Ok, I think enough time has passed for me to address the issues with the recent controversy and where I still stand with the whole thing. No, none of this has changed my point of view. However, I am a lot more level-headed about this whole thing now because the time has passed and I think I can address the topic to present my argument in the best way. Can you?
Before I get started, I want to make a few things clear.
I am a brown woman. I do not call myself black, as both sides of my family are from marginalised groups. I am 50% black Jamaican and 50% Indian, so I refer to myself as brown so that I do not deny either part of my ethnic identity. They are both important to me and they have both played a massive part in the way I was raised, experienced the world and have been treated, both growing up and now. For that reason, Iâd prefer it if you didnât call me one without calling me the other. They both matter to me, so donât take one away.
A lot of people in Insta were calling me a black woman, which is an easy mistake to make, but my Indian side is just as important to me as my black side, so please respect that if you can 
As well as that, I do not pretend to speak for all black people. I am one view. I hate it when anyone tries to speak for their whole group. Donât do it. Itâs disgusting. We arenât a monolith.
Thirdly, if you actually watched the videos I put out, youâre probably aware of my opinions. This is going to be the more detailed version of that. Please bear with me.
So recently, there was a story in which a (Iâm assuming) white author made a black character comment on the size of his junk, saying it was big. Then, he continued to make jokes about it.
A lot of people jumped on this. They claimed that it was racism and hypersexualisation, citing the fact that many black men had been chosen during slavery specifically for the size of their junk and that black men are frequently portrayed this way in the media.
I disagree patently, and for many, many different reasons. So here they are.
The Guy Was Being a Douchebag
Now, I watched the scene. Clearly, the thing that the writer was going for was a guy who was an arrogant douche (or stronger words I donât want to say right now). Douches do brag about the size of their junk! If you would like more information on why, please see âToxic Masculinityâ below.
After speaking to the author, it was made clear to me that she did not intend to perpetuate stereotypes about black men, as there is a lot of crossover with being a general arrogant, unlikeable guy. Iâve seen arrogant men of all races brag about their junk being huge. Iâve seen likeable men of all races joke about this obsession with junk size among arrogant men.
While it is clear that there is undeniably a stereotype about black men and junk sizes, there is also a stereotype when it comes to all men and their obsession with bragging by referencing their junk sizes.
So with how the media uses coding, the message of âthis guy is arrogantâ could have been expressed the same way no matter the guyâs race. We see someone bragging about their junk size even if theyâre white and we know theyâre a douchebag (or an a**hole). Thatâs how the coding of this kinda thing works.
And itâs often true of real life, too! Arrogant men often talk about how big they are downstairs!
Toxic Masculinity
The real big thing here is the term âtoxic masculinityâ. It is an issue in many black communities, with things like men being hesitant to hug one another or express emotions out of fear of being called gay. It is a problem in black communities just like it is a problem in white ones, but we need to sort out our own.
What I believe this conversation should have led to is a talk about how toxic masculinity affects black communities and stops our beautiful black men from being able to express themselves or reach their full potential. Toxic masculinity can be crippling.
What is Toxic Masculinity?
Toxic masculinity is basically a version of masculinity that is harmful to men and everyone around them. It happens with all kinds of men, but it affects different communities in slightly different, subtle ways.
Overall, it refers to men being pressured or even forced not to show their feelings, as this is considered âwomanlyâ or âweakâ.
It refers to men, therefore, expressing their emotions in aggressive, violent ways. Getting into fights, being generally aggressive when they feel threatened.
It refers to men being told that showing any emotions makes them âlike a girlâ. Like when men tell each other that theyâre nagging like women. Thatâs a form of toxic masculinity.
This is a massive reason why the suicide rates among men are so dang high. They canât get help when they need it because they are made to feel as though it makes them less of a man to reach out and show sensitivity or âweaknessâ. Then, they canât take it any more and they hurt themselves instead. Often in very violent ways, as thatâs what theyâre used to.
As well as that, and importantly for us, we have the fact that men are often made to feel as though they need to be going out and having all the heterosexual sex. That sleeping with women somehow validates their masculinity.
They just associate big junk wth lots of manliness without even considering the middle area of why
Toxic Masculinity and âManhoodâ
Now how does this have anything to do with the story? Well, I watched an amazing video recently about toxic masculinity and I cannot, for the life of me, remember the name of it. If I ever come across it again, I will comment below with a link to it.
In the video, they spoke about the fact that there is a reason why âmanhoodâ is another synonym for a manâs downstairs organs. That often, a manâs junk is linked, in his mind, to his masculinity.
Put simply, a lot of men, thanks to toxic masculinity, have this mentality that if they have a big downstairs organ, it makes them more of a man. That is a huge issue and it feeds into how arrogant men act and speak.
Of course, if you are pretty well-endowed, you think that having a big downstairs area makes you the manliest person ever and manliness matters to you, youâre going to get arrogant about your junk size, and probably brag about it a whole lot. See how this is linked to the arrogant character in the story?
That is why toxic masculinity can cause men to act in this way no matter their race or ethnicity. Of course, it is a little more complicated with black men due to the historic reasons why black men in America tend to be more well-endowed, but we need to be aware of toxic masculinity when speaking about characters who brag about their junk.
However, this is not completely to do with what their downstairs does for their sex life. As well as that, itâs also to do with the fact that having junk sets most men apart from most women (there are many exceptions to this, but that doesnât factor in with most cisgender men).
So because most women donât have junk, to have the biggest junk makes you the least like a woman. Big junk doesnât necessarily have anything to do with sex for them. In fact, most cis het men donât even consider sex when theyâre bragging about their size to other cisgender heterosexual men.
There Are Positive Versions of Masculinity
Before I move on, I just want to say that a lot of people seem to think that âtoxic masculinityâ means that all men who express themselves in âmasculineâ ways are toxic.
That is not true in the slightest. There are hundreds of ways that men can express their masculinity in positive ways. The problem with toxic masculinity is that it is damaging to the men who experience it and everyone around them. There is nothing wrong with being a man. There is a lot wrong with making men feel like less than men for not living up to some Conan the Barbarian standard of manliness.
I hope this makes sense.
It is Not Hypersexualisation, it is Perpetuating a Stereotype
Now letâs move on to the biggest issue I had with what people were saying about this on Instagram: hypersexualisation.
I had an issue with a particular aspect of the portrayal of this black man, but please see âThere Was One Line That Was an Issueâ for more information on that.
The issue is that what happened in the story is not hypersexualisation.
If we want to be taken seriously and understood, we need to call it as it is.
Unfortunately, seeing junk mentioned in a story and immediately assuming that it is sexualisation weâre dealing with is very naive, ignorant and reductionist. It wonât help anyone to come to conclusions like that without evaluating the evidence we have and making educated inferences.
In order to truly understand what I mean by this, letâs have a look at what âsexualisationâ really means.
What Is âHypersexualisationâ?
In order to really assess what âhypersexualisationâ is, letâs break this down a little bit.
According to the Cambridge Dictionary, sexualisation is:
to see someone or something in sexual terms, or to make someone or something sexually exciting.
And for more than one reference, according to Merriam Webster, sexualisation is:
to make sexual, endow with a sexual character or cast
Now, letâs have a look at hypersexualisation specifically.
According to Your Dictionary, hypersexualization is:
To make extremely sexual; to accentuate the sexuality of
All other dictionary definitions for the word âhypersexualisationâ I could find link straight back to the word âsexualisationâ, because the prefix âhyperâ means âoverâ, and implies excess or exaggeration.
Basically, in order for something to be hypersexualised or even sexualised, it needs to link to sexuality in some way, it needs to be seen in sexual terms, or the sexuality of said thing or person needs to be accentuated.
Why This Isnât Hypersexualisation
If you think that any time someoneâs junk is mentioned, it automatically has to be in a sexual light, youâre plain wrong.
Junk does not have to be sexual.
-
People can speak about it in a medical way, in terms of diseases, changes or overall health.
-
They can talk about it when referring to pee.
-
For most people, being kicked in the nuts isnât sexual in the slightest, but itâs another way that junk is mentioned.
-
It can be spoken about when referring to comfort, like it being caught in awkward places when people sit down or zip up trousers.
-
Trans people can talk about it when talking about their experiences of dysphoria, transitioning and feeling comfortable in their own body.
-
Of course, bringing it back to toxic masculinity, a lot of people refer to a manâs junk when talking about things like emasculation.
-
It is how most doctors determine sex and assign gender at birth.
-
Religious conversations involve such organs, for example, talks about circumcision
NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE SEXUAL
Iâm sure if you thought about it, you could all come up with some other ways in which people talk about junk in non-sexual ways.
Have you never heard a woman talk about her bits when referring to bras, periods or health? Are these conversations always sexual? No.
In the same way, a heterosexual man bragging about the size of his junk with another heterosexual man is not sexual. As I said, for many men, their junk is the thing that separates them from women, so having the biggest junk makes them the least like a woman.
So, Iâm sorry to say it, assuming that any talk about junk is sexual is stupid and childish.
How Does This Relate to the Story?
As I said, a heterosexual man bragging about the size of his junk with another heterosexual man is not sexual. Assuming it has to be is childish. Use definitions, people.
In the story, the black man in question was bragging with another heterosexual man about the size of his junk. He was doing it because he was being arrogant and trying to show off, not because he was in any way sexualising himself.
As far as I could see when I had read the story for myself, at that point, none of the jokes he made about his junk were in any way sexual, either. In fact, most of the jokes were about how inconvenient it was to be well-endowed, not speaking about sex with anyone, man or woman. He was humble-bragging!
The author was not presenting this talk in a sexual way, so it was not sexual. If it was not sexual, it cannot be sexualisation, or hypersexualisation.
There Was One Line That Was an Issue
Now saying that, I want to make it very clear that there was one line I had an issue with in the story. The line was this:
âWhat? Have you never seen a black manâs **** before?â
I spoke to the author about this whole ordeal and at the time of speaking with me, she was also under the assumption that this was the line that had an issue, and I agreed. She had removed it by then.
Why Do I Have an Issue With It?
Well, the issue here isnât anything to do with sexualisation or hypersexualisation. As I said multiple times in my own Instagram story, the issue with this story is not sexualisation or hypersexualisation. It was a stereotype. That is the bad thing here.
The thing is that the idea of a black man being well-endowed isnât necessarily bad. Itâs the fact that itâs a stereotype that makes it bad. We need to show that, sure black men with big junk exist. However, they arenât the only black men who exist. Thatâs the problem here.
The problem is that many black men are made to feel like there is something wrong with them if they are not well-endowed due to the perpetuation of this stereotype.
However, we donât combat this by attacking and demonising the portrayal of well-endowed black men in the media. We do this by portraying all kinds of other black men in the media. Having a bit of everything!
Itâs the same as how thereâs nothing wrong with a smart Asian person. The problem is the assumption that all Asians are smart, as this makes Asian people who arenât smart feel like thereâs something wrong with them.
We donât combat the smart Asian stereotype by getting angry every single time there is a smart Asian person in the media. This would alienate all the smart Asian people out there,
who are still part of a marginalised group even if they have it slightly better when it comes to representation. We combat this by making sure that there are loads of other kinds of Asian characters in the media who are good at other things.
Just because black men who arenât so well-endowed as other black men are having a real awful time in the media, it doesnât mean we should hate on the portrayals of well-endowed black men. There are black men with big junk out there, and they are also marginalised. We should never put one marginalised group down to raise another. We rise up together, or we are no better than the people who have oppressed us.
See âThere Isnât Enough Representation of Any Black Menâ for more details.
Stereotypes suck and are bad. We can point those out. In fact, it is important that we point them out to make representation better.
Why? Well, the reason why representation is so damn important is because we should all feel like we identify with people in the media. The media should represent the world at large. Especially if itâs media for children and young people! Knowing that they are not alone and there are people like them in the world helps so much.
There Isnât Enough Representation of Any Black Men
Representation of all black men is important, including well-endowed ones. There isnât enough of any kind of black man in the media. I want to see more black men in general, because that means thereâs much more of a chance to portray diverse kinds of black men. Black men arenât all the same. No group of people is a monolith. And the more black people in our media, the more we have a chance to show them in different lights, including the size of their junk.
See this incredible YouTube video for more details:
Iâm going to give you another example, and this one is going to refer to a group I belong to specifically, so bear with me.
Example: Light-Skinned People in the Media
I am light-skinned. Well, duh! Iâm not fully black! It was very likely that I had lighter skin!
As a light-skinned person, it would be stupid of me to try to claim that there isnât more representation of people like me than there is of dark-skinned people. We do have a much easier time when it comes to representation. Especially when it comes to black women being seen as beautiful! Light-skinned women dominate in that field, and it would be stupid of me to claim that they donât.
However, it would also be stupid to claim that there are just as many light-skinned black and brown people in the media as there are white people. Anyone who says that is a dumbass.
So we still arenât where we should be when it comes to representation of light-skinned people, either!
A lot of people have been complaining about how all black women in the media have been light-skinned recently, and I completely understand and empathise with them. It is both true and disgusting.
HOWEVER
There are some people out there who take this frustration with how dark-skinned black people are pushed aside and turn it into hatred and aggression against light-skinned people.
We are still experiencing a push-back on light-skinned women! I mean, people hate Zendaya as MJ in Spider-Man. People are fighting against a fairly light-skinned Arial in the new Little Mermaid. They hate Catwoman being light-skinned, even though sheâs been so before!
Deluge and I actually had a friend on a game we play complaining about forced diversity in The Witcher today! And when Deluge pointed out that the actress who plays Yennefer was white-passing, our friend said something along the lines of âbut thereâs still bone structureâ.
This is not a world where light-skinned people are privileged. Theyâre just sightly less disadvantaged than dark-skinned people.
So when I see people fighting against portrayals of their light-skinned brothers and sisters, it makes me angry. Light-skinned people arenât privileged. Forcing down one marginalised group to push up another makes you just another kind of bigot.
We should be celebrating each otherâs victories when it comes to representation.
We should be pushing for our own representation, but not at the expense of another marginalised group, just because theyâve had a little bit more progress.
And with how scary the political climate is at the moment, we have to do this together, or weâre going to lose.
But How Does This Link to Junk?
The same goes for junk size in the media. There arenât enough black men in the media, period. That includes black men who have a big downstairs.
While it is true that the original historical reasons why there is a stereotype and disgusting and we should move past that, we should not do that by pushing down and demonising our brothers who are on the big side.
As I said in my Instagram story, sure! Slavery did cause the black-man-big-downstairs stereotype in America. However, it also did something else.
It meant that most of the men who came to America and survived on the slave ships did have the gene to give them a bigger downstairs.
So, as usual, the stereotype does have a tiny grain of truth in it.
We canât ignore the social reasons why this stereotype exists in favour of the historical. Especially when the social reasons are directly a result of the historical ones.
Slave owners deliberately chose black men with big junk, which fed the stereotype.
BUT ALSO
Slave owners deliberately chose black men with big junk, which caused most of the black people in America to be descended from Africans who had big junk, which caused those genes to be successful and fed the stereotype.
That doesnât make it right, but we have no right to try to ignore that men who are well-endowed exist. We have no right to try to vanish away their reality. And we certainly donât have a right to silence, stifle, demonise and push them down in favour of a portrayal of black men that we prefer.
How many men have you seen in the media in general, well-endowed or not? I mean, junk size is barely mentioned anyway, but itâs not a lot compared to white people.
So while it is important to break out of these stereotypes, any complex portrayal of a black man is a tiny step forward in terms of representation.
The Way People Reacted Sucked
Now, this is my final point, but I think it is the most important one.
Do you actually want to see any change? Do you actually want us to make a difference when it comes to representation? Do you want the '20s to be more diverse than any decade that came before them?
I know I sure do. My blog posts express as much.
Well, if weâre on the same page with that, you need to understand that the woke-scold way people reacted does nothing to make people understand and sympathise with us.
If Iâve learnt anything from two years of arguing with people about representation and diversity, itâs this: screaming at people does nothing but make them dig their heels in and refuse to listen.
Worse than that, it makes them turn to the other side. We call them racist and get angry with them and then the other side â the actual other side. The people who want to see us fail. The people who are actually racists on purpose and donât just accidentally say something racist by accident â sticks up for the people. They sympathise with them. They tell them how weird weâre being. They say that âthe leftâ are ridiculous crybabies.
And every time that happens, we look worse and the other side look much more appealing.
Is that what you want? I know I donât.
I actually want to win. I actually want a more diverse, inclusive and safe world.
Are you going to help me or are you going to help the other side by making us look bad?
I realise I didnât cover racism, but itâs 4am so I can do it at another time.
?