It’s not exactly a secret that the Manosphere, stuffed to overflowing with he-man women haters, is also full of racists. Some of them quite open with, and even proud of, their racism, repeating literal neo-Nazi talking points and comparing blacks to apes. Others, especially amongst the Men’s Rights Activsts, pretend to be above race, often portraying themselves as champions for black men while reserving their most virulent racism for black women.
Enter JudgyBitch, the slur-spewing A Voice for Men “social media director” — and white lady. A recent post on her blog asks the question “Black men are failing catastrophically – are Black mothers to blame?”
Can you guess what her answer is? Yes, that’s correct.
According to JB, the only women who know how to raise black boys properly are … white women. Her evidence? A study that found
there are no significant differences in outcomes between black and white males with white mothers. [But] large differences persist between these groups and black males with black mothers.
So why might this be? JB, drawing on one of the explanations proposed by the paper, notes that
Black boys raised by white mothers tend to have distinctively white, rather than Black speech patterns. Barack Obama anybody? He sure is articulate for a Black guy /snark/. Those speech patterns allow Black boys to avoid a wage penalty as men.
JB apparently sees this as evidence of the parenting genius of white mothers. It’s not. If a black boy or man with “white speech patterns” is judged to be smarter than a similarly intelligent black boy or man who “talks black,” that’s proof, not of superior white parenting skills, but of the racism of the person doing the judging.
This is not actually complicated stuff, folks.
JB comes close, a couple of times, to acknowledging the racism at play, noting at one point that “[w]hite mothers … are treated differently by the school system [than black mothers], no matter what race their children are.”
But instead of exploring the possible roots of this “different” treatment — HINT: IT’S RACISM — JB decides to go after the central target of her deeply ignorant piece, those much-demonized black mothers:
I want to flip the question over and ask, rather than ‘what are white women doing right and what advantages do they have’, to ‘what are Black women doing wrong and why are they doing it wrong’?
This formulation is as revealing as her comments about schools: after momentarily acknowledging the advantages white women have, JB declares that she won’t be examining this question because she’d much rather be slinging shit at black women instead.
And sling it she does, declaring flat-out that “Black women do a shit job with their sons.”
And how did this happen? As JB sees it, back “when the recession hit in the 70s,” cruel government policies that denied
welfare for families with men in the home … effectively destroyed the Black nuclear family, and by extension, Black prosperity and community.
But the rest is all the fault of black women:
How easy would it be to take the resentment that ought to be directed against the policy and aim it instead at the man who is not allowed by law to support you? How easy would it be to turn that resentment into fury and outright hate? How easy would it be to decide “I don’t need no man anyways they can all go straight to hell”?
Pretty easy, apparently.
Then along comes feminism, making things even worse — by encouraging women, black women in particular, to think of themselves as heroes of their own lives.
Feminists are engaged in an all-out war against families, including Black families. Feminists convince Black women that struggling to raise children without the love and support and companionship of a man is a badge of honor: it is a sign of strength, courage, bravery, valor – it’s all rah rah rah you go girrrrl – if something in your life sucks, blame the man and that includes Black men.
Is it any wonder Black women resent and hate their sons? Is it any wonder they raise thugs and gangsters? Give those exact same boys to white women, who have been taught to a much, much lesser extent that they don’t need no man, and those boys become accountants and neurosurgeons and teachers and HVAC technicians and entrepreneurs.
But as much as JB wants to paint feminism as the big villain here, she can’t quite restrain herself from lecturing black women on what she’s decided are their failings:
White women raise Black boys better than you do, Black women. That should make you want to puke. It should make you crazy angry. It should make you want to scream and punch something and cry. You can’t blame all of it on racism and feminism, although those things play a huge role.
It starts with you and your relationship to your sons and their fathers.
Stop hating them. Start loving them. Understand that you have years and years and years of hate, egged on by feminists, to overcome. Black men need to trust you again.
Of the long list of things that JB — a Canadian white lady and stay-at-home mom — doesn’t know shit about, the lives of black women is probably pretty close to the top. But that doesn’t stop her from, well, judging black women and finding them wanting.
But what JB is indulging herself in here isn’t just racism; it’s that potent blend of intersectional hate, of racism and misogyny, that black feminist Moya Bailey calls “misogynoir.”
Like a lot of white people who enjoy pontificating about black people, JB’s attempts to educate herself on the subject are halfassed, laughably slipshod.
The notion that welfare has destroyed the black family is an ancient right-wing trope. JB’s “support” for this argument comes largely from a post on Discovering The Networks, a site run by right-wing gadfly and professional leftist-hater David Horowitz, devoted to exposing what he calls the “networks and agendas of the political Left.”
Fun fact: it is literally the first site that pops up when you do a Google search for “welfare ‘black families.'”
If you dig even a teensy bit deeper in the Google results, you’ll discover that JB’s “understanding” of welfare is what’s technically known as “wrong.” As Cynthia Gordy notes in a post on The Root, the rise of single motherhood in the black community was largely the fault of, well, the economy, stupid. (Well, the economy in a deeply racist society, that is.)
“What happened in the mid-1950s were technological changes that abolished unskilled jobs that most black men could do and created high-tech jobs that they couldn’t,” [sociologist Andrew] Billingsley told The Root, explaining that the advent of efficient, goods-producing machines drove millions of black men out of the stable blue-collar work force. “That’s what kept black families from getting and staying married, not the welfare system. To say otherwise is a misunderstanding of the data, and it’s a misreading of history.” …
[T]here is no public-housing eligibility requirement that excludes couples. Some states used to apply such regulations, but the Supreme Court struck those down in 1968.
For those unfamiliar with the concept of time, 1968 comes before “the recession [that] hit in the 70s.”
But who needs facts when you have prejudices?
That might as well be the slogan of the Men’s Rights movement.
—
Please read the newly revised COMMENTS POLICY before commenting.
JB has been a proud and unashamed racist for quite a while. Her blog is full of it.
I’ve lived in the deep south all my life and I have never heard this sort of drivel from anyone before. At least she didn’t use the N word…I guess? What a truly despicable human being she is.
What’s really sad is that we’ve set that bar so low. At least she didn’t use the N word.
This isn’t exactly a view that is the sole opinion of Bloomsfield, but I do find it interesting how starkly it was demonstrated in the article, that a child of a black man and a black woman, a black man and a white woman, or a black woman and a white man are all considered to be black, while the only permutation of parenthood that produces a white child is a white woman and a white man. Suppose it’s really your standard “just one drop” racist purity sentiment, isn’t it?
Btw, what is JB offering as a solution when she talks about black men fairing better with white mothers and her utter dismissal of black culture?
I hope she’s not suggesting children be taken away and adopted out, cos that’s just a little bit genocidal. I’m sure she hasn’t forgotten that her country has form for that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system
I feel bad for JB’s children. I hope they grow up to be a better person than their mother.
In European countries and the Americas, it’s Muslim women that Muslim patriarchs want to cover up. I mean, I’m sure they’d happily cover everyone, but they can’t and as far as I know aren’t trying. If Muslim feminists wanted to go naked in a Mosque, I think that would be a reasonable protest. They’re the one the leaders want to cover up, so they’re the ones who can resist by uncovering. Also, they have some claim to the space. I don’t see how non-Muslims stripping in someone else’s worship place accomplishes anything.
In fact, I would say that as a general rule, houses of worship are out-of-bounds to people who are not members of that faith unless that church has political power that affects non-members.
“unless that church has political power that affects non-members”
But they almost always do, which is what makes them dangerous.
I don’t believe that Judy Bloomfield raped anyone ever. Won’t-take-no-for-an-answer is the perfect way to break up a relationship.* And she says she does it all the time? Nonsense. That’s just something she says to cause controversy.
It’s the perfect fake crime: No one can prove she didn’t do it!
*Of course, not everyone has the emotional strength and the financial wherewithal to leave. But I’m going to NOT go out on a limb and say that the white men Judy Bloomfield dated did.
This discussion is about JB and her blatant racism against Black People. Islam in the Western World has literally zero to do with this article.
JB’s drivel is not merely bigotry; it is the laziest kind.
White people better because they are. Done.
JB presents white women as inherently better at parenting without even clearly describing what that inherent superiority entails exactly. Well apart from claiming with zero proof that Black women hate Black men. JB blithely equates single parenthood with bad outcomes without presenting proof or taking certain social economic realities into account. Of course that is normal with Wingnuts. They tend to think as mainstream culture as something strictly regulated by the laws of nature; not as something manmade that the dominant group should take responsibility for. Responsibility is something lesser beings need to engage in; not the people with the most power and privilege.
‘Islam in the Western World has literally zero to do with this article.’
Going off topic is kind of what we do around here.
But yes I agree that JB’s bigotry stems from laziness. She makes a valid observation, like black men being disadvantaged or single parent families struggling, but then leaps to a conclusion which doesn’t involve any actual thinking or research, one that invariably panders to common prejudices and pleases her equally bigoted fan base.
Sad thing is she had a crappy upbringing herself, but gleaned no insight whatsoever from it. She just excoriates her abusive mother while idolizing the equally violent father who abandoned her and all his other children.
Sounds like she blames her mother for everything rather than insisting both her parents take proportionate responsibility for the mess they made.
Because that would involve her doing some introspection, and from reading her blog I’d say she’s not too keen on that.
Not keen on introspection and not keen on thinking on how the status quo came about. She is a typical Reactionary in that respect. Critical thinking makes you question familiar things and that hurts so she avoids that like the plague.
Reactionary is the right word, it’s all about reacting rather than reasoning.
“WHITE CISHET MEN
WHITE CISHET WOMEN
ALL OTHER MEN
ALL OTHER WOMEN”
Not so sure black men come before all women. She completely dehumanizes black men in her rant, to the point of stripping them of all agency. She reduces them to dangerous animals destroying society because someone didn’t train them correctly. This is the kind of dangerous racist rhetoric that lead to the Emanuel AME shootings.
@snorkmaiden and Alan Robertshaw
The convo aboce reminds me of the Christina hoff simmers/claire lehmann types who basically tell western feminists to stop complaining and look at the actually oppressed women in insert-place-here.
Have you heard of the latter woman? She’s fairly popular with manuresphere types
Hi Ellie
Must confess I haven’t heard of either of them. I’m not particularly up on a lot of the MRA stuff; just what I get here.
I sort of stumbled on this site by accident [I won’t bore you with the convoluted path that lead me here] and I just love the contributors. I don’t identify as a feminist. For various reasons *I* don’t think it’s an appropriate tile for me to use. I completely understand why other guys are happy to use it though and I respect that.
I do try to be a pro-feminist though [although I’m pretty good at putting my foot in it] and this site has opened my eyes somewhat. I knew from friends, and just personal observation, that women can get a really shit time of it, but I didn’t know there was such a visceral level of hatred for women from organised (well, in a certain sense) movements like MRA/MGTOW.
“Suppose it’s really your standard “just one drop” racist purity sentiment, isn’t it?”
DING! You are correct.
Hi Ellie,
I haven’t heard of the latter woman, is she another FemRA, those women dishearten the hell out of me.
I hate it when one issue is dismissed by referencing another more severe issue elsewhere, unless someone is truly whining about nothing and then putting their irritation on a par with genuine suffering. One example of this was a colleague of mine in a old job who once said to me, without irony:
‘I’m just like an African. Because while they might need food, I really need a pint of beer.’
I don’t even remember what his point was.
@Alan Robertshaw,
speaking of putting one’s foot in it, a political blog I like to visit has recently got an infestation of MRAs. The blogger, who I normally think very highly of, wrote an unfortunate ‘what about teh menz’ type article about the gender bias shown in the Duluth power wheel. Unsurprisingly some of his feminist regulars took him to task over this, and clearly it blipped on AVFM’s radar because the comment section is now flooded with anti-feminists hurling abuse, even Paul Elam has made an appearance. It feels weird to me, it’s rare for me to see the kind of people WHTM discusses spill over into my day to day life.
They’re trying to persuade the blogger that feminists have turned on him and he must now take the red pill, I’m hoping he’ll be too smart for that as I like his blog.
For example, MRAs constantly comparing their bonersads to rape. =P
“sn0rkmaiden on July 26, 2015 at 5:32 pm
Btw, what is JB offering as a solution when she talks about black men fairing better with white mothers and her utter dismissal of black culture?
I hope she’s not suggesting children be taken away and adopted out, cos that’s just a little bit genocidal. I’m sure she hasn’t forgotten that her country has form for that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadia
n_Indian_residential_school_system”
I’m sure she doesn’t care, or care about the ongoing cultural genocide of the First Nations, Inuit and Metis. I’d be willing to bet she doesn’t care about our missing or murdered aboriginal woman either, like most of Canada. She can take her cues from the federal government on that, she certainly comes across as part of the CPC base.
On the topic:
There were a few bad rules (in the unintended consequences category) in parts of welfare law at various points. For instance, while housing isn’t attached to marital status, it is true that qualification for other forms of welfare are based on ‘household income’. As the minimum wage was allowed to stagnate, you had increasing numbers of families where, even with both parents working, they were not making enough to actually care for their kids.
The solution that a lot of poor people reached was that it was better to NOT get married. The guy would still be involved with parenting (note Ikeke35’s post on that subject), but legal marriage would functionally push the family off of welfare, without leaving them in a position of better care for the kids.
Of course, Reaganism in the 80s decrees that this constituted welfare fraud, so they would actually investigate the homes of mothers on welfare–if they found evidence the father was in residence, they would cut the whole family.
So now, the fathers had to live apart from the mom and kids, which of course costs more money but still not enough that it made financial sense to get married), thereby further limiting their child-care budget, AND as a kicker resulted in actual absenteeism among the dads. (Even with effort and good intentions, bonding with kids over distance is just more difficult.)
So the problem mainly comes from various efforts by conservatives to ‘limit abuse and fraud’ in welfare, while also refusing to require employers to pay an actual living wage. (Note: On the minimum wage issue, the Democrats get only half a pass–if the party actually wanted to address the issue, they’d restore the minimum wage’s purchasing power from the late 60s, and then tie it to inflation; right now, they prefer to use it as an issue every 12 years or so, as a way of kicking the poor and reminding them that they have to vote Democratic if they want to keep eating.)
The problem in this whole situation is that in the U.S., at least, “Muslim” IS heavily identified with ethnicity/race (I can’t speak to England, where Alan is from–it’s possible that the Muslim population is more generally ethnically balanced there). So there’s an increasingly strong assumption that if you’re Middle Eastern, you’re Muslim.
And in turn, America is still horribly segregated by race. One outcome of this is that Muslim women in America (especially first-generation immigrants) are often still cut off from the support networks that might help them get out of an abusive or dangerous situation. That said, the Femen approach isn’t going to make any impact on that isolation, either; if anything, it will make it harder for Muslim women to approach others, because the misogynists will be more wary. So, ultimately, I concur with sn0rkmaident–the protests don’t accomplish what they allegedly wanted to accomplish, and often hurt the people they were allegedly intended to help.
@ Sn0rkmaiden
Re: putting one’s foot in it.
At a gallery. Girl I’m with bumps into one of her girlfriends. She introduces me to her friend; her friend introduces me to her bloke “This is Dinos”.
They get to catching up. We do the bloke thing “Alright?” “Yup. You?” etc. We get onto the gallery. “What you reckon?” I start talking about some of the things I’ve seen. I get onto the Chapman Brothers exhibit they had. “Oh, what did you think of that?”
“Well” I say “Some of it was quite good. Of course there was a of of padding and that [x] thing they do is so over-rated, but I did like [y] and [z]”. I carry on and then realise my mate is staring daggers at me.
“How are you getting on with Dinos?”
“Er fine…”
“Dinos CHAPMAN!!!”
“Oh”
A disproportionate amount of nannies in the US are black women. If black women are so terrible at raising kids, why do people pay them to raise their kids?