The Black Male Renaissance: What Happens When Contempt and Hate Speech Creates a Movement

What's good, people? Welcome back to the Onyx Report. Black masculine news from the day. Hope everybody's well. Like, share, subscribe, join, donate, hit the hype, support the show so we can continue to bring you these independent blackmail thoughts.

Now, as, uh, as does happen, uh, organically, I like to start with another session of the #sacredblackmasculine. And this is basically when brothers are out there doing things that they often aren't credited for and somehow doesn't seem to come up when everybody wants to talk about how, you know, dangerous and problematic black men are. These are the kind of instances they like to ignore. And shout out to Jez for sending me this. But let's check it out.

>> Who fell into the ocean off a cruise ship? Wow.

>> How she fell in the water? My daughter.

>> Oh, he helped somebody. Somebody else fell. Oh, it was an older lady.

>> A, it was a man. Good one.

All right. Shout out to that good brother who, uh, saved somebody. You know what I mean? Those are the kind of things that we just, you know, we don't often get to hear about. But like I always say, this is not new. This is what black men are. This is who black men are. And we've never stopped doing these kind of kind of things in general. You know what I mean? But sometimes you need evidence of it because the stereotypes and the conversation around those stereotypes can become so thick that it's easy to believe. Especially when you're talking about people who've either been programmed to deeply engage those stereotypes as reality, and unfortunately, that sometimes includes us, or you talk about those who have been paid and financed to promote these stereotypical ideas. So sometimes you need evidence, and even brothers need evidence sometimes to to find out that we are not what people talk about us as, how people describe us. In the sense that, you know, any human group of people are on a spectrum of problematic to great, and black men, if anything, have demonstrated everything within the human spectrum quite demonstrably. Unfortunately, the positive end of it gets swept under the rug far too often. So that's why I do the #sacredblackmasculine because I like to point out the realities about black male life beyond stereotype. So again, shout out to that brother.

Now, I want to say today we are talking about the black male renaissance. What happens when contempt and hate speech creates a movement? Now, I'm not going to go in depth on the Renaissance because this is something I'm still meditating on. You know, shout out to cousin T. I did an episode of his show and he kind of introduced me to the concept, and in as much as I've been a part of it, I hadn't really meditated on it as a renaissance in terms of what black men are engaging in. This moment that we've been having for the last decade that has been building and growing where black men are starting to take stock in who they are, and they're starting to push back against a, a number of demographics that are invested in undermining black male as a group. And so in this moment, not only am I seeing black men push back, develop a vocabulary to articulate their own experiences, but also developing solutions to the problems that we're having. You know, whether they are far-fetched and, and, and rooted in things we can't control, or they are up close and near and are definitely within our ability to control, black men are developing solutions to their issues across the board. And we talk about those on the show. That we are in network with other, uh, content creators that talk about these very things for a reason. All right. So, there is a kind of renaissance happening, and I think we've been seeing it for some time now, and in fact, it's actually hitting a lot of other people. Some people are inspired by it. This is why the Passport Bros are no longer just black men, you know. Others are intimidated by it, and you can tell that it's, uh, something that either scares them or incenses them because we're not supposed to speak up. We're supposed to shut up and take it.

So, as we delve into some of the examples of what I'm talking about, I just want to first and foremost say, we're going to keep the comments clean in the live show as well, or I should say, in the, in the live broadcast and in the replay comments. We're going to keep the comments, uh, clean. I do not want anybody to refer to anybody in a derogatory fashion, and I want to be clear about that.

Now, I'm going to play a number of examples of hate speech that come out of the black male gay community. Now, this is not an indictment of all black men who are gay. I have gay male, gay black male listeners. To me, as long as you, you know, are, you can recognize what's going on and you're willing to contribute to developing solutions in good faith, I have no problem with that. You know what I'm saying? I'm not attacking anybody in regard to that. But I do take issue with some of the people that I'm going to broadcast, uh, today. And I take issue with some of their, uh, misandrous, anti-black, misandrous comments. You know, some of which I believe, uh, is hate speech. I'm going to call that out, and I'm unapologetic in that. I had a, I had a gay brother in the comment section a few weeks ago ask me why I even mention sexuality. And I want to be clear about it. It's not because I'm waging war on LGBTs in the black community or otherwise. But when you have people that identify straight black men and call them out as a problem simply because they exist, I got to, I got to respond to that. I got to respond to that. And to me, if you're over here silencing the response and you're not dealing with the statements made, I'm looking at you sideways. There's no reason black men should have to take, you know, insult from anybody. And if they're not going to take it from their mothers and their sisters and their wives, and, you know, if they're not going to take it from them, they damn sure shouldn't be taking it from nobody else, including black LGBTs. So, we're going to be, uh, professional in how we respond. We're going to, we're going to address the point of what's being said, and we're going to keep it there. Okay.

Um, now this first one is not dealing with that directly. We'll get to that in a second. This first one is more so dealing with a man who I believe is kind of succumbing to the gyocracy, right? And in so doing is kind of, uh, promoting an idea that the gonocracy wants to promote. An idea that reinforces the notion that black men are lesser beings. Check it out.

>> [ __ ] I'm a combat veteran. I'm a [ __ ] mixed martial artist. I'm undefeated and I'll be anybody's ass you put in front of me, bro. And I'm telling you, I'm tired of masculinity. I'm tired. It's always men. I'm not worried about no woman molesting my children. That happens. But I'm way more afraid of what a man is going to do. Legitimately.

Now, I want to say, in the first clip of the #sacredblackmasculine clip, did you notice that almost everybody on that platform who was out there trying to help the person that fell into the ocean were men? I'm just curious, and I want some of you guys to sound off in the comments section when you see clips from around the world where there's devastation, there's tragedy, there's, you know, whatever it may be. It may be a tornado, a tidal wave, a war, whatever it may be. Now, we're quick to say men are the ones who engage in warfare. And that's true. But we don't ever acknowledge that the majority of the people who end up doing that labor, helping people on the ground, not only in terms of emergency services like firemen and ambulance folk, but even just everyday men who are out there helping people who are hurt or lost or whatever. You ever notice that when you look at the video for a lot of that, it's overwhelmingly male, and nobody ever says anything about that? See, I talked about this in the last show. When it comes to men, we are quick to see the negative and we are quick to ignore the positive. And we act like it doesn't exist. So, even when he says, "It's always the men." Yeah. Well, it's always the men that I seem to see out there helping people too when [ __ ] goes left. Is there any acknowledgement for that? Yeah. Go back and look at the clip if you didn't see it, you didn't pay attention to it, and look at the brother who's, you know, trying to save the person that fell in the water, and count how many men you see on the platform, and they're not standing around on their phone. They're not crying. They're not waiting for the police to show up, who are all, you know, usually male, and on top of that, right? These are these appear to be everyday men who are in conversation with each other while in action, trying to, trying to figure out how to help. And, and, and if you've been in those scenarios, you know what it is. Men are shouting ideas. They're kind of coming up with alternatives. They're saying that this isn't working. They're critiquing things, but it's all for the sake of accomplishing a certain goal, which in that moment is usually helping somebody, and they never get credit for it. That's the thing that gets me. We are so quick. And this is the programming we get in the West, most particularly. The programming that suggests that that men, and black men in particular, are nothing but monsters and engage in warfare and rape and they don't care. But when you look at the statistics, it tends to throw things on its head. This is the thing. It tends to throw things on its head. Everything we thought we knew about deadbeat dads and rape and sexual assault and, you know what I mean? It, all of these different areas. The data is, it usually upends the stereotypes, particularly about, about black men. But you hear certain people reinforce them over and over again. Now, I don't have a problem. If you have a problem with masculinity, as a man, then that's your thing. Do you know, you do with it as you would. But I noticed when he says, "It's always the men." I'm like, "Yeah, okay, fine. It's always the men." But when there's help that's needed on the ground, isn't it always the men? Y'all tell me what y'all see. That's what I see. But, uh, I'll let them continue.

>> Fed the [ __ ] up. Women are better leaders than us. And it is studies shown on that [ __ ]. When women lead, people are happier. I think men should keep their roles in society, cuz that's beneficial to family values. But when it comes to nurturing a society, we [ __ ] suck cuz our egos get involved. We want to dominate. I don't know who this man is, but I will keep coming back to social media for rants like these. No notes. And it really illustrates to me the difference between the patriarchy and matriarchy. When we talk about bringing down the patriarchy, I don't know of any woman that wants to control a man's body. I just want you to stop controlling mine. I just want your boot off my.

Okay. So, when it comes to, uh, providing sperm when you want to reproduce, whether he wants to or not, is that controlling a man's body? When you want him to go to war when you feel under threat, is that controlling a man's body? When you want to put him in prison because you didn't like how he made you feel or you felt intimidated or scared, is that controlling a man's body? There's all kinds of ways we could talk about control, but just because men and women don't enact the same behavior doesn't mean that one, one gender is better than the other. Women can be quite devious, exploitive, manipulative, controlling, and violent. And I'm not saying that they're monsters. I'm simply saying as human beings, we possess the capacity for everything we can imagine. From graciousness to, I mean, you know, the worst possible behavior that a human being can possess. Everybody's capable of that. In the West, we've created this unrealistic dichotomy where women are still perfect angels and men are monsters. And yet, if you scratch the surface, you can generally find that the same behavioral patterns exist in both. At best, there might be a difference in display. You know, men tend to be direct. You know, like if you take, if you talk about, like, uh, intimate partner violence, men tend to be direct and they tend to use their own hands. Women tend to be indirect. Usually will initiate violence by using an item or a weapon. You know, we'll, we'll talk a lot to incite the violence, knowing full well in this culture that when violence is, is considered, we only start with physical violence. But we don't talk about psychological and emotional manipulation. We don't talk about any of that, which are areas that women tend to indulge in before the first blow is thrown. And, and statistically, she's the one to throw it first, whether she's throwing an item, using an item like, you know, a baseball bat, a broom, a vase, it doesn't matter what it is, some scissors, a knife. And I've showed you case after case on this show that women will initiate that violence. But the clock doesn't often start until a man responds to her violence, and that's where they get the audacity and the entitlement to sit up here and talk about, "I just don't want men to hurt me." No, y'all, y'all participated on equal terms. You know, a lot of the abuse, especially in the black community, is bidirectional. But these people are going off of stereotypes because the stereotypes are comfortable, and they, and as long as they reinforce women's ego, they're okay. And that's another thing I want to talk about. He talked about male ego. And it's interesting to me how many people seem to believe that women don't possess an ego. It's interesting to me. Women are extreme. Women can, it can be extremely, um, uh, what do you call it? Uh, interested in status. Hell, one of you pointed out in the comment section, uh, uh, when I did a post on YouTube the other day about, uh, the women, the nine degrees and no jobs post, and I posted a brother's comment about that piece where he went into some detail about his own experiences dealing with women in terms of degrees and a lack of experience in his field and some of the issues he had with that. And so a lot of you responded to to that piece, and one of you made an interesting statement about women's use of degrees in relation to status, and it was something along the lines of it, you know, it, it's not about getting degrees necessarily that are practically useful. It's about getting degrees for the sake of status and flexing on people, especially men. In the last 40 years, how many times have you heard an educated woman, somebody who got a degree beyond a high school diploma, talk about blue-collar men as if they are something off her shoe because they don't have a college degree, right? How often has that been a thing? How many black men can attest to being treated like dirt if they didn't have college degrees? Even if they were six-figure earners or above, they were often dismissed by a woman who may not have a pot to piss in, but she has a college degree, and she will talk to you like you're the problem, right? A lot of that is rooted in status, and a lot of that status is rooted in ego. But we act as if women don't have ego. Again, we, we only define one side of the dynamic. This is why Dr. Hannah Spear or Spear, I may be mispronouncing her name, but I, I played a clip from hers, uh, psychologist on my show before, but she makes an interesting statement when she starts to talk about, um, uh, what is it? Uh, extremely problematic behavior. What is it called? Being on borderline. That's what she talks about, borderline. But she talks about borderline behavior in women, and she examines how it's presented, how it presents differently, not because women don't have it, but because the definition of it is so closely tied to males that when women don't fit the definition, they go invisible. And we only talk about borderline as it relates to men. But this, and I'm, I'm bringing her up for a reason because there are a lot of different people that have been doing similar kinds of research for years that aren't getting their just due. They're not being acknowledged, but they're pointing out the ways that women engage differently. This is why even when you talk about great, this is why the made to penetrate category had to be created. It is an example of what I'm saying about borderline personality disorder and Dr. Spear. It's basically that women engage in similar behavior, but they do it on their own terms. And as long as society ignores women's terms, then the definition itself will always be related to men. Even the very definition of rape used to be defined all the way up until 2012 from 1930 by the FBI as, as the violation and of a woman's body. And I'm paraphrasing, but that was the very definition. So, how could there be a conversation about whether or not women engage in rape if the very definition only applies to female victimization? But that's what you're seeing in this video, and you're going to hear it more and more in the show, but I'll let her continue. But I just want to put that out there.

>> my neck and I want my children to be safe. Think about women leading. It's not about oppressing men at all. It's mostly about centering children and descentering men. You and I both know that if a woman were leading this country right now, we would not be engaged in war. We would be trying to fund our healthcare system. By the way, check your insurance premiums, cuz they're probably going up. Universal childcare, paid federal leave for postpartum, I don't know, education, things that might improve the birth rates. Don't tell the natalists. Oh, and we'd probably be bringing some pedophiles to justice. That's the difference.

That's the difference. Really? That's what the difference is. I've heard this argument for years. Uh, you know, if, if women were in charge, there wouldn't be any war. There wouldn't be any conflict. Okay? You know, it's a good show. I did a review of it years ago when it was live. It was, uh, based on a comic book. It's called Y: The Last Man. The letter Y and then The Last Man. And it was turned into a TV series, and I, it only went one season, but it was really interesting in the sense that I thought it was going to, you know, the producers were feminists, so I thought it was just going to be another, you know, a show about how perfect the world would be if women ran it. And boy, was I wrong. It, it, they really, I, I'll give them credit. They actually, you know, were pretty honest about what would likely happen if the world were run by women. The show is basically about every male, and I want to say even the animals, you know, all the males die across the entire globe, and it's nothing but women left, nothing but females left. And they show you what actually takes place, and it's really quite interesting. But this, this fairy tale notion that men are the problem, so much so that if you eliminated them, everything would just be gravy, is is absolute [ __ ]. But you still have people that are willing to get up here and talk about that as if it's true because it sounds good. And of course, it's self-aggrandizing, right? It's, it's really a form of arrogance and maybe even narcissism, as much as that word is used in social media. Maybe because it's ridiculous, ridiculously self-serving, right?

But let's get to the question of, uh, hate speech. Now, in this last, uh, few months, there have been a number of gay men that have gone public making statements, most particularly directed at straight men. And those statements have been very much in line with the, uh, black gyocracy. They're very complimentary of women, right? If anything, most of them are political appeals to link with women. And I'm going to show you what I mean. Here we go. Hold on.

>> A trend that you are tired of seeing?

>> Um, I'm tired of seeing men breathe.

>> Why do they keep doing that?

>> I don't know. Like, go away. You're getting on our nerves. We need peace. Go see that lady so you can stop getting on our nerves. God damn it.

>> Are you talking to my ex?

>> Uh, you know, I'm just honestly, I'm talking to the straits. Okay. Not the heterosexuals, but the straits. Okay. Please, please wash your ass. Matter of fact, don't do it. Okay. Get sepsis. Okay. It's natural selection going to take your ass out anyway. So we can actually have peace over in this [ __ ]. Okay? Cuz I'm tired, and I know you're tired.

>> Exhausted.

>> All right. Yeah.

I consider that hate speech, to be honest with you, you know, but that's, that's where it's gotten to, right? These ideas that, uh, they, you know, they go back to the feminist notion that everything would be great if ran by women. What you hear some gay men doing in this instance is shoehorning themselves into that by serving as complimentary figures to women. They, they're supposed to be men that reinforce this idea that women are superior and better in whatever capacity they're talking about at a given point in time. And this is how they go about it to kind of closely adhere to women, to appeal to women, so that there can be an even closer bond. Right? And this is coming from the last few decades where we've seen, you know, via feminization, the ascension of women in key areas where women have taken over certain fields and have decidedly attempted to remove men from those areas. So what you have here is are gay men who are appealing to that process, appealing to that advancement and linking themselves to that. Right? Here's another example. Uh, same gentleman. Uh, this is on the Joe Budden show. Here we go.

>> Heterosexual, that's biology. Straightness, that's a performance.

>> I'm too high for this one.

>> Nice water.

>> Straightness and whiteness, they're sisters. They're constructs.

>> Constructs.

>> It's a label for.

This is such [ __ ]. First of all, this whole question, and this has been popular in grad, in, in universities, and especially graduate school for the last couple, couple decades. There's this idea that because there are social practices, social constructs, as it's referred to, uh, that, that must mean that they're lies. That must mean that they're really not real, and we should get rid of them, right? That, that, and really all they are are practices that people agree to participate in. So, I'll give you an example. Uh, following the law is a social construct, pretty much. That's, that's, you know, following the law, whether it's driving on the street where we agree to stay on the proper side of the street and adhere to the signs and the lights, or whether it's, you know, not engaging in violence and calling the police or the authorities instead. I mean, these are all social constructs. These, but really, the core of a social construct in a society is that it is an agreement. Cuz really, at, in its extension, that's really all a society is. A, it's, it's people agreeing to participate on certain terms, agreeing to obey the law, because if you don't have it, you just have chaos. You just have chaos, and it just becomes the, you know, the strongest survive, and, you know, whoever, whoever doesn't have leverage dies. It, at the end of the day, it's all about an agreement. So, when you talk about social construct, yeah, there are plenty of things that are social constructs. That doesn't necessarily mean that you eliminate them or ignore them. And then there are social constructs that are reinforced by nature, you know. So, this whole question on sexuality, what he's basically saying is that you don't need straightness. It's a social construct. And if you just let things go as they go, things that you would call gay would happen amongst people who don't have any identification whatsoever. It would just happen. You know, that's kind of where they try to go with this argument. Now, overwhelmingly, you, the majority of the population would engage in what we would call typical heterosexual behavior. This is where reproduction comes from. But the idea is that if we just get rid of these notions of heterosexuality and homosexuality, then people would just express themselves. And, and I think what you have many gay men in this context saying is that there would be a lot more gay behavior than not. This is the argument they're making, and subtly trying to suggest that you should just get rid of it and let everybody be gay to whatever degree that they, you know, that they want to be, you know. So, this is what he's kind of low-key arguing, that this whole notion of social construct is, is basically a lie. And if we just get rid of the social construct and act the way we want to act, everything would be great because heterosexuality is akin to whiteness and oppression and exploitation. And I've heard these arguments for decades, and at the end of the day, I go back to an agreement. You know, that's how a society functions. And the truth of the matter is, there are plenty of people that just don't have those urges in that fashion. You know, that doesn't matter. That doesn't mean that somebody's going to not going to interpret them a certain way based on how they dress, how they speak, what they do, so on and so forth. But that doesn't make everybody gay either. But these are the kind of gray areas they like to play in to denigrate men. Men who do not necessarily support or participate in this kind of behavior. Now, that doesn't mean that you got men protesting in the street against all things gay. It doesn't mean you got men chasing gay men down the street and trying to beat them up. It doesn't have to do with any of that. You just got some brothers that just, you know, plenty of brothers that just don't engage in that. They will respect you as a human being and leave it at that. But that doesn't mean they want to participate in what we would call gay behavior. But the, when they can play with these gray areas, that's where they, that's where they think they can push the boundaries and challenge men in particular. And you notice they don't do this with women because women are far more sexually fluid. They're far more sexually fluid. Men generally don't tend to be in the same kind of way. But I'll let them continue.

>> You to perform. Also, when you think about certain boys that are raised, they're not raised how to be decent human beings. They're raised how not to be like girls. They're taught to.

So, now he's conflating the notion of decency with this notion of not being like girls. And this goes back to a very old argument that really all men do, all manhood is, is not womanhood. And this is an argument that I've heard from black feminists and, and black LGBT or black queer, uh, uh, studies, right? This idea that manhood doesn't really have any standards of its own. It doesn't have any values of its own. It's just not being female. And it reinforces this idea that all men want to do is dominate and oppress one another and kill people and, and, and, and get power just to function and exploit others. This is how they define manhood. And that, that, that, that's a choice. That in and of itself is a social construct to choose to look at manhood in this kind of problematic fashion. And follow the trend of seeing men as nothing but being toxic. But that's not true. That's not what manhood is. It isn't about solely not being female or not being you. But at the same time, it isn't. And the qualities of femininity are not necessarily masculine. That doesn't make them problematic in and of themselves. And it doesn't make them inhuman. They can make, they can be quite complimentary in that fashion. But there are all kinds of subtleties involved in that. Look, I'm a single father. Depending on who you talk to, there are things that I may do that some people don't like. Some may even call them feminine. And what do I mean? I give my son a hug and tell him I love him, you know. But is that feminine? Well, that's up for you to decide. But at the end of the day, men do that. Men confess love. Men can talk about emotion, and we can do all of that. But we don't have to emulate women to do it because we actually do do this. But the lines that are being drawn, they're accusing straight men of drawing these lines, and they're not acknowledging their own participation in these very lines that they're talking about. They're reinforcing lines when they question the lines that, that, you know, popular society engages in. And the notion that they're pushing is that men are, are, are inherently toxic, inherently exploitive, inherently violent, and inherently anti-female, simply because they're men.

>> Anyway, hold on.

>> Hate anything that's feminine, anything that's soft. And that, you know, anyone that expresses emotion that is soft. And also that rage and anger are also emotions.

I just gave you an example of an emotion that I've expressed that doesn't have anything to do with rage, right? Or anger. As if men can't express love. And this is the thing. Men have been doing this for since time immemorial. This [ __ ] argument that men are incapable of being emotional is, is, is ridiculous. But here's the thing, they only recognize emotion in terms of how women emote. So if you don't emote like women, you are not emoting as far as they're concerned. And if you speak up about it and draw the line of difference between how men and women tend to emote, the argument is that you hate women and you're fundamentally anti-female. You see how they, they play the fence on both sides in that respect. But it's not true. It's not true. And men don't have to be gay to express themselves in all kinds of different ways because men always have. We express love for each other in all kinds of ways. But we don't necessarily bend the knee and, and, and give fealty to women as the only people who are qualified and capable of expressing emotion. And that's fundamentally what they want. A lot of conditioning that has happened that hasn't allowed, especially us as black men, to just be human beings. You have to perform. Your value is contingent upon what you do versus who you are.

>> I understand that.

>> When you can rest well in yourself, what somebody else does with their private parts ain't stressing you out. You're not trying to perform. That's a heterosexual man. But when you are straight, it's rah rah. I hate women. Moment is over.

This, this, this is a [ __ ] construct onto itself, right? This idea that there's a difference between heterosexual and straight, first of all, that's a fabrication that you put together. But you know what? You rock with that if you so choose. That doesn't exist, you know, in that respect. There are plenty of men that have no problem being straight and don't have to run down the street trying to beat up gay men just because they exist. That's [ __ ]. I, I mean, really, it, it's an unnecessary framework to use to try and denigrate men in these kinds of conversations.

>> Oh, but it doesn't stop there. Let's see it. Let's see it go further.

>> You said something last week that I was like, "Oo, that's really stepping on some toes." You talking about black men. You was like, "If you really want to know what the problem is."

>> Yeah. You was like, "It, it ain't the black women. Let's really talk about the black men and the lack of accountability in that space."

Now, let me stop there before I let him speak. Now, you notice how she set this up? The conversation was already highly complimentary to black women's sensibilities. This is how this conversation is even being setting up. This is self-aggrandizing, right? This is a, this is a woman having a, a black woman having a conversation with a black gay man, gay man, about how black straight men are the problem. So, even in the framing of the conversation, she's already placing black women in a position of, you know, perfection, purity, and just having to deal with these [ __ ] that can't get their [ __ ] together. This is really how it's being approached before he's even said a word, right? Because this is a political alignment between the within the gyocracy, and you have plenty of, you know, LGBT folks in the gyocray. Now, believe it or not, you actually have some LGBT folk that are critical of the gyocray. You have some that are in the massphere, male, female, with various sexual expressions. It, you'd be surprised, right? And some don't announce it publicly because they're worried about being dismissed and, and disrespected or whatever because of popular stereotypes. But you'd be surprised how many folks are critical of all kinds of different philosophies and, and ideologies. But I, I'll let him speak. This is funky denoa.

>> There is

>> Fair use.

>> There is a conversation that needs to be had in house amongst the straight black male collective. It's time. There's a conversation. You know, black women are excelling in so many different areas. They've mobilized. They got their sister thing. They getting their degrees, getting a.

He's talking about the gyocracy, and the gyocracy has been subsidized by white society for generations. So all of this black girl magic that he's referring to as black women's success, and black men just can't get their [ __ ] together. Really, he's talking about a system where women have been advanced on certain terms, you know, and men, black men have been denied. And he's making that, this, this difference in, in advancement, this difference in treatment, a product of, uh, black men just not being capable. Now, this idea that black men need to have a conversation unto themselves that's not about the women. We've been hearing these calls since the 1980s. This is not a new call. And believe it or not, many black men have engaged in that. They've engaged in trying to have these conversations. I, I remember them in the 1980s and '90s trying to have these conversations about what we need to do, what, because what, what the women said were wrong with us, and what we need to correct to make women feel better. I've been hearing about these [ __ ] conversations for decades. The red pill space are men who are having a conversation in many respects on how to address their issues, articulate their concerns, and in certain sectors of it, how to improve as men, but not necessarily by taking their cues from women or black queer folk, actually determining for themselves what values they want to uphold. Right? This is part of an evolution of a discourse in the black community that's been going on for decades now. A lot of people want to dismiss that part of the conversation because it doesn't appease the interests of the gyocray. But at the end of the day, that's what this conversation is there.

>> Come on. Come on. Come on. There we go.

>> Together. And there is this, this, this, you know, super toxic masculine push to be alpha males and to be leaders and want to be in charge of everything. And, and I say this with my whole chest. Want to be in charge of so much [ __ ] and want to be the head of the household and want you to, to respect them, and not all brothers, but many. The only thing they got on their damn resume is audacity. That's it. Ain't got [ __ ] else to offer the world but audacity. You know what I'm saying? And that's a real conversation that needs to be had. Y'all mad. The sisters think they all mad cuz they got their degrees. But get yours. Like, what are y'all waiting on? You know what I'm saying? And so that's a real conversation that needs to be had when we start talking.

Well, what about the real conversation that the degrees are not translating into anything substantive? Is that a conversation or no? And that's not a, that's not an attack on people getting degrees. That's not what I'm saying. Degrees can be useful, but they need to be useful. They need to be obtained strategically. And not everybody does that. So this idea that just because black women get degrees, they inherently have their [ __ ] together, and that if you want to get your [ __ ] together, just go get a degree. This is idiotic. That has nothing to do with anything. See, these are talking points that are rooted in misandrist stereotypes, and they've gotten so comfortable doing it that they treat it as truth. You don't hear any statistics being articulated. You don't hear any studies being invoked seriously where they actually present the study and the title and the authors. You don't hear any of that. It's just stereotypes. It's just casual talking points that we've been hearing for decades. That's all this is.

>> talking about issues that maim the black community and, and, and dead weight. The numbers show it ain't the sisters.

>> What numbers?

>> They ain't going to like you. What numbers show what isn't the sisters? What are you talking about? But you notice they don't do that. The numbers show. What do the numbers show? What exactly? What numbers are you looking at exactly?

>> You saying that?

>> I don't give a damn. It ain't the sisters.

>> Well, they say the degrees don't matter.

>> It ain't the gay boys.

>> Yeah. Cuz that that's what that's.

>> It ain't us. It's, it's not us.

>> Yeah.

>> The gay boys. We ain't the ones selling dope.

>> Mhm.

>> We ain't the ones in games. We ain't the ones creating illegitimate children running around, you know, creating broken homes. We ain't the ones battering and beating the women's. We ain't the ones in it. It's not us.

See, but this is where statistics can be, can be valuable in fighting these stereotypes, right? So, he talked about beating the women, but we know according to the data, most abuse is bidirectional. And if you want to look at the demographic with the highest rates of abuse, they're, they're lesbians. Where's that conversation at? You want to have a conversation about deadbeat dads, but the data shows that black men are, are the most attentive and present fathers across race. Where's the conversation at with that? See, I mean, we can challenge these notions with actual data, not stereotypes. But he's referring to stereotypes that I've been hearing since the 1980s. What is it? We're not selling dope. Okay. So, you mean to tell me that black women have never sold dope or have never, uh, engaged the drug dealers in the community? You tell me. Did, was there a social reward given to black men who would dope deal? What is the social reward? The prettiest, most beautiful women in the community. Did they chase the, the drug, the drug dealers? That's the social reward we're talking about. Or did they go after men who had their degrees, who had their lives in order, who had good jobs, who had careers, who had plans set up? Which, which groups of men did you see women go after with with greater zeal? But the interesting thing, I talked about this before when I watched the Bobby Brown story. Uh, it was interesting because they were showing how his mother was selling drugs, and this was only like a few years ago. Uh, I can't remember what year it came out, but it was only a few years ago, right? Some, I want to say it's sometime in the last five or six years, but I remember being amazed because that was one of the first times I ever saw a black woman selling drugs in a movie or even heard about it in a conversation about drugs in the community, cuz women, women are kind of, you know, they're kind of out of that conversation. We only talk about men as if women have no involvement in it. But the community is a constellation of of issues and people and, and things that where folks are doing. Women are definitely involved in the drug movement. I grew up in it. I saw it. And out of respect to key family members, I won't go into detail other than to say I saw women participate in it on their own terms. And you know what else? If you look at child trafficking around the world, you'd be surprised how many women are involved in that as well. So these ideas we have, these manakian ideas that that all men are in one spot, all women are in another, another spot, and it's just these men [ __ ] up the game for everybody, is not true. Human beings are not that simplistic. Even when you want them to be, even when you try to force them to be. And the other thing to be clear about what, in terms of what he's doing here, when he says, "It's not the gay boys," he's trying to make a political alliance with black women to say that those [ __ ] over there are the problem, and I'm over here with you. I'm not one of them. This is what this is. This is what this gesture is. Both gentlemen are doing. They're trying to point the finger elsewhere. It reminds me of Paul Mooney's, uh, comedy when he used to say, you know, "I say, 'Nigga,' you know, a hundred times every day to keep my teeth white." In other words, by pointing the finger over there, I make myself clean, and they are the repository of all things negative and dirty. Just by pointing the finger and making the accusation, I absolve myself of all accountability. Now, I believe that the way he's going about this is far too simplistic. But if I were to apply his logic, I'm like, "Okay, well, who's disseminating HIV to the greatest degrees in the black community? Which group has it to the greatest degree?" Guess what it is? Black MSM. Men who have sex with men. So, I mean, is that the level of analysis that we're going to use? We're just going to point fingers and say, "Well, you know, okay, straight black men, dope deal. Gay black men, pass out HIV." And we're just going to point fingers all around. I mean, that to me is so superficial, and it doesn't really address the issue. Human beings are more complicated than that. But if this is the level of conversation you want to have, there's plenty of ammunition to go around. We can point fingers. I noticed you didn't talk about what your demographic has to contribute to the conversation because you're too busy trying to form this alliance with black women.

>> It's not y'all.

>> It is. Now come to the time that we have a conversation. I have been saying for years on this show that black men need to have a conversation. Black men alone. We have got to figure out what is going on with us. This is not something that black women can help us.

Now, this is interesting. Sometimes he's a part of black men, and sometimes he's not. Sometimes it's, he says it's not us, and it's not black women, and then other times he says, "We have to fix this." So, it's interesting. And just so you're clear, yes, there's a still image on the screen that is not a mistake. I did that on purpose, but let's continue. Uh, okay.

>> With this conversation does not include black women. Black women stand down and stand to the side. Black men need to have a kumbaya amongst themselves. And I'mma niche this out a little more. And.

They already are. Not only have we been doing it since women told us to do it. And, and understand, women told us to do it on their terms. They even gave us their talking points in the 1980s and '90s. This is what all these talk shows were so instrumental in doing. They were disseminating, among other things, their vocabulary. And so when black men would get together and have dialogues about what it meant to be a man, a lot of the time we were doing it right, in the manner that black feminists told us to do it, by first acknowledging ourselves to be the sole problem, and then fixating all the solutions on what we were doing wrong and what we needed to do right by how women define right and wrong. There was no, no need or value in critiquing women. And this is one of the reasons you see such a deluge of, deluge of men speaking up and articulating their issues with.

black women. It's it's dismissed as misogyny, but that's not what it is. It's decades of black women being telling black men that they are above critique. They are above accountability and all the problems exist in black men. You cannot do that for decades and tell men to be quiet and expect that to happen. What you're going to end up with is a is a is a a a breach in pressure where after a while men are going to explode and they are for a while going to hyperfocus on what women do because there's been no conversation about what women have done for decades. Women have been absolved in the black community of any critique without men without blowback where men were, you know, reframed as misogynists. So that you're damn right there are plenty of men that have a lot to say about what women do because we live in the same community. You're talking about men who've been traumatized by women, who've been devastated by the things women have done, who've been dehumanized and objectified by women. You cannot dismiss that, especially when those women are subsidized by the state. So, it's not just that women are doing evil [ __ ] to men sometimes. It's that they're they're able to do it with the support of the state. She can fabricate a charge that doesn't even have to have any evidence simply because she's angry at him. and his whole world can crumble. That's that's devastating. And there's been no accountability for that whatsoever. But we've been told for the longest that not only did those things not happen, but you should shut up about it even if you have evidence because the problem is all the men. That kind of speech men are just not going to tolerate and they stop doing so.

Here we go. >> And it's heterosexual black men. I'mma catch a lot of flack for this, but I'mma say it out loud with my whole chest. Straight black men are the cancer of the black community. That's where it start. >> That's hate speech. As far as I'm concerned, pure hate speech. Pure hate speech. >> And that's where it stops. Ladies, I'm here to tell y'all something. All this [ __ ] that y'all got going on, some of y'all, not all of y'all, with the gays and with the trans, let it go. Your issue is not a trans woman. Your issue is not a punk or not a [ __ ] Your issue is all of our issue. Straight black men. Straight black man.

>> Now, I want you to notice something. He said your issue is not a trans man or I mean a trans woman, you know, not a gay man and it's not a punk or what he's really saying is your issue is not a biological male who's queer. Your issue is not that. Your issue is all with straight men. This is a political um what would you call it? Uh uh invitation. He's trying to extend an olive branch. And he just referred to some of the some black women who are taking issue with some black queers in different contexts. He's trying to address this because there's some there there it's there's rumored that there's a fracturing taking place where some uh some women and some black queer folk and of course there's overlap in those two communities and demographics are are are starting to have some degree of conflict in debate. And so he's trying to reassert this artificial connection between queer the queer community and and black women. Right? artificial in the sense that um you know it's it's it's a construct. It doesn't have to exist to the extent that it exists and people participated in in it. That is what it is. But it's not always the case, right? You want to use the social construct game. It can go it can work both ways. But the point is that he's trying to repair whatever this rift that he's acknowledging by saying, "Look, let's pivot. Let's stop with the conflict between us and point the finger." Allah Paul Paul Mooney at these straight men so that we can absolve ourselves of any culpability or accountability for the issues in the community because it's all them guys over there. That's what this is. This it's it's a political invitation. It's a gesture of union and it's hate speech. It's both because they know that there are many black women that respond and appeal to hate speech about black men. That's what he's doing. are the enemy to the gays. Straight black men are the enemy to the trans. Straight black men are who are causing harm to the girls and the women. That's where it's at. Now, y'all can shoot the messenger. Y'all can call me all type of [ __ ] on the Shade Room and all the other blog sites that's going to pick this up and I'll eat it. But you'll never see a situation where girls and women walking around saying they scared of the gay boys. They scared of their life for the gay boys. They don't want to be around the gay boys. It ain't us going around with these fragile ass egos. Can't take rejection. We've got to ask ourselves. And I don't even know if

>> So, you're saying women can take rejection and don't have egos. So, apparently women and black queer folk have no egos and it's just again those straight black men and they can't take rejection. Really, the majority of black male life, especially as it relates to, you know, uh, pursuing women for all kinds of things, from sex to relationships, is rejection. You actually have to reconcile with rejection early on cuz you're going to get more of it. The majority of who you go after as a man, you're going to get rejected. I mean, Patrice O'Neal used to say it best. He said that the the, you know, when I talk to a woman, you know, the women I get with in my conversation just worked. And I'm paraphrasing, but he said it what I said just worked for you. It didn't work for 10 other women, but it worked for you. It is what it is. It's about as it's about as regular as a car crash. It just it's an accident. Some women it works on, some it doesn't. But the point he's getting at is there's going to be a lot of rejection in that and he just accepts it and keeps it pushing. He says the same thing to each group of women, each woman until it works. But the point is men have had to deal with rejection every day. This is not a new thing. But this idea that men can't handle rejection is interesting, especially when you consider how many women are now being forced to initiate conversations with men because men have withdrawn and pulled back. A lot of it going back to the culture of Me Too, which really comes out of, you know, feminist culture in the first place. So, this is not new. Me too was just another level of it that relied on reputational damage and not as much on policy. See, when it was policy, then you had to get the police involved. You had to get the courts involved and so on and so forth. But what me too did is it opened the door for reputational damage that did not be need to be filtered through any institution other than the media. And that meant that there was no question about evidence. There was no question about due process. You were guilty simply because you were accused. That was the power of me too. It could destroy men's lives and it did not need to submit to an evidentiary process. So what men began to do was withdraw. And so now you have women that are forced to make the first move and many women are seriously take issue with this. They really resent having to be the first to start conversation. This is why Bumble existed because women wanted to uh needed to actually be the ones to initiate conversations because men have been withdrawing. But if you look at what's going on with Bumble, it's not going so well. And you can look at social media and listen to all the women complaining about having to walk across a room and strike up a conversation. There are even plenty of videos about women starting conversations with men and getting rejected, getting outright rejected and not dealing with it very well because they're not used to it. They've taken for granted that men can handle rejection. And by and large, we do. There's only a small percentage of cases where you have an individual who does not take to it well, who doesn't take to rejection well. But because men have been socially expected to initiate conversation with women for generations, of course you're going to have more, especially in terms of what's in the news, more men that don't handle rejection. Well, it's going to appear that way. But when you notice women have to be the ones who initiate conversation, they don't actually handle it very well either. And instead of, you know, act first of all, a very small percentage of men will physically attack a woman that rejected them. That is an infantessimly small group. Now, women don't necessarily do that in that fashion. You know what she might do? She might try and damage your reputation by calling you gay or call the police and falsely accuse you of something you didn't do because she felt rejected. And I've shown cases of that. I've shown video of that and I got a few more to show this week. Anyway, if the black straight male collective can even answer this question because their egos tend to be so fragile. How is it we are raising boys with these fragile ass egos that feel it is okay to slam girls on their head for saying no?

>> What percentage of men what percentage of boys are doing that? Y'all tell me what percentage because if it was a regular occurrence, you would be able to tell me. Oh, 64% of young boys are slamming girls on their head because she said no. Really? It's so rare you can't give me a statistic because it doesn't happen often. It's it's it's a rare occasion or occurrence that's being attributed to all men. Right. All right. Damn it. Come on now. There it is.

>> Why is it that we have to make the females of the community make all the adjustments? It's not fair. Straight black men are the cancer of the black community. Argue with your mammy.

>> All right. So, there you go. These are the kind of conversations that are being had about men and you're seeing the alliance, the attempted uh repair of whatever rift may have developed to whatever extent that it did uh between uh you know the gyocracy in terms of the women in the gyocray and the the black queers in the gyocray. That's what this is. This is political and the attack on black men is a useful tool to misdirection and to a reallocation of of accountability. Something that black women have only had to experience in the last decade where black men have been demanding accountability for their contributions in terms of toxicity in the community because for so long women have been absolved from critique. Right? But I want to point out something else we've talked about on this show as well. And this is uh Dr. James Sedanius who died uh not very long ago, couple years. Shout out to him, James H. Sedanius. And one of his major contributions as a professor of psychology from UCLA is the subordinate male target hypothesis. And one of the things he did with this notion is point out how exactly subordinate males have been attacked. And so what you're seeing with this alliance between subordinate uh uh females and a different demographic of subordinate males in in terms of black queer men. It's an alliance that seeks to advance itself in a society that's predicated on the oppression and dismissal of subordinate males. They seek to advance themselves by highlighting and focusing publicly on denigrating those same subordinate males, particularly the males that white society doesn't like. So the idea is since we are not them and they have all the problems, the more we can point at them and align and ally ourselves with each other as women and queer, we can closely more closely associate with the very same white elite that has problematized subordinate males. But I'll read what's here, right? Subordinate male target hypothesis, SMTH, argues that while women from both dominant and subordinate arbitrary groups, or for example, different races are discriminated against on the basis of gender, women from subordinate arbitrary set groups are generally not directly discriminated against on the basis of their arbitrary group membership. Rather, arbitrary set discrimination is primarily directed against males from subordinate arbitrary sets. More broadly, social dominance theory suggests that arbitrary set discrimination should be regarded as a form of intergroup conflict and a largely maleon-male project. Such conflict is primarily executed by males and primarily targeted against outgroup males rather than outgroup females.

Now, you can apply this in a variety of context beyond race, but because, you know, we deal with black men on this channel, we're going to apply it that way. I just want to be clear that that's not the only way to apply it. based on how uh Dr. Sedani has framed this, but if you're going to apply it to race and gender as we understand it in the black community, what he's saying is the treatment of black males is initiated mostly by white males in a in a white supremacist society as it were. And black women, black females do not experience the same u brunt of racism the way black males do. They're not arrested to the same degree. They're not killed to the same degree. They don't experience the harshness of racial discrimination to the same extent that black males do. And this is documented. If you check his work, he actually gives you plenty of examples, you know, not stereotypes. He gives you documented examples on the extent to which black men experience it differently. Now, what I'm using SMTH here to say is that what you've heard in these last number of clips are queer men who are trying to use the gyocracy as a way to advance themselves as a unit by denigrating the very black males that society already denigrates. This is how you advance yourself. This is how you have you could have, you know, all kinds of groups that look to advance themselves at the expense of black men. And I've seen it in the academy. I've seen it in all kinds of fashions. You know, I remember even as a kid listening to Richard Prior. I remember he did a bit and of course I didn't understand it cuz I was a little kid and my dad had the cassette in the car and he went in the store to get some and he already told me I wasn't allowed to listen to Richard Prior, but I put it in anyway. And Richard Prior had a joke about Vietnamese folks moving to United States learning how to say [ __ ] And I didn't fully get it. And it took years for me to understand it cuz I was a little kid. But the fundamental idea Richard Prior was even talking about back then was that in order for, you know, Vietnamese folks to be considered more American, they had to learn how to identify and call out [ __ ] to differentiate themselves. We go back to Paul Mooney. I say [ __ ] 100 times a day to keep my teeth white. The blame is over there. That's where all the dirt is. I'm clean because I'm pointing at pointing it out. That's what's happening here, right? All they're doing is is attacking subordinate males and aligning themselves with elite society so that they don't have to be held to the same uh discrimination by association. This is why there's so much emphasis on pointing out the difference between black womanness, black queerness, and straight black maleness. The more we point out the difference, the more we don't have to be associated with them. Airgo, we can be considered civilized. But we don't need any statistics to back this up. We just, you know, you feel like saying it, right? So, this is where we go with that. But it's interesting. One of the things you didn't hear them talk about very much were uh studs, lesbians. You didn't hear them talk about that very much. And I'm not saying that there's a grand reason behind it all, but usually when you hear about this conversation about black women and or, you know, and and black queers, it usually centers around exactly what Funky Dava said, women, gay boys, trans women, you know. So, in other words, women and queer biological males. But y'all hear a lot about the studs. And maybe one reason that's happening is be is because studs on one level or another are starting to understand men in a way that we didn't anticipate.

Check this out. >> So y'all just don't trick on studs? >> Ladies to the front, you got some explaining to do. View discretion advised. >> Like we can't get no flowers. You can't pay for no haircut. You can't pay for a rewist. Damn. Ain't no random act of thought around this [ __ ] We just got to provide. Provide. No. Since these fees be acting like we ain't [ __ ] they don't need us. We don't bring no value to their life, man. [ __ ] that. WE GOING ON STRIKE WITH they ass. It's time to go on strike, man. It's time to stop putting up with this [ __ ] >> Good gay women don't mean that they're stupid opportunists. That don't mean we stupid. HOW YOU TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE of me and you got a man that don't even want to take CARE OF THEIR KIDS, but you trying to take advantage of me when I'm free help? You don't take advantage of something that WANTS TO HELP YOU [ __ ] DUMMY. >> Every time we go out, the expectation is that the stud pays what?

>> So ladies, it has been brought to my attention that y'all are pissing off the studs as well. So much so that they're going on strike. Yeah. They say y'all inconsiderate. Y'don't care about nobody but them. Y only want money. Y'all don't have no true substance to y character. Y'all manipulative, abusive. I just showed a lighter video. I didn't even want to get deep into this type of stuff. But because this technically this is stud business and I'm not a stud, but I just found it really ironic because the narrative has always been, oh, it's the men. The men are this horrible. You know what? I ain't never seen a gay man reconsider about going back straight because his dating life as a gay man just isn't going great. The studs are reconsidering. That's how badly it's going with the generation of women today. But according to y'all, y'all the best job women have ever been. This is the best generation of women ever. According to y'all, I beg to differ, but here we are. Some of y'all expect the world and more. But then also don't believe you got to reciprocate that same kind of energy. I I really don't get it. Or there are women that say, "Oh yeah, he got to pay all the bills. He got to do all these things, but if he ever asked me to pay a bill or buy lunch or whatever, he blocked." What? I know they be saying stay out of grown woman's business, but this was just too good to pass up because I would love to see the excuses as to why y'all got the studs going on strike. You know what it takes for a stud to go on strike and these equations? They are your allies. They on your side of the fence here and they saying, "Nah, we can't [ __ ] with them. We cool." Nah, it ain't working out. It's just It's just not worth it. But let y'all tell it, boy, all the men are horrible. All the men are narcissistic. All the men are horrible. They don't know how to date. They don't know how to court women. and they don't know how to do all this extra [ __ ] But you know what? Even with this kind of evidence, I know you ain't going to listen to [ __ ] that I'm saying cuz I'm just a normal guy. Yeah. Keep it changing.

Now, I can say I have heard in the last number of years more and more studs come out talking about their mistreatment at the hands of women. Women who have not traditionally identified themselves as lesbians until very recently. when they've talked about not having the dating options they're looking for and in so doing, right, they've started to talk about uh dating more women. But the problem the studs are having is that they're being treated like heterosexual men, being exploited for their resources, being taken for granted for what they contribute, not being reciprocated to. And this is what you're hearing complaints about. Again, I've been hearing this for some years now. I remember I talked to uh Shay Chararda on her channel about this a few years ago and I remember her being surprised about it and laughing because she had she had not heard how many women how many studs were frustrated about how they were being treated like men taken for granted exploited all of that. You would think you were talking to a woman or a man who had just gone through a 20-year marriage, right? But it was the same talking points. And kind of what you have happening here is some of them are realizing that men's responses are not necessarily because men are just, you know, whatever stereotype you've created. Some of these women are starting to figure out that men's responses are an an adaptation to women's behavior. So the extent to which he may deal with her at from an arms length, the extent to which he may have left her, she only told you why she he she only told you that he left her. you know that they they broke up, he left and it was cold and heart and then you got with her and after a few months you realize she's not actually a very good person. She's exploitive. She takes things for granted. She assumes you. She objectifies you. Maybe the reason her man left were for the very reasons you're having problems with her right now. So in other words, these women, these studs are starting to figure out that men may not be as crazy as they've been presented. And they're actually having some of the same reactions. They're starting to socially withdraw. I've seen studs talking about going back to dating men. I've seen studs talk about going monk. All of those are very similar reactions, aren't they? Because they're starting to figure out that men may not be crazy, you know. But there's also confusion as you heard in the first woman talking about why can't I get flowers too? Well, you know, when you present a very particular type of masculine frame as your as as how you identify, I mean, most of the ones I tend to see on social media look like they stepped out of a rap video from the 1990s. Now, if you're going to present that kind of masculinity, you're going to be treated like a man. That just is what it is, right? So, there's all kinds of problems with that. But at the end of the day, what I find interesting is I generally don't hear anything about trans uh men and uh lesbian women when it comes to these kinds of of arrangements that you're hearing with say funky deniva and black women. You don't hear about them. Why? H I I I actually wrote a paper some years ago and I quoted a woman or no, not a woman. I'm sorry. What was it? Um oh, it was it was a it was a trans man. That's what it was. And I quoted the transman ad that had a real deep long uh interview in a paper. And one of the things that this person said was that they didn't understand how black men's lives were until they had to live them. They talked about the way black men were treated by the police. They talked about the way they had now been treated. So, at first they were biological women presented as such. Excuse the noise as to if you can hear it. It's uh they're practicing for Fourth of July in my neighborhood. So, my apologies for that. But you had these trans men who talked about when they were when they were female presenting, they saw black men at a distance. The more they presented as a masculine, a biological male, they started to get treated differently, not only by police officers and and women in society, right? But, you know, it it that was the thing. It was it was not it was not only by police. It was also by women. They started to notice that they weren't trusted. They started to notice they were being talked to like they were animals and and started to be treated as such arbitrarily being pulled over and given tickets being arrested because they looked like somebody that may have committed a crime. You had a lot and there's actually a film I show in my classes. You had a lot of trans men that started to recognize how different going back to Sedanius how different the treatment was from of black women from black women. I mean, black men from black women. They started to notice these differences. And it's interesting. So now you have lesbians who are getting tired of dating and tired of being getting tired of being taken advantage of by women who exploit them for their maleness. I find that interesting. But either way, black men, I think, in many respects, have grown very tired of this. These kinds of of stereotypical groupings between different demographics, the the throwing of black men under the bus. No matter what we do, no matter how well we do it, it's a constant reframing to talking points that go back to the 1980s. I think a lot of black men are tired of it. But in so being tired, I think Cousin Tall has a point. I did a long interview with him on his show like a little over a week and a half ago, I think, and he he had a good point about this black male renaissance that's happening right now. It's more than black men just going monk. It's more than passport bros. There's a a building celebration of black men among black men and boys that's slowly starting to happen and and we're seeing elements of it in terms of of of combating misandry in society and in the black community online and in person. But I think we're also seeing black men starting to celebrate who they are. And I'm definitely seeing it online and I'm all for it. I'm highly supportive of it, but I think that's what's happening right now. But give me your thoughts. Let me know what you think about this. Uh, contribute to it. Remember, keep everything respectful in the comments section, but make your arguments and, um, you know, apply a story, apply data, wherever you see it relevant. I look forward to reading them. Holl at y'all later. Peace.