Mac Diva has the second of two posts on the topic. Good analysis.
And I also see Janine at startle the echoes had a reaction to Mac's first post that I'd like to address:
I did find an informative post examining the bus ads themselves. P6 linked to MacDiva who researched and found good information about the background and politics of the organization that put out the ads.I hope folks aren't mixing the issue with the messenger by intimating that if you think there's a problem in this country with black fathers being absent from their children's lives and you support addressing that problem then you're supporting the bus ads and the organization that sponsors them.
Speaking for myself, I can tell you that that's not the case. Does the fact that the right wing is attempting to use this issue for its own purposes negate the validity of the issue itself? Not in this household! I hope we're not going to spend all our time and energy focusing on bus ads instead of looking directly at the crises faced by millions of black families. (Not just black families, btw, but that's where I'm focusing my attention.)
Like I said in my first post, it's a hot mess we're dealing with here.
First of all, I think it's pretty obvious that there are marketing techniques that creep into your head while you ain't looking. I once worked with this really nice mature (consciously choosing the Politically Correct terminology) woman who told me that she didn't drink beer, ever. Didn't like the taste. Yet on a really hot summer day, those beer ads make her really thirsty and curious. And most people don't consciously notice the sexual imagery in ads though they seem to respond to it. So when a high-profile campaign targeting Black people emerges you damn skippy I want to know who's behind it and what their motivation is. Based on what's coming out about this crew, they should be specifically disallowed any input into the discussion.
That, of course, means I think there should be a discussion.
I don't think acting out a specific ritual is what bonds a couple. I think their bond validates the ritual rather than the other way around. So I'm pro-commitment, pro enlightened self interest, and if your view of things is such that you must undergo the ritual to be that way, fine…but don't riff on folks that work it out without the ritual. The stats say some 50% of single mothers have never been married, but mere inspection shows that the number of single mothers with no men in their children's lives is nowhere near that high. As Mac says:
Nor is there any recognition that many of the women are in committed relationships, often involving cohabitation. They may not 'have papers on a man,' but a man is present in the home. Of equal importance, some of those women made rational decisions to give birth based on their economic status, physical and mental health and desire to have the experience of parenthood. If one has any respect for women as autonomous human beings, one has to grant them the right to make the decision to reproduce for themselves.
And there's also this to consider:
| Births Out Of Wedlock, 1950-1992 | |||
| Year | Black | White | Black multiple |
| 1950 | 16.8% | 1.7% | 9.9 |
| 1960 | 21.6% | 2.3% | 9.4 |
| 1970 | 37.6% | 5.7% | 6.6 |
| 1980 | 56.4% | 9.3% | 6.1 |
| 1992 | 68.3% | 18.5% | 3.7% |
This comes from Two Nations by Prof. Andrew Hacker. Notice that the ratio of Black to White Out Of Wedlock Births is decreasing, while the absolute number of each is increasing.
This all suggests something is going on that affects Americans across the board, that it's affecting white folks more than Black folks, but that Black folks (having less headroom) is hitting the crisis point first. Just a suggestion, but since it's in keeping with my understanding that there's really only one kind of human irrespective of one's social in-group, I run with it. You may disagree…I'm just stating my position for possible future reference. At any rate there are two questions this raises: what is causing this, and how to react to it.
No answers here yet.
Posted by P6 at June 10, 2004 10:45 AM
Trackback URL: http://www.niggerati.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2230
Comments
Black men and Women will always bump heads on the having children situation, but who is right? Women get pregnant and say I want to have this child...okay, but what if the man says I don't think that would be a good idea? There's the problem women! The future can be seen right before your eyes, and it's not hard to understand. Many women have a problem with abortion, which is really understandable, but the choice is yours. There are many guys out there who feel this...I didn't want to have a child so Ms. Thang or Thangs are on their own. Now who is really affected by the choice? The woman, and the child, because the man has took the stance of see you later. Having a child is very hard so the best way to stop all the non-sense is wrap it up ladies. Women are trying to force black men to be fathers who told them from the start...NOT GONNA HAPPEN. The woman can answer in to ways...either okay see you later, or I will get child support on you. Either way, the child will still get hurt, because their dad is not around. Now it's up to mommy to find a black father figure for their child. The whole situation is very sad, but it all could have been avoided.
To conclude, Black men and women, I feel both should be held accountable for the decline in the black family. Black men for having sex without protection, and women for not really seeing the whole picture within the child's future. I would provide some numbers, but I think I will stop here. Peace & Love to everyone!
please send me information of Black absent fathers please. I need documentation for a paper for school
Posted by amber at July 28, 2004 04:22 PM