A sister speaks out . . .

http://www.sexingthepolitical.com/2002/two/aiding.htm

R. Kelly is gonna do 5 minutes worth of jail-time if that--come out and become a minister--you heard it here first.
But in the meantime, Chocolate Factory (his latest album) is selling well. We gotta keep him able to buy blank tapes so he can keep recording his intimate moments with kindergardeners.

Does society paint Black women as brazen hussies or hot-to-trot Jezebels?

Do we fit black girls into the paradigm of “asking for it.”

Is the black community past due for a deep look at itself when it comes to how we avoid dealing with sexual assault and exploitation, particularly in our homes?

Justice will handle it all in due tyme ..................

Monster,

Of course we've always been painted with the sassy, "Sapphire" brush. All lil girls are "asking for it" in the sense that they dress too provocatively and act a lil too sexually mature. Now, I'm not saying they deserve to be molested/sexually assaulted because of their attire. But when you're in a setting where there's members of the opposite sex, scantily clad lil girls and no adult supervision--something bad is gonna happen.
We're waaayyyyy past due for a closer look at how we deal with sexual assault and exploitation............

OHMAWGAWD---KEME ACTUALLY MADE SENSE WITHOUT BEING INSULTING----if I'm dreaming don't wake me...................

Great input Keme!! Now . . .let me paraphrase the article at the link and get your thoughts:

To fight racism and hostility in the workplace, the Black family was where most if not all Black men and women turned to as a source of refuge.

The article states, this is why Black women rejected the feminist movement in it's early days, because part of it's political platform was an attack upon the patriarchical structure that exists in traditional families and Black families adopted the same structure.

The article goes on to say that, as a result, Black women have deliberately ignored "valid critiques about patriarchy and the price to families is short-sighted. That impulse, combined with the caveat against “airing dirty laundry” is about as effective as the Catholic Church’s in-house handling of abuse."

Do you think that Black women have silenced themselves by NOT facing the truth about sexism in the Black family by ignoring it in order to save face in public as well as to try to keep some sense of peace at home? To quote Audre Lorde: “Your silence will not protect you”. What do you think?

http://www.sexingthepolitical.com/2002/two/aiding.htm

keme on hit good question!!!!

Keme...you answer my questions! Nah!!!

Having a bad reaction to the meds? :D

(looking around)--Keme, you couldn't be talking to me like that!!

Anyway Keme, unlike you I will not try and speak for all Black women (as you try and portray yourself as John Q. Blackman)--I can only speak of my definition.
I define myself as a unique, Divinely-created, invaluable resource and I demand to be treated as such.
I refuse to kneel or bow and the World may see that as me being difficult or being a "b*tch" and if it does that's their issue to deal with, not mine. My head is not turned by flashy clothes or jewelry but by honesty and sincerity.
Keme, I guess that line will be drawn when we've decided to kill all you males and resurrect the Amazonian way-of-life--hehehehehehehehehe........
The line will be drawn when we've decided we've had enough and we are rapidly approaching that point...........

lol@John Q Blackman!!!!!!!!!!!

Keme...try to stay focused and answer my question I posed to you several messages ago . . .

"Do you think that Black women have silenced themselves by NOT facing the truth about sexism in the Black family by ignoring it in order to save face in public as well as to try to keep some sense of peace at home? To quote Audre Lorde: “Your silence will not protect you”. What do you think?"

Come on, you made sense once, try it again . . .

Keme...do you have a problem with answering my questions? The piece that I quoted and asked you to respond to, appeared in the article written about R. Kelly....

Oooooooookay...now, we're still waiting.

Sheesh... :rolleyes:

I said it once I'm a say it again NNQueen I think Kem likes it feisty...start anotha argument wit him, itll last longer :) LOL

Keme....scroll!

:)

Very interesting kem ... where was this open forum that you mentioned? is that thread archived?

I heard the same that "the men wouldn't let the women participate..." but I didn't hear them say "they didn't have anything to attone for" ... that would certainly be a pivotal point in understanding the dynamics of relationships going on today.

I read the question differently. My interpretation of the question is that Black women have deliberately ignored sexist treatment in the home because they would be too embarrassed if it were known in public that she was being treated that way, and if she objected to it, it would create problems in the home. So, by not saying anything about it (effectively silencing herself), she actually perpetuates the condition and becomes part of the problem.

Question: How did sexism result in the Black family evolving into a matriarch?

I'm still not clear about your interpretation of sexism which is defined as a "set of attitudes and behaviours towards people that judge or belittle them on the basis of their gender, or that perpetuate stereotypical assumptions."

Because we live in a patriarchal society, sexism is usually exercised by men toward women. Even if what you say is true, still there is evidence that a man can impose sexist attitudes toward and treatment of women in the home. Women are more often objectified in our society than men. Now I'm not saying that men aren't, I'm just saying that more often, women are.

But what I gather from the article, Black women might tend not to discuss it openly as much as White women, which is why Anita Hill was praised by White women and alienated by Black women. I've heard Black women say about Anita that she shouldn't have "washed her dirty laundry in public" like that when she exposed Clarence Thomas' sexist behavior.

So I'm not sure I follow the meaning behind your comments, especially when you wrote:

"Very few [women] were willing to admit or even acknowledge the mistakes they had made in their lives. It is too easy to play the blame game. Especially for females. That is where the hidden sexism lies in our community. Men hear all the time what they do wrong. A woman's sins are too quickly and too often forgiven. Thus they are repeated."

By this are you blaming SEXISM on Black women?

The problem with Anita Hill's revelation....ten years had past since the incidences, I think that's what bothered those who alienated her.

Oh, well, since you put it that way Keme, then...I disagree!

ZG, I agree that was part of the issue with Anita's "coming out."

I agree with Kem, welfare was part of the downfall of the Black family and females went along with it.

And I disagree with you too Regina. And the reason I disagree is that the two of you are taking a situation that is far more complex than that and reducing it to a single one-liner which I think is an insult to Black people in general and to Black women in particular. And what does welfare have to do with sexism which is the focus of this thread?

Peace!

How much has the fiasco around R. Kelly affected the Black community and the way we perceive what may have been considered as not unsual behavior by Black men with young girls?

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=13386

I'm asking these questions because I don't really know the facts but hopefully someone here who does can shed some light on the subject.

Wasn't there a time, in many different cultures, when it wasn't taboo and was permissible and even encouraged for younger women to marry older men?

Weren't there rituals and cultural celebrations around the time when young girls, during a certain cycle of her life, were honored and introduced to her society as a woman, ready to marry and bear children?

When and why did this change--or has it changed only in more modern so-called "civilized" countries?

In western civilizations, age is used as a ruler to measure where one is in life from the womb to the death beds. There is school-age, work-age, when to get legally married-age, when to legally drink alcohol and purchase cigarettes-age, when to drive-age, when it's socially acceptalbe to bear children-age, retirement-age.

With most (if not all) of these "age" driven social activities, there are stigmas attached if people operate outside of the parameters of what's socially acceptable behavior. But many people add to the legal aspects of these things and judge them morally as well.

Somehow, at some point in time, some people started to think it was "sinful" or went against a particular religious dogma, if, for example, an older person is attracted to or wants to marry a much younger person.

Jerry Lee Lewis was ridiculed, ostracized and publically humiliated when he married a 13 year old girl (not to mention that she was also his cousin).

Are these relationships written about in the Bible or Q'uran or some other religious textbook? Does religion set an age standard on relationships between men and women?

Was the most overwhelming issue people had with R. Kelly the fact that he was having sex with a young girl as opposed to sex outside of marriage? He's been labeled "sick" because he's attracted to younger women. Why is that taboo?

:nuts:

What is wrong here!!! People are supporting a man that lies about having sex with kids. Is it just me or this is crazy, why on earth is people buying this man records and saying things like "oh yeah he's a grown man" and "whatever he does behind closed doors is his business". Well when he's corrupting the minds of our little sisters its should be everybodies business.

I agree with Nine cloud and Regina on this one, as well as NNqueen, although to a lesser degree. NNQueen. your statements about mores and tradition regarding the rites of passage on the previous page are very profound. If I may I would like to answer your question, of what and when things went wrong. It happened we were sold into slavery, and has never been the same. I've been reading all the post on this topic... very carefully I might add. You all make very good points.

R. Kelly is sexual child predator, and we need to make a pariah out of people that assault our children. No matter what color they are. In the case of R. Kelly specifically, we should not support him by buying his records. Black men need to show discipline regarding underage girls, not to mention drugs, finances and health.... and black women need show more guidance in dealing with our young girls. Be more pro-active than reactive

hotep

There are a couple of things that R. Kelly did that was wrong, not to mention illegal, in the eyes of many people that have heard the story about his latest sexual fiasco. One, that he allegedly engaged in sexual activity with a MINOR, and two, he had the audacity to videotape it.

We know that things like this happen. We read about it, we hear about it. We listen painfully when we hear tale of it happening in the African American community. R. Kelly is no longer just another guy on the street. He's a famous public figure now and with that comes a heavy burden. Many people--especially young ones--look to him as an example of what they might be able to do one day.

The African American community has made R. Kelly a very rich man. With his fame came fortune that many people can only dream of. Men might look at Kelly and think they want the type of things he can pull with his money--cars, homes, jewelry, parties and women. Women might look at Kelly and think they want a man who can give them the things they want that the average man with a 9 to 5 job might not be able to.

As we look at our youth growing up faster, looking older, behaving more like adults than many adults , it gets a little scarey because we know that, although they may look older, they don't have all the skills and experiences they need to make better choices. Children and adolescents need good parental guidance to help them make the kinds of decisions that all of us who have been through that stage know they will have to make.

Many of us here were taught by some guardian figure--either biological parents, family members, foster parents, and well-intended people in our communities--how to think and make good choices. We weren't allowed to run the streets and do whatever we wanted to do. When we did things right, we were praised, when we messed up, we were disciplined and told not to do it again. But we knew through those experiences how to make good decisions.

Many of us grew up exposed to some religious experience. We were taught about God and knew what the Bible was and even about the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer and Psalms 23:1-6. We heard our elders in the home, in the church and in our communities talking about God and Jesus, we knew the difference between right and wrong. Many of us lived under rules in the home that were based on the religious experiences of our parents.

Sekhemu, it's a well known fact that we are descendents of Africans that were sold into slavery. I agree that it changed the lives for all of us forever. I am not belittling that fact, but I'm wondering how long do we want to keep explaining everything that we do today based on something that took place so many years ago? Can we not be held responsible or accountable for the individual choices that we make when we make them? Do we not know the difference between what is acceptable by us and what isn't? Can Kelly use the fact that we were once slaves as a defensible argument?

The here and the now, for better or worse, this is where we live and we know the rules. Racism is still being practiced daily but when at all possible, we shouldn't put ourselves in harms way for this type of issue. Pedophilia doesn't uplift us as a people; it doesn't build love and respect among our community; it doesn't free us from racist psycho bigots; our children are robbed of their true sense of self and are not empowered to be better than thugs and sluts. It destroys families--Black men and Black women. It destroys the very foundation of our community that many others of us are working so hard to build. Conscious activists lay a brick and people like Kelly, our brother, can't keep his pants zipped up when around girls and breaks the bricks up.

"Black men need to show discipline regarding underage girls, not to mention drugs, finances and health.... and black women need show more guidance in dealing with our young girls. Be more pro-active than reactive ."

I agree Sekhemu--self-discipline and guidance are the key. And both should be practiced by Black men AND Black women because some Black women might be out there doing the same things. We need to start busting our own people instead of waiting for the po-po to get to them. We need to stop accepting dysfunctional behavior in our homes and communities. We need to stop pretending like we don't see these things when many of them happen right in front of us. Often silence is viewed as consent. So you're right Sekhemu--we need to be more proactive instead of reactive.

Peace!

Not to belittle what has been said before. Now the state of Illinois and the City of Chicago can be corrupt places as far as the law is concerned. Now what happened with 'innocent until proven guilty?' Now R could have been the guy in the video, but IF the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago are dragging there feet and the videotape is 'slam dunk' against Kelly even if the 'victim' is reluctant to come forward (can easily solve that by giving immunity and declaring her a hostile witness and threatening the parents with aiding and abetting) then let the feds take over-they DO have child porn and prostitution laws(if the girl actually kept the money as alleged that Kelly gave her in the video) to prosecute. Enough time has passed that an indictment should have ALREADY come down. Those who are buying his music are doing so with the thought of 'innocent until proven guilty'. If YOU are accused of something vile-you'd want the same presumption until a trial is held and completed.

You're right yaphet---Jim Brown, Mike Tyson, OJ Simpson, Michael Jackson, R. Kelly, Kobe Bryant, et al. do deserve their day in court and should not be tried in the public arena BEFORE the jury has had an opportunity to see/hear the facts and render a decision.

Ashe NNQueen.

Part of the problem with parents today is the need to feel we have to be our childrens friends. Instead of assuming leadership and responsibility. It's often very painful to do what is right, particulairly when we don't want to... but you are right Queen, we need to call our people on the carpet. Stop pandering to people that are not raising our level of awareness and creating and maintening the cycle of mediocrity and superficiality.

We don't have a whole lot of time to set things straight. The future is now! So I say again, we ought to make a pariah out of people like R. Kelly et al. This is the time for probably the only time for those in the position of responsibility to start acting responsible instead of what feels comfortable

Hotep

We can make a pariah out of anyone, but not if someone or something tells me too. Tyson is a pariah already with me. Not because he's a street thug but a street thug that was taught skills and received love from a man(Cus D'Amato) that raised him as his own and taught him right from wrong and received more **** opportunities than anyone. Jim Brown an intelligent and a very complex strong man that is embittered by America and to a certain extent by OJ for not getting all that he is due. Now does he have problems with women? Well some incidents were explained and confirmed by the 'victims' themselves. The woman that he allegedly threw-she said she slipped when going out the window to get in the apartment below so the cops couldn't find her. My mind is still out on Jim-too many coincidences.Kobe-since it is new-benefit of the doubt given my gut feelings says about 60% that he did something,about 40% says he did absolutely nothing. Like I said-our justice is not perfect but a trial IS the only forum both sides get to hash things out and some facts either way may come out that reinforces or changes your mind about what you initially thought.

Yaphet R. Kelly was brought up on multiple child pornography and molestation charges. Not only that it's been well documented that he's payed of a number of under age girls to stop them from going to the authorities. The point is nobody is supporting the other men you mention in your reply like they do R. Kelly. We need to stop treating these sexual predators with kid gloves. At least Mike Tyson had to go to prison for what was essentially her word agains his.

yaphet...in a perfect world there will be a perfect judicial system (or maybe there won't even be a need for one) but the point is, our world is not perfect and the public knows that. Nevertheless, I'm sure Kelly will have his opportunity to tell his side of the story. In the meantime though, it's difficult not to form some initial opinions about the whole story, especially when people come forward and admit they have some problems, as Kelly did in an interview. Is he denying that he has sex with underaged women or is he denying that the man on the video is him?

I agree with Sekhemu...let's bring the brother out of the closet, lurking in dark allies and let him know that our community doesn't support him preying on our young girls by not buying his records. Let's send him and others like him a strong and very clear message about that.

If we do this in spite of the fact that there are parents out there who don't know and don't care what their children are doing, in spite of the fact that there are young girls who willingly engage in such activities, it will make a resounding difference to these predators AND to the irresponsible parents and misguided children.

Now, I would imagine you would then say--okay that sounds reasonable but WHEN should the African American community do this--before the trial or after the trial? True, in the US judicial system, you're supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty." But let's face it yaphet....even though the Kelly's and Simpsons can afford the best attorneys in the world who can win their cases, in the eyes of the African American community, are they really innocent or have they simply managed to remain free on some legal technicalities?

Look at OJ after his famous trial. The African American community was shown on tv celebrating the jury's verdict of not guilty but I don't see us helping him to regain what he had lost in the form of contracts and endorsements afterwards. Why is that? Is it because we really don't believe he's innocent? Then why were we so jubilant over the verdict?

Kelly goes on television admitting that he has a problem and needs counseling. Writes songs about his fall from grace--and people run to the stores to buy his story. Why can't we chill on purchasing any more of his music, until AFTER the verdict then determine for ourselves his guilt or innocence.

I would agree with you Queen on a certain extent with R Kelly. Just wish they can get his trial on. If he is arrested and charged-where is the indictment? They would get more progress to get somebody to turn in a mob case than this one. Look, I am a civil libertarian as anyone but I support close to the boundary draconian measures as having the state child welfare agency take the victim from the parents, hold the parents' on many charges as general as obstruction of justice, hindering prosecution and conspiracy. Bring Sparkle in and get her cooperation by threatening to charge her with madam and other pandering laws with minors. Go to the school that R Kelly went to and anyone that ran their mouths off to the tabs and anyone that would listen about R Kelly-give them immunity and go hard on any perjury charges if they lie on any sworn testimony. Take the victim that was videotaped(after separated from parents) and any other victims of R Kelly whether they settled with R Kelly or not-give immunity from prosecution. Those that settled with Kelly if they refuse to cooperate, jail them and work very dilligently to vacate every monetary settlement made with Kelly through the courts-whether he paid them or not and use RICO laws to threaten jail and forfeiture of possessions if no cooperation is received. All the silence and conspiracy of silence for R Kelly for money making ventures across state lines does have the elements of a RICO prosecution that can be made by a neophyte DA-if they so choose. My method, not illegal and quasi-legal at best are the best method for getting at the truth. Enough carrot-TIME for the STICK!

By the way, I would expand any RICO prosecution to his label, distributors, award shows that nominated his music and any venue that had him appear.