Repeating your moronic nonsense doesn't help you. The first study was still based off of unscientific polling. The second is still about a different demographic which lends nothing to the first.Moron .... and I hate to insult morons like that, buuut ..... Neither stat was about black men, though they included black men in their samples.
One was about interracial families. That is not about black fathers since in many instances, the interracial family includes a white father.
The other was about black households. In many cases, there is no father present in the household. In other cases, the father who fled was white.
You cannot possibly extrapolate the idiocy you're peddling with that data. I don't care how disfunctional you are.
it is getting really old, I mean arguing with an absolute braindead douchecan who cannot read or think is like brushing my teeth with dogshit toothpaste
ok fucktard, read this without moving your lips: the first study was about biracials with BLACK FATHERS
here is a separate link to the same study. Study Claims 92% of Biracial Children with Black Dads are Born out of Wedlock
In an independent study on the Social Science Research Network “Examining the Birth Trends, Family Structure, Economic Standing, Paternal Relationships, and Emotional Stability of Biracial Children with African American Fathers,” Tiffany Calloway, B.S. J.M, claimed “92% of biracial children with African American fathers are born out of wedlock and 82% end up on government assistance.”
so far so good, eh dumbshit? could you follow that? so are you going get smarter and are you going to quit lying about it?
There's no lie as I never denied either study included kids. Hell, I even pointed out that in black households, there are many cases where there is no father present in the household. In other cases, the father who fled was white.secondly in the study with percentage of black households WITH KIDS (another point you lied about) use welfare at an 82% clip, after once again you showed that you cannot read. This is all cases, father there or not, and if the father fled the number is likely higher. Now you assume with out any supporting data that there is a significant number of white fathers that fled these black women and that these households have significant numbers of biracial kids born to white fathers! prove it liar, prove it or admit you lied. So suddenly it is the black women chasing white men, LOL, gawd you are one stupid fukker.
Apparently, you're too fucking retarded to comprehend the implication of the use of the noun, "father," in respect to "kids."
I would rather not repeat, but you are an illiterate dumbass who says stuff like this
'Neither stat was about black men, though they included black men in their samples."
when in fact I just showed you it is precisely about black fathers, and so I have to spend time correcting your incompetence and lies. I would rather not but it seems necessary when dealing with such a dimwitted individual like yourself.
My point stands as well as ever, the first article about black fathers of biracial kids is strongly supported by the black households with children data. Black fathers do not support their kids.
You tried to use 'household', instead of 'household with children', data on me once. Now you also try and twist my words to say I am impying the physical presence of the father matters. Nowhere did I say that, all I said was the black fathers do not support their kids. Now you randomly interject that there is some significant amount of white men fathering kids with black women and leaving them which skews the black households with kids data. I called bullshit and I call it again, prove it you ratfuck pathological lying sack of shit.
lol, yes, that is all you can an illiterate liar can do, my point was made so sit back and enjoy
still waiting for your data on how many white men bang those ghetto black chicks an then leave them as you claim. ....what? you have none?