Comments on: Professor Gates’ Tantrum

By: Zencommand

Zencommand — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 00:01:06 +0000

And, I thought I lived in America.
It is my right ON MY PROPERTY to speak to a police officer any damned way I please.
Just who the hell do these cops think they are?
In a public place – OK different story. But in MY HOME a cop can quickly be a trespasser if he doesn’t behave him/herself. I am the who’s in charge at my home regardless of the uniform and badge worn by ANYONE.
This is not a two-way street – a cop, like any guest, is required to behave in the way I see fit. I, on the other hand, am not required to reciprocate. It’s my kingdom and my rules. Period.

By: Welmer

Welmer — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:55:05 +0000

Given how many black and Mexican guys get nailed by the courts for unrealistic CS, I don’t think that would be too difficult.

By: icr

icr — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:50:08 +0000

Yep. When a child-support reform law was up for a vote, a big crowd of men with bullhorns would scare the daylights out of the legislators.

You’d better make sure you have a contingent
of blacks and hispanics in the group. Any gathering of white males who are don’t fit into the elite or SWPL categories is seen by the MSM to be a probable crypto-Klan rally.

By: Reggie Greene / The Logistician

Reggie Greene / The Logistician — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 04:26:42 +0000

We have three observations about the Harvard professor incident:

1. We find it interesting that the fact that this was the professor’s home was evidently not established early on way before the dispute escalated;

2. We find it fascinating that the versions of two members of society, who most would ordinarily view as responsible and honest citizens (this obviously does not include politicians), would vary so dramatically from a factual point of view.

3. Finally, considering that the reading and viewing public were not present at the scene (and thus have no first hand knowledge), and that there is no video tape to our knowledge of the sequence of events and what was said, how so many have formed conclusions, and made assumptions, about who did what and who was wrong.

There are some things which Professor Gates might have considered upon the arrival of the police, no matter how incensed he may have been.

By: miles

miles — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:53:09 +0000

“Instead, they should be out in the streets, calling radio talk shows, calling representatives, getting on TV, writing blogs, talking to reporters, etc. They should protest and make noise, preferably in large groups. If they do get arrested, they should try to get the story in the news. That’s what works here in America. ”

Yep. When a child-support reform law was up for a vote, a big crowd of men with bullhorns would scare the daylights out of the legislators.

By: Justin

Justin — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:40:11 +0000

Uh guys, that was a MOVIE. It did not occur that way in real life. Frankly, it is just part of the media agenda of strengthening the image of the minority male.

The overall point is correct, though: the only way we will get attention is by taking it to the streets. Organization is the solution!

By: Lukobe

Lukobe — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:05:44 +0000

I remember that scene. (Great movie, BTW.) Of course, Malcolm X ended up dead and his movement ended up splintered, but that doesn’t take anything away from the power of that scene.

By: Derek

Derek — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:58:51 +0000

There was a scene in Malcolm X where a group of black Muslim men marched in perfect military formation to first confront the cops and then to the hospital to support a member that the cops had almost beaten to death. The movements where clear, crisp, and threatening.

Only Malcolm X did any talking and he did it in a non whiny, non girlishly, cool as ice manner backup by an army of men. The discipline and power displayed by the men following him made all the presentation that was needed to force the cops to deal with his demands. I think actions of this nature play to our strengths as men, not the whiny protest shit.

By: Lukobe

Lukobe — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:56:31 +0000

Aren’t groups like Elks, etc., still male-only?

By: Calvin

Calvin — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:35:49 +0000

“I think a return of private fraternal organizations of some sort is in order. Guys need their space, and they need some way to organize in a comfortable atmosphere where they don’t have to worry about appearing “beta” around women.”

I totally agree. The traditional male organizations of generations past have all been dismantled by now though, in the name of gender equality, “inclusion”, “diversity”. New private fraternal type organizations are necessary.

The major challenges I see to this are the diversity/gender equality mongering power structure that dismantled the old male institutions, and the societal pressure that attacks anything that might appear “beta”.

Not only will the state and public institutions seek to attack any resurgence of male organization, but social and female pressure will come out to stigmatize the male orgs as filled with disaffected “beta” males, weak angry men, homoerotic, etc.

Perhaps secret societies could do some good. While there’s no public display of organized male power, which of course is desirable, it could assuage fears of men who would be uncomfortable with publicly acknowledging their participation. And it could perhaps induce a greater degree of honor.

One major downside, among others, of course is the whole defection thing. If the group became publicly known, it would be under attack, and a disaffected member may find it in his interest to go publicly against the group, and earn fame, public approval from women and the dominant gov’t and public structures.