Broadcast

Live streaming video by Ustream

You Can Tell by the Way I Walk: A Qualitative Study of Males in the Penn State Harrisburg Fashion Show Production

By Marcellus C. Taylor


Abstract

This study looks at the role of masculinity in the practices of the Black Student Union Fashion Show at Penn State Harrisburg. The study critically examines the way the male character perform their masculinity in light of the feminine stereotypes of typical fashion shows. Also it engages male participants in their personal accounts and experiences in the fashion show. Finally, because of the exotic nature of modeling within the show, this study will engage the male participants in their feelings of masculine expressions such as gender and sexual orientation. The study is a combination of in depth interviews and observations. There were five interviews and three observations conducted over three months. The initial findings suggest that the male models felt that they had to “switch up” there masculinity to fit the modeling world. Also there performance of masculinity included feminine qualities, dominance and control.

Keywords: masculinity, fashion show, performance



Introduction
Modeling is distinguished from other types of public performance, such as an acting, dancing or mime artist, although the boundary is not well defined. Appearing in a movie or a play is not considered modeling. However, models may be considered to express emotion in their photographs or video. (Williams at el 1999) The culture of modeling is one that is fierce, innovative and often a difficult atmosphere to individuals who are considered outsiders of this social world. A few of those outsiders include males, plus size females and people of color.

Male models are seen as the outsiders because the world of modeling has been dominated by females who have transformed the field. My study examines the nature and culture of such models. I have studied analyzed and discovered patterns and trends that are created when males participate in this unique culture. The male models in this study were all part of the Black Student Union Fashion Show at Penn State Harrisburg located in Middletown, Pennsylvania.

The Black Student Union Fashion Show, cast of members was in total twenty-four students. I had the privilege of engaging the male models in the production which in total was ten of the twenty-four. There were many social structures to this fashion show that led to a few different themes of the subculture of the male models. I notice that performance; sexuality and masculine identity were all important themes that were birth out of the performance of fashion modeling for the male models.

METHODS

My study is a combination of interviews and observations. I wanted to get a group and individual perspective on their view of the social world of fashion modeling and the role of masculinity with the entire social setting. The settings for the interviews and the observations vary on the location of the fashion show rehearsal, availability of empty rooms and the director’s demands of the models. Overall these two methods proved to be essential in the development of this entire project.

One of the greatest experiences of this entire research project was the interviews. I was able to engage five of the male models in an honest dialogue about masculinity, sexuality and performance. I was able to gain a high level of entrée because I had developed relationship with these models prior to my research. My first interview was with a model that will be referred to as Cruzie. This interview took place on February 16th, in W-213 in the Olmstead Building of Penn State Harrisburg. Cruzie was a vibrant, energetic and open model who loved to dance and model. The second interview was with Rex the director of the entire Black Student Union Fashion Show. Rex and I met in W-213 in the Olmsted Building of Penn State Harrisburg and had a great dialogue about his design and implantation of the show.

The next set of interviews took place the following week on February 23rd. Both interviews were held in the Gallery Lounge located at Penn State Harrisburg. The third model that I interview wanted to be address as Fresh Prince. He was a comical individual who liked to in his own words “keep it real” about the entire fashion show. Next was Ace, who had a few interesting sentiments about sexuality. My final interview was conducted a little over a month from the last interview. I interviewed Pop, a novice to the whole modeling culture. We interviewed in the Kunkle Auditorium of Penn State Harrisburg while the rehearsal was taking place.

The interviews were another essential component to the overall effectiveness of this paper. I conducted three interviews which gave me tremendous insight into the social world of modeling. Each observation was intriguing and I learned something new from every experience. The first observation was on February 9th, at 9 pm in the Kunkle Auditorium at Penn State Harrisburg. At this observation I discovered that there was a system of stratification within the male models. There were individuals who were talented and skilled male models, jokesters and people who tried hard but could not complete choreographic task.

The seconded observation occurred on February 16th, at 7:15 pm in the Gallery Lounge at Penn State Harrisburg. This observation was fascinating because for the first time I saw the male models try to prove that they could model. When an individual would do well I notice that the called that person a “Diva”. This term made me think internally about how they view themselves as male models. The third observation was on February 23rd, in the Kunkle Auditorium at Penn State Harrisburg. For this observation I gained a greater level of awareness of the conflict of femininity and masculinity.

In both the interviews and observations I gained valuable information. In the interviews the way I discovered themes was I asked questions that specifically dealt with the topic at hand. This was critical because the wrong questions could of hid important information from this project. In the observations I had to totally remove my bias and see the situation as a new and intriguing setting. The issues I ran into were the demands of the director. The director was demanding and often didn’t allow models to interview during practice. I had to either meet before or after the practice was over to secure enough time to interview.

In essence the methods used in this study allowed me to explore a subculture that is compacted with countless patterns and themes. Also this methodological approach allowed me to discover the true feeling of male models in the Black Student Union Fashion Show at Penn State Harrisburg. The respondents gave me tremendous insight into the attitude and nature of the male models in the show. They were my extra set of eyes and ears that enabled me to paint a masterpiece of male modeling and the themes and characteristics that are associated with this culture.

Analysis
Three major themes emerged from the critical analysis of the male models that participated in the Black Student Union Fashion show. The first was the performance of modeling in a feminine environment. Performance for the sake of this study is defined as the “carrying out” of a particular task or role. The second theme is sexuality. Sexuality is understood in this study as the condition of being characterized and distinguished by sex. The final theme is masculine identity. This theme is the most prevalent in the observations and interviews conducted with the male models.

Performance
Performance is the “carrying out” of a particular task or role. Before we can analyze any other theme we have to closely look at the situation itself. First it is critical to note that in the words of author Ervin Goffman, “that part of the individual’s performance which regularly functions in a general and fixed fashion to define the situation for those who observe the performance… is the
expressive equipment of a standard kind intentionally or unwittingly employed by the
individual during his performance.” ( Goffman 1969). This quote refers to the concept of performance and the characters that carry out various roles. In every social situations performance is critical to the process of engagement and completion of any production.

Sexuality
Sexuality is the condition of being characterized and distinguished by sex. In this study sexuality is critical in the performance of modeling. Men in female-dominated occupations do encounter questions regarding their sexuality. This questioning, however, does little to impede their progress in the organization. To reaffirm their masculinity, these men seek out male identified specialties, emphasize masculine aspects of the job, and pursue administrative positions. (Williams 1989, 1995)

“Feminine” Activity
In the case of one interviewed male models he notes these following sentiments about modeling being a feminine activity:
I don't believe that modeling is a "feminine activity". I think the notion of modeling being a "feminine activity" has been established between majority of the models are females, and there aren't many opportunities in modeling to show much masculinity. Being concerned with how you walk, how you dress, and maintaining your posture while 'twisting, turning, and spinning' are associated more with feminine attributes versus male attributes. I believe modeling is much like nursing, in that aspect.

In the examining of this above statement we see the concept of sexuality rest heavily on the difference between actual and perceived gender occupations. When I critically read and examined the text, “Men Who Cheer”, I discovered that the concept of a “feminine activity” was a major stigma that made the male cheerleaders uncertain of their place in cheer-leading. Another male model uses these words to express his feeling about modeling being a “feminine activity”:
At first I did think it was a feminine activity. On shows like “America’s Next Top Model” they are pretty sexist since they are only looking for women, so it helps mold that stereotype that modeling would only be for girls.

Perception of Homosexuality
Another concept under the theme of sexuality is homosexuality. Since modeling is often seen as a “feminine” activity, those males who perform are often labeled as feminine and homosexual. In “Men Who Cheer”, the author mentions that “Men who cheer are perceived and labeled as homosexual”. (Bemiller 2005) So true is this study, many of the male models initially believed that modeling was for women and secondly for gay men. The director of the show expressed this belief heads on in the following statements when asked “how did the fashion change you?
” It changed how I viewed fashion and modeling. It's not just for women or gay males".

The Selling of Sex
All throughout the rehearsals I noticed that the concept of sex was intertwined in every scene. During my second visit I notice this type of behavior. After a critical analysis I noticed that the male models in the show responded more efficiently when the concept of sex was involved. In “Men Who Cheer” a few males actuality were more inclined to participate in cheer-leading because the females were “hot”. I recorded some descriptions in my field notes:
"During this scene I saw for the first time the strong influence of sex and sexuality. The female model that was playing the role of Rihanna blew kisses, rubbed her body in a sexual manner and did an occasional wink. Such behavior is a classical representation of sex. The male modes seemed poise to participate in this scene. Three of them were chosen to have major roles. The male with tightest abs got the leading role. Additionally the males were covered with oil to add to the sexiness of the scene. The female models truly embraced their role and turned into sexy, luring and passionate performers'.

Throughout the entire scene I notice that the male models seemed extremely comfortable interacting with the females. The male models I interviewed also believed that sex was a major part in the culture of modeling. One male gives this great summery of the selling of sex:
"It was a way to appeal to the audience as well as a way for the models to feel more secure with their own sexuality".

Masculine Identity
In this study I also discovered a theme of the male models trying to hold on to their concept of a masculine identity. Masculine, for this study was defined as anything traditionally considered being characteristic of a male. This concept can be analyzed from two different prospective, dominance and aggression.
Dominance
Dominance was a critical factor in the performance in the rehearsals of the fashion show for the male models. Rex, the director used this to encourage the other male models to aim for perfection. In this study dominance wasn’t about vocal control but rather chorographical skills. A male model I interviewed used these words to explain the role of dominance in the fashion show rehearsals:
Dominance at the fashion show rehearsals came into play when it came to whose going to be in the front for choreography scenes and who had the best model walk/pose. I think the goal for males in modeling is not only showing off what they're wearing, but to also have a walk/pose that shows power, personality, sex appeal, and how "suave" you are.

Aggression
The use of violence and aggression are common characteristics utilized in maintaining masculinity for men. ( Connell 1995,2002; Messner 2005). This this sub-concept was made evident in the “Fight Club” scene of the fashion show. The males seemed to embrace aggressive characteristics to assert their masculine identity. I noticed the following:
"The next scene was a replica of an actually fight. There were two male models in the centered of the huddle of male models appearing to be fighting one another. The male models came really close to actually hitting each other. They rolled on the floor and pushed each other with such malice and passion. After the scene I asked one of the male models who was engaged in the fighting segment of the scene, “how was he able to perform that well during his part”? He said, “I use to fight a lot when I was younger, and actually it seems pretty normal to be”. His sentiments helped me realize that aggression, control and authority too many of the modes was normal behavior".


Conclusion
The aim of this study was to explore and the sub-culture of male modeling. The findings suggest that the male models that participated in the Black Student Union Fashion Show were transformed by the modeling and also that they redefine modeling to fit their personal identity. The themes of performance, sexuality and masculine identity served as a set of lenses to view the male models within the show. In this study we also discovered that the male models had an initial fear of modeling because of the “feminine” and homosexual connotation that is associate with modeling. Another critical finding is that the male models related to feeling of dominance and aggression to help them perform as models.

The study also points out that a central idea surrounding the entire fashion show was sex. Sex was used to engage the audience and to lure the male models into participating and interacting with the females in the show. Homosexuality came off as a phobia of many of the male models. They initially thought that only gay men participated in modeling. This fear caused many of the men to hesitate performing certain scene and being a part of the entire production.

In the future a study of this nature must dive deeper into the felling of the women who watch the male models perform this craft. This study did not engage the female models on their view of male models and the stereotypes that they associate with them. Future researchers should also be advised that a study of this nature is about catching the models in the act of modeling. This is a study of individuals practicing a particular art form; it’s not about the personal lives of models.


References

Connell, R. W. 2005 Masculinities / R.W. Connell Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, N.S.W. :
Connell, R. W. 1987 Gender and power : society, the person, and sexual politics / R.W. Connell Polity Press in association with B. Blackwell, Cambridge, UK :
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday/Anchor Books.
Michael A. Messner (2005) “Still A Man’s World?: Studying Masculinities and Sport,” pp. 313-325 in Michael S. Kimmel, Jeff Hearn & R. W. Connell, eds. The Handbook of Studies on Men and Masculinities. Sage Publications.
Williams, Roshumba; Anne Marie O'Connor (1999). The Complete Idiot's Guide to Being A Model. Penguin. pp. 159–160. ISBN 9781592575923
Williams, Christine L., 1995 Still a man's world : men who do "women's work" / Christine L. Williams University of California Press, Berkeley :
Williams, Christine L., 1989 Gender differences at work : women and men in nontraditional occupations / Christine L. Williams University of California Press, Berkeley :

King Day Blog: 'It Aint Dead', but its dying: black church influence in the black communituy

The reality may not be that the black church is dead. Rather, it is coming to an end of its relevance. I need not to glance over the astounding impact that the black church has traditionally held socially and politically. However, today the church is now in need of the same revival that it has provided many men and women over the world. The church cannot save anyone. Someone needs to save the church.

The loss of influence the black church has is affected by other factors, of course. Stronger socio-economic stratification amongst blacks has certainly made the church less divisive and less unifying. While middle-upper class blacks begin to further exclude themselves from lower class and povertised blacks, the unity that the church possessed- as far as creating a space where a waiter and councilman could workshop together- has gone as well. The problems that black people have today are not the same forces that placed black people together in the past. Formerly confronted by the constant pressure of racial animosity and fear against whites, today our fears are very different. While animosities toward whites may persist in some areas, I assert that blacks are under more pressure internally. Instead of tensions held toward other races; a familiar, yet, distinct fear is held by blacks against other blacks. A middle class parent does not want their child playing with a povertised black, for various reasons- one of them is the assumptions about the upbringing and character of those "less fortunate." In fact, partial reasoning for blacks electing to move out to suburbs is to shake away from potential trouble apparently inherent in urban areas that challenge the rearing of their children. In addition to assumed child-rearing deficiencies, our views about opportunity have changed the way that we embrace each other. While previously, a waiter and business owner could bond with the reality that their contributions are likely to become squandered or marginally disrupted by superordinate, racially-discriminate forces, that is not likely to be the case today. The business owner, likely enamored with his successful business he believes he cultivated with hard work and discipline, will likely feel that a poorer man is not trying hard enough and that he lacks the ambition and drive to achieve. By contrast, the poorer man may feel that he has not been afforded the opportunity at the right time and that the more successful man is fortunate. The economic boom and expansion of the black middle class- where many black men and women were attaining great jobs and wealth- has created the illusion that success is attainable as long as you try hard, stay focused, and disciplined (and it is assumed that this is easy to do). Thus, it becomes assumed by those who have made it that those who have not experienced success have not tried hard enough, lack focus and lack discipline. Many people expect the church to maintain the ability to unify all types of African Americans. The reality that people tend to live and associate with those from similar economic backgrounds minimizes the churches potential to play a similar role that it traditionally had.

These convoluted realities make worshipping and unity quite difficult for blacks. The successful black man is certainly weary of the possibility of being asked for an opportunity by a gentlemen he is unsure will operate successfully. The potential for someone to ask for donations, time, and responsibility that this man may not desire can be the consequence for being successful. Confronted with challenges of his own- whether they are other organizations, jobs, or family- living and operating with those of less “fortune” appear to be unwanted work for the successful black man, and a burden he is certain to avoid. Black Americans who are actually from Africa are experienced with a similar dilemma. But, many of those who are successful welcome the opportunity to help, and those who look forward to the opportunity are willing to listen, learn, and take whatever the ones who made it are willing to give. The American reality- where people want everything they want for themselves- it is certainly difficult to create unity with a prideful poor man who wants for his own and wants to create for his own, and a rich man who doesn’t mind helping but doesn’t mind not-helping if arrogance gets in the way, which is certainly common amongst Americans. Americans feel entitled to opportunity, making an even exchange between "haves" and "have-nots" an event of conflict and discomfort.

The Black Church faces a much larger and complicated issue. While the church traditionally bore the load for those disgruntled by racial injustice, intra-racial tensions is not a specialty of the church. In fact, the church prides itself on the ability for them to side-step such distractions. The idea of the church doors being “open to everyone” and that “no one is judging”(which is a statement for fools) is an attempt that the church makes to suggest that they are bigger than social backgrounds. Though traditionally they may have been because everyone had been preoccupied with the larger beast in the room (racism), today it remains the elephant in the room. The church must ask: “How can I unify the poor and the wealthy without placing a burden on the wealthy and charity on the poor?” “How can we be honest about these issues in a healing way?” Though Chris Rock talks about this conflict in a humorous way in his classic tirade about 'black people vs. niggaz war', he understood that this was a big issue. Yet laughter always softens the blow. The church is dead because it’s torn apart socio-economically. However, the tear is not exclusive to economics.

Generational gaps will also contribute to the death of the church. As generation after generation get more liberal and more liberal, the church stays conservative and conservative. The generational effect, in juxtaposition with religious doctrine and catechism, is the black communities’ greatest flaw- domestically and internationally. Perhaps what has stifled Africans and those in its’ diaspora is its emphasis to follow tradition which can stifle change. Unfortunately, the traditional religious prescriptions that black people have are rare to change with the times to better-fit needs of its people. This can have unfortunate results-- the inability to make decisions that benefit the people in its’ particular situation, stifle them competitively, and creates tension between generations who grudgingly “suffered” through and those who desire to change tradition. The church’s generational issues occur through doctrine. As youth are developing physically earlier, encountering sexual behavior earlier, and exposed to more at an earlier age, the church doctrine still strongly remains against such issues. Secularity is something that the church desire to have no parts in. Instead of hosting secular parties as a way to bring members in, they stand against them. Instead, ministries attempt to bring youth together through gospel rap—something that reminds many youth of white people trying to rap in children's shows to appeal to black people because rap is “hip.” The majority of youth disregard it as disingenuous or unrealistic. And for the young men and women who are genuinely in to doing the “Lord’s Work”, they are hoarded and shown off to the older crowd; and unfortunately, groomed to become a traditional pastor. While this may still appeal to older men and women, those other than the young pastors’ friends and those in his immediate peer circle are likely to be unaffected by his desire for ministry. Once again, creating a separated circle, where those like-minded stay in the church, and others like-minded are secluded and partake in other activities. Evangelizing doesn’t work because it appears in the same vein as the men who sell hats and gloves- it appears that you are selling something, and today’s youth do not like to be sold ideas directly (which is what makes rap so subtly effective). It is certainly a task for the church. In a generation where things are only effective when passed through informally, how will the church get young men and women interested in listening (church service) and how do they maintain credibility? Black people have a very low tolerance for hypocrisy, how does the church rebuild its reputation in the eyes of the youth? Until someone comes up with an answer and saves the church, in addition to repairing the assumptions that elders have about youth, the church will continue to die just as it dies with Americans in general. Does the church detest mainstream hip-hop so much that they will disassociate themselves with the hip-hop generation? If the status quo persists, the hip-hop generation will disassociate themselves, thus, leading to the demise of the black church.

The black church simply has too many social problems amongst black people internally for them to have any answers to the problems that churches face. While mega-churches seem to have no problem because of its attractiveness, the smaller churches appear to have larger hurdles to jump because they are located within the heart of the community. If the church has no desire to address these issues, or change the methodologies of the church to fix and fit the needs and problems in the church, then it will die.

Additionally, I am not oblivious to other factors that contribute to the churches' loss in influence. The fact that many parents have lost control of their household also contribute to the general loss influence. As parents lose control- as those responsible for taking children to church- children are likely to carry on the disinterest they have in the church and are not likely to develop an interest as they get older. Though there are many more issues that contribute to this particular issue, economics, opportunity, and generational disconnect are factors that are the largest contributors to the predicament that the church faces when their relevance is questioned.

Femininity and Black Masculinity at Morehouse

The large uproar about Vibe magazines ‘Mean Girls at Morehouse’ article is certainly grounded and based along two lines: What is right, and what is Right. The touchy-ness of the issue makes it too difficult for one to distinguish between either of them. However, at its deeper core comes a deeper question: Is the concern based on the students’ fears of Morehouse becoming a “school for gays?” Is the commotion over this topic really about a dress code? How about homosexuality?

Ironically enough, the conversation is about neither of them. The conversation is strictly about black masculinity.

Just as when we are to talk about racism, we are talking about white supremacy. For any critical thinker, it is important to identify the heart of the matter. However, before we go any further we must accept the following:

1. Morehouse is a school for homosexuals. If one is nearing the end of his high school experience and is homosexual, Morehouse College will likely enter the realm of his interests. Any objective person would be more than aware of the relatively large gay community at Morehouse College. If students are willing to accept this reality, it will help us understand that homosexuality will always be a component of the school, whether the administration will allow it or not. Morehouse’s strict all-male population, centered dead-smack in the center of Atlanta- One of the nation’s gay capitals- attributes to the schools popularity amongst homosexual students. It also attributes it to Morehouse’s growing popularity because Atlanta is a fast growing city.
2. There are serious cases of homophobia at Morehouse College. Despite the dress-code being aimed at all types of controversial “cultural uniforms”, students at Morehouse continuously aim- justified or unjustifiably- at the .05% of students who are actually cross-dressing. Meaning that a select few have been magnified in the hyper-sensitized, reasonably-insecure psyches of many black males attending the school.

However, it is critical that we address the heart of the issue. Morehouse had been created in 1867- shortly after the “emancipation” of enslaved blacks throughout the south. The school is created with the intention on educating men. Seeing that the school has no vocational roots, it is clear to see that our founders identified education as the method of use to rust the chains of slavery. More importantly- almost every black institution spearheaded by black males in our society has one underlying goal in mind:

Rebuilding the psyche, image, and respect of the black man.

We are talking about black men who could not defend or take care of their families. Any self-conception of manhood they could fathom they were not allowed to publicly exhibit without adhering to the consequences of such behavior. These were men were forced to step off sidewalks while white men walked on them. These were men who were beaten, castrated, and hanged for glancing at white women. And these were men who were not allowed to eat dine, or even speak to a white man a certain way. Read Born to Rebel, Dr. Mays’ autobiography, and he will tell you about his various encounters with white men on Pullman Trolleys who would directly insult him face to face. Though that is prejudice and could have happened to black women too, man-to-man, it is considered and understood as an attempt to demasculinate another man.

These temperaments transferred culturally onto to black men today. Black men- more than any other demographic- may be the most concerned about the image that he sends to the public. He understands that the “system” (media, policy, or economics) is concerned about making him as silly-looking and as non-a-factor as possible.

Meanwhile, there is Morehouse College- a school that professes its students to be a remedy to the historical devaluation and demasculation of the black male. One of the reasons that black males profess their sexuality so much is because the system has not allowed them to be a “man” in any other sector but the bedroom. Morehouse’s focus, like all black male organizations- be it fraternity or business organization- is to rebuild the black masculinity that has been taken away from them for centuries.

We are not beyond the days of racism or its residue. Men consciously and unconsciously are still attempting to rebuild their masculinity. For a black man still cannot comfortably be black and be male simultaneously. In this sense, we cannot- and refuse to- identify with individuals who are black males who have no desire to be men. In fact, it is an outrage to some.

And yes, image is also inclusive to manhood. That’s the essence of culture. Cultures are only cultures when they have developed a set of shared values. Interestingly enough, also included in culture is the possession of a set a shared symbols! Symbols are images! Within our culture, for one to profess themselves to be a man they have to ascribe to the cultural and symbolic tenets of manhood- and many of them are superficial. It is similar to Christianity. A symbolic tenet of Christianity is the acceptance of the cross for its symbol- because if you and I have different definitions for what the cross is symbolic for, it becomes difficult for us to share the religion. When one says they attend a school for men- particular image comes to mind. Cross-dressing does not fit that image. The morality of this reality is not of importance, but if we must… It is important to know that every culture has a defined set of female and male roles- the role of the male is called masculinity. Morality is developed by cultural values, and if one goes against those cultural values they are deemed immoral.

Whether masculinity is defined is semantic. The answer to your question is the image that enters your mind when the term ‘masculinity’ is mentioned. The Morehouse administration and the student body share a collective conception of what masculinity is within this culture. And we see cross-dressing as a potential threat to the status of respectability that we have been attempting to build globally for nearly 200 years. We see cross-dressing in the same sense in which Big Mama’s House, Madea, and the Nutty Professor see it- as comedy. We see cross-dressing making Morehouse College the butt of jokes, not the spark of conversation. And as much as Morehouse should stand above the masses as far as understanding diversity- we are also aware of how this particular diversity could hurt its reputation. And at Morehouse- that is all we have! No money, no significant donors, no large endowment- only reputation. And seeing that reputation is likely what brought you (the reader) to this school, it becomes easy to correlate its reputation to its bottom line. Even a cross-dresser should understand the threat such an image has to Morehouse.

This may be the only institution where black masculinity is so cherished. Because it is an all-black male school in America- I need not to express the other misconceptions that Morehouse College has to guard itself against (examine the Rick Ross situation). An all-male school dealing with femininity certainly tilts the bucket over in an environment where we are still not completely viewed as all men. Most of it is negative media. However, we refuse to allow self-inflicting damage.

What is Marriage?

This blog was birthed out of a conversation I had been recently engaged in. I facetiously asked a friend of mine : “So what exactly is happening when you get married?” After receiving the expected responses or typical responses, I began to think about the social acknowledgments of marriage. I have attempted to draw them out in the following:

1. Marriage places the two of you in a bond strengthened by God and it places a sacred unity between the two that no longer makes lust for each other sinful, nor casual fornication. Marriage places two souls together for eternity.
2. Marriage is the acknowledgment that you have found your soul mate, and that you are bound together- “through sickness and through health”
3. Marriage shows that you are “equally yoked”, meaning that you shared the same values and are “cultivated” in manner similar to each other. This typically assumes that you have the same faith, customs, traditions, etc.

There is certainly more to tease out when it comes to the assumptions about our spiritual or social respect for marriage. However, even beyond that, I would like to acknowledge some of the more-personal assumptions and acknowledgments we make about this “sacred” unity:

1. Married people are less likely to cheat because they have made their acknowledgment of their commitment to you in front of God (However, I have never heard any priest or minister ever mention anything about commitment in marriage).
2. Married people tend to live in more stable homes. Its our basic belief that a mother and father being in the home provide the best foundation and building blocks in order to raise healthy and functional children.

Despite many of the notions I have attempted to place into this conversation, when it comes to marriage, no one seems to identify the basic tenets of marriage without super-fabrication, or some sort of romanticization of the act. We have continued to deny this one word and how it impacts such a unity.

CAPITALISM

For those of you that may not truly understand what capitalism is, then you and I may disagree strongly. Many people may understand capitalism as simply a form of economic policy so as to talk about China being a mixed economy with some elements of capitalism. Before we are to proceed, we have to acknowledge that capitalism is a political movement. Capitalism is a way of life, or more importantly, a system that turns a market into ANYTHING. As you watch ‘For the Love of Ray J’- capitalism. Jersey Shore- capitalism. Pornography- capitalism. Hip hop videos and black culture- capitalism. Religion- capitalism. It’s a way of life that has turned everything sacred into a political and economic process. In its basic form, it is expressed in terms of investment. It takes the valued culture and attachments one makes about marriage, life, God, and their children, and turns them into to materials made to be invested upon and profited upon.

Before I am verbally attacked, I would advise you to acknowledge that profit, like in capitalism, is not always measured or evaluated in dollars and cents. Coca-Cola can send some free Coke to Haiti just to make the people feel as if they care. It is because in this system, they understand that your emotions, dreams and ideas can quickly be turned into a dollar. Artist simply do not rap just for the sake of art, but for the sake of being compensated for their inner-most discretions and indiscretions. This is not the nature of man, for those that may think so.

Marriage is the same way. Though, before we begin to elaborate on marriage, lets understand what marriage really is:

1. Marriage is a way that people or persons fiscally tie their emotions with the other.
2. Marriage is also a tool in which people use to be looked upon favorably, understanding following the model of “family man or woman” will create benefits opportunity-wise and financially down the line
3. Most of all, in this system, marriage is purely legal, economic (generates billions in revenue as far as employment, marriage officers, clerks, counselors, pastors/priests/rabbi’s, wedding planners, RINGS, etc.), and superficial- for most of it lacks any cultural components of cultural emphasis (tradition and culture are not always synonymous because tradition without the understanding of culture is pointless- its like not knowing why men take their hats off in the building).

Lets understand that in my first list of acknowledgments concerning the social acknowledgments of marriage, all of these components are or should be acknowledged before marriage is even there. If someone has lied to you before marriage, they likely will lie to you after marriage. If you were never equally yoked before marriage, you wont be after the ceremony. And if God had not been in the relationship before marriage, God wont be there after it. The crucial components that make a relationship sustainable are things attained through spending time together, and just because you have exchanged a ring and have some religious figure talk to you about how God will be on your side will not change anything. Is the bond never felt before marriage?

Also, people only believe in these super-spiritual notions about marriage while its convenient for them. They are only equally-yoked until he or she cheats, or gets fatter, or loses some money or loses a job. They are only soul-mates until the man decides to get abusive and the vows and all the other decrees quickly fly out the door. The divorce rate in America has never been larger, and its because once the materials or exhilaration of the marriage declines, so does the value. As soon as one feels as if they are not receiving profit for their emotional investment, that’s when the partnership, the merger, or the business- regardless of how much the two have gained together- closes up. Then, the law creates a severance package, which is used a contractual tool. When a football team decides to waive a player, it means that they still have to pay the players' salary until the the contract runs out. This is partially a tool the players union bargains for to keep team owners from aborting contracts early and coaxes them into remaining faithful to their contractual obligation, which was to have the player through “sickness and through health” until their contract expires. In marriage the contract is a life time, and unless you do not have a ‘no-waive-clause’ (prenuptial agreement), you will likely lose big.

But isn't that the essence of capitalism? Its a place where Where you place your eggs in one basket. Shouldn't marriage be one of those things where the partner says: “I love you, and you are worth going broke for if this doesn’t work out because I am giving you my all, anyway… I have no problem losing opportunities for you because I love you and I am not worried about my individualistic welfare because I am never planning to become that way because we are soul-mates for eternity.”

Nope.

Because in capitalism, you place opportunity and resources over the companion. Re-read what I said: capitalism turns EVERYTHING into a market, even the things we hold sacred. It reverses and usurps its meaning, taints it, and it becomes something completely opposite in what its intended to be. Marriage no longer becomes a spiritual bond but becomes superficial BONDAGE, where I stay faithful to my wife not because I love her, but partially because I do not want to lose what I have gained. I come home at night, make love to my woman not because I simply want to please her, but also its in my best economic and legal interest to keep her pleased. I want to works things out- not just because I truly would love to have my wife here, but because of the economic and legal pains we would both have to go through. There is nothing sacred about that, and if that’s the marriage you want, you can keep it. Love is one of those things that should not be bolstered by material comfort. It’s a gamble. Besides, the alimony will never heal those wounds, you’ll still be bitter despite you winning custody or you retaining the house.

The problem inherent with this line of thinking is that many of us are consistent with our thinking patterns. If behind our companion we see a legal and financial obligation, then certainly we will see it behind our children! Our children today are immediately seen as a mouth feed or a body clothe instead of a spirit to nurture. And then your children will see you as a spoon to feed them and wallet to clothe them. And we’re all too familiar of what happens when any group of people see each other as a utility- you begin to FEEL like one.

In conclusion, I surmise that marriage should simply be a public acknowledgment of unity. It becomes a place where the community sees and holds each other accountable. In addition, I would love to see my Queen and I not buy each other rings, but rather get tattoos or a marking that we only identify- which acknowledges the unique and particular bond that we possess. She has no need to change her last name to mine, for her identity is just as worthy as mine. Nor do we need to go through the legal ramifications of marriage. We can simply have this ceremony without any paperwork. I want cultural relevance, not political or economic. I want the spirit there- a sincere acknowledgment of our emotions. I want my ceremony to be a celebration of what we have already established, not what will happen in the future because all we ever really have is the present. It’s a pledge of commitment because it is made to the public, an official joining of the families, and the development of tradition and a culture. That’s the way marriage should be.