well.

there's this.






...and my current favorite:




oh, and how could i forget...

i'm sorry jessie

you're right, of course. we have been in no way updating the blog often enough. sometimes i get lazy. so i'm gonna just post something real quick to let the internet know i haven't died, and perhaps i can get this whole 'posting' thing to become a habit again.

the subject today: ignorant people and internet commenting.

so i was reminded today of a long-standing irritation i've had. i went to check some of my blogs i haven't read in a few days, and discovered that sister toldja, who i find to be occasionally hilarious, got herself in a bit of trouble while i wasn't looking. apparently this post got linked on jezebel and, in the eternal words of eddie murphy, white folks lost their motherf*ckin minds. that poor little blog, which usually gets somewhere around 5 comments on a post, suddenly had just about 150, and most of them were mad as hell. if i had to summarize them in just a few words, it would be something along the lines of "you're an ignorant racist bitch, you remind me of hitler, its your fault racism still exists in the world, and as a white person i feel personally attacked and victimized." oh, and about 70% of the comments were posted anonymously. now you see why we don't allow anonymous comments on THIS blog.

so here's the thing thats always bothered me about the internet, and the world of internet commenting:
1) people seem to think its ok to pretend like they don't understand when something's a joke, and then just go off on it like it was an article in the new york times and not a post on a humor blog.
2) people seem to think 'anonymous' means 'i can insult you personally and compare you to hitler.'

and 3, which is the main reason this whole thing fascinated/annoyed me, is that people who (and i'm gonna go out on a limb and make a WILD generalization here) in their daily lives don't give more than a passing thought to issues like racism, homophobia, and social justice in general, who spend their time reading blogs like jezebel and gawker so they can keep up on their celebrity news, but probably don't even know the website for the BBC and certainly don't have any race-themed blogs bookmarked in their browsers suddenly feel the need to get impassioned about something when it happens across their computer screen on their way to some article about natalie portman's latest romance. i'm sorry, but in real life if you came across a group of black people talking about racism, you would keep walking because you would be uncomfortable and uninterested. but on the internet you feel like you have a right to join the conversation? fuck that. this is that brownstoner brooklyn eviction blog post all over again. just because something involving race or class falls into your otherwise wealthy, white, heterosexual internet 'space' doesn't mean you all of a sudden have a stake in that issue. if you spend 98% of your time ignoring issues like that, you frankly have no right to get indignant.

i'm mad late to work so i'm gonna just end this with little to no conclusion, and just leave you with these words of wisdom: the internet is a dangerous place, people. the same person who moves their purse to the other side when you sit down next to them on the train could be getting home, logging on, and trying to make some profound point about race in the comments section of a blog. you would never know.


addition: now that i'm AT work and shouldn't be blogging, i had a great thought and a clarification: i'm not actually mad at jezebel and gawker. both enjoyable websites, and tons of normal and smart people read them. here is my point - if you're going to get righteously indignant about something, you first need to earn some kind of righteousness. so don't pretend to get indignant about something you don't talk about enough to have confidence in your own opinions. express an opinion, sure, but feel free to also recognize you're not the expert.

the gays, the blacks, and other random thoughts

all right...i've had a bit of writers block, but it doesn't seem to be going away so i'm just gonna push on through.

the subject of this post was originally going to be proposition 8, but i feel compelled to make a detour before i even begin: i recently went to see Milk, and i need to give it a quick shout-out. the movie was amazing, sean penn was amazing, and it was so incredibly relevant as to appear almost heavy-handed. but of course, when they were making the movie they couldn't have known Prop 8 would pass. which really makes you think, doesn't it. Just a brief background for those who haven't yet seen it, Milk is the story of the life and death of Harvey Milk, San Francisco Supervisor and the first openly gay public official. A large part of the movie focuses on the fight against proposition 6 in california: a proposition which would have banned gay people from teaching in california schools. watching the celebrations in the movie as prop 6 is defeated against the odds is a pretty grim juxtaposition to our current time. you can't help but think we may be sliding backwards. if, during a time when an openly gay public official lived every day knowing his life was in danger, they could defeat prop 6 but today we couldn't seem to defeat prop 8, what does that say about the direction our country is headed?

i don't actually think, though, that we're sliding so far backwards. prop 8 was a pretty horrendous setback, but i do believe its only a matter of time before gay people have the right to marry and this whole mess is a thing of the past. until then, though, just a couple of thoughts on the whole prop 8 thing:

1) I saw Sean Penn interviewed on Charlie Rose about Milk and various other things, and just wanted to paste a quote that I thought was particularly compelling, and also more eloquent than we've come to expect from our television sets. When asked about prop 8, Penn said,

"When they talk about it, its just a word, and ‘why not leave the traditionalists to their word?’ Well, you know, there’s 13 year old kids still today hanging themselves because the reach to identity is still too far, because they’re homosexual, or whatever the issue is….and we can’t give up a word? To save that kid’s life? It’s a national shame"

aw. Sean Penn.

2) there has been a LOT of talk about the role of black people in passing prop 8, and it just seems like its time for someone not-crazy to weigh in. people have blamed obama for not supporting gay marriage. rightly so. he really did not come through in any way shape or form on that issue. Sure, he opposed prop 8, but as a writer for Salon pointed out, "not so loud that anyone can hear him."

even so, there seems to be this sense that black people, rushing to the polls to vote for obama, tipped the balance towards prop 8. while that theory has since been disproven (it would have passed with or without black help), the fact does remain that 70% of black people surveyed voted in favor of prop 8. thats a lot. but i'm not completely sure why everyone was so d*mn surprised. homophobia in the black community is not a new issue, but everyone seemed to be trying to make it a new issue, to the detriment of logic. example: Charles M. Blow, "visual columnist" for the New York times, and currently trying his hardest to knock bill kristol from his current position as 'kaya's least favorite columnist,' wrote this piece in which he seems to imply that its not homophobia that's the problem. in fact, its not even all black people. no, black WOMEN are the problem because they're so scared of being alone forever that they have to lash out at gays for decreasing the pool of potential mates. um, what? wrong. illogical. also pretty damn sexist. i give that twenty-five fails for charles m. blow.

this type of logic-stretching seems to really be going around, though. so the black community is homophobic. everyone is trying to focus in on one issue that makes it so: maybe its the 'down-low' phenomenon (boo, hiss). maybe its that black women just can't find a man (hiss, boo). maybe it's the church (hmm...). but at the end of the day all of these arguments fail because they're trying to simplify a complex problem into a sound byte. sure, many churches have played a role in the pervasive homophobia in this country (i'm looking at you, mormons). but other churches (what up, episcopalians!) have made serious progress in fighting homophobia. just like white people, black people don't all belong to the same church. "the church" is not the problem. but i guess its not that quotable to say homophobia in the black community is influenced by homophobia in certain religious communities, homophobia in mainstream hip-hop which is, of course, encouraged by wealthy white funders, and a complex history of desexualization and hypersexualization tracing roots back to slavery that creates a lot of baggage around black sexuality and gender identity, among other things. and of course, nowhere in any of these discussions has it even come up that 'black' and 'gay' are not mutually exclusive categories. hm. i know we all want to make our point quickly and get published, but its possible certain issues would result in more productive conversation if we actually engaged with the complexity of the issue at hand rather than trying to fit it into a cute and simple box.

more on this later. i think i'm significantly late to work. i'll just leave you with this:


3) just for your enjoyment:

Review: Trouble the Water

Friday night I was all ready to settle into some television and a slice of pizza when one of my roommates forced me to get up off my butt and head downtown to the IFC Center to see the opening screening of a film called Trouble The Water.  Reluctantly I went (I can be really lazy- I was tired!) but fortunately was incredibly grateful that I did.

The film, executive produced by Danny Glover (who was there!  He was standing in my way as I tried to sneak in some outside food lol), follows a trio of Hurricane Katrina survivors who lived through the storm and are attempting to rebuild their lives in its environmental, social and economic aftermath.  TTW uses footage taken by the documentary makers, clips from news channels/speeches and home video caught by one of the main subjects of the film, Kimberly Rivers Roberts.

Roberts, her husband, and a friend (encountered during Katrina) return to New Orleans two weeks after the storm to find their homes destroyed.  Unlike what you'd expect, TTW doesn't just talk about how much of a failure the infrastructure our government's disaster relief groups were, but it brings life to the fact that the people whose lives were most devastated by the storm were already dealing with life-threatening situations, drug abuse, death and financial instability.  Kim's mother died of AIDS, both she and her husband were former drug dealers who were failed by the public education system, their friend Brian is a former addict, they have no bank account and- like so many others- couldn't leave New Orleans because they simply did not have the means.

Trouble The Water not only reminds us of what happened during Katrina (as well as the fact that the US Government cares very little about the impoverished minorities crowded in its urban centers) but brings to light the fact that the sicknesses exacerbated by Katrina in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast (poverty, poor public education, drug use, STIs and STDs, violence, abuse) not only existed before the storm, but are still here and will be here long into the future unless we take some sort of action.  If there's only one word I could use to describe this film, it would be:

Real.

I strongly urge you to go if it's playing in your city- click here to find information on screenings and openings.

Rest In Peace

Bernie Mac passed away this morning due to complications from pneumonia (combined with his sarcoidosis)- he had been hospitalized since August 1 and was expected to have a full recovery.

This is really sad, for obvious reasons.  Bernie was not only a great comedic talent (admit it- you cracked up because of at least one of his jokes or performances) but also discussed a lot of very REAL issues like poverty, inner city education and drug abuse in his performances.  He was totally real and unashamed of where he came from- and where a lot of his family still was/is.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the McCulloughs and the rest of Bernie's survived family and friends.

Black? Help us keep out the Mexicans!

So I meant to blog about this a WHILE ago (like when I first read the article) but I've had a lot going on an dam a negligent blogger - sorry Kaya!  Anyway, according to the New York Times, the US Border Patrol, in an effort to beef up its forces, is now reaching out to young African Americans.  You read that right- border patrol is stocking up on Black kids.

Maybe I'm being a bit sensitive, after all I usually get pissed when I hear about one government group or another reaching into a very specific pool of minorities b/c they figure those kids have no other alternatives and little prospect for work outside of government or law enforcement.. but even so this seems severely fucked up.  I don't normally like to 'air family business,' but I think it's no secret that Black Americans have a huge and I mean HUGE amount of tension and resentment for ethnically diverse immigrants.  Why?  Well, outside of the normally American reasons ("they take away our jobs!" "they suck up resources!" "they take space in schools!") many immigrant groups come to America with a messed up view of Black Americans fueled by hip hop videos, violent movies and racist portrayals, and this perception can sometimes manifest itself in feelings of superiority.  Not to mention Black Americans are pretty much the lowest caste in American society, and the idea that people can come in from another country, be in America for a few months and already have more social and economic capital than Black Americans (who were the base and foundation of even creating America) is pretty fucked up.

So, even though you know they would never admit this, I think it's pretty obvious that this is definitely helping their recruitment agenda.  Kill two birds with one stone- help darken up the group that's trying to keep a country built on immigration "pure" and recruit kids that have a blind resentment (and sometimes hatred) toward a group of people that they have more in common with than they think.

You know, these are the times when my dual status as both a Black American and a first generation latino immigrant make me have all sorts of complicated emotions.  It's all just very sad.

Just in time for Father's Day!

Click here to go to an ebay charity auction for Bill Cosby's sweaters from the great days of Cliff Huxtable. Proceeds benefit Cosby's N.A.S. charity, fixing the hood one ungrateful youth at a time.

If you guessed what N.A.S. stands for +10 points.
If you guessed/said it and aren't Black -2,000,000,000 points.
Sorry, sometimes it beez like that.

so wonderfully exotic

One thing that I’ve always loved about fashion photography has been the rich colors, unexpected shapes and oftentimes bold composition of each shoot.  Since I was 10 years old I remember soaking in the pages of Vogue, Harper’s and Elle, not for the (generally uninspiring) editorials or tips on what was new or in, but in sheer appreciation of the art that I’ve come to love.  Of course, I’ve always accepted my love of fashion with a grain of salt- after all, as I’ve stated before, it’s an industry rife with elitism, sexism, racism and exploitation, the proverbial playground of the privileged that, on its upper levels, is all but closed to us plebeians.

So over the years I’ve been an active consumer and a casual fan, never overestimating my love, knowing that while she can be beautiful, creative and provocative, she’s also often petty and manipulative.  Which, sadly, I was reminded of while flipping through this month’s Vogue.  The June 2008 issue of the fashion industry’s bible was dedicated to SJP and the upcoming SATC movie, but deep in the recesses of its layout is the article “from here to timbuktu... and beyond.  Sally Singer travels to the end of the earth for a little night music.”  I’m sure you’ve already caught on to what annoyed me about this article.  Bright pictures of model Liya Kebede mingling with the Malian locals, sporting “ethnically inspired” fashions in the most ethnic of all places (oh, Africa.  Sigh.)  If the imagery itself weren’t enough to warrant my defenses popping up, this quote definitely helped spark a bit of anger:

“Which brings me to the true glory of Mali: the wanderers themselves... You see women driving pink 125 cc. bikes in kitten heels, stretch pin-striped pencil skirts, and blonde bobbed wigs.  You see schoolgirls in Heidi pinafores and young boys in hip hop gear, pastoral floral dresses.  Above all, you see the world as if exfoliated of the dead layers of Western trends, norms, preconceptions.  It’s a visual and auditory jolt that makes this sandbox at the end of the earth feel like the most privileged of all playgrounds.”

Yes, you read correctly.  Now, stripping away some of the most immediately annoying parts of this article (“this sandbox at the end of the earth,” right.. how exactly is Mali at the end of the earth?  If I’m not mistaken California could easily be qualified as the “end of the earth” to this white woman fashion news editor, but come ON how completely cliche and colonial) the most frustrating part was how this woman continued the theme of “oh how quaint, look at how luxuriously I can live in this dust bucket of a country!  This is so deliciously different from my every day life!”

Oh, and the comment about Mali being stripped “of Western trends, norms [and] preconceptions?”  PLEASE.  Oh goodness, that right there almost made me want to vomit.  I’m no expert on Mali or Timbuktu, but I seriously doubt that the eclectic hodgepodge of outfits seen on the streets of this city has much to do with a collective fashion statement by the people as much as it has to do with a myriad of economic issues and access to certain resources.

And okay, I get it, if you’re an American who has never been to Mali (which I never have) I’m sure that the change from Western culture and amenities would be really jarring, and would inspire you to have a different appreciation both for your home and your new surroundings.  But, in this day and age of hyper-sensitivity to global issues you think that she’d at least once bring up something about the environment and its condition that had at least a tiny ounce of social relevancy (aside from immediately mentioning and dismissing her non-status as an anthropologist, economist or tourist) but, no, of course she did not.

So we get to the point- when the hell IS it someone’s job to have cultural sensitivity?  Surely this can’t only be reserved for us anthropology students and those in academia- I mean, this woman is a lead editor at one of the most highly circulated publications in the business, and she’s continued to support the ignorant stance of appreciating a place only for its superficial merits.

Blah.  I just got all aggravated.  I’m going to go get a pepsi.  To calm me nerves.

penalty on the court

Damn. I'm not even going to begin to comment, this article says it all. Please read and comment what you think.

LeBron James first Black man to pose for cover of Vogue magazine. Find out why this is ass after clicking the link.

in keeping with a theme...

another post about feelings!

so i just finished reading Gloria Naylor's "The Women of Brewster Place," (don't read the editorial reviews at the bottom of the amazon page if you don't want the whole story ruined for you) and first of all i have to strongly recommend that if you read the book, you don't read it in a public place, like the train. that said, it was a really wonderful book, but one quote in particular stood out to me and has sort of been haunting me ever since i finished the book. without giving too much away, two of the women have a fight, and one of them walks out the door. in a couple pages, something really horrible is going to happen to her to make me wish i had not read that chapter. anyways, the narrator says this about the one who stays:

"theresa would live to be a very old woman and would replay those words in her mind a thousand times and then invent a thousand different things she could have said or done to keep the tall yellow woman in the green and black dress from walking out of that door for the last time in her life. but tonight she was a young woman and still in search of answers, and she made the fatal mistake that many young women do of believing that what never existed was just cleverly hidden beyond her reach."

i just wanted to share that, because i didn't want to be the only person feeling extra-depressed about that line. as a young woman still in search of answers, there are about a million things i can think of that i believe are just 'cleverly hidden beyond my reach.' so damn. this chapter of the book was just devastating.

that said, i totally recommend you read the book. the writing was beautiful, and the stories really just speak to a lot of different pieces of you.

extremely on point

Star Jones own'd Bill O'Reilly.

i love upeople

so last night I went over to Solomon's Porch in bedstuy and saw Hanifah Walidah and Olive Demetrius's documentary, U People. you can check out their website here, if you're so inclined - they also do a fabulous podcast.

the basic premise - while shooting the music video for Hanifah's "Make a Move," they also shot a lot of footage of all the women in the house interacting, talking about life, and just generally getting deep. Then they made that footage into a film.

so this post is not going to be long, I just really wanted to urge people to check out the site and see the movie when it starts going to film festivals. It really felt to me like I was sitting in my own living room, talking to my own friends. I felt like every conversation I saw on that movie was one i've had thousands of times before, but just the experience of seeing it on screen, of hearing those words come out of someone else's mouth, was intensely validating. Hanifah and Olive spoke about how these types of conversations about race, gender, and sexuality are conversations that we as black women and queer black women often have among ourselves, but they are not conversations that often make it into the public sphere. This movie is their attempt to bring some of those conversations out of the living room and into other people's living rooms, and I think that's sort of great. I just wanted to give a shout out to them and to all the beautiful people in their movie. I think its the kind of movie everyone can get something different out of, but for me, it was just great to see myself reflected in so many other people.

so yeah. this post was a bit full of feelings, but that's probably a stunning recommendation for a movie, no? see it. love it. check out their podcast. its great.

with inflation, what would 40 acres be today?

alright so first of all, i recognize that brittany (*cough cough*) and i have been a bit lax in updating. turns out a blog is a lot of work. life can get hectic. sorry. we'll do better.

but back to business: skimming through the "most emailed" section of the new york times, i was delighted to find out that skip gates has an article in the op-ed section. i had been going through severe withdrawal since graduation, and since i've been watching less tv, it seems like "finding oprah's roots" is on less and less too. i refuse to ever admit to "missing harvard," but if i DID miss something about harvard, it would definitely be the af-am department. so when i saw that dr. henry louis gates jr. had written an article called "40 acres and a gap in wealth," i was on it before you could say "doesn't he mean 'mule'?"

ANyways, harvard ramblings aside, i'm pointing it out on the blog for a few reasons:

1 - this way i dont have to email it to anyone, so its almost time-saving in a way
2 - i really needed to update the blog.

but more importantly, 3 - gates is pointing to something i think most of us know about, but for some reason hasn't made it into the canon of "things wrong with black america:" land ownership. the difference between owning property and not is huge, and gates is pointing out that this difference back in the day can be seen in the present (oprah's ancestors owned land. so did whoopi goldberg's). and of course people have all sorts of things to say about that. maybe if black people owned land they'd be more invested in their communities. maybe they'd be more upwardly mobile. etc. etc. the point is, it's clear that property ownership is a big step in the "right direction," and is a step that most black americans either haven't taken, or haven't been able to take.

so in the spirit of a) finding out how many people actually read this blog, and b) friendly conversation (or not-so-friendly argument. either way), i have a question to ask you:

so most people didn't get that 40 acres and a mule they were promised. those who did seem to be significantly better-off than those who didn't. so lets talk about reparations: how does the idea of straight-up land change the reparations debate? what if instead of getting a check, black people got some property? i'm not saying lets do this, because i think we all know it won't happen. but i am asking what you think.

bye bye barack

you know, i wasn't even gonna post on this mainly because i'm lazy, but a recent trip to the comments section over on the field negro's post inspired me to have my (belated) say.

so you (hopefully) have heard already: Barack Obama fucked up big-time and booked "ex-gay" Donnie McClurkin to share the stage with him on his gospel tour. Needless to say, the gays got upset. among some of McClurkin's more memorable statements have been equating homosexuality to lying (its wrong, but some people just like to do it), and announcing a war between the gays, and the rest of "normal" america. i don't really want to go into the whole thing, so for your convenience i'll just go ahead and link to all the articles on this story over at pam's house blend. read from the bottom.

anyways, i have SEVERAL beefs i really just need to air and be done with it. so it's time for a good old-fashioned number-the-rage:

1. Obama: what the fuck? i mean i know you're not even that cool, and i never liked your face anyways, but this is a low even for mr "let's build a wall to keep the mexicans out." i mean not only did he book the guy, but when there was an outrage, he chose to stand by donnie "i used to be gay and now i'm not because its sinful, please don't interview my lover and blog about it because that would be awkward for me" mcclurkin.

did he expect NOT to lose the gay vote? and does he think he doesn't NEED the gay vote? like aside from being a shitty thing to do, it just seems straight up dumb. the amount of votes he might have gained by having a gospel tour cannot possibly be close to the amount he just lost for this fiasco. whoops.

2. Donnie: also what the fuck? first of all, don't embarrass yourself. you're claiming that you "quit the homosexual lifestyle" circa 2002, yet i just read an interview with a dude who claims to have been sharing your bed from 2001-2004? it just doesn't quite add up. also, i don't like you.

3. EVERYONE ON THE INTERNET: just shut the fuck up, really. i know, i know. don't read the comments on blogs, dont' read the comments on youtube. it will only make you mad. but guess what? i read them. and i'm mad. over on field negro's post, the conversation about obama and mcclurkin quickly did a downward spiral into various people arguing over whether homosexuality is a choice or not, whether boys who play with dolls are gay, how if gayness grosses you out that doesn't make you a homophobe, and of course how most lesbians are totally still attracted to men.

come. on. if you don't know what you're talking about, there's no need to write an essay about it and post it on the internet. just think what the internet would be like if before hitting "post comment" people stopped and said to themselves "i wonder if what i just wrote has any value at all?" and possibly "i wonder if anything in my life has made me knowledgeable on this subject, or whether i'm just talking out of my ass." ugh.

bottom line: if you're homophobic, and apparently most black people still are, maybe there's nothing i can do about that. but don't go bitching all over the internet that we shouldn't be so hard on obama. he, much like yourself, lost my respect a while back. i know black people continue to hold on to him and defend all the stupid-ass shit he does, but this is my announcement: i'm officially over it. obama sucks, and frankly i doubt he'll ever get a chance to prove that. but if by some miracle he does, don't say i didn't tell you so in 2009 when the supreme court cuts down roe v wade and affirmative action in one fell swoop, and obama shrugs his shoulders and goes back to building his wall.

free rap concert! sike nah, but you can join the army though.

Okay, so it's no real secret that the armed forces take a huge chunk of their population (no, not the officers and not the generals and ish, the recruits that end up on the front lines) from the bottom of America's socio-economic ladder. And of course, although the fighting is being done across the world instead of across the street, America is in a war (which people seem to be forgetting all the time, hell, I'm guilty of it) so of course recruitment efforts have been ramping up more and more as support for the war in Iraq (and subsequent enlistments) has been dwindling. What else has been increasing? The Army's attempt to be hip, youthful and overwhelmingly Black. Take a look at this screen shot of their website..
Black guy, front and center, and no, the picture does not alternative to show other soldiers of different races, ages or of another sex. Mm, and do you see that iPod bribe in the bottom left corner? Ridiculous. The only thing that really drove me to go to the Army's website was the fact that while I was watching BET the past few days I've noticed a lot of GoArmy commercials, and have also noticed that these commercials tend to focus only on Black people.
I feel like before they used to be a little more subtle about it, but I guess they figure they're just gonna go for it full force.
Next thing you know, they'll be offering promotions like "Free chain on enlisting! Rim for a Friend- with each friend you bring to the army you'll get one 26" chrome spinner!"


..okay sorry, I know I'm wrong for that lol.

color television

..Okay sorry, I couldn't help it. Lol.
Anyway, as I've been sitting home and resting on my little bit of time off from working most of my activities have centered around catching up on cable television. Okay, so most of my one main activity. And if you know much about me, you know that I can a.) obviously get annoyed by most people and most things going on today (which can be seen on this blog) and b.) I love cartoons and children's programming in general. While at home my television is pretty much regularly set on Nickelodeon and the Disney Channel, and I stay watching shows like SpongeBob SquarePants and Jake Long American Dragon. For anybody who shares this should-have-been-outgrown-but-is-still-fun sentiment of mine, you know that these shows (while often sickeningly corny or sweet) are generally a really great time. Most of the time they give kids valuable lessons while providing harmless entertainment. Not to mention these shows really touch kids, and definitely have a huge influence on shaping entire generations (come on, how many of us don't get excited when somebody brings up when All That was actually good, or when talking about old episodes of Salute Your Shorts or Eureka's Castle?)- and what works at shaping these kids and developing strong brand loyalty? Relating. At least in the sense of having characters, situations and environments that really speak to a child's reality- after all, how can you get lost in a world when you can't really see yourself in it? And what makes a show really great? When it relates to minority audiences.
Yep, people of color have saturated popular culture, and while we don't control most of the wealth in this society, we definitely control a large cornerstone of its buying power (which is a problematic issue that I won't even get started on right now). Obviously this has been getting more and more well-known to corporate America, who has in turn developed whole genres of movies, music, product lines and commercials to serving this previously under-served and often ignored audience. The world of media & entertainment has caught on as well, and over the past 8 or so years has really ramped up programming that focuses on characters of color. And who has done this really well in my opinion?
Disney.
Yep, ironically enough the corporation founded by and named for a huge racist, bigot, anti-semetic asshole has provided at least two really good shows centered around a black family. One, which I'm sad to say has been canceled, was The Proud Family. Focused on Penny Proud and her friends, this show did a really good job of attracting a Black audience (a Destiny's Child made theme song? Yeah) and sticking close to themes used by other children's shows (honesty, hard work, unconditional friendship, etc.) all while still feeling really genuine. What I mean to say is that The Proud Family didn't just feel like a regular cartoon with Black people pasted in, it felt very natural. Another show that accomplished this same genuine feel was definitely That's So Raven. Using Raven's great ability at physical comedy (I'll probably be roasted by someone for saying this, but she's often really reminded me of a young, Black Lucille Ball) along with a cast whose acting styles really blended well with Raven's extravagance and eccentricity, Disney was able to deliver a show that was entertaining to everyone, but could really reach out to a young Black audience.
While I love Disney for these shows, I also love me some Nickelodeon, and for a while was annoyed that they seemed for some reason to be seriously sleeping on an audience of color. Yeah there use to be Taina and Keenan and Kel, but shows like that have been long since canceled and other shows like Zoey 101, The Naked Brothers Band and Ned's Declassified have taken over. And don't get me wrong, these shows are cute (I actually really enjoy Ned's Declassified, that kid is hilarious) but there's a serious lack of color.
So where does the color come in with Nickelodeon?
Nick Jr.
So yeah, this is definitely not that tween audience that most companies seem to be clamoring for, but it's still a really impressionable audience that could be served well by having characters to whom they can relate. And, interestingly enough, Nick Jr. is serving up minority programming in a really innovative way. And no, I'm not going to be talking about Dora the Explorer or Go, Diego, Go! but I'm going to focus on some equally great shows.
First up- The Backyardigans. This show is, in addition to being incredibly cute, secretly for Black kids! Okay, so obviously it's for everyone, but with a Black female creator and characters named things like Uniqua, Pablo and Tyrone, this show is definitely for children of color. My first encounter with The Backyardigans was when my friend Tiff told me "there's a show with Black kids singing on Nickelodeon!" and then urged me to check it out as soon as I could. So I did, and I'll admit that first I was a little thrown off by the fact that none of the characters are actually humans or like, you know.. correctly colored even for the animals that they represent, but I immediately warmed up to it. These "backyardigans" use their rich imaginations to create entire worlds in the back yards where they explore typical kid issues all while being surrounded by great imagery and making use of a really amazing soundtrack. Not to mention Nickelodeon does a great job of serving a minority audience not by simply having a cast of minorities, but by completely integrating them into the programming- children of color voice the characters and the characters are given what most people would classify as typical "urban or ethnic" (read: Latino or Black) names, kind of giving the feeling that of course it's natural for them to be in this setting because they are as much a valuable part of this society as anybody else. So yeah, I basically have a new spot in my heart for this cute bunch of back yard kids.
But Nick Jr. hasn't stopped with The Backyardigans in its interesting use of and appeal to minority audiences. Another show that has recently premiered on the daytime network for children is Yo Gabba Gabba!, a show that uses hip hop and dance to help kids play to learn. Okay, so when I first heard of and saw a few clips of Yo Gabba Gabba! on YouTube I was definitely not impressed, and was almost a little annoyed at the whole fried-chicken song (I can't find the clip, but yeah..). However today as I was sitting around watching t.v. I flipped to Nickelodeon and found an episode of the new show and was almost immediately drawn in. And I'm 22. Okay okay, so I already admitted that yes, I am oldish and I love children's programming, but this show is like actually freaking great. Maybe it's just me and my generation, but the way it uses hip hop beats reminiscent of old-school along with bright colors and shapes and a really interesting 90's aesthetic (down to the pixelated video-game backgrounds used as sedge ways between games and dances) this show really masters playing to learn and does a great job of getting kids up and moving (an issues of increasing relevance in a society that is definitely saturated with weight problems in all age demographics) while showing that different kinds of musical aesthetics have value. So you can see what I mean, here's a clip of the intro to this show in action..

The point of this rambling? I really love kids shows, and I'm really pleased at what I've been seeing develop over in the pre-K area of entertainment for kids- I'm really excited to see what they come up with next.

intel: processors for the man

While browing the net I saw this gem of an Intel ad on a forum:

Yeah. That's right. Let it sink in real good.
Anything pop out at you? Anything at all?
Okay, so clearly you guys are smart enough to see what's incredibly problematic about this ad, but I'll go ahead and say it anyway, just to make sure that it's clear: RACISM.
So when I first saw this, other than the flaming anger that began to rise inside of me (with a fair bit of vomit in my throat, as this sort of thing just plain makes me sick) I was a bit confused at how it at all related to computers and technology. So not only is it problematic that these men (all conveniently Black men) are bowing down (yeah I know it's a stance in racing/track but clearly you see the imagery) to a white man, but even the copy that 'justifies' the imagery is itself problematic:
"Multiply computing performance and maximize the power of your employees."
Wow, so much to unpack. So first of all, even though "power" in terms of meeting deadlines and maximizing resources would be a relatively beneficial result of having really good processors, but to me the word power combined with the image of the men (strong, hunched and athletic, muscles very clearly sculpted, highlighted by shadows and even sort of glistening in the lighting) really connotes more of a brute, physical sense of power. In a sense, nothing about the image gives me the idea that the processors complimented the intellect and ability of the workers.
Which brings me to another problem that I have- the men very clearly represent the Intel processors and not the workers. Let me tell you why.. The print reads that "multiply computing performance" (clearly through Intel processors) but that you "maximize the power of your employees," nothing about the power of these men looks maximized. Instead, it really just looks like the same man (generalizing Black people, how nice) multiplied over and over again, ready to out perform (because he's about to run really fast, you know why? Because he's Black, and boy can those n*ggers run, huh?) those crappy old other processors. When it comes down to it, Intel equates these Black men (or even this Black man, since he really seems to be just copy/pasted onto the ad because of the lack of attention and detail given to his seemingly unimportant face) to technology, to machines- to tools that white men (read: corporate America, controlled by white men, obviously) can buy, sell, use and control and with no tough feelings- I mean look at the smug smile on that guy's face.
I mean damn, you'd think that after the ole 3/5 thing was in history that we'd actually start to be seen as human beings and not as property anymore, but I guess you really shouldn't overestimate the power of racism and the ignorance (i.e. ignoring racial issues) of white America. Damn. Like come ON- who let this ad run, and how many people approved it? Do Black people even WORK at Intel?
If you are Black, working at Intel, and you somehow saw the concept for this and had a hand in approving it before production then you suck ass and are a failure for letting this get out.

In closing, what does this mean for good ol Brittany?
The next computer I get will have an AMD processor.
Thanks.

i'm not a g but i move like they move, with a head full of smarts...

That, if you didn't know, is a line from one of my favorite Little Brother songs Lovin' It off their The Minstrel Show cd. Just some context for you. Want to listen to it? Here you go!



Anyway, I just wanted to ramble at length a little bit about the development of my own personal music tastes, and just some thoughts I've had about hip hop as a genre and even as a movement. I will admit that I didn't have much respect for MCs in the past- especially around the time I started developing a taste for music and popular culture (around high school) because, though the tracks were always danceable, I just didn't feel like the artists themselves were really saying anything that I wanted to hear. I couldn't relate. I could sit and chill with Rob Thomas as he and MB20 cranked out tunes about the anxiety of getting older and starting a new life or the thrill and simultaneous terror that comes with finding someone to love. The Backstreet Boys represented everything about youth to me and even Blink 182 made me laugh about the awkwardness that is adolescence and young adulthood. But Juvenile? Puff Daddy? Foxy Brown? As much as I knew I should have been close to them, should have supported, defended and enjoyed their music I couldn't. Even though there were people like Nas, Outkast and countless other underground/not as mainstream artists that I didn't know about, they weren't the ones really in the forefront, they weren't the ones that I, as a young girl living in Central Ohio, could really have exposure to.

And then Ludacris came along.

Okay, so yeah, maybe he isn't the long ago foreseen prophet of hip hop, but you have to admit dude is nice on the mic. The summer that Southern Hospitality came out I began to actually see rap for the amazing and diverse genre that it is. It's like when you grow up next to some gangly looking kid who you're pretty sure has never even seen a noxema (yeah, throwback to the 90's!) commercial let alone ever been acquainted with their product. But then you graduate high school, and you see him in that cap and gown, smiling, coming into the man that he really is and has always been and you notice that his skin is more clear, his shoulders are more broad, and his smile is captivating- and you fall in love. Well yeah, it wasn't all of that at once for me, but he definitely opened the door. What hooked me on Luda wasn't necessarily what he was saying, but the wit that he used and the clever way that he laced his lines together (hand-me-down socks then hand-me-down rocks? Come on, y'all know that is hilarious and hot).

So I got into mainstream rap and started to like artists not just for the tracks that their producers created but for the lyrical skill that they employed. Ludacris remained my favorite, but then I started to be a little more impressed with Fabolous, a little bit of Li'l Wayne and Jay-Z. And it was cool, it was real cool. I found that rap had a pretty warm home and it invited me in to stay a while, so I did. Rap became my connection to the world, whenever an MC called out the midwest they were calling out my city, my home, my name. But for some reason I just couldn't fight the feeling that something was just slightly amiss.

It's pretty obvious that Black people, and in my case Black Americans, are a small, very marginalized and often invisible community in the racially stratified society that makes up the U.S.A. But here were these MCs, these men and sometimes women who were placed at the forefront of popular culture- they transcended the barriers that keep so many Black people hidden and became visible and vocal. But damn, the messages that some of them were putting out there weren't always so hot, you know? Even though they try to escape it, however much they scream "I am not a role model!" it can't be denied that the nature of their status in American society makes their success a double-edged sword; they can have all the things that they probably never thought could possibly be available to them, but being forced into the limelight makes them a part of a very small amount of representations of Black people. And they need to do a good job, right?

Yeah, so therein lies the rub. And again, that all-consuming blackness. Just when you think you may have escaped it, there it is, smothering everything you touch and coating all of your accomplishments with its pain, its joy and the implications that those things have for you and your people.

After I started realizing this it was just like.. well damn. How can I enjoy this track now that I know that it creates a negative image of Black people, of me? How can I dance to a song that, on the surface level subjugates Black women? Having these questions made me angry, but they also made me thoughtful. I began to do more research on hip hop- its beginnings, its founders, all that stuff. I had to figure out where it went wrong (and shit, if it was wrong) and why...


Okay, so this is really long. I'm going to finish it later on today or tomorrow since it got so rambly. But until then I'll leave you with a few songs/videos that I particularly enjoy from the kind of hip hop that I began to enjoy and will talk about in my next blog post...





This video is hilarious..


So yeah, I'll be back soon!

is Bobby Brown on crack? or are we all?

as i was wandering around the internet this morning (surprisingly enough, thousands of people are not trying to check out books on zoology today, so i have some free time on my hands at work), i discovered an interesting fact. apparently today is international day against homophobia. who knew? definitely not me. but now that i DO know, it seems like as appropriate a time as any to share some reflections on homophobia in the black community.

obviously this is something we'll have a lot more to say about as this blog continues, but to start us off, i wanted to share an email i got the other day that disturbed me. it was sent out over the ABHW list, and it was a clip of bobby brown being crazy on that 24 hours british show where apparently they lock you in a room with the host, Jamie Campbell, for 24 hours. i'm not completely "sure" how to put the video in here, and brittany is not awake yet for me to ask, so if this doesn't work out, sorry in advance. but here's the clip:

the full transcript, which i may or may not quote from depending on how i feel towards the end of this post, is available on towleroad.

anyways, aside from the fact that bobby brown is completely insane, here's what really bothered me about this:

people seem to find it hilarious. yeah its kiiinda funny how crazy he is, but when i watched this mainly i was horrified/frightened. i mean first off, jokes about prison rape aren't funny to begin with, so Campbell probably shoulda got slapped in the face once for that, but second of all, threatening to fuck another man up because you think he might possibly be gay is like, not really funny at all either. when i got this email, i expected people to reply being like, "dear lord he's crazy," but instead i got amusement. then i made the mistake of looking at some of the comments posted on youtube and on concrete loop. bad idea. the things people were saying were ridiculous. two themes in particular really rubbed me the wrong way.

1. about one million variations of "he must be hiding something." oh ok, so the problem here is not that bobby brown is wildly homophobic and advocating violence against gay people, the problem is that he must secretly be gay and that's funny because it makes him less of a man. great. way to take away a positive message.
2. another million variations of "i would have done that too" or "he did the right thing." the fact that so many people (and on concrete loop that usually translates to a lot of black people) think that the way he acted is in any way acceptable is horrifying to me.


so i mean, we'll talk about this more later i'm sure, but what i'm trying to say is basically what the fuck is wrong with the black community that anyone (albeit one of the craziest ones) would think it was ok to act that way on television, and that he could say something like this and be greeted with amusement rather than horror? it seems like for the amount of time we spend talking about the problems with portrayals of black male masculinity, we aren't trying very hard to change.