newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Bezos is really outchere in these streets. Sending ghost writers to release intersectional hot fire on brehs. Walking around like an action movie mastermind goon.
Last edited:
The Washington Post is going after black men
- Thread starter WakandanPride
- Start date
Bezos is really outchere in these streets. Sending ghost writers to release intersectional hot fire on brehs. Walking around like an action movie mastermind goon.
It's deeper than this but cult of the blk male isn't gonna allow for honest discourse just like cult of the blk woman gets on a victim soapbox anytime you discuss their issues.
It is what it is.
Another empty “both sides” post that’s used to deflect from black women being legitimately called out
So a sensationalized headline where a black woman is employed by a white publication to negatively generalize black men based on a very small minority, isn’t an attack but black men calling out black woken who routinely do this is an attack?
Another empty “both sides” post that’s used to deflect from black women being legitimately called out
You're not gonna get an honest discourse with these black feminuts and loose booty boys when it comes to the hi tech demonization of black men to advance "progressive" values. You can't even get brehette to admit that the majority of black men in GA who voted were on code and voted close to 90% for Abrams.
But whenever you bring up the sizable number of black women in FL who voted for DeSantis, all the sudden its radio silence.
Yea I get it. I call these clowns out to expose them for others to see. That’s why we should all do it. That booksnrain poster is just as bad as matt504.
What is it that you're calling out, the only thing on display here is the very hypersensitivity you accuse others of.
A landscape where a Black woman saying "what's up with all these Black men voting for a republican candidate in Georgia" is perceived as an attack.
"Why isn't this Black women calling out white women instead"
The only thing you nikkas call out with any real success is attention to your obsession with homosexuality and perceived attacks that don't really pass the smell test when closely scrutinized. When you can't demonstrate how this article is an attack against Black men, the goal post is moved to "other Black women authors do it".
This is what I mean by a lack of accountability, you nikkas aren't even capable of admitting when you're wrong so there's no way in hell we should expect your ilk to call out or even recognize other Black men's poor behaviors.
What is it that you're calling out, the only thing on display here is the very hypersensitivity you accuse others of.
A landscape where a Black woman saying "what's up with all these Black men voting for a republican candidate in Georgia" is perceived as an attack.
"Why isn't this Black women calling out white women instead"
The only thing you nikkas call out with any real success is attention to your obsession with homosexuality and perceived attacks that don't really pass the smell test when closely scrutinized. When you can't demonstrate how this article is an attack against Black men, the goal post is moved to "other Black women authors do it".
This is what I mean by a lack of accountability, you nikkas aren't even capable of admitting when you're wrong so there's no way in hell we should expect your ilk to call out or even recognize other Black men's poor behaviors.
It is an attack. Almost 90% of black men voted for Abrams so there was no “all those black men who voted republican”. The headline is a blatant lie and it was told to push an anti black male agenda. You’re defending it because you’re anti black male.
The tweet in the OP makes mention of the percentage of Black men that voted for Abrams, if anything it's a pro Black male piece as it literally gives Black men an out and also calls out white women in the VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH.
that might be the only attack to be found in this entire piece ironically.
Agin, where's the attack?
"but what about the headline
"What's more interesting is how Black men were able to come into this thread and shyt on this Black women for her looks and draw no rebuke from the "pro Black" males here who claim to be Black first, the reason is because you nikkas aren't Black first, you're Black Male first, so you take no issue with nikkas shytting on her as you've already thrown her to the bushes for a perceived slight in asking "What’s up with all those black men who voted for the Republican in the Georgia governor’s race?"
Again, the headline is the attack. I haven’t read the actual article and I’m not going to read it. You want to treat us like we’re stupid and don’t know how the internet and clickbait tactics work. They knew exactly what they were doing with that headline and that’s the point.The tweet in the OP makes mention of the percentage of Black men that voted for Abrams, if anything it's a pro Black male piece as it literally gives Black men an out and also calls out white women in the VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH.
that might be the only attack to be found in this entire piece ironically.
Agin, where's the attack?
"but what about the headline
Black men of Georgia didn’t need an “out”. Black male voters of Georgia have nothing to apologize for or explain. They voted for Abrams at 90%. If black women are going to question anyone it should be their white “sisters” who went against Abrams at 75%. I know, I know. Y’all can claim feminism all day but when it’s time to hold your white sisters in the struggle accountable then y’all get scared and decide to lash out at black men instead.
The fact that this woman knew that only 11% of black male voters went against Abrams with almost 90% for her, yet still decided to go along with that dishonest headline anyway proves that she’s at least complicit with the anti black male agenda. The content of the article which may not be as negative to black men, doesn’t take away from damage that the headline does.
fukk this ugly ass chic and all the other black feminists working with whites to push an anti black male agenda. Pro-black doesn’t mean you ride for all black people. I consider blacks like you and the ugmoe who wrote this article to be enemies of the black community. This guilt trip shaming shyt doesn’t work over here buddy. I’m only standing with blacks who are black first and this woman isn’t black first. She’s a black liberal feminist. She’s a woman and a liberal first. What loyalty do black men owe her when she’s throwing us under the bus for clicks and pats on the head from white people? She can hop on a national white platform and throw us under the bus with a headline implying that we’re to blame for Abrams losing in Georgia, but we’re supposed to defend her? bytch please.What's more interesting is how Black men were able to come into this thread and shyt on this Black women for her looks and draw no rebuke from the "pro Black" males here who claim to be Black first, the reason is because you nikkas aren't Black first, you're Black Male first, so you take no issue with nikkas shytting on her as you've already thrown her to the bushes for a perceived slight in asking "What’s up with all those black men who voted for the Republican in the Georgia governor’s race?"
It IS an attack....Anytime the black candidate there are always articles after blaming the black men for not voting enough for them...
This isn't one of those articles but you'd know that if you read it.
Mr Hate Coffee
Veteran
That’s a stupid premise tho. Why focus on what a small percentage of people are doing when we have much bigger issues to worry about?
That’s what makes the article misleading and supporting an agenda.
I agree with you on the article itself, but the headline isn't just clickbait but also irresponsible. How many people are going to skip reading the article and go off of the headline itself? Plenty will and they'll have in their minds that a substantial amount of Black men are voting against Black interests. It's needlessly divisive.
The irony is I came across a article title stating that Stacy Dash believes liberals divide Black men and women. Can't believe I'm saying this but she has a point, one only need to take a look at the subject of this thread and the ripple effect.