Wacky State of Fe/male Relationships...

[Im The Truth]

There It Is...
by Iya Ogunsina
http://oyansoro.com/07_07/Articles/Erkel.html

This was in response to a wacky message about the horrible state of the Black Male/Female relationship. The last statement in that message was "When have Black men ever laid down their lives for Black women?" as if no one could asertain an/any answer.

Yes, Black men have laid down their lives for us. I suspect that many died as they tried to save the women who were being kidnapped and enslaved. I know that many died as they faced down the Klan from the porches of their houses. I'm certain that those who went and died in war (the Civil War, Spanish-American, WW I, II, Korea, VietNam) thought (whether rightly or wrongly) they were protecting their individual and collective families by fighting slavery, Communism, or whatever new booga-bear the govt recreates as the newest fear inducer.

In my opinion, our issue is that we have accepted/forced into another culture's value system and it doesn't work for us and our historical presence in these here New-nited States. We come from cultures (African and Indigenous American) that were matrilineal, where ancestral lineages are tracked through one's mother, and patrilineal where ancesry is traced through one's father's lineage. But we are living in a patriarchial society here in the US.

While some might say that patrilineal socities are the same as patriarchial societies, I would beg to differ. Patrilineal means tracing ancestry through father, that's about ancestry and ethnicity -- whose customs, traditions and spiritual practices will you inherit. Patriarchy, on the other hand, is about POWER being in the hands of men alone. This power includes economic, political and social power. In patriarchial societies, men have the power to define what their social role will be and they define what their social expectations are of the women in their society, too. Remember, women didn't get the right to vote in the USA until after 1922 -- that's after WW I !! And, it was women of the West (Wyoming or Montana, can't remember which) who earned it first, then it became a national issue. Shucks -- them mountain women finally convinced their men that if it had not been for the strength of women, families would have never successfully migrated across the plains. So much for that excuse that women are too weak-minded to be involved in politics.

Our African cultures were not patriarchial; all the power was not lodged with men alone. They tended to be much more egalitarian with separate (but equal) power bases for men and women. Craft guilds included spiritual practices; so, if the women who dyed cloth were devotees of Oshun (the cosmic energy/deity/goddess who channels certain aspects of creativity) did divination as a part of their "religious" practice, they could possibly receive a message from Oshun that something in the community needed to be re-balanced and it would be those women's responsibility to see that the proper ritual was done to re-establish balance. They would not go to the King, tell him, and leave him to fix it; nor, would the King assume it was his responsibility to fix it. It would be his responsibility to allow the women the resources they needed to do the work and his responsibility (or delegated to a member of the court) to see that the women did the necessary ritual/sacrifice. In traditional cultures, women hold their own power and are respected for their contributions -- real and potential.

In our traditional lives, potential is just as important as actuality. The potential of a newly conceived life is a continuation of life, not an economic or social burden. Children are seen as the insurance policy for the continuation of one's family's presence on the planet, the continuation of a cultural practice, the continuation of knowing. In modern America, children are seen as trophies of our accomplishment (I snagged that man; he's mine for life now), insurance policies for keeping sick relationships handy (I got him now cuz I got his baby), dollies to dress up in cute designer gear ($45 shoes for feet that can't even walk!), or liabilities (How we gonna send all these brats to college?). Unfortunately, many of our men have not moved from the plantation mentality of thinking that fathering multiples sets of children is somehow an honorable accomplishment; and, using the plantation past imbedded in their (sub)conscious mind, that it's Massa's job or dey mama's to take care of 'em.

And, now that we'z all free and equal, they can have access to Blondie, Barbie and Betsy -- shall we say Blondie, Barbie and Betsy can now have what they've always wanted -- and our poor menfolk no longer feel the need to "maintain the race." They can make "cute" kids, ones with caramel skin and long naturally straight hair, cuz I know we know that their lives will be a whole lot easier than being coal black and nappy headed. (I'm being facetious, but you know we Americans have much residual crap about skin color and hair texture.)

Plus, add to all that an economy that places BeaverCleaver/PartridgeFamily home ownership (you realtors know what I'm talking about -- the crib like Snoops got, or at least new carpet, finished hardwood floors, separate bedrooms for each child, attached garage and a downstairs gameroom) out of the reach of most working class folk.

Whew! We've got so much to unpack out of our collective pysche's suitcase. It's a wonder we are not all just looney all the time.

To get back to a Black-Black marriage trend, we have to decide that we want to remain a culturally stable ethnic group. That takes group consciousness, which have been consistently degraded since the wonderbread event called de-segregation.

So, there it is. Where do we go from here?