Sunday, February 27, 2005

The Historic Psychic Scars that do Not Heal

Sometimes a moment of revelation can happen in the midst of a very ordinary event.

I was recently watching a very disturbing performance on C-SPAN the other day where a group of women sat transfixed before a man who spent the better part of an hour trying to convince them that mothers were not very good at raising our own children. Even though God, nature or just plain dumb evolutionary forces have designated us, women, the female of the species to bear, nurture and guide our young to maturity, this jackass thought he knew better then God, nature and evolution itself.

He brazenly stated that single fathers performed better then their female counterparts (single mothers) in 20 something different categories.* He blamed single mothers, as well as female teachers, for the fact that boys entered into gangs, claiming they were looking for the ‘male presence in the family’ they missed out on in their home life; very conveniently forgetting to mention the male presence who abandoned those families in the first place, thus making young men susceptible to the call of the wild, so to speak.

Additionally he let ‘white America’ get a free pass on this, as most of these problem homes are and will continue to be African-American, clearly impacted by the historic legacy of slavery in this society. Wherein single black women were encouraged to have one child after another, outside of the institution of marriage. Actually these women were rewarded for this behavior, as after they produced anywhere from 13 to 15 children for their white master to trade off for profit (remembering that this man was often the father of these children as well), this unfortunate mother was finally rewarded with her freedom.

This proved a true bargain with the devil and we live with this legacy today…and we MUST stop running away or trying to deny this responsibility or we will never solve the problems associated with it. By the way, anyone desiring more information on this phenomenon only need read the autobiography of Frederick Douglass...a real eye opener for those truly interested in the history of fathers in American society throughout that whole historic epoch.

Actually, historically North America was the only place in this hemisphere that micromanaged a people into being a self-reproducing slave population. Every other country, except our own, such as Brazil, the West Indies, etc., had to import slaves in order to have any, whereas the United States worked out a system that we could produce our own…and like I said, above, we live with this shameful legacy today as do the women who bear the psychic scars of this trauma and pass that along to their chilldren and their childrens' children.

There should be no minimizing of that crime and subsequent obligations we all bear because of it, none. It is our historic burden, our shame, an unpaid debt we still owe and we must bear it and deal with it, without blaming the victims who are still being crippled by that very ugly historic legacy.

We must accept this situation and it’s historic causes (us) and, most importantly, stop blaming the single black mother for this problem as young black men in gangs or in prison or doing drugs are not in trouble in this country because of their mothers.

AND I’m getting sick of listening to people trying to claim this.

Anyway, I digress…

This arrogant and foolish man then went so far as to mention that men appeared to be very willing to stay at home, while women went to work to support them, so men could raise the children, that they invested a whole two-second sperm donation in creating.

While mother who starts preparing for her children physically, psychologically and emotionally since about the age of 13 or so, (some say 7) then goes through 9 months of hell and high water (not to mention the hours of painful and bloody labor) to finally get them here in one piece, that she should be perfectly content to, well go join the marines, for instance, for a job to support her family…since there really didn’t appear to him to be much too different in being a marine or a mother…

Well at least it answers the question of why the US had to abandon most of its post-Vietnam era military ventures…and why some are beginning to question whether or not higher education, itself, is proving to be a huge waste of time and money for the US. As we appear to have raised and educated our ‘best and brightest’ to be some of the biggest jackasses in history.

Actually listening to this rant did not surprise me; as I’ve been listening to the male of our species pontificating on how much better a job they could do at raising children then mothers for the last 10 years or so now; but what did surprise me was that none of the women challenged him; they just sat their dumbly nodding in assent with faint smiles on some of their faces. There was more of an uproar at Harvard a few weeks ago, when someone dared to questions womens’ aptitude for science. Like, let’s face it, that is probably priority #853 for most women, as compared to these attempts to intellectually convince us that we aren’t good for our own children.

I almost hate to tell this jackass that mothers have been designated, since life itself first crawled out of the primal mist, as the most obvious, natural and best guardians for the young. This is the case in every species, including our own, and this designation was no accident. It’s because mother is the one who invest the most in bringing forth life, that she is the most natural guardian to see to it that that investment produces ‘fruit’. This has been the case and will remain the case long after this idiot falls into a hole somewhere and hopefully pulls it in after him; and if we are really lucky he’ll pull in the rest of these gender-neutralized social engineers who are perfectly willing to experiment with our kids in all kinds of weird family forms and strange custody arrangements.

A mothers’ children are her most precious possession, yet here we are ready to hand over, what women and women alone bring forth in pain and bloody suffering, to hand off into some sort of weird, gender-neutralized, social-engineering experiment, without a word of freakin protest.

I was disheartened and puzzled but then tonight once again, another revelation (and thank God it came just as I was ready to update my blog because otherwise, I would have been hard pressed to have an optimistic post tonight with all the death and destruction visited upon women by men this week; one bloody murder of us after another.)

Anyway, I’m watching C-SPAN again, listening to Tavis Smiley’s forum on the “State of Black America” and he introduces Thomas A. Parham, Ph.D who begins to expound on why African-Americans are in so much distress in spite of the 30 or 40 years since the civil rights movement and all the changes and assistance that is currently available for them. One of the issues he focuses on was psychic scarring. It exists, it run deep, it’s not visible. Additionally it can run so deep if you have enough traumatized generations born during the process, that you don’t even recognize it anymore. You think it’s normal and natural.

Thus you act and react to events, totally unaware that you are following a script that was written for you long before you, yourself, even existed. So no control is needed to keep you in your place, since you have already internalized the role that you’ve been assigned. It’s the matrix write large. Worse actually, as a matrix, if it existed, would be a physical ‘thing’ thus susceptible to being located and destroyed, whereas a historic psychic injury is not detectable, yet it can destroy your soul or, worse yet, cause you to destroy your soul since you don’t even recognize your essential self when it appears.

It struck me with a shock of recognition that Parham could have easily been talking about women, as what group has been living someone else’s script longer then we have.

Women, in their role as mothers, are frequently convinced by others that the mother/child bond is non-existence, so we have no more right to our children, then anyone else. Actually others should have more rights to them, as they are smarter and better then mothers, far more worthy to raise our children then we are. Additionally, we should be willing to participate in allowing men to experience being mothers, especially since they are so much better at doing everything else then us, why not this to? Or that our feeling towards are children are real, but irrational, primitive, not as significant as thing as a career in science. Definitely not as important as even a one-night stand with some jackoff who is only interested in women for how fast they can get you into the back seat of their cars, leaving you with a quick-drop sperm deposit before you are kicked to the curb again.

Actually everything in the world should be seen as more important to a mother then her children.

This fixation lately on women chasing after men for sex (as imprinted upon women via the media as in Sex in the City, Brittany Spears, every music video ever made, breast implants, etc.,) or the white wedding that must precede community-approved childbearing (that women spend much time chasing after causing tremendous soul-searing damage to ourselves in the process) keeps the focus on men, front and center in all womens’ lives.

It has caused women to expose ourselves to constant danger as in bringing dangerous men into our lives and our homes, rather then live alone.

It has caused women to allow men to disrespect us on both an individual and collective level, while we try everything possible to drag them to the altar for the traditional white wedding, that most men run from like the plague.

It has allowed women to subject ourselves to every sort of abuse from the one-night stand to posing half-naked everywhere we go, (more psychological rape of women which we enable to be done to us, we enable it). Regarding the one-night stand, let’s face it, this does nothing physically or emotionally for women. If we are being totally honest about it, women really use the one-night stand as a negotiating tool in a misguided attempt to build a deeper relationship with a man, who is actually only using women for sex in these one-night stands, nothing more.

It has allowed women to overlook the fact of abuse, both physical as well as emotional, in order to keep just about any relationship with a man no matter how destructive to us or our children.

It has caused women to use pregnancy as a negotiating tool in more desperate attempts to convince men to commit when men clearly want no part of us; thus causing our children untold hardship as they are court-ordered into relationships with men who would rather they do NOT even exist. Not to mention the worse case scenario if these ‘fathers’ decide to take custody in order to evade child support. Then our children, who should be front and center in our lives, our most precious possessions, are lost to us through the greed of men.

Sometimes lost forever as a mother losing custody might never see her child again. It the equivalent of sending a slave mothers’ child off to the deep south. It was the fear of most slave mothers as they knew it portended the end of their attempts to nurture and protect their children from outside forces…and spun their children out into the world and God only knew where they would wind up, God only knew…very similar to Bridget Marks’ twins or even Lisa Mason’s daughter…Once a mother loses custody of her children, anything can and frequently does happen to them…anything.

Thus, women must recognize this distortion of our priorities for the psychic scars that they are and work to heal ourselves.

Women must stop this trite madness of chasing men for either sex or marriages until we have healed ourselves to the point that we are able to negotiate a truly mutual relationship.

Women must focus on what should be front and center in our lives, our most precious possession, our children.

Women must stop listening to others who are either jealousy of the mother/child bond or are attempting to regain their position at the top of the hierarchy and have no problem with climbing unto the backs of our children to get there again.

Not to mention that they are quite content to continue inflicting even more psychic injury on women, as they continue this struggle to deprive us of our children.

I've posted some statistics below to dispute the 20 something talking points put forth by these gender-neutralized idiots in their quest to convince women that joining the marines would be more significant to mothers, then mothering our own children...

*Shaken Baby Syndrome Statistics

One shaken baby in four dies.

Some studies estimate that 15% of children's deaths are due to battering or shaking, and an additional 15% are possible cases of shaking.

Of the 37 children that died in Florida in 1995-96 13 died from a combination of Shaken Baby Syndrome/ Head Trauma.

Of the thousands that survive death, serious injury usually occurs.

"SBS" victims range in age from a few days to a few months old; the average is six months.

More than 60% of the victims of Shaken Baby Syndrome are male.

Almost 80% of the perpetrators of Shaken Baby Syndrome are male

Information courtesy of:

By the way these statistics hold true for New York as well.

I guess they forgot to include the 21st item on the list.

Here we have some other info overturning more lies put out about mothers.

Additionally the information indicates child abuse is increasing, probably as more men get custody of more children in their ongoing attempts to avoid paying child support, we will continue to see an increase.

This is why I frequently tell women never be afraid of honest statistics. As I am confident enough that thousands of years of evolution is not going to lie about the choice of women as the most obvious, natural and best guardian of the young in every species, including our own...

Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities: Statistics and Interventions
Author(s): National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information

Year Published: 2004


Despite the efforts of the child protection system, child fatalities remain a serious problem.1 Although the untimely deaths of children due to illness and accidents have been closely monitored, deaths that result from physical assault or severe neglect can be more difficult to track. Intervention strategies targeted at resolving this problem face complex challenges.

Unless otherwise noted, statistics in this fact sheet are taken from Child Maltreatment 2002 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2004).

How Many Children Die Each Year From Child Abuse and Neglect?

The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) reported an estimated 1,400 child fatalities in 2002. This translates to a rate of 1.98 children per 100,000 children in the general population. NCANDS defines "child fatality" as the death of a child caused by an injury resulting from abuse or neglect, or where abuse or neglect were contributing factors.

Many researchers and practitioners believe child fatalities due to abuse and neglect are underreported. States' definitions of key terms such as "child homicide," "abuse," and "neglect" vary (therefore, so do the numbers and types of child fatalities they report). In addition, some deaths officially labeled as accidents, child homicides, and/or Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) might be attributed to child abuse or neglect if more comprehensive investigations were conducted or if there was more consensus in the coding of abuse on death certificates.

Recent studies in Colorado and North Carolina have estimated as many as 50 to 60 percent of deaths resulting from abuse or neglect are not recorded (Crume, DiGuiseppi, Byers, Sirotnak, Garrett, 2002; Herman-Giddens, Brown, Verbiest, Carlson, Hooten, et al., 1999). These studies indicate that neglect is the most underrecorded form of fatal maltreatment.

Are Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities Increasing?

The rate of child abuse and neglect fatalities reported by NCANDS has increased slightly over the last several years from 1.84 per 100,000 children in 2000 to 1.96 in 2001 and 1.98 in 2002. However, experts do not agree whether this represents an actual increase in child abuse and neglect fatalities, or whether it may be attributed to improvements in reporting procedures. For example, statistics on approximately 20 percent of fatalities were from health departments and fatality review boards for 2002, compared to 11.4 percent for 2001, an indication of greater coordination of data collection among agencies.

A number of issues affecting the accuracy and consistency.

Who Are the Perpetrators?

No matter how the fatal abuse occurs, one fact of great concern is that the perpetrators are, by definition, individuals responsible for the care and supervision of their victims. In 2002, one or both parents were involved in 79 percent of child abuse or neglect fatalities. Of the other 21 percent of fatalities, 16 percent were the result of maltreatment by nonparent caretakers, and 5 percent were unknown or missing. These percentages are consistent with findings from previous years.

There is no single profile of a perpetrator of fatal child abuse, although certain characteristics reappear in many studies. Frequently the perpetrator is a young adult in his or her mid-20s without a high school diploma, living at or below the poverty level, depressed, and who may have difficulty coping with stressful situations. In many instances, the perpetrator has experienced violence first-hand. Most fatalities from physical abuse are caused by fathers and other male caretakers. Mothers are most often held responsible for deaths resulting from child neglect. However, in some cases this may be because women are most often responsible (or assumed to be responsible) for children's care (U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1995).

Information Courtesy of:


Pseudo-Adrienne said...

Thank you for recognizing that the scars of slavery are still alive and well, and still inflict psychological injuries on the African-American community. The most cruel thing that could ever happen to an African slave woman here in the States was having her own children sold to another plantation. Even if the white slave owner was the father, he would sell them anyway because they were nothing but cattle and "goods" to him.

Sometimes the mother would plead desperately to the master (her sperm donor) to keep them on the plantation. And sometimes she was lucky (but very rarely), and the master would keep the children as house slaves, which is what usually happen to Mulatto children anyway. And me being a mulatto and female, I'm pretty sure I would have ended up a house slave.....and then possibly and disturbingly a sex-toy for the master.

But as for this dipsh*t on C-SPAN...what an idiot. Women are usually and most of the time of course the better primary caregiver because women have been trained since day one to love, nurture, and care for children. That's why little girls get baby-dolls to play with when they're young. The toys instruct them how to take care of them, love them, be good mommies, etc. Little girls and beyond receive nothing but constant reinforcement about how to be maternal and prepare for motherhood. By the time a girl is 13, that's all she knows....unless she's an anomaly like me and turned out way different, even though she did play with baby-dolls when she was 5. I guess the Matrix failed with me, and good.

When's the last time a parent or a toy instructed or indoctrinate a boy how to be a good, nurturing, loving parent?! Parents just give boys GI Joes, toy cars, violent video games (I'll admit that I love playing Grand Theft Auto and Mortal Kombat), and guns. Boys and young men receive ZERO instructions or indoctrination in how to be a good parent. Boys, especially adolescent males, are just taught how to screw girls and leave them. No "how to be a good parent" mantra are instilled within them.

And yet these morons, like this guy on C-SPAN, who probably was raised like a typical male with toy guns and never instilled with any parental skills in the way girls are, truly believes that he is better than someone (ie: women) who received constant social/cultural reinforcement on how to be a parent?!! Idiot...

See, that's why I'm not one of them anymore. Where the f--k do these guys get these beyond imbecilic ideas?!!! Their ass, maybe?!!

And it is good to see a white person who admits that the scars from slavery still exist and effects us to this day, and we have an obligation to fix it, rather than blame the victims. America has a culture where we always blame the victims.

NYMOM said...

"The most cruel thing that could ever happen to an African slave woman here in the States was having her own children sold to another plantation."

Yes, but believe it or not, that wasn't the WORSE thing that could happen to them as, at least, at another neighboring plantation, mothers could hear news about their children from other visiting slaves or, sometimes, manage to sneak away from their own plantation for a quick visit... like what Frederick Douglass's mother used to do...she had to sneak out to visit him, at great risk to herself, since he was sent away as an infant to live off the plantation with other slave children, also separated from their mothers...

These children were kept off plantation usually cared for by older slave women and they would not be allowed to return to the plantation again until they were about 6 years old and could do some productive work like fetching water, running errands, caring for animals, etc.,

Actually Frederick Douglass's mother died before he was allowed back and he, himself, after his return almost died numerous times as well. It appears that his father/master paid no attention to him whatsoever. No one even bothered to feed him half the time, bathe him, or anything you would normally do for a six year old. Douglass managed to survive by stealing food and even a blanket as he said many times in his story, that he would have died from exposure if he hadn't managed to steal a blanket to keep himself warm at night...

Even then by the way, the media, such as it was, tried to lie about Douglass's father and paint him a better man then he was. Just as they do for men today. They tried to claim that Douglass LIED about his life and that his father arranged a tutor to teach him to read. It was an attempt to smear Douglass since he began to speak out against slavery. The media was trying to paint slavery as this benevolent institution where men 'cared' for slaves and any children they spawned on them... whereas the truth was that they spawned these children to sell for profit, not to be father to them...

Douglas was actually 'rescued' from his father through the dumbest of luck...a relative of his father had a somewhat sickly wife...she was looking for a young boy to run errands for her and help her around the house with chores and his father, wanting to get rid of Douglass, sent him off to live in Maryland...which by the way, this father didn't know or care WHAT happened to Douglass, he didn't even know these people very well...It think they were relatives by marriage...Douglass was about 10 or 12 years old I believe...

Anyway it was this woman who taught Douglass to read. I think she liked for him to read books to her while she knitted or something...She was threatened a few times by her husband when he used to catch her doing it but somehow, lucky for Douglass, she kept doing it anyway...

Anyway back to what I was saying, the WORSE thing that could happen to a slave mother and child was to have the child sent to the deep's probably equivalent to a non-custodial mothers' child being involved in a moveaway today; as there is NO guarantee that either women of that epoch or this one, would EVER see her child again...

Look at that Lisa Mason, 3 hours away and didn't see her child for almost 7 years...this little girl just abducted in Florida, same thing, father did not allow mother to see her daughter for over 4 years, since she was she's gone missing (and let's face it, probably dead) so this will be same crap again...she'll be allowed to view her daughter in her casket...

This is why I frequently refer to Frederick Douglass' book...I actually keep it close to my computer although it's gone missing. Maybe my granddaughter borrowed it as she is bi-racial and we like to keep her informed of her history so she grows up, God willing, not acting like an idiot...

I consider that book my bible and refer to it recently, particularly today when men conveniently would like women to forget their 'parenting' history and how they treated their own children in our historic past, which wasn't all that long ago. People keep talking about these things like they are ancient history...They aren' the emancipation of slaves took place in 1864 or so, about a year before we ended the Civil War.

American fathers could have rescued hundreds of thousands of their children during that period...yet they did nothing and these were the elite of their society, btw, they could have done anything they wanted...

YET today we are supposed to believe that men are just as concerned about children as their mothers are and always have been, no difference...that's why they ALL want custody now and deserve it because men are so concerned about has nothing to do with child support...

Hard to believe that people could think women are so stupid, isn't it...

"Women are usually and most of the time of course the better primary caregiver because women have been trained since day one to love, nurture, and care for children. That's why little girls get baby-dolls to play with when they're young."

I am not so sure I believe that this is just a question of training as in every other species the female is the bearer and primary caretaker of the I happen to think that is no coincidence...

Women might ultimately be better off if it was just a question of early training and there is no maternal instinct or mother/child bond involved; although I think if that does turn out to eventually prove to be the case, very few women will even bother having children since who the heck is going to go through all that pain, disfigurement, inconvenient, sheer bloody mess of the whole thing if there is no instinctual drive to be a mother underlying the whole thing...

Women will just be like men who, most of the time, can't be bothered...

Actually males in most other species are not allowed around the young and mothers will either flee or try to kill them if they attempt any contact.

Witness bears for spite of the propaganda spun out there by the media with that movie "The Bear" about a male bear who takes an abandoned cub under his wing and raises him, that, in reality is total and complete bs, it would never happen...As in the wild, male bears kill and eat cubs, even their own progeny...and male bears are responsible for the high mortality rate of bear cubs in the wild today...

We are on the edge so to speak in coming to some definitive conclusions regarding whether this is nature or nurture as my generation of women was already imprinted by society to be mothers; whereas my daughters (which is your generation as I have a 31 and a 20 year old) haven't let's see how many of them stick to the script and have children...

My oldest did but that was an accident and she has often said that with all the pain and mess involved she would NEVER do it again...and she hasn't, that was over ten years ago...My youngest closer to your age isn't sure she wants children either...

So time will tell...I believe if women having children is JUST a question of training, then most women will chose to just say no as the rewards are non-existent today compared to the investment women put into the whole thing...

Let's see.

And yes, I consider it my duty to remind people of this debt Ameria owes, not just because my own granddaughter is bi-racial but because we need to keep reminding those who chose to forget of the parenting history of men versus the parenting history of women and why men need to make the case for themselves as fathers and women do NOT and should not have to... as history speaks for mothers' goodwill towards their offspring, not so with fathers...

Callum said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
NYMOM said...

Sorry Callum...but I'm deleting you again as I warned you and others that this site is NOT going to turn into a contest about who abuses children more, men or's a small group of either men or women who do it, not reflective of the vast majority of us and thus, I'm not allowing you to try and smear women with the label of abusive.

Tom Naka said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.