What is BITCHASSNESS?

Like the Maharincess of Franistan, the word "bitchassness" is in my vocab a lot. I really hate this word, but sometimes, it's the only one that applies. I've been asked what it means - more than once - and it's a very hard term to define, and I have virtually no time to explain it. So I'll jot this quick definition down for now, and I'll come back to this later: bitchassness is the combination of being a punk and being a coward. It's committing bitch acts, and then arranging it to where you don't have to answer or account for them, which is particularly galling when there's no reason to do it. You can sift through my "bitchassness" tag for some examples. I'll be back soon.

There is no FAMU sex tape.

That is all.

I feel the earth move under my feet...

That rumbling you're feeling right now is bodies turning in their graves.

Martin. Medgar. Malcolm. Jimmie Lee. Harry. Viola. Andrew, James and Michael.

These are the names of just a handful of the people who were murdered fighting for our freedom.

I've long said that there's nothing and nobody who could ever make me ashamed of being black. Right now, that theory is being tested. My pride in my race is being severely strained. Not over something as lame at the BET Awards or the existence of Flavor Flav, but because a black man was illegally arrested in his own home, and far too many of us think it was his fault for having the nerve - the gall! - to know his rights and stand up for himself.

What a bastard.

I admit my disdain for the police is pretty high, and I don't apologize for it. But I'm not crazy, either. Like most black Americans, I know the routine if I'm ever pulled over or detained. Hands on the wheel. Move slowly. Don't even think about doing something as crazy as asking for a badge number - that's some Hollywood shit. (The jury is still out on whether it's safe to have your license and registration in your hand, since it could be mistaken for a weapon.) Speak softly and politely and for the love of God, smile. And keep smiling. Keep smiling when you're pulled over for driving a raggedy-ass VW Jetta in the "good" part of town. Keep smiling when you're pulled over twice in the same night while driving your boyfriend's expensive Audi. Keep smiling when you're sitting on the curb in your army PTs and a pair of flip-flops while the cops - who are doing an illegal search of your car - won't even toss you your jacket. Keep smiling when you're stopped at the door of any store. Keep smiling when you wake up in the morning, moving stiffly to examine the bruises on your arm, it could've been worse. Keep smiling or else it could very well get you killed.

Sometimes you get sick of smiling. So when Dr. Henry Gates got arrested for little more than LWB - Living While Black - I got a little excited. This was a man who could actually afford to stand up and fight. This was a man who could put a spotlight on the egregiousness of racial profiling and overzealous police officers who measure their penises with with nightsticks (or masturbate with them). Sure, bells went off at my head at "beg my forgiveness", but I was chalking that up to my MTV Generation* fear.

And then - Jesus tap-dancing Christ on a cracker!!! - the president spoke up in Gates's defense. President Barack Obama took a break from channeling his inner Cosby and finally said out loud that yes, people of color tend to be disproportionately stopped - and even harassed - by police officers. Okay, so I could've sworn I heard Rev. Wright chuckling somewhere, but I pushed that out of my head, along with the sudden aching in my right arm. I went to bed and slept for 16 hours straight, convinced that finally - finally! - justice was going to be done. Not that shaky O.J. Simpson kind of justice, but justice for a man whose innocence couldn't be denied by anybody. I couldn't wait to party at the newly christened Gates Square in a couple of months.

When I woke up, I was in Bizarro World.

The general public was enraged, but not with Sgt. Jim Crow(ley). They were furious with the president. Not only had Crowley still not apologized - not even for arresting a man in his own house when the burglary charge turned out to be bogus - but Pres. Obama was all but apologizing to him. Dr. Gates (last seen fighting "for justice for all the black men in America") was contemplating having a beer with this man. Black people were mocking Gates for not following "the black rules" when it came to being arrested. Over and over and over, I kept hearing this phrase: He got what he deserved.

Why?

Better yet, how?

Being a jerk in one's own home is not illegal. Refusing to step outside and show your ID to a police officer is not illegal. Talking about a cop's mama is not illegal. Disorderly conduct? Please. On the other hand, false arrest is illegal. Refusing to give your full name and badge number is illegal. If it's true that Dr. Gates wasn't read his rights while being arrested (or before being questioned, IIRC), then that's illegal as well. Oh, and calling for backup after Gates had provided Crowley with two forms of ID was a bit of a jerk move.

So with all due respect, Mr. President, Sgt. Jim Crow(ley) is not an "outstanding police officer." He's not a hero. He is, to quote one of my favorite movies, a big baby who doesn't know his thumb from his dick. He is hiding behind a badge, a blue line and a racial divide. I've yet to read a single article that suggest Gates is guilty of anything; at the most, it's"they both were in the wrong." Well, one was possibly in the wrong, and one was breaching his duties as a public servant.

White privilege: when you can be hailed for NOT doing your job.

I'm sick of hearing about how it wasn't smart for Dr. Gates to talk back to the police officer. I'm sick of hearing about how what we, as ordinary black Americans, would've handled the issue. I'm sick of hearing about his white wives and his trip to Ireland and his smarmy Harvard ways and how he thank he white. Is Skip Gates a massive asshole with a chip on his shoulder? By every account I've seen, heard and read so far, yes. Was his arrest due to him being a black man in America? Maybe, maybe not. Is he a clueless Ivy buppie with his head up his ass, especially considering his age? Definitely.

But being a media-whoring asshole whose trip to Nigger Alley came way too far along in life doesn't warrant being arrested. It is not illegal, nor should it be illegal. Any so-called good American should be outraged - and they would be, if Dr. Gates was white. If Dr. Gates was white, James Crowley would be little more than a mouth-breathing lughead who terrorized a poor old man far above him on both the economic and social ladder. He'd be little more than white trash.

But this is kind of a non-issue now, isn't it? Now that the charges have been dropped and (black) feet have been held to the flames, it's pretty much over. An event that Dr. Gates basically pimped - at the expense of the feelings and experiences of black people - is now being considered a 'teachable moment'. People are desperate to move on. The president - who is recovering very well from his double knee surgery due to extreme backpedaling - is being hailed as a peacemaker. Peace, as usual, is coming at the expense of the disenfranchised.

"I'm going to Disney World Washington, DC!"

This should not be happening. 50 years ago, this wouldn't be happening. Dr. King and Malcolm X didn't see eye to eye for most of their lives, but at the very least, both of them would've had strong opinions about this matter, wouldn't have been afraid to say so, and probably laughed at the idea of having drinks with the oppressor, at least until he admitted he was dead wrong.

Sometimes, I really think we don't get it. The assassinations of Dr. King and Senator Robert Kennedy were 40 years ago, which is chronologically a blink of an eye. The grandmother of my great-grandmother - who died only eight years ago - was a slave. The Dallas Independent School District wasn't legally declared desegregated until 2003. (It is now over 90% minority; Dallas is over half white.) Yet the powers that be threw us Affirmative Action - which primarily benefits white women - housing projects and The Cosby Show, and we've been sitting at the front of the bus with our feet up and hands behind our heads ever since. Then we mock Revs. Sharpton and Jackson when we're too lazy (or fearful) to stand up and give them our seats. These were men who were on the front lines during the Movement, and yet we're so pampered and scared that we lambaste Rev. Sharpton for supporting a black man for having the nerve to protest a false arrest.

We laugh at him when we should be apologizing.

And to Martin. And Medgar. And Malcolm. Jimmie Lee. Harry. Viola. Andrew, James and Michael. They're long gone, and we're so complacent in the scraps of freedom that they sacrificed their lives to give us that we haven't stepped up yet.
___

*Generation Y is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Sorry.

Covenent to Dallas Academy: "We're sorry you suck."

Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. - 1 Corinthians 9:24

Here's what you've heard: last week, the girls' basketball team at The Covenant School beat the girls at Dallas Academy, 100-0. Dallas Academy (or DA for short) is for "...students who have been diagnosed with dyslexia, dysgraphia, and other learning differences." Because of this, Covenant is a much of testosterone filled jerks who beat up some poor retarded kids* and have no right to call themselves Christians. In fact, they've been bullied so badly about their victory that they are attempting to retroactively forfeit it. I guess that's what Jesus would do.

Here's what you probably haven't heard: the same night, DA's boys beat Covenant's boys 50-38.

Why does this chap my ass so much, you ask? First, blowouts in high school sports (and especially private school high school sports) are not uncommon, as the talent in these schools tend to be lopsided. The fact that these girls are learning disabled is really not the issue here, as evidenced by the DA boys winning the same night. Earlier this year, the Jesuit Rangers boys' basketball team beat the McKinney Boyd Broncos, 108-22. When Coach Mitch Grimes says that these things just happen, they really do. I give credit to DA for not harping on this "we go to a special school and that's why we're not very good" angle, because as their boys have shown, it's bullshit. Being ADHD doesn't make you a bad athlete. Being unable to dribble the ball does.**

Second, as an athlete who has been on both sides of blowouts - both in team (volleyball and basketball) as well as individual (tennis) sports, there is nothing more insulting than the idea that my opponent should ease up on me because I'm not as good. I don't like watching a group of girls being demonized for doing what they should have done, which was win. That's what they're supposed to do. That's what they practice for. That's why they're there. Whatever new aged, feel good bullshit is being pumped in schools is still not translating to the real world***, so why in the world do we insist on hoisting it on our children? Hell, the mercy rule isn't even enforced in real world sports - otherwise, I would've been spared of such sharp, neverending agony last December when Philadelphia crushed Dallas 44-6.

"Okay, how about we let them score the touchdowns, but they aren't allowed to go for the extra point. That's fair, right?"

Now, had I been the coach, I would've removed my first stringers and let the second and third stringers play the game, and I probably would've laid off the full court press. It would've been the nice thing to do. But until a mercy rule is firmly put into place, no coach has to follow my hypothetical example. Besides, this is high school varsity basketball, and these athletes are competing for scholarships and slots on college basketball teams. As cruel as this may sound, you run up the scores so you can run up your stats so you can impress the scouts. Is it taking advantage of the situation? Mos def. But if you don't like it, don't play competitive sports.

And yes, I understand that the students at DA are learning disabled, which doesn't seem to matter for the boys' team. But seriously, listen to these girls.



They're not looking at the score? They don't play to win? Why the hell not? Who taught them that defeatist attitude? Let me guess: the same man who is forfeiting the rest of his team's season, Coach Civello. Here's another example of his leadership:

Civello, as is his custom, didn't say anything to anyone from the opposing school after the game. He always allows for a cooling-down period. A week later, he has not been in contact with anyone from Covenant.

A cooling down period for what? Civello's team has lost every single game for the past four years. Their last three scores before the Covenant game were 78-10, 50-8, and 89-8. And yet, he has plenty of time to court America's new sweethearts, as opposed to reaching out to DA's coach, Mitch Grimes. Gotcha.

I know I sound like I'm whipping up on the girls. I'm not. Hell, I'm impressed by these girls. They know it's just a game, and they seem to have moved on. I'm whipping up on their loser coach, who is parading his team around like a bunch of horses at a fair. He could've played this incident down - kids get blown out all the time - but he didn't. I'm whipping up on the Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools, the idiots who have these two teams in the same playing division. I'm whipping up on the media, who is using this game as an invite to the typical "this is what's wrong with America" battle cry in this everybody is a star country we live in, and taking extra delight in slamming a bunch of high school girls for having the nerve - the GALL! - to play their best, even if it was against a lousy team. I'm whipping up on the people who believe that it's okay to lift up the spirits of the DA players and fans by tearing down the Covenant players, calling for the coach to be fired and the girls - the WINNING girls - to be suspended for the rest of the season. And yes, the Covenant girls deserve a lick or two. C'mon, after a while, it should've been obvious that this was going to be a hollow victory. But I simply can't condemn the Covenant team for treating the Dallas Academy team just like everybody else. I mean, if DA wants to play with the big girls, shouldn't they be treated as such?

LET THE KIDS PLAY. Just let 'em play! Seriously, getting your butt kicked when you play your best is not nationwide news, and it will not scar you for life. Just ask the girls at Dallas Academy.

*This story is already dubious enough, but trying to paint the DA players as "handicapped" and "retarded" just to make the Covenant girls look even worse is beyond the pale.

**This is coming from an ADHD athlete.

***The one where the rent is still due on the first, regardless of if you're learning disabled or bipolar or your booty itches.

Will Tyler Perry just die already?

I love Janet Jackson. Have since I was a kid. I sport a sankofa in the small of my back. So when Tyler Perry defended Janet like a true gentleman when some no-name "journalist" tried to attack her in a fit of bitchassness, I said I would never again go out of my way to attack his work.

I'm rescinding that promise.

I just made the mistake of watching The Family That Preys, seeing that it has two of my favorite actresses, Alfre Woodard and Kathy Bates. I'm one of those people who can watch a bad movie with good actors in it, which is why I own a copy of The Gospel. I'll have to come back to this entry later, but I'll say this now: Tyler Perry is a cancer to black America who deserves to be dragged into the street and shot. If we can lose Biggie and we can lose 2Pac and we can lose the Jam Master, there's no reason in the world why Tyler Perry should live to coon another day.

That is all, for now.

This just in: white gays lose right to marry as well as their damn minds.

Disclaimer: This is a link to the article in question. There have been arguments that the actual column suggests the exact opposite of what the author is trying to say. As a writer who has had this happen to me more than once thanks to an inept copy desk, I'm going to give the writer the benefit of the doubt and reserve my wrath for the editors and whoever is responsible for the cover and the title.
_____

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. – attributed to Einstein

The Advocate: Because we don't really need - or want - your support

I was writing a long entry about how the phenomenon of black homophobia is a crock of shit (more on that later), when I found myself having to write this entry first. The Prop 8 thing is not going to go away anytime soon, sadly, and the rift between white gays and people of color (of all orientations) is going to be there for a pretty long while. The excuse of “Well, I was lashing out when I said those things; it’s time to heal” isn’t going to swing this time, mainly because all the rage white gays were spewing was being directed to the wrong black people. Black voters for Prop 8 were hardly reading liberal, pro-gay blogs with calculators and maps of California counties in hand, trying to get to the bottom of all this. You really think Trick Trick is losing any sleep over this?

A lot of younger blacks have views that run almost polar opposite to our parents’ views, and we’ve taken a lot of shit for challenging their views and telling them flat out that they were/are wrong. I know I’ve moved more than a couple of mountains in my family. Furthermore, a lot of our parents are either very young Boomers, or Generation Jones, arguably the last generation to be directly affected by the Civil Rights Movement. For them, Dr. King is not a symbol or a name. He is not some guy you drag out to win arguments. He’s not an ace card. He was real, and while I certainly can’t speak for all black people, or even all older black people, I can say that that quickest way to get a “girl, hush that foolishness!” is to compare your plight – however serious it may be – to what they went through. My high school experience at Honky McCracker Senior High School was unquestionably a study in institutionalized racism, but it wasn't my grandmother's high school experience of integrating the local high school after the colored high school closed.

Which brings me to my point. As much as white gays want to blame this on sensitive black people and our need to oppress another disadvantaged group (because we obviously have nothing else better to do), here’s the thing: in the black community, the only thing that you’re allowed to compare to the Civil Rights Movement is the Civil Rights Movement. Black white, gay, straight, son of God…if you are trying to get any point across and the words “Dr. King” come up, you’re probably going to lose your African-American audience, particularly if they’re over 50. In fact, the idea that “as long as we’re not being lynched” mentality has run kind of opposite to our well-being as a whole.

Warning: objects in this blog entry are far less real in your mind.

I’ll let Tim Wise, the Guru of Interracial Relations, explain why:

…[C]ontrary to popular belief, research indicates that people of color are actually reluctant to allege racism, be it on the job, or in schools, or anywhere else. Far from "playing the race card" at the drop of a hat, it is actually the case (again, according to scholarly investigation, as opposed to the conventional wisdom of the white public), that black and brown folks typically "stuff" their experiences with discrimination and racism, only making an allegation of such treatment after many, many incidents have transpired, about which they said nothing for fear of being ignored or attacked (10). Precisely because white denial has long trumped claims of racism, people of color tend to underreport their experiences with racial bias, rather than exaggerate them.

Now, one’s delicate sensibilities and painful memories shouldn’t matter any more than one’s religion, and even though the “gay is the new black” motto is lazy and patronizing (“C’mon, you should get it! You’re black!”), it doesn’t take away from the fact that there is only one right way to vote for this issue. It would also be nice if my money tree would start producing $100 bills. The bottom line is simple: as long as white gays keep hoisting up WWMLKD posters and expecting black people to hop aboard the gay rights train, they’re going to stay mad for the next 50 years. It’s not going to work. You’ve been told it’s not going to work. You’ve been SHOWN that it’s not going to work. Therefore, if you keep doing it over and over, don’t be surprised if people like me start to wonder if you have another agenda, one that has nothing to do with healing and everything to do with eking sympathy out of non-black gays. But hey, maybe the gay rights movement is getting their cues from third wave feminism nowadays.*

And just to show that making very powerful and logical arguments for gay rights is very easy to go without pulling poor Martin out of the grave, I’ll finish with this:

I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.—Mildred Loving

Hat tip to Renee at Womanist Musings for inspiring this mini-rant.

*In light of the fact that Prop 8 has placed a big wedge between people of color and non-black gays, I thought it would be great to exercise my white privilege and once again drag poor Dr. King out of the ground to underscore my agenda – this time, in the way of blatant plagiarism!

_______

Mood: fed up
Currently listening to: Midnight Marauders, A Tribe Called Quest

Memo to white women

The first black man who was legally allowed to vote was Thomas Mundy Peterson in 1870.

The first woman to vote was Lydia Chapin Taft in the year 1756. Needless to say, she was a white woman.*

Therefore, as much as white women love to whine about how black men were allowed to vote before they were, this is what's commonly known as complete and utter bullshit.

Get a calculator and a clue,
Me

P.S. If there were so many black men voting before 1920, what was that whole civil rights whatchamajiggy thing about again?

*Speaking of which, white women were allowed to vote in New Jersey as far back as 1776, though this ended in 1807. Women were allowed to vote nationwide thanks to the suffrage movement of the 19th century, but to say that black men were allowed to vote before white women is bollocks.**

**Which one of you bastards got me saying "bollocks" all the time?

_____

Mood: aggravated
Currently listening to: First Day of Snow, Heatwave

I have read a lot of ridiculous "nigger stole my marriage" posts, but this one, directed at me, beat the mousy band.

How much water do you need to drink from a lake before you know if it's salty?

To which I responded:

Salt water or freshwater?

He deleted my post and, locked the topic and banned me from his journal. Lulz.

Proposition 8: Stop blaming your weak, lazy campaign on black people.

Check out Shanikka's post over at Daily Kos. She does an excellent job breaking down the numbers of the Proposition 8 vote, and gives proof positive that there is no possible way that blacks could've caused Prop 8 to pass.

I admit that I was one of the ones who was furious at the thought that such a high percentage of blacks voted for Prop 8. I still think those voters need a kick in the ass. But the more I think about it, plus the more I go over Shannika's post, plus the more black people I talk to (God bless teh_intarwebz), the more I'm starting to think this is all a way to pin the Prop 8 passing on black people - no more, no less. Here's why:

- A lot of times when I'm writing about Prop 8, I write "pass" when I mean "fail" and "yes" when I mean "no." From what I've read and from the Californians I've talked to (all races, sexes and orientations), there are a few things they all agree on. One of those things is that the Prop 8 proposition was very ambiguously written. How many times have you voted "no" in favor of something? Is it possible that many people voted yes, meaning "yes, I believe gays should be allowed to marry?" as opposed to "yes, I believe gay people shouldn't marry?"

- Marriage is a religious institution, and this countryis a Christian one. Both Obama and Biden have both spoken against gay marriage, saying that marriage in and of itself is between a man and a woman. However, they are wholeheartedly for civil unions, and the full, legal rights that married people have. I hear a lot of gay people saying that's not enough, but if they have a problem with that, they need to take that up with their preachers, not with the government.

Personally, I would have no problems if marriage was not offered to anybody in the United States, and everyone had civil unions. My parents got married by a JP at the local courthouse during my mom's lunch break, practically on a whim.* You trying to tell me that wasn't a civil union?

- Let's talk about this 70% vote. First off, you're relying on the idea that every black voter marked his/her race on the ballot, and lots of us don't. Second, the numbers came from CNN, a news source that we can no longer trust. What we're just now learning is that the exit poll was based on less than 2,300 people. If you take into account that blacks in California only make up about 6.2%, we get roughly 224 blacks who were polled. 224 blacks to blame an entire race! The original percentage of black voters who were expected to say yes to Prop 8 was only around 52-58%. Anytime you get a vote that much higher over the projected vote, something went wrong. (Ask Pat Buchanan.) If you're only asking 224 people, it's easy to come up with 70%, just like it's easy to call a state for one person with 10% of the votes. How close to 100% did it take for Obama to turn Indiana blue? Had they asked 2,240 black voters, there's a good chance that the percentage would've been much different.

Finally, and this is the most important thing: Prop 8 was passed because NoP8 ran a lousy, lazy campaign. They relied too heavily on the celebrity endorsements, the fact that they were in a blue state, and that the presidential race was happening on the same day to do any actual work. Additionally, if the gay community was relying on the minority vote to help fail Prop 8, they haven't been paying attention. Minorities - black Americans in particular - have always been conservative (Democrat != liberal). The numbers notwithstanding, the fact that most blacks voted against Prop 8 is not a surprise. The idea that one group of oppressed people would automatically vote in favor of another group of oppressed people is not only asinine, it suggests that minorities don't have a mind of our own. Prop 8 relied on two things: that we would either vote for them because we're black, or we would vote against them because we're black, so there was no need to reach out to them in the first place. Either way, there was little to no reachout to the black community (as small as it is) in the state of California. And that was a huge mistake, because minds can be changed with hard work and open conversation.

I come from a Catholic family, and I grew up believing that homosexuality, like abortion, was wrong and unnatural. I believed this for the same reason my family believed it: because the Church said so. It took getting older and getting to college and doing a lot of thinking and self-exploring and befriending gay people (something I never would have done in high school) to figure out that without a Bible in my hand, I had absolutely no basis for this line of thinking. And once I figured that out, I began to challenge other people's thinking, starting with my own family. I can honestly say that 10 years ago, my family probably would've voted for Prop 8. Today, there's no way they would have; my mother is furious and disgusted with Arkansas's vote to ban gay adoptions**, and that makes me proud.

Another point: personal opinions don't always translate to the polls. The Catholic Church is very specific on abortion - it is a sin, even in the case of rape and/or incest. I happen to half agree with that sentiment. But I would never vote on a proposition that banned abortion under any circumstance, not even if my own parish was the one writing the bill. One of my heroes, Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius, has come under serious fire for being a pro-choice Catholic, as many of us are. Blacks as a whole aren't too keen on interracial marriage (don't lie); our sentiment is more along the lines of "it's okay...as long as it's not my family." But I'd be genuinely surprised if we were to vote against it if it was to ever get to that point. See where I'm going with this? A person's personal beliefs and prejudices don't necessarily frame their vote. If black people are so homophobic, how come the two counties with the most amount of black voters not only defeated Prop 8, but set Prop 8 on fire and danced around the flames? Speaking of voting, 27% of gays voted for McCain this year - the highest percentage of gays voting for a Republican ever. What's up with that?

I keep hearing a lot about the gay community "supporting" the black community. Bollocks. Riding on the coattails of the Civil Rights Movement does not equal support. (And since when have civil rights come from the popular vote, as opposed to the Supreme Court?) If non-black gays would leeching off the civil rights movement, perhaps they would have more black allies, gay and straight. Gays in this country (of all races) have very legitimate issues that need to be addressed, and this is an issue of civil rights, but stop dragging poor Rosa Parks into this.*** I'm so sick of gay people - especially gay white men - wanting to hold our hands one minute and then supporting this garbage in the same breath. The gay community constantly and consistently shows disrespect to blacks by comparing their struggle - which is perfectly valid in and of itself - with our struggle. Once again, laziness is costing them. In order for gays to get blacks to see their side (especially older blacks who lived through that time), they must come up with their own argument and make us see their side. Just like using the Bible to explain who homosexuality is wrong, so is using the Movement to explain why it's right.

Consider this: as a person with bipolar disorder, I fit the legal definition of being disabled. However, I can hide being bipolar if I choose to. I shouldn't have to, but I can if I choose to. Whether or not I do does not take away from the fact that it's a privilege and I can. Therefore, trying to compare being bipolar to being paralyzed or having Down's Syndrome is not only insulting, it's downright ridiculous. On the flip side, I don't think physically disabled people are barred from owning guns, or practicing law in certain states. People don't have long, serious discussions about whether the physically disabled should be allowed to have children, or whether they should be sterilized, and those who do are usually shouted down by people with good sense. But these arguments, while having some things in common, are simply not the same. Trying to suggest that one group has it worse than the other group is like trying to say that being burned to death is worse than being stabbed to death.

And let's be fair: the fault of the passing of Prop 8 isn't on the Mormons, either. Most potential laws have two sides: a pro and a con. It is the job of your side to present your case in a manner that makes people see your side. Saying that the passing of Prop 8 is the fault of the Mormons is like saying that New England losing the Super Bowl is the fault of the New York Giants. How is it the Mormons' fault that the NoP8 people ran a half-assed campaign and took the California vote for granted? The pro side spent millions and millions of dollars and beat the pavement to get people to see their side, as hateful as it was, and they have something to show for it. The con side needs to go back to the drawing board, get a REAL plan, and figure out how to stop isolating entire groups of people.

BTW, I'm perfectly aware that there are black gays and lesbians, and for them, this is a double issue. However, writing "gays (except for black gays)" gets tedious after a while. And now I'm done, more or less. Thoughts?

*edit on 11/9/2008: There is a little anonymouse here who claims that I wrote, "The more I talk to black people, the more I understand why they voted for prop 8." I will pay good money for anybody to show me where I ever said such a thing. I DON'T understand why ANYBODY voted on Prop 8, nor have I spoken to anybody who has." Try again, wee mousie.

*This may have had something to do with the fact that my dad is Baptist, meaning no self-respecting priest would have married them anyway.

**Why isn't this being concentrated on in the news? Because there are virtually no minorities to blame this vote on in Arkansas, that's why.

***This goes double for nursing mothers. Rosa Parks did not sit down on the bus for your lactating breasts. Next person who tries that will get brained in the head with a can of Similac.

The bitch had it coming, or, is it ever okay to hit a woman?

I get so sick of this question, mainly because it only seems to be a common discussion with black people. Even worse, you get a bevy of black women, in their attempts to prove how anti-feminist they are*, piping up about how if a woman is man enough to take a swing at you, she's man enough to get hit back.

Please.

When I get asked this question - and being a mixed martial artist, I get it a lot - my answer is always the same: it's not okay to hit anybody. That's not to say that I would live by that particular creed - sometimes the only thing a person understands is a good ass-whuppin' - but that doesn't make it any less wrong, so just cop to it and be finished. I would tell that to any woman or man. Legitimate reasons to go on the offense and attack somebody are very, very, very small. Don't do it.

That's the ideal answer. The real answer is a little more complicated. A male friend of mine put it like this: it's not okay to hit anybody; it's never okay to hit a woman. I can agree with that, if I wish to avoid a long debate. If you're a woman, hitting a man is like being drunk at Mardi Gras around strangers: it's not a good idea, and the odds are stacked against you, but it doesn't warrant you being violated. The second part is the most important, not the first.

You'll always have the whiners in the Bitchassness Choir singing about how if a woman swings on him, yadda yadda thus and so. But the truth is, those men probably wouldn't swing on their boys that way. Additionally, this is such a straw man argument that it's laughable; how many women run around taking random swings at men? About as many who falsely report rape, but that doesn't stop the argument from coming up during discussions of sexual assault.

But what if I'm defending myself?

Negro, PLEASE. It doesn't take all of this to defend yourself.



Don't get me wrong - when you are in serious danger, all bets are off. I am a firm believer that the lives of me and mine are precious enough to take yours away, if I can. But when it's your crazy ex-girlfriend - and you knew she was crazy when you were dating her - you know good and hell well that you're probably going to get a nasty scratch at worst. You mean to tell me you can't do a running tackle? You can't pin her against the wall, or on the floor? Any able-bodied idiot can do that.

I get hacked at the self-defense argument because I've spent most of my adult life learning self-defense as a martial artist. In this argument of self-defense in the "when can I hit a woman?" debate, most people forget that the main purpose of self-defense is to get away. A lot of instructors rarely even say "hit" - they say "strike" instead, and you always hear about how to "diffuse" the situation, even though "diffuse" really means "take that sucker's eyes out."



But there are some girls out there who can box as hard as any man.

Unless you're dating Ann Wolfe or Lucia Rijker, you sound like a punk. No, really. You do. Go back home and get your balls and then come back this blog. There's a lot of complaining about how black women don't treat black men like men, but it's really hard to take you seriously when you say things like that.

Back in high school, I nearly missed graduating because I took on a girl who hauled off and hit me. At the time, I thought it unfair - after all, she hit me first - but over time, I can see why my punishment was so severe: because I deserved it. I had just come out of basic training the summer before, and while we were about the same size - I was a little taller and she weighed a little more - I was in much better shape and had the advantage of being trained in military hand-to-hand combat. I could have walked away if I wanted to, and had it escalated, I could've subdued her. The principal knew all of this, which is probably why I wound up with the suspension AND the time in alternative school AND the fine AND the probation. Swearing up and down that it was self-defense when I was standing there without a scratch** is probably what got the fine - $350 for insulting the principal's intelligence.

All these years later, I can say what I know to be true:

1) It was wrong, and
2) The bitch had it coming.

When it comes to men hitting women and then claiming self-defense, that's usually what it boils down to: the bitch had it coming. I've never heard a man say that he truly felt threatened, or that he felt he was in genuine danger, and that's why he just had to throw a haymaker, then go to the ground and follow it up with some sucker punches. All the whining and the justifying is the long, LONG way of saying that the bitch had it coming.

Until women start fighting with their hands closed (and not around a handful of hair), please spare me the self-defense speech and tell me what I already know you really mean: the bitch had it coming. Then I can roll my eyes at you while you go back to choir rehearsal. But don't tell me it was self-defense. We both know you're lying.

*Don't get it twisted. Feminism is a joke, mainly because feminists are only for the rights of women who think, vote, and look like them. But I am 150% for the rights of ALL women (not just the ones I like) and there's nothing sadder than watching a woman debase herself and her position just to get a date.

**I did, however, get my shirt ripped off. That argument didn't swing, either.