Sunday, August 08, 2010

Are Heterosexual Black Females Bigots When It Comes To Their List Of Ineligible Men?

Of course, the purpose of this post in in response to the arguments that I have been hearing in defense of same sex marriage in response to the judge in California having turned over the ban on gay marriage in California per the passage of Proposition 8.   The judge, the attorney Ted Olson and many others that I have heard interviewed on this matter have used the direct comparison between the interracial marriage associated with the landmark court case "Loving v Virginia" and the right of people of the same sex be provided with the same privileges.

They are arguing that the construct of "race" - which is a function of thousands of years of "mating decisions" with the construct of "gender".    In using the legal infrastructure that was used for the Civil Right Movement where Blacks had the repression used against them they are daring to make the case that gender and race are equivalent.   

Sadly and shamefully several key progressive Black leaders have accepted this notion, confusing the supposed "advancement of RIGHTS" as being just, regardless of the societal consequences.

The Debate Strategies That Are At Play

I have concluded that when the cultural radicals that support the upending of societal tradition effectively put the "Judeo-Christian cultural underpinning" to our society on trial and force it into a government court of law they are effective at confining the arguments into one of RIGHTS.   

The supporters of the multi- millennial  Judeo-Christian culture are then asked to prove to the judge how such a radical change will negative impact society and why a minority class would be harmed over this continued "discrimination".

Their two strong points with the debate tactics of the cultural radicals are:
  1. Putting the traditionalists on trial and forcing them to justify their position
  2. Make reference to the notion of "discrimination" as a point of evil that society should try to rid itself of
Though they attempt to make discrimination into a pejorative the truth is that no civilized society could exist without some preference for one class of behaviors and norms while they suppress another class of them.    This is not about "discrimination" but instead an attempt to edit this list of permitted behavior and society's acceptance of it.  

By putting those who seek to protect the traditional definition of marriage on trial by forcing them to prove that allowing gay marriage would cause societal harm they doing little more than executing upon a larger strategy that was in place all along.   As I read various progressive media artifacts I note how frequently they attack the "oppression" that is associated with the paternalistic, homophobic, class-centered culture that we reside in.  Though this is the cultural theory that allowed us to build up the most powerful nation in the world, while including the acknowledged grand mistakes that were made along the way - they have no particular interest in considering how their own point interests impact the balance of our culture.   That which was once thought to be "settled cultural norms" are always under assault.  

The cultural radical has largely been placed inside of a cultural system that was precast for them.  Compare this to various dysfunctional societies where two groups of people with the misfortune of living on the same land mass are always on the brink of war.   The task of building up certain cultural constructs that allow these people to unify as a nation is a far greater task than one involving the disassembly of a culture that is full of strictures.

I have listened to several debates and newspaper journalists (Michael Kinsely). When faced with having to justify the unraveling of any particular standard for marriage (and thus open the door up to polygamy or even self-marriage for those who masturbate - yes I heard this in a college debate) they dig a deeper hole which should give us all pause.

Just as author and anti-Evolution theorist Ben Stein suggests (greatly paraphrased)- "Don't waste your time debating with a person who believes that man and the universe were made by a series of accidents.  Having yielded to this position - nothing that he accepts as a cultural position has any supreme  consequences.   We are all "accidents after all".   I am forced to agree with this observation.

Ironically despite the long history on the crackdown of Polygamy among the Mormons from more than 100 years ago - we now find that the Mormons did not violate any particular moral order.  They merely did not have the POPULAR WILL and the judicial operatives planted in the appropriate place at the time to have their way.

I would love to see the results of the next big polygamy prosecution going forward.


If you listen to a single Black female who is seeking a Black male parter for a committed relationship under the bond of marriage they will often detail the slim pickings that are presented to them with a list that contains these following items:
  • Many Black men are already married
  • Many Black men are gay
  • Black men get educated, make money and get a White woman
  • Too many Black men are incarcerated 

These women who are seeking to settle down with a life partner who happens to be ensnared in one of these categories are simply out of luck.   While a man that is married in a heterosexual relationship - in the context of our culture of monogamous heterosexual marriage is simply one who "got away" these other categories have a strong elements of societal policies which have allowed these issues to fester.

In watching a "Scared Straight" program today a prison guard told a young female who was heading down the wrong track that while only "25% of the females going into prison are lesbians, up to 75% practice this lifestyle upon departure".   In the male prison population there is a similar acquiescence to the confined conditions that they suffer from.  Clearly there is some component of choice involved in this lifestyle.   If I as a heterosexual male am asked to commit to a monogamous heterosexual relationship and deny myself from other options out of the sake of societal and familial stability then most certainly the same imposition can be made for the male who is physically equipped as I am (until evolution kicks in) to forge his desires to receive sexual stimulation via a male partner and instead seek to direct his efforts toward the culturally traditional heterosexual relationship.

The consequences of our disruption of the standard that has endured for thousands of years are already being expressed.   The proof of "conservative Republican divorce rates in the South" is not evidence of the failure of this cultural reference.  This is only used in the "American political domain" against one's enemy but it fails to justify the abandonment of this time tested order.

If nothing else - We all had better get clear on what we believe and work hard to express it amongst our loved ones who we most care for.  As time inches forward various forces are going to appear and will strip away many of the norms we take for granted today.

It will be shown to be the case that what you believe in your heart as justice and proper order need not be accepted by these others or society as a whole for them to be true.   Those who are lost in this world care not for any observable truth let alone are they concerned about the disorder that they will welcome in.


Anonymous said...

Don't agree! Society is evolution! BTW, the rest of your blog.

Constructive Feedback said...

The Greeks and Incas figured they were "evolving" as well.

Darryl said...

And the remnants of their culture remains with us today.

“If government tolerates discrimination against anyone for any reason, it becomes an excuse for the public to do exactly the same thing.” ---Republican Mayor of San Diego Jerry Sanders, after the Prop 8 trial

Constructive Feedback said...


The word DISCRIMINATION is a ruse.

There is no CIVILIZED SOCIETY that does not discriminate as it prefers and enforces certain norms.

The only thing that you are arguing (aside from using the word as a negative reference) is to have the list of frowned upon behaviors EDITED.

You can't logically tell us why Polygamy, child marriage and other practices around the world should be prohibited. This culture's enforcement of "16 years" as the age of consent is an arbitrary reference just the same.

I choose to retain the cultural references that have worked for over 2000 years.

Anonymous said...

typical black rhetoric...

Constructive Feedback said...

[quote] typical black rhetoric...

I never knew there was such a thing.

Is there a thing called "Typical Hispanic rhetoric"?