Tariq Nasheed Premiers "Buck Breaking"

[King]

No.



This laughable idea of white men typing up black male slaves and raping them to break them. Pure fantasy. If you think about it for just five minutes, you'll find the logical fallacy in this Playgirl shyt. Tariq is so obsessed with homosexuality that he made a whole damn movie about it.

What I can't figure out is why so many black men are so desperate to believe that our male ancestors were tied up and raped by white men. There is absolutely NO scholarship pointing to anything remotely close to this. You really think some of our most educated and experienced historians are unable to verify this Literotica, but TARIQ NASHEED can?! This is about as legitimate as the 1776 Project (which also had no historians and no scholarly researched and was universally clowned).

First off that’s a fukking lie and comparing it to literal disinformation like the 1776 Project is disrespectful as fukk to our male ancestors who were raped and sexually abused.

In regards to scholarship, I highly recommend you read The Man Not by Tommy Curry. The book is written by an actually scholar and gives an historical overview of sexual abuse by slave masters through emancipation/Jim Crow, and modern day.

And seriously, actually read the book. Don’t just go on goodreads, read some biased summaries just to feel validated in your response to this post. Actually cop the book/pdf, sit down, and read it. Look over the sources as well.

To me it seems like you’re bought into the racist LGBT woke coalition worldview that erases black men’s struggles from history - especially in regards to homosexuality. Which is another underlying issue in itself why this history is so stigmatized and attacked.

 

[ViShawn]

No.



This laughable idea of white men typing up black male slaves and raping them to break them. Pure fantasy. If you think about it for just five minutes, you'll find the logical fallacy in this Playgirl shyt. Tariq is so obsessed with homosexuality that he made a whole damn movie about it.

What I can't figure out is why so many black men are so desperate to believe that our male ancestors were tied up and raped by white men. There is absolutely NO scholarship pointing to anything remotely close to this. You really think some of our most educated and experienced historians are unable to verify this Literotica, but TARIQ NASHEED can?! This is about as legitimate as the 1776 Project (which also had no historians and no scholarly researched and was universally clowned).

Tariq told me those were called "Bussy Balls"

 

[CodeKansas]

And where is the RESEARCH for Tariq's gay fantasy come to life on film? Who are the credentialed scholars co-signing on this interracial wet dream? I bet some of you still believe in Mandingo fighting and Willie Lynch, too.

I've made no criticism at all. I'll gladly watch the movie once I know more about the legitimate scholars, researchers and historians who verified these claims. Secretly gay-ass Facebook brehcels don't count, sorry.

I mean, we got three - Tariq, Judge Joe Brown and Bishop Swan - none of whom, to my knowledge have even a BACHELOR'S degree in history, much less the antebellum South.

I can tell.



GOD FORBID I want to know more about this historians who made such a powerful historical narrative!

Tell me, do you go eat at fancy restaurants without reading the reviews first? Take your car to a mechanic with asking about him/her? Walk into a barber sight unseen? Because if you do, you're just the kind of sucker Tariq is counting for free publicity for his swirling bussy desires.

 

[Spiritual Stratocaster]

And where is the RESEARCH for Tariq's gay fantasy come to life on film? Who are the credentialed scholars co-signing on this interracial wet dream? I bet some of you still believe in Mandingo fighting and Willie Lynch, too.

There was an interview of a formt slave posted on here where his master kept him in a girls dress until he was like 12.

 

[Maxine Shaw]

can?

There was an interview of a formt slave posted on here where his master kept him in a girls dress until he was like 12.

I believe that. Nobody is saying that there was no sexual assault against male slaves - CERTAINLY not me. But the idea that it was this widespread practice for a specific reason (to emasculate black men - as if black men were even considered men in the first place!), yet there's virtually no mention of it ANYWHERE is called a fantasy.

 

[Maxine Shaw]

First off that’s a fukking lie and comparing it to literal disinformation like the 1776 Project is disrespectful as fukk to our male ancestors who were raped and sexually abused.

No, the lie is a self-hating homophobe using our ancestors' pain to peddle books to stupid fukks who get their history from Facebook memes.

In regards to scholarship, I highly recommend you read The Man Not by Tommy Curry. The book is written by an actually scholar and gives an historical overview of sexual abuse by slave masters through emancipation/Jim Crow, and modern day.

Okay, I will if I can find it at the library or online. I am interested in knowing why a single book is going to be able to verify the existence of a practice that no one else has been able to verify this far. It *looks* legit, though, and Dr. Curry is certainly bonafide.

And seriously, actually read the book.

Don’t just go on goodreads, read some biased summaries just to feel validated in your response to this post.

Translation: This book sucks and doesn't justify anything I say, but read it anyway. Which I will certainly do because unlike Tariq Nasheed, Curry has CREDENTIALS. BTW, the GR reviews are almost ALL five-star for this book.

To me it seems like you’re bought into the racist LGBT woke coalition worldview that erases black men’s struggles from history - especially in regards to homosexuality. Which is another underlying issue in itself why this history is so stigmatized and attacked.

Maybe I just don't believe in homophobes peddling bad porn stories to equally homophobic hoteps. Now, are you telling me that this loan book WILL verify that white slave masters were raping black male slaves on the regular to dehumanizing them? If so, do me a favor and point me to the general part of the book that says so.

(edit)

Tommy J. Curry’s provocative book The Man-Not is a justification for Black Male Studies. He posits that we should conceptualize the Black male as a victim, oppressed by his sex. The Man-Not, therefore, is a corrective of sorts, offering a concept of Black males that could challenge the existing accounts of Black men and boys desiring the power of white men who oppress them that has been proliferated throughout academic research across disciplines.

Ahhhh. Now things are becoming clearer.

 

[King]

No, the lie is a self-hating homophobe using our ancestors' pain to peddle books to stupid fukks who get their history from Facebook memes.



Okay, I will if I can find it at the library or online. I am interested in knowing why a single book is going to be able to verify the existence of a practice that no one else has been able to verify this far. It *looks* legit, though, and Dr. Curry is certainly bonafide.



Translation: This book sucks and doesn't justify anything I say, but read it anyway. Which I will certainly do because unlike Tariq Nasheed, Curry has CREDENTIALS. BTW, the GR reviews are almost ALL five-star for this book.



Maybe I just don't believe in homophobes peddling bad porn stories to equally homophobic hoteps. Now, are you telling me that this loan book WILL verify that white slave masters were raping black male slaves on the regular to dehumanizing them? If so, do me a favor and point me to the general part of the book that says so.

(edit)



Ahhhh. Now things are becoming clearer.

We’re talking about facts here, whatever you’re saying up to this point is still conjecture. If you refuse to actually read the source you asked for don’t quote me anymore.

Here’s the link to a pdf

Spoiler

Library Genesis: Tommy J Curry - The Man-Not: Race, Class, Genre, and the Dilemmas of Black Manhood

 

[Maxine Shaw]

We’re talking about facts here, whatever you’re saying up to this point is still conjecture. If you refuse to actually read the source you asked for don’t quote me anymore.

Here’s the link to a pdf

Spoiler

Library Genesis: Tommy J Curry - The Man-Not: Race, Class, Genre, and the Dilemmas of Black Manhood

I'll quote you if I damn well please. But I *will* read the book. Thanks for the link.

Table of contents :
Introduction • Toward a Genre Study of Black Male Death and Dying: Addressing the Caricatures that Serve as Theory in the Study of Black Males

1. On Mimesis and Men: Toward a Historiography of the Man-Not; or, the Ethnological Origins of the Primal Rapist
2. Lost in a Kiss? The Sexual Victimization of the Black Male during Jim Crow Read through Eldridge Cleaver’s The Book of Lives and Soul on Ice
3. The Political Economy of ******dom: Racist Misandry, Class Warfare, and the Disciplinary Propagation of the Super-predator Mythology
4. Eschatological Dilemmas: Anti-Black Male Death, Rape, and the Inability to Perceive Black Males’ Sexual Vulnerability under Racism
5. In the Fiat of Dreams: The Delusional Allure of Hope and the Reality of Anti-Black (Male) Death that Demands Our Theorization of the Anti-ethical
Conclusion • Not MAN but Not Some Nothing: Affirming Who I Cannot Be through a Genre Study of Black Male Death and Dying

Epilogue • Black, Male, and (Forced to Remain) Silent: Censorship and the Subject/Subject Dilemma in Disciplinary Conceptualizations of the Black Male

Acknowledgments
Notes
Index

Um...which chapter covers buck breaking?

 

[King]

I'll quote you if I damn well please. But I *will* read the book. Thanks for the link.



Um...which chapter covers buck breaking?

Stop being obtuse. Seriously, I am not going to hold your hand I just gave you what you asked for. It is your responsibility to do the research and correct your own beliefs.

You need to stop being ignorant. I said - DO NOT QUOTE ME IF YOU AREN’T GOING TO READ THE BOOK.

Historically, rape during slavery was not bound by sexual designation. While Hartman insists that “sexuality formed the nexus in which lack, female, and chattel were inextricably bound and acted to intensify the constraints of slave status by subjecting the body to another order of violations and whims,”49 history shows that Black “males” were also sexually abused, and the bodies of these men and boys were sodomized throughout the diaspora. James Sweet presents accounts of enslaved men submitting to rape out of fear of death throughout the eighteenth century. For example, he offers the story of “a Mina slave named Luís da Costa, [who] confessed that one day while he and his master were out in the woods, his master forced him to submit to anal sex.” His master, Manuel Alvares Cabral, was known to have sodomized six of his former male slaves in 1739.50 Sweet also notes: Perhaps the most violent sexual assaults of slaves occurred in Pará in the late 1750s and early 1760s. Francisco Serrão de Castro, heir to a large sugar engenho, was denounced for sodomy and rape by no less than nineteen male slaves, all Africans. Among those who were assaulted were teenage boys and married men. As a result of these sexual attacks, a number of the victims suffered from ‘‘swelling and . . . bleeding from their anuses.’’ Francisco Serrão de Castro apparently infected his slaves with a venereal disease that eventually took more than a quarter of his victims to their graves.

Here’s a quote from chapter 4 which is LITERALLY NAMED:

4. Eschatological Dilemmas: Anti-Black Male Death, Rape, and the Inability to Perceive Black Males’ Sexual Vulnerability under Racism

 

[Maxine Shaw]

(hotep babble)

In other ther words...nowhere. In fact, you proved my point. Again, NOBODY is saying that male slaves were not abused - we know that. It's been researched and noted, just like here. But "buckbreaking" was never a thing, and certainly not an accepted, well-spread practice for keeping Black male slaves in line. In fact, the historical figure named in the very paragraph you quoted was "widely denounced" for raping his male slaves. (That's another problem with Tariq's fantasy - the idea that buck breaking was so common and widespread that it would have would have been accepted in society.) Save that shyt for the bedroom, not academia.

(And seeing that I am actually laughing out loud by page 8, this book probably *will* be bushed. In summary: Black men are the biggest victims of patriarchy b/c people say mean things. Also, Black feminists suck and TOTALLY have not made these exact same point he's made about 50 fukking times.)

 

[King]

In other ther words...nowhere. In fact, you proved my point. Again, NOBODY is saying that male slaves were not abused - we know that. It's been researched and noted, just like here. But "buckbreaking" was never a thing, and certainly not an accepted, well-spread practice for keeping Black male slaves in line. Save that shyt for the bedroom, not academia.

(And seeing that I am actually laughing out loud by page 8, this book probably *will* be bushed. In summary: Black men are the biggest victims of patriarchy b/c people say mean things. Also, Black feminists suck and TOTALLY have not made these exact same point he's made about 50 fukking times.)

fukk off. fukk you for wasting my time. You can’t reason with an ignorant person. The entire context of that quote revolves around male rape as a widespread practice of a system of control that evolved through Jim Crow until modern day. But you wouldn’t know that because you didn’t read the book.

Negged bytch.

 

[Buckeye Fever]

I got mines today at Nubian bookstore in Clay co. Finna grab this sandwich and cheesecake from Publix, and call it a day.

I loved Publix when i visited the south

 

[Budda]

In other ther words...nowhere. In fact, you proved my point. Again, NOBODY is saying that male slaves were not abused - we know that. It's been researched and noted, just like here. But "buckbreaking" was never a thing, and certainly not an accepted, well-spread practice for keeping Black male slaves in line. Save that shyt for the bedroom, not academia.

(And seeing that I am actually laughing out loud by page 8, this book probably *will* be bushed. In summary: Black men are the biggest victims of patriarchy b/c people say mean things. Also, Black feminists suck and TOTALLY have not made these exact same point he's made about 50 fukking times.)

I don’t get your argument he just gave you the receipts you will fully dismiss as ‘Hotep babble’ male slaves did get raped all over the diaspora so what is even your argument?

 

[Maxine Shaw]

I don’t get your argument he just gave you the receipts you will fully dismiss as ‘Hotep babble’ male slaves did get raped all over the diaspora so what is even your argument?

*typing slowly* That while male slave rape was certainly something that happened (no one is arguing otherwise), the concept of slave rape by "gay" white masters as a way to emasculate Black men is nonsensical, homophobic and has no basis is history. Hell, if Dr. Curry is in this documentary, it would certainly give it some legitimacy.

(hotep tears

Didn't I say I'm only on page 8? Sheesh.

 

[The Fade]

In other ther words...nowhere. In fact, you proved my point. Again, NOBODY is saying that male slaves were not abused - we know that. It's been researched and noted, just like here. But "buckbreaking" was never a thing, and certainly not an accepted, well-spread practice for keeping Black male slaves in line. In fact, the historical figure named in the very paragraph you quoted was "widely denounced" for raping his male slaves. (That's another problem with Tariq's fantasy - the idea that buck breaking was so common and widespread that it would have would have been accepted in society.) Save that shyt for the bedroom, not academia.

(And seeing that I am actually laughing out loud by page 8, this book probably *will* be bushed. In summary: Black men are the biggest victims of patriarchy b/c people say mean things. Also, Black feminists suck and TOTALLY have not made these exact same point he's made about 50 fukking times.)

Yeah y’all quote white supremacist suffragettes and collude with CIA agents and don’t call it out. A lot of y’all are planted there by Steinem herself and destroy grassroots orgs off of Republican money