Nightline Reinforces Stereotypes Of Lonely Black Women

Thanks to Kenichea for showing me this video.

Nightline just did a "poor black woman are lonely and single" story. I just LOVE these. I decided to provide a summary:

I love how we break down the numbers of black men, and we show the quintessential single black women professional and all her lonely single professional black friends.

Then we have Steve Harvey. Steve Harvey is a relationship expert. I guess being a comedian and being married three times makes for great relationship advice. Steve informs us that black women don't need to settle, but rather compromise (read black women need to settle, we're just saying it differently this time).

Then the story completely brushes over interracial dating and pretend that isn't an option at all, as no non-black man will bring you home to his mother. Hell the non-black man who isn't willing to bring you home to his mother, isn't a man worth dating, move on to the next one. That's a whole different blog posting.

So we see Steve Harvey again, this time his advice to all the single professional black women at the table is to get them an old black man. Thanks Steve, we all want a daddy to protect us.

Now that we've solved the single black woman crisis by supplying them with geriatric black men, the race will continue to live on.


If you can't tell, I really don't like these stories. It makes black women, even choice ones seem desperate, lonely, and eager to get a man. Then black women are always told we must "compromise" or "settle". Then we are told we are not coveted and no man of any race really wants us or is willing to date us.

What a confidence booster. It makes me feel good to know even the cream of the crop black women are down trodden and desperate.

Thanks Nightline for reinforcing stereotypes.


Will white men use you?

It's often been said by comments on this blog that for white men they typically don't approach black women because they think black women are not interested. This video seems to indicate though if a woman pursues a man, especially a man of a different race, she will get rejected. I think she is also saying that black men have an advantage in the interracial dating game because men are typically the pursuers, where as women are expected to wait to be pursued.

This brings up some issues. If you actually show an interest in a man, is this a turn off to the man? Or if you actually pursue a man, does that mean you will end up used? If a black woman pursues a white man or any non black man, will she get rejected, or does this apply to men of any race?


Do You Think We Could Ever Go Back To This?

This is some vintage Sesame Street. Jesse Jackson back in the 1970s before he made a complete ass of his self telling children no matter their race, income, or social standing that they are important. The fact that Jesse even mentioned race and the fact Jesse Jackson was even on the show, would cause a big public outcry as pedaling reverse racism to white people and indoctrinating our children into socialism and marxist beliefs.

Hey at least I have this to watch:

Jesse Jackson Reads Seuss - Click here for more blooper videos


Why The "Current War On Christmas" Proves The Media Can't Be Trusted

I'm sure everyone has heard about the "War On Christmas." You know, "Jesus Is The Reason For The Season" and "You can't take the Christ out of Christmas," or that if you use Xmas instead of Christmas, you are taking Christ out of Christmas. You should also know I'm a Godless liberal/communist/socialist heathen. Because being liberal means you can't be religious, only Godless. It's true because Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck tells us so. The media also tells us that "political correctness" has taken over. We are all living in fear and it's all the fault of the liberals and PC police. Or so people want you to think. I lost faith in our media a long time ago, but it seems things are getting worse and there are less sources of reliable information out there because now we have media trying to compete with Twitter and Facebook instead of actually doing something like finding out the truth.

A few weeks ago I caught Bill O'Reilly. He was upset at the evil liberals spreading their anti-Christian agenda. The American Humanist Association hates baby Jesus and runs down religion because they say you can be a good person without being religious. I will post the ad:

I will also post Bill O'Reilly's response. It doesn't seem all that fair and balanced to me. Isn't that what Fox news is all about?

I missed in the ad where baby Jesus and Christians were run down. Why is proclaiming you don't believe in God an affront to Christmas or Christianity. Jesus wasn't born on December 25th. It's estimated Jesus was born in September. When we celebrate Christmas now falls on the old winter festival of Yule or Yule-Tide.

Now the new outrage. A kid was suspended from school for drawing Jesus. At least that is what his dad said. Comments turned to blaming the left, political correctness, and the evils of diversity. Being accepting of other cultures is an insult to America. Thank Glenn Beck and your coded words of "special interest" and "us vs. them" arguments. A boy drew Jesus on the cross, and per his father he was suspended for the picture and given a psychiatric evaluation. All because his teacher asked him to draw a Christmas picture. Another assault on Christianity.

Then the school came out with a rebuttal to the story. Apparently the picture the media is plastering all over the place is not the picture that got the kid in trouble. He also was never suspended. The teacher never gave an assignment about Christmas. Now the father is backpedaling and unable to return calls.

The media plastered this story all over the place yesterday, but the response from the school seems to be overlooked by the media themselves and the readers. I wonder why?

This is why for the conservatives who say the mainstream media is biased have no leg to stand on. This is why our news industry is failing. Facts no longer matter, you make sure you get the people riled up, even without merit.


Caster Semenya They Still Don't Know

I've written about Caster Semenya before here and here. I find it odd that people provided links proving she was a man and indicating she was had to be a man because she is ugly, but yet major newspapers around the world couldn't confirm it. As of November, we still don't know. The IAFF doesn't want to make the results public,but it has been shown that Semenya will get to keep her medal and her prize money, and as it stands right now in the race that set off this whole mess, she ran as a woman. But, I will still get folks proclaiming this woman is a man, and have no problems with the way this whole case, which should have been private, was completely given trashy tabloid treatment all over the world.

South African Runner’s Sex-Verification Result Won’t Be Public
Published: November 19, 2009
One of the most public and controversial cases of sex verification in sports has apparently been resolved, at least in part, but the answers to some important questions have not been made public.

Fabrice Coffrini/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
A woman protested outside the International Olympic Committee’s headquarters in Switzerland on Thursday.
Enlarge This Image

Anja Niedringhaus/Associated Press
Caster Semenya won the 800-meter gold medal at the world championships in Berlin.
South Africa’s sports ministry said in a statement Thursday that Caster Semenya, 18, the world champion 800-meter runner, had reached an agreement with track and field’s world governing body to keep the gold medal and prize money she won at the world championships in August.

Most notably, however, the sports ministry did not say whether Semenya would be allowed to continue to compete as a woman. The statement also did not disclose the results of sex-verification tests she had undergone.

“As such, there will be no public announcement of what the panel of scientists has found,” the sports ministry said. “We urge all South Africans and other people to respect this professional, ethical and moral way of doing things.”

Semenya, who attends the University of Pretoria, could not be reached for comment. Her coach, Michael Seme, said in a telephone interview from Pretoria that Semenya “is going to compete as a woman and will remain a woman until she dies.”

Asked whether Semenya had been cleared to compete as a woman without further testing or surgery, Seme said: “I don’t want to talk about that. The only thing I want to say is that I’m happy Caster will retain her title as the fastest 800-meter runner in the world. The most important thing when you are an athlete is to get your medal.”

Disputes in sports over athletes’ sex are rare, and perhaps never has such a case been as volatile as the one that emerged at the world championships, when it became apparent how unprepared her sport was to handle cases of athletes who may have both male and female characteristics.

As Semenya posted the fastest time of the year in the 800 meters, track officials said they had begun sex verification testing on her, but South African officials said that they were blindsided by the claims and insulted that officials had disclosed such private information.

In September, Leonard Chuene, president of Athletics South Africa, apologized for denying knowledge of the sex tests done on Semenya in his country, saying he had hoped to protect her privacy.

After Semenya won the world title, international track officials ordered more tests, saying questions had been raised about her muscular physique and drastic improvement.

Chuene said that tests had been conducted at a Pretoria hospital on Aug. 7 at the behest of track and field’s Monaco-based governing body governing body, the I.A.A.F. Chuene has said that despite medical advice from one of South Africa’s top sports medical officials, he refused to withdraw Semenya from the competition in Berlin because the results of the tests were not yet known.

Athletics South Africa said last month that it had suspended Chuene and the rest of his board.

Sex-determination testing was once obligatory for female athletes at the Olympics because of persistent allegations that some competitors were not really women. Sanctions are very rare. One case came at the 2006 Asian Games, where a middle-distance runner, Santhi Soundarajan of India, was stripped of a silver medal after failing a verification test.

The sex-determination testing was phased out in 1999 because of concerns about inequities. The testing is now reserved for specific cases in Olympic sports.

The testing done on Semenya takes weeks to complete. It requires a physical medical evaluation, and includes reports from a gynecologist, an endocrinologist, a psychologist, an internal medicine specialist and an expert on gender. The effort, coordinated by Dr. Harold Adams, a South African on the I.A.A.F. medical panel, was conducted at hospitals in Berlin and South Africa.

It is unclear what the exact threshold is, in the eyes of the I.A.A.F., for a female athlete’s being ineligible to compete as a woman.

“The implications of the scientific findings on Caster’s health and life going forward will be analyzed by Caster and she will make her own decision on her future,” the sports ministry said. “Whatever she decides, ours is to respect her decision.”

The I.A.A.F., did not immediately respond to the statement made by the South African sports ministry. The statement had been expected to be issued next week.

The South African sports ministry said it had asked for an apology from the I.A.A.F., which denied leaking information about Semenya, but responded, “It is deeply regrettable that information of a confidential matter entered the public domain.”

Makhenkesi Stofile, South Africa’s sports minister, described Semenya as excited about the apparent resolution of her case, according to the South African Press Association.

“She will roll with the punches,” Stofile told the press association. “In my view, Caster Semenya’s future is in her hands. She can decide to run as a woman, which she is.”


The Tiger Woods/Rihanna Comparison

I knew this was going to happen. I just didn't think so many people would grasp on to it as gospel truth. They think that there is a double standard in domestic violence situations, with men on the losing end of the stick, and Tiger Wood's incident is proof of that. The question we are now hearing is where are the activists now?

Even though I agree there is a double standard in how domestic violence is treated, depending on the victim's gender. This isn't the case.

Let's look at the facts of each case.

Let's start with Tiger:

No one was arrested, the only thing given so far is a ticket to Tiger for careless driving.

Both Tiger and his wife, Elin are hush,hush about their "personal matter"

We haven't seen Tiger's injuries to his face and don't know if they came from the accident or elsewhere.

Now let's look at Rihanna:

Chris Brown was arrested.

Both Rihanna and Chris admit domestic violence did happen.

We have pictures of Rihanna's injuries.

I don't know how we can compare the two, except that for some, Tiger is the more "innocent victim" than Rihanna. Tiger has admitted to some "transgressions" that impacted his marriage. The extent of these transgressions are unknown.

Per many fans of Chris Brown, Rihanna pushed Chris Brown and he could take no more. She might have given him an STD, or she was cheating on him, or she started arguing with him because he got a phone call from another woman. None of these things have been proven, no one has admitted anything of the sort.

Even if Rihanna gave him herpes, talked about his momma, and had a three way between two men right in front of him, there is no justification for the injuries she received from Chris Brown. Even if she hit back, if he hit first, he is the one going to jail in most states. That's just how it typically works.

For some reason though, with those considering this a double standard, with admitted "transgressions", Tiger was the innocent one and Elin had no right to hit him. Which is true. The problem is in this scenario, we don't know what happened.

Now another thing I don't understand is Rihanna released an album and had the audacity to talk about her experience, which to some meant she was exploiting her experience. Women write bestselling books all the time alleging abuse, and they don't do it as therapy. They do it for money. How do we know she wasn't working on that album or scheduled to work on that album before the incident. She started recording the album in March of 2009, the incident occurred February 2009. Maybe the production and song writing started a mere month before the accident, so why are you upset she is promoting her album?

Let's talk about domestic violence against men. It is more common than we care to admit. Apparently 76 out of 1,000 males are victims of physical assault and/or rape by their spouses. It is also known that men are less likely to identify their attacker. Those are sad numbers, no person regardless of gender should be assaulted or beaten by their partner, and no one should excuse such behavior.

Yes, the number of women being victims of domestic abuse is higher, which is why in our society when we see domestic abuse, it is a woman that comes to mind, not to mention in our society there are strict gender roles. Women are supposed to be the weaker sex, men, at least men back in the day were told never to hit girls. I think this is changing looking at the reactions about Rihanna on twitter.

So yes, there is a double standard when it comes to men and women and domestic violence, but this isn't the case with the comparisons being made to Tiger Woods and Rihanna.

I also find it odd with the Rihanna and Chris Brown case, we were supposed to wait for the facts outside the picture and the arrest, but with Tiger, we are to go full steam ahead about what happened.

Case and point:

Thanks Mr. NoFace for this one.


Why R-Uh?????

I want you all to listen to this song. Listen carefully. I know the demographic of this blog doesn't need to be told this, but just in case, I will give this warning: IF A MAN COMES UP TO YOU AND INDICATES THAT HE WANTS TO GET YOU PREGNANT BECAUSE HE THINKS YOU ARE ATTRACTIVE, RUN FAR AWAY FROM HIM.

Now I was done with R. Kelly by the mid 1990s when a woman reminded him of a Jeep.

I was even more done with him peeing on kids.

I just wish this man would go away.


I'm A Horrible Blogger

I'm sure many people would agree with that. They think I must suck complete ass. I'm a sucky blogger because as of late, I've been lazy. I'm uninspired. I'm running out of ideas. I'm also extremely hormonal (thanks p17 shots) and stuck on bed rest until my due date. I'm not set to deliver this child until March. I've been in the hospital. I might be going back, so yeah I'm sucking right now. This baby better love me. Between the surgery, hospitalization, weekly ass shots, and bed rest, I'm going a bit crazy. This child better stick around.

I promise I will try to improve on my piss poor blogging as of late. In the mean time, anyone have any books to recommend. In particular books on history, religion (a comparative analysis, not the religious texts themselves), or political theory. I'm currently reading a book on Ayn Rand. I can't stand the heffa or her philosophy, but I find it an interesting read.


Hugging Is Sinful?-Christians Yall Need To Get Your Folks Off The Stage

Christian Side Hug from The Fathers House on Vimeo.

I've never known it to be considered sinful to hug in the traditional sense. Like this:

I might give you the side eye if you hug like this:

::Warning might not be safe for work::

::giving you scroll warning::

It might not be right, but if you are greased down and hugging, I just find that sexual. Otherwise, I never thought of hugs in general to be sexual. They can be sexual, but when I hug my momma, my daddy, and sometimes even my husband, sex isn't entering my mind.

I'm curious about this video, why are there gun shots and an ambulance in the song. Why is it cool to be considered a "rough rider", as I thought Ruff Ryders disappeared circa 1998.

Are rabbis and priests excluded from this rule of no front hugging? What are these folks thinking if their aunt hugs them at Thanksgiving dinner, does it really give them impure thoughts?

Does Angelina Jolie buy babies? Is it a diss to adopt children now? I didn't know it was out of vogue to adopt, I will tell my parents next time I talk to them.

Did anyone notice the boo as Obama's name is mentioned, because we all know he's the anti-christ. Also I don't quit understand why folks are mentioning the Democratic shift in the Congress. I mean what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

I didn't know Jesus thought hugs were sinful either.

What this video taught me, co-opting thug and hip hop culture, getting shot, and side hugs are ok; but regular full frontal hugs and adoption are completely evil.

I'm a nasty heffa I guess. I hug folks all the time.


Black People Aren't Marketable In International Markets

Do you notice anything differences in the two pictures above?

Yeah some other folks noticed too. Apparently in international markets films with black people don't do very well. Mind you, it is understandable that the two black actors aren't as well known as some of the other actors, but is Kristen Bell or Malin Akerman international stars? Why not put Jean Reno on the poster, he is well known in France and other European countries?

Why is that even Will Smith as big as he is in America doesn't fare well with international audiences.

I guess I am perplexed because there seems to be this notion that America is a racist country, but other places are more enlightened? Any other countries more enlightened or just racist in a different way?

What Color Is Obama Exactly And Why Does It Bother People He Chooses To Be Black?

I recently came across a blog posting written by Juana Bimba titled "What Color Is Obama? It Depends On Where You Stand." It rubbed me the wrong way a little bit, and it could be my racism coming out, but it seemed to completely ignore the history of race and race relations in America, and downplay the racism that occurs all over the world, particularly in hispanic nations. Since I couldn't comment there, I decided to comment here. Please read the post I am responding to here.

No, really. Because if you’re standing, say, in Minnesota, then Barack Obama is definitely Black. But if you stand in the Dominican Republic or, for that matter, anywhere else in Latin America, then he’s not Black, but Brown. An important distinction.

The problem with this is many "non-biracial" blacks would be considered this as well. I find it kind of hard to understand why people of other races try to define Obama as biracial or multiracial, when he himself identifies as black.

To begin with, Latinos see race differently, because we realize that in the world, there are different takes on race.

There are different takes on race, but to deny the history of America and pretend that race here does not matter or has no impact on our present does nothing to help race relations in America.

But Latinos, by and large, are an aggregate of in-betweens, and that’s how we see ourselves. We also believe in an individual's right, within reason, to call him or herself whatever he or she wants.

I don't necessarily think this is true, I look at the economic disparities between the latinos of slave ancestry and their lighter hued counterparts in many parts of Latin and South America, the fact that blackface can still be found on hispanic stations, that people don't understand why Memin Pinguin might be considered offensive, or why folks like Vicente Fox can make comments about Mexicans taking jobs even blacks won't do, that many of the darker persuasion are denied "professional jobs" based on skin hue, or denied access to certain clubs make me think that many hispanics are race conscious and that there are racial lines established, regardless of ancestry. I don't think that on the whole looking at these experiences folks are considering themselves "in-betweens." I already know that per some American hispanics like Fernando C. de Baca that hispanics, per him consider themselves above blacks, because blacks came here as slaves and hispanics came here a conquerors.

And that he did so because, among other things, it was politically expedient. So he joined a Black Church, married a woman much darker than himself, and began working with Chicago’s Black community.

So he could not have made the decision to be identified as black for social and societal experiences that aligned him more with the black community? Was it strictly politics that made his decision? When he met Michelle, how do we know he even had political aspirations to become a Senator, much less President? Could he not be attracted to a college educated, fit, attractive darker hued woman, simply because he was attracted to her? I think that is where the frustration lies, placing the blame of racial identification on American blacks, when in fact, many American whites, hispanics, and asians embrace and accept these definitions as well. I've met many biracial people in my lifetime who have white family members who do not acknowledge them, that deal with the racism that I deal with, and who if you go on appearances alone, could look black. I think your argument also fails to acknowledge that in America, blacks with slave ancestry are overwhelmingly mixed with other, mostly white, and some Native American. It's a fact that many white Americans fail to acknowledge as well.

Even Tiger Woods who has embraced his biracial identity has dealt with racism, and most of it had nothing to do with his asian, native, or white ancestry. The Fuzzy Zoeller comments begging Tiger not to order fried chicken and collard greens come to mind.

African Americans themselves later adopted the “one-drop rule” as a way to ensure political unity in the group (or prevent the lighter-skinned from defecting to the White side).

This comment completely ignores the fact that whites weren't willing to embrace lighter skinned blacks into their homes and families, except in instances of servitude and that lighter hued blacks were often seen as leaders in the black community, and openly embraced. Again, lighter hued blacks weren't necessarily forced into choosing black by other blacks, but by whites.

While Blackness is an absolute in America, Whiteness is an added value, with Whites deciding who profits. Meaning, it has always been Whites who decide who’s White and can benefit from all privileges thereto attached.

This I agree with, but I would venture to say this doesn't just happen in America.

For Latinos, the rules of race are very simple: you are what you look like. Go to the mirror: if a White individual stares back, then you’re White. Even if your parents were not. For us, there’s no such thing as “passing”, because if you LOOK Caucasian, then you are. End of discussion.

Is that actually true though. I get mistaken as something other than black all the time, but there are times people have no problem making out that I'm black, so where in the context of race would I fit?

This is why Latinos so resent the pressures of racial labeling in the United States, and conversely, why our take on race confounds others. We bring a totally different perspective to this subject—and also the belief that we‘re entitled to our own views, that self-definition is a personal right, and that nobody else should try to mess with it on behalf of group politics.

Is it really group politics, or societal standards that have made things this way? This article seems to blame blacks for the racial designations in this country and that blacks are determined to hold on to the one drop rule, when in reality whites, hispanics, and asians do this as well, and not just in America.


I'm Not A Real Wife-NSFW

Twitter is at it again, on Friday a trending topic was born, #arealwife. Now I asked my husband what he thought a real wife was, and thankfully his definition falls in line with mine, but according to some, I'm not a real wife:

If a man beats me, I'm going to snitch. Maybe you shouldn't be concerned with snitching, but maybe some anger management classes or therapy. No person should ever have to take a beating from their spouse, that isn't being a good spouse, but being a victim of abuse.

I'm all about being submissive, at times, just like my husband is submissive towards me. That is part of compromise, sometimes you take a step back and let the other lead, but you don't do it without question and one spouse does not have authority over another.

I am sorry, but I didn't go to college and get a job for the sole purpose of cooking. If I wanted to cook, I would be a chef. I cook for my husband because I want to cook for him, not because it is required of me. My husband sometimes cooks for me.

I thought give and take was part of every relationship, I guess I was wrong.

I didn't know my purpose in life as a wife was to fuck and feed my husband. I thought I had other qualities and characteristics he found attractive outside that realm. Yes I like to cook, yes we have sex, but I thought marriage was more than cooking and sex. I also thought my husband was actually interested me and my opinions, maybe I was wrong.

If my husband has to go to another "bitch" because he isn't getting sex from me, than there are other issues to discuss such as, why is he not getting sex from me? Am I frigid? Is he doing something I don't like? Maybe I'm sick or actually have a headache? If I don't "suck the shit out cha dick" properly, I would really like for my husband to at least be able to talk to me about it. If I am casual enough with you to put your penis in my mouth, we can have a conversation about what I do when said penis is in my mouth.

My husband has never asked this of me. I am glad, I don't think I could buy my husband a lap dance and watch some other woman dance for him topless. It might make me uncomfortable. Much like I don't think my husband would be cool with some man gyrating his crotch in my face. Maybe we are insecure, or maybe, just maybe, we don't partake in strip clubs? Crazy I know as all men are supposed to love strip clubs, but my husband does not. It kind of creeps him out.

Uuuhhhhmmmmm NO. If my husband is having "downlow" relations with another woman, and I find out, more than likely I will not be sticking by him, as I would feel betrayed. I did not sign up for an open or polyamorous relationship, so that is not something that is going to work for me. I know this sounds horrible, but I don't understand the purpose of having an exclusive relationship, unless it is monogamous. That is my belief system though, if others are ok with this so be it.

I think the thing that amazed me about these comments were the fact that many came from women. I wonder if they are married, or if they are single and trying to impress some internet men. I think it is also scary to see these comments because I thought the younger generation of men and women had left misogyny behind, but it seems it is out in full force. What causes this archaic view of women in the year 2009?


As Long As You're Cute And Can SANG, Domestic Violence Is The Fault Of The Victim

I'm sorry I haven't been posting. I've been away for a few days, but I'm back. I was able to moderate comments and tweet from my phone, so I know this is late, but I had to discuss it.

This is Rihanna sharing her account of what happened between her and Chris Brown. Chris Brown responds to the interview. In the defense of Chris Brown, he at least owned up to what he did. He didn't make excuses or try to play it off like Rihanna is to blame for the situation.

Now let's go to the fans. I can say I'm not a fan of either. I am a bit old for Rihanna and Chris Brown. Now when the story first came out, the first thing folks wanted to say is let's get both sides, as if there is a legitimate reason for beating the hell out of a woman. The police department got enough of both sides to arrest Chris' ass. The pictures of Rihanna's face show what Chris did, but we still want to hear both sides of the story? Then we got the "Rihanna must have done something to Chris" first argument. That she was pushing him mentally or physically and he just snapped. Apparently abuse is ok, if you are pushed to do it.

Now I understand good music or being a fan of someone will cause you to overlook abuse, but honestly, why now is it that Chris Brown fans are going around hating on Rihanna as if she is the cause for all of his issues? You know I was on twitter, and the comments from the Chris Brown fans are crazy and make no sense to me. I understand you like Chris' music, but what did Rihanna do to you? Maybe his fans enjoy beat downs or think domestic abuse is ok as long as you have a good album?

Oh yeah, I forgot, when it comes to situations between black women and black men, black women are always at fault.


Black Students Told To Act Like Slaves

I remember being one of few black children growing up in my schools. Whenever we mentioned any type of black history we talked about slavery and the Civil Rights Movement. This usually occurred in February. This usually entailed white people being upset and or crying at the horrible practice of slavery and personal apologies to me as if I was personally a slave. As a person who has never been a slave, I just looked at them crazy and went on. I was uncomfortable about talking about slavery because I knew those kids always saw me differently, and looking back now, that discomfort came from the fact that these kids were influenced by parents, grandparents, and vast other relatives who had views of black people based upon the concept that we were slaves, and then after that inferior enough to need to be segregated from. They knew I was different, I was other, and even if they would never admit it less than in many cases of my classmates. The same ones who were shocked I was in advanced/honors classes, that I didn't live in a ghetto, that my parents were degreed and expected me to go to college, and that I didn't fit into the black "stereotype" they expected most black people to be.

Recently, a black historian at Latta Plantation in N.C., Ian Campbell decided to uphold historical accuracy by choosing three black kids out of a majority white 5th grade class to put a bag on their shoulders and pick cotton. Some parents at the school were upset. Mr. Campbell, the historian felt that he wanted to be historically accurate instead of politically correct. You know my feelings on the political correctness scapegoat.

I wonder if Mr. Campbell thought of other ways to discuss slavery. Like showing how hard slavery was, or retelling the account of a slave through a slave narrative, or did he go all out and make some of the white students overseers complete with whips?

Did Mr. Campbell have no other options to express historical accuracy without singling out black children to pick cotton? Did he not think it would make them uncomfortable? Did he not think that now these kids are going around thinking that black folks did nothing in the span of American history but be slaves and pick cotton?

I understand you want historical accuracy, and I know Mr. Campbell is black, but does his blackness make his actions ok, or less racist?

Here is a link of Campbell defending his actions.


The Terrorist Talk Comes Out

This is the Larry King Show discussing the horrible events that happened at Fort Hood. This was before they had much information on the shooter, and most of the information given was speculative.

Notice Shoshana Johnson challenges Tom Keniff, and he is quick to question her experience and authority, but not Dr. Phil. She is a POW of the Iraq War. She was shot in the ankle and held captive from March 25, 2003 to April 13, 2003 . She has PTSD. She and Dr. Phil agreed that using the shooter's last name (Nidal Malik Hasan) to determine if this was a terrorist act was irresponsible. It was, we have no proof he had any ties to any extremist Islamic groups.

I find it odd that Tom Keniff was quick to say he was a veteran of the Iraq War, and then question if Ms. Johnson had ever been to Iraq.

I wasn't surprised her authority was questioned by this man, it seems typical that whenever you are a woman, in particular a woman of color, this is the norm in the workplace and in schools. He assumed she was just a low level no one, who had no idea what was going on. It turns out she had more credibility than him.

I also find it odd that whenever a Muslim person commits a crime, it is assumed it is an act of terrorism, but he isn't the first soldier to shoot fellow soldiers at a military base. We should also note that Hasan is an American born citizen. What he did was horrible, but why must we put racial stereotypes on his motives? What motives did Dean Mellberg have? Or Timothy McVeigh? What was the motive of a fellow soldier killing five other soldiers earlier this year in Camp Liberty, Iraq? Did their last names make it any easier to speculate the motives of their horrible acts?


Facebook Republicans Keeping It Classy

Note to Republicans: Please take your crazies off the porch, and put them in the house and hide them.

The RNC just lets fools post whatever the want on their facebook page, and only took them down because someone called them out on it.

I guess the biggest fear is that if a black man and white women have a child, the child will do something horrible like become President of the United States of America.

Thanks Zirgar for showing me this.


Things Darkies Say

Yesterday on twitter, there was a trending topic that threw people completely off. It was the number one trending topic on twitter, and from all appearances, I was appalled. The trending topic was #thingsdarkiessay . Now I'm an American, you can't call me darkie, I can't call white folks whitey. It's an old school derogatory word for black folks. Apparently in other parts of the world, particularly in South Africa, it doesn't have a negative connotation. The topic was started by a black South African, it was intended to make fun of stereotypes.

#thingsdarkiessay : Started in South Africa, where "darkie" does not have the same negative connotations as it does in the United States, as a joke about stereotypes. It has since cause controversy including being removed from the list of Trending Topics by Twitter and the hashtag #SouthAfricansArePissed

Of course from an American context darkie means :

darky, darkie, darkey [ˈdɑːkɪ]
n pl darkies, darkeys Informal
1. an offensive word for a Black
2. Austral an offensive word for a native Australian

In other parts of the world, the term Darkie is associated with black people as well, and we have the asians who associate darkies with nice, white teeth:

As a result culture wars started. Black Americans, like myself were outraged, angry, and looking at it from the perspective of Stormfront invading Twitter. I was steady scratching my head because from first appearances from the stream of trending topics, I saw tweets like these:

I see this, I'm ready to curse out folks. These people aren't from South Africa, they're not black, and they are using black American stereotypes. Doesn't seem all that innocent of a trending topic.

A culture war ensued. South Africans were upset saying that Americans shouldn't be offended, and that America was pushing it's own morals on the rest of the world, like usual. Twitter removed the tag from it's top listings. It was still possible to contribute to the #thingsdarkiessay debate, it just wasn't listed on the trending topics list. The hashtag #SouthAfricansArePissed arose as a result. I guess in many South Africans minds, removal of this from the trending topics list was another case of American Imperialism. Then the whole stereotypes of black people get upset over "any little thing" and are "culturally ignorant" came forth to further ensure that there would be more tension and more divide.

I don't understand why it is cool to refer to yourself as a "darkie", much like I don't understand when people refer to themselves as "niggas." I just don't do that, it is offensive to me, and the biggest reason it was trending was because it got people in an uproar. I understand that "darkie" as a derogatory term does not apply to South Africans, but I know that the word "kaffir" or "nig nog" does. It doesn't mean I should go around using these words, even if they don't have any impact on my personally. I have no negative connotation to "kaffir", "nig nog", or many other words used around the world to refer to black people, because they don't personally impact me. I think that if you are using a global platform to express your opinions, you shouldn't be shocked when someone from another culture or region of the world might find something you say as offensive, strange, or just down right mean, especially if what you say takes on a different meaning in that part of the world.

I think this debate to be about ethnocentrism. The question now is who are being ethnocentric, the black Americans or the South Africans?

I think what angered me most is the South Africans were outraged at the black Americans having issues with the term "darkie", but not outraged at non South Africans using it in a derogatory way to stereotype and offend black Americans, taking "darkie" out of the "African pride" context they were proclaiming. They seemed more upset and focused on the "Us vs. Them" mentality of which blacks are better or more enlightened.

Again, it goes to show that just because we share a complexion, does not mean we share the same culture.


Halloween Tribute To Duane Jones

Perhaps most of you are too young to know who Duane Jones is, or maybe you just don't know him because he pretty much just starred in low budget horror films, but Duana Jones is a cult figure. He is significant because he was the first African American cast as a hero in a mainstream horror film, and that film is the classic Night of the Living Dead. He was also noted as the first African American actor to star as a non-ethnic lead in a major motion picture for the same movie.

It should be noted that Duane Jones should be known as Dr. Duane Jones. he taught acting at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts and was a professor of theater at State University of New York at Old Westbury.

Happy Halloween!!!!!!

Black Happiness-Tasha Reid aka Yoon Mi Rae

* Black Happiness by Tasha

My skin was dark from my past
People used to point at me
Even at my mom Even at my dad who was black, and in the army
People whisper behind my back
Said this and said that
I always had tears in my eyes
Although I was young
I saw my mother's sadness

seemed like it was my fault
Because of my guilt
I washed my face everytime during the day
With my tears I melt the white soap
I always hated my dark skin
why O why
Does the world judge me
When I hate the world
I close my eyes

I put my soul into the music my father gave me
I feel the volume
And fly higher and higher
Far away
la musique

(When I hate the world)
(Music soothes me)
(you gotta hold on)
(and love yourself)
(When I hate the world)
(Music raises me up)
(so you gotta be strong)
(you gotta hold on)
(and love yourself)

Time passed and I was thirteen
My skin was dark brown
Music doesn't judge color
They give me light
I lead my music
We lean on eachother
I don't feel lonely
Then one day
I was given a chance
I held on to my microphone

And suddenly I was on stage
I say goodbye to music and ask it to come back
Then I became nineteen
I have to lie
I put white makeup over my face
They told me to wear a mask
They said my mom's race was okay
But not my dad's
Every year my age was nineteen
During times when time stopped

I felt like I was in jail
And I leaned on myself
I spent endless, painful days
I ignored their warnings
And because I missed music
I tried to escape
But no, I got caught
I prayed all night
And now I'm free


Blackface Has Made A Comeback-Thanks Tyra!!!!

Tyra should know better. Making it "biracialface" instead of "blackface" doesn't change that it is still stupid as hell. Skin color is not an option or clothing choice. It is emotionally charged and Tyra of all people should know that. Now we will have idiots supporting blackface with the old addage "black people do it too" excuse to justify stupidity and racism. How long has this show been on the air, isn't it like on it's 800th season? It's obvious they are running out of ideas.

There is a huge complaint that within the fashion industry there is a lack of diversity in the models used. I guess this is how they resolve the problem, instead of using actual people of color as models, we just paint some existing (mostly white) models up, and diversity has been achieved. Racism in the fashion industry has been eliminated. Thanks Tyra!!!!!

'America's Next Top Model' Cycle 13: Biracial Photoshoot, Ravishing or Racist?

Last night on America's Next Top Model, Tyra took the final 6 models to Hawaii, where they underwent 'transformations' to embody two distinct ethnic heritages for a 'hapa'-inspired photo shoot.

Since the final photos of the models--who each donned darker hair, painted skin, and color-corrective contact lenses to take on the various ethnic looks--hit the web yesterday, a debate is waging about whether the photo shoot is an intentional publicity stunt (perhaps meant to play off of French Vogue's recent Blackface spread that sparked much outrage), an innocent (and some might say successful) attempt to celebrate Hawaii's diversity, or just another poorly advised photo shoot from Ms. Banks, just as insulting in its ignorant conception as its offensive execution.

After all, it's not the first time Tyra has come under fire for telling her ANTM models to act out something in poor taste--and this time, without so much as a word during the show about the possible repercussions of putting white models in exotic costumes and dark makeup. Such a stunt treads dangerous ground--even for Tyra, who frequently breaches the topic of race on her talk show and often firmly, openly denounces behavior she believes is discriminatory. As a black woman, does she have greater license to commission such work?

I don't have all the answers, but I do know that Tyra has a greater responsibility than most--especially as a role model to young women--to encourage education and respect among women of all cultures. It's certainly not for me to say whether Tyra's intentions with this photo shoot were to do so or not, especially because such an argument is squarely beside the point. It's the result we should be concerned about--as in, how Tyra's many diverse viewers--Black, White, Asian, Latina, and everyone in between--responded to the 'hapa' photo shoot.

Did you find the photo shoot inspiring, beautiful, and celebratory--or insulting, offensive and demeaning of other cultures?

Are people just being too sensitive--or was a little more sensitivity needed in avoiding this tasteless stunt?


Who Else Can We Offend?

I Guess Martin And Marcos Are Hard To Pronounce?

I understand a boss if he has a preference that his employees speak English while working, but to demand they change their names to sound more "Anglican"? Can a boss tell you to change your name? If your name was Trevion or Keisha would he have the right to change your name to sound more "white", even those these names are considered uniquely American, but black American? I don't find Marcos or Martin hard names to pronounce. Neither are Juan or Rosa. Will having a hispanic name detract people from using your business? Does refusing to change your name to something more "white sounding" give a boss the right to fire his employees? If he had white employees would he require Sebastian or Katherine to change their names if they were hard to pronounce?

Even if the employees choose to speak their language on their lunch break, does a boss have a right to demand you speak English to ensure you aren't talking bad about him or her?

Hotel Owner Tells Hispanic Workers To Change Names

By MELANIE DABOVICH, Associated Press Writer
14 mins ago

TAOS, N.M. – Larry Whitten marched into this northern New Mexico town in late July on a mission: resurrect a failing hotel.
The tough-talking former Marine immediately laid down some new rules. Among them, he forbade the Hispanic workers at the run-down, Southwestern adobe-style hotel from speaking Spanish in his presence (he thought they'd be talking about him), and ordered some to Anglicize their names.

No more Martin (Mahr-TEEN). It was plain-old Martin. No more Marcos. Now it would be Mark.
Whitten's management style had worked for him as he's turned around other distressed hotels he bought in recent years across the country.

The 63-year-old Texan, however, wasn't prepared for what followed.

His rules and his firing of several Hispanic employees angered his employees and many in this liberal enclave of 5,000 residents at the base of the Sangre de Cristo mountains, where the most alternative of lifestyles can find a home and where Spanish language, culture and traditions have a long and revered history.

"I came into this landmine of Anglos versus Spanish versus Mexicans versus Indians versus everybody up here. I'm just doing what I've always done," he says.

Former workers, their relatives and some town residents picketed across the street from the hotel.

"I do feel he's a racist, but he's a racist out of ignorance. He doesn't know that what he's doing is wrong," says protester Juanito Burns Jr., who identified himself as prime minister of an activist group called Los Brown Berets de Nuevo Mexico.

The Virginia-born Whitten had spent 40 years in the hotel business, turning around more than 20 hotels in Texas, Oklahoma, Florida and South Carolina, before moving with his wife to Taos from Abilene, Texas. He had visited Taos before, and liked its beauty. When Whitten saw that the Paragon Inn was up for sale, he jumped at it.

The hotel sits along narrow, two-lane Paseo del Pueblo, where souped-up lowriders radiate a just-waxed gleam in the soft sunshine as they cruise past centuries-old adobe buildings. One recent afternoon, a woman slowly rode her fat-tire bicycle along a cracked sidewalk, oversized purple butterfly wings on her back and a breeze blowing her long, blonde dreadlocks.

The community includes Taos Pueblo, an American Indian dwelling inhabited for over 1,000 years, and an adobe Catholic church made famous in a Georgia O'Keeffe painting.

After he arrived, Whitten met with the employees. He says he immediately noticed that they were hostile to his management style and worried they might start talking about him in Spanish.

"Because of that, I asked the people in my presence to speak only English because I do not understand Spanish," Whitten says. "I've been working 24 years in Texas and we have a lot of Spanish people there. I've never had to ask anyone to speak only English in front of me because I've never had a reason to."

Some employees were fired, Whitten says, because they were hostile and insubordinate. He says they called him "a white (N-word)."

Fired hotel manager Kathy Archuleta says the workers initially tried to adjust to his style. "We had already gone through four or five owners before him, so we knew what to expect," Archuleta says. "I told (the workers) we needed to give him a chance."

Then Whitten told some employees he was changing their Spanish first names. Whitten says it's a routine practice at his hotels to change first names of employees who work the front desk phones or deal directly with guests if their names are difficult to understand or pronounce.

"It has nothing to do with racism. I'm not doing it for any reason other than for the satisfaction of my guests, because people calling from all over America don't know the Spanish accents or the Spanish culture or Spanish anything," Whitten says.

Martin Gutierrez, another fired employee, says he felt disrespected when he was told to use the unaccented Martin as his name. He says he told Whitten that Spanish was spoken in New Mexico before English. "He told me he didn't care what I thought because this was his business," Gutierrez says.

"I don't have to change my name and language or heritage," he says. "I'm professional the way I am."

After the firings, the New Mexico chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens, a national civil rights group, sent Whitten a letter, raising concerns about treatment of Hispanic workers. Whitten says he sent them a letter and posted messages on the hotel marquee, alleging that the group referred to him with a racial slur. LULAC denied the charge.

The messages and comments he made in interviews with local media, including referring to townsfolk as "mountain people" and "potheads who escaped society," further enflamed tensions.

Taos Mayor Darren Cordova says Whitten wasn't doing anything illegal. But he says Whitten failed to better familiarize himself with the town and its culture before deciding to buy the hotel for $2 million. "Taos is so unique that you would not do anything in Taos that you would do elsewhere," he says.

Whitten grew subdued as a two-hour interview with The Associated Press progressed. He said he was sorry for the
misunderstanding and insisted he has never been against any culture.

"What kind of fool or idiot or poor businessman would I be to orchestrate this whole crazy thing that's costed me a lot of time, money and aggravation?" Whitten said.

Whitten should have dealt with the situation differently, especially in a majority Hispanic town, said 71-year-old Taos artist Ken O'Neil, while sipping his afternoon coffee on the town's historic plaza.

"To make demands like he did just seems over the top," he says. "Nobody won here. It's not always about winning. Sometimes, it's about what you learn."