Each illustration tells a personal story for me, and collectively they demonstrate a vulnerable side of Black people that’s not often acknowledged by society, our communities, or even ourselves. We are subject to numerous negative stereotypes that limit our free range of desires, prospects and emotions, leading to damaging effects on our social interactions and mental health.

This collection, aptly named “For sad girls and lonely boys”, features Black women and men in a way we refuse to see them: vulnerable.

We tend to combat the negatives (like "aggressive" or "ghetto") with words like "strong" and "resilient", forgetting that there is also a sensitive side to all of us in need of care and tenderness.

If you wish to continue the conversation on the impacts of adverse stereotypes on people of colour, leave a comment below.

In this post, I detail the controversy behind Ruud van Empel's work featuring black children. Although I've used this particular artist as an example, I've seen the debate arise surrounding several white artists who exclusively (or almost exclusively) paint black subjects. The questions of intent, appropriation and exoticism tend to combat the praise of positive representations for a group of marginalized people. Race theorist Stuart Hall has opened us up from merely critiquing whether or not representation of a particular subject exists to critiquing the ways in which the particular subject matter is represented. So if the representation is positive, should it matter who is creating it?

Confronting Black Vulnerability in For Sad Girls and Lonely Boys

Art, Positionality, and Painting Black Subjects