Hip-Hop vs. America, II: My Thoughts

The BET Special is back and this time they dealt with the relationships between black women and men, a topic for the ages. I really like the intellectual wing of BET, BET News, too bad its only a seemingly minor venture for a company that is concerned with keeping the masses numb (I'll talk about my dissatisfaction with BET on another day). Yet, this special was good. I love the mix of intellectuals and hip-hop artists/industry people and media insiders. It allows everyone to have the opportunity to speak and represent their different industries. However, this time, it seems that the Hip Hop/industry people came with a bit of a chip on their shoulders. They were really on the defensive from the start and it seems like the show opened with yelling and screaming. While the program was great, I still feel that it is too short of a program for BET. They need to do something major on this issue (kinda like CNN's Black in America coming in July), but I doubt we will see that anytime soon. I must say though that I am completely appalled by the comments and ideology of Rev. Eugene Rivers. Rivers is a Pentecostal minister and "christian activist", however he had some incredibly conservative, narrow-minded and misogynist viewpoints. He tried to make the argument that Black Women wanted to see more strong black men and not an increase in strong black women. At first I couldnt believe a man who preaches the gospel could make statements that were so unfair, unjust and misogynistic. One of my favorite intellectuals, Dr. Michael Eric Dyson (who was also on the panel and began to look increasingly more frustrated by Rivers) on the first part of this special last year coined the term "ecclesiastical apartheid" to describe the way in which women constitute 75-80% of the congregations but cannot lead the church, and not only did Rivers scoff at the use of the term, but also at the idea that there was a problem. He said that since Black Women weren't on the whole leaving the Black Church then there was no problem. As Dyson and Dr. Marc Lamont Hill (another respectable brother who is on my blogroll), tried to explain the misogynistic pathology that these women have ingrained in them, Rivers refused to accept this idea and even resorted to referring to David Banner as "Doc", commending him for agreeing with his claim. This is a problem that I have with the Church as a whole. Well, one of the many. Its my honest opinion, that the Church has been used for so long to subjugate different groups of people (i.e., non-christians Post-Constantine, Blacks during Slavery, and now women). The Bible is read with an oppressive ideology and once a group steps outside of the realm of the oppressed, they take on that "empire" theology that all is well with the world because all is well with them. If they see someone from the oppressed group actually making it, they believe that it is very possible for everyone of that group, not understanding that the person is the exception, not the rule. We as black men (and I'll be the first to admit that I haven't always been the best at this, but I am working on it) need to stand up for the black women who love us unconditionally. We need to see strong black women on TV, who are focused on making a change to the patriarchal system that controls the world right now. And since everything in the Black community seemingly starts in the church, it needs to start with more black women, and women in general, being put into the leadership roles within the church. We need to end the patriarchal pathoology that America has pimped since the beginning. We need a change and we, as Black Men in America, need to stand arm in arm with Black Women in pursuit of that change.


Update :

Thank you to Tommy D for asking a very relevant question about the pathology that Black Women, and women in general, have that affects them. What Dyson and Hill were referring to in explaining that there are women in power positions, but are still held captive to patriarchy is the fact that patriarchy looks for a certain type of women to lead. The woman must, in many ways, be very much like a man. Look at the Democratic primaries. There was a lot of sexism thrown at Hilary, especially after she cried on national TV. People began to question her ability to lead because she was showing too much feminine emotion. That is the problem with this patriarchal pathology it forces a stereotype of what women in power should look, or act like. And the common standard is a woman who can hang with the good old boys as long as she doesn't try to take over or make any distinct changes. Hope that explains the baseline problem with patriarchal systems.

Former Sheriff Shaq

At an event in a NYC nightclub, Phoenix Suns Center, Shaquille O'Neal spit a freestyle that included the now oft-quoted line "Kobe, tell me how my ass taste". The free-style diss was directed towards LA Lakers star and NBA MVP Kobe Bryant. As a result of this, Shaquille O'Neal has had his sheriff status in Maricopa county revoked. The sheriff, Joe Arpaio, who describes himself as America's toughest sheriff, explains that if any of his other deputies were to use that type of language, the same would have happened to them. But I cannot help but see the hypocrisy in this. The Sheriff who criticizes Shaq's behavior, is known for feeding his inmates green bologna and clothing them in pink underwear. Granted they are prisoners and have been convicted of some crime, to place them at a health risk with spoiled food and to humiliate them is morally wrong. Who is this guy to try an impose some values onto Shaquille O'Neal? Where is the government in looking into the way these prisoners are treated? It seems the detainees at Gitmo have more rights than the inmates in Maricopa County. While Shaq's freestyle has sent shockwaves, it is decidedly whack with minor pithy lines and it is worth nowhere near the attention that it is getting. Besides, its overshadowing Shaq's platinum (who knew) album, that was also decidedly horrible, Shaq Diesel.

Talking White

Ralph Nader has stepped out of his damn mind and said that Barack Obama is "talking white" and taking advantage of "white guilt". Nader says that Barack has yet to speak on what can be blanketed as black issues (i.e., the housing market, payday loans, etc.) and is trying to stay away from the issues that Jessie Jackson used in his campaign. I agree that Barack has not explicitly spoken on black issues, however after hearing his economic and social change plans, I think they will help America as a whole and that is by far the constituency that I think the President should respond to. I think Obama needs to essentially prove himself to the everyone in America and we as Black people should hold him to the same standard as we would hold a white candidate. However, Nader, is totally off base with his comment and somebody needs to shut him up. He says that Barack is pretending to be white so that he doesnt challenge the establishmnet. Two things, I think about when I hear this statement is what does pretending to be white mean? Is white a state of being that educated people attain? I dont think so. Outside of pigmentation, race, biologically speaking, has very little to do with how a person acts or behaves. So Nader's comments are not substantial on that point. The second thing that comes to mind is, does being white mean you automatically dont challenge the status quo, or cannot challenge the establishment? I'm troubled by Nader's comment (and the fact that he has decided to re-enter because he is not satisfied with the candidate) because it is these type of senseless attacks that continuously bring the focus off of the issues. If Nader wants to draw attention to himself do it in another way. America is ready for change. There have been 8 years of continuous deception and ignorance on the behalf of the Bush Administration, and I for one am very excited to see what happens with the next President of the United States. But with Nader coming out, Barack has said that he simply is trying to get attention, which is entirely believable. Barack is going to do what he did when Hilary tried to pull the same stunts. If you dont remember, let me refresh your memory...

The Return of Don Imus

So after Nappy Headed Hoes, Don Imus got another show. While I would talk about the ADHD-like behavior of "outraged" people like the Rev. Al Sharpton (seeing as how they were outraged until he was fired, after which they dropped the issue and its relation to hip-hop), there are more important issues to address. Imus recently talked about Adam Jones and addressed race in his talk. Now the entire world is in uproar and again calling Imus racist. But unlike some people, I cannot co-sign it. If Imus is telling the truth (which I think he is), we cant possibly condemn the guy for actually trying to make an issue thats constantly researched and condemned: disparities in arrests and convictions for Blacks. So why is this such a big deal for America? No one has even addressed the turnaround of the Player formerly known as Pacman. Jones, who has began working with NFL Legend, Deion "Primetime" Sanders, and is actually turning his life around. Seems like DuBois was right when he said the problem of the twentieth, and I would argue America, is the problem of the color line. Your thoughts?

Allow me to reintroduce myself...

So, at the urging of one of my friends, I have decided to start my own blog. It will undoubtedly give me something to do and a place to vent on a wide range of issues. The name of the blog is The Redmond Report which is a throwback to my old high school column. While that column focused primarily on sports, I think I'm gonna talk about a lot of things on here. But if there's something that you wanna know my position on, let me know. So for now, this is the first entry.