Category Archives: Repost

Repost: The TRUE SIZE OF AFRICA = India + the U.S. + most of Europe — put together! Talking to Black Children about R/WS Part 4

Racism Is White Supremacy

It was no surprise to learn that European mapmakers — as far back as the 16th century — DELIBERATELY reduced the size of the African continent, but I had no idea by how much until I compared the maps below.

Map A (updated in 2013?) shows Europe and Africa as roughly the same size while North America is larger than both. This is FALSE.

world-continent-mapMAP A:  THE WHITE SUPREMACIST VIEW OF AFRICA  (the version taught in school)

————–

The composite map below (Map B) is not 100% accurate — for example, all of China does not fit inside Africa —  but it is more accurate when comparing the size of the African continent to Europe and the United States.

True_Size_Of_AfricaMAP B: AFRICA  (and the countries/continents that could fit inside it!)

This is just ONE more piece of evidence that:

1) we live under a system of white supremacy/black inferiority —…

View original post 314 more words

INSPIRATION!!!

(reposted from http://www.voice-online.co.uk/article/barbican-underestimated-opposition-human-zoo)

The Barbican Underestimated Opposition To The ‘Human Zoo’

CAMPAIGNERS: Protesters outside the Barbican earlier this month

I AM currently blushing and bursting with pride.

The abomination created by Brett Bailey and approved by the Barbican Centre has been shut down.

I know for a fact, because I was there, that the press release by a Barbican spokesman – and now quoted in the pages of several news outlets including theEvening Standard and ITV is a lie.

Were we loud? Yes. Were we determined? Yes. Did we stand our ground? Yes. Were we upset? Yes. Did people go in to see the “show”? Yes.

Was anyone harmed? No.

The real reason why the Barbican had to shut the show down is much more simple: they completely underestimated the depth of feeling in the community.

The Barbican arrogantly provided a tiny “gallery”, behind bars (oh the symbolism was not lost on us!) from which its chiefs expected us to chant our little songs and beat our nice drums; thus providing a nice soundtrack for their show and, as one of their guest did, a little dance. Oh yes, he did!

They were fully warned that we were coming and warned of the numbers, yet when I arrived there was not a single police officer present.

I believe the Barbican wanted to close down the show and our show of strength provided them with an escape clause. No arrest. No cautions. In London in 2014 that is as peaceful as it gets.

In the fight against racism I have always said we need a variety of fighters. Last night, we had the perfect mix.

An iconic leader Sara [Myers], who even seasoned veterans could follow. The picture of her upheld fist has inspired many.

The wise thinkers. Lee [Jasper], Zita [Holbourne], Mike, Ngoma and others.

If only the Barbican knew how much strategy was adopted chopped and changed to achieve that shut-down.

The young bloods. Let me tell you this: watching our young men and women stand firm in support of our self-respect was inspiring.

They were disciplined, yet self-thinking. I am 110 per cent sure that without them this would have failed.

I stood beside Rastafarians, Muslims, men, women, youngers and elders. All races. I stood with a young man in a suit and others in jeans. Old activists and just ordinary people who saw injustice and said ‘no’. I thank you all.

I also need to thank both The Barbican and Brett Bailey.

Without them, none of this would have been possible.

Brett does not know better. He thought London would just roll over like other European cities. Mate, we have critical mass here.

If it were it not for them both The Barbican and Bret Bailey we would not have this much-needed victory.

I hope it inspires a generation to get from behind those keyboards.

I am not even sure if arrogance is the right word, but I can’t print the other words I have used, so arrogant will just have to do.

The Barbican board, bar one member, is all white, but that in itself is no excuse as last night I stood with a number of white people they themselves protesting against that abomination.

I also spoke to white passersby including a uniformed officer; the reaction from each was the same.

Why have such a show? Who is it for? How much did you say?

The Barbican board is that breed of person who is our worst enemy. They claim the event is anti-racist, educational, important.

Yet they ignored 22,000 voices telling them that in the 21st Century placing a living black person in chains and cages, then inviting guest to pay to look at them is not acceptable.

These people are dangerous. These people are the worst type of racists because beneath everything they do is one simple concept: “We always know what’s best for you”.

At least with the BNP you know what you are getting.

This is our lesson.

The Barbican waved away 22,000 plus signatures, yet fell to less than 100 voices.

I want you all to think about that the next time you are tempted to click ‘like’ and think your job is done.

Unity and self-respect are mighty weapons.

You do not have to agree with everything I stand for to stand with me.

Everyone can lead, under the right circumstances.

So what are you doing? Action not words.

Paul Lawrence is a writer, public speaker and debater. He is the director of Engage Training and the outgoing VP of 100 Black Men of London.

REPOST: Your Superficial Ass DESERVES To Be Single

(reposted from http://www.thisisyourconscience.com/2013/12/your-superficial-ass-deserves-to-be-single/, 25th December 2013)

Your Superficial Ass DESERVES To Be Single

By  on 12/16/2013@lincolnablades

  • BaNBFO-CAAAMWu6

When it comes to sex and dating, I am shamelessly superficial and I will NOT apologize for it all. Now this doesn’t mean that I have absolutely zero intellectual interest in women because it’s quite the opposite, as I NEED a woman with real mental depth of thought. In fact, I often refer to myself as a superficial sapiosexual because I believe mental AND visual attraction must be present for me in order to find a woman sexually attractive. But after a few conversations with some friends this past weekend, I’m starting to realize that there is more than one way to be superficial.

See, my superficiality is completely inward in the sense that I want to date and smash a woman I feel is sexy as hell, and whom I feel is absolutely beautiful. I want a woman who has an ass that I feel is amazing, and who has tig ol’ bitties that turn ME on. But all superficiality is not about inward desires, because there’s a whole gang of people out there who base the quality of their partner on society’s superficial concerns. These are the outwardly superficial men who date women based on what the majority of people in our society would DEEM to be beautiful, and the women who date men based on what other people DEEM to be handsome. This might seem like a ridiculous ideology to you, but the truth is that a lot of men and women are single as HELL today because they haven’t found someone “socially superficially acceptable”.

I have a single homegirl who is in her early-to-mid 30′s and we frequently talk about relationships, especially since I know starting a family is one of her goals. When we talk about her love life, I notice that she does NOT have a shortage of eligible suitors and finding a date is the last of her problems (very accomplished and gorgeous woman), but remaining in a healthy relationship is difficult for her. Whenever shit goes south between her and some dude, she always gives me a list of reasons why things weren’t “meant” to work out, but after a long-ass talk this weekend, I realized that most of her problems are self-created.

She meets and dates a lot of great dudes because she’s always open to going out with a man and getting a free meal (I’m not even gonna comment on that today), and she admits to enjoying the time she spends with these guys – but she also has a type. She wants him to be at least 6’2 (her HEEL height), he must have a well defined six pack and she wants him to be handsome. Now, as a superficial man, I can’t call her out for doing the same thing that I do, but after further investigation we BOTH realized that we had completely different motivations behind our skin-deep attractions.She basically admitted that she can’t she herself with a man that other people can’t see her with.So while she’s met more than enough relationship-worthy men, she hasn’t met a dude that she could confidently walk down the streets with in a manner that would make OTHER people praise the dude she was with. Either they weren’t tall enough, ripped enough, or cute enough to LOOK like an “equal” match for her.

Look how mutually attractive they are to everybody - they MUST be a happy couple.

Look how mutually attractive they are to everybody – they MUST be a happy couple.

Now normally, this would be the part of the conversation where I go the FUCK in on her and call her out for being stupid, but her confession made me more sad than annoyed. The fact that she’s so intent on finding a man that appeases society’s ideals of who a tall, beautiful, professional woman should date instead of either being inwardly superficial or NOT superficial at all is downright pitiful. And to think, the same people who define her thoughts on the “perfect man” are also the same people who may have found their own happiness by not listening to what anyone else thinks.

And it’s this outward superficiality that leads both men and women to making STUPID-ASS decisions on who to date. That’s why there are men out here who don’t want to date a woman if her skin is too dark, or if her natural hair is too kinky. It’s not because they don’t possess the ability to find any allure in her features, it’s because their outwardly superficial desires are so rigidly aligned with the dominant westernized image of beauty that they can’t create their own standard of attraction.

I’ve said it once, but I will say it again: Being superficial is NOT a bad thing, because 95% of us are superficial in some way when it comes to dating, but identifying the driving factor behind your superficiality is of the utmost importance.

This Is Your Conscience

– See more at: http://www.thisisyourconscience.com/2013/12/your-superficial-ass-deserves-to-be-single/#sthash.A5OeHPAR.dpuf

BEYOND THE TOKEN BLACK GUY: ISOLATIONISM IN AMERICAN MEDIA

BEYOND THE TOKEN BLACK GUY: ISOLATIONISM IN AMERICAN MEDIA

(reposted from link)

 

token black guy

Many of you have likely heard of the Bechdel test, but in case you haven’t, I’ll run it by you now. The Bechdel test is a feminist means of analysis, originally conceived for evaluating films. Virginia Woolf wrote long ago of the problem of women characters existing, almost without exception, only in relation to men or barely existing at all, and this test is a way of exposing that cinematic inequality. Introduced in Alison Bechdel’s comic strip Dykes to Watch Out For, the test demands three requirements of a film in order for it to be deemed woman-friendly:

  1. It has to have at least two named female characters;
  2. who talk to each other,
  3. about something besides men.

In your spare time, go through this list of movies and check out all the films that have failed the test. There’s tons. But that’s not what this blog is about. Rather, I want us to consider applying the same rules to films, television, etc., but reframing them to consider the presence (and absence) of people of color in these mediums.

Clutch Magazine did a piece on this awhile back in which Tami Winfrey Harris crowdsourced some ideas for what that set of requirements would be. One suggestion offered the following demands for evaluating whether a film represented people of color as multi-faceted human beings:

  1. One or more named people of color,
  2. who talk to each other,
  3. who don’t act in a service capacity
  4. who are reflective of their culture and history but don’t communicate through stereotyped action, such as an affected accent.

An interesting list. Somebody do me a favor and go ahead and apply this criteria to every movie made in the last fifty years and let’s watch the vast majority of them fail.

You see, these tests are interesting because they reflect the way Hollywood a) perceives the humanity of oppressed groups, and b) interprets America’s willingness to see women and people of color on their screens as more than fragmented stereotypes, fetishes, etc. (I will add that I think Hollywood often underestimates the greater American audience’s sensibilities, but when we see backlash like this over a character being cast as black, we can see why Hollywood would say “Fuck it” and stick to the white male hero over and over….and over and over and over again, in the interest of their profits.)

Anyone who knows me knows that my mantra is “Movies are never just movies. TV is never just TV. Nothing is ever just something.” In a culture of capitalism, oppression, patriarchy and white supremacy, every piece of media we consume, from our movies to our commercials to the packaging of our food, carries messages. And when it comes to women and people of color, the message being sent isn’t just “Women’s lives revolve around men,” or “Black people are servile,” although those messages are certainly present. The message is this:

You are alone.

That is, in my opinion, one of the most dangerous messages that Hollywood imparts. In the midst of the negative images of sluttiness, airheadedness, docility, thugification, propensity for violence, ignorance, and more, all of which are dangerous in the way they impress upon the audience a skewed and inhuman version of real people, the image of isolation is one that concerns me greatly.

The problem is twofold.

For the oppressed group being represented, being a “token” is more than just being the only black guy at the party, or the lone female officer on a starship. We are being fed the message that we exist alone in a white, male world. There is no one to help us. We exist solely as an opposite to a norm. We are allowed little flexibility in our identity and our future. We are a joke: our breasts are on display, our blackness, our way of speaking. We are a face that could be replaced with any other face, a life that could be replaced with any other life. We are not unique. We do not matter. Rising above this cookie cutter life isn’t worth attempting, because do you see how alone you are? In this film, in this commercial, you are not father, daughter, astronaut or engineer. You are your blackness. You are your femaleness. You are alone in your blackness and femaleness. And that is all you will ever be.

For white, male audiences, the problem is just as great and allows the white, male gaze to feel justified in its Othering. The message is, “You are not alone.” By (over and over) perpetuating a white world on every screen in America, white audiences’ belief that they are the core, they are what matters, they are the hero, they are the norm, is fed, and continues to grow. White male characters onscreen generally only have to deal with one black guy at a time. That isolated black male presence is manageable, governable. Dominatable. The message is, “You don’t have to worry about people of color. You don’t have to worry about women. See how few of them they are? And look how many of you there are! You are the majority! You are what matters!”

I’ve heard the “token black guy” stereotype referred to as “Affirmative Action for Hollywood.” Perhaps. Perhaps this long-running trend is half-brained directors wanting to appear diverse and inclusive. Perhaps someone, somewhere thinks this method of representation is accurate: “Well, only know one black guy, so only one black guy needs to be in the film.” Perhaps it’s Hollywood covering their ass and not wanting to upset the never-sleeping giant of white self-righteousness. Perhaps. But either way the message is the same, and I urge you to consume media with great caution. Malcolm X once said something about newspapers which I will apply to all media in our generation: “If you’re not careful, the [media] will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”

Keep your eyes open and, when consuming mass media, keep your mind closed. You are not alone. You are not a joke. You do not exist solely as an extension of your blackness, femaleness, gayness. You are not an Other. 

REPOST: Bajan Sitcom To Hit UK Screens (originally posted 9/5/13)

(taken from today’s issue of The Voice newspaper, the UK’s most popular paper reporting on issues affecting the ‘black’ community of England. Can be viewed on their site at this link

 

A NEW Caribbean sitcom will make history next week, when it becomes the first Bajan series to be shown on UK television.

Keeping Up With The Joneses is a popular series from Barbados and will launch on The Africa Channel next Monday (May 13.)

The sitcom follows the Jones family, who reluctantly become the subjects of a reality show called Life & Times in the Caribbean. It requires that a camera crew follow the family around and film their every move.

Irving, the patriarch of the family, signs the contract to do the show against his wife Angela’s wishes. Now, the couple and their two children – 17-year-old daughter Tracy and 10-year-old son Nathan – have to co-exist, while looking good for the cameras, which results in embarrassing encounters and hilariously awkward TV moments.

Keeping Up With The Joneses attracted record audiences when it was aired by the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation channel in 2011 and 2012, and became hugely popular in Barbados.

All 15 30-minute episodes will now air on The Africa Channel, bringing Caribbean flavour to UK screens.

Keeping Up With The Joneses will air daily from May 13 on The Africa Channel, Sky channel 209 and Virgin channel 828. Visit http://www.theafricachannel.co.uk

 

Damn! I want to see that! But I can’t because I don’t have Virgin or Sky!!! I hope the website will be good and working.