“I note that my enemies have written a great deal about me, yet they rarely quote me directly. Why not? If I am so disreputable myself, I must at least occasionally say disreputable things. Is it possible that what I say is more cogent than they like to admit?”
- Joe Sobran (*winks at Zek*)
It would appear that since my recent posting on the matter, quite a few
White Knight Syndrome: A personality characteristic found in most males that lead them to: 1. rush to the aid of any female they see who appears in any form of distress. 2. Become attracted to said damsel in distress. 3. Follow the dying code of chivalry and generally act like a nice guy. Also called young man's disease. -Urban Dictionary.com
people’s feathers have been ruffled, and have taken it upon themselves to “respond” to your correspondent’s humble writings. I welcome the attention!-let a thousand flowers bloom, and all that.
Sadly though, the critiqes, if one can call them that, leave a great deal to be desired. For one thing, they don’t actually take up what I said, or misquote me, or they launch into purely personal attacks that have nothing to do with the matter at hand. But then, Ad Hominem has always been the last refuge of scoundrels.
Interestingly, not one, but TWO White Knights – literally – have stepped into the squared circle to defend the honor of the Swirling Sistahood. One of them regular readers of my missives will know quite well, Chuck Ross; the other, a new blogging voice to these parts, one Zek Jevets (the latter is the BF of one of my subjects of my piece, one Ms. Jasmin).
Gentlemen, I see the charges you have levelled against me, and will answer them!
Shall we dance?
Let’s take Mr. Ross’s missive first. Here’s the opening salvo of his Oct 6, 2010 post, “Anger Over Something New”:
“It seems that Obsidian is increasingly agitated by the “Something New” craze that seems to be encroaching on his lek of black women. He’s tried every manner of invalidating the relationship choices of black women – especially insofar as the chosen are white men.
I find this funny given that Obsidian is the one blogger who repeats the mantra that one sex has no say over what the other sex finds attractive. But when black women start choosing white men his inner psychoanalyst comes out as if to imply that there is something wrong with black women who choose white men (my interests lie in dispelling the corollary implied there that there is something wrong with the white men chosen).”
And here’s Mr. Jevets’ opening argument, taken from his Oct 5, 2010 (were these guys in contact with each other or something – notice the calendar dates) post, entitled “Balls Deep to Epic Fail: Swirl Hate”:
“Well, allow me to link the offending post which attempts to utilize my girlfriend (among others, including myself, indirectly) in a condescendingly offensive way to make a blanket statement about something which has nothing to do with the author, but does manage to be sexist, racist, and ignorant. That is, the idea that Black women who swirl are settling for Plan B and hating on Black men because of it.”
Um-hmm.
Please note that both Men have gotten it all twisted – I haven’t said anything of the sort. Here’s what I actually said on the matter:
“At any rate, Ms. Jasmine’s blog seems to center around IR dating and marriage, and I have no problem with that – if you believe in what America stands for – and I do – then you support the idea, indeed the Right, of Freedom of Association. I fully support and defend a Woman’s right to choose whom she will allow into her bed and heart.”
Now folks, I’ll tell you something – the other day’s post was an excellent study in just how peoples’ minds work. Not only did I say the above in the initial post I wrote on the matter, BUT I CAME BACK AND PUT IT IN BOLD LETTERING in my “remixed” version, just for emphasis – and STILL, people like Ross and Jevets, to say nothing of their readers and commenters, get it all twisted. But then we all know the old saying: no good deed goes unpunished, right?
Let’s examine a bit more of what these gentlemen are saying here…
For one thing I am NOT impugning all Black Women who “swirl” – and I thought the title of my post speaks to this. It says “To Swirl With ANGER” – not just to simply “swirl”. As I said above, I have no problem with whoever a Sista decides to get with. That’s her right.
What I WAS TALKING ABOUT is a trend I’ve noticed in more recent years, where the shopworn “Niggas (read: Black Men) ain’t shit” mantra, has been taken on by a segment of the Sista Swirling crowd. Indeed, such drive by pieces are done in one way or another all the time, and this is what I was talking about when I linked to Ms. Jasmin’s post. But wait, there’s more!-here’s another post that’s making the rounds of the blogosphere, in case you haven’t heard.
All I’m asking is – if these Sistas are so happy with the mates they’ve chosen, why the need to even address Black Men at all? I mean, what’s the point? And what’s with the seething undercurrent of anger under it all?
This is something neither Ross nor Jevets addresses. Hmm.
What both gentlemen do however, is greatly distort what I actually said, toss all manner of strawmen arguments and red herrings onto the table, and/or launch into wholly irrelevant personal attacks – the latter of which, is a surefire sign, that you have indeed, won the argument.
How so, you may ask? Easy – Jevets attempts to discredit the whole of my argument based on the tagline at the top of my blog, and then attempts to discredit the two sources I referenced in my piece; Ross attempts to discredit my thesis by introducing factors that I never discussed (for example, his parting shot here - what’s that all about? LOL).
(It should be also said that both Jevets and one of his readers, a recent commenter here named “Natasha” seem to engage in a bit of hypocrisy themeselves – both hold themselves out as the standard bearers and apostles of logic and reason, but have no problem in the least stooping to the lowest forms of Ad Hominem that I’ve seen in quite some time. Sad – if they tried really hard, they would be able to come up with some cogent counterarguments.)
Simply put, it is not “sexist” or “racist” to merely observe, and openly state, that in the American Mind, Black Women in toto, do not represent the standard of beauty and attendant status that comes along with it – and of those relatively few that do indeed qualify, they tend to look a lot closer to Vanessa Williams than Venus Williams. This was what Sailer and the Psychology Today articles were talking about, and we have massive amounts of evidence that supports this thesis, from the “Black doll/White doll” and picture studies, to even Black music videos themselves. Sure, we can rail on and on about “sexism” and “racism” all we like, but in the end it doesnt change one bit of what I said in this regard, based on the two articles above:
“As hardly needs mentioning at this point, Black Women in America are in a unique, to say the least, position in the sexual marketplace (SMP); simply put, their “market appeal” is limited. Sure, we can all think up notable exceptions to this rule: Dihann Carroll, Earth Kitt, Rashida Jones, Stacy Dash, Halle Berry – but by and large, these Women are just that – exceptional. They’re NOT the everyday average, rank and file Sista you see on the block on the regular. For that set, getting with a White guy is more like “Plan B” – in a word, settling.
And we all know what “settling” means for a Woman, regardless of color. Now don’t we?
The reason for these Sistas’ irateness is because of one, the fact that they weren’t able to attract the Men of their choice – Black Men – two, they had to more or less settle for guys they could get, which were White guys, and thirdly, many of these Sistas are quite envious of the fact that Black Men, even everyday ordinary ones, have more “appeal” in the SMP. This is documented – for every Sista who “swirls”, there are easily 3 to 5 times as many Brothas who can play that same game.”
And I posit that they play a role in the current discussion, writ large and overall. Now of course, these two fine gentlemen are free to disagree with me, and even to personally attack me. But I find it interesting that neither has actually debunked what I said, on the same rational grounds that they claim I don’t have a leg to stand on.
The sexual market place is real. And in said place, there are indeed clear winners and losers. It is not a stretch to point out who they are, as painful that may be, in aggregate – indeed, when it comes to Black Women, all the media and books, shows and specials, plays and movies devoted to them on this topic alone, is all the proof anyone needs on this score.
Moreover, please note that I never once, interjected a personal opinion on the matter, and only a few days after post my “swirl article” put up a fairly extensive post detailing what I personally find beautiful in Women, the majority of whom were Black. No one could say, after taking a look at said post, that I was somehow the White Man’s Manchurian Candidate – clearly, my tastes in Women are quite outside the American (read: White) mainstream. That said however, I am not blind to the realities of this world either; there’s a “there” there, and it does no one, especially most Sistas, any good at all, to pretend otherwise.
I could go on, but I’ll leave it to my readers to hash it all out for themselves. The personal attacks, strawmen arguments and wild-pitch style misquotes of my words and positions, really do speak for themselves in these two gentlemen’s posts. Even if everything they (and/or their readers: Hi Natasha!) say is true, it STILL doesn’t address the points made in my post, particularly what I quoted above and the sources I cited. Nor does it address the many hit pieces out there on the part of Something New advocates, who seem to delight in putting Brothas as a whole down, in a deeply misguided effort to lift their own selves up.
It’s all a Fool’s Errand, if you ask me.
But, I hand it off to you all – what do you think?
Comment & reply, holla…
The Obsidian’s iPod is now playing: “Take It Personal” by Gang Starr
The Obsidian
PS: You can see Mr. Jevets and my comments here and here, respectively, on my previous “To Swirl With Anger” post…
