A Cure for Aids!!!

Well, not really. :/
But, I'll tell you why I chose that as the heading for this blog. Oh, fair warning, this will definitely be another controversial blog so prepare yourself. So, I was googling myself.........right. I've done absolutely nothing in this world that would afford me to be on google's search engine but a couple of minor programs, but I did it anyway because I was bored. What came up though, was a response I had written to an article in the New York Times about human trafficking in India (that still is a huge problem by the way). I had did it for my Economics class during my senior year of high school. You want to know the relevance between my Economics class and human trafficking in India? There is none. Its just that my teacher for that class was socially conscious, so he integrated projects in the class that entailed social issues that he thought were important for us to explore and think about. I'd probably do the same thing. Anywho, what that response reminded me of was a debate I got into (like I always do) in one of my classes during senior year about how we should deal with AIDS. I caught hell that day in class because I offered a very interesting (meaning controversial) solution that upset most people for reasons that I will explain later.

My solution to rid society of AIDS was this: The government should issue a commission to encourage all people nationwide infected with AIDS and people with potential to be infected with AIDS( extreme irrevocable stage of HIV) to gather at a harbor or port. Then, the government should send all of the AIDS and potential AIDS victims to a designated tropical island in the Caribbean Sea. The island would only be inhabited by these people with no exceptions. They will be surveilled heavily to ensure security and safety. Allow them to live at this designated island for the remainder of their lives or coerce them to stay on the island for the entirety of their lives. Provide them with a lifetime supply of all kinds of food. Treat them medically as necessary and give them all of the modernized technology and other resources that the collective group of people desire. Stipulate the law of the island so that the people do not have to pay taxes or work. There will be no free trade on this island as there would be no currency, however, there will be an equal distribution of resources. (Shades of Communism?) Let them die there. The hope is that AIDS and potential AIDS victims will emigrate to the island because of the lifestyles and freedoms they'll still be able to enjoy. They could lead normal lives, just as they would in the place they were living preceding their move to the island. Now, of course they won't be afforded the liberty of travel which counters my argument that they would be able to lead normal lives just like anyone else on the planet. Although they won't be able to enjoy those freedoms, they would be doing their native countries, and the world at large, and invaluable service by contributing to the cause of ridding our society of a macabre disease.

This proposal definitely has a million loop holes because its just a rough sketch of what the plan might actually be. If I were politically savvy enough, I might be able to meticulously conduct an actual plan of action that would be in-depth and refuted any counter arguments that I think may appear after the discerning of my plan. Though, I highly doubt that I would be able to prove the pundits wrong after they carefully destroy my proposal with ethical and moral suppositions. But, I think you could implement this plan in effort to quell all life-threatening diseases and illnesses. It could potentially be....... a panacea, if you will. I certainly think its better than Eugenics and Compulsory sterilization. But the bottom line is that its still morally and ethically wrong just as those two programs were.

There are tons of moral and ethical questions emanating from my proposal. And that's where I got into a bunch of quarrels with my classmates. They said my plan was heartless and wrong; and I was unconscionable to actually suggest something like this. And, they're probably right. Call me unscrupulous if you want, but I thought and still do think that it was a pretty shrewd idea even though it probably violates every natural, human and inalienable right in the books. Maybe it just needs to be modified a little bit. Oh well....

Parting Thoughts:
I really don't want to be the second coming of the young Spike Lee in the early days of his film making career. He sort of mellowed out as he got older, but he still is speaking out.
I don't want to be a young volatile pretentious filmmaker who becomes galvanized at the inkling of any comment(s) that could/would conjure controversy. <----verbose. :/
That's definitely how Spike was when he was a young film maker, spry and ready to defend his ideas. Though, because of my nature, I don't think I'll be able to elude that kind of controversy. I just hope that my films are my primary form of discourse and my mouth is the last. Sigh....
It's great to be smitten.
It's better when two people smite each other. <----Affinity at its best.
The Sean Bell verdict was disgusting, but totally not surprising. (I might blog about it)

Oh yeah, Do The Right Thing.

Abortion....

So, a few days ago I was in a heated discussion/debate with a few friends on the subject of abortion. I, being pro-choice, was matched up against two pro-life supporters with the aid of another pro-choice endorser. Although they won't say that they're pro-life because of certain provisos which I'll mention later, you could say that they champion most of the arguments and philosophies authored by authoritative figures who are pro-life. I am a staunch pro-choice person and my unequivocal nature of spewing out my ideas was definitely challenged. They definitely brought interesting and thought-provoking ideas. However, I think I was able to persuade them and even prove to them that fundamentally, they themselves were in fact, pro-choice.

Now, the battle for those who are pro-choice is usually one fought against Christian fundamentalists (at least in the government). Before I get into the meat of the discussion around abortion, I want to know what happened to separating church from state. I think its criminal for any religious bipartisan who is an arbiter to inflict their subjective nature based on their religious mores on a constitution that is laden with statutes that promise the American people certain liberties. Although it may seem as though Christianity pervades this country more than any other religion, elected officials must understand and act politically as though no one is adhering to any given religion. Thus, people should be regulated as such. This is why you have so much tension in rural areas of the deep south where activists are advocating for sex education but they're being throttled by local governmental religious partisans who believe that people should not have sex before marriage. By the way, I think thats totally naive. You cannot expect everyone to be abstinent in a country as "free" as this one. Its only right, responsible and necessary to implement sex education in those communities. The people in those areas who are not Christian fundamentalists are becoming enthralled to the pervasive religion. The nerve of these Christian conservatives. I actually think the words Christian Fundamentalism and Liberalism are antonyms of each other. Forgive my digression.

Christian fundamentalists would posit that abortion is murder. They would contend that any egg that has been saturated by a sperm is a human being and thus the termination of that human being's life through the will and intent of the mother or any other person via abortion should be stipulated as murder. Although there is an ongoing discussion about when the fetus actually becomes a human being, I'll still entertain that assertion. First, there aren't any laws that are a part of the constitution that guarantees the right of anything that is a not a human or animal. So, if indeed a consensus arises that says that fetus' are not human beings, technically that fetus does not have the right to life and thus the act of abortion would be permissible because it would not be murder. However, if the fetus is recognized as a human being, I argue that that "human being" does not have the right to body of the mother. Although the "fetus/human being" is dependent upon the mother's body for survival, that does not mean that it has the right to utilize the mother's body. There are no laws that stipulate a human being as the right to another human being's body. If that were the case, someone who was facing potential terminal illness would have the right to another human being's body if that was the necessary procedure needed to continue their existence. Since the "fetus/human being" does not have the right to the mother's body, she is fully within her right to remove it from her womb.

The people that I was having a debate with exclaimed that they had no sympathy for those who irresponsibly create unwanted pregnancies and consequently seek abortions. They even said that they thought having the child was their punishment for being irresponsible. This is where the discussion transforms into a moral/ethical one. Now, I will never view a childbirth as retribution for the parents who conceived an unwanted child. I do understand my adversaries positions, however, I do not endorse their philosophy. I definitely do not think that someone who carelessly conceived a child should be punished by being forced or coerced into having the child. Despite the circumstance, I still support the idea that they should be able to choose whether or not they want to have the child. The area where many pro-life people have gotten in "slippery slopes" is when they mention certain exceptions to abortion. These exceptions often entail circumstances that raped women or women who face potential health risks might incur. Now, its not that the pro-life people are saying they don't have to have the child, but they believe because of the unfortunate and life-threatening circumstances that may face these women, they should have the right to choose if they want to have the child. Isn't that idea fundamentally pro-choice? That's where I think I stumped my opponents.

The suggestion that my opponents did offer was that the law should incorporate certain exceptions to the rule of abortion and certain circumstances would afford people the opportunity to gauge whether or not they want to have a child, such as the example of rape. I really don't think that idea would work. There would be too many ways in which people could engage in some sort of collusion in order to create circumstances to attain amnesty and evade prosecution for abortion. For example, someone could could argue in front of a judge that they have been threatened if they have a child and that they will be killed by someone they cannot identify. It doesn't matter how inane that may seem, I'm pretty confident there will be people who will take their cases (some like the aforementioned example) to court and that would be too much of a burden on the justice system.

Another interesting question that has been raised around abortion is that should the father of the child have the right to choose whether or not the mother should have the child. I say no because if that were allowed, then the man's will of the mother's body would be an extension of those in office who are trying to regulate the bodies of women. I've said this time and time again. I do not think an elected official should be able to regulate the bodies of people. The counter-argument that I've gotten is that the laws that stipulate rape, murder, battery, assault, and manslaughter are all punishable by law, are all laws that regulate the bodies of people. But those are clearly different situations. The topic of abortion is unique because of all the controversial and unanswered questions that surround and it should be treated as such. Worse than religious bipartisanships, I think its a damn shame that the primary officials who are deciding what women can do with their bodies are men. Those boards, houses and courts are completely void of any empathy and a key understanding of the womans body because they lack the essential element to garner that empathy and understanding: Women! The intricacy of women's body is being undervalued and that is extremely unfortunate.

Bottom line is this. There are too many ways that would exist for people to circumvent the law if there were exceptions to abortion. In addition, there are too many unanswered questions that compromise the issue of abortion. Abortion has been debated for decades by some of the most authoritative biologists and philosophers ever to inhabit this planet. I think, in order to quell all of this banter, the government should cease trying to justify the regulation of women's bodies and give them right to exercise their own discretion on whether or not they want to have a child. Period. If abortion is soon abolished or stipulated as murder (which it looks like it might be) there will be a pandemic that will have thousands of women curtailing pregnancies illegally like back in the sixties when Jane was on trial. And if that happens.......(sigh)...... Infant mortality rates will sky rocket. Forced pregnancy is morally wrong. The unprepared should not be forced to prepare themselves.

Aside from all this discussion, abortion has been voted on a lot the past few years. Not actually the act of abortion, but rather the trimester in which you could have one. Gradually, the allowable abortion trimesters have been knocked off one by one over the past decade in the Supreme Court. I believe we are down to the last one. The new supreme court justices that Bush Jr. has appointed (who are probably Christian fundamentalists) are pro-life. The last vote was a 5-4 vote in favor of allowing abortion in the first trimester. If there is one more supreme court justice appointed to the Supreme Court who is pro-life, or if one current supreme court justice is persuaded or coerced (which is not dubious at all), then we may all be in for one hell of a ride.

Parting Thoughts:
I hate finals.
I'm glad school's over.
Did you know nursing, which used to be a menial job reserved for women, is now an occupation whose pay is equivalent to that of a starting professor and is occupied now by more men than women? Crazy.....
There is now the possibility that Duke Ellington may be considered the foremost greatest and heralded musical composer in American history. <-----Incredible.


Oh yeah, If you want to hear my take on abortion musically, check this out. One day, I'll land on the Digable's planet...

Heartbeats........Five Of Them.

Art Form: Cinema
Type/Genre: Drama

The Five Heartbeats is by far my favorite film of all time. I think that this film was constructed beautifully and Robert Townsend's writing and directorial skills seem impeccable considering the product he devised. I also have to pay homage to Keenen Ivory Wayans who participated in the screenwriting of the film. I first saw this movie when I was younger when my grandmother used to watch it all the time. And when I say all the time, I mean all the time. I used to never understand why she would pop that thing in the VCR every morning but I guess now I can. I think The Five Heartbeats is one of the most underrated films to have ever been syndicated by Hollywood. The movie was made in 1991 so I don't really understand why it isn't a fairly common known film amongst the past two generations. I'm not saying its one of those films that should be exceptionally prominent in the minds of the public like the heralded Scarface or The Godfather series. But its definitely one of those films that most people should have seen and probably loved regardless of class, race, etc. There are so many things that I can relate to and appreciate in this film.


The Characters

Choir Boy (Tico Wells): So the origination of my alias on this blog has finally been revealed. Yeah, Tico Well's character served as the muse for my nickname, Choir Boy. Choir Boy will also be the name of my independent of production company once I enter to the realm of cinema: Choir Boy Productions. Though, my connection to the name Choir Boy has little to do with Tico Well's character. I chose the name Choir Boy because I definitely think I'm always preaching to people, trying to spread and encourage thought about different things of the world; the socially conscious thing. That objective has been concretized by the advent of this blog, The Tipping Point, which is basically my personal soap box. Aside from that, there are things I can relate to that are encompassed in Well's character. He's the shy one but the member who has arguable the best voice. The guy whose singing is so high pitched that if he fusilladed his voice, it would become nothing more than a glass shattering cacophony. But he's also the guy who's in the back and never gets the attention of the girl he's been eying for a long time. Choir Boy is like the little brother whose big brothers are the coolest and get all the women why he can only dream to be like them. I was definitely like that in my lifetime (the very little of that I lived so far). I've had friends in high school who I envied because they had girls that I thought should have paid attention to me because I knew I was a better person. But Choir Boy does what he has to do to get them (lying about being the leader of the group). I won't comment on that being applied to my life, but I understand. ;)

Dresser (Terrance Williams): Dresser was just the coolest guy in the group. Those suspenders were off the chain. And his dancing skills were hot although he was shown up by the old man. But more importantly, Dresser was the family man. That part of him comes out in the scene when he finally expresses his frustrations with Duck and Eddie because he's upset about not having money and he learns that his wife is expecting a child. I completely understand. Dresser wasn't about the stardom or fanfare. He just wanted to do what he loved and take care of his family. There's probably been an innumerable amount of times where I've envisaged what kind of family I want to have and how we'll live. The idea of being to efficiently provide love and subsistence for my spouse and children while possibly being immersed in the celebrity world is something that sneaks into my mind quite a lot. Despite the money and fame, Dresser maintained that family was important. I respect that.

Eddie (Michael Wright): Eddie King! ( though he pronounces it, Eddie Kang!) Eddy is the man. The guy is enamored with fame and money. I don't think that becomes a bad thing until you become gluttonous with things that come with stardom; things like women and material wealth. Greed could also become an affliction. Those are definitely the things that conflict Eddie in the film and nearly lead him to his demise before self-destructive behavior is curtailed by his potential wife. But what I can relate to with Eddie was his willingness to be that star. He took the leading singing role because he wanted it most. He wasn't necessarily the best singer, which is debatable, but he was determined that that spot was his. And that's how I feel about coming into the film world as an African American filmmaker. There have definitely been the great writers/directors such as Spike Lee, The Hughes Brothers, Keenon Ivory Wayans and John Singleton and the many unnamed. But I think there is a void right now for the new African American Filmmaker. And I want to be the person to assume that spot. You can call it a dream, but I call it a destiny. That's why I'm so steadfast in my pursuit of getting there.

J.T. (James Thomas): The Ladies Man. Now, J.T. had a huge lust problem. Actually, it was worst than that. He had a severe sexual addiction which definitely can be self-destructive. But hey, hormones are hormones. And they get you sometimes, or most times, but a consistent excercitation of self-control can impede that. What I liked most about J.T. was the love he had for his brother. No matter what, he looked out for him; even in the waged war over Baby Doll between them. He even named one of his sons after his brother. That's beautiful. It just makes me wish I could have that kind of relationship with my [half] brother. Sadly, I don't and its really unfortunate. But if I'm fortunate enough to have two sons, I'm definitely going to raise them to have the kind of love, care, and respect for one another that J.T. had for Duck (and vice versa) in the film. Oh, and "shy brother", I think I'll teach that to them too.

Duck (Robert Townsend): Out of all the main characters, Duck is the one I relate to and admire the most. There's a reason why he's the protagonist of the film and its because everything that happens to the group and those affected by the group is a product of his work and dreams. Duck is the visceral writer/choreographer/poet who seems to come up with the perfect tune, lyric, or step because his creative prowess is so unconscionably innate. It seems like everything he does turns into a complete work of art-his music and choreographed performances- and ultimately it's greatly and profoundly appreciated by the public. Although his artistry affords him more money, women, and resources he could ever dream of, he remains subdued in his own world. He shows character traits of a recluse at times, but when he comes out, he delivers something that will be remembered forever (as far as his art goes). I feel like I'm that person too.....

I think all of these characters possess something that I feel I have. Parts of the timber of each individual person lie somewhere inside of me.

The Story Line
I think this film has the best screenplay I've ever seen. The story encompasses so many pertinent parts of the "rags to riches" story for artists and more specifically Black artists. When the group hears their song on the radio for the first time, the elation was incredible. (I love that scene by the way) I think that's how I'll feel when I'm at Festival De Cannes for the time watching my first feature film being screened. The new lifestyles that succeeds the group's long awaited syndication was really cool. Also, the scene where all five members drive through the street with the same car in different colors was the bomb. And the HUGE house with the big ribbon on its facade that Duck surprises his mom with was hot too. I also really liked the scene when the group was on their first tour, driving, and they were unjustly stopped and embarrassed by the police because they were black. Shortly after, Duck then gets back into the car and sings America the Beautiful. Genius. Those are just a few scenes I like, but the film overall is great.

Oh, and the soundtrack is BANGIN!

You can youtube it if I've compelled you enough to watch it or if I've reminded you of how great it is/was and you want to see it again. One.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJHWfLTaG_0&feature=related

There's No Place Like Home...or is there?

Art Form: Writing
Type/Genre: Book/Manifesto

So, my Womens Studies class -which has profoundly affected my cognition- has just finished reading this book by Linda R. Hirshman entitled Get To Work (A Manifesto For Women Of The World). Hirshman is a radical feminist and writer who has been one of the catalysts of the brewing third wave feminism. She wrote an extremely provocative article called Homeward Bound in the American Prospect in which she denounced the influx of women who were opting to stay at home instead of pursuing careers. Her tone in this book is very inflammatory and I understand her urgency to relay this message to women. This book makes a valiant attempt to encourage women to pursue different goals other than staying home in order to keep them from permeating traditional family roles that allow for women to assume stay-at-home positions; which results in the marginalization of women. However, I do have several gripes with this book and Linda's message.

First, I don't think it is at all progressive for Linda, as a radical feminist herself, to polarize the women within the feminist cohort. Linda thoroughly vilifies all women who choose to stay at home. She posits that the women who make this choice actually believe that staying at home is a position that they should inherit; they do not actually delineate whether they should weigh other options. Basically, Linda postulates that women who stay at home are acting under false pretense. She says that the choice has faded and women are just accepting. While I don't agree with that, I want to say first that condemning stay-at-home moms and making them the pariahs in the eyes of working mothers does not benefit the feminist agenda. This kind of discernment of stay-at-home moms versus working mothers is only divisive. Staying at home is not always bad. I think that if you're comfortable enough to settle yourself at home without the burden of working and pursuing capitalistic goals, then you should do it. Hirshman says that educated women who stay-at-home eradicate their possibility of having any affect on the world because they're always in the house. That's not necessarily true either. Many stay-at-home moms write and also participate in their community. Also, every woman should not be inclined to enter the labor force and neither should every man.

I don't think that women who choose to stay at home assume that role. And I also don't think women who stay at home are doing a disservice to feminists or are hurting the feminist agenda. Calling all women to leave their homes and "get lives" will not solve the inequality of traditional family roles. It is still certainly possible for dual-earning heterosexual couples to fall victim to traditional family roles that could further marginalize women. Hirshman aims her vocation of entering the work force to college women and prospective female students. She urges them to set realistic goals, saying that they shouldn't study art but rather vest their interests in subjects that will afford stable jobs, lucrative income and resources. Hirshman also calls for women to take their jobs seriously for job security (establishing tenure) so that they don't end up in precarious lifestyles. She believes money is the fundamental panacea for traditional family roles that marginalize women because generally, the person with the larger source of income in dual-earning households exercises more clout.

I don't think that works. A woman could be a doctor or a lawyer and still be pressured into assuming traditional family roles such as nurturing children, cooking, cleaning and all the other essentials to prevent an unkempt home. The woman having money or a larger source of income than her spouse won't automatically allow her to place those or other responsibilities on her spouse. My resolution is marital bargaining. I think that if women do not want to be burdened with traditional family roles then they should engage in meaningful negotiations with their spouses so that both parties can resolve to equally distribute responsibilities of the home. I also firmly believe that if the marital bargaining does not work due to the apprehension of the woman's spouse, then she should be fully prepared to divorce or separate from him to alleviate any potential marginalization. A good [husband] will understand that the obligations of and for the home should be fairly split between the two so that neither person feels mistreated.

That's my take. If you're really interested in this, you should pick up the book and check it out. It's a very quick read; 90 pages. I definitely appreciated what Hirshman had to say although I disagreed with her premise.

P.S.:
Did you just..................congratulate me for reading?

P.SS.:
I want my son to think just like Huey when he's age 9.

Nigg(er)(a) and its Nigg(er)(a)s

You know what really grinds my gears? People who used the word nigger. Yup, here I go. I'm going to engage in the same conversation that authentic conscious people have been engaged in for the past several years since the word has pervaded the vocabulary of black people. There is nothing that chafes me more, than someone addressing me as a nigger. First of all, I have a name and second of all, that sh*t is degrading, demeaning, dehumanizing and a racial epithet. I will never be a nigger and it freakin' kills me when people call me and each other that. Now, the most common counter-argument I hear is that the masses of Black people have tailored the word so that it is now appropriated as a term of endearment. Are you effin' kiddin' me? So if I go to my wife or mother and say, Hey nigg(er)(a), I love you. <---That's supposed to be affable? Get the hell out of here. There's nothing cordial about calling someone or being called by the word nigg(er)(a).

Moreover, there's a lot of hypocrisy that stems from that premise. And most of us know what that is. It's that when a white person uses the word nigg(er)(a), it's readily received with tension. First off, that's completely unfair to any non-Black (or should I say anyone who's ancestors were indigenous to the continent of Africa) who thinks it ok to the use the word. That's one of the most asinine double standards I've ever incurred. Plus, the word nigg(er)(a) is palpable all throughout our music. How the hell can you so called, endeared "nigg(er)(a)s", complain when someone of another race uses the word when its all over your music. That word is used ridiculously in mainstream Rap music. If White people, or any other kind of people, hear us call each other nigg(er)(a) and then hear our music call us nigg(er)(a), of course they're going to think it's ok. That's freakin' logic and intuition.

Bottom line, those who use the word readily do not have a sincere appreciation for its history. And what kills me is that people always say, they "know", where the word originated. BS. If you have a complete understanding of the word's origins, why the hell do you say it. And I love when people proscribe to the messages of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (probably the most commercialized African-American hero in American History) and then call themselves and there brethren nigg(er)(a). I bet if Dr. King Jr magically showed up one day in front of them, their discourse would be crippled because they use the damn word so much. And they're not going to say that in front of Dr. King. So many people use the word nigg(er)(a) and profanity regularly because they can't find other words/phrases to express how they actually feel or what they're thinking. That's sad. Pick up a book people! People think articulation is a gift or a talent. And to some degree it just may be. But I bet, if you read something once in a while, you'd be able to express yourself a whole lot better than you used to. But back to my tirade.

This is why I don't accept that argument that the meaning of the word has changed for our generation. Would you use the word nigg(er)(a) in a job interview? How about in a conversation with someone you really admire who's done something that you want to do in life? My inkling is, no, you wouldn't. Why? Because the word nigg(er)(a) is semantically the same as profanity. There are negative connotations associated with the word just like cursing. Shoot, eff that. The word nigg(er)(a) is denoted negatively holistically. And for all you righteous folks out there, indulging in your piety, who think using the word nigg(er)(a) isn't a sin, you need to go repent. Make haste. Hypocrites.

I remember there being articles written in the New York Times about the City of New York pursuing a new Public School legislation that would stipulate students who use the word nigg(er)(a) would be punished or in some way reprimanded. I'm totally partial to that. I think people who use the word nigg(er)(a) should receive some kind of retribution for using it because no matter the context it is used in, it's wrong. Period. But Freedom of Speech just had to be a natural right. I guess that effort is futile now.

I don't think that people use the word because they really believe its a term of endearment. I think there use of the word is a product of the environment that they're groomed in. It's just like the old adage, "You are what you eat". If you think about that cliche abstractly, relating to why people use the word the nigg(er)(a), it makes sense. Just substitute the word, eat, with consume. My example for this assertion is Rap. If you consume music that is laden with the word nigg(er)(a) for long periods of time, pretty soon you'll be using it. Now think about the environment. If everyone is listening to the same music, everyone uses the word, and dialogs between people has the word in it several times over, then people will be become desensitized to what the word actually means. And that's exactly what has happened. In order to start some kind of change, there has to be individuals who don't use the word and socializes with people that do so that somehow, they can see that you can express yourself without using that God awful word. It might help to teach them what it actually means too.

I'm really anticipating Nas' new album. He's supposedly entitling it "Nigger" and I hope he's devising this album constructively so that it purports some of the things wrong with the ignorance that has consumed the masses of Black people. If it just ends up being a ploy for record sales, I'll be extremely disappointed. I hope Nas is sensing the same sense of urgency in our community that I have, especially with our youth, and his concern is manifested in his new album. Listen up:


Parting Thoughts:
You ever notice that every minority in America is viewed as an __________ American. "African American, Hispanic American, Italian American, Asian American". But white people in this country are just Americans. <----BS. White people are not indigenous to this country/continent. They need to understand and accept that.

Oh yeah,
Freshman Year is just about over. I'm one year closer to having to actually do something with my life. :(

I'm one year closer to actually doing what I want in life! :)

The American Composer

Art Form: Music
Type/Genre: Classical

<-----Aaron Copland is one of the most respected and praised American Composers and Classical musicians in the history of the Americas. He is noted for his impeccable style, musicianship, and years of devotion to the craft. I think Aaron Copland is a genius. I first heard his music when I saw Spike Lee's He Got Game. Spike used some of Aaron's music to score the film. I thought it was a brilliant move by Spike because the sound fit the scenes. There was only one scene where I thought Spike could have used another segment of Aaron's music (its the first scene of the guys playing basketball in the The Garden in Coney Island where Spike uses parts of Rodeo/Hoe Down of The American Album). I'm digressing. I definitely don't want to act on my impulses as a cinephile right now so back to the composer. I had youtubed some of the music that I liked composed by Aaron Copland and I had stumbled upon a video of him speaking on a broadcast. What I found out that I like most about Aaron is that he was the first classical musician in America to incorporate Jazz into his music. At the time, Jazz was a pre-dominantly Black form of music in America (as it still is) so when Aaron released his music, the pundits maligned him for using Jazz. For a long period of time classical music moguls viewed Aaron as a joke because he used Jazz. But Aaron was very steadfast about his music and didn't pay attention to what people were saying, but rather did what he felt was right in his heart. What inspired him most was that when he was young, he noticed that most of the world's classical music hailed from Europe. America didn't have any kind of classical music to claim as its own. And thus, FanFare For The Common Man of The American Album was born. Fanfare For The Common Man is probably one of the most popular and wide-spread pieces of music ever used. You'll often hear it on network television and in stadiums at significant sporting events. Finally, the critics came around. And the same people who said his music was a mockery of American tradition began to crown him as one of America's own great musicians. Aaron Copland was born and raised in Brooklyn and thus his exposure to Jazz music happened easily. From the beginning of his career as a musician, he never discriminated against any type of music. When I was watching him being interviewed, one of the things he said that I loved the most was, that he made music that came from his heart. When he was scoring music for orchestras, stages and screens, he was never pressured to conform. He said it was his intuition that guided him. Whenever something was right, he felt it inside of him. I can totally relate to that. When you feel something inside, you know its right; especially when it comes to art. And that's exactly why I'm excited about the ideas that I have in regards to kinds of films that I want to make. I'm definitely a fan of all art, and I think of all the artists I like, he's one of my favorites across the board.

My favorite piece written by Aaron is a Ballet entitled Billy The Kid.

I think I'm going to let my children fall asleep to some of his music when they're infants.

Guru's Jazzmatazz

Art Form: Music
Type/Genre: Rap/Jazz

I have definitely been "cooling" to Guru's Jazzmatazz lately. This album is really cool. Guru, the lyricist, raps over jazz beats on every track. The album is definitely antiquated, but I recently discovered it. The album features some of the most revered Jazz musicians including Lonnie Liston Smith and New Orleans' own, Mr. Branford Marsalis. My favorite song on the album is, Loungin' featuring Jazz musician Donald Byrd. I also like Transit Ride, in which Branford Marsalis is featured, because I can relate to it being from New York. For me, this album compiles a great group of songs that I would chime to while cruising down the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Drive at midday with light traffic.


Guru's voice is very smooth and rhythmic; it's comparable to Common's. Every song is pretty melodic and has a solemn feel to it. There's hardly any profanity or vulgarities which makes the album even more refreshing. Oh, and Guru's also from Brooklyn so that inclined me to like it even more. I think the album's intricacy is really innovative because of the mixture of jazz and rap, albeit there may have been other artists who have similar albums.

I'm definitely advocating for you to give this a listen. I've pretty much extolled Guru for the album and I think its a classic.

Him....

I never thought I would bring myself to write about this, but I guess it was only a matter of time. Over the past few nights I've been falling asleep to Will Smith's Just The Two of Us and it got me thinking about my situation with my father. I've been wrestling with the history and future of the relationship between me and my father for quite some time now and I think its time to finally let some of this out.

I really don't even know where to begin...... When I was younger, my mom had split custody with my father for me. I would spend time with my father every other weekend. I think those weekends were some of the worst Saturday's and Sunday's I ever had. That man tried to discipline me as if he were raising me everyday. And that did nothing but confuse me because I only saw him every other week. To me, it was like being hit and yelled at by a complete stranger. I developed a mild discontent for my mom because she would allow me to taken by this man with regularity and every time I got in that car, I knew it would be trouble for me. I never really enjoyed myself with my father really. Me and him were never compatible. I think it was until I was past the age of 10 when he started to take me and my little (half) brother out. All I remember from those days was that he showed a lot of favoritism with my little brother over me. Back then I used to think, I'm the oldest, the first born, why does he get treated better than me?

That used to upset me a lot. But I think what hurt the most were the empty promises that my father gave me. He would promise to come see me and take me shopping the following week after he had seen me. And before the day would come that I would anticipate seeing him again, there would be some voicemail on the answering machine and my mom would have to bring herself to tell me that he wasn't going to make it. That hurt a lot. Especially as a young boy. My father constantly excited me by promising these wonderful trips and every single time he would let me down. The worst part of that was, I never understood why he kept doing that to me. Finally, my mom decided she couldn't see me hurt and disappointed over and over again and she told my father to stay out of my life if he was going to continue to treat me this way.

After a while, I finally got over it. I learned to live life without my father. The constant disappointment definitely dealt a blow to my feelings and my psyche. But I came to understand that that was just how my father was. And I had to accept that. I did. But now that I'm older, I really think about it differently in retrospect.

I think right now, because I have a better understanding of what it means to be a parent, I'm even more hurt by the way my father neglected me when I was a younger child. To hell with a female, a potential employer, or an audience rejecting you. Being shunned by the person who created you is the worst type of rejection. It really hurts. When I think about it now, all I can say to myself is that this guy really didn't want to be active in his son's life. How can you do that? How can you not want to be a part of your own seed's development? How you can walk around, living, knowing that you have a son on this planet that you know nothing about. You have to be completely unconscious to live that way. He's my father......and he didn't want me. It hurts like hell to accept that.

When I first saw Drumline, I loved the scene when Devin (Nick Cannon) goes to the train booth that his father works at in the subway station and hands him his graduation ticket after the ceremony was over. I thought that was beautiful. When I was a senior in high school, that's all I thought about doing. Finding my father and throwing everything that I had accomplished in his face. But I think better of it now. I think it would hurt him more to see me accomplish my dreams and know that he wasn't a part of the journey that molded me and my success. I turned out to be a fairly decent human being and he missed out on that. I give all the credit in the world to my mother who did everything she could to raise a decent young man despite the culture of Brooklyn, New York could have on a young impressionable mind. Thanks mom. I Love You.

I've had people in my life who've told me that he's going to come back one day. I have a cousin who had a father that he didn't know. His father came to see him at his house a few weeks before he would then past away. My cousin embraced him. When I heard my cousin's story, all I thought about was how I was going to react when my father finally steps back into my life spontaneously. Who knows.... I don't know how I'm going to respond. I have so much anger, frustration, animosity and a few other choice words for him. I don't know if I'm going to be able to channel it properly. I just know, that's going to be one hell of a day for me and my family. One thing I that used to be puzzled about, is why I never grew to become like my dad. I didn't become as tall and muscular as he is. I don't share a keen resemblance with him nor do I have a remotely similar personality. I don't think I was supposed to be anything like my father. And I'm glad for that.

One person I have all the respect and love for is my stepfather. He came into my life when I was 11 and he's been there for me ever since. He didn't have to take care of me. I was not his responsibility. But I think he showed the ultimate kind of care and love to take a child who wasn't his and raised him as his own. And my stepfather caught me at a very interesting age. I was just beginning to develop as a young man. I think the kind of person I've become has a lot to do with him. He taught me a lot about life. He taught me how to have a certain cognition about people. He helped me develop an intuition that I now depend on everyday. Me and my stepfather have a beautiful relationship. We had our growing pains, but thats only natural. Now we both enjoy and look forward to each other's company. We've added a dimension to one another's lives that seemed non-existent for a while. He became my father-figure in life and what I had missed out on for 11 years, he provided for the next 7. I also became the son that he never had before. All of my accomplishments in high school made him feel like a proud parent because he was a part of that. And now, he's a proud supporter of the Tar Heels and we enjoy many conversations about Carolina sports. I may be a first generation graduate, but both of my parents are Tar Heels in my eyes because they were the catalysts who created the foundation for me to get to UNC. It's a beautiful thing. I have an official Carolina family. And that legacy starts with my parents. I have an ever-growing respect and love for both of them.

My hope is as people become parents, they take responsibility for their children. I can't wait until I have children. I've had dreams about having fraternal twins for a while now. I hope that comes to fruition. I'm extremely excited about the parenting skills I'm going to implement, though I haven't considered the views/belief's of my potential wife, but I'm sure since she'll be my wife, she'll share a lot of the same beliefs I have. I've grown to really envy the Wayan's Bros. When I see those guys show the kind of affection they have one other as brothers, it makes me want to have a better relationship with my own little brother. But because of strained relationships within my family, I was never afforded that opportunity. The idea of being the primary of source of influence on another human being's life excites me. I've had this reoccurring dream of me (as an older man) walking into my twins' room. Both of their cribs are opposite one another and are sidled against the wall. I stand at one of their cribs and just stare at them for the length of the night. And out of the corner of my eye, peripherally, I can see my wife standing there in her pajamas smiling at me because she understands the joy and excitement I have in my heart at that very moment. It's a beautiful dream and I love when I have it. It excites me. I think I'm just really ready to be the kind of father that mine never could bring himself to be. I'm still young and there's going to be a lot of time before I have children. But when that day comes, I think I'll be filled with a happiness that will be incomparable to any other.

I'm seriously too young to be thinking about all this. Oh well...

Parting Thoughts:
I don't really have any. I just needed to get this out.

Oh yeah,
If you have an opportunity to affect someone's life in a positive way, take advantage of it. It could be as simple as giving a stranger a compliment. You never know what you can do to help another human being. There's nothing that makes people feel better than seeing the warmth in others. Peace.

To Go or Not To Go? Why is that The Question?

Well, its that time of year again. Its the beginning of Spring which means for all you college basketball fans out there, the banter about which superstar (and sometimes perennial superstar) is entering, staying or leaving college. I happen to be one of those passionate die hard fans and media junkies who feasts upon the heavily syndicated lives of all star athletes. Its one of the reasons why I'm torn on whether college basketball or professional football is my favorite sport. The amount of passion, pride, competition, and parity that exists in college sports is unbelievable. That's why I favor college sports over professional leagues. For most players, and I'm writing exclusively for Division I, over ten thousand student athletes get only four years to compete for individual accolades, stock for the next level, division and national titles. It is because of that brevity, that most student athletes invest so much emotion into there respective sports; which makes college sports that much more beautiful. I think the nature of college sports is what hoists it above the professional leagues. And since I attend an institution whose athletic program ranks among the nation's elite, my interest in the sport has entered a new realm. So this is my turn to posit what I think about the dynamics of college sports.

Coming In
Ahhhh, the steadfast, persistent, predator-like intricacy of recruiting. I find it amazing that these athletic programs track some of these kids by the time they're in the sixth grade. If thats not going on the hunt, I don't know what it is. I'd encourage all potential student athletes to take all four years of high school to delineate which academic institution/athletic program they'd like to be a part of. I was reading our (UNC) briefing room on ESPN.com's website for Men's Basketball and it stated that we already have 4 underclassmen who have committed to our program. Now, of course I'm a partisan of the Heel's and its great to see that we're getting the best of the best while they're still being groomed, but I think its problematic to commit to a school so fast. What I do understand is that for some or most of these players, is that the schools they commit to as freshman and sophomores in high school are schools that they've dreamed of attending for most of their lives. I'd still encourage them to take the length of their high school careers to think about the decision and to weigh there options. Even if they verbally commit to a program, they still have some clout because they could recant and hold off for a while just to give their futures some more thought. I hope all potential student athletes exercise that opportunity to have a thorough, meaningful, and ongoing discussion about where it would be best for the student athlete to attend for them and the family.


Staying
It would definitely be ideal if these players would stay in college all four years so that they could obtain a full education and acquire college degrees. We all know about the potential for an athlete to get hurt, so having that degree is a great back-up plan. However, there are more issues present that should or could compel one to stay in school. The percentage of student athletes who make it to the professional league's is very small. Moreover, those who are drafted in later rounds, for example the 7th and 8th rounds will probably not make that much money. And there is also a very good chance that the player's career in the professional league would be very precarious. Thats why having that degree is like having an alternate insurance policy: Just in case things don't work out as planned.
The other part to deciding whether to stay in college is developing or polishing fundamental or other skills so that upon entering drafts, you are a versatile player. Having molded those skills to a greater degree than your sport peers will make you a more attractive candidate in the eyes of scouts and will probably land you a solid and stable position in the professional leagues.
Too often we've seen athletes, especially in college basketball, who go 1 and done in college to chase the money in the professional leagues. A lot of the number 1 overall draft picks actually do not become what they were expected to be in a certain amount of time. Most turn out not to be that good amid the immense competition in the professional leagues and their careers go to the waste side.
However, on the flip side, if you enter the draft that young you obviously have more time to develop because you will probably spend more time in the league. But I'd posit this is only true for basketball as opposed to football where players retire in their mid-30's more often than not. So, for the All-American Superstar with the above-the-rim, lightening speed, bruising strength, vertically limitless and precise throwing arm: Your talent is just your talent. It's wonderful to be gifted, but its better to be a well-rounded and polished athlete. Hey, His Airness (Michael Jordan) spent three years at North Carolina. Arguably, the greatest player in the history of professional basketball was the product of great molding under the tutor liege of arguably the greatest coach in all of basketball, Dean Smith (is it just me, or does Carolina produce legends? Gotta love those Heels).

Leaving
Well, I'd say that most of us know that most athletes who leave for the big leagues early are chasing hummers, fancy cars, and houses with 23 bathrooms (even though you only have one butt). I think a lot of these guys get a ridiculous amount of pressure from their families to leave college and declare for the draft so that Uncle Ray can get that Benz he thought he'd never have after working 35 under years in the steel mill. Hey, I understand that for most of these players who don't come from families with a good amount of resources (black athletes) need the money. But I hope that these families, especially parents, are not manipulating their children through some colluded plan just to get the money.
Thats unfair to the life and career of the student athlete. They should be able to make these decisions for themselves. These student athletes probably have so many people in their ears that they could never think for themselves and thats a shame. They're the ones with the gifts, talent and potential. And of course they have certain obligations to help their families. But it is/was their hard work and effort that afforded them the opportunity to go to the next level and therefore they should be granted complete autonomy when making that decision. They are adults right? I'm not saying that family and friends should completely abstain from advising the student athlete, but to make sure that the given advice is out of sincere care and is in the best interest of the student athlete.
I'd say the chances that most student athletes make these decisions on there own is dubious. There are so many shallow people that exist in this world. And some become more shallow once they find out that their son/daughter, nephew/niece, or friend can jump, shoot, throw, or run at unprecedented levels. The greed is definitely palpable.

NCAA
This is where the controversy stirs up. There has been a lot talk about whether the NCAA should pay players while they're in college. I don't know where I stand on this issue yet. I don't even know whether I will take an agnostic position. Though, I do understand both sides of the issue. From what I've gotten thus far, the NCAA will always vie for not paying student athletes because they are receiving scholarships and thats completely understandable. Also, to begin paying student athletes would be unfair to the rest of the student body who would be paying full fledged tuition in some way, shape, or form without financial allocations. In addition, if student athletes do start to receive salaries, the NCAA would become more of a League (which it kind of already is) and individual athletic programs would become more like franchises (which they kind of already are). Student athletes negotiating contracts to attend universities and play for their respective programs doesn't seem feasible because of the aforementioned issues. Who would these high school graduates negotiate with? What about the possibility of being manipulated by agents or university officials? Would the parity in college sports diminish?

The other side presents a compelling argument as well. People have spoken out against the NCAA because the restrictions that stipulate how student athletes have to conduct themselves are extremely rigid; sort of like a job (hence the irony). For example, many student athletes have been reprimanded for receiving tickets to certain venues or just receiving money. Those regulations are somewhat unfair. Oj Mayo, a basketball player at the University of Southern California was disciplined for receiving tickets to a basketball game at Denver's Pepsi Center from All Star NBA player and current Denver Nugget, Carmelo Anthony. That definitely seems questionable. Also, the conditions under which student athletes work are very similar to how athletes work in the professional leagues. The training, conditioning, and actual playing are similar. The one disparity is that professional players get paid. Should the NCAA be allowed to regulate the lives of student athletes on campuses with other students who have unregulated lives? Are scholarships enough? What happens to student athletes who incur career threatening injuries?

Look, the big thing is, the NCAA makes tons of money off of these players and some of the pundits think that its unfair to the student athletes. I'd agree with that. I definitely don't think its a coincidence that the top athletic programs happen to be an entity within the best academic universities in the country. The athletic program is a big part of how much money they make and the resources they are afforded. UNC is a great example. North Carolina's athletic program has gotten the school billions of dollars and raised the endowment to incomparable levels just like other top programs. Thats why the Duke's, UCLA's and Michigan's of the world stay atop the college hierarchy. The athletic programs are in integral part of their ascension and that allows them to polarize themselves, in all aspects of the university, from other colleges in the country. Although this issue has gotten a lot of publicity, its definitely something to think about.

Parting Thoughts:
He Got Game......brilliant film.
I swear North Carolina is the only place where there is no clouds and the sun is just on your back.
I need an iPod badly.
Could you imagine a world without mirrors?
Financial Aid sucks.

Oh Yeah,
"It might feel good, it might sound a lil' somethin', but damn the game if it don't mean nothin'. What is game? Who got game? Where's the game in life, behind the game behind the game? I got Game. She got Game. We got Game. They got Game. He got Game. It might feel good, it might sound a lil' somethin', but fu*k the game if it ain't sayin nothin'! -PE

Classic Funny

Art Form: Comedy
Type: Staged

If you laugh, best believe you're going to hell. LMAO. And Eli is officially my favorite rapper.

But here are a few questions for you to ponder during and after you watch this:
Why are his hands on the dude's chest like that?
What is up with Eli's outfit?
Are some of the words that Eli says real?
What is up with the split screen and the hearts?
Is Eli playing or is he really retarded and they're using him?

I would have usually used my discretion and not post something like this on my blog, but this was/is too funny.

Hip Hop Horayyyyyyy!!!!!......Noooooo.......

How The Mainstream Polluted The River of Hip Hop

It was only a matter of time before I attacked the current state of Hip Hop culture. And yes, I do think that Hip Hop culture, particularly Rap, has reached the nadir of its existence. So, due to the immense amount of thoughts I have on Hip Hop culture, this isn't going to look like a blog, but rather an essay. Yup, its that serious. But since when do my blogs, not look like essays?

Correction

I'm really tired of looking at my iTunes options and seeing Hip Hop and Rap under the category: Genre. Hip Hop is not a genre. Hip Hop is a culture. Here's a little education for those folks who don't know its history. Hip Hop (which originated in The Bronx of New York City) began as a cultural institution that consisted of a DJ, an emcee, break-dancing and graffiti art. In today's world, people use Hip Hop and Rap interchangeably which is wrong. Rap is the genre of music. Its definitely true that graf-art has significantly diminished from Hip Hop because of laws in the U.S. that stipulated spray painting, or applying mediums to surfaces, to public property was/is a federal offense. Although its still done, its mostly done in foreign countries where the local authorities deem graffiti-art as negligible. Graffiti art is beautiful. I've seen some beautiful pictures of graf-art in Singapore and the detail was amazing. Graf-Art's original purpose, to express and articulate the frustrations of the underclass, working class, oppressed, maligned and neglected people, shared many similarities with the original purpose of Rap. Unfortunately, those uses of the art forms have crept away from the culture and are no longer an intricate part of Hip Hop. So if you're an organized person and likes to assort their music: Do not put anything under the genre of Hip Hop. And someone needs to school these companies on Hip Hop so they cease making the same mistake they've been making for too long.

Affluence

Every time I see a Rap video, there are glaring images of gawky chains, watches, and wrists bands laden with diamonds, gold and platinum. Those who are Hip Hop savvy would call this, "ice". There are also extremely rare renditions of cars, expensive clothing, boats, planes, motorcycles and large houses. Again, those who are Hip Hop savvy would call this, "doing it big". Yeah, right. This is definitely ridiculous. Aside from the fact that the majority of the things you see in these videos are rented, including the "ice", it makes absolutely no sense to have these things. I wonder to myself what these so called rappers would be without their fancy clothes and glaring images of dollar signs. If you ask me, I think these people actually use their monetary resources as a sense of affirmation. And thats a shame. Your ascension through the Hip Hop ladder is defined by how much money you accrue. Really? It has absolutely nothing to do with your talent, journey, personality, background, work ethic and positive contributions to the culture. Its all about the money. It is definitely frightening when almost every Rap "artist" equates money with happiness. And too many people are entering the Rap "game" just for the money. There is no respect or appreciation for the art form and that is seen by the content of the music. But I'll get into that later...

Vice

How many Rap songs have you heard, when there isn't a mention of drugs, prostitution/pimping, or killing? You'd probably say very few; maybe even none. <----Problem. Almost every Rapper, and specifically gangsta Rappers, allude to some sort of immoral behavior in their rhymes and glorify it. How is that at all positive? I don't want to hear about how you were so marginalized and underprivileged, that you sought out the informal economy and sold self-destructive substances to your own people as a means of survival. Nor do I want to hear how many "hoes" you have and how many times you've manipulated and objectified women to such a degree that they've become less than human beings in your perception and even sources of income. I do not want you to celebrate your manhood in a song by confirming how many women you've "knocked-off" in an effort to prove that you're a better "man" than I and others. I'm tired of hearing you rhyme about how many lives you taken or the ability you have to take another person's life. I don't care if you're a rabid, ruthless, unmerciful and inhumane murderer and you care very little, or none at all about the lives and well-being of people other than your own. Cutting someone's head off, does not impress me. I am not taken aback by your prowess to pursue women with no respect to their humanity at all. I will never be enamored with your shrewd methods of evading those who "protect and serve" and retrieve substances, then use them as commodities in the neighborhoods populated with people who look just like you. I'm sorry.

Male Chauvinism

Sigh.... I think this one pains me a little more than others. It really saddens me how we treat our women in Hip Hop culture. I've seen a innumerable amount of music videos, you tube videos, TV Shows and films related to Hip Hop culture that completely objectify women . Females in Hip Hop are, for the most part, treated as voluptuous pieces of steak that one can order and consume at their own disposal. There is absolutely no respect. Scantily clad, promiscuous, submissive and hyper-sexualized women should not be a palpable image in Hip Hop. All that does is communicates messages to our young women that their bodies are the most significant part of their person hood. They must succumb to the will of men and wait on the whims of their male-counterparts, especially those who have ridiculous amounts of money and resources. Are you serious? Women are not pieces of meat. And they shouldn't be treated as such. You can add the lyrical content to the mix as well. I've heard too many times in rap songs, incendiary lyrics that imply women are only objects to be pursued for entertainment and sex. And this has too much to do with the themes of masculinity associated with Hip Hop culture. Its deplorable by all means. Yet, rap songs are decorated with content that suggest women are inferior beings only to be thought of as sources of male affirmation. Misogyny is pervading Hip Hop in a sad way. Thats why you see all these girls shaking their tales in videos and dance competitions. It's because they want the male audience to be receptive and the current culture of Hip Hop has taught the male conscious to only respond to the bodies of women.

The Content
The lyrical content of Rap has definitely reached the depths of stupidity and ignorance. Almost every rapper assimilates these bubble gum rhymes in their songs that actually say nothing. All I hear, are well thought out metaphors and similes that I cannot relate to, at all. The content of rap music has increasingly become inane. None of these "artists" are actually devising songs that are worthy of appreciation. In mainstream rap, there are hardly any songs that I'll keep in my library and deem them as classics so I can listen to them when I'm wallowing in a rocking chair. I don't want to be 40 in my family van with my wife and children, and the radio plays one of these throwback rap songs and I'm galvanized by the mentioning of it. What would I look like parading to the beat and lyrics of "I Get Money" in front of my 12 year old daughter? I'll answer that for you. Stupid. And thats what most Rap consumers (and I don't mean only financial consuming but the act of consuming) look like now while listening to that stuff. Though, the majority of them are more ignorant than stupid. I'm all for the freedom of speech. Hell, I definitely need it. But the problem with the lyrical content of rap is that there is an overwhelming amount of people who internalize what these guys are saying. Consequently, they behave and act in ways that are reflecting of what they're listening to. If Rap can influence your dialog in the profound way that is does most people's, imagine what kind of people we'd have walking around if rappers actually incorporated real dialect and significant ideas in their music. Not only would it be extremely creative, but the original purpose of Rap would begin to float again. To uplift.

The Ploy
Well, it seems like every southern rapper is doing it nowadays and its working. Shoot, Hip Hop moguls would say Rap is flourishing right now and the culture has purged the pit falls of Hip Hop with refreshing and creatively new ideas. Yeah right. Every new rapper is doing the same thing. Get some hypnotic beat with a catchy chorus and throw a dance on that thing. Think about every new rap song thats out and tell me if it does not have those elements. Right. What the capitalists pigs atop the Hip Hop ladder see is an ignorant ass demographic who is enticed by the idea of seeing modern day minstrel shows like T-Pain and Plies take over your TV Screens and iPods. Thats how they're making all their money. They are recycling the same images and themes, that I've mentioned in this blog, that appeal to certain groups of people. Sad....And people are falling for it. Those guys with ties and suits that tell people like Rick Ross to actually go and buy diamond necklaces to help to create that image should be held culpable. But nobody thinks about them. Bottom line. Ignorance is making Rap money. It might be a lucrative vocation for the rappers, but its only self-destructive for the consumers and draining Hip Hop of its beauty.

Oh, and I wanna send out a big EFF YOU to all the rappers engaging in this strategy to quickly attain money and resources. You effers are whack and don't tell me what you're doing is art. You have absolutely no appreciation for the art of Rap or Hip Hop and you shame those who came before you who were using this medium as a means of uplifting the consciousness of their people. Assholes.

Dear Consumers,
You've been had! You've been tricked! Led astray! Hoodwinked! Bamboozled!
And you know what? I charge the Rapping Man. Brothers and sisters, I'm here to tell you that I charge the Rapping Man with being the most misogynistic person on earth. I charge the Rapping Man with being the most volatile on earth. I charge the Rapping Man with being the most degrading man on earth. I charge the Rapping Man for feeding you garbage for nearly over 20 years. I charge the Rapping Man for rhyming about lifestyles that most of you will never have. I charge the Rapping Man with serving you utter and complete filth. I charge the Rapping Man for treating your women with no respect or dignity. I charge the Rapping Man for depriving your and my kind, of valuable music. He can't deny the charges. You can't deny the charges. I'm here to tell you, that I charge the Rapping Man. And he needs to stop jiving.

Sincerely, Choir Boy.

P.S.:
Malcolm X was the isht

Parting Thoughts:
Do I care too much?
Nope. The problem arises when I don't care enough.
I'm soooo ready for the summer to come.
I've fallen in love with stir fry.
I hope next semester will be very fruitful for me.

Oh yeah, since this blog was so dense, I wanted to leave you all with something funny.


http://www.superdeluxe.com/sd/contentDetail.do?id=D81F2344BF5AC7BBDF72CDEA065DF6EC64D4197F95A17CBF


By the way, Hip Hop is Dead.

Wo(man)?

Ok so, in recent news there has been a revelation that a man is pregnant. Don't become aghast. Babe and his crew isn't flying yet. And hell isn't thawing out as we speak. His name is Thomas Beattie and he is trans gender. He was born a female and got a trans gender/sex change operation years ago. He married some woman and now they are having a child that he has been nurturing inside of him for about six months now. He's definitely showing.

Alright, I know that the immediate reaction of most people would be something like, "that's sick, he's/they're disgusting, both of them are an abomination", so on and so forth. However, I refuse to engage in any active discrimination against anyone. This has a direct correlation to the "man's", or his wife's sexuality, which has been maligned by almost, if not all, religions. Faith is faith and people believe what they think is right. The world has a decorated history of trying to prove that people were innately inferior to other people. And through the course of history, all of the those theories have been proven wrong. For example, centuries ago, European scientists tried to proved scientifically that native Africans were inferior to the western people. The justification of the treatment of those people under religion was an extension of that science. However, the test of time throttled that idea. And now you have scientific research being conducted to prove that there is a gene for homosexuality. I wonder if they've ever searched for the gene for heterosexuality....... Simultaneously, you have religious figures and patrons who denounce homosexuality because they believe its a sin and an abomination to God.

I don't know exactly when, but the terms "homosexuality" and "heterosexuality" were terms that were created by man and ultimately stratified people. What's funny is, no one identified with either of those social/sexual institutions before the advancement of medical technology. And in the early days of this planet, having sexual desires for and engaging in sexual acts with both sexes was prevalent. Its palpable throughout history because most King's and Queen's had concubines of both sexes. I don't want to prescribe to any ideologies about the makeup of certain groups of people because history tells us that most likely, those ideologies are dubious. Scientifically proving that people are inferior/different/sick so that the science can coincide with ethical or moral principles is an archaic and ironically, an unscrupulous idea that has never worked before.

Great Quote: "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind"
Something to think about.

Ok so, back to the trans gender guy. Yeah, because of all the aforementioned things I just said, I don't want to discriminate. But this is my problem with Thomas' situation. I was watching a clip of him on Oprah and he said, "When I woke up in the morning I felt like a man".

This is my problem with that. There is no way that one can feel like a "man" or a "woman". However, one can feel like male or female. Get me yet? No? Ok.
The only thing that separates males from females is your anatomy. Hence, your sex. However, nothing separates your gender. Everything about your gender is socially constructed. You can sit there and think of a million things that you associate with one gender (meaning not anatomical) and I guarantee you that, in theory, it can be done by the opposite sex. However, there is nothing anatomical and that is sex specific, than can physically be felt by the opposite sex.

This female did not wake up and feel the anatomical nature of a male. Nor would a male wake up and feel the physical nature of a female. It's biologically impossible. I wouldn't wake up and say, I feel like I'm beginning to menstruate. There's no way I can feel that. However, what I can feel is the social constructions of gender. If this female (Thomas) got up and felt the urge to, let's say, play with dolls (which is an activity that is associated with femininity), she wouldn't feel like a male. She would feel like engaging in something that is generally associated with "women" and "women" are socially constructed. The same goes for a female who would wake up, and feel the urge to go play with trucks; another activity generally associated with masculinity, another social construction.

My point is, this female didn't wake up feeling like a "man". She woke up and felt like engaging in activities/behaviors that are generally associated with the socially constructed "man" or masculinity. Masculinity and femininity are in the same boat with race, gender, class, and the still disputed "sexual orientation". They're all social constructions of man. None of which are or have been proven to be biological.

So when she says, I woke up and felt like a "man", I seriously question her sincerity. I think that possibly, she wanted to behave like a "man" and the social pressure of certain behaviors being identified with gender casted an internal affliction inside of her. It is possible that her actions or behaviors were close to being holistically identified with the male gender and she felt immense pressure to physically become a male. But she actually became a manifestation of the socially constructed "man". Maybe she thought, because her actions/behaviors were so incredibly masculine (which is socially constructed), that her attributes as a person culminated into being a "man". Then she has the sex change because she feels those traits can only completely manifest themselves if she is physically, male. And somehow, she actually feels relieved of the social pressure because her exterior allows her to comfortably engage in actions/behaviors that are identified with "men". And that is because, people who prescribe to social constructions of masculinity identify the actions/behaviors she engages in with the exterior of a male. Got me? Hope so. If not, here you go.

Michael Jackson. MJ epitomizes the idea of a person who felt so much unbearable pressure of identifying with some socially constructed stratified social institution, that he made the choice to alter himself physically. Who knows what that pressure is/was, but I think there's a direct correlation between his and Thomas' psychology.

I just hope that the next time Thomas Beattie is on a talk show and he says, "when I woke up, I felt like a man", that the host seriously delves into that question and finds the origin of that thinking. It would be really interesting to me. Well, I'm off my soap box for now.

Parting Thoughts:
Final Four today. National Championship freshman year?
I don't like the saying, "If you don't know, you better ask about me".
I want to get to the point where I can say, "If you don't know, you can read about me".
Potato wedges......delicious.
I just might go clothes shopping for the first time.
I miss being age 9.

Over and Out.

Oh yeah, Go Heels!

A One Night Stand.........for enlightenment.

(Deep Breath). Ok, so tonight I went to a forum entitled "What is a Real Man" and it was a very interesting experience. I sat there and listened dreadfully to an innumerable amount of people express what they thought was a "real man". This was definitely one experience, one that I have had many times over, where I felt that ignorance had pervaded and overwhelmed the minds of people. Or maybe they have simply been misled far too long.

To begin things off, they asked all the males in the room to stand. The orator said that he was going to call out certain things and that if a male who was standing did not have or relate to that particular thing, he should sit down. The group that was hosting and sponsoring the forum had conducted a survey and the things that the orator were listing were the most prevalent traits and characteristics that pollsters said conjured a "real man". I don't exactly remember everything that he listed, though I do remember a few. And although I had a problem with the activity as a whole, the ones that I do remember that he said incited a lot of dismay from me. Those things were "strong" and "religious". It's really unfortunate that I can't remember the others because I would definitely lash out on those as well.

These are my gripes with those things. Being "strong" does not constitute a "real man". And I found it painfully frustrating, that the census labeled the idea of "strong" as merely physical. The idea of being strong is not exclusive to what you can do with your body. Being "strong" incorporates, will, determination, logic, perseverance, gall, and ability. After calling out the word "strong", the orator said, "If you can't lift your own body weight, you ain't strong". sigh......
I strongly believed that religion didn't belong there. If the host/hostess were responsible, they would've realized that religion is not a trait or characteristic, it's set a principles or beliefs. Being extremely religious does not make a "real man". I would not have a problem if he had said someone who is spiritual because I feel generally, people aspire to have a great deal of spirituality assimilated into and throughout their lives.

I had a problem with the event's title before I even came to the venue because I believe there is nothing that constitute or affirms a "real man". The panel persisted on asking questions to the audience about what a "real man" was. And I agree with a friend of mine who said that most answers that were given, didn't answer the question, but rather were statements that expressed each individuals ideals in the opposite sex. I accept that 100%.

I don't think there is a definition of a "real man". There isn't a definition of a "real woman" either. However, I do think that there are goals and traits that people aspire to have that makes them great people. There is no standard, no set of principles, or traits that if culminated by a male individual, he is now considered a "real man". People were just throwing out what they think a "real man" should be. For example, taking care of your kids, or being confident (I extracted that from the phrase, "I want my man to be hard body") or being motivated. What people failed to realize was that those things don't make for a good man, they make for a good person. Everyone should aspire to be responsible, motivated, and confident. Just because a father takes cares of his kids does not make him a "real man". It makes him responsible. If a male has no fear in protecting or approaching a woman, that does not make him a "real man". It makes him confident. The issue here is that people were proscribing to social constructs that have been identified and associated with gender. You should not conform to social constructions. If that were the case, then everyone would be readily willing to function in a society based on stereotypes. Do we want to do that? No.

Someone offered me a contrasting argument which entailed that since we've been raised conforming to social constructions, why should we change we now? All of the ideals that we're brought up in this forum are traits that we consider follow traditional gender roles. That was sad to hear someone say. You would actually prefer to conform to the conventions of social constructions than to deviate from what society as deemed as normalcy. Unbelievable.

My point is that there is no quintessential male or female. Nor is there an ideal person. However, there are qualities that make us good people, not good males or females. If we were operating on the ideology founded on conventional gender roles, then there would be a set of standards exclusive to men and exclusive to women. This may be a far fetched example, but I think that is comparable to asking what makes a great male cat or female cat instead of asking what makes a great cat.

There was also an inquiry about whether nice guys/girls finish last. I don't think nice guys/girls "finish" last. My opinion is that "nice" (and this my inkling of what traits are generally associated with nice guys/girls) guys/girls are generally respectable and socially sensitive human beings. I believe those qualities take a great deal of maturity. And quite honestly, young people aren't wise enough to understand the "nice"guy/girl's humanness. Generally young people, because of inexperienced and immature minds, are attracted to immaturity and what's "fun". I think that nice guys/girls possess a maturity and humanness that would be attractive to older and wiser people because they understand what makes for a great person. The impressionable young mind, because of the ideologies that imbues young people (especially in a technological world), does not understand those qualities because they deviate from the social norms of that age group.

Interracial dating was also a hot topic. All I heard was, black women get bitter when they see black men dating white women yadda yadda yadda. Look. What we to need understand is, that skin color does not make a person who they are. Bottom line, before we were black, brown, yellow or white, we were human beings. And human beings are naturally attracted to each other because it is an anatomical, hormonal and instinctual intuition. If anyone has a problem with interracial dating, which means that they do not condone human beings become intimate with other human beings solely because of their skin color, that is ridiculously and starkly shallow.

I would say, that as human beings, we should all carry unique personalities and aspire to be responsible, confident, articulate, cultured, intelligent, intuitive, aware, sincere, accomplished and motivated people. I think those are qualities that both sexes look for in the other ideally and when there is a great and compelling combination of any of those, a natural attraction is sure to follow.

Though almost no one agreed with me, and I was pretty much maligned for subverting the premise of the forum, I stayed strong. That felt good. I have to admit, its not always good to be a minority within a minority. Sometimes it sucks. In this case, it almost did. But then I realized, that's why I have a purpose.

Parting Thoughts:
Ignorance is disheartening.
I will never give up.
My mouth gets really dry sometimes.
I may have an anger problem. Help me?
Trust is beautiful.

Over and Out.

Oh yeah, Huey for president.

Edumakashun

Education is a big thing now in America and has been one of the issues thoroughly discussed in the recent electoral debates. What I'm hearing the most from the candidates is that the curriculum and expectations in education should change from the bottom up. Essentially, the lowest grades should be refined. I whole heartedly agree with that plan. Most of the students who end up not achieving as they should are products of bad elementary schooling. It's a shame when compulsory education is implemented in curricula as early as second grade. Now, I'm not saying that we should do away completely with teaching basics, such as the fundamentals of math, science and reading, but as students ascend in school grades, the education they receive should be tailored more towards their critical thinking skills. And you can still do that with base subjects such as science and math. Challenging students to devise their own math problems or science theories will help them grow more cognitively than just giving them problems to solve or just sticking them in chem. labs following the steps to a worksheet.

Treating students like receptacles is not healthy. The nuances of the college classroom should be assimilated into the high school classroom. It would benefit both the teacher and students alike. I now think that education should be like a profound conversation. Someone broke down "conversation" for me and I thought that it would work for schooling. I'll give you the truncated definition because that conversation was really deep. See, a conversation is an exchange, hence the conversing. (I don't think you're stupid, I'm just trying to make my point clear) The environment inside the high school classroom needs to be an exchange. This definitely should not be the standard for every class because there are times when students need to just listen, but if you want them to grow intellectually, force them to spew out some thoughts.

I honestly do believe this: You never know what you really think about something until you actually have to speak about it. You're left with no choice but to articulate your thoughts. The problem in pre-college education, is that students aren't being lured into expressing themselves. Consequently, they go through years of education not giving serious thought to what they're learning and it affects them holistically. Going years without developing a working discourse is engaging in self-destructive behavior. And that's evident in today's world.

I really think we should give some serious consideration into quelling all these "higher achievement" courses and grades. Think about it. Psychologically, that affects those who are both in and not in those courses/grades. The people who are in it get a psychological boost. They feel more able to perform academically and are also more confident about their cognition and ability. Conversely, the people who aren't in it or don't make it are affected negatively. Just imagine not being in that course/grade as a young person with an impressionable mind and you're being overtly told that your intellect and ability is not up to par with your comrades. Psychologically, that affects you. And it can result in many different things. The most prevalent effect is lowering your own expectations opposed to the students who are in those courses increasing theirs. You don't feel capable, you lose confidence and it affects your initiative to work. Sounds plausible? I think so.

You cannot gauge intelligence or ability based on memory. A lot of the exams, especially the state mandated ones, do not accurately test aptitude, rather they only test the strength of your cerebrum, which is the part of the brain that holds your memory. The S.AT., A.C.T., and Standard Achievement Tests are all frauds no matter what. I don't think there is anyone who honestly felt "smarter" or "dumber" based on their State test scores. And if someone did feel either of the two, there is some serious insecurity there.

I don't think anyone is smarter than anyone. People are knowledgeable about certain things and they are most privy to things that are key to their survival. Those who live in the Ivy Towers are extremely articulate, keen on books, politics, and cultural capital. The people who live in ghetto's possess knowledge about how to manage themselves in their situation. Do not undermine street smarts. Anyone who lives in a depreciated neighborhood surrounded by vice and marginalization for a number of years and survives that is smart. They know how to manage living in that situation, just like the Ivy prince and princesses know how to manage living in their situation. They are constantly in venues that require the knowledge they have or are in pursuit of and it benefits them. Neither is smarter than the other. It's just that the knowledge that they have is varied. I say all that because certain groups of people are polarized based on "intelligence" and it isn't fair. Everyone is a human being. And all human beings have potential. The problem is that the Powers That Be don't see that and consequently they neglect those people. That neglect rears its head in the geographical-educational system we see today.

Teaching To Transgress..... Good book.

That's my spiel. Oh, I wanted to share this. Sorry, it isn't hyperlinked.
http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/15772-black-history-what

Parting Thoughts:
I think its safe to say that Women's Studies has changed my life.
Facebook status' could have their own show. Really, they could.
Time sucks.
There should be a recall on all water-based deodorant.
Guru's "Jazzmatazz" is off the chain.
If the guy from the AllState commercial asks me one more time if I'm in good hands, I'm gonna freak.

Over and Out.

Oh yeah, Dead Prez- They Schools. Give it a listen.