Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:

...For example say that a women on this board wishes to post a personal question of a "feminine nature" in the Sista's Spot...in order to garner feedback from her sista's. She might not want the men on this board to see said question realizing that some men might intrude in her discussion and or take it out of context and bring it up later in another conversation. Rather than being bothered by the prospect of this she could utilize a 'for women only feature' thereby maximizing women participation and eliminating the men's participation and vice versa.[/b]




Oddly, I've done just that, and a brotha still posted in there anyway regarding feminine hygeine products Eek lol. HOwever, it wasn't a problem to me, as his behavior was respectful and he offered as valid a theory as anyone else. His presence in a for sistas only thread didn't bother me one bit...


http://africanamerica.org/eve/...261003644#2261003644
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
why is what some dude trying to do relevant???
Because my conclusion re: his motives COMES from the highly dishonest nature of what he's saying! If what he's saying were non-bs, relevant stuff worthy of discussion, then it wouldn't have led me to what he motive is! Obviously, if what he's saying is meritless enough to transparently reveal his motives, then it's too meritless to be discussing the merits of!

In any event, I already DID discuss the point: NO ONE NEEDS TO LOOK AT PICS. IT'S A FALSE DICHOTOMY BECAUSE THE INITIAL PREMISE (men who don't have relationships "need" to look at pictures) IS FALSE.
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
So I'm reading the back and forth between women like Kocolicious and Khalliqa and the men on this site and I find myself inspired to write this. I normally don't get involved in gender wars because they normally just devolve into emotional spats and side taking that divides along gender lines regardless of who's right and wrong. However, because I see women who I genuinely respect i.e. Kocolicious and Khalliqa that are seemingly trying to make sense out of why men are reacting the way they are in the "Carnival" thread...I would like to share my perspective.

For starters lets get something straight I'm addressing this from a completely honest and purely MASCULINE perspective...So I know I may say some things that from a womens perspective she may not be able to fully relate to... Anyway just accept what I'm saying in the spirit in which it's given which is only to inform. There are some fundamental things about Men that women need to understand... one being that we are VISUAL when it comes to sexuality and what that means. This is not about choice with regard to what we are stimulated by it is purely PYSIOLOGICAL ...when a man see's an attractive women actual bio chemical processes are triggered this is NATURAL. This is the driving force which motivates Men to even pursue women in the first place which consequently keeps the human race going...it's just as natural as the womans desire and drive to give birth. Women can no more understand this aspect of men as men can understand why women would seek to be impregnated carry a child for nine months and then have it pulled from her body...in some cases multiple times. To the Masculine mind the idea of this type of thing happening to our bodies is Abhorrent...we are just not wired for such a thing. Now I'm not talking about effeminate punk men who want to be women their damn self ...I'm talking about REAL TESTOSTERONE DRIVEN MEN like myself.




If this post is about "the masculine nature", how is it that it's getting so far off track and has veered off the actual debate about "the masculine nature" into something else entirely. off
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
What if all of that were true about this woman?
Would you still support men sexually objectifying women in private?


I wouldn't care. The only man for whom this is relevant for me is my man (in real life). Even then I only have so much say since all adults have a certain right to autonomy (which I'm very careful about respecting).

As to other men (or women)... what they do (on or offline) is not my business.
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
You may want to add an answer to the initial question regarding your avoidance of defining sexual objectification.


Why? What men do on a message board doesn't matter to me. There are millions of us online everyday doing a million different things. As long as it isn't breaking the law, I don't particularly care.

If it offends me, I don't read it.


Oh? See you're here for entertainment... but I come to also discuss issues.. some of those issues are moral.. and some of those moral issues affect the dynamic of the board..

You've given your opinion that men need choice.. but haven't stated your opinion regarding the topic of the choice...

Would your opinion change if the board had frequent pics of abuse of children? what about abuse of women? and claimed it as a right..I was wondering if there was a limit to your ability to turn a blind eye to what others do? or not...

quote:

---
With that said, I'm sorry for engaging you here so negatively (I really don't like snark, from others or from myself). But it bothers me that you'd accuse EbonyRose of doing exactly what you do/have done. I don't care for faux moral hypocrisy and that's how your posts (in this thread) have struck me. So that's why I got involved.


Ah.. you've made an internet "friend" and have decided to side with her (and others) assessment of someone else on the board...

hmmmm....

and this is what is coloring your position...

well, if you are sincere about not taking the internet personally then I would suggest looking more into expanding that decision to include bias...

quote:


quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
otherwise you'll reach your goal in no time...


I honestly have no idea of what you're talking about. What goal?


see above...


btw: all this energy spent on "assessing me" do you have a comment about the topic? not the men's right.. you've stated your opinion there.. but the topic of sexual objectification
and if not.. then again...

see above...
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
why is what some dude trying to do relevant???
Because my conclusion re: his motives COMES from the highly dishonest nature of what he's saying! If what he's saying were non-bs, relevant stuff worthy of discussion, then it wouldn't have led me to what he motive is! Obviously, if what he's saying is meritless enough to transparently reveal his motives, then it's too meritless to be discussing the merits of!

In any event, I already DID discuss the point: NO ONE NEEDS TO LOOK AT PICS. IT'S A FALSE DICHOTOMY BECAUSE THE INITIAL PREMISE (men who don't have relationships "need" to look at pictures) IS FALSE.


Vox,

You know I'm argumentative.. however, I am surprised that out of all the guys you chose to pic up this argument. My initial comments were not directed towards you, out of all the guys here I've tended to believe you would have very little problem with respecting women or attracting women.. Smile
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
why is what some dude trying to do relevant???
Because my conclusion re: his motives COMES from the highly dishonest nature of what he's saying! If what he's saying were non-bs, relevant stuff worthy of discussion, then it wouldn't have led me to what he motive is! Obviously, if what he's saying is meritless enough to transparently reveal his motives, then it's too meritless to be discussing the merits of!

In any event, I already DID discuss the point: NO ONE NEEDS TO LOOK AT PICS. IT'S A FALSE DICHOTOMY BECAUSE THE INITIAL PREMISE (men who don't have relationships "need" to look at pictures) IS FALSE.



Vox, I believe it was you who created the "dichotomy".

The initial comment wasn't cast in either/or fashion:

quote:

He commented to me that it sounded like a bunch of dysfunctional men as men who are actually getting real female attention don't have time to salivate over "pictures" of women on a website.. giving each other high fives for photos they found on the internet... He thought this sounded very much like what adolescent boys do...


Again, you might disagree with the value judgement ... or his assessment of what is transpiring ...

But "highly dishonest"?
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
some of those issues are moral.. and some of those moral issues affect the dynamic of the board ... Would your opinion change if the board had frequent pics of abuse of children? what about abuse of women? and claimed it as a right..I was wondering if there was a limit to your ability to turn a blind eye to what others do? or not...


First, if a moral issue affects the dynamics of the board (I presume, unfavorably) for you, then you simply find another board. If a board posts pics of abused kids and women which offent you, then you find another board.

Yes, you are a part of a net-community and yes, you do develop meaningful *net-relationships* online. But they are limited in scope and they are dynamic. And boards change. To dictate the tenor of a board is not your job, Khalliqa. It's MBMs. And so far, he's been silent.

Furthermore, this society has not made viewing soft (or hard) porn of adult women and men illegal. Therefore the men here have every right (whether I like it or not) to do that.

quote:
You've given your opinion that men need choice.. but haven't stated your opinion regarding the topic of the choice...


That's the point, Khalliqa. The topic of choice is whether men have a choice in posting what they want (within the terms of service of the board). As far as I know, they do, and that's enough for me.


quote:

Ah.. you've made an internet "friend" and have decided to side with her (and others) assessment of someone else on the board...

and this is what is coloring your position...


No. I simply abhor moral inconsistency and "faux" outrage. ER didn't do anything to warrant your personal dig at her.

The message board is not your personal domain...
quote:


Originally posted by Shulamite:

she ..., feels like she lost the status,


19

Wait a minute.. I returned to these comments and I must say that this is a very interesting comment for you to make about my "supposed" status.. You think I have a STATUS?

And more importantly DO YOU WANT IT???

quote:
Originally posted by Shulamite:

I am looking at primary sources, as well. There is a search engine here... and I stand by what I observe.


LOL.. wait.. wait..

Are you checking up on me girlfriend???
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
You think I have a STATUS? And more importantly DO YOU WANT IT???


No, I don't think you have a status nor would I want it if I thought you did. But I think that you think you have/had a status, and that this is what is driving, in part, your outrage. I really do.


quote:
Are you checking up on me girlfriend???


Not anymore than I "check up" on anyone else. I read (as time permits) a lot of old topics, many of which have good insights. And in doing so, I make certain posting trend observations about many people... including you.

What's particularly odd about you is how comfortable you are merging real life dynamics on a virtual board. That stood out to me as a red flag.
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
You think I have a STATUS? And more importantly DO YOU WANT IT???


No, I don't think you have a status nor would I want it if I thought you did. But I think that you think you have/had a status, and that this is what is driving, in part, your outrage. I really do.


quote:
Are you checking up on me girlfriend???


Not anymore than I "check up" on anyone else. I read (as time permits) a lot of old topics, many of which have good insights. And in doing so, I make certain posting trend observations about many people... including you.

What's particularly odd about you is how comfortable you are merging real life dynamics on a virtual board. That stood out to me as a red flag.


I see..

while you are utilizing your personal time entertaining yourself by trying to assess internet personalities .....

I am engaged in dialogue regarding a topic regarding how men objectify women.. a topic you care little about..

so can you stop entering the thread with your pseudo-psychoanalysis.. and your need to vindicate your internet friend? I know this is how you choose to spend your time entertaining yourself.. but like I said.. I come for the discussion topics..

perhaps I will entertain your theories on posters later... and we can discuss why you are tripping off someone's STATUS.. on a message board no less.... *rolling*
Last edited {1}
quote:
from HONESTBROTHER:
Vox, I believe it was you who created the "dichotomy".
No, within the original comment, we saw a comparison between the supposed actions of:
quote:
men who are actually getting real female attention
vs.
quote:
dysfunctional men ...[who]have time to salivate over "pictures" of women on a website..
I may have identified the dichotomy, but I didn't create it.

Plenty of men who get female attention view pictures of women, whether on a website or elsewhere; plenty of men who get female attention take a moment to look at a woman they don't know as they walk by. That's part of what's so false about what he said.

quote:
My initial comments were not directed towards you, out of all the guys here I've tended to believe you would have very little problem with respecting women or attracting women..
I do have very little such problems. Perhaps you should take that as a clue that my comments on this topic truly are in the spirit of helping you read between the lines put on you by some manipulative joker. There's a certain subconscious pattern analysis that goes on; almost like an algorithm that runs in the brain. When something like your friend's comments are run against it, they don't match what the pattern recognition tells you is logical and correct. There is no doubt that this guy is using game on you. He's feeding you nonsense to reel you in. That's about the last of my commentary on this issue.
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

I do have very little such problems. Perhaps you should take that as a clue that my comments on this topic truly are in the spirit of helping you read between the lines put on you by some manipulative joker. There's a certain subconscious pattern analysis that goes on; almost like an algorithm that runs in the brain. When something like your friend's comments are run against it, they don't match what the pattern recognition tells you is logical and correct. There is no doubt that this guy is using game on you. He's feeding you nonsense to reel you in. That's about the last of my commentary on this issue.



oh, i see what you mean. There was a thread in which some how-to-pimp-women type stuff was posted, and when sistas responded negatively to it, the OP posited that it was posted to reveal male playa playa tactics in a spirit of being concerned for sistas and their role as uplifters of brothas. So that's kinda sorta along the same lines of spitting lines of bunk to reel in a sista. Ok. I get it.
quote:
So that's kinda sorta along the same lines of spitting lines of bunk to reel in a sista. Ok. I get it.


A swing and a miss! Big Grin No. What VOX is saying is ... Dude, is saying what he knows/thinks Ms. K wants to hear, e.g., real strong black men are satisfied within their relationships, jobs and role as protector of women and have no time for anything that does not promote the relationship, they careers or their role as protector, let alone something as morally repugnate as sexual ojectification of women.

While I tend towards VOX's suggestion ... that the guy is "flinging woo" [lol 20 I love that phrase], it doesn't necessarily have to be the case. It may be a case of "like minds" or a group-based gender behavioral/roles philosophy, i.e., the, or a specific sect of the, NOI.

It seems that Ms. K and, from what she says, others around her spend a great deal of time on defining what is appropriate gender behavior/roles.

And it appears, for right or wrong, that Ms. K is attempting to re-educate the unwashed.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
from HONESTBROTHER:
Vox, I believe it was you who created the "dichotomy".
No, within the original comment, we saw a comparison between the supposed actions of:
quote:
men who are actually getting real female attention
vs.
quote:
dysfunctional men ...[who]have time to salivate over "pictures" of women on a website..
I may have identified the dichotomy, but I didn't create it.



Again ... I don't see "highly dishonest" ...

There IS a dichotomy (in that a comparison is being made) ... but not one that is both exhaustive and mutually exclusive ... and one which might very well speak for the honest pov of the speaker ... even if you believe it to be inaccurate of men as a whole.


quote:

Plenty of men who get female attention view pictures of women, whether on a website or elsewhere; plenty of men who get female attention take a moment to look at a woman they don't know as they walk by. That's part of what's so false about what he said.


The comment was about more than the mere act of viewing pictures or even a strange woman.

quote:

salivat[ing] over "pictures" of women on a website.. giving each other high fives for photos they found on the internet... He thought this sounded very much like what adolescent boys do...
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:

Furthermore, this society has not made viewing soft (or hard) porn of adult women and men illegal. Therefore the men here have every right (whether I like it or not) to do that.


...The topic of choice is whether men have a choice in posting what they want (within the terms of service of the board). As far as I know, they do, and that's enough for me.


As long as sexually objectifying women is legal and no one says anything you're down with it...??



quote:
quote:

Ah.. you've made an internet "friend" and have decided to side with her (and others) assessment of someone else on the board...

and this is what is coloring your position...


No. I simply abhor moral inconsistency and "faux" outrage. ER didn't do anything to warrant your personal dig at her.



Ah... sweetie...

Let me explain something to you.. I come here to post to people I've engaged dialogue with for years.... I know their personalities ... you don't...

So when I am critical of them.. I have a history from which I draw from.. you are an observer with very little field experience making assessments emotionally based off your friend's reaction...

You are in no position to make assessments that should be taken with any seriousness...

there are over four years of posts here with complex viewpoints that interact and change overtime.. I doubt you've gathered the complexities of the arguments or the relationship dynamics in such a short period of time...

calm down sis... I thought you didn't take the internet seriously? Now you gone make yourself the moral arbiter of relationships that have been forming for years after a few months of "posting" study and hearsay?

girl please...

quote:



The message board is not your personal domain...


see this is like the other same weird comment you keep making.. about status...

personal domain implies that someone else feels they are not getting the attention they want... either you feel this way or someone you are speaking with does.. If you don't have a comment to make regarding a position then you just look like you're jumping the gun currying favor to people who need attention...


stay on topic or please stop following me around the board trying to figure me out..

starting to feel like stalking chica..
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

He's feeding you nonsense to reel you in.


Okay I went back and looked at what you considered "nonsense"

I looked at this statement:

quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
IT'S A FALSE DICHOTOMY BECAUSE THE INITIAL PREMISE (men who don't have relationships "need" to look at pictures) IS FALSE.



No sir.. not so.. at least I didn't get that.. what you've described is an absolute.. what I heard from him was a suspicion.. based off a principle that seems to be consistent.. and that is...

when someone is satiated in a certain area they tend not to go seek out something even LESS satiating...

He experienced that in his life, I guess that's why he mentioned the turkey thing.. and I took it as him saying "Hey a guy doesn't have to do that when he's truly satisfied"

but honestly that was HIS point.. my point was really that men SHOULDN'T be reducing and exploiting the images of women to degrading pics.. you know how degrading images affects not only the exploiters perception in gradations but also has a ripple effect on how they view women in general.. (eg. the mass marketing of the ghetto lifestyle image abroad)

I don't know what you see wrong with that... sck

quote:
That's about the last of my commentary on this issue.


Okay I understand.. but I hope you at least read what I've wrote above.. sad

take care..
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
As long as sexually objectifying women is legal and no one says anything you're down with it...??


No. I'm not "down" with sexual objectification from either gender. I'm "down" with the legal / administrative right for others to do it if they want without having to be worried about someone hijacking their reverie with moral proselytizing, as you have done here.

It's stupid, arrogant and presumptuous of you to do that. And I don't need a history on the board to recognize that.



quote:

I come here to post to people I've engaged dialogue with for years.... I know their personalities ... you don't...

...

You are in no position to make assessments that should be taken with any seriousness...


Khalliqa. This is your pathology. Unless you've interacted with people extensively offline, you don't "know" their personalities any more well than anyone else posting on a board. You're dealing with a carefully constructed and static "face" that individuals prepare when interacting online. I repeat: this message board - no message board, unless you're the administrator, - is NOT your personal domain.


quote:
If you don't have a comment to make regarding a position ... stay on topic


This is the topic. This is my position. Neither you, nor I, nor anyone can dictate what content can or cannot get posted on MBM's board. If you are unhappy with it, state your case (once, please! damn!), then find another board.

I don't care if you think you've "known" people for 25 years. You don't have the moral authority to tell them what they should or should not be posting.

That you think you do shows a very immature understanding of what the net is and what it isn't. It also shows that you need to get a life and develop relationships with real people, imo.
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
As long as sexually objectifying women is legal and no one says anything you're down with it...??


No. I'm not "down" with sexual objectification from either gender. I'm "down" with the legal / administrative right for others to do it if they want without having to be worried about someone hijacking their reverie with moral proselytizing, as you have done here.

It's stupid, arrogant and presumptuous of you to do that. And I don't need a history on the board to recognize that.



quote:

I come here to post to people I've engaged dialogue with for years.... I know their personalities ... you don't...

...

You are in no position to make assessments that should be taken with any seriousness...


Khalliqa. This is your pathology. Unless you've interacted with people extensively offline, you don't "know" their personalities any more well than anyone else posting on a board. You're dealing with a carefully constructed and static "face" that individuals prepare when interacting online. I repeat: this message board - no message board, unless you're the administrator, - is NOT your personal domain.


quote:
If you don't have a comment to make regarding a position ... stay on topic


This is the topic. This is my position. Neither you, nor I, nor anyone can dictate what content can or cannot get posted on MBM's board. If you are unhappy with it, state your case (once, please! damn!), then find another board.

I don't care if you think you've "known" people for 25 years. You don't have the moral authority to tell them what they should or should not be posting.

That you think you do shows a very immature understanding of what the net is and what it isn't. It also shows that you need to get a life and develop relationships with real people, imo.



*sigh* you cursing and everything... all in a tizzy...

calm down ...

There is a difference between arguing the legality of a behavior and arguing the moral correctness of a behavior..

This distinction should be clear.. obviously for some of you it requires further clarification..

Let's take Romulus for instance.. he has every right to say in response to the abuse of a teenager "Hit that trick again!", Click this to see the thread even if he were to post that privately in the only men's section, I believe as many others do, that it is worth pointing out that he shouldn't do that, not because he doesn't have the right to do it.. however because a poster finds it morally reprehensible...

Can't you see that?

If you can... good.. then let's continue.. If not skip to the bottom and say wooooooosahhh.. There are plenty more issues imo deserve more ire than getting upset because some internet poster doesn't like sexually objectifying material.. good grief..

The message board is a place where people type their opinions.. no one has control over anyone.. but we do utilize words to communicate a position.. to understand others position.. to try and influence other's positions.. etc.. within dialogue one single person may have multiple motives or none of these motives depending upon their mood.. to whom they are speaking etc... so when a person types and engages a passionate discussion it would be folly to believe that they think they can physically make everyone believe as they do...

Incidentally, the benefit of knowing the history of the posters means that you would understand that many of these discussions we've had before and each new argument has the potential to bring out new knowledge.. the other benefit is knowing that personalities and posters change and this can color the dialogue in a way sometimes subtly that an observer will not understand....

To the observer passionate or continued dialogue can be interpreted various ways... When I enter the Den.. (see you weren't here but the legalities of this board have not prevented intergender interaction..) I see proliferate degradation of women.. I feel the pressure of someone who is offended by otherwise intelligent men holding opinions in this matter.. and since this is a message board we engage in dialogue an explain our disagreements on the subject.. now when certain personalities enter the fray our history (of which you have little knowledge comes into play).. See? You are following my words and the pressure you feel makes you believe that this is personal.. but as you have come to realize you can't judge people on the internet fully.. so please know that because I post in one thread in the DEN passioantely may feel to you like I'm all over the board dominating.. but I'm not... I'm sorry my presence has effected you so intensely...

Now you may disagree with my position regarding naked pics of women with their legs spread open and whatnot being degrading to women.. you seem to desperately need vindicate your friend AND the men who do degrade women.. this is your right.. to your opinion.. as it is my right to believe you sound crazy right about now.... but I would think your calls for removal from the board would be better self directed because you seem to be taking this way too seriously...

You're psychoanalyzing people.. talking about people need to leave the board.. following posters around and whatnot and you haven't been here but a minute.. It seems someone has ignited you emotionally and is using you sort of like..

ummm...

like their attack dog to try and do what they could not do...

but you know what? I'm just speculating...

though at least I'm aware of it...

Now.. when you first came here I thought your level of logic was refreshing, but after engaging you in topics I realized you would blatantly lie when it can easily be called on it.. which means that in arguments when pressed you lie and/or get highly emotional.. we all do sometimes.. that was no biggie to me.. human nature we all do some times..(smile) Now it just seems like you have a personal vendetta.. and you don't even know my ONLINE persona well enough to be tripping like this...

People have the right to do foul things, just as people have the right to argue passionately their opinions and value judgments about it..

You have to remember this is a message board and although emotions will flare up from time to time, try not to take it too personal..try to take it easy...
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
Breathe ... Shulamite ... Breathe.


Kweli, my issue with her in this thread (and a few others) is a hypocritical self righteousness that judges others for doing exactly what she's done. I find it arrogant and immature. I also admit, unfortunately, that I know a little too much about her (wrt this forum) and it isn't flattering. I've lost my respect for this poster, so yeah, that affected my "snarky" response when I noticed what she wrote to EbonyRose (it was the irony of ironies to me, based on what I learned). I simply don't respect her any more.

---

With regard to the issue, I do support the existence of "affinity groups" and recognize that the conversations occurring in said affinity groups may or may not be my cup of tea. But I'd protect the right of the group to have its conversations free from being hijacked - ESPECIALLY if the conversations are occuring within a forum dedicated to said group.

I support making the forums "access-only" or just doing away with them altogether (if we don't respect affinity group boundaries, there's no point in having them).
quote:
Originally posted by ocatchings:
If we arranged a mud or oil wrestling match between Dr. Shulamite and Khalliqa to settle this arguement, would it be for sexual objectification or entertainment purposes only?
19 19 19

Just a thought......... lol




That made me laugh in spite of my irritation, but still...

spank

Aren't you supposed to be on punishment from your wife and daughter anyway??? And you're daydreaming about a female mud-wrestling match. nono
Eek Damn, I thought this thread would've calmed down once I got off the site for awhile... Shulamite, I see hypocrisy is a major pet peeve of yours!

quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:

Kweli, my issue with her in this thread (and a few others) is a hypocritical self righteousness that judges others for doing exactly what she's done. I find it arrogant and immature. I also admit, unfortunately, that I know a little too much about her (wrt this forum) and it isn't flattering. I've lost my respect for this poster, so yeah, that affected my "snarky" response when I noticed what she wrote to EbonyRose (it was the irony of ironies to me, based on what I learned).


Shulamite, the brand of "morality" you're witnessing here really amounts to a "personal dogma," if that makes any sense. It's application does not have to be logically or morally consistent. And judgment of others is a main hallmark of it, even if the judgment = projection to some degree. I know it can be annoying, but just remember that, in a nation of hundreds of millions, the vast range of types and mindsets out there will inevitably include ones like this one.
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by ocatchings:
If we arranged a mud or oil wrestling match between Dr. Shulamite and Khalliqa to settle this arguement, would it be for sexual objectification or entertainment purposes only?
19 19 19

Just a thought......... lol




That made me laugh in spite of my irritation, but still...

spank

Aren't you supposed to be on punishment from your wife and daughter anyway??? And you're daydreaming about a female mud-wrestling match. nono


lol

I am still on punishment.
But given the economy and the fact I started doing my taxes last night, I'm looking into alternate money making endeavors.
The way I see it, have AA.org as a sponsor and we could charge a decent price for a pay per view. MBM of course would get a cut for the board. You and Khalliqa could be the main event and we would have an undercard.
The money generated would be our own internal stimulus package.......Are you in?
lol OK, Who do I send my dry cleaning bill to? I just wasted my coffee.

OC, I thought first that you are obviously a dysfunctional man who is dissatisfied in your relationship(s) and career(s), so you seek gratification through suggesting such vile competition as mud/babyoil wrestling. spank

Now, it would'a been all good if you had suggested lime jello, cuz I have it on good authority that the combatants be looking good. I can't wait for the pre-match weigh-in.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
Now, it would'a been all good if you had suggested lime jello, cuz I have it on good authority that the combatants be looking good. I can't wait for the pre-match weigh-in.


ek

spank nono to you too, Kweli!

(sensing that the Den is back in ...ahem... balance, shulamite takes her leave once again...)
Whooo Lawwwddd!! Eek Eek

Shulamite, sistahgirl ... I would have warned you if I had thought/known alladat woulda been goin' down! Big Grin lol

However ... they tell me experience is the best teacher .... and so now ... without reservation ... You UNEQUIVOCALLY know what the rest of us do! Eek laugh

Sorry I didn't give you the heads up, but ....

wel to the family! hug
Last edited {1}
See ... ER is truly in touch with her masculine side AND it is clear that she recognizes that Shulamite is also in touch, as evidenced by ER waiting to warn a somebody about a female AFTER all the drama.

No self-respecting man would warn another bruh about a female [absent life threatening conduct] before the bruh got a taste because bruhs know bruhs ain't gonna listen. lol
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
See ... ER is truly in touch with her masculine side AND it is clear that she recognizes that Shulamite is also in touch, as evidenced by ER waiting to warn a somebody about a female AFTER all the drama. No self-respecting man would warn another bruh about a female [absent life threatening conduct] before the bruh got a taste because bruhs know bruhs ain't gonna listen.



laugh laugh laugh
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
See ... ER is truly in touch with her masculine side AND it is clear that she recognizes that Shulamite is also in touch, as evidenced by ER waiting to warn a somebody about a female AFTER all the drama.

No self-respecting man would warn another bruh about a female [absent life threatening conduct] before the bruh got a taste because bruhs know bruhs ain't gonna listen. lol


LOL .... lol That's really funny! Big Grin


And actually ... yes, it's true that I wouldn't have thought that she would have listened to me ... just by her profession of choice, you can tell that she's one of those 'proof, please' flowers, kinda people that actually needed to see for herself.

Plus ... let's face it ... the reality is pretty hard to believe without that firsthand - WTH Confused - Whoo Lawd! Eek ... kinda knowledge that only a one-on-one conversation with Ms. K can bring!

However .... yes, I would have warned her if I had known she was going to go there to that extent ... 'cause that's what sisters do .. they lookout for each other! And give fair warning! Smile It wouldn't have done no good ... but at least Shulamite would have known I had at least tried! lol

But ... she figgered it out! As best as anyone can, anyway. And I knew she would. I think she's been properly vetted ... wouldn't you say?!? lol And will know not to try and do no crazy $#!T like THAT again if she knows what's best for herself! 20
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:
So I'm reading the back and forth between women like Kocolicious and Khalliqa and the men on this site and I find myself inspired to write this. I normally don't get involved in gender wars because they normally just devolve into emotional spats and side taking that divides along gender lines regardless of who's right and wrong. However, because I see women who I genuinely respect i.e. Kocolicious and Khalliqa that are seemingly trying to make sense out of why men are reacting the way they are in the "Carnival" thread...I would like to share my perspective.

For starters lets get something straight I'm addressing this from a completely honest and purely MASCULINE perspective...So I know I may say some things that from a womens perspective she may not be able to fully relate to... Anyway just accept what I'm saying in the spirit in which it's given which is only to inform. There are some fundamental things about Men that women need to understand... one being that we are VISUAL when it comes to sexuality and what that means. This is not about choice with regard to what we are stimulated by it is purely PYSIOLOGICAL ...when a man see's an attractive women actual bio chemical processes are triggered this is NATURAL. This is the driving force which motivates Men to even pursue women in the first place which consequently keeps the human race going...it's just as natural as the womans desire and drive to give birth.....


LD, I think it is always good to *see/hear* the male perspective on various issues. Thanks for your take on the issue.

It is clear that you know how to discern what is natural versus unnatural....and I thank you for your own attempts to protect Women, while showing Brothas a positive example of ManHood.

I also like what HB said regarding the fact that a Woman's Mind Creates Love. Yeah, yeah, I know that most people don't see a Woman's mind and "fall in love," but in order to see what a Woman's mind is capable of, you have to be willing to go deeper than surface level. That takes work SomeTimes; real effort and real time...and I believe that is about creating more than a temporary, SuperFicial bond.

This is why I respect what Khalliqua is saying regarding the importance of Men to have the ability to distinguish between what is natural and what is unnatural, and how having that rare ability directly ReLates to how a Man will interact with Women (either directly or InDirectly).

I am the first to AcKnowledge that Men are visual creatures, but where I used to chastise Men (and I will tell you what changed my OutLook on that in a minute) was in the fact that moving and thinking strictly off of our visual indicators can create serious problems within Our Community. From Rape to creating children and not taking care of them, yes even to InterRacial Relations, if we don't ReSpect (or look again) the essence of a person (meaning if we don't go deeper than the surface), we are bound to be assistants to some very negative agents that are tearing US up.

I believe that most Men here utilize Common Sense when looking at Women, as from what I've seen there are the rare few who actually post naked (nekkid....LOL) pictures of ladies or UnAttractive pictures of Women shaking their a$$ets.

HowEver, I know Khalliqua's concern comes out of sheer KnowLedge of how many Men use pictures of Women to further their "Objective" and irrational thoughts of exploiting Women sexually. In that I do agree with her sentiment and quest to teach that Men could and should use their time better.

I'd also agree with Shulamite in that we don't control each other. The best we can do is teach and then move on: it is each person's responsibility to decide how they will take any teachings, be they moral or not, and apply them to their own lives...

...although the negativity get so Old, Real Fast.

***For me personally, what changed my "hard" stance ReGarding some Men's issues, but specifically with ReGard to their "MascULine Nature," was a dream that I had.

I know I'm going to catch "hell" for this, as when I relay what the dream was, I seem to be opened up to all kinds of mess. But I know why I had the dream and I know what change came about as a result of the dream, so I am going to tell it here:

In my dream, I was in FeMale form, but clearly I was a Male having sex (and that is the polite word for it....sorry you all - my old self would have just said, f*cking, but I've been trying hard to change ALL of my evil ways...LOL) with a FeMale.

Yeah, tripped me out too because NO, I don't have HomoSexual issues.

But what surprised me the most in the dream was not how "voracious" I was, but the fact that I got the sense that the sex was "UnControllAble"....or "driven" by an UnKnown source....almost like looking OutSide of YourSelf at a situation that you can do nothing about.

What's worse: I had no intention of stopping.

...and then I woke up and knew immediately the point of that dream - that was this: I need to stop chastising Men ReGarding SomeThing that is so very OutSide of ThemSelves.

While I can hold Men AccountAble, I have a new appreciation for WHY some Men "hunt" the way that they do; why Men are much more aggressive than Women on that front.

It is through those eyes that I am able to let Men handle theirs, because I know realize just how difficult ReStraint must be on a daily basis.


That in no way excuses UnNatural behavior, because we each are ReSponsible for how we go about living, among OurSelves and others.

But it does allow me to "leave the Den," fully aware of the fact that being a Woman, I am amongst Lions at times.

"Wisdom Is A Woman Teaching!"
EbonyRose,

Thanks. I've been on forums for the better part of 13 years and have had my share of flame wars with neurotic folk. So... I'm not frightened of it.

I would have ignored it (and had been doing so) but the dig at you finally ticked me off. I also know that others have been hurt by some of this brand of "alpha-female" hypocrisy and was responding out of that.

Anyway... I'm over it now. I'll just "leave her to heaven", and move on...
Originally posted by LieDecrypter
quote:
Koco, while I greatly enjoy and appreciate the praise that you always lavish me with...sometimes I wish that I could be on your bad side at least for once... so that I could test my endurance against one of your famous withering tirades that are filled with so much spirit and wit I can barely even read through them without beaming like the sun...I feel I'm missing out, so I'm going to start the first LD vs Koco beef on this site with this statement...Kocolicious I can't STAND you....J/K.


fro Sorry Brotha LD...on your worst days you will probably have to get on a ladder to step up to their low ignorant/stupid/arrogant self-entitled level of some of these folks on this board. It aint in you to push that way. You were raised decent. I can tell. Believe me...you never want to go there...and if there were ever a possibility...[which I totally DOUBT]...believe me I would cry like a newborn baby first...cuz that would be a real serious indication to me there is no hope left in the world...but! Fortunately, thank God,[cuz I believe in the universe] I know hope is ALIVE and well with abundanceBig Grin

fro
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
Khalliqa, your "friend" is running game on you, sweetheart. There is nothing dysfunctional about enjoying photos of attractive women. And if you read between the lines of what he was saying, he basically backhandedly dissed you. By saying real men don't "have time to post... anything on message boards," he's saying that people generally who post on message boards have no life. You post on message boards. In fact, you have almost 60% more posts than I do on this site, even though I've been on the site roughly 75% longer than you. Plus, you post on several other sites. You have time to get into lengthy soap opera psychodrama wars with male posters. If he has any clue of any of that, then he was "neg-hitting" you, in the parlance of that weird seduction subculture.

Your friend was validating your statements, but the backhanded diss was aimed at opening you up psychologically. And you know what? I'm pulling for him.


He already won. 20
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by LieDecrypter:

...For example say that a women on this board wishes to post a personal question of a "feminine nature" in the Sista's Spot...in order to garner feedback from her sista's. She might not want the men on this board to see said question realizing that some men might intrude in her discussion and or take it out of context and bring it up later in another conversation. Rather than being bothered by the prospect of this she could utilize a 'for women only feature' thereby maximizing women participation and eliminating the men's participation and vice versa.[/b]




Oddly, I've done just that, and a brotha still posted in there anyway regarding feminine hygeine products Eek lol. HOwever, it wasn't a problem to me, as his behavior was respectful and he offered as valid a theory as anyone else. His presence in a for sistas only thread didn't bother me one bit...


http://africanamerica.org/eve/...261003644#2261003644


Now, see, that's exactly the kind of stupid shit that idiot audioguy did was what I referenced to.
quote:
As long as we're being honest .... I ain't een gon lie ... I love the sight of a woman's hips, thighs, breasts, posterior ... ALLADAT.

These things are what distinguish women (physically) from men.

The contours of a woman's body form the hills and valleys of the landscape of another world.

They inspire desire in men.


Couldn't have said it better.........

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×