You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘human-rights’ tag.

It seems as though Women’s Rights have become the latest hotbed issue.  Every time you turn on the TV, women’s groups are popping up everywhere hell bent on getting what they feel is their due.  From clergy to politicians, everyone seems to have an opinion on the role of women in modern day society.

Black Women, White women, Asian women, Hispanic women, Indian women, et al., have come together to demand rights from their oppressors…men.   And why not?  Especially when every committee and senate meeting that focuses on women are comprised of nothing but men.  But, for all the sign making, speech writing and girl talk, there seems to be very little focus on reality!  Thankfully, that’s where I come in.  I promise to be brief but frank.

All disenfranchised groups in America are essentially battling one group of people to obtain their rights—wealthy, white men.  To be completely frank, the white man is the target of all protest in America, because that one group, whether in politics or the business world, makes all the rules/decisions and run the country.  But, while we’re speaking the truth, let’s also admit that African Americans have an even more complex battle with white America than other groups, owing to their arrival not being of their own volition.  No other group in the history of the country was forced to forget their names, gods and identity, or later forced to cohabit with the same people who made that so.  So, it would stand to reason that, although Black females are confronted with the same issues as White women, Asian women, Hispanic women, Indian women et al, the discrimination they face has another dimension to it.

This is because Black Women, even today, experience the type of racism that is a result of and caused by white America denying the basic reality of her humanity (right along with her black male counterpart).  Far from being denied certain rights simply because of her womanhood, the Black Woman is denied certain rights because many feel she isn’t enough of a person to deserve them.  Thus, I have to believe that the issues of racism and being treated as a human being must surely far outweigh her need to be equal to her black man since both of them aren’t even considered fully human yet, even in 2017.  Look no further than the constant barrage of monkey comparisons and Harambe based comments about darker skinned women to see examples of this.  Nevertheless, she is being dragged into a campaign of fighting for Women’s rights, a fight that really does not benefit or involve her at all!

In fact, let’s be honest.  White Women have been the biggest beneficiary of so-called equal rights fight for women.  It is HER counterpart, the white man, who is refusing to include her in the spoils that racism has afforded him, but he still considers HER to be higher than any other woman.  After all, she supported his destruction of an entire race of people; she stood with him at lynchings; she kept the sheets of his robes washed and the eye holes on his torture outfit aligned; etc.

She’s been a faithful partner to her white man.  But, where did it get her?

She, the White female, has a valid point.  Her contribution to racism is totally being ignored by him.  This is unfair to her!  She was tricked, bamboozled . . . had!   She made major contributions to the implementation of racism and, as such, she expected more of a piece of the American Pie.  She didn’t get it.  She has to fight for her cut.  But the rest of us don’t necessarily have to join in that fight.  Let us not forget that, while women make less than men for the same jobs of equal quality, the White woman is still making more than any other race of women and, in many cases, the men of color as well.

But, what does the Black female stand to gain by the acquisition of Women’s rights? After all, she isn’t even viewed as a human being, much less a “REAL” woman.

So, how about channeling this wasted energy into securing human rights for black people as a whole before fragmenting and diluting the issues with issues that aren’t yet of any consequence? If after being fully acknowledged as human beings Black Women are being male dominated, I’ll join the fight.  Til then, there are bigger fish to fry.

Can anybody hear me?

Advertisements

Though I have already touched on how people blame God for their living conditions in a previous blog “Born This Way,” I still have a few valid questions and/or comments. Why is it that African-Americans (more than any other Americans) are expected to understand and/or agree with Gay and Lesbian chosen lifestyles or else be considered a homophobe or even worse, somehow deserving of the racist treatment they receive at the hands of white America?

While we’re on the subject, why is the Gay Rights Movement compared to the Civil Rights Movement where blacks were being treated as sub-human and where human rights were being denied? Did I miss something? Are gays and lesbians being denied basic human rights? Freedom from imprisonment? Maybe that’s part of the confusion. We called it the Civil Rights Movement when it was actually a HUMAN rights movement.

I’m not saying that Gays and Lesbians should be denied the right to marry. That is a State decision and, quite frankly, people’s religious beliefs are just not relevant. But, I submit to you that being denied the right to marry and being denied the right to education, voting, careers, and even life itself at times is nowhere near comparable. I’m not saying that Gays and Lesbians should have to deny their lifestyles. They shouldn’t. But, the simple fact is, they could. Can blacks hide their blackness?

In other news, why are Gays and Lesbians given a pass to break the rules of the same Bible that was taught and referenced as the Book that this country is supposedly built on? Why are they given a pass to cite God as the blame for their situation as opposed to having to confess their sinful behavior as it is described in the Bible? They need to be treated just like the rest of us and ask for forgiveness and then change their ways to be in agreement with what the Bible dictates. Okay, you can argue that everyone does not adhere to the Bible. That is a matter of choice. However, if we are going to cite this book as sacred, then we need to cite it. We can’t keep citing it halfway, which is what we as a culture seem to do. In the United States, this book, the Bible, is considered sacred…except when it comes to homosexuality.

In fact, every other sin (murdering, lying, stealing, coveting, fornication, adultery, etc.) is held up to the light in the Church. Yes, I used the word “sin” since homosexuality is shunned in the Bible and called an abomination. So, if homosexuals are given a pass than every other sin mentioned in the Bible should be excused as well. Does that make sense? Well, it shouldn’t!!

What kind of world can we expect to live in if individuals who don’t wish to change their chosen lifestyles are encouraged as Gays and Lesbians are encouraged?   What if every sinner committing all manner of sin received encouragement? What if every sinner used God as their defense? Can’t you just hear it now: I can’t help but commit murder? I should not go to jail because God made me this way? It’s not my fault? The same could be said for thieves, liars, etc. In fact, every sinner would have an excuse not to change, not to be born again, citing God as the blame. Given this excuse, why should anyone change their ways or have to pay any penance since God supposedly made them this way? My point, either follow the Bible or don’t but don’t change the religion or redefine the text to conform to the opinions of a few. It either IS the basis or it ISN’T.

With all the celebrating of the 50th Anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s, “I Have a Dream” speech, one barely has a moment to reflect on exactly what is being celebrated. More importantly, no one has even considered the idea that a grand celebration may be contraindicated.

Fifty years ago, Jim Crow laws shaped the lives of black persons. Basic human rights were denied to them, under the guise of law and morality. Voting rights were a constant issue as well. While not outright slaughtered in the streets, black people were beaten and killed from state to state while the wheels of justice were seemingly stuck in the middle of the road. The very lives of blacks were taken as near worthless. As a result of this madness, there were constant marches and boycotts against the very visible Jim Crow. But Jim, though successful, was unpolished. He simply could not hide his evil and venom from the world at large and, as such, was an embarrassment to his Northern cousins. So, in order maintain the status quo of inequity and unfairness, he required a makeover. In essence, he had to reinvent himself.

Jim Crow gave birth to a new and more sophisticated form of himself. Instead of donning sheets and hoods, he donned business suits and carried leather briefcases. He traded in his fire hoses, rope and dogs for law, policy and money. He changed his stance and speech patterns, gained epicurean insight and began calling himself James Crow, Esq.

Unlike his uncultured cousin, James Crow, Esq., has a stellar education and is better able to twist and pervert the justice system for his dirty work. Unlike his counterpart, he uses the pen as his weapon instead of the noose. In this way, he is able to distance himself from the old, obvious racism and pretend that his own sins, though as numerous and cruel as his counterpart’s, are somehow right and fair-seeming. The outcome is the same for those targeted by Jim or James, but James’ hands APPEAR to be clean…and in today’s society, appearance is everything.

But we celebrate. We celebrate the death of Jim Crow while ignoring the continued survival of James. We tell ourselves or, better yet, are told that race is no longer an issue and that those who think otherwise are troublemakers and race baiters. But, lo and behold, just as in the days of Jim Crow, voting rights are still an issue. Decades later, the new face of an unjustified and unpunished murder is Trayvon Martin instead of Emmett Till. In 2013, African Americans are still given harsher penalties than their white counterparts for the same crimes.

So…what was the celebration for?

As strange as it may seem, we appear to be celebrating the strides African Americans have made in their quest for equality in the same vein as someone who was suffering under eight tumors and now has only six. Obviously, you don’t want to dismiss the unmistakable healing that has taken place but, make no mistake, he is not whole. He continues to need major assistance and adjustments. For all his strides, the cancer is still there.

Now, let’s imagine that it took 50 years for the two tumors to vanish. Would you feel the same about his achievements or would you have expected him to have been restored to wholeness and able to stand on his own two feet?

Can anybody hear me?

What do you think would happen if the terms, “Christian” or “Christianity” were mentioned every time a crime was committed in the United States. by an everyday, church going American citizen?  For example, the “Christian Rapist” or the “Christian Bomber” committed this crime today.  I mean, this is what happens when a Muslim or someone from a non-European country who falls outside of the Christian faith commits a crime.

For example, whenever a terroristic act occurs, we frequently hear that the perpetrator was Islamic or a Muslim terrorist or an Islamic extremist.  This is often followed by a litany of well-chosen words designed to instill fear in the listener.  If this treatment was the same in all cases, how do you think Christianity would be viewed?  Might it be viewed in the same vein that Islam is today?  With that in mind, we have to ask ourselves if there a campaign to give Islam a bad name while preserving the name of Christianity?

Let’s face it; a lot of our understanding of our society is largely shaped by television and other mass media.  Our views are framed by what we have been told.  Whether you admit it or not, when you are on the train or on a bus and someone of Middle Eastern descent boards, you instantly feel nervous, especially after 9-11.  If the Middle Easterner has the audacity to be wearing a backpack, he could clear off the entire front row if he just pretends to be even slightly agitated!

Nevertheless, when it is a homegrown terrorist, such as Timothy McVeigh, religion often does not come into play.  Why not?  Timothy McVeigh was labeled a lone devil and Christianity got to maintain its good name even while its members continue to commit egregious crimes and horrible social offenses in the United States on a daily basis.  Somehow, Christianity is never discussed when any crimes occur.  So, when a crime is committed by a good old, Sunday-going Christian, their religious background is simply left out.  We may hear that the offender was “slightly off” or “bored” or “socially disaffected/awkward” or simply “wealthy” with nothing better to do then to construct a bomb and use it in a crowded arena.  The one thing we won’t hear is whether the criminal was Baptist, Catholic etc.  No, we won’t hear that.

Can anybody hear me?

The other day, a co-worker came running towards me shouting that she is about to become a grandmother for the first time.  Needless to say, I was excited for her  . . . that is . . . until she went on to say that she was glad that the baby would be going home with the girl and the girl’s mother since her son and the girl are not married.

That’s when I exploded.

I mean, aren’t we women first, and the mothers of sons second?  When did we lose our empathy for the women that we supposedly were teaching our sons to love and cherish?  When did we forget the treatment that we received at the hands of no account men and condone, if not outright encourage, that same behavior in our sons towards young women?  How did it happen?  When did it happen?  How/when did we become so uninterested, so uncaring, so maliciously unconcerned with regard to the girls that our sons mess over (during their learning/experimental phase) while simultaneously nursing our own bad relationship and abandonment wounds?

I confess… I am sorely disappointed by my sisters.  Not all of them, of course.  My disappointment lies solely on the women who have sons (not daughters) and allow their young “men” to devastate the lives of other females without repercussion.  This is particularly sad given the fact that more than a few of these same women are single parents themselves.  Whether abandoned, despised or just plain ignored, they have found themselves in the same position that various young women have been left in by their trifling sons.  These same women raise sons but somehow don’t get the message across to them that it isn’t okay to engage in casual sex with females, make a baby and then go on their merry way, leaving the mother of the child sidelined.

I know, I know, it is important that we make our daughters understand that it is they who are taking the majority of the risk during intercourse (most often, not even good intercourse but, that’s another blog).  Men can participate during the pregnancy; the rearing of the child; and the financial, spiritual, emotional, psychological and educational development of the child if they “choose” to.  Women, on the other hand, don’t have that same level of choice/flexibility.

This is not to say that women are saintly, innocent and/or don’t make mistakes.  Neither do I mean to imply that women are always good parents or bereft of responsibility when it comes to sex.  On the contrary, I mean to emphasize that women are the ones who end up pregnant, not men, so any decision she makes (be it to give birth, to give the baby up for adoption or to abort) will have a lifetime effect on her that it will not have on the man.

In this generation where females have more birth control options at their disposal than ever, there is really no excuse.  Yet, women continue to play Russian Roulette with their lives.  They continue to take unnecessary risk with their futures by depending on and believing in a male (yes, I said male, not man) who makes a lot of pre-sex promises but will fail to deliver. So, perhaps, the mothers of sons can take a different approach.  Perhaps, our sons can benefit from being forewarned that the reality of their momentary need for pleasure is the merging of two families, FOREVER.  I mean, is just any girl worthy of carrying on your family lineage?  Or maybe mothers can teach their sons that the bitterness they feel over the absence of their own father is the same as the child feels for their absence.  Is your absence somehow more reasonable and right than that of your own father?  Can anybody hear me?