en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/662261 Comments by octogalore http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/adam-lambert-not-to-gay-to-oppress.html#IDComment39934004 Exactly. Even if it were some kind of spoof, eg he is making fun of the idea that people would want him to be straight, a clothed man posing with a near-naked woman just isn't cool. As you say, it lends additional credibility to women being sexual props. I actually think the reverse would be very sexy, although with a straight woman and a naked man used as plaything -- specifically because that goes *against* the mainstream meme and would be edgier. For example, if the Ciara and Justin Timberlake roles in their video were reversed, with him in chains and less clothing. Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:00:29 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/adam-lambert-not-to-gay-to-oppress.html#IDComment39934004 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/dont-let-girl-beat-you.html#IDComment39846671 I hear you... even so-called evolved guys rarely speak up when someone says insultingly "you throw like a girl" or something similar. That and "get some balls" and "like a scared little girl" (when used to insult a boy or man) are used frequently. Even the casual use of "he" as a default for a random animal one sees conveys a message to little girls.... and boys. I'm glad your boys are getting the benefit of your perceptiveness! While one of my partners said I had "man arms" because I have been lifting and my triceps are getting some definition (my biceps don't cooperate as well), my daughter said the other day that she wants to be "strong like mommy." That made me happy. My husband, not so much. Thu, 22 Oct 2009 02:15:02 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/dont-let-girl-beat-you.html#IDComment39846671 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/chris-rocks-good-hair-is-having-bad-day.html#IDComment39625937 Sounds like Rock's good intentions (I assume they were) didn't pan out too well. What you mention about blaming hair for relationship failure really seems extreme. Why assume the guy is paying the tab for that -- I've never heard of men of any race ponying up for feminine upkeep, whether that entails hair, nails, tampons, birth control, or whatever. In focusing on celebs, Rock may have picked a focus group that is more likely to have weaves/relaxed hair not because they personally seek to emulate WW, but because they are in an industry that asks them to do so. So he may have been projecting a desire onto the BW that is really imposed rather than chosen. Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:24:00 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/chris-rocks-good-hair-is-having-bad-day.html#IDComment39625937 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/blackerthanmichaelsteele-hashtag-game.html#IDComment39487233 Similarly with Thomas Sowell. I've read most of Sowell's books, including his autobiography, and although he is often called a "sellout," it would be very difficult for someone who's read the autobiography, even someone who disagrees strongly with Sowell's economic positions, to argue that. Tue, 20 Oct 2009 04:34:01 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/blackerthanmichaelsteele-hashtag-game.html#IDComment39487233 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/blackerthanmichaelsteele-hashtag-game.html#IDComment39487230 Great post. Steele hasn't succeeded in connecting, but it isn't because of his existing as black or not black enough. He simply isn't doing what good salesman (aka politicians) should do -- articulate a value proposition that speaks to the target audience. I think the statement above that Clarence Thomas is a "sellout" contradicts the spirit of the post. Randall Kennedy, in "Sellout," explains why one (such as himself) can disagee strongly with Thomas' politics, but also believe that Thomas himself believes them. Kennedy demonstrates how Thomas' upbringing leads to his beliefs and how, despite people claiming he imitates Scalia, Thomas has often been the thought leader. Kennedy believes Thomas has a coherent philosophy that he, Kennedy, doesn't support, but doesn't feel that makes Thomas a "sellout" if the latter sincerely holds his own beliefs. Tue, 20 Oct 2009 04:33:56 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/blackerthanmichaelsteele-hashtag-game.html#IDComment39487230 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/transgender-mayor-eric-brewer-outed.html#IDComment39483659 Agree. I'm no expert on trans definitions but my mom is a therapist and has noted that various clients who cross-dress identify as the gender they appear to be when not cross-dressing -- eg, a man who likes dressing occasionally in women's clothes, or vice versa. They didn't identify as transgender. Some cross-dressers probably do, but I don't think we can know this with Brewer. Transgender is "being a person who identifies with or expresses a gender identity that differs from the one which corresponds to the person's sex at birth" as an ongoing identification; cross-dressing can range from transitory to ongoing, I would think. Tue, 20 Oct 2009 03:30:35 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/transgender-mayor-eric-brewer-outed.html#IDComment39483659 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38739531 I just read a comment above that suggests you aren't saying it's per se wrong but simply that it's preferable for a same-race family to adopt. I agree. But often that isn't an option, especially with an older child who's waited years in the orphanage. Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:15:48 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38739531 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38738930 Another thought. I think it's inescapable that white parents aren't going to have the perspective black parents will about what a black child will encounter. So right off the bat, there is a strike against the situation as ideal. But looking at the hierarchy of needs of a child, at the very top is: to have parents who love her or him. Many children in orphanages do have parents, or relatives, who love the child, but cannot afford to take care of the child. Others do not. And in one case I am very familiar with, the child had direct proof of this. The child did not have loving or available relatives or the current prospect of a loving home. So in that situation, we are no longer able to look for ideals. At that point, if there are adoptive parents who love the child, who will provide a loving home, who will do their best to provide not only link to the child's culture and an environment that is friendly to it and understanding of the pitfalls, I think it is unconscionable to suggest that transracial adoption is per se wrong. Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:08:59 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38738930 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38714930 That doesn't meant the adoptive parents, if of another race, shouldn't do everything they can to educate themselves. And assuming a white parent cannot feel anger and passion in preparing a child and dealing with ongoing racism is not quite fair. The parents can also choose an ethnically diverse community -- as mine did -- and be aware that even this won't shield young Korean girls from being called "chink" and being asked if they eat dogs. You're right that a white parent can never "get it" in the same way, and so one cannot pretend it is ideal. It isn't. But real life isn't. Adoptive parents can do their best, and their best is often much better than ignorant celebs with savior complexes. Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:03:26 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38714930 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38714923 Cosigning Atlasien. Celebrity adoption is a small subset of transracial adoption. While some celebs are motivated by liberal credentialing and also don't choose (as you are right, they should) to instead use their ample funds to aid parents who are present but cannot afford to take care of children, that is a limited fact pattern. Many children are in agencies because there is no relative who, absent financial concerns, would be available and willing to care for that child. to be ct'd.. Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:03:20 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/white-people-raising-black-babies.html#IDComment38714923 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/zahara-jolie-pitt-ask-your-mama-to-buy.html#IDComment38642098 As a white woman I am no expert on black hair, but living in a very diverse community, I see black kids (of upscale black parents) with their hair styled like Zahara's in this pic pretty frequently. (I personally love big full hair but again, would never claim any expertise in this matter and if I adopted a black child, would make sure to get some quick). Most of them have different styles on different days, and if we saw a bunch of pics, like one for every day of the week, at different times, with Zahara's hair this way, it might be a better argument. I agree with Luc that the overall point is valid about white parents who adopt black children learning how to take care of black hair. I disagree with blanket assertions about motives and results of individual white adoptive parents of kids of color (full disclosure: my parents are in this group). Sometimes it's done to be trendy and the kids in question have family in the picture who can't afford to take care of them. Other times it's not quite that simple an argument. Wed, 14 Oct 2009 03:28:07 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/zahara-jolie-pitt-ask-your-mama-to-buy.html#IDComment38642098 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/zahara-jolie-pitt-ask-your-mama-to-buy.html#IDComment38642000 I understand the points being made, but I think we need more than two pictures. Kids that age, of any race, can leave the house looking a certain way, roll on the ground at the playground, and then look like a mess. None of us know what care was taken with Zahara's hair at the beginning of the day. to be ct'd... Wed, 14 Oct 2009 03:28:00 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/zahara-jolie-pitt-ask-your-mama-to-buy.html#IDComment38642000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/obamas-nobel-peace-prize-brilliant.html#IDComment38412769 Excellent post. I hate to do the boring "you nailed it" comments, but this really does nail it down. Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:00:16 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/obamas-nobel-peace-prize-brilliant.html#IDComment38412769 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/rooting-against-america-nobel-peace.html#IDComment38043818 I totally agree with you about nuance. Most of us could write the Rush Limbaugh and Daily Kos reactions and get it pretty close to where they'll come out on any given issue. The nuance is the reasoned comments from the left, and yes, the right. I think there's more racism and lunacy from the right, but let's face it, both Condi Rice and Miguel Estrada and many others faced it from the left. We're in a partisan world, and some people who disagree will use all their weapons, including bigoted ones. There is also a discussion taking place at a substantive level, raising some of the issues Sparky and Kristin have raised, as well as other issues -- such as people like Greg Mortensen, who have long-term careers risking their lives in endeavors like setting up schools for Muslim and Pakistani girls in poor villages. People who have concrete accomplishments, and not just promise. I don't agree with many of Obama's politics, but I could support him getting a Nobel prize at a future point if he gets things done -- even if I don't agree with those things, I can understand that others do. But now? To me, it reads like more of a bribe. Fri, 9 Oct 2009 23:56:24 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/10/rooting-against-america-nobel-peace.html#IDComment38043818 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/dear-readers.html#IDComment36384349 Feel better! Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:58:45 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/dear-readers.html#IDComment36384349 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/nike-commercial-makes-black-athlete.html#IDComment36183187 I agree with blackinalberta. The point seems to be "protective layer" for a strong and powerful athlete, and that appears to be what's depicted. If anything it seems robotic rather than animalistic, and actors of all races have been depicted as robotic super-people frequently enough that this seems innocuous. I agree with Jeremy that depicting a black superhero is a good thing, given the exclusion or appropriation of POC in that genre. And then, the fact that the post winds up talking about federal loan eligibility -- while very valid -- seems like a major stretch from the premise. I'm not black and therefore don't hold myself out as an expert on this. If a random group of black people thought on balance that this was problematic, I'd conclude that's the definitive analysis. But I have to wonder if such a group would conclude that. I wonder if some in that group might think that devoting more than at most a paragraph to something so tenuous is doing a disservice to the goal of racial justice, given the multitude of inarguable examples of othering out there. Sun, 27 Sep 2009 03:44:08 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/nike-commercial-makes-black-athlete.html#IDComment36183187 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/what-is-racism.html#IDComment35846282 I like au napptural's point about monolithic. I'm not sure we can say that Clarence Thomas, for example, is inauthentic or simply Scalia's puppet. Randall Kennedy in "Sellout" makes this point well. Kennedy, who is black and liberal, makes clear that he (Kennedy) disagrees strongly with Thomas' judicial ethic. But after carefully analyzing his opinions and Scalia's he feels that Thomas has as much influence on Scalia as vice versa, and that Thomas' viewpoint is consistent with the direction of his views since he was a young man and consistent with his upbringing by another conservative man, his grandfather. We can disagree with those views but I agree with Kennedy after reading "Sellout" that Thomas has an authentic belief in his principles (many of which, for the record, I take issue with). Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:28:51 +0000 http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/what-is-racism.html#IDComment35846282 http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2009/09/serena-williams-can-woman-get-angry-can.html#IDComment34830471 I think Serena's reaction should be put into the context of the racist treatment of her and her sister, such as their treatment at Indian Wells (which they later rightfully boycotted). She had more reason to be wary of a wrong call. It doesn't make her reaction justified, but it does mean that now that she's apologized, people need to move on. The comparison with McEnroe is apt. He was viewed as a pain in the ass, but it was dismissed as "it's just him, he's a wack job but what a character." With a woman, and a black woman even more so, it's scary and unhinged. With men, competence often excuses personality issues, eg being a screamer as a boss (I've got one of those!) -- except possibly if he's both black and physically large. With a professional woman, success doesn't typically result in tolerance of outbursts -- and being black and comparatively large in size compounds that. All that said, I'm envious of Serena's arms. That's some serious work in the gym. Thu, 17 Sep 2009 04:27:11 +0000 http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2009/09/serena-williams-can-woman-get-angry-can.html#IDComment34830471