Changes that help us change

It should come as no surprise that to positively change our lives we must purposely change our minds. New ways of living often require new ways of thinking, and new ways of thinking often require new ways of reasoning and perceiving "the world, and they that dwell therein." We must change not only the way we think through situations, but also the much more visceral process of the way we think to situations.

iAMrj * richard jones

Good men treated badly

A good man who's a single man is a suspect. Far too many women are suspicious of his "goodness" because they believe that, if he is really a good man, he should (and would!) be taken.

Often, the assumption here is that there's an overabundance of good women from which a good man can choose. A good man may be hard to find, but not his lady. Thus, women interrogate him incessantly - "So, tell me, why is a 'good' man like you still single?" - as though it's a criminal offense for him not to be committed to someone.

Catch is, women also want good men to be single. They complain that "all the good men" are taken, gay, family members, fictional characters, or just too far away. "Where are all the 'good' men?" they wonder, because they cannot love without them. They desire the good men whose very existence they often deny. Many women seek what their cynicism often won't allow them to see.

Even if the statistics showing that single women far outnumber single men are accurate, this does not mean that all or the majority of those women are good women. Like finding a good man, finding a good woman can be like searching for lost contact lenses in a haystack. So, good men also have a good reason for being single: It usually takes making some or a lot of wrong choices to finally get with Ms. Right.

A good man might also be single because he simply prefers this lifestyle. There may be somebody for everybody, but sometimes people just want to be alone. Therefore, a good man isn't necessarily someone who wants to date or marry. He may want friendship and little or nothing more. And, of course, this is okay, especially if he's "man" enough to be honest about his life and intentions.

What I'm getting at is this: It doesn’t make sense for any woman to want a good man to be single and then hold it against him for being just that. It's also his prerogative to take his time with relationships or take timeouts from relationships. Besides, what makes a man good isn't his having or not having a certain lovestyle, but his having a lifestyle distinguished by integrity, respect, compassion, and consistency.

iAMrj * richard jones

Racist NBA dress code? Nonsense!

The love of money is the root of all kinds of edicts.

That's what someone should have told Indiana Pacers guard Stephen Jackson, after he said during an interview with ESPN that the NBA's new dress code makes "a racist statement."

Jackson is in a tizzy because, come November 1, he and the other NBA players will be forbidden from wearing jewelry on top of the new, mandated "business casual" attire during league or team business.

"I just think that's attacking young, Black males," said Jackson, who "protested" by wearing four chains to the Pacers' exhibition game against the San Antonio Spurs on Tuesday night.

He also indicated that he intends to protest for as long as he can do so for free! According to news reports, he said that he would not continue to defy the dress code because he did not want to pay fines.

Professional basketball may be a "game" of sort, but one thing it is for sure is serious business. Someone needs to remind Jackson that the main business of a business like the NBA is to make as much money as it can.

The NBA entertains us for the sake of enRICHing its owners and advertisers. So, whenever the dust settles, these are the groups of people that Commissioner David Stern must appease.

Thus, Michael Wilbon wrote in the Washington Post, "Right now the league's image isn't good. I'm not talking about the perception of NBA players in a hip-hop universe, which the league married itself to 10 years ago; I'm talking about their image among the people who pay for their lavish professional existence, meaning primarily network partners and corporate sponsors. Hip-hop may be the image of the league; by and large it doesn't fund the league."

Anyone who thinks that Stern should do more to appeal to and appease another group of people needs to understand that, in the business world, there is the greatest strength in numbers when your numbers add up to the greatest source of income and revenue.

Ticket purchases might guarantee you a seat at NBA games, but they don't ensure that you will have a real voice in NBA boardrooms.

If you want the NBA to reflect a certain image, then compel it to do so by truly bankrolling it or boycotting it.

As for Jackson, if he ever goes from making shots to calling the shots, then he will truly understand why he must "dress for success."

iAMrj * richard jones

My problem with "being Black"

All efforts to determine who is Black and just how Black they are immediately thrust us into an interminable crisis involving criteria. What or whose standard should we use? Should people be considered Black merely because they claim to be Black, or must the claim to be Black be accompanied by other specific characteristics, commitments, and connections?

Of course, some people provide swift and savvy answers. But the more we are persuaded by their arguments, the more likely it is that those same arguments will lead us to preclude ourselves or a significant number of others we thought were Black.

Thus, Howard Winant wrote, "Race is not only real, but also illusory. Not only is it common sense, it is common nonsense. Not only does it establish our identity; it also denies us our identity."

It is also disturbing how the very notion of "being Black" often seems to uphold the very form of racist thinking it is said to oppose.

Racism is the idea that a person's pigmentation somehow determines their proclivities, potential, priorities, and pursuits. It is also the fallacious notion that one can judge who's better than who merely by the color of their skin, and when this attitude is acted on, it is leads to sinister and savage efforts to elevate one so-called race above all others.

Of course, this means that racist thinking is not only reflected in overt degradation of others. This misguided mindset is also and always mirrored in the expectation that people should believe and behave certain ways simply because they are said to possess certain biological traits.

For example, racist logic is reflected in the very popular assumption that there is a generic and global "Black community" upon which "racial" identity has conferred limited likes and dislikes or "a set of unproblematic group interests."

Such is "a deceptive cloak of racial consensus," as philosopher and social critic Cornel West dubbed it in his must-read essay titled "The Pitfalls of Racial Reasoning."

This "racial reasoning" should be renounced and resisted not only because it is deceptive, but because it inexorably (mis)leads people to perspectives and practices that force them into arbitrarily fixed and fettered modes of being and expression rather than liberate them to pursue all positive possibilities.

iAMrj * richard jones

Parenting and positive possibilities

I'm a new daddy! Not because there's a newborn in my life, but because over the past few years I've renewed my relationships with my three daughters. They're ages 18, 13, and 11, and the foremost reason I'm so blessed to be me. As I wrote in a confessional piece titled "Daddy, Do Better," loving and being loved by them has made a powerful and positive difference in my life. Such is a joy of parenting that I'm delighted to share with you.

I also want to encourage all other parents, especially men, to reclaim and revitalize their relationships with their children. No matter what age you and your child are, and no matter what your relationship with your child or children is like, there's always room from improvement and the need to deepen intimacy. As parents, we also need close and appropriate relationships with our children to truly feel good about ourselves and avoid being inundated with regret.

That does not mean that our relationships with our children will be problem-free. There will be challenging moments and times because "to error is human." Of course, parents are human too, so it's certainly not always our children's fault that they and our relationships with them sometimes falter. Regardless of the reason for each predicament, it's critically important that we respond with humility, empathy, openness, honesty, forgiveness, and a helping hand rather than with just sternness, defensiveness, judgmentalism, and rebuke. Just as we must not always condone, we must not always condemn. We must be wise, even-handed, and circumspect in guiding our children and growing with them.

For parents who are estranged from their child or children, as I once was, there's undying hope for renewal until death do you part. And the fount of this hope isn't denial of the needless pain either the child or parent has suffered, but that indomitable desire for a wholesome parent-child relationship that seems to indwell every parent and child. It may seem impossible to even fathom the healing of gaping familial wounds, but as long as there's the breath of life in you and your child, there's a real and fighting chance that you can breathe new life into your relationship.

If, for whatever reason, you're a parent or child interested in such matters, please share your thoughts, suggestions, inspiring stories, questions, and concerns. I'd love to know that you were here and what you think.

iAMrj * richard jones

Blacks shouldn't defend Bill Bennett?

My blog titled "Bill Bennett loses his 'philosophicool'" has many Black readers doubting whether I am "truly Black." Apparently, the color of my skin should have somehow compelled me react more negatively to his intentionally absurd proposition that one could reduce the U.S. crime rate by aborting every Black baby. Not only should I be Black and proud, but Black and predictable as well.

My critics also imply that there is no better way for me to enhance my life and expand my positive possibilities than by having Black demagogues and their disciples arbitrarily tether my thoughts, delimit my desires, and dictate my decisions.

Of course, I disagree with my critics on those points. But what do you think? What should be 'the' Black response to Bill Bennett's "thoughtless thought experiment?" Or, is it wrongheaded altogether to expect any kind of uniform response from Blacks? Please click the appropriate link on this page and leave your comments.

iAMrj * richard jones

Bill Bennett loses his 'philosophicool'

A public philosopher who does not always think before he speaks is his own worst enemy. Consider, for example, William Bennett, the University of Texas-trained philosopher and former U.S. secretary of education. His recent comment about aborting every Black baby in order to reduce crime has, for many people, cost him whatever was left of his contentious credibility.

But dare this father of three Black babies point out that "Virtuous Bill" mentioned the appalling position not to espouse it, but to expose a weakness in utilitarian pro-life reasoning. A man had just called into Bennett's daily radio show and suggested that one might be against abortion on the grounds that it consists of taking the lives of humans who could make positive contributions to our economy in general and social security in particular.

Immediately recognizing that such reasoning "cuts both ways," Bennett informed the caller that he would not make such a philosophical argument against abortion. He then cautioned the caller to be careful with that kind of reasoning because someone could just as easily argue in favor of abortion on the grounds that certain individuals are likely to have a negative impact on society.

It was in this context that Bennett said, "I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every Black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." He quickly added that this would be "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky."

Philosophizing in public can be as "tricky" as the kind of defense of abortion Bennett raised and then rebutted. It is hazardous even, as thought police unwilling to do any real thinking work indefatigably to impose their ignorance and inanity on the very people they claim to protect and serve. But as Ohio writer Sim Evans observed, such is "the Politically Correct Society. It is an amorphous society, where the boundaries of acceptable speech are arbitrarily set by the chattering class and unevenly enforced by the sword of character assassination."

Thus, Bennett's faux pas was an ill-advised thought experiment. With the media more hungry than ever for revenue-generating sound bites rather than real substance, our country's centuries old racial divide distended by the New Orleans disaster, and Bennett's detractors desperate for dirt to bury him, his reductio ad absurdum could reduce his public image and influence to rubble. Having spent years in the public arena, he should have known better than to think aloud like a shock jock fresh out of Philosophy 101.

"As a philosopher," stated Bennett the next day, "I was showing the limitation of one argument by showing the absurdity of another." He showed something else, too - that truly political philosophers must approach sensitive issues with deep sensitivity and at least a modicum of marketing savvy. Otherwise, they will inject their own influence with invalidity and unwittingly perpetuate the image of deep thinkers as educated fools. And that, I assure you, is not 'philosophicool.'

iAMrj * richard jones