Essence Magazine Accidentally Steps Into an Intra/Interracial Dating Minefield

by Latoya Peterson

We got a request from reader Nafis to cover the Essence magazine controversy that is heating up the black blogosphere. But the comments included with the tip made me laugh a bit. Nafis writes:

i know it might go against parts of the racialicious agenda, but i feel like you should talk about the ”cycle of ignorance” that leads to racism. The comments that the author highlights are very derogatory, and it speaks a lot about the situation within the black female community.

Our agenda is to fairly clear – to provide an anti-racist perspective on pop culture. And regular readers know that we are a feminist-minded site, and generally work to incorporate other anti-oppression principles into what we do. So talking about “the situation within the black female community” isn’t really what we do since most of those perceptions are based in stereotypes about black women. However, what is compelling about the whole situation is how conversations about interracial dating play upon stereotypes and deeply held convictions, that tend to drown out any other type of commentary.

The Situation

BET’s entertainment blog gives a good summary of what is going on:

When Essence editors chose to put Reggie Bush on the cover of their February 2010 “Black Men, Love & Relationships” issue, I’m sure they thought they were just giving their readers a little dose of sexual chocolate eye candy (those abs!), but instead all hell broke loose!

The Essence.com boards are flooded with seething comments from people who can’t understand why a magazine geared towards Black women would make the NFL player who is dating a non-Black woman, Kim Kardashian, the cover choice for an issue that celebrates Black love.

A lot of hateful comments were posted to the Essence boards, some even saying that Bush was a “white supremacist” and anger that a magazine dedicated to celebrating black women would put a man dating a non-black woman on the cover.

The vitriol on this one is fierce – but what is really the issue here?

The “Dating Out” Controversy

A large factor in the controversy revolves around the idea of black men dating outside of their race – but not in the way it seems to be interpreted. A lot of the existing analysis looks at black women and their issues with men who date interracially. But most of the comments on the Essence site are not objecting to Reggie Bush dating Kim Kardashian – they are protesting him being on the cover of an issue about “black men, love, and relationships” targeted to black women. Now, there were quite a few comments on either side of the pole, either saying the Bush cover isn’t a big deal because interracial love is a part of our landscape, or saying that Bush is a sell out – but the vast majority of the comments seemed less concerned with who Bush is dating and more concerned with the message Essence is sending to its readership about who desires black women. Many of the readers felt that Bush’s selection for the cover (over black men who are involved with black women) reinforces the idea that black men are generally uninterested in dating black women once they hit the big time, and many commenters vocalized the desire to highlight some of the other men in the issue who have been seen publicly with black women. (Interestingly, a few people on the Essence site and elsewhere said they would have preferred covers with Robin Thicke or Robert DeNiro, since they were in interracial relationships with black women.)

Very Smart Brothas posted a response to the controversy looking at one of the major underlying assumptions – that successful black men are flocking to nonblack women in droves, and that is why the Bush cover feels like a slap in the face.

the friend thought that this was just another example of how often high-profile african-american men choose to be with non-black women (nttawwt). (half)jokingly she remarked “i won’t say that half of ya’ll run out and get white chicks, but at least 49 percent of ya’ll do”

when i replied that her perception was way off, she cited the study that was bouncing around the web last year about black men being almost three times more likely to marry outside of their race than black women as proof.

i then showed her the actual numbers from that study (3.7% of married black american women and 8.4% of married black american men had a non-Black spouse), proof that while it’s technically true that african-american men are more likely to marry outside of their race than african-american women, the difference between 91.6% and 96.3% is hardly worthy of any “all ya’ll n*ggas is playing in the snow” hysteria.

The Champ goes on to detail people in the spotlight, noting his shoddy research, but ultimately concluding that there is more scrutiny on interracial relationships which makes them appear more prevalent, particularly among celebrities.

The Kardashians and Our Current Black/White Binary

The most interesting aspect of this whole controversy is how Kim Kardashian has been framed. Some people have called her non-black – others have called her white. (And many just pointed to the sex tape.) Kim Kardashian is actually Armenian, Scottish, and Dutch. Our current limitations on the entire concept of “race” make it hard to come up with a term that would accurately describe the Kardashian sisters, but there are two things that stand out. One, all of Kim Kardashian’s publicized relationships have been with black men. Her first marriage was to Damon Thomas, a record producer, her relationship with Ray-J went into infamy, and she is currently with Reggie Bush. So it doesn’t appear that her sole motivation is to chase fame, as is often alleged.

Two, I am not sure if the Kardashian sisters themselves identify as white. One of my close friends is an avid watcher of Keeping Up With The Kardashians, and she asked me my opinion on the racial content of a recent episode, which we think is from season 4, episode 4. (YouTube has pulled everything but the E! authorized clips.) This one didn’t involve Kim, but rather Kourtney Kardashian and her sister Khloé Kardashian Odom (who recently married Lamar Odom of the LA Lakers). The clip has been removed from YouTube, but on this particular show, Kourtney and Khloé went to a breast feeding class, while Khloé’s slacker ass boyfriend Scott Disick (who appears to be white – not much information is known about him) decided he wanted to chill by the pool. When Kourtney arrives at the breastfeeding class, she turns her nose up at the white cabbage patch kid in front of her. “I don’t like this baby,” she says. Khloé, asks her if she prefers “her black baby” and offers to switch dolls. Kourtney agrees, happily.

I have no idea what to make of this reverse doll test, but it does make me think that the Kardashian’s relationship to race is a little more complicated than people assume.

The “Black Women Hate Interracial Relationships” Meme

This article hasn’t hit the mainstream quite yet – it is still only a topic of conversation in the black blogosphere. And to me, that’s a benefit, because what will be taken from this conversation (black women hate interracial dating!) isn’t what we are actually reading. The number of opinions within the black online community are immeasurable, especially as each of the four or five articles I’ve read about the controversy received more than 50 comments (and an excess of 300 on the VSB and Essence sites). So what are people saying?

Some are using the controversy to reinforce stereotypes about black people, in general. (”While I did have a best friend thats black we mostly hung out with 2520s. [Note: 2520s means "whitey"]. And you know what?…We had FUN! There wasnt someone always clocking what you wore, who you were dating, or what car you drove…”)
Some use it to reinforce stereotypes about overly picky black women (”Every guy on here, myself included, knows at least one single, eligible brother that is looking for love, from a black woman. But he’ll get zero play …”)
Some use it to reinforce stereotypes about evil black women (”The truth is black women are spoiled beyond belief.”)
Some say it’s not about the relationships, but standards of beauty that shortchange black women (”I don’t think anyone really cares about the race of Joe NBA Blow’s wife, but rather “is anyone attracted to me? will I ever fit into the conventional & more popular standard of beauty? and will this definition ever be broad enough to include my image?””)
Some discussed flawed expectations of racial solidarity (”Black women have NO obligation to support Reggie Bush b/c he is a “brother”. You know, the same way he’s not obligated to date a black woman b/c she is a sista.”)
Others mention it’s about the elevated hoops black women have to jump through to be considered on-par with her white counterparts (”I’ve known men who had impossible standards for the Black women they dated, only to settle for the most marginal of women when they were of another race.”)
Some brought up that it wasn’t Kardashian’s race, but her exploits that caused the controversy (”for the black men that are dating white strippers and hoes, if they are willing to go that route, do you think you would really want to be with them anyway.”)
Some say the fact that Kardashian isn’t racially identified is a bonus (”Kim Kardashian may not be black,and shes not white either.At least he didnt go get a waifer thin white girl like many of them do.Shes beautiful and thick!”)
Quite a few people said they expected this of Essence (”WHAT are you mad about? Requiring Essence to be anything more than superficial or topical would be like standing over a glass bowl expecting a gold fish to articulate the Theory of Relativity.”)
Some think it’s just celebrity drama (”Reggie Bush is a mediocre football player and Kim’s famous for no viable reason. They seem like each other’s equals to me.”)
Some want to give Bush the benefit of the doubt (”how many people have ever heard Reggie Bush speak about how he feels about black women? Or examined his dating past? Just wondering. Maybe he wanted to try something new.”)
Some say the cover is just eye candy (”He was chosen for the cover for his sex appeal, not his cultural relevance to Black women”)
Many are indifferent (”In conclusion, was Reggie Bush the best choice for the Essence cover? No, probably not. But should we freak out or get mad about it ? No. Why get your blood pressure up?”)

Clearly, there is not one, unified opinion from black men and women, but rather a reflection of where each individual begins to approach the issue.

Here’s to hoping that the mainstream continues to miss this story.

Share and Enjoy:

Trackbacks & Pings

Race and Popular Culture This Week | Ernesto Aguilar on 15 Jan 2010 at 5:54 am

[...] posted on the Essence magazine controversy about interracial dating and Reggie Bush as cover model. Coming out characteristically unscathed is Kim Kardashian, Bush’s white [...]
Mixed Media Watch: Kimora Lee and Djimon Hounsou Cover Ebony Magazine | Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 22 Jan 2010 at 11:23 am

[...] another magazine cover, the Ebony magazine spread on Kimora Lee and Djimon Hounsou is being embraced all over the (black) [...]
We Used to Like John Mayer and…We Still Do | Parlour Magazine on 10 Feb 2010 at 2:41 pm

[...] about you? Sure he doesn’t date black women, but isn’t dating white/other women why ESSENCE got reamed for that Reggie Bush [...]

Comments

Celeste wrote:

Disclaimer: I don’t even physically handle copies of Messence.

If Essence’s goal was to actually sell issues of this magazine with a black love theme to their black female readership then Reggie Bush was a poor choice. I don’t think that Bobby Deniro would be a better choice because while he loves black women, he himself is not black so that doesn’t go with the black love theme. The theme of the issue is to celebrate romantic love between black people. The only choices for that cover would be a beautiful black man or woman (I think giving a nod to queer black women would have been much better than Reggie) who is in a loving relationship with a black woman. It would have been even cooler if the cover had a black loving couple on it. If they couldn’t think of anything else just throw Michelle and Barack up there, that’ll sell for sure. As long as Kardashian’s race is not black then a couple with her in it cannot be “black love”.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 12:02 pm ¶
Queen B wrote:

Since Essence is a magazine targeted towards Black women I can see why people would be upset with the cover since the man in question is in relationship with a woman who is non-black.

I agree that a cover with someone like Robin Thicke would have been more interesting because here is a white man who is married to a black woman and that would have sparked an interesting discussion about black women broadening the field in terms of who they are open to dating to include men who are not black.

In regards to the Kardashians ethnic identity, I would probably classify them as white but on the other hand, what sets them apart from other celebrity white women such as Jennnifer Aniston or Reese Witherspoon is that their body type i.e., voluptuous figure is more commonly associated with women of color like Beyonce or Jennifer Lopez.

On one hand, the Kardashians do not fit the blonde/super thin standard of beauty but on the other hand, they seem to have an advantage over black women in a sense that a would a black version of Kim Kardashian ever become as famous as she has.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 12:08 pm ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:

@Queen B – What you would classify the Kardashian’s as is your opinion, but what is not known is how they racially identify. (They often just answer with their ethnic background.) As I said above, it is not known how strongly the Kardashian’s identify with race at all, much less issues of blackness or whiteness.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 12:12 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:

will smith and jada pinkett are still going strong…

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 12:12 pm ¶
Thea Lim wrote:

Great post, really glad esp that you tackled the part about the Kardashians’ race. I definitely don’t think they identify as white – no hard evidence here, but that’s just the sense I get. I don’t mind Kim Kardashian for the very shallow reason that I am pleased that one of the (alleged) world’s sexiest women is a woman of colour…at least in my eyes.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 12:24 pm ¶
teaspoon wrote:

An issue like this really makes me consider the privilege that is inherent when white and light-skinned women read mainstream (read: tailored for the white majority) magazines. Glancing at an issue of Cosmo or Redbook, they won’t feel marginalized or unrepresented. If a man in an inter-racial relationship is featured, it won’t bring up questions about the societal views/beauty standards held up against white women.

I also hope that this doesn’t receive mainstream attention, because the wrong kind of dialogue would take place.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 12:31 pm ¶
Lola wrote:

I don’t think they accidental stepped into any minefield, for the past several years Essence has become very toxic. They very much encourage the single/desperate black woman stereotype. I ended my subscription in 2005.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 12:55 pm ¶
Michele wrote:

The problem isn’t Reggie and Kim its Essence Magazine. All those angry women on the message board should just cancel their subscriptions and quit buying it at the newstands. Essence Magazine is supposed to inform,uplift and support black women. It does not and they are not even trying.

Last year on the cover of the Black Love issue they had Sean P Diddy Combs and Kim Porter. Porter and Kim have 4 children and they are not married. Diddy has left Porter numerous times and Porter and another woman were pregnant at the same time. I guess Porter is just standing by her man.
This past summer Essence told their readers to go to strip clubs to meet men. I am sure all the commitment and marriage minded men are hanging out at strip clubs looking for their soul mates.

The picture of Reggie is from an old GQ photo shoot. They couldn’t even be bothered to do a new photo shoot for their cover.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 1:22 pm ¶
clairelynette wrote:

Before I even read the article that followed I just wanted to see who was on page 96! Who could possibly outdo the cover?! Lol. I didn’t even think to think of Kim Kardashian and if her relationship with Reggie Bush was suitable enough for Essence. I wish that instead of “black love” that Essence would celebrate “love” and good relationships. Whether they are interracial or not they should be celebrated because it’s hard enough to stay together in this world, I suppose my rose colored glasses have a high tint factor because to think Essence would do such a thing any time soon is naive.

I actually wish a lot of things were different with that magazine as it has a lot of potential. I had to give up reading culture/lifestyle/fashion magazines all together as none of them “speak to me”. The closest one that ever came was Suede and it closed up shop after only a few issues. I told myself that I would not pick up another Vogue, Elle, Marie Claire, W etc. unless there was a person of color on the cover, ANY person of color. I haven’t read a fashion magazine in months. I do believe there was one recently with Jennifer Lopez but found the articles to be unoriginal and uninteresting so I left it on the stand. What a shame.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 1:24 pm ¶
Val wrote:

Putting Bush on the cover was an odd choice for a magazine whose motto is ‘ESSENCE, the magazine where Black Women Come First’.

I think they were trying to be provocative but missed the mark. There is no way they didn’t know that there would be a backlash.

Also I’m glad you noted the real numbers of Black men in IR marriages. The stereotype that Black men marry non-Black women in huge numbers is such a tired stereotype.

Being that Essence is a sister company to CNN I’m really afraid that this will be reported there and as you said the focus will probably be Black women being against IR relationships. Which is not what this is about.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 1:25 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:

i don’t want to derail…but as far as kim k’s racial i.d. goes…it seems like the kardashians have a history of making close ties to people in the black community, so they have some type of consciousness about inclusion, or lack that unreflective aversion to socializing or professionally networking with people of color

after all, — her dad was friends with oj simpson, one of the kardashian sisters dated ray jay, and, when the sisters were talking about hiring friends to work in the boutique, the camera panned to the register, and a black girl was working there [just sayin']

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 1:28 pm ¶
kenda wrote:

My memory’s a bit hazy, but I think there was an episode of Keeping up w/ the Kardashians where Kim & one of her sisters were trying to figure out what box to check on a form that asked for race. I’m not sure how the situation was resolved, but the obvious implication is that they do not consider themselves white.

I’d heard that Reggie Bush was going to be on the cover of Essence, but I wasn’t sure what the controversy was about until now. I’d simply heard that black women didn’t like him being featured b/c they don’t like that he’s dating a non-black woman. So, I’m sure if the larger media catches wind of this dust up, they’ll be sure to latch on to the “black women are lonely and angry” narrative.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 1:29 pm ¶
gatamala wrote:

cocolamala~Sammy J & LaTanya are still together too! *heh*

**
Cher mentioned that growing up with Armenian looks in blonde-loving California was difficult. I can only guess the sense of disconnect one who is ethnically from the Caucasus feels around “Caucasians”. Hopefully someone of Armenian descent will chime in here.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 2:04 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:

i guess it is kind of ironic(?) that a magazine about African American women, has difficulty foregrounding people with … you know…ties to African American women.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 2:11 pm ¶
TopLevelExecutive wrote:

I agree with Lola. The inclusion of Reggie Bush just shows how out of touch that magazine has become when it comes to their target audience: me and other Black women. The Susan L. Taylor-helmed Essence would’ve NEVER disrespected its audience the same way that this “incarnation” has repeatedly done.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 2:13 pm ¶
TopLevelExecutive wrote:

@ Michele. To be fair, the publishing industry is dying and they couldn’t drum up the money to do a brand new photo shoot, so they figured that paying for the old pic would save tons of $.

They’re not doing anything different than Harper’s Bazaar’s Angelina Jolie tabloid cover.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 2:15 pm ¶
aimerrouge wrote:

First, I’ve heard that Essence is on the financial ropes. They don’t have money for a photo shoot, so that picture of Reggie is actually 2-3 years old, used by another magazine (Maxim, I think).

Second, I’d like to add that another blogger eloquently stated what I feel as a Black women. To paraphase -

Reggie Bush is entitled to love whomever he wishes. Everyone is entitled to love whomever they wish. However, this is Essence magazine. Essence’s target audience is Black women. I wish in issue discussing Black men, love and relationships, Essence would have picked someone who picked (the collective) “me.” That’s all. (see theblacksnob.com)

This is my second go round with an Essence subscription. It may be my last, based on how they react to this. The first time I quit Essence, there were too many articles that didn’t speak to me – even while acknowledging Black women aren’t monolithic. This time, I got the subscription in conjunction with my Essence Festival tickets. Great way to increase to subscriptions actually. I enjoy the concerts, but the magazine?

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 2:25 pm ¶
eh wrote:

Well Armenians (at least in California) have faced housing and other discrimination (remember the “No on 8″ add that featured narration by Samuel L. Jackson). I think part of the E show goes into the standard stereotype about “ethnic” families (matriarchy, loud etc), and Bruce is there to play the role of the WASP among the crazy “ethnics”. Often people who are ostracized in school will identify more with groups that have been ostracized. Khloé was home schooled, because people were mean to her. As far as Essence goes, isn’t it one of the few lady mags that is actually expanding? I feel like this is a manufactured controversy; something CNN can use on one of their reports. If that is true, then that makes CNN not too different then FOX.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 2:31 pm ¶
MyEyesSee wrote:

Essence is a magazine for black women therefore one would expect the man on the cover to be into black women. That’s certainly how I feel as a black women who mostly dates interracially.

Therefore, I don’t think the point of the cover controversy is a pro or con debate about interracial relationships. Reggie is certainly able to date the woman of his choice. Although Kim isn’t white, she she damn sure ain’t black .

However, if I’m going to spend money buying a magazine for black women you best believe the guy on the cover better be into someone like me.

By the way I read a bunch of comments this weekend about this cover, I remember a woman saying it’s about the fantasy and that because Bush doesn’t date blacks it ruined it for her. A black man responded to her that she should keep dreaming because 92 percent of the black men in their social circle did not date black women. This had nothing to do with celebrity couples but regular folks, which is what most of us see being played out every day, statistics be damned. Hence why I date interracially.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 3:00 pm ¶
Irene M. wrote:

I don’t know how the Kardashians identify, but the Russian slavs I hang out with do NOT consider people from the Caucuses to be white. In my experiences, the non-racist ones will identify people from that region by saying “from the Caucuses,” naming a specific ethnicity, or saying Central Asian. The racist Russians will just call them Turks the same way American racists will call anyone Latina/o “a Mexican”.

However, I suppose that only matters to Armenians from the former USSR or Armenian Americans dealing with Russian communities (pretty likely considering how small the US Orthodox Christian community is). But, it’s something to keep in mind when we talk about the “whiteness” of the Kardashians.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 3:38 pm ¶
Aiyo wrote:

When I saw the cover I really did not know who he was until it was pointed out to me and even then I still didn’t care however I see the problem though highly contradicting of Essence magazine to do tha. I seriously hope that this doesn’t go mainstream all this anti-black women crap is pissing me off.

I agree with the whole reinforcing the sterotype of black women are so mad with interracial couples which is just a bunch of freshly squeezed bullcrap. I have had a few instances where a black man was with his non white girlfriend and they would watch me expecting me to pay them any attention (you know like I don’t have a life)

I can recall a incident when me and my friends mostly black and few asian girls were approched by a black man with his white girlfriend and thy went off on us black girls because they thought we were giving them the bitter evil eye which we weren’t we were admiring the girl’s caught. (Not to mention that the dude was butters I mean just not attractive and neither was his girl) So long story short i told them I was offended that he thought I could actually be attracted to him and jealous of her and publically embarass them because they were embarrasising my friends and I.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 3:59 pm ¶
A.D. Nix wrote:

@ clairelynette: “I wish that instead of “black love” that Essence would celebrate “love” and good relationships.”

That’s kind of my wish for Essence as well – the target and audience is known and we know what the space is for and about. From an editorial stance, “blackity black black black” in every headline sometimes feels a little ham-fisted. You’re Essence and that’s why I’m here. And if you are going to offer the “Black Men & Love” cover to someone whose love sphere is not exclusively “black” . . . you may get some questions from the same readers you’ve cultivated with alternating “Girl, don’t give up hope” and “There is little hope for love, black woman! (But pray on it)” dating articles. Because when nuance and problematizing issues isn’t really a strong part of your editorial track record on the subject, what does this choice suggest?

And I’m confused as to how is Robin Thicke is a better choice. Do black woman have the Blidas Touch and mine just isn’t working? Aren’t black men (not black lady lovers i.e. why not Wanda Syke’s partner?*) the focus of the feature? I can’t get to the article so I’m having a tough time figuring out how Bush is really fitting into the specific micronarrative (I certainly get the macro!) in the issue.

(Also: I kind of miss the blink of an eye that was ‘Suede’ too)

* Rhetorical. We can all guess why.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 4:07 pm ¶
BlackIvy wrote:

@teaspoon

Cosign.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 4:27 pm ¶
Louise wrote:

I’m not pissed at interracial dating whoever does it. however reggie bush for cover maybe not. but it’s overblown…. like a fart in the wind..

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 4:54 pm ¶
umm....what wrote:

I think the patriarchal bend of most black female oriented media needs to be addressed. Essence/Jet etc have become cesspools of a certain kind of thinking by sensationalizing interracial relationships into a rejection narrative and connecting that to the ills of black communities. The thinking is that “if black men would date/marry black women, then our communities wouldn’t be in such bad shape.” It is a very right wing family values type of thing and its amazing that such a thing has cultural relevance to us, but it does and that’s scary. They are directly invested in putting forth a mythology of a shinning black knight who will fix all the problems of the black community by making black women feel good about themselves.

I think they intentionally shy away from examining the difference between POC of different races dating and POC dating white people because it problematizes their simplistic world view. They would have to understand that non-white women, by definition, do NOT meet white beauty standards in the same way that lighter skinned black women do not. While color-gradients have their social effects and meanings, we know that they come a distant second to race. Non-black POC are NOT white. I know many folks like to think that everybody who’s not black has it better than we do, but that type of thinking silences the problems that other groups face. American racism, as a function of history, is tailor-made to affect black and indigenous communities in a certain way, but with greater numbers of Arabs, Latinos, and Asians in this country, new problems are arising every day that will take on greater shape and proportions with the passage of time. I think that magazines like Essence and Jet do a disservice to the anti-racist and anti-sexist causes because they articulate male dominance and black inferiority by vesting the survival and success of black people not in resisting systems of domination and uniting with other oppressed groups but in fantasies of a black male savior that will single handedly repair the damage of 400+ years of racism.

Also, its worth noting that IR marriage affects genders of certain races differently. Black men and white men might be more likely to date outside of their races, whereas Asian men as well as black or white women may not be.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 5:09 pm ¶
Adrienne wrote:

Puhlease. As if Black men who date White women will date ONLY White women.

The problem isn’t even Reggie Bush or whether he can still be eye candy for Black women….it is the notion of “claiming” Black people and rejecting Black people who date interracially.

You’d think Reggie is going to be with Kim Kardashian FOR LIFE and never ever date anyone else. He hasn’t even married the girl.

I think the issue is resentment because the Kardashians are the ones who get to be the stars on t.v.

Black women are shown on t.v. reality shows as having drama, having a hard time finding a man, having drama with other Black women, having drama with Black men, being hair trigger defensive.

We don’t get to peek inside solid relationships between Black women and Black men on t.v….and I do get the resentment…but Reggie Bush… he has a nice body, I loved what he did with his athletic skills on the college football field. I’ve been a Reggie fan since USC. I knew who he was before he started dating Kim, so as a USC fan, I was a Reggie Bush fan.

I too hate the stereotype that Black women are just bitter….and I am just as uncomfortable with how schizoprenic the comments section can be at Essence in regards to interracial dating..comments that claim some Black folks who date interracially while rejecting others who do always make my head spin…because its as if the women who resent the cover are doing the claming or rejecting rather strongly…so of course the loudest voices get the attention.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 5:18 pm ¶
jen* wrote:

I was wondering how the statement could be made that Bush “doesn’t date black women”. Has he never dated them? (I’ve never paid
attention so I have no idea)

The hysteria just seems excessive. But IR seems to be the topic du jour right now – yesterday I was riding with a friend and they had Michael Baisden on in the background. The volume was low, but it seemed like every few minutes they blasted some statistic [no source that I could hear] that percentage of black women in IR has increased so much in the last few yrs – blah blah blah.

One of those topics to get people calling in and hollering for one thing or another – I was glad when we made it to our destination and I didn’t have to listen anymore.

I probably still couldn’t pick Reggie Bush out of a lineup – even tho that pic up there looks HOT to me. I was never into Essence, but I can kinda see why its readers would prefer a black man exclusively into black women. Kinda. I guess cuz I’m a mixed girl I just can’t get behind the idea of saying that so-called “black love” [what is this anyway?] would be defined as strictly between two black people.

The whole thing seems blown out of proportion to me, but I could just not be getting it. I’m with everyone else who’re crossing their fingers that this stays under the MSM radar, though.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 5:36 pm ¶
Misty Knight wrote:

Wow, so Im not the only one who dreads MSM getting thier paws on this fiasco?
I can see it now
“Black Women: Why Are You Sooo Angry?..Again?” followed by a montage of pics of scowling black women, and recaps of passionate blog comments.

I’m still quite surprised at the outrage about RB’s cover. I don’t recall the same fits when Terrance Howard had his. But maybe that’s because it wasn’t about “Black Love”?
But then again isnt he featured in the “fantasy” section?

I understand the opinions of women wanting to
fantasize about men who would reciprocate the attraction, but seeing as how the typical entertainer usually dates anything but the typical woman, I don’t see how anyof them are more “attainable”, then RB.
They all have a “type”-that most women don’t
fit.
Then when they doooo date a “normal” looking women (ie; Tameka Raymond, Pharells ex-girlfriend) they get anything BUT glowing recognition.

I have to say, Im still surprised at the reaction to this cover, and the steam its gathered.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 5:42 pm ¶
A.D. Nix wrote:

@ umm….what

Yes. All of that.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 5:48 pm ¶
pinksghetti wrote:

I think it is ok to have Reggie Bush on the cover he looks really sexy, but I understand why some BW are upset because of how we are constantly portrayed in a negative manner by the “mainstream” media (and in real life) . Essence is probably happy about the controversy because it sells. I think people shoule realize that Kim is pretty and that’s probably why Reggie is dating her just like he would date a pretty woman of any color.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 5:48 pm ¶
metal mickey wrote:

Chiming in that in Russia at least, people from Armenia are not considered white. Caucasians (people from Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan but also Chechen, Ingushetia etc in Russian Federation) and Central Asians are very discriminated against in Russia and are subject of neo-Nazi violence. Even though Russia is a very multi-ethnic country. However I do not know how an Armenian in America would identify, but I can’t imagine that the above information wouldn’t play some part.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 5:51 pm ¶
Celeste wrote:

@*jen: Then how would you define “black love”? Being with someone of the same racial/cultural background (not that we’re a monolith, far from it) is something that’s important to some people and that should be respected. Racial/ethnic groups are allowed to have boundaries/categories within their group that people outside of the group can’t access. By marrying a non-BM I don’t think I can put my relationship in the black love category but I’m not disregard that such a categorization should exist. If there were a magazine aimed at Armenian men and they have an Armenian love issue, I wouldn’t blame them for not putting Kim up there.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 8:21 pm ¶
GeeLennox wrote:

So what if she’s not white? Are Black women supposed feel better when Black men reject them in favor of other women of color instead of white women? (not saying that’s the case with RB and KK)

I don’t know what they were thinking.If I had a subscription I’d cancel it.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 8:45 pm ¶
Mara wrote:

Americans use the term Caucasian to meet white, but it’s original definition means people from the Caucus mountains. For instance, certain nonwhite Eurasians and Indians are considered Caucasian.

And also to gatamala: Cher’s father isn’t white, though he probably has some white ancestry, he is physically not white. I believe that he was Mexican-American of Native American ancestry. She always felt odd because her mother was a beautiful blonde and so was her younger half-sister.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 9:04 pm ¶
umm....what wrote:

I’m black and in love, therefore I have black love. All the love I have is black. I don’t have any other kind.

As for the people who place such an overwhelming importance on the idea of intraracial dating/marriage/love, I think we need to interrogate the rationale for that. I’m pretty sure that issues of patriarchy, purity, entitlement, grudge, etc will surface.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 9:15 pm ¶
A.D. Nix wrote:

@ Celeste
If one indeed sees cause to ‘race’ love, I would think the race of the body giving it would be more important than the body receiving it i.e. my love is as “black” as I am. But the whole idea isn’t really sitting well with me. Why not just say “love between black people” if that’s what is intended?

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 9:27 pm ¶
Celeste wrote:

@umm…what: So you think that most of the reasons why people would want to date/marry intraracially are going to be negative or come from some type of backward thinking?

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 9:29 pm ¶
Rachel wrote:

I think there’s a serious piece missed here, that’s sad for Essence and the Kardashians. I’m using heavy stereotypes, so if you read this negatively, it’s more about my own cynicism about race in America than my belief that these values are worthwhile. Within (especially upper-class) white America, I think there’s a view of Black men as being well-equipped toys–think of them as a high-tech gadget–particularly true for athletes. For the Kardashian’s this makes a lot of sense, at least from my own perception of the show, everything is about THEM. Having a black husband means people will admire him, but never let his success overshadow theirs. This is particularly sad for Essence, and their magazine cover, since the conversation automatically goes–1. oh those abs and 2. oh he’s attached to that white girl. So the conversation immediately moves away from a black man and his success (in love or otherwise), to a white girl’s ambiguous relationship to race. This not only reinforces the idea that he’s just a toy, it seems to me to just be yet another way in which recognition, and voice, is moved away from black communities.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 9:37 pm ¶
Sonnyboy wrote:

“Girl, don’t give up hope” and “There is little hope for love, black woman! (But pray on it)” dating articles.

THIS IS WHY I ENDED MY SUBSCRIPTION TO ESSENCE!

Perhaps it’s regional, but here in the South all the people of Armenian descent I know of personally check the box by white and socialize white and call themselves white.

This recent discussion about the Kardashians was my first foray into the idea they are anything but white under American standards. I mean jet black hair or a shapely figure just does not automatically make you non-white.

I find such assertions much like how you go past the Mason Dixon line and suddenly black folks start calling people with the last name Danza or Milano ” you know Italian, not really white ” as though geography has changed what those folks check on the Census box, but I digress.

A reporter I worked with saw Reggie Bush at the Kentucky Derby a few years back in Millionaire’s Row . She described the girl with him as “Gabrielle Union looking, but not her.” So unless it was his sister, he apparently has dated a black woman in the past. Not that I care one way or the other.

This debacle is why Essence, Ebony, and Jet are having issues staying viable and relevant. Same articles, same language, same slant, same people on the cover over and over and very little acknowledgement of the diversity of black opinion.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 10:39 pm ¶
Adrienne wrote:

I am uncomfortable with the notion that someone else’s man (Reggie Bush) belongs to/doesn’t belong to a whole group of Black women…or that Reggie is rejecting a whole group of women.

We don’t know Reggie personally, or at least I don’t, to be able to say he rejects Black women.

Nor does Reggie “belong” to a whole group of “us” or “other women”.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 10:43 pm ¶
Sonnyboy wrote:

Re: Kardashian sisters whiteness.

I also notice on the men’s sites where those girls are quite popular and prominent in the photo galleries .i.e. Maxim, Men’s Health they have taken a lot of flak for being “white women” who only date black guys.

I have no idea how they I.D. but outside the world of POC , I really am not sure that many people think they are non-white.

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 10:44 pm ¶
DivergentDana wrote:

“And I’m confused as to how is Robin Thicke is a better choice.”

Especially since successful black men are often pilloried for choosing to marry black women that have Paula Patton’s phenotype over black women that are notably different from the beauty standards in mainstream society and the black community. If a black athlete married her, it would be considered “SAMO”, and he would be shunted aside in favor of someone like Denzel or Samuel L. or Obama’s more acceptable choices when it comes to representing the purest manifestation of love for black women, but apparently, Thicke gets mad props from these same women. There’s definitely a valid issue in regards to what a stereotypical black “trophy wife” looks like and why, but the blatant hypocrisy has come up more than once regarding who “counts.”

Posted 12 Jan 2010 at 11:48 pm ¶
laura wrote:

Where do I start? For the record,the first I ever heard about Kim Kardashian was over the sex tape featuring her then boyfriend pissing on her. Oh and she has a big ass. The time it took me to type those words is exponentially more time than I have spent thinking about this woman. Quite frankly, I don’t care if Reggie Bush is dating not-so-white Kim or if he goes all the way white. It has nothing to do with me. I’m surrounded by black men with white women (I’m in the arts and it’s pretty common) and I notice it but it has nothing to do with how I view myself or my value as a woman (which is pretty damn high).

I think it was a mistake to put Reggie Bush because I don’t think he’s worth the trouble, no matter who he dates. It’s possible that he does love black women; his mother’s black and if he has sisters, aunts, cousins, friends then it’s a good chance that he loves quite a few black women.

Like the saying goes, one monkey don’t stop no show. Or as the a poster mentioned, 8.7% don’t stop no show. What’s most important is that black women love THEMSELVES and Essence should be focusing on that. The world at large doesn’t love black women, like it or not. If we love ourselves, it doesn’t matter.

It makes me sad that Essence has come to this. I can still remember my first Essence. As a young girl growing up in lily-white suburban Canada, it was a lifeline to a world where ‘pretty’, looked liked me.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:18 am ¶
yolanda wrote:

as a young black woman who predominately dates white men, i never really know how to respond to situations like this. on one hand, i COMPLETELY understand why women would be offended by it, and on the other there’s that lurking thought that it isn’t my place to say anything, as if i don’t have a right because of who i choose to date.

however, for many reasons (and probably ones already mentioned) i think that i have a right to be offended by reggie bush on the cover of essence if only because it’s a magazine geared towards black women. why would the magazine knowingly put him on the cover of an issue about black love and relationships when he is dating a woman who isn’t black? it’s kind of huge slap in the face to black women–kind of like saying, “HAHA isn’t he hot? you know you can’t him though, right?”

i think there are two problems here, and i’ll try to explain this without rambling and making no sense at all:

#1: there are many black women who have no desire to date non-black men. so even IF the majority of marriages are intraracial, it still feels like a slap in the face when reggie bush is put on the cover of a black women’s magazine. it reinforces what we see in videos, amongst athletes, and in the media–”regular” professional black couples are not as prominent as all the seemingly interracial ones–and that hurts.

#2: black women do not have the opportunity to date out as much as black men. black women are plagued by so many stereotypes and racist attitudes that makes interracial dating a minefield. i’ve had some pretty effed up things said to me and assumptions made about me from white men, and sometimes it makes me want to give up altogether. for every great white guy who’s actually interested in dating me, there’s 10 slime ball who’s only interested in what he thinks i have to offer sexually. so seeing reggie bush kind of only reinforces the, “here’s an eligible black man who’s with someone who isn’t black, and here i am alone even if i WANTED to date out.”

/end novel.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:26 am ¶
Snarkysmachine wrote:

They could have at least put Roger Ebert on the cover. He loves himself a big, beautiful, smart black woman.

Reggie Bush was probably not the wisest choice, but not due to his choice of romantic partner. Considering the demographic of Essence’s readership, I would think someone like Don Cheadle would be more appropriate.

He’s wicked hot.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:27 am ¶
yolanda wrote:

I agree that a cover with someone like Robin Thicke would have been more interesting because here is a white man who is married to a black woman and that would have sparked an interesting discussion about black women broadening the field in terms of who they are open to dating to include men who are not black.

i’m not attacking you, but more of the general statement surrounding black women “broadening” our dating prospects. i know a lot of black women who find men of other races attractive–even ones who are *generally* not open to it. but something most black women realize from the age of 12 and older is that most men of other races are not interested in us for serious relationships.

as a black woman who dates predominately white men, it is an effing minefield trying to find someone who is genuinely interested in me for more than just sex, a cultural experience, or an exception to what he believes most black women to be like. i can understand why black women would be reluctant to deal with that bs, and i get so tired of reading that black women should do this and do that as if it’s so. easy. women are women, and i shouldn’t have to work any harder than other woman to get a date, and i shouldn’t be made to feel like it’s desperation/begging or nothing at all.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:38 am ¶
jen* wrote:

@Celeste – umm….what and A.D. Nix basically answered with my idea of black love: if a black person is involved in a loving relationship, that person is practicing so-called “black love”. If it must be described as “black”.

I’m not even entirely sure what black has to do with it.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:44 am ¶
Sealinewuman wrote:

Cher is actually half Armenian coincidentally. Her father is Armenian, her birth name is Sarkisian. Her mother is the one with Cherokee ancestry, as well as French and Irish I think.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:46 am ¶
m. wrote:

@Mara:
Cher’s father was not Native (Armenian), and neither was her mom. That was just some stunt she pulled for that song because she thought she could somehow relate to those oh-so-tragic breeds (which is gross, because ‘half-breed’ is actually considered a slur in the Native community; if a white person pulled a stunt like that calling themselves “the mulatto”, there’s no way they’d get away with it).

You know, a lot of white “ethnic” people have faced discrimination since coming to the U.S. or immigrating to other countries in Europe. So, yeah, that’s pretty much all white people that aren’t WASPs. I don’t see how this makes Armenians (or Turks, Greeks, et cetera) Special Caucasians or even “people of color”?? That seems to be the identity du jour, though…or the label that people pull out like Twizzlers when it’s suddenly fitting. It’s suddenly cool for people to slap labels on themselves when they are unable to understand the discrimination they/their parents may have received, and it’s easy since their shoulders are free of the burdens that come with not really having a choice in how you are viewed/perceived by others. Must be nice.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:49 am ¶
Lakshmi wrote:

The Kardashians have always seemed very, very proud of their Armenian heritage (Kim’s Twitter bio is simply “Armenian Princess”). I’ve heard through the grapevine that all of them are fluent in Armenian as well. So I think that as a family they’ve always identified more with their ethnic/cultural background than with anything else.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:59 am ¶
mieko wrote:

@umm….what: I don’t think we should interrogate the rationale behind interracial marriage/dating/love any more than interrogating the rationale behind intraracial marriage/dating/love. “Issues of patriarchy, purity, entitlement, grudge, etc” as you say, have the ability to surface in all relationships because they are a part of our culture and how we see and are seen.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 12:59 am ¶
Nigerian wrote:

like Denzel or Samuel L. or Obama’s more acceptable choices when it comes to representing the purest manifestation of love for black women, but apparently, Thicke gets mad props from these same women. There’s definitely a valid issue in regards to what a stereotypical black “trophy wife” looks like and why, but the blatant hypocrisy has come up more than once regarding who “counts.”

Exactly. But does that mean the angry about light-skinned, long-haired “Black” trophy wife is misplaced? I’m not sure yet. Actually, now I am quite confused. LOL

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 1:02 am ¶
Queen B wrote:

Robin Thicke may not be perceived as the “better” choice but I think that putting him on the cover as opposed to Bush would have generated less controversy because one is married to a black woman albeit a fair skinned black woman and the other is dating a non-black woman.

Going back to the theme of “black love” it can be interpreted as love between two black people or a black woman being loved by someone regardless of race which is why I would not mind seeing Thicke.

In any event, with the exception of the Obamas, Will and Jada, Beyonce and Jay-Z, I can’t think of too many high profile black couples.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 1:14 am ¶
123 wrote:

re: Kardashian’s race

Since when are Armenian not white (i.e., Caucasian)? Not all Whites are blond haired, blue eyes with a slender build and thin facial features; there are variations in size and color. Kim not looking like a ‘typical’ white person doesn’t mean she’s not white, neither does her–or her biological family members–not self-identifying as White.

Armenian, Scottish, and Dutch are all White (Caucasian) ethnicities, just like Chinese, Malaysian, and Laotian are Asian ethnicities and Nigerian, Kenyan, Tanzanian are Black (Negro) ethnicities.

Even if Armenians aren’t officially considered White, Kim is still 50% White and 100% non-Black. The pissed off Black female readers are rightfully angry/outspoken about this particular Essence issue. This magazine is geared towards *Black* females and this issues was supposed to be about *Black love* (i.e., a romantic, committed relationship between a Black man & Black woman). There are plenty of men (famous and non-famous) in loving Black relationships that could have been featured on the cover.

Personally, I stopped reading or even flipping thru Essence years ago after I noticed that the first pages in issue after issue featured beauty product ads showing only white women. Nothing against white women, but given the magazine’s target demographic and the fact that the same companies have ads featuring Black women, I thought the ads that were chosen for print were odd.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 3:32 am ¶
Nicole wrote:

I had to leave my Essence subscription alone a very long time ago. Though it was affirming to see a magazine that had beautiful covers of gorgeous black women regularly — the inside of the magazine was just well… lousy. Essence hasn’t met my needs in a very long time. With that said… I continue to be amazed at how difficult it seems for this magazine to actually stay dedicated to their targeted demographic. Here’s the thing — if single black women are constantly being admonished for “holding out” for their black prince who may not be coming, why not show men who do actually love and support black women and who may not be black? How hard is that? Putting Reggie Bush on the cover is just more of the same “let’s support brothers because they are brothers” rhetoric that pays no attention to the sisters and their needs/viewpoints — and that we’re being constantly ridiculed about. (shrug) I’m all about loving my brothers but a magazine that is supposed to be targeted to my interests and my life as a black woman should be able to show me pictures of men who have chosen black women to love and who are examples of healthy, whole, monogamous relationships. The constant drive by the media to showcase “all these black male celebrities” who date interracially seems pointedly derisive and is starting to trigger my spidey-senses that something else is going on. For the past few months, the news has been saturated with the near impossibility of black women to be married. The blame has been on our standards (too high), our unfailing loyalty to black men (not necessary) or our general unworthiness to be a wife (too sassy, too many kids, low morals, etc.). All of which are lies and untruths. So for Essence to then come along with a cover that plays directly into this manufactured controversy… is just shameful. I miss the days of Essence when you were excited to go to your mailbox and read from cover to cover and at the end, you felt good about yourself, about your sisters and about the world as it relates to black women.

Now? Not ever. Eye candy is a good thing. But I just refuse to believe that its so absolutely difficult to find black men who are beautiful to look at, who are in healthy, monogamous relationships with black women. For the record, I’m not against interracial relationships, nor am I against Kim Kardashian. Its just sad all around.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 6:06 am ¶
From the Continent wrote:

@Teaspoon. Thanks for your post. It was thoughtful and insightful.
Love is love no matter what RACE we are and what RACE we choose to love. If you can’t find love with a black man, then look for love with a non-black men.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 7:26 am ¶
Moni wrote:

Robin Thicke would have been a provocative choice. He has spoken about and sung about his love for a black woman. If the black love issue would focus on black women and the men who love them, he and any other man who has publicly done that could be featured, imo. I would like to hear the publishers’ rationale for putting Bush on the cover.

As for the magazine itself, when I open it, I see pictures of beautiful black women, all shapes, hues, and with all textures of hair. Its still the only magazine where you see such diversity of black beauty. I don’t really read the articles anymore, but I get confused when people say Essence is full of pics of white women…are we looking at the same magazine?

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 9:16 am ¶
Celeste wrote:

@Umm what and AD Nix: We’ll have to agree to disagree then. I don’t see the difference between the words “black love” on a magazine geared towards BW that spends lots of time on the subject matter of attracting/keeping a black man andthe term “love between black people”. I think that’s pretty strongly implied by the context. My love is black love too but my relationship is not black love, it’s black and asian love (that sounds much cornier than black love).
Obviously marrying intrarracially is not a priority with me but I’m not gonna bust up the whole idea of it because I don’t qualify.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 9:58 am ¶
Dee Dee wrote:

I’m not a regular subscriber but I pick up a copy of Essence every now and then. And I agree that Reggie Bush would NOT have been my first choice for a cover with the title “Live Your Fantasy” in a magazine geared towards black women. Would this ever cause me to rant online? Nope. Will I lose sleep over this? Hardly!

I think it’s high time we put the Robert De Niros, Robin Thickes and Jon Bs of the world on the cover of Essence in addition to black men who love black women. This magazine is supposed to cater to black women as it’s demographic so show men who do date and/or marry black women while displaying the diversity of backgrounds these men have.

I love black men but the reality is that there is NO WAY I can limit my love options to black men. There’s too much dismissal of me as a love option and truly not enough time…

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 10:32 am ¶
TierListE wrote:

I cosign with yolanda’s comments.

Also as a person who’s dating history mainly consisted of white guys, it has it’s pitfalls and back tracks, and sometimes I feel there’s too much belittling or admonishment of black women that have interest in a mono-cultural relationship.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 10:46 am ¶
sweeterjuice wrote:

This just all feels like laziness on the part of the Essence editors. It sounds like they didn’t even think about trying to make this article a thought-provoking, well-rounded piece about “What Does ‘Black Love’ Look Like In The 21st Century USA?”

So many missed opportunities…

(1) I don’t understand why they just didn’t put President Obama on the cover. He and Mrs. O. appear to have a great black man/black woman love story going on.

(2) So MANY gorgeous black male celebrities partnered to black women could have gone on the cover other than the POTUS. Denzel Washington. Lawrence Fishburne (aka Mr. Gina Torres to Firefly fans. Oh, and swoon!), Courtney B. Vance (aka Mr. Angela Bassett). Don Cheadle (swoon) has been with his black girlfriend for ages. The list goes on. Did any of those men not cross the ninds of the editors? Especially on the heels of their recent “Will You Marry Me?” feature showcasing black couples getting engaged!

(3) As others have said, there’s plenty of interracial celeb couples. Halle Berry, Suzan Lori-Parks, Taye Diggs, Seal, Iman, Melody Hobson (how long has she been dating George Lucas, anyway?), Gelila Assefa, Cuba Gooding, Aisha Tyler, and Gabrielle Beauvais all have non-black partners.

There’s been plays and films exploring interracial relationships, too. Othello and Desdemonda, anyone? Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? Something New (the most recent example, I think)?

Any of those couples –real and fictional–could have been a great starting point to do a great piece on the constantly evolving perception of interracial relationships in the US. The ups, the downs, the history, the future, the myths and the realities.

Heck, if Essence editors were smart, they’d devote a whole issue to it, since clearly there’s a great deal of controversy around the topic.

(4) Agree that gay and lesbian black love could also have been addressed, too! I can’t think of any celeb examples off the top of my head, but that doesn’t mean someone at Essence couldn’t do some research and get some interviews together, maybe even look at the gay marriage controversies and get the perspective of black gay & lesbian couples.

I don’t think Essence had any malicious message about interracial relationships that they were trying to foist on their readership. I think they were going after a celeb fluff piece built around the idea of “black love” as an excuse to showcase current black male hotness, and didn’t think things through. And while I’m always glad to see more photos of Idris Elba (SWOON!) , if the editors are smart, they’ll take this opportunity to do a _real_ article about Black Love In America.

For that matter, how about the Racialicious staff consider doing one, while the Essence folks are tied up with this controversy? Could be an awesome piece.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 10:52 am ¶
gatamala wrote:

a point about Essence: it is “geared toward” Black women, IOW it is designed to make money off of black women’s concerns (i.e., insecurities).

It is not a black, nor black-woman owned magazine. It is owned by Time, who may merge/has merged with Viacom (the owner of BET).

We need to question what a black publication is/is not.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 11:28 am ¶
ginag wrote:

What, is Boris Kodjoe no longer around? Last time I checked, he was plenty hot. (And up for a part in a JJ Abrams project, so there’s the relevance angle).

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 11:38 am ¶
Candace wrote:

You know, somehow I can’t muster too much sympathy for the women who are pissed off about this cover somehow meaning Essence is not catering to their needs, when this entire discussion is rife with heterosexist privilege, and there are entire swaths of black women who have never been catered to by this or any other black publication.

Just look at this discussion. Only a couple of people have even brought up the notion that queer relationships qualify as “black love”. I’m a queer black woman in a polyamorous relationship. I’ve been involved with people of a variety of races and genders. I know good and hell well that Essence is not “for” me and never has been, despite being a black woman all my life and being raised by and around black women. My life and experience as a black woman has never been represented by this magazine, nor have the lives or experiences of any of the black women I know. It has always been about catering to a very narrow view of cissexual black womanhood, so please forgive me if I’m having a bit of schadenfreude at the notion of “sistas” getting butthurt over this. Welcome to my daily existence.

“Black” publications are the worst punchline in the joke that is print media in general and the quicker they die off the better off we’ll all be. Maybe then we can rely on the internet to showcase the greater diversity of blackness and tell *all* of our stories and stop relying on shitty, dated magazines for our self-worth.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 1:22 pm ¶
brooksie wrote:

@Rachel #38…you’re quite right. This is where the convo seems to lead back to, Kim..not Reggie. Odd given that she’s NOT on the cover! (smile) You’re very much on to something here. The convo about this is NOT about HIS accomplishments or even HIS looks, but about his romatic attachment.

Really this is all “mountain-outta-molehill” stuff that too many BW fall for. I hardly think choosing him for the “Black Love” edition was an accident as few things in life really are. There’s way too much money to be made of out insecurities. This whole BW-IR existential angst is making some folks quite rich. “Essence” just wanted its fair share too.

@umm….what #25…Black mag issues like these bother me for exactly the reasons you outlined.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 2:03 pm ¶
umm....what wrote:

@ Celeste
Frankly put, the privileging of racial endogamy is generally problematic. There’s not really another way to put it. The most “noble” reasons I’ve ever heard has been using marriage as a means of “cultural preservation” or “maintaining community.” That sounds a lot like a nicer way of saying racial purity to me. Physical preference is another story, but that doesn’t really deal with the issue at hand (the IR dating minefield).

The other issue that I feel needs to be unpacked is the notion that black men who date interracially will “settle for marginal women of any other race.” That’s basically like saying black men will date undesirable women of other races or that they will date women who aren’t as attractive as whatever black woman they “should” be with, . That is a point that is often used to blast black men for being in relationships with plus sized women of other races (fatism or size prejudice if you will). Our society doesn’t really have the ability to process the fact that many people prefer plus sized partners so when that unites with aversion to interracial relationships, the results are especially virulent. There is an assumption that a black man in an interracial relationship with a woman who does not fit into mainstream America’s narrow (pardon the pun) beauty standards would only date a black woman if she was like Halle Berry or Tyra Banks or somebody of that caliber of physical attractiveness. That, I think, is racist because it relies on the idea that the highest (or most attractive) black person can only ever compete with “marginal” or “average” people of other races. The belief in that is what generates the anger because its so contradictory to basic understandings of self-esteem.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 2:08 pm ¶
blackstocking wrote:

I’m 42 and used to LOVE going through my mom’s new Essence magazine when it arrived every month when I was a kid. A magazine full of beautiful black women.

This might explain why I am know “trapped” with a subscription that doesn’t run out until 2013! (Got a great deal on Ebay).

Black Love Edition always equaled two black people who love each other. However times change and I’m flexible. I’m open to non-blacks who love a black woman (David Bowie would have been a great choice) and/or black woman who loves another black woman. However, a black man who is in a love match with a non-black woman is a poor choice for the cover of this issue. Should have put Reggie on last year’s issue that featured Edris Alba on the cover.

Essence is a hot mess. The articles are woefully all the same, month after month, year after year. I miss Susan Taylor. The magazine is now so meager, I actually look forward to Rev. Jakes’s column. Better than Steve Harvey.

The Reggie Bush fiasco edition also gives us take 2 on “Black Men would rather Bang Other Women” w/ an “expose” of sex tourism in the Dominican Republic. Also, don’t miss the high-fashion layout w/ impossibly skinny black models. (Yeah I know some of us is impossibly skinny, but still one of the models looks smaller than my 13-year old who wears a size 1-3 and is 5″6″ 1/2).

High spot is the article about preventing teen pregnancy EXPECT that it calls on only black mothers to prevent teen births.

With two young daughters in the house, I regularly donate my copies to a program that collects mags for the hospital. Messence is in bad shape and I won’t let my girls read it.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 2:14 pm ¶
bdsista wrote:

@AD, whats wrong with blackityblack black? When almost every other fashion and beauty magazine is white except Latina, I look for some blackity black every month. Another reason why I vacay in the caribbean b/c its such a refreshing change from the grinding white supremacy I work under daily along with my two hour daily commute. Some of us NEED the reinforcement of monoculture sometimes. Not that I don’t appreciate other things (like the $144 James Taylor/Carole King concert ticket I just got presale), but I totally “Get” why sistas are upset. Essence is the only mag that has been about Black women since the 1970s and if you weren’t alive then, then realize the only other Black Mags were Jet, Ebony and maybe Right On or something similar. That was it. Essence editors dropped the ball in selecting Reggie. I read the Will and Jada issue and it was nice. Standards dropped when Kim Porter and Diddy were on and Essence caught heat b/c Diddy was busted making another kid and also AGAIN not paying attention to their demographics, readers did not like an unmarried couple with kids as a standard. Black women wanna be brides like every other socialized girl in the US. The Black Love issue is supposed to make that more of a possibility, it is supposed to show healthy loving relationships, it is supposed to show men who LOVE Black women.
I have subscribed since it started almost. Dropped it for awhile and then came back for the past 7 years. I had to balance Vogue, Harpers Bazaar, Elle, Allure, InStyle and Town and Country with something that had a cover that looked like me.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 2:26 pm ¶
DivergentDana wrote:

“I feel there’s too much belittling or admonishment of black women that have interest in a mono-cultural relationship.”

Agreed. Disclaimer: I’ve been interested in non-mono-cultural relationships for a long time now, so my thoughts aren’t borne from animus towards those who are similarly inclined. There’s kind of a chasm regarding the way in which the two groups (black women and white men) see the world, and everyone is not going to be interested in the work of bridging that. Also, in a world where men are expected to initiate the various stages of a romantic relationship, the perception of status and similarity matters when it comes down to who gets “to that next level.” Also, it’s harder to rewire what “type” you’re sexually attracted to than the “just date out” people let on — even though that’s not “supposed” to matter to women, which is another story entirely.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 2:26 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:

Wanda Sykes is partnered with a white woman and they recently adopted a child. When will they get featured in Essence?

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 3:46 pm ¶
kenda wrote:

@ Candace #63
I agree that the heteronormative nature of these discussions of black love is problematic, to say the least, but I still think a conversation about heterosexual black relationships is one worth having. We just have to remember that not every black woman is looking for a man.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 4:39 pm ¶
John wrote:

All was that was posted was a image of RB. Black women who also date outside their race have covered Essence! Yet black women wern’t up in arms about that, RB wasn’t posted under black love, but the fantasy section.

I also disagree with the posters calling for white men to grace the cover, Kim wasn’t posted on the cover, Reggie was. To have a white man cover essence is just as bad as putting Heide Klum, Eva longoria, Kim K, Ellen Pompeo, which would be stupid and would cause the all mighty upset as they’re non black and all have wealthy succesful black men!

If your argument is that RB shouldn’t have graced Essence due to the interacial relationship, then neither should Halle or any other black women involved in such a union, since the vast majority of black women date black men, wouldn’t that also be pointless. And a white man and black women isn’t black love, I’m sorry it isn’t, the love I share with the women I date isn’t black love, since I date them because I find their non black features more attractive!

IR’s arn’t as easy as people make it seem, for every white person who’s open to dating outside their race theres a 100 who arn’t. When you leave the club and party scene us blacks are exiled from IR dating, finding a white women who is beautiful and also educated is hard, I don’t really want to pick women up in clubs, I guess black women also feel, the most attrative eligable white men, are either dating white women or other’s(Hispanic,Asain) ect… or simply don’t want to be with a black women!

I honesetly feel my whole dating life would’ve been more simple if I was attracted to black women. Funny thing is I’ve heard many IR daters say their not limiting them selfs, we are, most other races arn’t open to us, I really dont want to date some average looking white women, why should I have to settle in looks, why should a black women have to date an average looking white man? Do we have to expect mediocre white people!

Well since most IR dont have standards guess it’s not a problem, the amount of black men who say their not attracted to black women but date average white women is laugable! Same for black women, they would rather date some middle aged dude, or plain dude while claiming their not attracted to black men. Also these same people arn’t exactly aesthetically pleasing.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 4:43 pm ¶
A.D. Nix wrote:

@ bdsista
I don’t mean black in terms of content I mean, literally, the word “black” in way too many headlines and article titles. Do you have to call an article “Black Vacation Spots” in order for an Essence reader to gather that the travel suggestions are geared toward a black traveler?

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 4:50 pm ¶
pinksghetti wrote:

I’m a BW and I’m sure there are many others who think like me. Even though as I stated earlier I can understand why some are upset and why Essence probably put him on the cover (or maybe the naivette in me thinks they wanted to show they are open-minded). To me if Essence would have not put him on the cover because of dating Kim K. that would be some sort of like discrimination which would be just as wrong if a men’s magazine refused to put Heidi Klum on the cover because she is married to Seal, IMO.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 4:55 pm ¶
DivergentDana wrote:

“That is a point that is often used to blast black men for being in relationships with plus sized women of other races (fatism or size prejudice if you will).”

I’ve always wondered how much of that is an expression of differing cultural norms, as opposed to pure status exchange. Even the black female beauty ideal within the black community is on the larger side of the spectrum of thinness, and I’d assume that there’s more variation regarding men who find larger weights more appealing among black men, particularly in the South. I’d bet money that full-figured black women are more popular with black men than their white counterparts are with white men. Many of the black men involved may be expressing a physical preference that they’ve applied to black women all along.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 5:15 pm ¶
Kat wrote:

I’ll second Misty Knight on the Tameka thing… That was vile. Tameka’s own take on it:
“Unfortunately I think that some black women are — subconsciously — not in love with the image they see in the mirror. Therefore in turn they do not love someone like me. I look too much like them.” She goes on to say that she may have been better accepted if she looked more “exotic.”

@ ginag:
The ironic thing regarding your suggestion is: Boris Kodjoe’s parents were living out an interracial relationship so apparently not ‘Black Love’…

Other than that: The entire story reminds me of gay singers in boy bands… Even straight singers are unattainable for the ‘consumers’ anyway, yet…

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 5:28 pm ¶
the champ wrote:

after reading approximately 1000 different comments (between here, vsb, essence, abelleinbrooklyn, sister toldja, and whataboutourdaughters) about this in the past week, the myriad responses generated by the bush cover controversy seem to just reinforce the idea that experience and personal perception define more of what we hold to be “true” about race than we’d like to believe.

its easy for me (as a black man who’s dated nothing but black women, has two (still) married black parents, and has a circle of friends who date nothing but black men and women) to cite census statistics as proof that mountains are being made out of interracial midget molehills.

but, just as my personal experiences have led me to a place where “damn. since when did back-up NFL running backs start getting international magazine cover love?” was my first thought when seeing that cover, i can understand how another set of experiences could lead to someone being angry or hurt by what that cover represented to them.

still, this understanding also comes with a recognition of the fact that some people tend to choose whichever version of the “truth” best fits the narrative/cultural critique they’ve already formed, and few things upset me more than when this happens.

the bush cover controversy is a perfect example of this; for every heartfelt comment/statement i read, i probably viewed two where the person used this as their platform/opportunity to express whatever personal agenda they had and previously formed judgments they made…a dangerously disingenuous way of examining things that usually leads to scapegoating. to paraphrase pres from the wire, nobody wins when this happens…one side just loses more slowly.

eh. i’ve said too much. anyway, thanks for the link.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 5:38 pm ¶
cocolamala wrote:

@A.D. Nix and bdsista

i personally am looking foward to their 2010 list of Black films (that star white actors)

and their review of “Black” tv shows, like Glee and SNL and 30 Rock

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 5:58 pm ¶
Kenny wrote:

divergent diva I agree with and to the sistas saying put Deniro or Thicke on the cover that is ridiculous, yes I know some BW/BM are more flattered by White attraction and won’t admit it to themselves but putting Bush on the cover,lame as it may be, is getting slammed while having Iman and other famous sistas with White mates on the cover is not. Armenian women have no history of oppressing Blacks that I know of unlike a certain other group of males.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 6:06 pm ¶
ladydai wrote:

@Robin Thicke,
I’m sorry but whenever there is a nice looking white guy, who is married to a black woman, whether Robin Thicke, Jon B, etc. Black women seem to much rather pick apart the sister he is with, rather than celebrate the relationship. So, it would not have been a good alternative.

I think as black women, we have some serious esteem issues to overcome. For some reason, we always choose to measure ourselves against the next woman, as opposed to embracing our own beauty.

Kim Kardashian, shouldn’t leave anyone questioning the validity of their worth in society. Robin Thicke’s wife, should not leave someone, feeling as if their complexion is unacceptable. Moreover,the wife of Jon B, should not compel us to say, she is not pretty enough, because she is dark skinned with short hair. Do you get my drift?

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 8:00 pm ¶
Katie wrote:

@gatamala (#61) That is a good point. Like what really is the magazine’s interest in Black Love? It sounds like mainly they just love Black women’s money.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 8:32 pm ¶
Rishona wrote:

I’m with #71. This is the year 2010. Why would Essence even be writing such tired, stale articles focusing on “Black Love”. As if it differs from any other kind of love…

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 8:51 pm ¶
Neecy wrote:

I would like add to those who have insinuated that IR dating for BW is the boogeyman or a minefield b/c of the negative perceptins of BW and how non black men view us——-

Why is it that BW keep promoting this? That is, that IR are so much more difficult for us (than mono racial/cultural ones) b/c we are not appreciated by men of other races, thus they don’t want to take BW seriously when it comes to dating and marriage?
Can you honestly say that BM view BW in any higher regards than other races of men? As if BM are not or are incapable of using BW for sex or having bad perceptions about us or stereotyping BW.

i think its time for BW to UNDERSTAND that no COLLECTIVE race of men (including Black men) view BW in really high regards. I think this is evident in the great numbers of single unmarried and supposed “will never be married” BW. I really wish Black women would stop blaming Interracial relationships as the ultimate sacrifice for a BW looking to expand her options and increase her probability of finding love.

Fact is, BW need to look at men as INDIVIDUALS and not a collective group based on race.

Yolanda stated that for every one nice white guy, there are 10 slim ball white guys. That’s generally what most women run into when dating regardless of race. Most of the men (regardless of race) you meet are not going to want to be serious or take any woman serious. So what is wrong with finding the 1 out of 10 good ones (and that’s assuming that you are not bypassing other good ones in the process)?

BW are doing themselves and other BW a great disservice promoting the same tired “wm are only out for sex or bad stereotypes” about BW when in fact, there are just as many BM who discriminate, use and exploit BW.

I’m not trying to turn this into a IR debate, but i felt I had to present another side of the story.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 9:19 pm ¶
Tiffany wrote:

Black women should just stop reading Essence magazine if every issue gets them upset.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 9:33 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:

Black love is a term that has been unofficially coined by whoever painted the first picture of a beautiful Black woman in Egyptian looking clothing, in the arms of a beautiful Black man also wearing Egyptian looking clothing. A version of that pic was then sold at every “Black” expo on the planet. And then, since no one else cared, Black women have been actually using the term as an actual sociological term. And yes, that is very heteronormative of me, I realize that. But, I do think that the people who actually care about the term should be the peopl who maintain agency over the term, for the simple fact that they care the most about Black love.

Reggie Bush should not be on the cover because he is not “in love” with a Black woman. And really, Kim Kardashian is famous mostly for a sex tape. How many Black women do we know can be famous for a sex tape? That is just one of the double standards that we as Black women deal with and we don’t need a cover of Essence to remind us of how we don’t get the same consideration that other women seem to have.

On The Bachelor, Black women get about as far as half an episode, where as non-Black women on For the Love of Ray-J make it down to the wire. I think that while statistics are one thing, what we see in the media and our mainstream entertainment is another, and SOMETIMES, more important part of the narrative.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 9:39 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:

Oh, and what was wrong with Dwayne Wade? He seems like a PERFECT choice.

Or the actor Sterling K. Brown from Army Wives? Again, a perfect choice!

I agree with whomever said that Essence was being lazy.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 9:40 pm ¶
tj wrote:

We always get bogged down by the nuances of what is means to be white and black, and whatever. We start talking national origin and percentages-WHEN it is convenient to do so. The point is the idea of beauty, the standard. It is colorism, racism, standard of beauty, and feminism wrapped in one. It is the idea, the notion, the meaning of beauty in this society. It is challenging to many who assume beauty is biological and preferences are biological. Hmm. They are social. Very much social. And in this society there are white, light, long hair, blah blah physical features that men choose to laud in women. This is white supremacy to be blunt. And well, welcome to that world Reggie Bush-u are joined by many.

Posted 13 Jan 2010 at 10:02 pm ¶
emma wrote:

I just got the Essence and I thought some women would be upset, but honestly I just wondered who in the hell decided that Reggie Bush was a fantasy for a large number of women? He’ s cute, but he’s no Denzel on his best day or Denzel’s worst. I think more black women fantasize about Jonny Depp and George Clooney then Reggie Bush.

Posted 14 Jan 2010 at 12:18 am ¶
octogalore wrote:

I think it was at the very least tone deaf, based on the stated focus of the issue and the fact that Essence is targeted towards black women.

While Kardashian’s racial identification is indeterminate, it can at least be stated that she cannot logically identify as “black,” under any definition. Given the focus of the issue and magazine, a black woman should have been involved, preferably as the cover model but at least as the love interest thereof.

Also, I think the controversy surrounding the perceived increased frequency of black men dating non-black women doesn’t have to do with the overall numbers, but the perceived percentage of conventionally successful black men who date or marry non-black women. I would imagine this percentage is greater than the 8% mentioned above and probably by a larger margin than the corresponding percentage of conventionally successful black women who date/marry non-black men is greater than the 3% mentioned above. Although, this is just a guess. I think it’s men who appear more in the media — eg, sports stars, Tiger Woods, Harold Ford, etc. — who are the source of the stereotype about dating out, rather than the average of all black men.

Posted 14 Jan 2010 at 1:40 am ¶
Kat wrote:

@ Michelle: Omigod!!! I loved Sterling Brown’s and Ryan Michelle Bathé’s wedding.

Posted 14 Jan 2010 at 10:59 am ¶
Michelle wrote:

@Kat

I saw those photos as well and I agree, it was a beautiful wedding. Some might even call it “Black Love” .

Which again begs the question;

If a “White” or “mainstream” (whatever those terms mean) publication (in this case, InStyle Weddings) can feature an actor who is on a Lifetime television show, why couldn’t Essence do the very simple homework of finding Sterling Brown and using him for the cover? Lifetime Television for women has a very large Black female base. I would wager that Black women watch Lifetime as much as they watch football.

Just a major fail on the part of Essence. Really, they just didn’t even make an effort.

Posted 14 Jan 2010 at 11:54 am ¶
yolanda wrote:

@Neecy:

i’m not going to pretend like interracial dating for black women is something it isn’t. you said black women should stop acting like it’s “the boogeyman” and that we do others a “disservice” by speaking about how hard it is but–i still do it. that’s the thing: when i talk about how hard it is and what a minefield is, i’m doing it because it’s something i experience everyday and i think other women should have that knowledge, too.

i don’t discourage anyone from interracial dating–i’d be a huge hypocrite to do so. yet at the same time i think i’d be doing black women MORE of a disservice if i pretended it was as easy as saying, “i want to try something new.”

Posted 14 Jan 2010 at 10:32 pm ¶
K wrote:

@ Rachel -

I agree with your view (it’s a “hobby” of wealthy older white ladies to try and bed younger, more attractive, less wealthy black men), but not as it applies to the Kardashians. Kim’s recent significant relationships have all been with black men.

Posted 15 Jan 2010 at 12:11 am ¶
K wrote:

Sykes is married to a white woman, who gave birth to their twins.

It’s interesting how in this conversation so many people say “partner” instead of wife.

Posted 15 Jan 2010 at 12:15 am ¶
MJS wrote:

Yolanda said:
“for every great white guy who’s actually interested in dating me, there’s 10 slime ball who’s only interested in what he thinks i have to offer sexually.”

indeed there are horrible stereotypes about black women but this statement can be applied as a general term of how women are viewed as after viewing feminist sites that talk about how women are shown in the media geared twards white heterosexual males what you’ve said is an enevitable outcome-most notibally the “Nice Guy(TM)” .

Posted 15 Jan 2010 at 12:33 pm ¶
MJS wrote:

sorry forgot to say this is not to take away from what you said as WOC do have it harder not just in this field but in many sectors of society as well, not that it has to be said but, yeah.

Posted 15 Jan 2010 at 12:37 pm ¶
Anna wrote:

What does the article say inside?

I notice RB is mentioned unter “fantasy” as one of the sexiest men, not under the relationship caption.

Also, the title does not say “black love”, but “black men”, the way I understand it, the focus is on the men, their love and their relationship problems.

- umm….what (and others), I agree.
I am a white woman, my fiance is black, I consider him to be a black man thus his love is black – he has been raised by a black family, community, and so forth. Why would his love not be black?

I’m not the target audience of Essence I guess, but if I would see that caption, I would be interested because I want to know about how black men live their relationships and love. (regardless of interracial relationships or not)

Than, of course, if the article inside the magazine did not mention any loving/healthy relationship between two black people, I would feel akward. But that depends on the article itself, not the cover.

I guess they just mixed the “sexiest men” topic with the topic on black men. (Maybe one of the other “sexy men” might have been a better choice?)

This is my point of view, but again – I am not the target audience so I might not be sensitive enough about it.

Posted 16 Jan 2010 at 1:11 am ¶
Michelle wrote:

I had to re-read the comment moderation policy because I was incredibly fired up by Anna’s post.

But that in and of itself, I think, points to the crux of the issue. I don’t really think that we have gotten to what I see is one core issue to be addressed. Observing not just the cover of Essence, but the actual magazine through a somewhat feminist framework might be helpful. As I understand it, one could argue that a crucial point in feminist theory is “having a room of one’s own”. This is very elementary, so forgive me, but many regard Virgina Wolfe’s dictum “a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction”, as one of the beginnings of a modern feminist movement. The idea of a woman having a room of one’s own, a place of one’s own, is very important in this discussion. Black women have been denied a place of their own, a place that is not beneath and therefore defined by a patriarchal and/or white power structure. Essence magazine can be said in many ways to represent (at least at its founding) a symbolic place where Black women can transform, love, heal and even fail, without the eyes of White people watching and defining who we are every step of the way. I think Essence in THEORY and in MYTH still represents that for many Black women, gay, straight, transgendered, mothers, childless mothers, Christians and Buddhists alike.

Through the years Essence has had many failures to include many of our stories and yet it has attempted to deal with many different issues surrounding Black women, and in the very ATTEMPT, there has been something comforting in knowing that it is a place of our own. So, to hear a White person, or ANYONE who isn’t a Black women attempt to define what Black love is or is not raises the hair on the back of my neck. Because Black love has long been one of the things discussed in this “place of our own”. And let me be honest, a White woman speculating that her love with a Black man is “Black love” is particularly confronting. Black love is a term that has long been in usage in the Black community and has never really been talked about outside our community until now, on this actual thread. I don’t think that many people get how important the term is for many segments of the Black community and while not a sacred term, it is still a term that I feel should be defined by the very people who hold the concept of Black love so near and dear to their hearts.

I don’t know, but I feel that the bent of people on this blog is that it is somehow juvenile and provincial and even embarrassing for Black women to wish for Black families, with Black men who love them and little Black kids running around with Afro puffs and cornrows. While it may not be YOUR dream, is it so wrong or racist for it to be the dream of another?

Posted 16 Jan 2010 at 10:17 pm ¶
Celeste wrote:

@Michelle: Yeah, that’s what I don’t get, especially your last paragraph.

Posted 17 Jan 2010 at 12:36 pm ¶
Emmeaki wrote:

m. wrote:

You know, a lot of white “ethnic” people have faced discrimination since coming to the U.S. or immigrating to other countries in Europe. I don’t see how this makes Armenians (or Turks, Greeks, et cetera) Special Caucasians or even “people of color”??

I had a Greek coworker who adamantly refused to be considered white. She constantly complained about white people (we were in customer service and there were a lot of annoying customers who happened to be white).

If someone stated that she too is white, she would let it be known that, “I’m not white, I’m Greek!”

Posted 17 Jan 2010 at 1:36 pm ¶
Adrienne wrote:

The ironies abound…. the Reggie Bush cover was selected by Black women…the concept of Reggie Bush (a Black man) as a fantasy of Black women is a fantasy of a same race relationship…the feminist idea that a man should not define who you are and Reggie being defined by who he is dating…and she’s not even on the cover with him…but he’s always defined by who she is… the responses to Reggie is as if he’s not a Black man that can belong to Black women even in fantasy…and that his presence is insulting to Black womanhood…and the assumption that Black men who date interrically will never ever eva date the same race in their lifetime.

Posted 17 Jan 2010 at 6:15 pm ¶
honeypot13 wrote:

“The world at large doesn’t love black women, like it or not. If we love ourselves, it doesn’t matter.” Sadly – I concur. No external validation cometh, and maybe that’s a good thing.

@ Yolanda – Girl, I’ve been there done that too – I’m a woman first – I shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to be seen as such just because I happen to be – gasp – black.

I am also very tired of the media portraying black women as a science project type experiment. Everyone knows how we should think, act, be. It’s as if they stomp on our toes and judge and penalize us for screaming “OUCH”.

Im tired of it – but Racialicious is a welcome refuge from the ignorance.

Posted 20 Jan 2010 at 6:49 pm ¶
Femi wrote:

So, I read all of the above, and while I agree with some of he comments (being a black woman, sometimes it just hurts….) the comment about “Black Women Being spoiled” is just a tad ridiculous. How is that Black women are spoiled, but on the same hand the grief is that Black women are without partners? Who exactly would be getting spoiled by?

In addition, I am ambivalent about reggie Bush being on the cover, mainly because when I looked at it, I was excited because visually, he just looks amazing. But then when I remembered that his girlfriend is white, it kinda hit me like “oh, yeah, she is white. WTF?” . I didn’t hold onto those feelngs for too long, because I actully do like the Kardashians (they’re shenanigans always keep me laughing) but are we to dismiss it because she’s not “that kind of white”? Being Armenian doesn’t mean that she’s not white, it just means that she’s not from a country where blond hair is the norm. At the end of the day, she’s still a white girl, just a white girl with a curvy body. So if people wanna be up in arms about it, can you blame them?

And in conclusion, the line “ya’ll n*ggas playing in the snow” had me in stitches!

~Peace

Posted 21 Jan 2010 at 10:41 am ¶
Dee Dee wrote:

@Adrienne – “The ironies abound…. the Reggie Bush cover was selected by Black women…the concept of Reggie Bush (a Black man) as a fantasy of Black women is a fantasy of a same race relationship…the feminist idea that a man should not define who you are and Reggie being defined by who he is dating…and she’s not even on the cover with him…but he’s always defined by who she is… the responses to Reggie is as if he’s not a Black man that can belong to Black women even in fantasy…and that his presence is insulting to Black womanhood…and the assumption that Black men who date interrically will never ever eva date the same race in their lifetime.

I don’t know “who”, exactly chose the Reggie Bush cover since Essence is now under new management. But I do know that as a black woman, having to fantasize about black on black love is an insult to me AND my imagination. Why should I have to fantasize about that while other women get that relationship in the flesh, hmmm?

The identity of your partner never defines you but it DOES speak volumes about who you find attractive, compatible and available to you. Reggie Bush can date whomever he pleases; it will never be any of my business. But placing him on the cover of a magazine that allegedly caters to black women and presenting him as a fantasy man is disingenuous. If we’re simply talking fantasy outside of the realms of racial reality then we should be placing black women as fantasy objects on white male magazine covers. Wonder when that will will actually happen?

Reggie Bush doesn’t threaten black womanhood. He’s simply removed from it IMHO. But then again black women are told time and time again to include themselves in an entire society that is bent upon excluding us. THERE’S the greatest irony of them all.

Posted 23 Jan 2010 at 12:36 pm ¶
louise wrote:

@DeeDee

OMG….. DeeDee, how apt and how true.

If we’re simply talking fantasy outside of the realms of racial reality then we should be placing black women as fantasy objects on white male magazine covers. Wonder when that will will actually happen?But then again black women are told time and time again to include themselves in an entire society that is bent upon excluding us. THERE’S the greatest irony of them all.

That’s the truth, if we offer up anything other than mammy’s open and happy arms and smile at misfortunes that befall us as black women…. we are told we are bitter and small and we have to assimilate no matter how much resistance we meet.

Even if we are told how we are repulsive to the world and repugnant to men, in a hetronormative world…. that stings…. it really burns.

I just cannot say it any better than you have.

I love you DeeDee

Posted 25 Jan 2010 at 3:47 am ¶
Dee Dee wrote:

@Louise – Thanks lady! I’m just telling it like it is (from my perspective at least). Be well

Posted 25 Jan 2010 at 1:23 pm ¶
honeypot13 wrote:

I hear ya’ll @ DeeDee and Louise – and I have really had to do some serious soul-searching to pick my face up off the ground regarding our portrayal and representation in the media. Sad part is too – some of these negative representations are from our own community.

I have decided it is all a big lie – black female undesirability is just perpetuated because hey – someone has to be portrayed as being at the bottom, and everyone needs and loves a scapegoat. So, I’m determined to depersonalize it – though that is anything but easy.

Truth is – black women have and always will be beautiful – it’s just rarely acknowledged socially – and for good reason (all those aforementioned).

I have decided – screw society. I can’t bear to carry the weight of our denial any longer. I validate myself.

*stamping “APPROVED” on my forehead*

Posted 25 Jan 2010 at 4:23 pm ¶
A. wrote:

And LOL @ this particular issue, seeing as how it has a couple in there that is IR (a black woman and a Thai man) and also outs the Dominican Republic as being the place for black men to hook up with light-skinned prostitutes.

Posted 01 Feb 2010 at 8:09 pm ¶
robyn wrote:

@sweeterjuice
(1) I don’t understand why they just didn’t put President Obama on the cover. He and Mrs. O. appear to have a great black man/black woman love story going on.

because this cover seems to be faairly sexual, and it would seem a bit silly to me if the man representing our country appeared on the front of a magazine bearing his stomach.

Posted 08 Feb 2010 at 1:33 am ¶
Sharon Joseph wrote:

You statistic is incorrect as an indicator of how prevalent this phenomenon is. Only 58% of black men are marrying. Subtracting 8% from that leaves half of black men willing to marry black women and that is a very SAD state of affairs.

Posted 08 Feb 2010 at 5:21 am ¶