Physician, Heal Your Damn Self

That I can understand. Carry on.

I love you gus.

My love for you runs deep as well, snood.

Awwww, that's so sweet!

This is sort of long, but it's a from a blog by someone named Ali Eteraz, an international finance and human rights lawyer...

it says some stuff better than I could about the situation with hip hop...

hope some of you will take the time to read it...


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You can't make a ho a housewife." - Dr. Dre;

"Money, Cash, Hoes!" - Jay Z;

"This is why I'm hot/Catch me on the block/ Every other day/Another bitch another drop" - Mims

In the aftermath of the term "nappy headed hoes" a popular refrain has been that Imus merely echoed the misogynist vocabulary popularized by black men in hip hop, so that he should either be exonerated, or at the least, forgiven since he apologized.

My argument is that Imus, as a grown up man, has to be held accountable on his own right, and blame cannot be shifted upon Dr. Dre or Jay-Z. Blacks are not responsible for acts of white racism. Blacks are not tasked with the job of teaching white people the limits of acceptable vernacular. Black preachers do not have to "forgive" Imus (as Matt Lauer asked of Al Sharpton) .

Black academics do not need to do a "better" job of educating white America. There is no such thing as exoneration by or forgiveness from the Big Black Collective Brain. Imus can apologize (he has). Some people will forgive him (I do); some will not. Those that do not forgive Imus, are not morally or ethically beholden to forgive him. In short, blacks don't need to teach whites better; whites need to teach whites better.

However, as soon as Imus the individual has been dealt with, something must be done - by the promoters of hip hop culture - about hip hop misogyny. Mind you, this is not because white people get sucked into thinking that hip hop is the authoritative way of discussing black culture. No, no, no! Black culture need do nothing simply because white people do stupid, racist things. If black people start thinking like that, they end up conforming that the racial discourse is (still) anglo-centric. It isn't. White people don't come first.

However, black culture must deal with hip hop misogyny for the sake of black (as well as increasing number of Latina and Asian) women. When confronted by critics of hip hop culture, its defenders suggest that they do not need to reform because don't owe anything to white people; or, as Snoop Dogg put it, "we ain't no old-ass white men that sit up on MSNBC going hard on black girls." Yet, what these defenders do not realize is that when they defend themselves like this, by appealing to the existence of white racism, they are buying into the primary premise of anglo-centrism; namely, that when it comes to American racism, white people come first.

What the civil rights movement did, beyond giving political rights to a subjugated minority, was to say that in the white/minority discussion, minorities speak for themselves, and to themselves. The civil rights movement destroyed anglo-centrism. Before it, minorities spoke about themselves, to whites; minorities had to speak about themselves as whites spoke about them.

This was why, before the civil rights movement, blacks called themselves "negroes" and "colored" in the manner of whites but afterwards started calling themselves "black" or "African American." The destruction of anglo-centrism is the most important spiritual legacy of the civil rights movement.

Blacks and other ethnic minorities cannot now let a group of entertainers and producers of pornography re-assert this anglo-centrism simply because it profits them (i.e. Snoop Dogg gets a nice cut from Joe Francis of Girls Gone Wild). Yet, with the rise of degradation in hip hop, that is precisely what is happening, and misogyny is simply the most egregious example.

Mainstream hip hop is replete with misogyny far worse than anything Imus expressed. In fact, mainstream hip hop is actually a toned down version of the truly predatory examples of hip hop patriarchy. Those that want to see such examples should watch BET's "uncut" videos, specifically "Tip Drill" by Nelly (warning, nudity and explicit sexual content) which goes something like this: "It must be yo ass cuz it aint yo face" while hundreds of faceless backsides shake towards the camera.

In other words, hip hop misogyny today is so bad that the first step will not be to affirm women's minds; it will be to affirm that a woman's face comes before her backside!

In addressing its misogyny problem, hip hop will have to question one overlooked but unavoidable fact fact. Hip hop is owned by whites. The most powerful man in hip hop is not Puff Daddy; it is David Geffen of Sony Records. Contrary to popular belief, Russell Simmons is not the brains behind Def Jam Records; Rick Rubin is (there goes my chance to be invited to HBO's Def Poetry Jam).

A fed up black blogger recently discussed the whites who control what is arguably the most important hip hop record label: "And no no no. Russell Simmons did not co-found Def Jam. Nor did he ever run Def Jam. Rick Rubin ran Def Jam. Later Lyor Cohen ran Def Jam. Nor did Russell ever sign Def Jam's big acts. LL Cool J? Rick Rubin. The Beastie Boys? Rick Rubin. Public Enemy? Rick Rubin. Oran "Juice" Jones? Lyor Cohen."


The problem, thus, is very simple. If today's minorities want to revive hip hop to the art form it once was, and the art form it can be, they have to take stock of their complicity in its misogyny, not in order to make white people less racist, but for the sake of their own dignity.

Meanwhile, if white people feel that hip hop is putting them in a position where they aren't sure what is racist and what is misogynist, then maybe people like Imus need to speak out against the white people that run hip hop and get some clarity. Hip hop can still become entertainment and deliver from violence; today it will take all races to do so.

"Its time for some mind sex, we aint got to take our clothes off yet/We can burn the incense, and just chat/Relax, I got the good vibrations/Before we make love lets have a good conversation" - Dead Prez

bump

sorry, just anxious to see what others think...

OK, I'm back to thinking, and read your thread post, Snood, but skipped for now the rest.

I agree with you, from my place.



I see nowhere enough choices. Yes, I know programs are hurled.

My slight experience via my ex is that a lot of south LA black men (don't know about women) were, what, railroad workers? aircraft industry workers? and that all fell apart with loss of industry, no recourse, low transportation, and, finally, no regard. My ex is white but raised two blocks, in one case, and a few more in another, of major "riots". He was playing baseball, preteen, as a chubby white kid in Watts, the day the Watts riots started. He could tell, more than I could, the history of economic goings on there over time.

Drug culture replaced industry, by my way of thinking.

I hope it is not still the same for all those neighbors..

OK, I just read your last post, had a NO in the middle, will have to go back and isolate that to talk.

Here's that middle part that aroused my questioning -


What the civil rights movement did, beyond giving political rights to a subjugated minority, was to say that in the white/minority discussion, minorities speak for themselves, and to themselves. The civil rights movement destroyed anglo-centrism. Before it, minorities spoke about themselves, to whites; minorities had to speak about themselves as whites spoke about them.

This was why, before the civil rights movement, blacks called themselves "negroes" and "colored" in the manner of whites but afterwards started calling themselves "black" or "African American." The destruction of anglo-centrism is the most important spiritual legacy of the civil rights movement.



This seems slightly a naif concoction - but maybe not at all wrong in the effect.
I'd like to hear/read how the wordage changes flowed, in much more detail.

The destruction of the anglo-centric mindset in black Americans is the main thrust of that passage. The "change in words" is incidental to that.

Well, snood, for one thing, I had to look up the meaning of misogyny. Frankly, I'm glad that I didn't know what it meant. As Thomas Gray observed, "...where ignorance is bliss, tis folly to be wise...". That quote is so often misunderstood. Does it really matter what the epithets are for ethnic groups? Frederick Douglas referred to the "black man" long before it was popular to do so.

As for Ali, he did a marvelous job of equivocating. Well, he's a lawyer ain't he?

equivocating? about what?

It seemed to me that Ali was playing both sides of the fence, snood. Pretty good at it, too.

Snood- Wonderful thread, and right on target.
I will say more about it, but I really need to get my thoughts together.

bookmarking

Okay, I've been thinking about this and I'll probably be pummeled for saying this, but here is how I see it:



Yes they are.

Everyone teaches others how to treat them. Visit any womans shelter and you'll see women that have taught their spouses and boyfriends how to treat them, what is acceptable. They are victims. But, they are victims only as long as that is how they identify themselves and until they learn to change their own definition of themselves and what is acceptable treatment of them by their boyfriends / spouses.

Snood, your fiance is teaching you how to treat her. If you make an off color joke, snap off a one liner that zings and she doesn't say "Hey, stop! That's not okay to say to me," then you'll know you can continue to make such comments. Hit her when you get mad, and if she doesn't leave your ass, you know you can hit her again to release your anger and your opinion of her would be lessened. If she walks out and tells you to shove it, you'll respect her more and most of us would applaud her.

Nobody here messes with de wabbit. Why? She has taught us how to relate to her. ( just lightening the moment, Deb, really!) We respect jespah as a fair and level headed mod. We know how to enterpret what some here post, what is acceptable and what isn't, what is to be given weight out of respect for their thoughts and words, and who to ignore.

We all know Bear is not going to take offense to foul language thrown at him in jest, but that the same words even in jest, would be hurtful / disrespectful and would draw the wrath of every woman here if cast towards Diane. As a group, we set the tone for this forum, so that collectively we (most?) know what we can say/do/post and we behave towards each other according to those limits set by our "community."

Look at how many times Bush has had to say "I'm the Commander in Chief. I'm the Decider. I'm the Commander in Chief. I'm the Decider." What previous president has had to keep reminding us over and over of that? Bush doesn't have our respect. He doesn't outomatically get it, as he thinks he does, just because he's the president. He has to earn it, just like the rest of us. He has taught us not to trust or respect him through his words and actions.

Parents don't automatically get the respect of their children. They have to earn it.

So, we DO teach others how to treat us. As a segment of the population blacks teach everyone else how to treat them, what is okay to say and what isn't. They do so individually and as a group through such things as civil rights marches, LA Riots, Million Man Marches, music and movies they participate in, gang activities, dress, Katrina and the reaction to the Imus incident.

I think there is a lot of confusion. Who doesn't love Sydney Poitier? Mahammad Ali? Martin Luther King? Coretta Scott King? Maya Angelou? Snood? Oprah? Bill Cosby? We know and respect them because they have earned it. They taught us how to treat them. They weren't victims.

Yet, the rappers, gangs, and other segments of the black community which are prominant on MTV, news casts, and police blotters give another view. Unfortunately, that segment gets a lot of airtime that skews opinions and feeds stereotypes for those that like to judge.

Asians aren't victims. Irish aren't victims. Mexicans aren't victims. And, you really don't hear much about the American Indian claiming victim status, but who got the worst end of all of that and is still being screwed by society today?

I think the question to ask is why are blacks still considering themselves (as a whole - knowing there are many exceptions) victims? Change that self definition, and society will at large stop viewing that segment of our community as victims.

I suggest starting with New Orleans. We need to move everyone back in that wants to return and not let them wear the victim label based on some concocted plan by the rich to take over New Orleans and change it's original and familiar face.

Finally, and I'll stop now, my comments elsewhere about the Rutgers girls news conference, stating that I would have preferred that they come out with their shoulders back, chest out, smiles on and talked about their accomplishments and how proud they are of themselves rather than slumped and talking about how their feelings were hurt is my view because of all of the above. They are teaching other young women / young black women and all the rest of society that they were victims of a stupid old white man.

They don't have to be.

(Okay, pummel away!)

Squinney- I have been thinking about this for a few days, and I am a bit conflicted. One thought that troubles me is why do these accomplished and intelligent women need to become defensive over some schmuck's idiotic remarks? If a person knows their own worth, it is not necessary to defend themselves against some insensitive jerk.

Then, on the other hand, they are very young women, who have been held up to ridicule. Thoughts, everybody?

Well, "injured victim" is not the overarching impression I got from watching and listening to the Rutgers women. They were just giving voice to an idea whose time had come. The idea had understandable indignation and angst attached to it, but I didn't get the impression they thought of themselves as "victims".

That was exactly the opportunity they were given, handed to them on a plate, for the Coach, an accomplished beautiful black female, to come out and say "Ha! Imus is wrong. Look what beautiful accomplished black females we are!" It was a perfect teaching moment for the coach they love and respect. It was the perfect teaching moment for how to respond to such racist/sexist comments. It was the perfect teaching moment for telling society how to treat them.