Aphotic Chronicles

'What Can the White Man Say to the Black Woman?' ~ Alice Walker

2012-03-14T23:42:00.003-07:00

What is of use in these words I offer in memory of our common mother. And to my daughter.

What can the white man say to the black woman?

For four hundred years he ruled over the black woman’s womb.

Let us be clear. In the barracoons and along the slave shipping coasts of Africa, for more than twenty generations, it was he who dashed our babies brains out against the rocks.

What can the white man say to the black woman?

For four hundred years he determined which black woman’s children would live or die.

Let it be remembered. It was he who placed our children on the auction block in cities all across the eastern half of what is now the United States, and listened to and watched them beg for their mothers’ arms, before being sold to the highest bidder and dragged away.

What can the white man say to the black woman?

We remember that Fannie Lou Hamer, a poor sharecropper on a Mississippi plantation, was one of twenty-one children; and that on plantations across the South black women often had twelve, fifteen, twenty children. Like their enslaved mothers and grandmothers before them, these black women were sacrificed to the profit the white man could make from harnessing their bodies and their children’s bodies to the cotton gin.

What can the white man say to the black woman?

We see him lined up on Saturday nights, century after century, to make the black mother, who must sell her body to feed her children, go down on her knees to him.

Let us take note:

He has not cared for a single one of the dark children in his midst, over hundreds of years.

Where are the children of the Cherokee, my great grandmother’s people?

Gone.

Where are the children of the Blackfoot?

Gone.

Where are the children of the Lakota?

Gone.

Of the Cheyenne?

Of the Chippewa?

Of the Iroquois?

Of the Sioux?

Of the Mandinka?

Of the Ibo?

Of the Ashanti?

Where are the children of the Slave Coast and Wounded Knee?

We do not forget the forced sterilizations and forced starvations on the reservations, here as in South Africa. Nor do we forget the smallpox-infested blankets Indian children were given by the Great White Fathers of the United States government.

What has the white man to say to the black woman?

When we have children you do everything in your power to make them feel unwanted from the moment they are born. You send them to fight and kill other dark mothers’ children around the world. You shove them onto public highways in the path of oncoming cars. You shove their heads through plate glass windows. You string them up and you string them out.

What has the white man to say to the black woman?

From the beginning, you have treated all dark children with absolute hatred.

Thirty million African children died on the way to the Americas, where nothing awaited them but endless toil and the crack of a bullwhip. They died of a lack of food, of lack of movement in the holds of ships. Of lack of friends and relatives. They died of depression, bewilderment and fear.

What has the white man to say to the black woman?

Let us look around us: Let us look at the world the white man has made for the black woman and her children.

It is a world in which the black woman is still forced to provide cheap labor, in the form of children, for the factories and on the assembly lines of the white man.

It is a world into which the white man dumps every foul, person-annulling drug he smuggles into creation.

It is a world where many of our babies die at birth, or later of malnutrition, and where many more grow up to live lives of such misery they are forced to choose death by their own hands.

What has the white man to say to the black woman, and to all women and children everywhere?

Let us consider the depletion of the ozone; let us consider homelessness and the nuclear peril; let us consider the destruction of the rain forests_in the name of the almighty hamburger. Let us consider the poisoned apples and the poisoned water and the poisoned air and the poisoned earth.

And that all of our children, because of the white man’s assault on the planet, have a possibility of death by cancer in their almost immediate future.

What has the white, male lawgiver to say to any of us? To those of us who love life too much to willingly bring more children into a world saturated with death?

Abortion, for many women, is more than an experience of suffering beyond anything most men will ever know; it is an act of mercy, and an act of self-defense.

To make abortion illegal again is to sentence millions of women and children to miserable lives and even more miserable deaths.

Given his history, in relation to us, I think the white man should be ashamed to attempt to speak for the unborn children of the black woman. To force us to have children for him to ridicule, drug and turn into killers and homeless wanderers is a testament to his hypocrisy.

What can the white man say to the black woman?

Only one thing that the black woman might hear.

Yes, indeed, the white man can say, Your children have the right to life. Therefore I will call back from the dead those 30 million who were tossed overboard during the centuries of the slave trade. And the other millions who died in my cotton fields and hanging from trees.

I will recall all those who died of broken hearts and broken spirits, under the insult of segregation.

I will raise up all the mothers who died exhausted after birthing twenty-one children to work sunup to sundown on my plantation. I will restore to full health all those who perished for lack of food, shelter, sunlight, and love; and from my inability to see them as human beings.

But I will go even further:

I will tell you, black woman, that I wish to be forgiven the sins I commit daily against you and your children. For I know that until I treat your chil dren with love, I can never be trusted by my own. Nor can I respect myself.

And I will free your children from insultingly high infant mortality rates, short life spans, horrible housing, lack of food, rampant ill health. I will liberate them from the ghetto. I will open wide the doors of all the schools and hospitals and businesses of society to your children. I will look at your children and see not a threat but a joy.

I will remove myself as an obstacle in the path that your children, against all odds, are making toward the light. I will not assassinate them for dreaming dreams and offering new visions of how to live. I will cease trying to lead your children, for I can see I have never understood where I was going. I will agree to sit quietly for a century or so, and meditate on this.

This is what the white man can say to the black woman.

We are listening.

what does it mean to be RADICAL?

2012-03-04T12:15:00.005-08:00

i was watching a lecture from Melissa Harris-Perry she gave at a university about her book, Sister Citizen, where she talked candidly about the plight of Black women and what it feels like to be in our position in this society (if not all universal political spheres). i agree with everything she had to say, and i have a lot of respect for her.

recently, Harris-Perry snagged a spot for a new show on MSNBC where she talks politics and other social issues with a Black Feminist edge. doing a little research on her, i see that her first book, which received little to no recognition was followed-up with Sister Citizen : Shame, Stereotypes, and Black Women in America in September of 2011. prior to that, and currently, she is a professor of Political Studies and African American Studies.

my question is : how is it that Harris-Perry has been able to rocket to the top of the media, become a political analyst, and be rewarded with a show of her own on a major news network so quickly? not only that, but she doesn't seem to be saying anything other Black Feminists haven't said prior to her. she has not produced any shocking statistics or studies or theories on the struggle of Black womanhood in this country, yet MSNBC is asking her to tweet her opinions on The Help?

this is not a criticism of her. the fact that a Black woman is actually speaking to our realities is radical, in and of itself. her metaphor about 'The Crooked Room' (in the first link above 12:50 in) is so on point and true. however, these are not things i have not read somewhere in the pages of a bell hooks or Toni Cade Bambara piece. she is radical, in that she speaks. for a Black woman, in a post-colonial (arguably) society, that alone is radical.

however, i personally have a narrower idea of what radical is. radical, to me, is scaring white people. it seems to be very easy, and for some whites, it is. but to scare even the liberal white people who date Black people, love Roscoe's Chicken & Waffles and listen to Wu-Tang and Outkast is a feat upon itself.

take the slight dichotomies of the past and present. W.E.B. DuBois experienced so much animosity that he retreated to Ghana. whereas, Booker T. Washington was sharing crumpets and tea with Alabama political figures who probably lynched and castrated Black men on Saturday afternoons. although he was assassinated, white people LOVE Martin Luther King Jr. so much so that they even have a holiday reserved in his honor. Malcolm X, on the other hand is still regarded as a militant, violent, racist who hated white people. even on a global scale, in Africa, many who posed a geniune threat to the white supremacist platform, have been assassinated : Nkrumah, Lumumba, Sankara and The Mau Mau. Obama-not a threat. Louis Farrakhan-a threat. Henry Louis Gates J.r-not a threat. Assata Shakur-a threat. bell hooks-a threat. the education of Black youths-a threat. an African American/African connection-a threat. solidarity amongst all people of color-a threat. John Africa-a threat. Michael Steele and Herman Cain-about as much a threat as Taylor Swift.

those who talk about whiteness, white supremacy, and colonialism and even suggest resistance and/or self-defense are the real threats to white people. and off that, it is clear to see why Harris-Perry received a show so quickly from MSBNC - because she isn't a real threat.

from now on, i'll be looking for the people that scare white people. white people love Obama just as they all love tokens that pose no threat to them. i can't wait for the person to run for president, write a book, become a professor who's dodging bullets and has to hire Suge Knight as a bodyguard. maybe we shouldn't wait for someone to do be that, and should just be them ourselves.

and i think, most importantly, we have to be aware of these things and learn to question and criticize those people that are picked to be our representatives by white people. we have to ask ourselves, whenever someone Black wins a political position, gets a television show, or gets national recognition for something, what have they sacrificed or diluted or stay silent on and why are white people okay with them?

with all that said, i have yet to read her book. i plan on doing it soon and maybe writing a review about it. if anyone has read her book and would like to give some insight, feel free.

"He got the peace prize, we got the problem. ... If I'm following a general, and he's leading me into a battle, and the enemy tends to give him rewards, or awards, I get suspicious of him. Especially if he gets a peace award before the war is over." - Malcolm X on Dr. Martin Luther King after he received the Nobel Peace Prize

comment. think. criticize.

"...no one else will tell you so remember that you are Black gold."

2012-02-05T13:11:00.000-08:00

Esperanza Spalding - Black Gold (feat. Algebra Blessett) from Concrete Loop on Vimeo.

The Diaspora in Europe

2012-01-18T11:51:00.000-08:00

the other part of the African diaspora i spoke the least about in my previous post about Africans and African Diasporans was the diasporic community in Europe. the DynamicAfrica blog put up a number of videos on African Immigrants living in Europe which gave much insight to their lives. however, they are immigrants and don't necessarily have the same experience as those that were born from 2nd and 3rd generations in Europe. here's one of the Surprising Europe series:

i cannot say i know of many blogs or website from the diaspora in Europe, so feel free to share.

on another note, watching these series reiterated the desperate need for Black people in the diaspora, those on the continent, and those immigrating from the continent to other, especially Western nations. the transition of Africans in Europe would be so much easier if they had possibly a Black organization on their areas helping them and getting them situated. legal advice, knowledge of health clinics or doctors/physicians that do work on the side, or housing with other Black/African roommates is not something impossible. we just need the solidarity first.

comment. think. criticize.

The Diaspora in Latin America

2012-01-18T10:18:00.000-08:00

a post or two ago, i was discussing the rift between Africans and African Americans, and i went into detail about the diaspora. the portion about the diaspora was lacking much on non-USian people from the diaspora. i've become more informed about various situations of Blacks not only in the West Indies, South America, and Canada, but also in Europe. and really, there's Black everywhere with small communities in Asia and Australia as well. if anyone has any resources on those from the diaspora in Australia, the Middle East, Indonesia or Asia, feel free to share.

this post i wanted to talk about Latin America and those that are put in the "Latin" category. this video discusses the complexity of the term "Latino/a" and the racial ambiguity that exists in the term:

the categories in the US often times force people to choose between one or the other, when oftentimes they embody both simultaneously. "Black" and "Latino/a" is often referred to as "Afro-Latino/a", "Black Hispanic", or just "Spanish" in New York City. the political correctness of each of these terms is not to be determined by me, but some find the term "Hispanic" or "Spanish" offensive, while others see no problem with it.

many people from Central an South America embrace the African part of their culture and/or themselves, but just like any colonized people, it is devalued collectively. South America, in particular places such as Brazil have more Blacks than any country outside Africa, yet most media representations of Brazilians look like this. systemic racism and issues with self-hatred plague Afro-Latino communities just as they do all others. during the slave trade, more Africans went to South and Central America than the United States, but you would not know it looking at their media.
here are some blogs, websites, and videos about Afro-Latino/as:

Liquor & Spice
Latino video
NeoAfrican ton a posts about Blacks in South and Central America
What's it like to be Lationo-and Black video
AfroLatinos: The Untaught Story video
LatiNegr@s
Black in Latin America Brazil, Mexico & Peru, Cuba, Haiti & The Dominican Republic videos

comment. think. criticize. add & share

should white teachers be allowed to teach histories about people of color?

2012-01-18T09:50:00.000-08:00

so, i took 20th Century Black History this semester as a way to get credits for my African American Studies minor. and i'm getting annoyed by a few things...

for one, my professor is white. i'm not going to say i wasn't disappointed the first day of class to see someone that looks like Stone Cold Steve Austin (minus the muscles) setting up his slideshow.
firstly, i don't think any college should prohibit someone from achieving a degree or teaching position in African American studies if they're white. i do, however, think there should be extra requirements for them to get a degree in the field and that colleges should encourage or try much harder to employ Black professors for Black Studies as much as they possibly can. there are a number of Black with degrees in Black Studies that cannot find jobs. he cannot and will never be able to speak about Black history from the perspective that we can. and that is what is most needed. equally, i don't want a white man or woman teaching me about Taoism, Asian Studies, Arabic, Spanish, or Latin American Studies. the diversity of schools is lacking and the perspective is one of an outsider. i want someone whose first language was Arabic or Spanish to teach me those languages and i want an Asian teaching me Chinese, Taoism or Asian Philosophies. not a white man who went to China for 3 years and now thinks he can teach me about Asia or the Spanish language.
does he (or they) know more about Black history than most Black folks? more and likely. does he know more about Black history than a Black person with a degree in African-American studies? absolutely not. and he never will.

and he said the n-word today. twice. he was reading something that said it and he recalled a quote from some racist politician, but still.

also, i really enjoy, actually i need, a Black professor. at least one a semester. i have another one (Geography of Africa course...of which the professor and i are the only Black folks in the class...), but i need more, and i need them talking about the things that are important to our community.

comment. think. criticize.

Just A Band's Blinky Bill - Hey!

2012-01-10T00:24:00.000-08:00

i really really dig this.

why i'm not voting...

2012-01-05T22:52:00.001-08:00

i've decided i'm not voting this time around, or possibly ever. here's why:

1)Politics is a distraction
i think this is almost analogous to the issue of tokenism. tokenism (also known as integration in the US) is something that was done to get our minds away from the highly racialized (amongst others) hierarchy that exists in this country. if they appease us on some small, cosmetic level, we will cease to think about all the issues and the depth of the issues.
similarly, politics is done for the purpose of getting our minds off the perpetual problems our society and others like it produce, encourage, and maintain. for example, the idea of democracy is one that does not exist in this country. we have raided and raped other nations under the guise of delivering democracy to their doorsteps. yet, we have the Electoral College that can override the majority rule with whomever they wish. not to mention the absurd obstacles presidential candidates have to overcome in order to even have their name placed on the ballot. monetary fees, petitions, media coverage, and other limitations make it so this can never fully be a democracy. not to mention the way in which the media (more and likely backed by the government) spotlights two main candidates making it so that we always have to choose between a democrat and a republican. how is this democracy if i only have two choices and someone chooses them for me?
everyone in this country feels or has felt as though they were choosing the lesser of two evils and i'm over that. it is a waste of time and a distraction, at best. there are millions of dollars spent every four years, and the years leading up to these presidential races, for what? us to get someone whose going to do what the last shitty president did before him?
democrat or republican, they've all come from the same steaming pile of corruption.

as opposed to this country spending millions of dollars, time, and energy to understanding and expelling racism, sexism, LGBTQ issues, classism, the problems with our modes of subsistence, and food production...we're spending time of cosmetic issues such as how many democrats are in the house or if the republicans will put up a strong candidate against Obama. it is a distraction and nothing more.

2) Democrat=Republican=Independent=Libertarian
none of these parties are particularly different. they all have the same core values and you can rest assured that no one they put into presidency will truly have any power to change anything. four or five laws and a removal of troops from some country we should have never been in means nothing when we have thousands of issues and a system doomed from the get go.
last election, i was rooting for Dennis Kucinich (although i voted for Obama). he had a number of positions i still respect even now. however, i know that even he cannot impact the system that much because he is not genuinely in control. he is a token, again, to keep your mind off those behind him who certainly hold much more power than he ever could.

3) I'm over this 'Vote or Die' shit.
i can complain and will complain about the system until it changes. this remark i've heard too many times against those that choose not to vote - "you can't criticize the president if you don't vote" - is hogwash. being a citizen of this country, (or even of the world, considering the monetary power and position the US holds on a global level) and being effected by the decisions made by this country legitimates my opinion. as a citizen of the world, we all have a say in the American government. when the US bombs Libya and Yemen without regard, without a "demoratic" vote, without any consideration for borders and a nation's sovereignty, we all have to criticize the government whether or not we pay taxes, and whether or not we have voted.

4) so that when Black folks that love Obama tell me "that's a vote for Obama lost! why aren't you voting?" i can give them all the reasons i'm not voting for him and why his color has shown to be more of a crutch than a place of solidarity.

5)because i'm focusing on social issues.
dealing with and changing social issues are what will truly change this country and our system. once that is in place, the whole concept of "politics" and "politicians" will be arbitrary.

6) because i know the two evils this race will produce will be far from my ideals.
Obama is the democratic candidate. and i've made it clear that i've lost all political respect for him. and the Republican candidate looks as though it will be either Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, or Newt Gingrich. White Man 1, White Man 2, and White Man 3. they're all the same.
Newt has recently said he'd like the talk to the NAACP to help discuss ways to get Black folks off food stamps. Rick Santorum, another republican candidate, recently said he doesn't want to give Black people other people's money (welfare). so between Token Obama and a couple of white racist cunts who think every person on welfare is Black, what point is there in voting?
there isn't one.

comment. criticize. think.

The Rift between Africans and the diaspora

2012-01-04T16:28:00.000-08:00

not too long ago this post came across my dash on tumblr. you can read my response at the very bottom, so i won't repeat it. i mainly wanted to talk about the rift that exists and hopefully some solutions to building bridges and make amends.

i've spoken about this before in another post, and every time it gets brought up, i can feel hostility and pain on both sides. it is such a touchy subject that i have to remove myself from it at times because too many emotions arise from just speaking about my reality and my personal identity.

but it's become more and more evident to me that if we are to survive in this world, there has to be unity between us. ultimately, amongst all people of color, but we have to start in our own communities. i don't think it was a coincidence that the American revolutionaries that reached out to Africa or other diasporic communities have been swiftly assassinated, jailed, or considered the most dangerous by their respective governments. Assata Shakur, Malcolm X, Louis Farrakhan, Marcus Garvey, etc. when detrimental links are shown between American (US) consumers and government, it is almost always silenced in some fashion because unity between us would mean unfathomable change on every level.

once we become unified and our struggles intertwined, there will be no mission that is unachievable.

so here are some ideas i've gathered from reading the views from those born on the continent and those that weren't that i think will aid in the bridge for both sides:

For Africans from the Diaspora:

Learn: it is a wonder just how little i knew about Africa last year, and the year before that, and before i read this one book or got linked with that blog. our system is sustained by our ignorance, so why would our public education have more than 2 pages on the entire continent of Africa?

go to the travel section and pick up books about Africa to get a basic feel (although, note, most of these books are written by white people who have their own experience in Africa that may or may not be based on their status as tourists/voluntourists).

the internet IS YOUR FRIEND. there is no excuse to not know about Africa, people from the continent, and various cultures within it. i have learned an immense amount of information from friends i've linked with through the internet, African blogs i've followed, and people i've met in person that have been very helpful. here are some blogs and websites about and from people from Africa:

Mingle: find out about African clubs, restaurants, organizations, and stores in your area. shop there, chit chat there, become facebook friends, etc.

Read: get some books and read your ass off. there are a number of fiction books from authors like Wole Soyinka, Chimamanda Adichie Ngozi, and Chinua Achebe that write about experiences in different African cultures. Chinweizu Ibekwe, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, John S. Mbiti, Cheik Anta Diop, and Ifi Amadiume are non-fiction writers that should be looked into as well. aside from books, read up on the history of different nations and colonialism. read about apartheid in South Africa, the Blood Diamond trade in West and Central Africa. read about respected leaders like Thomas Sankara, Patrice Emery Lumumba, Kwame Nkrumah and leaders that have aided in the destruction of their country like Robert Mugabe and Charles Taylor. and don't forget the revolutionaries such as Leymah Gbowee, Steven Biko, and Queen Nzinga. wikipedia does a great job of having a good amount of info about a country, its population, language, etc. all in one place.

Watch: Ousmane Sembene, one of my favorite filmakers from Senegal, has done a number of films about West African culture. search 'Africa' on netlfix (Lumumba is awesome!), youtube, vimeo, and Google Videos. there are a number of Nollywood flicks on youtube in full. watch them and ask some people you've become acquainted with any questions you may have.

Important to note: everything you read about and hear through the news is not always reality and that you must interact with the people in order to get their reality. no one else can tell their story. it is also imperative that you understand that Africa is a gigantic continent with an immense amount of diversity. what is true for someone in West Africa is not necessarily true for those in the Horn of Africa. even within the same country - Igbo is something separate from Ijaw and Yoruba.

classism and political rifts exist within African communities as well and those with money and political standing do not have the same reality as those without.

also, and most importantly for those trying to reconnect, understand that those living on the continent are not waiting for us to come back so that they can embrace us and have a period of mourning for our destructed history. they have their own lives and may not even know, let alone understand, those of us that wish desperately to return and reconnect. it isn't good or bad, it simply is what it is. this is something we have to understand and move on (something i'm still trying to do...).

For Africans from the Continent:

Learn: from what i've heard, most Africans know a lot about the US and even television shows from the US are aired in a number of African countries. those shows tell about the lives of rich/middle class white America. many African immigrants come to the US with stereotypes about Black Americans birthed from these diluted and edited media outlets.

the US is not a land of milk and honey where we all have money, good education, and equal access to prestige and power. racism, classism, and sexism are thriving in the US at this point and have since its conception. these media outlets and television shows will never show you the dozens of Black males the police have murdered, the Black and Brown women that have been forcibly sterilized or the number of Black people who are working 2+ jobs and still can't pay their bills. and it damn sure won't tell you about our history of lynching, genocide, and the systematic dehumanization of people of color. not just of Blacks in the US but of Native Americans and immigrants of color.

here are some blogs and websites of people from the diaspora that speak about our realities:

Waheed Photo Archive
AfroDiaspores
Aikura
Colorful Diaspora
Stark Reality
The Runaway Slave
Red for Gender - focus on gender in the Caribbean
Crunk Feminist Collective
Soul Eyes - Ghana via Canada
Yearning for Unity
Tembo Nzuri
Imsoblackimbright
Guerillamamamedicine - American in Egypt
The New Black Woman
Eternal Summer of the Black Feminist Mind
Reparations for Enslavement and the Blackside of Things
Futuristically Ancient
Shadow and Act: Cinema from the Diaspora
Abagond
The Nu Black

Mingle: as much as you can. this may have to be done via the internet, but it's mingling nonetheless.

Read: there are a ton of books written about Black experiences in the US and other diasporic communities. writers in the US like Cornel West, Michael Eric Dyson, Saidiya Hartman, bell hooks, Angela Davis, and James Baldwin, and Stacey-Ann Chin are just a few. unfortunately, i cannot name any other writers off the top of my head from the Caribbean or South/Central America, so feel free to add to the list or do a simple google search. books that speak about our histories can be found from writers like Marcus Garvey, W.E.B. DuBois, Fredrick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, Langston Hughes, and Zora Neale Hurston. and if these books are not available, google searches with yield just as much information.

Watch: watch films about slavery so you know what they did to us and why we are still recovering. i would suggest staying clear of most news outlets because they tend to focus on and even exaggerate negative aspects of us as a people. there are a number of contemporary films you can watch to see Black life in the US (like Precious), but almost all of these films come along with baggage so it is important to read the criticisms in addition.

Important to note: in turn, as your realities are not the same across the continent, nor is ours. i am from the southern US middle-class background in a small rural military community. this is not the same for someone raised in an urban lower-class (financially) background in Northern US. not everyone is rich in the US, regardless of what they tell you on the news. most of us live in debt up to our eyeballs acquired from college. public education may be better than some places around the globe, but there still exists a hierarchy in which rich white kids have better resources and opportunities than Black and Brown children living in largely colored communities.

i cannot speak of the other diasporic communities, but if you come to the US, understand that you are Black. you will probably get special treatment from whites that like to fetishize you or look at you through a pitying eye ("the poor malnourished, uneducated, savage African that just needs a pair of TOMS shoes and a check from UNICEF..."), but otherwise, you are Black and will be looked at the same way those of us born here are seen. that being, if you're male-a criminal/rapist and is you're female-an emasculating bitch best used as a sex object. all of these can be usurped depending on your level of assimilation, of course. this whole mess about i'm not Black, i'm Somali, i'm Igbo...ain't happening in THIS country. it is true, but once you step in this country, the color of your skin is most important. most people in this country could not tell you whether "Igbo" is a people from West Africa, or a city in Jamaica. and frankly, most don't care. so understand that you may spend ridiculous amounts of energy and time on foolish questions and categories Americans may try to force you into.

also, regarding those that want to reconnect with you, your culture, your country, etc. (note that it is not all of us...not even most...unfortunately) please understand that this is vital to some of us. there is a lot we simply do not know and/or have yet to understand about you or your particular culture. be patient, please. but don't be afraid to set us straight about misunderstandings.

comment. think. criticize. feel free to add to my list if you like.

Mother Tongues

2012-01-04T15:32:00.000-08:00

i recently saw an article about languages that are dying around the world. it reminded me of an article i read in my Anthro book. here's an excerpt from my book speaking about the languages of origin for immigrants (or really just non-English languages) in the US or in countries that have a different language.

"If immigrant groups eventually lose their "mother tongues" in many if not most countries, this doesn't mean that the process occurs at the same speed in every group. why is that? why do some immigrant groups lose their language faster than others?

a comparative study by Robert Schrauf discovered the most likely reasons. first, Schrauf assessed the degree to which immigrant groups coming to North America retained their native language over time. the greatest retention was defined as when the third generation (the grandchildren of immigrants) continued to use the native language. Examples were Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and Haitians.

on the other hand, the third generation in some groups as no comprehension of the native language except for isolated words. even the second generation (the children of the immigrants) mostly spoke and understood only English. Examples were Italians, Armenians, and Basques.

Schrauf then measured seven social factors that might explain longer versus shorter retention of the mother tongue. he looked at whether the group lived in tightly knit communities, retained religious rituals from the old country, had separate schools and special festivals, visited their homeland, did not intermarry, or worked with others of their ethnic group."

very interesting. i wonder if those that are in power who are so against second languages, particularly Spanish, know just what it means to sustain a language and what it does to family units to lose that language. if tight knit communities are the medium for maintaining a language, it mot certainly means a break-down in that if that language was to be lost or diluted.

comment. think. criticize.

The Dark End of the Street

2011-11-18T14:44:00.000-08:00

so i went to a lecture yesterday about this book that just came out from an Alumni from my school. the book is entitled The Dark End of the Street: Black Women, Rape and Resistance--A New History of the Civil Rights Movement from Rosa Parks to the Rise of Black Power by Danielle L. McGuire.

i found the title of the book very interesting, which is why i went to the lecture. turned out to be a very informative and eye-opening, and maybe if i wasn't broke, i would have bought the book.

during the lecture, and i supposed in the book as well, she details the ways in which Black women had to deal with sexual abuse at the hands of white men. black women were raped, sexually abused and harassed at alarmingly common rates on their way to and from church, the store, and most often, work (which was almost always in a white person's home, on the white side of town). the assailants were mainly police officers and bus drivers and males in the households in which they worked.

and while i found it surprising, there were actually a large number of women that reported these assaults to the police. McGuire found hundreds of police reports that were filed, witness testimonies, and statements from the victims.

this is all well known, or not surprising to most people who know the dynamic historical relationship between Black women and white men in this country. the purpose of the book, however, was to show that the civil rights movement was not a movement started, organized, or funded by Black men.

at some point, after the cases of Gertrude Perkins and Recy Taylor had garnered more outrage from these women that were assaulted on a daily basis, they began organizing against this treatment. they were always helped by men, pastors most notably, but the point being that these every day Black women who started this - they organized pastors to each other, held small boycotts, and eventually financed similar protests by selling baked goods. eventually, this led Rosa Parks (one of the activists who worked early on against the sexual abuse) to become what most of us have heard was the catalyst for the movement.

maybe i'll have more if/when i get her book, but i thought this was a very interesting point which seems to be well backed. but why do we constantly only hear of the civil rights movement through male names? why had i never heard of Dorothy Height until she died? what about Edith Savage and Fannie Lou Hamer? why can we list more names of men apart of the struggle than of women? is this the patriarchy of our system (and/or of the European system) finding its way into our own plight?

on another note, why is this book being written by a white woman? does anyone else feel slightly disappointed when books like these that expose histories forgotten or unknown are researched and written by white people?? how different would this book be had it been written by a Black woman or man? is this even a valid question??

comment. think. criticize.

Vintage Africa

2011-11-14T20:22:00.000-08:00

i recently found an amazing website full of colonial era photos of The Congo, Central African Republic and Angola. i found them while searching for one of the photos below i found in a book about ethnomedicine in postcards. they're beyond beautiful. it doesn't specify what people's they're from, but i believe some are of the Banziri.

this photo is the one i was searching for. the book says this about it:

Enema among the Banziri (in what is now the Central African Republic) - Collection L. Martin
Instillation or insufflation of enema liquids into small children is a common type of self-care in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly for young children. modern estimates suggest that at least one million enemas are being used every month is Soweto and that infants in Swaziland may receive as many as 50 enemas a year.

interesting, yea?

if you know of any other websites that feature vintage photos of indigenous people, feel free to share.

Negro History: Lost, Stolen or Strayed

2011-11-14T19:56:00.000-08:00

a very interesting documentary about Black History from the era of the 60's.

it is hosted by Bill Cosby with a few clips from early 20th century film that illustrate perfectly the way Blacks were perceived at the time. whats also interesting about this, is that it shows Cosby in way i haven't seen him before. he is angry (justifiably so) with a touch of dark sarcasm.

the only side of Cosby i have seen have been from The Cosby Show and his most recent remarks where he just appears to be an angry old Black man whose top priority is getting young Black boys to pull their pants up. but looking at this film and getting the feelings Cosby was trying to portray, it seems as though the Cosby right now is, just as a number of Black elders who lived during the turbulent times of the 60's are. they are angry that the real revolution never came and that Black youths of today have little knowledge of what they went through and a half-assed interest in even knowing. the bitterness he shows in his media appearances are simply an overwhelming sense of disappointment. he seems to be angry at the youth, but the youth didn't raise themselves. but he has every right to feel as he does.

watch parts 2, 3, 4, and 5 as well.

comment. think. criticize.

Skank Attire?

2011-11-11T11:41:00.001-08:00

recently the philosophies and/or intentions regarding the way i, or women in general dress, and exactly what message that may send out to others, mainly in the culture of the US have inspired me to write a post about these feelings. i cannot put my style into any box, however, i will say that mini-skirts and dresses are part of most of my outfits; i own one pair of jeans, and other pants are few and far in between.

while talking to some friends and partaking in a discussion in one of my classes about some comments Muhammad Ali made (at 4:00) about what women should and should not wear, it has come to my attention that the majority of my outfits may be seen as me sending out the message to men that i want to be "bought". the critics use phrases such as "a woman doesn't dress that way unless she's advertising" or "why would a man buy the cow when he can get the milk for free?"

my (and others') outfits are apparently sending this message to men "i want to fuck. i'm a slut. i'm a prostitute. i have no morals. and i have no self-respect" and/or "i want to be bought aka married." the language used to demean other women, based solely on their wardrobe, shows just how little things have changed since the era of the suffragettes.

now, these stereotypes and ideas are not surprising given the religiously saturated society we live in that typically (from Abrahamic religions) believe that women are inherently temptresses that, unless tamed (by clothing and other sexually repressive means/mentalities), will be the doom of the world with our insatiable sex drives. it seems that most that have taken their religion to any serious levels (nuns, other religious women living in communes, etc.) feel the need to be completely covered, barely even showing an ankle. which i think has more to do with being likened more to a man than a woman. but that's another post...

these ideas are the fuel that compel people to ask a rape victim what she was wearing at the time of her rape. these ideas fuel statements that infer every rape/sexual assault/molestation case of a woman is done because she was asking for it and/or wanted it. these ideas are what keep women feeling as though it is OUR responsibilities to KEEP from being raped, as opposed to men just learning to control themselves (it should be said, however, that women and men are victims of rape/molestation by men and women).

women are not a monolith, and different women are portraying different messages. some women actually are sending the message to men that they're ready and able to fuck right then and there. and there isn't anything wrong with that. women have sexual appetites and we shouldn't have to stifle our sexuality because our society has deemed it something unhealthy and corrupt. some women are looking to have men pay their bills in exchange for sex. some are looking for attention and validation from men (and from women as well). and considering this society judges and evaluates women based on our physical appearances, it shouldn't be surprising that women judge themselves on the same standards, that is, on standards set by men.

the point being that, whatever a woman is doing it for, it cannot be assumed that all women are dressing for those same reasons.

personally, i dress however i want to. is it for male attention? i wouldn't say it is. it is more a political statement against the type of restraints this society places on women's bodies; women's sexualities. it is a statement that illustrates body-acceptance and sexual contentment. i think in the struggle towards owning our sexuality, as women, our wardrobe is a very important aspect that should not be slept on. we portray a lot with our attire. i also like the idea that i can possibly change stereotypes of scantily clad women by showing that we don't all have the same agendas. some of us are simply and perfectly content with our bodies and feel no need to cover them. as opposed to me approaching this from the standard of being covered, i'm approaching this from the perspective that we should be/would be naked if it weren't for certain societal standards.

moreover, as a woman of color, i can be dressed in a three piece suit and granny flats, and still be called a "hoe", a "slut" or any other label that seeks to put women down via our sexualities. the supposed lasciviousness of women of color and other sexual fetishes that have been placed on us will be present with or without attire that cover my neck and stop right below the knee.

i'd like some feedback on this.

criticize. comment. think. thoughts.

thoughts on Occupy Wall Street protests

2011-10-27T09:03:00.000-07:00

so here's a synopsis of whats happening with Occupy Wall Street et al. - recently, a bunch of folks have decided to "occupy"/protest certain areas of the country. there are a slew of various cities that have been occupied, such as New York City (Wall Street), Philadelphia, Oakland, Boston, etc. they all have issues with how the system is being ran, being forced to fund wars, being led to believe that a college degree will ensure economic stability when in reality it means nothing when the economy is a mess, accruing thousands of dollars of debt just by simply obtaining a degree, and other issues concerned with corporations and rich people having tax breaks and basically shitting on all non-rich people.

let me just say that all of these issues are legitimate issues to be concerned with enough for a protest/urge to change certain laws. i think it's very backwards the way this society pushes everyone to obtain a college degree, only to learn once you try to obtain it or actually succeed in getting it, that you will more an likely only be able to find a job that only requires a high school diploma or some type of non-academic training. i believe the biggest concerns are those with an unaffordable education and issues with health insurance. all of which have valid oppositions.

with that said, i don't necessarily support the OWS (acronym for Occupy Wall Street which i'll use for the duration to refer to all Occupy movements).

for one, it seems as though the protesters feel as though there is no power in being a consumer. but there is. it seems as though Americans want to be able to buy all they want, from whatever company, and then be able to tell that company they don't support their...wages, or occupation in certain countries, etc. we have to start looking for alternative ways to live in this system (with an aim of breaking it down) and those ways may not be the easiest or the most comfortable. maybe this involves learning to make your own clothes, growing the majority of your own vegetables, opting out of eating meat, buying from thrift stores and second hand consignment shops for some time/permanently (or bartering), opting out of the new video game/ipod/flat-screen tv/Jordans/Louboutins/hybrid automobile/human remy virgin yaki weave/any type of gold or diamond, finding different ways of transportation that don't rely on petroleum, using less electricity in your home, washing clothes by hand, finding other means of entertainment besides television, and the internet. we have buying power, and on a mass scale we can have a large impact. it can be done, we just have to be creative.

second, the rich are not the problem. Wall street is not the problem. predatory lending agencies and vicious student loan corporations are not the problem. Obama is not the problem. Republicans are not the problem. Democrats are not the problem. wars overseas are not the problem.

the ENTIRE SYSTEM is the problem. the design, the implementation, the maintenance, the philosophies that garnered it are ALL the problem. the more i have been learning about other cultures, with an emphasis on pre-colonial indigenous groups, the more i realize just how philosophically bankrupt this system is and always will be.

for example, the Third Genders i spoke of in the previous post are individuals that are ostracized in our society. but, in their own pre-colonial societies, they were accepted. my teacher suggested that this was a way of maintaining the balance; the well-being of the society. this person that may have been born a male but chooses to take on the role of the female is still someone that can contribute to the society; they're still humans; they're still someone's child. how can it be that our ancestors worked maybe 5 or 6 hours a day, yet everyone in the society was clothed, fed, and generally happy? there is no fixing little issues and "working within the system". there needs to be a complete breakdown and rebuilding of the system. a number of us right now are working 40+ hours a week and there's still thousands of homeless or near homeless people in our society and the rest that still need assistance to feed themselves. the issue is the ENTIRE SYSTEM.

third, i believe these protests that seem to be some universal trend, are planned.

how is it that some of the most stable nations in the world are the ones rioting as if they're the worst of the worst? Libya and Egypt, who have just overthrown their governments, with one leader shot dead, are two of the most stable countries in Africa (see charts here). the most unstable countries in the world have no OWS or protest to speak of. i hear about civil wars in Liberia, Sierra Leone, The Congo, Rwanda, and parts of south east Asia, Mexico and Central America yet the US and Egypt are rioting? Mubarak and Qadaffi weren't the best, but they weren't Hussein and Charles Taylor. and BOSTON is protesting? for real? yet black folks in Brownsville BK are no where near protesting their shitty conditions?? and we now have white folks in the US calling themselves refugees. ??? come on...

if anyone in the US has the right to be protesting it's people of color living in ridiculously low-income communities. oh wait, we have been doing that and no one has given a shit about it til 20 something year old hipster white kids started feeling the weight of our mess of a system on their backs. like it has been said at numerous OWS, black and brown folks have been the 99% since the inception of this country. the black male unemployment rate is at least 10% nationwide, and white folks are coming out en masse upset at the system??

this shit is planned. i'm not saying they don't have legitimate issues. i'm saying it's very skeptical that all these protests are occurring at this point in history and all at the same time with no consensus on the purpose or objectives of these movements.

think. comment. criticize.

Third Genders

2011-10-02T16:00:00.001-07:00

so, in my Anthropology class, we began talking about genders and the boundaries and possible objectivism concerning the ideas of gender and what not. my teacher mentioned these four different groups from various indigenous (pre and post colonial) groups that operate outside the typical western idea of gender - that is, that man and woman are determined and aligned along biological limitations.

it is often thought, especially within the black community when speaking about "gay", "homosexual", "transgendered", etc. that these are colonial/European manifestations. this is especially evident in black power and Afrocentric circles (which can be seen here at 7:40). it is constantly tossed around not only by brothas and sistahs on an informal level, but is very much a part of a number of black scholarly work (Frances Cress Welsing, Eldridge Cleaver, Louis Farrakhan and the entire Nation of Islam, to name a few, have all had some anti-"homo" element to their writings/beliefs). this is not surprising, given the overwhelming amount of religiosity existent in black and brown communities, but there also is an underlying idea that being "gay" is a white/European thing; something only whites do. in the same idea that....white folks climb mountains, swim with sharks, jump out of planes....and other nonsensical things, but that these are things black folk don't do. but is this the case (rock climbing is quite fun, i might add...)?

from what i have read, the term "gay"/"homosexual", etc. are European creations. the term and connotations surrounding these labels originated in Europe. the idea that one's sexuality or sexual interests are the largest determining factor of one's self; one's identity; one's personality are also European. does this mean, however, that same-sex relations and/or people that lived as what we would today call "transsexual"/"trans-gendered" were non-existent prior to the term "homosexual" and prior to colonialism? not at all. here are four examples that do damage to this assertion:

Fa'afafine - those, typically male, who identify as this third (or possibly fourth, i've read) gender in pre and post-colonial Samoan society. more informantion here and here.
Xanith - those that identify has neither man nor woman that are typically biologically male within Islamic societies.
Hijra - biological males that have a feminine gender identity from South Asia.
Two-Spirit -also known as Berdache, are biological males that identify between masculine and feminine genders. more information here and here.

it appears as though this idea that westerners have of "transgendered" or possibly even "gay" (considering many of these examples have sex with both sexes) have always been around, even before colonialism. the idea that gender (roles, characteristics of a person) seem to be more aligned with personal identity rather than one's genitals; gender was something fluid rather than the restrictive way in which we think of it at the present.

in some cases, it seems as though whites that identify as "gay" or "transsexual" have influenced the way in which these societies thought of these third genders, mainly in negative ways. their influence changed one's sexuality or gender to the main determinant in one's self; in one's personal and societal identity. although, i don't feel as though many Fa'afafine or Two-Spirit have viewed this influence in negative ways.

it is also very interesting how the majority of the examples i've found have been of males, with almost no speak of biological females being "third gendered". does this suggest something about the female role in pre-colonial societies? or more about the male? from the examples, this third gender is usually recognized by the parents of the child at an early age and raised as such (as can be seen in the Fa'afafine), so the presupposition is that they were born this way. if this is the case, are women not born that way? why not?

i would like to read more examples of these from Africa and ancient Europe as well....if anyone knows of any examples.

comment. think. criticize.

(first two photos are Two-spirit. last one is Hijra.)

i am troy davis

2011-09-22T10:30:00.001-07:00

i have a number of feelings right now, so many that i don't really feel like writing anything. i'll instead let these photos convey how i feel.

this is what powerlessness feels like.

capitalistic, blood-sucking leeches masquerading as academic institutions

2011-08-19T13:31:00.000-07:00

so i'm in the process of starting my Bachelor's degree. i haven't even started classes yet, and i already hate this institution.

if an institution or organization purports to be existing for the purpose of furthering its clients' (students') knowledge and wisdom in their respective fields, then their prioritization should be centered around that; education and access to that for the most amount of people should be central. however, just going through the process of getting loans, paying tuition, and other absurd fees (which at time, i feel as though i'm the only one that see these prices as completely ridiculous), have shown me that what is central to this institution, or any university for that matter, is money. these "educational institutions" are really businesses with the goal of gaining capital and nothing more. a wise brotha calls it "dissent management".

i can't recall where i saw this, but there was a study done on graduating college student's knowledge (ability to form strong opinions, growth of their knowledge of events going on around the world; of people and countries around the world; of their histories, etc.) to see what they had gained from their college experience, and the majority of students showed that their knowledge had very little growth compared to their knowledge upon graduating high school. the main reason being is that many students take classes they know they'll pass, skipping over the more difficult courses for fear of not passing (which i'm sure has something to do with financial aid and it being removed if you fail or drop below a certain number of credit hours), as well as professors becoming extremely lazy with their curriculum and failing to offer their wisdom in ways that ensure the student is learning and soaking up knowledge as opposed to simply remembering enough to pass the next test.

everyone is here simply to get a sheet of paper that says they are smart enough to do A, B, or C. and quite honestly, i believe the majority of people on this earth are comfortable with that. but where is the...respect/appreciation for the student that comes here to learn? and not just in the area of business and engineering? but learn about the world? about people that inhabit it? about our links to them? about the concept of a "link" and whether or not this is dependent on the idea of reality, identity or even a god? where is the space for those that want to dig deeper?

i paid $80 the other day to attend an orientation in which i received an ID card, registered for class, and learned ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! i didn't even get a campus tour, a speech about the different resources the school offers, etc.....NOTHING. i wouldn't have attended were it not mandatory. but again....$80!? and i've just learned that to get a parking pass...to park at least a mile away from my classes is $205!!!!!!! WHAAAAAAT!??

my school is about 80% white and middle/upper income, so this could possibly be the reason that they expect all their students to pay these absurd fees as if we all have money for these things, but i don't understand this. it's as if they figured that people cannot refuse to pay these fees, not the majority of students away, so why not amp up the pay?

a fee i can understand, but $205? i cannot understand this type of capitalistic bullshit. i cannot.

and what is the option of not choosing to get at least a Bachelor's? there isn't much of one.

and i don't even want to get on the student loan agencies and their evil tactics because i might break something. is it just me (and my minimum wage earning salary) or is this just the most ridiculous foolery type shit you have ever heard?

comment. think. criticize. donate =)

Richard Mosse

2011-08-03T10:52:00.000-07:00

i've been seeing pieces from this artist Richard Mosse on the internet for some time now, and i've only recently looked into his extensive work. here are some of his amazing pieces.

inspirations from colored folk on food

2011-07-26T20:49:00.000-07:00

lately i've been finding a bunch of videos by people of color on food. healthy food (vegan, vegetarian, etc.) and it's quite inspiring. i found this Food Heaven Made Easy with Wendy & Jess on Clutch, Chef Akhi who does raw food, Breeze Harper with Sistah Vegan continues to inspire, and i found this brotha on tumblr.

it's nice to see people of color getting back to our "roots", in a sense, and seeing that our diet is a major factor in our mental well being, and our food choices are political votes, in a sense.
when we purchase food from fast food restaurants that set up shop mostly in lower-income neighborhoods, market their nutritionally vapid and poisonous food to our youth, use advertising that features people of color perpetuating stereotypes (such as "mammy"), that participate in deforestation to house the absurd amount of animals they need to maintain their businesses - we are telling them that we approve of everything they do; we are saying that we support their business. the same goes for meat corporations and grocery stores that place profit above quality and ethics. i've written a post on this a while back, and another one, so i won't go into detail of why fast food and most American food corporations basically shit on everyone, but especially people of color.

i hope more people of color will begin to understand the links between our diets and our overall lifestyles as well as our political acts. but i suppose, first, there needs to be some mad nutritional education. or rather, unlearning unhealthy eating habits.

comment. think. criticize.

Wattstax

2011-07-01T19:38:00.001-07:00

i recently came across a small picture on an awesome blog i follow on tumblr of two sistahs grooovin. so i researched the name Wattstax and found a film about a music festival from 1973 in LA. the film not only showcases various musicians and artists from that time period (The Staple Singers, Melvin Van Peebles, Isaac Hayes, etc.), but they also interview common black people about racism, about black male/female relationships, politics, gospel and the church, and living in LA in '73. definitely a must-see.

here's a clip from youtube:

watch the entire film here (on the link, click the red button, and then click it again after it turns green. ignore any pop-ups).

Teenage Pregnancy's new white face

2011-07-01T13:17:00.001-07:00

i recently found the website XhibitP via TheNuBlack website. XhibitP is a virtual gallery that houses works from various artistic mediums that address social issues. currently, they're tackling issues surrounding teen pregnancy.

teen pregnancy seems to be everywhere in the media right now. Sarah Palin's daughter was a teen mother, MTV has a new show entitled '16 and Pregnant', and there was a story in the news recently about a high school in Tennessee that housed more pregnant females than ones that were not. conversations have arisen which have asked whether shows and movies (like Juno) that showcase teen pregnancy are glamorizing teen pregnancy or educating the general public.

most episodes of 16 and Pregnant feature white teenagers being raised by their middle/upper-income families. Jamilah Lemeiux brought to light the fact that at a time in which pregnancy was only though to inhabit poor women of color, it was something to be ashamed of, but now that it has a white face, it is something to look at sympathetically.

it's interesting the way the media has chosen to portray teen pregnancy. when young black and brown women were getting pregnant (Claudette Colvin), it was seen as something to further negative attitudes against black women. they were seen as loose, promiscuous, and void of any value (which, in our society, almost always centered around virginity) they may have had (which wasn't much to begin with considering their "race"). the ideas about a black women being nothing more than lascivious sexual objects were then coupled with the idea of that women of color were negligent and irresponsible mothers, all while we took jobs mainly as care-takers, wet-nurses, midwives, and baby-sitters to white families. the idea has not changed much. although it has currently been joined with the idea that we're having abortions like it's a Sunday ritual.

unfortunately, this is nothing more than racism functioning in the social realm. when black and brown women do something society as deemed irresponsible, devious, and sexually deviant, there are movements that call us feeble-minded and justify sterilizations. when a white woman does it, and Lemeiux said, it's something to feel sympathetic about, and something that truly needs to be addressed now; something for politicians to rally around; something the society needs to get to the bottom of. if shows like 16 and Pregnant are going to be shown, they need to show the diversity and the reality of these situations. they have failed to show women from lower-income housing; ones living in government housing; ones struggling to make next month's rent; ones that do not know who the father of their child is; one's without cars, without parents to depend on, or without enough money to have baby showers.

but on another note, what is the deeper issue with teen pregnancy? is it the fact that they are having sex at what our society sees as a young age? is it because the US doesn't have the economic or social stability for a teen mother to be independent? is it because these women are nowhere near the mindset one needs in order to be a mother in this country? is it because religious influences convince us that celibacy is the only right way to go about procreation?

in traditional indigenous societies, women had children regularly starting in their teens. the problem between their societies and ours is that we have taken away rites of passage and other social forms of teaching the youth to be adults, not to mention genuine respect for human life over that of career opportunities and monetary gain. so do these young mothers have the issues or the society?

society is definitely the problem, although we should not wait on young women to get pregnant in order to act. when a young woman becomes pregnant, there are organizations willing to give her an abortion (although it is illegal in some states), and the government willing to give free food (WIC). but where is the other help? where is the help a young woman needs in order to know how to care for her child? financial advice to help her be independent? or any other type of social safety net that insures she's in the most healthy (physically, but most importantly, mentally) state she can be for herself and her child?

after reading a very insightful and inspiring chapter from bell hooks about sisterhood, i feel as though women of color (and ultimately all people of color, but there needs to be a model, first) need to rally around one another and create these types of safety nets. we need to build organizations that offer mental, physical, economic, and spiritual aid to teen mothers, as well as single-mothers, or just mothers in general. we have to be the ones that decide how our communities receive sex-education and demand that it not be saturated in religious nonsense and sexist notions of value and womanhood.

when women of color look down and spread gossip about other women of color because they happen to have 2 and 3 different fathers to their children, or may keep more than one sexual partners, we are maintaining the social cesspool that these children are unfortunately born into, not to mention that it severs any relationships that could garner unity.

bell hooks quotes Toni Morrison in Feminist Theory where she urges women to repair our relationships:

"i want not to ask you, but tell you not to participate in the oppression of your sisters....I am alarmed by the violence that women do to each other: professional violence, competitive violence, emotional violence. i am alarmed by the willingness of women to enslave other women. i am alarmed by a growing absence of decency on the killing floor of professional women's worlds."

bell hooks follows up by saying this:

"To build a politicized, mass-based feminist movement, women must work harder to overcome the alienation from one another that exists when sexist socialization has not been unlearned, e.g. homophobia, judging by appearance, conflicts between women with diverse sexual practices. ... we must renew our efforts to help women unlearn sexism if we are to develop affirming personal relationships as well as political unity."

i think once we (as women of color) take control of ourselves and commit to one another - young and old, pregnant, not pregnant, post-abortion, academically educated or not - only then will we see a situation in which children are welcomed into the world as opposed to being looked at as burdens that our society has made us bear or obstacles we have to overcome in order to live with any level of stability.

comment. think. criticize.

The Meaning of the Fourth of July for the Negro

2011-07-01T12:44:00.000-07:00

this year the Fourth of July falls on a monday, so the country will be celebrating this occasion this weekend. whenever i think about the Fourth of July, or any independence day that takes place in colonized countries, i think about the insightful and unabashed honesty Frederick Douglass spoke with in his speech - "The Meaning of the Fourth of July for the Negro". i appreciate how his rage, anger, and pain can be felt through his words.

i think all black and brown people have to speak with this level of honesty and truth whenever we are asked to celebrate a holiday (4th of July, Thanksgiving, Columbus Day, etc.) that disregards our history and our ancestors. here are some excerpts:

"I am not included within the pale of glorious anniversary! your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. the blessings in which you, this day, rejoice, are not enjoyed in common. the rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. the sunlight that brought light and healing to you, has brought striped and death to me. this Fourth of July is yours, not mine. you may rejoice, i must mourn. to drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony."

"Fellow-citizens, above your national, tumultuous joy, I hear the mournful wail of millions! whose chains, heavy and grievous yesterday, are, to-day, rendered more intolerable by the jubilee shouts that reach them. If I do forget, if I do not faithfully remember those bleeding children of sorrow this day, "may my right hand forget her cunning, and may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth!" To forget them, to pass lightly over their wrongs, and to chime in with the popular theme, would be treason most scandalous and shocking, and would make me a reproach before God and the world. My subject, then, fellow-citizens, is American slavery. I shall see this day and its popular characteristics from the slave's point of view. Standing there identified with the American bondman, making his wrongs mine, I do not hesitate to declare, with all my soul, that the character and conduct of this nation never looked blacker to me than on this 4th of July! Whether we turn to the declarations of the past, or to the professions of the present, the conduct of the nation seems equally hideous and revolting. America.is false to the past, false to the present, and solemnly binds herself to be false to the future. Standing with God and the crushed and bleeding slave on this occasion, I will, in the name of humanity which is outraged, in the name of liberty which is fettered, in the name of the constitution and the Bible which are disregarded and trampled upon, dare to call in question and to denounce, with all the emphasis I can command, everything that serves to perpetuate slavery the great sin and shame of America! "I will not equivocate; I will not excuse"; I will use the severest language I can command; and yet not one word shall escape me that any man, whose judgment is not blinded by prejudice, or who is not at heart a slaveholder, shall not confess to be right and just."

comment. think. criticize.

2011-06-22T22:23:00.000-07:00

enough is enough

2011-06-18T15:08:00.000-07:00

over the weekend, i was in an exchange of words with someone on tumblr. the origin of the discussion was surrounding yet another bash against black women. on some level, i feel as though this is so common that it is almost a given when discussing racism, sexism, and any other ism. but it feels as though lately, it has been happening more and more.

covert bashing and subliminal attacks are a norm, for all people of color, especially in hollywood. but it seems as though black women have been at the brunt end of many recent overt and unabashed attacks. from the situation with the billboard, the nfl star's remark, the Psychology Today article, the plethora of amateur videos on youtube (some even by black women, unfortunately), famous radio hosts' remarks, to "friends" on my facebook contantly making updates about black women having multiple fathers to their children and basically trying to shame the black women on their friends list. it's almost as if bashing black women is the new...black.

what is a big issue, for me, is that these are usually coming from black people. black men harp on the supposed failures of black women as if they have any idea what it means to be a black woman. and black women that are focused on keeping these men agree and perpetuate these stigmas.

i have my issues with black women subjecting their hair to chemicals, heat and whatnot, but i'm really tired of black men feeling as though they have any place whatsoever to comment our hair. they have no idea what it means to be 20+ years old and not know what their natural hair feels like, nor do they understand the types of pressures society puts on women's appearances. a sistah may have a horrid looking Virgin Remy Malaysian Sliky weave on her head, but it isn't their place to say anything about it.

i suppose this post is mainly a rant. i'm just frustrated by the amount of anamosity there is against black women, and women of color in general. and when women of color even attempt to come together and get ourselves to a healthy state (whether that be feminism or some other movement), it is attacked as well. attacks like the ones i have mentioned reiterate the need for movements like feminism in our lives. we have to have something in our lives that encourages us and pushes us to analyze how we look at ourselves and ways to empower ourselves. i have no problem with anyone (black men most importantly), making constructive criticisms about black women. but the key word is CONSTRUCTIVE. when there is a criticism that fails to put particular issues within their respective context, within that culture, within that time period, then it simply becomes as attack without purpose.

comment. think. criticize.

Babylon

2011-05-22T17:54:00.000-07:00

i've been getting into Jamaican movies mainly about Rastafarians and Jamaican life in general. i hadn't known about the culture of the West Indies until i moved to NYC and lived amongst mainly West Indians in Flatbush. the accents, the languages, the music were all completely foreign to me. but i've come to love it.

this is a film entitled Babylon about a young toaster hustlin while trying to play music. the film Rockers (from Netflix), also a must see, goes into the Rasta ideals and tenants, which are very interesting. i've found a little explanation of some of the terms they use here. the music in this film is on point. this reggae today (this T-Pain sounding garbage) that i mostly hear has nothing on this music from the era of this film. check one of my favorite parts in Rockers here.

comment. listen (definitely listen). love.

Ain't no "we"

2011-05-03T11:23:00.000-07:00

"Like I always say: Ain’t no “we”. You did what you did. You killed who you killed. I am not part of your “we”. I’m not included in your power-sharing and decision-making so I can’t be included in responsibility for your actions. When I say “we”, I mean something else. My “we” is not enclosed by barbed wire borders. My “we” is not predominantly white and male. My “we” includes my sisters and brothers all over the world."

-via Zuky blog in reference to the death of Osama bin Laden and the ubiquitous phrase "WE KILLED OSAMA!!"

natural hair experience #12,013

2011-04-28T09:47:00.000-07:00

sooo...not too long i got fired from my job. but now i have another one. and yesterday was my 5th day at work. 3 of those days i had my hair in a puff and the last two, i had my fro out. yesterday one of my boss says "you need to put that up. it needs to be up...like the other day...but you can't have it out like that."

it's one thing to read about the negative experiences in having natural hair on some of the blogs i get on, but it's another to experience it. and my response was one of compliance, but i suppose the expression on my face said otherwise, because my boss asked me a few minutes after her remark -"i didn't offend you did i?" fortunately for me, this is a job i plan on leaving in about 3 months after i save up a bit for college-this is NOT a career. what i thought most about throughout the day was the discomfort women with natural hair must have in corporate jobs or ones they consider the careers they want to be in. what does one do in one of those situations wherein if you don't comply with their policies, they're likely to be terminated? it's a bit uncomfortable feeling as though my boss thinks i look a mess, and based almost solely only my hair....which is based on her negative Western indoctrination of natural black hair.

but the most interesting thing of that day was the responses i got from different customers. one white guy asked me whether i was going after the Lauryn Hill look (as if he knows ANYTHING about Lauryn...), another screamed "Macy Gray" at me and asked if i could sing him a song. two guests told me they liked my hair, and another brother told me to keep it natural "cuz thats real".

the compliments are okay, however the other remarks are a bit annoying. it's as if my hair is a gimmick or a form of entertainment as opposed to being just what my hair looks like naturally. i'm not Lauryn Hill, Erykah Badu, Macy Gray, Angela Davis, Jill Scott, Afro Samurai, or a character from Good Times. and my hair is not a show, a costume, a joke, or the manifestation of an attention-deprived black girl. i am just me and my hair looks the way it grows out of my scalp. nothing more or less. but i'm not surprised. i'm the only one i've seen down here with a real fro longer than a couple inches. and while people in the north are so used to it to the point at which they're starting to look at relaxed sisters a bit funny (maybe thats a stretch...), the south is still about 50 years behind with 100 naturals in Atlanta alone and about 6 scattered around the tri-state area.

i've yet to fully figure out what i'm going to do about my boss at work (because a puff gets a bit boring after a while...and because my fro has the right to do whatever the fuck she wants when she wants...). i may send some messages to some natural websites with my company name and a letter of the type of treatment natural hair receives in southern Alabama or i may just have a sit-down and ask to see the wardrobe and appearance policy with a special explanation on the hair. or i may just let it go. this is a temporary job and the customer comments do nothing but add unnecessary frustration to my day.

comment. think. criticize. encourage.

Kerry James Marshall

2011-04-18T00:23:00.000-07:00

i just realized that i haven't done a post on one of the best artists i've seen in a while that goes by the name Kerry James Marshall. and how it is that i have gone this long without even knowing his name is a shame. i think the darkness of his subjects is what draws me to his work.

inherent inhumanity?

2011-04-17T21:40:00.000-07:00

i can recall a number of times reading about and seeing in documentaries and television specials, about the ways in which lynchings were preserved through photographs and newspaper articles. oftentimes, the photographs would be turned into postcards and shipped to far-away family members and loved ones, inscribed with a sentence or two of love and good intentions.

the history of lynchings as preserved through postcards is the basis for the website Without Sanctuary, which has over 70 postcards, almost all with dates, names, and background stories of either the victim and/or the criminals. one postcard is in three parts of a black man being beaten by a mob, and then burned alive, all strung together with a ribbon, meant to unfold like a home-made book.

a week or so ago, i was watching a video with Ivan Van Sertima being interviewed by someone about his books. the interviewer begins to ask him about what all of his books, concepts, and facts he's uncovered say about the "humanity" of whites/Europeans. the question was, in essence, asking how is it that of all the empires and diversity the world over, we only see barbarism like the kind seen in these postcards (amongst other things) from one group of people (or only exhibited in others in times of distress/war)? Van Sertima insists that he doesn't believe in any theories involving humanity because they aren't rooted in anything concrete.

is there something inherently wrong or different in Europeans/whites that could explain these types of actions, wars, genocides, and mutilation of individuals? it is only recently that i have learned that aside from lynching an individual, lynching victims were often tortured prior to the hanging. during and/or after the death of the victim, fingers, toes, the ears and nose were often cut off and sold as souvenirs, along with the penis, as castration seemed to be almost mandated. one of the photos on the website i linked above is a photo framed, with a lock of the victim's hair in between the frame and the glass (!?).

the question is often raised in western philosophy (and possibly psychology and psychoanalysis) whether we are all completely mad and chaotic beings, being held together by society, religion, survival, what ever....or are we "rational", reasonable, logical, people at our core whose only barbarism surfaces within repressive and oppressive societies? (theres a really good documentary that addresses these questions in part here).

i believe most people who have done any research on the subject of race, have concluded that the idea is nothing more than a social construct. besides physical appearances, there are no fundamental or inherent concepts or beliefs that arise outside (or before) social upbringing. we are all the same. then again...that's scientific.

if we accepted the idea that there is nothing inherent in this idea of "race", then where is the basis of almost any black American intellectual with a Pan-African, Black Nationalist, or Afrocentric agenda? is there not an idea that suggests we are connected to cultures and traditions of Africa? Dr. Clarke illustrates this point in this video, where he says the heart of every black person is in Africa, irrespective of our geographic birthplace.

maybe it isn't a coincidence that many people making these arguments also ascribe flawed and inhumane attributes to white/Europeans. ??

so what is it? do we enter into this world as a "tabula rasa" or do we have cores rooted in our places of origin (isn't everyone's Africa anyway?)? if there are inherent characteristics in each of us, along racial, national, or cultural lines, what are they? are some rooted in negative attributes while other are not?

comment. think. criticize.

Thomas Sankara: The Upright Man

2011-03-26T18:25:00.000-07:00

this is a video (in 4 parts) outlining the political career of Thomas Sankara. yet another reason i think youtube would do a better job teaching history as opposed to the public school system...

comment. think. criticize.

The Mis-education of the Negro

2011-03-17T09:52:00.000-07:00

"The most disastrous aspect of colonization which you are the most reluctant to release from your mind is their colonization of the image of god." -France Cress-Welsing

"i saw no African people in the printed and illustrated Sunday school lessons. i began to suspect at this early age that someone had distorted the image of my people. my long search for the true history of African people the world over began." -Dr. John Henrik Clarke

since i've moved back to the south, i've had much more contact with the two smallest people in my nuclear family-my niece (4 years old) and my nephew (7 years old). i see the shows they watch, see the food they eat, and get a since of how they see the world in everyday conversations with them. unfortunately, this is has lead me to realize that there are some serious issues in how we raise our children, especially black children. i believe most people have already come to this conclusion, but i think that every single aspect of a black child's life needs to be examined in order for us to get back to pride, solidarity, collective respect for one another, health, economic stability, etc.

for one, i will say that they have all they need-meaning food, shelter, well-rounded and well-intending adults caring for them, love, acceptance, etc. what they do not have is an African centered education; an education or a foundation that enables them to be strong, intelligent, and proud black adults.

the other day, i was showing my nephew a cartoon on youtube based on one of the African Folktales of Anansi the spiderman (or the spider??). there is a part in the video where Anansi goes to the Sky God and asks him for his stories. the Sky God looks something like this. this is the conversation that ensued:

nephew: (with one eyebrow raised) thats god?
me: yea, whats wrong with him?
nephew: thats not what he looks like.
me: well how does he looks?
nephew: he has a beard and long hair and....and he has a tan. Jesus has a tan. he [the sky god] is dark. he [god] ain't dark like that.
me: so god isn't black?
nephew: no. he's tan like Jesus.

in essence, he believes god to be white. this should not have shocked me, but it did. it hurt, actually. this is probably one of the worst things a black child could say. i shouldn't be shocked, considering even the images in our house is white, the ones at the churches he's been to are white, the ones in his Sunday school books are white, and the ones on television are white.

the only response i could gather to say was "some people think he's black", to which he didn't respond. i don't hold any beliefs in any gods or god-like entities, so i feel as though telling him "god is black" would be lying to him. however, if he is going to believe in a god (which, in itself, i have no issues with) i would rather it be one that looks just like him.

i think it's one thing to understand the level of dehumanization it took for us to forget the gods of our ancestors and that it began with the onset of colonialism, but it is another to attempt to change that colonized concept in someone else's mind, especially that of a 7 year old. how does one (one that is not the parent) begin to even address it? and how can i, someone who has no concept of "god" even tell him that his idea of "god" is incorrect? i do, however, believe that having a concept of god that looks like oneself is best for the individual psyche. Cheik Anta Diop and Dr. John Henrik Clarke have both spoken about the tragedy of our dissociation from African religions and philosophies.

the problem is not just a concept of god, but what consequences this idea will have on him as a black person. his concept (like most black and brown peoples') of good and bad will have a white/black dichotomy. and considering he isn't "tan", his identity will never be content with his level of self-worth, or with that of other blacks.

but this isn't just from church and religious organizations, white supremacy is also very evident in the shows they watch. The Disney Channel is, like most shows on television, mainly white with black and brown people peppered here and there. my niece likes Justin Beiber and her favorite show is Hannah Montana. Justin Beiber is a sack of nothingness and boredom who has more hype than talent, but Hannah Montana is interesting. although she's already white, she embellishes herself with a blond wig in order to become the famed, loved, and talented teen-aged pop star. the only black people on The Disney Channel's shows are service people, baby-sitters, the chunky, loud, neck-twisting black girl or the comic relief, hip-hop loving, urban black boy. and considering i've been told that my hair is "busted" on a number of occasions by my neice (whose hair is also natural), it's already visible how this show has manifested itself in her ego.

i think as adults, we tend to think that children do not pick these things up; that they don't see color, but one only has to see the doll test to know that this is far from reality. if we do not educate our children (our; not just our own but the collective), they will be mis-educated, as many of us have come to realize too late.

so right now, i'm thinking of whether i can actually have any influence on them. even if i were to embark on a complete African history lesson, equipped with philosophies, gods, goddesses, religious concepts, names, dates, books, videos, maps, instruments, and everything else...it would be only me doing this, and thats only for a portion of the day. is it enough to combat hours (upon hours) of white-washed television, religious books and church full of white imagery all of which is happening in a 70% white populated town? even though i, admiteldly, am far from knowing enough about Africa. i suppose i'll have to at least try.

comment. think. criticize. educate. recommend any books, videos, etc. you think might be useful.

2011-03-08T18:44:00.000-08:00

Communion: The Female Search for Love

2011-03-08T15:45:00.000-08:00

i'm about 30 pages to the end of a book i HAVE to do a post about- Communion:The Female Search for Love by bell hooks. this is one of the best books i've read and one my favorite by bell hooks. this books is almost like a self-help book coupled with a political edge.

as usual, bell is speaking the TRUTH. she discusses, analyzes and gives solutions for many issues women, particularly women of color face in dealing with personal relationships, but also in the area of personal love; personal acceptance. she also tackles gender roles (even some supposed positive ones), feminists' romantic relationships with men and ways in which feminism has failed (and ways in which it has been victorious), and life as a young feminist in the heart of the movement. she also points out that feminism has made strides in the arena outside the home, but has yet to truly make a dent inside the home; in personal relationships with men; in the bedroom. here are some quotes from the book that i believe are crucial.

"Contrary to mass media's insistence that we were learning how to be man-hating, in fact we were taught to understand the ways male identity and self-actualization were usurped by patriarchal socialization. Men who oppressed women did not do so because they acted simply from the space of free will; they were in their own way agents of a system they has not put into place".

"I believe that feminist debate about love and sexuality ended precisely because straight women did not want to face the reality that it was highly unlikely in patriarchal society that a majority of men would wholeheartedly embrace women's right to say not in the bedroom. "

"Complete feminist culture transformation could happen without male allies only if women were willing to sacrifice their desire to have primary relationships with men.... We did not want to acknowledge out loud that feminist demands had been compromised, that many of us were settling for equality and power in the public arena while continuing to conform to sexist gender roles at home or, most important, in the bedroom."

"Men who were willing to be househusbands, to take care of the kids, to be advocated for equal pay for equal work, to do their share or even all the housekeeping, were not willing to change in any way their sexual habits.... what if the real discovery that feminists could not speak was the fact that men did not care if we were equals everywhere, including the battlefield, as long as they remained our superiors-the ones in charge, the ones on top-in the bedroom?"

"Male domination of females in the sexual arena (whether they maintain control by wanting too much sex or none at all) is a constant reminder that females are not free, that we have not attained full equal rights or equity."

"...patriarchy, like any colonizing system, does not create the context for women and men to love one another."

"Until our culture can break through myth and accept that women are not innately capable of nurturing others, the assumption that women are better able to love than men will prevail. ...nurturance-the ability to care for another in a manner that enhances well-being-in a learned behavior. men learn it as well as women. patriarchal culture is reinforced when males are not taught ways to nurture and care for others."

"Until we are able to acknowledge that women fail at loving because we are no more schooled in the art of loving than are our male counterparts, we will not find love. ...As long as being loved is seen as a gesture of weakness, one that disempowers, women will remain afraid to love fully, deeply, completely... women who learn how to love represent the greatest threat to the patriarchal status quo."

"The intensity of their hold on mass culture's imagination is so strong that many young women seeking to be independent, powerful, and successful have simply embraced the idea that they are "bitches". their uncritical acceptance of this image is problematic. it helps perpetuate sexist stereotypes about powerful women. young women want to embrace the "hard bitch" image because it keeps them from having to confront the pain that comes when females are punished for choosing to be self-actualized and successful."

"we demand that men change, and when they do, we are often not ready to affirm and embrace the liberation we claimed to desire."

"Patriarchal culture was not disturbed when feminism appeared to be a woman-only thing. however, as more males became involved, feminist cultural revolution threatened to bring an end to patriarchy."

Africa for Africans?

2011-03-03T13:08:00.000-08:00

i watched a very interesting and informative documentary last night (just got Netflix. yea. it's on like Donkey Kong...) titled Mugabe and the White African. i didn't read any commentary on the film, i just watched it because i was curious about the title.

the documentary is about a white family that is in the process of being kicked off their land in Zimbabwe by a new law president Robert Mugabe made making all land transactions void, although the only ones being effected are the land-owning whites. Michael Campbell (shown in the photo on the left with his son-in-law in front of their farm workers), owns a mango farm he purchased after independence from the government. the farm is equipped with 10 to 15 black workers whom they claim will lose their jobs if the farm taken over by the government. the Campbells consist of a couple, with their son, his wife, and their two kids. apparently, Mugabe is against the ownership of African land by whites, even if they self-identify as "African" and have been there since their birth. and most importantly, even if they purchased their land legally and have no history of mistreatment or wrongdoings against their workers.

the film follows Michael and his son-in-law from their farm in Zimbabwe to court to challenge Mugabe, who is in the habit of postponing the court hearings. the film dances around questions of whether or not a white person can be an "African", whether or not a white person should or shouldn't own land on the continent and the moral implications of being white and owning land in Africa.

i don't know much about Robert Mugabe, but the little that i do know is all negative. from the film, they have audio clips of him saying "Zimbabwe is mine", he's shown admitting on camera to operating a corrupt government, and the video details his ruthless political standing. he "won" his most recent (supposed democratic) election in which he was the only candidate and he's notorious for stifling any opposition (his political opponents and citizen uprisings are usually beaten, jailed or suddenly disappear). the film paints him as a callous, racist dictator who, while saying he wants to return the land to "peasant blacks", is really looking to take over the land himself (or a close family member) and sell the parts and resources for profit. and this is aside from him comparing himself to Hitler and sporting a mustache that looks as though it is inspired by the genocidal authoritarian.

i'm not sure about the validity in these claims against him, considering the way the western media distorts facts. however, it is a fact that the 30+ year reign of Mugabe has left the country in a far worse state that when he took office, although his wealth has continued to build (he has taken over at least 3 of these farms he's seized).

at one point in the film, a black man thats come to Michael's farm to intimidate him, says "we want you out! OUT! you come here, you take our land! i cannot go to UK, to Britain, to England and get land!" to which Michael Campbell responds "yes and we are less than 2% of the population....you say want this land for black peasants?? you come here in a new vehicle every time. and you're worried about the peasants?"

what i found interesting about this film was that, for one, it was obviously from the white perspective. the reckless use of the word "racist" was thrown about so much that i'm not sure the users actually knew the weight or the proper definition of the word. Mugabe and his "African for Africans" mentality was called racist many a times. but is he?

every white person living on the continent that was born there is more and likely a descendant of a colonist. and i think most people have come to the agreement that colonists have pretty much destroyed...the world. and while they populate less than 2% of the Zimbabwe population, they (according to Wikipedia) own more than 70% of the farm-worthy land. and i doubt this is the case for just Zimbabwe. so how "racist" or even "wrong" is it for Mugabe to want to give the land back to black people whom these whites' grandfathers and great grandmothers took it from? i don't believe he's wrong at all. if they're in the minority, they should be holding as much land as they do population. at this point in history, as i've been discussing with a friend of mine, is that Africa, Africans and all colored people need to abandon Europe. in order for colonized people and their countries to get back to a state of stability, they need to take measures, firstly, to assure that the people that have been disenfranchised in the past have an economic foothold to get back to stability. if that means kicking the whites out, or taking their economic standings from them, then so be it.

that being said though, i don't agree with Mugabe's means of kicking these people off the land and misusing the land by giving it to his family in a nepotistic giveaway. workers of Mugabe's often move these white farmer people off the land using violence, usually resulting in death.

in the film, after the farmer's case was postponed a second time, workers for Mugabe (i'm guessing??) attacked the couple and their son in the streets and beat them almost beyond recognition. and considering they were, in a sense, occupying land that wasn't their's, they couldn't legally retaliate. eventually, they won their case. unfortunately, the farm was burned to the ground soon after by the same people they were beaten by. what that case says for Zimbabwe, Zimbabweans, and Mugabe was not all that clear at the end of the film, and it probably isn't in reality either.

should other nations be doing something similar (that is, forcibly taking economic leeway away from the white minority and/or kicking them out of the countries they've come to call home)? should all African nations at least encourage whites to "go back to Europe"? what repercussions would that have between African countries and western ones (importing; exporting; job outsourcing; alliances; treaties; etc.)? can white people born and raised in Africa be "Africans"? is the removal of the economic stronghold that whites have in certain African countries instrumental in the recovery of Africa from its colonial past?

criticize. think. comment. watch the film and tell me what you think about it. watch the trailer.

Don Cherry Trio

2011-03-02T12:18:00.000-08:00

Don Cherry Trio video i found via the blog Africa is a Country.

"Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery." -Malcolm X

2011-02-21T19:01:00.000-08:00

today is the anniversary of the assassination of Malcolm X-one of the greatest revolutionaries ever, and someone i personally look up to. i did a post about him a while back with some relevant quotes and sayings. today, i wanted to post a video of him speaking because i feel like his voice is very incite-ful, like Audre Lorde says....like a riot. i think this video and the questions he poses in it are so important for us as a people. WHO ARE YOU? WHERE IS YOUR HISTORY?

i was doing some research a couple days ago about the word "Africa" and where it came from, and interestingly enough, it came from a white man (more and likely. the name's origin is a bit sketchy). in any case, however, the name did not come from "African" peoples. so, how accurate is the term "African"? i see a number of people change the spelling to "Afrikan"...is this an attempt to rid the the word of its etymology? but on the other hand, Dr. John Henrik Clarke says the term "black" doesn't tell you who you are nor where you come from. i think it was Maya Angelou who said something along the lines that we are obsessed with naming ourselves because someone else has been naming us for so long.

comment. think. criticize. ask more questions.

(issues with) Black History Month & Langston Hughes

2011-02-01T16:26:00.000-08:00

today is the first day of Black History Month AND it's Langston Hughes' birthday. i'm probably more excited about the ladder, though. Black History (education) is an extended period for me. 10 years? 20 years? lifetime? who knows... and i think black people should stop hyping it up as this once a year...only at church...on first sunday type deal. this is your life; your people; YOUR history. it's quite sad that it has to be reduced to a 28 day month, but i suppose it has to be thrust somewhere into the national US psyche, so i'll take what i can get. and my facebook is going to be bombarded with poems, speeches, videos, book suggestions, quotes, links, and everything else i can think of to honor this month...and also to bring knowledge about all the cultures that have been forgotten, erased, ignored, and degraded.

anyway, i think Langston Hughes is someone everyone knows about, but not that many people really know his poetry. his thoughts on racism, blacks, god, and religion are all evident in his poetry and i love how he can pack so much into a 4 or 5 line stanza. i've already attacked my other blog with poems by Langston Hughes, so i'll just put a few on here.

God to the Hungry Child

hungry child,

i didn't make this world for you.

you didn't buy any stock in my railroad.

you didn't invest in my corporation.

where are your shares in standard oil?

i made the world for the rich.

and the will-be-rich

and the always-have-been-rich.

not for you,

Hungry Child.

The White Ones

i do not hate you,

for your faces are beautiful, too.

i do not hate you,

your faces are whirling lights of loveliness and splendor, too.

yet why do you torture me,

O, white strong ones,

why do you torture me?

Shadows

we run,

we cannot stand these shadows!

give us the sun.

we were not made

for shade,

for heavy shade,

and narrow space of stifling air

that these white things have made.

we run,

oh, God,

we run!

we must break through these shadows,

we must find the sun.

comment. think. criticize. share some poetry?

2011-01-25T22:54:00.000-08:00

Amethyst Rock~ Saul Williams

2011-01-25T22:38:00.000-08:00

Saul Williams never ceases to amaze me. just found this video, and as always, his words are the TRUTH.

"stealing us was the smartest thing they EVER did / too bad they don't teach the truth to their kids / our influence on them is the reflection they see when they look into their menstrual mirror and talk about THEIR culture / their existence is that of a schizophrenic vulture..."

comment. listen.

Black Feminism and its Haters

2011-01-25T21:10:00.000-08:00

so...my friend Fabian, who i've had many conversations with, is in the habit of criticizing black feminism, so much so that he has felt the need to write a short essay detailing his issues with the movement. i'll show his paper and then my response to it:

Mattress: The cries of captured women in their enslaver’s house

"Bokùnrin réjo bobìnrin pa á, kéjo má sa ti lo" (If a man sees a snake and a woman kills it, what matters is the death of the snake). -Yoruba proverb

"Tokotobo lo n sise oko Ido." (Both the vagina and the penis should work together for success on Idos farm) -Yoruba proverb

"Nwa-agbogho Ugwuta si nne ya na otu nwoke ka ya na-agara onwe ya, o wee tuburu ya raa. Nne ya wee si ya gaa rakwuru. O gaa, a rachie ya ozo." (An Ugwuta (Oguta) girl told her mother that as she was going on her way,a man came and thew her down and sexed her. Her mother told her to go and retaliate. She went, and was sexed again.) -Igbo proverb

"Anaghi atu ikpu ukwu egwu maka na o bughi ya gaara ownwe ya." (One cannot be afraid of the wide vagina because it cannot sex itself). -Igbo Proverb

“The African woman seems to have achieved that economic independence for which our women are clamoring”. -Mary French-Sheldon

Feminism and its short comings have already been explored by people such as Esther Vilar and Jack Kammer. This paper will not continue on that journey because beating on a dead horse is not our interest; however this paper will explore the oxymoron known as “black feminism”. This paper will highlight some myopic tendencies of the “black feminist” movement. It will also shed light on black heroines of the past who had no need for any sort of feminism and it will hopefully give black women the tools needed to create a true movement based on their history.

Many African women especially those in America (where the headquarters of black feminism seems to be located) are under the false oppression that they are oppressed by all of society and at the head of this oppression gang are black men. Let us not forget that in America more African women attend college and university than African men do. (link here), the fact still remains that African men die on average much earlier than African women. (link here), and African women not only earn more income compared to African men, (link here). They are more likely to be employed than African men (even in this “recession”) (link here). So it is very confusing that African women would identify with such a movement.

To label one a Black “feminist” is detrimental towards history. Because by calling themselves feminists legitimate concerns especially those regarding “race” get usurped by gender issues that black women cant possibly face from their economically powerless African men. When Fela Kuti called his music “Afrobeat” he was following the ancient African custom of placing importance on names. He could have simply called his music “Afrofunkjazz” but by doing such he would have ended up as a footnote in jazz’s or Funk’s history. Such is the fate of black feminists who will inevitably become footnotes in the history of the feminist movement.

African women do however need a movement to educate their black men and sons of their historical importance and power that they wielded before all the isms of Europe. Take for example the issue of sexism within the black panthers movement, most of the women were only allowed cooking and clerical roles. Many of the men were probably ignorant of the fact that African women historically shared the burden of the battle field with their men, the Candace’s of Ethiopia, the aba women of 1912 and the Amazons of dahomey are fine examples of black women wanting to be more than baby pushers and meal makers unlike their European counterparts whose only example of battlefield prowess (Joan of arc) was burned.

Historically speaking African women had no need for “ feminism” women such as Queen Nanny of Jamaica, and Queen Nzingha of Angola would more than likely laugh at modern day African women who are hell bent on copying the supposed “patriarchy”, (Chinweizu has already shown the matriarchy that it truly is in his book titled “ The anatomy of female power) how is it that black women who historically controlled the marketplace( they still do in America if one is to look at the fact that more African women work than African men) ever faced gender oppression from black men. Bell Hooks in many of her analyses has shown us that capitalism and “patriarchy” go hand in hand. My question is how can African men can be patriarchal when they have no capital to accumulate and they are more likely to be in jail than in school, (watch here) .Many black feminists should realize that the oppression they do face is not because of their gender but because of their race. The book “White Women’s Rights” by Louise Michelle Newman goes to great lengths in proving this point. Below is a discourse between Ida B Wells and white feminist Frances Willard found in her book.

The confrontation between Frances Willard and Ida B. Wells began with an interview

given in October 1890, in which Willard expressed her belief that white Southerners

were mostly “kindly intentioned towards the coloured man” and sympathized

with them over their “immeasurable” problem. She went on to portray black men as

illiterate alcoholics who multiplied like the “locusts of Egypt,” concurring that in the

South, black men represented a physical threat to white women, who were in constant

need of white men’s surveillance and protection: “the safety of [the white]

woman, of childhood, of the home,” Willard proclaimed, “is menaced in a thousand

localities at this moment, so that the [white] men dare not go beyond the sight of their

own roof-tree.”49

These pronouncements outraged Wells, and she exposed these depictions as racist

myths in her pamphlet Southern Horrors. Wells argued that accusations concerning black

men’s lack of sexual control were used to cover up the fact that interracial sexual liaisons

between black men and white women were voluntarily engaged in by white

women.

“The miscegenation laws of the South . . . leave the white man free to seduce all

the colored girls he can, but it is death to the colored man who yields to the force and

advances of a similar attraction in white women. White men lynch the offending Afro-

American, not because he is a despoiler of virtue, but because he succumbs to the

smiles of white women.”50

Willard took great offense at this representation of the moral character of white

women, and attacked Wells for casting doubt on the racial-sexual purity of white

women. “It is my firm belief,” Willard wrote, “that in the statements made by Miss

Wells concerning white women having taken the initiative in nameless acts between

the races, she has put an imputation upon [the female] half of the white race . . .

that is unjust.” Wells, in turn, objected to this misrepresentation of her position, and

pointed out that she never put such an imputation on white women. All she had said

was that “colored men have been lynched for assault upon [white] women, when the

facts were plain that the relationship between the victim lynched and the alleged victim

of his assault was voluntary, clandestine, and illicit.”(1999, p.68-69) [from the book- White Women's Rights: The Racial Origins of Feminism in the United States by Louise Michele Newman]

Why did Mrs. Wells not instantly jump on the bandwagon of gender? Why are more African women not taking her example even though in America your black sons are more likely to be in jail than white men, your black babies die more than white babies (here) such inadequacies will never be looked at because by joining the gender binaries of Europeans your pressing issues take a back seat.

The more black women copy the colonial economic system of the Europeans the more they will need feminism, the more they will see cultural practices such as polygamy as oppressive, because most African cultural customs are only oppressive when practiced under colonial and capitalist domination. Mary French-Sheldon an early feminist and traveler had this to say of African polygamy:

“A man accumulates more land or more cattle than his first wife can attend; he purchases

another wife, and so on. The wives are far from being jealous of each other; in

truth are delighted to welcome a new wife, and make great preparations for her. Each

wife has her own hut. . . . She has control of her own plantations, and has the

supreme right to her children. Her moral standard is exactly the same as her husband’s.”

The fact that a “feminist” could see it as a system that helped to alleviate housework and increase female autonomy and power is a testament to the myopia affecting black feminists. This same well traveled feminist even went ahead to state that she was never treated with more chivalry anywhere in the world than by the “oppressive sexist African man”

In summation the ancient Africans understood there is significance in a name and the fact that my African women have decided to name themselves after their oppressor’s movement is a problem. I hope they can use this paper to distance themselves from a movement that is nothing more than colonialism by feminine means and be motivated to create a new female movement based on African history and reality. We African men are not supposed to speak for women but we speak of them (as an elder reminded me) however as their son and brother I cannot help to see my mothers and sisters being misled into adopting a misguided system and not speaking up on it or as Fela speaks to African women in this song (here).

___________________________________________________________

since i've began identifying with feminism, i've heard these sentiments quite often. especially from men of color. luckily, i don't see these as a challenge, i see them as an opportunity to strengthen my arguments and my commitment to the struggle.

from what i've gathered, the synopsis of black (colored) feminism from the eyes of men of color is....colored women joining forces with white women to villanize men of color and at as the more oppressed victims simultaneously denying or disregarding the oppression men of color experience. and that is aside from the stereotypes of feminists being lesbians hell bent on hating men and.... worshiping pussies or some craziness. and considering we've (most of us that identify with feminism) grown up in colonized countries, in which patriarchy runs deep, it is not a surprise that the voice against patriarchy is condemned.

for one, there is a misunderstanding of feminism altogether. black feminism, more so. feminism is simply a movement that aims to focus on the issues directly and indirectly impacting the lives of women. historically, this began as a white woman's movement, and not surprisingly, was not exempt from racism, classism, heterosexism, ableism, capitalism, cissexism, etc. this is the issue many women and men of color have with aligning themselves with the movement, as my friend raised in his essay. why women of color who experience very different experiences from white women would align themselves with these women is a valid question. however, feminism for women of color, to my understanding, has very little in common with the white feminism of the 30's, headed by women such as Susan B. Anthony and Julia Ward Howe and later on women like Gloria Steinem. a major problem with people, particularly men, attempting to criticize feminism is that they simply do not know enough about it. picking up a Betty Friedan book for a college course and watching The Color Purple does not make you an expert or even knowledgeable on feminism enough to criticize it. after you've read some bell hooks, Gloria Anzaldua, Audre Lorde, Cherrie Moraga, Angela Davis, and the like, maybe then we can have a constructive dialogue.

considering my friend looks to combat black feminism, i'll be speaking from that perspective, although it is closely connected (if not synonymous) with feminism of all women of color. black feminism looks to end racial, sexual, class, and gender inequalities (although the issues i mentioned earlier are recent additions). and while many feminists of color may have various paths they believe will result in equality, these are the main tenets of feminism. and the more and more i read authors like bell hooks and Toni Cade Bambara, the more i come to the understanding that patriarchy sometimes comes on the form of a woman, in the same way that oppression of colored people can also come from people of color. so, villanizing men is not our goal or means of gaining equality. women perpetuate patriarchy and sometimes even misogyny just as men do. men are oppressed under patriarchy just as women are. men are not and have not been the "enemy" of black feminism because there is not one set "enemy" of feminism. in addition, black feminism aims to end all forms of oppression for all people. not just women. not just women of color. the aim is at women of color because our voices, our perspectives, our well-being has been the most neglected in this and many other countries for most of history. bell hooks, who always seems to have the right words to say, wrote this in her book Talking Back: Thinking Feminist. Thinking Black:

"Emphasizing paradigms of domination that call attention to woman;s capacity to dominate is one way to deconstruct and challenge the simplistic notion that man is the enemy, woman the victim; the notion that men have always been the oppressors. such thinking enables us to examine our role as women in the perpetuation and maintenance of systems of domination. to understand domination, we must understand that our capacity as women and men to be either dominated or dominating is a point of connection, of commonality. ...i understand that in many places of the world oppressed and oppressor share the same color. i understand that right here in this room, oppressed and oppressor share the same gender. ...it is necessary to remember that it is first the potential oppressor within that we must resist-the potential victim within that we must rescue-otherwise we cannot hope for an end to domination, for liberation."

i would agree or at least respect the stance my friend has for wanting to get back to our traditional societies. i think looking towards African, Native American, Indian, Aboriginal, and Asian traditions concerning gender could be a positive force in the movement (or at least examining the relationships from a feminist perspective).

also, this whole idea that feminists are somehow choosing gender over race is a farce and just another example of mis-education concerning black feminism. we are not and have never aimed to choose gender over race or race over gender. i think one of the most important discourses in colored feminist circles is understanding that these two dichotomies intersect at our being; we live at the intersections of these two struggles. i am who i am and have experienced the things i have experiences because i am a black woman; i am a woman that is black. there is no separation of that. my relation to white women is different to the black man's relation to them; my relation and history with white men has been different than that experienced by black men; my ideals of womanhood, historically and currently, have been in relation to black men-my life has been a perspective and the experience of the intersection of those two dichotomies; the combination of the two. not one or the other. so questions concerning why i'm aligning myself with white women comes only from people who have not truly examined the intersections of various struggles. the same applies to gay black males who experience different kinds of oppression based on their sexuality AND their race. or Muslim women who experience oppression based on their gender AND their religion (in the US). these are all unique points of view whose respective struggles cannot be distinguished.

in any case, i think that feminism is a strong force that has the power to change our society for the better. no other movement is aiming to tackle all forms of oppression and domination at the same time. and i think people in colored communities should look to open more dialogues with each other concerning how our men and women interact; how women interact with each other; how men communicate with other males; how our stereotypes, preferences, and beliefs concerning sexuality, domination, and love have affected our communities and how it can repair them.

comment. think. criticize.

gems on Youtube

2011-01-02T16:36:00.000-08:00

i've recently discovered some gems on Youtube that should definitely be seen. and then watched again. check em out:

Sankofa

Shaka Zulu

Their Eyes Were Watching God

Eve's Bayou (some parts are missing)

Crooklyn

Imitation of Life

if you know of any good movies (like Sarafina! or Shaka Zulu), please share.

Joey Lawrence

2010-12-31T16:41:00.000-08:00

someone on Tumblr posted a link to this awesome photographer- Joey Lawrence. his stuff is ridiculous. all the people in his photos look like gods. check him out.

an injustice in Mississippi is an injustice everywhere

2010-12-31T15:47:00.000-08:00

so i've been reading about the Scott Sisters in the news every now and then, and theres been a break in the case just recently, but even more outraging than their arrest.

to make a long story short, the Scott Sisters were arrested 16 years ago and sentenced to 2 life sentences for stealing $11. yes, ELEVEN DOLLARS. yes, TWO LIFE sentences each.

ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY!

i would write a post about this, but a common friend on facebook wrote a very good and concise commentary on the story with some very important questions we all should be asking the government.

here's the commentary:

The number one priority is to assess the financial circumstances under which Jamie will be able to get the greatly needed kidney transplant from the donor who will be her Sister, Gladys. Where is the money coming from, who will pay ? Her kidneys failed IN prison, she got sick IN prison.

The second priority is to assess and examine the strategies necessary to make their release fully permanent. Indefinite suspension is not FREEDOM. This action is not about JUSTICE. We promised Jamie and Gladys JUSTICE.

We need to question the terms and condition and status of their release. The State of Mississippi has released them without pardon and without a commutation which very much remands them still to the custody of the Department of Corrections, but not under the normal probationary regulations. We have to ask why. This is bottom line an impediment and barrier to block them from talking to media, the community or to redress the great injustice done to them and the burden it has placed on their lives and their family.

We have to ask, on this matter was this a way of ensuring that the Sisters cannot charge the state with violation of both their judicial, civil or human rights or challenge the initial sentence of 2x life sentences; or challenge the conduct of the court or prosecutors in the matter ? Did Barbour view this release as a way of removing political baggage off of his desk in his quest for the Republican nomination for President , espeically in the light of his recent idiot racist remarks reported widely ? Why was there no immediate release ? Why did Barbour intentionally underscore guilt in his statement, where guilt is at the core of the question of the courts' decision ? Why did the Pardons Board recommend no commutation or pardon ? They could have and the Governor could have chosen his option of indefinite suspension.

Suspension means just that, suspend, hold up. At any point, these Sisters can be returned to prison. If they speak to the media, hire an attorney, file complaints about their incarceration or the inadequacy of Jamie's medical treatment while incarcerated; or if they speak at all about the conditions under which they were found guilty, sentenced or incarcerated. Have any of us ever heard of one instance when the government imposes an organ donation as a term of anything ? In the situation of a suspension of sentence, I guess they can just about do anything. This action is nothing less than house arrest, with organ donation thrown in and no financial capacity for the surgery.
Still I wept in happiness for Jamie and Gladys and their family. As a Mother, I wept for Evelyn Rasco. Rest now for a while. We have work to do.

this case brought to light the history of the government and large corporations exploiting the bodies of people of color, especially that of prisoners. what cases have ever required a prisoner to give up a part of their body? what right does Haley Barbour think he has to make someone give up an ORGAN!! the books Killing the Black Body and Medical Apartheid speak about the ways the government has disrespected our rights to our own bodies since the beginning of colonialism. i cannot fathom how this case has even been thriving for 16 years. this needs to be a call to action. especially for those that believe race relations are all unicorns and sunshine since Obama was elected.

i'm ready for a riot. anyone know of one, just let me know the time and the place.

also, here's Governor Haley Barbour's address so you can send him hate mail:

Governor Haley Barbour

P.O. Box 139

Jackson, Mississippi

39205

comment. think. criticize. riot.

foolishness on facebook

2010-12-24T14:38:00.000-08:00

so....my facebook inbox was recently greeted by a letter from a friend from high school "concerned" and confused about the content of my blogs (i have links to both blogs on my facebook). "do you hate white people" was the main question of the initial message, after 1 or 2 messages back and forth, i received the following message...and no link to respond...apparently the account was deleted. maybe she thought i was going to get the Black Panthers together and bomb her house. i'm posting this on here to show the type of ignorance, and the levels of denial that are still prevalent in our society. not only on racism and race relations, but on the views of what the US is doing around the world. apparently, we're taking democracy and rights, happiness, unicorns and sunshine to the middle east....not death, destruction, rape, division, and the dismantling of economic self-reliance.

next time someone comes at me with some foolish questions as if it is my job to....open their eyes, really....i'll just link them to this blog to give them my take on it.

here's the message:

you cant convince me that people of color have been targeted in their infant mortality rate & with cancer...that is reaching
especially in the article talking about black hair products and increased risk of cancer apposed to whites.I studied cosmetology.I know what is in a relaxer.there is no natural and safe option to change the hair chemestry to restructure curl pattern in the way of a relaxer. the pH level is in the range of depilatories and drano.people should never use them anyway.hair oils are available non-aerosol & all natural.most hair & skin products can be made naturally.BPA and other toxins are found in MOST plastics...not just hair product containers.just like the food we eat we should always know what we are exposing ourselves to.
lack of education is a choice.we have public schools.there are many FREE outlets to find education.we are not limited to private schooling here.
incarceration rate is an individual choice...no ones circumstances MAKES someone commit a crime.they make that choice.

I have not been living in a bubble.i do believe there are racist people in our country, but i will NOT believe there is a social and economic conspiracy against people of color.

also many cultures are represented in my family,
hispanic,black and native american.My best friend who calls me sister is black and she has never made me feel like that there is some grudge between our races.I'm sure she is aware of racism in the world but it has NEVER kept her from doing anything or getting what she wanted out of life.I have never hear her one time say to me that her skin color has been a barrier to her progress.

And i can tell you've experienced racism in the south toward me by black people.. completely unwarranted...because for some reason southern black people still think that all white people are automatically racist...i am not an didnt deserve it.some people have this chip on their shoulder and its made out of some paranoia that is fed to them.

I'll have you know I love our military.our military has nothing to have shame over..we arent like the nazis exterminating a the jews.we fight wars when we feel it's necessary & we take it abroad to keep the fight of our soil.we search out the threat and stop it,we dont wait for it to come at us...just like this war.9/11 targeted american citizens of many races...not just white people.and our military is full of people of color.our enlistment is voluntary so they make the same choice to be a solidier and serve in our wars.and all the destruction that was brought to other countries we hire contractors to rebuild it,we didnt just leave it.we have started schools & job training there as well.we've tried to bring democratic votes.we've been there training thier own people with military and police training to better equip them in achieving THEIR goals for their country.

and how is it that our president is african american if white people seem to be always taking the advantage of power?he is the MOST powerful man in the united states..
[but hey maybe his white mother really isnt dead and is actually behind the scenes pushing her white people agenda into his politics?...maybe you can find a way to expose that conspiracy.]

And if this country isnt good enough for you...and you're here by "circumstance"...how bout you move to africa or the middle east and try and voice your concerns there?...i'm pretty sure you wont have the opportunies of expression like you have the rights to here.

These things you have said are really offensive to me & it shocks me to hear from someone i thought i once knew.By your last paragraph especially i can see now you are a racist & we cannot be friends anymore.I'm sorry to say.

yeeeaaa...absolute foolishness. i would give my response to this, but i think thats the point of this entire blog. and to clarify, my most recent facebook link was a link to an article showing the hazardous chemicals in black haircare products and one of my previous messages to her mentioned the (daunting) disparities in the rates of healthcare, poverty, etc. between people of color and whites.
comment. think. criticize.

"One should die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly." -Nietzsche

2010-12-24T00:17:00.001-08:00

i just found this video putting the philosophies of Fredrich Nietzsche more into context. very interesting.

Nietzsche is probably my favorite western philosopher, which i think is due to equal parts insanity and ingenuity. his work has inspired me in so many ways. he's typically labeled a nihilist or fatalist, or just....depressing, but i read his stuff, and i'm inspired to just go live life on the brink, saying "fuck you" to any naysayers. thats his philosophy. there are no hesitations or mediocrity with him- you live life and have the confidence to face risks or die; you attack life with all your might or kill yourself; LIVE or DIE. it's crazy, on some level, but....inspiring depending on your situation. and all this is aside from his views on Christianity, Abrahamic religions, theology, etc. i just really admire how theres no fear or inhibitions with him. he was fearless when it came to religion, authority, and tradition. and thats rare.

that being said, he was a misogynist. and as an advocate of feminism, it's difficult to respect such a person. but, i do believe that had he been able to get past his personal experiences with the women in his life, he could have been a leading feminist. i think when he speaks about women, he is speaking from a place of pain (then again, isn't every misogynist coming from some place of pain?), and not from that area in his brain that produced the brilliance in his other philosophies.

anyway, check it out. this is part 2 of 3, which i thought was the most interesting, but theres 2 more parts to it:

comment. think. criticize. check out Thus Spoke Zarathustra-a personal inspirational book. and The Antichrist would be a great stocking stuffer for your Christian pals....

changes

2010-12-19T15:51:00.001-08:00

so i've left my beloved city of brooklyn to come back to the south. mmm....

one of my friends said living in NYC made you feel as though you're part of something bigger. and that is so true on many levels. moving from such a vibrant and diverse city to a place with almost no diversity thats about as vibrant as a coma feels like...meh...=/. yes, i have to resort to emoticons to describe my feelings right now.

i think one of the biggest things i'll miss is living in a colored community. that probably made the most impact on me. the comfort of being in a store, a sidewalk, a bank, or subway cart in which i'm not the only person of color is....beautiful; it's a level of comfort i cannot describe. it wasn't until i was in a subway cart with nothing but black and brown folks (because my neighborhood was mainly West Indians) that the feelings of being the only black person in....almost every situation i can recall growing up...really surfaced and solidified.

bell hooks and Henry Louis Gates Jr. both talk about growing up in black communities and how it felt so good to come home from being out in their jobs or school, to come back to where you can just be you without having the weight of representing every single person that has your skin color. moving to NYC is the first time i've felt that. never once did i take that for granted.

from here there is a Bachelor's in Anthropology and a minor in Religious Studies. from here theres change that will hopefully get me employed with a job i actually enjoy. from here theres changes, which i welcome. changes like these are a great time for self evaluation; evaluating where i've been, what positive changes i've made, what i've learned from those changes, what i hope to change in the future, etc.

i will be visiting nyc maybe...7, 8....15 times a year ....just to keep myself centered.

comment. whatever. send me positive vibes.

2010-12-06T12:28:00.000-08:00

Civil War re-enactments and other festivities saturated in White Privilege

2010-12-06T09:09:00.001-08:00

recently, i had a discussion on Tumblr about how people celebrate (do re-enactments) of the Civil War and/or other historical events from the Antebellum south and what exactly these events are saying. a fellow Tumblr remarked that she and/or her ex participated in Civil War re-enactments and that it was really just a chance to get dressed up for history buffs. and i've just read about how the 50th anniversary of the secession is coming up either now or soon and all the parties and whatnot that will be planned in celebration.

why is it that the LOSING side of the war is always so eager to bring it up and have celebrations surrounding it? losers are supposed to sulk and whine about what could have/should have been done better, mourn their dignity, pride, and self-respect, and then MOVE ON. this is with wars, civil disputes, basketball games, and marching band competitions. i don't know why Mr.Charlie and the rest of his imps feels as though he is exempt from this rule. ??

considering i'm from the south, this topic is not a new one to me. going to school with most whites wearing shirts with the confederate flag on it (along with hats, belt buckles, hair bows, necklaces, backpacks, cars, school supplies, and other memorabilia), there were plenty of people eager to defend The South when negative sentiments were expressed. a shirt i recall is the one with the confederate flag that says "i'm offended that you're offended". it should say "i'm offended this makes you recall slavery, lynchings, and the compete subjugation of your people....it should make you recall well-trained horses in Confederate colors and those good ole Antebellum values!"

aside from that, i've had some more in-depth conversations with people on Myspace political forums and in person about the role slavery played in the events. most southerners (and/or Republicans) will contend that slavery was not an important role in the war. states rights, and laws regarding self-government (or small government) were the main reasons for the war. this goes against what i'd learned in nearly all my history classes, but the again, these classes have left out too much for me not to be skeptical about their curriculum.

so i've been doing more research myself. Wikipedia and the National Park Service have written some articles about the main issue in the war. and it ain't states' rights. here is what Mississippi had to say when it seceded:

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery...Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money [the estimated total market value of slaves], or we must secede the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property."

many apologists of the south would like to mention the fact that most white southerners (2/3rds, to be more exact) and those that fought in the war did not own slaves, therefore the issue could not have been slavery. but the southerners that did not own slaves were working and poor classes whites. and to my knowledge, no nation has ever went to war with even a regard for the poor and working class. the rich (powerful) individuals control almost all issues with any government. in the South, they were slave-owners whose main source of wealth was slavery. even now, the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the working/poor classes of Americans and all to do with various corporations' monetary interests. yet, as in the Civil War, the main individuals on the battle ground are working and poor class individuals that will gain nothing from fighting. and besides the superiority whites self-imposed over blacks, what did the South have prior to the war that was so important? what is so important and singular to the South that white southerners feel the need to celebrate on nearly a daily basis that the Union was against? oh, right-SLAVERY.

but this issue and this post isn't so much about the Civil War as it is about race relations and who comes out of history looking gallant and/or neutral and who does not.

if whites who support the south can now tell a history in which it was not as gruesome and sickening as it really was, their self-pride is restored. knowing that you come from people who lynched blacks and sold their genitals as souvenirs in front of cheering mobs is not a story one would want to tell their grandchildren. and likewise, theres almost never any mention of slavery in any Civil War reenactments (which i believe take place annually) and there will be no mention of in these upcoming events. the lives of those most effected by the war (non-whites) are non-existent...yet again. these events are done by people who have the privilege of looking into their history and not seeing the complete dismantling of their ancestors' basic human rights. and they're CELEBRATING it.

and this is my main issue with these events-it is a continuation of the white-washing of history. in most public school textbooks, educational lectures, and historic events like the upcoming ones, the perspective; the lives; the basic human struggles of non-whites are too often left out, forgotten, ignored, or glossed over. the more knowledge i gain about the past the more enraged i am that i haven't know these facts before; the more dismayed i am about the "education" we receive in public schools. we see this in what has happened to the Arizona school system, we see it in our national holidays such as Columbus Day and Thanksgiving, and now we see it with these commemoration events. i've talked about my disgust with the whitewashing of American history before, so i won't go into it again. these upcoming events just drive home the point that we as communities need to start educating our children. it is not up to the oppressor to educate the oppressed. mis-education or no education at all is tantamount to their power.

we need to make it mandatory that every time history is mentioned, the race relations and what they have done to our respective communities and relations be made evident. every Confederate flag should be shown alongside a photo like the one below (there are plenty photos more gruesome, but i'd rather not show those. if you haven't seen them, however, you should look them up). and every time some trumpet is sounded to honor the Confederate states, someone should be blasting Strange Fruit by Billie Holiday. the minute we forget what happened to our people is the minute it will happen again.

i'm going to be in the south during the planned parade in Montgomery, Alabama, and considering i'm about an hour and a half away from there, i'll more and likely be protesting the event in some form or fashion. the NAACP is planning to protest, but if they plan to be peaceful about it, i'll be doing my demonstration on my own.

comment. think. criticize. if you're in the south and want to join me in protest, hit me up.

also, check out the post about this topic at a blog i follow.

Lost Kingdoms of Africa

2010-12-02T11:51:00.000-08:00

a friend sent me a link to this video about the lost civilizations of Nubia. very very interesting. i think everyone; every single person should watch this. i think the majority of people on earth (black, brown, or other) believe that besides Egypt, the rest of Africa was a bunch of savages singing and dancing all day. we may have moved past the word "savage" as of recent times, but we still know nothing about these Nubian, South African, and Central African civilizations. Henry Louis Gates Jr. does a similar voyage to West Africa in his short series Wonders of the African World, and interestingly enough, this is the first i'm hearing about most of these facts and discoveries. theres iron work dating back to the 6th century in places like Chad, Nigeria, and Benin. why have i never heard about this?

anyway, watch the film. it is in 6 parts. also, check out the others he does in Benin and Zimbabwe.

Claudette Colvin v. Rosa Parks

2010-12-02T10:39:00.000-08:00

recently, the anniversary arose of the time Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus, which became a catalyst for the civil rights movement and many subsequent movements. her individual contribution should be celebrated and appreciated for as long as our memories permit. however, i would like to talk about another case that was very similar to Rosa Parks but did not warrant the national outcry and media attention as Rosa's case.

the story of Claudette Colvin is one few people know mainly because they weren't supposed to know. 9 months prior to the Parks incident, Colvin refused to give up her seat to a white person, was forced off the bus, and arrested. similar to the Parks incident in nearly every aspect with the exception of the individual doing the civil disobedience. Colvin was dark-skinned, 15 years old, and living in a less than middle class neighborhood. soon after her arrest, she got pregnant out of wedlock, which, to the bible-thumpers of the movement, was a ticket to hell.

in the past year or so i've been learning more and more about the black female perspective of the civil rights movement, and it's very disheartening, if not frustrating. the article noted this- "Garrow believes attention to Colvin is a healthy corrective, because "the real reality of the movement was often young people and often more than 50 percent women." The images you most often see are men in suits." this is patriarchy at its finest, and at worst, eurocentrism.

what does it say about the leaders of the movement when they waited until the "right" ("right" meaning light-skinned, middle-class and uber-christian) person came along?

i think it is the epitome of assimilation to want to present ourselves to the oppressor only in the way the oppressor deems fit. white people judged us by Eurocentric standards, and we began to do the same. so much so, that we compromised the integrity of a supposed revolution for it. and all this is aside from the way the Black Panthers treated their female counterparts, or the fact that women weren't allowed to speak at Martin Luther King Jr's March to Washington.

one could argue that this as an attempt at a well-planned revolution. and had Rosa not been "presentable" in her appearance, we might still be fighting for basic things like desegregation (although i personally would side with segregation). but we should not and should never have compromised our realities for a revolution. the reality was that not all blacks were light-skinned and well versed in the bible and waiting for marriage to have sex. some of us didn't have "good hair" or resume-worthy social lives. and they needed to see that; WE needed to see that in order to know just how necessary and cathartic this movement was.

and this is why i personally would have sided with the Black Panthers and maybe even the Nation of Islam. i feel too many times that the movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. was too acceptable; too presentable. too often it feels as though they were asking the oppressor for equality, whereas the alternative (black panthers/nation of islam) was saying "this is my afro. my name is Blackity Black Black. say hello to my rifle....bitch". and thats how it should have been! we were angry and were beyond justified in that rage. a revolution is a REVOLUTION. it is not something planned out and calculated by certain patriarchal males sitting at a round table judging whether female A refusing to give up her seat on the bus has skin light enough to present to the white oppressor. theres a reason why we're STILL having issues of racism, colorism, and sexism in this country as well as within the black community.

if anything, i think more stories like these should come out so that we as a community can analyze and critique every single aspect of it.....and maybe get on with a real revolution...

think. comment. criticize.

to kill or not to kill. that is the question.

2010-12-01T10:35:00.000-08:00

last night me and a co-worker of mine had an interesting conversation about one of those ethical/moral mental experiments...which i love. this took me back to my Intro to Philosophy and Intro to Ethics classes in which we did plenty of these plus more. probably my two most favorite classes ever.

"so, you have two rooms. one has your mother in it and the other has 20 pregnant women in it. you have to blow up one. which one do you choose?" he asked.

"i'd blow up the room with the 20 preggo women...." i said.

"WHAT?! how could you do that!?" he said, surprised.

we went into a discussion about why he chose to kill his mother and why i chose not to and what that says about each of our morals. it was an interesting conversation. what would you do in that situation (and this question has a presupposition that you are on somewhat good terms with your mother. if your mother was Mommy Dearest, the experiment loses its intentional dilemma)? he chose to kill his mother because he felt that choosing otherwise would be selfish. these are 20 women AND 20 babies that have yet to live, so....the more the merrier, i guess.

i ended up arguing that i would save my mother because these are 20 pregnant women, but they are insignificant in my life. yes, it is selfish, but i'm content with that....to some extent; more content with it than the alternative. in addition, i'm not a fan of Utilitarianism; quantity does not always trump quality.

i think these experiments are interesting because they get people to look at their morals and ethics at face value. in this experiment, my co-worker would save 20 pregnant women, and he feels as though it is of higher or better moral value than the alternative. but theres 20 women (a couple hundred times over) dying everyday. with a couple hundred dollars for a hospital, 10 times that could be saved in some remote areas. although i'm not making the case that throwing money at issues such as poverty is going to change the issue... this is just to show that 20 women can easily be saved on a daily basis and the commoner that says he'll save 20 pregnant women is only saying they'll do it to make themselves feel better about their morals.

we live in societies that encourage and praise the few individuals that live disgusting lavish lifestyles. theres 10% (for example) of our people living in ridiculous mansions while more than triple that are living in poverty. we all know this. yet almost all of us still aspires to be that rich fuck with a solid gold toilet.

we're okay with 20 or more people perishing (be it through death or an impoverished life) on a daily basis, it just isn't okay in these types of experiment because it's in your face-you have to look at it and judge yourself. we tend not to or not want to do that on a daily basis. or so, thats my take on it. that being said, i did choose my mom to live...so on some level i've either become cold-hearted to where the thought of 20 people dying doesn't phase me...or i've come to some level of content with my own selfishness.

heres another experiment that i asked in my ancient myspace blog a year or so ago:

so you're in a course or class in school in which they're testing people's psychological thoughts on certain foods. up next on the menu is human. this man recently died from nothing viral or disease related, and donated his body to science and scientific research. they've cooked him up just like chicken nuggets. do you taste or not?

ultimately, this experiment pulls at our thoughts on cannibalism and the taboos surrounding it. i LOVE hearing people's reactions to this.

so, tell me your thoughts and choices to these experiments and why.

also, a good book to look at with a ton of moral experiments is The Pig That Wants to be Eaten by Julian Baggini.

Christian Scott-The Eraser (Thom Yorke Cover)

2010-11-26T02:23:00.000-08:00

An Appeal for Ancestor Veneration

2010-11-25T11:05:00.000-08:00

so today is Thanksgiving Day, or as some in more conscious circles call it, Thanks-taking Day. i won't do the typical rant about how celebrating this day is the acceptance and support of a country's racist, genocidal, and destructive history, all while placing the white historical perspective at a higher level of importance and continuing to devalue and ignore histories of colored communities. well, i guess that was a rant...

anyway, i've been thinking a lot lately about this idea of ancestor veneration. here's a little background info on ancestor veneration if you wanted nice historical introduction. a number of indigenous societies practice AV, most notably for me are the Mexican, African and Chinese.

i volunteer with an organization that helps to sustain practices of the Mexican culture, and one of my favorite events is the Dia De Los Muertos (Day of the Dead). a huge altar is the main focus of the 3 day event. fruits, breads, candles, flowers along with photos and mementos of family members that have passed don the altar. it isn't uncommon to see smaller altars in the homes of many individuals that celebrate this holiday. also, the decorations and face-painting of skeletons and typically "scary" imagery that accompany the celebration have a really interesting concept behind them. in our western society, we typically think of death as something negative, bad, frightening or even taboo. but Dia De Los Muertos is a celebration of the life of the dead; celebrating them, their energy, their thought and goals; celebrating the time we had with them. skeletons are not just bones that signify morbidity and gloom-they're the frame of someone important; the remnants of a loved one. it's a beautiful celebration all around. while i have read about ancestor veneration in African and Chinese societies, Dia De Los Muertos is the only one i have actually experienced.

and i've been thinking what an insightful and positive idea ancestor veneration is and could be for many communities damaged by colonialism and the like. if African Americans, for example, began to think (say in a weekly or monthly celebration or practice...maybe along with an altar?) of our ancestors more often than most of us do (which is usually limited to the month of February), what positive impacts would this have in our lives and in our community?

if we were constantly thinking about those that have died so we could have simple privileges (human rights, really) we overlook, how much more humbling and appreciative would we be? people think about college as something everyone does, but what if we were constantly reminded that our people have been denied until quite recently proper education? would the drop-out rate for black youths be as depressing as it is now?

a while back, i was reading Black Boy by Richard Wright and theres a chapter in which he details how he began to educate himself. he worked for a white man that allowed him to check out books from the library using his card. the librarian questioned him about his need for these books and the became suspect at the subjects, he had to keep them hidden most of the time, and even his friends and family looked at him funny. "why you reading them books?... you think you better than us? ....you need to put them books down and learn you a trade." these are the types of remarks he heard from his own people. if it were found that he was actually getting these books for himself, he could have been physically harmed. like....damn! really? my library card began to have a certain glow after reading that anecdote. not to mention the fact that slaves were likely to be whipped or even killed for learning how to read. how special now, does a book, a diploma, a library card, or self-education as a whole become?

how treasured does one's own sanity, dignity, well-being, or autonomy become when we realize the types of obstacles your ancestors had to endure to get these things? those enslaved were even robbed of choosing their own diets. if your realize that the same shit you're eating at McDonalds is not that much different from the lard and animal innards our people were forced to eat, how would that change our diets and eventually our overall health (which is quite disheartening). how would our consumer choices, life choices, and political activities change? for those of us that have a colonized past, the act of just telling the stories and histories of some of our peoples is quite revolutionary in itself.

the only issue i see is the religious (Muslims and Christian, mostly) communities seeing this as "witchery" and maybe even devil worship. many western anthropologists that studied African societies termed this practice incorrectly for some time as "ancestor worship" (the wiki link shows the issue of this term). and i can see religious individuals assuming the same, as it does suggest reincarnation. but, i think with a little explaining, i think it can work alongside their beliefs, considering it's really just respect and remembrance for the dead, and not actual worship. it also might be very painful for some of us to look at the history of our respective ancestors, but ultimately i think it will be a catalyst for change as well as education in our communities.

comment. think. consider it a part of your day...week...month? be thankful-whatever your situation.

2010-11-06T14:43:00.000-07:00

Racism in Religious Imagery

2010-11-06T13:35:00.001-07:00

so i mentioned a while ago how i had just discovered all these old Phil Donahue episodes on youtube. one in particular that i want to discuss is the one entitled "Was Jesus Black?" in this episode, Phil has various black people on the show discussing the historical references and arguments to support the idea that Jesus was black.

while i am fascianted with nearly every aspect of religion, i am only vaguely concerned with the racial make-up of Jesus. theres barely any evidence to show he existed at all, let alone any to give insight to his "race". black people should spend more time questioning the morals and subliminal messages of the bible than the racial make-up of any of its important figures. but thats another post. i wanted to expand on the comments made by the (self-identified) white people that phoned in to offer their opinions.

the main sentiment of the white individuals in the audience and on the phone was- "what does his skin color have to do with it?...i don't care if he's black, green, or hot pink!....it's sacreligious to speak about the phenotype of god...etc." what i find interesting is that it didn't seem much of a concern for the white people calling in to question why it would be such an issue to worship a god (or god in human form) that looks nothing like you. then again, it doesn't take much of an imagination to wonder why some individuals have such difficulty stepping into the perspective of someone of a minority race when our perspective has been, for the most part, ignored, distorted or completely left out in most textbooks, history lessons, and general historical education. the inferiority complex evident even today in many (most) black and brown people has to be examined from all axes. religion may not be the arena most people explore, but with people of color being some of the most religious in the country, this field has to be studied.

growing up in a non-denominational church in southern Alabama, the only figure in my religious upbringing that resembled me in was satan and his demons. they were the only dark-skinned individuals in ANY religious imagery. in contrast, every depiction of God, Jesus, Mary, Joseph, Noah, Moses, or any angel was white. Asians, Pacific Islanders, Blacks and Native Americans did not exist. at the time, it didn't have much effect on me (or so i didn't think). living in a country in which most shows, movies, television commericials, etc....are white, white, and white, it wasn't something that stuck out to me. every now and then the pastor of the church i grew up it mentioned the verse in Revelations that talks about Jesus having "hair like wool...", which got a reaction. but that isn't enough to reverse the overwhelming racial preferences in Christianity.

i don't consdier myself a Christian presently, but the idea of a white god and a black devil never was a factor in that. and i'm wondering now, why is that? why is it easy for many black and brown people to accept this idea of a white god? what kind of effect does this have on the personal esteem when all the people that look like you in the Bible dwell in hell? does it have any effect on our thoughts?

i've recently read about the Black Madonna and about how the imagery of Christianity at one point and time was very black, but was changed once it reached the Americas. Europeans changed this imagery to fit themselves as a people, so why haven't we as blacks and browns changed the imagery to suit ourselves?

in some circles, it is happening. one of my aunts gave my mother a Bible with all the characters represented as black people a while back. it was the first bible i had seen like that; the first time i had seen a black Mary and Joseph holding a black baby with black wise men behind them. Afro-centric churches have changed the imagery of Jesus, but as far as the masses of black church-goers, i think the imagery is consistently white.

what have been your experiences with religious imagery? do you think it has effected your personal ideas on color, race, or nationality? do you think it effects the esteem of others? is it necessary to liken the imagery of your religious gods and goddesses to oneself? also, if one can change the imagery of religious figures so easily, and have it become near fact in many people's eyes....wouldn't it be equally easy (and possible) for one to do the same to the religious text itself; to the message of the Bible? can this be added to the argument that suggests Christianity was instrumental in the mental enslavement of Africans?

comment. think. criticize.

Language

2010-11-05T22:37:00.001-07:00

so i was in the language section of the library last week when i saw this book entitled Black Talk: Words and Phrases from the Hood to the Amen Corner by Geneva Smitherman. sounded interesting. so i checked it out. it's basically a dictionary of terms used mainly by African Americans, or at times, people of color living in urban settings. in addition to words and some interesting etymologies, it also contains an introduction that speaks the issue of "talking black" in professional settings, the history of it, and the somewhat recent contriversy in the school system with teachers actually wanting to teach "Ebonics". heres some words in the book (some of which i find hilarious):

B- 1)a form of address for a male or female, though more common for males; probably a shortened for of "Blood". "yo B, wassup?" sometimes the initial of the person's first name is substituted for "B." 2)euphemism for bitch.
Bidness- any personal affair, event, experience, or activity one is involved in. "i got some bidness to take care of" might refer to anything from paying a utility bill to confronting somebody about a deal that's gone awry. bidness is the AAE [African American English] pronunciation of "business".
Bumping Titties-fighting.
Call Myself/Yourself/Herself/etc. -to consider yourself to be doing something; to intend to do a thing without actually acheiving your objective. "girls, what you call yourself doing?" that is, what do you think you're doing?; and "i call myself having this dinner ready on time," that is, i had every intention of accomplishing that goal, but i didn't.
check yosef- monitor your words, actions, or behavior. "Yourself" pronounced yosef in AAE.
cock sucker- a man who is weak, passive, emasculated. derived from the notion that a man who performs oral sex is a weakling; the myth is that African American men don't go down on women.
cracker- a white person; a derogatory term. possibly derived from the sound of the master's whip during enslavement; by extension, any white person.
down south- any place south of the Mason-Dixon Line, once consdiered the most racist part of the United States. However, Malcolm X coined the expression "up south", to signify on the mythical notion, held by blacks for over a hundred years after emancipation, that the US north was free of segregation and racism.
European Negro- an African American who thinks like and identifies with European Americans, and who rejects black casues and the black community. also Afro-Saxon (older term).
God don't like ugly- a popular saying from the Oral Tradition, meaning that some negative action, behavior, or attitude is displeasing to the Creator, and you will be punished.
HNIC- Head Nigger in Charge; a black person put in charge by whites, usually not in charge of anything meaningful; generally functions to keep other blacks in line. also BNIC (Boss Nigger in Charge).
honky- a negative term for a white person. probably derived and borrowed from the name-calling and expression of resentment by settled European Americans against central and Eastern European immigrants, who were negatively referred to as "hunkies" (from 'Hungarians'). blacks, in competition with these immigrants in the first half of the twentieth century, generalized the term to all whites.
hoochie- a sexually promiscuous female.
kitchen- the hair at the nape of the neck, inclined to be the most curly (kinky) and thus the hardest part of straightened hair to keep from "going back".

some of the words in the book i have never heard until i moved to New York, and some i have never heard ever (bumping titties??), and some i have attempted to remove from my vocabulary. it's also very telling how many words in this book reference drugs and sex (almost every other word is code for crack, heroine, or oral sex). i like how she included possible origins of some words like "Cracker", supposedly coming from the sound of a whip.....interesting.

in any colonized society, the colonized subjects all have to deal with assimilation, even in ways we may not even dream. it seems that language, even today as yet another barometer for genuine assimilation-those who speak properly (that is, as European as possible) are seen as more intelligent, more professional, and possibly even wealthier. and in some circles, language can be an indicator of where one stands-someone speaking too "white" can be seen as a sell-out or someone out of touch with their roots. Chican@s who speak English and Spanish can give much insight to how language can/has effected the colonized subject. although English and Spanish are both the languages of the colonizers, Spanish has come be viewed as the language of the uneducated/poor.

oftentimes, i think we assume that these slang languaages are the dialects of the poor and uneducated, but really, it is the normal meandering of language. all countries and all societies have and/or have had proper and slang dialects. the American English is actually a slang version of the English from England. as is the English of South Africa, Australia, India, and Jamaica. one dialect is not any more intelligent than the other. i think it's important to remember that language is simply a tool for communication. and if one cannot comunicate with their own people, what is the purpose?

comment. think. speak unapologetically.

John Henrik Clarke

2010-11-05T15:26:00.000-07:00

"My main point here is that if you are the child of God and God is a part of you, the in your imagination God suppose to look like you. And when you accept a picture of the deity assigned to you by another people, you become the spiritual prisoners of that other people. " -John Henrik Clarke

i like learning about scholars whose works have been characteristic of many other scholars, but have yet to reach me for whatever reason. i've read a few times about John Henrik Clarke....a quote here or there, but i just recently saw a youtube video of him speaking about how Islam and Christianity have been instruments in the enslavement of African peoples (which is probably the most fascinating topic to me, period). theres actually a good number of videos on youtube of him speaking on various topics. coming from Union Springs, Alabama (very close to my hometown, Enterprise), a son of sharcroppers (which i've come to understand as slavery under a different name), a writer, historian, professor, a Pan-Africanist, and basically the pioneer of African Studies in the United States. his books are up on my reading list. here's one of his videos:

Fela Anikulapo Kuti

2010-10-22T11:32:00.001-07:00

i went to a party a week ago to celebrate Fela Kuti's birthday (he died in 1997). i've only seen a few videos of him on youtube, so this party actually opened me up more to him and his music. he's in this video speaking the truth, like he is in most. his songs are not only amazingly layered, sometimes with a full ensemble, but the lyrics are very subversive (speaking about colonialism, religion, black nationalism, politics, and social issues). i also really respect the visual art of his performances. his dancers and musicians were always stunning, while his dancers in particular were just ridiculous; amazing. i like that he chose to stay true to himself and his culture, his people, his gods, his language. here is one of my favorite songs of his i've managed to find on youtube.

Reblog: Female Genital Mutilation

2010-10-22T10:49:00.000-07:00

this is another reblog. i wanted to post this one because this is yet another topic that impacts many people in the world, and seems not to be talked about as much as it should be. i also wanted to post it because i have somewhat changed my tone when it comes to practices like these. in this post, i think it's pretty evident that i am more concerned with making moral statements about the individuals and societies that partake in this practice more than i am with understanding it in its cultural context. and until i fully live as someone in one of those societies, or at least have a conversation with someone that has undergone this practice, i cannot fully make a valid argument for or against this practice. too often, i think, many of us are concerned with moral judgements, even when it gets in the way of knowledge on a subject such as this one. here's the post:

i read a couple weeks back about this movie that was coming out starring model Liya Kebede in an autobiographical film about '80's model Dirie Waris. here is the film trailer:

after going through female genital mutilation and being married off at 13, Waris, a Somalian, was discovered in London by a model agent. after becoming famous, she shared her story and has started her own foundation whose sole purpose is to fight against Female Genital Mutilation. she has also written an autobiography entitled Desert Flower that i've been trying to get for the longest. i think someone stole it from the library.....i think this movie premiered at some type of film festival, so i may need to find it on the internet or wait for it to come out on DVD. this story interested me because it reminded me of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's autobiography Infidel. i think i read that about 2 years ago, and it was such an eye opening piece of work for me. i don't get emotional very often, but i cried a number of times throughout that book. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a native Somalian as well, underwent Female Genital Mutilation too. her grandmother held her down, while a man from their neighborhood (whose main occupation was to genitally mutilate females) cut off her clitoris with a rusty pair of scissors. he then stitched up her labia around her clitoris, which then was to be broken or cut open by her husband on their wedding night (although she escaped while on the trip to marry him). all while being administered no anesthesia, somewhere between the ages of 11 and 14. Ayaan recalls fainting when she urinated for some time after that episode. she is such an inspiration for me. not only has she gone on to educate herself, she's spoken out (at the risk of her life) against FGM as well as religiosity through her autobiographies and a film with the late Theo Van Gogh (a death threat for her was stabbed into his chest by religious extremists) and she's also served in Dutch Parliament.

i think this was the first time i'd read a personal account about Female Genital Mutilation, and i've since read a number of accounts (another to note, a book entitled Burned Alive by Souad). but every account is as horrific as the first. its difficult to even fathom someone doing that to one of the most sensitive areas of the body, but it happens all the time. The World health Organization has some facts about this "practice". and ReligiousTolerance.org has some background information/theories about the supposed reasoning behind FGM.

as a westerner, it is difficult to critique practices from areas of the world i have never been because even though i have read facts, personal accounts, and statistics on a certain topic, i have a western bias whether i want to or not. i will have an aversion to some things simply because it is not commonplace for me. however, i think the only way someone can be corrected or changed, in their opinions, is to put those opinions on the table. if your arguments aren't heard, then you're likely to stay stagnant-stagnant in you mental state, in your politics, in your personal life, in growth altogether. to me, progression IS life. if i am not progressing , then there is no point.

that being said, i acknowledge that i may be wrong in condemning this practice, however, i think its a deplorable practice that should be banned by any means necessary. some individuals choose to call it "female circumcision", but its nowhere near that of male circumcision. its MUTILATION in every sense of the word. males undergo mutilation as well, it is simply more common for males, especially in the United States to undergo it soon after birth. but males have the foreskin of their penises cut off, while females have their clitoris cut off, and then have their labia stitched up around the clitoris. men do not have issues with urination after FGM, like females, and males do not have a menses or have to go through childbirth, so its almost pointless to even attempt to compare the two.

aside from the immense pain that is experienced through FGM, females also have issues urinating, usually get infections or diseases, have hemoragging and genital ulcers soon after, with an increased chance of STD's such as HIV. after the labia is ripped or broken open by husbands, genital tears are likely to occur. and thats not including the complications that result from childbirth. this practice forces women to have Cesarean sections, and the death rate for children born from mothers that have undergone FGM is significantly less that that of other children born to women that have not undergone FGM, not to mention the heightened risk of death for girls themselves. and all of this is even more horrific considering that prepubescent girls undergo this. if adult women chose to go through this, i probably wouldn't feel as disgusted by this, but there are young girls that are held down against their will, mutilated without anesthesia, usually cut with some crude knife, scissors, pieces of glass or sharp metal.

i think its also necessary to note that, from what i've read, the societies that expect women to be mutilated, the reason is because men want a virgin when they are married, and considering the vagina is stitched shut under the labia, this is one way of ensuring chastity. but does this mean that these men have some type of fetish with chastity? arguably. but what society doesn't? a simple examination of terms like "slut", "hoe", and "tramp", can show you that women in our society are judged a good deal based on their levels of chastity. women that have a large number of sexual partners are considered the lowest of the low, while men that do it have their dicks gold plated and worshiped.
it should also be noted that i don't necessarily link this to any religion in particular. although i have many issues with religion, and believe that it impacts society negatively more often than not, there really is not any particular Surah (verse) in the Quran that promotes or mandates FGM. however, i do think that Islam and Christianity do a part in limiting the ideals of females and holding the chastity of females higher than anything else. think about the most praised female in the bible. Mary. she did what besides have a child-while supposedly maintaining her chastity? NOTHING. she did absolutely nothing. she was a virgin and a mother, and she's held as the ideal in the bible. i think once something becomes habit in a society, its difficult to deviate from that, regardless of how unreasonable it may be.

so whats the point of this post? i think its always good to get a different prespective on something, and hear about different practices from different parts of the world. it also forces you to think about your thoughts on morality as a whole.
is it wrong to condemn other cultures? to what extent? if you say "no", then does this include things like child sex slavery? or even genocide? if you say "yes", then where do you draw the line between an uninformed opinion and a valid argument? do i need to experience FGM in order to critique it?

watch the movie. help me find the movie. read their books. comment. think. criticize.

2010-10-22T10:35:00.000-07:00

Reblog: Malcolm X

2010-10-22T10:23:00.000-07:00

so i was on a blog i follow, and he began reposting old posts of his, just temporarily. and since i've had a change of scenery lately, i thought i might do the same, in case you may be interested in some of my old thangs. heres one about Malcolm X:

i read the book By Any Means Necessary by Malcolm X a month or so ago and its one of the most insightful books i've ever read. it is a compilation book of his speeches, interviews, radio broadcasts, NOI meetings and rallies.
i think its necessary for everyone to read reread and take heed at Malcolm's words because he seems to be misunderstood by many people who haven't read his actual words. in a political forum i was on a while, there was a discussion about him, and there were accusations of him being pro-violence, angry, and anti-white. even now, i think many people find it easier to identify with Martin Luther King Jr's path and not Malcolm's mainly because of these accusations.
he wasn't ant-white, he was pro-black. he was not violent, he simply understood the need for self-defense and did not sugarcoat the need for it. and yes, actually, he may have been angry. anyone who knew/knows the reality of the situation for being black in America should have also been angry. i think that anger is quintessential for change. and specifically for the black struggle in America, i think anger was/is fundamental; a prerequisite. bell hooks talks about having a rage that is more than justified against the white supremacist capitalist patriarchal country we live in in Killing Rage...a book i highly recommend. although, i must say that the Buddha raises a good polemic against violence, in favor or pacifism....
anywho...here's excerpts i found most insightful and relevant to the cause:

Spellman: what is your attitude toward Christian Ghandian groups?

malcolm: Christian? Ghandian? i don't go for anything thats nonviolent and turn-the-other-cheekish. i don't see how any revolution-i've never heard of a nonviolent revolution or a revolution that was brought about by turning the other cheek, and so i believe that it is a crime for anyone to teach a person who is being brutalized to continue to accept that brutality without doing something to defend himself. if this is what the christian-ghandian philosophy teached, then it is criminal-a criminal philosophy.

spellman: what is the program for acheiving your goals of separation?

malcolm: a better word to use that separation is independence. this word "separation" is misused. the thirteen colonies separated from England but they called it Declaration of Independence; they don't call it the Declaration of Separation, they call it the Declaration of Independence. when you're independent of someone you can separate from them. if you can't separate from them it means you're not independent of them. so what was your question?

spellman: what is your program for achieving your goals in independence?

malcolm: when the black man in this country awakens, becomes intellectually mature and able to think for himself, you will then see that the only way he will becomes independent and recongnized as a human being, he has to have what they have and he has to be doing for himself what others are doing for themselves. so the first step is to awaken him to this, and that is where the religion of Islam makes him morally more able to rise above the evils and the vices of an immoral society. and the political, economic, and social philosophy of black nationalism instills within him the racial dignity and the incentive and the confidence that he needs to stand on his own feet and take a stand for himself.

"Revolution is like a forest fire, it burns everything in its path. the people who are involved in a revolution don't become a part of the system-they destroy the system, they change the system. the genuine word for revolution is Umwaelzung which means a complete overturning and a complete change, and the negro revolution is no revolution. because it condemns the system and then asks the system that it has condemned to accept them into their system. that is not a revolution- a revolution changes the system, it destroys the system and replaces it with a better one."

"there can be no white-black solidarity until theres first some black solidarity. we have got to get our problems solved first..."

"it is we who have fought your battles for you, and have picked your cotton for you. we built this house that you're living in. it was our labor that built this house. you sat beneath the old cotton tree telling us how long to work or how hard to work, but it was our labor, our sweat and our blood that made this country what it is, and we're the only ones who haven't benefited from it. all we're saying today is, its payday-retroactive."

"no white person would go about fighting for freedom in the same manner that he has helped me and you to fight for our freedom.no, none of them would. when it comes to black freedom, then the white man freedom-rides and sits in, he's nonviolent, he sings "we shall overcome" and all that stuff. but when the property of the white man himself is threatened, he's not nonviolent. he's only nonviolent when he's on your side. but when he's on his side he loses all that patience and nonviolence...Our people aren't going to wait ten years. if this house is a house of freedom and justice and equality for all, if thats what it is, then lets have it. and if we can't all have it, then none of us will have it."

"i'm not bloodthirsty. i'm one of 22 million black people in this country who's tired of being the victim of hypocrisy by a country that supposedly practices democracy."

"prior to one hundred years ago, they didn't need tricks. they had chains. and they needed the chains because you and i hadn't yet been brainwashed thoroughly enough to submit to their brutal acts of violence submissively. prior to a hundred years ago, you has men like Nat Turner, that Brother Benjamin was talking about, and others, Toussaint L'Overture. none of them would submit to slavery. they'd fight back by any means necessary. and it was only after the spirit of the black man was completely broken and his desire to be a man was completely destroyed, then they has to use different tricks. they just took the physical chains from his ankles and put them on his mind."

"we don't organize any black man to be a democrat or a republican because both of them have sold us out."

"...the oppressed never uses the same yardstick as the oppressor."

"question 22: the first guy that was shot at the moment of the Independence War was a negro.
malcolm: he wasn't shot for negroes. he was shot for america. i don't want to take away from Crispus Attucks, but he was shot. he was a slave. his people were slaves.
question 23: he was a slave perhaps, but not on his knees-on his feet.
malcolm: sir, you can take a dog...and sic him on somebody else and he's fearless. i'd like to give you an example. no matter how fearless a dog is, you catch him out on the street, stamp your foot; he'll run because you're only threatening him. his master has never trained him how to defend himself; but that same dog, if you walk through the master's gate, will growl and bite. why will he growl and bite over there and not growl and bite over here? over here he's growling and biting for the defense of his master and the benefit of his master, but when his only interests are threatened, he has no growl. nto only Crispus Attucks, but many of us in America have died defending America. we defend our master. we're the most violent soldiers America has when she sends us to Korea or to the South Pacific or to Saigon, but when our mothers and our own property are being attacked we're nonviolent. Crispus Attucks laid down his life for America, but would he have laid down his life to stop the white man in America from enslaving black people?"

2010-10-14T11:00:00.000-07:00

"Cornered"

2010-10-09T08:20:00.000-07:00

this is a piece by the artist Adrian Piper entitled "Cornered". she deals with race and labels such as "black" and "white" and overall racial classifications in a very interesting context. part two is here. got this video via the blogger Abagond.

comment. criticize. think. check out her other installations on youtube.

word of the moment

2010-10-06T17:23:00.000-07:00

dictionary.com has where you can sign up for e-mail updates for words of the day. and i'm reading The Watkin's Dictionary of Religions and Secular Faiths by Gerald Benedict and theres so many interesting concepts, philosophies, beliefs, as well as basic history lessons he offers in just the definition of one word that i thought i'd share them in the same manner. and i don't know how often i'll do these, or find one interesting, so thats why it's "of the moment".

Fakir- Islam. Arab. fakir. 'poor'. someone who has adopted a mendicant lifestyle or who is in need of God. it is also a general, alternative term for a Dervish, or anyone living as a Sufi and practicing Sufi rituals. Originally, the name was accorded to a Muslim who has carried out missionary work, thus aiding the spread of Islam. the tradition is based on a saying of Muhammad's 'Al-fakr fakhri', 'poverty is my pride'. in Islamic tradition there are two kinds of fakir, the ba shiar, those within the law and the be shiar, those without the law. the difference is simply one of Muslim orthodoxy, the former practicing within the terms of Islamic Doctrine, the latter, although claiming to be Muslims, freer and more open in their associations. the two groups founded fraternities from c.770 CE. frequently these fraternities were formed from secular occupations, like fisher-men and camel drivers. the be shiar fraternities practiced extreme asceticism, even self-mortification. the concept and practices are by no means limited to Islam and have parallels, both with the medieval Christian friars, and with Indians who practice extravagant forms of asceticism, like walking on red hot coals, lying on a bed of nails or remaining immersed in water for long periods of time. others reputedly remain in one place until birds nest in their hair or creepers grow around their limbs. as with all such groups the object is to gain spiritual merit by a renunciation of the world.

the photos at the top were the results of googling the word.

comment. think.

where in the world is Phil Donahue?

2010-10-02T12:16:00.001-07:00

i just found this video of an old Phil Donahue show entitled "The Issue of Race" in eight parts. what ever happened to the Phil Donahue show anyway? another video popped up on the sidebar of his show entitled "Was Jesus Black?". lol...if Phil isn't dead by now, can we start a petition to get this man back on television? give him the rights of the BET network since they clearly don't know what to do with it...

anyway, this episode includes Sistah Souljah (hip hop artist and activist), Dhoruba Bin Wahad (a former Black Panther), Cornel West, Alan Keyes (republican asswipe) and others. i really like how everyone just threw themselves out on the table, some let go of some rage.

it's interesting to look at this-filmed sometime in the last 80's/early 90's and see that a lot of the things they are discussing; problems in the black community; problems in dealing with race have not really changed. i had never heard of Dhoruba Bin Wahad, but he brings up some really good points and i really respect how he integrated the issue that is patriarchy into his arguments when the others were mainly focused on race. and Cornel West brings up some very good points as well. i figgin love him. i love how he seems so passionate about everything he says. theres much i disagree with him on (in the area of religion), but i don't see how anyone cannot like this man. and aside from that white man who was talking nonsense i didn't really dislike anyone with the exception of Alan Keyes. i don't know if anyone remembers, but he was in the primaries of the presidential race in '04. and he was exactly the same in '04 as he was in this video-a joke. talking complete nonsense nowhere near the core of the problem. he's like a black Sarah Palin with a penis. and it's sad that he and Michael Steele are poster children for Black Republicans.

interestingly enough, it seems as though all the people on the panel want the same things for our communities and our relations, but are still arguing.

here is the first clip (1 of 8):