Menu

Why white men love the black woman

Posted by James, 31 Aug

Ever wondered why some white guys, love black women so much?

It seems that being a white male and proclaiming your attraction to black women (not only sexually, but also romantically) may lead to a lot of controversial and dangerous things. Let’s leave the debate of why more black women may be opening themselves up to white guys. The main focus of this debate is: why some white guys are opening themselves to black women. Let’s concentrate on that.

Find your soulmate on LatinoLicious

Join Free

Most white males don’t feel like they are running short of white women to marry. White males just marry at high rates. So question is: Why black women? The thing is it will not be fair to bundle up black women as one since everyone is their own person… be it in appearance or personality.

However, one thing that a white male friend of mine said… and I let him get away with bundling it all up is: “We love a black woman's confidence, her tenacity and her undeniable achievements in the face of great adversity...᾿ Since this info was coming from a man, there was definitely the mention of the lips, the curves, and that wonderful skin as well.

So what about stereotypes like “black women are either sexually conservative or total sluts?" Many people give so much lip service to interracial dating sites. You would think they have never done it. But those uptight individuals are the ones that spread these stereotypes. What happened to the highly educated black woman? How about the caring, decent and involved black woman?

Probably most white guys and others are confused with the stereotypical trash people spread around and if you are one that falls for such lame ol’ lines, then you sure as hell haven’t dated a black woman.

Bottom line, you don't have to sacrifice who you are for a white guy. They will love you anyway. Just be you and open yourself up… and if you like white guys, some white guy will find you too.

Related Stories

More Opinion Articles

8096 responses to "Why white men love the black woman"

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  1.   Member says:
    Posted: 20 Mar 10

    Actually, black people deserve reparations. The same way Jews were able to get reparations. Obviously, the double standard does not surprise me. This country still dislikes black people. It will not change anytime soon. This country systematically tried to keep "black people" out of the economy. During segregation black people actually had some thriving businesses and schools. Basically, you know what happens when the black man gets to "successful". They want to put him in his "place". I am out.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  2.   Salsassin says:
    Posted: 20 Mar 10

    Sorr y bub, no one living stole anything from you. Go on a time machine and try to get reparations that way. I hear hot tubs work. The Civil Rights Movement wasn't about acceptance, but of pushing congress to legislate laws that would protect civil rights.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  3.   boots says:
    Posted: 20 Mar 10

    To ....e-dub...one comment you made in your last post ...was very important to this whole debate..btw thanks for your participation and you are entitled to your opinon....what was the goal of the Civil Rights movement...I agree with you, it was'nt about acceptance...(I dont know if you were being sarcastic or not).... acceptance ! why should blks seek acceptance from whites,acceptance in what way!...as another human being? Even with the passage of laws ..."laws wont change a man's heart" .We have been fighting some of the same battles for years and years over and over.....to hell with acceptance.....I really believe this whole thing with IR relationships is a search for acceptance on blk peoples part...We need to stop looking for white people to accept us, have sex with us, marry us etc.Just respect us as human beings, repay to us what you have stolen, enforce your own laws to protect all people ,grant equality in the criminal justice system, fairness in employment,and a fair distribution of the wealth of this country ."Let justice flow like a mighty stream".

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  4.   Member says:
    Posted: 18 Mar 10

    Dear Boots I agree with you. Without the Nation of Islam, Stoklely and the Panthers, Dr King wouldn't have that much leverage with the power structure. They blamed "Dr King" for black people getting hit upside the head and dogs sicked on them at the time. They said Northern 'agitators" caused them to abuse Dr King and black people. Do you think non violence "made them see the light"? It wasn't until the FBI started to 'strong arm" the Klan and the Southern powers that be like Governor Wallace into stopping the terrorism on black people in the South.I assure you they didn't just 'talk to them" and say "hey guys cut it out on black people". LOL

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  5.   boots says:
    Posted: 18 Mar 10

    Queens ....you r so correct on this ....in order to make real gains in this country blks have had to have a dual role ...that's what made kings effort so brilliant....without Malcolm X , Stokley Carmichael(who coined the phrase BLACK POWER)the Panthers and others I dont think we would have made real progress

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  6.   Member says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    I meant Civil War Documentary.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  7.   Member says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    Dear Sal The north "detached" themselves from the issue of emancipation? Actually no they did not. I have been watching the Civil Rights documentary recently. The north "were not exactly" in favor of free slaves. However, "slavery" in its "form" was unacceptable to most. Even Southerners really didn't like slavery but it was a necessary evil economically. Abraham Lincoln never felt slaves were equal to white men. He suggested they be sent back to Africa. They asked a poor white southern man that fought in the Confederacy during the Civil War. Why are you fighting? You don't own "any slaves". The poor white man replied "they came down here". Now back to the non violence protesters. It is hard to say if "non violence" succeeded. After War, comes 'peace" or a "length of normality". Violence still occurred before Dr. King's death and after. After the Klan was "dismantled" and they knew they would be "prosecuted" by the Federal Government. The country started to get better. The threat of incarceration was a deterrent. Not so much the "non violent" protests. If Laws were not in place to protect black people, you would still be getting hit upside your head. Dr King was brilliant in making it seem like " it was non violent". He used the "black extremists" when necessary and distanced himself from "them" when necessary. Barak Obama reminds me of Dr. King. He is very shrewd and smart. He managed to use Jermiah Wright, who helped him gain votes from prominent black people and help from prominent black congress people. He ran as fast as he could when the media caught on to Jermeriah Wright being friends with Louis Farakhan. Obama just managed to keep "arm's length" from the Civil Rights establishment. I think arguably he one of the best black "politicians" I have seen ever.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  8.   Salsassin says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    The Non-Violence was on the part of the protesters, not the rioters. And it did succeed. The North had detached itself from the issue since emancipation. This forced it front and center in their televisions all the time. It made people sick to their stomachs it made people active in trying to get legislation changed. Martin Luther King was an act of desperation by an extremist and it had the exact opposite effect. It martyrized him.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  9.   boots says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    Greetings to all....WOW!..Iam really amazed at the depth of understanding that you all have shown on this subject...I have many thoughts on what has been said...it's just nice to hear the views and analysis of younger people, blk and white.Even elements in the Blk Panthers party were moving toward a community that did'nt focus so much on skin color just as King and Malcolm X.The complexity of the blk problem in the USA will take a multifacet approach ,whether Washington v Dubois or King v Malcolm X. The burden of blks in this country has been one of race and class...one common thread has always been present though, is the denigration of all our blk leaders.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  10.   Member says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    Malcolm X advocated insurrection. You don't have to carry it out. The Nation of Islam exercised their power enough to get their point across. I do agree the audience was different for both men. However, for the South it was more about "Northern" interference than Civil Rights. White people who were "indifferent" we not the problem. It was racists with a badge and membership with the Klan was the problem. Some black slaves were taken to the UK. You are somewhat right about that. Sal you made an interesting point but that is not "non violence". Just because you are on the "receiving" end of violence does not mean you accomplished something. The accomplishment was to make the "media" see it. Most black people didn't think getting beat upside your head was the "way to go". In the "North", there was more riots and insurrections going on. Dr. King did this..... In 1966, after several successes in the South, King and others in the civil rights organizations tried to spread the movement to the North, with Chicago as its first destination. King and Ralph Abernathy, both from the middle classes, moved into the slums of North Lawndale[74] on the west side of Chicago as an educational experience and to demonstrate their support and empathy for the poor.[75] In Chicago, Abernathy later wrote that they received a worse reception than they had in the South. Their marches were met by thrown bottles and screaming throngs, and they were truly afraid of starting a riot.[79] King's beliefs mitigated against his staging a violent event, and he negotiated an agreement with Mayor Richard J. Daley to cancel a march in order to avoid the violence that he feared would result from the demonstration.[80] King, who received death threats throughout his involvement in the civil rights movement, was hit by a brick during one march but continued to lead marches in the face of personal danger.[81] Apparently, Dr King's "non violent" movement was increasingly becoming violent. I just don't believe non violence "protest" caused change. I firmly believe "Fear is stronger than love". People will respect you if they fear you. The white power structure feared elements in the Dr.King movement were eventually going "to be extreme". I am pretty sure they didn't want to be "seen" beating on old church black ladies on television. Nobody had sympathy for black men back then. Things haven't change much.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  11.   ZPIGGIEST says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    Ok you can tell by my nickname that I'm full figured and beautiful..now the facts. I have lived in alabam my whole life (birmingham) and so I know my city's history and am living in its present. I live in the wake of the civil rights movement everyday of my life. I love MEN be it black or white but I do have a penchant for white men though its extremely hard to carry this out in my town. THE NEW SOUTH is the old south in a new modern staineless steel wrapping. I still get stopped in white neighborhoods and YES there are places I will not take my black ass through simply because of my color because I would not be safe. With all of this said I love sex and can just a teensy itty bitty way see how they may view us as sluts. Though in this day an age I will gladly be a whore, slut, and freak for MY MAN (who is white) he loves it and so do I..

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  12.   bigeyes31 says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    e-dub that was funny. LOL I get your point.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  13.   e-dub says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    I think we’re missing a few points here: 1) Can someone point out to me Malcolm X’s act of armed insurrection? If not, I would submit he was relatively nonviolent. 2) I would submit the primary difference between Malcolm X’s message and Dr King’s message was the intended audience. Malcolm X’s message was primarily aimed at the Black community to make them realize their destiny was in their own hands. Dr King’s message was primarily aimed at the white community to make them realize the Civil Rights Movement wasn’t a threat to the white community. 3) Black people who helped the British weren’t taken back to the UK. They were initially taken to Nova Scotia and then to Sierra Leon. 4) I can’t/won’t speak to the goals of the Civil Right’s (Hay, I’m just the white guy here—I’m not entitled to an opinion) but if the goal is acceptance it’s not going to happen—well it might happen the same time Mr. Queen accepts me—ha!!!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  14.   Salsassin says:
    Posted: 17 Mar 10

    It was his middle class background that allowed him to be exposed to concepts such as that of Gandhi. It was not "non violence", it was "non-violent protest". It was "you can try to shut us down, but we will keep on coming, in your face. We won't get down to your level because we are better than you."It was "I have the balls to be right in front of you. You might resort to violence, but that is your weakness. But you still won't be able to quiet me. And each time, more people will come to my side. And each time you will be more vilified, and your excuses will become weaker and weaker" That is what non violent protest was, and it was a success.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  15.   Member says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Sal I was watching a documentary about slave catchers. Slaves outnumbered slave owners. They mention that they didn't even have enough "oversees" watch all the slaves in the south. That was why "slave catching" was so profitable. It would be equivalent to "Bounty hunting" like 'Dog the bounty hunter". Slave owners and whites were already concerned about slave uprisings. Since the days America tried to "break away from the British". The British enticed the black slaves to rebel against the Americans with promises of taking them back to Britain and making them "free". They did take some slaves back to Britain that did rebel against America. Of course, the British lost and slaves suffered the "wrath" for that. These little "things" left out of American history. I am not historian but it was interesting. Now back to the "non violent movement". Jim Crow was just an extension of the "Klan". After the South lost the Civil War and their "way of life". Slavery, after all, was a big industry. Poor whites and their wealthy white sympathizers decided to terrorize black people. That Klan is really the catalyst for the "Jim Crow" Laws. Malcolm X' father was part of the Marcus Garvy movement. They believed black people should be self sufficient and start their own businesses. Here is an excerpt "Malcolm Little was born on May 19, 1925, in Omaha, Nebraska, to Earl and Louise Little (née Louisa Norton).[15] His father was an outspoken Baptist lay speaker; he supported Pan-African activist Marcus Garvey and was a local leader of the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA).[16] Malcolm never forgot the values of black pride and self-reliance that his father and other UNIA leaders preached.[17] Malcolm X later said that three of Earl Little's brothers, one of whom was lynched, died violently at the hands of white men.[18] Because of Ku Klux Klan threats, the family relocated in 1926 to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and shortly thereafter to Lansing, Michigan." Contrast this with Martin Luther King Jr's upbringing. "Martin Luther King, Jr., was born on January 15, 1929, in Atlanta, Georgia. He was the son of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Sr. and Alberta Williams King.[3] King's father was born "Michael King," and Martin Luther King, Jr., was originally named "Michael King, Jr.," until the family traveled to Europe in 1934 and visited Germany. His father soon changed both of their names to Martin Luther in honor of the German Protestant leader Martin Luther.[4] He had an older sister, Willie Christine King, and a younger brother, Alfred Daniel Williams King.[5] King sang with his church choir at the 1939 Atlanta premiere of the movie Gone with the Wind.[6] King was originally skeptical of many Christianity's claims. [7] Most striking, perhaps was his denial of the bodily resurrection of Jesus during Sunday school at the age of thirteen. From this point he stated, "doubts began to spring forth unrelentingly."[8] King married Coretta Scott, on June 18, 1953, on the lawn of her parents' house in her hometown of Heiberger, Alabama.[9] King and Scott had four children; Yolanda King, Martin Luther King III, Dexter Scott King, and Bernice King.[10] King became pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama when he was twenty-five years old in 1954.[11]" The reason I bring these two men up. It is to touch back on the "success" of "non violence". Obviously, Martin has never suffered "poverty". I question if Dr. King would be so non violent if he grew up "hard" like Malcolm. Martin was fortunate to go to the best Black colleges and went on to graduate school. The only thing "Martin" had with "regular black people" was "the church and his skin color". He had courage, I will give you that. It is one thing "to visit the ghetto" but is another thing to be "raised in the ghetto". Dr King did make some "effort" to understand poor black people heading "North" and visiting Chicago and Harlem. I doubt towards the end of his life that he thought "non violence" was going " to work". I just don't see where "non violence" helped black people. Maybe, just to garner sympathy. It was white people violent to us "back then". It is kind of puzzling. For black people to be practice non violence would mean was "violent" ALL ALONG. I don't recall blacks sitting on lawns with their family watching white men get "lynched".

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  16.   Salsassin says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    That was one of the biggest problems with violent reactions. Just remember Nat Turner. Yes, he instilled the fear of death in the slave owners. He also gave an excuse for slave owners to instill even more repressive measures. But by the time of the civil rights, The US was trying to portray itself as the land and representative of the good in the world to the world. Jim Crow completely clashed with that image. And the more the media showcased that, the worse the USA looked.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  17.   Bamababe2k9 says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    The point is if we "acted out" are we not giving in to the perception that blacks are savages and animals? That's what the other side was saying we are. Had blacks fought back as you thought they should, the racist win. The fear of violence was in there too along with economic boycotts and seeing the true animals and savages do their thing through the eyes of the media. It was a brilliant move on Dr. King's part. Blacks are probably the most powerful minority out there and not because we act violently, it's because we used our intelligence and strength to fight back, not our fist, hands or guns.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  18.   bigeyes31 says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Well, Sleeping Beauty(Me)LOL has awaken from her slumber.... Peace from the Well Rested

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  19.   tatted2death says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    LMAO...funny how it only takes a little nudge to "wake the beast" again.... Like I have said before....everything I type will be for "only them" from now on.....(tsk tsk and lol). HAVE A GOOD ONE, GOOD PEOPLE Peace and Blessings tatted2death

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  20.   bigeyes31 says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    I am glad that TRULY balanced people are debating REALISTIC points. Keep up the good work in focusing your "attacks" on the points. I recognize this strategy well,LOL. Peace

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  21.   tatted2death says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Wonderful (TRUE) debate going on here lately.....hats off to Queens, Salassin, Bama, ICH and others. This is definitely one of those issues that I can see all sides to.....one of those that beg for a balanced thought process. Continue on good people....so many good points that have already been addressed (esp. by Bama and Sal). Peace and Blessings tatted2death

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  22.   Member says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Dear Ich Even though I disagree with Dr. King, the goal was for legislation for Civil Rights to "pass". That was a BIG accomplishment. Everybody can talk about how "militant" they were. But Dr. King was brilliant in the sense that he actually "pushed" for laws to be passed. I will never dismiss Dr. King as the leader of the black community at that period of time. Malcolm X makes you think with your "head". Ultimately Dr. King made you think with your heart. I am pretty sure Dr. King felt dismayed by the infighting in the black community. He went ahead anyway with the non violent talk even though violence was rampant. The funny thing is Malcolm X managed to do more internationally with "other African and Saudi leaders" than Dr King was able to do. I am pretty sure Dr. King wanted to do some "things" that Malcolm was able to do abroad. Unfortunately, they would have called him a communist and etc. They called him that anyway. Dr. King was tied to the "getting all the races" to get along and hold hands. Dr. King made things better for the future. I can admit that.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  23.   Ichibod says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Non-violent protest, violent protest. It really makes no difference. Was the overall goal achieve? No, it was not. And that depends on what the goal was initially. Much like the search for weapons of mass destruction sent our soldiers to die. No weapons were found because it was all a lie to begin with. Why did we stay in Iraq after finding that out? What is the purpose of "stay the course" now? Was the goal for blacks to be accepted in society as equals or was it to viewed as a feared and angry race of people not really looking for oportunities and justice, just payback? Both forms of protest took place at the time and continue to take place. Each form was not perpetrated by the same factions but they were in fact deployed in serveral different ways. If we are accepted in certain areas of public life in American culture, feared and despised in others (by some of our own people even), who's to blame for not sticking to the plan? What protest strategy really won? What was the original goal?

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  24.   Member says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Queen Latifah Where was the non violence? Oh you mean the black people that stood there and took the beating and the dog bites. You just contradicted yourself. "Queenie here is the deal, the non-violent movement worked as I said because most black folks didn’t fight back and Dr. King used the media as his tool to force white America to look at itself. non-violence, fear of an economic boycott and probably the fear of violence did have an effect on white America." PROBABLY the fear of violence. End of argument.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  25.   Bamababe2k9 says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Queenie here is the deal, the non-violent movement worked as I said because most black folks didn't fight back and Dr. King used the media as his tool to force white America to look at itself. non-violence, fear of an economic boycott and probably the fear of violence did have an effect on white America. I will believe to the day I die that if we fought back, it would have taken us longer to get our rights. Dr. King KNEW America would be watching and would awaken their sense of urgency and justice when they saw how we were treated. Black South Africans didn't even fight back and they had it just as bad as we did, but their revolution came peacefully as well. I think in that case, the chickens were about to come home to roost and the apartied government there knew it. I think if black people back in the day had given in to their basic instincts,the racist and the white supremest win.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  26.   Member says:
    Posted: 16 Mar 10

    Dear Sal I disagree on your point about Dr. King's methods working. If you notice Dr King's movement was "middle class". Dr. King was considered "middle class". Largely, the black extremists like Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammad came from very "tough" backgrounds. In my opinion, Martin Luther King could only approach the movement one way as a "Christian". Also, Martin Luther King managed to "tap" into the economic power of black people in Alabama. I still have mixed feelings about Dr. King. Here is an excerpt of an analysis of Dr. King that was interesting. "The march originally was conceived as an event to dramatize the desperate condition of blacks in the southern United States and a very public opportunity to place organizers' concerns and grievances squarely before the seat of power in the nation's capital. Organizers intended to excoriate and then challenge the federal government for its failure to safeguard the civil rights and physical safety of civil rights workers and blacks, generally, in the South. However, the group acquiesced to presidential pressure and influence, and the event ultimately took on a far less strident tone.[63] As a result, some civil rights activists felt it presented an inaccurate, sanitized pageant of racial harmony; Malcolm X called it the "Farce on Washington," and members of the Nation of Islam were not permitted to attend the march.[63][64]" Seems like Dr. King wanted to keep "the thugs" out of the March. At the same time, want to "use the thugs" to indirectly threaten the white power structure. If you ask me, Dr King is brilliant. LOL For the Civil Rights Act to be passed. I am pretty sure Dr. King had to find a way to pacify those black people that were going to "lash out". Dr. King reassured the white power structure that he "could do that" with this non violent movement "talk". He was able to get orchestrate the legislation for black people. However, without the "courage" "of the president. Dr King history might have turned out differently. Malcolm was "forced" out of the Nation of Islam. He rarely bad mouthed the "Nation" until they try to firebomb his home. Malcolm said " He has taken back anything he has said about other black leaders". Not because he didn't believe it. He wanted to still be "relevant" in the discussion for black people. Malcolm never denounced being a "militant". He just became "open minded" towards the end of his life. I agree MLK wasn't a pacifist. But MLK knew how important "your reputation" is. Something "Jesse Messy Jackson" failed to understand. My favorite quote from Malcolm X "Malcolm X was equally critical of the civil rights movement.[79] He described its leaders as "stooges" for the white establishment and said that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a "chump".[80][81] He criticized the 1963 March on Washington, which he called "the farce on Washington".[82] He said he did not know why black people were excited over a demonstration "run by whites in front of a statue of a president who has been dead for a hundred years and who didn't like us when he was alive".[83]" EXACTLY. I am gone.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  27.   Salsassin says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    Dr. King was killed by extremists, not the general public. His methods were working. Like Vietnam, the new media technology was exposing too much. People can be racist all they want, but they are rationalizing it in their heads. They have to explain it to themselves somehow where they feel they are doing good. Most people are not evil, just extremely ignorant. The vast majority are not the active exploiters. But the apathetic onlookers. Sometimes group think would take hold. Plenty of social psychology studies on that, but in general, apathy and "benevolent paternalism" mentality was the general trend. Nascent TV media was shoving it in people's faces bursting their little dream visions of a perfect 'Leave it to Beaver" world, where everyone is good and dandy. MLK wasn't a strict pacifist though. He was using a tool because it worked. In the end I do think MLK and Malcolm X where both gravitating towards each other. If they hadn't been killed, it would truly have been interesting to see what would have happened.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  28.   Member says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    Dear Bama You said the Dr. King non violence movement was beneficial for black people. At least, you implied that. I do not think it was "non violence" that "changed" anything. It was the implicit idea that "a couple negros" in this country is real dangerous and radical enough to "retaliate" for the wickedness they did to black people. Do you want deal with me (Dr King) OR the Nation of Islam and other militant organization. The white establishment said "we will do with Dr. King. They never liked Dr King. I doubt even if they had any respect for him. You are saying violence would have massacred black people. I doubt the they could kill "millions" of black people in the 50, 60 and 70s. That was just fear to scare black people. Black people was being beaten and killed "anyway". They killed Dr King in Memphis. Does that look like the signs of "non violence winning". Dr King was smart to provoke the white authority to beat him upside his head on television. However, if you believe "all black people" in the south didn't retaliate that is not true. You think they just "hung" black men for just whistling at white women. It happened but not as much for "self defense". A black man defending himself from a white man got him killed more than "so called" looking at a white girl. South Africa is a different story. I would have to get into that later. American has been built on "violence", The Civil War, Revolutionary War, and etc. Just because you can sit there "and take the punishment" does not mean you "win anything". I don't subscribe to Ghandi or any non violence doctrine. Jesus was not even non violent. He said in so many words "forgiveness" should be the first option. Even in Islam forgiveness is the first option. But people take the "extreme" end of Islam and maim people for crimes like stealing and etc. Cutting off their hands, stoning women for adultery and etc. In my opinion concerning non violence it was the lesser of "two evils". A sane spokesperson for black people like Dr. King OR Malcolm and the other black militants sticking a gun in your face for the shit you did to black people. I look at this way. You suffer discrimination and lack of job opportunities. Eventually, you can only push a "man so far". White people didn't say "oh Dr King is non violent so let's stop abusing black people". They didn't start "caring" UNTIL these radical black groups had counter arguments to that. Malcolm merely put a "face" to a message "that sounded" right at the time. Fuck that get your gun, I am tired of you doing this to us. Dr King's message didn't appeal to ALL black people. This non violence crap you talking about. They were "worried about" the black people who did NOT think like "Dr King". I call it the Nat Turner syndrome. After Nat Turner led one of the biggest uprisings by slaves in America. The white plantation owners cracked down on that shit. The same fear "lingered" right through Jim Crow. Dr King 'changed that mindset" all by himself? I really question that. Lastly, there are certain parts of South Africa that is prosperous. Stop watching all these "Feed the children" shows. It would take too long to explain why things are the way they are in Africa. I actually watched this speaker talk about Africa. A Phd professor. He only had to say 1 thing to me. He said "How the fuck black people starve in Africa"? I sat in my chair and pondered it for weeks. You can't say dictators in Africa want to "starve themselves, much less their people". It just wouldn't make any sense. Unless, someone is intentionally keeping "Africa" the way it is. I will be back later. Oh yea, Sal point taken on that the Maroons.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  29.   Bamababe2k9 says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    @Ich Thank you sir. I appreciate that comment. Most of us get it that the movement would not have been successful if we would have fought back. That was the whole point. Dr. King knew the media would be right there when the dogs and water hose would be turned on us. He knew in order to change a nation, he had to change their hearts first. @Queenie, are you insane? If a black man could get killed for even LOOKING at a white woman, you know good and damn well they would have hung him by his toe nails if he struck a white person. Do you honestly think the mostly "white" media back in the day would not have loved to catch a black person whupping a white men's ass to make their case against us? Come on now you can't be that naive. And how can you say the movement didn't work? Look where we are today. If violence worked, then why didn't South African's do it since blacks are the majority there? Obviously, you don't know how powerful the media is and how much influence they really have.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  30.   Richard says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    Hi, Richard here from the UK Back to the initial question. I'm 44 and grew up in a middle class background with no real racism or perhaps if honest, some mild racism and miss trust but mild only. However since my late thirties I have to admit I am incredibly attracted to Black females. I am happily married to a white lady but if I were free, I would be looking for a beautiful black girl. I would actually say and admit, that I am obsessed at the moment with Black ladies and have played away from home. I am not proud of that but just being honest Regards to all

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  31.   Salsassin says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    Yeah, the Maroons fought. They also signed treaties to return runaway slaves. Seems they chose to let their brethren take the slap so they could be at peace with the Brits. Simplistic history telling is always entertaining, but rarely tells the whole story. The maroons or cimarrones existed all over the place. Including Peru, and we all have our heroes from their experiences. But let us not claim they did not negotiate, just like Dr. King, trying to find the best solution for their people. In the US, contrary to Jamaica, European descent people were and are the majority. Going to run and hide in remote regions wasn't a viable solution for many people. For those that could, many did flee Jim Crow. Canada, Mexico, etc.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  32.   Member says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    Dear MzBrown I will accept the compliment. Anyway, thanks for reprimanding that white man for "hollering" at black women while he has a black wife and kids. Good day.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  33.   Member says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    Author: Ichibod Comment: @ Bama, "And the main reason the non-violent movement worked, was we weren’t the one’s spilling the blood." Isn't it a shame some people just don't get this. That's the whole point of turning the other cheek, never repay evil with evil, and esteeming others greater than yourself is about. You just saved me alot of typing on this subject with that statment. That was marvellous!" I guess this is directed at me. You are both full of shit. The implication of violence was always the underlying power to Dr. King's movement. Dr. King wasn't always non violent. He changed his tactic to make the "media" sympathetic towards the civil rights movement. Blood was spilled on "both sides". They will never show black men beating on white men "in the media". Especially back then. I don't even know where people get their facts from. They seem to think getting beat upside your head and dogs being sicked on you "won you something". Dr King was murdered. Various cities rioted with black people upset about his murder. Black extremists groups became popular, which later on formed "gangs". Dr. King never denounced the black extremists groups. Go look up the archives and show me where he did that. Dr King felt it wasn't the best "solution". Most black people rather die with a gun in their hand instead of we shall overcome. They show the same shit in the media every Feb. The real heroes are the leaders of the Black Panther party movement and Malcolm X and Elijah from the Nation of Islam. I don't believe in turning the other cheek. In the end, most black people didn't believe that bullshit after Dr. King was murdered. Some things that are evil should never be overlooked. Separate water fountains, no blacks allowed signs, get to the back of the bus. All this shit for what reason exactly? (Mocking you) turn the other cheek. Go tell that to cowardly Negros not me. I am a maroon, we fought the British in Jamaica. I don't give a fuck about turning the other cheek. You had to kill us before we would be subjected to that bullshit. Oh yea, we also stole black women off the slave plantations and brought them to the mountains. Marcus Garvey's blood line runs through me! I am out.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  34.   e-dub says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    As an average white guy, I think it's obvious that, I should sit down and shut up. I've been told what my opinion should be so -- shutting up.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  35.   Ichibod says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    @ Bama, "And the main reason the non-violent movement worked, was we weren’t the one’s spilling the blood." Isn't it a shame some people just don't get this. That's the whole point of turning the other cheek, never repay evil with evil, and esteeming others greater than yourself is about. You just saved me alot of typing on this subject with that statment. That was marvellous!

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  36.   Bamababe2k9 says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    @BE totally agree with you girl. That's to me is what made Malcolm great was he was able and willing to change. @Queenie I've been to white churches, I invited one of my best friend's who is white to my church and she came.I've eaten at her house, was in her wedding as the maid of honor, stayed at her house and she has stayed at mine. I met one of my ex's parent's one Thanksgiving and they welcomed me with open arms. Everyone's experience is not the same. He met my family and they welcomed him. And the main reason the non-violent movement worked, was we weren't the one's spilling the blood.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  37.   MzBrOwNSuGaR says:
    Posted: 15 Mar 10

    @ Laurelton Queens, without the "Mr." Lil boy, let me just put it this way, if my only other option was a man with diarrhea of the mouth like you, I would sell out in a heart beat.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  38.   Member says:
    Posted: 14 Mar 10

    I came back to address the Malcolm X statement. Again, he wasn't racist. He is simply reacting to the environment that white people "caused". If you called me a nigger and coon, do you expect me to like you or dislike you otherbrother? We have come a long way. However, in the context of Malcolm's X time he wasn't considered racist. If you read his autobiography, Malcolm's X mother was a very fair skin woman. She could pass off "white". His father was a tall, big, black man that was a Baptist Preacher. They say he was allegedly killed by the Klan or racist police officers. Malcolm's nickname "was red" for a reason. I would consider Malcolm "biracial". Can a biracial man be racist???????? Non violence did not cause change in this country. Martin Luther King JR did a non violent movement but the "opposition" was NOT non violent. The hit black people upside their head and sick dogs on them. Even the white sympathizers were subjected to this treatment. When Dr King got killed in Memphis, black people rioted in some cities. Why don't you talk about the aftermath of Dr King's murder? You think everybody was "holding hands" in the country because Dr. King did " I have a dream speech". I am always up for a debate on the "merits" of non violence and violence. Change did not happen until blood was spilled. That is just the reality.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  39.   Member says:
    Posted: 14 Mar 10

    Dear Otherbrother Oh really, it is black "people" like me that make white people think black people are associated with negativity. This is what you said............. "I have probably sat at dinner with more black people than you have. I have attended both white and black churches. Most military bases the congregation is pretty evenly mixed. Most of my friends have their friends for gatherings like labor day or memorial day oh yeah they are black. I know more black people who cannot bring home a white friend than vice versa." No you haven't. You meet a couple black people and that makes you the authority on black people. I was raised in a black neighborhood in Jamaica Queens. Williamsport PA is the first time, I have been in a majority white town. You can never make that comparison to me ever in your life. Since I was born in the church, I rarely saw white folks. Perhaps my eyes "deceive me". Black people "attending" a majority white church does make society "all of a sudden" equal and fair in my opinion. You have your anecdotal story and that is fine. You also said this............. "Black men should be pissed when the likes of Bill Cosby and President Obama make statements that black men need to be responsible and step up as parents, who said they already were not doing that." I am pissed about it. Considering Bill Cosby was a womanizer and had sex with his "maid". President Obama is pandering to the black community. He blames black men but will not reprimand black women. Black women have control of their bodies. They contribute to the "out of wedlock" birth rate. That is left out for some reason. You said this.................. "Oh Yeah, do not be a hater, because you can not get a good solid woman, doesn’t mean nobody else can, I said what I said, I said i can holler and I holler pretty good, however I have never attempted to solicite any woman of any color any where, I can nothelp that i am the man I am, I have no concerns." Um, you said you got a solid woman but holler at "other women". How is that hating? Stop watching Hip Hop on BET. What is your definition of Holler? You don't solicit women than that is different than. You said this................... " We do not always agree but we do always talk and discuss. I can not help you have proplems with women, that is something you need to fix. This site is not going to do that for you. You call women who you can not handle sell outs, that’s what the problem is. You stated in earlier conversation that all the women you dated that were just as or more educated than you were to demanding and had issues. It was that you had issues and couldn’t handle them so they went on to bigger and better things. " I have dated quite a few educated women in long term relationships. I am not demanding. They were demanding. Maybe, I could handle situations differently instead of "giving up" on the relationships. Listen, I have a dominant personality. You are speculating they went on to bigger and better things. Some have, and some have not. I am sorry to tell you, but black men is not the problem. Plus, when the relationship ends, I really don't ponder if their lives was "successful or not". I just worry about myself. I don't take credit for anybody's success except my own. There are plenty of successful women. They outnumber me. I am not the one complaining about dating, they are. I am just telling you what it is. I believe everything I say. I wouldn't waste my time replying to you, if I did not. You claim their is still racism but the lies come from black men. Last time I checked, a majority of lies comes from white men. Their history books filled with lies. They still have George Washington as a "hero" and Thomas Jefferson. None of those "founding fathers" are Heroes to me. Again, you tell me what I am lying about? If you love black women so much, why you pick them last to date? Why so few white men "online" will date black women? Boots you hit it right on the nail. Now, we are the PROBLEM. Bad enough, he disrespects his black wife coming onto "young black girls". One of the sellout black women admonished him on what he is doing. I am surprised Mzbrown jumped on his ass. Good day

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  40.   boots says:
    Posted: 14 Mar 10

    @ other brother.....most whites make statemens like yours all the time " I never owned a slave"...etc etc. Whether you or your father owned a slave means nothing....the fact is, massive amounts of wealth, land and other assets were transferred from parents to children to great grandchildren, wealth which blks had no opportunity to accumulate....I suggest you read (Black Labor White Wealth) Claud Anderson powerNomics Corps. The disproportionate amount of personal wealth between blks and whites is hardly subtle as you say....No sir! Iam not the cause of a problem that whites have created in this country and wont even acknowledge to this day...It seems that whenever some white dude finds a blk woman to marry... he suddenly becomes embolden to lecture blk men on race relations and how to treat blk women

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  41.   MzBrOwNSuGaR says:
    Posted: 14 Mar 10

    @ other Brother you said: "i can holler and I holler pretty good," " I respect my self and my wife. I do not do any thing my wife doesn’t know" RESPECT is NOT letting ya wife know that, because you so sweet and, " the man that I am", you go around doing ya "good" hollering. RESPECT for your wife is to act like you a husband, and behaving like a married man when she is around, and when she is not.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  42.   Member says:
    Posted: 14 Mar 10

    boots Although I do not know you and haven't read evry one of your post, the few I have read tell me you are the cause of the problems we have today. I have never owned a slave my father didn't and his father didn't. Beyond that I do not know, however I owe nothing to nobody but my wife and kids. Yes there were and still are atrocities subtle ones to like the case of genalow wilson, and the young lady in the Walmart Case I forgot her name and where the incident took place but it was clearly a racist thing. That though contrary to popular beliefe is not my fault, There are no lies said from white men who love black women, the lies come from the black men who do not like it.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  43.   Member says:
    Posted: 14 Mar 10

    Oh Yeah, do not be a hater, because you can not get a good solid woman, doesn't mean nobody else can, I said what I said, I said i can holler and I holler pretty good, however I have never attempted to solicite any woman of any color any where, I can nothelp that i am the man I am, I have no concerns. I know where dinner is served I eat every night. I respect my self and my wife. I do not do any thing my wife doesn't know. We do not always agree but we do always talk and discuss. I can not help you have proplems with women, that is something you need to fix. This site is not going to do that for you. You call women who you can not handle sell outs, that's what the problem is. You stated in earlier conversation that all the women you dated that were just as or more educated than you were to demanding and had issues. It was that you had issues and couldn't handle them so they went on to bigger and better things. You try to take credit for them moving on and doing better, that is always funny, that my man is called insecurity. You are rolling with the big dawgs not children, just quit playing because we all really know you do not really believe 80% of what byou say. You can't I mean a few of your points are on target, and usually they are good points then you fly off into left field somewhere. Somethings just not right.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  44.   Member says:
    Posted: 14 Mar 10

    Queens it sounds good, however once again you are as usual mostly off base. First and foremost because you read Malcolm’s X biography doesn’t mean he wasn’t racist. That is totally absurd, he actually was very racist o be factual. Non Violence is the exact reason why we are where we are today. Granted we have so far to still go, but it is people like you that continue to spread lies that keep black people from progressing in today’s times. You said “Ask some white people, how often they have black people over for dinner? How many invite black people to their “church”? We self segregate in colleges, clubs, and etc.” again because you haven’t been invited to dinner does not make your statement true. I have probably sat at dinner with more black people than you have. I have attended both white and black churches. Most military bases the congregation is pretty evenly mixed. Most of my friends have their friends for gatherings like labor day or memorial day oh yeah they are black. I know more black people who cannot bring home a white friend than vice versa. You said “White people associate black people “with negative” things. Nothing you can say to me will change that.” Again your ignorance doesn’t make that true. Most White people do not associate black people with negative anything. No matter what you say that is actually fact. In fact it has been you that have associated black people with negative things. It is people like you that keep alive perceptions like more black men are in jail than in college. In fact there are more black men in college, or what is the percentage of black fathers that do not pay child support and support their children. Ask the black community that, the facts are most blacks believe the number is high when in fact it is in par with white father that refuse to support their children. Black men should be pissed when the likes of Bill Cosby and President Obama make statements that black men need to be responsible and step up as parents, who said they already were not doing that. Just as many of my black friends have always been responsible and good fathers as my white friends. It is crap and distortions like that that keep the perception inaccurate and alive. As I have stated in the past you are right on a few statements you make you got some of the following correct. You said Many white people benefit from “white privilege”, while black people continue to be subjected to subtle racism. You can see that with our current black president Barak Obama. They use code words like “let’s take back our country”. They say stuff like” He wasn’t born here”. I could go on about it. Yes unfortunately there is still major racism out there, I see every day with my children, and there are many racist people putting out crap like the president wasn’t born here. He was born in Hawaii and ELIGIBLE for office. The rest of course you off bases, Let’s take our country back has nothing to do with being black and everything to do with the Presidents socialist policies, many conservatives said the same thing after Jimmy Carter was elected. While you’re sipping your Kool-Aid call up your mortgage company tell the customer representative you’re a white male and you do not to pay your mortgage this month. Let me know what she says, however our first lady stated she shouldn’t have had to pay back her student loan because she is black, who is benefiting from what?

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  45.   Member says:
    Posted: 13 Mar 10

    Dear Bama We can debate "whether" the non violent movement worked. You said it worked for "black people". Actually when DR King was killed, riots broke out in many cities. Thus, the black panther movement and "these other black power movements" started popping up. For all this non violence working, why Dr. King end up shot in Memphis? Violence actually caused the "change". Not the so called "no violent movement" that Dr King preached. Also, Dr King did advocate for black people to defend themselves. People always leave this out of history. Dr. King had guns in his home. It wasn't uncommon for black people in the south to have guns. I read Malcolm's X biography and he wasn't racist. He was a product of that "time". If you call me a nigger, coon and try to hang me from a tree. How am I supposed to feel "about you"? You call me "racist" towards white people. For what reason, because I don't allow you to take 'advantage of me". As for Malcolm being killed by the Nation, it is truly unfortunate. However, Malcolm said "he does not want white people to join his movement". Even after being excommunicated from the Nation of Islam. He told them they can 'send him money". Malcolm still felt a "certain way" about American whites. Just because you can understand your nemsis. Does not mean I am your friend. We are not going to have dinner together. Ask some white people, how often they have black people over for dinner? How many invite black people to their "church"? We self segregate in colleges, clubs, and etc. Many white people benefit from "white privilege", while black people continue to be subjected to subtle racism. You can see that with our current black president Barak Obama. They use code words like "let's take back our country". They say stuff like " He wasn't born here". I could go on about it. People in society don't judge people individually UNLESS they personally meet them. White people associate black people "with negative" things. Nothing you can say to me will change that. Dr King's movement was a "black middle class movement". Malcom X and the Nation of Islam was the leverage for Dr. King to sway the white power structure to even "listen to him". The reason I call it a "middle class black movement", black people were able to cripple the Alabama economy with boycotts. Poor Negros wouldn't be able to do that shit. Secondly, nobody is going to listen to angry violent Negros like Elijah from the Nation of Islam. They were important for that time period because they "tapped" into the anger of black people. But politically, nobody was talking to them. Dr King was brilliant in the sense, that he was able to talk to the powers that be. But use the "black extremists" to say "you know these black people here will burn down the country". I think you better listen to me. Nobody views history like that. They just "spit out" the same bullshit in history books. You think the white men in power was like "oh your non violent" well let's give these "Negros" rights then. Shit, what the hell were we thinking. Sorry for sicking the dogs and hoses on you. Power is 'always" taken, NEVER GIVEN! Hey Big Eyes lol.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  46.   bigeyes31 says:
    Posted: 13 Mar 10

    @Boots I don't think you hate white people. I think you are frustrated by what you see as the continued disenfranchisement of black men and people in this country. I don't love white men;I love men. One in particular who happens to be originally from Morrocco,lol, he isn't black or white but he is fine,lol, but that is another story. @Queens I am from Alabama and where I lived it is not possible to overlook racism and prejudice. The town is separated into two major sides one of which is highly developed with businesses,shops and evident prosperity, while the other, although not in abject poverty, pales in comparison. It is understood which side is the "white" side. Now, it is 2010, why does it still look like 1954? @Bama I agree with your response about King and X. I think King knew that whites were ready to violently defend "their way of life" of oppressing black people so he went the opposite way. White supremacists have been talking of a race war since that time and think King understood this and chose the right strategy. It put his opponents off guard if you will. Malcolm X, I loved because he was complete to me. He had shortcomings that he overcame and was teachable. He was able to be enlightened.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  47.   boots says:
    Posted: 13 Mar 10

    Queens thanks... and I get your point....to Bama it was not my intention to offend you as a christian I will ask your forgiveness before my LORD JESUS b/c I am a christain too......I just feel that we should understand the words of CHRIST in the right context...GOD is love but GOD is also JUSTICE and Righteousness....there is no love outside of justice...so when a person claims to love someone and that person treats them in a degrading way that's not love in Gods eyes... that's a perversion

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  48.   boots says:
    Posted: 13 Mar 10

    SAL...LOL...you may be well aware of the imprisonment during the Jim Crow period but most young whites and blks dont have a clue...and its doubtful based on some of your statements that you even understand the ramifications of the tranfer of wealth in the last 100 yrs ,and why blks were left out.I suggest that you read SLAVERY BY ANOTHER NAME by Dougal A.Blackmon...I dont stand alone in my line of thinking. I have quoted prominent authors over and over GARRY WILLS,RANDALL ROBINSON,DOUGALS A.BLACKMON, THEODORE DRAPER,CLAUD ANDERSON....You say that the mention of Christopher Columbus is a strawman "and the whole story has been told" well if that is the case and everybody knows that he was a horrible man, then why dont we rename every school, street etc named in his honor. Surely the Jewish people in the USA would be filled with rage at the thought of sending their children to a school named in honor of Hitler.Moreover are we really teaching our children the real story of the civil war that ROBERT E LEE and all of the Confederate states the whole bunch were treasonous and should have been hung. And if this is true then why do we allow the confedrate flag to fly at all in this country ,whites still fly it with pride. Your statment about MANUMISSION shows just how shallow your thinking is on the whole subject.The whole concept is hypocritical in its self. That a mere man could grant you freedom, a right given to all men by God himself, according to your Declaration of Independence .Again intellectual gymnastics sir just as you are involed with now...And since when did the selling of slaves by other Africans absolve this country of their moral obligation to those lofty ideals which this country was supposedly founded on .I have no need to read ANNA KINGSLY.However you my dear SAL should read this excerpt b/c you have shown that you dont understand how slavery was practiced in Africa...King Affonso of Kongo (Congo) wrote to King Joao of Portugal in 1526 "Each day the traders are kidnapping our people children of our country,sons of our nobles and vassals,even people of our own family.King Affonso grandchildren had been taken into slavery en route to Portugal for religious education.This corruption and depravity are so widespread that our land is entirely depopulated.It is our wish that this Kingdom not be a place for the trade or transport of slaves".King Joao wrote back: you tell me that you want no slave trading in your domains ..yet the portuguese on the contrary tell me that the Congo is so vast and thickly populated that it seems as if no slave has ever left....While King Affonso was now stanger to slavery.....he had undertood it as a condition befalling prioners of war criminals, debtors ,out of which slaves could earn or even marry their way This was nothing like seeing this wholly new and brutal commercial practice of slavery where tens of thousands of his subjects were dragged off in chains.When the King sent emissaries to appeal to the pope in Rome,the emissaries were arrested upon arrival in Lisbon....(The Debt what america owes blacks)plume books pg 27 While I dont claim to be a scholar by any stretch..I am quite certain in my 35 yrs of studying this subject I have given it much more thought than you my friend

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  49.   Bamababe2k9 says:
    Posted: 13 Mar 10

    @Queenie last time I checked Malcom X who HATED white people changed his mind about them when he went to Mecca and saw White Muslims worshipping along side with him. This is a man who thought justice was given when John F. Kennedy was killed. And he also thought we should fight back by any means neccessary. Dr. King knew if we came out fighting like you suggest, it would have been another 10 or 20 years before we got our rights. Got news for you, non violence movement WORKED. If a white man stepped up to you and said I think all black men are like Flavor Flav, you would be pissed and SCREAM to top of your lungs that was a racist comment. As I said in my previous post everyone should be judge as an indiduval, not judge as a group.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment
  50.   Member says:
    Posted: 13 Mar 10

    Dear Boots I do not think you hate white men. There are certain people that overlook what was done to black people. Especially, in Alabama of all places. The silent white majority is just as guilty allowing racists to attack black people. The justice system routinely let these white men go. People always talk about "Dr King". Dr. King was trying to stop the retaliation of black people due to the injustices that were being done. White people praise him for letting himself get "sicked on by dogs" and beat "upside his head" for asking for "basic human rights. Even Dr King knew that black people were not going to put up with that shit for long. Dr. King was just the lesser of two evils to the white establishment. They certainly didn't want groups like the Nation of Islam and Black Panther party retaliating on "fearful" whites. Let's get this straight. White people hated black people first. Accusing a black person of being racist is like blaming the victim for being raped. These cotton picking Negros trying to imply black people are racist to whites so they can get a pat on the head and a "date". These are the worst form of black people. Good day.

    Like or Dislike: or 0 (0)
    Reply to this comment

Opinion

Find your soulmate on LatinoLicious

Join Free

Coaching Testimonial

"My online love inspiration angel"

Submitted by: Patricia, USA, 21

To be honest, in the beginning, I thought it would be a waste of time. But since I've never seen a similar service in any other dating site, I decided to give it a try.

I always "thought" my profile was on point and I did not need any help to correct my page. I always had in my profile if someone is not attracted to my profile, then that's "their" loss.

BOY WAS I WRONG!!

I will never forget my first time using the Coaching Service I was introduced to my personal Dating Coach. Let me put it this way, if it was not for her I would have given up long time ago (even though I'm a new member).

She taught me so many things and gave me good advice, I did not want to stop chatting with her at all.

She opened my eyes to many possibilities when finding love. She is definitely an inspiration and I appreciate a whole lot. She is more than a Dating Coach to me; she is more of a close friend/guide to me. She is definitely my "online love-inspiration angel".

Find out more

Most Popular

Your Comments