Racism doesn’t end when even the government says so. Despite the fall of apartheid in South Africa, the haunting demons of prejudice and racism can still walk among its citizens, especially those in positions of power.

Such is the case with South African judge Mabel Jansen who recently made headlines after her facebook comments during what appears to be an interview surfaced. Jansen’s racist mindset was on full display when she says that rape, as well as murder, is not only part of black culture, but that black people take pleasure in it.

In her conversation she typed the following:

Since the revelation of her Facebook comments, Jansen tried to defend herself on Twitter saying that the comments were “taken out of context”. She has been put on leave and is under investigation. There is currently an online petition to have her removed from the bench.

To say that her comments are offensive would almost be an understatement. Anyone shocked by such comments haven’t been paying attention to the last hundred years of white supremacist history.

Jansen’s comments are a white racist conviction that black people – black men rather – love to rape and kill. Most racists believe in this myth so much that they obsess over black criminal behavior whenever and wherever it occurs. They particularly love when when the victims are white. That way, they can advertise the unsubstantiated and racially paranoid warning that a massive swarm of black demons are out to annihilate the white race.

In Jansen’s case, black men love to rape – gang rape – their own babies, daughters and mothers and will eventually move on to white women next. She also believes that they also think that killing each other is “no biggy”. And, of course, she concludes that that is the truth about black culture.

A white racist’s “truth” is always based on narcissistic falsehoods on how nonwhites are inferior to him or her.

Even though, Jansen admits that “white people have a lot to account for”, somehow black people are way worse!

Okay, I get it. We do have problems with rape and violence in our communities. Not once have I heard any black person anywhere deny that. But to confine it as part of our culture, and only our culture, is not just racist, but also erroneous and problematic.

Just because there are black folks who have murdered and raped doesn’t conclude that black people are a race of murderers and rapists, especially if those criminals are a minority. Judging an entire group based on a few malcontents, is an idiot’s move to hate others. And creating and magnifying reasons to hate others is nothing short of insane and villainous.

If racists care so much about the white race, then they should be doing something about their own problems of rape and murder. What about white men who rape babies, daughters, mothers and pets!? What about the white men who kill white people? Jansen can not say that white intraracial crime doesn’t exist in South Africa or anywhere else in the world. And she definitely can’t claim that white interracial crime isn’t an issue.

But something tells me Jansen is one of those racists who will turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to the crimes of white people. She seems too focused on the pathologies of the black community in her jurisdiction to be bothered by the reality that those same pathologies are found in every community in the world, especially her own.

The post South African Judge: Rape Is a Part of Black Culture appeared first on Madness & Reality.

As someone who lives well outside of the BeyHive, it’s just always intrigued me what about celebrity, and specifically Beyoncé’s, that attracts so many people and people so passionate.  When she performed “Flawless” the word “FEMINIST” as a sign as big as the stage was illuminated and Nigerian writer Chimimanda Adiche provided a voice-over from her essay “Why We Should All Be Feminists.”  Mostly what fueled this curiosity about Beyoncé’s celebrity isn’t that people are talking about it, but it is often who is saying what about it.  For the first time in my recollection, I saw the black public intellectuals of the day proceeding to create the meaning out of her artwork, and begin the process of parsing lyrics and images all across the span of black consciousness.

Making Meaning ex-celebritas

Celebrities from time immemorial function as the target of unadulterated glorification to unmitigated hate.  And this celebrity is not relegated to the world of art–music, literary or visual–often times its in the political realm (think Barack Obama, to Hillary Clinton, to Donald Trump and even other international leaders), sports figures or even when it comes to celebrity preachers to prominent activists.  In the case of Beyoncé, her celebrity has transcended some of the realness that many of our other celebrities have.  In the way that Oprah, and the behemoth that Harpo Studios became, was someone we invited into our living rooms for 25 years, or even Barack and Michelle Obama truly have embodied what it means to be America’s First Family, Beyoncé is not real like that.  Beyoncé is tangibly intangible.  She inhabits what postmodernity would call a type of hyperreality existing beyond our reach in many ways.  She rarely gives interviews and rarely offers commentary in the way that many other artists have chosen to wade into the political arena or take a stand for various causes.

The phrase of ex-celebritas is a play on the theological notion that tribal deity YHWH (Yahweh/Jehovah) of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament created the world ex nihiloor “out of nothing.”  In the sense, much of God’s sovereignty is attributed to the idea that meaning was made out of nothing.  Applying that same knowledge, as a society we create meaning out of celebrity.  And as we do that, we ascribe meaning to people, places and things that may not have endeavored to have such meaning.  As two of my blog essays back-to-back focus around the image of Beyoncé, a first ever, it’s not hard to automatically see that in turn we ascribe meaning to the individual celebrity too.  It’s as if there is a reciprocal dance between the two poles of creation and projection in which one party might not be a participating member.

When clergy of the early Church, prior to the fourth century, supported the creation of icons, it was literally artists and patrons of the church creating the holy in their own image and then in turn giving meaning to that icon.  The finished artwork had zero agency in what it was fashioned to look like, and then had to be subjected to the interpretation of others.

In that way, Beyoncé is an icon.

The historical genesis of an icon is inherently theological and of Greek origin.  Icons at the beginning of the first millennium of the Common Era were considered holy images either as a painting or wooden images.   So yes, as Beyoncé’s celebrity has risen to that of an icon, it is accompanied with a particular type of sacredness.  Celebrity, as a concept, usually invokes meaning that is secular, but for Beyoncé, her image has become sacred for many–especially black women.  It should come to no shock to anyone as to why she is iconic to so many black women.  One might would have to go back to Diana Ross to find a black woman celebrity who has the wide-reaching appeal of a pop-star outside of the black music world.  This is not to discount musicians like Janet Jackson or Whitney Houston, but beyond the shadow of a doubt, Beyoncé has surpassed these women in many ways.  To put it another way, Beyoncé functions as a text.  Text, as a word, comes from the Latin textere which means to weave.  That suggests that much of who she is and what we say she stands for is in turn personified in who she is.

Canonizing Beyoncé as Sacred Text

The first time I ever entertained the idea of Beyoncé as more than a pop artist was watching the now-canceled Melissa Harris-Perry Show on MSNBC on a Saturday morning and I heard the conversation that enthroned her as a feminist.  I remember at the time as I was wrestling with my practical definition of feminism because so much of my conversation with black women were offering such different variations of not just a working definition, but what constituted feminism: who could effectively be called a feminist and what were considered feminist practices. But even more specifically I was hearing a divergence of conversations about black feminism.  Actually, a former student of mine helped me out when she offered up Patricia Hill Collins understanding of having a “unique angle of vision” to suggest that Beyoncé’s entrée into [black] feminism may not, nor is required to look like everyone else.

For me her self-titled album Beyoncé was the marker that put Beyoncé in the stratosphere.  It was an unknown and midnight album drop that immediately got the burgeoning Black Twitter collective further established in its presence online while much of Black America was still reveling in Obama having been re-elected again.  She and her husband, hip hop rapper and mogul Jay-Z, were getting invites to the White House by now.  She was just that big.  That meant that whatever she said or did was worthy of being canonized.  But, ever the smart businesswoman, Beyoncé kept her interviews to a minimum–if any at all–and her pregnancy was all but a private affair even after the birth.  This meant that all the public had was her music–lyrics and music videos.

While Beyoncé’s music is obviously R&B, it’s also pop music.  And pop music usually doesn’t lend itself to grand lyrics or lyrics with deep messaging; it tends to be in relatively surface and spell out exactly what it means.  The depth of hidden meanings rests in sexual innuendoes such as “watermelon” and “cigars on ice” or downright explicit.  Think “surfbort.”  Nevertheless, her lyrics have been parsed by some as if they were found on the Dead Sea Scrolls and contained the key to unlock ancient lost languages.  And it doesn’t stop there.  The music videos themselves are part of the sacred text, where everything is thought to have a hidden meaning that must be unlocked.

“Y’all haters corny with that Illuminati mess”

The fact that so many people think that Beyoncé is part of the Illuminati has led to her actually incorporating a response to that in her lyrics.  A YouTube search would prove that there are no limits to those who operate in the world of conspiracy theories and people who have too much time on their hands.  Aside from claims of being in the Illuminati, there are YouTubers who have called her an agent of Satan.  Not metaphorically, but literally.  While I’m sure those that have created videos as such would never refer to Beyoncé as “sacred” anything, I would argue that they see her as a text of sorts, and one in which they have ascribed meaning.  In the way that some may see her as a black feminist, others see her as part of the Illuminati and a Satan worshipper.  Yet the Hoteps see her as anOshun, an orisha from Yoruba culture. Go figure.

Harris-Perry, now in a role as an editor at Ellemagazine, published a call-and-response dialectic that I think highlights to just what level Beyoncé operates as a sacred text for so many people, with so many unique angles of vision.  Even if you don’t agree with the meaning being made, one has to admit and acknowledge that serious thought and more so, serious devotion has been given to this.  It is cult-like.  Cultic practices, even with their negative connotation, do appropriately describe what often functions as a religious following.  In the way that hip hop teens and children of the 90s quote Tupac and Biggie with a cultic religiosity, there is a new generation of women of all ages who will quote Beyoncé for years to come.  And even more so, reference her videos.

The early years of Beyoncé with Destiny’s Child produced music videos at times only two steps removed of the days of the video vixens that populated the majority of hip hop videos of the 1990s and early 2000s.  And again, as she moved into a solo act, we began to see her, in effect, grow up and mature into an adult.  An adult with sensitivities and proclivities appropriate for her age.  We saw progression.  However, with rappers reaching middle age, some artists resist the notion of evolution, still trying to hold fast to their so-called “glory days.”  Certainly after her marriage to Jay-Z, her pregnancy and perhaps just the reality of just being over 30 years old, her videos took on distinctive artistic qualities.  It was clear that these music videos were not meant to be seen as part of the same textural fabric as videos produced by Rihanna, Keyshia Cole and whatever else the cadre of urban hip hop has devolved to with the likes of Future, the Migos, 2 Chainz and Fetty Wap forming the group of Poor Unfortunate Souls from Ursula’s garden in Disney’s The Little Mermaid.  From her fashion choices, to the choreography, to the way she wears her hair and even the costumes and design of the backup dancers all form text the same way one looks at sentence structure–complex sentences to simple ones–from parallel structure to verb tense to help form an image of the author who’s composed it.

In theological circles, the science of exegesis is far from perfect and more often than not one performs eisegesis.  Ex- being the prefix for “out of” in this case, meaning what does one “pull out of” the text.  The opposite being what is being read into the text.  What put me at odds with a few professors in seminary was my proclivity to stand “in front” of the text and provide what’s called a reader’s response to the text.  I’m very much okay and interested in what is being read into the text because we are the sum total of our experiences and to act as if we can so easily divorce ourselves from them in order to give a so-called pure interpretation is naive.  Instead, I’d rather admit the bias up front and still offer a transparent opinion.  So when it comes to the best of what one can even assume as pure in this context, is what what is known as the author’s intent: in what way did the creator of the text intend for the text to be interpreted.

Icons and Iconoclasm

I’ll admit, up until this point in the essay I’ve been trying to keep my bias at bay, and I’m sure I’ve not done such a good job, but in all intellectual transparency I want to admit that I do have one.  Part of the paradox of Beyonce is that her icon status seems to have created a type of bullet-proof veneer that insulates her from criticism.  For quite some time, I find myself interested in critiquing the critical, not simply because I want to disagree with people but partially because I understand that as individuals and as a society we are motivated by a multitude–much of which we fail to recognize or at least admit out loud.  For what it’s worth, I appreciate Harris-Perry saying unabashedly that she’s part of the BeyHive because it contextualizes her response.

Another part of my bias, again in intellectual transparency, is that I’d like to think myself to be an iconoclast–at least one in the historical sense.  In response to the icons that the Church had fashioned in their own image, the Eastern Church (not the Western Church that eventually became the modern day-Roman Catholic church under Constantine) began practicing the physical tearing down and destruction of the holy icons.  For me, I consider this to be deconstructive work that attempts to make meaning of those that make meaning.  In other words what’s driving people to create a sacred text out of Beyoncé.

Finally, what has been a driving force of my bias, wrapped in this particular personage of Beyoncé, is the ways in which I see many people cherry-pick and self-select the Gospel of Beyoncé.  Often times when I hear [legitimate] critiques of hip hop writ large toward black men and it’s prevalent misogyny and mistreatment of women in both lyrics and videos, the sourcing of those texts–lyrics and videos–span the entire career of many of the artists.  However with Beyoncé, it’s as if her first song, video and performance was “Flawless” because that was considered her declaration as a [black] feminist.  As big of an icon as she is, I consider it intellectually irresponsible if those that ascribe meaning gloss over the fact that when she was with Destiny’s Child she was someone who wanted a man to pay her “Bills, Bills, Bills” and presumably she was going to “Cater to [him]” and without a doubt she thought it not robbery to define black masculinity when she said he would be a “Soldier.”

Those songs were my introduction to Beyoncé as a young black male in high school and eventually in college.  And I shall never forget my professor in my Introduction to African American History at Fisk University, declaring from the front of the class that Beyoncé, not Destiny’s Child, was single-handedly setting black women back with the song “Cater to You.”  Meanwhile, I couldn’t help but feel excluded from the “soldier”-motif created simply because I was a college student, not the token roughneck of the ‘hood.  In much the same way that feminist theologians reject Pauline passages of 1 Corinthians because Paul doesn’t affirm women preachers, and the way that black liberation theology rejects Paul’s letter to Philemon considering the enslaved man Onesimus or the haustafeln passages throughout the New Testament epistles because of their reference to “slaves obey your masters,” I think its perfectly fine for us to not hold Beyoncé to old lyrics, but I think we have to acknowledge that it’s part of the corpus of her text.  By most accounts, we’ve shuffled off this proto-Beyoncé in favor of a deutero-Beyoncé in which we apply reader-response eisegetical techniques for the sake of society’s meaning making.

Notwithstanding white gaze toward all things Beyoncé, I am interested in the narrative that doesn’t emerge as the dominant narrative.  I wrote about this to some extentlabeling part of that narrative being shaped by the black syndicate media in my previous blog essay about her and Kendrick Lamar.  Let me say up front, I’m not interesting in hearing black men co-sign together in favor of mounting some anti-Beyoncé campaign for the sake of retreading white masculinity blowhards, but rather the notion that perhaps Beyoncé’s angle of vision is cast more toward capitalism than activism.  Again, my bias is heavy when it comes to conversations around capitalism and that’s often informed by my personal politics.  At what point does the dominant narrative allow questions around the way that we make all things fit into a positive narrative around Beyoncé and instead offer serious criticism to the merchandise that capitalized on the perceived activism around the “Formation” music video and Super Bowl performance; the exorbitant prices of ticket sales for her world tour; the Ivy Park line of clothes not including plus-sizes.  These are all minority reports that get shoved into the same dust-bin of forgetfulness of proto-Beyoncé.

Just a quick walk into any Roman Catholic church building and any non-Roman Catholic church building, one immediately sees the images of the sacred and the holy fall away.  In most modern megachurches, at most one singular cross may hang from the center and the brilliant stage lights cast beams onto blank pulpits and altars, walls and windows in which the parishioners are free to project their own meaning.  While it was a breaking away from what was to become the state-corrupted and sponsored Roman Catholic church, it was also a breaking away from tradition and ultimately spawned many other reformations itself.  The creation of each new denomination and tradition–Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, Pentecostal, Seventh Day Adventist–all let us know that there is room in which a multiplicity of meanings can be had.   When Martin Luther tacked his 95 critiques on the church door at Wittenburg, and it was the beginning of an iconoclastic movement.  This breaking away is more commonly referred to as the Protestant Reformation.

The Beyoncé Re-“Formation”

I paid $17.99 for the Lemonade album on iTunes because I refuse to get Tidal for a plethora of reasons.  And this was my first ever Beyoncé album or track purchase.  I bought it because I saw it as engaging contemporary culture.  And I must say, even from a musical point of view, I was quite pleased with what I heard.  I felt it showed the broad range of Beyoncé’s vocals as well as her choreographic skills.

However, it was sensory overload.

If you read that to mean overkill, then allow me to expound because that’s certainly not what I mean.  Overload in the sense that there was no rest for the weary; the metaphorical imagery was legion.  Having not just a theological, but a God-centered spiritual approach to the album, I don’t at all feel qualified to offer what would look like a comprehensive response to everythingthat transpired in the midst of the 65 minute visual album not even one week after its release.  In the video, there were interludes that weren’t included in the tracks, where Beyoncé through voice-over intoned words that vacillated between prayers of supplication to jeremiads and laments all the way to a theology of anger and frustration displayed as prose that had mystical and transcendent qualities that surpassed orthodox spirituality.

I personally can’t answer why Beyoncé is just that important to halt just about every news story about Prince’s death which was a pretty damn big deal.  But let’s magnify this a bit: the typical news cycle has shrunk to about 7 days, and Lemonade didn’t even give the death of Prince the opportunity to last a full news cycle.  This leads me to believe that within a week’s time, the country will have moved on beyond this.  In fact, as I type this, it’s an election night–and a deciding night in which Bernie Sanders will undoubtedly watch the nomination slip from his fingers permanently, and the GOP will effectively haveto have a contested convention in order to prevent Trump from being the nominee.  Even as I conclude this blog essay, I’ve turned away from the immediate topic at hand: the Gospel According to Beyoncé.

This gospel message that society has projected onto Beyoncé–made in our own image–is a message we have made her have.  I’d rather us own the fact that we culturally make meaning and ascribe to persons and ideas and sometimes even physical artifacts like buildings, paintings and sculptures.  Perhaps I’m being repetitive at this point, but admittedly no more repetitive that “I slay/okay.”  Projecting meaning, whatever meaning that is, onto Beyoncé is fine, she’s a celebrity, an icon, but we ought not be pedantic enough to release ourselves from responsibility of that meaning and in turn beatify her as though these thoughts, these notions, these meaningsfrom the Almighty and Sovereign Beyoncé.

My hope is that in the cobbling together of this gospel sacred text, this re-“formation” of Beyoncé, that we put together a complete text.  One that includes the frayed edges, the blended fabrics and even the attempts to weave pieces together that we know weren’t originally intended to be together, but it works together for the good of someone who needs disparate parts to make a whole.  I’m not interested in a sanitized Beyoncé; one that erases her work with Destiny’s Child in favor of someone who baptized in the waters of cause célèbre.

What can’t be taken away from Beyoncé is that she has empowered a third-wave of feminism–especially black feminists and womanists–with a new text from which to draw a type of femignosis in which to create meaning.  She also has required us to rethink the ways in which we see the production of black music–as entertainment or activism, and she certainly falls in the Oprah category in which we become free to question the ways in which blackness requires a certain type of aesthetic when it comes to what do you do for the race.  Remember in 2012 when Harry Belafonte openly questioned the motives of both Jay-Z and Beyoncé and Hova actually dropped a diss lyric against Belafonte?

As I did read through the call-and-response dialogue from Elle, one male college students notes that the visual album made his girlfriend cry and that was the first time he had seen her cry.  And I get that.  I’m not interested in disconnecting or demystifying the possibility of emotional or intellectual liberation that may come as a result of performing a type of lectio divina around this last project, but ultimately I believe that it’s more about the individual illuminating their own liberation.  But perhaps the woven text(ure) of Beyoncé is just the blank canvass in which liberation is possible.

If nothing else, Beyoncé lets us know that there can me more than meets the eye when a bottle of hot sauce can really be Hot Sauce. Swag.

The post Made in Our Own Image: The Gospel According to Beyoncé appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Instead, we get to see her share her time lamenting about the racial effects of the term “Becky” on white women. I kid you not with this.

@phagmob girl BYE. do you know how many time ppl have called me BECKY? it didnt have any kind of positive intention behind it. dont start.

— IGGY AZALEA (@IGGYAZALEA) April 25, 2016

https://twitter.com/IGGYAZALEA/status/724720385267126272

 

@rNicaRo the whole becky thing "give me that becky" comes from white womens supposed love for blow jobs. so excuse me but, i dont want

— IGGY AZALEA (@IGGYAZALEA) April 26, 2016

So, let me get this straight: Iggy Azalea took offense to the “Becky with the good hair” line because she thought it was a reference to white women. Also, she doesn’t like the connotation of “Becky” being associated with oral sex. You know: Becky is that dirty, racist term for oral sex that demoralizes all white women and cause them pain, strife, and depression? Yes, that term.

Iggy Azalea Understands Very Little

All sarcasm aside, I just think that Iggy is (once again) confused as hell with what is going on in the world. Don’t get me wrong; I do respect her opinion on being called out of her name. And yes, the term “Becky” does refer to the stereotypical side of things. Automatically, when many Black people think of “Becky” they think of a white woman. Still, it should be comical that all of this conversation is coming due to a song that isn’t referencing a white woman (from my knowledge). Thus, Iggy has understandable feelings within the wrong context.

Additionally, if there was some real reference given to the situation then there would be a better understanding of how off Iggy Azalea really is:

1.) Becky was a really popular baby name decades ago: Many babies were named Beckyback in the 1980’s and 1990’s. It was usually ranked toward the top of names chosen (from the 600’s to 900’s). However, that popularity has waned for some apparent reason. Still, that gives a context as to why that name was given, and used, to reference white women.

2.) White women are, on average, more likely to perform oral sex than Black or Hispanicwomen. The National Health Statistics Reports took a survey back in 2012 on sexual behaviors. What they found was interesting: 69% of women had oral sex while 59% was for Hispanic and 63% was for Black. But that isn’t all, I’m afraid. 49% of white women surveyed stated they had oral sex before they had vaginal intercourse. Only 37% of Hispanic and 27% of Black women could say the same. Thus, the nickname Becky for “oral sex” isn’t some assumption. White women are more likely to have oral sex.

3.) Being called “Becky” isn’t going to do very much. How much of Iggy Azalea’s life is to be affected by the term “Becky”? I’m sorry, but “Becky” and “nigger” will never be on the same level. Iggy can hit me up when she loses a limb, life, or finds her life hindered because someone thinks of her as a “Becky”. Otherwise, she can be offended but the comparisons don’t equate.

Iggy Azalea Will Get It One Day

In the end, Iggy Azalea will understand one day. She will realize that “Becky” doesn’t hold much weight. Sure, she can be offended and I can respect that. However, the name comes from a strain of truth in action. Also, I don’t imagine her losing her job because she is considered a “Becky”. Now only if we could get her to understand why her music career fell off.

The post Iggy Azalea Doesn’t Understand the Use the Term “Becky” appeared first on Madness & Reality.

While the state has come under fire for its proposed policing of bathroom usage of transgender members of the LGBT community, as Barber points out, North Carolina’s new anti-LGBT law negatively impacts everyone in ways well beyond sexual orientation or gender identity.

The post Rev. William Barber: North Carolina’s New anti-LGBT Law Like “Jim Crow” appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Also, it is a bunch of sadistic, and sexist, bullshit.

Still, many (Black)people hold onto hypermasculinity as if it is the definitive badge of Y chromosome possession. Case in point: in recent history, Michael B. Jordan and Ryan Coogler had recently taken a photo together for Vanity Fair. They were dressed up like the professional, and successful, men they are. To be frank, there was nothing more to make of the shoot. That is, until the hypermasculinity that plagues our society reared its ugly head in all of its patriarchal forms.

Many (Black)people did cartwheels of homophobic disdain over the picture. Yes, my good readers: they actually took a picture of brotherly affection into something way more sexual and perverse than it needed to be. From people questioning “why is he holding his head like that” to commentary of “effeminate” and “demasculation” (is that a word?) appeared out of so many Twitter fingers that it was really head scratching in how far they reached.

All of this conversation and topic trending on the internet over a picture.

A fucking picture, people.

Hypermasculinity Makes Losers of Us All

Damn, people. Is this it? Is this the summation of Black manliness that we are actually trying to achieve here? At what point is manliness is supposed to equate “no affectionate touching” or “making sure you don’t cup my head in any type of way”? Who is coming up with these retarded rules of engagement? And when are we going to stop dancing to the song of hypermasculinity?

Yet and still, I can’t be surprised. Black men are expected to be the “superior beings of inferiority” at every given moment. At the drop of a Lincoln copper penny, we will be called half-witted niggers and quickly dehumanized for whatever blanket faced reason between the pillars of racist expectations and jungle bunny-hyperviolent folklore. Meanwhile, as soon as there is an ounce of sensitivity, emotion, or – God forbid – affection shown between two Black men that have EVERY reason to embrace each other like brothers, there must be some sexual aspect to tarnish the moment. We are all expected to know by now that Black men can’t exhibit simple things like human emotion and caring for each other. Let’s face the bigger issue: Black male expectation swings pendulum style between deity-like to virulent animalism.

Between those extremes of expectations comes the place where Black men hold their stance with being human. No, Michael B. Jordan and Ryan Coogler should not be questioned on a PICTURE that suggestions nothing outside of brotherly bonding. No, Black men should never have to subdue ourselves to the petty expectations of patriarchal archetypes. And no, Black men shouldn’t do goof-ball things to readily assure the people around them that they are actually “men”. The egg-shell walking and Gregory Hines level tap dancing for respectability has gotten out of hand.

Hypermasculinity Sucks

All of this just goes to show you what is wrong with our society. Hypermasculinity is not a badge of honor; it is a plague. And this plague has carried over into places and spaces it shouldn’t exist. A man can embrace another man that he respects in any way they want if it isn’t obviously questionable. Affection should never be limited to women and children. Then again, you cannot be surprised by the comments of those that are extra sensitive with their patriarchal beliefs over a picture.

You know: because they are bored.

The post Michael B.Jordan, Ryan Coogler, & the Boredom of Hypermasculinity appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Say what you want about Amber Rose, but she has found a way to keep her name in the media. If she isn’t breaking-up-to-make-up with Wiz Khalifa, she is shutting down Kanye West on Twitter. If she isn’t deflecting the slut shaming that comes her way, then she is having a city wide slut walk. Say what you will: Amber Rose has kept her life happening as a B-List celebrity. And it seems that she won’t be slowing down anytime soon.

In recent history, Amber Rose appeared on the Tyrese and Rev. Run hosted show “It’s Not You, Its Men”. She appeared on the show for promotional reasons. Within the interview, there are some topics that came up: how she is perceived and the point behind the Slut Walk. She gets into the meaning of the Slut Walk and gave the reasoning behind it. And then, that is when things got interesting.

Amber Rose, in all actuality, had to address the situation of when “No means No”. She clearly states:

If I’m laying down with a man — butt-naked — and his condom is on, and I say, ‘You know what? No. I don’t want to do this. I changed my mind,’ that means no. That means f-ing no. That’s it… It doesn’t matter how far I take it or what I have on, when I say no, it means no.

Right after that, Rev. Run gave the classic adage that many people follow: “dress how you want to be addressed” to some applause from the crowd. Rose quickly dismantled that nobly sexist idea by reiterating that a person’s outfit does not mean she is DTF (down to fuck) or that they should be mistreated in any way. In short, Amber Rose spent a lot of time explaining to Tyrese and Rev. Run why she believes certain behaviors are not okay.

And you know what? She is absolutely right.

Why Amber Rose is Correct

Amber Rose is correct for the simple fact that she is addressing the pervasive rape culture mentality that has hampered people regardless of race, creed, or gender. And this ideology – that women are not in full ownership of their bodies – is part of the problem. Women don’t owe it to anyone to actually “look appropriate” unless we are talking about professionalism for a job. Their outfit and their wardrobe is not some sort of categorical flaw that should be assessed on the respect that you have for them, either. All this leads to is mistreatment of women because they don’t do what is expected of them. And that’s foolishness.

And yes, they are looking sad. Successful. Yet sad.

What is even sadder is that Tyrese and Rev. Run – two black men – would even condone to such beliefs. The same mentality that many men put on women is the same respectability politics laden mentality that Black men face on a daily basis. This falls right in line with expecting men to “pull up their pants” and “not wear hoodies” so they won’t face any drama. No Black man should condone behavior of respectability politics. Survival tactics that doesn’t assure survival isn’t a survival tactic at all; it is cow-towing to those that don’t care about our survival anyway.

Amber Rose Epilogue

Amber Rose, regardless of her outfits and even her actions, should be treated like a human being. That is not only fair but it is also her right. Condoning the ideals of chaste femininity is nothing more than respectability politics under rape culture. As a people, we need to stop making people responsible for things they are not responsible for. Also, we have to agree that people are in ownership of their own bodies. Kudos to Amber Rose for taking a stand for equal treatment and fairness.

Maybe she is more than a B-List celebrity. I can’t wait to see what else she comes up with.

The post Amber Rose is Right: Women Own Their Bodies appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Most commonly recognized as the quintessential crossover darling and purveyor of catchy pop-music and dance routines, this year Beyoncé decided to extol the wonders of her Blackness by releasing a song and video, and performing a SB50 set, that’s undeniably Black without the burden of respectability, Single Lady-friendly hand gestures, or Flawless soundbites preferred by the mainstream; the better for them to thrust and sing to, or co-opt as part of their YouTube reenactments or cabaret acts. I mean, this go-round, Beyonce went balls to the wall, and described herself as a Texas bama who loves to hoard hot sauce in her handbag, and white folks are like, ‘Quoi? What does any of this even mean?’

I don’t want to make this solely about Formation—(more than enough essays have been cranked through the pipeline already)—as much as I mean for this to be about the push-back against Black self-love and representation, but the video and song are decidedly political (for Beyoncé); and much of the Melina Matsoukas-directed offering seems to be a love letter of sorts to New Orleans and the Black southern aesthetic often derided by the mainstream (when they aren’t pilfering style and music trends from it), featuring clips of New Orleans bounce culture; Beyoncé and her dancers (all Black women) strolling; the pop star singing about the love she has for her baby’s afro and Negro noses with ‘Jackson 5 nostrils’; voice-overs by New Orleans-born comic and rap artist Messy Mya (who was shot and killed in 2010) and ‘Queen of Bounce’ Big Freedia; Beyoncé draped atop a New Orleans police car submerging herself underwater over voice clips about Hurricane Katrina; graffiti that reads “Stop Shooting Us”; and a Black little boy in a hoodie, dancing in front of a white police squad while they stand with their hands up.

Couple the video’s anti-police violence stance with Beyoncé and her dancers coming out during the SB50 Halftime show dressed in Black, at attention in an X formation, in homage to Michael Jackson, the Black Panthers, and Malcolm X, and a deluge of White tears flowed forth like a torrential downpour. Beyoncé, who said her latest effort is meant to make people feel proud of and have love for themselves, was suddenly evading the White Gaze instead of performing for it. And now white people are pissed, don’t know what to do with this latest incarnation of Beyoncé, and so have called for her head on a platter.

The post Getting In Formation: Beyonce, Race & White Tears appeared first on Madness & Reality.

The year 2012 was significant for black male masculinity on several fronts, far too many to discuss here, many of which were around how black men were entering public conversations about black women and black male privilege in social media spheres, to the way that black urban fashion had shed much of its nascent hip hop bagginess trading it in for fitted and skinny jeans, Obama was running for re-election, same-sex marriage in black religious circles was a hot-button topic as the president came out in favor of it, more and more young people were freer to talk about sex and sexuality and at the same time the demographic remained woefully ignorant as new concepts, phrases and theories around this topic were conceived almost every other week.   For the sake of this piece, first (1) I’d like to specifically highlight the fashion aspect because it’s so readily outward; it functions as a extension of one’s self be it conscious or even more intriguing when it’s subconscious, in the personhood of Russell Westbrook.  (2) Odell Beckham challenges our notions on how black men are allowed to enter not just conversations about sexuality but what is displayed in black male-to-male physical contact.  (3) Cameron Newton, ultimately, I think is the most complex because he embodies both the unique respectability performances of Westbrook and Beckham, but after his post-game presser ultimately does what many black men are simply afraid to do in public–even our beloved Obama: to be angry.

It has been fascinating to see how these young black men have performed in the spotlight over the past eight years.  Westbrook was drafted in 2008 and landed at the new Oklahoma City Thunder expansion team and as the Thunder established themselves as championship worthy, we suddenly began to have conversations that had absolutely nothing to do with the metrics of sports, but actually fashion.  In 2012, Westbrook famously came out in red glasses, and wore form-fitting clothes that depending on the eye were extremely fashion forward or just simply tacky.  For me, that was the hallmark of a new era of black men in sports.  Famously, the then current NBA commissioner, David Stern, had implemented the dress rules about what athletes could and could not wear as they arrived for games.  The authoritarian flexing of autocratic power reminisced of the perennial slave-master relationship that has often been used to describe the relationship to players and their, well, owners.

Russell Westbrook

The reason I chose Westbrook as opposed to some of the other NBA players who have an avowed predilection for fashion is because Westbrook is among the more famous ones and that pedestal on which he sits makes him a different kind of target and ultimately he’s required to wear it different.  Below are a mere sampling of clothes that Westbrook has worn:

When I wrote about this phenomenon in 2012 it was still relatively new and I was merely joining the chorus of those who had much of the same observations I had.  Nearly four years later, where’s the commentary on this very same topic?  It’s mostly silent.  Why?  Because it’s been normalized.  And not just normalized, but actually celebrated.  From Westbrook’s first appearances in loud and garish fashion up until now, this country has seen same sex marriage as the law of the land, we’ve been introduced to transgender(ed) persons and we are outright challenging the norms on gendered clothing.  It’s one thing when Jaden Smith, the 17 year old son of famous actors Jada and Will Smith, is seen wearing what archetypically would be seen as women’s clothing, but it’s another thing for a grown man like Westbrook to even challenge sexuality norms by wearing form fitting clothes.

For me, Westbrook redefines black male masculinity by being comfortable in his own body and exercising personal agency in the physical extensions thereof–the clothes he chooses to wear.  What’s key in all of this is his own ability to define for himself what’s comfortable for him.  Its the metaphorical equivalent of talking softly yet carrying a big stick.  For him, his fashion is his big stick.  He doesn’t need to announce that he’s swagged out because everyone sees it and knows it.  By him exercising his personal agency it offends the sensibilities of many–black and white–who have sought to keep him in a certain category and in turn, the redefinition occurs.  Westbrook’s star power as an athlete now serves as a archetype of many black youth who no longer have the image of a Michael Jordan or Scottie Pippen wearing oversized suits with shoulder pads so sharp you could split a hair on the corner of it, but rather that of black man who isn’t afraid to show off his physique–in form fitting pants, shirt and blazer–for whomever may look.

One’s masculinity in the hip hop era from the late 1980s through the early 2000s was often dependent on just how oversized one’s jeans were and how oversized one’s shirt was.  The number of XXXL shirts that were sold during that era has yet to be calculated.  The insular norms of the established African American culture associated this fashion with inner-city gang culture and the violence often times accompanied hip hop culture.  This is to say that to dress like that was to be a “thug” and many of the same racial profiling charges that blacks accuse whites en masse for were also committed by other blacks as well.  It manifested itself in respectability politics that said “pull your pants up” and “why are the clothes so baggy.”  The irony is that now, many of the same folks who passed judgement on baggy clothes will see those in fitted jeans now, and through a lens of judgment they will tsk-tsk amongst themselves and ask are they gay.

Odell Beckham, Jr.

Odell Beckham, the wide receiver for the New York Jets ups the ante for challenging what it means to be black and male in this country.  More than enough think-pieces have been written about this as the conversation reached a fevered pitch in the middle of the 2015 season.  However, I think few, at least the ones that were circulated widely, went far enough as to suggest that Beckham’s image had the leveraging power to redefine something as major and complex as black masculinities.  Beckham, as a case study, is more about how African American culture has chosen to see Beckham, not so much the larger American culture.

His biggest “offense” was that he was found guilty of engaging what’s colloquially known as suspect behavior.  There have been a long list of euphemisms to describe anything that didn’t fit into a particular sexuality norm of a given community.  The gossip website Bossip posted a mashup of Odell Beckham in social media pictures full of these alleged suspect moments with him dancing with various teammates and old friends, multiple instances of pictures as benign as selfies with another man, all the way to seeing him shaking his head at something (none of us know but the perception is that he was looking down at a teammates butt and shaking his head and moving along), this was all suddenly worthy of a wide swath of social media (namely Black Twitter) calling him gay.  The internet was ablaze.  The conflagration, however, went more in his defense than not.  The only ones who were hell bent on calling Beckham gay were mostly those who were of the “hotep Negro” persuasion and who frequently attend Umar Johnson lectures and seminars.  The conversation around Beckham was further flamed when actual charges of anti-gay slurs by the Carolina Panthers players surfaced.  Even though no one officially came forward, not even Beckham himself, to address the anti-gay slurs, the mere rumor of them and subsequent news stories by reputable outlets about the possibility of slurs was yet more fuel to the fire around Beckham’s sexuality.Almost all of the conversations around Beckham have been written and voiced by black folk.

And what I never saw dealt with in the numerous think-pieces and blogs is the fact that we, as black men, don’t know how to publicly embrace male-to-male physical touch.  I really think it’s that simple.  Outside of familial relationships (fathers, sons, brothers and uncles), to see another black man interact physically with another is gay.  To use Riley Freeman’s character from “The Boondocks” contextual application of gay, this word in this context contains all of the homophobia and slur-like qualities of prejudice and bigotry as well as the sheer ignorance of someone who simply doesn’t have the vocabulary to express feelings of discomfort and novelty at something that is unfamiliar.  I’m not sure what’s more depressing: the fact that black male interaction–dare I say intimacy–is so rare that it’s a novelty or the fact that my people don’t have the vocabulary to express their emotions making it easier make someone the Other.  In reductionist terms, to use the word gay in this context make one worthy only of a fictional cartoon character who’s seven years old.  Somehow the stigma of being physical with another male outside of a contact sport like football or one that has a lot of physical contact like basketball is simply seen as gay.  That’s it.  Nothing more in-depth to it than that.  As if the capacity to explore deeper is wholly non-existent.  It is inextricably linked to the fact that black men don’t talk about feelings, that black men historically have not been affectionate towards their own sons, and that ultimately black men need to make their boys “man up” and “be a man” even when they’re barely potty trained.

Thankfully, that old model of parenting is dying with the last generation that passed it down. This dogged death-grip some within the black community have on pushing a traditional black masculinity is smothering us.  Beckham seemingly doesn’t give a damn.   I wonder in part what does his growing up in New Orleans have to do with that.  The gender binary has been challenged in the streets of New Orleans for at least a generation dating back to the time of Beckham’s birth.  While bounce artist Big Freedia has some household recognition, she is merely one of many in New Orleans who are extremely well known in the southeastern Louisiana region.  Although Beckham went to a parochial school in the city, undoubtedly he was influenced by New Orleans culture and going to school 45 minutes away at LSU he was still under the sway in which black men in New Orleans interact with each other.   Without going on too much of a tangent, New Orleans was the first place I ever saw heterosexual black men dance with the use of their butts and it was considered social acceptable.  This was directly due to bounce music and its influence in local culture.  It also brought gay and straight folks together in social settings and clubs where it would be almost unthinkable in other black urban locales.  Rather than just give kudos to Beckham and his own liberation (which we should), the redefinition doesn’t just hang on his personal agency, but it rests rather in the performance of it and how the public perceives it.  It’s almost as if he dons white boy drag and New Orleans bounce.  To be fair, I’m assigning these qualities to Beckham and these are mere speculations from an outside observer, but it’s almost as if he picks and chooses some of the qualities of white maleness that are attractive and he put them on, grabs a set of crayons, adds dat BEAT, colorizes it in a unique New Orleans and African American cultural aesthetic and makes it uniquely his.  Blogger Rafi D’Angelo wrote that

White men are allowed a greater range of expression before they are automatically considered gay. The boys in Marvel movies are always flirting and nobody cares. Matt McGorry can say his male co-star has a pretty mouth and nobody cares. Channing Tatum “vogued” and nobody cares.

Hopefully, the use of the word drag does a bit more than just conjure up images of men in women’s drag at disco clubs in the 1970s, but also recollect the ways in which we dress up the parts we choose to wear in our lives.  So while drag is usually reserved for clothing and how said clothing articulates one’s life, we can see drag in how we perceive one’s masculinity performance and how they choose to act in public.  With Beckham still outwardly displaying tenets of African American culture–being ontologically black–does this mashup of African American cultural nods (the way he dances, the dances themselves, how he wear his hair) with this possible New Orleans bounce aesthetic and white boy drag, he inhabits, to put it differently, in a queer space.  And that’s okay.  Being in that queer space doesn’t make Beckham gay or same-gender loving, but it does put him in a rarified space that not many people accept.  However, the very next question should already be forming: to what extent has Beckham normalized this queer space, thereby not making it queer but rather mainstream?  I still think the jury is out on that one, but I do think that, like Westbrook, having such fame does give one the image-power to force a significant type of redefining of black masculine space.

Cameron Newton

When it comes to the black male masculine aesthetic, Cameron Newton, quarterback for the Carolina Panthers, breaks the rules when it comes to respectability politics.  Primarily, he’s just too big.  He’s too bigand black.  In much the same way that Tamir Rice and Michael Brown suddenly had these superhuman and overly grown and larger-than-life physical characteristics, Newton’s physical existence has the power to offend and challenge sensibilities.  Seeing America’s professional sports athletes, such as a Newton who stands 6’6″ and 245lbs, wearing fitted designer pants and suede slippers does not jive with our accepted image.

As Newton and subsequently the Carolina Panthers steamrolled their way through the regular season and playoffs.  His on-the-field celebrations drew the ire of the losing teams’ fanbases and those who stand outside of African American and hip hop culture had their senses assaulted as they watched Newton “dab” his way to the Super Bowl.  It climaxed when a soccer-mom decided to say Newton was an unfit role model for the youth of America.  It immediately following that letter-to-the-editor that the dab, this singular dance move, was politicized.  What gravity does one hold where a dance move becomes a form of social resistance against respectability politics?  It was yet another reminder that much of the black physical body is political: our hair has the ability to make political statements before we open our mouths, and our skin color has the power to make us instant criminals in the sight of many.  All of the mainstream media conversation about Newton in the games leading up to the Super Bowl and certainly the Monday-morning-after conversations surrounding him told me everything I needed to know: this was never about football nor his athletic abilities.

I had been wrestling with this particular triumvirate of black male professional athletes, all who are younger than me–the age gap between Beckham and myself is enough for him to have been a student of mine in the college adjunct classes I’ve taught–and just how they have chosen to be black men, define masculinity and manhood in such a public arena.  I’ve wrestled with this because while only four years separate Westbrook and myself, at times the ways in which they perform African American culture in what author M.K. Asante, Jr. says is post-hip hop, the separation gap seems to be by an entirely different generation even unfamiliar to me at times. I struggled because it seemed that this three in particular had affected how I saw black men acting different, dressing different and knowing that for hundreds of thousands of young black boys in America, those three are held in high esteem the way Dr. J and Kareem Abdul-Jabar functioned for my older cousins.  All up until yesterday, I was frustrated at these thoughts rolling around in my head.  I wasn’t sure how I felt and interrogating my mind and feelings weren’t leaving me with much to work with. It wasn’t until I saw the video of  Newton getting up from the post-game press conference, sullen, and well angry that it clicked for me: whether intentional or not, Newton told us it’s okay to be angry despite the gaze of others.  And that that was something worth talking about.

Respectability politics functions so that others are pleased.  (Others in this context is not to be confused with The Other.)  The reason I say othersplural is because in just the same way that Rob Lowe could tweet that Newton isn’t being a role model or Bill Romanowski referring intentionally to Newton being a “boy” in a tweet that went ’round the world, there are just as many black folk saying that his behavior in the post-game moments were unacceptable.  Referring to him as a “sore loser” or being “unsportsmanlike” are fine in situations where everything else is equal, but in a league where one’s fashion sense gets questioned in the same press conference as questions about throwing interceptions and opening up a passing lane tells us that all things aren’t equal.  Those are all respectability norms.  Some of which we almost universally are okay with, and other times we aren’t; some times it works for our advantage, some times it doesn’t.  Whether it be because another Broncos player was talking loudly in the chaotic space that was the post-game presser or because Newton’s emotions got the better of him, he chose to wear his emotions on his arm even though respectability dictates otherwise.  Just ask Obama.  Even when someone to his face called him a liar, Obama still kept his cool.  Newton on the other hand visibly was rattled.  Frustrated, I’m sure.  Angry, no doubt.  And that’s fine.  Those are all human emotions.  I don’t think the NFL requires its players to sign a contract that asks them to be perfect and lay aside every human emotion they have.

Many forget the cloud of foolishness under which Newton entered the NFL.  One of the positives of Newton was the fact that he had this clean image sans tattoos and piercings.  The owner, Jerry Richardson, was so caught up in appearance that even when Newton alluded to growing out his hair, his owner emphasized how nice his hair looked short.  Only Newton and Richardson know just how much his starting QB position straight from the draft was dependent not on his athletic ability but whether he looked the part.  Resisting fashion norms, it seems, has the power to reify normative aesthetics and sensibilities to the point of redefinition.  Owning clothes was about the only piece of property enslaved Africans on North American shores had any agency over and all of the post-slavery history has shown that black Americans have consistently had their own unique style of clothing that consistently challenges Eurocentric standards of beauty for both women and men.

As final thoughts go, I’m not even sure if we, as black men, are the point of transcending our ontological settings as black men.  Too often many of us grew up wehre manhood was something you became by being masculine and doing socially ascribed masculine things such as going to work all day and “bringing home the bacon.”  It also allowed one to be violent if necessary, by “doing what had to be done.”  It also meant never showing emotion thereby reducing love to things you could to for others through caretaking and provision and not through emotional support.  It even meant not acknowledging physical or mental weakness foregoing mental health.  For many of us black masculinity was all about being a man while focusing on things to do rather than persons to be.  Far too few of us saw mutual black male-to-male love in the form of friendships and familial bonds and the display of black male self-love usually looked to much like arrogance, pride and domination.  What many of us did see was a lot of white male patriarchy historically mimicked in past generations displayed as dominance over another male and certainly dominance over black women–both of which had largely terroristic and violent capabilities.

What I see in the trinity of these three black men, Westbrook, Beckham and Newton, is an image of black men who love themselves and (presumably) love the partners that are in their respective lives.  The redefinition of black masculinity is best displayed in an ethic of self-love and self-care.  Irrespective of the labels of “white boy drag” and “queer” and “performance” and “aesthetic,” seeing black men produly love themselves is a redefinition because I’d contend, historically, as a whole, we never loved ourselves.  We were never taught to love our bodies, our voice and our righteous minds.  Instead we learned how to be celebrated.  By adolescence, it was no longer cool to even tell you mom “I love you” if you were in front of your other 11 and 12 year old friends.  Do you know what that does to a black male psyche in these yet-to-be United States?

This trifecta of black men, whether subconsciously or intentionally have made a permanent step forward toward that point of transcendent racial and social norms.  Black men have to begin to embrace this change.  When we hold onto these anachronistic notions of manhood, what are we really holding on to?  The times, they are a’ changin’ and the more stubborn we choose to be the more and more ill-prepared we are making our sons.  There’s a whole new generation of black women who aren’t putting up with this shit anymore, so who will our sons marry then?  Much of what justifies some of these old ways of doing things are rooted in a plantation culture that was birthed before the Great Migration, so why do we think it should work in a world where Twitter, Facebook and a myriad of dating apps are at the fingertips of the 12 year olds we give smart phones?  No, I’m not expecting a major call to arms or a revolution, but I am expecting us to do better one person at a time.  We have to get to a point where we get past America; always finding the next post- movement.  Staying static is lethal.  Going backwards is suicide.  The American brand of oppression has addled our minds.  We don’t think straight and every approach requires shape-shifting to even attempt an answer who’s reach is perpetually to short, filling a glass that can never be filled and casting out one rope trying to save the masses.  Transcending American won’t happen overnight, and it would be useless to require an immediate change because that would result in more frustration.  While one dab of paint in another does not automatically make a new color, the composite characteristics, nonetheless, have been irreversibly changed.  We’re not there yet, but with each step there is a new quality that is added and a new hue is rendered–one dab at a time.

The post How Russell Westbrook, Odell Beckham Jr., & Cam Newton Have Changed Black Masculinity appeared first on Madness & Reality.

You know the idealism: that women, no matter what rank or association they claim, owe men “something”. And that “something” could be sex, attention, a phone number, or anything of said value to the male species.

Yet, there are two particular situations that stood out in recent history with head shaking results.

One of these situations dealt with the tried and true overly-masculine response to rejection:

Janese Talton-Jackson, 29, of Penn Hills, Pa., located just outside Pittsburgh, was leaving the bar around 1:50 a.m. when the suspect followed her to her car, where she was shot, Pittsburgh police said. ShotSpotter, a gunshot-location system, notified police that shots had been fired in the area. When police arrived, they stopped Charles McKinney, 41, also of Penn Hills, on a traffic violation.

Police were talking with McKinney when it was radioed that a woman had been fatally shot. McKinney heard the dispatch and sped off. [1]

And then, there was the situation where a woman is always asked (by a male) to “smile” as if being a woman means they are to flash gratitude at the male’s request. Still, I found an article written by Damon Young that completely understands my disdain for the act:

After hearing Nicki tell me the details of her awful week, watching her take a phone call that somehow made things even worse, and seeing her wait for a bus, clearly upset, it angered me knowing there was a good chance some guy would notice this beautiful woman—depressed for various reasons—and politely (but insistently) demand that she put a smile on her face. Despite the fact that he’d had absolutely no idea why she was down—for all he knew, she could have just found out a family member died (which she did, btw)—he might even pepper his request with an annoyingly familiar “Come on, sis. Things can’t be that bad.” Basically, since they obviously can’t or don’t experience the range of emotions that any other human (well, any other man) can and do experience, they should be able to smile on demand. [2]

And just like that, there will always be that juxtaposition of a man asking/demanding something that a female doesn’t owe them in the first place.

Women Owe Men Nothing

We can all be remiss from the outlandish foolishness just to realize that men making demands of women that owe them nothing is both annoying, disrespectful, and demeaning. Women aren’t here to adjust their bra straps to the whim of every human being that just so happens to have a penis. They aren’t here to play up to the idealism of the worthy, courteous female. They aren’t here for our entertainment. They aren’t our puppets. They aren’t our toys. They are not our play things. So, miss me with the condescending objectification.

And anyone (men) out there that feels that “wouldn’t it be easier to be nice and give in to the man’s demands” is full of shit themselves. No, it isn’t easier to give in to a man’s demands. No, she doesn’t owe you a phone number. No, she shouldn’t have to talk to you. No, she doesn’t want to smile for you. And you know what: she doesn’t owe you (men) a God damn thing.

The Misogyny Epilogue

Let’s be clear here: women have a right to live, function, and express themselves without the male repression of objectivity. These women have every right to talk to, as to NOT talk to, men. And that is their choice to make. Expecting women to comply with a male’s requests/demands is not endearing. It is called obsessive control. It is called misogyny.

So, let the women be in control of their lives and bodies, you assholes.

The post Old School Misogyny: Women Owe Men Nothing appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Many people expressed their support of the court’s decision. Others, not so much. Some folks, needless to say, are livid that their idol may be going to prison. Some compared Bill Cosby to Bill Clinton and Tamir Rice stating that the former’s still celebrated and admired even though he has sexually assaulted several women while the latter’s tragic death by two trigger-happy white cops is being purposely overshadowed through coverage of the Cosby scandal being used as some kind of “distraction”.

While I agree that the media is racist in many ways, why can’t we focus on two cases at the same time? We’re not so simple-minded as to not think about more than one issue. But I digress.

There comes a time where you have to briefly divert your frustrations to get your point across. Sometimes you need to have a heart-to-heart with your people to wake them up. Yes, you will likely be called names. You will likely be considered a House Negro by your own peers. But you have to tell it like it is to get others to see the whole picture.

That being said, I have to ask, people (particularly you, brothas and sistahs who are Cosby supporters) why the hell are you defending Bill Cosby?

Is it because he helped usher in a new era of black entertainment during a period where positive African Americans were hardly seen on television through his crown jewels “The Cosby Show, A Different World” and “Fat Albert”? Is it because he was an activist of sorts telling black people to get it together and straighten up, because racism is no longer an issue, and there is no longer an excuse for our condition? Is it because you believe that he’s somehow targeted because of his activism and accomplishments and that America desires to bring another great black man down as it has done O.J. Simpson, Michael Jackson and Mike Tyson while white celebrities like Woody Allen, Roland Polanski and Charlie Sheen continue to gain fame and fortune? Seriously, what is it?

I know that I’ve set myself up for an assload of insults and condescension. I know I probably will get ousted as a House Negro for “attacking” a once-beloved American icon. But before you cast me into the pits of online hell, slow down and stay with me for a few more paragraphs.

I’ll tell you why I don’t support Bill Cosby and along the way, I’ll tell you why you shouldn’t either.

Bill Cosby made it clear about his stance when it comes to poor black people. In the infamous 2004 Pound Cake Speech he delivered to the NAACP, Cosby went in on poor black folks, essentially blaming them for their own problems. He blamed black women for having too many children out of wedlock and blamed black men for sagging their pants and going to prison. If you get gunned down by the police, it’s your own damn fault:

“Looking at the incarcerated, these are not political criminals. These are people going around stealing Coca-Cola. People getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake! Then we all runout and are outraged: ‘The cops shouldn’t have shot him.’ What the hell was he doing with the pound cake in his hand?”

Another reason is quite obvious. Cosby admitted in a civil case several years ago in a deposition that he bought some pills so he can use them to sleep with women. He admitted to having sex with the women who accused him of assault. The man basically told on himself. Yet, some people still choose to defend him. One of the usual arguments is that Cosby’s never been charged. So he didn’t do it. Yet, some of those same people claim how fucked up the system is when you have police getting away with the murders of black folks. Think about it.

I get how hurt many of you are right now over this whole saga. I’m hurt as well. To see an icon that has contributed so many positive black images on mainstream TV go down like this is hard as hell to watch. But we have to accept the reality that Bill Cosby is no hero. He’s a hypocritical sexual deviant whose time has come to face the music he started playing. Sometimes you have to put race aside in a subject that is more about sexism. I believe this is one of those times.

Yes, I know racism exists. Yes, I know the justice system is out on the hunt against black men. Yes, I’m aware that it’s hard being a black man, especially now. But like The Boondock’s character Huey Freeman said during the episode about R. Kelly’s trial, “Every famous nigga that gets arrested is not Nelson Mandela.”

We also have to accept that there are black men who happen to be rapists. (I didn’t say that black men are rapists. I said there are black men who happen to be rapists. There’s a difference.) We can’t continue to protect them or support them, especially if they’re famous. Why should we, especially when some of the victims are black women just like a few of Cosby’s victims?

One of the ways we can combat this problem is to raise our young boys to love and respect women. We must teach them about rape, sexual abuse and how they both are about power over women. We must start now and help end this saga of abuse against women, or else we’ll give birth to more rapists.

The post People, Why Defend Bill Cosby? appeared first on Madness & Reality.