Baphomet, or the Goat of Mendes, is a symbol that has played a mysterious and often misunderstood role throughout his-story. Baphomet’s roots are not something society know nearly as much, as they know it to be symbolic to witchcraft, occult, and to a lesser extent, esoteric thought. One of the first mentions of Baphomet is allegedly traced back to an eleventh century letter, penned by a crusader named Anselm of Ribemont, who describes a Templar ritualto Baphomet and God, held before a battle. In more recent times The Church of Satan, created by Anton LeVay in 1966, has adopted the image of Baphomet as their insignia, calling it the “Sigil of Baphomet,” and using it to suggest that logic—associated with Luciferian —stand as an individual’s guiding “moral” force. Many who delve into the legend of Baphomet claim it is not a deity meant to be worshipped, not is it a steadfast representation of Luciferian logic, but instead something bigger, more encompassing.
Eliphas Levi has given us the most famous depiction of Baphomet. In an 1857 illustration from his book “Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie,” Levi sketches Baphomet out in solemn detail and poise. Levi then explains the image and it’s detailed, symbolic meaning, “The goat on the frontispiece carries the sign of the pentagram on the forehead, with one point at the top, a symbol of light, his two hands forming the sign of Hermeticism (as above, so below), the one pointing up to the white moon of Chesed, the other pointing down to the black one of Geburah. This sign expresses the perfect harmony of mercy with justice. His one arm is female, the other male like the ones of the androgyn of Khunrath, the attributes of which we had to unite with those of our goat because he is one and the same symbol. The flame of intelligence shining between his horns is the magic light of the universal balance, the image of the soul elevated above matter, as the flame, whilst being tied to matter, shines above it. The head expresses the horror of the sinner, whose materially acting, solely responsible part has to bear the punishment exclusively; because the soul is insensitive according to its nature and can only suffer when it materializes. The rod standing instead of genitals symbolizes eternal life, the body covered with scales the water, the semi-circle above it the atmosphere, the feathers following above the volatile. Humanity is represented by the two breasts and the androgyn arms of this sphinx of the occult sciences.”
Baphomet is a symbol that is meant to represent the sum total of all things in the universe, acting both as parallel and paradox, showing the observer and student alike that concepts like “good” and “evil” exist only through perspective, and that all creatures, things, and ideas have a dark and light side within. Through Levi’s description we find that Baphomet is a symbolic representation of balance and necessity, in all things. Whether Christianity then appropriated Baphomet as a representation of the devil, or the devil and Baphomet coexisted with some success, is unclear. But the equation happened nonetheless. Baphomet now stands as a complex image, seemingly representing all levels of the occult; and perhaps this is fitting for a god that represents all and the balance of all. Baphomet stands as a literal, figurative, and meta-composite symbol. According to those who study the narrative around it. In the passage above twice there is the mention of androgyny associated with Baphomet. This not only indicates that Baphomet is his-story’s first transgender. It has also causes me to conclude why certain types of students of esoterical knowledge, willingly and brazenly claim homosexuals or transsexuals’ are more “spiritual” than heterosexuals. There is no other reason I can logically see that claim being made. Other than its association with Baphomet.
In his 2024 Oscar nomination speech, actor Christian Bale made it a point to thank Satan, whom he claimed “[gave] me inspiration for playing this role.” We have all heard stories of hollyweird being a hotbed of satanic carrying ons, ever since Rosemary’s baby exploded onto the scene. According to the narrative, none other than Anton LeVay, pre-eminent advisor to hollyweird on all such matter, and student of perhaps the greatest know Satanist, Allister Crawley, was the advisor to the screen writers of that movie. Comedian Kat Williams is most notorious for speaking about certain rituals in hollyweird that a male actor…particularly a black male actor…most perform in order to be elevated into the stratosphere of STAR. Two of the most indelible rituals is to wear a dress, thus signifying the androgyny of Baphomet. And doing or allowing an homosexual act to take place on your person or with another male. This includes allowing your penis to be sucked by another more prominent male. Or performing oral sex on said male. Or engaging in anal sex. Some say such acts can be later used to “whitemale” that actor, if he ever goes against the grain. Destroying his career and perhaps his very life. Some claim that beyond ritual sex is either participating in human blood sacrifice. Or, if the individual has become too rebellious, too irrelevant, become the victim of ritual blood sacrifice. Kissing the (a) ring means to show fealty or submissive respect, usually to someone in a position of authority or power. It paints quite a vivid picture, as you might imagine of a medieval court where lords and ladies bow down to the monarch, pressing their lips to his signet ring in a display of loyalty. Since the worship of Baphomet is said to have originated with Templar Knights, who were elite soldiers of Christendom and the Holy Roman Empire. And since the idea of kissing a signet ring is said to have occurred during that period. Would it be a stretch to say that the signet ring kiss is a symbolic replacement to an early ring kissing? That of kissing the arse of Baphomet and thus the ring around the anus. To show fealty or submissive respect for authority and power? If so then it brings to a greater light, the sex rituals of hollyweird does it not?
Today the worship of Baphomet in is many guises has crown as society has either become disenchanted with “god” or become more hungry for a god to ease their worldly pain and uncertainty. It has now become a competition between the forces of the Abrahamic religions and their many offshoots. The forces of the agnostics,. The forces of the Luciferins. And those who practice a more none Eurocentric type of worship, like IFA, Buddhism and such. Yet at the end of the day I believe for sure that when it comes time to the end all that will not matter, because the cult of personality worship will eventually be reduce to dust. For “what doth it profit a man, to gainthe whole world, and lose his own soul?”
I don’t know. I not trying to lose my soul following the ways of man to my personal destruction. My way is not your way. And I am perfectly happy with that.
When a fiction becomes fact reality then becomes fantasy
UNTIL THE LION LEARNS TO WRITE, EVERY STORY WILL GLORIFY THE HUNTER
– Chinwe Achebe, When Things fall apart
The “Holy babble”, is a compilation of Eurocentric fairy tales, once shared around camp fires and during centuries of torture and the burning of female herb gatherers, midwives, natural healers, and those who were viewed as deniers of the Roman Imperialist religion. This book of fairy tales had a narrative in one of its fables, about a generational curse. Often referred to as the “Curse of Ham,” this fable was actually the curse of Ham’s youngest son, Canaan. But lets not let fact get in the way of a good camp side story. Accordingly the story- laid out in its first chapter, from Genesis 6:22 – it goes like this:
As explained in Genesis 6:9, “Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.”
After this, life went on. The Bible tells us Noah planted a vineyard, drank some of the wine, and became drunk — then “lay uncovered inside his tent,” which is when trouble began. The fairy tale account next tells us that “Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father naked and told his two brothers outside“. Unlike Ham, these brothers, Shem and Japheth, covered Noah’s nakedness and avoided looking at his naked body.
When Noah awoke and found out what happened, he blessed Shem and Japheth. Then he issued a curse — not on Ham specifically, but directly on Ham’s son Canaan.
“May Canaan be cursed! May he be the lowest of servants to his relatives.” Then Noah said, ‘May the Lord, the God of Shem, be blessed, and may Canaan be his servant! May God expand the territory of Japheth! May Japheth share the prosperity of Shem, and may Canaan be his servant.’”
Yet somewhere during the addled mind of the creator of this book of fable, it was introduced that Canaan’s curse was passed back onto his father Ham, who’s crime was of suggested that he Ham, “lusted” or laughed at the naked body of his drunken sot of a father. Now any one of Bebe’s kids would know what lusted means and what it entails. The implication is the above lines, was and is, that Ham being an out of the closet Sodomite, lusted after his father’s drunken and naked body. And his reward according to more fantasy Jewish tales in the Torah, that Ham was to be “cursed” by black skindidness, big lips and broad nose. An enlarged penis (oh what a curse) and a life time of servitude to others not of his phenotype. Not one bibliophile, religious leaders of any stripes, sheeple (flock) or intellectuals I know of. Have ever questioned why one of “gods” chosen. He was such…”a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.”…became so pissed drunk ( a sin) he stripped all the way down to his ashy ass, laying spread open for the world to see his butt hole. Yet while this sinfully druken sot, was never chastised for that series of indiscretion. Ham or Canaan was. Nor did any off the aforementioned proponents of all thing godly and knowledgeable wonder why Ham was suggestibly lusting homosexuality at his father, when according to the holy babbles own narrative, the first mention of homosexuality was in the Twin Cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco…er…Sodomy and Gonorrhea…damn it Sodom and Gomorrah. I say suggestibly, because that was the interpretation I have heard since the Church tried to colonize my little rebellious mind.
The Curse of Ham is a fools tale told to children to get them to stop asking too many questions
During my time in the killing fields of the Canadian Public Fool Shitstym, post secondary edition. I had developed an interest that blossomed into a love for the field of psychology. Among other pursuits, such as all those great looking and agreeable women that also attended school with me. However, unlike my time in school, I will not be distracted by the subject matter at hand. Trust me on this. It is in psychology I discovered the notion of projection and self fulfilling prophecies, which I later reinterpreted as self fulfilling stereotype. Projection is the process of displacing one’s feelings onto a different person, animal, or object. Its a defensive mechanism based on ones own inadequacy, to attribute one’s own unacceptable urges or weakness unto another. For example, if someone continuously bullies and ridicules a peer about his insecurities, the bully might be projecting his own struggle with self-esteem onto the other person.
Stereotypes are a set of cognitive generalizations (e.g., beliefs, expectations) about the qualities and characteristics of the members of a group or social category. Self fulfillment describes a statement or belief about the future as self-fulfilling. Meaning that what is said or believed comes true because people expect it to come true. Thus in modern times a self fulfilling stereotype becomes a series of beliefs or statements about qualities and characteristics of Africans and descendants of Africoid people, outside of the largest and most resource rich continent on the planet. One example of a self fulfilling stereotype is that the “white man” is closer to god and the “black man” the farthest. To many who smoke that crack, the proverbial “whiteman”, is almost like the six million dollar man in that he is smarter, better looking, more creative, wealthier, more progressive, works harder makes for a better mate and a better citizen. Of any nation.
Meanwhile, anything the “black man” produces is purely through “natural animal instinct”. Which on the surface is puzzling. Because looks and intelligence for example are natural attributes that Africoid people do not lack. As for the other stereotypes, those are subject to ones environment, parentage or lineage, personal development and character.
Western (white) society and specifically America; that syphilitic bastard bitch of child. One of the children of the original whore of Babylon, called the (un) hy Roman Empire, along with her equally whorish sister, the British (Brutish) Empire is one of the, if not the most unique societies on the planet. America is not an homogeneous society by no metric of measurement. Yet it strives to force homogeneity on its citizens and professes so to the outside world. And while many will say Canada has more a diverse ethnicity, particularly in a city like Toronto or the Province of Ontario. America by and large surpasses Canada in the size of its population and more so, in the scope of attempting to shoe horn those diverse ethnicities into one steaming pile of nationalism called Americana. This despite America’s well accepted international and national identity, which is based less on its nationhood of “sacrifice and love of the flag”, but on its unstated but very open identity of whiteness. Be aware that whiteness on its own is and should not be an issue.
That is, if the Moon was really made of blue cheese and there were actual pots of gold at the end of each and every rainbow. This ideology of “whiteness” in contrast with “blackness” or any other “ness”, becames synonymous with and collectively associated with “god”. This mainly after a series of papal bulls, or Romanus Pontifex, was issued in 1436 by Pope Eugenius IV and in 1455 by Pope Nicholas V. Each Papal bull (shit), was put out, praising Catholic King Afonso V of Portugal for his battles against the Muslims, by endorsing his imperial minded, military attacks into Western Africa. The Papal Bull (shit)Instructed Afonso V, as a “good and devote” Catholic soldier, to capture and subdue all Saracens, Turks, and other “non-Christians”. And to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery.
Note that the term Saracens has been claimed to described any person — Arab, Turk, or other—who professed the religion of Islam. The third major book of fables.
Earlier in the Roman world, there had been references to Saracens (Greek: Sarakenoi) by late classical authors in the first three centuries AD, the term by then were applied to any of the original Arab tribe living in what is today called the Sinai Peninsula. But in reality should have been rightfully identified as North Eastern Africa. Due to the fact that prior to the building of the Suez Canal, Egypt and Libya used to be in Africa, but after rhe construction of rhe canal, had been “moved” to the middle East. In the following centuries the use of the term Saracens, by Christians, morphed and extended to cover Arab tribes in general; and, after the establishment of the caliphate, the Byzantines ( Eastern European Christians) referred to all Muslim subjects of the caliph as Saracens.
Through the Byzantines and the crusaders, the name spread into western Europe, where it was long in general use and has survived until modern times. Also note that Spain and to a lesser extent Portugal, just threw off 800 years of Muslim rule, primarily in the image often portrayed of African Muslims called Moors. And since Africoid looking, and not the later Turkic-Arab-Khazar looking , tribes were largely in the peninsula at that time, many back then, attributed the term Saracens to the majority nomadic tribes of Africoid people. Today unfortunately the term Arab is associated with a particular ethnic look. But centuries ago Arab, before the spread of Islam and, with it, the Arabic language, referred to any of the largely nomadic Semitic inhabitants of the early and misnomered, “Arabian Peninsula”. And not the African Peninsula. And I will say it again, loudly for the late comers. Since Egypt and Libya used to be in Africa, ithas since been moved to the artificial man made and politically identified zone called “Middle East”.
In using the term Semite or Semitic in its proper historical and ourstorical context, scholars would be hard pressed to refute that this identifier and the people the term applies to did not look like those African living below the Sahara. I urge you on your own to research the roots of the Semitic languages and its origin. Long after the Imperial Roman emperor, in the guise of the Catholic Church declared a war on mainly African people, “justified by god”, King James of England, authorized and sponsored another version of the Roman Catholic book of lies and fables in 1611. This in itself was a translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England. And within in this foul bit of Mein Kopf, is where the Curse of Ham was first dredged up from the foul sewage filled mind of this homosexual and pedophile English ruler.
AS AN A SIDE: Enslavement of different humans by marauders, invaders and tyrants. Of nations and individuals, has been around since the first man put a sturdy stick to wet clay tablets. This as a way to record and preserve events as witness, and as a form of backup to any prevailing verbal accounts utilized at the time. I am not like a lot of delusional diasporic Africans, who think that the TransAtlantic Slave trade was the ONLY and uniquely event of its type in all the world. The TransAtlantic enslavement of Africoid people was just the latest greatest narative of enslavement, recorded and re-recorded up until the early 20th century. Nor will I be like those few imbeciles who find playing with shiny rocks an intellectual pursuit, while eating paint chips, both of the “white skinded and dark skinded persuasion, who insist it never happened despite tons of evidence otherwise.
Indeed though, that particular brand of enslavement that exclusively target Africoid looking people by European and the modern versions of Arabs, are based solely and ONLY on skin tone, as many have religiously claimed. This is certainly unique in and of itself. It is and was a prolonged series of horrific events, which has had a generational effect on African people and their descendants for more than 500 years. Centuries of trauma that many in the seats of power, and those who claim ignorance, or who are actually, generally ignorant of or immune, to its effects on descendants of these enslaved Africans, will deny or dismiss as not that bad.
Prior to the European and Arab’s current savagery, enslavement was based on a variety of things. None of them excusable. There were ethnic rivalry, personal indebtedness, punishment for local crimes and the unfortunate results of being captured prisoners of wars. Never purely on skin tone. And it was never entrenched in the sickness of religion like Christian (insanity) and even more so in Islam (Arabism). Hence the modern American dilemma concerning the Curse of Ham.
Of the numerous results of America’s his-story of African enslavement, one particular dilemma had been soften and used as a rewriting of an original story. And one that curiously encompass self fulfilling stereotype. This is the misguided focus on 1619 as the beginning of African enslavement in the Colony called the United States For America (original name), since then changed to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, to reflect the switching of the constitution and changing that colony’s status from a Constitutional Republic to a Corporation. Long before the recent advent of critical race theory, this particular belief skewed peoples knowledge of American his-story. The true start of slavery in America. And the impetus to introduce victim blaming in the equation. The year the first enslaved Africans were brought to Jamestown is drilled into students’ memories, but overemphasizing this date distorts his-story and and is used to pacify or misdirect people’s “lying eyes” from what they saw and read to what they tell you you saw. Or read.
Certainly, there is a story to be told regarding 1619, but it is not helpful in over standing American slavery as an institution nor to help us better grasp the complicated place of African peoples in the early modern Atlantic world. For too long, the focus on 1619 has led the general public and scholars alike to ignore more important issues and, worse, to silently accept unquestioned assumptions that continue to impact us in remarkably consequential ways. One basic question the free thinker must ask oneself is, what was the status of the newly arrived African men and women before 1619? Were they slaves? Servants? Or something else? And, second, what did the white inhabitants of the Virginia Colony think when these dark-skinned people were rowed ashore and traded for provisions? Were they shocked? Were they frightened? Did they notice these people were black? If so, did they care?
In truth, these questions fail to approach the subject of Africans in America in a his-storically or Ourstorically accurate way. None of these queries conceive of the newly-arrived Africans as free people in their own right. These questions also assume that the arrival of these people was an exceptional historical moment, and they reflect the worries and concerns of the world we inhabit rather than shedding useful light on the unique challenges of life in the early seventeenth century. Overstand that 1619 was not the first time Africans could be found in an English Atlantic colony, and it certainly wasn’t the first time people of African descent made their mark and imposed their will on the land that would someday be part of the United States. In fact according to Professor Ivan Van Sertima in his very important work ” They Came Before Columbus”, Africans were in the Americas long before Christopher Columbus stumbled and bumbled his way to these shores in the name of voyaging to India. Hence the colonizers coined “West Indies”, to sort shake off his misdirected voyage. A note to all the kneegrows who strongly and wrongly proclaim “We were here first, and never were slaves”. Overstand that denial of factual evidence and truth does not eliminate the facts, evidence or truth. Yes, we were here long before the Europeans came. And yes, many Africans were also enslaved. Two separate events can still be true in their own rights.
As early as May 1616, free Africans from the “West Indies” were already at work in Bermuda providing expert knowledge about the cultivation of tobacco. I am unsure if these “free knowledge” were freely given at the end of a whip. There is also suggestive evidence that scores of Africans plundered from the Spanish Pirates, during one of their own “trips”, and were aboard a fleet under the command of Sir Francis Drake ( one of England’s greatest heroes and Pirates) when he arrived at Roanoke Island in 1586. In 1526, enslaved Africans were part of a Spanish expedition to establish an outpost on the North American coast in present-day South Carolina. Those Africans, much like their brethrens and sistrens did for centuries afterwards, launched a rebellion in November of that year and effectively destroyed the Spanish settlers’ ability to sustain the settlement. Which they eventually abandoned a year later. Nearly 100 years before Jamestown, African freedom fighters, enabled American colonies to survive, and they were equally able to destroy European colonial ventures. Crispus Attucks anyone?
These stories highlight additional problems with exaggerating the importance of 1619. By highlighting that particular date and the Chesapeake region, the rewriters of Our stories, effectively erases the memory of many more African peoples than it memorializes. The rewritten narrative silences the memory of the more than 500,000 African men, women, and children who had already crossed the Atlantic against their will, aided and abetted Europeans in their endeavors, who also had provided expertise and guidance in a range of enterprises, and who suffered, died, and – most importantly – endured. That already written narrative that Sir John Hawkins was behind four slave-trading expeditions during the 1560s suggests the degree to which England may have been more invested in African slavery than we typically recall. And that slavery in the American colonies did not start in 1619.
Tens of thousands of English men and women had meaningful contact with African peoples throughout the Atlantic world before Jamestown. In this light, the events of 1619 was indeed more than a bit of a rewriting of his-story than what is typically allowed. We now come to the dilemma at hand and how it ties into the Curse of Ham and self fulfilling stereotypes. Over the last several years, the claim that the first “legal” slave owner was a “black man” by the name or Anthony Johnson, had been and is till widely circulated, like a bad broken telephone game, through blogs, memes, articles, and videos. This was lapped up by the kneegrow contingent that lacked critical thinking but instead carry a whole heap of parochial emotional issues around self.
The following link solidified a concern I have had for years, with this particular tale. I shall share the information from the following blog.
On Misbar’s website the author stated that their investigation did indeed conclude that Anthony Johnson was not the first slave owner in America. Johnson apparently arrived in Virginia as either an indentured servant or a slave (records wete not exactly clear on that point) in 1621 and worked on a tobacco plantation owned by Edward Bennett. Sometime between 1625 and 1640, Johnson was able to buy his way out of servitude and purchase some land. By 1650, he owned a 250-acre estate where he raised livestock. Records from 1641 indicate that Johnson had a black indentured servant named John Casor.
In 1654, a planter named Robert Parker helped to secure the freedom of Casor, claiming that he was being illegally detained as an indentured servant. This smacks of typical white jealousy and the centuries long attempts the steal or destroy “black people’s property”. Something that continues till today. All we need to do is go back to the early 1900s and the attacks of Tusla Oklahoma and other succesful African enclaves. Of course Johnson fought this decision in court until Casor was returned to the Johnson family in 1655 as a “servant for life”. This court decision helped to set the precedent for slavery in Virginia. However, the first slave owner in America came years before this decision. In 1640, an indentured servant named John Punch was the first man sentenced to lifelong slavery for attempting to flee from his own servitude. Therefore, Hugh Gwyn, a white man and the “owner” of Punch, is recognized as the first “legal” slave owner in America. Please research the true differences between legal and illegal. Lawful and unlawful. Additionally, a man named Samuel Maverick is said to have arrived in Boston with two slaves as far back as 1624.
The image that is often shared, among “black” people, does not feature Johnson either, but rather ex-slave and prominent abolitionist Lewis Hayden. Photography was not invented until the 1830s, more than a century after Johnson’s death in 1670. The conclusion? Our belief as a dispossessed people, in and of ourselves as “failures”, “less than”, “aint shit” or “cursed”. Supported by centuries of religious indoctrination. Are the self fulfilling acceptance of a projected stereotype passed down for generations onto our very existence. By the most vile and demon spawn actors on the planet. Those who use “whiteness” as a reason to slaughter, rape and enslave, whole generations of a particular group, simply based on their phenotype and skin tone. And like trauma victims who have never had an ounce of therapy or compensations for generations of pain, we have been acting out our unhealed trauma through, anti social and self harming behaviors, that are internally and externally harmful to our persons our environment and the greater society. Africans who are descendants of 500 years of enslavement become the stereotype the majority population told us we are. And we embrace it and make it our truth. Social scientists and psychologists have said that these behaviours can cause changes that affect each of us by the way our genes work.
These changes are called epigenetics.
Epigenetic changes can affect gene expression, development, age, and health in different ways, such as infections, cancer, and nutrition. As well it also lowers self esteem and perpetuates a self fulfilling behaviour and stereotypes that fortifies and factualizes the projections of others who may very well be more epigentically damaged as those they project their self hate on.
The video below is an example self ffling stereotypes are created via what the socialist calls the Hegalian Dialectic. Cause, effect, solutions. But a solution beneficial to the predators and not the prey.
The next videowill make many who hold on to “whiteness” as devine. This includes, Europeans, Asians, Mestizos or Africans. Showing this next video not me using a reverse uno card or any form of reversal of superiority. A high vibrational being need not step on anybody to elevate themself. However, try as many Eurocentric or Asiancentric scientist do, you cannot escape the fact that the melanated being called the African is something special.
The question I will ask of African people is what will we do with the information in the second video. Will we sit around engaging in intellectual and emotional self pleasuring? Or will we embark on throwing off the limited belief indoctrinated into us, and work to make the world a much better place than the one the predators currently are trying to destroy? Part two of this blog will explore a very simple, yet difficult step towards such a work.
This is how it has been going since the kneegrow female joined her man as she was ushered off the plantation, eventually to get infected with feminism’s superiority over their supposed complementary gender. I believe that the only reason someone becomes a cult fanatic is because they had a bit of that fanaticism in them from the beginning. The kneegrow female always resented the black male ever since chattel slavery was legislated out of that system of commerce. When “Mable” was given access to “Becky’s” house and saw how “fine” and sophisticated white people’s lives where. She then compared her life to that with the meager trappings of the lot of former the ex-slaves. This is why the kneegrow females have always complained to her man, how his lot in life was lacking in comparison to “Ken” and what he was and is able to provide to “Barbie”. I mean look at the kneegrow females today. They truly live vicariously through the image of white women and expect black men to be like white men, and see the world through blue eyes..
The latest trend of kneegrow females showing their stank attitude to her counterpart for the world to see, is on full display in these videos.
Under this video one respondent wrote this, “I find it so funny how a woman that is a successful lawyer/reporter and self made millionaire is getting backlash for saying no to dating a bus driver when she has every right to have a preference just like every one that’s saying yes to dating a bus driver. Also, nothing in that interview was said negative about a bus driver. She was asked a question and she gave an honest answer. I’m sure she has dated men that made way less than her but at 40 that’s not what she wants which is okay. As for Sherri she’s saying she would when she’s paying spousal support for her ex husband”.
May I remind you that Sherri Shepherd recently was on a public forum begging women to allow their husbands to help out single mothers. So we know Sherri Shepherd is doing this because Eboni K Williams is trending right now for the wrong reasons. And we know in this age of internet and social media, everybody and their retarded aunties love to pile on.
Chris Rock, once dropped a truth bomb on his audience when he stated that women can never go backwards in lifestyle. Apparently Eboni K Williams has or had a law degree, but todate, no one has evidence of her practicing law. And if she did, it was a short lived practice. For a majority of her public life, she has been in entertainment. First as some mi or reporter with Fox News, and then later she was given opportunities to succeed by Shaun Combs and currently Byron Allen.
The hyena pack jumped on black men as synonymous with bus drivers, when the question was about bus drivers. Not black bus drivers. There was even a white woman who calked into a show by Iyanla Vanzant, talking about black men and had to be corrected by Vanzant that the question was about bus drivers. In general. Not black bus drivers. However, like white men in amurdikkka, with black women, the narrative always turns back to black men. Even when they are out minding their god damn business.
The video below is how a defiant, stiff necked foolish, miseducated, high earning and entitled feminist, responds to criticism for their bullshit!
Keep in mind this woman called off a 4 year engagement to a White millionaire, because he chose to quarantine during the scamdemic with his adult children and not with her. Four year engagement. To a wealthy white man, who hit it and quit it. But she twists her mouth to shit on black men, whom she wouldn’t even respond to after he says good morning to her. This is a woman that literally stated she tried every dick in the circus, but be all ethical and preachy on black men’s short comings. Black men who before this week, didnt know her from a can of paint. Yep! Seen it often.
This is not the same video below with Melanie King, but an addition
Most of you may hsve hrard of the one online-dating website that asked users to answer an array of personal questions to help them ascertain how best to craft the app to make it more effective for women. Hence the reasons why men’s preferences were obscured, while any preferences of women left on the app and website.
The results were not surprising….
DATING STANDARDS FOR MEN:6 pack, 6ft, 6 inches, 6 figures, ex thug that love Jesus, hard worker but always available, strong yet sensitive, hard yet soft, a ladies man but loyal, no kids but wants a singe mother.STANDARDS FOR WOMEN:Take me as I am….
The rests showed that for “dating” in the era of dating apps and hook up culture, none white men showed preferences for their race of women, while none white women, showed preferences to white men. One of the urban tales of the bitter kneegress and the manginas who worship them, is that white women are privileged and are the pursuit of black men. Yet almost every none white group responds more readily to white men than men from their own race. This pattern is clearer among straight none white women. According to the information garnered from the survey, white women are undeniably privileged in the amurdikkka, but they are not universally desired as white men in the dating scene.
Both heterosexual men and lesbian women from non white grouping tended to contact women who are from their own racial groupings over white women. While white men and white lesbians prefer white women over none white women. Homosexual Asian and Latino men favour white men, while homosexual kneegrows favour homosexual kneegrows. Among all racial preferences we find online dating, none is stronger than white preferences for whites. Both white men and white women actively seek each other out, reproducing intimate segregation through their exclusivity. Not saying a oreference for your own kind is a problem. But the results kills many of the lies narrated by black females and the simpanzees that drink their bath water.
The lies that black women are divesting, because “there’s no good black men available”, has also been thrown around with no context or even facts. There’s 331,900,000 people in amurdikkka, with single men of ALL RACES representing 31% of that number, which equates to approximately 102,889,000 single men. There is approximately 22 million women (21,68 million) living in the country, with 48% of black women who are never married or single, which equates to approximately 10, 560,00. Out of 102,889,000 single men and 10,560,000 single, that’s only 10.2% of the single male population. So with all the eligible black men out in the killing fields of the dating scene, why are black women married at a lower rate than black men?
If black woman can’t find what they are looking for in the black community, even though there are 556,000 black men that are married, and they cant find it at a high rate with non black men. What exactly are they complaining about again? And who exactly is the problem? In an age of large scale narcissism and entitlement, its very hard to self examine and self refelect on one’s own flaws and take acountability for them.
For every single black woman, there are 10 single men of ALL RACES. It’s only a matter of time that these men started scooping up all of these marriage material, in shape and agreeable black women. Right Eboni? How about all these other women who regurgitate the same bullshit narratives.
Black women own more business than black men.
“More than half of black business owners are men. By comparison, 55% of majority black owned business in amurdikkka, in 2020 had male owners, while 37% were owned by woman and 8% had equal male to female ownership”, in February 21, 2023. “Black women represent 42% of women owned businesses, three times their share of the female population and 36% of all Black owned employed business (Black men account for 64% of black business)”.
“According to a 2019 report commissioned by American Express, black females’ founders earn average revenue of $24,000 per firm. that equates to less than 17% of what all women owned businesses earn”.
Black women earn $24,000 average revenue according to report from http://www.blackenterprise.com. Only 3% of black women are running mature businesses. One explanation maybe the types of businesses started. Analysis shows that 61% of black women entrepreneurs start business in either retail? Wholesale or the health, education, government or social services sectors. Nineteen percent of all employer based businesses were female led, but 36% of all black owned business were headed by women over all. When comparing women owned business of all racial categories, black ( non Hispanic) women have the highest percentage of ownership compared with men in their racial category. In amurdikkklan astounding 17% of black women are in the process of starting or running new business. That’s compared to just 30% of white women and 15% of whit men. Yet despite this early lead only 3% of black women are running mature businesses. To understand why this steep drop off occurs and how to combat it. Datas were analyzed from interviews with more that 12,000 people, nearly 1,700 of whom identified as entrepreneurs and nearly 1,2000 of whom own established business. One analysis offered several possible reasons black women struggle to sustain their business. One explanation maybe the type of business started:
The e analysed data shows that 61% of black women entrepreneurs start business in either retail/wholesale or the health, education, government or social services sector, compared to the 47% of white woman and 32% of white men entrepreneurs. To the extent that these are small, informed business with low margins in crowded competitive contexts, they are more difficult to sustain over long term.
“Black women are forced to be masculine because we have to work and other women get to stay at home”. This is another false narrative pushed out by the kneegrow females and the liberal feminist mouth pieces. Nobody can force you tbe masculine. Numerous women in countries around the world are in the workforce and you can see femininity awash in these countries and business. Black women WANT to be masculine, because they are jealous of black men’s alleged advantage that frankly, is not there. Thus they strive hard to have the biggest balls on the block. Which is as distasteful as heterosexual black men competing for with them for feminine spaces.
The US department of Justice, office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, put out a report on prisoners in 2021. What was presented was that there was 331.9 Million people in the USA. The total number of people in state or federal correctional facilities was at the time,1,204,322. which is 0.36% of the US population. Of the 19.91 million black men in amurdikkka at the end of 2021, the total number of black men in state or federal correctional facilities was 364,500. The black community has so many conversations about black men in prison and not enough enough about the 98.17% that are free. That’s 1.83% of the black male population, 98.17% are free. That’s 19, 545,500black men who are not incarcerated.
According to high degreed educated and high earning black women, black men are not on their level, due to unemployment or underemployment and low educational status which forces black women to SETTLE or date down. Lastly, there are 5556,387 more married black men than married women, even though there’s approximately 1,7770,000 more black women (21.68 million black women vs. 19.91 million black men). In 2021 the annual earnings was $50,187. The annual earnings of black women in that year was $45,543. This is a difference of $3,646. In the first quarter of 2023, black men’s median usual earnings of full-time wage and salary workers was $909 weekly, $3,636 monthly or $43,632 annually, if earnings stayed the same throughout the year. For black women, the median usual earning of full-time wage and salary workers was $862 weekly, $3,448 monthly, $41,376 annually, if earnings stayed the same throughout the year. This would be $2,256 difference between how much a black man and women would have , if the earnings stayed the same.
Who’s settling for who again? Black men make more money than black women, but if you hear these status chasing, overly registered and miseducated, under achieving straggle muppets, black men have fallen far behind them. Despite the promotion of quotas for black women, federal and state programs to boost them up above black men via business, and educational incentives.
Blackmystory weblog 