No Capes!!

Bill Cosby is black and that sucks. Being black in America can often times suck, but that is not why it sucks that Cosby is black. This is not even about his personal black experience and how that may have sucked. This is more about how the fact that he is black, will impact the African American community internally. Anyway, Bill is black, and not only is he black, but he was the black man to be in America for generations. He had funny, but respectable stand up routines. He crafted a respectable black family for television that was so respectable that it could even serve as a blueprint for "normal" American families. He, this black man, would  be elevated to "America's Dad." He pretty much moved on and became America's grandad with, "Kids Say The Darnest Things"

Bill was so good, so respectable, that it almost felt like he was single handedly making America into the post-racial, colourblind society we hear so much about. He was elevating the black community, one sagging pants at a time, carrying it to the dizzying heights of waist worn respect and decency. Golly-gee, if Martin had a dream...

Whatever.

Why does it suck that Bill Cosby is black? It sucks because some of us, too many of us, will don our capes for Bill Cosby. Too many of us will step onto the battlefield of racial politics, march to the front lines, and take fire for Bill Cosby; for the culture. Mind you, brother Bill was not returning the favour, in fact brother Bill was not a fan, nor a defender of the culture. Brother Bill threw the culture, and the men and women in it, living it, making it, under the bus whenever he could. Bill tried to silence Hip Hop, Bill detests AAVE (..but Fat Albert though), and constantly, and consistently castigates the black poor for the choices they are forced to make, and for not working hard enough and pulling themselves up.
I wonder if Bill loved black people. I think he did. I'm sure he did. I'm just not sure that he liked their blackness; not all of it. A lot has been invested in making blackness unwanted and unlikable - I get it; we all struggle. It sucks that Bill is black because rallying to the support of our brothers, and to a lesser extent our sisters (sad), in these types situations is an instinctive, defensive response in the black community in America. We know that the justice system, from police to judges to lawmakers, has not always had our best interest at heart. We know that equal crime does not merit equal time, as we see here and here. So, we cape. We cape hard. We even cape for those that do not need, nor deserve our capedom, just because they are black. #thejuiceisloose Bill does not deserve us donning our capes.

Celebrity sex scandals are nothing new, in fact a sex scandal can catapult virtual unknowns to A-List status in the blink of a Kardashian eye. However, this entire thing surrounding Bill Cosby is not a sex scandal. This is about predation, incapacitation, manipulation, assault, and rape - rape being about power, not sex. It was a power trip.

Bill had been out here drugging, manipulating, abusing, and raping women for about 40 years and getting away with it. This side of Bill Cosby was not even a massive secret. While it may not have been public knowledge, it was certainly known within the industry. As we have seen with most of the men named in this #metoo and #timesup era, their actions were not those of sexually deviant masterminds that fooled everyone, they were actions facilitated by those around them, willingly or not. They were also the actions of powerful men, using their power and influence to silence, shame and/or destroy anyone, not just their victims, who would challenge them, or call them out on their actions.

The judicial system does treat black men worse than all other men in America - a statistical fact that can be seen here, and here. Bill Cosby is not one of those black man statistics however, not even close. In fact Cosby has done something that no other black man that I can think of has ever done in America, and that would be get away with the rape and sexual abuse of almost 60, mostly WHITE women, suffering the lightest possible sentence. In the land of Emmett Till, the Central Park 5, and Brian Banks, this is nothing short of magic. The statute of limitations has been Cosby's friend here,and had Hannibal made his joke a year later, Cosby would likely have never seen a trial, much less a jail sentence. Bill Cosby could have been fated like Daniel Holtzclaw, or like Dr. Larry Nassar, but he was not. Lucky him I guess.


For many, Bill Cosby, his work and his art, especially in television, mean(t) a lot, well beyond  mere entertainment value. If that is the case, then hold on to Clif Huxtable if you must, but let Bill go.


It is hard for many people to square all of this. The irony of a man that preached respectability politics so loudly, a man whose entire media empire, and public image was build as that of a righteous and moral man, being accused of things so degenerate seems too baffling to be true. Remember that we are human, and we can be many things, even completely opposite things at the same time.
The famous "Pound Cake Speech" that condescends to the black youth to pull up their pants and to speak properly; and the drugging and sexual assault of Andrea Constand, the one case within the statute of limitations, and the one that has ultimately sent him to jail, both happen in 2004.

That nigga was magic.

Lives Matter

Which edition of "Lives Matter" are you using?

Are you still running the uni-racial, and outdated "Black lives Matter"?

Don't be left behind! Upgrade to "All Lives Matter" today!

All Lives Matter is the updated, cares about lives, platform for those who just can't bare to care for one set of lives,  and one set of lives alone.

Not sure who the victim was in the John Crawford case? No worries! All Lives Matter can be applied to the case, encompassing all persons involved,  spreading your emotion equally to everyone and absolving you from having to take an uncomfortable stance on an otherwise clearly racial problem.

*Terms and Conditions apply:
All Lives Matter is not an independently operational platform and still requires the uni-racial Black Lives Matter,  or BLM, as a running root platform.
All Lives Matter;  Black and Minority lives matter separately.

"All Lives Matter" - Ask your in life bigot, racist,  colourblind diversionary if All Lives Matter is right for you.

ALL LIVES MATTER is brought to you by the makers and distributors of "Straight Pride" and the fast growing cult classic,  "Blue Lives Matter"

Dear David,

Reparations for slavery, a topic that comes and goes, has once again come to the fore of public discourse. This topic's most recent public showing, is due in large part to the Prime Minister of the UK, David Cameron's official visit to Jamaica, a former British colony, his address to their government and Portia Simpson, Jamaica's Prime Minister's words to him.

Prof. Sir Hilary Beckles, in his role as the Chairman of the CARICOM Reparation Commission, penned an open letter to the British PM, raising the issue of reparations to him. Just over a year ago, in an address before The House of Commons, Prof. Sir Hilary Beckles spoke on reparations and gave suggestions/proposals of how reparations could work. The letter is posted in full below. The link to the reparations address can be read by clicking here, or the link below the letter.

This is not an opinion post today, but rather one seeking discussion about reparations, and the opinions of people here in Barbados, the Caribbean and the wider world about the topic. What do we think folks, reparations yay or nay? Yay, but different to the proposition in the link?

Open Letter to the Honourable David Cameron, Prime Minister of the UK & Northern Ireland

26th September 2015

Dear Honourable Prime Minister,

I join with the resolute and resilient people of Jamaica and their government in extending to you a warm and glorious welcome to our homeland. We recognise you, Prime Minister, given your family's long and significant relationship to our country, as an internal stakeholder with historically assigned credentials.  To us, therefore, you are more than a Prime Minister. You are a grandson of the Jamaican soil who has been privileged and enriched by your forebears' sins of the enslavement of our ancestors.

As we prepare for you a red carpet befitting your formal status we invite you to cast your eyes upon the colours of our national flag that symbolise the history we share. You are, Sir, a prized product of this land and the bonanza benefits reaped by your family and inherited by you continue to bind us together like birds of a feather.

Be assured, Prime Minister, that you will find no more generous people on our planet Earth than those who will greet you with golden hearts and civilised consciousness. I urge that you embrace the sincerity of our salutations. It is born and bred in the cauldron of our enslavement by your family and society. Consider it a golden gift of friendship and not simply the empty expression of protocols relevant to the events you will attend. It is furthermore, an overture to an expectation of a dialogue of reparatory justice that can redefine for us a new intimacy for this long 21st century on which we are embarked.

Your advisers would have informed you that beyond the boundary of the affairs of State, civil society welcomes you without reservation, though with a qualification that bears the burden of our tortured past within the historically textured present. I speak of outstanding and unresolved matters that are relevant to our sense of mutual respect as equal nations dedicated to the cause of furthering humanity's finest imagined destiny.

I speak, Sir, of the legacies of slavery that continue to derail, undermine and haunt our best efforts at sustainable economic development and the psychological and cultural rehabilitation of our people from the ravishes of the crimes against humanity committed by your British State and its citizens in the form of chattel slavery and native genocide.

In this regard I urge you to be aware that the issue of reparatory justice for these crimes is now before our respective nations, and the wider world. It is not an issue that can be further ignored, remain under the rug, or placed on back burners, as your minister who recently visited us so aptly described your agenda for Jamaica and the Caribbean. It will generate the greatest global political movement of our time unless respected and resolved by you, the leader of the State that extracted more wealth from our enslavement than any other.

The Jamaican economy, more than any other, at a critical moment in your nation's economic development, fuelled its sustainable growth. Britain as a result became great and Jamaica has remained the poorer. Jamaica now calls upon Britain to reciprocate, not in the context of crime and compulsion, but in friendly, mutually respected dialogue. It is an offer of opportunity written not in the blood of our enslaved ancestors but in the imagination of their offspring and progeny who have survived the holocaust and are looking to the future for salvation.

As a man, a humane man, with responsibility for the humanity of your nation we call upon you to rise to this moment as you realise and internalise that without the wealth made by your enslaving ancestors, right here in our Jamaica, we would not be enchained together, today, called upon to treat with this shared past.

Successive governments in this land, a place still groaning under the weight of this injustice,  have done well during the fifty three years of sovereignty, but the burden of the inherited mess from slavery and colonialism has overwhelmed many of our best efforts. You owe it to us as you return here to communicate a commitment to reparatory justice that will enable your nation to play its part in cleaning up this monumental mess of Empire. We ask not for handouts or any such acts of indecent submission. We merely ask that you acknowledge responsibility for your share of this situation and move to contribute in a joint programme of rehabilitation and renewal. The continuing suffering of our people, Sir, is as much your nation's duty to alleviate as it is ours to resolve in steadfast acts of self-responsibility.

In the four corners of Kingston there are already whispers that your strategy will be to seek a way to weaken Jamaica's commitment to Caribbean reparations in a singular act of gift granting designed to divide and rule and to subvert the regional discourse and movement.  You Sir, are a Briton, not a Greek, and we have no reason therefore to fear what you bear. But we do ask that you recall that the Caribbean region was once your nation's unified field for taxation, theatre for warfare, and space for the implementation of trade law and policy. Seeing the region as one is therefore in your diplomatic DNA; and this we urge that you remember.

Finally Sir, I write from the perspective of an academic bred in Britain and reared in the University of the West Indies, an institution your nation planted in Kingston in 1948 with a small but significant grant. It would honour us to show you what we the people have reaped from this single seed. We have created a flourishing federal farm that now cultivates the minds of millions, a symbol of our collective determination to take seriously our self-responsibility and to place our dignity as an emerging nation before any other consideration. From this singular seed we have grown one of the finest universities in the world crafted by our hands and inspired by our dreams.

This story, Sir, can guide your reflection as to who we are and what we expect of you.  We urge you then, in this light, to indicate your nation's willingness to work towards a reparatory justice programme for the Caribbean, with a view to allowing us to come together in order to come to closure, put this terrible past behind us, and to leave it to us to continue the making of our future.

Kindest regards,
Hilary Beckles,
Chairman, CARICOM Reparations Commission.

The reparations proposal as taken from a transcript of a speech given by Prof. Sir Hilary Beckles before the British House of Commons in the summer of 2014 can be viewed here: https://www.cavehill.uwi.edu/news/releases/release.asp?id=514

No Violations Here

Recently I have seen a New York Times article making rounds on my Facebook timeline. The article is about sex slaves and the exploitation and abuse of women and girls in certain territories of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. "ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape"* is the title of the article and it delves into the newly codified rules of sex slavery in these territories and how they are being used as tools of recruitment.

The author, Rukmini Callimachi, uses the testimony of 21 girls and women, as well as official Islamic State documents, research by Amnesty International and other watchdog groups, and other sources, to get the information, and evidence to craft this article.

Flag of the Islamic State

The article begins, "In the moments before he raped the 12-year-old girl, the Islamic State fighter took the time to explain that what he was about to do was not a sin." setting a tone that stays for the remainder of the piece. Age is of little consequence; of the 21 females interviewed, the only ones not raped were those post-menopausal and those prepubescent. These rapes were not sinful, as we shall soon see.
How is it, that a religious group can, not just condone, but encourage this type of behaviour from its adherents when such acts are considered heinous globally, and even within the teachings of their religion? Well, simply, the girls and women being raped are Yazidi, and the newly codified sex slave laws, with the claimed backing of the Qu'ran, allow for the soldiers of the Islamic State to rape these women and girls. In fact, it is not even considered rape, but, in the words of the man who raped the 12 year old we are first introduced to, it is ibadah or worship**. He prayed before the rape, and after the rape.Guidelines for slavery, and, of course, rape, were all contained in material put out by the Islamic State's Research and Fatwa Department - seriously.

Callimachi goes on to describe the ways in which these women and girls come into these circumstances. They are rounded up and put into buses once used to facilitate the Hajj, but now with curtains covering the windows. We are hearing the tales of survival and escape, but there are still more in captivity, being abused and being raped, and there are yet still more entering into captivity and sex slavery.

This long post (I apologise), however, is not about the Islamic State, nor the the horrible actions it now officially sanctions and the crimes it has committed against humanity and, especially, humanity's women and girls. This is actually about us. Westerners (Caribbean included -woot,woot!). This is about how we reacted to this article and our 'speck in the eye' attitude to the Islamic State's 'log in the eye' behaviour.

Our disgust - well founded for sure -  does not quite match up with our local (western) attitudes towards women or rape. Maybe it is the whole ISIS-ness of it, and the official-ness and the Research and Fatwa Department-ness and the Islam-ness of it all that creates our deeper disgust. A 15 year old Yazidi girl recounting her rape(s), and the fact that it so closely correlates to that of a 12 year old girl, and several other women and girls is heart wrenching. We, without reservation or interest in the story of the rapist, believe her; believe them. Yet when six and a half dozen women accuse Bill Cosby of drugging and raping them, it takes months for some of us to start to believe them -  and this is only now in the months after Hannibal Buress brought it up during a comedy routine.
With this most recent surfacing of the Cosby rape allegations, the media went about asking industry insiders and other comedians about it; "Oh, yeh it has been said." or "It was known" were not uncommon responses. It was as if it was just another celebrity quirk. Mariah Carey likes white M&Ms, Lil Wayne likes a spliff and some purp, and Bill Cosby likes a bit of drug and rape; every now and again he may go for some statutory rape. WTF folks.

Bill Cosby meme collage.

Rick Ross, clearly from the Cosby School of Getting Laid, said,

"Put molly all in her champagne, she ain't even know it. I took her home and enjoyed that, she ain't even know it"

Now I'm not saying that Rick Ross is a rapist, he makes claims about many things in his music that he has never done or seen - hell, every rapper alive is the best rapper alive, but it speaks to our general attitude about such things when the lyrics main criticisms come in the form of internet memes, and it still enjoys regular club and radio play.

Buju Banton -"Gal mi serious, me haffi get you tonight, haffi get your body even by gun point."

"...haffi get your body even by stick up."

Burning Flames advises forced entry:

"...I know just what to do when a woman batten down she house,

and mek up she mind to keep you out.

...so the solution, to get inside,

'cus she lock down she house so tight.

...kick in she back door!"

All over a background sound effect of a screaming woman balling "murder, murder", and "call the police."

Let us not forget the Caribbean social meme of the school girl and the minibus. Glamour Gal Sue was liming in the van stand waiting for her man, "The Original Article Ruffneck Dan.***" When Vybz Kartel has to ask you not to "fuck inna de school bus****" we have a problem. Moreover, it is usually a relationship between a school girl and a bus driver, but most popularly, the bus conductor.

                                

Beyond this, rape is not just a too common occurrence in prisons, but an expected part of the incarceration experience. It is common in almost all pop culture references to prison - "don't drop the soap" Further to the point, most consider rape in prison an extension of justice and not a violation of a person and that person's rights and body. We have convinced ourselves that there is nothing wrong with this, much in the same way the Islamic State's soldiers are convinced that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing. The Islamic State has made legal their mistreatment of women and girls and their attitudes towards rape, we in the west maintain such behaviours as abhorrent and illegal, but our actions, our culture, our prison systems say otherwise.

The Islamic State's treatment of women and girls, their creation and perpetuation of sex slavery via methodological sex conquests, and their religious and, now, legal justification for all of this is horrible. The west - and us here in the Caribbean - are really not too, too far off in our treatment of women, exploitation of women and attitudes to rape. We may think of ourselves as more sophisticated, and we might well be, but, "It is not rape, it is worship." is not much different to, "It is not rape, it is justice." or "It is not rape, it is just a good time."

Last question, can husbands rape their wives, or nah?



*- Article linked here.
**-Ibadah is usually translated as "worship"
***- Madd - De Maddy Maddy School Patrol
****- Vybz Kartel - School Bus

Dancing In The Mud For The Sake of Cleanliness

My early life and experiences led me to Rastafari.
Rastafari cemented black consciousness in me.
The African experience - enslavement, colonial, post-colonial, neocolonial - led me to PanAfricanism.
The scope of the PanAfrican community opened my eyes to the humanity of us all.
The humanity of it all led me to human rights.
Humanity led me to gay rights.

Somewhere in there, in this midst of this journey, a moral relativism started to bubble up; I had to sort that out. Sorting that out rekindled my appreciation for nuance and context.

We are all people. We are all complex. Some of us have "simple" complexities.
Burnt toast after waking up on the wrong side of the bed with a headache which leads to grumpiness at work, so, "Fuck you Troy!"
Some of us are boys and like boys in a world that says we aren't to like boys, but then we also kinda like girls too.

Some of us are all these shades of grey in a black and white world.

Well, whatever. Fighting and playing in the mud just gets us all dirty.

 

 

#InTheBrightestRed

#InTheBrightestRed (For Pompasette Magazine) Monday November 24^th, 2014, a grand jury does not indict police officer, Darren Wilson, in the shooting death of 18 year old Michael Brown in August 2014. The decision, unsurprising to many, stirred the emotions of people across the US, and the international community, sparking protests and even riots. Barbadians took to social media, as did the world, to follow the situation and voice opinion on it. #JusticeforMikeBrown and #Ferguson were popular hashtags on my timeline and newsfeed that night. Last year, Skittles, iced tea, hoodies and blacked out profile photos signified solidarity with Trayvon Martin. Sadly though, I cannot recall this level of solidarity with, or outcry for, I’Akobi Maloney, or indeed anyone that may have suffered similar injustices in Barbados.
Why is there this disparity in responses? Why are we so vocal and active, online at least, about the tragedies and injustices in America, but so muted – indifferent even – to local injustices that are similar?

To begin, it is always easier to judge the faults of others and avoid your own. The bigger the fault, the more we judge. The more we expect from the party at fault, the more intensely we react. The USA has painted itself as the defender of freedom and democracy in the world. The President of the United States is often referred to as “The Leader of the Free World”, so terrible events like Mike Brown occurring on their soil create an opening for foreign critics, giving license to cast a self-righteous side-eye in their direction. However, to turn that critical eye inward is not an easy nor desirable task. The required introspection makes us uncomfortable and admitting that we too can be host to great injustices is a confession that we may not be quite ready to make. #sipstea

I’Akobi’s case did not experience the same level of media attention as the Trayvon Martin or Michael Brown cases did. This is not to say that it was not covered by the local media, it was, but we live in a time when the lion’s share of media consumption by Barbadians, especially by the social media generation, is American. Trayvon and Michael received coverage on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, ABC, Comedy Central, in The Huffington Post, The Washington Post, The New York Times, and a host of other television, radio, print and online media outlets, all of which have huge social media presences and followings. How does this affect Barbadian sentiment and response? The listed media outlets are constant and consistent with their output. They take, or create, trending topics and have hours of time dedicated to them specifically. Interviews with experts and officials, family members and friends, animated charts and graphs; these things and more come with this “American media package.” The result of this bombardment is that issues are always in your face, you become increasingly engaged, meaning, more tweets, more statuses, ie. a greater response. I’Akobi did not have the benefit of this. By contrast, I’Akobi was covered by the two local print newspapers, the one television station’s news hour, and a few popular local blogs.
They went beyond viral, I’Akobi did not.

Spoken word artist, Adrian Green, in a piece titled “Too Small” notes that the size of Barbados, and the intimate nature of Bajan life is a factor in the differences in reactions to the Trayvon and I’Akobi incidents. It is a valid observation. I did not know I’Akobi personally, but I know his brother, and many people that were close to him. I was awoken by a phone call from a friend, on the night he died, who was so distraught that she could not speak clearly. On the flip, I know police officers, and I know people that know officers involved in the incident. The intimacy and connectedness of small societies can be very intimidating for people, and this can inhibit even the most passive forms of protest against perceived injustices. We feel less afraid of personal repercussions when engaging international topics, but are much more self-aware and self-censoring when approaching local topics. Within the confines of 166 square miles there is the very real chance of actually coming face to face with the person(s) that you are protesting against, and that is an uneasy thought for most of us.

Finally, being a population of mostly black people, able to identify with the racial history and dynamic of the US, it is easy to identify with Mike and Trayvon because #itcouldhavebeenme. For this same reason it is a bit harder for most to identify with I’Akobi. There is no clear racial element to make I’Akobi’s cause “trendy.” Consider this though, just as most white Americans will be unable to understand what it is like to be #livingwhileblack in America, most Barbadians will not understand what it is like to be a Rasta living in Barbados; draw your parallels.

*As written for, and submitted to Pompasette Magazine.


Click here for the trailer to the documentary,  "The I'Akobi Conspiracy: From a Mother's Perspective"

Nigga Nigga Nigga

Perspective. Often overlooked.

Once during a Political Science class, "African Political Philosophy in Antiquity", or something like that, the point was made that it is always going to be really hard to fully understand/ grasp the concepts of these old African systems of thought because we are approaching them from a point of understanding that is western/European. No matter your emotional alignment, or your political mooring, the social and educational foundation upon which they lie is going to be, primarily European, specifically English in the case of Barbados. It is an uncomfortable thing to hear and can be quite disconcerting. I was in my Pan-African, Rastafari, Black Power freshness; I was different to those still stuck on that western train, that "Babylon Shitstem" mentality; I was supposed to be different.

I digressed, that is not the point nor purpose of this post. I am not sure it is even relevant.

Nigga.
Who can and who can't say it?
If we - niggas - stop saying it, the perpetuation of white supremacy will end, or at least weaken, right?
Hurtful word and no one should say it; period!
Context, it is all about context.
My brother, my nigga.

Lots of opinions, from a lot of places about one, maybe two, word(s) depending on if you draw a distinction between nigga and nigger.

Piers Morgan, the most recent person of note to attempt this, has called for the discontinued use of the word nigga/nigger. He lists a variety of reasons to support his position, none new, most reasonable, one ignorant and all viewed through the historical lens of white supremacy and political and institutional black oppression and dehumanization. There is a kind of white guilt that informs his position, which is fine. Understanding the past properly frames contemporary life experiences and provides the knowledge needed for advancement. Of course, there is also a kind of white privilege that somehow fuels the notion that his opinion is relevant, which largely, it is not. Piers, this is not about you nor your feelings. Most importantly to note though, is that this is not black people's problem either; nigga is not a black creation. The society that created the term, and the negativity attached to it, is to blame for the usage, not those negatively affected that have sought to repurpose it positively, however controversially, for themselves.

Otherwise motivated but on the same side as Piers, would be black people who call for its disuse. These are usually, older folk from the civil rights era and people generally who hold that era as the foundation of the contemporary black experience. For them there is a very emotional connection to the word, and the very malicious and dehumanizing manner with which it was used by whites towards blacks, often times accompanied by dogs, burning crosses, hanging bodies, fire hoses and all manner of psychological and physical assault and degradation. This set cannot fathom why people would refer to themselves and their loved ones with such a term. For them, this word cannot be reclaimed nor can it be repurposed. This call for disuse also comes from a place heavily influenced by white supremacy, black oppression and abuse.

The above perspectives are all centered on the historical use of the word by whites towards blacks. Anyone coming to the table on this issue from the perspective of its historical white usage will always call for the discontinuation of its usage, whether a well meaning old white man like Piers or black people with a civil rights era foundation. From that perspective the word is, and can only be, hurtful.

There is another lens through which we can see this nigga/nigger thing. Niggas have been calling niggas niggas for a long time, from way back in the day. I do not mean, thefirsteverhiphopalbum back in the day or when Paula Deen was a little girl type back in the day, but before America recognized black men as citizens, like before 1865 type of back in the day. When nigger went from being a simple reference to black people, to a reprehensible entity to be feared and kept ignorant, is when the nigga to nigga endearment and empowerment started. This black to black, nigga to nigga, perspective is also important. From this perspective, the discomfort felt by contemporary whites which is rooted in white supremacy's legacy is less relevant to black people, and allows us, if we so desire, to say "So what?!" to their discomfort and dislike. This perspective is in direct opposition to the previous one.


"Why wouldn’t you want to embody that which most scares your oppressor and change its meaning?" - Talib Kweli


Piers Morgan dismisses African Americans, mainly African American youth, as using the word "in an ironic way." Piers goes on, "They’re aware of its history; they know from their parents and grandparents that arrogant, dumb, racist whites used it as a wicked, derogatory insult against their black slave forebears. And they enjoy the freedom of being able to say it now in the knowledge that it’s become taboo for whites to do so." He then claims that he understands and empathizes. He does not, not really, but, more interesting is the condescending tone he delivers this message in. It is as if he is explaining to a toddler, for the hundredth time, that he cannot eat his crayons. "Take those crayons from your mouth Timmy, you know you shouldn't eat them." What he could have gone on to say would have been something like, "Also, your black slave forebears began to use the word as a badge of honour and as a term of endearment among themselves, flipping the negativity of the arrogant, dumb, racist whites into a positive - something that they have done all throughout the slavery and Jim Crow experiences." He could have then gone on to reference comfort food, souse and negro spirituals and black churches, which are all the nigga to their respective origins' nigger, ie. the negatives made positives.
There is a lack of understanding by the youth as to the hurtful power that that word holds for their parents and grandparents, and that of course comes a less racially volatile contemporary environment, but its continued use within the black community is not just a simple "irony." That is why Mr. Morgan cannot say that he understands.


"There is no other word like it in the English language, encompassing both the ugliest sort of hate and a communal, if subversive, sense of love and affection, depending upon who is saying it and in what context. It can be wielded as a tool of both white racism and black empowerment. Its most accomplished practitioners can drop it into conversation as a noun, adjective, verb or interjection." - Lonne O'Neal Parker


When approached from the perspective of reclamation, empowerment and resistance, the word is open for continued use within the black community. Continued use is very much still a part of the racial politick. Remember that while we like to focus on the contemporary experience, the African American experience in America has only been one of full citizenship for about half a century. Post racial societies do not yet exist anywhere, despite what we are told.

As anyone on the pro-use side will tell you, there are times when even internal use of the word will have negative connotations and go from an endearing term to a degrading, and oppressive one. Any reference to struggling, hustling, grinding, working hard, celebrations, family, friends, etc. are usually positive nigga uses. References to merking niggas, dope boy niggas, ignorant niggas, my niggas v. dem niggas etc. are negative nigga uses and perpetuate the negativity of the term, and actually go against the intetntion of the reclamation of the term. Problematic, but only so for those with either of the two perspectives above. There is another perspective; it is held mostly by the youth. It is not as nuanced as the other two. Thanks to popular music, multiculturalism and failure to understand or care for context, the term, which was always akin to 'dude' or 'brother' within parts of the black community, has taken on that meaning for a new generation, but spans a wider racial demographic. Again problematic, but language was never known for being stagnant and the youth are not famed for their understanding of, nor penchant for, the historical context of the world they occupy.

The Washington Post has done a pretty interesting interactive project about this. You can tailor make your own video, have a random one done for you, and afterwards you can spend time exploring all of the videos. This project accompanies the article linked above in the Lonne O'Neal Parker quote. Click here to go to THE N-WORD: An Interactive Project Exploring a Singular Word.

Ultimately, however, disuse, continued use or the disconnected, new generation use aside, the racial problems in the world are not rooted in any word. Institutional and structural issues within societies are what give birth to, and maintain, the injustice of racial inequality. Stop and frisk, school to prison pipelines, prison industrial complex, the racial disparity in convictions and sentencing, ingrained fear of black bodies, unrecognized and unchecked white privilege, unchecked police brutality, etc. facilitate America's racial problems. Add to that the fact that Jim Crow is not a history lesson, but a living memory for many Americans. Add to that the fact that John Crawford III and Eric Garner happened a few months ago.
Let us not get too distracted by nigga this and nigga that. Those with malicious intent will use it regardless. More discrete, but equally ill intentioned, people will use modern day euphemisms like "n-word" or "urban" or "inner city" and smile =) all the while. Police will call you sir or ma'am and still arrest you more frequently than any other racial group. Words, caricatures, gestures and symbols are all applied or repurposed afterwards to fit the structure.
Niggas got better shit to do than to focus too much on semantics, not because it is unimportant, but because it's a red herring topic in the racial debate and we have bigger fish to fry.

And That Is The Gospel Truth

“The only way to the heaven is through the Lord Jesus Christ. Believe me, that is the gospel truth.” These were the words that a friend had offered to me in one of our religious debates. This idea of truth, the one he represents because of his Christian faith, is flawed. The flaw, however, is not that he believes truth to be an absolute entity, because it is absolute, but it is that he thinks that Christianity is that absolute.

Before I can explain properly the flaw I mentioned above let me first define truth. Truth simply is what is. That is, in the absence of all hindrances of interpretation as a result of socialization, religion, education and all other shapers of realities, truth is what remains, absolute and nonnegotiable. Say that there is a fish tank with a fish in it and there are five people at various points about this fish tank, four of them are looking into the fish tank and seeing the fish and another is backing the fish tank and is not seeing the tank nor the fish. To each of the four persons who are looking into the tank the fish will appear to be at a different point in the water due to the refraction and reflection of light, through the water in the tank, the glass of the tank, and the air, and then of course the actual interpretation of the information collected in their eye and processed in their brains. This is reality to each of them. Not truth, reality. Reality is shaped and developed; truth is absolute. None of these four persons will argue as to the existence of the fish, but they will argue about its location, colour, size, and other things about it. Were they to graphically represent the fish and the tank, taking into account the physical issues of interpretation, such as refraction and reflection, they would each get the same and exact location of the fish (accounting for parallax of course). In a scenario where this happens truth is discovered. As for the person not looking at the tank, there is no fish tank in his reality, and he therefore does not know about it nor the fish. However, because he does not see it or acknowledge it does not mean it does not exist. In his reality there is no concept of the fish in the tank, but the truth is that there is a fish tank. 

My friend is like one of the four persons looking into the tank. He lives a Christian reality and has seen the truth, but has not yet realised the inaccuracies that have led to his point of view, in other words he has not had the opportunity to graphically represent the fish and the fish tank. 

Examine the real core principles of any major religion in the world from antiquity to present and notice that they are all the same. From the forty-two laws of Ma’at, through the ten commandments of Moses, through the teachings of Buddha and of Jesus, to the modern day laws of countries, they are all basically the same. Even the non-religious believe in the basic core principles of their religious neighbours. Atheist will call these principles, “living right and moral lives.” The perfect being, or highest authority of any religion - God - is the representation, embodiment and source all of these principles. While even an atheist does not accept the existence of God they do not argue about the existence of these principles or that society and life operate much more efficiently when we live by them. These common principles are the fish. The separate religions and atheism are the fish tank, the water, the refraction and reflection, the air and all of the other things that affect how the fish is viewed. The interpretations of this information are the realities that are shaped just as each of the four persons thought the fish to be at a different location. 

Truth is without facade, it is not a slave to opinion or influence. Reality is nothing more than a point of view, which means that it can be changed. If it can be shattered of shifted, it is a paradigm, and a paradigm is a reality. You have heard of paradigm shifts and reality checks, but never of a truth shift or a truth check and that is because truth is, as was said earlier, absolute and nonnegotiable.

The truth however is not always what is important or even relevant. The truth is inaccessible a great deal of the time. Reality/perception/interpretation are more important. Ironically, that is the truth about that.

 *This is not to say there is a god, or that there isn't. I used the religious theme because the conversation with my friend, at the time of writing this, was fresh in my mind.

Lest we forget

When a politician or any other public official drops the line "Do you know who I am?" It should be powerful and get things to happen. You see that "I am" should resonate powerfully because it is the collective voice of a people. That "I am" is really a "We are", and should hold the power of the "we" entity.

The problem is that the "we" forget that the "I am" is merely an amalgamation of us. The problem is that the "I am" thinks that "he/she IS" and would then turn to the "we" as if he/she is something divinely placed over them.

There is too much indebtedness in our political reality, and this makes the democratic process here tedious and nearly silly. The MP, elected by their constituency, is more bound to the desires of the PM than they are to those of their constituents. The PM holds their "job" in his hands, and a PM ruling first above equals will not hesitate to remind a MP of this. 

Little men and women with god complexes. Egos fueled by an ignorant public, small testicled yes men, and folk with heads and asses high in the air displaying red, blue and yellow plumage like the yardfowls they are, making crass and loud noises about things that they have no control over.

To my lovelies sitting on the fence, I pray that you are sitting side saddle and not straddling the fence. For those "staying out of it" just remember that in this society, politics is overarching and all encompassing. Political inaction is a political action. Political activeness does not simply mean B, D, P or independent. You have a voice, use it.

Lest we forget, the politician is a servant of the public. We are the public. The politician is no more powerful than we allow; do not let fancy words and domineering attitudes make us forget this. Democracy allows for potentially the most revolutionary form of government, if only the masses remember that in democracy "we run tings, tings nuh run we."

Keep your mind clear and free.
Keep your voice clear and loud. Make your actions clear and firm.

The November Haiku and Seventeen Syllables

Last year, 2011, I set out to honour Barbados' 45th anniversary of independence through poetry. I, however, did not want to write a typical poem of tribute, like an epic or a sonnet, but I also did not want to fall into the cliche of a free form bajan, sing song NIFCA type piece. This is when I came up with the idea of haiku. I would write 45 haiku to commemorate 45 years of independence. I wrote four.

This was actually quite a normal thing. I would start a project and lose momentum, or just give up on it. My tribute to my country ended up as four haiku written in a little leather bound journal. Sadder still, three of them reference the trident clearly indicating a singular focus and inspiration - a tattoo on my back. I had a fascination with the broken trident for part of 2011, and designed a tattoo where the trident appeared to actually be broken and not just to be cleanly cut as it appears on the flag.

Blue, yellow and blue.
Dismantled Union Jack;
trident now broken.

Look upon my back,
a broken broken trident.
True independence.

For want of a broken trident
I broke the trident into pieces.

These fields and hills are
beyond recall - gone away.
Their vacation homes.

These are the four. 

It is 2012. I decide to complete the tribute and I code name it #project17. I began working on it in October. I wrote down as much things related to Barbados as I could. From musicians and artist, to food and drinks, sunsets, historical information, things related to the Barbadian/Bajan culture, politics, etc. I began to actually develop the project from just a whim, into an actual working project. I began to think now, not just of writing  the 46 haiku - it was 2012- but also about what to do with them once I was finished, how would I put them out, would I put them out to the public at all? Initially I just wanted to write the haiku and I did not have any intention to put them in the public domain. The thought had not even crossed my mind. Now, a year later, I was thinking about putting them together in a small book format, 4 inches by 6 inches. I had conceptualised a cover and an introduction to the collection. This had gotten beyond the point of being an idea and was actually beginning to breathe.

This project was very important for me, but not because it was a tribute to my country. The completion of #project17 and the evolution of "The November Haiku and Seventeen Syllables" represents a journey completed. I had started many projects and have fallen through on a lot of them, and with this one I have actually finished it. The finishing of this is what is important to me, not so much the actual poetry nor the tribute to Barbados.

Here is the complete incomplete work: The November Haiku and Seventeen Syllables (I have to finish the cover and add page numbers)

     

Some good old Adrian Green to wrap it up.

Peace and love family.


ps. The blog might be back up and running soon; cannot make promises at this point in time.

Free-Dumb

Slaves no more!
we are free!
Free!
Free?
Are we? - Carson Howard

Is there any justification for believing that human beings are free? Will sweet freedom come my way?

Donkey before the cart, first things first, before attempting to find justification for human beings being free, if there is any justification to be found, we are going to have to sort out what we mean by ‘free human being.’ We will define such a human being as one who possesses free will, and, just to cover all bases, free will will be defined as the ability to consciously and independently make choices, decisions and commit actions without prior cause, coercion and/or divine intervention, in other words do as you please without being told, otherwise prompted, the divine intervention of God/god(s) or without some thing in late or recent, social or personal, history influencing the action/deed.

 T_*

Free will is a topic which has plagued the minds of man from time immemorial across many disciplines: philosophy, theology, physics (theoretical) and more. What is it about freedom and by extension the free will of human beings that has caused such constant rumination and discussion?

The essence of human freedom is the fundamental problem of philosophy and therefore the question about human beings being free is the fundamental question of philosophy.¹ - Martin Heidegger

Being an amateur philosophe I will (try to) get all philosophical and shit. When speaking about free will one will inevitably hear about Determinism and determinist, if not by that fancy academic term, by the points of their arguments and the tenets beliefs which are, the actions and thoughts of a person are not freely created or committed but are predetermined by various factors ranging from that persons socialisation, their genetic inheritance or socio-biological makeup and environment and education, and politics, etc. There are two types of these determinist people; hard determinist, who believe completely in predestination and that no person can therefore be held morally accountable for any deeds he or she commits, good or bad. The second type are the soft determinist who believe that there is some compatibility with determinism and free will, manifested in acts of compulsion, consent and intent < which I think is like those choose-your-ending type books that were popular sometime ago, the story is written your choices are limited to a set of predetermined outcomes ( I could be wrong; never read one of those books).

There is no doubt that the average human being believes in free will, our belief in our own free will is necessary to our very (structured and defined social paradigm of an) existence; this is what we have been led to believe, here in the “civilised west”. From the liberal, anti-establishment, rebels (Occupy this and that) to the most traditional and conservative of persons are firmly rooted in the free-will paradigm. Capitalism, and democracy are based on human beings having free will; they need it to function really. The ‘American Dream’, one of the most powerful driving forces of the American way of life, is based on the concept of human free will. Democracy, the socio-political system wherein each individual is allowed to offer themselves to lead their country, the system wherein each individual has the choice to choose whom among those, who, by choice, offered themselves, should be allowed to govern over them and their country. Democratic countries are the ones where there is freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of association and the list of “freedoms” goes on. Freedom and choice are the core components of democracy, therefore the free will of its citizens is not just accepted as existent but a right inherently granted (btw if something is granted to you, it can be taken from you - just saying).

Even cultures/religions with predestination as a main philosophical tenet free will still manages to somehow creep in. Indian culture and the philosophy karma is an example of this. Karma is the idea that actions or deeds committed and their effects create the experiences of the future, present and the past, basically it is a cause and effect situation. The concept of karma found in Indian religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism, makes room for the modifying of one’s karma by deeds one commits and therefore one can freely will to change one’s karma and change one’s destiny. So free will is all over the place, but is it a justifiable belief?

As we said earlier, determinist arguments for predestination include a person’s upbringing and socialisation and genetic inheritance as a type of mold or foundation for the type of person that that person will eventually develop into.

“At the point where you can predict my acts directly from my state of health or my social conditioning or what I have just eaten, you can stop treating me as a free being. And if you choose to predict them in this way, rather than trying to make sense of my point of view, then you are choosing to not treat me as free. You are merely regarding me as a thing, that is, as part of the surrounding process.”² -Mary Midgley

Predictions are made all of the time about human behaviour. Poor and underprivileged people will usually be the ones most likely to turn to a life of crime. The probability of an African American male from a poor, urban background ending up, undereducated and incarcerated in the American penal system is higher than that of an African American from a middle class, suburban background and is definitely higher than those for white Americans from any social bracket. You always hear about the child who accidentally killed or seriously injured his/her, usually his, friend after trying out some wrestling technique that they would have witnessed on television. It would seem then that certain factors, once in place would lead to a predictable outcome. From this angle life seems like a mango seed; plant the mango seed and you will get a mango tree, no matter how much you wish for mahogany, mango will bear.

So what about those folks who appear to react differently to those in similar environs or develop differently to those with a similar socialisation like the person who gets out of the ghetto and gets some money and moves into the suburbs, or the person raised among thieves but develops into a pious person, is this where free will comes into play? Soft determinist would claim yes and that this exemplifies the free will of human beings. Where one makes the conscious choice to do something one is not expected to do is the execution of free will. The hard determinist however will continue to say no and to argue that there was something in this person’s life, other than the visibly obvious, that would have determined their change. They would claim that while yes the person was raised by thieves that their social interaction outside of the thieves that raised them would have lead to their religious development or that maybe by seeing the negative effects of thieving on the people who raised them constantly hiding from authorities or constantly being arrested would have lead them to act differently. This argument by the hard determinist does however present room for a choice to be made by that person; whether to grow into a thief or to move away from it because of what they would have seen or experienced elsewhere. Even within Capitalism, where competition and freedom of choice for the consumer is needed, there is an element of predictability. The way products are marketed, the location of product sources like stores, are all dependent on the predictability of human behaviour.


In religion [read Christianity], the concept of seeking God and the kingdom of God is one which requires human freedom. According to Heidegger, freedom is independence from nature, meaning that human action is not caused primarily by the natural process. Heidegger also goes on to say that since freedom is independence from nature then it must also be independence from God and autonomy in relation to God. In this autonomy one can then develop a relationship with God, wherein one seeks God and acknowledges God.³


Is there any justification for human beings being free? Yes. On an average day, for the average person what determines what we eat? What makes us change our minds in the canteen line to have rice as opposed to the pie we were craving, there are no health issues for this person, no dietary problems, no bio-physical problems like stomach gas or anything to initiate that change from pie to rice, nothing except our own free will to choose, our compulsion. “I do not feel like going to the gym today.” Why not? There is no fatigue, no work to be done, no reason for not wanting to go to the gym other than because I do not feel the need to go. Modern human civilizations are based on the concept of free will and its existence, especially western, "developed" (that is another story) countries like the USA. The American dream was mentioned earlier and the American dream is the belief in a freedom that allows a person to achieve what they want to by hard work, by luck, by ‘being all that they can be”, regardless of one’s disposition at birth. The American dream is the idea that one can better one’s self and those around you if you try hard enough to; simply put the American dream is Hope. Hope is the belief in a positive outcome to the unlikeliest of circumstances moderated by the realization that nothing is certain.⁴ The democratic nations and institutions across the world offer hope, hope that one can be part of something bigger, hope that one can participate in the governance of one’s country, i.e. one can make the rules for him or herself. The poor, underprivileged, the oppressed, the minorities of a country are all promised hope and this hope is manifested in their choices, in their will to want better and to live above the expectations/predictions their society prescribes for them. Free will is justified because it is the core of civilisation as we currently know it, even the Buddhist can change their karma by good deeds.


So yeh free will justifiably exists, but it sure is not independent to predestination. Most human actions are the reactions to actions previously committed or events gone before, free will manifests itself when the course of action is not clearly defined or more than one course of action presents itself like the person raised by thieves but experienced a way of life outside of their upbringing. While free will exists and is justifiable, the question as to human freedom remains. For example, while people are “free” to choose a leader for their country, the felon has no such freedom, and while democracy promises a plethora of freedoms, like the freedom of speech, one is not free to slander a person. Any time you compromise these freedoms in the manners stated you are liable to be giving up your freedom within society to be punished ranging from fines and services, to incarceration and execution. So, yes it is justifiable to believe in human freedom, but as for it actually existing I beg to differ. As I commented to a friend sometime back, a dog on a plantation is no freer than a dog restricted to an apartment, it is just less restricted. Freedom within a parameter is not freedom. I would be so bold to even question if freedom exists at all? From a Kantian perspective even God, whom or whatever it may be, is duty bound to maintain this world and the natural order of things; what ever that is and if you believe in that sort of thing.





1. Martin Heidegger, The essence of human freedom: an introduction to philosophy (London. New York: Continuum, 2002)203.

2. Mary Midgley, The Ethical Primate; Humans, Freedom and Morality (London. New York: Routledge, 1994)164.

3. Martin Heidegger (2002) 4-5

4. David Straker, http://changingminds.org/explanations/emotions/hope.htm (Syque, 2002-2008).

StrangeRasta is now on twitter so look up there above the toolbar ^ and follow me on twitter. New blogs will now be posted via Twitter along with Facebook and Blogger. More ways to connect with the strange one. A Facebook page soon to come so look out. The Facebook page is here! http://www.facebook.com/StrangeRasta

Jack and Jill update

The parents of the boy from the previous blog, "Jack and Jill went up to Hill, but had to cut their hair", have successfully enrolled him at the St. Giles Primary School. From all accounts the boy is happy there and the parents are pleased. The matter concerning the Hill Top Preparatory School will not be pursued any further.

It remains a pity that in 2011 acts of discrimination of this nature still happen. C'est la vie...n'est-ce pas?

Jack and Jill went up to Hill, but had to cut their hair.

Had to leave home and venture to the internet cafe/ gaming arcade to put this together (my system is still not working properly).

There are certain naturally occurring things that can be detrimental to our personal and social growth and development. For example the naturally occurring phenomenon which takes place across the human body but is concentrated in the armpits can lead to social rejection, scorn and ultimately pariah status. This occurrence, called body odour or, when one can say of one's self, to quote Doddy from Azman "I smell like get from round me", is a serious thing but over time humanity has deal with this offensive scourge by bathing and the application of potent aromatics to the body which over power the natural stink with pleasant, and/or neutralising scents, in the form of deodorants, colognes and perfumes. Another naturally occurring condition which is even more serious and detrimental to ones personal and social growth and development is nakedness. The very core of one's being, the very manner in which one comes into this world is a terrible plague and without the safe cover of clothing one might suffer the scorned eye of society and the negativity of its wretched tongue. Beware of those who bare themselves disrobed in public, they are a vile and nasty creature, lost of morality and sanity. Trust me the sight of a naked man or woman walking down the street will scare you, especially if the man or woman is not within the social paradigm known as "attractive".

There are many more vile natural occurrences and states of being that offend the social order and hinder personal advancement. Being born black in a post Atlantic Slavery socio-politcal paradigm for example does provide one with a series of challenges automatically, another is being born on any of these god-forsaken back water, banana republic, third world small islands, and another is not cutting one's hair. Ok, maybe the location of one's birth is not a naturally occurring thing, but it is something over which one has no control. Anyways you might be wondering about the last of the three things mentioned just now in what you probably thought was my departure from the humours and shift towards the serious. You are probably wondering why has the strangest rastaman included not cutting one's hair to the list of naturally occurring, socially detracting features of society. Well we rastafari already know how hair in its natural state can detract from one's social progression and add to one's social alienation and stereotyping. In fact most women who have let their hair grow out naturally have encountered some form of "what you do that for?", "why you don't straighten it?", "how long you leaving it so?" and other questions about the hair's natural state.

Body odour, left to run rampant, can be quite an unpleasant thing. The naked human body, minus its obvious distracting potential (especially since it is such a taboo) does benefit from the protection of clothing. Hair, grown into dreadlocks, benefits from being cut; how? I fail to see how the removal of hair from one's head can positively change one's life, except in a world where having it grow is wrong. Ok fine I have defeated my own argument because we do live in a world where having it grow is wrong. And it is wrong for two very good reasons: firstly because it just is, and secondly because they said so.

Not good reasons? Are you sure? Because when I was younger a lot of the things that I had done wrong were met with the justice of "because I said so", and a lot of teachers told me that somethings are the way they are because that is just the way it is. For example "Why is the sky blue?" "Because it just is"

You cannot go to the Hill Top Preparatory School with locs, because that is how it is. Well there was the case of some people who went with locs, but that is how it was then, but you cannot go there with them now because that is how it is now. (confused? I am) There was this one kid who went to Hill Top Preparatory School with locs, but then he/she felt weird a few weeks into the term and wanted to cut them and this was confusing for all involved. (not sure how so, but again this is the way it is) Locs, or the state one's hair will enter if left uncombed for an extended period of time, and popularised by those terrible rasta people here in the Caribbean, are a no go currently at the Hill Top Preparatory School.

It is a scientifically known fact that people with locs cannot learn as quickly as their trimmed contemporaries. It is also a scientifically proven fact that, in addition to their reduced learning aptitude, persons with locs also decelerate the learning process of those in their immediate surroundings and environs. It is therefore best to keep those dreads out of regular schools and let them be schooled together (probably to cut coconuts and say irie mon to tourists), if we let them learn at all.

Atiba, the boy who was rejected because of his hair.

Look at that little tyrant to the left, he will surely render the entire student body stupid with those dangling dread-ful locs.

All jokes and sarcasm aside. The issue is this, a mother and a father looked to get their son into the school closest to where he lives, and long story (click for the long story) made short, when the child and his father went to the school to be oriented, the principal informed them, well informed the father; she had not paid any mind to the child, that the child's fancy haircut was not going to allowed at the institution. Yes, a private school has the right to decide whom it lets enroll in its classes, but this is a case of discrimination at a high level, and not only that but it is also a lesson in "them and us" to the younger generation. This child, the one pictured above, now has to realise that while mummy and daddy, and his family, biological and otherwise, love him regardless of his appearance, there are those out there who will not get to love him because they have decided in their minds that the hair on his head, in the dreadlocks, is unwanted/ to be frowned upon. The other youngsters, four and five years old who may have seen the interaction, now have a social equation in their heads; boy + locs = undesirable.
How can a country in 2011, boasting of all manner of good social features be caught refusing a child an education because of the hair on his head? Did not the incident at the Samuel Jackman Prescod Polytechnic a few years ago show that discrimination based on hair is a stupid endeavour? Even in that instance the position of the faculty had some sort of "logical" rationale behind their position, claiming that it was a safety issue and they did not want the students potentially harmed by having their hair caught in the moving parts of the machinery. Simple solution cover and restrict the hair. How can Hill Top Preparatory School really want to dismiss this family, did they not read about one Kevyn Callender, who was unable to work for a certain airline at the airport (where had worked before mind you) for no reason other than because he had locs? (well maintained and styled locs by the way).

It might be because I am a rastaman that this irks me, but I cannot be, and I know that I am not, alone in feeling that this is wrong.

Black woman and child, for you I have so much love...

The detriment is to the school, not to the child nor his family. The school is stuck somewhere in the middle of the last century and should really examine its policies and open itself to the world as it is and should be.

Honestly, foolishness is foolishness, and while Hill Top Preparatory School has the right to admit whomever it desires, it should not be allowed to do so in a discriminatory fashion to the detriment of a child and a family for something as trivial as locs. I would love to organise some sort of protest. I have already suggested that sympathetic parents of the students at the same school and other schools purchase those "tourist tams" that come with the fake locs and send their children to school in them as a sign of protest, peaceful but to the point. I would love to see this happen, so if there is anyone interested hit me up in the comment section below or email me at enam.idrissa@gmail.com. Might just be wasting my time, but I think it is worthwhile and needed.

Check out this blog as well, but it will cost you, so get your money ready, it is merely a Penny for her thoughts.
Video blog about the topic found here as well: Barbados wunna still with this in 2011?
Click here for the mother's story.

"They say I'm crazy for choosing rasta, but I stay natty, I love my culture..."

 

StrangeRasta is now on twitter so look up there above the toolbar ^ and follow me on twitter. New blogs will now be posted via Twitter along with Facebook and Blogger. More ways to connect with the strange one.