The emasculation of the Black Man continues...
Options
Comments
-
jetlifebih wrote: »
Maybe your reality is distorted....jetlifebih wrote: »jetlifebih wrote: »jetlifebih wrote: »Again it’s the representation....i realize that ? are here to stay but.....
There are 10 shows with black males that have a reoccurring role, there is no reason why 7 out of the 10 are ? 2 are docile and the one brother who appears to represent the behavior of the average black male has 2 baby mommas and a ged....
They are misrepresenting black males on national television as ? and or dysfunctional
You made up those numbers. What are the actual numbers?
I don’t watch scheduled programming
Then you shouldn't use that as the basis for your stance because its easily disproven
Disprove it then...
I agree in theory, but again there is a reality here that you are ignoring....you sound like females who say women should be able to wear whatever and not face harassment....i agree....but the reality is you can’t wear what you want and not face harassment....thats the reality....if you wear a lace dress best believe somebody is going to say something inappropriate....take your head out of candy landjetlifebih wrote: »Again it’s the representation....i realize that ? are here to stay but.....
There are 10 shows with black males that have a reoccurring role, there is no reason why 7 out of the 10 are ? 2 are docile and the one brother who appears to represent the behavior of the average black male has 2 baby mommas and a ged....
They are misrepresenting black males on national television as ? and or dysfunctional
For starters, its not up to any fictional characters to "represent" anyone.
Secondly, there's millions of black males in the country. It's impossible to "represent" then anyway.
Fictional characters aren't spokesman for your race, sexuality or gender
In reality, fictional characters don't represent anyone.
Also, women should be able to dress how they want without harassment.
Where do you think cacs got the feeling that blacks were going to steal their pocketbooks?
Perceived realism
https://library.uoregon.edu/sites/default/files/data/guides/english/howard_journal_communications.pdf
This ? is irrelevant.
Fictional characters aren't spokesman for your race or gender -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Shizlansky wrote: »The more I look at ? like this the more I see it’s a war on men.
You know what? I don't know if it's a war on men or men are just becoming weirdos by traditional standards. These dudes been out here wearing makeup for a while. The fact that they just now started putting it into marketing doesn't really change that.
Masculinity is changing. I've dropped my theory a few times already, but I'll say it again: you guys need to realize the changes that have taken place since the sexual revolution. The pill, which liberates women in their sex lives, is well known to affect hormones to such an extent that it will completely change the kind of guys women are attracted to: instead of chiseled jaw lines, muscles, and power they refer softer features and revile obvious displays of masculinity. Ever notice liberal women tend to be into softer dudes than Conservatives? It's a weird coincidence that the group which attacks masculinity the most is also the one most likely to be on the pill.
Now, consider how much estrogen we expose kids to nowadays due to the growing prevalence of hormones in the food and the piles of research that confirm plastic disrupts androgens in humans and you get a population of men with lower testosterone and a population of women willing to carry their seed.
Alright ill take my tinfoil hat off.
"Masculinity is inherently problematic" -- Da Feminists.
It's not changing what women want or are attracted to. The idea that a man has to he some gritty G.I. Joe character might be changing but that's mostly due to cultural phenomena.
Some of the gender roles have been changing because culturally one can make more money in white collar jobs. Because the money and safety is in jobs where you won't die or get maimed, men are less into traditional male roles like building, fixing, and other manual labor jobs.
That doesn't mean attraction is changing.
Dudes that look like Prince still only appeal to a small number of women. All that androgynous, metrosexual, genderqueer stuff isn't all that appealing. You just see more of it in entertainment.
Women still want traditional dudes because security and being a provider is still highly valued. The only difference is that the provider is not guaranteed to look a certain way anymore.
"It's not changing what women want or are attracted to. The idea that a man has to he some gritty G.I. Joe character might be changing but that's mostly due to cultural phenomena."
Preferences are affected by biology, most notably hormone exposure.
1
2
This ain't got ? to do with mating, which is what we're discussing. We aren't talking about career choices -
atribecalledgabi wrote: »I want to work mining. It pays well and it's way out in the middle of nowhere away from all the annoying people. I work downtown right now and being in the middle of a metropolitan city is the worst.
I don't think ? ass dudes would do those jobs. Your average metrosexual isn't interested in getting his hands ? .
You ain't gotta be peak masculinity to be a plumber, electrician, firefighter, or farmer. Metrosexuals and lames be in the gym too so the physicality in some industries (like construction) in itself isn't really the issue. Those jobs in particular I feel like ppl go into as a combination of they grew up around it and where they are.
I think mining, steel, certain duties in the marines and on oil fields are inherently manly tho.
Being in the gym does not mean you are strong or embody masculine ideals of power and endurance, though. There are a lot of women in my gym that can't even lift their own body weight. I see a lot of office types that the treadmill, stay on the machines, and their bodies show it. They would struggle with my job lifting glass panels while suspended10+ stories off the ground, and my job is not anywhere near as demanding as needing to be able to lift a 250lb man through a burning building, with full gear on.
You are hugely misrepresenting the strength of feminine dudes. There have been HUGE reductions to the requirements for strength, intelligence, and other traits in a lot of jobs due to the inability for people to meet them. That says a lot about changing trends within the populations
There's a difference between being in the top 10% of men in terms of these features, and being manly. The group we're talking about, feminine males, are not even in the top 40%, so it really does not say much if those occupations you list are not the most manly since they wouldn't even be the types to ? that you just disparaged, like custodial work.
I'm not....my whole stance was that feminine men are just as capable of doing blue collar work as overtly masculine men, since all blue collar means is working with your hands. The job in and of itself has no bearing on whether you're stereotypically masculine or not. You can be a ? and work construction, which is harder on the body, or you can be a ? and be a garbage man...less harsh on the body. Both are blue collar jobs.
However, I said steel, mining, certain duties in oil or the marines (or other branches), are inherently masculine because they generally require longer hours and more physicality than the avg blue collar job...and I don't think a ? would do that. -
jetlifebih wrote: »
Maybe your reality is distorted....jetlifebih wrote: »jetlifebih wrote: »jetlifebih wrote: »Again it’s the representation....i realize that ? are here to stay but.....
There are 10 shows with black males that have a reoccurring role, there is no reason why 7 out of the 10 are ? 2 are docile and the one brother who appears to represent the behavior of the average black male has 2 baby mommas and a ged....
They are misrepresenting black males on national television as ? and or dysfunctional
You made up those numbers. What are the actual numbers?
I don’t watch scheduled programming
Then you shouldn't use that as the basis for your stance because its easily disproven
Disprove it then...
I agree in theory, but again there is a reality here that you are ignoring....you sound like females who say women should be able to wear whatever and not face harassment....i agree....but the reality is you can’t wear what you want and not face harassment....thats the reality....if you wear a lace dress best believe somebody is going to say something inappropriate....take your head out of candy landjetlifebih wrote: »Again it’s the representation....i realize that ? are here to stay but.....
There are 10 shows with black males that have a reoccurring role, there is no reason why 7 out of the 10 are ? 2 are docile and the one brother who appears to represent the behavior of the average black male has 2 baby mommas and a ged....
They are misrepresenting black males on national television as ? and or dysfunctional
For starters, its not up to any fictional characters to "represent" anyone.
Secondly, there's millions of black males in the country. It's impossible to "represent" then anyway.
Fictional characters aren't spokesman for your race, sexuality or gender
In reality, fictional characters don't represent anyone.
Also, women should be able to dress how they want without harassment.
Where do you think cacs got the feeling that blacks were going to steal their pocketbooks?
Perceived realism
https://library.uoregon.edu/sites/default/files/data/guides/english/howard_journal_communications.pdf
This ? is irrelevant.
Fictional characters aren't spokesman for your race or gender
You clearly ignoring the point just to argue -
jetlifebih wrote: »Again it’s the representation....i realize that ? are here to stay but.....
There are 10 shows with black males that have a reoccurring role, there is no reason why 7 out of the 10 are ? 2 are docile and the one brother who appears to represent the behavior of the average black male has 2 baby mommas and a ged....
They are misrepresenting black males on national television as ? and or dysfunctional
For starters, its not up to any fictional characters to "represent" anyone.
Secondly, there's millions of black males in the country. It's impossible to "represent" then anyway.
Fictional characters aren't spokesman for your race, sexuality or gender
If you believe this then you're completely naive to the influence that media portrayal has over your race or sex. Why do you think it was such a huge deal that Cliff and Claire Huxtable were upper class professionals? Why was it so important to us that their daughter was show going away to a fairly expensive Black University? Why have Black folks been pushing for more positive portrayals of us in tv shows and movies for decades? Because we know that how we're shown on tv and in movies directly influences how we're perceived in real life. So if Black men are constantly portrayed as an effeminate ? man, the general public will come to speak of us and react to us accordingly. -
atribecalledgabi wrote: »atribecalledgabi wrote: »I want to work mining. It pays well and it's way out in the middle of nowhere away from all the annoying people. I work downtown right now and being in the middle of a metropolitan city is the worst.
I don't think ? ass dudes would do those jobs. Your average metrosexual isn't interested in getting his hands ? .
You ain't gotta be peak masculinity to be a plumber, electrician, firefighter, or farmer. Metrosexuals and lames be in the gym too so the physicality in some industries (like construction) in itself isn't really the issue. Those jobs in particular I feel like ppl go into as a combination of they grew up around it and where they are.
I think mining, steel, certain duties in the marines and on oil fields are inherently manly tho.
Being in the gym does not mean you are strong or embody masculine ideals of power and endurance, though. There are a lot of women in my gym that can't even lift their own body weight. I see a lot of office types that the treadmill, stay on the machines, and their bodies show it. They would struggle with my job lifting glass panels while suspended10+ stories off the ground, and my job is not anywhere near as demanding as needing to be able to lift a 250lb man through a burning building, with full gear on.
You are hugely misrepresenting the strength of feminine dudes. There have been HUGE reductions to the requirements for strength, intelligence, and other traits in a lot of jobs due to the inability for people to meet them. That says a lot about changing trends within the populations
There's a difference between being in the top 10% of men in terms of these features, and being manly. The group we're talking about, feminine males, are not even in the top 40%, so it really does not say much if those occupations you list are not the most manly since they wouldn't even be the types to ? that you just disparaged, like custodial work.
I'm not....my whole stance was that feminine men are just as capable of doing blue collar work as overtly masculine men, since all blue collar means is working with your hands. The job in and of itself has no bearing on whether you're stereotypically masculine or not. You can be a ? and work construction, which is harder on the body, or you can be a ? and be a garbage man...less harsh on the body. Both are blue collar jobs.
However, I said steel, mining, certain duties in oil or the marines (or other branches), are inherently masculine because they generally require longer hours and more physicality than the avg blue collar job...and I don't think a ? would do that.
? get fired. Nobody wants to hear whining or see someone unable to work through injuries on a job site.
Feminine men can do some blue collar work but they dont. Same reason women don't do blue collar work: too much estrogen. Their preferences are for people work -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Shizlansky wrote: »The more I look at ? like this the more I see it’s a war on men.
You know what? I don't know if it's a war on men or men are just becoming weirdos by traditional standards. These dudes been out here wearing makeup for a while. The fact that they just now started putting it into marketing doesn't really change that.
Masculinity is changing. I've dropped my theory a few times already, but I'll say it again: you guys need to realize the changes that have taken place since the sexual revolution. The pill, which liberates women in their sex lives, is well known to affect hormones to such an extent that it will completely change the kind of guys women are attracted to: instead of chiseled jaw lines, muscles, and power they refer softer features and revile obvious displays of masculinity. Ever notice liberal women tend to be into softer dudes than Conservatives? It's a weird coincidence that the group which attacks masculinity the most is also the one most likely to be on the pill.
Now, consider how much estrogen we expose kids to nowadays due to the growing prevalence of hormones in the food and the piles of research that confirm plastic disrupts androgens in humans and you get a population of men with lower testosterone and a population of women willing to carry their seed.
Alright ill take my tinfoil hat off.
"Masculinity is inherently problematic" -- Da Feminists.
It's not changing what women want or are attracted to. The idea that a man has to he some gritty G.I. Joe character might be changing but that's mostly due to cultural phenomena.
Some of the gender roles have been changing because culturally one can make more money in white collar jobs. Because the money and safety is in jobs where you won't die or get maimed, men are less into traditional male roles like building, fixing, and other manual labor jobs.
That doesn't mean attraction is changing.
Dudes that look like Prince still only appeal to a small number of women. All that androgynous, metrosexual, genderqueer stuff isn't all that appealing. You just see more of it in entertainment.
Women still want traditional dudes because security and being a provider is still highly valued. The only difference is that the provider is not guaranteed to look a certain way anymore.
"It's not changing what women want or are attracted to. The idea that a man has to he some gritty G.I. Joe character might be changing but that's mostly due to cultural phenomena."
Preferences are affected by biology, most notably hormone exposure.
1
2
This ain't got ? to do with mating, which is what we're discussing. We aren't talking about career choices
It shows how strong the effects of hormones are: they affect sexuality and even our more basic interests outside of sex.
You said hormones aren't changing ? . I just showed you things they affect. Learn the science before you form your conspiracy theories -
-
The truly ironic thing that whenever I even heard someone mention that men and particular black men are becoming weak or soft or feminie they usually are in the same boat.
If you are fat or obese don't talk to me about being a strong man. If you can't run a steady baby ? mile don't talk to me about endurance. If your body is shaped like a donut and you got ? ? sagging low then you might as well be worse then these overtly wannabe men. They truly worse part of all this is that overall Black Men don't care about being strong and in this day and age it's almost required to not just survive but to prosper. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Shizlansky wrote: »The more I look at ? like this the more I see it’s a war on men.
You know what? I don't know if it's a war on men or men are just becoming weirdos by traditional standards. These dudes been out here wearing makeup for a while. The fact that they just now started putting it into marketing doesn't really change that.
Masculinity is changing. I've dropped my theory a few times already, but I'll say it again: you guys need to realize the changes that have taken place since the sexual revolution. The pill, which liberates women in their sex lives, is well known to affect hormones to such an extent that it will completely change the kind of guys women are attracted to: instead of chiseled jaw lines, muscles, and power they refer softer features and revile obvious displays of masculinity. Ever notice liberal women tend to be into softer dudes than Conservatives? It's a weird coincidence that the group which attacks masculinity the most is also the one most likely to be on the pill.
Now, consider how much estrogen we expose kids to nowadays due to the growing prevalence of hormones in the food and the piles of research that confirm plastic disrupts androgens in humans and you get a population of men with lower testosterone and a population of women willing to carry their seed.
Alright ill take my tinfoil hat off.
"Masculinity is inherently problematic" -- Da Feminists.
It's not changing what women want or are attracted to. The idea that a man has to he some gritty G.I. Joe character might be changing but that's mostly due to cultural phenomena.
Some of the gender roles have been changing because culturally one can make more money in white collar jobs. Because the money and safety is in jobs where you won't die or get maimed, men are less into traditional male roles like building, fixing, and other manual labor jobs.
That doesn't mean attraction is changing.
Dudes that look like Prince still only appeal to a small number of women. All that androgynous, metrosexual, genderqueer stuff isn't all that appealing. You just see more of it in entertainment.
Women still want traditional dudes because security and being a provider is still highly valued. The only difference is that the provider is not guaranteed to look a certain way anymore.
"It's not changing what women want or are attracted to. The idea that a man has to he some gritty G.I. Joe character might be changing but that's mostly due to cultural phenomena."
Preferences are affected by biology, most notably hormone exposure.
1
2
This ain't got ? to do with mating, which is what we're discussing. We aren't talking about career choices
It shows how strong the effects of hormones are: they affect sexuality and even our more basic interests outside of sex.
You said hormones aren't changing ? . I just showed you things they affect. Learn the science before you form your conspiracy theories
1) This isn't a scientific journal.
2) "Less masculine" doesn't mean more feminine, and if you look at the example given there's minute differences in the face drawn.
3) There isn't even a link to a scientific journal.
4) I never said that changes in hormones doesn't "change ? " I said it doesn't make women more interested in feminine looking men.
We can debate what a "feminine look" is because the face in the example given isn't really feminine. It's just a bit softer, but still masculine, version of the previous face. -
konceptjones wrote: »jetlifebih wrote: »Again it’s the representation....i realize that ? are here to stay but.....
There are 10 shows with black males that have a reoccurring role, there is no reason why 7 out of the 10 are ? 2 are docile and the one brother who appears to represent the behavior of the average black male has 2 baby mommas and a ged....
They are misrepresenting black males on national television as ? and or dysfunctional
For starters, its not up to any fictional characters to "represent" anyone.
Secondly, there's millions of black males in the country. It's impossible to "represent" then anyway.
Fictional characters aren't spokesman for your race, sexuality or gender
If you believe this then you're completely naive to the influence that media portrayal has over your race or sex. Why do you think it was such a huge deal that Cliff and Claire Huxtable were upper class professionals? Why was it so important to us that their daughter was show going away to a fairly expensive Black University? Why have Black folks been pushing for more positive portrayals of us in tv shows and movies for decades? Because we know that how we're shown on tv and in movies directly influences how we're perceived in real life. So if Black men are constantly portrayed as an effeminate ? man, the general public will come to speak of us and react to us accordingly.
BOLDED 1: Media has a tremendous influence. You are just arguing the wrong media.
Underlined: The Cosbys are given undue credit. The Jeffersons had already showed mid to upperclass blacks years before that. The Cosbys were just more popular with white folks. Also, fun fact: one of the most progressive and popular black shows ever was What's Happening? But that show gets no love.
Also, Black people complaining about positive portrayals has been overblown for awhile now. Positive portrayals of black life and the black family and black men are quickly thrown down the memory hole. Folks hold on with a death grip to negative portrayals.
BOLDED 2: Yes, we do no that TV shapes opinion. The problem is its not FICTIONAL characters that shape opinion. It's the NEWS.
Individuals see ? and robbery as a daily event where the bulk of the perps are black males and they see that as the reality.
No amount of fictional black doctors can compare to seeing "thugs" with dreadlocks accused of a real ? or robbery on the news. Especially when the news is repeated several times a day.
I'm not arguing the media doesn't have an effect. I'm arguing that fictional portrayals don't have the same effect as the news amd other more realistic portrayals.
Final point: White men have been doing ? and effiminate ? on TV for years. If what you are saying is true, then white men would be considered effiminate as ? but they aren't.
People understand the differences between real and entertainment. The problem comes in when the lines are blurred (like the news).
-
Man wtf is that picture up there?
Looks like a pregnant jackal
Please dont quote that thing -
That's what the media puts out there. None of it is by accidental imo.
-
I'd get up and leave. I paid my respects.
I will say this if I know the person well enough to come to the conclusion this is something they would've wanted or be OK with I wouldn't leave but I damn for sure ain't clapping for it.
Here is the whole video. I never saw it before. That ? is insane to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKu3eB7owV4
This some GOAT ? -
One thing bout tv: when it hits you feel no pain
White folks say it controls your brain
I know better than that, it's just games
