to some degree, i agree with her.
on the other hand, hearing she's an israelite got my TKON antenna up...but more on that later.
first of all, i don't expect her to elaborate too much within 4 minutes. and i appreciate her honesty here. that's a reality for many of us (and men as well).
i think that this sista and i have some things in common. we are both lovers of our people, desiring of love, peace, and joy, trying to make our way in this crazy, crazy world. she's obviously a beautiful, intelligent woman, and i appreciate her being brave enough to speak her truth.secondly, anyone who reads this blog probably knows by now that i don't understand how anyone takes anything in the bible literally.* it makes far more sense as metaphor. i tend to compare literal (mis)understandings of the bible to a group of folks finding a mangled copy of the matrix trilogy 1000 years from now, trying to fill in the plot holes, and calling it the one true religion.
"blame the feminists" does not and never has flown with me. anyone who has ever seriously researched the movement easily discovers that the feminism this sista alludes to (particularly in its nascent stages) had SHIT to do with women of color. in fact, most white women leaders were neglectful towards, if they didn't outright shun, women of color.
women of color were forced to develop a parallel movement based on their own issues which some later called womanism. black, chicana, latina/hispanic, and native american women have always had different relationships to their men, and the movement for liberation often included things like resisting domestic violence, condemning the criminalization of their men and upholding their culture, language, and family structure.
black women may not have needed to be "liberated" from our men, but we did (and still do) need to liberate ourselves and our mates from the racism, classism, and sexism that plague our lives. again, history tells us that our men did not feel the need to lead women around by their necks until they were influenced by the followers of abraham.
i do agree that there are plenty of sweet, loving, wonderful sistas who act as the embodiments of nurturing, sweetness, compassion, and love. i'm one of them. but i don't see the problem with being "independent", particularly in this day and age.
the statistics are what they are, and the damage has been done. if our mates are late showing up to our lives, should we remain lonely, broke, and unfulfilled in the meantime? if we heal and come into our full selves, we can support and love our brothers while also saying, "come to me ready, or not at all" until they take charge of their own healing processes.
that, to me, is not counterrevolutionary, harsh, or "against god". the consequences of the dance of wounded souls are apparent each and every day. there are too many babies being born to parents who are ill prepared to care for, love, and nurture them. we need to stop, look, listen, and HEAL before we usher the ancestors back into the world.
the socioeconomic separation of black women and men is/was perpetuated by the white supremacist system that viewed women as less threatening (and allowed them to slip under the economic radar with things like domestic work & hair care) and criminalized the men.
i agree that we have fallen into the trap of keeping up with our WASP-y neighbors, but even that wasn't possible until the mid-late 60s and integration. before that, segregation--with all its ills--offered a social, economic, spiritual, and intellectual isolation that actually assisted the black community in many ways.
i just sighed at the commentary on lesbians. sexual abuse and the lack of understanding between the sexes that the author herself alludes to are probably far more salient factors in chosen homosexuality--which i think is blown largely out of proportion by similarly minded folks--than a lack of trust/faith in the black man.
sexuality is a continuum, gender roles are socially/culturally assigned, and some of us are just born that way. the faster we can accept those truths, the better.
having seen a lot of male israelites and very few of their women, i take many of their missives with a heavy dose of salt. i'd be reluctant to join up with any group that seems to only involve women as an afterthought and/or as a mere accompaniment to the male backbone of the organization.
*steps off soapbox*
thanks for your time.
*i do believe that the old testament was meant to be taken literally, HOWEVER, it was also speaking to the very specific culture, law and mores of a particular group of people. that group was pretty small, and most african ppl at the time didn't have jack to do with it. it's also quite difficult to understand in the absence of complete study of the torah (some of that's oral, y'all) and other jewish scriptures.
the new testament is a series of esoteric metaphors, largely meant for initiates. based on what i've seen/read, it was not taken literally in its day and should not be now. if you can dig deep enough to get to the meaning behind the metaphor, be my guest. but it's been my experience that the "keys to the kingdom" are far more accessible in metaphysical systems such as yoga, hinduism, orisa, vodou, akan, native american/indigenous spirituality, etc., and that's why they are perceived as a threat.