“Why more black women should marry white men” - The New York Post

yung Herbie Hancock

Funkadelic Parliament
Bushed
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
7,168
Reputation
-2,451
Daps
21,579
Reppin
California
I thought this was an April Fools day joke until I initially clicked and saw that the author has been on this wave for a minute. We talk about this on a weekly basis and yes I am going to preface this (again) by stating MOST black women don't hate black men, and most don't even know what "divest" even means because it's such an online thing.

We've gone from deliberate social attempts to dissuade black marriage to returning to supporting marriage, but only with white men. Pretty interesting shift, and the only surprising thing is that this isn't coming from a black woman or gay black man. It's coming from a straight black man, who is married to a black woman. A successful black man, married to a successful black woman (she's a Stanford professor of psychology). You know who has a decent marriage success rate? Successful people, economically. Like this author and his wife. You know who has bad marriage success rates? Poor and working class people - two classes black people are disproportionately members of.

It's important not to pathologize blackness IMO because it often comes from a one sided perspective. In reality, poor and working class white people have high divorce rates too. Not to say poor or struggling people shouldn't get married, or that there are benefits to marriage. There are a LOT of benefits and more black people should get married. But we need to be smarter about who we date. Who we're allowed to nut in us (if you're a woman), and who we're nutting in (if you're a man). Who we're marrying. Because right now a lot of people are making idiotic decisions that ruin them economically and socially.
I agree with this as well however the loudest black women voices in media nowadays are black women of immigrant descent. For some reason they're over represented in media and journalism compared to black American women. Africa is the white man's playground (In fact, Kenya is basically like Thailand nowadays). White men go there to basically run through women. It's no surprise that African women are some of the biggest bdwenches. They're the ones being put on a pedestal politically too. Kentaji Brown is of Jamaican descent.
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
14,858
Reputation
3,972
Daps
59,682
I don’t think black men change their standards and expectations like black women do when it comes to non black partners. I think it’s because men do the choosing.

This 100%.

Broads be like "ewww look at Terrell with that chunky white gurl." As if Terrell wasn't smashing a chunky Black woman three months ago. A brehs type (slim thicc, curvy, skinny, BBW etc) doesn't change with race.
 

yung Herbie Hancock

Funkadelic Parliament
Bushed
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
7,168
Reputation
-2,451
Daps
21,579
Reppin
California
You can reference stats that measure which race and gender marry out as a whole, or the percentage of wm/ww who marry ir and in both cases, yts are still more likely to marry their own.

Legacy, race, and yt supremacy is paramount to their existence.
This is false. White WOMEN are the most likely out of all groups to marry their own. Statistics back this. White men actually date out more than white women. Black men's rate of dating out is actually similar to that of hispanic and Asian men, but we get called out for it because black women have a low marrying out rate. This doesn't mean that black women are race loyal though since marrying =/= casual dating. I'd wager that black women casually date out more.
 

Piff Perkins

Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
51,715
Reputation
18,812
Daps
281,718
I agree with this as well however the loudest black women voices in media nowadays are black women of immigrant descent. For some reason they're over represented in media and journalism compared to black American women. Africa is the white man's playground (In fact, Kenya is basically like Thailand nowadays). White men go there to basically run through women. It's no surprise that African women are some of the biggest bdwenches. They're the ones being put on a pedestal politically too. Kentaji Brown is of Jamaican descent.
I see you have a negative rep on the site, and are peddling the diaspora nonsense. No thanks. @Houston911

I haven't counted but I'm gonna assume there's a very large group of ADOS women who are on board with the divest movement. This is NOT something coming from out of the US largely. And to be frank I'm not sure what you're bringing up Brown as she's shown no sign of being a divester, hasn't slandered black men etc. She's married to a white dude and has a successful marriage, good for her. That's not the issue at hand.
 

Hitchens

Pro
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
334
Reputation
55
Daps
1,688
You can reference stats that measure which race and gender marry out as a whole, or the percentage of wm/ww who marry ir and in both cases, yts are still more likely to marry their own.

Legacy, race, and yt supremacy is paramount to their existence.
I am not disputing that Whites have the lowest interracial marriage percentage wise. I am disputing the reason for their low ir rates. You and Carmelbarbie believe that the reason for white men low irr is because of racial loyalty and I am making the argument that it is completely useless to use ir rate for Whites to demonstrate white men racial loyalty because of their population size. Whites pop size is 200 million, minority pop size is about 120-130 million. So even if every minority were to marry a white person Whites would still have the lowest ir rate compare to minorities(60-65 percent whites would be in a interracial marriage compare to 100 percent for minorities. Essentially it is impossible for Whites not to have the lowest IR rate
 

CarmelBarbie

At peace
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
10,600
Reputation
8,574
Daps
58,841
Reppin
Charlotte
We know it aint happening like that because the highest intermarriage group is white and Hispanics.

Statements like "expand your options" "date white men" are disingenuous because it's always from a position that Black Women are the only group of women available for white men and as if White, Hispanic and Asian women don't exist and aren't also in competition for the same men.

For this to work Black Women have to hold the highest value for their buyer (white men) compared to other currencies (white, Hispanic, Asian women)

Black Women are the weakest compared to the others. So finding marriage is still going to be difficult regardless.

White Men deciding not to marry Black Woman isn't happening because Black Women say "no I'm only interested in brehs". It's happening because The Average white man is not interested in Black Women in the first place.

This is more likely to still leave black women alone, single and without a marriage.

But is the bolded really the position it’s coming from? I think the argument is that only focusing on one group of men limits your options as opposed to being open to all men. Once your open to all, the number of options increase and there isnt the same fierce competition as it is for a small pool of men.

statistically speaking there are a significant number of wm in this country. There is actually a large enough pool of wm, that wm are over represented on dating sites, in the workplace, and even in certain cities where there are more men than women.

I recall when I visited Williston ND, I saw an equal number of bm married to ww, as I saw wm married to bw. I saw some black couples, but far more IR on both sides, that area had a good amount of black people (more than I thought). The wm were hollering and approaching very aggressively.

I realized that in certain areas of this country where there are far more of them, and fewer of us, it’s far more likely for black people to date and marry them based on sheer proximity and abundance. But that’s only if the black person isn’t set on only dating and marrying other black people.

Every year a list of cities where there are more men than women is published, but that surplus is always about the population of wm. If a bw lives in an area where there are more men than woman and she is open to any race of man she actually has less competition because of the surplus of men compared to women.

Even if she doesn’t live in those areas, in many locations across the USA there are far more wm than bm. she is actually facing less competition being open to all races of men than by only going for a much smaller pool of men(bm).

to illustrate, say in given community of single men there are 10 bm, 100 wm, 8 Asian men, 6 Latino men. If she only focuses on those 10 men, because they are low in number, she has to hope that she can appeal to at least one of those ten men. Meanwhile those ten men are dating bw and nonbw, so she’s competing with a lot of women for a smaller number of men—that makes competition fierce for those men.

But if she were to be open to every race of men—her chances go from just a pool of 10 to 124. So she’s still competing, but now she’s competing for a larger pool of men.

The thing is, if we are using dating surveys to assess who wm value the most it is true that they date and marry other groups more than bw. But the same can be said for Brehs. Based on the surveys y’all are not desired as partners by anyone but bw, but despite that, it isn’t stopping y’all from dating, proposing and marrying other women, and isn’t stopping those other women from giving you chance and saying yes when you do propose even if they generally don’t prefer you. Those other women prefer wm, and Hispanic men over you, creating more competition for you to appeal to them over others. Yet knowing that they aren’t even interested in y’all very much, somehow, someway, by going for every woman instead of just bw, y’all are able to secure relationships and marriages with them. :manny: The author advocates for bw to follow that approach. Does it mean every wm will propose? No. But he’s telling bw to put themselves in a position to be open to all races of men to increase their chances of marriage(whether that be with white, brown, yellow, or black).
 
Last edited:

CarmelBarbie

At peace
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
10,600
Reputation
8,574
Daps
58,841
Reppin
Charlotte
He's bisexual. I actually know someone who went to school with him at Harvard.

Can you show me an article like this for any other communiy? Do you know the outrage that would ensue if a white man wrote an article saying "why white women should date black men" for a major news paper like the new york times. They would have thrown a riot. Actually, something similar happened during the willmington riots of the late 1800s. Alexander Manley (who was mixed) said that he had a white girlfriend, these white men encited a whole riot over it and burned the town to the ground. We lost a prospering city because of that.
A bm wrote this article not a bw. :mjtf: Save your outrage for him. He wasn’t asked to write that article or that book, he did both on his own.
 

Xavier

Iconic
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
919
Reputation
1,625
Daps
11,637
Reppin
Where Kings Will Dream
Actually, I’m not sure if your talking about me or not, when you talk about agents, considering I don’t fukk with LSA. But what I’ve said is that neither group is loyal to the other. The birth rate only measures how many babies are being born. Not how much sex is being had. But Babies do indicate that one is engaging in unprotected sex.

Sex rates between bw and wm, and bm and nonbw aren’t measured. The same way bw use the marriage rate to point out how many of you date out, even though marriage is not the same as dating, and dating doesn’t always lead to marriage (take a look at our marriage rates for instance) you all are using the birth rate to determine who is having sex with who more, despite the fact that sex doesn’t always lead to babies.

Your argument that men do the proposing and that’s the only reason bw aren’t married to wm more even though they sleep with them a lot, could also be applied to the babies: women do the birthing. They can take birth control to prevent pregnancies from happening. They can also decide to keep or terminate pregnancies if they do get pregnant. One could argue that just because bw are more likely to have a wm baby OOW and WW are not as willing to have biracial babies OOW does not mean ww aren’t having just as much sex with bm, the ww just don’t want to have half black babies as much as bw. See how that works?

Really we can’t verify who has sex with who or who dates who more, because neither rate is being measured. What we can determine from your marriage rates to ww and from bw’s birth rates to wm, is that neither group is loyal. The fact that bm propose to ww is indicative of that, and the fact that bw birth wm babies is indicative of that.

What y’all choose to do with that information is on you. If y’all decide that because some bw are disloyal wenches there’s no need to feel guilt about dating out yourselves that’s fine, likewise if brehettes decide that because some Brehs are disloyal bucks, there’s no need to feel guilt about dating out that’s fine.

simone-biles-gymnastics.gif
 
Top