Showing posts with label race. Show all posts
Showing posts with label race. Show all posts

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Conspiracy Theories: Pro-Choice and Eugenics


It is entirely possibly to discuss the choices in reproductive freedoms and birth control without entertaining the ideas of eugenics and genocide. I don't praise or worship Margaret Sanger for her classist, and subsequently racist, stance on eugenics and birth control. Similarly, let the record reflect that I'm not thrilled about positive eugenics propoganda handed over by the conspiracy theorist militant Negroes of our communities.


Okay. I understand that this might sound harsh. I also understand that people specify desirable qualities they look for in their mate, which may support a degree of positive eugenics in future family planning. Let's ignore the minor degrees of positive eugenics theories and jump right into the extreme ones. For example, I have an associate that I very much value for a lot of different reasons and opinions. However, in our initial correspondances, he made it clear that he was impressed with my beauty as a young Black woman; aside from my physical beauty, he made it clear that I am very intelligent, knowledgable, and resourceful. And so, in complimenting my personal characteristics, his solution to our friendship was this: we should have children together to improve the quality and condition of the entire Black community, and so that the Black race could better compete with the world. And I did not find this to be brilliant, but instead insulting. Positive eugenics is the practice of encouraging the so-called "genetically advantaged" to procreate. Before, during, and after my dear mixed-up associate identified me as genetically desirable, I leaned away from the idea of having a family. And so, the feeling in my stomach when discussing such theories as his pushed me further and further away from the idea of being a mother. As I often say, not in the forseeable future.


In my veryveryvery not-so humble opinion, when minority communities embrace pro-positive eugenic theories, it not only detracts from the work and responsibility of parents and community in raising children (nurture), but it validates the things that white slave masters actively practiced and believed in with regard to the reproductive exploitation of women slaves in America (nature).


In the early 1900s, Margaret Sanger did fully support negative eugenics - or using birth control to limit fertility as a means to eliminate those deemed genetically unfit - and she did birth the American Birth Control League. As a Black woman, I do not deny nor excuse any of this. This is factual, despite my personal ideologies. She, however, raised a substantial amount of positive points not specific to eugenics, that bleed into different realms of reproduction and human sexuality.


While I am becoming better at respectfully disagreeing and not using what I deem to be, well, just wrong and using it to invalidate all of a person's opinions, it has always been difficult for me to not look at a person and judge them based on their evils. Yet and still, I will respect and defend my mixed-up associate as I will certain aspects of Margaret Sanger in being pro-choice.


The idea that I am supposed to procreate with the aforementioned associate is an inside joke that often comes up between us. When recently joked about, my response was simply that the world is overcrowded and beyond capacity in terms of human population, and that I'd rather not be part of the problem. And while the joking response of my assicate turned my stomach, the theme that anti-choice sentiment included sparked a teeny tiny debate. Yes, there is such a thing. "Our child might be the solution," he says, "with my ferocity and your attitude, he could one day kill millions." I sighed a 'no thanks' to avoid what could have been a match of repartee, and he continued, "I don't think you could make a greater contribution to the resolution of over-population." Laugh, "He could be deadlier than Planned Parenthood."


My response, quick and simple, "Planned Parenthood has helped many women. Not having Planed Parenthood is 'deadlier' than Planned Parenthood. Word." Word. I often think that people like starting with me to see my fire and passion. To see my mind work. To see if I'll back down. (As recent as this morning, my dad tried his best to set me off and then told me that my eyes were really pretty when I am angered.) And so, here we are:


Him, "I thought that would enliven you." Laugh, "But what is the ethnic breakdown of abortion in America and the world. If a people have an adversarial perspective of us, isn't it easier to kill a warrior as an embryo than kill him later on the battlefield?" That was poetic.


Me, "Abortion, unless it isn't a choice to have or NOT have one, is a choice that women make. The problem with anti-choice sentiments is that they don't take into account the choice, and on the other end -- the nonsafe abortions that have and will continue as a result of limiting our resources. One could argue that limiting our resources and having anti-choice billboards specific to the Black community is their way of having us kill ourselves." This is the problem with conspiracy theories.


Him, "What Black people don't consider is demography and the correlation between population shifts and power on our planet. That's why China is such a beast now. They outnumber Americans 5 to 1." Well now, what's that got to do with the price of tea in China? Oh wait.


Me, "That's a separate issue to genocide and certainly to the population overcrowding. And also, poor exdample as China has a limit on children they can birth. And since male children are socially more desirable, female children are adopted out, abandoned, or killed. Which goes back to anti-choice in issues of reproduction and women's bodies. Boom." Boomboomboom.


Him, "I'm talking about birth control as a part of a genocide policy. What are your views on that?"


Me, "I think that if you aren't considering the idea of choice in birth control tactis, you're missing the point. And it isn't genocide unless mandated and/or institutionalized."


Him, "So the issue of choice is tantamount, even in a mass murder plot? Restrict resources and promote pro-choice billboards as part of a genocide campaign? Pretty crafty, but the people are awakening today. And since when does Congress vote on a genocide resolution? The demographers say that at the present rate of birth, Blacks and latinos will be the majority in America by 2050. And you don't think a racist mind would employ and fund Planned Parenthood regardless of its mission statement, to prevent the rise in our numbers?"


Instead of addressing each and every impassioned point that he point he made, the bells sounded and I brought the conversation to a halt. Scrrrrrrrrrrrch. Do I find conspiracy theories interesting? Absolutely. I do not entertain every one thrown at me, of course, but the ones that are detailed enough to illustrate any level of serious reflection at their own inception should be entertained for the amount of effort utilized. I don't know that this was one of those moments. Looking back on it, the response was so well articulated that it may have deserved more than I gave it.


Me, "You can't have it both ways -- you can't say the enemy is plotting and then suggest we are too awakened to fall for it. You're contradicting yourself and eery argument you've ever made. That you suggest the 'enemy' is plotting against us, but then say that my argument [about the pro-choice billboards encourages us to kill ourselves with back-alley abortions] is unappealing because we're awakened. One cancels out the other. Your argument provides that the level of consciousness be qualified, and that is subjective. You can't cancel out my argument in using the 'awakening' but allow your argument to still be valid." Research: unsafe/illegal abortions.


While the debate did not turn ugly and emotional, it did end as they often do: with my being told to step by game up in order to identify "evil machinations executed from high levels of power" and questioning whether or not I truly identify that there is an opponent.


More than anything, I oppose themes and ideologies; if I opposed people instead, my associate and I would not have any interest in speaking to one another for the fiery debates in the past that often ended in name-calling. (I'm not a namecaller.) I'd have to considering turning away from people much more for their choices and beliefs that are anti-me. It would be difficult to survive in our world, and I would be forced to be alone. My work would be destroyed; I've reluctantly advocated for people who hated me more than the forces that are against us.


I'm learning. Respect. Be Righteous.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Subliminal Messages in Internet Advertising

In searching for the right things to write, especially among my own internal reflections and contemplations, I recently decided to work on independent research projects for myself. In essence, I decided that I'd continue my involvement in academia in this way, and accomplish the things that I'd like to accomplish on my own time; and so, your favorite nerd-activist will be submerged in the depths of academic research, purely for leisure, and hopefully reporting any interesting findings to the masses.


In the midst of researching reproductive exploitation during US slavery, I stumbled upon a page about slave breeding. The page was brief and fairly informative, but featured on the left hand panel was an advertisement. I will add that I have no idea how internet advertising actually works (what goes where and when), but I found it ironic, insulting, and powerful to the point. Screenshot below.



It reads: "AfroRomance: Where Love is More Than Skin Deep" and features a white man appearing to lay on top of a Black woman. Not captured in the screenshot is the "search for interracial singles". Interesting to have appeared on the "slave breeding" site.


Take from it what you will. Be righteous.

Friday, August 6, 2010

Wow! A LOT Has Been Going On!


So much has been going on in the last couple of days and it's been quite remarkable. I think I'm finally settled in the new place (and finally have internet access so I'm back in the bloggin' business!), and I've been running around crazily for weeks!


A few great things though! I suppose the first of really important things happening was the decision by the CA court that Prop 8 is unconstitutional! That's a big deal, and after I read through the ruling, I was (1) ecstatic that there are rational individuals in positions to make important decisions (I'd given up hope for sometime) and (2) disturbed that it even required a hearing -- especially with the pro-prop-8ers and their poor case. I mean, seriously? Reading through the lengthy court document made me disappointed in humanity -- especially when religious institutions throw the "they can be gay in private but not in public -- for the sake for the kids!" argument into our contemporary 2010, freedom-of (and freedom from) religion American society. What a headache it is to know that people still exist with so much irrational hatred (and think that it's totally okay and justifiable!).


The "Ground Zero Mosque" (and I the only one offended by the actual name?) has been approved. And good on them. All Muslims aren't "terrorists". It really amazes me that people are so worked up about this mosque. I saw protesters on the news the other day holding signs that said something to the effect of "building a mosque at ground zero is like building a Hitler statue at Auschwitz". Seriously? Is it? That's a little ridiculous and you can't systemically oppress another religious group's practice of their faith because of your own supremacist views. Period. Oh, and I'm a nontheist. So, yeah.


Then there's that whole immigration thing in Arizona. Still and still. I don't have a comment prepared.


I suppose that's all I have for now! Cheers, and have a happy weekend!


Be Righteous.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

...Speaking of Whoopi


Admittedly, I have to sometimes take breaks from technology and the news in order to keep myself from going crazy. I have an intense (sometimes read: serious) personality a lot of times, and that doesn't make me unhappy. I care about issues to the point of exhaust; and it's because I also act on these issues. I get so mentally involved in issues, and for that reason, a joke - that is parody and not satire - at the interest in any of the issues and injustices that I am so involved in protesting is more damaging, in my opinion, than the humor that may be in it.


At any rate, in an effort to work on my zen and create an ambiance, I'm goofing off on facebook for a bit yesterday - just after reacting to Whoopi Goldberg's "he-has-black-friends-so-he-isnt-racist" defense - and noticed that good friend of mine made an inappropriate joke in reference to the situation. And the joke made it to facebook, twitter, and eventually a variation of it made the blog. Ready?

C'mon Whoopi, sure Mel Gibson isn't racist; you don't have to worry about being raped by a pack of niggers; you look like a man.


Well, okay. I realize that the comment was meant to be taken lightly but my problem with these comments is this: of the many issues with sexual abuse and domestic violence, major issues that many victims deal with are feelings of guilt (like they may have perpetuated the assault) and feelings of low self-worth which could stem from a number of things, including physical appearance. Moreover, the comment speaks to standards of beauty and maintains the myth that rape is about sexual attraction and desire.


I would not be true to my character if I didn't say anything, even to my good friend and mentor (smile). I'm not into blog-wars as I don't have enough readers for that anyway, so I don't want people to get me wrong and believe that that's the point of any of this.


While the joke was at the expense of Whoopi, the words of the joke say something to people who believe that people who "look like a man" (or unattractive people, or people who have been told they are physically worthless and have internalized that abuse) cannot or have not been abused. It appears to support a myth of people who are ill-informed and do not know better - even if it is a joke. Having worked on the side of victims, this is a trend that is seriously furthered by law enforcement, nurses, and anybody who isn't fully aware and sympathetic to the dynamics of rape. Period. (Ironically, this theme is illustrated to perfection in "The Color Purple")


And while I understand that there has to be a silver lining, and there has to be some sort of light in this sick, sad, dark world of ours, I'm not entirely certain that any joke sending that sort of message (about the rape of a woman who "looks like a man", not the pack of niggers) is the something that I can take lightly. This isn't about an individual, but those comments and attitudes have to die. Seriously.


Would it be Whoopi Goldberg-esque of me to point out that this person doesn't hate women, ugly people, or rape victims, but that it was a stupid comment? Shrug. This isn't to defend Whoopi's disillusionment, but one has to wonder how to defend the character of a person who makes stupid comments. I'm not taking it personally, again this isn't about a person, but an idea. A whole set of ideas that need to end.


Be righteous.

It was also kind of a jackass thing to add a faux apology in small print, too..#justsayin.

Way to Go, Whoopi.


I'd like to take the time right now to discuss two separate, but loosely connected issues. As a matter of fact, I will takcle the initial issue in this post and then discuss the separate issue in a post after this one. Ready? Okay!


Whoopi Goldberg. I suppose I should note, for every person incapable of picking up on the subtlety in my sardonic wit, that there is nothing serious in the title of this post.


In 1993, Whoopi Goldberg defended Ted Danson's performing in Blackface. While I don't necessarily remember this event specifically (or caring; I was a kid and this was just before I was tainted by the horrors of the real world), I do remember my catching wind of it when I was a bit more mature and saying "hmm, maybe I shouldn't be supporting someone who thinks that this is okay; whether it's intended to be offensive doesn't really take away from the fact that..it kinda is."


In 2009, I remember officially decided no longer to support Whoopi, as much as I love her (and as beautiful as I think she is - agree or not, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I've always thought she was physically intriguing. Fuck conventionalism). This was because she decided to discuss on The View how Roman Polanski's sexual encounter with a 13 year old kid, who was also under the influence notthatitmatters, was not rape-rape. I remember being outraged and saying aloud, several times, shame on you, Whoopi. Shame on you.


In 2010, I am even more disgusted with Whoopi, after acting as a free-standing character witness for Mel Gibson after his infamous bigoted, misogynistic tirade days ago. Per Whoopi:

"I know Mel, and I know he's not a racist...I have had a long friendship with Mel. You can say he's being a bonehead, but I can't sit and say that he's a racist having spent time with him in my house with my kids. I don't like what he's done, make no mistake."


Well, that's just great Whoopi. I made this point the other day when I was in a heated discussion with a perfect stranger about making anti-gay, anti-black-anti-woman, bigoted comments; how can you expect these issues to be taken seriously if you attempt to defend a person's (alleged, previous) character? Even the most horrible of people have to maintain a social life. How many times have we heard racists say, "I'm not a racist, I have Black friends!" What about homophobes saying, "I don't hate gay people, I know plenty of them!" Or even the friends and family members of domestic violence abusers saying, "my baby would never do anything like that!"


Exactly. Shame on you, Whoopi.


I can't say that I expected more, but she should stop refrain from commenting on issues regarding her famous friends. She's beginning to sound like a whoopie cushion. Hey, I get one corny joke per day.

Monday, July 5, 2010

Revolutionary but Gangsta Grillz (not much of) a review!


I wanted to take some time to do a full review the new mixtape by Dead Prez, entitled "Revolutonary but Gangsta Grillz", but I'm having a difficult time finding enough direction to spit it out. However, I do have three favorite songs that I just love. The general opinion I've heard from people who aren't too far into it is that it isn't typical of Dead Prez because they're trying to blend and fit in with what's trendy. That's not what they are about, but I don't think that I see it as a loss to their original style or message; instead, I think that they're trying to reach the new "hip-pop" generation by putting this out there and I'm not gonna lie, I love that I was able to sit my 12 year old cousin down and say "listen to this song, it's about natural-hair girls!" It's really worth a listen. The mixtape is downloadable for free-99 on a their website! No excuse to let this one pass you by!


The track listing is as follows:


1. "Intro" – 0:33
2. "Far From Over" – 3:36
* Samples from "Over" by Drake
3. "Soul Power" – 3:00
4. "Exhibit M" – 1:45
5. "The Game Is A Battlefield" – 3:21
6. "Malcolm, Garvey, Huey" feat. Divine – 4:39
* Samples from "Beamer, Benz Or Bentley" by Lloyd Banks
* Includes a speech from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
7. "The Beauty Witin" – 3:06
* Samples from "Nothin' On You" by B.o.B.
* Released on Mother's Day, May 9, 2010 as dedication to the natural beauty of black women
8. "KRS-One Speaks" – 0:18
9. "The Movement" – 1:59
10. "Gotta Luv It" – 2:05
11. "Never Turn My Back" – 3:39
12. "Don't Waste It" – 2:52
* Samples from "Wasted" by Gucci Mane[2]
13. "Lil Ghetto Boy$" – 3:02
* Samples from "Lil' Ghetto Boys" by Dr. Dre
14. "Overdose" – 3:13
15. "Fear Not The Revolution" – 2:37
16. "Let The People Be Heard" feat. Estelle – 3:29
17. "RBG 'Til I Die" feat. Zayd Malik - 3:57
18. "Hood News/Struggle Like Us" – 1:52
* Samples from "Swagga Like Us" by T.I. and Jay-Z
19. "The G In Me" feat. Mikeflo - 3:51


And now for my favorite songs, complete with a little blurb on why I enjoy 'em:



I love that the mixtape opened with this song because Drake (from whom the beat of this song is taken) is the newest cancer - every where you turn, you see Jimmy from DeGrassi rapping with Lil Wayne and Young Money and you can't help but wonder 'isn't he Canadian? Where'd his "rap voice" come from?



This song is my absolute favorite! I actually heard this song a few months ago, and apparently, Dead Prez released it on Mother's Day. I love it; everything about this song is perfect to me and I think it's important that there is music and pop(-ish) music that acknowledges the natural beauty of Black characteristics. This is a beautiful and important thing because historically, we were taught to hate ourselves (ask Malcolm...) and while I don't care who's natural and who isn't, it's important for young girls and women to hear that it's okay to be yourself - you're beautiful.



Malcolm, Garvey, Huey. I love this song. I mean, as it is, the "Beamer, Benz and Bentley" song is kind of a "banger", and I love this much better than the original. Besides that, the mixtape has speeches from the aforementioned leaders (and MLK), and it even has a snippet from "A Love Supreme"!


Anyway, again, check it out. It's FREE, and I really enjoyed it!


Be Righteous.

Sunday, July 4, 2010

What, to the Slave, is the Fourth of July?


I posted a snippet of this speech in a previous post written about Juneteenth and Black independence. On Independence Day in 1852, Frederick Douglass delivered the speech "What, to the slave, is the Fourth of July", which discussed the hypocrisy of the country celebrating liberation from one nation while enslaving human beings in their own.


I often quote this speech because it truly illustrates so many themes, including the application of certain moral standards where they affect the interest of the person or party making the judgments; while this speech is my main reason for not supporting American Independence Day, these themes can be applied to our government in many other ways today. The contemporary political climate for many Americans is a systemically oppressive and socially enslaving reality. This has to change. We have to change.


Below is the speech in its entirety. I know that it may be lengthy, but my "Independence Day" ritual is to read and reflect upon it. The speech does speak about the "Christian god", but understand that this idea was/still is the socially expected norm during that time. I'm not that anti-American; America as a nation, gained its independence from the British on July 4, 1776. However, the truth of the matter is that there were many people, even beyond slaves, that were looked down upon and treated unfairly. Many people may ask why the majority of Blacks in America even identify with the enslaved if they are unable to trace their roots directly back to slavery. I'll say this: even if you were not enslaved (or if you do not know whether or not your ancestors were), we are bound by more than our skin color; as a result of slavery, and eventually the development of segregation and Jim Crow, we are still at a systematic disadvantage as a result of how we have traditionally been viewed as a result of our skin color. Other disadvantaged groups where these ideas apply include, but are not limited to: the LGBTQ community, women, mentally ill, and non-Christians.


Fellow citizens, pardon me, and allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I or those I represent to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us? And am I, therefore, called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits, and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us?

Would to God, both for your sakes and ours, that an affirmative answer could be truthfully returned to these questions. Then would my task be light, and my burden easy and delightful. For who is there so cold that a nation's sympathy could not warm him? Who so obdurate and dead to the claims of gratitude, that would not thankfully acknowledge such priceless benefits? Who so stolid and selfish that would not give his voice to swell the hallelujahs of a nation's jubilee, when the chains of servitude had been torn from his limbs? I am not that man. In a case like that, the dumb might eloquently speak, and the "lame man leap as an hart."

But such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad sense of disparity between us. I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. The blessings in which you this day rejoice are not enjoyed in common. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence bequeathed by your fathers is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought life and healing to you has brought stripes and death to me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me to speak today? If so, there is a parallel to your conduct. And let me warn you, that it is dangerous to copy the example of a nation (Babylon) whose crimes, towering up to heaven, were thrown down by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation in irrecoverable ruin.

Fellow citizens, above your national, tumultuous joy, I hear the mournful wail of millions, whose chains, heavy and grievous yesterday, are today rendered more intolerable by the jubilant shouts that reach them. If I do forget, if I do not remember those bleeding children of sorrow this day, "may my right hand forget her cunning, and may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth!"

To forget them, to pass lightly over their wrongs and to chime in with the popular theme would be treason most scandalous and shocking, and would make me a reproach before God and the world.

My subject, then, fellow citizens, is "American Slavery." I shall see this day and its popular characteristics from the slave's point of view. Standing here, identified with the American bondman, making his wrongs mine, I do not hesitate to declare, with all my soul, that the character and conduct of this nation never looked blacker to me than on this Fourth of July.

Whether we turn to the declarations of the past, or to the professions of the present, the conduct of the nation seems equally hideous and revolting. America is false to the past, false to the present, and solemnly binds herself to be false to the future. Standing with God and the crushed and bleeding slave on this occasion, I will, in the name of humanity, which is outraged, in the name of liberty, which is fettered, in the name of the Constitution and the Bible, which are disregarded and trampled upon, dare to call in question and to denounce, with all the emphasis I can command, everything that serves to perpetuate slavery -- the great sin and shame of America! "I will not equivocate - I will not excuse." I will use the severest language I can command, and yet not one word shall escape me that any man, whose judgment is not blinded by prejudice, or who is not at heart a slave-holder, shall not confess to be right and just.

But I fancy I hear some of my audience say it is just in this circumstance that you and your brother Abolitionists fail to make a favorable impression on the public mind. Would you argue more and denounce less, would you persuade more and rebuke less, your cause would be much more likely to succeed. But, I submit, where all is plain there is nothing to be argued. What point in the anti-slavery creed would you have me argue? On what branch of the subject do the people of this country need light? Must I undertake to prove that the slave is a man? That point is conceded already. Nobody doubts it. The slave-holders themselves acknowledge it in the enactment of laws for their government. They acknowledge it when they punish disobedience on the part of the slave. There are seventy-two crimes in the State of Virginia, which, if committed by a black man (no matter how ignorant he be), subject him to the punishment of death; while only two of these same crimes will subject a white man to like punishment.

What is this but the acknowledgment that the slave is a moral, intellectual, and responsible being? The manhood of the slave is conceded. It is admitted in the fact that Southern statute books are covered with enactments, forbidding, under severe fines and penalties, the teaching of the slave to read and write. When you can point to any such laws in reference to the beasts of the field, then I may consent to argue the manhood of the slave. When the dogs in your streets, when the fowls of the air, when the cattle on your hills, when the fish of the sea, and the reptiles that crawl, shall be unable to distinguish the slave from a brute, then I will argue with you that the slave is a man!

For the present it is enough to affirm the equal manhood of the Negro race. Is it not astonishing that, while we are plowing, planting, and reaping, using all kinds of mechanical tools, erecting houses, constructing bridges, building ships, working in metals of brass, iron, copper, silver, and gold; that while we are reading, writing, and ciphering, acting as clerks, merchants, and secretaries, having among us lawyers, doctors, ministers, poets, authors, editors, orators, and teachers; that we are engaged in all the enterprises common to other men -- digging gold in California, capturing the whale in the Pacific, feeding sheep and cattle on the hillside, living, moving, acting, thinking, planning, living in families as husbands, wives, and children, and above all, confessing and worshipping the Christian God, and looking hopefully for life and immortality beyond the grave -- we are called upon to prove that we are men?

Would you have me argue that man is entitled to liberty? That he is the rightful owner of his own body? You have already declared it. Must I argue the wrongfulness of slavery? Is that a question for republicans? Is it to be settled by the rules of logic and argumentation, as a matter beset with great difficulty, involving a doubtful application of the principle of justice, hard to understand? How should I look today in the presence of Americans, dividing and subdividing a discourse, to show that men have a natural right to freedom, speaking of it relatively and positively, negatively and affirmatively? To do so would be to make myself ridiculous, and to offer an insult to your understanding. There is not a man beneath the canopy of heaven who does not know that slavery is wrong for him.

What! Am I to argue that it is wrong to make men brutes, to rob them of their liberty, to work them without wages, to keep them ignorant of their relations to their fellow men, to beat them with sticks, to flay their flesh with the lash, to load their limbs with irons, to hunt them with dogs, to sell them at auction, to sunder their families, to knock out their teeth, to burn their flesh, to starve them into obedience and submission to their masters? Must I argue that a system thus marked with blood and stained with pollution is wrong? No - I will not. I have better employment for my time and strength than such arguments would imply.

What, then, remains to be argued? Is it that slavery is not divine; that God did not establish it; that our doctors of divinity are mistaken? There is blasphemy in the thought. That which is inhuman cannot be divine. Who can reason on such a proposition? They that can, may - I cannot. The time for such argument is past.

At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed. Oh! had I the ability, and could I reach the nation's ear, I would today pour out a fiery stream of biting ridicule, blasting reproach, withering sarcasm, and stern rebuke. For it is not light that is needed, but fire; it is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, and the earthquake. The feeling of the nation must be quickened; the conscience of the nation must be roused; the propriety of the nation must be startled; the hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed; and its crimes against God and man must be denounced.

What to the American slave is your Fourth of July? I answer, a day that reveals to him more than all other days of the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mock; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy - a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation of the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of these United States at this very hour.

Go search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the Old World, travel through South America, search out every abuse and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the everyday practices of this nation, and you will say with me that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, America reigns without a rival.

Frederick Douglass - July 4, 1852


Please enjoy your family time, and if you are drinking - do so safely!


Be Righteous.

Friday, July 2, 2010

Mel Gibson's Rant: More Than The N-Word


Apparently, Mel Gibson has been recorded on tape going off on the mother of his infant saying the following:


"You're an embarrassment to me. You look like a fucking pig in heat, and if you get raped by a pack of niggers, it will be your fault."


"How dare you act like such a bitch when I have been so fucking nice."


"I am going to come and burn the fucking house down...but you will blow me first."


Amazing. The blog world has majorly been focusing on the fact that he used the n-word, which is also amazing to me. He went on a tirade and threw the ugliest racially offensive in the mix. I understand the outrage of his usage of the n-word. As a matter of fact, I've oftened joked(?)/wondered if white people say the n-word if they're mad enough. The rant was sickening. Yet, the entire tirade in and of itself is absolutely repulsive.


The hope or insinuation that any person is raped is disgusting; and silently or very loudly and angrily expressing that the fulfillment of another person being raped would be their own fault is plain despicable. And then, threatening violence (in burning the house down) but saying that your significant other will perform oral sex on you before you do such a thing makes you a perpetrator of rape; I'm quite sure that if she was forced into such a situation, she would be able to press rape charges because the act was performed under coercion and threats.


Further, look at this snippet of the initial quote:
..if you get raped by a pack of niggers..
So naturally, as if any part of this is acceptable at all, the grouping of "rape" and the n-word grouped together says much more than is written: it speaks to a historical depiction of Black males in American society. The black beast rapist is an image that was created by white society to maintain both slavery, and then segregation, and it was used to define the racial and gender social structure in America. This is not to say that some Black men do not rape; yet, when I see the association of Black men with (interracial) rape, I immediately get imagery of lynchings in the South and the desparities in convictions and punishment where interracial alleged sex crimes occur.


Black women aren't the only ones with image issues; Black men have been depicted in several different ways, including brutes, rapists, Nats and Toms, as America developed and socially evolved. Unfortunately, just as some Black women feel the need to behave a certain way, feeding into the jezebel stereotype, Black men are feeling their way in terms of the development of social masculinity. Mel Gibson's comments illustrates an uncaring and expectation that Black men are nothing more than predators.


...and you probably thought that Matt and Trey's depiction of Mel was exaggerated!


Be Righteous.



EDIT: also, Mel's usage of the word "pack" as in "pack of niggers" equates Black males to animals. I kinda hinted at that, but did not spell it out, and it's important to the overall context of the post.
EDIT: 7/10/10 below is the actual audio.


Bamboozled! Chris Brown and aficionados


You know, I was really fighting the feeling; I was not interested in supplementing the blog world and mainstream media's recent explosion of reporting on Chris Brown and the BET awards. As a matter of fact, I was certain that my computer, itself, would literally explode because the internet must be exhausted with the everyone having an opinion on Chris's "breakdown" at the award show. I refused to have anything to do with the BET Awards early on; I was on twitter and threatened to unfollow the bulk of my friends for tweeting about the awards. And I got sucked in -- it began with my flipping back and forth and somehow, forth stopped on the awards on a network that I am sure the Black community should not be in support of. Back in the day, Black Embarrasmentntertainment Television actually had some positive aspects to it and one day, poof! No more. It's sole output has been degrading and exploitative and for that reason, I try my best to avoid anything related to the network. Personally, this upsets me because I believe in supporting Black business because we cannot expect the success of our own if we lack faith and support; yet, it directly conflicts with my own personal beliefs about the worth and strengths of the Black community to do so in this particular instance. But, alas, I was sucked in. I'll admit to you this: I'm disappointed in myself for giving in.


It was nothing more than I expected it to be: a bad car accident that you just could not look away from. Right up to Chris Brown's tribute to Michael Jackson. Sure, the award show had its high points, relative to the rest of the show. But, oh..Chris Brown.


If, by chance, you've been living under a rock without access to the television or internet, here's what happened in my home (and during Chris Brown's performance):
I'm stretched out across the couch, glued to the tube. I have my blackberry in hand and when Chris Brown began dancing, I was messaging my best friend about what a skilled dancer he is. I was not surprised that BET permitted him to perform since he was disallowed at many events last year. I got a little bored with the transition of his performing, looked down at all of the tweets and it sounded like my audio was screwed up on the tv. Confused, I look up, to see Chris Brown doubled over, "crying".


Now, I'm sure that my readers (and even non-readers) can guess my reaction: staged, phony, publicity stunt to win his way back into the hearts and minds of those who had decided not to support him. Now, I'll tell you this: the rational individuals who have chosen not to support the brother any more are probably the ones who did not support his music initially because I know several teenage girls that have rallied behind him immediately after his assault on Rihanna, his court trial and conviction, his internet "apologies", his colorist and degrading comments toward blogger Sandra Rose, the creation of #teambreezy on twitter (which, further invited the public into the ugly battle between he and Rihanna, causing a similar twitter trend on her behalf), the ranting on twitter about certain stores not marketing his music, and most recently the UK taking a stand and not allowing him into the country to tour. And from the very beginning, there was the victim blaming: "she gave him an STD", "she hit him first", "you're a hater", et al. And you know what? He was convicted, he served his sentence, and my issue with Chris Brown is not solely an issue with Chris Brown.


Having direct experiences with victims and perpetrators of relationship violence and also having done the bulk of my research on issues of sexual/relationship violence within the Black community, there are issues with domestic violence. One major issue that does not get as much attention as it should is the social consequences as they relate to the abuser. In fact, I'm sure that some of you may have released a mental gasp at my referring to Chris as an "abuser"; I've had grown women and men ask me to not refer to him as such because, in their own rationale, "abuse" dictates something long term and ongoing. This is silly because I'll tell you this - domestic violence agencies and reserachers refer to the perpetrator of violence, whether it happened once or several times, as abusers.


This is a prime example of a major problem. Why is Chris Brown - the celebrity that you do not know - an exception to what is common and logical in examining relationship violence? Chris Brown does not know me personally, and as such, he does not owe me a personal apology. He does not owe his fans a personal apology, because they have been excusing his behavior from the beginning of his socially perceived fall from grace. I also am not aware of whether or not he is continuing counseling. Chris Brown as a person and individual is not the entire problem with Chris Brown.


As a celebrity, he has been placed on a pedastol and, as a result, demands that his fans continually support him - despite acknowledging his wrong doing. The fans and the celebrity feed into one another; you fans, you've told Chris Brown who and what he should be and, like a minstrel show, he has given you everything that you've craved and applauded, both before and after his assault on Rihanna. This is about maintaining an image. Yet, what are the reasons that his behavior has been excused besides the above hater-isms?
Besides hearing "he didn't hit you/she asked for it", a major reason that, within the Black community, relationship violence is so far underreported and overlooked is because of a perceived necessity for racial solidarity above all else. This is also a major reason that women's rights within the Black community is taken as a sour flavor - because we shouldn't be focused on the disparities of hurt and injustice that come from within because we are a family. As a matter of fact, the day after the award show, I turned the radio off because I heard someone on the radio saying, "we can't just let one of our own..."; seriously. The next day, 106 and Park dedicated the show to Chris Brown, saying he's back. The blogworld has referred to his performance as a redemption song. For crying out loud, the kid won an award that very night. Just like that...all is forgiven in social media's world.


It is unreasonable that as a community of people, we turn our backs and leave a celebrity or non-celebrity perpetrator of relationship violence to fend for him/herself. Yet to continually support their career without blinking an eye and acknowledging, as fans, that their behavior is completely unacceptable in any form of society, is also not a reasonable answer. This isn't about anyone giving their lives to whatever-higher-power you may or may not believe to be true. Instead of spending so much time defending, rationalizing, and supporting their actions, though, we should be encouraging them toward a healthy lifestyle as examples to our young children. If you want the Black community to remain unified, why not move it along in a healthy and reasonable light?


What I don't want is for people to say "he/she is one of our own and therefore, we cannot do ______". That's silly to me. Chris Brown (and others) is a human being that fans and supportors of his entertainment have made into an image, and if you choose to support him (or others), do so at the best interest of the community and not in the best interest of the image that you want for him. The entire Chris Brown-Rihanna situation was higher profile than other relationship violence because of their celebridom and as such, was the perfect opportunity to engage in dialogue, as a community, about relationship violence and unhealthy behaviors. Yet instead, every main social networking outlet that I find young Black people on (mediatakeout, twitter, facebook) are filled with children and adolescents ignoring the abuse and excusing relationship abuse.


The fact of the matter is this: women are physically and sexually abused by their partners every single day. And many cases do not even make it to court because, as a result of "real life" apologists and defenders of abuse, women stay in these relationships. The same can be said for women abusing men (though there is not as much research to prove), and homosexual relationships. I've encountered people who think twice at celebrity relationship violence but are black and white about "real life" violence, and there are also the same types of people, besides the victim, that defend the actions of the abuser and blame the abused. The violence will not stop if the community is unwilling to, not only acknowledge wrongdoing and abusive relationships of celebrities as such but also, apply our standards of thinking in a universal manner and teach young children and adults what is acceptable and what is not.


I'll admit that I feel repetitive in that this post is nearly identical to my other Chris Brown-Rihanna/relationship violence post. I am not of the opinion that abusive relationships are private matters; if we are unwilling to speak out, then we can never expect any improvement. Teach the youth - including Chris Brown and other celebrities - that violent relationships are never acceptable, instead of creating images of what they should be based on your salivating as fans or supporters.


Be Righteous. And watch Bamboozled..those themes don't just apply to racial identity and entertainment.

The Root of the Problem


I submitted this post a few days ago to another blog; in the event that it is posted, I'll be sure to attach a link!


Initially, I wanted to be outraged at "The Health Care Bill Should Tax Weaves Like It Taxes Tanning", an blurb written by Cord Jefferson of The Root. Here's why: 2010 is the year of scrutiny for Black women. We've been under a perpetual magnifying glass; the blog world and mainstream media have been studying Black women, like a new species that has gone from the wild to domestic life in recent years. We have become a major topic of discussion for makeshift anthropologists who are interested in our lifestyles, mating practices, relationships and income. Not to discredit the social sciences, but news reporters and blog writers are not sociologists and the much focused on question of "why are you successful Black women single" has been given so much attention in 2010 alone that is has become disgusting.


The aforementioned post at The Root was not that, though. As a matter of fact, I found myself nodding in agreement instead of shaking with outrage at the author's rationale. In short, Cord Jefferson proposes, in a tone that mixes logic with a bit of parody, that since the health care bill has recently added a tax to tanning because of its medically unhealthy consequences (otherwise known as cancer), it should follow that fake hair is also taxed for the same reasons. This may sound a little offputting at first; after all, the use fake hair does not cause cancer or other medical repurcussions...does it? Well, I don't have the answer to that, but I will say that the article uses weaves as an example to identify more than it's really saying: the chemicals and other things that Black women use in our hair are unhealthy for us. This isn't simply an attack on relaxers, which is also why I'm not convinced that it is solely an attack on Black women more than it is an attempt to identify that our self-image needs adjusting. There are photos all over the web of women and girls that have had allergic reactions to relaxers, hair color, texturizers, and other chemicals that we plaster ourselves with to adjust the way that the world sees us, and to boost the way that we see ourselves. Some allergic reactions are so severe that they do, in fact, require medical attention and while the dermatological effects may not be as expensive or long term as cancer treatments, they are parallel experiences. White women, too, suffer from body image issues which is one reason for unhealthy behaviors that may just cause cancer. Equally, Black women participate in other unhealthy behaviors that, similarly to white women's issues, have been recycled and evolved over time. That is not to say that we do not suffer a longer, more severe systematic form of psychological oppression simply based on our perception of beauty; rather, it is hitting on just that.


Jefferson pulls examples from Tyra to Beyonce, and even posts a recent picture that hit the web of Naomi Campbell's major hair loss. Even so, the most important thing brought out in this post is the following sentence:


Perhaps some of the money saved could even go toward things like social welfare programs designed to help young black girls stop fetishizing straight blonde hair in the first place.


This is the bottom line of it all: image. While the author did not go in great depth about the historical contexts and the evolution of how Black women view themselves, consciously or subconsciously, I gathered that this was a light hearted attempt for a man to speak out about Black women's body image issues and, in my opinion, it did what it was supposed to do. Disgusted, irritated, confused or, like myself, satisfied with the article, it was meant to create a dialogue amongst ourselves. Black men might just be paying attention to our behaviors, and that makes me wonder if we are giving as much thought to our rituals as some other people may be. As a self-identifying Black feminist/womanist/women's rights activist, there are so many battles that Black women face in our macro- and micro-societies; it's just as important to channel some sort of energy within ourselves to reflect and understand the traditions that we recycle and identify whether or not the real root of the problem is worth defending.


Be Righteous.

Saturday, June 19, 2010

Juneteenth, 2010.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Friday, June 18, 2010

Disparities: Missing White Woman Syndrome


The point of this post is illustrated between 1:58 and 3:33; it's the best I could do!


My studies are all in the realm of social science. I've recently discovered contemporaries with similar mindsets as myself in some regard, but in other regards social science seems less than important as it is specifically (in my studies) constructed by the history of a very diverse bunch known as America on the whole. My goal in life since I was two years old was to save people; no, not in a spooky religious sort of way, but in a way that is long-lasting and more affecting of the people: I want (and have) hands on experience working with people to improve the condition of their lives. And while I very much realize that all people are in need of assistance and "saving", I feel for women and persons of color (as a woman and person of color). As such, many of the things that I have studied and worked to change deal specifically with the imbalance in our (American) social reality as it relates to women, people of color (largely Black people), and women of color.


The media and society have a mutual give-and-take relationship when it comes to the definition of reality on the whole; an individual's own reality and definitions do matter but are sometimes not representative as what is presented by society. The old chicken and egg argument dominates: does the media maintain a true reflection of the people (though society has been around as long as the media), or does society influence more what the media should be portraying as society's needs?


My college courses (at my predominately white university, for the record), often discussed a phenomenon known as Missing White Woman Syndrome(MWWS): the apparent racial bias in the media's (over-)reporting of young, attractive, "conventional", upper-middle class white girls/women over impoverished-to-middle class girls/women of color. I often ponder on this; there is a serious pattern of local and national panic when white women are abducted (or, even victimized in one way or another) versus when women of color are victimized at all. So much so, in fact, that there are websites available that post pictures and information for women of color because of the expressed imbalance. Remember: there's "justice", but there's also, very often, "just-us".


MWWS has only recently received the acknowledgment of its unfortunate reality. LaToyia Figueroa was a young pregnant woman of color that was reported missing in 2005 after not showing up for work. She was murdered south of Philly...an entire month after she disappeared. Her case was overshadowed by Natalee Holloway's disappearance and reported little by the mainstream media.


Last night, I'm sitting at work and I began thumbing through the most recent People Magazine. As I've made apparent, I have an interest in sex crimes and, what many police divisions describe to be "special victims". As such, I am always very caught up in the killings of young women and, admittedly, I've been very caught up in the details of Natalee Holloway's disappearance from the day she went missing. I mean, she was(/is?) the same age as me and the fact that they've yet to discover her whereabouts is terrifying and must be absolutely tragic for her parents. And when the suspect in her disappearance and alleged death popped up on the national media's radar weeks ago, I thought '...so, he killed this poor girl on five years to the day of Natalee's disappearance because she was asking him about whether or not he actually murdered her?' Odd way to prove your innocence. There was a difference though: he confessed to killing Stephany Tatiana Flores Ramírez and is taking his punishment. Now, though he has made off the record contradicting statements about killing Natalee and/or selling her into sex slavery (which is very possible considering he has a serious gambling and drug addiction - that caused his lawyer-father to stop supporting him), he was never even charged or tried for Natalee's murder because of such little evidence. It is devastating, and very unfortunate but these things happen in real life. Everything is not always Law and Order, and many missing persons and/or murders go unresolved.


Equally unfortunate to me, though, was People Mag's cover:



I feel for Natalee Holloway and her family. I also feel for Stephany Tatiana Flores Ramírez, who is hardly pictured to the right of Natalee Holloway. Joran van der Sloot confessed to brutally murdering her. He is being tried for this crime. He is not currently being tried for the murder of Natalee Holloway. So why is Natalee Holloway the feature of this cover?


We could argue that it is American-centric, which I also have a problem with given that the crime and alleged crime still occurred elsewhere. I don't intend to disrespect Natalee Holloway, but it seems as though the young, beautiful, upper-middle class white woman - the feature - is of greater value than the young dead Latina who is the most recent victim of van der Sloot's crimes.


I have no problem that the article mentioned Natalee Holloway; I understand wanting to draw parallels and hoping to bring van der Sloot to justice for the disappearance of Natalee. Truly, my heart goes out to everyone who was personally affected by Natalee's vanishing into thin air. Yet, I'm disappointed; if the media feeds into the subconscious of society, what is it telling us about the value of young women of color who are missing or murdered?


Be Righteous.

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Tupac Shakur


I had a talk about Womanism last night, and the intersection of race and gender that every Black woman has to deal with. I don't have an agenda against men or Black men; I don't, however, feel as though not speaking the truth or an opinion that is generally overlooked to maintain any person's (man/woman/entertainer/whatever) legacy is cool. I don't think Black men (/any men) are the scourge of society. I love men. No, really, I looooove men.


I don't hate Tupac Shakur. I think he has a lasting legacy that speaks to multiple sides in him; from Tupac the poet to Tupac "Thug Life" Shakur. I awakened this morning and among "Happy Birthday Tupac" tweets were tweets about Tupac's real, genuine love for Black women as evidenced by his lyrics:


And since we all came from a woman
Got our name from a woman and our game from a woman
I wonder why we take from our women
Why we rape our women, do we hate our women?
I think it's time to kill for our women
Time to heal our women, be real to our women
And if we don't we'll have a race of babies
That will hate the ladies, that make the babies
And since a man can't make one
He has no right to tell a woman when and where to create one
So will the real men get up
I know you're fed up ladies, but keep your head up


Now, I love this song because it is uplifting and I can appreciate the struggles being acknowledged. I love some of Tupac's music and can appreciate the aspects of his life and personality; in some regards, he was poetic. I realize that music is entertainment and entertainment is not real life, which is why I decided to offer a counter opinion in stating that Tupac was also convicted of rape and has demeaned women to a certain point; regardless of if you want to distinguish the difference between "women" and "bitches":



I did point out in my conversations about the brotha that, true enough, he has inspired many people. Many of the people my age when I was coming up were caught up in the "Thug Life" message, though. A lot of people are able to point out the positive messages in his music as well but I pointed out that praising a man as a hero and ignoring his wrongdoing is sending a poor message to young men and women coming up.


A person that I was engaged with completely doubted the fact that the victim was sexually assaulted because of a retraction of statement, though, after he was convicted of a crime is, to me, a form of victim blaming/precipitation in that a young woman (who still contends in articles and online to this day that she was raped) is being disbelieved because of a man's own celebrity. I wasn't there, but let's look from a socio-cultural and legal/historical standpoint:


Yes, "convicted" of does not always mean guilty, especially in terms of Black men and the American justice (or "just-us") system. However, rape/sexual assault has a low conviction rate because of the he-say/she-say nature of a trial. Fact. Also fact is this: Black man on white woman sexual assault (or alleged sexual assault) is typically punished far more than rape that allegedly occurs within the same race. Fact. More factually, though, is the historical idea that crimes WITHIN the Black comunity the Black community alone have been isolated by the American justice system, forcing them to become Black issues - which is one of the reasons that sexual assault is reported far less from within the Black community.


I'm not saying that there has never been a woman that has alleged that a rape happened that did not occur. I am, however, saying that the dynamics from within the Black community tend to speak to our history from inside America and regardless of conviction or not, rape allegations should be taken seriously. Imagine being raised to believe that you have to protect your brotha and look out for the best of the community, by any means necessary. Do you turn your brotha in for sexually assaulting you? Do you deal with the harassment of his friends, family or fans for a lie? Do you listen to and allow your name to become everybody's description of a whore to get back at someone in criminal court (which translates to jail-time, not money)? Why would you lie?


Regardless, my point in acknowledging his convictions - not a supposed opinion of him - is this: how do you explain to your sister, daughter, little cousin, or niece that he held this incredibly deep love for his sistas, as evidenced by his music, but is caught up in illegal activities, has been locked up, and yes - has been convicted of sexual abuse? And that he should be praised and celebrated?


Unfortunately, the things that we see are not all of man. I have no interest in demonizing Tupac Shakur as a man because his music is left behind and has some positive messages in it for the community. I do, however, want to bring an issue of conflicting persona to everyone's attentions. People can be profound. People are human, and that does not excuse any wrongdoing whatsoever. People, however, should be interested in explaining the complexities and roundness of the people that they choose to "praise" instead of ignoring the bad for the sake of what you perceived their character to be?


EDIT: I'd like to point that one of my major beliefs is separating "entertainment" from reality. While I note that one feeds the other in terms of the ideas perpetuated as "truths", entertainment is valid but does not take away from the reality of any situation. For instance, I do realize that I've quoted Biggie in a post, and that doesn't take away from his upbringings and the realities - even when he continuously rapped about the selling of drugs and has also said disrespectful things about and regarding women. My point is this: ignoring the human side of an individual where they have publicly illustrated their own wrongdoing to sustain a positive image and/or legacy of them is wrong. For the sake of our youth, just tell the entire truth.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Sister Inspirations: Alexis Pauline Gumbs


Not so long ago, when I was doing research for my undergraduate independent research thesis, I was so very fortunate enough to come into contact with many inspirations; sisters livicated to the same causes, devoting the same volume of activism to change, making moves: inspiring. My chosen topic for the project was historical contexts of sexual assault toward Black women in America; with that, I wrote about the transition through the major movements in America, and about the deficiencies in current crisis centers where culture and cultural competency are involved. My passion (and what I believe to be my life's work) is healing Black women where relationship (sexual, mental, emotional, physical) violence as a gender issue and a cultural issue intersect because they are issues that cannot be divorced in the issues faced by women of color.


Among the several of my inspirations that I was introduced to in the interest of research and reflection is a Sister writer/activist/survivor/scholar/everything-I'm-working-toward by the name of Alexis Pauline Gumbs. She is amazingly talented and incredibly intelligent, resourceful and inspiring. Moreover, to me it was so refreshing and motivating to know that there are sisters in my generation who are speaking out about Black womanist thought. I truly enjoy her presence and I hope that we are all successful in the journey to change the world that we live in and know by reinforcing the strengths that sisters of color - bisexual or lesbian or queer/questioning or straight or trans - formally educated or working to better the community in different ways - religiously affiliated or not - or whatever other qualities (because there are many) we may bare.


Alexis is just amazing. She recently received her Ph.D in English, African and African American Studies, and Women's Studies - and if that does not get any of my sisters and brothers, younger or older, motivated and worked up then I don't know what will do it!


Lex maintains a podcast: Eternal Summer of the Black Feminist Mind. In a recent edition entitled "Still Brave" was her graduation gift to the Black feminist world and I know that everything that she involves herself with will succeed without question. It already has.


Eternal Summer of the Black Feminist Mind: Still Brave - listen here!


Lex, you have truly been an amazing Sister-Inspiration of mine, and I hope to touch other sisters the way that you've touched me. Congratulations on all of your successes - I know there are so many more written into your future! And kudos for putting this podcast together; very well composed and the message and music are amazing.


Be Righteous...and inspired!

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Bigger Than Hip-Hop


Okay, hip-hop. As a music lover and a member of the Black community, I don't feel I can completely turn my back on you. I've often expressed a confused-love-hate relationship of hip hop music as a result of the disrespect that Black women live with in the music and the glorification of certain degrading social situations, but that doesn't make these situations less relevant, prevalent, or invalid as experiences faced within Black culture and the hip-hop listener's community.


I take issue with the idea that there are disingenuous and unauthentic self-claiming hip-hoppers that are being unexamined in terms of, not only the quality of product they are producing, but the accessibility of poor messages to children (which, I know, speaks also to parenting). Some artists don't fail to acknowledge the fact that their audience is 12-15 year old children, and with that acknowledgment comes an uncaring attitude.


There are so many good qualities in hip-hop. Having had my upbringing, I experienced life in different communities. I used to play kick-ball in the street with what seemed to be the kids from "Hey, Arnold!" I got a boom-box for one of my earlier birthdays and it had a double tape-deck, and I sat on the deck during sticky-hot North Carolina summers listening to mix-tapes that I made of singles from the radio. I've always been an over-thinker and I can even recall when my thorough examination and interpretations of music began: I was around ten and had heard an unedited version of "Mo' Money Mo' Problems." And, of course, I figured if they weren't one of George Carlin's 7 Dirty Words, it isn't off limits. I didn't stop to think that there might be a reason the radio bleeps the words out! So, I'm listening to the song in the car with my dad, and I was boppin' my head, proud to know that they sampled Diana Ross's "I'm Coming Out" so perfectly, probably wearing one of those horrid looking jumpsuits worn by Mase and Puffy in the video and giggling with thoughts of "Ma$e Gumble" and "Puffy Woods", and - of course - rhyming to Biggie, and said the phrase "triple beam, lyrical dream - I be that cats you see at all the 'vents bent". Generally, my dad could appreciate my love of music and ability to recite any song after hearing it once; musically minded, I also have a talent at identifying and perfecting pitch. However, also being an early scholar, I hated (and still hate) when people challenge me to make me stupid, as my father did plenty of times growing up. Immediately, he turned the radio down and said, "do you know what a triple beam is?" Well now, I knew it was that thing my teacher taught us about during the science part of our day. Proudly, I told him this. And he explained to me that it is a device used to measure drugs. Truly, this experience might be the reason I question everything to the point of annoyance; I like to know the origin of words and phrases so that I don't mistakenly look buffoonish.


Yet growing up in hip-hop has made me appreciate the things that I can relate to, and even experiences that I cannot because I feel how real they are. Despite what some may tell you, I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth. I've grown through more experiences than a lot of people are privy to; a lot of those situations intersect with old school, new school, and pop-culture hip-hop. However, I also experienced social situations that aren't exactly understood to be what is portrayed as "the Black community" - complete with "talking/acting white" - and I don't think that this invalidates my opinions as a scholar and interpreter of the message or experience.


Since I don't completely have a work-sleep-blog-leisure schedule worked out yet, I tend to catch up on the happenings of the week on Sunday mornings after I get off work. Finally getting around to episodes of The Michael Eric Dyson Show, I was excited to be able to listen to a(/nother) hip-hop discussion. The tail end of the show featured Thomas Chatterton Williams, author of "Losing My Cool: How a Father's Love and 15,000 Books Beat Hip-hop Culture". Now, I don't like to judge a book by it's cover (or title), but...well, just fast forward through all the really informative (and very well stated) stuff about the President and financial regulation and have a listen:


Is Hip-Hop Culturally Valuable?
(I couldn't embed the soundclip, but the link will take you straight to it)


I don't think Mr. Williams' argument was well-rounded enough for the show, and taking task with Jay-Z is not exactly a careful examination of hip-hop culture's realism and societal importance to the minority communities that experience what is spoken about. While I may not like to listen to much of the bullshit music on the radio, I'm more anti-listening-to-the-bullshit-music-on-the-radio-without-proper-interpretative-skills. I don't hate hip-hop, I hate the complacency associated with our culture's allowing such vulgarity and outdated ideas to be recycled and allowed such a substantial influence on how our culture is portrayed. I'm sick of parents not explaining to children what's what. If my dad hadn't challenged me to understand the rhymes I was recycling, would I even be as thorough a thinker as I am now? Granted, I have my own definition of what "real" hip-hop is, but that doesn't discredit the bullshit music and musicians to whom I refuse to listen.


Also, I have a problem with the fact that Mr. Willams is so caught up on Jay-Z and drugs. At one point, he seemed to be heading in the direction of the often blatant disrespect of Black women, but didn't. What about the women in and affected by hip-hop? Have we, yet again, been othered?


Maybe I'll purchase Mr. Williams' book tomorrow, just to hear his argument. It's difficult to read a man in a snippet of the conversation; yet, from what I hear? Bullshit, son.


Be Righteous. And also, be insightful.


Sunday, May 2, 2010

Mmmm. Soul Food sans Meat!



In gaining employment after what seemed to be an eternity and re-working my entire life's schedule, I've been extremely busy and have yet to work out a consistent regime by which to adhere for updating the blog! At any rate, over the last week or two, I've had so many ideas and experiences swirl through my mind but have had limited time to sit down and actually write everything out. I'm thinking of a master plan...


Now that I'm finally getting on my feet, my next order of business is meeting people with similar interests and characteristics as myself. Last week, a friend of mine from home referred me to a local vegan soul food restaurant and I became so excited. Ever heard that adage you are what you eat? Well, honestly..I believe what a person eats speaks a lot about them and their beliefs and mentality. I could get into it and go deep, but here's my example: I could not date a guy that eats pork. I mean, I'm only just slightly more flexible with beef or other mammals, but I'm largely anti-swine.


Again, I'm not always perfect; I try to be conscious of the foods that I eat. While I do eat poultry occasionally and majorly fish, I go days without any "meat" and eat veggies, beans, rice, tofu. So, when I decided upon what I just learned to be one of a few vegan soul food spots in the area, I was so very excited and satisfied. The people there were engaging; there were oils and soaps and clothing sold there. The fact that it has a loose religious affiliation matters not for several reasons (that might turn into another post in itself). I meant to take a photo of the building and of my food, but got caught up in the atmosphere so quickly.


I ordered a Brunch platter. This consisted of: steamed broccoli, grits, vegan sausage patties, tofu scramble and juice. Wow. It's filling, healthy, organic, no animal by-products, no caffeine...homemade. Just plain wonderful. For...drumroll...ten bucks! Amazing? I think so.


I think it's admirable to promote healthier eating habits within (and with-out) our communities. I know that it's difficult for a lot of Negroes to wean themselves from eating thewhiteman's swine, or cow, or anything else. It doesn't coincide in my beliefs, and again, not that I have a perfect body by any means, but I think that being conscious of the chemicals and, well, just plain nasty shit that we put in our bodies. We lead the planet in being affected negatively by numerous health problems!


Again, I wish I had taken a picture, but it does look partially like the above photo. And I felt as though I made a connection with the people. No doubt, I'll be back!


Be Righteous.

Monday, April 19, 2010

Rape Victims: Who Cares?


As an advocate and activist, I find myself constantly reminding people that people choose not to report rape/sexual assaults (and may even change their mind down the road) for a number of reasons. While crime dramas can sometimes do a great job portraying how things maybemightsometimes go down, there are a lot of situations that aren't necessarily as "ideal" as TV makes them to be. I'm not going to jump on my "the police aren't your friends" soapbox because I have a confused relationship with the law: I've disclosed being a Detective's kid, and I've also butt heads with several police officers (that know him!). I've read about tensions between Black people and the police, and I've even seen police in my current city go overboard (leave it to me to relocate to South Central, lol). I mean, even my Detective father instructed me on dealing with the local police upon moving because of their heavy-handed reputation. With that said, I have also found myself having to remind all people of this fact: the images that you see on television are for entertainment - they are not real. In other words, the smart, witty, passionate, hardworking detectives you see on Law and Order: SVU are not real people; not every police officer you encounter will have the same caring-"we're-gonna-get-the-bad-guy"-attitude. I am not completely of the opinion that, as a member of the Black community, the support of the police is always lesser. Yet, the Black community minimizes contact with police on a number of issues and a main issue is sexual assault. Sexual Assault Awareness Month fact: 60% of rapes go unreported. With the knowledge that Black women are compounded with the tension of race and the police, can you imagine the statistic for Black women who are sexually assault?


I've had the pleasure of collaborating with the police in combating sexual assault and advocating for victims. I've met SVU detectives that I felt should be in a different line of work. On one occasion, I was advocating for an 18 year old Black lady that had been sexually assault by a way older family friend. She told me that the investigating detective, a white woman, told her that it was her fault she was raped. Ideally, the police would work together with advocates and, maybe sometimes, they do; yet, it is difficult to bridge the gap when there are few Black women advocating (because of the inherited silence on the matter) and when young Black women are being told by the police that there would be no investigation on their attack - proof or not - because of something they did to perpetuate the attack.


I browsed this article on Alternet a couple of days ago, and my attention was redirected to it last night by my good friend Rippa (check out his blog: The Intersection of Madness and Reality). The story is, unfortunately in my experience, not uncommon: young woman drugged and date raped, goes to police, is given the run around, and ultimately, not believed by the authorities. Further, the authorities try convincing her that she was drunk (when she was drugged!). This happened to a student of an HBCU, so if you assumed she was a young white girl by default, figure race into the equation. Now, read on, The Story of the Night Hannah Was Not "Officially" Raped:


April 17, 2010

On Saturday, Dec. 9, 2006, Hannah* woke up in her Howard University dorm room with a piece of her life missing. Hannah, a 19-year-old sophomore, had unexplained pain in her rectum and hip. Her panty liner, which she had worn the night before, was missing. Vomit dotted her gloves and coat. Her friend Kerston lay beside her in the skinny dorm room bed. Kerston told Hannah not to shower -- they had to go back to the hospital to secure a rape kit. That weekend, Hannah claims that she was provided the following excuses for why she could not receive a sexual assault medical forensic examination: She was drunk; she ate a sandwich; she was a liar; she didn't know her attacker's last name; the police had to authorize the exam; she was outside the hospital's jurisdiction; she wasn't reporting a real crime; she was blacked out; she changed her story; her case was already closed.


The article continues:


"We think she's been raped," Kerston and Sade informed an orderly as they dragged her into the hospital. Hospital officials handed Sade some paperwork to fill out on Hannah's behalf. In the box indicating the reason for the ER visit, Sade testifies that she wrote, "raped, possibly drugged." A nurse sat Hannah down and took her blood pressure. Hannah threw up on the floor. Kerston and Sade helped to clean it up off of the ground. The nurse put a vomit bag in Hannah's hands. She was incoherent and barely conscious. She threw up into the bag. According to the girls' testimony, when a doctor finally saw Hannah, she determined that she was too incoherent to consent to receive a rape kit, because she couldn't verbally confirm that she had been raped. According to the girls, the doctor told them to take Hannah home, let her sleep it off, make sure she didn't shower, and then return to Howard University Hospital for a rape kit the next day. When the girls begged the doctor to treat Hannah's symptoms of sexual assault and drugging, the girls claim that the doctor told them to leave the ER. (The doctor testified that she informed Hannah's friends that they would have to wait six to eight hours before Hannah was treated, and that the girls chose to leave the hospital without treatment). When Kerston and Sade took Hannah back to her dorm, she threw up again.


This incident is also in my new location, and I have to catch myself from saying what should have happened since I am a newbie to the area. However, where I used to live, this is what, ideally, would have happened: immediately taken to triage based on the symptoms, an advocate from the local sexual assault agency called, and then, if the victim indicates, the police will be called. It should happen in that order (if the victim is over 18 years old) because of (new) blind reporting legislation that allows the victim, as long as there are no sustained injuries, to decide whether or not she would like to press charges. The advocate should arrive before a rape kit is done to ensure procedure is followed, the support the victim, and to serve as a liaison between the hospital and the victim. I am of the opinion that if any of these links are missed, if any part of the protocol is skipped, then it falls apart at the interest of the victim.


There are so many organizations in this area that advocate for victims and, from what I've heard, they do a wonderful job. What happened to "Hannah" this night was a complete disaster on so many fronts beyond the physical and mental trauma associated with being sexually assaulted; "Hannah" faced every rape victims fear: not being believed or treated fairly and, ultimately, being punished for her victimization.


Be Righteous.