You can now see why I tend to get riled at some of "our people". Here is a pic from a video clip featuring our beloved editress, her husband and their kids at Disneyland. I am not going to display the kids or embed the video here as it is improper to rant over pics of other people's children on account of annoyance at their parent. Clicking on the pic will send you to the clip at Youtube.
This is why I get angry. Here you are having an enjoyable time as a mother of the traditional family with parents of the opposite sex then you go on some show featuring some gay host and label it as a construct, that construct. Do you consider your family to be a construct, that construct? Is what you have something your female peers, young and old, cannot and should not realistically aspire to because it is a construct, that construct?
Granted that our fatherly star from our favourite family show may have been drugging his dates to get some hands-on obstetrics experience for his role as the future Dr Huxtable, but that did not and does not negate the value of the Cosby Show. In that interview she and Don Lemmon stated when growing up they knew families like the Huxtables, families who were the Huxtables. So why do you turn around and label it as a construct? The world is full of flawed heroes. Show me a hero, and I will show you someone who had a lot of flaws in their time which were not made public, because it was inconvenient or not helpful for the social morale, so why turn the Cosby issue into an attack on the Black family?
Now getting back to why we should settle for families of two gay dads and single mother/parent family.
Is there some affliction within the community which is resulting in many men turning gay?
Is it on account of high levels of imprisonment, or high levels of unemployment that are resulting in family breakdown, that women should settle for single parent families?
If women are in single parent families is it by deliberate choice, choosing to be single, wittingly and consciously choosing to have children of wedlock, or it because of breakdowns in relationships?
From what I hear there are packs of feral gay men roaming the streets and parks of Atlanta, terrorizing God fearing heterosexual people and demoralizing young religious women who seek male partners to form families with. Perhaps young women of today have so many of their potential marriage partners turning gay that they should not realistically aspire to the kind of family that you have.
This is the problem I have. It seems that over the last 20 years so a schism has developed between males and females of the current generations. Now you are a race, a community which has been in America for the last 400 years, probably a lot longer, and have a history going back to the beginning of time. Why should the situation of the current generations, set the tone of relationships within the community for posterity? Instead of taking a deeper long term view and realizing that this contemporary state is nothing more than a blip in the existence of a people that has had thousands of years together in the past and has thousands of years ahead of it in the future, you seem to throw in the towel and insist that we should be open to non-traditional alternatives. Do you consider yourself to be wildly lucky to have the kind of family you have, that you had the luck of the draw?
You are a mother of four, and I am sure you wish to see all your children in heterosexual marriages in the future. Are you happy to see your daughter as a single mother, and your sons as the parents of families of gay dads? I am sure you don't, you want them to have the same kind of family that you have, so who are the ones who are expected to settle for single parent families or families of homosexual parents? You have to look to forming the conditions in which your children and grandchildren are going to develop in.
Your responsibility is to ensure that the conditions which have brought about the divisions in the current generation don't affect the upcoming generations. Your responsibility is to ensure that right from their kindergarten years, the images and attitudes which have caused this divisions are cut out of their lives, that on growing up they are more committed to each other, than the current adult generation seem to be. Whatever social, moral or endocrine dysfunction which is resulting in homosexuality developing in young males needs to be looked into. The persistent, sensationalist, dysfunctional and degenerate antics in black owned media needs to be cut out.
And there is apparent pandemic of so many men marrying white women, which must be a factor in this state of affairs.
I could run on and on, but does this interest in alternative family options have something to do with the presence of JP Morgan on your board? I am seriously suspicious of any company in which JP Morgan has an interest, especially one owned by African Americans.
Is that the JP Morgan which is one of the “great vampire squids wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming their blood funnels into anything that smells like money.”?
Is that the JP Morgan which earns a penny on every transaction made with those Social Security purchase cards made famous by one Mr Ghetto, which so many of members of your community depend on?
Is that the JP Morgan which is a major shareholder in the private prisons business, which is considered responsible for sponsoring legislation that has so many black people in prison today and continues to profit from their incarceration? Could they have a ongoing profit making-interest in the continued and long term incarceration of men has the effect of shrinking the available pool of eligible black men, and could that be the reason why we should celebrate single mother families and families of two gay dads?
Is that the JP Morgan which was a major player in "ninja" mortgage backed securities scandal which so many black people got caught in? Since there is apparently no money in Ebony, or is there, what interest does JP Morgan have in it?
Apparently what they earn or lose from their investment in your publication, they earn many time over from your target audience. It must be to exercise some influence on editorial policy, such as conditioning the younger upcoming generation to settle for alternative relationships and lifestyles which were not even conceivable for their parents generation, let alone witting choices.
Does that entail going on some talk show or news segment and describing your kind of family as a construct?
Lady, you ought to speak more responsibly and have more commitment and faith in the ability of your race to attain their ideals, both in the near-term future and in the long term as well, not to pander to a Marxist, counter-culture agenda promoted by white socialist ideologues, apparently on account of the minority within your race whose feelings may be hurt by the unashamed and uncompromisng assertion of our ideals.
Then there is the slight matter of how Ebony Magazine's Youtube channel, at the time of writing this article, just short of 2 years, has managed to acquire the astonishing sum of 263 subscribers and 9,429 views. I don't know about Facebook, but it looks like in this internet era, some executives are not keeping their eyes on the ball. But then that warrants an entire blog post in itself. Stay tuned.