down the errors in what I said.