Skip to main content

We (black people) need to stop focusing on finding love "outside" and start finding love on the "inside". Our romantic lives tend to follow our personal/professional lives. How many brothas/sistas have hooked up with someone "just because" or because of "loneliness"? Now nobody should want to be with someone who is not at least working on thier potential. If your only option is to be with a janitor/waitress, pick the janitor/waitress that knows the value of a dollar, has and utilizes good judgement, displays a truly good heart and sound mind and you should be okay. If said janitor/waitress is always asking for 5 bucks every week, thats a sign right there... Big Grin (and yes I know some custodians and food preparers that have more money stashed away and more intellictual acumen than PHD's). But to not have some romantic ideal and standards is just plain foolish as well as not observing every aspect of someone. Yes, some people are diamonds in the rough just waiting to be discovered but there are also some who are just plain rough...and should be left right where they are. *Whew* I'm done now, I can finally enjoy this fish sandwich I've been drooling over.......... thanks
You guys are all completely missing the point of qty's post (and all the others posts like hers that have come before). Do none of you see the disparity between the two standards she pointed out? It doesn't strike any of you as ODD that it is fine and even considered "rational" for a Black man to want the best looking woman available ("Who wouldn't choose a video girl over a 200 lb woman?" was the gist of the quote, I believe), but a Black woman is immediately scolded (as we see from the posts immediately following qty's post) for wanting anything "too fancy." She must be open to the buck-toothed, hump-backed janitor, but it's "just common sense" for the Black man to only want the Halle Berry and Beyonce look-a-likes. All of that was lost on you all?

The point is NOT that "janitors aint shit" or however else things were apparently interpreted. It's the double standard.
I was once a janitor but am neither hump backed nor buck toothed, I don't know too many brothas that date anyone looking remotely like Halle Berry (much less Beyonce), and I don't have a problem with 200 lb chicks...Now the 300 lb chicks is another subject....

Are ya'll sure that the outbreak of brothas dating Beyonce look-alikes isn't a figment of your collective imagination? What a man lusts after and claims he wants is not necessarily what he dates or actually desires. Let's not argue because we're confusing somebody's fantasy with reality.

And even if these brothas were plentiful (which I doubt) it's not quite a double standard. An ambitious and intelligent janitor can still go far in life... if a sista weighs 400 lbs the odds are very much against her ever looking like Beyonce...
Two things:
1 - Gambit, I wasn't talking to you. Turn that frown upside down.

2 - HonestB, you're still missing it, baby. Hee hee. It is not that men are going out and dating these "perfect women," it's that it's perfectly okay for them to want that and the same is not true for us. THAT is the double standard. It works like this:

In front of a man stands Halle Berry and a random Plain Jane.

Man: I choose Halle!
Crowd Reaction: Naturally! Who wouldn't?

In front of a woman stands Denzel and a random Plain Joe.

Woman: I choose Denzel!
Crowd Reaction: That's what's wrong with you all. What makes you think you are worthy of dating a Denzel? You all are focused on the wrong things and need to be open to all types of Black men and stop trying to go for the Denzels. Why does a brotha have to have all of this stuff before you will look at him? What happened to growing with a brotha? And if Denzel cheats on you, you deserve it and I'm gonna laugh because that is what you get going after those types of desireable men.
Originally posted by Frenchy:
Two things:
2 - HonestB, you're still missing it, baby. Hee hee. It is not that men are going out and dating these "perfect women," it's that it's perfectly okay for them to want that and the same is not true for us. THAT is the double standard.

Well maybe, baby, you're right. I'm just not getting it. Personally I'd take Alfre Woodard over either Beyonce or Halle Berry. And I just learned she's married to a white guy.

Maybe it's just me. I like smart women. And I know if I require both brains and a body like Beyonce I'll be waiting forever...

And in the end we're still just arguing over people's fantasies... OK we're arguing over a fantasy double standard.

giveup You win. But it still boils down to fantasy. And the only thing important to me is reality.

Video girls? I don't have cable and haven't watched TV in over 4 years. I don't even know what the video girls look like.
Originally posted by Frenchy:
HonestB, you're still missing it, baby. Hee hee. It is not that men are going out and dating these "perfect women," it's that it's perfectly okay for them to want that and the same is not true for us. THAT is the double standard.

Frenchy, I think your the one who's missing it. The double stadard exists because men and women have different stadards. It's perfectly O.K. for men to want women that look like Halle Barry. It's perfectly O.K. for women to want men who look like Denzel Wahington. But, if that's what you want, then that's what you get. No complaining about personality issues that were not taken into considration at the outset.

The issue being driven into the dirt here is "What are you looking for?" Are you looking for a janitor or a supermodel? The answer is no... but what we are looking for could be found in either of these two places.
And I would take a nice, respectful Plain Joe over a Denzel any day of the week. But that's not the issue. It's about more than just what we are allowed to fantasize about and pursue. For women, who are already in a sexist society, it is yet another excuse for men to use to belittle, undermine, and irrationally blame us. sad
Originally posted by Frenchy:
The double stadard exists because men and women have different stadards.

What do you mean by that?

I mean that men and women don't look for (or even at) the same things when looking at a prospective partner. Therefore, It's silly for us to judge each other based on our own (unique) standards. Most especially when it's not even our own relationship that we're talking about.

However, It just might be beneficial for us to try and understand each others standards. That might make it easier to actually find a partner.
Originally posted by nayo:
Name-calling? Darn. I especially agreed with this:
"Most of the so-called love I've seen has been a lot of infantile degradation..."

Ad nauseum. I recently had a black fellow, ask me could I find him a girlfriend. Ask me could I find HIM a girlfriend. I said my name was'nt 'Hitch'. Then, he goes on to say, "you sure got some big legs...I see those big legs everyday, and I say mmmmmmmm. Where yo man at, gurrl? Let me give you my phone number, and you tell ya girls about me. ya heah. I'm 53 years old, and I needs a woman. The woman I just broke up was to needy, to clingy. Tell ya girls about me" wth.

This on the train to work, in my suit, attache case. No, I was'nt doing the 'stuck-up' thing. Not at all, but can I just get a good morning and how are you today, and you sure look nice. Spoken to me, and not at me? And not that it matters (much) but we were the only two Black American folk on the train; and, the others were 'oyinbo'. lol! And he was loud.

oyinbo...hmm...Nayo..are you Nigerian? just curious.
Originally posted by Frenchy:
I mean that men and women don't look for (or even at) the same things when looking at a prospective partner.

What do you mean by this, specifically?

Category A: Qualities women look for in men- Confidence, Self-Control, Mystery, A Sense Of Challenge.

Category B: Qualities men look for in women- Flexability, Integrity, Loyalty, A Giving Nature.

All of these things are good qualities, but the difference lies in the priorities.

A woman will stay with a man who has all of the qualities in Category A, even if he has none of the qualities in Category B. But, if he has all of the qualities in Category B, and none of the qualities in Category A, he will find himself on the curb.

A man will stay with a woman who has all of the qualities in Category B, even if she has none of the qualities in Category A. But, if she has all of the qualities in Category A, and none of the qualities in Category B, she will find herself on the curb.

If I may, a little about myself:...besides my humble education: I'm 5'6", weigh 147, I'm losing my hair and I wear glasses. I have been informed on many an occasion by many a Sista, that while I have a great personality"”I'm respectful, patient, loving, generous, loyal, dedicated and funny...I'm not their "cup of tea". They loved me, but could never be "in love" with me.

I understood this, kept the bitterness at bay and continue to enjoy friendships with five Sistas which has spanned these twenty-five years. I understand my looks are not my strongest attribute, and I'm good with that. I never expected a fashion model to fall for me"”but the "Plain-Janes" can picky too.

Do you want me to describe the Brothers whom they engaged in child-bearing relationships? Women can chose also"”I understand that this choice is an individual thing.
Originally posted by Frenchy:
And how does this Category A & B theory you have justify or explain the Double Standard that's been pointed out?

I don't see how any of that speaks to why it is okay for men to aim for the best but women must remain "realistic" with respect to dating partners.

The Double Standard only exists because of the different words being used. The different words being used are the evidence of different standards, not a double standard. If a women aims for the best, what is she aiming for specifically? Is she aiming for Denzel? Why? Is that the best? What this article was trying to point out is that, for women, finding love is about finding Category A. It's not about finding Denzel, unless Denzel fits Category A. Now, is that aiming for the best, or is it being realistic?

And when did anyone start expecting women to be realistic? Did I miss a memo? The last time I looked women started planning their weddings at about five years old, and it usually involves a knight in shinning armor astride a unicorn. What's realistic about this?

Let me try this another way. If there is a double standard, is it not imposed on women by themselves? Are women asking themselves, "is it better to be alone because I didn't get Denzel (because he's the 'best'), or should I be 'realistic' because having a relationship is more important?"

Basically, aiming for the best=being realistic. That's why there's no Double Standard.
Last edited {1}
Frenchy -

There were three posts after qty226's response before yours. Which one touted a double standard? Here's mine again:

Nobody's saying you have to date an ugly or ignorant or disrepectful blue collar brother just because he's a brother. Likewise, a brother shouldn't feel compelled to date an unattractive (to him) sister just because of her education, wealth or career. What we are saying is that a person (man or woman) not having a "professional" job, does not make them less qualified to be a good mate. A college degree is not THE gold standard for intelligence.

Ultimately, I think you have to go where your traits are desired. Some men like skinny women - some like big women, etc. Find that place where like interests, qualities & goals are pursued.

HB & Thayfen are giving you some playful jabs , but you are setting up a catch 22 with your expectations. If a brother is eliminated from your (and many other sisters) dating pool because he's blue collar, what is he supposed to do? Sit home dateless, just so he doesn't receive scorn for interracial dating? I've never dated interracially, but if that floats your boat & you're mature enough to deal with all the social implications of a long term relationship with someone outside your race - DO YOUR THING!

Where's the double standard? There was no scolding. If you set looks aside, how do you know that a blue collar or non-degreed person can't be a good mate for you? Note there have been very few discussions about people's physical preferences, outside of Rowe. We are talking about personality traits. If you know that common ratio of women to men is 10 to 1 on college campuses, isn't it apparent that every female college graduate can't have a college educated mate? Black females are more prevalent in white collar jobs as well (in relation to Black males). If those are prime criteria for choosing potential mates, you know going in you have a smaller pool to choose from.
I am apparently speaking a different language because you all are still not hearing me.

I am not talking about the merits of a blue collar man. There's nothing wrong with a janitor or whatever else. I've expressed that several times now.

Please go back and read the quotation that QTY pulled out of the article and her response. Then note your own comments in response, effectively proving exactly what both of us have been saying. Please also note the scenario that I posted.

It's acceptable for a Black man to choose a Halle Berry. That is seen as the obvious choice if given a chance (ONCE AGAIN, the quote from the article goes something like "If you put these two side by side, men naturally will go to the video girl look alike."). Why do you spend time trying to pound it into ours that we need to keep our eyes squarely on the value of the Everyman at all times? We are the ones dating the plethora of Everymen, while you cast aside the Plain Janes as too black & ugly and whatever else. We don't need to hear this. We don't need that lecture about how the college degree is not the gold standard. When you put Denzel next to the garbage man and the sista goes gaga over Denzel we run into the lecture about the merits of the garbage man and how just because he has that job doesn't mean he isn't smart and can't provide and we are shooting ourselves in the foot for not looking at the garbage man and blahblahblah. That is the constant disparity. And it's not something specific to men on this board.

I don't know a different way to keep saying this. We'll just have to remain on different planets if it's not clear at this point.
We're speaking the same langauge, you're just reading & comprehending in another one! Big Grin

Reread this portion:
Note there have been very few discussions about people's physical preferences, outside of Rowe. We are talking about personality traits.

We're not talking about men wanting Halle or women wanting Denzel. Look around at couples next time you go out - how many men are "Denzel" & how many women are "Halle"? Most of us date & marry the "everywoman" too. What many of the men here have told you is this:

We don't care about a woman's career when choosing a mate
We don't care about a woman's degrees when choosing a mate

Many of the women here insist that those two things should matter more than all the things we've (Men) said matters to us in relationships.

If what you're doing now for your relationships is working, cool. If not, do you insist on doing things the same way, expecting a different result? bang Or do you try something different? All of the embittered Black men & women need to try something different. You can be "right" or you can be happy. appl

Always with heart & concern

bow bigddouble bow

Add Reply

Link copied to your clipboard.