In keeping with our ongoing discussion
(and debate) on Prof. Ralph Richard Banks' book "Is Marriage For White People"
, I thought to focus this part of the discussion on what I call "The Dragnet Aspect"
- so named after a longtime O-Files reader and commenter Dragnet.
His comments on the original post were in my view worthy of focus and discussion here; but before we get to that, let's discuss a bit about the Man himself, shall we?
For those who may not know, Dragnet is that elusive Brotha so much of these kinds of discussions are based on - he's Ivy League-educated, White Collar gainfully employed, tall and handsome (and, while it isn't mentioned by the Blue Pills of the world like Banks, Dragnet has a formidable degree of GAME to boot) and single. Therefore, I think what he has to say about these topics, holds considerable weight.
Let's go to his comments now, shall we?
DRAGNET: Banks writes that black women marrying out will put pressure on black men to "man up". What he's basically saying is that the actions black women take can influence the behavior of black men.
OBSIDIAN: Indeed he is; and it is this, among a great many other points, that I intend to thoroughly dismantle in due course when I actually address Banks' argument head-on. Stay tuned...
D: But black men have been arguing this point for the longest time, except we've been getting called misogynsts when we do it. It's obvious that a lot black men don't care about college because too many black women want to fuck thugs and rappers, and that if black women would stop dating thugs and dealers that young black boys would start getting jobs and degrees with a quickness.
"Just recently, an article published in the Wall Street Journal by Dr. Ralph Richard Banks has created sort of a buzz among the various so called “Black Women Empowerment” fanatics as well as a bit of unease between some of them. One of the main ones embracing this article is Christelyn Karazin.
The premise of the article is the idea that if black women ‘date out’ more, it could/would motivate black men to improve in order to compete with the added competition. It’s an interesting premise because historically, this basic premise has been one that the BWE group has repeatedly shunned on the basis that it places responsibility on black women for shaping the behavior of black men.
But lo and behold, when the idea of black men’s behavior being influenced by black women involves black women dating and marrying non-black men, it is acceptable. It really goes to show how much BWE/IR bloggers are agenda driven.
Consider that for years, black men have pointed out and complained about the disproportionately strong trend of black women seeking relationships with bad boys. It has long been argued that this trend heavily influences the behavior of black men and has been supported through research under the theory of sexual selection. Even the dreaded Satoshi Kanazawa touched on this:
“In reality, however, women do often say no to men. (In my experience, they
always do.) This is why men throughout history have had to conquer foreign
lands, win battles and wars, compose symphonies, author books, write sonnets,
paint portraits and cathedral ceilings, make scientific discoveries, play in
rock bands, and write new computer software, in order to impress women so that
they will agree to have sex with them. There would be no civilization, no art,
no literature, no music, no Beatles, no Microsoft, if sex and mating were a male
choice. Men have built (and destroyed) civilizations in order to impress women
so that they might say yes. Women are the reason men do everything.”
“If every Black woman got together and said, "We're not gonna date guys unless
they have PhDs. We're not gonna date guys unless they have a Master’s [degree].”
Guess what? In due time, n****s will stop selling dope and they'll start going
He was attacked relentlessly for this statement. Such a statement has been repeated over and over by black men criticizing black women for routinely sexually rewarding bad behavior, yet black women’s response has overwhelmingly been critical indicating that this notion places responsibility on black women. Yet, as we see with Karazin and others like her, if this basic idea is expressed in a way that promotes black women dating and marrying non-black men, it is quite acceptable. There are more than enough quality black men out there to put pressure on trifling black men to clean up their acts, yet this will never happen until these quality black men begin getting the attention that they deserve."
Of course, Rocky was attacked for making the same point Dragnet makes in the last Banks post. Yet another vote for NOT trying to convince Women about things they both know not and have no desire to know about. Right?
But the truth is, what it is: Women are the gatekeepers to sex, folks. Barring rape, which is and has been, on the decline in a big way over the years, Women determine who gets lucky, and who doesn't. It's really as simple as that.
Now, unlike others in the Manosphere, I'm not gonna oversell the idea that all Women hookup with cads, thugs, rappers, gangbangers, losers, slackers and the like, because I know for a fact that this isn't true. But I've also been around long enough to know that there IS a goodly bit of truth to what Rocky, Dragnet and so many other guys are saying here. Moreover, as far as I am concerned, I am completely good with whoever Women choose to allow into their bed. I just want them to take full responsibility for it, whatever that may be.
More on this later, keep reading...
D: It's interesting that black women don't mind taking responsibility when doing so would enable them to, in theory, marry white men. But when taking responsibility would mean they'd have to take up with (Black) betas, all of sudden they can't be held responsible in any way for the behavior of black men.
Tru dat - in fact, Rocky
puts an even finer point on the matter by saying the following, taken from the same "Wall Street Journal Fix"
"The next flaw is the discovery that the white men that black women marry are on average less educated than the black men that black women marry. Thus, the so-called competition would not be based on personal quality, but instead entirely on race and since no black man can change his race, such added competition would be meaningless. It’s much like the high level of marrying out done by Asian women. Asian American men have outdone white men socially and economically for decades, yet Asian women still marry out at a higher rate than any other group of women. Asian women simply want white men, period and the ONLY thing that Asian men could do to compete is to become white, which is impossible."
Need I say more?
Back to the D-Man:
DRAGNET: (Responding to a quote of mine): "Dragnet isnt saying that these women are chasing after thugs etc NOW; hes saying that while younger they wasted a lot of that time going after cads instead of getting w/the more stable brothas around."
Yes absolutely---but my critique is even more fundamental than that. I'm saying that it's hypocritical to believe that black women's dating behavior can only influence the actions of black men when they're encouraged to date white men, and not when they're encouraged to date decent black men (ie, beta Black males). Good black men have been saying that if women only dated degreed brothas, the losers and thugs would get to college with the quickness...only to be shouted down for saying this places the responsibility for black mens' actions on black women. However, when presented with the notion that black women can change black male behavior by dating white guys, all of a sudden black women are now quite accepting of their power to influence the behavior of black men.
It's really just another example of how females just aren't into betas---and Banks (guided by his gynocentrism) has now lent the sheen of academic scholarship to this hypergamy.
O: Dragnet hits on a number of very important points here. For one thing, he directly calls BS on the (BWE Sistas) thinking that Black Women can't influence the actions of Black Men, unless White Men are involved - a clear and present case of Hypergamy in action, since White Men remain the most socially, economically and politically attractive Men in the country. Personally, I can live with that, and here again I find myself standing apart from most of the denizens of the Manosphere - look, telling a Woman to get with a guy who has ZERO sexual attraction going for him, is like the Angry Feminazis telling Men to get with Women because of their minds. Assuming said minds were airtight logic and reasonwise, the reality is that Men need more than that in order to get them interested. Simply put, for both sexes, NOTHING HAPPENS IF THERE IS NO SEXUAL ATTRACTION. Merely being good mate material isn't enough, and that's true again, for either sex.
Of course, Dragnet highlights the major issue gumming up the works here: that Women have far more responsibility for the role they play in the Mating Dance that they're willing to let on or own up to, and that it's up to us Men to continually point this out to them.
That's the whole point of my original Banks post to begin with: to note that in the end, the Spinster Sistas find themselves in the spot they're in, in large part due to a series of life decisions they've made that have inherent tradeoffs in them, among them being, reduced chances for dating and mating.
Extended years of schooling and the like (among other things, like inherent behavioral traits that are inherent with being born on the right end of the Bell Curve
) tends to be inversely correlated with marriage and childbearing for the female.
Oh, and for those who doubt what I just said, consider the words of the world's longest running Prime Minister
, Lee Kuan Yew
of the island nation Singapore
, who set out to use the power of the state
to rectify such problems:
"On the night of 14 August 1983, I dropped a bombshell in my annual National Day Rally address. Live on both our television channels, with maximum viewership, I said it was stupid for our graduate men to choose less-educated and less-intelligent wives if they wanted their children to do as well as they had done. . . . It had taken me some time to see the obvious, that talent is a country’s most precious asset. . . .
The implications were grave. Our best women were not reproducing themselves because men who were their education equals did not want to marry them. . . .
This lopsided marriage and procreation pattern could not be allowed to remain unmentioned and unchecked. . . .
I quoted studies of identical twins done in Minnesota in the 1980s which showed that these twins were similar in so many respects. Although they had been brought up separately and in different countries, about 80 percent of their vocabulary, IQ, habits, likes and dislikes in food and friends, and other character and personality traits were identical."
I'll be discussing Singapore and its very unique history and situation it finds itself in very soon, but for purposes of this discussion, I cite it to blunt the howls on the part of the BWE cultists
and the like, that their situation is so very unusual; it is not.
There now exists in our midst a section of Women who are Spinsters
, and for reasons that are a combination of nature and nuture - with the latter being purely of their own volition.
The only thing that remains now is for them to shut up and get on with the business of enjoying their lives as they have fashioned them.
I'll hold here; comment and reply, invited!
Now adjourn your asses...