| The Daily Show with Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Extremely Loud & Incredibly Gross | ||||
| ||||
Showing posts with label sexism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sexism. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
I Couldn't Have Said It Better Myself!
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Now It's Sexism in Session(s)
I saw the clip when the show first aired. I had other things on my mind. But after seeing this article in The Nation, I decided to share just a couple of thoughts. I share Jon Stewart even though we're saying the same thing because he's funny.
1 - Should they start complaining about executive compensation, remember this:
2 - They can't pass this, but they can go after ACORN?
1 - Should they start complaining about executive compensation, remember this:
"Congress should not be involved in writing or rewriting private contracts," he (Sessions) argued.
2 - They can't pass this, but they can go after ACORN?
The bill was, he (Sessions) maintained, a "political amendment at bottom, representing a political attack on Halliburton."
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Rape-Nuts | ||||
| ||||
Monday, June 8, 2009
Poor White Men :sigh:
I don't mean poor as in "having little or no money." I mean poor as in "unfortunate;hapless."
LOL!
Here's another article with a bit of a fresh perspective about the Sotomayor nomination and the racist backlash by conservatives.
Don't get me wrong. On one hand, to keep talking about the notion that Sotomayor is racist does lead credence to the lie. On the other, not to talk about the fallacy of logic would be to miss an opportunity to education:Not only are conservatives lying about Judge Sotomayor, they're lying about the current and future status and prospects of white men.
I mean, take Patty B (Pat Buchanan) for example. He's said:
LOL!
Here's another article with a bit of a fresh perspective about the Sotomayor nomination and the racist backlash by conservatives.
Don't get me wrong. On one hand, to keep talking about the notion that Sotomayor is racist does lead credence to the lie. On the other, not to talk about the fallacy of logic would be to miss an opportunity to education:Not only are conservatives lying about Judge Sotomayor, they're lying about the current and future status and prospects of white men.
I mean, take Patty B (Pat Buchanan) for example. He's said:
You got down to four women, not a single white male – all women … Probably half of the great lawyers and judges are white males in this country. To rule them out, why? Because of sex and because of their race is wrong, I think.There are a few problems with this statement I think we should break down.
- Who decided that half of the great lawyers and judges are white males? Is it really that many? Isn't it racist to assume it's that many without actually knowing?
- Let's say it is that many. Does that mean that women and minorities are less likely to make good judges? Or, does that mean that we need more women and minority judges?
- And let's say it is that many. Doesn't it mean that white males are over-represented on the Supreme Court? How is that not racist?
- Isn't it strange that with all the barriers women and people of color face in this country, the only time conservatives/Republicans really speak out against racism and/or sexism is when they perceive it's happening to white men?
And let's not delude ourselves. This is NOT just a run-of-the-mill conservative attack against Democrats. This is an attack against anti-racism - that's why they're stealing the language of anti-racist activists. This is an attack against racial and gender progress and equality. This is an attempt to maintain white male supremacy in the US.
Don't get me wrong. They know these attacks won't keep Sotomayor off the bench. What it will do is galvanize whites and their lackeys of color against Democrats; against Pres. Obama's next political move; and most especially, against future attempts to ensure equality and justice for all.
They are protecting their positions of power. And that is wrong, I know.
Friday, December 12, 2008
My Two Soldiers
Blagojevich smalojevich. Barack Obama has had nothing to do with this pay-for-play scandal. Whatever Blago had in mind, it's clear he knew that bleeping Obama was only interested in giving him bleeping appreciation.
And to the US Senate Republicans: come of it! Stop hating on the UAW. The labor union isn't the problem. US auto companies haven't been making cars people want to buy. When I buy a car, I don't even have intentions of buying from the US auto industry. So, if you wanna clear out the ranks of upper-level, executive management, please do. But leave the union alone. Cause the way I see it, you're coming up against to philosophical contradictions. One is that the cost of workers in the North is too high, especially do to healthcare cost. One way to get rid of the healthcare cost burden on employers would be some sort-of "socialized medicine" via national medicaid/medicare for all, some sort-of single payer system. At the very least, we got to get rid of the system we have know: healthcare for profit. Sorry. People's lives shouldn't depend on insurance companies' bottom lines. And some form of "socialized medicine" will help cut costs for American business - and that's important to you, right?
The other contradiction you're up against is this notion of the free-market. The way I've understood it, in a free market, labor is a form of capital. Why are you so willing to help one side of the free market, business, but not the other, labor? In a truly free market, labor is allowed to make the same self-interested decisions that business is allowed to make. So, in the end, quit hating on a system you purport to support.
Now that I've expressed my feelings about that, I'm moving on. The Republicans are idiots. They're being obnoxious to block the American auto bail-out, or rather, bridge loan. And they're being especially obnoxious to demand Obama come clean about any contact and talk he or his staff or any emissary may have had with Blagojevish. I repeat: if we know nothing else, we do know that Blagojevich was angry that Obama wouldn't play game with him. Doesn't that clear Obama? Quit trying to paint him with Illinois corruption and call me when the Cubs win the Series, or the Bulls win the Finals. I have bigger fish to fry.
My cousin and her husband are due to be ship out to Afghanistan in early January. Hence, my title. And, quite frankly, I'm conflicted about the situation. I understand we need to finish the job in Afghanistan's, and I'm pissed that lame-a, er, -duck Bush didn't do so in the beginning. And the latest reports are that Afghans aren't do any better than they were before. For some, especially women, the situation has become worse. Just a few months ago, I watched part of a special about Afghan women setting themselves on fire as acts of rebellion against someone, be it an abusive husband or an abusive mother-in-law. (I don't know whether or not they had access to guns. But I do know that women aren't likely to use guns to commit suicide. And, I suppose, watching "your" woman burn to death at her decision can stick in the craw of the men who claim control of them.) I only watched part of the special because my stomach couldn't take it. Many of these women were unsuccessful at the quick suicide they intended and eventually died slow, painful deaths. They lived long enough to tell their story, so I guess that's something to support. But watching these talking faces with charred skin and lips noses burned off was more than I can take. Don't get me wrong. When it comes to the crime dramas I love so much, I can stomach stuff like that. I know it's fake. But when it's real, it causes not just my stomach to ache, but my heart as well.
So, part of me understands we may need the military to stabilize the situation enough so that, I would hope, we could send in more nonmilitary aid. But I hate that my cousin and her husband's lives are at risk. Now, I must confess, my cousin, who I'll call Lauren, and I aren't that close. I haven't really spoken to her in almost a year. But she's my cousin, and I love her. And I think she was dumb to have joined the army in the first place. I mean. First of all, I don't believe the myth that for this country is all that honorable. I mean, for me, it kinda depends on the war. I don't know. I just don't think America is worth my life. It's kind of hard to explain, so I'll leave it for a later post. Suffice it to say I think dying for America means you've died to maintain a system that cause more harm than good. And, I just can't accept the notion of dying for America in the face of having committed my life to Christ. I and anyone else who professes to be a Christian is supposed to be seeking God's kingdom and righteousness, and I just don't think America represents either one.
Plus, all the military deaths I can think of post-WWII haven't been for "freedom." They've been for oil or just maintaining control of the world. All this hype about winning the Cold War without bloodshed is just that - hype. Hundreds of thousands have died in the "Cold" War between Russia and America. Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing the situation never came to a war of nuclear weapons, but really. Do you really think someone would've turned America into a communist nation against our will? If you do, it's no wonder you think Al Qeada or any other terrorist organization could turn us into a Muslim country against our will. Or that the immigrants from south of the border will suddenly turn us into a Spanish-speaking 3rd world country. You're delusional.
Did I mention I'm actually angry at Lauren for having joined the Army in the first place? That's why I'm a bit conflicted about her and her husband, who I'll call Jamie, being called to Afghanistan. That's a choice they made as much as a mess BushCo. created. Now, from what I understand, the army was a way out for him. But her? She just initially joined the National Guard for the grad school money. It's not like she couldn't have earned scholarships or my aunt and uncle couldn't have chipped in. In fact, another aunt of ours said they would've gone door to door raising money for my cousin to go to school. For generations, our family has supported education, starting with my great-grandfather who opened a school.
And here's what really bothers me. Lauren and Jamie have three children. Three. One child should be two-years-old by now. Another turns three after Christmas. The oldest turns four in February. So, with 12-16 month tours, my cousin and her husband are going to miss the birthdays of their children, and the missing starts right away.
And what happens if Lauren and Jamie die? I know all of my family will do whatever we can to take care of the children. In fact, that's not even anything I personally have to worry about. But it's something the children will have to deal with. One memory I have of the oldest when she wasn't quite one is of her picking up telephones and remote controls and saying into them, "Elno. Doing!" as though she were expecting Lauren on the other end. And I can hear my cousin always answering the phone, "Hello? How you doing?" I'm not sure the children are old enough to understand death. In my mind, I can only imagine how long they'll expect their parents to be on the other side of a ringing phone or opening door.
Then again, what happens if Lauren and Jamie both survive? We know that post-traumatic stress disorder is under-reported and undertreated. Are they going to be the same parents the children remember?
I'm just conflicted about this whole thing.
And to top it off, cause I feel it needs to be, bin Laden has lived to see his nefarious plan come to fruition. At this point, over 4200 American soldiers have died in Iraq alone. That's more than the number of people who died in the 9/11/01 attacks. 540 Americans have died in Afghanistan. I haven't even started on the number of dead, injured, or displaced Iraqi and Afghan civilians. The total is well over 2 million. Closer to 3 million I would venture to guess. And for what? Are we really any safer? Isn't Obama still sending out messages? And last I heard, this whole Gitmo/torture/rendition method has been working against us; and, according to someone who's talked to foreign insurgents in Iraq, there's an untold number of American deaths due to US torture of so-called enemy combatants.
And now, the Mumbai attacks.
What of my cousin? What of her husband? What of their children? What of them and other families like them. Has this venture really been worth it? If you think it has, you're either delusional or evil. Maybe both.
And to the US Senate Republicans: come of it! Stop hating on the UAW. The labor union isn't the problem. US auto companies haven't been making cars people want to buy. When I buy a car, I don't even have intentions of buying from the US auto industry. So, if you wanna clear out the ranks of upper-level, executive management, please do. But leave the union alone. Cause the way I see it, you're coming up against to philosophical contradictions. One is that the cost of workers in the North is too high, especially do to healthcare cost. One way to get rid of the healthcare cost burden on employers would be some sort-of "socialized medicine" via national medicaid/medicare for all, some sort-of single payer system. At the very least, we got to get rid of the system we have know: healthcare for profit. Sorry. People's lives shouldn't depend on insurance companies' bottom lines. And some form of "socialized medicine" will help cut costs for American business - and that's important to you, right?
The other contradiction you're up against is this notion of the free-market. The way I've understood it, in a free market, labor is a form of capital. Why are you so willing to help one side of the free market, business, but not the other, labor? In a truly free market, labor is allowed to make the same self-interested decisions that business is allowed to make. So, in the end, quit hating on a system you purport to support.
Now that I've expressed my feelings about that, I'm moving on. The Republicans are idiots. They're being obnoxious to block the American auto bail-out, or rather, bridge loan. And they're being especially obnoxious to demand Obama come clean about any contact and talk he or his staff or any emissary may have had with Blagojevish. I repeat: if we know nothing else, we do know that Blagojevich was angry that Obama wouldn't play game with him. Doesn't that clear Obama? Quit trying to paint him with Illinois corruption and call me when the Cubs win the Series, or the Bulls win the Finals. I have bigger fish to fry.
My cousin and her husband are due to be ship out to Afghanistan in early January. Hence, my title. And, quite frankly, I'm conflicted about the situation. I understand we need to finish the job in Afghanistan's, and I'm pissed that lame-a, er, -duck Bush didn't do so in the beginning. And the latest reports are that Afghans aren't do any better than they were before. For some, especially women, the situation has become worse. Just a few months ago, I watched part of a special about Afghan women setting themselves on fire as acts of rebellion against someone, be it an abusive husband or an abusive mother-in-law. (I don't know whether or not they had access to guns. But I do know that women aren't likely to use guns to commit suicide. And, I suppose, watching "your" woman burn to death at her decision can stick in the craw of the men who claim control of them.) I only watched part of the special because my stomach couldn't take it. Many of these women were unsuccessful at the quick suicide they intended and eventually died slow, painful deaths. They lived long enough to tell their story, so I guess that's something to support. But watching these talking faces with charred skin and lips noses burned off was more than I can take. Don't get me wrong. When it comes to the crime dramas I love so much, I can stomach stuff like that. I know it's fake. But when it's real, it causes not just my stomach to ache, but my heart as well.
So, part of me understands we may need the military to stabilize the situation enough so that, I would hope, we could send in more nonmilitary aid. But I hate that my cousin and her husband's lives are at risk. Now, I must confess, my cousin, who I'll call Lauren, and I aren't that close. I haven't really spoken to her in almost a year. But she's my cousin, and I love her. And I think she was dumb to have joined the army in the first place. I mean. First of all, I don't believe the myth that for this country is all that honorable. I mean, for me, it kinda depends on the war. I don't know. I just don't think America is worth my life. It's kind of hard to explain, so I'll leave it for a later post. Suffice it to say I think dying for America means you've died to maintain a system that cause more harm than good. And, I just can't accept the notion of dying for America in the face of having committed my life to Christ. I and anyone else who professes to be a Christian is supposed to be seeking God's kingdom and righteousness, and I just don't think America represents either one.
Plus, all the military deaths I can think of post-WWII haven't been for "freedom." They've been for oil or just maintaining control of the world. All this hype about winning the Cold War without bloodshed is just that - hype. Hundreds of thousands have died in the "Cold" War between Russia and America. Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing the situation never came to a war of nuclear weapons, but really. Do you really think someone would've turned America into a communist nation against our will? If you do, it's no wonder you think Al Qeada or any other terrorist organization could turn us into a Muslim country against our will. Or that the immigrants from south of the border will suddenly turn us into a Spanish-speaking 3rd world country. You're delusional.
Did I mention I'm actually angry at Lauren for having joined the Army in the first place? That's why I'm a bit conflicted about her and her husband, who I'll call Jamie, being called to Afghanistan. That's a choice they made as much as a mess BushCo. created. Now, from what I understand, the army was a way out for him. But her? She just initially joined the National Guard for the grad school money. It's not like she couldn't have earned scholarships or my aunt and uncle couldn't have chipped in. In fact, another aunt of ours said they would've gone door to door raising money for my cousin to go to school. For generations, our family has supported education, starting with my great-grandfather who opened a school.
And here's what really bothers me. Lauren and Jamie have three children. Three. One child should be two-years-old by now. Another turns three after Christmas. The oldest turns four in February. So, with 12-16 month tours, my cousin and her husband are going to miss the birthdays of their children, and the missing starts right away.
And what happens if Lauren and Jamie die? I know all of my family will do whatever we can to take care of the children. In fact, that's not even anything I personally have to worry about. But it's something the children will have to deal with. One memory I have of the oldest when she wasn't quite one is of her picking up telephones and remote controls and saying into them, "Elno. Doing!" as though she were expecting Lauren on the other end. And I can hear my cousin always answering the phone, "Hello? How you doing?" I'm not sure the children are old enough to understand death. In my mind, I can only imagine how long they'll expect their parents to be on the other side of a ringing phone or opening door.
Then again, what happens if Lauren and Jamie both survive? We know that post-traumatic stress disorder is under-reported and undertreated. Are they going to be the same parents the children remember?
I'm just conflicted about this whole thing.
And to top it off, cause I feel it needs to be, bin Laden has lived to see his nefarious plan come to fruition. At this point, over 4200 American soldiers have died in Iraq alone. That's more than the number of people who died in the 9/11/01 attacks. 540 Americans have died in Afghanistan. I haven't even started on the number of dead, injured, or displaced Iraqi and Afghan civilians. The total is well over 2 million. Closer to 3 million I would venture to guess. And for what? Are we really any safer? Isn't Obama still sending out messages? And last I heard, this whole Gitmo/torture/rendition method has been working against us; and, according to someone who's talked to foreign insurgents in Iraq, there's an untold number of American deaths due to US torture of so-called enemy combatants.
And now, the Mumbai attacks.
What of my cousin? What of her husband? What of their children? What of them and other families like them. Has this venture really been worth it? If you think it has, you're either delusional or evil. Maybe both.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Somalia: Girl Stoned to Death
This is not an indictment against either Islam or religion in general. And just to be sure, this isn't an indictment against people of color around the world, and Africa in particular. So read this article and think, "Those people. It's an indictment against global sexism, and global includes the US. Part of changing the world will be empowering women; and, part of empowering women is making sure the men in the family are able and willing to protect them, especially as children.
What does that mean here in the US? Should we go over to Somalia and change their regime? No! And besides, we're already ever though fighting "terror," right? Somehow, this slipped by. And as you'll see, more weapons are not needed.
For the US, it means a couple of things. It means supporting Somalian and international NGOs whose mission it is to empower, protect, and heal women.
This also means we're really gonna have to clamp down on domestic violence and violence agianst women. We're gonna have to empower women by raising the minimum wage. And even more importantly, we're going have to pay more to jobs usually left to women, ie childcare, elderly care, teaching, secretarial work, etc and so on. No, money can't buy happiness; but it can sure as hell by freedom and a sense self-empowerment.
What I mean to say is this - If we're really going to end these sorts of barbarity against women in the world, we're going to have start by ended our more sophisticated by still barbarious treatment of women here in this country. And that means more than just maintaining a structure that benefits corporate masculinity. We're going to have radically chagne the entire system if we really want to put an end to sexism hear and around the world.
And before I finish with me thought, sexism isn't the reason Hillary Clinton lost. And sexism isn't why Sarah Palin's clothing brought so much attention. I mean, Clinton didn't even compete in 11 primary elections, and remember all the attention John Edwards got for his $400 USD haircut? - No1KState
PRESS RELEASE
October, 31 2008
Somalia: Girl stoned was a child of 13
Contrary to earlier news reports, the girl stoned to death in Somalia this week was 13, not 23, Amnesty International can reveal.
Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was killed on Monday, 27 October, by a group of 50 men who stoned her to death in a stadium in the southern port of Kismayu, in front of around 1,000 spectators.
Some of the Somali journalists who had reported she was 23 have told Amnesty International that this age was based upon a judgement of her age from her physical appearance.
She was accused of adultery in breach of Islamic law but, her father and other sources told Amnesty International that she had in fact been raped by three men, and had attempted to report this rape to the al-Shabab militia who control Kismayo, and it was this act that resulted in her being accused of adultery and detained. None of men she accused of rape were arrested.
“This was not justice, nor was it an execution. This child suffered a horrendous death at the behest of the armed opposition groups who currently control Kismayo,” said David Copeman, Amnesty International's Somalia Campaigner.
“This killing is yet another human rights abuse committed by the combatants to the conflict in Somalia, and again demonstrates the importance of international action to investigate and document such abuses, through an International Commission of Inquiry.”
Amnesty International has learnt that:
Background
Amnesty International has campaigned to end the use of the punishment of stoning, calling it gruesome and horrific. This killing of Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow demonstrates the cruelty and the inherent discrimination against women of this punishment.
The reports on this killing should be understood within the climate of fear that armed insurgent groups such as al-Shabab have created within the areas they control in Somalia. As Amnesty International has documented previously, government officials, journalists and human rights defenders face death threats and killing if they are perceived to have spoken against al-Shabab, who have waged a campaign of intimidation against the Somali people through such killings.
Since the death, a number of individuals have told Amnesty International they have fled from Kismayo out of fear of suffering a similar fate to Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow.
What does that mean here in the US? Should we go over to Somalia and change their regime? No! And besides, we're already ever though fighting "terror," right? Somehow, this slipped by. And as you'll see, more weapons are not needed.
For the US, it means a couple of things. It means supporting Somalian and international NGOs whose mission it is to empower, protect, and heal women.
This also means we're really gonna have to clamp down on domestic violence and violence agianst women. We're gonna have to empower women by raising the minimum wage. And even more importantly, we're going have to pay more to jobs usually left to women, ie childcare, elderly care, teaching, secretarial work, etc and so on. No, money can't buy happiness; but it can sure as hell by freedom and a sense self-empowerment.
What I mean to say is this - If we're really going to end these sorts of barbarity against women in the world, we're going to have start by ended our more sophisticated by still barbarious treatment of women here in this country. And that means more than just maintaining a structure that benefits corporate masculinity. We're going to have radically chagne the entire system if we really want to put an end to sexism hear and around the world.
And before I finish with me thought, sexism isn't the reason Hillary Clinton lost. And sexism isn't why Sarah Palin's clothing brought so much attention. I mean, Clinton didn't even compete in 11 primary elections, and remember all the attention John Edwards got for his $400 USD haircut? - No1KState
PRESS RELEASE
October, 31 2008
Somalia: Girl stoned was a child of 13
Contrary to earlier news reports, the girl stoned to death in Somalia this week was 13, not 23, Amnesty International can reveal.
Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was killed on Monday, 27 October, by a group of 50 men who stoned her to death in a stadium in the southern port of Kismayu, in front of around 1,000 spectators.
Some of the Somali journalists who had reported she was 23 have told Amnesty International that this age was based upon a judgement of her age from her physical appearance.
She was accused of adultery in breach of Islamic law but, her father and other sources told Amnesty International that she had in fact been raped by three men, and had attempted to report this rape to the al-Shabab militia who control Kismayo, and it was this act that resulted in her being accused of adultery and detained. None of men she accused of rape were arrested.
“This was not justice, nor was it an execution. This child suffered a horrendous death at the behest of the armed opposition groups who currently control Kismayo,” said David Copeman, Amnesty International's Somalia Campaigner.
“This killing is yet another human rights abuse committed by the combatants to the conflict in Somalia, and again demonstrates the importance of international action to investigate and document such abuses, through an International Commission of Inquiry.”
Amnesty International has learnt that:
Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was reported as being 23, based upon a judgement on her physical appearance, according to one of the journalists who had reported the stoning. Her actual age was confirmed to Amnesty International by other sources, including her father.
Her father said she had only travelled to Kismayo from Hagardeer refugee camp in north eastern Kenya three months earlier.
She was detained by militia of the Kismayo authorities, a coalition of Al-shabab and clan militias. During this time, she was reportedly extremely distressed, with some individuals stating she had become mentally unstable.
A truckload of stones was brought into the stadium to be used in the stoning.
At one point during the stoning, Amnesty International has been told by numerous eyewitnesses that nurses were instructed to check whether Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was still alive when buried in the ground. They removed her from the ground, declared that she was, and she was replaced in the hole where she had been buried for the stoning to continue.
An individual calling himself Sheik Hayakalah, was quoted on Radio Shabelle saying:``The evidence came from her side and she officially confirmed her guilt, while she told us that she is happy with the punishment under Islamic law.'' In contradiction to this claim, a number of eye witnesses have told Amnesty International she struggled with her captors and had to be forcibly carried into the stadium.
Inside the stadium, militia members opened fire when some of the witnesses to the killing attempted to save her life, and shot dead a boy who was a bystander. An al-Shabab spokeperson was later reported to have apologized for the death of the child, and said the milita member would be punished.
Background
Amnesty International has campaigned to end the use of the punishment of stoning, calling it gruesome and horrific. This killing of Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow demonstrates the cruelty and the inherent discrimination against women of this punishment.
The reports on this killing should be understood within the climate of fear that armed insurgent groups such as al-Shabab have created within the areas they control in Somalia. As Amnesty International has documented previously, government officials, journalists and human rights defenders face death threats and killing if they are perceived to have spoken against al-Shabab, who have waged a campaign of intimidation against the Somali people through such killings.
Since the death, a number of individuals have told Amnesty International they have fled from Kismayo out of fear of suffering a similar fate to Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Sad But Encouraging News Out of Africa
October 28, 2008
Court Rules Niger Failed by Allowing Girl’s Slavery
By Lydia Polgreen
DAKAR, Senegal — A West African regional court ruled Monday that the government of Niger had failed to protect a young woman sold into slavery at the age of 12.
The landmark ruling, the first of its kind by a regional tribunal now sitting in Niamey, Niger’s capital, ordered the government to pay about $19,000 in damages to the woman, Hadijatou Mani, who is now 24.
Slavery is outlawed throughout Africa, but it persists in pockets of Niger, Mali, Mauritania and amid conflicts like the one in northern Uganda. Antislavery organizations estimate that 43,000 people are enslaved in Niger alone, where nomadic tribes like the Tuareg and Toubou have for centuries held members of other ethnic groups as slaves.
Ms. Mani’s experience was typical of the practice. She was born into a traditional slave class and sold to Souleymane Naroua when she was 12 for about $500.
Ms. Mani told court officials that Mr. Naroua had forced her to work his fields for a decade. She also claimed that he raped her repeatedly over the years.
“I was beaten so many times I would run back to my family,” she told the BBC. “Then after a day or two I would be brought back.”
Ms. Mani brought her case to the court this year, arguing that the Niger government had failed to enforce its antislavery laws.
She had initially sought protection under Niger’s laws. In 2005, Mr. Naroua gave her a certificate freeing her, but when she tried to get married he claimed that she was already married to him.
A local court ruled for Ms. Mani, but a higher court reversed the judgment. In an absurd twist, Ms. Mani, who had gone ahead and married the other man, was sentenced to six months in jail for bigamy. She was released after serving two months.
“Nobody deserves to be enslaved,” Ms. Mani said in a statement. “We are all equal and deserve to be treated the same. I hope that everybody in slavery today can find their freedom. No woman should suffer the way I did.”
Slavery has long been tolerated in Niger. The Niamey government outlawed the practice in 2003, but it continues in the remote reaches of the vast, arid and impoverished nation that straddles the Sahara.
Antislavery organizations hailed the decision as an important victory against deeply entrenched social customs.
“For 17 years, we have been working towards bringing slavery to the attention of the authorities,” said Ilguilas Weila, president of Timidria, a Niger antislavery advocacy group, in a statement. “This verdict means that the state of Niger will now have to resolve this problem once and for all.”
The Community Court of Justice, the entity that ruled against Niger, is a judicial arm of Ecowas, a political and trade group of West African nations. The court, which can sit in any of the member nations, was created in 2000 and has made a number of important rulings.
But its limited ability to enforce them has sapped its influence.
Earlier this year, the court ordered the government of Gambia to release a journalist who had been missing for two years and was believed to be in government custody. Gambia ignored the judgment.
Court Rules Niger Failed by Allowing Girl’s Slavery
By Lydia Polgreen
DAKAR, Senegal — A West African regional court ruled Monday that the government of Niger had failed to protect a young woman sold into slavery at the age of 12.
The landmark ruling, the first of its kind by a regional tribunal now sitting in Niamey, Niger’s capital, ordered the government to pay about $19,000 in damages to the woman, Hadijatou Mani, who is now 24.
Slavery is outlawed throughout Africa, but it persists in pockets of Niger, Mali, Mauritania and amid conflicts like the one in northern Uganda. Antislavery organizations estimate that 43,000 people are enslaved in Niger alone, where nomadic tribes like the Tuareg and Toubou have for centuries held members of other ethnic groups as slaves.
Ms. Mani’s experience was typical of the practice. She was born into a traditional slave class and sold to Souleymane Naroua when she was 12 for about $500.
Ms. Mani told court officials that Mr. Naroua had forced her to work his fields for a decade. She also claimed that he raped her repeatedly over the years.
“I was beaten so many times I would run back to my family,” she told the BBC. “Then after a day or two I would be brought back.”
Ms. Mani brought her case to the court this year, arguing that the Niger government had failed to enforce its antislavery laws.
She had initially sought protection under Niger’s laws. In 2005, Mr. Naroua gave her a certificate freeing her, but when she tried to get married he claimed that she was already married to him.
A local court ruled for Ms. Mani, but a higher court reversed the judgment. In an absurd twist, Ms. Mani, who had gone ahead and married the other man, was sentenced to six months in jail for bigamy. She was released after serving two months.
“Nobody deserves to be enslaved,” Ms. Mani said in a statement. “We are all equal and deserve to be treated the same. I hope that everybody in slavery today can find their freedom. No woman should suffer the way I did.”
Slavery has long been tolerated in Niger. The Niamey government outlawed the practice in 2003, but it continues in the remote reaches of the vast, arid and impoverished nation that straddles the Sahara.
Antislavery organizations hailed the decision as an important victory against deeply entrenched social customs.
“For 17 years, we have been working towards bringing slavery to the attention of the authorities,” said Ilguilas Weila, president of Timidria, a Niger antislavery advocacy group, in a statement. “This verdict means that the state of Niger will now have to resolve this problem once and for all.”
The Community Court of Justice, the entity that ruled against Niger, is a judicial arm of Ecowas, a political and trade group of West African nations. The court, which can sit in any of the member nations, was created in 2000 and has made a number of important rulings.
But its limited ability to enforce them has sapped its influence.
Earlier this year, the court ordered the government of Gambia to release a journalist who had been missing for two years and was believed to be in government custody. Gambia ignored the judgment.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
It's Not Your Kid!
I have no problem with not selling candy or soda.
But new Virginia pharmacies that will sell no birth control?
As far as I can tell, it's okay to control when, where, with whom, and how many kids you have. If you're relying on the death of Onan died because he refused to impregnate their late brother's wife and be responsible for a child who wouldn't legally be there's, let me remind you that having a child, especially a son, was a woman's social security at the time. You're comparing apples to fish. Yes. Apples to fish.
Give people whatever birth control they request and their doctors' prescribe. The world is overpopulated. God isn't gonna be upset that not every emission of sperm and ovulation leads to the birth of a child. Er . . . duh!
At least their intentions are laid bare for all to see as the stores are named Divine Mercy Care Pharmacy. Whatever.
But new Virginia pharmacies that will sell no birth control?
As far as I can tell, it's okay to control when, where, with whom, and how many kids you have. If you're relying on the death of Onan died because he refused to impregnate their late brother's wife and be responsible for a child who wouldn't legally be there's, let me remind you that having a child, especially a son, was a woman's social security at the time. You're comparing apples to fish. Yes. Apples to fish.
Give people whatever birth control they request and their doctors' prescribe. The world is overpopulated. God isn't gonna be upset that not every emission of sperm and ovulation leads to the birth of a child. Er . . . duh!
At least their intentions are laid bare for all to see as the stores are named Divine Mercy Care Pharmacy. Whatever.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Girl-child Just Ain't Safe in a House Full of Men
Sexual Assault in Military 'Jaw-Dropping,' Lawmaker Says
July 31, 2008
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A congresswoman said Thursday that
her "jaw dropped" when military doctors told her that
four in 10 women at a veterans hospital reported being
sexually assaulted while in the military.
A government report indicates that the numbers could be
even higher.
Rep. Jane Harman, D-California, spoke before a House
panel investigating the way the military handles reports
of sexual assault.
She said she recently visited a Veterans Affairs
hospital in the Los Angeles area, where women told her
horror stories of being raped in the military.
"My jaw dropped when the doctors told me that 41 percent
of the female veterans seen there say they were victims
of sexual assault while serving in the military," said
Harman, who has long sought better protection of women
in the military.
"Twenty-nine percent say they were raped during their
military service. They spoke of their continued terror,
feelings of helplessness and downward spirals many of
their lives have taken since.
"We have an epidemic here," she said. "Women serving in
the U.S. military today are more likely to be raped by a
fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."
As of July 24, 100 women had died in Iraq, according to
the Pentagon.
In 2007, Harman said, only 181 out of 2,212 reports of
military sexual assaults, or 8 percent, were referred to
courts martial. By comparison, she said, 40 percent of
those arrested in the civilian world on such charges are
prosecuted.
Defense statistics show that military commanders took
unspecified action, which can include anything from
punishment to dismissal, in an additional 419 cases.
But when it came time for the military to defend itself,
the panel was told that the Pentagon's top official on
sexual abuse, Dr. Kaye Whitley, was ordered not to show
up despite a subpoena.
"I don't know what you're trying to cover up here, but
we're not going to allow it," Rep. Henry Waxman, D-
California, said to the Defense official who relayed the
news of Whitley's no-show. "This is unacceptable."
Rep. John Tierney, the panel's chairman and a Democrat
from Massachusetts, angrily responded, "these actions by
the Defense Department are inexplicable."
"The Defense Department appears to be willfully and
blatantly advising Dr. Whitley not to comply with a duly
authorized congressional subpoena," Tierney said.
An Army official who did testify said the Army takes
allegations of sexual abuse extremely seriously.
"Even one sexual assault violates the very essence of
what it means to be a soldier, and it's a betrayal of
the Army's core values," Lt. Gen. Michael Rochelle said.
The committee also heard from Mary Lauterbach, the
mother of Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach, a 20-year-old
pregnant Marine who was killed in December, allegedly by
a fellow Marine.
Mary Lauterbach said her daughter filed a rape claim
with the military against Marine Cpl. Cesar Laurean
seven months before he was accused of killing her.
"I believe that Maria would be alive today if the
Marines had provided a more effective system to protect
the victims of sexual assault," she said.
In the months after her daughter filed the rape claim,
she said, the military didn't seem to take her
seriously, and the onus was on "Maria to connect the
dots."
"The victim should not have the burden to generate
evidence for the command," Lauterbach told the
Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs.
"Maria is dead, but there will be many more victims in
the future, I promise you. I'm here to ask you to do
what you can to help change how the military treats
victims of crime and to ensure the victims receive the
support and protection they need and they deserve."
Another woman, Ingrid Torres, described being raped on a
U.S. base in Korea when she worked with the American Red
Cross.
"I was raped while I slept," she said.
The man who assaulted her, she said, was a flight
director who was found guilty and dismissed from the Air
Force.
Fighting back tears, Torres added, "he still comes after
me in my dreams."
The Government Accountability Office released
preliminary results from an investigation into sexual
assaults in the military and the Coast Guard. The GAO
found that the "occurrences of sexual assault may be
exceeding the rates being reported."
"At the 14 installations where GAO administered its
survey, 103 service members indicated that they had been
sexually assaulted within the preceding 12 months. Of
these, 52 service members indicated that they did not
report the sexual assault," the GAO said.
The office found that the military and Coast Guard have
established policies to address sexual assault but that
the implementation of the programs is hampered by an
array of factors, including that "most, but not all,
commanders support the programs."
"Left unchecked, these challenges can discourage or
prevent some service members from using the programs
when needed," the GAO said.
Tierney said, "what's at stake here goes to the very
core of the values of the military and the nation
itself.
"When our sons and daughters put their lives on the line
to defend the rest of us, the last thing they should
fear is being attacked by one of our own.
July 31, 2008
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A congresswoman said Thursday that
her "jaw dropped" when military doctors told her that
four in 10 women at a veterans hospital reported being
sexually assaulted while in the military.
A government report indicates that the numbers could be
even higher.
Rep. Jane Harman, D-California, spoke before a House
panel investigating the way the military handles reports
of sexual assault.
She said she recently visited a Veterans Affairs
hospital in the Los Angeles area, where women told her
horror stories of being raped in the military.
"My jaw dropped when the doctors told me that 41 percent
of the female veterans seen there say they were victims
of sexual assault while serving in the military," said
Harman, who has long sought better protection of women
in the military.
"Twenty-nine percent say they were raped during their
military service. They spoke of their continued terror,
feelings of helplessness and downward spirals many of
their lives have taken since.
"We have an epidemic here," she said. "Women serving in
the U.S. military today are more likely to be raped by a
fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."
As of July 24, 100 women had died in Iraq, according to
the Pentagon.
In 2007, Harman said, only 181 out of 2,212 reports of
military sexual assaults, or 8 percent, were referred to
courts martial. By comparison, she said, 40 percent of
those arrested in the civilian world on such charges are
prosecuted.
Defense statistics show that military commanders took
unspecified action, which can include anything from
punishment to dismissal, in an additional 419 cases.
But when it came time for the military to defend itself,
the panel was told that the Pentagon's top official on
sexual abuse, Dr. Kaye Whitley, was ordered not to show
up despite a subpoena.
"I don't know what you're trying to cover up here, but
we're not going to allow it," Rep. Henry Waxman, D-
California, said to the Defense official who relayed the
news of Whitley's no-show. "This is unacceptable."
Rep. John Tierney, the panel's chairman and a Democrat
from Massachusetts, angrily responded, "these actions by
the Defense Department are inexplicable."
"The Defense Department appears to be willfully and
blatantly advising Dr. Whitley not to comply with a duly
authorized congressional subpoena," Tierney said.
An Army official who did testify said the Army takes
allegations of sexual abuse extremely seriously.
"Even one sexual assault violates the very essence of
what it means to be a soldier, and it's a betrayal of
the Army's core values," Lt. Gen. Michael Rochelle said.
The committee also heard from Mary Lauterbach, the
mother of Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach, a 20-year-old
pregnant Marine who was killed in December, allegedly by
a fellow Marine.
Mary Lauterbach said her daughter filed a rape claim
with the military against Marine Cpl. Cesar Laurean
seven months before he was accused of killing her.
"I believe that Maria would be alive today if the
Marines had provided a more effective system to protect
the victims of sexual assault," she said.
In the months after her daughter filed the rape claim,
she said, the military didn't seem to take her
seriously, and the onus was on "Maria to connect the
dots."
"The victim should not have the burden to generate
evidence for the command," Lauterbach told the
Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs.
"Maria is dead, but there will be many more victims in
the future, I promise you. I'm here to ask you to do
what you can to help change how the military treats
victims of crime and to ensure the victims receive the
support and protection they need and they deserve."
Another woman, Ingrid Torres, described being raped on a
U.S. base in Korea when she worked with the American Red
Cross.
"I was raped while I slept," she said.
The man who assaulted her, she said, was a flight
director who was found guilty and dismissed from the Air
Force.
Fighting back tears, Torres added, "he still comes after
me in my dreams."
The Government Accountability Office released
preliminary results from an investigation into sexual
assaults in the military and the Coast Guard. The GAO
found that the "occurrences of sexual assault may be
exceeding the rates being reported."
"At the 14 installations where GAO administered its
survey, 103 service members indicated that they had been
sexually assaulted within the preceding 12 months. Of
these, 52 service members indicated that they did not
report the sexual assault," the GAO said.
The office found that the military and Coast Guard have
established policies to address sexual assault but that
the implementation of the programs is hampered by an
array of factors, including that "most, but not all,
commanders support the programs."
"Left unchecked, these challenges can discourage or
prevent some service members from using the programs
when needed," the GAO said.
Tierney said, "what's at stake here goes to the very
core of the values of the military and the nation
itself.
"When our sons and daughters put their lives on the line
to defend the rest of us, the last thing they should
fear is being attacked by one of our own.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Please, Help the Johnson Achieve Justice
This young woman was raped, murdered, and her body was burned...
...the Army called it suicide.
To help, please click here to go to colorofchange.org.
LaVena Johnson was a 19 year old private in the Army, serving in Iraq, when she was raped, murdered, and her body was burned--by someone from her own military base. Despite overwhelming physical evidence, the Army called her death a suicide and has closed the case.1
For three years, LaVena's parents have been fighting for answers. At almost every turn, they've been met with closed doors or lies. They've appealed to Congress, the one body that can hold the military accountable. But, as in other cases where female soldiers have been raped and murdered and the Army has called it suicide, Congress has failed to act.
Will you join Mr. and Mrs. Johnson in calling on Congressman Henry Waxman, Chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee, to mount a real investigation into LaVena Johnson's death and the Army's cover-up2? Will you ask your friends and family to do the same?
From the beginning, LaVena's death made no sense as a suicide. She was happy and had been talking with friends and family regularly3--nothing indicated she could be suicidal. And when the Johnsons received her body, they noticed signs that she had been beaten.4 That was when they started asking questions.
After two years of being denied answers and hearing explanations that made no sense, the Johnsons received a CD-ROM from someone on the inside. It contained pictures of the crime scene where LaVena died and an autopsy showing that she had suffered bruises, abrasions, a dislocated shoulder, broken teeth, and some type of sexual assault. Her body was partially burned; she had been doused in a flammable liquid, and someone had set her body on fire. A corrosive chemical had been poured in her genital area, perhaps to cover up evidence of rape.5
Still the Army sticks by their story. They refuse to explain the overwhelming physical evidence that LaVena was raped and murdered and continue to claim that she killed herself.
For many Black youth, and working class young people of every race, the military is seen as an option for securing a better future. LaVena came from a deeply supportive family, and while the military wasn't her only option, she was attracted by its promise to help her pay for a college education and the opportunity to travel around the world. She also thought that by joining she could continue her lifelong commitment to serving other people in need. She made a decision to serve in the military, with all its risks, and expected respect and dignity in return.
LaVena's death is part of a disturbing pattern of cases where female soldiers have been raped and killed, and where the military has hidden the truth and labeled the deaths suicides.6,7 In virtually all cases, Congress has been slow to investigate or hold the military accountable in any way. Unfortunately, most families simply don't have the resources, time, and psychological strength to push back.
We can help the Johnsons, and other families, by holding Congress accountable in the LaVena Johnson case and by demanding it investigate the pattern of cover-ups by the military.
Please take a moment to join those calling on Congressman Waxman to investigate the cover-up of LaVena Johnson's death:
Thanks and Peace,
-- James, Gabriel, Clarissa, Andre, Kai, and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
July 28th, 2008
References:
1. "The cover-up of a soldier's death?" LavenaJohnson.com, March 6, 2007
http://www.lavenajohnson.com/2007/03/cover-up-of-soldiers-death.html
2. "Is There an Army Cover Up of Rape and Murder of Women Soldiers?" CommonDreams.org, April 28, 2008
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/28/8564/
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. "Suicide or Murder? Three Years After the Death of Pfc. LaVena Johnson in Iraq, Her Parents Continue Their Call for a Congressional Investigation," Democracy Now!, June 23, 2008.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/23/suicide_or_murder_three_years_after
6. See reference 2.
7. "2 Years After Soldier's Death, Family's Battle Is With Army," New York Times, March 21, 2006.
http://tinyurl.com/mzcvh
Other References:
"Justice for Pfc. LaVena Johnson," DailyKos, June 30, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/5bh73v
"Rapists in the Ranks, Los Angeles Times, March 31, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/2z2c8l
...the Army called it suicide.
To help, please click here to go to colorofchange.org.
LaVena Johnson was a 19 year old private in the Army, serving in Iraq, when she was raped, murdered, and her body was burned--by someone from her own military base. Despite overwhelming physical evidence, the Army called her death a suicide and has closed the case.1
For three years, LaVena's parents have been fighting for answers. At almost every turn, they've been met with closed doors or lies. They've appealed to Congress, the one body that can hold the military accountable. But, as in other cases where female soldiers have been raped and murdered and the Army has called it suicide, Congress has failed to act.
Will you join Mr. and Mrs. Johnson in calling on Congressman Henry Waxman, Chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee, to mount a real investigation into LaVena Johnson's death and the Army's cover-up2? Will you ask your friends and family to do the same?
From the beginning, LaVena's death made no sense as a suicide. She was happy and had been talking with friends and family regularly3--nothing indicated she could be suicidal. And when the Johnsons received her body, they noticed signs that she had been beaten.4 That was when they started asking questions.
After two years of being denied answers and hearing explanations that made no sense, the Johnsons received a CD-ROM from someone on the inside. It contained pictures of the crime scene where LaVena died and an autopsy showing that she had suffered bruises, abrasions, a dislocated shoulder, broken teeth, and some type of sexual assault. Her body was partially burned; she had been doused in a flammable liquid, and someone had set her body on fire. A corrosive chemical had been poured in her genital area, perhaps to cover up evidence of rape.5
Still the Army sticks by their story. They refuse to explain the overwhelming physical evidence that LaVena was raped and murdered and continue to claim that she killed herself.
For many Black youth, and working class young people of every race, the military is seen as an option for securing a better future. LaVena came from a deeply supportive family, and while the military wasn't her only option, she was attracted by its promise to help her pay for a college education and the opportunity to travel around the world. She also thought that by joining she could continue her lifelong commitment to serving other people in need. She made a decision to serve in the military, with all its risks, and expected respect and dignity in return.
LaVena's death is part of a disturbing pattern of cases where female soldiers have been raped and killed, and where the military has hidden the truth and labeled the deaths suicides.6,7 In virtually all cases, Congress has been slow to investigate or hold the military accountable in any way. Unfortunately, most families simply don't have the resources, time, and psychological strength to push back.
We can help the Johnsons, and other families, by holding Congress accountable in the LaVena Johnson case and by demanding it investigate the pattern of cover-ups by the military.
Please take a moment to join those calling on Congressman Waxman to investigate the cover-up of LaVena Johnson's death:
Thanks and Peace,
-- James, Gabriel, Clarissa, Andre, Kai, and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
July 28th, 2008
References:
1. "The cover-up of a soldier's death?" LavenaJohnson.com, March 6, 2007
http://www.lavenajohnson.com/2007/03/cover-up-of-soldiers-death.html
2. "Is There an Army Cover Up of Rape and Murder of Women Soldiers?" CommonDreams.org, April 28, 2008
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/28/8564/
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. "Suicide or Murder? Three Years After the Death of Pfc. LaVena Johnson in Iraq, Her Parents Continue Their Call for a Congressional Investigation," Democracy Now!, June 23, 2008.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/23/suicide_or_murder_three_years_after
6. See reference 2.
7. "2 Years After Soldier's Death, Family's Battle Is With Army," New York Times, March 21, 2006.
http://tinyurl.com/mzcvh
Other References:
"Justice for Pfc. LaVena Johnson," DailyKos, June 30, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/5bh73v
"Rapists in the Ranks, Los Angeles Times, March 31, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/2z2c8l
Monday, July 21, 2008
Pretty Sure This Isn't Montgomery, Alabama
Or, 1964.
And a hint for anyone seeking domestic work - don't live in the home with your employers. I'm sure it looks like phone on TV; but historically, it has only led to sexual assualt and harrassment and even rape, being "on-call" 24/7, losing a sense of control over one's destiny, etc, etc.
Shared Struggle Led Women to Political Action
Domestic Workers Spurred Montgomery Protections
By Katherine ShaverWashington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 21, 2008; A01
Most Sundays for the past six years, about 25 live-in nannies and housekeepers from across the Washington area have gathered in Silver Spring to share stories of mandatory six-day workweeks, 14-hour days and salaries that amount to as little as $1 an hour.
Calling themselves the Committee of Women Seeking Justice, they gather in a circle and commiserate in English, Spanish, Hindi and French. Among the topics: no sick days, little overtime pay, feeling "on call" at all hours and sleeping on basement floors. Several have shared stories of having been kept as modern-day slaves, organizers said, rarely allowed out of the house and never seeing a cent.
Some are so worried their bosses will find out about the meetings that organizers use code -- "Come to my nephew's christening" or "Come to my niece's birthday party" -- when calling their employers' homes.
Click here to read more.
And a hint for anyone seeking domestic work - don't live in the home with your employers. I'm sure it looks like phone on TV; but historically, it has only led to sexual assualt and harrassment and even rape, being "on-call" 24/7, losing a sense of control over one's destiny, etc, etc.
Shared Struggle Led Women to Political Action
Domestic Workers Spurred Montgomery Protections
By Katherine ShaverWashington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 21, 2008; A01
Most Sundays for the past six years, about 25 live-in nannies and housekeepers from across the Washington area have gathered in Silver Spring to share stories of mandatory six-day workweeks, 14-hour days and salaries that amount to as little as $1 an hour.
Calling themselves the Committee of Women Seeking Justice, they gather in a circle and commiserate in English, Spanish, Hindi and French. Among the topics: no sick days, little overtime pay, feeling "on call" at all hours and sleeping on basement floors. Several have shared stories of having been kept as modern-day slaves, organizers said, rarely allowed out of the house and never seeing a cent.
Some are so worried their bosses will find out about the meetings that organizers use code -- "Come to my nephew's christening" or "Come to my niece's birthday party" -- when calling their employers' homes.
Click here to read more.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Black. Female. Accomplished. Attacked.
I only disagree with the comment about the hip-hop industry. The stereotype of the sexually deviant black woman has been around for the last 4-5 centuries. The name Saartjie "Sarah" Baartman comes to mind - or at least it did after some googling.
Black. Female. Accomplished. Attacked.
By Sophia A. Nelson
Sunday, July 20, 2008; B01
There she is -- no, not Miss America, but the Angela-Davis-Afro-wearing, machine-gun-toting, angry, unpatriotic Michelle Obama, greeting her husband with a fist bump instead of a kiss on the cheek.
It was supposed to be satire, but the caricature of Barack Obama and his wife that appeared on the cover of the New Yorker last week rightly caused a major flap. And among black professional women like me and many of my sisters in the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority, who happened to be gathered last week in Washington for our 100th anniversary celebration, the mischaracterization of Michelle hit the rawest of nerves.
Welcome to our world.
We've watched with a mixture of pride and trepidation as the wife of the first serious African American presidential contender has weathered recent campaign travails -- being called unpatriotic for a single offhand remark, dubbed a black radical because of something she wrote more than 20 years ago and plastered with the crowning stereotype: "angry black woman." And then being forced to undergo a politically mandated "makeover" to soften her image and make her more palatable to mainstream America.
Sad to say, but what Obama has undergone, though it's on a national stage and on a much more prominent scale, is nothing new to professional African American women. We endure this type of labeling all the time. We're endlessly familiar with the problem Michelle Obama is confronting -- being looked at, as black women, through a different lens from our white counterparts, who are portrayed as kinder, gentler souls who somehow deserve to be loved and valued more than we do. So many of us are hoping that Michelle -- as an elegant and elusive combination of successful career woman, supportive wife and loving mother -- can change that.
"Ain't I a woman?" Sojourner Truth famously asked 157 years ago. Her ringing question, demanding why black women weren't accorded the same privileges as their white counterparts, still sums up the African American woman's dilemma today: How are we viewed as women, and where do we fit into American life?
"Thanks to the hip-hop industry," one prominent black female journalist recently said to me, all black women are "deemed 'sexually promiscuous video vixens' not worthy of consideration. If other black women speak up, we're considered angry black women who complain. This society can't even see a woman like Michelle Obama. All it sees is a black woman and attaches stereotypes."
Black women have been mischaracterized and stereotyped since the days of slavery and minstrel shows. In more recent times, they've been portrayed onscreen and in popular culture as either sexually available bed wenches in such shows as the 2000 docudrama "Sally Hemings: An American Scandal," ignorant and foolish servants such as Prissy from "Gone With the Wind" or ever-smiling housekeepers, workhorses who never complain and never tire, like the popular figure of Aunt Jemima.
Even in the 21st century, black women are still bombarded with media and Internet images that portray us as loud, aggressive, violent and often grossly obese and unattractive. Think of the movies "Norbit" or "Big Momma's House," or of the only two black female characters in "Enchanted," an overweight, aggressive traffic cop and an angry divorcée amid all the white princesses.
On the other hand, when was the last time you saw a smart, accomplished black professional woman portrayed on mainstream television or in the movies? If Claire Huxtable on "The Cosby Show" comes to mind, remember that she left the scene 16 years ago.
The reality is that in just a generation, many black women -- who were mostly domestics, schoolteachers or nurses in the post-slavery Jim Crow era -- have become astronauts, corporate executives, doctors, lawyers, engineers and PhDs. You name it, and black women have achieved it. The most popular woman on daytime television is Oprah Winfrey. Condoleezza Rice is secretary of state.
And yet my generation of African American women -- we're called, in fact, the Claire Huxtable generation -- hasn't managed to become successfully integrated into American popular culture. We're still looking for respect in the workplace, where, more than anything else, black women feel invisible. It's a term that comes up again and again. "In my profession, white men mentor young whites on how to succeed," a financial executive told me, but "they're either indifferent to or dogmatically document the mistakes black women make. Their indifference is the worst, because it means we're invisible."
As someone who recently left a large law firm to work in the corporate sector, I have to agree. I liked my firm, but I always felt that I had to sink or swim on my own. I didn't get the kind of mentoring that I saw white colleagues, male and female, getting all around me. The firm was actually one of the better ones when it came to diversity, and yet of 600 partners, only five were black women.
A 2007 American Bar Association report titled "Visible Invisibility" describes how black women in the legal profession face the "double burden" of being both black and female, meaning that they enjoy none of the advantages that black men gain from being male, or that white women gain from being white.
Invisibility isn't the only problem. I run an organization dedicated to supporting African American professional women and often run empowerment workshops at various conferences. At a recent such workshop, I asked the participants to list some words that would describe how they believe they're viewed in the workplace and the culture at large. These are the kinds of words that came back: "loud," "angry," "intimidating," "mean," "opinionated," "aggressive," "hard." All painful words. Yet asked to describe themselves, the same women offered gentler terms: "strong," "loving," "dependable," "compassionate."
Where does the disconnect come from? Possibly from the way black women have been forced into roles of strength for decades. "Black women are the original multitaskers of necessity," says one nonprofit executive. "We've perfected it because we've been doing it for so long. But people don't appreciate the skill it requires, and they don't recognize the toll it takes on us as human beings."
For all our success in the professional world, we have paid a significant price in our private and emotional lives. A life of preordained singleness (by chance, not by choice) is fast becoming the plight of alarming numbers of professional black women in America. The fact is that the more money and education a black woman has, the less likely she is to marry and have a family.
Consider these stunning statistics: As of 2007, according to the New York Times, 70 percent of professional black women were unmarried. Black women are five times more likely than white women to be single at age 40. In 2003, Newsweek reported that there are more black women than black men (24 percent to 17 percent) in the professional-managerial class. According to Department of Education statistics cited by the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, black women earn 67 percent of all bachelor's degrees awarded to blacks, as well as 71 percent of all master's degrees and 65 percent of all doctoral degrees.
With all the challenges facing professional black women today, we hope that Michelle Obama will defy the negative stereotypes about us. And that, now that a strong professional black woman is center stage, she'll bring to light what we already know: that an accomplished black woman can be a loyal and supportive wife and a good mother and still fulfill her own dreams. The fact that her husband clearly adores Michelle is both refreshing and reassuring to many of us who long to find a good man who will love and appreciate us.
Recently, a friend who's a married professional mother of three girls wrote to me: "I think one of the most interesting things about Michelle Obama is that what she and her husband are doing is pretty revolutionary these days -- and I don't mean running for president. For a black man and woman in the U.S. to be happily married, with children, and working as partners to build a life -- let alone a life of service to others -- all while rearing their children together is downright revolutionary."
It's how so many black professional women feel. And our hope is that if Michelle Obama becomes first lady, the revolution will come to us at last.
snelson@iaskinc.org
Sophia A. Nelson is a corporate attorney and president of iask, Inc., an organization for African American professional women.
Black. Female. Accomplished. Attacked.
By Sophia A. Nelson
Sunday, July 20, 2008; B01
There she is -- no, not Miss America, but the Angela-Davis-Afro-wearing, machine-gun-toting, angry, unpatriotic Michelle Obama, greeting her husband with a fist bump instead of a kiss on the cheek.
It was supposed to be satire, but the caricature of Barack Obama and his wife that appeared on the cover of the New Yorker last week rightly caused a major flap. And among black professional women like me and many of my sisters in the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority, who happened to be gathered last week in Washington for our 100th anniversary celebration, the mischaracterization of Michelle hit the rawest of nerves.
Welcome to our world.
We've watched with a mixture of pride and trepidation as the wife of the first serious African American presidential contender has weathered recent campaign travails -- being called unpatriotic for a single offhand remark, dubbed a black radical because of something she wrote more than 20 years ago and plastered with the crowning stereotype: "angry black woman." And then being forced to undergo a politically mandated "makeover" to soften her image and make her more palatable to mainstream America.
Sad to say, but what Obama has undergone, though it's on a national stage and on a much more prominent scale, is nothing new to professional African American women. We endure this type of labeling all the time. We're endlessly familiar with the problem Michelle Obama is confronting -- being looked at, as black women, through a different lens from our white counterparts, who are portrayed as kinder, gentler souls who somehow deserve to be loved and valued more than we do. So many of us are hoping that Michelle -- as an elegant and elusive combination of successful career woman, supportive wife and loving mother -- can change that.
"Ain't I a woman?" Sojourner Truth famously asked 157 years ago. Her ringing question, demanding why black women weren't accorded the same privileges as their white counterparts, still sums up the African American woman's dilemma today: How are we viewed as women, and where do we fit into American life?
"Thanks to the hip-hop industry," one prominent black female journalist recently said to me, all black women are "deemed 'sexually promiscuous video vixens' not worthy of consideration. If other black women speak up, we're considered angry black women who complain. This society can't even see a woman like Michelle Obama. All it sees is a black woman and attaches stereotypes."
Black women have been mischaracterized and stereotyped since the days of slavery and minstrel shows. In more recent times, they've been portrayed onscreen and in popular culture as either sexually available bed wenches in such shows as the 2000 docudrama "Sally Hemings: An American Scandal," ignorant and foolish servants such as Prissy from "Gone With the Wind" or ever-smiling housekeepers, workhorses who never complain and never tire, like the popular figure of Aunt Jemima.
Even in the 21st century, black women are still bombarded with media and Internet images that portray us as loud, aggressive, violent and often grossly obese and unattractive. Think of the movies "Norbit" or "Big Momma's House," or of the only two black female characters in "Enchanted," an overweight, aggressive traffic cop and an angry divorcée amid all the white princesses.
On the other hand, when was the last time you saw a smart, accomplished black professional woman portrayed on mainstream television or in the movies? If Claire Huxtable on "The Cosby Show" comes to mind, remember that she left the scene 16 years ago.
The reality is that in just a generation, many black women -- who were mostly domestics, schoolteachers or nurses in the post-slavery Jim Crow era -- have become astronauts, corporate executives, doctors, lawyers, engineers and PhDs. You name it, and black women have achieved it. The most popular woman on daytime television is Oprah Winfrey. Condoleezza Rice is secretary of state.
And yet my generation of African American women -- we're called, in fact, the Claire Huxtable generation -- hasn't managed to become successfully integrated into American popular culture. We're still looking for respect in the workplace, where, more than anything else, black women feel invisible. It's a term that comes up again and again. "In my profession, white men mentor young whites on how to succeed," a financial executive told me, but "they're either indifferent to or dogmatically document the mistakes black women make. Their indifference is the worst, because it means we're invisible."
As someone who recently left a large law firm to work in the corporate sector, I have to agree. I liked my firm, but I always felt that I had to sink or swim on my own. I didn't get the kind of mentoring that I saw white colleagues, male and female, getting all around me. The firm was actually one of the better ones when it came to diversity, and yet of 600 partners, only five were black women.
A 2007 American Bar Association report titled "Visible Invisibility" describes how black women in the legal profession face the "double burden" of being both black and female, meaning that they enjoy none of the advantages that black men gain from being male, or that white women gain from being white.
Invisibility isn't the only problem. I run an organization dedicated to supporting African American professional women and often run empowerment workshops at various conferences. At a recent such workshop, I asked the participants to list some words that would describe how they believe they're viewed in the workplace and the culture at large. These are the kinds of words that came back: "loud," "angry," "intimidating," "mean," "opinionated," "aggressive," "hard." All painful words. Yet asked to describe themselves, the same women offered gentler terms: "strong," "loving," "dependable," "compassionate."
Where does the disconnect come from? Possibly from the way black women have been forced into roles of strength for decades. "Black women are the original multitaskers of necessity," says one nonprofit executive. "We've perfected it because we've been doing it for so long. But people don't appreciate the skill it requires, and they don't recognize the toll it takes on us as human beings."
For all our success in the professional world, we have paid a significant price in our private and emotional lives. A life of preordained singleness (by chance, not by choice) is fast becoming the plight of alarming numbers of professional black women in America. The fact is that the more money and education a black woman has, the less likely she is to marry and have a family.
Consider these stunning statistics: As of 2007, according to the New York Times, 70 percent of professional black women were unmarried. Black women are five times more likely than white women to be single at age 40. In 2003, Newsweek reported that there are more black women than black men (24 percent to 17 percent) in the professional-managerial class. According to Department of Education statistics cited by the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, black women earn 67 percent of all bachelor's degrees awarded to blacks, as well as 71 percent of all master's degrees and 65 percent of all doctoral degrees.
With all the challenges facing professional black women today, we hope that Michelle Obama will defy the negative stereotypes about us. And that, now that a strong professional black woman is center stage, she'll bring to light what we already know: that an accomplished black woman can be a loyal and supportive wife and a good mother and still fulfill her own dreams. The fact that her husband clearly adores Michelle is both refreshing and reassuring to many of us who long to find a good man who will love and appreciate us.
Recently, a friend who's a married professional mother of three girls wrote to me: "I think one of the most interesting things about Michelle Obama is that what she and her husband are doing is pretty revolutionary these days -- and I don't mean running for president. For a black man and woman in the U.S. to be happily married, with children, and working as partners to build a life -- let alone a life of service to others -- all while rearing their children together is downright revolutionary."
It's how so many black professional women feel. And our hope is that if Michelle Obama becomes first lady, the revolution will come to us at last.
snelson@iaskinc.org
Sophia A. Nelson is a corporate attorney and president of iask, Inc., an organization for African American professional women.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
It's About Time!
First, a quick note concerning my opinion of Zimbabwe: Robert Mugabe needs to hold free and fair elections. Yes, he'd probably lose. In that case, he'd need to allow the democratically elected officials come to power. Yes, he and his supporters in government would probably also lose the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed. That's where the IMF and World Bank come in - quit giving lend countries these bogus loans with the economic terms that promote the sort of corruption we've seen arise in the developing countries were you lend money. Considering the years of slavery and colonialism, I can hardly see how any country in Africa doesn't have a budget surplus due to the reparations owed by the West. That aside, if the point is to grow a prosperous and dynamic economy that can support the country, you can't lend the money only to those in power. You have to do macro-lending and allow countries to develop more than one cash-crop.
Oh, and while I'm on the subject of African countries and their business relations to the West, if Big Oil would pay Nigeria and the people in the Delta their fair due, and treat the workers with due respect, so-called extremists wouldn't disrupt oil production.
Oh, and a note about Condoleeza Rice: When are you going to turn you humanitarianism on your boss, George "W is for War-Lord" Bush?
U.N. Security Council Says Sexual Violence Akin to War Crimes
By Maggie Farley, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer June 20, 2008
UNITED NATIONS -- The U.N. Security Council affirmed Thursday that rape and other forms of sexual violence can constitute war crimes, and called for measures to combat such attacks.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice introduced the U.S.-sponsored resolution at a special session attended by diplomats from 60 nations.
Rice said the resolution brought an end to a debate about whether sexual violence was a security issue and belonged on the council's agenda. A similar resolution last year failed to pass, with several members disputing the need for it.
"I am proud that today we respond to that lingering question with a resounding yes," she told the Security Council. "This world body now acknowledges that sexual violence in conflict zones is indeed a security concern."
We affirm that sexual violence profoundly affects not only the health and safety of women, but the economic and social stability of their nations."
The resolution established U.N. procedures to monitor sexual violence in armed conflicts and called for the secretary-general to report in one year on their implementation. It also urges the U.N. to impose sanctions on violators.
Advocacy groups pushed the issue back onto the council agenda after China, Russia and South Africa said last year that sexual violence was an unfortunate byproduct of war and one that was addressed by a number of U.N. agencies, but was not a matter of international peace and security.
The resolution also urged the secretary-general to clamp down on peacekeepers who prey on vulnerable women and children instead of protecting them.
Despite an attempt by the U.N. to revamp the regulations and culture among peacekeepers and staffers after incidents of sexual exploitation over the last few years in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Liberia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, reports of further abuses surfaced last year in several countries.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the council that he was committed to "zero tolerance" and "zero impunity" for sexual abuse by U.N. personnel and urged countries that provide troops to follow through with prosecution because the U.N. has no authority to try the perpetrators.
He pledged to strengthen the world body's code of conduct and hold supervisors accountable for assaults committed by soldiers and staffers.
The presence of high-level female officials at Thursday's meeting was deliberate. Rice chaired the gathering. France's secretary of state for human rights, Rama Yade, called for the prosecution of sexual violence at the International Criminal Court. British Atty. Gen. Patricia Scotland denounced recent attacks on women in Zimbabwe, especially the killing Wednesday of the mayor's wife in the capital, Harare.
The wives of the U.S. and British ambassadors to the United Nations also have worked to raise awareness that rape is a deliberate war tactic meant to intimidate and destroy communities, as seen in the former Yugoslav federation, Sudan's Darfur region and Congo.
After adopting the resolution, the council held an informal session to condemn increasing violence in Zimbabwe in the run-up to the June 27 presidential runoff election.
Next week, the Security Council will have its first formal meeting on the violence there and will be briefed by U.N. envoy Haile Menkerios, who was in Zimbabwe on Thursday.
South Africa, China and Russia have blocked official discussion so far, saying it would be interfering in a nation's internal affairs.
Rice cited concern among council members that "free and fair elections cannot possibly be held" in Zimbabwe because of the increasing intimidation of and violence against the opposition by the government of President Robert Mugabe, who is seeking reelection.
"I think that the mood in the room was one of extraordinary concern and a desire for President Mugabe to hear that there is tremendous international concern about what is happening in his country," the secretary of State told reporters after the meeting.
"I don't see anything that President Mugabe has done that has been helpful to Zimbabwean people, so maybe it's time for international pressure."
Oh, and while I'm on the subject of African countries and their business relations to the West, if Big Oil would pay Nigeria and the people in the Delta their fair due, and treat the workers with due respect, so-called extremists wouldn't disrupt oil production.
Oh, and a note about Condoleeza Rice: When are you going to turn you humanitarianism on your boss, George "W is for War-Lord" Bush?
U.N. Security Council Says Sexual Violence Akin to War Crimes
By Maggie Farley, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer June 20, 2008
UNITED NATIONS -- The U.N. Security Council affirmed Thursday that rape and other forms of sexual violence can constitute war crimes, and called for measures to combat such attacks.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice introduced the U.S.-sponsored resolution at a special session attended by diplomats from 60 nations.
Rice said the resolution brought an end to a debate about whether sexual violence was a security issue and belonged on the council's agenda. A similar resolution last year failed to pass, with several members disputing the need for it.
"I am proud that today we respond to that lingering question with a resounding yes," she told the Security Council. "This world body now acknowledges that sexual violence in conflict zones is indeed a security concern."
We affirm that sexual violence profoundly affects not only the health and safety of women, but the economic and social stability of their nations."
The resolution established U.N. procedures to monitor sexual violence in armed conflicts and called for the secretary-general to report in one year on their implementation. It also urges the U.N. to impose sanctions on violators.
Advocacy groups pushed the issue back onto the council agenda after China, Russia and South Africa said last year that sexual violence was an unfortunate byproduct of war and one that was addressed by a number of U.N. agencies, but was not a matter of international peace and security.
The resolution also urged the secretary-general to clamp down on peacekeepers who prey on vulnerable women and children instead of protecting them.
Despite an attempt by the U.N. to revamp the regulations and culture among peacekeepers and staffers after incidents of sexual exploitation over the last few years in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Liberia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, reports of further abuses surfaced last year in several countries.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the council that he was committed to "zero tolerance" and "zero impunity" for sexual abuse by U.N. personnel and urged countries that provide troops to follow through with prosecution because the U.N. has no authority to try the perpetrators.
He pledged to strengthen the world body's code of conduct and hold supervisors accountable for assaults committed by soldiers and staffers.
The presence of high-level female officials at Thursday's meeting was deliberate. Rice chaired the gathering. France's secretary of state for human rights, Rama Yade, called for the prosecution of sexual violence at the International Criminal Court. British Atty. Gen. Patricia Scotland denounced recent attacks on women in Zimbabwe, especially the killing Wednesday of the mayor's wife in the capital, Harare.
The wives of the U.S. and British ambassadors to the United Nations also have worked to raise awareness that rape is a deliberate war tactic meant to intimidate and destroy communities, as seen in the former Yugoslav federation, Sudan's Darfur region and Congo.
After adopting the resolution, the council held an informal session to condemn increasing violence in Zimbabwe in the run-up to the June 27 presidential runoff election.
Next week, the Security Council will have its first formal meeting on the violence there and will be briefed by U.N. envoy Haile Menkerios, who was in Zimbabwe on Thursday.
South Africa, China and Russia have blocked official discussion so far, saying it would be interfering in a nation's internal affairs.
Rice cited concern among council members that "free and fair elections cannot possibly be held" in Zimbabwe because of the increasing intimidation of and violence against the opposition by the government of President Robert Mugabe, who is seeking reelection.
"I think that the mood in the room was one of extraordinary concern and a desire for President Mugabe to hear that there is tremendous international concern about what is happening in his country," the secretary of State told reporters after the meeting.
"I don't see anything that President Mugabe has done that has been helpful to Zimbabwean people, so maybe it's time for international pressure."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Share This Article
But Don't Jack My Genuis
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.