The Creepiest October Yet

Untitled painting by the artist, Quwwa Davis.

After becoming Muslim in 1992, I stopped celebrating the usual holidays and certain cultural festivals. I figured October wouldn't have that same creepy feel or atmosphere, since I no longer participated in Halloween festivals, both on the job and at home.

Yet another form of creepiness has started taking place in October that seems to get worse every year.  One that has devastating and frightening effects on society, and unlike Halloween, is far from fictitious.

It seems to have started before the turn of the decade,when the NFL jumped on the "humanitarian" and PR bandwagon, and decided to promote Breast Cancer Awareness to its fans, by making the players add pink to their usual attire....

Let me pause for a moment to let that sink in. So the NFL took the opportunity to publicize its support for Breast Cancer Awareness, a condition mostly experienced by women, who at this time only made up a small fraction of the fan base until 2009, and even to this day has very little to no female personnel on the field, by making the team players add the effeminate color of pink to their attire.

Then the field began to look increasingly pink in hue. 

This also allow the NFL to promote Breast Cancer Awareness by selling pink NFL paraphanelia to its patrons.



One would begin to wonder since this is a sport dominated by males, shouldn't the NFL at least provide some sort of balance by promoting prostate cancer as well? It's only logical, but for some reason, they've failed. I guess they figure the only thing men should be concerned with is erectile dysfunction, but even that's gone now, since Viagara and Cialis have pulled out of sponsorships due to loss of patents.

So I sit here, years later, still trying to make the connection between breast cancer and tossing a football around a field, and trying to avoid getting clocked by a 250-pound linebacker who runs a 40-yard dash in 4 and a half seconds. My primary conclusion seems to be to tap into the largest consumer bloc in the world, being that of women.

My one sole consolation in all of this is that I no longer had to watch Jessica Simpson prance around Texas Stadium and abroad with that God-awful Pepto-Bismol Tony Romo jersey. Good riddance to both.



But then it got creepier, as the Ray Rice/Janay Rice debacle in 2014 kicked into overdrive, causing Ray Rice to lose his livelihood and be stripped of his constitutional rights of not being punished for the same "crime" twice by the tyrant and protector of feminists' interests, commissioner Roger Goodell. But that didn't matter, nor did it matter that Janay instigated the altercation by spitting and hitting Ray. The only thing that mattered was that Janay seemed to have started something she could not finish.

The NFL announced in October of 2014, primarily as a response to 16 female senators and other womens' groups trying to throw their biased and partial influence around, it was adopting a "No More" campaign, where NFL players this time had to appear on a series of commercials taking a stand against "domestic violence", which is really a code phrase for violence against women. The month of  October is now also recognized as well for violence against women, or domestic violence. In addition to having a pink ribbon to commemorate BCA, now a purple effeminate ribbon is now introduced.

Never mind the fact that a growing amount of studies show the rise of abuse of men by women. Forget studies showing that a growing number of altercations and domestic abuse are instigated by women, the only concern is what happens to women.

The No More campaign had some very head-scratching moments, to say the least. My biggest question was what in God's Holy Name is Ice-T doing on such commercials? Mr. Ice "Mutha-F***in'" T, who introduced himself as "The L.A. Player" on his first album "Rhyme Pays", who cites the late pimp and author Robert "Iceberg Slim" Beck as a main influence, whose songs about sex and women would make Tipper Gore's face turn red with rage, is now concerned about "domestic abuse?" Wow.




Then in October of 2015, Ebony Magazine tried to get into the act, amidst multiple accusations of sexual assault against comedian and TV star Bill Cosby. They conveniently used the month of October, designated as Women's month, as a springboard to promote a November 2015 issue entitled The Family Issue(s). Yeah, I'm scratching my head at that propaganda move to this day. But it also gave a chance to show-off the new editor-in-chief and self-proclaimed black feminist Kierna Mayo, as she took to national news to discuss the edition with other White female journalists, who obviously threw softball questions at Kierna, all designed to not only subtly implicate Bill in the accusations, but to generalize ALL BLACK MEN as monsters and predators, and to subvert the traditional definition of a nuclear family, which included both a mother and a father, and the father is normally the head of the household.

Suddenly October no longer seems like a month to promote the overall well being of women, but to scandalize and propagate feminists' man-hating notions, and promote power trips by using issues such as sexual harrassment and assault, street harrassment, rape, and the totality of no good men. October looks less like a month of preparing to dress your kids up like ghosts, goblins, witches and warlocks, and more like a male witch-hunt by malcontent feminists.

But October of this year has been the creepiest yet, especially in light of the sexual assault allegations of film mogul Harvey Weinstein. With numerous charges  and allegations being levied against Harvey, two of the craziest incidents occurred. 

 The first concerned Donna Karan, the famous fashion designer, who briefly added in a short interview that it is women's responsibility of how they project themselves in public, which opened the floodgates of howls, boos and hisses from the feminists. Donna apparently broke the first feminist commandment;

Thou shalt not hold women accountable for anything bad that happens to them. It is never their fault.

But Donna has an undeniable point here. Women are responsible for how they project themselves. Yet these feminists continue to feed their foolish desires using irrational opinions, trying to assure women that sexual harrassment/assault is an issue of power, and not of declining morality, in which both men and women have aptly contributed to. 

We just witnessed a sickening social media challenge taking place, where women appeared on social media, rapping about what extremes they would go through to get some d**k. Some of the participants were of dubious distinctions, some had their careers started by being in sextapes, some were single mothers who had babies by different fathers, all contributing to rhymes describing what lengths would they go through for some sex. The song itself, sung by a rapper name GameOva Reedy, which which is so raunchy that it's not worth repeating, but is also worth noting of the another popularized song from the same area, entitled Monkey on tha D***K

The other incident involved this ridiculous #metoo campaign, where women who were victimized by sexual assault/harrassment/rape posted their experiences on social media to a broad audience. Why this was done was beyond me, for as I stated in a blog of 2016, courting public opinion is not always a good thing to do in this society, and in many cases will come back to haunt, such as the so called War on Drugs, and the War on Terror. Well now add the War on Men to that list. 

Using Harvey's allegations and President Donald Trump's comments, feminists used these men, as well as Bill Cosby, and other male public figures to suggest that sexism and assault/harrassment are issues of power, and not of declining sexual mores. That's why it's important to them to leave out the male counterpart narratives, because it exposes their faulty logic. 

Many women became upset at the fact that men were trying to chime in on this silly social media campaign, and some publicly showed their disdain towards such a thing, but the question is why? Why are they so hellbent not to include the male counterparts' story, whether it regards domestic violence, rape, or any other trauma women wish to claim only they suffer? 

Why do they always refer to these things as issues of power? Do they not realize it does not take a person of power/influence to sexually violate someone, nor does someone have to sexually violate a person to wield power or influence over another? So when these female teachers are seducing young males into having sex with them, where is the power dynamic in that? 

They know those theories won't hold water. But they also know when a person is emotionally vulnerable, it does not take much to make them feel good. Just boost their self-esteem, even if you have to LIE. 

Tell them your clothing does not make a difference in how you are perceived. They'll love to hear that, even if it's not true. Never mind the fact the man has seen MULTIPLE IMAGES of women in provocative or scantily clad clothing, which obviously is going to have an effect on his perception of women in general, especially in Western societies. Just assure them they are not accountable for any degradation and decline in society. It's all the man's fault.

Then to cap it all off, a female judge overturned Ezekiel Elliots' injunction, and ordered him to begin to serve a 6-game suspension for charges he continues to deny to this day, and despite refusals to indict from the Columbus, OH police department, to the findings of the investigator that Goodell personally employed, not only has he ignored those findings, he even withheld the investigator from attending the final decision, he and his connected friends have deliberately railroaded Elliot, all for the sake of keeping some malcontent women off his back. 

That letter must have really spooked him.

I know October has spooked me in ways Halloween has failed. I pray I can survive the next October. Only God knows what's in store.  

Untitled painting by Quwwa Davis

The NFL's Last Straw

Revised version.

Artwork by the artist.

Ok. That's it.

I'm done.

Stick a fork in it.

El Finito.

I'm through with the NFL, and no, it has nothing to do with Colin Kaepernick. That's another topic for another blog.

The NFL has been sticking its foot in its mouth since it decided to create its own moral compass, and institute a personal conduct policy in 2007. This was supposedly designed to curb and deter irresponsible off-field behavior from players, and to retain a "clean" public image. Since then it has done nothing but dug an even larger hole for itself with seemingly selective justice against certain teams and players, hypocrisy, inconsistent punishments, double standards, and above all created a tyranny in leadership in the form of current commissioner Roger Goodell.  Now players can receive long term suspensions for off the field behavior that have no impact on the game whatsoever, while actions that can directly jeopardize the impact and integrity of the game either go unabated or receive much smaller suspensions, as what has happened to the New England Patriots, head coach Bill Belicheck, and quarterback Tom Brady.

So much for integrity.

Last week  Dallas Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott was placed on a six-week suspension for "violating" its vague domestic policy, where he was accused of assaulting his then-girlfriend in July of 2016. This happened despite not being charged by the local police department, citing inconsistent evidence from the accuser, and an affadavit from a friend who states the accuser was lying. This comes after a year long investigation performed by the NFL, after the Columbus, Ohio police department decided not to press charges. A 14-month long investigation.

So much for due process.

In its statement last week, the NFL stated it received "substantial and persuasive" evidence that led them to believe Elliott committed the offense. Sounds like circumstantial evidence is being used here.

So much for innocence until PROVEN guilty.

This reminds me of an article written in a local newspaper sometime in 2013. The author, a black female public figure, came up with this erroneous opinion that if a young woman accuses a man of sexual assault or violence, and the evidence appears inconclusive, your safest bet would be to take the side of the young lady. She reasoned that if in the final analysis the man is actually innocent of the charges, he can recover, whereas if the accuser is correct but not believed, it can have devastating effects. Wow.

So according to her analysis, if a man who spends time in prison for assault/rape is found innocent, he should be able to fully recover with no problems at all. Even if he can't get back the 1-10-20 years he spent in prison falsely accused.

Wow.

Recently Elliott has joined with the NFLPA and appealed the decision. This promises to get very messy.

Even messier than the Ray Rice fiasco in 2014. Nobody likes to recall that public relations nightmare, however reflecting on the Ray Rice incident again provides us with much insight on why the NFL continues to suffer from bad PR today, and who may really be behind all of this mess.

Ray Rice and his then-fiance Janay had an altercation in February of 2014. He was charged with misdemeanor assault, arrested, and shortly after released. The NFL in response suspended him with a two-game suspension later that summer. From the initial response, both Ray and Janay were content with the decision. Goodell even defended the decision shortly after when confronted by women's groups.

Then things took a turn for the worst, but not by their hands. Somehow that celebrity-gossip tv show-suddenly turned- reliable news source TMZ  got a hold of the videotape and broadcast the incident on their show. Then the crap really hit the fan.

The "public outrage", mostly comprised of women's groups, forced Roger Goodell to reverse Ray's punishment, suspending him indefinitely, after the initial suspension. So now we have double jeopardy.

So much for constitutional rights.

If one looks at the tape without others' commentary, they will clearly see Ray Rice backing up from Janay, and Janay charging at Ray, to which he quickly reacts by punching her, laying her out flat on the elevator floor.

It's not a pretty sight to see, however such a sight should not lead us to judge by our emotions and jump to conclusions, which is obviously what happened here, referring to the altercation as"domestic violence", which is code language for men who have the audacity to hit women. They could not claim spousal abuse because clearly it was a fight between two people, and Janay started the altercation by slapping him.

So despite the cries of feminism and equality, we still seem to have this contradictory ruling that a man cannot defend himself when a woman charges at him.

Man charges at man = man can defend himself
Man charges at woman = woman can defend herself
Woman charges at woman = woman can defend herself
Woman charges at man = man cannot defend himself.

Clearly an open door to assault by females toward men.








If I stated right now that the average man is physically stronger than the average woman, I would be called a misogynist. You know it's true. But a woman can use that same analysis to prove that a man should not put his hands on a woman. This is the problem humans face when using double standards to achieve "equality" among the sexes.

Shortly after the indefinite suspension, Goodell received a letter signed by 16 female senators, comprising of fourteen Democrats and two Republicans, stating that under no unconditional terms should a man who hits a woman be given a second chance to play.

Examine Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's take on the Ray Rice issue.





Listen to the language, and how she says Ray admits to "beating" her, not hitting her. When did one or two punches constitute a beating? She describes it as if Ray was constantly punching Janay even as she lay on the floor unconscious and defenseless. The video shows differently. Then she describes the reaction by the league and team in a way most typical of feminists/liberals, that of this "patriarchy" where every male is out to get the woman, and will cover up any damning evidence that could incriminate them.

Remember now, sixteen women senators signed that letter and sent it to Roger Goodell.

Seems to me the people were more upset that Janay was knocked unconscious rather than the fight itself, but honestly ask yourself, if Ray charged at Janay, and in self-defense she happened to knock him unconscious, would we have the same reaction towards Janay?

I think not.

Even Janay herself took to social media to voice her opinions about how the media and the public blew things out of proportion, and also to show support for her husband. But what was the response by the media?

Mostly to view her as a co-dependent, beaten and battered woman.

Even Democrat Senator Richard Blumenthal chimed in by presenting legislation designed to compel leagues to adopt and enforce zero-tolerance policies toward "domestic violence", code word for men who hit women.

Wow. I wish the Democrat senators had that same passion and sympathy for those little babies they feel have no right to live, using ridiculous pseudonyms such as "reproductive rights", code name for abortion. Rather than show compassion, they develop sick theories and redefine rape to include men who have sex with women without verbally asking, "honey, can we have sex?" or "baby, can I have some of you?"

And having stripper/models/porn stars to advocate this mess does nothing positive for your credibility.

I wish those same Republican senators would've kept that same pacifist approach that they try to spew on those countries and populations they wish to oppress and take their resources.

So much for compassion.
So much for unconditional love.
So much for forgiveness.
So much for equity among men and women.
So much for loving thy enemy.
So much for turning the other cheek.

And some of us actually felt that the likes of Hillary Clinton would be a better choice for President of the United States than Donald Trump? Really? As one person stated, they're both two wings on the same dirty bird.

And while we're on the feminist topic, since they're so upset with White Male Privilege, where were they to add support to the Native Americans for the removal of the racist Washington Redskins nickname? Where was Blumenthal in all of this? Where was his legislation to enforce the removal of such an offensive name? Where was the outcry for the removal of Team Owner Daniel Snyder for upholding the name?

Crickets.

So much for women's rights. It's been proven time and time again that it's not equality they seek, Their actions have proven that even THEY don't believe in equality, nor do they respect diversity. They would rather try to disrupt a current order, regardless if it is just or unjust, or even worse gain an upper hand, an advantage. They seek the same privileges they accuse men of fostering.  And now they have an upper hand in the decision making in the NFL. Roger Goodell answers to nobody...

...except women.

But the NFL has no one to blame but themselves for this mess. I can say it all started when they decided to court the largest consumer bloc in the world; women.

Using Breast Cancer Awareness as a Trojan Horse and creating a slick PR campaign, the NFL decided to tap to the female market in 2008.  Players were then "encouraged" in the month of October to add pink to their uniforms. The playing fields became decorated in pink, and pink paraphenalia containing the NFL logo was heavily promoted and sold during this month.

Since then it has done nothing but made a mockery of itself, insulting the intelligence of its fans, patrons, and it has given selective outside entities certain entitlements, while leaving the very players who sacrifice their health, reputation and overall well being at risk in order to patronize a certain demographic that at one time had no say nor impact in the affairs of this institution.

My interest in watching football began waning back when the colleges began succumbing to the corporate "sponsors". All of a sudden, the Cotton Bowl kept switching sponsors and names from The Mobil Cotton Bowl to the AT&T Cotton Bowl, to now having the annual New Year's Cotton Bowl game being played outside the Cotton Bowl itself. Then the collegiate stadiums and the bowl games followed suit and became known for their sponsors name.

Then the corporate fever hit the professional circuit. With teams leaving cities abruptly, billion-dollar stadiums surfacing, people being displaced from their homes, among other things, football seemed more like a political bargaining chip more than mere entertainment. And now this. Too many outside interests have spoiled a great spectator sport, and a game I enjoyed playing in the yard as a child.

So much for the NFL.

And I still haven't commented on the Colin Kaepernick situation.... yet.

Game Recognizes Game (Beyonce, The Police and The Panthers Part 3)

We are not White men; our people are more simple and direct. THEY BELIEVE WHAT THEY SEE. Believe in a man because he's there, not because he was there...

a quote from the 1968 blaxploitation movie Black Jesus.

You (Black people) go for it because you're chumps...You enjoy being lied to...

Imam Jamil Al-Amin (formerly H. Rap Brown)



I admit I have a habit of looking in the wrong places. Sometimes.

What do I mean?

I wanted so badly to gather other information proving my point that Beyonce's Super Bowl performance was not a tribute to the late Malcolm X, the Black Panthers, or any Black Power movement for that matter, I briefly suspended my blogging for a few days, searching high and low on all media outlets beit mainstream, independent or social, looking for SOMEONE who had an ounce of a fraction of evidence corroborating with my position. I even resorted to watching Youtube videos by some members of the "Afrikan" or "conscious" community, you know that community that claims consciousness, and decries other Blacks as being brainwashed, constantly on the lookout for hints of Illuminati, berates religion, refers to Black people who believe in a diety other than themselves as "mental slaves"? Yeah those people. Well, suffice to say I didn't get anything useful from those videos other than the fact that there seem to be quite a few people out here ascribing supremacy, divinity, superior intelligence, and the whole nine to themselves, yet could not see beyond the surface of Beyonce's performance.  Between the surprising celebrations of some, and skepticism of others, sprinkled with the usual Illuminati proclamations, and some even claiming the game was fixed, I found myself becoming despondent, and eventually took a brief pause from the blog.

I was at the point of deciding to just post images on the last part of this blog, when I spotted this video on Youtube.




Here is the corresponding February 9, 2016 article:
http://newsone.com/3355014/white-feminists-attack-beyonce-for-being-left-out-of-formation/

To sum it up, it seems that a White feminist, a singer named Arika Kane, took offense to the performance, due to the exclusivity of only Black female dancers in Beyonce's performance. She tweeted her disdain of the performance,  to which TV One newsman Roland Martin responded with his own tweet;

Arika's tweet set  members of a social group called Black Twitter on the defensive, as well as a host of other Black people, who quickly responded with a plethora of tweets, youtube video responses, and the like, mostly in defense of Beyonce's performance and video. Azealia Banks, known for her Twitter tirades, took Arika to task.

http://www.xxlmag.com/news/2016/02/azealia-banks-beyonce-white-feminists/


But the Arika Kane tweet sticks out, if we were to pay closer attention. Apparently Beyonce's stealth tribute to Black feminism was picked up by some White feminists who felt slighted, and as expected they made comments about it. I get it, just like I got that song Formation, which many Blacks took as empowering, though the video did not match with the lyrics, but that's another blog.

Meanwhile many Blacks sat by, judging her performance solely on what was perceived, not referring to any true historical references, nor making any clear analysis, and being enchanted only with the imagery on the television or the field. Such is the way of subversion.

If you pay close attention to the above video, you would notice the TV One network news host Roland Martin going in on Arika Kane, along with Michelle Bernard, giving her perspective on the matter. But the question to ask is why them?

TV One is partly owned by Catherine Hughes, a black woman, the only television company partially owned by a minority. If you take that into consideration with the fact that Michelle also describes herself as a feminist, you would understand why they would become upset and make light of the insinuations made by Arika, and the catfight begins.

But what is really missed is the fact that feminism was not supposed to be the central theme of Beyonce's performance in the first place.

Or was it?

Have we been hoodwinked again?

Black feminism, or Womanism, as some would like to refer to it as, has been used by the corporate conglomerates and other entities to perpetuate the gender war between Black men and women, and make a profit from it as well, no doubt about it. Claims of heteropatriarchy, Black male incompetence, and Black men intentionally throwing Black women and Black LGBT members "under the bus" flood the airwaves, beit Oprah and her propaganda network OWN, talk shows,  the Shonda Rhimes legacy being built, supported and propagated by the ABC television network, Ebony Magazine's hiring of Keirna Mayo, a self-proclaimed Black feminist who caused quite a stir last November with the controversial "Family Issue" regarding Bill Cosby's sexual assault allegations, Univision's purchase of The Root, a notoriously feminist online publication that validated even V. Stiviano's "gold-digging hustle", the movie The Perfect Guy, starring Sanaa Lathan, which premiered on September 11th of last year (never forget, huh?),  the selecting of Serena Williams as Sportsperson of the Year in 2015, and Spike Lee's failed film "Chiraq" for its Black feminist overtones and satirizing the violence in Chicago. Factor all of this in with the fact that The Black Lives Matter Movement is a feminist/LGBT organization, and you should come to the quick conclusion that things just don't look good for hetero Black men in America right now.

And who can forget last year's Emmy Award acceptance speech made by Viola Davis after winning the award for How To Get Away With Murder? Remember that diatribe she made, as if to give the impression that everyone is sitting in the lap of luxury except the Black woman? As is Black men are laced out, living it up at the expense of Black women? I mean c'mon sister.

Her famous proclamation that the only thing that separates women of color from anyone else is opportunity received much applause from the likes of Black women, and even some Black men, even some "conscious" men, but it didn't sit too well with the likes of Patricia Arquette. To women like her this was not the time or place to champion such an issue.

See game recognizes game. Feminists knew just what Beyonce was trying to pull at the Super Bowl. Some White feminists didn't mind, supporting it for its wide range implications, but others like Arika, did not take too kindly, because of what appeared to be exclusionary and divisive. But what some White feminists don't realize that in some instances, they too can become collateral damage in the bigger scheme. Who cares about a handful of pissed off White feminists when you're specifically targeting the Black community? See White feminism causes immediate suspicion among the Black community in America, so you need the ace in the hole, a Black feminist to drive the wedge in the Black community. Madonna, Taylor, Miley and the like can't do it, but Nikki, Beyonce, Oprah and other influential Black women who ascribe to this "skrong, independent Black woman" and "Brothers Ain't Sh*t" theory can. Such is the way of tokenism.

 Since Beyonce claims to be a feminist, then she must abide by the rules set by feminists,  e.g. the White feminists. She can't continue this schizophrenic pace of trying to maintain "relevancy" in all areas, especially if you've made it perfectly clear that you describe yourself as a feminist. After all, feminism was mainly a White, middle-class, female phenomenon, brought on by White liberals, having nothing to do with the plight of women of color, regardless of how women of all races try to "intersectionalize" feminism in terms of race.  Not including your White feminist sisters, who introduced Black women to the concept of feminism in the first place, may come back to haunt you when they cry foul, and some may expose your plan in the end. Like Arika Kane. You need to clue them in next time.

Look, it's a known fact by now the NFL has become radically feminized and politically correct, and Girl Power is one of the predominate themes here, as exemplified by the hiring of female coaches, the commemoration of Breast Cancer awareness month, which brings in dollars from the sales of "pink" attire, and the impact of women leading to the expulsion of Ray Rice for his part in the altercation between he and his wife. I say altercation and not domestic violence, because it clearly was not a case of a man just "abusing" his wife.

Some of us know women makeup the largest consumer base in the world. Some of us have actually done some studying on Edward L. Bernays, and some have read books like Brandwashed, Buyology, and The Hidden Persuaders.

So for future references, there's really no need to hide anymore. And to have the media, whether conservative or liberal, intentionally mislead people with Black Power/Nationalist/Liberation references at a time when heterosexual Black men are being demonized, profiled, disenfranchised, imprisoned and killed in America is just plain ridiculous.

But nice try though.

Black Panthers...Malcolm X....yeah right.

Bye Bye Black Sheep...Beyonce', The Police and the Panthers...Part Two

OK,

The first part may have been unsatifactory to some of the readers, seeing that I posted a video with an ex-KGB officer explaining Communist subversive activity in the United States. My humblest apologies...I thought it was educational and informative.

In this part of the blog I intend to squash this notion that part of the Beyonce Super Bowl performance posed as a tribute to the Black Panthers, but first let me pause to stop my laughter.

There are so many ways I can go at this, seeing the fact that Beyonce herself has never come out publicly to address this issue, and it seems no one in the media has tried to contact neither her, her publicist, nor any parties involved to get a statement or something regarding the matter. To add more sugar to the Kool-Aid, it seems it was the media who first brought this issue up in the first place. It seems rather strange to me that the media would TELL or INTERPRET the performance, and not try to get any word from the artist herself, the producer of the halftime show, Ricky Kirshner, son of the late famed Don Kirshner, nor NFL for their reaction to such allegations, which has caused quite a stir, and quite an opportunity for some to either enter the spotlight, or recapture some lost shine.

But let's add some visuals to the subject, shall we?








These are pics from Beyonce's 2014 MTV VMA performance. Read what is displayed behind the silhouette. It says FEMINIST. This has been Beyonce's self-appointed mission in recent times, to proclaim feminism and do her part to further expose it to the mainstream. Never mind that feminists themselves are to this day scratching their heads at Bey's contradictive stances such as the 2014 "Mrs. Carter" tour. I'm sure that rubbed feminists the wrong way(no sexual innuendoes intended) to see their unofficial mainstream mascot take part in a tour entitled MY HUSBANDS' SURNAME tour.



With that in mind we must turn our attention to the Black Panther Party, the original one that is. In short the Black Panther Party was an organization dedicated to self -preservation and self-determination of Black people in America, basing its' philosophy on Black Nationalism. Malcolm X (El Hajj Malik Al Shabazz) was a major influence in shaping the Black Panthers' philosophy and 10 point program, which ranged from quests for land, bread and housing, to the removal and exemption of Black men from military services.

This is the same Malcolm X who has suddenly become a target by today's generation of Black liberals, being accused of homosexual activity by Marc Lamont Hill, being an inadequate father by the likes of Boyce Watkins, and having a strained relationship with the womenfolk in his family, in particular his mother and wife. All of these claims have been documented in a book entitled Malcolm X: A Life of REINVENTION, authored by the late Manning Marable, published and promoted by Wendy Wolf, editor of Viking Books. This book, which appeared in late 2011, almost 47 years after Malcolm was assassinated, won the Pulitzer Prize as well, and it lauded as an excellent read, although the book was heavily criticized by Malcolm's children and some of his closest associates.

In a nutshell, Black Power movements, like those started by Marcus Garvey, Elijah Muhammad, and others in their time were mainly male-dominated, with the men being the forefront of the movement, something that was heavily criticized by the likes of feminists, being deemed as patriarchal and sexist. Elaine Brown, who was a member of the party between 1968-1977, allegedly left the party due to the "sexism" and "patriarchy", which she writes in her book A Taste of Power (pg.444).

Wikipedia writes;

Brown stepped down from chairing the Black Panther Party less than a year after Newton’s return from Cuba in 1977 when Newton authorized the beating of Regina Davis, the administrator of the Panther Liberation School. This incident was the point at which Brown could no longer tolerate the sexism and patriarchy of the Black Panther Party (A Taste of Power, p. 444). She left Oakland with her daughter, Ericka, and moved to Los Angeles.

So are we still willing to believe that was a tribute to the Black Panthers? After one of the former members stated that the late leader Huey P. Newton authorized the beating of a female member? So a self-proclaimed feminist is going to give a tribute to an alleged "woman-beater"?

Need more evidence?

...Dreaming of a White Super Bowl

Peace all! Hope you had a very Merry Super Bowl! I wish you all nothing but the best this holiday season! LOL

This holiday season was somewhat even more special, being that the festivities took place in Dallas, Tx, my hometown! That meant the city had to be decorated from head to toe in the latest holiday decorations!








A lot of money was thrown into making the visitors get that good ol' Southern Hospitality...Where they got it I don't know, I can't even get a receipt from my local library showing the return date on items I've checked out due to cutbacks in the city!



Even building that were not completed construction-wise took part in the festivities!





Then we had a nice little winter storm which almost made it a White Super Bowl...I can hear Bing Crosby singing now...I'm Dream-ing of a Whiiiiiite Super...oops wrong lyrics.

The winter storm caught everyone by surprise, even the electric company, who issued a winter emergency on Wednesday, asking mainly residents to shut down their electricity for a few hours! Wouldn't have been much of a problem, but I seriously doubt Downtown Dallas with all of its top dollar paying visitors were affected by this strategic move...

Unlike most winter holidays this holiday does not have a food drive, but people are driven to a food frenzy by all of the advertisements to party up and stock up...Friday evening was torture just trying to get some basic necessities for being bombarded with the chips-and-dippers and the beer guzzlers and wine suckers all scurrying about, in addition to the rough traffic from all of the snow and ice. I just wanted to get enough food to last through the next week...LOL

When it was all over the the buzz was filled with complaints about people not getting their seats, the failure of the transit system among other things, giving Jerry Jones reason to issue a public apology. Poor thing, he's had to apologize a lot this season, especially for the sadistic pay of a team he'd hope would be the home team in this year's Super Bowl. In the end, he'll make out big, just like the NFL, just like every bar in grill in town who overpublicized the event, and just like all of those corporations who wasted up to 3 million a pop for a 30 second slot just to show an ecstasy induced rapper advertising a car, an old cut-up face woman advertising a web hosting shop with a name that reeks of pornography, the never ending potato chip commercialism, among the other jokes that make up this feast called the Super Bowl, event in the first place.

The only ones who don't benefit are the citizens of the host city, who watch these corporate monsters claim local pride, only to move the stadiums to out of the area to the suburbs in the next 20 years, only after they've booted residents out and bought up the area to build stadiums with corporate kiss-ass suites.

In closing I think back to last years' Super Bowl between New Orleans and Indianapolis. One was sure that the Katrina tragedy would be a storyline used to show how the city of New Orleans "overcame" adversity, but in the end Katrina was hardly mentioned, if it ever was mentioned at all. No memorial for the victims, no mentioning of the many residents still living in FEMA trailers being threatened to leave the trailers. Just "WHO DAT?"

Do these teams really represent the cities?



Happy Holidays Y'all...