Black Lives Matter: Why the dual agenda?

I see what your getting at LOL. Yeah CIS black men isn't that an oxymoron?

To me BLM always seemed like a Black Feminist movement in disguise (which wants male members), it's funny because the feminist movement is one of the reasons why the black family has been torn apart
Interesting. Can you elaborate on this?
 
There is nothing wrong or derogatory with the term "cis" it just means people who identify with the gender they where assigned at birth thats it nothing more.
 
Naaaaaaah that "cis gender" **** is nonsense, like no doggie I'm a man.

some **** I just cant get with.
 
It really comes down to how people feel and understand about the transgender concept as a whole when it comes to these terms.

I'm just clarifying there isn't anything negative about the term.
 
 
Interesting. Can you elaborate on this?
There's nothing interesting about it.

First, NYC Game confuses the differences b/w an organization and a movement. 

Second, if you actually  build with some of the black women at the fore of the movement for black lives (instead of relying on suspicions), you'll find that their politics cannot be categorized as black feminism. It's like being unable to imagine a politics outside of the liberal/conservative binary. Black queer feminism? Yes. Radical black feminism? Yes. By the way, cis, black men can also adopt a black queer feminist lens. 

Lastly, to assert that feminism tore apart the black family is myopic at best. There never has, in actual historical fact, existed a single black family structure. If anything tore apart the multiple expressions of the black family, it was mass incarceration. To assert that feminism, not state repression, was more responsible represents a cowardly retreat from clashing with the oppositional forces that put our folks behind bars. I get it. Its easier to identify feminism as the culprit. But that doesn't make it an adequate explanation.
 
Interesting. Can you elaborate on this?

Well the majority following of the movement is black women, yeah sure you see them protesting black men getting killed by the cops but look at it's actual followers, I know what your going to say "you can't base a whole group on some individuals but whenever they post they have this undertone of misandry. Like black men owe them something. They are on the same mentality of a black twitter follower.
 
Well the majority following of the movement is black women, yeah sure you see them protesting black men getting killed by the cops but look at it's actual followers, I know what your going to say "you can't base a whole group on some individuals but whenever they post they have this undertone of misandry. Like black men owe them something. They are on the same mentality of a black twitter follower.
Yikes.

Gotta learn to give that patriarchy up, bruh.
 
Last edited:
 
Interesting. Can you elaborate on this?
Well the majority following of the movement is black women, yeah sure you see them protesting black men getting killed by the cops but look at it's actual followers, I know what your going to say "you can't base a whole group on some individuals but whenever they post they have this undertone of misandry. Like black men owe them something. They are on the same mentality of a black twitter follower.
You perceive it as misandry and an attack on men when its not in the same way when a black person starts talking about black issues and black rights  white people perceive it as an attack on white people.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that most white people are mad insecure, and don't know how to deal when things don't involve them.

It is like they want black issues to be addressed while simultaneously reassuring the country that white people have issues too.

It is low-key creepy.

It's not creepy, it's how they've been living life since forever, it's ingrained in this society. The same mindset can be attributed to any situation on a smaller scale, the star player who has to concede some attention to the up and coming star player, the new teacher who is not new anymore because somebody else was just hired, etc. Some people need to be feel involved w/ everything. It's an ego trip if anything.
 
Interesting. Can you elaborate on this?

Well the majority following of the movement is black women, yeah sure you see them protesting black men getting killed by the cops but look at it's actual followers, I know what your going to say "you can't base a whole group on some individuals but whenever they post they have this undertone of misandry. Like black men owe them something. They are on the same mentality of a black twitter follower.

Stuff like this is why BLM saw it necessary to include the inclusive language. Like god forbid young women that go out and protest an issues that mainly affect young black men, also ask those black men to consider issues that uniquely affect young black women.

It seems to me that most white people are mad insecure, and don't know how to deal when things don't involve them. They just are used to it on a political level.

It is like they want black issues to be addressed while simultaneously reassuring the country that white people have issues too.

It is low-key creepy.


There are black women, homosexual, and transgender people too. Those issues are strictly white issues.

Same way criminal justice reform is strictly not a black issue.
 
Last edited:
There's nothing interesting about it.

First, NYC Game confuses the differences b/w an organization and a movement. 

Second, if you actually build with some of the black women at the fore of the movement for black lives (instead of relying on suspicions), you'll find that their politics cannot be categorized as black feminism. It's like being unable to imagine a politics outside of the liberal/conservative binary. Black queer feminism? Yes. Radical black feminism? Yes. By the way, cis, black men can also adopt a black queer feminist lens. 

Lastly, to assert that feminism tore apart the black family is myopic at best. There never has, in actual historical fact, existed a single black family structure. If anything tore apart the multiple expressions of the black family, it was mass incarceration. To assert that feminism, not state repression, was more responsible represents a cowardly retreat from clashing with the oppositional forces that put our folks behind bars. I get it. Its easier to identify feminism as the culprit. But that doesn't make it an adequate explanation.

Actually I didn't confuse the two, but thanks for letting me know there's a difference.

Secondly, what do you mean by "if you build" you're being vague. Are you a full on expert on the movement? (not an organization).
Hold up partner are you talking about the same feminist that run to youtube and put male and female issues in a black or white category? The ones who say that all men are oppressors and all women are victims? The same feminist who will not talk about the other side of the coin which is mens issues but keep defining feminism as a movement for equality? What about the equality in family or divorce court? Nah they're pretty quite on that.

Lastly to sum it up it was about black power before it was ever about women's equality, black men and women were struggling, but in the end white women recruited black women for the feminist movement and now they have little to show for it. One of the feminist founders is supposed to be a CIA agent, Meanwhile look at the black family core, those incarcerations are partly because the gov't told women that if they wanted assistance they would have to have no father figure in the household, then you have another section of men who didn't want kids and either dipped out or the mother wanted to get back at the men who just wanted a nut and put them on child support some guys didn't have a job because they couldn't find work and if you don't pay they lock you up.
 
Last edited:
Stuff like this is why BLM saw it necessary to include the inclusive language. Like god forbid young women that go out and protest an issues that mainly affect young black men, also ask those black men to consider issues that uniquely affect young black women.
There are black women, homosexual, and transgender people too. Those issues are strictly white issues.

Same way criminal justice reform is strictly not a black issue.

Right?
 
Stuff like this is why BLM saw it necessary to include the inclusive language. Like god forbid young women that go out and protest an issues that mainly affect young black men, also ask those black men to consider issues that uniquely affect young black women.
There are black women, homosexual, and transgender people too. Those issues are strictly white issues.

Same way criminal justice reform is strictly not a black issue.

That's not even the point.
 
Dawg you realize you are saying the same stuff white people say to black people about race issues...you're just saying it about women and women's issues.
 
You perceive it as misandry and an attack on men when its not in the same way when a black person starts talking about black issues and black rights  white people perceive it as an attack on white people.

I take what's being said at face value, so if the majority of feminist are saying in general all men are rapist, and that women still get paid 76 cent on the dollar compared to men which is a lie and has been debunked countless times yet they keep regurgitating the same thing over and over verbatim with the amount of cents rising or falling I'm going to have an issue with that. You're talking about something totally different.
 
 
Dawg you realize you are saying the same stuff white people say to black people about race issues...you're just saying it about women and women's issues.
No it's not.
Apples and oranges sir.
It not apples and oranges there are parallels between the two

see below
 
Yikes.

Gotta learn to give that patriarchy up, bruh.
Nah, you need to stop blaming the patriarchy bruh.

I get no more rights than a woman gets in todays society.
You saying this is the same thing as a white person telling me "You need to stop blaming white supremacy and white people we are all equal today I have no more rights than you" It's the same thing.
 
Last edited:
My grievance with BLM, is that it seems to me that at times It puts its own agenda forward at the expense of victims and their families. I can only speak to certain examples, but IMO if the family is asking you to fall back, and you continue, who are you marching for?
 
Actually I didn't confuse the two, but thanks for letting me know there's a difference.

Secondly, what do you mean by "if you build" you're being vague. Are you a full on expert on the movement? (not an organization).
Hold up partner are you talking about the same feminist that run to youtube and put male and female issues in a black or white category? The ones who say that all men are oppressors and all women are victims? The same feminist who will not talk about the other side of the coin which is mens issues but keep defining feminism as a movement for equality? What about the equality in family or divorce court? Nah they're pretty quite on that.

Lastly to sum it up it was about black power before it was ever about women's equality, black men and women were struggling, but in the end white women recruited black women for the feminist movement and now they have little to show for it. One of the feminist founders is supposed to be a CIA agent, Meanwhile look at the black family core, those incarcerations are partly because the gov't told women that if they wanted assistance they would have to have no father figure in the household, then you have another section of men who didn't want kids and either dipped out or the mother wanted a free ride because they feel they want to get back at the men who just wanted a nut and put them on child support some guys didn't have a job because they couldn't find work and if you don't pay they lock you up.
By "build" I mean actually engage in conversation with and organize alongside black women under the banner of the movement for black lives. I am not talking about youtube personalities. I'm not talking about CIA agents. 

There is some truth to the 'interesting' history you provided. It is somewhat true that it  "was about black power before it was ever about women's equality." Embedded in many of the arguments and visions of black liberation during the late '60s was the assumption of gendered labor. Black men were the spokespersons and political organizers; black women were in charge of reproductive labor and instilling consciousness in black youth. The best aspects of black power movements addressed material concerns of poor and working class black people. The worst parts reified patriarchical relations. The lessons of the past is why today's movement rejects the binary that black power exists in tension with the centering of black women, trans and gender-non-conforming folks. Todays movement does not even principally argue in terms of liberal notions of "equality," but justice (economic, political, racial, etc). 

You lost me on the whole white feminism, incarceration, welfare stuff. 
 
My grievance with BLM, is that it seems to me that at times It puts its own agenda forward at the expense of victims and their families. I can only speak to certain examples, but IMO if the family is asking you to fall back, and you continue, who are you marching for?

I just feel like it is a distraction. People are up & arms because a hashtag is forced down their throats every day.

And all it has done is fuel the media's narrative, and make white people more unapologetic about their ignorance, arrogance, indifference, and even sometimes their racism.
 
Back
Top Bottom