Much has been said about the new movie 'Bridesmaids', and most if not all of it seems to be good, as the movie went on to gross well over the 24.2 million that was hoped for. Don't get me wrong, I am really happy that a movie with women holding down the fort was a hit in the box office... I'm still not going to see though.
I normally get down with Kristen Wiig, but I have to let this one burn...
From the jump I had a feeling there wasn't going to be much diversity in this movie at all, and I wasn't wrong. The minute I saw the movie poster, I knew. Yes, Maya Rudolph is a woman of color, but as usual with her, that is something that is left to the viewer to hopefully assume. Nobody outright comes out ever and says, Maya is a woman of color. They just don't. Is that my problem? Nope. That's something for Rudolph to figure out on her own.
For some reason, I guess I held out hope that maybe the trailer would have more people of color. The trailer I saw did not have people of color in any role except for in the background, as if they were shadows or something. That bothers me.
Another thing I noticed was the circle of friends, minus Rudolph, is explicitly white. Statistically, this is not far off from being accurate. Studies show that after high school, most Caucasians and Blacks will have very few friends of a different race in their circle, if at all in some cases. It's absolutely tragic (and a bit pathetic) but it's true and accurate. However, for a woman of color to not have any POCs as friends is odd. She has no cousins, no relatives, no friends who are of color? None?
Recently, while catching up on some interesting flicks, one film of note I'd seen several times before, was the comedic-horror flick, Teeth. A seemingly feminist manifesto of sorts (written and directed by a man, no less) about a young virgin named Dawn with a mean case of Vagina dentata, whose delicates snap, bite, and dismember any man trying to violate its orifice without her consent, including a male gynecologist who tries to molest her upon learning it's Dawn's first experience being examined. I started imagining the power every woman would have if her vagina were able to reject unwanted penis forced upon her during an attack or wayward penis that played games and whispered sweet nothings and lies to it while nestled inside of her... Interesting concept when told from the perspective of the movie.
"Daughters aren’t to be independent. They’re not to act outside the scope of their father. As long as they’re under the authority of their fathers, fathers have the ability to nullify or not the oaths and the vows. Daughters can’t just go out independently and say, ‘I’m going to marry whoever I want.’ No. The father has the ability to say, ‘No, I’m sorry, that has to be approved by me.’”
No, the above quote is not from 1910. It is not even from 1960. No, it is not from those days long ago when the only role that a woman could conceive of filling was that of a wife and mother. Nope. This was a recent quote from Doug Phillips, founder of the Vision Forum, a leading proponent of the Christian Patriarchy Movement.
Vision Forum Ministries is, according to its Statements of Doctrine, “committed to affirming the historic faith of Biblical Christianity,” with special attention to the historical faith found in the book of Genesis, when God created Eve as a “helper” to Adam. According to Christian Patriarchy, marriage bonds man (the symbol of Christ) to woman (the symbol of the Church). It’s a model that situates husbands and fathers in a position of absolute power: If a woman disobeys her “master,” whether father or husband, she’s defying God. Thus, women in the Christian Patriarchy Movement aren’t just stay-at-home mothers -- they’re stay-at-home daughters as well. And many of them wouldn’t have it any other way.
The stay-at-home-daughters movement, which is promoted by Vision Forum, encourages young girls and single women to forgo college and outside employment in favor of training as “keepers at home” until they marry. Young women pursuing their own ambitions and goals are viewed as selfish and anti-family; marriage is not a choice or one piece of a larger life plan, but the ultimate goal. Stay-at-home daughters spend their days learning “advanced homemaking” skills, such as cooking and sewing, and other skills that at one time were a necessity -- knitting, crocheting, soap- and candle-making. A father is considered his daughter’s authority until he transfers control to her husband
Now, I am a firm believer in a woman's right to choose what role she wants to take on in life. I am convinced that a woman who CHOOSES to be a stay at home mother, and to fulfill a more "traditional" gender role should be allowed to do so without being judged. But, I likewise believe that if a woman wants to pursue a full time career outside of the home, and eschew family life, she is entitled to do that as well. And, I do believe that a woman CAN balance a career AND a family, if THAT is what she wants to do with her life.
What makes this movement so disturbing is that the element of choice is nearly non-existent. A young girl whose family believes in the Christian Patriarchy Movement is NOT told that she is free to choose her own path. No, she is instructed from birth that her role is to serve the men in her life... first her father and then her husband. She is taught that a man is the ultimate authority, and any of her desires that conflict with the instructions of the man should be repressed, as they are evil in origin.
I recently wrote a post for Womanist Musings, in which I discussed my previous "Flirtation with Phoniness" The basic gist of the story was that I used to act and speak in way that I perceived to be more "Black" in order to fit in with a new found group of friends. In truth, I had adopted behavior based on racist stereotypes, and I was coming off like an ignorant fool. My boyfriend at the time had a conversation with me in which he told me how bad I was making myself look, and told me to "knock it off" and be myself.
One of the first comments on the post was from an individual who basically went in a totally different direction and decided that my post was all about sexism and my "patriarchal" ex boyfriend, who had the nerve to "lecture" me about my behavior. She completely ignored the point of the post (that I was exhibiting racist behavior that needed to change) in order to make this an issue of gender instead of race. She then posted a portion of my words on her blog, as an example of patriarchy in action. Thus ensued a long discussion about the right of a woman to make her own choices in life.
See, I believe that a woman is entitled to pursue whatever lifestyle she desires. If she wants to be a CEO of a company, she should pursue a career in business. If she wants to be a doctor, she should go to medical school. If she wants to have sex with many partners, she should be able to make that choice without being judged or shamed. And, if she wants to be a "traditional" wife and mother, she should be able to pursue that option as well.
Unfortunately, that last statement seems to be problematic to many (not all) "feminists" (particularly "radical feminists"). They believe that a woman can only live a fulfilling life if she pursues a career outside of the home. They believe that housewives are victims of patriarchy, that they have been "programmed" to take on that role, and if they only knew better, they would choose to be career women instead.
I recently read an article asking whether Karen Owen, the former Duke student whose "thesis" recording and rating her sexual activities has gone viral, is a feminist hero. I say no. Some have said that since "men do it all the time" HER actions should be seen as statement of female empowerment is ridiculous. We should be working to get men to STOP this sort of behavior rather than encouraging women to sink to the same level.
Now, I am not going to join in the chorus of people condemning Ms. Owen for daring to be a sexual woman and pursuing gratification through carnal activities. She did nothing wrong by engaging in sex with multiple partners. I do not believe that women should have to keep their legs closed while waiting for Mr. Right to come along, I feel that a woman has just as much right to pursue sexual gratification as a man.
I am simply saying that her choice to compile a list rating and discussing in graphic detail each of her partners should NOT been seen as a heroic action, but rather as a serious lapse in judgment. You cannot email anything that you would not want to go public. I believe her list was a serious breach of the privacy her partners deserved. It is one thing to gossip with your best girlfriends about the size of a man's penis and quite another to put it out there is cyberspace where it could possibly get into the wrong hands.
I believe that Ms. Owen should be held responsible for her violation of the rights of her partners in college. If any of the men on the list decide to sue OR to press charges for violation of their privacy, she should be taken to task for her poor choice. I hate to see her hailed as a hero simply because her list is seen as "revenge" by the female collective on the male collective. Imitating the actions of men who violate women does not solve any problems, it only exacerbates tensions.
In another example of piss poor judgment, art teacher Melissa Petro, who holds tenure at a school in the Bronx, decided to go into detail about her past as a stripper and a sex worker. Like it or not, teachers are role models for children, and elementary school students do not need to know about the sex lives of the people who stand in front of their classes delivering lessons.
Again, I am not knocking Ms. Petro for her past actions. However, there was no reason for her to publish articles on the internet using her real name. Children are computer savvy. How many parents are prepared to have a conversation with their young kids about the sex trade, and the role their teacher played in it?? Really, she should have been more discreet about what she shared online.
Ms. Petro has been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation into her actions. Now that this story has gone public, there is no way she can act as an effective teacher and role model for young children. She made a very poor decision, one that could and should remove her permanently from the classroom.
QUESTION: How different would the media coverage be, if were they Black?
There are far more videos like this at WorldStarHipHop.com, but I don't feel like linking that shit. I will just use this one video to illustrate my point.
Whether it's Chris Brown or some random ass clown who obviously has had insufficient home training, it seems that men are forgetting to keep their hands to themselves, and it just doesn't seem to be garnering that much negative attention these days.
Take Mel Gibson and Chris Brown. Gibson has gotten less attention (in my opinion) than Brown, but they both seem to be left alone to their own devices. Hell, I don't even know if Gibson will face charges the way things are going. We could argue that it's privilege, and fame, and money... But I think that ignores the fact that on any given day, I can find some user submitted video of a some guy clocking some girl in the face.
In one recent video, a black male spectator having just witnessed a black woman get knocked bloody, commented that "bitches" need to stop running their mouths or else they will get hit.
I don't think anyone questions a man's ability to defend himself from anyone if attacked, or if his family is attacked. What I do question, is this idea that women deserve to get their asses beat for stepping to a male. My personal opinion is, if I don't matter, as long as I'm not wielding a knife, abusing you or anything that will cause immediate and serious harm to you then you can just as easily restrain me or walk away. I have to do that as a woman with other women who might get hyper. I can't just put my fist to someone's face because I feel like it or because they were talking all that mess. Why do some men today feel like the rules of engagement have changed?
And ultimately, that's what it comes down to. It seems that the rules of engagement have changed, or are changing, to where despicable, wicked behavior towards women is alright because we want to be seen as "equals." That's right. Some men have commented that because we asked for equality, we therefore should be able to take a punch like equals. But the same men that say this, adhere to the strictest of gender roles (must know how to cook, clean, tend to children almost alone, good sex when he wants on demand). That's not equality most of the time. I guess it comes in handy when you want to put your hands on woman.
Who is to blame? I might get flamed for this, but I'm finding that it's not just men teaching their sons that hitting women is okay. In fact, I'm finding that there are quite a few mothers, most of them admittedly single, that have made it clear that they've told their sons it's okay to hit a woman if she hits first. This is wrong because it's physically not fair, but it's also a great disservice to their own sons. The woman may get away with attacking their sons, but the sons will not get away no matter the circumstances. I blame the fathers who are absent, but I blame the mothers who have obviously lost their damned minds for this surplus of men who act like beasts. We've come to hate ourselves as women so much that we're passing that hate unto our sons.
Furthermore, it doesn't leave room for these men to be accountable for their actions. If a man strikes out at a woman, and hits her first, he will always feel justified in beating her ass down, even if she defends herself from his attacks. In fact, these are the same kind of guys who will do something that warrants some kind of physical fending off, but will be doubly insulted at a good punch to the face for something like me defending myself from being jumped, rape, robbery, etc.
I'm of the belief that the feminism we've come to understand today was not tailored to the minority experience, but at the same token, I feel like something that powerful in the hands of certain people was not helpful to women period. You would think that we've regressed in some ways. I will advocate my sons learn to be wise, and choose battles, and that it's not okay to put your hands on a woman unless their lives are in immediate danger, or their families, friends, or someone in need is in immediate danger. You should get the picture.
Ladies, if you have a clue, you know that these days, living in the world is like living in the Wild Wild West. It's not safe anymore. The media has turned us into faceless meat that serves one or two good purposes. If you're a minority, especially a black woman, you're really in a jam because you know you basically don't matter.
I cannot stress enough taking up boxing, martial arts or carrying a weapon (preferably a knife AND pepper spray and I mean the good kind that will make someone want to cough their lungs up). If you find yourself in a situation where a guy is abusive, or you are out with friends, and find yourself in a compromising position with a male, you need to be able to wet the place up if necessary. Usually, pepper spray is highly effective, especially if you get the right kind. A taser or stun gun are also great options. Even if you have to practice at home with some shadowboxing or kicks, do it. Fighting is a primal instinct. You don't need lessons on how to fight, although they help. You can teach yourself how to be an extremely dangerous weapon if need be, and it's a great workout.
Earlier this year, I was hit in the face by a relative who should've known better, but did not. Yes, even the people we appreciate and love, can fall for the hype. Couple that naivete and ignorance with a heavy dose of coddling and enabling, and you've got yourself a recipe for the situation I found myself in. I couldn't just sit there. I had to fight back and I did enough to send a message: "IF you hit me, I will hit you back and you will not like it."
You have to be able to take a punch, and to keep going. You also have to know the tactics that will get you in and out. Even in my karate class, I learned that staying and fighting is not the first option. It's the one you have to take when there are no other options.
It's hunting season on women, and you know that. We are not the only ones being hunted (as young boys are hunted at a very young age), but we are the easiest ones to hunt for longer periods of time. Don't think your sex will save you. Learn to protect yourself, and learn some self-defense. The idiots like the guy above are procreating. They are not facing enough repercussions. It's time to get over the idea that we will be protected.
The rules of engagement have changed...for the worse.
OK, so today I have Jesus on my mind. No, not the little brown dude from Mexico; sorry, this isn't another one of my pro-immigration reform posts you love so much. Instead, I feel like talking about the white, sandal wearing, hippie looking dude - yeah, the wine making carpenter.
So anyway, ironically for the past few days I've been pondering this question:
If Jesus was a woman, would she be as famous today as he is?
I asked a couple of friends a few days ago and we've all concluded that we probably would not have heard her story. Personally, I happen to think that she would have died a lot sooner than the legendary guy on the cross. I dunno, but images of witches burnt at the stake come to mind. Which is really ironic because if it wasn't for Christianity there would be no witch hunts.
I mean let's be honest, folks: judging by today's standards and structure of male patriarchy, the biblical days were pretty damn sexist. Yep, and women were reduced to property one level up from cattle in my opinion. Sure, there are positive stories of women in the bible, but even they had to, as The Rock would say, "know their role." And today, this is one of my points of contention with Christianity and the worship of Jesus Christ by believers, and more specifically women. But hey, per the bible Jesus loved the chicks too.
I mean why wouldn't he? According to the "story", a woman is responsible for man's fall from grace with God, and it took the birth of a man from a white virginal platinum-plated uterus, to bring salvation to the world. That being the case, it's only natural for him to pity the women who threw their panties on the stage at his concerts. You know, sorta in a "don't worry baby, it ain't your fault; these niggas ain't shit and I got you," kinda way? You know, those black women who are obviously less virtuous than white women; black women who just can't find a man, so they run to the church like momma and grandma told them to?
Yeah I know it sounds kinda crazy but that's just how RiPPa's twisted mind sees it; and also, it didn't help that he watched this weeks episode of The Boondocks. For those of you who saw it, on the surface it appeared to be possibly the greatest dig at Tyler Perry, who in a few years has become the closest thing to a Black Pope the Negro kind has seen. Before he came along all black church goers did was eat at buffets and get fat. Now, because of Tyler Perry, they can eat at buffets and have conversations about his moviesas they get fat.
If there were ever to be an award for douche of the year, I am most certain John Mayer would win hands down. He recently did aninterview with playboy that had me wanting to wash my eyeballs out and rip something. The following is just a short snippet of the horror that is John Mayer.
MAYER: Someone asked me the other day, “What does it feel like now to have a hood pass?” And by the way, it’s sort of a contradiction in terms, because if you really had a hood pass, you could call it a nigger pass. Why are you pulling a punch and calling it a hood pass if you really have a hood pass? But I said, “I can’t really have a hood pass. I’ve never walked into a restaurant, asked for a table and been told, ‘We’re full.’"
PLAYBOY: It is true; a lot of rappers love you. You recorded with Common and Kanye West, played live with Jay-Z.
MAYER: What is being black? It’s making the most of your life, not taking a single moment for granted. Taking something that’s seen as a struggle and making it work for you, or you’ll die inside. Not to say that my struggle is like the collective struggle of black America. But maybe my struggle is similar to one black dude’s.
PLAYBOY: Do black women throw themselves at you?
MAYER: I don’t think I open myself to it. My dick is sort of like a white supremacist. I’ve got a Benetton heart and a fuckin’ David Duke cock. I’m going to start dating separately from my dick.
PLAYBOY: Let’s put some names out there. Let’s get specific.
MAYER: I always thought Holly Robinson Peete was gorgeous. Every white dude loved Hilary from The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. And Kerry Washington. She’s superhot, and she’s also white-girl crazy. Kerry Washington would break your heart like a white girl. Just all of a sudden she’d be like, “Yeah, I sucked his dick. Whatever.” And you’d be like, “What? We weren’t talking about that.” That’s what “Heartbreak Warfare” is all about, when a girl uses jealousy as a tactic.
For the love of God, seriously SHUT THE FUCK UP! This over privileged White man decides to wax prophetic about Nigger passes and then tells the world what it is like to be Black. How is it that one being possesses so much douchbaggery? I suppose he feels that he is being down and edgy with the peeps but seriously, the man knows more about rainbow brite, than he knows about what it is to walk through the world with a real marginalization.
"So don't be actin like you don't be backin that stuff up, girl in the club that's what you got ass for." - Mystikal (Shake Ya Ass)
Well, from the looks of it, everyone is getting in on the charitable bandwagon for Haiti. There was a telethon aired on MTV, Hip Hop for Haiti, and a host of other events aimed at raising funds for the beleaguered nation in the wake of one of the worlds worst natural disasters. In downtown Toledo Ohio, Marilyn's On Monroe got in on the act last weekend in assisting with funds for relief as advertised:
A couple of weeks ago in a featured post by Renee of Womanist Musings. We discussed the sexualization of black women as it played out in a new PETA ad campaign that featured a nude model. In that post I think we pretty much came to the conclusion that the ad was exploitive of black women; at least that's the idea many people who commented arrived at. I mean anytime a woman's body is used (or taken advantage of) to push a message or an agenda it's sexist, right? Shoot, we even discussed the exploitation of Beyonce's sexuality in the music industry in another post by my blog sister Seattle Slim.
Well, with that in mind, do we feel the same way about the undertakings of Marilyn's Of Monroe in Toledo Ohio? I'm just asking because I'm sure the people in Haiti could care less if any of the money used to purchase supplies came out of the crack of some strippers ass, or out of the pockets of the Pope himself.
Personally I found it funny that the "Christian" organization had no problem taking the money. Nor had any qualms with where any of the money is coming from. I especially loved the line "We don't have a right to judge a persons heart, if somebody is doing something they have to do for a living then that's the way it is." I loved it especially because we're often taught that "All money isn't good money."
But I guess the tragedy in Haiti warrants compromise, so I understand. Yep, and I can see a Dope Boys For Haiti fund coming real soon. That said, are you willing to compromise on your morals and principles and accept this act of charity even if it supports a patriarchal system? I mean clearly these women "own their sexuality," right? That said, is it really sexist, if the end justifies the means? I really would love to hear your thoughts, on this one. You can read the story at the Huffington Post, and I think you'll find the comments as interesting as I did.
Yep, you read that right, and yes I said it - Black women need to learn when to shut the fuck up! Oh well, I guess I am as sexist as I've been labeled recently by one of my readers. But anyway, let's get on to the subject of this post, shall we? OK, are you still with me Black women? I hope you are and at least allow me to kick some knowledge before you shoot the messenger... because some of you need to be told some shit.
OK, good. Recently there's been talk around the blogosphere about the recent White House press conference where Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had a, how do I say it... not so favorable exchange with April Ryan, a Black female reporter from American Urban Radio Networks? Yeah, that's it; according to some he exerted his white male privilege and, well, was talking down to the "sister" in a Q&A session concerning those party crashers at the State Dinner last week. Check it out and tell me what you think:
I'm sorry, and I realized that April Ryan was doing her job as a journalist asking the "appropriate" questions. But it seems to me, from where I'm sitting, she could have been a bit more tactful in her approach. I don't give a shit that she's black and he's white, or the fact that she's a woman and he's a man. The bottom line for me is that, she should have been more tactful, personable, conversation-able, rather than coming off as the wannabe "Super Bitch" cop in an interrogation.
Clearly she attempted to take the "conversation" in a direction Gibbs didn't feel necessary, and I think he did the right thing telling her to relax and breath. I mean, had he said "Sit'cho ass down and shut tha fuck up bitch!!" Or slapped the shit out of her with his pimp hand, I could understand all the negative talk in favor of April on this one. But in truth, Gibbs was clearly the adult, or the bigger person in this situation.
But let some people tell it, him having a penis and being white he was wrong.
In sales and marketing there's a theory called Rape vs. Seduction. What April did as far as communicating was RAPE the shit out of Robert Gibbs, or at least tried to. Had she used a "seductive" approach, she may have been able to control the conversation and have her questions answered instead of having to rebut Robert Gibbs and leaving the angry black bitch perception on the table. Yep, especially when she felt the need to "check him" after he attempted to gain control of the conversation from her badgering.
Oh, and by "seductive" I'm not implying that she should have given him the whole 1(900) phone sex operator bit. Yeah, she should have taken a deep breath or two - instead, she can look forward to getting all of her questions "waved off" at any other White House Press Conference. But hey, what do I know, I'm just another sexist, misogynist Black man who takes pleasure in telling bitches... you know... people with pussy?... To shut the fuck up...
Look, I'm done with this one for now, but if you'd like to hear more from me on this and other topics. Check me out on air tonight at 8PM EST on the show Freedom Through Speech Radio where myself, and my co-hosts Max Reddick of soulbrother v.2, and OneChele of the blog Black 'n Bougie will be chopping up topics of interest with a no holds barred approach. Yes, and you too can call in to the show to share your thoughts and opinions just as you do on this very blog. Look forward to seeing or hearing from you there.
(Editor's Note: I've been involved in some pretty heated debates lately centered around the feminist/womanist movement and race matters. At the end of the day, nothing was learned, and in my opinion, the discourse or exchanges did very little to dispel a few well known negative stereotypes of the parties involved. So, since I'm all about education unlike some blogs, I'm sharing a piece from Tami, of the blog What Tami Said. Take a few minutes to visit her blog and do yourself a favor of adding it to your blogroll as I have.)
Last week, in a post titled When Allies Fail - Part 1, we began a discussion about maintaining alliances in the face of failure.
What does it mean to be allied? The dictionary definition is to be joined in a group to advance common interests or causes. And what does this joining require? I think mutual respect, shared activism and adherence to mutual goals and objectives. Alliances are by nature two-sided affairs. Both sides bear the responsibility of maintaining the relationship. And this isn't easy. I have witnessed too many battles between members of marginalized groups and their professed allies to think otherwise. The disagreements are often raw, emotional and ultimately unsatisfying. Sometimes, I think we expect too much of our allies. Sometimes the privileged are too confident in their roles as allies and too slow to examine their own biases. As enlightened about race or gender a person may be, we are all products of a racist and sexist society. To expect any person, no matter how good-intentioned, to never reveal a racial or gender bias is to invite disappointment. If members of marginalized groups want to work with allies, we have to know that they will fail us sometimes. Our allies have to know that they will fail.
In that post, I tackled the responsibilities of anti-racist and feminist allies. What should an ally do when he or she has made an unwitting show of prejudice or privilege? Today, I want to talk about the responsibilities of marginalized people who want to work with allies. 'Responsibilities of marginalized people'...already I am hesitant to speak about allied relationships this way.
First, marginalized people are the owners of the anti-racist and feminist/womanist movements. The outcomes of the movement are about our humanity, our treatment, our futures, our children. Our fight is based not on empathy, but lived reality. Yes, racism and sexism ultimately effect everyone, no matter their race or gender. But, for instance, women involved in the feminist movement feel the urgency for change much more strongly than our male allies. We are more invested, I think. I say this not as a slight against men. It is the rare human being who is not most invested in things that effect them directly.
Second, marginalized people, like POC, have historically been oppressed. As a result, we adapt to living in a society that does not treat us as equals and sees us as 'other.' We try to conform. We code switch. We hide our culture. We change our physicality to match that of the majority culture. We hold our tongues in the face of the everyday dull aches of racism. We do this every day, both consciously and unconsciously.
It does not seem right, then, that historically oppressed people, while working within our own safe spaces in movements for our own liberation, have some responsibility to the feelings of privileged people--the historic oppressors--even those who call themselves allies. Haven't we earned a permanent high ground through centuries of mistreatment? Surely we don't have to make gentle our words, hide our anger, wear the mask (TM Paul Laurence Dunbar) even while fighting for our own equality. Do feminists have a responsibility for maintaining relationships with men? Do anti-racist people of color have a responsibility for maintaining relationships for white people?
If we want them as allies...yes.
We have a responsibility to treat our allies with respect and humanity. It is the same responsibility that every person has to another. This notion of human regard is the very foundation of equality movements. We cannot demand justice while mirroring injustice. We definitely should not feel a need to 'wear the mask' in our own safe spaces in order to make privileged people more comfortable. But we can act with compassion. When we do not, we fail at maintaining alliances. And allied relationships are too important to lose.
Allies are important to any equality movement. It does not help people of color if we are the only ones who understand racism and how it still exists in society. It does not help women if we are the only ones that believe we deserve equal treatment. This is especially true considering the ways that women and people of color have been kept from places of power. The battles are ours to fight, and we can win them, but we need allies.
So how should marginalized people navigate allied relationships?
So it's no secret that RiPPa loves the kids. Yes, I'm currently the father of three beautiful young ladies with another one due in January. I'm not gonna sit here and suggest that I'm the best parent in the world because I'm sure that there are a lot of things I could have done differently over the years. But hey, with a new baby on the way, please believe that I plan to do better with this one than I've done with each successive child in my care over the years. Times have changed, and adapt I must. That's why I'm going to teach this to my now 2yr old, and my newborn next year:
Yep, when I first saw the above video on Facebook over the weekend (one of my contacts is connected to the mother of this child), I was jealous of the lady who uploaded it. She was so proud that her baby won $20.00 earlier that day in a dance contest that she decided to have an after party/celebration at her house in her kitchen. Yes, like all proud parents, she wanted the world to see just what her baby could do. Nothing makes a parent more proud than the accomplishments of their kids, and I was jealous that it wasn’t one of mine.
“Shake that ass, do the Stanky Leg, and you'll never starve baby girl,” is going to be the message I teach my two youngest girls. Oh trust me; they're not going to be eventual failures like their two older sisters. Like I said, I failed with them; I can only wonder what they'll be able to do to be self sufficient when they get out of high school in the next two years. Had I done my job as a parent, at 16 and 15yrs old as they are today, they would be able to do this:
Boy do I wish my two oldest kids had such confidence in themselves.
When you’re able to dance and motivate erections by random men…
The world is definitely your oyster, no?
Obviously the parents of these children, unlike me, realized just how important confidence and making the booty pop is to ones survival. How can one expect their children to leave the nest and go out into the world without the necessary confidence to do something strange for a little piece of change? Sure you may deem such artistic expression inappropriate for girls at that age; but hey, you gotta start somewhere, right? Yep, women bitch a lot about different issues – they even form womanist groups and stuff. But I’m willing to bet that life would be different for them had they all started out dancing on a kitchen table and learned how to Twerk it instead of blaming men for their troubles.
P.S. If you fail to see the sarcasm in this post you should drink a warm cup of bleach.
Well, well, well, looks like Tawana Brawley has grown up and done well for herself. She's at Hofstra now? I wonder if she's gonna get a Ph.D like Roxanne Shante? I bet Rev. Al Sharpton is so proud of her. Ok no, Tawana Brawley is not at Hofstra, and I don't know if she's lied about being raped lately, but I know Danmell Ndoye did this week at Hofstra University. According to her, she had been tied up and gang rapped by five young men in a campus dorm bathroom. This was last weekend, but we now know that this was all a lie, and four suspects (who were all minorities) have since been released from police custody. Dang, I wonder if she went as far as to carve a backwards "B" on her face.
Jokes aside, rape is a very serious crime and is not to be taken lightly. Possibly worse than being a female rape victim, is being one who lies about it. Well in this case, the alleged "gang rape" turned out to be a consensual gang bang, or "train" as us guys used to call it back in the day. Oh how times have changed. Luckily for the accused, they had technology on their side as one of them taped this act with a cell phone camera. When Ms. Ndoye was confronted by the police after displaying inconsistencies that there was a possible tape she then fessed up and said that the sexual encounter was consensual. Now I can understand a female being embarrassed after putting herself into a situation like that; I've been to college before, and I've been witness to shit like this. But to cry rape is foul, and I think it's sad that her only punishment was to be suspended from school. Clearly this young lady is troubled and needs help, but I think that a charge for filing a false report is in order here. But then again I could be wrong about that.
When I was in college I had one of my friends go to prison for rape after his then "girlfriend" claimed that he violated her sexually. His girlfriend with whom I too had a friendship (actually, her and I were friends well before him and I were.), wasn't disturbed or troubled and was quite normal. But as is the case with rape, it's one person’s story versus another’s where often there are no witnesses. In the case of my dude, he had been seeing this young lady for some time but they never had sex because she was a devout Christian. From what I gathered from both of them prior to the "incident", they came close to crossing that line several times, but just never did. After returning from an on campus party (which was one of the best ever that I attended) at his apartment she decided to spend the night. Well, one thing lead to another and they had sex after they had both been drinking.
The very next day things became weird between them. They were still together and in the company of each other but one could sense that something was wrong. In subsequent days and separate conversations with both of them (instigated by them and not me) they each revealed that they had done the damn thing. Evidently she was a bit bothered by the fact that she was no longer a virgin as she had intended to be on her wedding night and she pressed charges. I wasn't there, and I don't know what transpired other than what both of them told me. And I'll be honest, even as one who advocates for rape victims, this did not sound like rape in the traditional "he didn't stop when I said no," sense. Facing a long prison sentence and being a poor Black kid in college, my dude decided to cop a plea and do four years in prison rather than take it to trial.
To this day it's still my belief that my dude didn't rape that young lady. Yes, and I'm sure to some of you women reading this that last line is pretty typical coming from a man. I understand, in our culture it's easy to blame the victim and some of you chalk it up as the patriarchy as usual. Well, I happen to agree with you on that as it does happen very often. But at the same time, let's not pretend that there are not women who cry wolf among us; women who lie and cry rape for any one of various reasons. Now don't get me twisted, the women who do this may very well be a minority in relation to the many women who have been sexually assaulted and abused. As a matter of fact, there is no statistical data to back up that claim outside of the stories in the news like the Hofstra, Duke Lacrosse case, Ben Roethlisberger, or even Kobe Bryant case.
But, in a culture where women often are afraid to even report rape and other abuses from men (oh yeah, I heard rape is even a bigger unreported issue within the lesbian culture), I think women should be equally enraged and hold women like Danmell Ndoye to account. Yes, and people calling her a "hoe" as they've been is not the way to do it. But like I said, this is the culture within which we live; she's a hoe and the brothers who ran the train on her would be heroes even if she never cried rape. Yep, and fellas, let this be a teachable moment, please? Always pack a video camera to your jumpoff. Yeah, do like they do in porn flicks and do an interview and be sure to get her age before the clothes come off. I'm sure my man Mystikal who's currently sitting in a federal prison would agree with me. At the end of the day, can anyone of you tell me why women lie about rape or being sexually assaulted?
UPDATE (2:00 PM): One of my homies on Twitter (shout out to my man @ThroatChopU) sent me an update to this story. I was wondering from the day it broke if she was either Black or White. I'm sorry, but my so-called racist ass always asks that type of question (LOL). Folks, after reading this chicks story (yeah, that's her pic above), all I can do is shake my damn head. Apparently she had a boyfriend and the time of the incident' a boyfriend she had just started seeing when school started this semester. Well, not only did she cheat on him by entertaining and consenting to this bathroom gang-bang. When confronted on her whereabouts by her boyfriend. it was then that she ran with the "I was raped," line. Talk about a girl with an imagination! I've told some doozies in my day to my significant other(s). But I doubt any one of them would go for that "she raped me," bullshit if it ever came out of my mouth. [Click here to read it]
You know what I'd like to know? I'd like to know who in the hell made up the rule about women shaving under their armpits. Who made up that rule? Who was the person that first did it, and signed it into law. Was it the same person who decided that shaving the pubic area, and giving it the Kojak look was the way to go? Seriously, I'd really like to know. Personally, I think the only reason to "go bald" is if you have a receding hairline like Wayne Brady. But err, it's not like anyone sees under your arms, nor your pubes.
Chances are, most of the women reading this will say that the woman in the clip above is nasty for not shaving under her arms. I'm pretty sure some of the guys will feel the same way as well. Interestingly though, none of the men will ever admit to not having sex with a woman because she was too hairy. For real though, what man do you know would turn down an opportunity to have sex with a woman because he found Dr. J's fro under her arms. I know I wouldn't.
And speaking of too hairy: if its nasty and unattractive for a woman not to shave, how many women would be accepting of a man choosing to shave his pubes or keep his pubic area completely shaven? Ok, so I'm not a woman, but if I were, having sex or seeing a man look like an 8yr old with a very big penis would be a turnoff? Dammit, you're supposed to have hair down there. Personally, I find the woman in the clip above attractive. But hey, that's just me. Yes, I have a thing for hairy women. Now, when you're talking about the hair on her legs poking out of a pair of tube socks, umm, that's a little too much.
Apparently some of the people who saw the video above felt the need to comment and contact this woman (on YouTube) with their displeasure. In the next clip she justifies why she doesn't shave. You know what? I'm kinda feeling her in her response. It has to be liberating to do or go against societal standards of beauty. You know, kinda like the Afro being a symbol of rebellion or Black Power back in the day? The only thing that bugs me about her is that she has this long ass weave on her head and her underarms are unshaven. I mean, I could be wrong, but if you have an afro under your arms, why in the world do you have a weave?
So do women shave because, well, some guy said it was nasty? Or do they shave because some woman decided that it was what's best? Somebody lemme know please. Because if there really is no medical benefit to shaving your armpits and pubic area, isn't it, well, kinda dumb?You know, kinda sorta like buying clothes for your pets? India Arie had a song a while back where she said "I am not my hair." Women, Black women in particular took to this as a song of female empowerment. I thought it as pretty cool at the time. But did they ever stop to think of which hair the woman was singing about?
I originally wanted to title this post "God Doesn't Like Feminists". I even had a very funny argument which supports the feminist movement in rough draft that I've been working on for a few days. Yeah, it takes a few days before the birth of genius sometimes. But instead, in keeping with my "Happy Negro" persona, you guys now have the title as posted above.
So why is there only one Oprah Winfrey? Now, this isn't a black or white issue. But even in acknowledging that, I can't help to put it out there that Black women have been holding the shitty end of the stick far longer than any other group gender wise, or racially. I had to be sure to put that out there to piss off the people who often come to this page who complain about me constantly write about racism in America.
So again, why is there only one Oprah Winfrey? How come we don't see more Black women as successful as Oprah? Hell, how come we don't see more White women as successful as Oprah? What did Oprah do that was so different? I mean, she's a Black woman, and last time I checked, thats a pretty huge disadvantage in today's society. As a matter of fact, just being a woman in America isn't easy as compared to men. Its a fact that women on average earn less than men for the same work. And this is something that holds us back as a society in general. In my opinion, everything starts with the woman, and its sad that women have to be silent victims in acceptance of male domination.
I have three daughters who will soon be facing the world. I don't have a son with whom I can share the optimism of becoming president of the United States now that Barack Obama has been elected. But what am I supposed to tell my daughters? I'm not gonna tell them its best that they stay barefoot and pregnant. I can hope that they would be married and building families themselves when they get older. But do I tell them that they can never be Oprah Winfrey? Can I say that knowing the disadvantages face by women. Hell, Oprah doesn't even have kids. So do I tell them for them to be successful they need to fore go any thoughts of children?
I really would like to hear your thoughts on the subject. I'm not so interested on what you think I should tell my kids. I'm more interested in hearing why there's only one Oprah. Most importantly, I'd like to know why and how this inequality has been in existence for so long, and why haven't you stood up and did something about it yet. I mean, we speak out on civil rights, gay rights, midget rights, but yet I don't hear too much by the way of women's liberation especially from Black women.
Please take the time to watch the following video so you can understand what I'm talking about. Seriously, there's a wealth of information that is shared in the following video. I would also urge you to take the time to read "The Motherhood Manifesto" or take time to look at the documentary. I had the privilege of doing just that a few months ago, and it was truly an eye opener.
“He who warned uh, the British that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin' sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.” -- Sarah Palin on Paul Revere
