Topic #11. why are black men ,the men most likely to date outside?
(Showing 16-24 of 24)

16. A few things on all of the above...
Fri, Sep 17, 1999 - 11:28 PM/EST
dman

To Hibou and Alfie: Social theorists have seen the parallel between Black men and white women for decades. It is there with a great deal of validity. Possibly some couples have gotten together because of it but I doubt it was a conscious act and I'm not trying to make that the implication of your statements.

To Joyw: Possible poor choice of words. Any Black person will be quick to point out that sleeping with the enemy does not make you an equal.

17. I'll say it again
Sat, Sep 18, 1999 - 12:51 PM/EST

Please don't simplify my statements to appease YOURSELF and justify your relationship. I never said BLACK MEN DATING OUTSIDE IS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST BLACK WOMEN. YOU ARE PUTTING UP THAT MENTAL ROADBLOCK AGAIN HIBOU.I didn't say - or believe- that anymore than I believe that if a white company hires a white employee,it's discrimination against blacks . But, if a good portion of white owned companies show a PATTERN of only hiring whites for managment, light-skin blacks for mid-level jobs, and dark blacks NOT AT ALL- then that is a problem. I am suggesting that black men are doing a similar thing. Right down to the light-skin black preference when white is not used.Also people who don't love each other or love FOR THE WRONG REASONS- can and DO stay together for years and decades! Also, black men who date or marry for the wrong reasons are still intraracists and still involved in interracial dating for ten twenty years - even if it is to many different white, asian, hispanic, or other light-skinned women. Though I understand your basic point about YOUR relationship.

18. Clarification
Sat, Sep 18, 1999 - 2:20 PM/EST
joyw

Sorry if I was obscure--"Sleeping with the enemy" is the title of a feminist essay or book (I don't remember which--read it about 10 years ago). The essence is not that white women being with white men makes them equal (hardly!!!!) but that it gives white women mixed motives to both support and fight against sexism.

I did not mean to imply that it referred to white women with black men--on the contrary, the "enemy" in the title of the essay is white men. I was trying to illustrate a key difference that I see between sexism and racism. Men and women need each other (in most cases), but racism is built on the notion that one race doesn't need the other.

19. I AGREE WITH "DIP"
Sun, Sep 19, 1999 - 12:11 PM/EST

....ELIMINATE THIS VERY COMMON PRACTICE OF DISCRIMINATING AGAINST ONE ANOTHER,BY RACE. THERE IS ONLY (1) ONE RACE, THE HUMAN RACE. WE MAKE UP A RAINBOW (OF GOD) NOT A SEPARATE RACE. I"LL TALK MORE LATER. I AM VERY MOVED BY ALL,(ALFIE,DMAN,JAYJAY,JOYW,HIBOU,LAFFZALOT AND SADSACK)

20. I'm back Alfie
Mon, Sep 20, 1999 - /EST

First let me say that I have really enjoyed all of this discussion with all you fine people out there and I have especially enjoyed debating with you Alfie.

Now I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt when you say your not angry but when you make a statement like: "Please don't simplify my statements to appease YOURSELF and justify your relationship." you sound disingenuous. That is an inflamitory statement and I don't need to 'justify' my relationship to anyone.

The truth is that you ARE saying that black men, though maybe not consiously, are discriminating against dark skinned women. I would be hard pressed to dissagree with that statement. It's probably true to some degree, although every individual has a story that must be judged on its own merits.

One last point. I think that people can meet for the wrong reasons. I think that they can date and marry for the wrong reasons. But I don't think you can love someone for the wrong reasons. Not real love. There is no wrong reason to love someone. There is too little love in this world and if you have it to give, then give it.

21. Angry Alfie
Mon, Sep 20, 1999 - 1:00 PM/EST

One of the most frustrating things about debates (even thoughtful ones) is when someone repeatedly accuses you of being something that you are not. I was not angry,but I find myself BECOMING angry everytime someone calls me angry! The suspicious part of me sometimes thinks that when people accuse you of something you can only deny,they are doing so in order to MAKE you angry. Whether consciously- or not, the accuser knows anger clouds judgement and thus,your argument. I have been in debates where the irritating use of the same statement or accusation,was enough to reduce a thoughtful person into someone too upset to make their "good points". Hibou, you came very close to provoking a hostile response from me. But that response was to YOU- not to the issue. In my previous comments, I never called people names.And never suggested that OTHERS in this chat group (who date interracially)had to justify THEIR relationships.Why you, Hibou? You finally irritated me enough to make me slip up in my usually careful use of language. If you feel slightly vendicated in your unfair assessment of me as " the angry black woman"(who made some good points)- so be it. Just keep thinking about what I have said and not what you are waiting for me to "slip-up" and say.Also, I beleive that black men are well aware of their racial biases toward women who are BLACK and men who are NOT. A few may be unconscious intraracists, but the issue of racism and colorism has been in the spotlight too long (and black men have been too involved in complaining about discrimination against themselves) to not know what they are doing to black women. It has been the assertion of the black men in interracial relationships, that any intraracism has been unconscious and brought on by white influences. If that is so ,then why aren't black women repulsed by black men? We should be, considering how aggressive the negative propaganda against THEM has been.I'll leave it at that.This dialog is making me weary.

22. Sorry Alfie.
Mon, Sep 20, 1999 - 4:14 PM/EST

First let's restate the obvious. I don't know you and you don't know me. However much it seems like we are having a conversation, we really are not. None of us has anything at stake here so please believe me when I say that there is nothing personal going on here. I may disagree with a point you make or misinterpret your tone as anger, but I don't have anything against you. How can I? I don't even know you!

The last few posts I have sent in this thread were mostly about me trying to come to terms with some of what I think are very good points that you have raised. But instead of really listening to me and clarifying yourself, you lash out and lecture me. Reread this thread and see if I'm not telling the truth.

If you are going to discuss these issues with people the you owe it to yourself and to them to come with an open mind and be willing to listen and not just lecture. I'm sorry that there was no way for me to send this to you directly and not post it for everyone to see.

If we are still at odds with each other after this, I promise that I will not make anymore postings directed at you.

Le Hibou

23. alfie
Mon, Sep 20, 1999 - 6:08 PM/EST

I have read my postings Hibou and yours. I didn't lash out at YOU unil you continued to accuse me of anger. I have yet to understand why my mood would matter ,anyway, it is the argument that counts. you stated that I was closed minded and did't hear other people. But it has only been you I have had a problem with. You stated that you CAN"T resent me because you don't know me, but you have decided early on that I am angry and resent YOU (without knowing you). I am no less inteeligent than you Hibou and I am know more prone to judging others I don't know than you. I didn't lash out at you only your insulting persistance in calling me angry. As for lecturing you, did you ever consider that fact that each time you accued me of anger you claimed that that anger made my points UNCLEAR. Any lengthy arguments I made from that point on, were precisly because you claimed not to understand me. I heard you and others. If I hadn't I couldn't have responded. You seem to believe that if someone disaggrees with you, it means they didn't hear you or are closed minded. I said that I understood your point about your relationship, but that wasn't enough. As for having nothing to loose. that's not true.You are in an interracial relationship and anyone questioning it with any success-is chipping away at your idealistic view of yourselves. this is not the first time a black man in an interrace relationship hit full capacity on my points about intraracism and decided that I was not giving him enough "rights" in the argument. You should read the postings in other dialog groups and you will understand just how clear and non-inflamatory I have been. I don't always think I'm right, Hibou. But I've heard evrything you have said many times before and found that the old " maybe there is SOME discrimination", and the "end the end its' about love" - to only be a distraction from the real issue of how serious or wide spread intraracism is. Read the other dialog groups. Especially #3.

24. Another
Mon, Sep 20, 1999 - 6:51 PM/EST

Now that I'm calmer,I'll watch my spelling, and add this. I aggreed with you on an occasion, Hibou. I was also open to other people's comments (Dip, Joyw,..) and encouraged them not to worry about my feelings too much -if I am wrong. I mentioned that I had read THEIR comments and thought them to be smart and thoughtful. You missed that too,Hibou. Clearly, you have decided my closed mindedness on the bases of my responses to you. I listened to everyone and only responded ,strongly, when I noted one of "the usual" comments on mixed relationships coming up. I didn't do this to lecture, but to keep the dialog moving beyond- "Let's just love one another"- to-"Are we really doing that?If not-why?" You wanted me to stop and acknowledge you for agreeing that SOME intraracism from black men exists.Maybe if we were face to face in a personal chat- not an open debate-I would have stopped to do those sort of emotional "hugs" and plesantries. But,black male color fixation is already well known-even by whites!!One of the issues is HOW MUCH OF IT EXISTS and HOW MUCH ARE BM/WF relationships influenced by it? That can't be truly addressed with a "maybe a little, but love will prevail". That may be true for your relationship, but this dialog is not a personal one. It is a dialog about what is possibly a national problem (and even international- race/color fixation). Personal situations can and DO add to an argument, but they can not BE your argument. That is what I called YOU on. I had no intention on continuing to address you, Hibou, until you repeatedly called my opinions angry and clouded. Reread my postings,again- LATER, MUCH LATER!!! I have read yours and others more than you could imagine. I have even read and considered the opinions of folks in other dialog groups. Don't apologize again, Hibou. You'll just call me angry and closed-minded again-in a different way. I will no longer address you directly. It is not The ALFIE/HIBOU dialog group and I am at least sensitive to that.