Hit Counter

posts tagged "debate"

Mitt Romney wants an economic policy à la Reagan with important tax reductions. Can someone please pass a note to this guy letting him know how fucking disastrous Reaganeconomics was for the US budget and that the US can REALLY REALLY NOT afford such policy right now?? 

Oh boy!!

Watch them once again fuck up the global economy, I can’t!!

hookedonsemiotics:

zeezeescorner:

In this great debate from 1971, Michel Foucault and Noam Chomsky disagree about the fundamental qualities of ”human nature” and the key task of social science in helping humanity achieve its collective potential. Chomsky believes that the social sciences should draw up a framework for an ideal society where creativity, freedom and scientific discovery will flourish. He sees it is our task to help to put this plan into action. Foucault argues that there is no ideal concept of social justice that can be universally applied. Instead, he sees that social scientists are tasked with critiquing social institutions and relations of power in different societies. Foucault says:

…one of the tasks that seems immediate and urgent to me, over and above anything else, is this: that we should indicate and show up, even where they are hidden, all the relationships of political power which actually control the social body and oppress or repress it. What I want to say is this: it is the custom, at least in European society, to consider that power is localised in the hands of the government and that it is exercised through a certain number of particular institutions, such as the administration, the police, the army, and the apparatus of the state…. But I believe that political power also exercises itself through the mediation of a certain number of institutions which look as if they have nothing in common with the political power, and as if they are independent of it, while they are not.

One knows this in relation to the family; and one knows that the university and in a general way, all teaching systems, which appear simply to disseminate knowledge, are made to maintain a certain social class in power; and to exclude the instruments of power of another social class. Institutions of knowledge, of foresight and care, such as medicine, also help to support the political power. It’s also obvious, even to the point of scandal, in certain cases related to psychiatry.

It seems to me that the real political task in a society such as ours is to criticise the workings of institutions, which appear to be both neutral and independent; to criticise and attack them in such a manner that the political violence which has always exercised itself obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight against them.

Read the entire transcript . Watch the debate and bliss out: part 1 and part 2.

unf he’s perfect

*intellectual orgasm* I almost bolded the whole thing :3

I knew it would one day pay off to follow the fucker from which I am reblogging this!

(via yung-lysenko-deactivated2014040)

wretchedoftheearth replied to your post: How am I being racist? There’s a very real racial correlation between vaginal length and penis size. I am friends with gynecologists…

humrep.oxfordjournals.o… Though it’s not as commonly studied as penis length, there’s no correlation between race and vaginal depth, actually, link to a study above

Thanks Simone. This is for you nirvikalpa

How am I being racist? There's a very real racial correlation between vaginal length and penis size. I am friends with gynecologists...

@nirvikalpa-deactivated20130416

Can anyone explain to him why saying shit like this is racist because this is so fucking gross, I can’t!!!

http://nirvikalpa.tumblr.com/post/28285590931/asian-men-have-small-peniseseseseseseseseseseseseseses

ANONYMOUS: Asian men have small peniseseseseseseseseseseseseseses. WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

…… to fit into the smaller vaginal canals of Asian women? Asian women have a tendency to have shorter vaginas. 

theaetherealmeadow:

academicsilence:

theaetherealmeadow:

academicsilence:

theaetherealmeadow:

academicsilence:

theaetherealmeadow:

academicsilence:

fucknoradfems:

theaetherealmeadow:

This is the Quigley Scale… this makes radscums’ heads explode. As you can see, the boundary between “penis” and “vagina” is not as clean cut as radscums (and for that matter, cissexist society as a whole) makes it out to be. Radscums, when should you start using the mens’ room? Number 3? Number 4? I should point out that the Quigley scale applies only to androgen insensitivity syndrome. There are plenty of other intersex conditions out there that can produce totally different genital arrangments.

[Image description: a diagram scale showing various kinds of genitals. Number one shows what most people would refer to as a penis and scrotum. Number two shows a penis with a slit running on the underside, and a scrotum. Number 3 shows a small penis/large clitoris and a scrotum/labia majora (looks a bit closer to a scrotum). Number 4 shows a smaller penis/clitoris with a scrotum/labia majora (looks a bit closer to labia majora). Number 5 shows a vulva with a somewhat large clitoris. Numbers 6 and 7 show what most people would call a vulva with a “normal” sized clitoris.]

Who’s pwned now, Rad-Fems?

:)

This is a scale used to assessintersex, not trans, conditions. The scale indicates genitalia outside of expected development; it is specifically used to assess the degree ofdisorderin genital development. This 1-7 scale was an expansion on the 1-3 scale previously used. These are not examples of “normal” variations in genital development. Please stop acting as if being intersex and being transsexual are the same thing.

Instead of simply copying Wikipedia,why don’t you try reading the actual article on the development of the scale?

I never said that intersex and trans are the same thing and I am quite aware that the scale is used to to grade androgen insensitivity syndrome.

Radical feminism has no critique whatsoever to aim at intersexuality. The problem we have is with trans ideology. By bringing this - a scale to assess intersexuality - in to the discussion, you are indeed conflating the issues. Stop doing that.

I am pointing out the absurdity that comes with biologically essentialist radscum “theory”. If a person with partial androgen insensitivity syndrome is a 3 or a 4 on the scale, and they identify as female, are they cis or trans? It all depends on the doctor’s subjective decision at birth.

Identity is not being assessed here. Sex is not identity. What this scale assesses is the degree of difference in sex. Medically speaking, a person at a 3 or 4 on the scale is not male or female. They are intersex. Did you read the article that I linked to? If you can’t access it, send me a message with a throwaway e-mail and I’ll send it to you.

Whether a person’s sex is male or female is as much of a social construct as the gender roles that accompany them.

No, it’s not. There are not endless functional variations in sexes.

And intersex conditions are totally normal!!! Just because they are less common doesn’t mean they are abnormal. The false belief that they are “disorders” contributes to untold suffering to many intersex people, whom suffer non-consensual genital mutilation at birth.

Yes, the practice of mutilating infants and children without their consent needs to stop. (Hey, did you know Sheila Jeffreys agrees with you on this point?) There is no point in mutilating a person’s genitals for cosmetic reasons - surgery should only be done if there is a functional problem, such as problems with elimination. However, medically speaking, AIS is indeed a “disorder.” It causes more problems then altered genitals. Sterility, osteoporosis and various cancers are all directly related to AIS; these are negative symptoms that need to be treated.

There is nothing disordered about being intersex. About 1.7% of births are intersex, and people with green eyes are not too far ahead at 2.7% so if being intersex is a disorder than so is having green eyes. Also there can be an overlap between being intersex and trans, because when the doctor designates a sex at birth, they are sometimes wrong!!!

Again, medically, intersexuality is indeed a disorder. These conditions are challenges to the normative functions of the body. Eye color does not (although it is worth noting that the gene expression that results in blue/green eyes is in many ways a negative adaptation, putting people more at risk for skin cancer.)

Once again, do not conflate the issues of intersexuality with the issues of being trans. If a doctor designates a person as male or female at birth when that person is actually intersexual, the issue is not that the doctor should have assigned them a different sex: the issue is that the person should have been designated INTERSEX. If you have a set of genitals, reproductive organs and hormones that fall within the normative ranges for male or female, you are that sex…no matter how much you dislike it.

I don’t get how you radfems are so against gendered socialization yet are so eager to pigeonhole people into categories based on biologically essentialist criteria.

Sex and gender are two different phenomenon. Gender socialization changes based on the social situation in which the gender role is created. Sex does not change. There is male and female, and a very small percentage of people who have physical expressions of both.

I’m really not sure why trans activists are so intent on trying to pin gender behavior on physical traits; all that seems to do is limit what you’re actually allowed to express rather than recognize full human potential. You don’t have to declare your body female to enjoy feminine things, or male to enjoy masculine things. Really.

It’s so contradictory. By the way, which bathroom should someone who has a 3 or a 4 use? Should they saw themselves in half and go to both? 

They would enter the bathroom for their socialized gender. And yes, I realize you’re about to do “AHAH! So trans people should go to the bathroom for their gender!” Before you do…once again, people who are intersex are not trans. Also, I emphasize, socialized gender. This is the gender they have been socialized to perform, not their personal gender identity.

In order for any sort of gender equality to be achieved, there has to be gender anarchy. What you are advocating is gender authoritarianism. By expecting people to behave a certain way as a result of their socialized gender, you are taking away their choice to be whatever gender they want, which is authoritarian.

Before you start to lecture me, learn the difference between sex and gender. You’re conflated them quite badly here. Sex is a biological reality; a person is male or female, or (quite rarely) intersex. This biological reality exists regardless of an individual’s identity.

Gender is a social construction. It is socially connected to sex, but a persons’ sex does not cause gendered behaviors. Gendered behaviors are a result of the complex socialization process that begins literally before birth.

As a radical feminist, I am for the abolition of gender. I want to see gender end. I want people to finally learn that a liking for pink is not written on the second X, and that a preference for trucks does not come with a heightened level of testosterone.

You, however, as a trans supporter, are explicitly supporting the continuation of gender ideology. Rather than promote the idea that all human beings have the capacity to engage in all human behaviors, regardless of their sex, trans ideology continue to promote the idea that if you like trucks and mud you “must” be a man, or if you like soft things and dresses you “must” be a woman. This is the harmful social construction.

You are upholding and giving credence to the socialization process that you criticize. That is not feminist or radical. In a truly equal society people would be able to choose to be whatever gender they feel like, regardless of whether they are a 1 or a 7 in terms of their medical sex.

I absolutely agree that in a truly society people would be able to to follow whatever behaviors they felt were right for them. However, this does not mean “choosing” a gender - all that does is reinforce the concept that there are different behaviors for men and women in the first place. A truly equal society would not impost arbitrary meanings on social behaviors.

Sex is indeed a biological reality. But the division between “male”, “female”, and “intersex” is not an objective division. Between 5 and 6, there is no clear boundary “intersex” and “female”. A good analogy would be the color spectrum. For example, light of a 490 nm wavelength can be defined in an objective way in terms of its wavelength. However, the concept of its color is abstract and subjective. In English that wavelength would be defined as between green and blue, whereas in Russian it’s a totally separate color that is considered neither green nor blue. Likewise, sex divisions are also like that too… the boundary between male, intersex, and female are blurry just like the boundary between red, orange, yellow, green, blue, and violet and is dependent on cultural and social factors. 

Gender exists in a spectrum that is analogous to the spectrum sex exists in. Some people are female, some people are bigender, some people are agender, some people are a third gender, some people are male. And gender is NOT caused by socialization- there is MUCH proof, like all the people out there who resist the gender they are socialized, sometimes from a very early age (aka trans people!) The idea that a genderless society is the path to equality is a fallacy. The existence of gender expression itself is not the problem, it’s the fact that people are coerced into a certain mode of gender expression that is the problem. If people are also coerced out of their freely chosen gender expression, that is just as authoritarian as coercing them into a gender expression that they did not choose. If someone who identifies as female likes to wear heels and dress up and such, and they feel like that is a part of their femaleness, there’s nothing wrong with that, so as long as it is freely chosen on their part and they are not coerced into it by society. Telling them that they are upholding gender essentialism by doing so is taking away their choice for freedom of gender expression.  Likewise, if someone who identifies as female likes to drive trucks and buzz her hair and wear combat boots, they are still just as female as the heels wearing person because no matter what their gender expression is, they still identify as female. Gender means different things to different people, and part of gender equality is for people to choose the expression that they feel are suitable for their gender, or lack thereof. 

I noticed you seem to assume that all trans people behave like stereotyped caricatures of the gender they are transitioning into. Way to erase the existence of butch trans women and femme trans men. “Trans ideology” as you call it recognizes that what people deem as being feminine and masculine is subjective, and thus rejects ideas like “likes Barbies=girl” and “likes trucks=boy”. 

Learn the difference between gender identityand gender expression.

THIS!!

tal9000:

[Image: A black square with white text: “Did you know? In 1945, when concentration camps were liberated, homosexual prisoners were not freed but were instead made to serve out their sentence.” Credit is to did-you-kno.tumblr.com]
dearestandqueerest:

metomorphose:

dumbthingsstraightpeoplesay:

elderlylockpick:

robofillet:

roxinpunch:

electriczebras:

fabfemmeboy:

i-found-you-justine-time:

everythingcominguprainbowcats:

saynathespiffy:

picturesinhismind:

blacksheepboy-:

hopeboysisacheapthing:

did-you-kno:

Source

You SHOULD know this, because it is INCREDIBLY important and something that wasn’t acknowledged until very, VERY recently.
(I did a history project on this in Y9. We got to do something from the 20th century; everyone else did, like, Marilyn Monroe, and I read a translation of Moi, Pierre Seel, déporté homosexuel and then did my project on that. Cheerful, no, but important to know about, yes.)

whaaaaat, seriously?!

In 1950, East Germany abolished Nazi amendments to Paragraph 175, whereas West Germany kept them and even had them confirmed by its Constitutional Court.
Well, that’s horrifying.



Oh my god

Homosexual concentration camp prisoners were not acknowledged as victims of Nazi persecution.[7] Reparations and state pensions available to other groups were refused to gay men, who were still classified as criminals — the Nazi anti-gay law was not repealed until 1994, although both East and West Germany liberalized their criminallaws against adult homosexuality in the late 1960s.
“Gay Holocaust” survivors could be re-imprisoned for “repeat offences”, and were kept on the modern lists of “sex offenders”. Under the Allied Military Government of Germany, some homosexuals were forced to serve out their terms of imprisonment, regardless of the time spent in concentration camps. (X)

Also worth mentioning that homosexuals are still largely unacknowledged as victims of the Holocaust even within circles where they should know better.  For example, in the Holocaust Museum in DC and Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, gay deaths are acknowledged only in passing and there is not a single picture of a “man of the pink triangle” - only of an empty ballroom that had once held a gay dance club.  When Yad Vashem was completely redone in 2005, gay groups pressed for inclusion alongside other non-Jewish groups such as the disabled, Roma, etc., and numerous senior-level officials and the Rabbinate condemned such requests for inclusion, with some going so far as to suggest that the homosexuals were German criminals and therefore did not belong in the same category as the Jews who had done nothing wrong.  When the memorial to gays in the Holocaust was unveiled in Berlin four years ago, senior members of Yad Vashem condemned it and, in particular, its proximity to the memorial for Jewish victims of the Shoah.

this planet shouldn’t be allowed to exist any longer

This is important. Of all the WWII history I learned in school, this was never once mentioned.

Oh my GOD.

And now my soul is bleeding.

Re-blogging again because when I was being taught the history of Nazi Germany, THIS WAS NEVER EVER EVER MENTIONED. NOT ONCE. 

See, Jay? I’m not the only one who wasn’t taught it!

well fuck i’m glad my family emigrated.
it takes a WHOLE FUCKING LOT to surprise but i’m actually surprised.
surprised that the revelation of this kind of information and that the fight for inclusion in MEMORIALS as in LET’S REMEMBER THAT OUR PEOPLES DIED TOGETHER were written off or received any sort of backlash.
that’s fucked up.

tal9000:

[Image: A black square with white text: “Did you know? In 1945, when concentration camps were liberated, homosexual prisoners were not freed but were instead made to serve out their sentence.” Credit is to did-you-kno.tumblr.com]

dearestandqueerest:

metomorphose:

dumbthingsstraightpeoplesay:

elderlylockpick:

robofillet:

roxinpunch:

electriczebras:

fabfemmeboy:

i-found-you-justine-time:

everythingcominguprainbowcats:

saynathespiffy:

picturesinhismind:

blacksheepboy-:

hopeboysisacheapthing:

did-you-kno:

Source

You SHOULD know this, because it is INCREDIBLY important and something that wasn’t acknowledged until very, VERY recently.

(I did a history project on this in Y9. We got to do something from the 20th century; everyone else did, like, Marilyn Monroe, and I read a translation of Moi, Pierre Seel, déporté homosexuel and then did my project on that. Cheerful, no, but important to know about, yes.)

whaaaaat, seriously?!

In 1950, East Germany abolished Nazi amendments to Paragraph 175, whereas West Germany kept them and even had them confirmed by its Constitutional Court.

Well, that’s horrifying.

Oh my god

Homosexual concentration camp prisoners were not acknowledged as victims of Nazi persecution.[7] Reparations and state pensions available to other groups were refused to gay men, who were still classified as criminals — the Nazi anti-gay law was not repealed until 1994, although both East and West Germany liberalized their criminallaws against adult homosexuality in the late 1960s.

“Gay Holocaust” survivors could be re-imprisoned for “repeat offences”, and were kept on the modern lists of “sex offenders”. Under the Allied Military Government of Germany, some homosexuals were forced to serve out their terms of imprisonment, regardless of the time spent in concentration camps. (X)

Also worth mentioning that homosexuals are still largely unacknowledged as victims of the Holocaust even within circles where they should know better.  For example, in the Holocaust Museum in DC and Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, gay deaths are acknowledged only in passing and there is not a single picture of a “man of the pink triangle” - only of an empty ballroom that had once held a gay dance club.  When Yad Vashem was completely redone in 2005, gay groups pressed for inclusion alongside other non-Jewish groups such as the disabled, Roma, etc., and numerous senior-level officials and the Rabbinate condemned such requests for inclusion, with some going so far as to suggest that the homosexuals were German criminals and therefore did not belong in the same category as the Jews who had done nothing wrong.  When the memorial to gays in the Holocaust was unveiled in Berlin four years ago, senior members of Yad Vashem condemned it and, in particular, its proximity to the memorial for Jewish victims of the Shoah.

this planet shouldn’t be allowed to exist any longer

This is important. Of all the WWII history I learned in school, this was never once mentioned.

Oh my GOD.

And now my soul is bleeding.

Re-blogging again because when I was being taught the history of Nazi Germany, THIS WAS NEVER EVER EVER MENTIONED. NOT ONCE. 

See, Jay? I’m not the only one who wasn’t taught it!

well fuck i’m glad my family emigrated.

it takes a WHOLE FUCKING LOT to surprise but i’m actually surprised.

surprised that the revelation of this kind of information and that the fight for inclusion in MEMORIALS as in LET’S REMEMBER THAT OUR PEOPLES DIED TOGETHER were written off or received any sort of backlash.

that’s fucked up.

(via basedkanyewest-deactivated20120)

anirishginger:

zuky:

Real Definition: Racism (i.e. white supremacism) is an interlocking set of economic, political, social, and cultural institutions, structures, attitudes, beliefs, and actions which systematically advantage one racial group at the expense of all others. Racism is measured not merely by interpersonal hostilities, but by the racial inequality of societal outcomes.

A definition based in reality, not in ass-backwards white ideology. 

This is why I love Zuky \(^_^)/ woot woot 

(via melancholic-despondency-deactiv)

fyeahblackhistory:

The myths surrounding Ancient African Writing systems

Historically, the continent of Africa was looked at as the “Dark Continent”. It was assumed that Africa was “uncivilized” and “barbaric” and in no way could have developed such complex languages. There were many different writing systems in Africa. The writing systems were and still are, a reflection of various philosophies [thought processes] found in African cultures and civilizations. Language, to an African mind is part of your spirituality. The word spirituality is a way of life based on a society’s belief systems and moral values as they relate to a higher being. A spirituality is all of what you define yourself to be and is intertwined with your everyday actions. Your spirituality cannot be separated from your being. Egyptians believed that God is everything and everything is God as did many other Africans, not the idea that God is just in everything. Spirituality is also the relationship between you and your ancestors. When a person dies, the “spirit” returns to a higher being. Your ancestors then become, your link with that higher being. Symbolism is a way of expressing that spirituality through individual aspects of your culture. Therefore spiritual symbolism means your relationship with a higher being and your ancestors who are parts of the higher being through the individual aspects of your culture in everyday life. Much of the text written by Egyptian scribes were attached to a Egyptian spiritual belief.

Source: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/Welcome.html

(via jhameia)

The Nigeria vs Ghana debate (Nigerian POV)

sonofdust:

All Africans are well aware of the statistics - Approximately 1 out of every 2 West Africans, 1 out of every 4 Africans, and 1 out of every 5 persons of African origin is a Nigerian.

Whenever there is a gathering of black/African people and a matter of politics is brought up, the fractions form and the “Ghana must go”, “419” insults fly around. All in jest …obviously. I tend to avoid such arguments as they are futile and there is clearly one winner regarding which is the best country: Ghana

Having been brought up in Nigeria for a fraction of my childhood I was instilled with patriotism, I recall assemblies were we did the oath, placing our hands on our chest and declaring to serve Nigeria. 

That blind optimism for Nigeria has disappeared. It is mind boggling that a country which is over 50 years old is the way it is. Corruption is the obvious bandwagon to jump on, that is well known but the fact it has become so ingrained in Nigerian Society is shameful. Security is appalling, armed robbery, theft is rife in the country, what is a society without peace? Don’t get me wrong I love our culture and tradition, the fact that 300+ ethnic groups are still together and have not fractured under the weight of post-colonial control and mapping is very commendable. But why are people so greedy in Nigeria, the curse of black gold is producing a society that is no society at all, people care for themselves first, their families second community doesn’t usually make the list.

How can someone have 2 lamborghinis, a ferrari, helicopter along with security guards to protect it but the road that leads to his house is full of potholes - one lambo is enough to fix that road for the entire town but people don’t care. HIV is now prevalent in Nigeria, hypocritically claiming to be conservative with sex and very big on religion.

The Nigerian government is just a sham. Deemed a “cabal” by the Hon. Patrick Obahiagbon, and rightfully so. The massive gap between the rich and the poor is fuelled by incompetent leaders, leaders that suck the economy dry, and these politicians keep on resurfacing and the Nigerian people have no boldness to rise up like the Tunisians. Contrasting the potential - oil, minerals, work force, weather, geological strength, land size - contrasting to this to what we could have achieved by now is just depressing. 

Ghana - Warrior King - on the other hand - the first independent sub saharan African country in terms of mineral resources, power, land, agriculture has nothing compared to Nigeria.

Yet look how far they have come, the just had one of the fastest growths in economy last year. Peace and Security prevail in this nation, in fact a lot of Nigerian businessmen and millionaires are now moving to live in Ghana - because it is safe. Safe. They have a richer society even though Nigeria has a larger economy to spend on its people, there is a greater togetherness in Ghana. Perhaps this is because Ghana is not as ethnically diverse as Nigeria but in terms of culture and tradition, I would very nearly declare that I’d rather be Ashanti than Yoruba but that is too a heavy statement. I love the culture, the attires, the art and the history. Nigerians don’t value history, museums are run down, galleries are run down. I don’t meant to paint Ghana as a Utopia, it is not, it has its flaws. Ghana has elections coming up this December and reports of fragility are breaking out. 

However if there is to be an argument between which is the better country, Nigerians should keep quiet and applaud Ghanaians. 

Also

  • The Black Stars are better than the Super Eagles
  • I have never met a Ghanaian I do not like, Nigerians on the other hand…

*Clear throat*

Before reblogging this I would like to say that I am not taking any side, I am Cameroonian  \(^-^)/ and I love all of you my African brothers (Please Nigerian or Ghanaian people don’t come at me, I love you guys *starts shaking and sweating heavily with fear*) I really don’t want to take side guise, can we all get along? Please? :-)

Anyway very interesting post, but I found it quite descriptive and not enough analytic in the sense that it doesn’t address the origins of the crisis that Nigeria is facing. 

"How can someone have 2 lamborghinis, a ferrari, helicopter along with security guards to protect it but the road that leads to his house is full of potholes - one lambo is enough to fix that road for the entire town but people don’t care."

^^^ THIS THIS THIS is Cameroon to the T. A place where you can see people driving fucking Lexus and Lamborghini on almost non-existent roads with children begging on the fucking side of the streets. The violence in Nigeria is just a result of the huge inequalities which are a product of corruption. Cameroon is starting to look like Nigeria and it terrifies me really ;_; Yaounde has changed so fucking much. I haven’t been there for years but people are telling me that violence is skyrocketing and everywhere on the hills of Yaounde - where the rich live - more and more ginormous mansions are being built, yet there are more children roaming the streets.  

So what do Nigeria and Cameroon have in common?? OIL!!

Yep, you can’t make an analysis of any African country while ignoring that every single one of them is STILL TO THIS DAY A COLONY. Cameroon is not a free country in my opinion and neither is Nigeria. Most of what is going there is directly due to white supremacy i.e. the corruption, indigenous people’s rights violated to the benefit of western (oil) companies, lack of democracy … all of this. Cameroon wasn’t always this, bad. Yes there was corruption, but not this rife, with not so much inequality and violence. It is when our reserves in oil where found that things really started to go downhill. And the fact that we now have the oldest African dictator, who is also senile and live recluse in Switzerland doesn’t help either. 

Seriously natural resources are the curse of many African nations. Equatorial Guinea and Angola are taking this road! Truly depressing!!

Ghana, on the other hand, is another story. I do not want to imply in any way that Ghanaians have no merit, but the true is that Ghana was and is still held by international financial agencies as the poster child for the success of their policies. I am saying it as it is, the west has a vested interest in Ghana doing much better because it would be the proof that the IMF and their wack ass economic policies work - and they don’t!! Democracy is not impossible in Nigeria or in Cameroon but it is not in the interest of western companies and governments contrary to Ghana!!

As for “The Black Stars are better than the Super Eagles

Who cares??

Sorry, but I can’t hear you over Cameroon’ FIVE African Nation Cups ;-)

BTW Imma need in the future every mention of African football to include our proud indomitable lions. Otherwise, that is blasphemy, people! BLASPHEMY!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH Sorry I can’t feel myself anymore when I talk about Cameroonian football, my head get so big XD

The problem isn’t that cultures intermingle, it’s the terms on which they do so and the part that plays in the power relations between cultures. The problem isn’t “taking” or “borrowing”, the problem is racism, imperialism, white supremacy, and colonialism. The problem is how elements of culture get taken up in disempowering, unequal ways that deny oppressed people autonomy and dignity. Cultural appropriation only occurs in the context of the domination of one society over another, otherwise known as imperialism. Cultural appropriation is an act of domination, which is distinct from ‘borrowing’, syncretism, hybrid cultures, the cultures of assimilated/integrated populations, and the reappropriation of dominant cultures by oppressed peoples.

What’s being appropriated in *cultural appropriation* isn’t the things themselves — the images, stories, artefacts, themes, etc. — it’s the capacity of people of oppressed groups to determine the meaning, scope, usage, and future of those things. Cultural appropriation involves taking over peoples’ control over representations of themselves. Cultural appropriation is an attack on cultural autonomy and self-determination, backed up by historically constructed domination.

What is cultural appropriation. (via bricorama)

Just for emphasis: 

What’s being appropriated in *cultural appropriation* isn’t the things themselves — the images, stories, artefacts, themes, etc. — it’s the capacity of people of oppressed groups to determine the meaning, scope, usage, and future of those things. Cultural appropriation involves taking over peoples’ control over representations of themselves. Cultural appropriation is an attack on cultural autonomy and self-determination, backed up by historically constructed domination

(via somerset)

So i just read this ‘ i guess what i am wondering is, it cultural appropriation if a girl from niger wears adinkra jewelry, or is it only cultural appropriation if a girl from the states does?  feel me?” And it scares me because I realised that far too many people have actually no clue what cultural appropriation means and its effect. And I felt compelled to re-post this definition of cultural appropriation because we have far too many people talking about something they do not understand or simply do not want to understand.

It is not about ‘borrowing’ some artifacts!! It is about ‘power relations between cultures' and the 'terms on which' the said borrowing is done. Whether or not black westerners want to admit it, their status of westerners afford them a long list of privileges that we Africans, do not have, I have developed this point earlier, we are clearly in an unequal power relation. Futhermore, the total lack of respect, consideration for the opinions of African bloggers and arrogance and self-entitlement I have seen yesterday from many African American speak volume on whose terms that 'borrowing' is happening.

We are basically asked, as Africans, to hush up while our cultures are being pillaged because you know, your blackness - a concept alien to most African cultures - entitled to our identity. Nope!! You can claim that you are African, it is perfectly OK but do not ever contest our discretion on our cultures and identities!

(via dreams-from-my-father)

Did you know?

yumadwhiteboy:

collectivecrack:

White American males constitute only 33% of the population. Yet, they occupy approximately:

  • 80% of tenured positions in higher education
  • 80% of the House of Representatives
  • 80-85% of the U.S. Senate
  • 92%of Forbes 400 executive CEO-level positions
  • 90% of athletic team owners
  • 97.7% of U.S. presidents

And then they flip out when they’re not allowed in the Women’s Tent. 

(via strugglingtobeheard)

The problem isn’t that cultures intermingle, it’s the terms on which they do so and the part that plays in the power relations between cultures. The problem isn’t “taking” or “borrowing”, the problem is racism, imperialism, white supremacy, and colonialism. The problem is how elements of culture get taken up in disempowering, unequal ways that deny oppressed people autonomy and dignity. Cultural appropriation only occurs in the context of the domination of one society over another, otherwise known as imperialism. Cultural appropriation is an act of domination, which is distinct from ‘borrowing’, syncretism, hybrid cultures, the cultures of assimilated/integrated populations, and the reappropriation of dominant cultures by oppressed peoples.

What’s being appropriated in *cultural appropriation* isn’t the things themselves — the images, stories, artefacts, themes, etc. — it’s the capacity of people of oppressed groups to determine the meaning, scope, usage, and future of those things. Cultural appropriation involves taking over peoples’ control over representations of themselves. Cultural appropriation is an attack on cultural autonomy and self-determination, backed up by historically constructed domination.

What is cultural appropriation. (via bricorama)

Just for emphasis: 

What’s being appropriated in *cultural appropriation* isn’t the things themselves — the images, stories, artefacts, themes, etc. — it’s the capacity of people of oppressed groups to determine the meaning, scope, usage, and future of those things. Cultural appropriation involves taking over peoples’ control over representations of themselves. Cultural appropriation is an attack on cultural autonomy and self-determination, backed up by historically constructed domination

(via somerset)

(via windupbirdchronicle)

chasingdevon:

This is to all those folks that get tired of us calling out racism, venting our own experiences on our blogs, why we hate being called “sj warriors” like these experiences aren’t our own, but mostly why you can go fuck yourself if you want us to shut up.
These aren’t just isolated incidents. This happens every day and people either send us these messages (I’ve deleted many because the n-word is a definite trigger, for obvious reasons) or passive aggressively post on their blogs about us.

chasingdevon:

This is to all those folks that get tired of us calling out racism, venting our own experiences on our blogs, why we hate being called “sj warriors” like these experiences aren’t our own, but mostly why you can go fuck yourself if you want us to shut up.

These aren’t just isolated incidents. This happens every day and people either send us these messages (I’ve deleted many because the n-word is a definite trigger, for obvious reasons) or passive aggressively post on their blogs about us.

(via windupbirdchronicle)

simplygarrison:

Most of his friends were getting rich, thats why. Capitalism only works with wins & losses. 

simplygarrison:

Most of his friends were getting rich, thats why. Capitalism only works with wins & losses. 

About 168,000 black men between the ages of 14 and 24 were stopped under the controversial NYPD program in 2011 — compared to the 158,406 who live in the five boroughs.

The startling statistic is part of a harsh critique of the NYPD’s stop, question and frisk program based on 685,724 encounters between cops and citizens in 2011.

The analysis of the hot button issue was based in part on information the NYCLU obtained from the NYPD, which says the stops have been instrumental in recovering guns and driving crime down to record levels.

NYCLU also revealed that although blacks and Hispanics comprised just 14 % of the population in six precincts, they still accounted for more than 70 % of the stops there.

For instance, in the 6th Precinct, which covers Greenwich Village and Soho, 77 % of the stops involved blacks and Latinos - even though they comprise just 8 % of the population.

The number is almost as high - 71 % - in the 19th Precinct that covers the Upper East Side, where blacks and Latinos are just 9 % of the population.