the great black hope of marriage: will jigga put a ring on it?

c's profilecPhotosBlogListsMore

Tools

Help

< Previous Next >

the great black hope of marriage: will jigga put a ring on it?

Once again we come back to the marriage factor among young black people and once again it seems as though people are looking around for role models on the marriage front. Think Will and Jada (oh nooooo), President Obama and the First Lady and now tada...Jay-Z and Beyonce. Seems as though the writer of this The Root article feels that if anyone can reach the young people and propel them to seek the nuptials, especially young males in particular, it would have to be Jay-Z, right? He has been married (we have to assume so since neither Bey or Jay-Z ever confirmed their nuptials) for over a year. He still sells millions of records everytime he drops one and he would be the perfect spokesman for marriage right? Not in my opinion. First off, Jay-z and Beyonce don't even show themselves as like a "typical" couple whatever that means. Rightfully so, in this age of paparazzi you have to be a little more private about your personal affairs but neither one, at least according to the article and to my knowledge, talk all lovey dovey about marriage on either of their recent albums. But seriously, I am sick of people trying to find a role model for marriage for young blacks. Look, in my opinion, marriage is not for everyone. Stop forcing it down everybody's throat that by getting married it will solve all of our social ills because it won't and I wish articles like the one mentioned above would stop portraying it that way. If you ask me, I think Jigga and Bey would have been better if they just moved in together (that is of course if they are truly married) and then things would be a lot simpler, but hey that is just me, chocolate_matters speaking on something I never really supported in the first place. Nothing Jay-Z or anyone else can say will change my mind on marriage at this time. I am flexible but for the time being it [marriage] just don't seem to be worth the hassle or the headache.

chocolate_matters

9/24/2009 2:09 AM | Blog it | Personal

Comments (10)

To add a comment, sign in with your Windows Live ID (if you use Hotmail, Messenger, or Xbox LIVE, you have a Windows Live ID). Sign in

Don't have a Windows Live ID? Sign up

	c hwrote: aha, I get what you are saying. Oct. 8
	chichi©wrote: We realized after the fact that it was just a governmental document- many years down the line. Within those years we learned the knowledge of becoming sovereign citizens (which meant taking back what it rightfully ours)- names, property, documents such as the marriage license. So we got caught out there not realizing until afterwards. It was a learning process for us as it is for many. So I am not against the idea of marriage and what it stands for- but the document is nothing more than a piece of paper to keep track of what you do and when you do it in the eyes of the government. You know that saying- If I knew then what I knew now- my marriage would exist out of our own agreement. Oct. 5
	c hwrote: I got a couple of questions for you: Why did you get married then? Only because since you yourself acknowledge that the "document" of marriage is a trap. Wouldn't it have just been better to live to togther under some type of common law agreement and you two could just make sure to keep update wills incase something ever happens to either one of you. I am confused by your thinking since you seem to be against "marriage" or at least the gov't document stating so yet you still went and got married, What gives? Oct. 5
	chichi©wrote: If i may- I am married- love it and know that it is not for all- My marriage is a state owned marriage- my husband and I gave up our rights to the government (as you C- placed in your sentence below)- the day we signed the agreement/ document/ government issued license. My relationship that i have with my husband will not ever depend on that document that the government issued. The marriage certificate/license was a trap for us from the state/government saying "YOU NOW BELONG TO UNCLE SAM". Before that piece of paper and the ring - my relationship was far more bounded between us as it is till this day. There is such a thing as a contract - which means once you sign that contract you are bound to the contract. The marriage license/certficate is a contract aka A TRAP. That document doesn't create the love that a couple shares between on another. Oct. 1
	c hwrote: all I can say is I want to go to sweden after reading this article: http://www.newsweek.com/id/212140. Yep, maybe I am a little jaded about marriage or maybe I just see it from a different perspective from many in this country who tend to view things through a "traditional" lens of co-habitating or "shacking" if you want to use the slang term. True with marriage things get handled better if the other partner passes away but that could be dealt before hand by having each partner write up a living will. MY point remains, marriage is not the panacea that many in the black community claim it to be. We need to broaden our perspectives of what is really happening in our communities and not tying so much hope to a government document signifying that because two people are "together" life will just be so grand. Relationships existed before paper and they will exist after paper as long as the two individuals see themselves as committed. Sept. 30
	Cherishwrote: Wow... interesting post (and follow-up comments). Can't say I agree with you c, but I can say that its obvious that many other men obviously feel the same way... and while marriage isn't for everyone I think there is nothing wrong with raising and teaching children (hell, and obviously adults too) that there is a HUGE difference between the commitment of two people who "shack" and two people who are legally married. If children are ever to be brought in the picture then there is definitely an additional plus to providing them which what in an ideal case (provided you don't marry an abuser) provides a more stable home, especially in the event that something happens to either person. I've seen a shacking couple after a decade or so of building a life and family where the "boyfriend" died and the woman lost everything "they" had because none of it was legally "theirs"... of course there are many ways to address this type of situation, but most people who aren't thinking marriage likely aren't thinking about these things either... Ultimately, the problem is not "marriage", the problem is people who take marriage lightly, expect it to be easy, marry the wrong person and/or do it for the wrong reason. To people who would rather date/shack for 50 years I say "why not?" My assumption is that they don't plan to be around that long anyway, and not being legally bound is an easy way out versus the costs/trouble of divorce... in the end, to each its own. As long as you make it known up front to the people you're dating that this will never be legalized, you give them the option to stay or leave and its their choice whatever they do. Sept. 28
	Ms.wrote: Very valid point Ms. L. But how many have "cared" enough to make the commitment and what was the result? I'm sorry, but I'm for "shacking". Marriage just wasn't made for everyone, just like kids aren't for everyone either. Sept. 28
	Leonawrote: Oh and, Ms. FAB...the difference between shackin and signing a piece of paper is this. The signed piece of paper means you cared enough to make a commitment. Without the paper AND THE COMMITMENT it is all just a "Booty call". Sept. 25
	Leonawrote: Leona Shanklewrote: Ooooooooh boy, so you think they should have been "SHACKING", huh? Interesting, C...very interesting. It is sad that so many young people (and, you're heading the list today) are jaded on marriage at such a young age. My own personal young-uns are in that bunch too. You guys should give it a try first (like for 10, 15, or 20 years - - THEN blast it all to smitherines. Hahaaaaaaaa Sept. 25
	Ms.wrote: True dat - marriage is not for everybody and most times end-up not worth the damn hassle and headache. Only last week I told someone marriage is over rated. I know it's not the "christian" thing to say because it is right in the sight of God to get married, but what's the difference between shacking and putting a ring on it? Ahhh, just going to the courthouse or church and signing a piece of paper?! The same thing that goes on in shacking goes on in a marriage. But anyways, the right thing as a "christian" is to get married - for God's sake and society sake. And yes, they are really married. That was confirmed a number of times by the media via producing the certificate and by B & J. Sept. 24

Trackbacks

The trackback URL for this entry is:

http://blaqmind.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!1CDD79197BEC60CF!9534.trak

Weblogs that reference this entry

None