The Irony of Whites Talking About Fatherless Black Families...

[Bobob]

The descendants of the same people who would break up black families by selling them are today the loudest talking people trying to diss the black community about single parent families.

When people start talking about race, there are just some simple realities that cannot be denied. If you are white and don't like how you are portrayed, start thinking about how unpleasant it really is for us who are not white to be portrayed as weak inferior people who got conquered by a supposedly superior race and culture. It is not a pleasant subject. For this to end we all must face the unpleasantness.

The doctrine of Partus sequitur ventrem comes from European civil law. It means; “That which is brought forth follows the belly.” This principle determined the legal status of children born by slave women in the America as well as other English or European colonies In colonial law, the partus doctrine justified enslavement, the indigenous people of the Americas and of the Africans imported to various European colonies personal property of those who imported them.

During the time American was a colony, this doctrine established de facto and de jure slavery for all children born to female slaves. Partus sequitur ventrem exempted the father from his obligations to children he fathered by slaves thereby creating the ability for slaveowners to have their way with enslaved women. Under this doctrine the biological father had no paternal responsibility to any child born to a slave woman. Because of this the slaver was provided the right to profit from exploiting the labor of children born to slaves. It gave the slaver the ability to sell children by taking them away from their biological parents. Partus sequitur ventrem was the doctrine that created the first family separation policy in what is now America.

Despite the claims of Africans selling each other, the doctrine of Partus sequitur ventrem does not appear to be a part of the system of African slavery.

Partus Sequitur Ventrem — The Rule That Perpetrated Slavery And Legalized Rape

This was the legal doctrine that made any child of an American female slave a slave as well. It meant any white fathers had no financial responsibility for their progeny. They were free to rape their slaves at will as there were no laws against that either. With no concern for any children that might come from the forced union. In fact, there was a market for mulatto and octaroon children who would be purchased to work as domestics. Some owners (Thomas Jefferson) used their half-white slaves as their concubines, finding them more attractive the closer they were to white. Sally Hemings was Jefferson’s wife’s half-sister, the product of her father raping a slave. Then again the master might sell their offspring to keep the peace with their wives who might be annoyed at little slave children running around who favor their husbands.

Not talked about in proper society were the children of free white women and black slaves. White women who weren’t sure what color the child might be could get a legal abortion those days. “Cottonwood” was a remedy known to slaves who sometimes refused to have children after being raped or as often as the masters would like. Some women would be forced to have over a dozen children if they survived as death during childbirth was relatively common. The rare slave would be offered their freedom if they produced enough children. Sometimes the dark child of a white woman was abandoned or given away. Usually just sold off although technically they were legally free.

View attachment 437108

Partus Sequitur Ventrem — The Rule That Perpetrated Slavery And Legalized Rape | by William Spivey | Dialogue & Discourse | Medium

Partus sequitur ventrem legal definition of Partus sequitur ventrem (thefreedictionary.com)

Black families without fathers over the past sixty years wasn't caused by slavery, IM2...it's something that took place because of a short sighted welfare system that made it financially beneficial to NOT have a father in the house incentivized that to take place!

Of course sending jobs overseas that once made it possible for people to survive had nothing to do with it. It all goes back to the same thing. Slavery, the dismantling of our manufacturing. Greed.

The dismantling of manufacturing in our country was the result of high costs, which resulted in manufacturing losing its competitive edge. The alternative was to move or close. They don't move to make more money (with exceptions) but move to remain profitable. The cost of moving is very high and is done out of desperation
as companies see the writing on the wall.

Germany addressed that without allowing their manufacturing to leave.

Actually. their manufacturing has opened in other countries and kept manufacturing in Germany also. Our government has also addressed it with intimidating statements and threats, and trump doing the talking. The great negotiator should take a lesson from Merkle.

 

[Mac-7]

Do you really want to split hairs on the crimes?

Lawyers do it all the time

Its the way our legal system works

now, are insisting on a quota for blacks arrests and convictions?

if a jury sends a black criminal to jail today does the next one have to go free?

 

[Mac-7]

And you are ignoring the fact that if a Black man was arrested and tried for some crime and a White person was not arrested for that very same crime that your assumption that Blacks commit more crimes is flawed.

Where does you vaunted lib sentencing commission say that is happening?

 

[pknopp]

The descendants of the same people who would break up black families by selling them are today the loudest talking people trying to diss the black community about single parent families.

When people start talking about race, there are just some simple realities that cannot be denied. If you are white and don't like how you are portrayed, start thinking about how unpleasant it really is for us who are not white to be portrayed as weak inferior people who got conquered by a supposedly superior race and culture. It is not a pleasant subject. For this to end we all must face the unpleasantness.

The doctrine of Partus sequitur ventrem comes from European civil law. It means; “That which is brought forth follows the belly.” This principle determined the legal status of children born by slave women in the America as well as other English or European colonies In colonial law, the partus doctrine justified enslavement, the indigenous people of the Americas and of the Africans imported to various European colonies personal property of those who imported them.

During the time American was a colony, this doctrine established de facto and de jure slavery for all children born to female slaves. Partus sequitur ventrem exempted the father from his obligations to children he fathered by slaves thereby creating the ability for slaveowners to have their way with enslaved women. Under this doctrine the biological father had no paternal responsibility to any child born to a slave woman. Because of this the slaver was provided the right to profit from exploiting the labor of children born to slaves. It gave the slaver the ability to sell children by taking them away from their biological parents. Partus sequitur ventrem was the doctrine that created the first family separation policy in what is now America.

Despite the claims of Africans selling each other, the doctrine of Partus sequitur ventrem does not appear to be a part of the system of African slavery.

Partus Sequitur Ventrem — The Rule That Perpetrated Slavery And Legalized Rape

This was the legal doctrine that made any child of an American female slave a slave as well. It meant any white fathers had no financial responsibility for their progeny. They were free to rape their slaves at will as there were no laws against that either. With no concern for any children that might come from the forced union. In fact, there was a market for mulatto and octaroon children who would be purchased to work as domestics. Some owners (Thomas Jefferson) used their half-white slaves as their concubines, finding them more attractive the closer they were to white. Sally Hemings was Jefferson’s wife’s half-sister, the product of her father raping a slave. Then again the master might sell their offspring to keep the peace with their wives who might be annoyed at little slave children running around who favor their husbands.

Not talked about in proper society were the children of free white women and black slaves. White women who weren’t sure what color the child might be could get a legal abortion those days. “Cottonwood” was a remedy known to slaves who sometimes refused to have children after being raped or as often as the masters would like. Some women would be forced to have over a dozen children if they survived as death during childbirth was relatively common. The rare slave would be offered their freedom if they produced enough children. Sometimes the dark child of a white woman was abandoned or given away. Usually just sold off although technically they were legally free.

View attachment 437108

Partus Sequitur Ventrem — The Rule That Perpetrated Slavery And Legalized Rape | by William Spivey | Dialogue & Discourse | Medium

Partus sequitur ventrem legal definition of Partus sequitur ventrem (thefreedictionary.com)

Black families without fathers over the past sixty years wasn't caused by slavery, IM2...it's something that took place because of a short sighted welfare system that made it financially beneficial to NOT have a father in the house incentivized that to take place!

Of course sending jobs overseas that once made it possible for people to survive had nothing to do with it. It all goes back to the same thing. Slavery, the dismantling of our manufacturing. Greed.

The dismantling of manufacturing in our country was the result of high costs, which resulted in manufacturing losing its competitive edge. The alternative was to move or close. They don't move to make more money (with exceptions) but move to remain profitable. The cost of moving is very high and is done out of desperation
as companies see the writing on the wall.

Germany addressed that without allowing their manufacturing to leave.

Actually. their manufacturing has opened in other countries and kept manufacturing in Germany also. Our government has also addressed it with intimidating statements and threats, and trump doing the talking. The great negotiator should take a lesson from Merkle.

If G.M. wants to open manufacturing in China to sell cars in China no one is going to complain. The complaint is when they do that to sell cars here.

Yes, we could learn from Germany.

 

[Blues Man]

Do you really want to split hairs on the crimes?

Lawyers do it all the time

Its the way our legal system works

now, are insisting on a quota for blacks arrests and convictions?

if a jury sends a black criminal to jail today does the next one have to go free?

Of course I'm not insisting on quotas.

But if a person gets convicted of Crime X and gets 5 years then every single person convicted of Crime X should get 5 years.

Do you disagree?

If a cop arrests a person for Crime Y then that cop should arrest every single person that commits Crime Y

Do you diagree?

 

[Blues Man]

And you are ignoring the fact that if a Black man was arrested and tried for some crime and a White person was not arrested for that very same crime that your assumption that Blacks commit more crimes is flawed.

Where does you vaunted lib sentencing commission say that is happening?

Since it was the sentencing committee their report only dealt with sentencing.

I am introducing another variable into the discussion.

 

[Mac-7]

The great negotiator should take a lesson from Merkle.

Merkle would not know the difference between an Allen wrench and a screwdriver

the germans are good at engineering because they just are

its something in the Teutonic DNA I suppose

Since the Industrial Revolution began german engineering has been better than American

where we excelled was in applying good engineering on a large scal at reasonable prices

and now china has even taken that away from us

 

[Mac-7]

But if a person gets convicted of Crime X and gets 5 years then every single person convicted of Crime X should get 5 years.

Even if one criminal has prior convictions and the other does not?

or if that criminal shows no remorse and utter contempt for the court that is judging him?

nothing is ever as simple as you want it to be

 

[Mac-7]

If a cop arrests a person for Crime Y then that cop should arrest every single person that commits Crime Y

Thats really crazy

if the cops did that there would be no black men between the age of 18 and 65 in the hood

but I suppose you mean after the cop books the black criminal he should diligently search for a white person to arrest next

 

[Bobob]

The great negotiator should take a lesson from Merkle.

Merkle would not know the difference between an Allen wrench and a screwdriver

the germans are good at engineering because they just are

its something in the Teutonic DNA I suppose

Since the Industrial Revolution began german engineering has been better than American

where we excelled was in applying good engineering on a large scal at reasonable prices

and now china has even taken that away from us

China has not taken away "reasonable prices" from us. When a pair of American made jeans cost $90 dollars, of course we will buy Chinese or Mexican, etc.
Our prices will continue to rise due to trump's failed, bullying policies as European countries make trade deals with China. The great negotiator.
Merkle doesn't have to know those differences because she has people in her sphere who know what she doesn't know. Trump has people in his sphere who voted for him and tell him what he wants to hear rather than what he needs to hear.

 

[beagle9]

We have been specific many times.

You mean arguing with or resisting the police.

thats not the way most white people act when they are pulled over

but there are exceptions

As you note, you do not have to simply bend over when your rights are going to be violated. Some reason causes you want blacks to do so.

Standing up for your rights is a noble thing. That aside, however, consider the practicalities of the situation. An armed officer is going to violate your rights and is authorized to use violence to subdue you if you do not comply. And should you fight back enough to become a threat, he/she can kill you. Then, should you manage to get away, the entire police force is looking for you and will arrest you on sight. Now, is it better to "stand up for your rights" and be beaten, a wanted fugitive, maybe dead, or comply and let a lawyer have a field day getting you a big paycheck?

The only reason that officer is charged to violate ones right's temporarily, is because it's the only way the officer can do his job when investigating any person involved in a crime or potential crime that has been reported. If a man sets up his wife by lies and fake bullcrap or vice versa when the law is called, then the officer arriving on the scene can only go by the information that was given to him or her. Ok so when the officer arrives, say the alledged victim who is setting the other person up, begins to pour on the bullcrap, maybe even show the officer some scratches, cuts or bruises self administered in order to seal the deal right. Then the next thing you know, is that the person being set up decides this is bullcrap, and I ain't getting out of this so they bolt. The officer then takes that as a possible admission of guilt, and takes off after the person. He catches the person, and the person begins to fight the officer, maybe take his taser in hopes to get free and not be tased when running away, so the officer gives warning to stop, and ends up shooting the possible suspect in so that he doesn't pose a danger on society at large.

Who is responsible for the person getting shot ???? The one who set the person up is who, and of course the poor person being set up not trusting in the justice system to give him a fair shake also led to the confusion in the situation, but the poor cop ends up being the bad guy in the end unfortunately. These things have got to be addressed, because they are real, but the leftist blaming the cops for political nefarious reason's is wrong big time.

 

[beagle9]

The great negotiator should take a lesson from Merkle.

Merkle would not know the difference between an Allen wrench and a screwdriver

the germans are good at engineering because they just are

its something in the Teutonic DNA I suppose

Since the Industrial Revolution began german engineering has been better than American

where we excelled was in applying good engineering on a large scal at reasonable prices

and now china has even taken that away from us

China has not taken away "reasonable prices" from us. When a pair of American made jeans cost $90 dollars, of course we will buy Chinese or Mexican, etc.
Our prices will continue to rise due to trump's failed, bullying policies as European countries make trade deals with China. The great negotiator.
Merkle doesn't have to know those differences because she has people in her sphere who know what she doesn't know. Trump has people in his sphere who voted for him and tell him what he wants to hear rather than what he needs to hear.

You shouldn't have the option of using a communist nation to slave their citizen's in order to make life cheaper for you here. If you think otherwise, then you are no better than those who reeped the benefits of slavery in the 1800s.

 

[Blues Man]

But if a person gets convicted of Crime X and gets 5 years then every single person convicted of Crime X should get 5 years.

Even if one criminal has prior convictions and the other does not?

or if that criminal shows no remorse and utter contempt for the court that is judging him?

nothing is ever as simple as you want it to be

Like I said the Sentencing commission's report accounted for that so for the sake of discussion lets assume that all contributing factors are accounted for.

But then again if Crime X is an automatic 5 year sentence why isn't it an automatic 5 year sentence for each commission?

For example let's say Crime Y is a class D felony and has a 2 year sentence. What does it matter if a person commits Crime Y once, or twice? the crime hasn't changed.

 

[Blues Man]

If a cop arrests a person for Crime Y then that cop should arrest every single person that commits Crime Y

Thats really crazy

if the cops did that there would be no black men between the age of 18 and 65 in the hood

but I suppose you mean after the cop books the black criminal he should diligently search for a white person to arrest next

and there'd be a lot more white men between those ages in jail.

 

[Bobob]

The great negotiator should take a lesson from Merkle.

Merkle would not know the difference between an Allen wrench and a screwdriver

the germans are good at engineering because they just are

its something in the Teutonic DNA I suppose

Since the Industrial Revolution began german engineering has been better than American

where we excelled was in applying good engineering on a large scal at reasonable prices

and now china has even taken that away from us

China has not taken away "reasonable prices" from us. When a pair of American made jeans cost $90 dollars, of course we will buy Chinese or Mexican, etc.
Our prices will continue to rise due to trump's failed, bullying policies as European countries make trade deals with China. The great negotiator.
Merkle doesn't have to know those differences because she has people in her sphere who know what she doesn't know. Trump has people in his sphere who voted for him and tell him what he wants to hear rather than what he needs to hear.

You shouldn't have the option of using a communist nation to slave their citizen's in order to make life cheaper for you here. If you think otherwise, then you are no better than those who reeped the benefits of slavery in the 1800s.

Hey, I need a pair of jeans. You got $90 for me? American manufacturing has to be competitive, and they are not. That is the free market, yes? This is where it falls short. Nobody that I know is going to spend $90 on a pair of jeans. The free world has to do something about China, not just trump who has failed miserably with his
saber-rattling tactics across the board.

 

[Bobob]

But if a person gets convicted of Crime X and gets 5 years then every single person convicted of Crime X should get 5 years.

Even if one criminal has prior convictions and the other does not?

or if that criminal shows no remorse and utter contempt for the court that is judging him?

nothing is ever as simple as you want it to be

Like I said the Sentencing commission's report accounted for that so for the sake of discussion lets assume that all contributing factors are accounted for.

But then again if Crime X is an automatic 5 year sentence why isn't it an automatic 5 year sentence for each commission?

For example let's say Crime Y is a class D felony and has a 2 year sentence. What does it matter if a person commits Crime Y once, or twice? the crime hasn't changed.

If a person commits crime Y once, and crime D once, he should get a longer sentence for committing crimes so that he gets the message.

 

[hadit]

We have been specific many times.

You mean arguing with or resisting the police.

thats not the way most white people act when they are pulled over

but there are exceptions

As you note, you do not have to simply bend over when your rights are going to be violated. Some reason causes you want blacks to do so.

Standing up for your rights is a noble thing. That aside, however, consider the practicalities of the situation. An armed officer is going to violate your rights and is authorized to use violence to subdue you if you do not comply. And should you fight back enough to become a threat, he/she can kill you. Then, should you manage to get away, the entire police force is looking for you and will arrest you on sight. Now, is it better to "stand up for your rights" and be beaten, a wanted fugitive, maybe dead, or comply and let a lawyer have a field day getting you a big paycheck?

The only reason that officer is charged to violate ones right's temporarily, is because it's the only way the officer can do his job when investigating any person involved in a crime or potential crime that has been reported. If a man sets up his wife by lies and fake bullcrap or vice versa when the law is called, then the officer arriving on the scene can only go by the information that was given to him or her. Ok so when the officer arrives, say the alledged victim who is setting the other person up, begins to pour on the bullcrap, maybe even show the officer some scratches, cuts or bruises self administered in order to seal the deal right. Then the next thing you know, is that the person being set up decides this is bullcrap, and I ain't getting out of this so they bolt. The officer then takes that as a possible admission of guilt, and takes off after the person. He catches the person, and the person begins to fight the officer, maybe take his taser in hopes to get free and not be tased when running away, so the officer gives warning to stop, and ends up shooting the possible suspect in so that he doesn't pose a danger on society at large.

Who is responsible for the person getting shot ???? The one who set the person up is who, and of course the poor person being set up not trusting in the justice system to give him a fair shake also led to the confusion in the situation, but the poor cop ends up being the bad guy in the end unfortunately. These things have got to be addressed, because they are real, but the leftist blaming the cops for political nefarious reason's is wrong big time.

I think it comes down to when you cut your losses. If you run and get away, you are not free because the police will not stop looking for you. Whenever and wherever you pop up, you will be arrested, and this time they will not be polite about it. If you are being arrested for a misdemeanor, don't be stupid and turn it into a felony. Fight it out in court. Sure, the system isn't perfect, but it's generally weighted on the side of the defendant. In fact, that's one of the complaints, that too many defendants who seem to be clearly guilty are released because the police didn't follow procedure perfectly or the evidence just wasn't quite strong enough. And sometimes you get a raw deal and there's nothing you can do about it. Maybe if we didn't demand so much government oversight over so many facets of our lives we wouldn't feel like Big Brother is watching, hoping we'll break one of the thousands of laws.

 

[Blues Man]

But if a person gets convicted of Crime X and gets 5 years then every single person convicted of Crime X should get 5 years.

Even if one criminal has prior convictions and the other does not?

or if that criminal shows no remorse and utter contempt for the court that is judging him?

nothing is ever as simple as you want it to be

Like I said the Sentencing commission's report accounted for that so for the sake of discussion lets assume that all contributing factors are accounted for.

But then again if Crime X is an automatic 5 year sentence why isn't it an automatic 5 year sentence for each commission?

For example let's say Crime Y is a class D felony and has a 2 year sentence. What does it matter if a person commits Crime Y once, or twice? the crime hasn't changed.

If a person commits crime Y once, and crime D once, he should get a longer sentence for committing crimes so that he gets the message.

Why should he?

If the sentence for Crime Y is 2 years then a person gets 2 years for every commission of that crime.

But then again a 2 year sentence has to be a 2 year sentence, none of this early release crap.

 

[AveryJarhman]

The descendants of the same people who would break up black families by selling them are today the loudest talking people trying to diss the black community about single parent families.

When people start talking about race, there are just some simple realities that cannot be denied. If you are white and don't like how you are portrayed, start thinking about how unpleasant it really is for us who are not white to be portrayed as weak inferior people who got conquered by a supposedly superior race and culture. It is not a pleasant subject. For this to end we all must face the unpleasantness.

The doctrine of Partus sequitur ventrem comes from European civil law. It means; “That which is brought forth follows the belly.” This principle determined the legal status of children born by slave women in the America as well as other English or European colonies In colonial law, the partus doctrine justified enslavement, the indigenous people of the Americas and of the Africans imported to various European colonies personal property of those who imported them.

During the time American was a colony, this doctrine established de facto and de jure slavery for all children born to female slaves. Partus sequitur ventrem exempted the father from his obligations to children he fathered by slaves thereby creating the ability for slaveowners to have their way with enslaved women. Under this doctrine the biological father had no paternal responsibility to any child born to a slave woman. Because of this the slaver was provided the right to profit from exploiting the labor of children born to slaves. It gave the slaver the ability to sell children by taking them away from their biological parents. Partus sequitur ventrem was the doctrine that created the first family separation policy in what is now America.

Despite the claims of Africans selling each other, the doctrine of Partus sequitur ventrem does not appear to be a part of the system of African slavery.

Partus Sequitur Ventrem — The Rule That Perpetrated Slavery And Legalized Rape

This was the legal doctrine that made any child of an American female slave a slave as well. It meant any white fathers had no financial responsibility for their progeny. They were free to rape their slaves at will as there were no laws against that either. With no concern for any children that might come from the forced union. In fact, there was a market for mulatto and octaroon children who would be purchased to work as domestics. Some owners (Thomas Jefferson) used their half-white slaves as their concubines, finding them more attractive the closer they were to white. Sally Hemings was Jefferson’s wife’s half-sister, the product of her father raping a slave. Then again the master might sell their offspring to keep the peace with their wives who might be annoyed at little slave children running around who favor their husbands.

Not talked about in proper society were the children of free white women and black slaves. White women who weren’t sure what color the child might be could get a legal abortion those days. “Cottonwood” was a remedy known to slaves who sometimes refused to have children after being raped or as often as the masters would like. Some women would be forced to have over a dozen children if they survived as death during childbirth was relatively common. The rare slave would be offered their freedom if they produced enough children. Sometimes the dark child of a white woman was abandoned or given away. Usually just sold off although technically they were legally free.

View attachment 437108

Partus Sequitur Ventrem — The Rule That Perpetrated Slavery And Legalized Rape | by William Spivey | Dialogue & Discourse | Medium

Partus sequitur ventrem legal definition of Partus sequitur ventrem (thefreedictionary.com)

Black families without fathers over the past sixty years wasn't caused by slavery, IM2...it's something that took place because of a short sighted welfare system that made it financially beneficial to NOT have a father in the house incentivized that to take place!

Black families without fathers are not the problem. But whites like yourself want to avoid the real problem.

On June 8, 2015, Charles Blow wrote an article in the New York Times titled, “Black Dads Are Doing Best of All.” McDonald should have read it. This article takes apart the tale of black fathers not being around for their kids. The issue of unwed births really has no relation to whether 2 parents are around. An unwed birth is a child being born and the couple is not married. That does not mean a man and a woman are not together raising the child. The single mother narrative got destroyed long ago, because a single mother does not mean a man will not be around to influence the child as it grows up. One fantastic example is the story Shaquille O’Neal tells about his relationship with Sergeant Phillip Harrison who raised him with his mother. Finally, the appearance of Barack Obama on the world stage allows me to say once and for all that a single parent family is not the cause of the problem. This article shows that the majority of black children in this country live with their fathers or their fathers are active participants in their lives. In reality, not the convoluted racist mind, a mother and father ARE present in the majority of black homes.

Josh Levs points this out in his new book, “All In,” in a chapter titled “How Black Dads Are Doing Best of All (But There’s Still a Crisis).” One fact that Levs quickly establishes is that most black fathers in America live with their children: “There are about 2.5 million black fathers living with their children and about 1.7 million living apart from them.”

Charles Blow​

A report titled “Fathers’ Involvement With Their Children: United States, 2006–2010,” was published by the Centers for Disease Control in the National Health Report on December 20, 2013. The findings are interesting for those who have decided they can paint black culture in moral terms. Moral terms that 244 years of American history show whites who have decided they can do the painting, refuse hold themselves to. The findings in this study debunk the standard racist white narrative to the point that it is miseducation, misinformation, lies, or whatever word you want to give to the purposeful deception provided to describe a race of people. Some of the findings are as follows:

A higher percentage of fathers who lived with their children under age 5 fed or ate meals with them daily—72% compared with 7.9% of fathers with noncoresidential children. A higher percentage of fathers living apart from their children did not feed or eat meals with them at all in the last 4 weeks—43% compared with 0.8% of fathers with coresidential children (Table 2). Variation by Hispanic origin and race was seen in the percentages of coresidential fathers who ate meals with their children every day. Specifically, Hispanic fathers were less likely to eat meals with their children every day (64%) than were non-Hispanic white (74%) or non-Hispanic black (78%) fathers.

There was a significant difference by Hispanic origin and race among fathers with coresidential children: Black fathers (70%) were most likely to have bathed, dressed, diapered, or helped their children use the toilet every day compared with white (60%) and Hispanic fathers (45%).

A higher percentage of Hispanic fathers aged 15–44 (52%) had not played with their noncoresidential children in the last 4 weeks compared with white (30%) and black (25%) fathers.

Larger percentages of Hispanic (82%) and white (70%) fathers had not helped their noncoresidential children with homework at all in the last 4 weeks compared with black fathers (56%).

• Pew Research estimates that 67 percent of black dads who don’t live with their kids see them at least once a month, compared to 59 percent of white dads and 32 percent of Hispanic dads. Evidence shows that a number of black dads living apart from their kids because of structural systems of inequality and poverty, not the unfounded racist assumption that African-American men place less or no value on parenting. Black and white fathers agree on the importance of being a father who provides emotional support, instills discipline and moral guidance. Black dads are also more likely to think it is important to provide for his children financially.

Simply put, the unwed, single mom, absent black father is not the cause of crime or violence in black communities. Single mothers have boyfriends, this seems to be ignored and it should not be.

"Jay-Z Speaks About Fatherlessness, Police"



During this broadcast Childhood Trauma (ACEs) victim Shawn Carter, aka Jay-Z, speaks about single parenting and police enforcement.


EndHate2021

 

[Mac-7]

I am introducing another variable into the discussion.

We introduced the variable of fatherless children and the pressure broken homes have on young boys

It applies to all races but the numbers of single mothers are greater among blacks