Black women don’t give head, and other lessons learned from Essence at mixed media watch

Black women don’t give head, and other lessons learned from Essence

CVK
essence (Thanks to Geraly for this tip!) The June 2006 issue of Essence magazine featured an article titled “Looking for Mr. White,” based on the results of a survey the magazine did, polling their readers about attitudes towards interracial relationships. You can read the article in its entirety here.

Sounds like Essence was surprised by what they found. About 45% of the respondents said they’d been involved in an interracial relationship, and 70% said they’d been asked out by a white guy. Also, 81% said they weren’t fazed when they saw a black woman with a white man.

But this being Essence, the article had to quickly steer the subject towards that other kind of interracial relationship: black men with white women. About 53% of readers said they disapproved of black men dating white women.

And from there the article just disintegrates into the same mess of tired stereotypes we see over and over and over and over again… Let’s count them down, shall we?

1. All interracial relationships are black and white

Apart from a passing mention from a guy talking about having “Black friends who date White women. Asian and Latino…,” this article only discusses relationships between black men and women, and white men and women.

2. Successful black men prefer non-black women

“Yeah, we’re cool with Halle switching from marrying Black men to dating Gabriel Aubry, a White model. But Kobe, Tiger, Terrence and Taye? Hmmm.”

more after the jump…

3. Black men can’t handle a “strong” black woman

“‘In general, it’s less of a power struggle to date White men,’ says Leah, the New York City artist. ‘Black men can trip when women challenge them.’”

4. White women have no standards

“Richard, the marketing specialist, sees the reverse. ‘White women are a little more accepting of your shortcomings’–be it job, income, education or status, he says.”

5. White people don’t get stuff about black people’s hair and skin

“…some Black women, for example, having to explain why they won’t have sex in the shower. (Who wants to stress about water getting under that shower cap?)”"Joel, 33, from Philadelphia is Black and says he’ll never forget waking up with a White woman he’d slept with for the first time. ‘She asked me, ‘What’s that on your hands?” he recalls, as she pointed to the white flakes between his fingers. ‘It was ash. She had never seen ash before.’

6. White women give head but black women don’t

“Lamarr, 30, an attorney in L.A., insists there are sexual benefits to interracial dating: ‘White women are much more accommodating. There’s a saying, What a Black woman won’t do for you, a White woman will.’ He says he recently had one sister tell him, ‘Look, I’m Black. I’m not going to be giving head like the White girls do.’”

7. White men are awesome in bed

“And what about White men in bed? ‘The earth moved. He was very good,’ says Lynn, 39, from Chester County, Pennsylvania, where she notes there are many Black women dating White men. Years ago she became one of them out of curiosity and was pleasantly surprised.”

If these stereotypes seem familiar, it might be because they are trotted out in literally every single article about black-white interracial relationships. Also, practically every single one of these stereotypes was featured in that spectacularly bad episode Oprah did on interracial relationships. Oh, but Essence forgot one: the one about how white people can’t dance? Whew! Good thing Oprah covered that one.

If you’re interested in more on how the media perpetuates endless stereotypes about interracial relationships, check out our article Media Reflects Society’s Ambivalence Toward Interracial Relationships and video clips from our New Demographic workshop, Not Just Fetishists and Race Traitors: Challenging the Ways We Look At Interracial Relationships.

Trackbacks & Pings

Mixed Media Watch - tracking media representations of mixed people on 17 Jul 2006 at 10:33 am

[…] MIXED MEDIA WATCH NEWS UPDATE Jen discusses several recent news items: a controversial Sony PSP ad released in the Netherlands, the potential HBO comedy series that may arise from Angela Nissel’s Mixed: My Life in Black and White, and a recent Essence magazine article chock-full of stereotypes about interracial relationships. […]
ATR 32 - July 17, 2006 - Voicemail 206-203-3983 - addictedtorace@gmail.com at Addicted to Race on 05 Aug 2006 at 11:11 am

[…] MIXED MEDIA WATCH NEWS UPDATE Jen discusses several recent news items: a controversial Sony PSP ad released in the Netherlands, the potential HBO comedy series that may arise from Angela Nissel’s Mixed: My Life in Black and White, and a recent Essence magazine article chock-full of stereotypes about interracial relationships. […]

Comments

bertie wrote:

I have mixed feelings even responding to this because I feel that as blacks, we spend an inordinate amount of time talking about interracial dating/marriage–and to add insult to injury, not only do we talk about it too much, we follow the exact same script every time (ie; black women are too loyal to brothas and need to date white men (why only white men I don’t know), there are too few dateable/marriageable black men, all black professional men date white women, white girls are easy, black men are players/dogs, white men are loving, loyal and compassionate, black women are demanding, overbearing, etc. etc, blah, blah, blah, bleeck). Its pretty clear that Essence was playing to its market (black women)-and thats why black-white couples are the exclusive focus, and why all the negative stereotypes (black men can’t handle strong black women, white women are easy/give head) are attributed to the black males/white females–whereas no negatives are attributed to black women (can’t bite the hand that feeds you) and white males are praised as good in bed as black men. (damn..of all the stereotypes about black men that need debunking they had to start with that one….lol). It seems like in this particular case Essence is wearing a certain agenda on its sleeve. Its sad that the choice to connect with someone of an opposite race always has to be justified by the percieved short-comings of the opposite sex within your own race.

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 5:03 pm ¶
the joy princess wrote:

I’m so used to this same simplistic and boring magazine-y script that I don’t think I would recognize a refreshing story about interracial relationships if someone even wrote one, LOL.

A lot of articles start out nuanced and sharp but get watered down by heavy handed editors. That’s women’s magazines for ya!

The reality though is that — unless those quotes were made up — people obviously still believe and buy into it. Essence didn’t have to make this up. They just had to find folks willing to go on the record. The script is still real for a lot of people apparently.

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 5:13 pm ¶
brad wrote:

“Aargh!” as Charlie Brown would say, I am so sick of “Essence” and “Ebony” continuing with this poor black woman schtick. It’s so sexist and racist to continue to bemoan the unavailability of “good” black African American men or how successful African American men only go Caucasian women. Instead of helping women to build better self-worth and understand that they are limiting their dating pool because of unreasonable standards or rejection of men of other ethnicities, these types of articles are destructive and serve no point.

On the one hand, statistics show that the majority of African-Americans are not in interracial relationships. So, where are all of the successful African-American men? Clearly, the majority are not with women of other races. So, this line of poisonous talk should be sent to the nearest biohazard waste facility.

And, the bilateral conversation of race, does nothing but to continue to play into old, supposedly taboo relationships. Let’s be real. There’s nothing new about Caucasian men dating or marrying or copulating with African-American women as history records. Why not do something novel like profile African-American women married to Asians, Indians, Native Americans, or Latinos? Since the majority of African-Americans have Native American ancestry, wouldn’t that be a significant opportunity to discuss what that should also mean for African-Americans and their ties to the U.S.?

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 5:23 pm ¶
gatamala wrote:

blecchh

It’s Essence, I guess I shouldn’t expect more…

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 6:08 pm ¶
eric wrote:

SNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOZE

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 6:35 pm ¶
Charlette wrote:

what a dump!

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 7:45 pm ¶
joe wrote:

you people are crazy if it where not for interracial relationships lighter skined people/mulattos would not even be here.
how you people think light skinned people got here in thr frist place they did not come off the slave ships they came threw race mixing.

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 8:35 pm ¶
brad wrote:

Joe:
Huh? Are you talking to us, the posters

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 8:38 pm ¶
brad wrote:

Huh? Of course people on this site understand that lighter skinned African-Americans result mostly from interracial marriage? This is a mixed-race site!

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 8:41 pm ¶
marcel wrote:

I’m with you totally brad.

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 8:59 pm ¶
Bohemian Writer wrote:

I am so sick of the f*ckin stereotype that black women don’t give head, where in the cosmos did this come from?

Oh yeah & about Essence, I boycotted them about 6 years ago or so…

Posted 10 Jul 2006 at 10:24 pm ¶
Merq wrote:

bertie… that post killed it!

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 12:12 am ¶
mr guy wrote:

“Joel, 33, from Philadelphia is Black and says he’ll never forget waking up with a White woman he’d slept with for the first time. ‘She asked me, ‘What’s that on your hands?’’ he recalls, as she pointed to the white flakes between his fingers. ‘It was ash. She had never seen ash before.’”

BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA!!!!!!THAT ONE IS GREAT!

Gotta love essense though.I have not read my sister’s for years now, this kind of stuff sounds familar.Looks like they never changed.Even an article about black women in IR relationships can become about black men and white women lol.And I thought of the same thing too.It’s always about white people when it comes to IR relationships.

And they almost always stereotype (both positively and negatively) the living hell out of white women, white men, black men, but not black women.Which honestly makes sense since it IS a black (mainly straight since they give a bone to lesbian and bisexual black women once in a while) female magazine.Like bertie said, can’t bite the hand that feeds you.Plus how many black male magazine will throw around negative steretypes about black men?Ugh, must we have to have such screwed up views of each other and who we date??

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 12:58 am ¶
S wrote:

Man, I have been out of the Ebony & Essence era for so long that I can’t even relate to some of the comments. I boycotted those magazines about 8 years ago, when, at the time, seemed like the only advice they had for black women was to CHANGE. Obviously, they worded it in a way which prevented the mag’s from going under, given that they still exist.

But month after month the message was clear: “Almost everything about you is wrong. Here is what people (mostly black men) are saying about black women, and here’s what you should do to CHANGE it: You’re hoping for a good man who takes care of his children and can keep a good job-but those standards are too high. You need to CHANGE & lower them. You don’t smile from ear to ear 24 hrs per day like Sarah and Christy, so you need to CHANGE. White men don’t like you because you are loud, so CHANGE and be quiet. Your hair is nappy, here is a perm so you can CHANGE it. Your hair is too short, here is the top-of-the-line weave brand so you can CHANGE it. Black women are obese, here are 3002 steps to CHANGE, and slim down like Amy.

I truly must have missed the “blackman bash” articles. Not that those are any better.

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 8:37 am ¶
site admin wrote:

I’m really amazed that Essence gets away with stereotyping its own readers/community to this degree. If there was a magazine for Asian-American women that talked about how white girls are lousy in bed because unlike Asian women, they weren’t trained from birth in ancient Asian sex secrets, I and every other Asian woman I know would be outraged. –CVK

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 10:20 am ¶
Stephanie B. wrote:

I agree. This stuff is old and is one of the reasons why I don’t buy the magazine since 2003.

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 10:53 am ¶
bertie wrote:

CVK—but see–thats just it–they’ve stereotyped everybody BUT their core audience. Their narrative is essentially: black men have issues, white women are sluts, and white guys are dateless/unmarried black women’s salvation. For an article supposedly about black women’s views/experiences in interracial relationships, they’re is remarkably little said about black women–its all about BM, WW, and WMs. Its clear Essence is trying to jump on the “new” trend of black female-white male relationships–they’ll probably reference Halle Berry, Heather Headley, Kerri Washington etc as being on the forefront of this “new” movement (ignoring the fact of course that Diane Carroll, Tina Turner, Diana Ross, Eartha Kitt have participated in this “new” trend for decades). This article has nothing new to say about an old topic. The funniest part is the writer’s suprise that so many black women have dated interracially–I think they must have really bought into the myth that most black women will refuse to go to dinner and show with a nice guy they’re attracted to because he’s…du du dunnnnnnn….WHITE!!!!!! So, if there is any silver lining in this article–its the debunking of the myth that black women are dateless because of their refusal to date other races in some blind show of solidarity to the troubled black man.

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 11:05 am ¶
site admin wrote:

Hey Bertie,

I see what you’re saying, but Essence *is* stereotyping black women as sexual prudes (no head), and pretty much implicitly agreeing with the statement that since white women have no standards, that must mean black women only date rich men and hence, are materialistic golddiggers. They’re not coming right out and saying it, it’s all kind of implied by the quotes they chose for this article. –CVK

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 11:18 am ¶
gatamala wrote:

thanks Carmen for spelling that out!! Essence *implies* the goldigging theme all the damn time. I wondered if some of the articles were merely typed by a woman .

I think the inordinate amount of time devoted to white men is because those relations evoke certain thoughts/feelings that have long, painful roots. Relationships w/ other men I guess don’t “count”.

The essence of their message to Black women is (1) like S said, change (2) the focus on white men (as if there are no other options) seems to be a me too/revenge sort of thing, (3) date the bus driver/janitor. If you don’t date/love/marry/fuck him you’re selfish and materialistic and won’t give a brutha a chance!

There has got to be a logorithm to express the number of ways that this rag can say the same thing. Any mathematicians out there??

Finally, I’m tired of the white-girl-will-do-what-you-won’t (for what it says about both sides)! [deep breath as I put myself out there] It’s simply not true that Black women won’t go down on you! a betamax is a betamax color be damned!!! ;)

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 12:42 pm ¶
Gandalf Mantooth wrote:

I dunno, been sneaking peaks at me mums’ Essence mags for years, though I have not been a reader for a long time. However, this doesn’t look much different than what I would have seen (cough) years ago. The magazine was seen as a kind of aspirational thing, like Robb Report, and it was inspirational, this is where Oprah got her schtick (as if Barbra Walters were voicing Essence edicts). I don’t know if it has an agenda (even unintentionally) as much as it is saying what its loyal subcribers expect to read. Where we see golddigging, they see people who want a better lot in life. Where we see a trifflin brotha stereotype, they see their sister’s ex-husband. We see prudes, they see “standards.”

It’s not simply a black women’s mag, but the mag of middle class black women. I’ll leave the implications out there.

Don’t really know where all the “change” stuff comes from S, maybe I was just too young to see it that way, however, even with what you describe, howzit different from Cosmo or whatever?

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 2:46 pm ¶
S wrote:

Well, when Cosmo features articles suggesting “change”, it is more for the current trend’s sake. It usually deals with fashion and fitness. It doen’t usually mention all the things people hate about white women, and a million steps to improve it. And I’ve never seen it put down other races DIRECTLY, just to hype it’s own. They don’t need to.

And it’s pathetic to put white women down in an article that’s supossed to be about BW. The so-called “strong black women” shouldn’t have to do that. Personally, I think most of the stereotypes about white women work to their advantage, and SOME black women really are jealous of that, whether they want to admit it or not.

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 4:21 pm ¶
the joy princess wrote:

Dayum, ya’ll are gonna make me have to defend Essence up in here, lol!

A lot of people on here have said they haven’t looked at the mag in a long time, lol. Good of you to admit that because I have kept up with it and I can tell you the mag has smartened up considerably. It’s had its peaks and valleys and I reread the article again and it really isn’t that sharp - so I can’t defend that, LOL. I do recall sighing after I read it, thinking they can do better than this?

But as others have said, there is a formula. Women’s magazines are mainly service books, selling how to get a better life. They have upwards of 1 million readers, with a higher pass-along rate. Women apparently like being told they are flawed, knowing that if they open up the magazine they can find 7 ways to be the ‘queen of self-esteem.’ LOL

I venture to say that they keep using the same IR script because it works, lol. And because it is such a time-worn script that particular discussion is never going to be cutting edge nor particularly intellectually insightful, unfortunately.

But I must say that within it’s same boundaries, Essence has been offering up things I never thought would be on their radar. They’ve got a new EIC and I think some things will be changing.

I’m about to be hypocritical and say it’s a mistake to think you know Essence based on this one article though.

They have done articles on black women and men who’ve dated interracially, beyond just white men/women. I don’t think Essence is shocked about that. There are women who’ve been on staff and who write for Essence that are in IRs of all kinds. I think they focus on white men and women because those are considered the most polarizing, there’s still beef there, if you will — unresolved “issues.” lol They also feature positive relationships between black couples as well.

And as for the sex, they regularly talk about oral sex, different positions, and sex toys, etc.

As for the trifling brother stereotype? Umm, yeah, that’s far too real for many women. But I also see the celebration of black men. Essence has expanded their perspective in the mag, almost too much maybe, LOL. Reminds me of all the criticism Alice Walker got for The Color Purple. I forget brothers can be so delicate sometimes, lol.

I see the critique of black women, but I also see the belief in our inherent beauty and worthiness and a desire for us to do better and live better lives. Again, I say this because I know and have met people who work there.

Lord knows I have critiqued and lambasted my fair share, but the reason why I defend Essence and maintain my subscription (even though Bitch: Feminist Response to Popular Culture is more my intellectual speed) is because it’s one of the few media properties where black women count and nobody else!!!

I don’t get my self esteem from Essence, but I’m glad it exists. I quit reading Vogue and other white women’s magazines (except Oprah’s) because like George Bush, they don’t care about black people, lol, specifically black women. So screw them!

I love opening up Essence’s pages and seeing beautiful sisters of all skin tones and hair types in its fashion layouts. I love the fact that I can see Mo’Nique on the cover. I love the fact that they do articles on what’s going on with young black women. I love the fact that black women get to be expert article sources in a way that they don’t in white women’s magazines. I love the fictive kinship they espouse.

Anyways, I’m going to direct my friends to the site to check out everyone’s comments so they can get another perspective from folks who don’t read the magazine or no longer read it, lol.

– excuse any typos!

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 5:11 pm ¶
Adrianna wrote:

I hate that freaking article it started it well then went to hell with the” black women get pissed off when they see” thier black men ” with white women. Essence is Ignorant. Even if some black women did feel this way, Essence make it seem like all black women are freaking desparate creatures for black me. They make it seem as if black men are supposed to be some kind of property.

Posted 11 Jul 2006 at 7:24 pm ¶
Gandalph Mantooth wrote:

“I forget brothers can be so delicate sometimes”

I’m not following you.

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 12:50 am ¶
the joy princess wrote:

Gandalph, it was a jokey joke. Don’t you remember the Alice Walker hullabaloo?

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 10:45 am ¶
mr guy wrote:

Well, it’s good to hear they improved.I’ll take your word for it joy princess.

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 12:06 pm ¶
the joy princess wrote:

Thanks, Mr. Guy.

Improved is definitely the key word, LOL!

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 7:48 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:

Esscence which used to be a great black magazine (and one of the best magazines in the U.S. period) until they latched onto the BF/WM Black men on the DL and every Rich black superstar is chasing WW (So I quess the Miami Heat and their all shades of Black Wives will never convince them) during the parade a couple of weeks ago (even Jason Williams is hooked up with a sista) Is one of the reasons I don’t read black magazines anymore (I stopped reading Ebony in the late 80’s when they went throught the same themes) I want a magazine that empowers Black Americans, 36 years of gret articles down the crapper in the last two years.

If this country wants natural IR articles like “All Black Men are having sex with each other to the R.Kelly single” or “Go get dat White Boy girlfriend these nigras ain’t no damn good” IS NOT GOING TO ACHIEVE THOSE ENDS. Maybe… and I am just saying MAYBE…. If you educated all people in their schools without sterotyping “do black women “give head”, Or Do white women love sex in the park” Or my personal favorite “Are Black Men really hung” (I don’t know about 18 million other brothas) Maybe If those professional sistas who edit the Magazine would actually say “You know maybe we need to just let things happen in the “NATURAL FLOW OF LIKE”

I am just saying…..

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 7:49 pm ¶
Kaonashi wrote:

LOL@ Essence articles. I stopped reading them years ago, when they had another IR article that ended with “The good news is that MOST Black women do not date out of their race.” They also seem to give multiracial individuals a hard shake as well.

Does anyone remember Honey Magazine? The editor was a woman who USED to work for Essence, and a great lil mag it was. Too bad the publishing company went bankrupt.

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 8:15 pm ¶
Gandalph Mantooth wrote:

Joy p:
I remember it well. Guess I don’t get it . . .

No face:
Miyazaki fan? Or just mysterious?

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 9:38 pm ¶
Pip wrote:

I am a black woman. i give head. I love black men, white men…..all MEN. Can we just live and forget the B.S. Stereotypes.

Posted 12 Jul 2006 at 10:26 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:

Why don’t people ask the editors of Esscene why did they giveup their leagacy as one of the best magazines in the buisness to do it’s every other month IR stihick about Black Men and Black Women hating each other because it sells magazines to…

1. Bitter Black Women (who want them to consider IR) but as “payback” to seeing some black “dis” them at some banquet

Posted 13 Jul 2006 at 11:32 am ¶
Stefanie wrote:

I love your posts, eric daniels, because they are…

1. witty
2. concise
3. reminicent of Late Night with David Letterman

Seriously, no matter their content, the format of your posts always makes me smile somehow.

Anyway, I wish we saw more in the media to conterbalance this kind of garbage from essence. It may be the pessimist in me, but it seems that for every one good, honest, non-harmful, non-stereotypical portrayal of IR relationships, there are ten like the essence piece. It’s frustrating to think that people probably see me and my husband together and think that either…

1. I’m with him for his penis size
2. He’s with me ’cause I’ll give head
3. He can’t “handle” black woman
4. He hates himself/ his race
5. I’ll pay his bills (I think of this every time I happen to pick up the check)
6. I have no standards and will tolorate foolishness on his part

Maybe these are true of some couples but they don’t have anything to do with us. What about love, people?

Posted 13 Jul 2006 at 3:30 pm ¶
Shanda wrote:

I am not sure why the original writer questioned the “sterotype” that sucessful Black men date white women. It has been statistically proven time and time again. Now, I would add in that figure all other race women (not just white to make it most accurate) because the truth is sucessful (well educated & higher SES Black men) do dispportionantely date (and marry) more non-Black women that Black women. That is a fact… now I am not saying I know the Why to that question but it is a reality, from research I have done in undergrad and research I have continued to keep a breast of.

Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 10:14 am ¶
Shanda wrote:

Brad:
While it is true the majority of Black men aren’t married to other races (the reality also is the majority of Black men aren’t married PERIOD) but the ones of higher SEs are more likely to be married and also, more likely to be married to non-Black women. To me to argue with the facts is pointless… we know but refuse to accpet the facts.. but the question what if anything can we do about it?

Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 10:17 am ¶
bertie wrote:

Hey Shanda–your logic seems to conflict with its self. If the higher SE black men are more likely to be married–and the overwhelming majority of married black men are married to black women (90 something percent according to the last census)–then how is it a FACT that the higher the SE the more likely a black man is to marry outside his race. When you say more likely–what do you mean?–more likely compared to who? Not more likely compared to other black married men since 90% are married to black women. Your logic seems inherently contradictory.

Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 12:31 pm ¶
Shanda wrote:

Bertie- Please tell me where you see that 90 something percent of Black men are married… heck I have never seen a % rate that high for any group in the US.

Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 8:12 pm ¶
Shanda wrote:

Bertie I misread… I will have to go pull research and come back with hard #’s.

Just a side note… marriage doesn’t always paint the whole picture… did you know in Califonia that there were more bi-racial/mutli-racial children born with one Black parent than from a Black male/Black female union… so a whole lot of Black men are not with Black women… just a side bar note though… I will come with the proof later =-P

Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 8:18 pm ¶
Shanda wrote:

Just a personal note from real experiance the number of Black men with Higher SES are extremely lower that Black women of the same. Fir example you know that many more Black women go to college than Black men… and the higher you go in education the less you find. In my Graduate program (4 different tracks of about 210-230 students) there was 3 Black males. One gay, one married to a White woman, and only one single (of, course I snatched him up before the other plethora of other women could) but the reality is that as a Black woman you are much more unlikely to find a “equal” match thehigher up you go. My major professor (whom I worked under to study Black female/non-Black male relationships) Gave the same personal accounts (which is how we ended up studying this population in the first place). When she went to get her Ph.D there were 4 Black men in her program 3 maried/dating Non-Black women 1 single… but there were 16 Black women in the program…

Just saying to claim that Black men really aren’t marrying/dating non-Black women more (not more than they do Black) much more than their female counter parts is crap!

* All I can say is that I decided long ago, not to let color/race/ethnicity limit my available options for finding a mate. I have dated Chinese, Korean, Cuban, South Asian Indians. I am an equal oppurtunity dater. The point of these IR articles geared for Black women should focus on how we often limit ourselves wating for the “right” Black man…. as I believe someone else already stated.

Ps. my fiance is Blasian Korean and Black

Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 8:29 pm ¶
Merq wrote:

“Blasian.” How decidedly cute.

Shanda, my dear, I’m afraid you’re using the same rhetoric that publications like Essence spew ad nauseum:

“We blamed black men for dating outside their race. But now that we’re doing it a lot more, we’d better find a way to blame that on him, too… or we’ll be branded hypocrites.”

I wonder how your “Blasian” fiance would feel if he knew you were pretty-much saying the only reason you ended up with him was that you couldn’t get an “all-black” man.

I wish him all the luck in the world.

Posted 15 Jul 2006 at 3:05 am ¶
eric daniels wrote:

Shonda I don’t get your logic either, There are only 275,000 Black Americans M&F married IR that breaks down to….

141,000 BM
135,000 BF

Married to men of various Races, I see black celebrities like the Miami Heat players and their black wives of all shades. My problem with BW and BM that they can’t just say “I prefer dating across racial lines’ without bashing their same race counterpart. I think there is hypocrisy on both sides when it comes to this issue, There are 38 million black people of African descent in this country there should be at least 5 million IR couples amongst Black Americans when there are in a population of 290 people there are only about 3 million Mixed couples not counting children.

Shonda you are watching way too much reality Television as a wise sage named Prince Rogers Nelson once said,

DON’T LET YOUR CHILDREN WATCH TELEVISON BECAUSE ALL THEY ‘LL DO IS “FIGHT, CURSE AND BREED”

Don’t trust the entertainment industry for IR realtionships because it lies and Most successful Black Men are married to Black Women at a clip of 90 percent.

Posted 15 Jul 2006 at 3:19 pm ¶
How to give a blow job wrote:

I am not sure why the original writer questioned the “sterotype” that sucessful Black men date white women. It has been statistically proven time and time again. Now, I would add in that figure all other race women (not just white to make it most accurate) because the truth is sucessful (well educated & higher SES Black men) do dispportionantely date (and marry) more non-Black women that Black women. That is a fact… now I am not saying I know the Why to that question but it is a reality, from research I have done in undergrad and research I have continued to keep a breast of.

—-

I think this is a really good point. My research has shown the same thing, actually.

Posted 20 Jul 2006 at 11:11 pm ¶
mizzday wrote:

you people are crazy if it where not for interracial relationships lighter skined people/mulattos would not even be here.
how you people think light skinned people got here in thr frist place they did not come off the slave ships they came threw race mixin

Dear Joe,
I beg your pardon. I am of KHOISAN south african descent. We are the oldest race on the earth dating back to mitochondrial EVE. We are yellow skinned people and we have always been that way. Yes, mulattos wouldn’t be here had it not been for race mixing. However, all light skinned people are not the result of race mixing. Study, homeboy and come back when you have a valid response.

Posted 10 Sep 2006 at 6:26 pm ¶