I happened to be home working on some artwork and decided to watch daytime trash TV. You can either watch Jerry Springer or one of several courtroom reality shows where immature people air their grievances.
One of the surviving judge shows is “Judge Joe Brown.” Every time there is a young man up against a young woman and the young man was stupid enough to borrow money from her it comes down to if he’s a “man” or not.
It struck me how ridiculous this assertion is. That somehow repaying someone determines if you’re a man. Repaying someone is simply about being an adult, gender has nothing to do with it.
Now I understand why Judge Joe Brown is using that terminology. Inevitably, when he is speaking to a young man about being a “man” that person is a young black man. I guess young black men–the kind dumb enough to show up in a
TV court room–like to play their women for money. And maybe the younger black male generation thinks it’s cool to borrow from individuals and then rip them off.
I don’t see how you can do that and respect yourself?
I was raised to pay my debts. Certainly, I’m not perfect, I did abuse some credit cards and had to learn the hard way about getting in over my head. However, when it came to borrowing from other people I avoided it unless it was a buck for a soda. That’s dangerous territory. I can admit though to borrowing a large amount from my girlfriend–looking back that was a mistake–but I did pay her on what I owed.
I guess what concerns me is that I think women should be held to the same standard. They too will “borrow” money from admiring men and never pay them back. So does that make them “not a woman”? That stigma doesn’t seem to stick. There’s a double standard still in play with daytime trash TV.
Women are expected to accept money from a man with no strings attached. The dirty secret is that in many cases the man got what he wanted–sex, or at least a flirtation towards possible sex.
Why does Judge Joe Brown distinguish between the sexes when it comes to repaying debts, as if manhood matters? I don’t care if you’re a young black man or a young white woman, if you owe money you have no excuse not to pay it back. Excuses are for little kids. Being a man is a meaningless phrase associated with a subjective interpretation of masculinity. Working a job and paying bills is about being an adult.
And I think it’s time we start using that terminology instead of defining manhood by Judge Joe Brown’s standards. Come to think of it, after watching Judge Judy several times I don’t think I’ve ever heard her use the phrase “be a man.” She says the same thing, “be an adult.” I love that grumpy woman–very unbiased when it comes to justice.
I might even go so far as to question Judge Joe Brown when he says a “man” should put on a raincoat and support his children. Well, yes. But shouldn’t we hold a woman to the same standard. If a man can put on a condom, a woman should be on the pill or use that new-fangled female condom.
Women have to be just as “manly” as men–because they’re supposed to be adults too. To say that the “man” is the only one responsible for knocking up a woman is excusing her as a child. Fact is, I would say that since she is carrying the major equipment for kid creation that she carries a greater responsibility for either being protected or saying “no.”
I guess my theme in this post is repetitive. Telling a young man that he is not a “man” for various reasons is absurd unless it’s all about psychology–and that’s where Judge Joe Brown makes sense. Because after all, he’s trying to embarrass the defendant. He might as well call the young black defendant a “pussy.” I think that term says it all and these days “pussy” as an insult has transcended gender, in which case the Judge could perfectly well call a young female defendant a pussy as well.
Pay your debts to family and friends. They’re not made of money and they’re not a credit card company that can eat the costs–you bunch of trash TV pussies.
