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.
Showing posts with label wth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wth. Show all posts
4.11.2011
12.16.2010
uganda (reconciling ministries network)
lots of questions/issues here...
why are they so stuck on white american christians and their messages of christianity? wouldn't it make more sense to at least flock to some black folks for these "messages"?
what's with the emphasis on sex?
oh, and...gay folks forced hitler to kill...gay folks? ok.
there needs to be some education around the differences between fetishistic practices (the recurring poo-poo theme...) and other forms of sex/sexuality.
while we're at it, let's also get into discerning the difference between sexual abuse and what happens between safe, sane, consenting adults.
and, ultimately, is having more africans killing other africans (in africa, no less) in any way a good thing? guess no one thought about it that way. everyone just wants to help the children...
personally, i'd love to hear about what ugandans believed before the anglicans and the catholics came around, 'cause i have a hard time accepting the idea that homosexuality is somehow being thrust upon this nation, but the garbled "word" of a foreign, presumably white god wasn't. or is the bible more ugandan than i thought?
praying for true, healing enlightenment, respect for life, and a return to OUR ways.
9.15.2010
8.18.2010
false media
{title track}
tonight i had a bit of an epiphany about competition-based reality shows. i'm sure i'm not the only one, but here goes:
now, i understand that there are prizes, career advancement opportunities and various other carrots at stake. i also don't mean to imply that there's anything wrong with honing your craft and being the best at what you do. that's a great thing.
but, beyond that...
it should be quite obvious that there is no dearth of beautiful women in the world, so why do we need a "top" model?
if you can cook, and you enjoy cooking, why subject yourself to an insufferable prick of a man (or, at best, someone who enjoys playing that role), all manner of stress, and the scrutiny of millions of strangers just to "prove" how good you are?
see my point?
talent isn't rare. giftedness isn't rare.*
there are many of us on this planet. each of us is born in a particular corner of said planet, with these gifts, talents, and abilities.
please understand: expansion and exploration is a wondrous thing. i'm not saying spend your life in a one horse town if that's not what you want to do. sometimes you're not born at home. go out, see the world, have a great time.
but, in that world-seeing, if you find a niche that contains family, friends, joy and abundance, what does all the stress and the scrutiny matter? what are the real reasons we get caught up in all this competition and hierarchical thinking?**
what's wrong with being an awesome force in your community, shining so brightly that you bring the world to you instead of forcing yourself on the world?
how many bloggers who make livings from the breakthroughs and breakdowns are living vicariously instead of using their talents to the fullest? conversely, what does it say when the only viable outlet for gifted satirists and social commentators is a sort of vicious voyeurism?
there is no need to create false hierarchies and artificially unattainable goals. we have what we need.
who has the audacity to tell us that we don't? m.a.c.? nike? walmart?
please. those things should be icing on the cake, not the alpha and omega of our lives.
let's get real. for real.
*dr. estes makes this point beautifully, often and well.
**i highly recommend reading yurugu. one caveat: i do not see euro-descended folks in the 21st century as a monolith; i firmly understand that there are whitefolks who "get" it. that said, "getting it" almost invariably involves an immersion in either an african culture or one (e.g. native american/indigenous, asian, etc) that is fewer degrees removed from humanity's ancient african ancestry. also keep in mind that much of what we think of as "european culture" is western, anglo-saxon and/or northern european. eastern europe and the moorish-influenced nations have some marked differences.
tonight i had a bit of an epiphany about competition-based reality shows. i'm sure i'm not the only one, but here goes:
if there are enough top models/top chefs/brilliant designers/gifted decorators (and the list goes on) to perpetuate several years worth of these shows, why does it matter who's the "top"?
now, i understand that there are prizes, career advancement opportunities and various other carrots at stake. i also don't mean to imply that there's anything wrong with honing your craft and being the best at what you do. that's a great thing.
but, beyond that...
it should be quite obvious that there is no dearth of beautiful women in the world, so why do we need a "top" model?
if you can cook, and you enjoy cooking, why subject yourself to an insufferable prick of a man (or, at best, someone who enjoys playing that role), all manner of stress, and the scrutiny of millions of strangers just to "prove" how good you are?
see my point?
talent isn't rare. giftedness isn't rare.*
there are many of us on this planet. each of us is born in a particular corner of said planet, with these gifts, talents, and abilities.
please understand: expansion and exploration is a wondrous thing. i'm not saying spend your life in a one horse town if that's not what you want to do. sometimes you're not born at home. go out, see the world, have a great time.
but, in that world-seeing, if you find a niche that contains family, friends, joy and abundance, what does all the stress and the scrutiny matter? what are the real reasons we get caught up in all this competition and hierarchical thinking?**
what's wrong with being an awesome force in your community, shining so brightly that you bring the world to you instead of forcing yourself on the world?
how many bloggers who make livings from the breakthroughs and breakdowns are living vicariously instead of using their talents to the fullest? conversely, what does it say when the only viable outlet for gifted satirists and social commentators is a sort of vicious voyeurism?
there is no need to create false hierarchies and artificially unattainable goals. we have what we need.
who has the audacity to tell us that we don't? m.a.c.? nike? walmart?
please. those things should be icing on the cake, not the alpha and omega of our lives.
let's get real. for real.
*dr. estes makes this point beautifully, often and well.
**i highly recommend reading yurugu. one caveat: i do not see euro-descended folks in the 21st century as a monolith; i firmly understand that there are whitefolks who "get" it. that said, "getting it" almost invariably involves an immersion in either an african culture or one (e.g. native american/indigenous, asian, etc) that is fewer degrees removed from humanity's ancient african ancestry. also keep in mind that much of what we think of as "european culture" is western, anglo-saxon and/or northern european. eastern europe and the moorish-influenced nations have some marked differences.
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.
2.15.2010
the rape tunnel
{trigger warning - source material discusses rape in a dismissive, denying manner}
{addendum: apparently, it's a hoax. but the sentiment still stands.}
art should heal.
promote discussion.
uplift.
agitate.
inspire.
of course, art often depicts pain.
sometimes the artist opts for some level of self-harm. not big on that, but they are the purveyor of their domain.
that said, i would maintain that art should not hurt the observer--unless it is in the context of revealing a stark truth or reality in the interest of unpacking, analyzing, and reevaluating said truth for the betterment of the community/society as a whole.
but since when is deliberately setting out to rape someone art? and what's with the cavalier attitude?
um, what?
cloaking your misogyny and misanthropy behind "art" is...pretty fking lame, dude.
{addendum: apparently, it's a hoax. but the sentiment still stands.}
art should heal.
promote discussion.
uplift.
agitate.
inspire.
of course, art often depicts pain.
sometimes the artist opts for some level of self-harm. not big on that, but they are the purveyor of their domain.
that said, i would maintain that art should not hurt the observer--unless it is in the context of revealing a stark truth or reality in the interest of unpacking, analyzing, and reevaluating said truth for the betterment of the community/society as a whole.
but since when is deliberately setting out to rape someone art? and what's with the cavalier attitude?
[Sheila Zareno] But rape is way more extreme than [his last project which involved] a punch to the face. Is your intention to ruin people’s lives?
["artist" Richard Whitehurst] Possibly. I’m not necessarily concerned with the positive or negative effects of this project so long as there is some effect on people’s lives. I’ve merely set up a situation where there is potential to impact people in meaningful ways. Maybe I won’t be able to rape everyone who crawls through the tunnel, but the door is open for all kinds of scenarios; rape, serious injury, maybe even death. I might even get arrested.
Right now the installation isn’t even complete, and I’ve riled up a substantial portion of the local population. The installation as an idea is powerful enough itself.
um, what?
cloaking your misogyny and misanthropy behind "art" is...pretty fking lame, dude.
2.04.2010
ain't no half steppin'
{first, let me preface this quasi-rant by saying i do sincerely hope those that transitioned as a result of what appears to be a very unfortunate accident are at peace, and that their families are comforted at this time.}
sigh.
that's all i could do when i heard about the james arthur ray incident this morning. somehow i didn't hear about it at all back in october. i have a love/hate relationship with the news...
aside from the fact that the secret is woefully incomplete in its approach--as noted by imakhu mwt shekemet in her description of her cowrie blessings book--this is an example of what happens when cultural misappropriation and white privilege go terribly wrong.
ray's assertion that he "sought out" these methods does not mean he knew the proper prayers, incantations and ritual items to ensure that everyone involved in the ritual would be safe. not everyone who seeks knowledge is taught.
his website states that a "native american expert" was involved in the construction of the lodge, but...did ray divine and/or note omens to discern an auspicious time? invoke the proper energies? or did he just learn how to build the structure?
also a little interested in how he's drawing folks to a $9,000-a-head retreat but doesn't have bail money.
other than the loss of life and injuries incurred, my concern is that a centuries-old tradition of healing and renewal will now be maligned because of the actions of folks too arrogant to realize they didn't know what the fk they were doing.
or, if you prefer a more legalized statement:
sigh.
that's all i could do when i heard about the james arthur ray incident this morning. somehow i didn't hear about it at all back in october. i have a love/hate relationship with the news...
aside from the fact that the secret is woefully incomplete in its approach--as noted by imakhu mwt shekemet in her description of her cowrie blessings book--this is an example of what happens when cultural misappropriation and white privilege go terribly wrong.
ray's assertion that he "sought out" these methods does not mean he knew the proper prayers, incantations and ritual items to ensure that everyone involved in the ritual would be safe. not everyone who seeks knowledge is taught.
his website states that a "native american expert" was involved in the construction of the lodge, but...did ray divine and/or note omens to discern an auspicious time? invoke the proper energies? or did he just learn how to build the structure?
also a little interested in how he's drawing folks to a $9,000-a-head retreat but doesn't have bail money.
other than the loss of life and injuries incurred, my concern is that a centuries-old tradition of healing and renewal will now be maligned because of the actions of folks too arrogant to realize they didn't know what the fk they were doing.
or, if you prefer a more legalized statement:
There certainly may be potential criminal exposure for Mr. Ray and others in this case as well. Among the questions on prosecutorial review would be -- whether James A. Ray intentionally and/or knowingly inflicted harm upon retreat members -- and whether he was competent to hold such an event in the first place or fraudulently misrepresented his capabilities for his own personal profit...
Such issues seem to be inherent in the realm of self-appointed spiritual leaders.
In short, one cannot attempt to monetarily benefit from the exploitation of spiritual practices of other cultures without taking reasonable precautions to assure the safety of paying participants. A person such as Mr. Ray cannot self-appoint himself as the guru, adapt his own method of spiritual enlightenment and be insulated from the general laws of negligence that apply to such gatherings. The lack of medical personnel present, as well as the apparent disconnect between reality and what Ray saw as spiritual enlightenment bear this out. Ignorance can result in fatalities or severe injuries when foresight and exercise of due care are lacking. In Sedona, Arizona, thus far it appears the evidence shows that it was.
12.08.2009
tiger by the tail
i'm sick of the tiger woods thing.
there are many reasons, but here's the main one: i still feel like we're having half assed, immature discussions based on the wrong questions. it's time to go deeper; ask the questions at the root instead of getting stuck on the leaves.
first and foremost, no one outside a relationship knows what the folks in the relationship have decided to put up with from each other. therefore, getting all righteously indignant about who's a whore/skank/slut and who ain't is irrelevant.*
the world has changed, is changing, as we speak. with that, the way we live and love is changing.
wouldn't it make more sense to begin to define loving in a more personal, intimate way and then build supportive communities around what works? what grows your family and contributes to the expansion and edification of your heart, mind and spirit might not look like anyone else's situation...and shouldn't have to.
what many of us are taught to "strive for" is built on jacked up gender roles, rapidly shifting socioeconomic standards, and paternalistic abrahamaic religious mores. in the western ideal, cis men and cis women are essentially brought up to be polar opposites of one another--opposites that are supposed to bond, procreate and live the (american/euro) dream for the good of (old man) god, forever and ever, amen.
that's a pretty small box to fit into, but plenty of folks are still trying. and the pressure to conform is leading to all kinds of lies and heartbreak.
the white, western world is now re-learning what many ancient cultures have known for centuries: all the things surrounding love and attraction happen within fluid continuums, not in rigid categories. manhood and womanhood are meant to blend into and compliment one another, with the true emphasis being on full personhood and soulhood. yes, you need an egg and a sperm to create more human life, but the binaries typically stop there.
but we're talking infidelity, so, for the record, here's my stance: if you are in an intimate relationship with only one other person, and both parties have explicitly agreed that said relationship is sexually monogamous, if one party has sex with someone else without their partner's consent, that's not cool.**
yes, "emotional affairs" are also possible, but with a sketchier premise that begins to delve into insecurities, lack of communication, arbitrary limits on the range and manifestation of human emotion...in short, another damn blog altogether.
so, someone cheats--whatever that means in your world. what you do about it is your business. my point is, there are other, more relevant questions besides, "why do _______ cheat??!?!?", such as:
how long does it take to openly and honestly discuss a problem? e.g., an "emotional" affair can happen on your desk or over the phone, but takes time to build steam. physical cheating takes effort: you're going out, meeting, take clothes off...etc. when and how are you dealing with your primary partner?
where do women learn to "let it slide as long as [zie-she-he] comes 'home'"? conversely, where do men learn that the appropriate response is to hurt/maim/kill the other party?
why is the first assumption that it's all about sex? people have many needs.
what barriers exist to dissolving a relationship where you feel disrespected? are they concrete/material? cultural? spiritual?
consider the money and power factor. what made tiger think these women would stay quiet when telling would also bring notoriety? what made him think his wife would stay (she'll be well taken care of either way, apparently)?
see where this is going?
ultimately, reducing these issues to "men will be boys" and "mistresses are whores" is silly, at best. if we're gonna talk about it, let's really talk about it.
*from what little i've read/heard, elin seems pissed, so it's probably safe to say the relationship was not an open one. still, the high horses are startling. none of us know the other women any better than we know her. plus, as someone mentioned earlier on my twitter feed, there are babies to think of.
**essentially, somewhere between 18-25 or so, you learn that this needs to be made crystal clear if you intend to get what you need out of the relationship and/or have a case if someone fucks up later. it's starting to sound like too many folks make assumptions about the nature of a situation and wind up getting hurt. communication is fundamental, at all stages. in addition, i abhor the "if you're not married, you can't cheat" crowd. how silly do you have to be...
there are many reasons, but here's the main one: i still feel like we're having half assed, immature discussions based on the wrong questions. it's time to go deeper; ask the questions at the root instead of getting stuck on the leaves.
first and foremost, no one outside a relationship knows what the folks in the relationship have decided to put up with from each other. therefore, getting all righteously indignant about who's a whore/skank/slut and who ain't is irrelevant.*
the world has changed, is changing, as we speak. with that, the way we live and love is changing.
wouldn't it make more sense to begin to define loving in a more personal, intimate way and then build supportive communities around what works? what grows your family and contributes to the expansion and edification of your heart, mind and spirit might not look like anyone else's situation...and shouldn't have to.
what many of us are taught to "strive for" is built on jacked up gender roles, rapidly shifting socioeconomic standards, and paternalistic abrahamaic religious mores. in the western ideal, cis men and cis women are essentially brought up to be polar opposites of one another--opposites that are supposed to bond, procreate and live the (american/euro) dream for the good of (old man) god, forever and ever, amen.
that's a pretty small box to fit into, but plenty of folks are still trying. and the pressure to conform is leading to all kinds of lies and heartbreak.
the white, western world is now re-learning what many ancient cultures have known for centuries: all the things surrounding love and attraction happen within fluid continuums, not in rigid categories. manhood and womanhood are meant to blend into and compliment one another, with the true emphasis being on full personhood and soulhood. yes, you need an egg and a sperm to create more human life, but the binaries typically stop there.
but we're talking infidelity, so, for the record, here's my stance: if you are in an intimate relationship with only one other person, and both parties have explicitly agreed that said relationship is sexually monogamous, if one party has sex with someone else without their partner's consent, that's not cool.**
yes, "emotional affairs" are also possible, but with a sketchier premise that begins to delve into insecurities, lack of communication, arbitrary limits on the range and manifestation of human emotion...in short, another damn blog altogether.
so, someone cheats--whatever that means in your world. what you do about it is your business. my point is, there are other, more relevant questions besides, "why do _______ cheat??!?!?", such as:
how long does it take to openly and honestly discuss a problem? e.g., an "emotional" affair can happen on your desk or over the phone, but takes time to build steam. physical cheating takes effort: you're going out, meeting, take clothes off...etc. when and how are you dealing with your primary partner?
where do women learn to "let it slide as long as [zie-she-he] comes 'home'"? conversely, where do men learn that the appropriate response is to hurt/maim/kill the other party?
why is the first assumption that it's all about sex? people have many needs.
what barriers exist to dissolving a relationship where you feel disrespected? are they concrete/material? cultural? spiritual?
consider the money and power factor. what made tiger think these women would stay quiet when telling would also bring notoriety? what made him think his wife would stay (she'll be well taken care of either way, apparently)?
see where this is going?
ultimately, reducing these issues to "men will be boys" and "mistresses are whores" is silly, at best. if we're gonna talk about it, let's really talk about it.
*from what little i've read/heard, elin seems pissed, so it's probably safe to say the relationship was not an open one. still, the high horses are startling. none of us know the other women any better than we know her. plus, as someone mentioned earlier on my twitter feed, there are babies to think of.
**essentially, somewhere between 18-25 or so, you learn that this needs to be made crystal clear if you intend to get what you need out of the relationship and/or have a case if someone fucks up later. it's starting to sound like too many folks make assumptions about the nature of a situation and wind up getting hurt. communication is fundamental, at all stages. in addition, i abhor the "if you're not married, you can't cheat" crowd. how silly do you have to be...
12.07.2009
sorry, kid, no toys for you...
this is the latest article i've seen in a rather disturbing trend: some charities are excluding the children of undocumented immigrants* in their xmas programs.
so it's come to this?
instead of examining the real reasons for immigration...
instead of tearing down that insipid wall at the border...
instead of focusing on growing homelessness, hunger and unemployment for all of us...
we're just gonna be all grinch-y about who gets toys and who doesn't and make folks feel worse about themselves that way?
yeah. that's really christlike, y'all.
*no person is illegal. also see no one is illegal - vancouver. some of the same factors are at play in the u.s. argument over immigration...
so it's come to this?
instead of examining the real reasons for immigration...
instead of tearing down that insipid wall at the border...
instead of focusing on growing homelessness, hunger and unemployment for all of us...
we're just gonna be all grinch-y about who gets toys and who doesn't and make folks feel worse about themselves that way?
yeah. that's really christlike, y'all.
*no person is illegal. also see no one is illegal - vancouver. some of the same factors are at play in the u.s. argument over immigration...
11.24.2009
the big picture
*warning: graphic, possibly triggering video linked to "sigh"*
sigh.
this is the second time in recent weeks that i've seen the "planned parenthood is killing us!" thing.
i'm already sick of it.
so...how come you get to appeal to folks' emotions while maintaining absolute silence about how black women also have less access to full information about reproductive health and adequate mental health services?
hell, even if you do have insurance or whatever, the u.s. ain't all that great with infant mortality rates compared with the rest of the industrialized world.
what about the foster "care" system that's chock full of kids of color that no one's adopting/caring for? they're getting funneled into the military and worse, you know.
if you really care about black women, their health and their babies, this misses many crucial points.
no one--and i mean no one--can talk about stopping abortion without simultaneously stopping domestic violence, sexual abuse, poverty, rape and a whole host of other issues that plague black women.
we also need accurate information about our bodies so that we can fully care for ourselves.
can't have that both ways, either.
yes, i am firmly pro-choice. when, how, and whether a woman becomes a mother are issues that are between that woman, the deity of her understanding, and her healthcare provider(s). period.
but that has nothing to do with why things like this piss me off so much.
to me, messages and media like this do not feel any more tied to my womanly welfare than ones that would suggest i need to tie myself to the nearest brotha and hang on for the ride. actually, they seem like a backdoor way to keep women barefoot and pregnant. or trapped in the good old "virgin/whore" dichotomy. maybe under the thumb of male dominance and all other sorts of nasty oppressions.
yes, the ghost of eugenics is an issue, but it hasn't been a {true} social movement since about 100 years ago. even if i give you the benefit of the doubt on that one, we also know that living in a racist, white supremacist context has resulted in all kinds of psychological and spiritual maladies that we have not yet dealt with effectively as a people.
what does bringing more babies into the equation--at this moment in time--truly solve?
did you know pregnancy and birth can be triggering for women with abusive pasts? are you only paying attention to that after they've become pregnant, or are you trying to save girls who are suffering now?
yes, i love children. without a doubt, they are beautiful, wondrous blessings. when you're prepared for them.
and i'm not just talking finances.
the moment you "save" a baby only to leave that child's mother in the lurch when she needs support, higher education, guidance, employment, child care, shelter, and all the things necessary to raise a child well in this world, you're dooming that baby anyway.
but i guess none of that matters.
....
addendum: for more on this topic, including stats and such, click here.
sigh.
this is the second time in recent weeks that i've seen the "planned parenthood is killing us!" thing.
i'm already sick of it.
so...how come you get to appeal to folks' emotions while maintaining absolute silence about how black women also have less access to full information about reproductive health and adequate mental health services?
hell, even if you do have insurance or whatever, the u.s. ain't all that great with infant mortality rates compared with the rest of the industrialized world.
what about the foster "care" system that's chock full of kids of color that no one's adopting/caring for? they're getting funneled into the military and worse, you know.
if you really care about black women, their health and their babies, this misses many crucial points.
no one--and i mean no one--can talk about stopping abortion without simultaneously stopping domestic violence, sexual abuse, poverty, rape and a whole host of other issues that plague black women.
we also need accurate information about our bodies so that we can fully care for ourselves.
can't have that both ways, either.
yes, i am firmly pro-choice. when, how, and whether a woman becomes a mother are issues that are between that woman, the deity of her understanding, and her healthcare provider(s). period.
but that has nothing to do with why things like this piss me off so much.
to me, messages and media like this do not feel any more tied to my womanly welfare than ones that would suggest i need to tie myself to the nearest brotha and hang on for the ride. actually, they seem like a backdoor way to keep women barefoot and pregnant. or trapped in the good old "virgin/whore" dichotomy. maybe under the thumb of male dominance and all other sorts of nasty oppressions.
yes, the ghost of eugenics is an issue, but it hasn't been a {true} social movement since about 100 years ago. even if i give you the benefit of the doubt on that one, we also know that living in a racist, white supremacist context has resulted in all kinds of psychological and spiritual maladies that we have not yet dealt with effectively as a people.
what does bringing more babies into the equation--at this moment in time--truly solve?
did you know pregnancy and birth can be triggering for women with abusive pasts? are you only paying attention to that after they've become pregnant, or are you trying to save girls who are suffering now?
yes, i love children. without a doubt, they are beautiful, wondrous blessings. when you're prepared for them.
and i'm not just talking finances.
the moment you "save" a baby only to leave that child's mother in the lurch when she needs support, higher education, guidance, employment, child care, shelter, and all the things necessary to raise a child well in this world, you're dooming that baby anyway.
but i guess none of that matters.
....
addendum: for more on this topic, including stats and such, click here.
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...
8.19.2009
argh.
bob herbert on healthcare "reform".
once again, this country is shooting itself in the foot because of the lies it continues to perpetuate and the prejudices it feeds...
once again, this country is shooting itself in the foot because of the lies it continues to perpetuate and the prejudices it feeds...
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...
6.11.2009
can't stop, won't stop
i'm not the only one calling out the foolishness.
people, we have got to pool our resources in order to protect our stories, our sacred places and things, and our culture. if we don't, it will be co-opted or erased in the great sea of eurocentric universalism.
people, we have got to pool our resources in order to protect our stories, our sacred places and things, and our culture. if we don't, it will be co-opted or erased in the great sea of eurocentric universalism.
6.07.2009
5.29.2009
it isn't about marriage. seriously.
thinking about the marriage equality issue again...
frankly, it's time to reframe the argument.
every article i see on the topic seems to be progressively devolving into nitpicky, almost juvenile squabbling. when that happens, you have to wonder: what are people really angry about?
if you can agree that marriage is, essentially, a familial contract, it's obvious that these contracts provide very specific bureaucratic privileges which can also tie into a certain amount of class privilege*.
contracts aren't about gender or religion, they're simply contracts, right? so any two consenting adults should have the right to enter into said contract.
to be fair, everyone--heterosexual or otherwise--involved in these contracts should be calling them civil unions. 'cause that's what they are.
let's not forget that the church doesn't marry you. the preacherman's (or woman) power is invested by the state, even if you don't have the marriage ceremony at the courthouse.
i have not heard one person argue that churches/spiritual orgs should change their practices, and if i did, i would call him/her an idiot. from a religious standpoint, marriage can most certainly be defined as a covenant between a man and a woman. i may not agree with you, but we can coexist. that's cool.
can you see how, when you start sifting through the messy details, marriage begins to emerge as something else entirely?
in my humble opinion, it is beginning to seem that the institution of marriage defined as a heterosexual relationship between one man and one woman may be one of the last tangible vestiges of the "america is and always has been a christian nation" myth.
when many of these state constitutions and statutes were being written, the myth was accepted as fact by the rich, white, (presumably) heterosexual males who wrote them.
furthermore, there are many people in the mainstream culture (which is already feeling threatened) who cannot abide the debunking of this myth.
maybe, on a very visceral level, folks are mad because the collective consciousness that does not subscribe to the western european, patriarchal context will not go away. understandably, those who are fully invested in that context--by birth or acculturation--are fighting to hold it up in all its oppressive, abusive, insanity-creating glory.
listen. many sane people have been trying to break this to you for years, but apparently it still has not sunken in. let me reiterate:
while the first europeans to step on what is now called american soil may have been fundamentalist protestants and catholics, many of the colored people who were subdued, captured and otherwise oppressed by those "founders" lied to you. they feigned adoption of your god in order to ensure their survival.
the indigenous people of this land were not christian.
the west africans who came over on the slave ships were not christian. it took generations--in the colonies as well as in the caribbean--to even nominally stamp out the memory of those traditions, and they were still never fully eradicated.
and so on.
to you, the great melting pot is a proud accomplishment. to many of us "others", it is a euphemism for cultural erasure.
as wade davis said, "other cultures are not failed attempts at being you. they are unique manifestations of the human spirit." i would venture that that statement applies to human sexuality as well.
again i ask: what are we really arguing about?
*marriage, for many upper and middle class folks (or those aspiring to the middle/upper class) equals legitimacy. our society further acknowledges the legitimacy of this contract with all the benefits mentioned above. simply put, married people are special. if you make them less special in any way--since us little folks in a big, capitalist world so rarely come to understand our true worth beyond these kinds of benefits--it's a threat. see how that works? part of how they distract us & turn us against one another...
frankly, it's time to reframe the argument.
every article i see on the topic seems to be progressively devolving into nitpicky, almost juvenile squabbling. when that happens, you have to wonder: what are people really angry about?
if you can agree that marriage is, essentially, a familial contract, it's obvious that these contracts provide very specific bureaucratic privileges which can also tie into a certain amount of class privilege*.
contracts aren't about gender or religion, they're simply contracts, right? so any two consenting adults should have the right to enter into said contract.
to be fair, everyone--heterosexual or otherwise--involved in these contracts should be calling them civil unions. 'cause that's what they are.
let's not forget that the church doesn't marry you. the preacherman's (or woman) power is invested by the state, even if you don't have the marriage ceremony at the courthouse.
i have not heard one person argue that churches/spiritual orgs should change their practices, and if i did, i would call him/her an idiot. from a religious standpoint, marriage can most certainly be defined as a covenant between a man and a woman. i may not agree with you, but we can coexist. that's cool.
can you see how, when you start sifting through the messy details, marriage begins to emerge as something else entirely?
in my humble opinion, it is beginning to seem that the institution of marriage defined as a heterosexual relationship between one man and one woman may be one of the last tangible vestiges of the "america is and always has been a christian nation" myth.
when many of these state constitutions and statutes were being written, the myth was accepted as fact by the rich, white, (presumably) heterosexual males who wrote them.
furthermore, there are many people in the mainstream culture (which is already feeling threatened) who cannot abide the debunking of this myth.
maybe, on a very visceral level, folks are mad because the collective consciousness that does not subscribe to the western european, patriarchal context will not go away. understandably, those who are fully invested in that context--by birth or acculturation--are fighting to hold it up in all its oppressive, abusive, insanity-creating glory.
listen. many sane people have been trying to break this to you for years, but apparently it still has not sunken in. let me reiterate:
while the first europeans to step on what is now called american soil may have been fundamentalist protestants and catholics, many of the colored people who were subdued, captured and otherwise oppressed by those "founders" lied to you. they feigned adoption of your god in order to ensure their survival.
the indigenous people of this land were not christian.
the west africans who came over on the slave ships were not christian. it took generations--in the colonies as well as in the caribbean--to even nominally stamp out the memory of those traditions, and they were still never fully eradicated.
and so on.
to you, the great melting pot is a proud accomplishment. to many of us "others", it is a euphemism for cultural erasure.
as wade davis said, "other cultures are not failed attempts at being you. they are unique manifestations of the human spirit." i would venture that that statement applies to human sexuality as well.
again i ask: what are we really arguing about?
*marriage, for many upper and middle class folks (or those aspiring to the middle/upper class) equals legitimacy. our society further acknowledges the legitimacy of this contract with all the benefits mentioned above. simply put, married people are special. if you make them less special in any way--since us little folks in a big, capitalist world so rarely come to understand our true worth beyond these kinds of benefits--it's a threat. see how that works? part of how they distract us & turn us against one another...
4.30.2009
on: swine flu
while i appreciate the human toll the swine flu has taken and may take over the coming weeks, it is a good reminder that we have not defeated or subdued nature, and as long as we live on this planet, we will not and should not do so.
germs are here to stay--whether we live in the richest, most technologically advanced society or the darkest slum.
death is part of life. so is illness.
yes, things have gotten better (here), but we also have to understand that there are plenty of folks across the world who are still dying in droves from things we don't even think about anymore (e.g. tb, measles, dysentery...)
but, if it worries you, here's the bottom line:
wash your hands, especially before you eat.
stay home if you're sick.
take proper precautions if your immune system is compromised.
...just like you would if a cold were going around the office. or a stomach flu.
don't allow the doomsday prophets and tamiflu pushers to warp your perspective. live your life.
oh, and you might want to google "factory farming" and "nafta flu", too.
stay well!
germs are here to stay--whether we live in the richest, most technologically advanced society or the darkest slum.
death is part of life. so is illness.
yes, things have gotten better (here), but we also have to understand that there are plenty of folks across the world who are still dying in droves from things we don't even think about anymore (e.g. tb, measles, dysentery...)
but, if it worries you, here's the bottom line:
wash your hands, especially before you eat.
stay home if you're sick.
take proper precautions if your immune system is compromised.
...just like you would if a cold were going around the office. or a stomach flu.
don't allow the doomsday prophets and tamiflu pushers to warp your perspective. live your life.
oh, and you might want to google "factory farming" and "nafta flu", too.
stay well!
4.15.2009
feeling my fire
i really am not one to entertain a whole lot of bullshit.
part of it is the truth-telling that comes with my pre-moon mood mix, but i am also in the process of burning what doesn't work so that i can clear a path to what will work.
one thing i was reminded of recently: you should never make someone responsible for your fantasy of them.
meaning, if you have this preconceived image or notion of someone, you need to either (a) dispel said notions before you enter into a deeper acquaintance with the person or (b) keep your notions, but be fully prepared for disappointment in case the reality is far different.
no (self actualized) person is going to be responsible for some personality they didn't create.
life is not a romantic comedy. do not make assumptions, and when people tell you who they are, believe them.
part of it is the truth-telling that comes with my pre-moon mood mix, but i am also in the process of burning what doesn't work so that i can clear a path to what will work.
one thing i was reminded of recently: you should never make someone responsible for your fantasy of them.
meaning, if you have this preconceived image or notion of someone, you need to either (a) dispel said notions before you enter into a deeper acquaintance with the person or (b) keep your notions, but be fully prepared for disappointment in case the reality is far different.
no (self actualized) person is going to be responsible for some personality they didn't create.
life is not a romantic comedy. do not make assumptions, and when people tell you who they are, believe them.
4.06.2009
what part of illegal don't you understand?
i'm digging this.
(unfortunately i can't literally "digg" it 'cause you've gotta sign up or something & i'm tired of arbitrarily signing up for crap, etc.)
i've been saying for years that america's kicking itself in the ass by refusing to properly educate its own kids simply because some of them don't look like kids we think should/need to be educated and/or are worthy of education.
...but we'll come up with all kinds of programs to get folks from elsewhere to do what we refuse to teach our young people to do. people who often take advantage of the opportunity to better themselves, then go back home.
it's really very simple: either you give everybody a true shot at the opportunity you're always going on about, or be honest and say it ain't here--unless you can pay for it.
it costs a lot more to keep someone in prison for 20-30 years than it does to provide them with a college education and/or job training. so what's the problem? who wouldn't want as many productive citizens as possible?
oh, right.
get outta line, and we'll toss you in jail with the quickness, age notwithstanding.
(unfortunately i can't literally "digg" it 'cause you've gotta sign up or something & i'm tired of arbitrarily signing up for crap, etc.)
i've been saying for years that america's kicking itself in the ass by refusing to properly educate its own kids simply because some of them don't look like kids we think should/need to be educated and/or are worthy of education.
...but we'll come up with all kinds of programs to get folks from elsewhere to do what we refuse to teach our young people to do. people who often take advantage of the opportunity to better themselves, then go back home.
it's really very simple: either you give everybody a true shot at the opportunity you're always going on about, or be honest and say it ain't here--unless you can pay for it.
it costs a lot more to keep someone in prison for 20-30 years than it does to provide them with a college education and/or job training. so what's the problem? who wouldn't want as many productive citizens as possible?
oh, right.
get outta line, and we'll toss you in jail with the quickness, age notwithstanding.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)