a few nights ago, someone posted Alexyss Tylor's latest on tumblr and i went ahead and watched. after that, i happened to find a Vice magazine piece where she told a bit more of her story.
now, i have a couple of issues with her--similar to the ones i have with Kola Boof, minus the twitter experience--but i also have a new-found respect. she's a survivor. i don't always dig the way she gets the word out, but i understand that she speaks to realities i have not lived and pains i do not know.
i've noticed that many women labeled "crazy" or "wild" carry an abundance of Dark Goddess energy. Her names are many: Kali, Nana Buluku, Pomba Gira, Pele, Maman Brigitte, Iyaami, Ezili Je Rouge, Sekhmet. all-seeing eye havin, fire-spittin, ass kickin and name takin Divinity. the Mama that brought you in and will take you out.
in this incarnation, my path stresses peace, light and balance, but i am aware that many sistas choose differently. i can hardly blame them; the help and privilege i've been afforded don't come to all of us.
when tragedy strikes or for those born into or out of pain, despair, and struggle, the light doesn't always make it through. sometimes the darkness comes first, and it comes strongest.
using the dark to heal is dangerous; it is the underworld journey, lonely and fierce. the light is safer, calmer, sweeter. but no matter the road, deep healing always carries the risk of no return. you can get lost in the dark, struggling against your own demons. you can go too far into the light, becoming neglectful and drifting into the next world before your time.
only those who remain on the surface forget the sanctity of balance.
so to Kola, Alexyss and others i say: there but for the grace of God/dess go i.
it's not an endorsement, or full agreement. i have my reasons for sticking to my way, as they do. still, i know that my way is only a way, not the way, and i'm not gonna reach everyone with it.
this is a recognition. an understanding.
i'm in my lane, they're in theirs, but we're all on the highway to the same destination: the empowerment of our sistas and the reemergence of Goddesshood.
Showing posts with label agree to disagree. Show all posts
Showing posts with label agree to disagree. Show all posts
7.26.2012
3.28.2012
2.14.2012
choosing battles: privileged neglect vs. hate
once, someone shared a wise sentiment with me: they're not always out to get you, sometimes they just don't care.
of course, the result might be similar or the same, but that perspective cuts through a lot of paranoia and fear. in a world full of ever-present boogeypeople, you can scare yourself right into apathy or inaction if you aren't careful.
however, if YOU care, that's power. 'cause you might get someone else on the bandwagon.
the folks who are supposed to hate us so much continue living life--their perceived evils and imbalances notwithstanding--while too many of us have stopped living to shoot at shadows.
if they were that obsessed with coming for us, they'd get little else done. but much still gets done. has been getting done.
to be certain, much of it is not in our favor, to our advantage, or for our health because they don't care.
but that's not the same as hate.
that's not the same as a genocidal master plan.
and it does not (always) equate to sitting down each day to decide how to specifically kill, maim or destroy [insert just about anyone not male / western-euro descended / hetero here].
am i saying no one is out to get "us"? no. quite the contrary. there are a few who've made it their life's work, for reasons that would take another blog or three to lay out.
but i don't think that's the majority.
i think the majority are riding a wave of conquest and privilege they don't understand the root of. they don't care because they don't have to; their circumstances allow them to reap the benefits, and that has the potential to make all but the most aware rather indolent.
i don't choose to lie awake thinking about folks who don't care about me, nor do i see the point in viewing my life as a never-ending battlefield.
i do choose to care more than they do. i need to see and relate to the people they don't. i am committed to learning, listening, doing my part in my little corner of the planet.
it might not be much, but it's what keeps me sane.
of course, the result might be similar or the same, but that perspective cuts through a lot of paranoia and fear. in a world full of ever-present boogeypeople, you can scare yourself right into apathy or inaction if you aren't careful.
however, if YOU care, that's power. 'cause you might get someone else on the bandwagon.
the folks who are supposed to hate us so much continue living life--their perceived evils and imbalances notwithstanding--while too many of us have stopped living to shoot at shadows.
if they were that obsessed with coming for us, they'd get little else done. but much still gets done. has been getting done.
to be certain, much of it is not in our favor, to our advantage, or for our health because they don't care.
but that's not the same as hate.
that's not the same as a genocidal master plan.
and it does not (always) equate to sitting down each day to decide how to specifically kill, maim or destroy [insert just about anyone not male / western-euro descended / hetero here].
am i saying no one is out to get "us"? no. quite the contrary. there are a few who've made it their life's work, for reasons that would take another blog or three to lay out.
but i don't think that's the majority.
i think the majority are riding a wave of conquest and privilege they don't understand the root of. they don't care because they don't have to; their circumstances allow them to reap the benefits, and that has the potential to make all but the most aware rather indolent.
i don't choose to lie awake thinking about folks who don't care about me, nor do i see the point in viewing my life as a never-ending battlefield.
i do choose to care more than they do. i need to see and relate to the people they don't. i am committed to learning, listening, doing my part in my little corner of the planet.
it might not be much, but it's what keeps me sane.
5.13.2011
open post: when "consciousness" fails to recognize linked oppressions. or: if you're brown, stick around (unless you're gay).
i was just having a discussion with my godbrother around this book, and had a thought:
and, as i added later, this attitude can also make things pretty rough for the sistas, albeit in a different way*.
what do y'all think?
*aside from the blog entry, i also find that these same voices are the ones railing against reproductive justice for black women and other women of color, couched in "concern" and, again, that looming fear of genocide.
i've noticed that the problem with [black / "afrocentric" homophobia] is that they're focused in on sexual acts, which, in turn, are sometimes confused with fetishistic practices. but trying to bring the complexities of kink into the conversation is pretty futile...
generally:
what makes babies = good
what doesn't make babies = bad.
the quality of the relationships in question and/or the psychosocial underpinnings of human relationships as a whole never comes into the conversation. it's black folks' fear of rejection/extermination/cultural annihilation on steroids. now, that's a real fear that's been imbued in us over generations--but we have to get beyond internalizing our oppression, even in our bedrooms.
so you have all that. coupled with a general lack of education around the basics of sex and sexual expression (except in the most patriarchal, male-dominated/controlled, sexist sense), it's a recipe for disaster when it comes to queer people.
folks wanna complain about "europeans" being sexually/sensually repressed, not realizing they've caught the same disease.
in my understanding, our ancestors understood ALL ways of being, living AND loving--balanced, imbalanced, and beyond. [emphasis added]
and, as i added later, this attitude can also make things pretty rough for the sistas, albeit in a different way*.
what do y'all think?
*aside from the blog entry, i also find that these same voices are the ones railing against reproductive justice for black women and other women of color, couched in "concern" and, again, that looming fear of genocide.
4.11.2011
nonsense & tomfoolery
this is bullshit.
and so is this.
sigh.
where to begin...
first and foremost, who decided that men were mindlessly lustful, emotionally childish creatures who never get out from under their mamas and can't think beyond the next piece of ass? some of you brothas need to be just as insulted by this as many of us are.
the only thing i could agree with was around 1:30 when shantel mentioned knowing yourself before you try to get involved with someone else. apparently she knows that she's willing to tolerate that kind of thing--or at least excuse it's happening to others--and that's her right.
however, (to truncate my earlier twitter rant) in my world, commitments come down to character. plain and simple. if you don't want a commitment, don't make one. and if someone breaks a commitment they make to you? you have every right to be hurt, angry, and walk the hell on out. period.
and the random "we got monogamy from whitefolks" argument? no. i am all for poly relationships based on a spirit of mutual trust, understanding and respect. if you want to bring other folks in, and everybody's informed and consenting, more power.
but, please, let's stop making excuses for bad behavior.
and, tyrese. you're gonna tell your daughter not to "own the cheat" (agreed), but at the same time, dude can't help but to run out on her? mixed messages, darlin. really mixed. then he almost recovers by bringing up the madonna-whore double standard, but jacks it right back up by basically saying madonnas should get used to being shitted on.*
these excuses, mixed messages, and generalized poppycock is part of what continues to disempower sistas, keeping them depressed, abused, dying of broken hearts and all manner of other maladies. these are the scripts that make it that much easier to cave to a partner unwilling to use protection; to stay in situations where we are not loved as we love, nor cherished as we cherish. this is what happens when you "love your sons and raise your daughters".
we need to deal with our denial--around our general mental and spiritual health, and the ways dysfunctional standards, upbringings, and ways of being have been normalized.**
i implore you, yet again, to educate yourselves in the machinations of TKON.
want more. be more.
choose to love fully, with eyes, ears, hearts, and spirits open....with the highest and best parts of yourself.
we can let this shit go. more than that, we need to let it go.
in my humble opinion, it's beyond time for a new paradigm.
*also note that this clip is about the only time in life i've ever wanted to hug wendy williams. it's unlikely to happen again, so i wanted to mark this historic moment.
**for more eloquent statements on these issues, i highly recommend browsing the crunk feminist collective and/or quirky black girls.
and so is this.
sigh.
where to begin...
first and foremost, who decided that men were mindlessly lustful, emotionally childish creatures who never get out from under their mamas and can't think beyond the next piece of ass? some of you brothas need to be just as insulted by this as many of us are.
the only thing i could agree with was around 1:30 when shantel mentioned knowing yourself before you try to get involved with someone else. apparently she knows that she's willing to tolerate that kind of thing--or at least excuse it's happening to others--and that's her right.
however, (to truncate my earlier twitter rant) in my world, commitments come down to character. plain and simple. if you don't want a commitment, don't make one. and if someone breaks a commitment they make to you? you have every right to be hurt, angry, and walk the hell on out. period.
and the random "we got monogamy from whitefolks" argument? no. i am all for poly relationships based on a spirit of mutual trust, understanding and respect. if you want to bring other folks in, and everybody's informed and consenting, more power.
but, please, let's stop making excuses for bad behavior.
and, tyrese. you're gonna tell your daughter not to "own the cheat" (agreed), but at the same time, dude can't help but to run out on her? mixed messages, darlin. really mixed. then he almost recovers by bringing up the madonna-whore double standard, but jacks it right back up by basically saying madonnas should get used to being shitted on.*
these excuses, mixed messages, and generalized poppycock is part of what continues to disempower sistas, keeping them depressed, abused, dying of broken hearts and all manner of other maladies. these are the scripts that make it that much easier to cave to a partner unwilling to use protection; to stay in situations where we are not loved as we love, nor cherished as we cherish. this is what happens when you "love your sons and raise your daughters".
we need to deal with our denial--around our general mental and spiritual health, and the ways dysfunctional standards, upbringings, and ways of being have been normalized.**
i implore you, yet again, to educate yourselves in the machinations of TKON.
want more. be more.
choose to love fully, with eyes, ears, hearts, and spirits open....with the highest and best parts of yourself.
we can let this shit go. more than that, we need to let it go.
in my humble opinion, it's beyond time for a new paradigm.
*also note that this clip is about the only time in life i've ever wanted to hug wendy williams. it's unlikely to happen again, so i wanted to mark this historic moment.
**for more eloquent statements on these issues, i highly recommend browsing the crunk feminist collective and/or quirky black girls.
4.29.2010
um...what?
i cannot and never will be able to deal with this without my head exploding.
if you can, more power.
thank you, and good night.
if you can, more power.
thank you, and good night.
3.02.2010
an uneasy love
i listened to the entire saviour's day address on sunday...
i've seen minister farrakhan speak in person, and i have long respected his views and insights on social issues, not to mention his unwavering wisdom in presenting a united front in the face of all the things black folks face in this country. he is gifted orator, respected leader and elder.
where we disagree: the undercurrent of percieved "jewish world rule", religious dogma, views on women, the perpetuation of compulsory heterosexuality and gender "norms"--honestly, possibly more than we agree on. i also recognize that he is a manifesation of several ways in which black male hegemony can force sistas into several corners at once.
and, of course, there's all that business with brother malcolm.
on sunday--more than ever--i found myself having to separate the wheat from the chaff; the message was unclear, and that disturbed me a bit.
full disclosure: i completely acknowledge that part of the reason for the lack of clarity could be my never having been affiliated with the nation. some of it wasn't for me--i get that.
even so, i wondered how damaging and dangerous certain implications can be when many who are hanging on your every word don't have the tools to make those subtle distinctions, no matter how much critical thinking you teach at the mosque.
in my humble opinion, min. farrakhan--like the rest of us--holds a piece of the truth. i certainly do not deny the existence of spiritual vision, clairvoyance and the like. all that still didn't stop me from feeling, at a gut level, that his deep allegiance to the problematic lineage of the NOI and its leaders skews the ways that truth is expressed.
in other words, it's possible that some of the leaps he has to take to make things fit within the islamic--such as it is--framework wind up feeling like half-truths.
i see the same thing with christians squeezing in holistic attitudes about, say, sex or liberal social policies. yes, it's there if you dig long and hard enough, or if you prioritize the words and deeds of yeshua above all else. but outside of that is a whole tome based on spiritual superiority and other oppressive power structures/hierarchies, the absolute authority of men/masculinity, the evil inherent in human beings, etc and so on.
the foundation matters. if you're going to use the master's tools, you can only shift the paradigm so far.
that said, i will always keep my eyes and ears open for an opportunity to hear the minister speak, and i'm sure i will still tend to agree with him when he says things like (and i paraphrase), "we like you, obama, but if you keep beating their drums of war, we won't follow."
but i have to trust my intuition, and lots of bells and whistles were going off sunday afternoon.
by the time he closed--"right on!" moments aside--i couldn't shake the feeling that the line between respected leader and cult of personality-leader was being danced upon. or crossed.
only time will tell.
i've seen minister farrakhan speak in person, and i have long respected his views and insights on social issues, not to mention his unwavering wisdom in presenting a united front in the face of all the things black folks face in this country. he is gifted orator, respected leader and elder.
where we disagree: the undercurrent of percieved "jewish world rule", religious dogma, views on women, the perpetuation of compulsory heterosexuality and gender "norms"--honestly, possibly more than we agree on. i also recognize that he is a manifesation of several ways in which black male hegemony can force sistas into several corners at once.
and, of course, there's all that business with brother malcolm.
on sunday--more than ever--i found myself having to separate the wheat from the chaff; the message was unclear, and that disturbed me a bit.
full disclosure: i completely acknowledge that part of the reason for the lack of clarity could be my never having been affiliated with the nation. some of it wasn't for me--i get that.
even so, i wondered how damaging and dangerous certain implications can be when many who are hanging on your every word don't have the tools to make those subtle distinctions, no matter how much critical thinking you teach at the mosque.
in my humble opinion, min. farrakhan--like the rest of us--holds a piece of the truth. i certainly do not deny the existence of spiritual vision, clairvoyance and the like. all that still didn't stop me from feeling, at a gut level, that his deep allegiance to the problematic lineage of the NOI and its leaders skews the ways that truth is expressed.
in other words, it's possible that some of the leaps he has to take to make things fit within the islamic--such as it is--framework wind up feeling like half-truths.
i see the same thing with christians squeezing in holistic attitudes about, say, sex or liberal social policies. yes, it's there if you dig long and hard enough, or if you prioritize the words and deeds of yeshua above all else. but outside of that is a whole tome based on spiritual superiority and other oppressive power structures/hierarchies, the absolute authority of men/masculinity, the evil inherent in human beings, etc and so on.
the foundation matters. if you're going to use the master's tools, you can only shift the paradigm so far.
that said, i will always keep my eyes and ears open for an opportunity to hear the minister speak, and i'm sure i will still tend to agree with him when he says things like (and i paraphrase), "we like you, obama, but if you keep beating their drums of war, we won't follow."
but i have to trust my intuition, and lots of bells and whistles were going off sunday afternoon.
by the time he closed--"right on!" moments aside--i couldn't shake the feeling that the line between respected leader and cult of personality-leader was being danced upon. or crossed.
only time will tell.
2.20.2010
it's complicated
someone posted this on facebook yesterday.
overall, it's beautifully written. i think the sentiment is sincere.
but it also assumes a level of choice that many communities of color do not/did not have in the "creolization" of themselves.
in other words, a modern day jewish woman's decision to marry a hindu man--both of you knowing your extended family histories--is a little different than the hows and whys surrounding the reasons native americans/1st nations, black folks, and latin@s exist in a variety of shades and hair textures.
and by a "little" different, i mean a lot.
it's difficult for me to allow the author to explain that away--however poetically--to solidify her child's multi-ethnic identity, even as i agree that, in her family's case, "no such thing as half" is relatively true.
her daughter can be everything at once because it's now.
born 60, 70--even 20 or 30 years ago, depending--she would have been jewish. period. and her mormon dad probably would have had an awfully hard way to go.
i'm also assuming that, phenotypically, the author, her husband and daughter present as white/european-descended. how many people--outside of her spiritual spheres--are going to ask her if she's "half" anything?
see how fuzzy that gets?
what do y'all think when you read this?
overall, it's beautifully written. i think the sentiment is sincere.
but it also assumes a level of choice that many communities of color do not/did not have in the "creolization" of themselves.
in other words, a modern day jewish woman's decision to marry a hindu man--both of you knowing your extended family histories--is a little different than the hows and whys surrounding the reasons native americans/1st nations, black folks, and latin@s exist in a variety of shades and hair textures.
and by a "little" different, i mean a lot.
it's difficult for me to allow the author to explain that away--however poetically--to solidify her child's multi-ethnic identity, even as i agree that, in her family's case, "no such thing as half" is relatively true.
her daughter can be everything at once because it's now.
born 60, 70--even 20 or 30 years ago, depending--she would have been jewish. period. and her mormon dad probably would have had an awfully hard way to go.
i'm also assuming that, phenotypically, the author, her husband and daughter present as white/european-descended. how many people--outside of her spiritual spheres--are going to ask her if she's "half" anything?
see how fuzzy that gets?
what do y'all think when you read this?
9.14.2009
coming to a cinema near you...
apparently, tyler perry has gotten his hands on for colored girls who have considered suicide/ when the rainbow is enuf.
confused? here's an idea of how it all went down and some possible casting choices.
others have taken the words out of my mouth...
my best friend gayle
fallon wilson
dopegirlfresh
post bourgie
AC
a bunch of poems, tyler? ok...
confused? here's an idea of how it all went down and some possible casting choices.
others have taken the words out of my mouth...
my best friend gayle
fallon wilson
dopegirlfresh
post bourgie
AC
a bunch of poems, tyler? ok...
6.15.2009
love (of money) and marriage
i drove to work today and, as usual, listened to a morning show which, as many do, contained a prank call segment.
premise: fiancee takes her ring in to be resized and appraised. hubby-to-be knows about the resizing, but not the appraisal. fair enough, i guess.
prank: "jeweler" calls fiancee and tells her that the ring is a cubic zirconia, "order now for $19.99!"-type deal and is only worth about $50.
result: fiancee proceeds to lose her shit, including a 3-way call to hubby-to-be to have the "jeweler" tell him what he's found, with hilarious results.
...but after a few laughs, i was just disturbed.
fiancee was all hyped up about how much her father was spending on the wedding and how, somehow, she couldn't be marrying the "man of her dreams" with a $50 ring on her finger--not with "all the money my man makes" and so on and so forth.
not to mention that instead of thinking, "damn, maybe my man got hustled..."--which would have been my first thought--you proceed to cuss him out before you find out the whole story?
to his credit, he stayed pretty calm until the very end of the call, and not once did he react to his fiancee with the same fury she threw at him.
i hope "for richer or poorer" ain't in those vows, 'cause something tells me if homegirl got that stressed over the cost of her (possibly all kinds of conflicted) diamond, it could be a wrap if dude loses that well-paying gig.
i acknowledge that my analysis is showing, but her whole reaction spoke volumes about the ways women are taught to value themselves and their relationships in a materialistic culture. i wish them the best, but...
premise: fiancee takes her ring in to be resized and appraised. hubby-to-be knows about the resizing, but not the appraisal. fair enough, i guess.
prank: "jeweler" calls fiancee and tells her that the ring is a cubic zirconia, "order now for $19.99!"-type deal and is only worth about $50.
result: fiancee proceeds to lose her shit, including a 3-way call to hubby-to-be to have the "jeweler" tell him what he's found, with hilarious results.
...but after a few laughs, i was just disturbed.
fiancee was all hyped up about how much her father was spending on the wedding and how, somehow, she couldn't be marrying the "man of her dreams" with a $50 ring on her finger--not with "all the money my man makes" and so on and so forth.
not to mention that instead of thinking, "damn, maybe my man got hustled..."--which would have been my first thought--you proceed to cuss him out before you find out the whole story?
to his credit, he stayed pretty calm until the very end of the call, and not once did he react to his fiancee with the same fury she threw at him.
i hope "for richer or poorer" ain't in those vows, 'cause something tells me if homegirl got that stressed over the cost of her (possibly all kinds of conflicted) diamond, it could be a wrap if dude loses that well-paying gig.
i acknowledge that my analysis is showing, but her whole reaction spoke volumes about the ways women are taught to value themselves and their relationships in a materialistic culture. i wish them the best, but...
3.31.2009
boycott jamaica?
this was pointed out to me this morning via twitter.
it's the sweatshop argument all over again.
i have enough ties to lgbtq people that i completely understand where they're coming from. similarly, i don't want kids losing fingers in machinery or working 15 hour days before they're even old enough to drive a car.
but for many poor but beautiful places like jamaica, tourism is what drives the economy. resort jobs are "good" jobs. tourism also supports craftspeople and various vendors both in and outside the resorts.
so, if you're going to boycott jamaica, are you also going to provide safe spaces for lgbtq people there? a statement from the government is a nice start, but we all know how lightweight they can be. and the police in places like jamaica don't work like they do here.
a paradigm shift is what's needed, and that shift will only arise through education, empowerment, and doing the work. a boycott is only one sliver of the puzzle. until enough people come out and the numbers are known, not much will change.
have these people spoken to (do they even know of?) any jamaican lgbtq folks--ex patriots or not--who have done or are trying to do this kind of work to keep these people safe? couldn't they provide more clear cut, comprehensive ways to help?
i'd be more eager to hear from folks like staceyann chin about culturally knowledgeable ways to handle this. i don't see any faces of color--or faces, period--on that site. and that pisses me off a bit since we're talking about an island full of black folks.
there's a difference between taking your dollars out of an already bad situation, thereby creating a void that could possibly make the situation worse--as one commenter wisely noted--and actually promoting justice for those folks.
have you even thought that far?
or do you just want to feel like you're doing something?
please don't misunderstand me: i know people are dying over there, and it's awful. i hate to see my people falling for the okey doke around sexuality because it was not our original way. i love dancehall, but i don't wanna hear about somebody wanting to set fire to my little brother because of who he loves.
i want a change as much as these folks do.
however, i would hope that we'd know by now that this sort of neo-colonialist, paternalistic (we're gonna take your allowance!) "action" typically winds up amounting to a pile of bullshit.
it's the sweatshop argument all over again.
i have enough ties to lgbtq people that i completely understand where they're coming from. similarly, i don't want kids losing fingers in machinery or working 15 hour days before they're even old enough to drive a car.
but for many poor but beautiful places like jamaica, tourism is what drives the economy. resort jobs are "good" jobs. tourism also supports craftspeople and various vendors both in and outside the resorts.
so, if you're going to boycott jamaica, are you also going to provide safe spaces for lgbtq people there? a statement from the government is a nice start, but we all know how lightweight they can be. and the police in places like jamaica don't work like they do here.
a paradigm shift is what's needed, and that shift will only arise through education, empowerment, and doing the work. a boycott is only one sliver of the puzzle. until enough people come out and the numbers are known, not much will change.
have these people spoken to (do they even know of?) any jamaican lgbtq folks--ex patriots or not--who have done or are trying to do this kind of work to keep these people safe? couldn't they provide more clear cut, comprehensive ways to help?
i'd be more eager to hear from folks like staceyann chin about culturally knowledgeable ways to handle this. i don't see any faces of color--or faces, period--on that site. and that pisses me off a bit since we're talking about an island full of black folks.
there's a difference between taking your dollars out of an already bad situation, thereby creating a void that could possibly make the situation worse--as one commenter wisely noted--and actually promoting justice for those folks.
have you even thought that far?
or do you just want to feel like you're doing something?
please don't misunderstand me: i know people are dying over there, and it's awful. i hate to see my people falling for the okey doke around sexuality because it was not our original way. i love dancehall, but i don't wanna hear about somebody wanting to set fire to my little brother because of who he loves.
i want a change as much as these folks do.
however, i would hope that we'd know by now that this sort of neo-colonialist, paternalistic (we're gonna take your allowance!) "action" typically winds up amounting to a pile of bullshit.
3.16.2009
here we go again...
more fear-based conspiracy programming.*
i support(ed) obama and still do, within reason. whatever the consequence of his presidency, a mccain/palin one would have only sped things up (can you even comprehend the world if he kicked and that woman was in the chair??!?)
that said, obama could still fk up. it wouldn't break my heart if he did.
i'm also unnerved by the shot of the black boys drilling when they're not doing anything that you wouldn't see at a black frat step show. i'm a lot more worried about the jesus camp kids. white privilege still goes a long way.
even if this film is absolute truth, obama could still have a wake up call. he has time--whatever the consequences--to say "fk the system" and encourage others to do the same.
hell, if i remember correctly, kennedy towed the line for awhile, too. he made a decision to go the way he went; he didn't go in with guns blazing.
i am with the idea that all these financial ups and downs are orchestrated and that a handful of old white dudes are running the show. the military is dangerously overblown, and our economy is a joke mainly because a few people with a lot of money said "screw the public".
but guess what?
there are more of us than them.
people are coming to consciousness.
not everyone forgot history.
and the military ain't what it used to be--at least not in people power.
i'm not saying alex jones is completely wrong--just that information can be disseminated without a bunch of fear-mongering and with far more than a brief nod to constructive, solution-oriented thought.
*full disclosure: i watched about 40 min straight, then skipped to the end. will watch the full film later and come back, if necessary.
i support(ed) obama and still do, within reason. whatever the consequence of his presidency, a mccain/palin one would have only sped things up (can you even comprehend the world if he kicked and that woman was in the chair??!?)
that said, obama could still fk up. it wouldn't break my heart if he did.
i'm also unnerved by the shot of the black boys drilling when they're not doing anything that you wouldn't see at a black frat step show. i'm a lot more worried about the jesus camp kids. white privilege still goes a long way.
even if this film is absolute truth, obama could still have a wake up call. he has time--whatever the consequences--to say "fk the system" and encourage others to do the same.
hell, if i remember correctly, kennedy towed the line for awhile, too. he made a decision to go the way he went; he didn't go in with guns blazing.
i am with the idea that all these financial ups and downs are orchestrated and that a handful of old white dudes are running the show. the military is dangerously overblown, and our economy is a joke mainly because a few people with a lot of money said "screw the public".
but guess what?
there are more of us than them.
people are coming to consciousness.
not everyone forgot history.
and the military ain't what it used to be--at least not in people power.
i'm not saying alex jones is completely wrong--just that information can be disseminated without a bunch of fear-mongering and with far more than a brief nod to constructive, solution-oriented thought.
*full disclosure: i watched about 40 min straight, then skipped to the end. will watch the full film later and come back, if necessary.
9.25.2008
love the lord, but keep your common sense
i've been having some really interesting conversations lately...
one thing that came up today was the notion of calling folks on the jeezus train** "stupid".
while i saw his point, i hesitate to call anyone "stupid" for their faith. i could easily be called a lot of things for killing a chicken.
but...i'd definitely call it "misinformed".
it's my firm opinion that any time your god has you suffering on the planet s/he supposedly put you on, something's wrong. something's also wrong when just about any and everything that feels good/right is arbitrarily forbidden. for everyone. (e.g., premarital sex is WRONG, even if you're not a sex addict, even if you're in love and monogamous, even if it's a mutual source of comfort and connection, etc.)
bottom line: i could care less if you pray by standing on your head and shouting "shabadoo!" 10 times a day...but you better have food on your table and your kids better have a future.
if you're more worried about what's going to happen after you die than how you're living right now, that's just plain anti-common sense.
but it's a damned good way to keep "the people" down and out.
**there was reference to another convo about the difference between baby jesus and grown ass man jesus.
baby jesus is a good way to make folks take all the crap you throw at them...meek and mild and rosy cheeked and all that. christmas stories in hushed tones. but folks who can look grown jesus in the face understand that he was a man who was a political prisoner, revolutionary, sorcerer (let's be real), and--word to sarah palin--a community organizer.
followers of baby jesus tend to be, well, a lot more binary in their thinking. everything's black and white. all the social justice/liberally minded christians i've known have had a lot more to say about GAM jesus.
one thing that came up today was the notion of calling folks on the jeezus train** "stupid".
while i saw his point, i hesitate to call anyone "stupid" for their faith. i could easily be called a lot of things for killing a chicken.
but...i'd definitely call it "misinformed".
it's my firm opinion that any time your god has you suffering on the planet s/he supposedly put you on, something's wrong. something's also wrong when just about any and everything that feels good/right is arbitrarily forbidden. for everyone. (e.g., premarital sex is WRONG, even if you're not a sex addict, even if you're in love and monogamous, even if it's a mutual source of comfort and connection, etc.)
bottom line: i could care less if you pray by standing on your head and shouting "shabadoo!" 10 times a day...but you better have food on your table and your kids better have a future.
if you're more worried about what's going to happen after you die than how you're living right now, that's just plain anti-common sense.
but it's a damned good way to keep "the people" down and out.
**there was reference to another convo about the difference between baby jesus and grown ass man jesus.
baby jesus is a good way to make folks take all the crap you throw at them...meek and mild and rosy cheeked and all that. christmas stories in hushed tones. but folks who can look grown jesus in the face understand that he was a man who was a political prisoner, revolutionary, sorcerer (let's be real), and--word to sarah palin--a community organizer.
followers of baby jesus tend to be, well, a lot more binary in their thinking. everything's black and white. all the social justice/liberally minded christians i've known have had a lot more to say about GAM jesus.
8.23.2008
i will not apologize (c) the roots
to some degree, i agree with her.
on the other hand, hearing she's an israelite got my TKON antenna up...but more on that later.
first of all, i don't expect her to elaborate too much within 4 minutes. and i appreciate her honesty here. that's a reality for many of us (and men as well).
i think that this sista and i have some things in common. we are both lovers of our people, desiring of love, peace, and joy, trying to make our way in this crazy, crazy world. she's obviously a beautiful, intelligent woman, and i appreciate her being brave enough to speak her truth.
secondly, anyone who reads this blog probably knows by now that i don't understand how anyone takes anything in the bible literally.* it makes far more sense as metaphor. i tend to compare literal (mis)understandings of the bible to a group of folks finding a mangled copy of the matrix trilogy 1000 years from now, trying to fill in the plot holes, and calling it the one true religion.that said...
"blame the feminists" does not and never has flown with me. anyone who has ever seriously researched the movement easily discovers that the feminism this sista alludes to (particularly in its nascent stages) had SHIT to do with women of color. in fact, most white women leaders were neglectful towards, if they didn't outright shun, women of color.
women of color were forced to develop a parallel movement based on their own issues which some later called womanism. black, chicana, latina/hispanic, and native american women have always had different relationships to their men, and the movement for liberation often included things like resisting domestic violence, condemning the criminalization of their men and upholding their culture, language, and family structure.
black women may not have needed to be "liberated" from our men, but we did (and still do) need to liberate ourselves and our mates from the racism, classism, and sexism that plague our lives. again, history tells us that our men did not feel the need to lead women around by their necks until they were influenced by the followers of abraham.
i do agree that there are plenty of sweet, loving, wonderful sistas who act as the embodiments of nurturing, sweetness, compassion, and love. i'm one of them. but i don't see the problem with being "independent", particularly in this day and age.
the statistics are what they are, and the damage has been done. if our mates are late showing up to our lives, should we remain lonely, broke, and unfulfilled in the meantime? if we heal and come into our full selves, we can support and love our brothers while also saying, "come to me ready, or not at all" until they take charge of their own healing processes.
that, to me, is not counterrevolutionary, harsh, or "against god". the consequences of the dance of wounded souls are apparent each and every day. there are too many babies being born to parents who are ill prepared to care for, love, and nurture them. we need to stop, look, listen, and HEAL before we usher the ancestors back into the world.
the socioeconomic separation of black women and men is/was perpetuated by the white supremacist system that viewed women as less threatening (and allowed them to slip under the economic radar with things like domestic work & hair care) and criminalized the men.
i agree that we have fallen into the trap of keeping up with our WASP-y neighbors, but even that wasn't possible until the mid-late 60s and integration. before that, segregation--with all its ills--offered a social, economic, spiritual, and intellectual isolation that actually assisted the black community in many ways.
i just sighed at the commentary on lesbians. sexual abuse and the lack of understanding between the sexes that the author herself alludes to are probably far more salient factors in chosen homosexuality--which i think is blown largely out of proportion by similarly minded folks--than a lack of trust/faith in the black man.
sexuality is a continuum, gender roles are socially/culturally assigned, and some of us are just born that way. the faster we can accept those truths, the better.
having seen a lot of male israelites and very few of their women, i take many of their missives with a heavy dose of salt. i'd be reluctant to join up with any group that seems to only involve women as an afterthought and/or as a mere accompaniment to the male backbone of the organization.
*steps off soapbox*
thanks for your time.
*i do believe that the old testament was meant to be taken literally, HOWEVER, it was also speaking to the very specific culture, law and mores of a particular group of people. that group was pretty small, and most african ppl at the time didn't have jack to do with it. it's also quite difficult to understand in the absence of complete study of the torah (some of that's oral, y'all) and other jewish scriptures.
the new testament is a series of esoteric metaphors, largely meant for initiates. based on what i've seen/read, it was not taken literally in its day and should not be now. if you can dig deep enough to get to the meaning behind the metaphor, be my guest. but it's been my experience that the "keys to the kingdom" are far more accessible in metaphysical systems such as yoga, hinduism, orisa, vodou, akan, native american/indigenous spirituality, etc., and that's why they are perceived as a threat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)