Tariq Nasheed: Slavery Wasn't That Bad For Black Women
Options
Comments
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it. -
desertrain10 wrote:lol
the narrator of the video clearly suggests for "many blk women slavery was not too bad" because they were pampered benwenches...as if any slave had a choice in the matter ....but i digress
You'd have to purposely ignore the rest of what was actually said in conjunction with that statement in the video to arrive at this conclusion ....beyond that tho ...are you asserting that house slaves shared an experience identical to that of the field slave? And who insinuated any condition placed upon blacks during slavery were of their independent choice?he then goes on to say for every harriet tubman there are thousand supa heads, carmen bryants
This is a controversial statement ...word?ultimately his premise being blk progress has been sabotaged by blk women because our loyalty laregly lies with white men
so yea the video was ignorant and highly irresponsible.....little he says in this video is based in fact/reality.... first, he disregards the fact most slave women worked along their male counterparts in the fields ...secondly, there was no mention of the systemic breeding of female slaves ....while sally heming, who was only 14,15 years old at the start of her sexual relationship with jefferson, was not working in the field , she like the other female slaves in her position lived far from a protected existence....and lastly, he disregards the fact blk women were the backbone of the abolitionist and civil rights movement ....
You're interpretation is your interpretation I'm not going to joust with you on that as the task would be rather fruitless IMO ...I will say however at no time in the video is there a disregarding of the fact that all slaves were slaves ...house or otherwise which it seems like your alluding to him attempting to do ...the fact is presenting a nuanced discussion about the specific conditions of different slaves and how those dynamics have impacted modern society isn't inherently ignorant nor irresponsible... you stating that sally hemming was far from living a protected life doesn't =\= she lived under the same specific conditions of a field slave which again is his point and as I said before you've had many other individuals talk about this without a contrived firestorm surrounding that statement ...but now it's controversial lolthat said, the fact that he does preface his thesis, which is a sweeping geenralization, by admiting he is making a sweeping generalization makes his supporters look even more foolish
the very definition of a sweeping generalization is a statement which speaks in general terms without any reservation, so that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny
He preferences his point by saying he doesn't intend to claim all black women will snitch on black men because they are aligned with a white man and I think that was what he was trying to get across ultimately ...in fact he later once again reinforced that he understands that all relationships between white men and black women don't have this power structure ...but if you want to get into a semantical debate over the fact that he shouldn't have said anything about speaking in sweeping generalizations as that could be seen as contradictory to what he just uttered prior that's fine but I understood what he was trying to get across ...probably not executed as exquisitely as he could have done most certainlynot to mention he has a long history of vilifying and sterotyping blk women
Mehhhh not fact ...he's vilified individuals that he feels are counterproductive to the collective community as a lot of us do ..when people like yourself extrapolate out your own personal biased characterization from the actual reality of what he does its rather corny TBH ... it would be akin to me saying you have a long history of vilifying men because of your adherence to feminist ideology ....black women aren't monolithic correct? Isn't this what you sunscribe to ..so then how would it be genuine to insinuate he has a history of stereotyping all black women when he makes clear distinctions on exactly who he's talking about when being critical of their behavior
Other than that it's good to hear from you again chocolate drop ...mmm mmm mmm
-
JDSTAYWITIT wrote: »
What a pathetic straw man
My ? , don't do it to yourself because you clearly don't know what you're talking about. In your statement, you basically implied that we should just take everything presented as fact because he had PhDs commenting. My statement might have been snarky, but it wasn't a strawman as I addressed your claim directly. However, if you want to throw out fallacies, then your argument could be seen as an appeal to authority and I used the Umar Johnson quote as an example because his credentials have nothing to do with the subject matter he was discussing in that case. But you know, I just provided a counterexample to your statement and didn't get caught up in calling out fallacies so as not to come of as, what was your word...pretentious.Secondly you've already established and admitted to not having a foundation to speak intelligently on the work from Tariq or the people associated with his work so to take the position that anyone is claiming what you're stating in the quote above is not only blatantly disingenuous it's also a sign that you're the type of time wasting ? detrimental to any kind of productive conversation .....goodspeed ?
Your arguments make no sense. Nowhere did I say I didn't know anything about Tariq, Umar Johnson, Rashidi, or any of the other people in the documentary. I said I watched half of Hidden Colors and didn't care for the presentation of the information. You say I'm wasting time, but what kind of productive conversation could anyone have with you? You don't even take the time to actually read and understand what others are saying. And then you when you do respond, you're responses consist of bad arguments against claims that really weren't made to begin with.
Man some of the ? on this site are amazingly bitchmade. It's amazing. I mean did that ? mack you and take your virginity or what. All I said was I didn't really care for the lack of sourcing and backing of information in Hidden Colors. That's it. I didn't disparage that dude, his work, or any of the others involved. And ? like you come in here taking offense, making all kinds of bad arguments, and generally speaking unreasonably in the way ya'll claim females do. I don't get it. If we men are supposed to be the ones that discuss and act on reason and logic, you ? make us look bad on a daily basis on here. -
desertrain10 wrote: »Now i know that black women have been used in this same regard but were men we have to be better than that. Just because black women have habitually disgraced black men on national airwaves don't mean we should.
we have ? , but where did yall get the idea that blk women have publicly bashed/shamed blk men any more than blk men when it comes to shaming blk women
within the blk community no gender has a monopoly on ? behavior and it is counter productive to perpetuate this lie
I don't know which gender and ? on the other more. I do know that black women supported two separate ABC specials basically bashing black men. I'm not going to say that's trumped everything that black men have done, but it was pretty bad and I don't recall black men doing anything like that. -
@Trillfate we need your connects....
Get Tariq nasheed on the line to clarify his statement or sentiments regarding the condition of black women during slavery -
semi-auto-mato wrote: »JDSTAYWITIT wrote: »semi-auto-mato wrote: »JDSTAYWITIT wrote: »Rashidi is in Tariq's Hidden Colors series and I believe that he was strictly speaking to slave revolts in American history ....it would be interesting to hear him define what he considered a successful slave revolt however ...I can only assume that he meant success in the sense of liberating Black Americans in the regions were the revolts took place im honestly not 100 percent sure
yes he was and you remember him. like I said I hope Tariq leads you to find real historians like Rashidi. don't let hidden colors be the only time u watch a video with dude in it. he has a lot out there. you can start with Introduction To The Study Of African Classical Civilizations
introducing black intellectuals like rashidi to the masses was a primary reason the series was produced ....it says something that these individuals align themselves with Tariq but it's the Internet forum trolls that begrudge him ....yikes
Most historians are easily accessible to the public. They are professors on college campuses across the country. They don't have security outside their door. If you live in LA getting to Rashidi is nothing. don't think that because u see him working with someone that he co-signs them or agrees with them. as a historian its his job to do all he can to get info out there.
don't get mad at folks if they don't view Tariq as a scholar or educator. They have a right to question the information he is putting out there. if it is fact then it should be easily backed up. Tariq is not putting anything new out there. he is not doing any knew research or coming to any new conclusions. he just repeating stuff but he has an audience.
my guy stop ....
anyone with a modicum of integrity isn't going to align themselves with a person they fundemenatally are at odds with ....the lengths some of you ? go to be anti is amusing ....it's ok to admit that Tariq did something positive and impactful by presenting this "old information" from these "already well know intellectuals" to the masses without the corny caveats or contrived dismissals -
Not one mention of Harriet Tubman. Slavery couldn't have been that great.
Think
Logically -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »My ? , don't do it to yourself because you clearly don't know what you're talking about. In your statement, you basically implied that we should just take everything presented as fact because he had PhDs commenting. My statement might have been snarky, but it wasn't a strawman as I addressed your claim directly. However, if you want to throw out fallacies, then your argument could be seen as an appeal to authority and I used the Umar Johnson quote as an example because his credentials have nothing to do with the subject matter he was discussing in that case. But you know, I just provided a counterexample to your statement and didn't get caught up in calling out fallacies so as not to come of as, what was your word...pretentious.
Your arguments make no sense. Nowhere did I say I didn't know anything about Tariq, Umar Johnson, Rashidi, or any of the other people in the documentary. I said I watched half of Hidden Colors and didn't care for the presentation of the information. You say I'm wasting time, but what kind of productive conversation could anyone have with you? You don't even take the time to actually read and understand what others are saying. And then you when you do respond, you're responses consist of bad arguments against claims that really weren't made to begin with.
Man some of the ? on this site are amazingly bitchmade. It's amazing. I mean did that ? mack you and take your virginity or what. All I said was I didn't really care for the lack of sourcing and backing of information in Hidden Colors. That's it. I didn't disparage that dude, his work, or any of the others involved. And ? like you come in here taking offense, making all kinds of bad arguments, and generally speaking unreasonably in the way ya'll claim females do. I don't get it. If we men are supposed to be the ones that discuss and act on reason and logic, you ? make us look bad on a daily basis on here.
Save The Time Wasting For The Next One ....I've Already Adressed You -
black dudes ? on black women inthis thread right now
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible. -
desertrain10 wrote: »Now i know that black women have been used in this same regard but were men we have to be better than that. Just because black women have habitually disgraced black men on national airwaves don't mean we should.
we have ? , but where did yall get the idea that blk women have publicly bashed/shamed blk men any more than blk men when it comes to shaming blk women
within the blk community no gender has a monopoly on ? behavior and it is counter productive to perpetuate this lie
Black women and men aren't equal though. A man ridiculing a woman is not the same as a woman ridiculing a man. The man is the king of his household. A man who's bashed by his woman is looked at as weak and lesser than by his peers. This is not the case for women. Women if anything receive sympathy.
Man and woman are not the same in status, role or anything similar. We all have our part to play, but women are being brainwashed to take on more masculine traits, in an attempt to continuously destroy our family structure. In other words, black women are getting their strings pulled by these white feminist demons and fed lies like, the black men doesn't treat them fair, when black culture has never discriminated against our women. That is the white woman's fight with her man.
Right now, we're in a cold war against a system that is trying to extinct us, and they're using these warfare tactics in an attempt to separate and destroy. They're playing to the black woman and too many of them are falling for the trap. Someone needs to tell black woman, this is not the time for you to bring up your subtle differences. We're fighting a war that is much bigger than your feelings. They need to women up and stand by their men. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
The bold is a foreign idea to many. You must agree w/ everything a person says or else you hate them, are a ? , and want to see them taken down. Criticism and asking questions isn't allowed -
JDSTAYWITIT wrote: »semi-auto-mato wrote: »JDSTAYWITIT wrote: »semi-auto-mato wrote: »JDSTAYWITIT wrote: »Rashidi is in Tariq's Hidden Colors series and I believe that he was strictly speaking to slave revolts in American history ....it would be interesting to hear him define what he considered a successful slave revolt however ...I can only assume that he meant success in the sense of liberating Black Americans in the regions were the revolts took place im honestly not 100 percent sure
yes he was and you remember him. like I said I hope Tariq leads you to find real historians like Rashidi. don't let hidden colors be the only time u watch a video with dude in it. he has a lot out there. you can start with Introduction To The Study Of African Classical Civilizations
introducing black intellectuals like rashidi to the masses was a primary reason the series was produced ....it says something that these individuals align themselves with Tariq but it's the Internet forum trolls that begrudge him ....yikes
Most historians are easily accessible to the public. They are professors on college campuses across the country. They don't have security outside their door. If you live in LA getting to Rashidi is nothing. don't think that because u see him working with someone that he co-signs them or agrees with them. as a historian its his job to do all he can to get info out there.
don't get mad at folks if they don't view Tariq as a scholar or educator. They have a right to question the information he is putting out there. if it is fact then it should be easily backed up. Tariq is not putting anything new out there. he is not doing any knew research or coming to any new conclusions. he just repeating stuff but he has an audience.
my guy stop .... anyone with a modicum of integrity isn't going to align themselves with a person they fundemenatally are at odds with ....the lengths some of you ? go to be anti is amusing ....it's ok to admit that Tariq did something positive and impactful by presenting this "old information" from these "already well know intellectuals" to the masses without the corny caveats or contrived dismissals
Listen tonight starts my fantasy league playoffs. I need Amari to step it up so I can't do this with u.
Tariq is not an historian. He is a filmmaker so it's no reason for a historian to not work with him. They trying to reach people like u. What research has tariq done? If ur a historian bring stuff to masses u need to talk archaeologist sociologist and doctors. That's the minimum u can do when talking ancient history. If he wants to talk about black women and slavery he should talk the association for black women historians. All if these people will work with him. It doesn't mean he is on their level. It doesn't mean the respect him intellectually. It means he has a platform and a audience.
Tell me something that tariq has taught u and tell how u know it be true. In others words show his work. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »Now i know that black women have been used in this same regard but were men we have to be better than that. Just because black women have habitually disgraced black men on national airwaves don't mean we should.
we have ? , but where did yall get the idea that blk women have publicly bashed/shamed blk men any more than blk men when it comes to shaming blk women
within the blk community no gender has a monopoly on ? behavior and it is counter productive to perpetuate this lie
I don't know which gender and ? on the other more. I do know that black women supported two separate ABC specials basically bashing black men. I'm not going to say that's trumped everything that black men have done, but it was pretty bad and I don't recall black men doing anything like that.
Yes, there were Blk women who went on tv crying about how they can't find a good man in the 80's or 90's
I like many of other Blk women thought it was bad form to say the least
At the same time, based solely off the words of many popular Blk male entertainers over the last 3, 4 decades I'd assume most Blk women were hoes and gold diggers with bad attitudes if I didnt know any better
No one is blameless
Pointing fingers means ? if both genders don't own up to how they perpetuate stereotypes that only serves to reinforce white supremacy
-
NothingButTheTruth wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »Now i know that black women have been used in this same regard but were men we have to be better than that. Just because black women have habitually disgraced black men on national airwaves don't mean we should.
we have ? , but where did yall get the idea that blk women have publicly bashed/shamed blk men any more than blk men when it comes to shaming blk women
within the blk community no gender has a monopoly on ? behavior and it is counter productive to perpetuate this lie
Black women and men aren't equal though. A man ridiculing a woman is not the same as a woman ridiculing a man. The man is the king of his household. A man who's bashed by his woman is looked at as weak and lesser than by his peers. This is not the case for women. Women if anything receive sympathy.
Man and woman are not the same in status, role or anything similar. We all have our part to play, but women are being brainwashed to take on more masculine traits, in an attempt to continuously destroy our family structure. In other words, black women are getting their strings pulled by these white feminist demons and fed lies like, the black men doesn't treat them fair, when black culture has never discriminated against our women. That is the white woman's fight with her man.
Right now, we're in a cold war against a system that is trying to extinct us, and they're using these warfare tactics in an attempt to separate and destroy. They're playing to the black woman and too many of them are falling for the trap. Someone needs to tell black woman, this is not the time for you to bring up your subtle differences. We're fighting a war that is much bigger than your feelings. They need to women up and stand by their men.
You are talking to a feminist REALITY will always escape her -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
This aint about him being above anything. For one, people took what he said made some ? out of it. Thats not critiqing, that's an act of sabotage. Second, if he's that wrong, about anything, people would have posted evidence showing so. And if they was really bout it, they would have tweeted, emailed, or attempted to make contact to challenge his claim.
Instead we get a bunch people using this opportunity to express unwarranted disdain and rumors for a black man that has done nothing but made real contributions. Whether it be historic info, surviving white supremacy, or game on finding the right mate. It would be a shame for folks to miss out on the efforts of people really putting out work because some crab thinking ? want to shame a brother, or sister, cause they feelings hurt. -
desertrain10 wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »Now i know that black women have been used in this same regard but were men we have to be better than that. Just because black women have habitually disgraced black men on national airwaves don't mean we should.
we have ? , but where did yall get the idea that blk women have publicly bashed/shamed blk men any more than blk men when it comes to shaming blk women
within the blk community no gender has a monopoly on ? behavior and it is counter productive to perpetuate this lie
I don't know which gender and ? on the other more. I do know that black women supported two separate ABC specials basically bashing black men. I'm not going to say that's trumped everything that black men have done, but it was pretty bad and I don't recall black men doing anything like that.
Yes, there were Blk women who went on tv crying about how they can't find a good man in the 80's or 90's
I like many of other Blk women thought it was bad form to say the least
At the same time, based solely off the words of many popular Blk male entertainers over the last 3, 4 decades I'd assume most Blk women were hoes and gold diggers with bad attitudes if I didnt know any better
No one is blameless
Pointing fingers means ? if both genders don't own up to how they perpetuate stereotypes that only serves to reinforce white supremacy
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
This aint about him being above anything. For one, people took what he said made some ? out of it. Thats not critiqing, that's an act of sabotage. Second, if he's that wrong, about anything, people would have posted evidence showing so. And if they was really bout it, they would have tweeted, emailed, or attempted to make contact to challenge his claim.
Instead we get a bunch people using this opportunity to express unwarranted disdain and rumors for a black man that has done nothing but made real contributions. Whether it be historic info, surviving white supremacy, or game on finding the right mate. It would be a shame for folks to miss out on the efforts of people really putting out work because some crab thinking ? want to shame a brother, or sister, cause they feelings hurt.
I feel what you saying, but some of these dudes are in here act like dude can't be criticized. ? was really coming at me just because I said I didn't like the way info was presented in Hidden Colors. I get what you're saying and respect that, but let's be real, the IC is never that civil on either side of an issue, no matter what the issue is. -
@JDSTAYWITIT
Hey bew
Ok really what he doing is pushing the tired narrative that Blk women are/were more likely to allign themselves with white men/white supremacy than Blk men. Mainly because Blk women have not had it as bad as Blk men
Everyone is free to have an opinion, cool. I just question how he arrived at that conclusion since most historical record does not support his thesis.
Yes, the experiences of a house slave were different than those of a field slave...same as the experiences/plight of Blk men and women differ...but to suggest Blk women haven't had it "too bad" is different...and again historically inaccurate
Most importantly slave women had no agency so I fail to really see how their supposed mentality translates to contemporary blk women
In the past he has also suggested a contemporary ? bed ? would be a blk woman who, through her feminism, her success, and/or her dating options, challenges the institution of black patriarchy. Which is a false equivalency
Challenging blk patriarchy is and was never the same as actively working to uphold white supremacy
That said, to say for every Harriet Tubman there are thousands of supa heads is not really controversial but rather a roundabout way of saying the majority of Blk women ain't ? ....keep it real
To conclude, misandary and feminism are not one and the same. So for some one to come to the conclusion that I am trying to vilify men with no other evidence than me identifying myself as a feminism would be corny. Same as me saying dude is a ? or misogynist based on him solely referring to a lone Blk woman as a "vindictive ? ". But time and time again he has made these sweeping generalizations largely at the expense of Blk women. It puzzles me how anyone can view him as being this misunderstood freedom fighter. All the criticisms thrown his way are well deserved
-
No one said he's above criticism nor was that even implied. But what do you expect when someone blatantly spreads misinformation?The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
This aint about him being above anything. For one, people took what he said made some ? out of it. Thats not critiqing, that's an act of sabotage. Second, if he's that wrong, about anything, people would have posted evidence showing so. And if they was really bout it, they would have tweeted, emailed, or attempted to make contact to challenge his claim.
Instead we get a bunch people using this opportunity to express unwarranted disdain and rumors for a black man that has done nothing but made real contributions. Whether it be historic info, surviving white supremacy, or game on finding the right mate. It would be a shame for folks to miss out on the efforts of people really putting out work because some crab thinking ? want to shame a brother, or sister, cause they feelings hurt.
I feel what you saying, but some of these dudes are in here act like dude can't be criticized. ? was really coming at me just because I said I didn't like the way info was presented in Hidden Colors. I get what you're saying and respect that, but let's be real, the IC is never that civil on either side of an issue, no matter what the issue is.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
The bold is a foreign idea to many. You must agree w/ everything a person says or else you hate them, are a ? , and want to see them taken down. Criticism and asking questions isn't allowed
My ? that's exactly what you and the rest of the ? who cosign ? like this are doing
The same people who made this thread and purposely missed his point to make theirs(this thread for starters) I've seen constantly critiquing ? like him, Umar Johnson, etc.
You ? always find something and then act like whatever you believe you found proves your point and discredits everything they've done
Nobody is above criticism but when that's all you do, there's a problem and it points to you clearly being disingenuous
This whole thread got a "umhmm girl, I told you he wasn't ? " vibe -
5th Letter wrote: »
No one said he's above criticism nor was that even implied. But what do you expect when someone blatantly spreads misinformation?The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
This aint about him being above anything. For one, people took what he said made some ? out of it. Thats not critiqing, that's an act of sabotage. Second, if he's that wrong, about anything, people would have posted evidence showing so. And if they was really bout it, they would have tweeted, emailed, or attempted to make contact to challenge his claim.
Instead we get a bunch people using this opportunity to express unwarranted disdain and rumors for a black man that has done nothing but made real contributions. Whether it be historic info, surviving white supremacy, or game on finding the right mate. It would be a shame for folks to miss out on the efforts of people really putting out work because some crab thinking ? want to shame a brother, or sister, cause they feelings hurt.
I feel what you saying, but some of these dudes are in here act like dude can't be criticized. ? was really coming at me just because I said I didn't like the way info was presented in Hidden Colors. I get what you're saying and respect that, but let's be real, the IC is never that civil on either side of an issue, no matter what the issue is.
Who said you said or implied he was above criticism? You don't have to say anything. If cats come in here expressing concerns with something he said or they believe he said, and you dudes go on the attack like ? are insulting your mothers, that says it all.
And what misinformation am I spreading? Just because you silly ? keep saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. Why don't try actually formulating an argument instead of making personal attacks and saying stupid ? . I suspect you can't do that though which is why you do what you do. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
This aint about him being above anything. For one, people took what he said made some ? out of it. Thats not critiqing, that's an act of sabotage. Second, if he's that wrong, about anything, people would have posted evidence showing so. And if they was really bout it, they would have tweeted, emailed, or attempted to make contact to challenge his claim.
Instead we get a bunch people using this opportunity to express unwarranted disdain and rumors for a black man that has done nothing but made real contributions. Whether it be historic info, surviving white supremacy, or game on finding the right mate. It would be a shame for folks to miss out on the efforts of people really putting out work because some crab thinking ? want to shame a brother, or sister, cause they feelings hurt.
I feel what you saying, but some of these dudes are in here act like dude can't be criticized. ? was really coming at me just because I said I didn't like the way info was presented in Hidden Colors. I get what you're saying and respect that, but let's be real, the IC is never that civil on either side of an issue, no matter what the issue is.
And foh ? , that wasn't what you said
That's another thing, when you wrong, just own it
You said the ? wasn't accurate or some other ? and that the information was provided w/o sources
? you on the internet and they giving you times, names, places and you talking about sources. Four movies full of scholars and historians giving info and you talking about sources. You watched half of one movie and criticized the whole series. How can you not see the issue with that. Say you didn't watch so you have no opinion cause you can't but to write two paragraphs of criticism after watching an hour and a half of maybe 9 hours worth of material -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »I'm indifferent to Tariq, but I'm curious as to why some of you dudes are so loyal to him. Being the typical "square ass pretentious intellect" (whatever the ? that means) doesn't make someone the best resource on something. That's true. But not being that doesn't make you a good resource either. In what way has Tariq established himself to have a reputable amount of expertise on things he addresses? That's a serious question too. I'm not ? on him. I honestly don't know and was curious.
I've no reason to doubt his intentions or commitment to black empowerment. Alot of the historic information he gives is the same ? I've heard prior to learning of him, along with the New stuff I find out. He ? with all the black scholars my father put me on. Reciting and acknowledging them for others to go learn. He ain't been bout no ? , he speaks up for blacks, gives real contributions to black society, and I've yet to hear him steer somebody wrong. And since white supremacist hate him, that also let's me know he's on the right track.
All I see is a black forum full of ? behavior allowing the opinions of other people influence what they think of him and black empowerment in general. There's has been an innate hate for this guy prior to this ? thread, y'all didn't need this to start. All I can say is that if you want to give dude a chance, I highly recommend it.
I didn't know people hated him. That's news to me. I've listened to some of his stuff and I'd agree with what you say. It does seem he's sincere with his intentions and it does seem like he acts mostly as a mouthpiece for the words of others, which isn't in itself a bad thing considering he probably gives those people their due credit. So I'm not knocking and don't have problems with him. I just don't understand why some people on here are taking any criticism so personal. You can respect what someone is doing without thinking they are irrefutable or infallible.
This aint about him being above anything. For one, people took what he said made some ? out of it. Thats not critiqing, that's an act of sabotage. Second, if he's that wrong, about anything, people would have posted evidence showing so. And if they was really bout it, they would have tweeted, emailed, or attempted to make contact to challenge his claim.
Instead we get a bunch people using this opportunity to express unwarranted disdain and rumors for a black man that has done nothing but made real contributions. Whether it be historic info, surviving white supremacy, or game on finding the right mate. It would be a shame for folks to miss out on the efforts of people really putting out work because some crab thinking ? want to shame a brother, or sister, cause they feelings hurt.
I feel what you saying, but some of these dudes are in here act like dude can't be criticized. ? was really coming at me just because I said I didn't like the way info was presented in Hidden Colors. I get what you're saying and respect that, but let's be real, the IC is never that civil on either side of an issue, no matter what the issue is.
That's what you said. I'm responding to the bold. As for the part about misinformation I'm talking about this thread as a whole. -
And foh ? , that wasn't what you said
That's another thing, when you wrong, just own it
You said the ? wasn't accurate or some other ? and that the information was provided w/o sources
? you on the internet and they giving you times, names, places and you talking about sources. Four movies full of scholars and historians giving info and you talking about sources. You watched half of one movie and criticized the whole series. How can you not see the issue with that. Say you didn't watch so you have no opinion cause you can't but to write two paragraphs of criticism after watching an hour and a half of maybe 9 hours worth of material
I didn't say the ? wasn't accurate. You ? need to either read, learn to read, or stop responding my messages. But stop quoting me and then saying ? that I never said. I said I watched half of the first Hidden Colors and couldn't get into it because there was no sourcing or proof given for most of the claims made. That's a fact. I said on more than one occasion that I'm not knocking the series or saying that the information was false. I just prefer documentaries that are a little more rigorous about supporting the claims made.
That's all, and you ? are throwing hissy fits over it like some ? . That's the ? that I'm talking about. Why does it hurt you so bad that someone didn't like the ? as much as you did. Why do I have to watch a whole series of something if I didn't like the style of the first one? Did the people the project change? Is Hidden Colors the only ? resource for knowledge about black history, culture, and issues? Am I telling people not to watch because it's bad? The answer to all those questions is no. And I didn't write two paragraphs of criticism. I gave one criticism, and you silly ? came at me like I was making ? up, so I gave examples from the actual documentary and you ignored those and started attacking me. That's so hoe ass ? .
And yes, scholars and historians need to give sources too. They aren't giving first hand accounts of anything. They are passing on knowledge they gained from their own research. Have you ? never written a ? research paper before. It doesn't matter if you have 4 PhDs and 100 years of experience, you still source your ? and provide a basis for claims you make especially when you're making claims like "The first samuari was black," "Arabic is an African language," and "a black man was the first to map out the Americas." I can't for the life of me understand why you're making it seem like I'm asking for something crazy when it's actually the standard for academic presentations of any kind papers, documentaries, whatever.
