A Word or Three

War on Success or Common Sense?

2012-02-02T17:26:00.003-05:00

Editor’s Note: Tax rates have become a partisan issue, but I believe it’s just a difference of opinion on what steps should be taken to be a fiscally responsible country. I’m asking liberal and conservative readers to be patient and open-minded enough to consider this topic in a depoliticized way. Thank ya kindly.

Last week, I hosted a State of the Union Watch Party, per barackobama.com’s request via several emails. (Unless Will Smith runs for office, the Prez has got my vote, but seriously… the emails have got to chillllll.) Most of President Obama’s statements were pretty safe and garnered him moderate applause in the chambers and my living room. Pretty vanilla stuff.

And then he made the following statement:

Right now, we're poised to spend nearly $1 trillion more on what was supposed to be a temporary tax break for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans… Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Do we want to keep these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? Or do we want to keep our investments in everything else - like education and medical research; a strong military and care for our veterans? Because if we're serious about paying down our debt, we can't do both. The American people know what the right choice is. So do I… we need to change our tax code so that people like me, and an awful lot of Members of Congress, pay our fair share of taxes. Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule: If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes. And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right: Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires... Now, you can call this class warfare all you want. But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense.

The way the crowd at my house hollered and shouted, you’d think we were in church with Pastor Wesley at Alfred Street Baptist (#shoutout!). Well, except for one person. A good friend of mine commented via Twitter, “#waronsuccess.”

Thinking about it at a basic level, I can understand that. Why should you pay a higher percentage of taxes just because you made more (legally at that!)? Sounds unfair. Everyone should pull their own load. But when you think beyond the surface, it’s a little more complex than that. Many of us have heard the adage, “It takes money to make money.” This is generally true. Let me provide you with an example:

Let’s consider Janet. Janet was born and raised in a suburb of Spartanburg, South Carolina, Boiling Springs. Janet’s parents are middle class folks; her mom is an engineer and her father is a tax accountant. I'll tell Janet’s story on the left and track the government’s role on the right:

Janet can’t seem to fathom why it is her patriotic duty to pay a higher tax rate than poor and middle class Americans. After all, her American-owned business is fueling the economy, providing jobs for thousands (who are now tax payers), and she worked hard to get there!

I agree. Janet did work. But so did America. America worked hard to ensure that Janet had the opportunities she had. I touched on just a few of the tangible hard costs, but one can’t even begin to quantify some things (like providing a relatively safe, clean country for Janet to work in.) Janet has consumers and can conduct her business here because people like living in an America where you can practice your religion, where you can earn a free education, where 18 year old citizens can vote (even the women!!), where folks can tweet whatever they want, and where teenagers can color their hair 4 different shades. Janet can do all this because Americans invested in America. That investment was often made with rifles and protests, but more often and frequently, it was made with tax dollars. If you think about it this way, one could argue that Janet has benefited more from than the government than a family living on government assistance. They’re getting enough to get by. However, Janet’s business is doing more than getting by; she's receiving support from a complex array of systems to run a multi million dollar business.

I understand the argument. On the face of it, a higher tax on wealthy Americans could be perceived by some as a “war on success”; I simply call it America asking for a fair return on its’ investment so that others can have that same opportunity in a fiscally healthy country.

It's not a war on success; it's a campaign for future success.

(By the way, higher taxation for the wealthy who disproportionately benefit from governmental support isn’t a novel idea; America is currently at a historically low level of taxation. Our current levels aren’t normal!)

The President closed the discussion of taxes for the top 2% this way,

We don't begrudge financial success in this country. We admire it. When Americans talk about folks like me paying my fair share of taxes, it's not because they envy the rich. It's because they understand that when I get tax breaks I don't need and the country can't afford, it either adds to the deficit, or somebody else has to make up the difference - like a senior on a fixed income; or a student trying to get through school; or a family trying to make ends meet. That's not right. Americans know it's not right. They know that this generation's success is only possible because past generations felt a responsibility to each other, and to their country's future, and they know our way of life will only endure if we feel that same sense of shared responsibility. That's how we'll reduce our deficit. That's an America built to last.

I'll just drop the mic there.

If you’d like to read more (well-informed) thoughts on this topic, I highly recommend:

1. State of the Union 2012 Transcript

2. A Conservative Opinion: Wealthy Americans Deserve TaxRelief, (Written in Oct 1999)
3. The Buffett Rule in History’s Grand Sweep
4. Only Little People Pay Taxes
5. Elizabeth Warren on Debt Crisis, Fair Taxation (LOVE THIS VIDEO!!!)

6. Are US Taxes High or Low?

Your thoughts?

Vanessa Deserves Half... Yeah I Said It!

2012-01-23T13:58:00.002-05:00

The moment a celebrity divorce hits the airwaves, the speculation begins, “I wonder how much she’s going to get!” immediately followed by the debate on spousal support and alimony. “Why did Jordan’s wife get half? She didn’t win any championships!” Interestingly, the conversation isn’t even split along gender lines; many women believe that the wife doesn’t deserve half of the men’s earnings and many men believe that the husband should give the money up.

(By the way, I realize that sometimes, the woman is the breadwinner and in some rare cases ends up owing alimony to their ex husband. However this post will deal primarily with what happens the majority of the time; money-making husbands ceding half of their fiscal earnings to their ex-wife.)

In most cases, I’m inclined to believe that the ex-wife should get half of what was earned throughout the marriage. Before you slam your laptop/ipad/droid/flip phone down in disgust, let me explain the 3 fundamental reasons why I believe as such:

1. Marriage is an extremely serious (ideally) life-long commitment; there are no take-backs. Those vows are heavy and vital for a reason. You are committing to not only spend your entire life with someone, but to share it with that person. You share a home, you share germs, and you share important life decisions. In many cases, (as in Tiger and Elin, Kobe and Vanessa, Jay and Bey) you share what Jay called “[his] greatest creation”, children. Those vows mean that if you lose your job or a limb or if you gain a love handle, it doesn’t matter, you’re in it for the long haul. That’s a LOT to sign on to. And there’s no take backs. If you divorce someone, you don’t get to take back what you gave during the marriage. You already committed to sharing the kids, that tattoo on your arm and yes, the income. Obviously, if you can no longer be married and/or live together, some commitments (such as shared space in the bathroom) are tossed for practical reasons. However, money earned during a marriage is a relatively easy thing to split evenly. You made the commitment; now you gotta stick to it.

2. Marriage has a well-documented history of painful endings. Couples, particularly well-off couples, KNOW going into marriage that there’s a possibility of a costly divorce and an even more costly split. The details of Michael Jordan, Paul McCartney, Mel Gibson, Madonna, and many others’ divorces are public knowledge. You may be surprised to learn that your wife has a really nasty habit of picking her nose while sitting in traffic. But men DO know that if their marriage ends prematurely, especially through some fault of their own, they’re going to lose half of what was earned.

3. Opponents of wives receiving half fail to recognize the value added by the marriage. The public and those outside of a marriage will never know all the little (and big) things a wife did for her husband in that marriage. Speaking figuratively of course, the man brought home the bacon, but someone had to cook it! A few examples:

A. a large part of why Tiger Woods received so many endorsements was because of his All-American family appeal. Tiger Woods gave that public apology about his philandering with those women because the companies he endorsed felt he had sold a lie. Whether you agree or disagree that he owed the public or his endorsers an apology, he was dropped by several endorsers not because he cheated on his wife; he was dropped because he failed to live up to the image that Gatorade slapped on their bottles. Elin helped him build that money-making image by being his wife.

B. Vanessa Bryant stuck by her husband after he slept with a promiscuous woman unprotected, exposing her to what could have been deathly or worrisome diseases. Furthermore, by jeopardizing his own health, he created the opportunity for Vanessa Bryant to become a widowed, single mother to their children. The world doesn’t know if it was the jewelry, hope, or the promises to do better that made her stay; all we know is that she stayed. I’d say that’s quite an investment that she deserves a return on.

C. There are countless other husbands, not so famous, who receive support and “added value” from their wives throughout their marriage. A wife often provides inspiration for her husband’s next project; a clean, welcoming home for her husband to return to; a smile and joke when her husband is feeling down; an ear for her husband’s problems; and a great partner in raising the kids (wiping their snot, buttoning their coats, attending parent-teacher conferences, reviewing their homework, admonishing them not to put their mouth on the water fountain, saying their prayers with them at night and it goes on). Husbands can go off to work assured that someone with a shared interest in his kids and home is taking care of it. You may say, “But that’s what she’s supposed to do; it’s her job as the wife and mother!” I agree, it is her job; and that’s why she needs to be paid for her services. A wife’s responsibility to her husband are an all-inclusive package with no hard costs. But when the marriage no longer exists, those costs have to be invoiced.

Here is where I usually ask you specific questions to get some feedback. But I have faith that my controversial statements are enough to get some of you to respond. Let’s go. What do YOU think?

Is that "The Thirst" or Simply Genuine Interest?

2012-01-10T12:29:00.008-05:00

A few days ago, someone I went to school with called to say Happy New Year. While, I was appreciative of his well wishes, I was a little caught off guard. To give you some background, the last time I’d spoken to him was probably two homecomings ago. When we were in undergrad, we didn’t date or even hang out one on one. I’m still not sure how it came to be that we had each other’s number, but nevertheless, he had it. I said thanks and we entered into that “So What Have You Been Up To/Let’s Catch Up on the Major Stuff” convo. About 5 minutes in I said, “Thanks for the call; I appreciate you reaching out. Maybe I’ll see you when you’re in town!”

And then the texts began…

“So what are you doing right now?”

“You know I’ve always liked you, Crys.” (We doing nicknames now!?)

“Believe it or not, I actually have a massage license…”

and so forth.

I did nothing to encourage these texts. My responses primarily consisted of “lol” “oh yeah?” “cool.” I thought maybe he was drunk so I didn’t think much of it. But the texts and calls continued in to the next day and night. And the next day. I even got the notorious good morning texts.

I know you think I’m leaving key elements out of this story. I’m not. This solicitation came up out of the blue. He hasn’t really said anything inappropriate; the comments are just strangely intimate considering the nature of our very platonic and shallow relationship.

So here’s the question… is this interest or is this what is commonly referred to as “#thethirst”? Has this gentleman crossed the line from appropriate courting to overbearing panhandling?

We (humans, men and women) often complain about a lack of effort put forth by the gender we’re interested in. Women in particular, often wish that men would communicate more. And here this guy is expressing what could be genuine interest, consistently, and 90% respectfully. (I mean, really… why do I need to know that you allegedly have a massage license?)

We could come up with all kinds of formulas for what makes something an indication of romantic interest or what makes it an indication of thirst, but I think generally speaking, it all boils down to 2 key things:

1. Your own preconceived notions of personal space and how frequent communication should occur. Some people like talking on the phone, some don’t. You may think he’s thirsty because he texts you to say “Good morning; have a great day at work” but he thinks he’s just letting you know that you were on his mind for at least a few moments.

And more importantly....

2. Your interest in the individual pursuing you. If you like the person giving you attention, then you tell your friends, “Awww, girl, he texted me good morning. *insert Rihanna voice* He da one!” But if you don’t like him, then you jump onto social media or text your friends and say. “Girl, I don’t even KNOW him, why he all in my space? #thethirst.” Guys are the same way. When a girl you like calls and says, “Hey I just happened to be cooking dinner, and I'm going to be in your neighborhood soon, want a plate?”, she’s wifey material. But if she’s not your type, you’re conjuring up images of Lynn Whitfield in Thin Line. Note to men: Most women don’t randomly offer meals, favors, tickets, etc just because we’re nice. Just like men, we have a motive. We almost always like you. So don’t make it a habit to accept a lot of free stuff from women or else she’ll think you’re leading her on.

I’ll give you an example: The longest relationship I’ve ever been in started when the guy started showing up at my job around the end of my shift and offering me a ride home. He made it a little less creepy by saying, “I just happened to be in the area.” (Lies! Lol!) At first, he showed up maybe once a week; then before I knew it, he was there every day at my quitting time, offering me a ride home. And you know what? It worked, because I liked him, and I thought it was sweet. (And I really didn’t like riding the metro late at night. Lol.) But if I didn’t like him, I’d have thought he was a stalker and considered a restraining order.

To be fair, some things are probably going to be considered in the Thirst Category regardless of how much you like the guy or gal. (Like… friending someone’s entire family on Facebook after one date.) Most things though are relative.

What do you think? Is my theory a little off or dead on? Got any funny examples of #thethirst or “awwwww” moments of genuine interest?

GOP: 2012's Humpty Dumpty (Part II)

2012-01-05T22:17:00.002-05:00

In my last post, I outlined why Ron Paul, Rick Perry, and Newt Gingrich, 3 GOP presidential hopefuls would fail to win the overall election. At the time of that writing I thought I had at least 4 more candidates to discuss, but it seems that after a lackluster showing in Iowa, Michelle Bachmann has bowed out. It’s a shame; she was probably going to be the easiest paragraph to type.

But anyway, moving onward and upward, let’s get right to it. What are the major flaws of Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, and Rick Santorum that will prevent them from the ultimate success?

Let’s start with the candidate I respect most:

Governor Huntsman.

Mr. Huntsman was elected as governor of Utah twice, and in 2009, resigned to accept President Obama’s appointment as U.S. Ambassador to China. He’s served in the Reagan and Bush administrations as well. While he is certainly conservative, he’s not so far right that liberals and moderates have difficulty finding common ground with his beliefs. He's a Mormon but he believes in evolution and his work in both Democratic and Republican administrations is evidence that he knows how to work with all kinds of people. Ironically… this is his Achilles heel.

His Flaw: Governor Huntsman can’t beat a moderate President by being moderate. The conservative and disenchanted who aren’t so enamored with President’s Obama administration aren’t going to replace him with someone who used to work for him. Similarly to 2008, a lot of folks are looking for change and Huntsman can’t (or won’t) do that. Huntsman is consistently at the bottom of all the polls so don’t look to see him in a presidency near you, however, feel free to view his (hilarious) appearance on the Colbert Show.

Rick Santorum

Next up is Rick Santorum. When I first started writing these pieces, I tried not to say anything particularly mean-spirited, ugly or petty about any of the candidates, but Santorum makes it hard. I don’t know if it’s the arrogant smirk, or his absurd campaign slogan “The Courage to Fight for America” (is America under siege?!), but whatever it is, this guy is a joke. Seriously, I don’t even know where to start with his flaws, so I’ll be concise.

His Flaw: His views really pissed off Dan Savage, popular writer and pundit. So Mr. Savage created a website redefining “santorum.” I’d call it ratchet if I used that word. I won’t type out the actual website, but you can click on it here. (If you’re 18.) As long as this site is up, Santorum doesn’t stand a chance. By the way, if you Google "Santorum", this is the first site that comes up. What a shame.

Mitt Romney

Finally, we’ve come to the candidate who most recently emerged (quite narrowly I might add) victorious in the Iowa primary, Mr. Mitt Romney. From the beginning, he’s been the “safest” Republican choice. He’s got a strong history of conservative values, he’s the child of a Michigan governor, he’s got a big presidential smile, and seems to make people at ease with the idea of a Mormon president. But he effed up and we all know where:

His Flaw: Years before the health care reform supported by President Obama, Mitt Romney successfully supported and initiatied a similar health care plan for the state of Massachusetts. There is one thing almost all conservatives (and some indepedents) agree on: the health care reform initiated by the Obama administration is a socialist, evil plan to make health care more affordable, efficient, and accessible to all Americans. Wait… that's evil? I digress… While Romney has a particularly great knack for talking about how horrible the Obama admin has been for our country, it’s a little hard to pull off when it seems as if you two are on the same page about Obama's most controversial piece of legislation. Sorry Romney; if only you’d known that caring about the residents of Massachusetts would come back to bite you in the rear. By the way, I highly recommend reading the article hyperlinked in this paragraph twice. Very informative.

So there you have it. Romney, Santorum, and Huntsman, nice try, but no cigar.

Am I underestimating Romney’s ability to unseat Obama or Huntsman’s ability to be the come back kid? Or is this a pretty good assessment of the remaining 3 GOP candidates? Let me know what you think. I'm always willing to learn.

GOP: 2012's Humpty Dumpty (Part 1)

2012-01-01T22:59:00.005-05:00

Whether it’s the NBA Finals, my Aunts’ Pound Cake Cookoff, or a Brandy vs Monica track, there’s nothing like seeing great entities compete… which is why I’m almost sad about the current campaign for Election 2012.

I know several folks believe reelecting Barack Obama is the end of life as we know it. Unfortunately for those people, no one on the other side has a campaign that has proved that they are any better. Each candidate has a flickering moment as the top contender in the lime light and then falters; the “New Car Scent” emanating from the tree dangling from my rear view mirror lasts longer than any of the GOP hopefuls reign over their competitors. Why?

That’s always how it is this far out. Remember when Hilary and our current Pres -and every now and then John Edwards- were shuffling spots in the Dem primaries? As the voters learn more about the candidates, their votes shift.
It’s pretty hard to unseat an incumbent President (there’s only been 3 one-term presidents since WWII.) Read more about incumbents who’ve lost ---> here.
Every single GOP candidate has at least one inescapable flaw that makes it difficult for the American voter base to accept them as president.

Let’s start with my 2nd favorite Republican.

Ron Paul

We all know a Ron Paul. He’s the great uncle in everyone’s family who says something outrageous or maybe something we all want to say, but have the tact to keep to ourselves. I’ll give it to the guy; he’s consistent. He’s so opposed to governmental payments that he won’t accept the pension he earns as a Congress member. He’s so conservative that he’s libertarian (see what I did there); he’s opposed to the U.S.’s participation in the United Nations, NATO, the War on Drugs, abortion, affirmative action and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But...

His Flaws:

You invite your great uncle to the BBQ because you have to, but that doesn’t mean you’d VOTE for him. Ron Paul is 76 years old. He’s old, a little cranky, and can’t handle the pressure of being a President. He nearly flipped on a journalist who asked him a question, while he was eating breakfast quite publicly in a hotel lobby. Dude… you’re running for office; if you want to avoid people, get room service.
While his ideas often seem like simple concepts that make sense, they often require a dramatic and radical change in thinking that people aren’t ready for. People (self included) just aren’t ready to sign up for ideas like the decriminalization of cocaine. Nah… not yet.

Side Serving of Flaw: He also has his name on some racist newsletters.

Newt Gingrich

Someone I really respect said that Newt Gingrich was really smart. This may be true; I just haven’t seen it. I think the best way to really paint a picture of why Gingrich won’t make it the Oval Office is an examination of a recent controversial position/idea he has for “poor kids.” To paraphrase, Gingrich believes that the government should change child labor laws and allow poor children who “don’t see adults working” to gain a work ethic by cleaning toilets and mopping floors. “The families could use the extra money anyway.”

His Flaws:

He’s not diplomatic enough to be president. When you come up with a solution that requires us to “relax child labor laws” you've lost a good chunk of your audience. When your solution involves putting mop handles in poor kids’ hands Annie-style, you’ve lost even more. (Wonder why he didn’t suggest giving them office or administrative experience? They can’t learn work ethic by running copies; only by being janitors huh?) Furthermore, when your solution suggests that poor folks have no work ethic, people hear “Gingrich must think that rich people work harder.” Anyone that’s ever worked at at Kmart the day before Christmas knows that isn’t true. I’d argue that in many cases, the work ethic of poor children rivals that of some rich children who inherit trust funds, are given a car on their 16th birthday and who don’t know what Tide is for.
He changes religions and wives like high school students change their Facebook status. He’s been married 3 times, was originally a Lutheran, then a Southern Baptist in grad school, and in 08 confirmed for sure that he was now Catholic. A liberal audience might be ok with this, but the conservative base that he hopes to propel him to the Presidency? Naaaah.

Rick Perry

I’ll give him this; this guy has guts. He stood before a conservative audience in one of the early debates and stood behind his plan to provide in state tuition for undocumented citizens working to get their legal citizenship. And attendees of these Republican debates happen to be professional booers. Kudos to you Mr. Perry. But you’re not the answer.

His Flaws:

He’s got no stage presence, or as the urban crowd calls it, “swag.” The guy practically writes entire SNL sketches every other time he speaks. We're all familiar with his HUGE gaffe that made the cover of the Washington Post where he was unable to name the three agencies of government he wanted to eliminate. (By the way, whoever heard of nixing the Department of Education?!? Is he ridiculous!?) But if you need more examples of silly statements, read here.
He’s more of a Texan than an American leader, and people can feel it. Back in 09, Perry suggested that Texas could secede and become its own country. He's just not ready for the Big Leagues.

I’ll address Huntsman, Romney, Santorum, and Bachmann next week in Part Two.

The GOP Hopefuls have something I certainly don’t have: the courage to run for president of a pretty powerful country. But they all have something else in common: an inevitable loss ahead. I’d put my niece’s college trust fund on it.

What are your thoughts? Do you see any other flaws in Perry, Gingrich or Ron Paul? Are the flaws overstated? Do you think they have a chance? Let’s talk about it. (Happy New Year!!)

Adopting Across Seas And Races: Is it Ok? (Part I)

2011-12-14T12:19:00.001-05:00

Disclaimer: I am not a parent nor am I adopted. I simply am writing based on my experiences with adopted adults and children, my brief experiences overseas, and my background in youth development. Also, I’m smart. So there.

About three months before I graduated from college, word on campus spread that the commencement speaker would be America’s Favorite Giver Away of Things, Ms. Oprah Winfrey. Interestingly enough, the response from my peers was mixed. Many were excited, others were nonplussed, and some were even angered. “How dare that woman who doesn’t give back to her own people speak at our graduation? I’ve never liked that ole mammy looking woman.”

Then, as usual, the discussion arose around Oprah’s Leadership Academy for Girls, a school she opened in South Africa. People complained that she should have opened a school in the U.S. and helped people here versus traveling so far. I have to admit, I was a little curious as to why you’d literally travel ACROSS needy children to find OTHER needy children you’d like to help. And then, in March 2011 when I visited Liberia, I got it.

The majority of my career and volunteer experiences has been grounded in youth development, particularly for “needy” children across the US. I’ve seen kids who couldn’t participate in after school programs because they had to go “work” (read: be corner boys a la The Wire), and students wearing thin, short sleeved shirts in 40 degree weather. I know that there are real almost “third-world” (I HATE that word) conditions in America. And yet… there’s a glimmer of hope for every single one of those kids. Every child I’ve ever encountered in America has access to at least one library, whether it was a locally funded one, their school’s, or one provided by a local Boys & Girls Club. We can talk about all the obstacles that make it difficult for that child to visit a library or even read a book, but that doesn’t change the fact that the access is there. While it’s seemingly small to many, access to libraries is one of several American privileges that cracks open the window of opportunity for the underprivileged.

Last spring, I traveled with my church to Liberia to work in their schools. Honestly though, my brothers and sisters there taught me more than I was able to give them. One of the things that really stuck out for me though: Liberia does not have a single federal or locally supported library. There is not one government-funded building where you can use the Dewey system or look up your favorite Goosebumps title. The few libraries there are privately owned and can only be accessed if you are especially privileged or lucky. (Read: Ballin’ so hard the police wants to fine you.)

Immediately, Oprah’s passion in South Africa clicked for me. The type of need in developing countries like Liberia, Indonesia, Sudan (both of them jawns), is in an entirely different stratosphere than that of American kids. As bad as kids in SE DC have it, I promise you… somebody somewhere else has it worse. My life’s work is evidence that my focus is on American kids, however, I recognize why someone would feel compelled to invest their dollars and love overseas. A Peace Corps member once provided the following analogy: “The odds of a kid making it out of the ‘hood in America are like the odds of winning the lottery. But Botswana ain’t even got no Powerball.”

Are there challenges? Well of course. Parenting, particularly adopting children inherently has its own challenges; adding a new culture only further complicates things. You’ve got concerns about preserving that child’s identity, how to instill them with pride in their own country/region, the immense paperwork, and a myriad of other things. But I’m willing to bet that the overwhelming majority of kids whose parents met those challenges head on appreciate that multifaceted investment. And in the end, isn’t that what matters? Finding a home for a child who needs one?

I know many folks have issues with celebs like Sandra Bullock and Brangelina’s presumably fad-like international brood of children. Folks question their motive and wonder if there just doing it because it’s a trendy thing to do. I don’t know them people, so I can’t speak on their behalf. I will say this though:

If the adopting parent(s) have a sincere desire to do what’s best for a child that hails from a different country than their own, the positives derived from providing said child a home significantly outweigh the challenges associated with doing so.

Give me your opinions, dissenting or not: I’d love to hear them. Part II will discuss interracial adopting, particularly White parents adopting non-White kids.

Also if you’re looking for an opportunity to have an amazing time while ensuring that an American (DC) kid has a great Christmas, please come out tomorrow:

Karaoke for a Cause

Liv NightClub | 11th & U Street NW
(above Tap & Parlor)

Thursday, Dec 15th, 2011 |6 – 10 PM

Bring a toy or $20 for a food basket at the Southeast White House

If you can’t attend, you can still donate: Donate to Karaoke for a Cause!

You can also RSVP here: RSVP to Karaoke for a Cause

I can't wait to see you there! Feel free to email any song requests! lol!

Women on Women Crime (How Twitter Made Me A Feminist)

2011-11-26T12:50:00.009-05:00

All things considered, the morning of Saturday, November 26th, 2011 was an interesting day for entertainment news. The NBA announced a tentative end to the lockout and a rumor sprouted that Lauren London, actress best known for her role in ATL, would be welcoming her second child, fathered by producer/R&B artist The-Dream. Sounds innocuous right?

Almost immediately, my Twitter timeline was overwhelmed with a barrage of tweets and tongue-in-cheek, mean-spirited commentary on the "hoes/groupies/bitches" that were rejoicing at the resurrection of the NBA. Many heads shook with pursed lips in Lauren London's direction, because in their opinion, she was a "hoe" for having a child with both Wayne Carter (Lil Wayne) and Terius Nash (The-Dream).

This morning, via Twitter, someone I really respect and consider an intelligent, kind woman of substance referred to one woman as a bitch and another as a hoe, all within the space of about 15 minutes. It hurt my soul! As my boy @JeffTrouble says, "I want better for me. I want better for you."

I'm used to reading nonsense on Twitter, but something about today's brand of judgment/nastiness was especially nauseating. The source of my discomfort was that most of the comments were not from misogynistic, Neanderthal looking/Geico promoting men; they were from women. I realize this may seem like a double standard. I am certainly not desensitized to sexist comments from men; that's a problem too (and another blog post). Nevertheless, a woman's desecration of another woman pierces more deeply and here's why:

We know better. Any woman who has ever been dancing at a club, walking down a street in a seedy neighborhood or actually... just walked into a classroom in a flattering ensemble can recall a moment where she was objectified. We know what it's like for a man to focus on our parts versus our whole. And yet... we who have been a resident of the Pit of Degradation, choose to embrace it (Spelman women in 04 were a great exception). We embrace the terminology, the music, and unarguably most detrimentally, we embrace the attitude that some women's decisions make them not worthy of our respect, sisterhood, and a hug. Instead of Juvenile lewdly demanding that we "Back that Ass Up", somebody's daughter is singing the hook to Travis Porter's "Make It Rain." (Most recognizable lyrics are from the 2nd soprano chanting, "You wanna see some ass; I wanna see sum cash; keep dem dollas coming, and das gonna make me dance.")

In the interest of being 100% transparent, I'll admit I'm guilty. I've dropped down and got my eagle on. I've worn a dress that highlighted my frame in a way that draws attention from the mens-es (As my girl @Kenya_D calls them.. lol). We all contribute in small or big ways; it's hard not to when mainstream culture guides you in that direction. But at some point, we have to take responsibility.

Women:

We can't completely blame hip-hop for sexist attitudes when Nicki Minaj pens the lyrics herself.
We can't completely blame the media for showing off our body parts when we designed the dress.
We can't completely blame "diva dudes" and manwhores when we sign up to be on their roster.
We can't completely blame The-Dream for his fallout with Christina Milian, when we run to judge Lauren London for her rumored pregnancy and no one says ANYTHING about The-Dream fathering a child when he's not married to the mother.

And we can't be surprised when someone questions the lack of a sense of community when we verbally assault women who seek out professionally athletes instead of addressing what may be a mental health issue like poor self-esteem or the notorious problem of "daddy issues."

Does this mean that we can't hold celebrities accountable for their decisions? Does this mean that we can't criticize folks? Does this mean that we can't value planned parenthood over seemingly accidental pregnancies? Does this mean that we can't wear sexy clothes or step foot in the club? Nah, of course not. But...

I do challenge us to think a little more sensitively and critically before we speak/tweet/snub our noses.

I challenge us to consider the effect on our subconscious and others' perception of us before we drop it like it's hot on any and everyone with a drink for you.

I challenge us to address each other with words befitting a sister, mother, or daughter.

I challenge us to use words and actions that evoke an attitude of respect from others.

Don't be mad at me, sisters. I said it because I've dropped the ball before and I want to be able to turn to you to pick it up for me. I also said it because I love you and I respect you and I want that love and respect to be reciprocated.

Oh and BTW, the most rewarding tweet of the morning after all the hoopla was this one:

@MsLaurenLondon:

Morning Rumors. Blah blah blah. No I'm not pregnant or Nor do I even know the Dream like that. Now back to real life. God Bless.

I'll wait for the apologies.

Is College for Everyone?

2011-10-31T16:29:00.007-04:00

Disclaimer: I don't think college is for everyone. However, I do think people overuse the "college isn't for everyone" mantra. This post expounds more.

I don’t ever remember thinking “What will I do after high school?” As early as I can remember, it was inevitable that I was going to a four year university or college afterwards. All that was left to figure out was which one would it be and who was going to ante up the funds. Considering that neither of my parents graduated from college (they opted for the military) - it’s actually pretty impressive that college attendance was so ingrained in me.

Now that I’ve been out of college for a few years, I wonder if I would have chosen to go to if the decision hadn’t been made for me. I’d like to think the answer is yes, primarily because college was one of the greatest experiences of my life (in and out of the classroom). You may be thinking, “Well it worked out for you, smarty pants, but what about people who weren’t meant to go to college? College isn’t for everyone.” I can agree that college isn’t a purse full of rainbows and Hello Kitty smiles for everyone. Nevertheless, I think this College Isn’t For Everyone (CIFE) theory is overstated, and I’m here to refute 3 pillars that the CIFE argument stands on.

“I hate the classroom setting; I learn better when I’m actually practicing my craft/talent/passion.” So lectures/taking notes/taking tests/etc isn’t your cup of tea. You prefer to make pottery, rap over beats, portray Othello, etc. Duh, everyone prefers that. However, taking some time to really sit down and study something gives you the opportunity to learn from people’s mistakes without having to make them yourself. You aren’t the first person who wanted to paint for a living. Why not learn the history and nuances of your field alongside future colleagues versus out on the streets? If you’re going to be stuck eating Cup O Noodles anyway, why not at least be learning at the same time?

“College is for people that know what they want to do. I’m not sure yet and want to try out some other stuff first.” Most people enter college at the age of seventeen or eighteen. Very few people know exactly what they want to do and even fewer end up doing what they set out to do. I know many prospective doctors/lawyers/teachers turned IT analysts/marketing consultants/fundraisers. Does this mean it was a lost cause? No! The great thing about college is that it gives you four years to be in a setting where your job is to learn not only about your chosen major, but also to learn about yourself! In college, you learn what you don’t like, what the competition is like in your field, and about more careers that you may have never considered prior to.

Two great schools. :)

“I don’t want to waste money paying for a degree I probably won’t even use.” This might be the easiest argument to defeat. College is more than 4 years spent studying communications or liberal arts. It’s an opportunity to meet people from different walks of life. It’s an opportunity to network with folks who may end up being your future bridesmaids or physician or psychologist. It’s one of the few places for adults where your job is to learn. Eventually, most of us will have to get a formal full-time job. So why start earlier than you have to? I went to school for psychology and theater. I didn’t end up becoming a psychologist or an actress, both career goals I thought I wanted when I enrolled at Howard U. But I use my degree every day. When talking to potential funders or angry parents, I’m using my acting and psychology skills. When volunteering with kids, or attempting to understand how I can best market to folks, I’m using my psychology degree. An infamous requirement to graduate from the College of Arts & Sciences is the swimming course. And yep, I’ve certainly used that skill. Most of the jobs I’m interested don’t care about the specifics of my college degree; they just care that I got one. While it’s not necessarily fair, a college degree in just about anything says a lot to a potential employer. It says that you dedicated four (or five) years to your education and that you’re invested in your future. Even for folks that want to be an auto mechanic or cosmetologist, college has a business class for you. Maybe eventually, you’ll want to own your own body shop or salon. Maybe you’ll create a hair product that you’ve fine-tuned over the years and you need some marketing classes to show you how to get it out there. College has a little something for everyone.

In closing, the biggest problem I have with this argument is the following:

It typically comes from people with hindsight vision: those who have already attended college. It’s easy to say that college was a waste of time if you got the chance to experience it. It’s not fair though to decide for someone else that it would be. It’s almost like you’re stunting their potential.
My other issue is… the CIFE theory is probably most harmful to minority males, who already don’t seem to be sold on the idea of pursuing a higher education. Despite the well-known fact that college graduates earn on average, a million more over their lifetime than high school graduates, only 10% of Latino males have earned their bachelor’s degree and less than 3% of students at large public universities are Black men. I’m not sure that the minority community is in a position to act as if “ too much many people are unnecessarily going to college all willy nilly.”

The stories of people who don’t attend college and go on to be lucratively successful are few and far between. Attending college is simply a smarter gamble. I’m not suggesting that you’re a failure if you don’t attend. Nevertheless, the CIFE is an overstated and somewhat dangerous argument to toss out there. Consider what I’ve suggested before you decide it’s a lost cause. Thoughts? Leave a comment!

Feel free to read these articles for Even More Words:

1. College remains elusive for Latino men.

2. College graduates earnings vs. high school earnings
3. Black men missing from college campuses

Don't Let History Pass You By!

2011-10-19T22:46:00.015-04:00

Mad cool points if you know where this picture came from.

On December 13, 1945, a cleaning woman and part-time janitor/barber welcomed a smiling brown boy with the odds already stacked against him to Memphis, Tennessee, a proud part of the Jim Crow South. His parents moved to Georgia and he grew up on a farm there where he lived a poor but happy life. His father worked three jobs to keep the family clothed and fed and encouraged him to get a college education. Just three years after the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, this young man went on to attend the prestigious Morehouse College and graduate with a degree in mathematics. From there he started working for the military while pursuing a master’s degree in computer science. After earning his master’s, this enterprising young African-American went on to work for Coca-Cola, Pillsbury, and then Burger King, each time gaining in status and acclaim. While at Burger King his division went from the least profitable to the most profitable. From there, this baby boomer was appointed CEO of a Pillsbury’s rapidly declining pizza chain. Under his leadership, the company did a complete 180 and became a profitable chain again. He gained national acclaim when he challenged then-President Clinton’s health care reform bill which, according to the now seasoned businessman, would force business owners to “lay off hundreds of folks.” In 2006, he battled Stage IV cancer with a 30% chance of survival and emerged victorious. In 2009, this industrious man founded the “Intelligent Thinkers Movement” with the intent of organizing activists in every congressional district.

And now, this man is poised to make history as the first Black man to win the Republican nomination, ensuring that 2012 would be the first presidential election virtually guaranteed to produce a Black winner. If you haven’t figured it out by now, I’m talking about Herman Cain. Herman Cain… the man who might be in the Top 10 for People Blacks Would Like to Auction Off in a Racial Draft a la Chappelle. Why the hate?

Ever since prejudiced Southerners hijacked the Republican party in the 1940’s, African-Americans have generally voted for the Democratic Party. According to FactCheck.org, over 88% of Black Americans voted for a Democratic president in 2004. Black conservatives such as Supreme Court Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele, and now Herman Cain are often considered sell-outs and called Uncle Toms. By and large, many Blacks believe that black conservatives have turned their back on their community, by voting for measures and legislation that harms low-income and usually minority citizens. I tend to agree.

Nevertheless… in our haste to castigate Herman Cain and his “9-9-9 Plan”, many folks have missed what may be a monumental historical moment. Whether we agree with Mr. Godfather Pizza or not, we cannot negate that his rise in the Republican Party is something no one could have anticipated. The polls in Florida, South Carolina and other places show Herman Cain is outpacing Mitt Romney and even the handsome governor from Texas, Rick Perry. About 4 years ago, many people said they thought would never see the day when we would have a Black man running for president. If you had told me then, even while watching coverage of our newly elected “post-racial” president, when the world briefly believed in unicorns and fairy dust and miracles, I wouldn’t have believed that a Black Republican, particularly one who had no real political experience before, would be Obama’s most competitive opponent in 2012. Colin Powell? Maybe. The former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza? Nahhhhh. Creator of a tax plan that sounds like some type of low-end retail store sale? Not a chance in hell. Even if he doesn't win the nomination, he’s already achieved more than can be expected. While I strongly disagree with the notion that America is post-racial, I do believe Cain’s seemingly vast acceptance by conservatives -black and white alike- is a positive marker of race relations for America.

Let me be clear: unless Herman Cain completely changed his views on tax cuts, proper government spending, health care reform, energy independence, and just about every other political stance, I wouldn’t vote for him to be president of a book club, much less a country. But that doesn’t mean I don’t acknowledge his intelligence or rightful place in the history books. He received a lot of flak for a CNN interview where he stated, “I don’t believe racism in this country today holds anybody back in a big way.” Well, besides the fact that that’s not a fact, I don’t even think he believes that. He was born in 1945, almost a decade prior to Brown vs Board of Education; he knows better. I certainly wouldn't underestimate the tenacity of the Southern Black son of a janitor and maid who ascended to immense success in the restaurant industry, a world typically run by old White well-connected men. Whether you plan to support the Pizza Peddler turned Politician or not, it makes sense to take note of Herman Cain.

He’s making history, one debate at a time. No need to be surprised. I warned you.

What are your thoughts? Anyone voting for Mr. Cain? Do you believe he deserves a respectful place in history?

Grocery Shopping for Scriptures

2011-10-05T14:04:00.003-04:00

One of the things I’d miss if I traveled several decades back would be grocery stores. If you live in a suburb like myself, or even a newly gentrified neighborhood, you have access to fresh produce flown from orchards in Florida and California, more spaghetti sauce brands than you’d ever thought imaginable and the whole gamut of paper towel options (thick and soft or rough but economically priced!)

Prior to the massive grocery stores with bright, welcoming aisles, most people had access to what was immediately available like Neighbor Jones’ potatoes, and Sister Smith’s homemade solution for warts. It was pretty much an all or nothing deal. Either you got the sugar made in your backyard or you just didn’t get anything.

Our society has been spoiled. Just the way we pick some brands of peanut butter (Choosy moms choose JIF!) and leave others on the shelf, we often choose to do the same with our morality. Specifically, I’m speaking of the so-called Moral Majority, who quote scripture to justify legislation or ideals, but ignore other scriptures when it doesn’t fit their agenda. The notorious example is capital punishment and abortion. The “religious right” argues for the protection of life citing that it’s a “gift from God”, yet most fail to be concerned about this protection of life when discussing capital punishment. One of the best arguments I’ve ever heard in opposition to capital punishment was a Christian one. A dear friend of mine said, “At every opportunity that Christ had to legally exact capital punishment on a sinner, He chose mercy. Who are we to choose death?”

Another inconsistency is on the issue of appropriate sexual behavior; for the moral majority only some of the scriptures seem to be put into the grocery basket of political ideals. Many opponents to gay marriage weakly claim they are opposed to the redefinition of “Biblical marriage.” According to these folks, marriage is a religious institution, Biblically defined as between a man and a woman. But we know the truth. Gay marriage opponents are really against homosexuality, which the Bible does decree as sinful (here, here, and several other places.) However these folks are grocery store shopping again. In the same book, often right before or after the verses on homosexuality, there are passages that extol the impiety of premarital sex, adultery, and sometimes even divorce. (Examples here and here.) Jesus himself stated in Luke 16, “Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.” Has anyone put forth an amendment to the definition of marriage that includes making heterosexual remarriages illegal? Of course not; that’s not the brand of sin that politicians care about. Just the ones that make people afraid their sons will like other boys.

*For the record, I don’t support creating any laws governing sexuality, largely because I think that’s none of the government’s business. Furthermore, with so many varying beliefs about what’s morally or ethically acceptable when it comes to sexuality, I’m not sure the government should be in the business of making bedroom decisions for such a diverse group of people as Americans.

I’m all about consistency. This doesn’t mean I think in black and white; but it does mean that I don’t think truths, moralities, values, ethics, etc can be called upon when convenient to your existence, political policies or practices. While I’m a liberal, I believe that both the Democratic and the Republican party are full of inconsistencies. I’m all about meaning what you say and saying what you mean.

How do you feel about the “Moral Majority” and our overall society? Do we shop for scriptures as we see fit? Thoughts?

Lies Come in All Shapes and Sizes

2011-09-23T12:08:00.006-04:00

In one of my favorite books, The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini, one of the main characters says the following:

There is only one sin, only one. And that is theft. Every other sin is a variation of theft.When you kill a man, you steal a life. You steal his wife's right to a husband, rob his children of a father. When you tell a lie, you steal someone's right to the truth…”

Most people understand a lie to simply be a statement that when tried against reality turns out to be false. Popular lies include:

1. It’s not you; it’s me.

2. No, really. Your hair looks great.

3. Hampton is the real HU.

While I agree that the aforementioned statements are indeed lies, I also believe that lies come in many forms; my least favorite is the lie of omission which is just as disastrous as the conventional lie.

For example, fellas… let’s say you go out to one of these CBC events, meet a woman in a pencil skirt and a smile, discreetly check to make sure her ring finger is free of bling, and the two of you exchange information. Over the next month you get to know each other, learn each other’s likes and dislikes, religious background, relationship history, etc. One day, as you’re picking her up for a day at the Harbor, she waves you in. You walk in and trip over a tricycle.

You say, “Whose tricycle is that?”

She says, “My son’s. It actually used to be my daughter’s, but she grew out of it.”

You are floored. “KIDS?! You have kids?!?! You never told me that!!”

“You never asked.”

This my friends is an example, albeit an extreme one, of the lie of omission. As the saying goes, when you assume…. You know the rest. But I don't think that always applies. I believe it’s fair to assume some things. If someone doesn’t say “I’m married” and doesn’t have a ring on, it’s safe to assume that he or she isn’t married. If someone doesn’t mention kids after weeks of correspondence and time together, it’s safe to assume he or she doesn’t have any. If someone doesn’t tell you that he's allergic to cheese, you're not wrong for surprising him with lasagna!

A good friend of mine over at A Bachelor’s Pad disagrees. He believes unless you explicitly state a non-truth, you haven’t told a lie. This is a straightforward way of thinking about things, but it’s problematic, causes unnecessary drama, and leads to broken windows, shattered dreams, and bitter women who work at Fedex and have no sense of urgency or customer service. (Wait, did I just get personal?)

Here’s why this is an issue. Humans naturally believe if it walks like a duck and it talks like a duck, then that’s what it is. Many of us have learned the hard way that just because I hang out with him every day and he has a key to my house and I met his momma and we have a Facebook photo album together and you send me flowers at my office and you know that I pull my left ear when I’m nervous and all of our friends have become each other’s friends and I let you hold my hand in front of the entire class of 2007 at Howard Homecoming does not mean that we are together if it ain’t never been said. (Sorry, got personal again.) The assuming party bears some responsibility for not having an explicit conversation about the exact nature of the relationship. However, the party that knowingly lulls someone into this sense of security that really isn’t there is also wrong. You are allowing that person to believe a lie by facilitating the lie. By playing the boyfriend role, but down the road saying, “Oh… you thought we was together?”, you have told a lie. Sure, you never explicitly told an untruth, you just lived it. And that is a lie of omission with a little twist of deception.

Some liars (of omission) say, “I didn’t know that he/she thought we were serious. I was just doing my thing.” Or ”I didn’t know that the cookies weren’t free. They were just sitting out there in an open basket.” And most of the time, that's bee ess. But let’s say they’re being honest. Let's say they really thought the Cookie Store was giving away cookies for the day or that a girl who told you she was ready to start a family didn’t expect a serious relationship from you. Where then, is your sense of responsibility? Where is your common sense? Your ability to think in a way that is socially responsible and ethical? We have got to do better, people.

No one likes to be called a liar. Especially a liar. The best way to avoid being a liar though is to share the whole truth. Not the parts you find convenient. Be upfront. Not evasive. If you don’t want to deal with the aftermath of a confused or scorned lover/friend, make it clear what the relationship is. Otherwise, you’re walking into a mess and unfairly placing the balance of responsibility on someone else’s shoulder.

What do you think? Is a lie of omission a lie, or just selective truth? Have you ever been the victim of a lie of omission? Have you ever been guilty of rationing out the truth as best fits you?

And as a sidenote and question to the guys, if we’re supposed to be asking any and all questions, how would you feel if someone you’re dating asked if you were gay? Would you be offended? Are heterosexual women (and men) expected to assume that by nature of their heterosexual relationship or interaction, that that person is not gay? #imjustsaying

Check out the opposing opinion here ---> What's In a Lie?

Republicans Switch Up Their Anti-Tax Philosophy

2011-08-22T13:24:00.001-04:00

I'm convinced that the decision makers in the Republican Party do not have the majority of hard-working Americans' best interest at heart. It's impossible.

I try not to take most GOP policies personally, and I usually succeed. But now they're hitting my paycheck.

At the bottom of your pay stub is a line for Social Security. 6.2% of your check is collected by the feds for Social Security. Your employer pays the other 6.2% and through this lovely arrangement, the government receives scrilla for Social Security.

That was the case until last December when Obama forged a deal that lowered our contribution to 4.2%, saving every family an average of $1,000 a year. The employers' rate remained at 6.2%. In light of the continued blue state of our economy, President Obama would like to extend that tax for an additional year, allowing people like myself, and probably you as well, to keep our 2% every two weeks.

Sounds good right? Well, the Republicans don't think so. And honestly, the government will lose about $120 billion if they extend this tax cut that we all benefit from, so I get it. We can't afford tax breaks. We have a deficit.

My problem here is the inconsistency. The GOP is known for their anti-tax stance; their philosophy is that by allowing people to keep a good chunk of their paycheck, we boost the economy. For example, many in the Republican party oppose ending the tax cut that folks making over $250,000 (less than 1% of the population), benefit from. Some consider it disgusting to even insinuate that millionaires and billionaires should pay more in taxes. (And by more, I mean what they used to pay during the Clinton era, prior to the Bush Administration's tax cuts.) Despite Warren Buffett, the godzillionaire admitting via open letter to the New York Times that he pays less in taxes than every other person in his office and that he should pay MORE, the GOP is still stuck on giving him and his few peers tax breaks. BUT NOT US! (Note: if you are self-employed or if you make over 250,000 you are not included in "us." Sorry.)

Interested in seeing exactly how much you'd lose?

In other words, the GOP believes we should cut our deficit on the backs of middleincomeonaires, but NOT on the backs of folks whose checks read like "oooooooooooooooooooo!" Pick a side; either you're for taxes or you're not for taxes. But don't decide to be for taxes when it affects the people who have the least versus those who have the most. Or go ahead and be that way. But if I accuse your party of being rife with unpatriotic slimy greed, you know where it comes from.

Carry on.

Don't Be Rude to The Help

2011-08-17T00:36:00.008-04:00

(A twist on More Words Wednesday, today’s post provides more light on the controversial book/film The Help.)

When I first saw previews for The Help, I assumed this would be yet another movie where Hollywood took a marginalized group and capitalized on their pain. I pushed it to the back of my mind and carried on with life. Then, at the family reunion two weekends ago, my mother handed me the book. I figured, why not give it a whirl.

It. Was. Amazing.

The story was breathtaking, the characters were three dimensional and it was quite an inspirational piece of historical fiction. The authenticity of the story was enough to make you ball your fist in anger, laugh aloud, talk back to the characters (Magic Johnson Theater style), and stay up half the night until you finished the next chapter. Millions of readers and scores of book clubs agree with me. Meanwhile, several folks, including the Black Womens Historians, have hurled many serious allegations against the work. I can’t vouch for the movie since I haven’t seen it yet. However, I can address some of the criticisms lobbed against the novel. Below are a few, followed by my counterclaim:

1. Who is this white woman writing a book about black maids? Why can’t we tell our OWN stories? A few weeks ago, acclaimed Black author Terry McMillan tweeted, “When black authors write about black people, white folks don’t read them. When they write about us: bestsellers.” And with a few notable exceptions -her books being some of them- she’s right. Nevertheless, when Kathryn Stockett penned The Help it didn’t muzzle the voices of countless black authors, artists, storytellers, teachers, historians, etc. If anything, Stockett’s overwhelming success sparked an interest in domestic workers and race relations in a broader audience that may inspire them to read more from other authors on the topic, who are likely to be Black. Furthermore, the story had 3 narrators. Two of them were Black maids and one was a young White woman. Unless the book had been co-written by a Black and White person, someone was going to have write across race lines.

2. This story has the oh-so-tired theme of White people coming to save Black people. I’m sick of it! This criticism has to come from someone who didn’t read the book. In the novel, black women and white women worked together to write a book about the domestic workers’ experience. In fact, one of the maids did a good chunk of the writing herself. Repeatedly, the novel references Black maids doing the bulk of the work, taking on the bulk of the risk, coming up with innovative ideas, and saving the day even after working in white people’s homes all day. There was no White savior in this story; the novel speaks of a true collaborative effort.

3. The book left out major historical events and didn’t discuss the civil rights movement in enough detail. The Help is a work of fiction. It is a novel. It is not a textbook. It did not attempt to take on the task of detailing the civil rights movement or anything else. It did however discuss Medgar Evers and his assassination, the desegregation of Ole Miss, Jim Crow laws, the March on Washington, and the conflict in Vietnam. All in a book that wasn’t necessarily designed to educate.

4. One of the major issues that Black domestic workers faced in the 60’s was sexual harassment. The Help didn’t even touch that! The Help touched on many themes including race relations, friendship, societal pressures for women, and finding love. Stockett could have sneaked in a scene about one of the employers abusing his maid, but she didn’t. I’ll be honest, I kept waiting for it to appear, so I was a little relieved when it didn’t happen. Those women had enough issues going on without it. Furthermore, while over 15 maids are referenced in the book, only 2 maids’ lives were followed closely. Is it really fair to assume that at least 1 in every 2 maids in Jackson, Mississippi in the 1960’s was sexually harassed? I don’t think so.

5. The Black dialect she wrote the maids’ perspective in was offensive. This criticism usually comes from college educated people who recoil at the fact that there was a time when Black women (our great aunts and grandmothers) said “Lawd”, “chile” and didn’t always make their subject and verb agree. I don’t particularly care to be reminded that women my grandmother’s age were uneducated and spoke like it; but it’s accurate. That’s really how they talked. I could often hear my grandmother’s voice coming off the page when I read Abileen’s perspective. The novel doesn’t make Blacks look dumb or like buffoons; if anything, it paints Whites as generally cruel and prejudiced. Black women who were around in the 1960’s, particularly domestic workers, would probably be amused or maybe even angered to know that we are ashamed of how they spoke. And I hate to admit it, but I’ve heard much worse grammar in parts of NE DC than I read in The Help.

6. There weren’t any positive Black men in The Help. Not true. Reverend Johnson, Abileen’s son Treelore, the man who offered to walk Abileen home, and a few others were all positive Black men in the story. It looks like this novel has charted more positive Black men than a Tyler Perry movie. *rimshot* Also, this book was primarily about women’s’ relations. People fail to realize that domestic workers worked at the home with the wives; they spent little time with the husbands whose socks they darned. There was more than enough material in discussing the complicated relationship between homemaker and maid.

7. Isn’t her family’s maid suing her for stealing the story? It is true. There was a woman whose name is similar to Abileen’s who use to work for the Stockett family. She was a maid who similarly to her almost namesake’s story, lost her son (although she lost her son to cancer, the fictional Abileen lost her son to a workplace accident). This is where the similarities stop. Ablene Cooper, who was attempting to sue Stockett, was about 10 years old when the fictional story took place, so she couldn’t have possibly been the inspiration for the story. In an interview, Katherine stated that in the 70’s, she grew up with a maid and that she included many of these experiences in the novel. This woman’s name was Demetrie, however she has passed away. I can’t say with 100% certainty that Ms. Cooper’s lawsuit isn’t valid, but it certainly seems flimsy. Interestingly enough, the book was released in 2009, and the film was released this year. The lawsuit didn’t arrive until after the book became a national bestseller. Something to ponder. Update: The lawsuit has been thrown out because of the statute of limitations.

The short version: People expected The Help to do a lot more than it set out to do. People’s complaints surrounding The Help are based in what they think the author should have talked about, how they think she should have shared the story and on who they think is allowed to talk about race relations. When in reality, that’s utter nonsense. If you would prefer to read a story about black women by black women, there are countless options available to you. Buy them. But shunning and criticizing The Help isn’t going to help those Black authors sell any faster, so what’s your purpose?

Either allow yourself to be entertained by The Help. Or don’t. But don’t create a scandal, controversy, or problem out of thin air. You’re only helping her sell books with every angry blog post you write. Meanwhile, we’ve got actual problems to handle; like tax breaks for billionaires that are so ridiculously unfair even Warren Buffet had to speak out against it.

Have you read The Help? Have you seen The Help? Are you a fan, a critic or a little of both? Please share!

What a Man... What A Mighty Mighty Good Man

2011-08-15T14:24:00.004-04:00

A little while ago, Hot Biscuits And Gravy wrote a piece on women defining men's standards and the short version is as follows:

“Woman: I have a degree and a good job, so why don’t you like me? I’m attracted to men with degrees and good jobs!”

What a silly thing for women to say/believe! While I understand that it's human to engage in this flawed thinking, I agree with the author of the post; women using their own standards to justify why someone else should be attracted to them makes little to no sense.

But I’ve noticed a parallel phenomenon among men. Many have an attitude that says, “I have my degree, my own car, my own house, no kids [or I take care of the ones I have], and I’ve never been to jail… how dare you not be humbled in my presence?! How dare you not recognize me for the mighty blessing that I am to you females!?” (VerySmartBrothas.com calls these men “diva dudes.”)

Let me make something clear.

Earning a degree is no easy feat. It’s quite an accomplishment to be proud of. Financial independence is also admirable. The fact that you’ve avoided to succumb to the evils of the world and become Prisoner #991234-01 l is also respectable. But to me, none of those things make you a man or an absolute catch. Here’s why.

Degrees and possessions are valuable accomplishments. Character and principles, on the other hand, represent something much more significant.

For those of you that have had the pleasure of being in a healthy relationship, what are some of the characteristics or attributes of your significant other that made you really appreciate them? I can toss out some examples for me. I really appreciate someone who:

puts others before self,
holds our relationship to a Biblical standard,
is willing to listen,
will be honest, even if he knows I won’t like what he’s saying,
will laugh at my horrible jokes in a crowd so I save face, and then gently tell me in the car not to ever get my material from Laffy Taffy wrappers again,
someone who will trust me and present himself as trustworthy.

I doubt that many of you will call to mind that bachelor’s degree or their sporty car when considering the value of your loved one. And if you do, well that’s a whole different blog topic altogether.

Men, do you really want a woman that loves you because of your education and “stuff”? This recession has proved that stuff can easily be repossessed and that often, an education won’t save you either. I know folks with JDs who are unemployed. Plus, what happens when she meets someone with more degrees and more stuff?! You’ve lost your trump card.

Women, I challenge you to be observant of characteristics that will hold steady over time, tribulations, recessions, surpluses and other transient circumstances. If you’re searching out a man who meets qualifications based on a surface resume, it’s likely that he’s searching out a woman based on a surface resume as well. And as we all know --Stacey Dash, my mother and Phylicia Rashad excluded-- our surface stock plummets much faster than men.

Men, I challenge you to place your best foot forward, which when dealing with a “good woman” isn’t your Wharton degree; it’s your kindness, your modesty, your contagious laughter, and your consistency. You may be surprised at the caliber of women who take an interest in you.

What do you say? Am I giving men with stacks of education and accomplishments a hard time? What are your thoughts?

To Snoop or Not to Snoop

2011-08-09T08:10:00.009-04:00

About a year ago, a girlfriend of mine called me mid-rage asking me and another friend to come over to check out some “evidence.” We headed over and crowded around her Macbook where her boyfriend had left his Gmail (and chats) up, just waiting to be searched. And boy. Did we uncover a treasure trove. I have to admit, while the language was strong and the content wasn’t all that surprising to any of us (we’d suspected it for months), seeing those exchanges in black and white might have been one of the most difficult things she’d ever experienced. We hit her with all the clichés (“He just wasn’t ready for a real woman like you… You need to throw his stuff outside!”). However, after we shattered his character, we went home and she was left staring at the computer screen reading the harmful words over and over again. I’m sure she still remembers most of it and doesn’t feel any better knowing that someone she trusted embarked on filthy conquests with such a cavalier attitude about their relationship. Nevertheless, she gained valuable information that she needed to make the right decision about how to proceed with their relationship.

So, should you check your significant other’s phone, email, Facebook account, odometer, etc? Many men and women say no. People often insist that the mere search for dirt ensures that you’ll find something. Others say, “If they’re not hiding anything, then it shouldn’t be a problem.”

Going through someone’s email, phone and other communication tools indicates a level of distrust that may make your significant other defensive, resentful, or suspicious of you. You may just find some inside joke that you don’t know all the details to. Or maybe you’ll find a photo (possibly unsolicited) that was sent to your man or woman. And now what? It could be a lot more innocent than you think, but all you see is red (panties). Even after he or she explains themselves, you’re now suspicious, and may even use it as a personal justification for some dirt you got caught up in. (Our mind is sneaky like that; it will use anything it can to justify our own selfish behavior.)

So on the question of snooping, I say NO, don't do it. Unless….

There’s reasonable cause.

You may be scratching your head and saying “Come again?” Let me explain.

God equipped humans with 5 senses which can be used to detect fine brunette hairs that couldn’t have possibly grown from your head, the sound of a Quiet Storm playlist, and yes… the scent of another woman, all up on your man. So while most men and women are smart enough to avoid major mistakes, we eventually slip up and leave a trail #tigerwoods. Despite the dramatic reactions depicted in film and television, few people are rarely completely caught off guard when confronted with evidence that their significant other is cheating. When you get that feeling that something isn’t right (based on very legitimate concerns) I say it’s ok to check and here’s why:

1. Time is precious. No one wants to waste their time in a relationship where only one party is committed.

2. HIV and other venereal diseases are real. I wholeheartedly support abstinence until marriage. However, I’m realistic and I know everyone reading this hasn’t chosen that path. So, I’ll say this: if you and your partner don’t take precautions to protect yourself from diseases and you suspect that your partner may be stepping out, your health is at risk. In order to minimize this risk, if you have a strong logical inclination that your spouse is cheating, you need to get to the bottom of it.

3. It will bother you until you do. Let’s face it; you see all the signs that your boo is cheating, but you have no evidence; you just know he disappears from the dinner table frequently and keeps his phone locked down harder than Guantanamo Bay. So before you get yourself all in a tizzy, find out the truth.

4. If your suspicions are wrong, you still win and you can begin to build trust. You notice that she’s always staring at the computer and that she’s always texting someone on the sly. You approach her about your concern, ask if you can look through the phone together, and discover she has an addiction to online poker and has been texting her bookie. See? That wasn’t so bad.

I know many of you say snooping is wrong no matter what the circumstances. Do what works for you. Just realize that life doesn’t come at you in such absolutes. I suggest the following “snooping*” rules:

1. Have a discussion with your partner (sans the accusatory tone) and let him/her know that you are worried that you could be hurt. You may find out that the reason they’re acting funny is because of all the Sonic commercials airing throughout DC although a Sonic is NOWHERE TO BE FOUND!

2. Don’t do it behind your partner’s back. Either ask them if you can check yourself or go through the device together. This may seem odd, but give it a try.

3. Whatever you ask your significant other to do, be willing to do yourself.

4. Before you begin, decide what you’re going to do based on what you find (or don’t find.) If you don’t find anything, then come up with a plan for building mutual trust and create checks and balances that eliminate cause for concern. If you do find something, decide if you want to work it out or dissolve the relationship.

5. Don’t assume the worst.

What are your thoughts? Is snooping ok? Should there be exceptions to this rule?

*snooping – I know that the term implies looking behind someone’s back for information, but I merely mean doing research.

Why the NFL Lockout Was a Great Accidental Moment

2011-08-01T08:29:00.001-04:00

I've only allowed one other person to guest write on this blog and that was a ghostwriter, so you know that this must be good. I'm not a sports expert myself, but my good friend known as ManoftheHour, knows EVERYTHING about sports. I asked him to deliver something of interest to a sports reader who makes his or her way over to my blog. Even I, a sports nitwit, could follow it. Enjoy!

Ever had something awful happen, and it turn out to be pretty cool? Something that, at the time the event occurred, you were sure it would be an awful blight on your life and then it turned out that it was exactly what needed to happen? For me, it was when I forgot to apply to John W. Ligon Middle School (formerly the best academic middle school in Raleigh) and wound up getting sent to Fred J. Carnage Middle School. Greatest. School. Ever.

The NFL just went through its own accidental greatness moment (I want to dub it a Carnage Catastrophe, what do you guys think?), with the 18-week lockout (the first work stoppage in over 20 years) officially over, look what has happened. The usual lukewarm offseason of Organized Team Activities (OTAs) and flaccid trades has been replaced by a magma-hot Free Agency signings that have elicited twitter rants, screaming TV talking heads, and blogs waxing poetic about the joys of having America’s favorite game back.

During the past 72 hours perennial pro bowlers have been traded (Donovan McNabb, Albert Haynesworth, Chad Ochocinco, Matt Hasselbeck—with 17 pro bowl selections between them) , teams have changed their QBs (Arizona, Minnesota, Seattle, Tennessee, and Washington will all have new starting signal callers next year), and Carolina has added a pass-catching Tight End (this really isn’t a league-wide trend, but we haven’t had one since Wesley Walls in the mid 90s and now we have Jeremy Shockey AND Greg Olsen and I’m excited). This lockout has spurred the interest of everyone. There is a combination of relief and jubilation. It is almost like all of the blah, mediocre, mind-numbing dreck of the months of offseason, was condensed into a turbo, microwave dinner version of itself. It was fantastic.

This is great right? Over the course of the lockout, there have been several players to intimate (or tweet) that while they were interested in playing this year (and, obviously, getting paid) that they would now have the opportunity to heal from nagging injuries. Without the break, the injuries would have been re-aggravated and not allowed to mend because of the nearly endless season of conditioning and “voluntary” mini-camps that plague the mythical offseason of professional sports. Cutting down the offseason activities would mean little in the grand scheme of things. Players take better care of themselves than ever before, and so the rigorous offseason of conditioning is largely no longer necessary.

The Charlotte Observer reported that indeed, in the new Collective Bargaining Agreement the NFL has agreed with the NFLPA (National Football League’s Player’s Association) that there will no longer be two-a-days (the particulars of the CBA indicate that while teams are allowed to conduct two practices in a day, one will have to be without the use of pads). In addition, there will be more days off once the teams head to camp (which will also be later in the offseason, per the new CBA). In summation, even the NFL has acknowledged a need to scale down its activities.

The exhilaration of a new system would not come without its drawbacks. Colts quarterback Peyton Manning (a player set to become the highest paid player in the league when he signs his new contract) was unable to get proper care after his neck surgery. Because of the delicacy of the procedure, and the fact that it is the second one he has had done in the past year and a half, Manning wanted to work with the Colts training staff. The staff was intimately familiar with his injuries and medical history, and had done all of his rehab since he became a professional. In addition to the player health issues that presented themselves as a result of the shortened offseason football activities, General Managers are having to make tough financial decisions in a very short period of time. Rookies have been unable to get playbooks in a timely manner are at a decided disadvantage to the veterans. The undrafted rookies could face more of an up-hill climb to make the teams than in previous years.

Still, the problems created by the new shortened offseason could be dealt with easily enough. The only reason that the players didn’t get treated by the team medical staff was because the lockout prevented management (and their other employees) from engaging in any conduct with the players. Without a labor dispute, team medical staffs would be free to treat players regardless of the duration of the offseason. As it concerns the rookies, undrafted rookies may take the brunt of the effects of the change. As viewers, however, we would experience very little drop-off in quality of play.

I just hope that the NFL takes this Carnage Catastrophe and makes the most of it.

If you liked this post, let ManoftheHour know in the comments so he'll be encouraged to write again. You can contact him directly here:

Twitter: Follow ManoftheHour

Facebook: Friend ManoftheHour

Email: manofthehour@awordorthree.com

More Words Wednesday #2 (For Political Junkies & Sports Fans)

2011-07-27T00:03:00.002-04:00

Two weeks ago, I introduced "More Words Wednesday," a Wednesday post where I highlight books that I've read and think someone out there will enjoy. I shared my last MWW with my little brother and he made a good point. "How can you recommend books for a general audience? You're good at recommending books for people you know, not just randoms." I take constructive criticism well, so instead of flying to Germany to remind him that I was his big sister and I could still beat him up, I conceded the point.

He's right. You won't like ALL the books I recommend. Nevertheless, I have a pretty diverse taste in literature so at least one of these Wednesdays should hit the spot for you. The whole point of a review is to give you an idea of whether it's worth your hard-earned dollars. (And if you make it to Borders soon, you can catch their Going Out of Business Sale! I bought a book today marked down 40%!)

THIS WEEK'S CHOICES

Today, I have a fiction recommendation for the political junkie and a non-fiction rec for the true sports fans:

American Wife by Curtis Sittenfeld. In 2004, just like the majority of Americans, I voted for John Kerry. As we all know, he didn't win and the Bush family continued to be our First Family. I'm not a big fan of George W, but his wife Laura wasn't so bad. American Wife is technically fiction, but it is based very loosely on Laura Bush's life. I know... it doesn't sound super interesting does it? But I PROMISE it is. For instance, did you know that as a teenager, Laura (and the fictional character, Alice) hit her high school friend in a bad car accident and killed him? (Not on purpose of course). Anyway, the story is pretty juicy and has a dramatic climax towards the end. No more spoilers; read it for yourself. Curtis Sittenfeld never fails.

Forty Million Dollar Slaves by William C. Rhoden. The title of this book is provocative and -to many- ludicrous. How dare you compare slavery in the 1800's to the career of an athlete paid millions of dollars for their talent?! Well, I'd explain it for you, but Mr. Rhoden did a much better job. His works offers history and current examples of the trials of the professional athlete and a whole lot of context for his premise. For example, did you know that the first winner of the Kentucky Derby was a Black man? In fact, black horse jockeys were so successful that eventually exclusive jockey associations and clubs were created to exclude them and prevent them from monopolizing the winners' circle at derbies. One quote from the book is the following:

How tough is it to buy an inner-city kid? Buy him some shoes, take him to dinner, and get him some nice clothes, maybe a car. You become his best friend, and he gets hooked like a junkie,” Rudy Washington said. Then you control the product. The secret is controlling the produce early It’s just like slavery. Modern-day slavery is what it is.

Check it out. Even if you don't agree with it, I promise you'll learn something!

There you have it! MWW, Edition #2. Here's to more drama, more discussion, and more words this Wednesday.

More Words Wednesday

2011-07-13T09:00:00.004-04:00

Everybody has their thing. Some people are into Gossip Girl, some folks are into cool gadgets, some folks are into women with big afros... but me? I'm a bibliophile. Which simply means, I love books.

From The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo to The Alchemist to Freakonomics, I just can't get enough. I probably wear glasses today because of all the nights I spent with a flashlight under my duvet as a child, finishing the latest Babysitter's Club or Goosebumps addition. But here's the thing; the only thing I like even more than enjoying a good book is helping others to discover books that they like. I don't mean this is in a Laura Bush Campaign for Literacy type way, I just mean that I am of the belief that everyone has the potential to enjoy reading, provided they find something that really intrigues them.

I have a great track record for suggesting books to folks, but as Lavar Burton would say, don't take my word for it. Ask my friends (like her, her, and especially him).

How is all this relevant to you? Because I've decided that every Wednesday is "More Words Wednesday." So every Wednesday I'm going to recommend two books for you to check out, typically one non-fiction and one fiction. (One cool way to remember the difference Fiction - Fake, Non Fiction - Not Fake.) Get excited!!! Hopefully the choices each Wednesday will inspire people who typically don't read to do so and provide options for regular readers' next choice!

THIS WEEK'S CHOICES

Maynard & Jennica by Rudolph Delson. Several times as I read this book, I made that sound you make when you're either crying really hard or laughing really hard. You know... that dry heave silent gasp followed by loud, raucous laughter. It reads kind of like a romantic comedy, except not cheesy and this book is fair game for guys and girls (I mean, hello; it was written by a dude!). It tells the story of how two people meet, but instead of telling the story in the traditional chronological way, it tells the story through the perspective of various folks (my favorite is the would-be vandals on a subway train they both happen to be on.) As I was reading it, I literally felt like I was watching it in a movie theater. Of course, that also made me a little sad, because I was reading it alone and I envisioned myself in the theater alone as other couples laughed around me. But that's neither here nor there. Read the book!

Malcolm X: The Reinvention of a Life by Manning Marable. Most people are at least passively familiar with Malcolm's X Autobiography as told to Alex Haley. Time Magazine listed it in their Top 10 Most influential biographies of the century. Also, it seems that it was the primary source in the Spike Lee film on X. However, Marable's book takes Malcolm's story a step further. This hefty book provides any history buff or just curious observer of American politics and religion with a more comprehensive look at Malcolm's life. Through his autobiography, much of Malcolm's experiences and life are presented in one dimensional fashion. Marable's book however gives you more of an idea on why X was who he was and dares to show you the human side of X. I can't say too much more without this becoming a spoiler, but I have to say... if you're looking for a challenge, an opportunity to learn, and an informative but fascinating story, this is your best bet. A friend of mine and I are currently reading this story and we now make references to it almost daily. It's just that compelling!

If any of you choose to read the books above, please let me know your thoughts in the comments below (but no spoilers please!)

Here's to more learning, more laughter, and more words this Wednesday.

The Birth of a Nation

2011-07-04T12:23:00.006-04:00

Yesterday afternoon (July 3^rd) I attended a birthday party. There were several friends in attendance, clad in red, white and blue, and a table was heaped with delicious food. Instead of attempting to buy hundreds of candles, the party planner decided to purchase a “2” a “3” and a”5” in honor of the birthday girl’s special day.

As the attendees sang Happy Birthday to America (not the Stevie version, I regretfully inform you), they followed up by chanting USA, and dug into a steaming hot apple pie. I watched with amusement and a bit of melancholy envy because I’ve known the birthday girl, America, my entire life but oddly enough I’ve never celebrated her birthday with such fervor.

Let me be clear. I am an American and very proud of it. I have always recognized the 4^th of July with some type of celebration whether it be fireworks or a cookout; who can really complain about a holiday that is a guaranteed day off?

Unfortunately, when I reflect on our “Independence Day” from Britain, the Liberty Bell seems to ring a little off key for me. Yes, it is true that on or around July 4, 1776, the United States did move to declare her independence from Great Britain. But how did our “independence” from Britain change the lives of Black Americans? Was their freedom in any way secured? Did they toss aside the chains of slavery and march forward to citizenship? We all know the answer to the preceding questions are “not really”; “no”; and “no” respectively.

The second sentence of the Declaration of Independence states “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

We’ve heard this line so many times that it almost seems rote. But read them again. You’d think it was a line from an abolitionist’s speech. When I hear “all men are endowed with the right to liberty,” my bosom doesn’t swell with pride in my country’s Founding Fathers. I’m filled with disbelief, disgust and pain. How could you pen those words and continue to support a system of slavery? How could Congress approve that declaration and not also approve the end of horrible crimes to humanity?

I know what some of you are thinking:

Slavery is over; get over it already. I’m not going to get into a long drawn out dissertation about how the descendants of slaves and slave owners continue to reap burdens and benefits respectively, because that makes people defensive. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the day we are expected to look back on with moist eyes makes my wrists ache with the inherited memory of slavery.

Why can’t you feel good about celebrating your own country’s birthday? Yes, America was born that day. Unfortunately, the America born that day was not created with my interests in mind. No kind thought or consideration was made about me and my family’s wish to have life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness. My ancestors and their children were considered less than men, not even actual people. What else can you derive from the statement that “all men are created equal” when people of African decent are not considered a part of this group?

Blacks weren’t the only group without rights. Only white men that owned land were even able to vote. Why take it so personal? You don’t see white women complaining. Well this criticism is easy to deflect. Lots of other groups were (and continue to be) marginalized. But Blacks and Native Americans -those who didn’t die of disease or run off- didn’t even have the right to life sans shackles. Marginalization >>> shackles.

I’m going to say it again because I’m sure many of you don’t believe me. I’m proud to be an American. I’m glad we’re not a group of colonies. I love living here and wouldn’t want to live any place else. Everyone, self included, reaps the benefits of being free of rule from the British. However, a holiday entitled Independence Day is quite misleading, all things considered. Independence was selective; freedom in the US from the Brits, slavery to the US for others. The so-called American dream was recognized for a good chunk of Americans that day in Philadelphia. A celebration is indeed in order. But a good deal of reflection on how America can ensure that the ideals represented in that Declaration are represented in our country today is much more productive, and in my opinion, more patriotic.

Happy Fourth. Enjoy the birth of a nation. Just don’t call it Independence Day.

Five Things Ladies Would Rather Not See

2011-06-30T10:44:00.009-04:00

For the past few months, my friend over at A Bachelor's Pad and I have been jokingly saying we'd write complementary articles, one from the man's perspective and another from the woman's perspective, we just needed a good topic. *in my Kevin Hart voice* Soooooooo, we picked an age old topic: "Turnoffs by the Opposite Sex." Ladies, if you're interested in reading about 5 Things Guys Don't Find Attractive, click here ---> A Bachelor's Pad (after you've read this one first to ensure I didn't discredit our gender).

As for the guys, the following is a list of somewhat superficial --but nevertheless important-- things that women just don't find attractive:

1. Long fingernails. Why?! Some women keep their nails long to be fashionable. But for men, there's simply no reason for it. It shows poor hygiene and gives me the impression that you're dainty enough to keep your nails long but too much of a woos to allow them to tear off while doing the heavy lifting of a neighbor's furniture. Also, unless you play the guitar, there's absolutely no reason to keep that pinkie nail longer than the others. That's a CLEAR sign of a drug user. Trim 'em.

2. Sagging Bottoms. Well first off, it's uncomfortable, which lets me know that you'd rather be what you consider fashionable than comfortable. Which is an odd and unattractive trait in a guy. There's nothing wrong with being hip, fresh or whatever you kids are caling it, but sagging isn't professional or dapper, it's just a trend, a fading one at that.

3. Men Who DON'T wear suits properly. This doesn't mean I discriminate against recently incarcerated men who are still figuring out that one size doesn't fit all. But it does mean that at some point, every man needs to visit a tailor or at least find a fine men's clothing store that offers suits that fit them well. When a man is wearing a suit for the first time and it doesn't hang well, he sticks out like a sore thumb and not in a good way. There's a reason the ladies love Maxwell and it's more than the sultry voice. It's the way his suits fit.

4. Overwhelming Cologne. It's one thing if you can hear someone around the corner... but if I can smell your Axe/incense/Tommy Hilfiger/Dolce & Godiva/Rick Ross Sweat Beads cologne before we're sharing intimate space, that's problematic. Someone who uses a subtle dab of cologne and a clean, crisp smelling aftershave is sending the message that they're well groomed, masculine, but not imposing. The guy who smells like he substituted cologne for body wash makes us feel cornered and intimidated. And not in a good way.

5. Using/Wearing Random Gifts from the Ex. This may be the one that throws you for a loop, but I promise I have a reason for it. A friend of mine has a boyfriend who collects watches. To date, he has about 40 odd watches. His ex girlfriend of five years purchased him a watch one year for Christmas (I know... kinda unoriginal right!?) Anyway, the watch wasn't particularly expensive or unique, it just was the one his ex-girlfriend bought him, and whenever he was mad at his current girlfriend, he'd wear that watch. Of course, this only pissed my friend off more and made her feel like he was throwing the ex back in her face. The point to this convoluted story is, unless it's the only Karl Kani Limited Edition track suit that you own, let it go. No one wants a constant reminder of their predecessor dangling in their face when you lean over for a kiss. I'm not going to go so far as to say you should throw these items away; you never know when you're going to need to pawn an old piece of jewelry to bail your uncle out of jail, but at least show your significant other enough respect to keep the past in the past.

There you have it; I gave you five that I think are relatively universal, what else do you guys have? Be sure to weigh in on A Bachelor's Pad list as well.

We're Off to See the Wizard!

2011-06-16T13:27:00.019-04:00

I have some sad news for you all. Our President of the United States, Barack Obama is not…

A wizard. He’s also not a magician. He has no access to a magic wand that will reduce gas prices, give you a job, lower the deficit, or make your girlfriend come back to you. Sure, the POTUS is by far the single most powerful man in the country, and arguably the free world. However, our Constitution is written in a way that creates checks and balances between the 3 branches of our government. In case your civics teacher was high on crystal meth: there’s the executive branch (the Prez), the judicial branch, and the legislative branch (Congress). (Ex. “Obamacare” was passed by Congress, and then signed into existence by the POTUS).

Maybe the confusion about Obama’s mystical powers stems from the messaging of his 2008 campaign. President Obama successfully won enough of the electorate with a message of change and hope. Nevertheless, during his acceptance speech that brisk November 4^th night, BHO stated:

“The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.

There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government can't solve every problem.”

Maybe you didn’t hear that because you were in the streets giving fist bumps to strangers and screaming at the top of your lungs. I recall that night vividly; I was at The Park at 14th and a close friend of mine was vacillating between moments of disbelief, excitement, elation, and tearful reminiscing on those who missed the historic moment. So I’ll grant you all a pass on missing that speech.

But what about common sense? Why do people think Obama can be any and all things to everyone? I attended a town hall on the economy with Obama about a month ago and the questions lobbed at him were unbelievable.
1. What are you going to do about the gas prices, Mr. President?
2. Mr. President, I work for the National Zoo, and they told me I’d be laid off in July. What would you do if you were me?

There’s a reason I will never be president. My response to the zoo lady would have been: “I don’t know... update my resume?! Look for another job?!”


Shameless promotion

Through a good old Howard hookup, I also had the pleasure of attending a Town Hall on the Economy with Republican-elected officials this week. The message from the leaders on the right is clear: Obama has failed (horribly) at everything.

A friend of mine, who voted for Obama in ’08 and considers himself middle of the road, told me emphatically, “Obama has done nothing for the economy. Nothing.”

I can think of a few folks that would disagree.

The four million children now covered under the Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act (Healthcare costs are directly related to the economy!)
The thousands holding down newly created jobs in the private sector (more created during this administration than during the entire Bush administration)
The millions driving on repaired roads, working at new energy jobs, and using bank accounts secured because of the Reinvestment Act of 2009
The women now protected against pay discrimination under the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

I believe we should hold all elected officials responsible for their actions, good and bad. As my friend Trae would say, we elect them to represent the will of the American people. It makes sense to criticize policies, ideas and ideologies. It does not make sense to criticize someone for not achieving the impossible.

At some point, we have to acknowledge that change is not embodied in one man, and it certainly doesn’t happen solely in one term, especially when you’re handed a filthy diaper of a country and expected to turn it into a glistening Thanksgiving meal. (That made no sense, but neither do folks’ expectations of Obama). We've got a better chance of getting a miracle from a Washington Wizard, John Wall. (I mean have you seen his stats??!)

Your thoughts?

"I've been used and abused" - signed, the English language

2011-06-09T17:46:00.008-04:00

As a graduate of a mildly pretentious university and a purveyor of the Washington bourgeoisie, my ear is hypersensitive to aberrations in people's use of the English language.

Most of us are familiar with common mistakes like using the wrong their/they're/there or subject/verb disputes. However, there are some other errors that go unchecked. Until now....

1. Misuse of the word "Humbled." A few years ago, for my friend's birthday, I got her an ostentatious display of balloons, a $75 gift card to her favorite store, and made her a pan of her favorite cupcakes. I was quite pleased with myself. Until after the birthday dinner, her boyfriend walked us all out to the parking garage, where he had parked her brand new Miata. I felt "humbled."

Not. "Wow! Six Grammys!? I mean, I expected at least two, but not siiiix! I'm humbled!"
Not. "I am both surprised and deeply humbled." [Obama on receiving the Nobel Peace Prize.]

dictionary.com:
--> humbled: having a feeling of insignificance, inferiority, subservience, etc; low in rank, importance, status, quality, etc.

2. Misuse of the phrase "in lieu." The way to properly use this word is, "In lieu of the tin of butter that this Paula Deen recipe calls for, I used light, unsalted margarine."

Not. "In lieu of your great report card, I'd like to increase your weekly allowance! Congratulations."

dictionary.com
--> in lieu: instead; as substitute

3. Misuse of the word "Stay." As a child I grew up believing that this word was to be used in the following manner: "I hope Lisa and Zack stay together!" I think the first time I heard it used incorrectly was as a college student in the cafeteria. A freshman remarked, "I heard all the stuck up girls stay in the Annex (a dorm)." I remember thinking, "Does he mean the stuck up girls hang out over there? What does he mean by stay?"

Apparently some think "stay" can be used in lieu of "live." (See what I did there!?) But nah, kid.

webster.com
--->stay: to stop going forward, to spend time in a condition.

*********************************

The Elusive S!

The letter "s" is one that has troubled urban communities for centuries.

People toss it in when it's not needed:

1. I'm going to Marvin's.

2. Happy New Year's!

3. Let's go Orlando Magics!

4. In the Battle of the Real HU, I support the Bisons.

5. That last hot biscuit with gravy is mines! (Nah, they're his.)

But then...people leave out the "s" when it is needed:

1. I'll be at Sasha house for Game Night.

2. You going to Jay get together?
3. Who run the world? (Girls) - Beyonce

What's up with that?!

*********************************

Ay yi yi. Well, now that you know what's up, don't be a perpetrator of aggravated assault against the English language. Any other commonly misused words that aren't commonly pointed out? The floor is yours.

Are We Each Our Own Dictionary?

2011-05-25T09:44:00.003-04:00

In the past few weeks, I've had heated debates about words that many deem offensive ranging from the N Word to female (versus woman). One argument that continues to rear it's illogical head is, "Words only have the power that you give them." For example, in Decoded, when speaking about "nigger", Jay-Z says,

To me, it's just a word, a word whose power is owned by the user and his or her intention.

The problem is, that's not how language and words work. Despite E-40's relentless efforts, words don't have the meanings and/or power that we personally assign them. Words come with way more baggage than Badu could have ever predicted. The "I give words power" argument gives people license to use words to mean whatever they would like, in whatever fashion they'd like with no consideration to their actual meaning, alleged power, and propensity to offend and harm others. Furthermore, it renders dictionaries, history, societal trends, socialization, denotations, connotations, and other contributing factors invalid.

A variant of this argument that also comes from "This Sounds Good But Doesn't Make Any Sense Land", is "Words can only offend you if you allow them to."

Last I checked, the majority of folks don't enjoy or seek out opportunities to be offended; it just happens.You can tell someone that you mean "nigga" as a term of endearment akin to brother, but it won't matter to my grandparents, because their history of the word is as a term of castigation. So this adult version of "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" is nonsense. Everyone's received a text message, an email, or piece of mail from Sallie Mae that has personally hurt their feelings. You probably weren't choosing to be offended, it just happened because of the nature of the words and/or the message.

Sometimes, I WISH that these arguments were true. I wish I could decide that, and I'm quoting a friend, "fornication really means eating mayonnaise sandwiches on Tuesdays at 11:35 AM." The words only have power argument has potential to be the greatest loophole of all time!

So why do people default to this "Words... Power... Blah Blah" Argument?

1. We're creatures of habit. And if you've grown up saying something your whole life, who feels like changing?

2. No one likes being told that what they say (or do) could possibly be offensive; it comes off as a personal attack. They'd rather default to, "How dare you be offended! Stop feeling offended!"

3. You meant the term in an offensive way and now you're backpedaling.

4. You heard someone else use the Words/Power line, so you think it's legit. But nah. Saying something over and over (Like "Here Here! The Rapture is May 21st!") doesn't make it true.

Rule of Thumb

My friend Katie, who of course is a doctoral student in psychology said it best,

If someone tells you the use of a word offends them, why argue with them? Either continue to use it and offend them or consider the variety and diversity of people's experiences and listen, learn and adjust.

If your words are offensive to others, unless they're a paranoid anti-ism-ist on every topic, it's probably a legitimate concern. Ask questions and try to act accordingly. I explained to a few friends why I preferred slim to skinny and my pal, David, said, "That's a great point. I get that." That's all it takes. Talking. Not this bee ess argument surrounding words and adjusting power levels and what not.

Thoughts? Submit them via Facebook or IntenseDebate below. The carpet is yours.

Dining Out Etiquette That You May Not Already Know

2011-05-16T16:46:00.007-04:00

The average person would probably tell you that they know proper protocol for dining out. Tip 18%, no elbows on the table, napkin in your lap, and you're all set right? That's a great start. However, as a former host and server, I can tell you... you think you know, but you have no idea. (Well maybe you do, in which case, just nod along as you continue to read.) The following are a few tips that make the dining experience more pleasurable for you, and for the staff (which in turn... again, makes it more pleasurable for you.)

1. Make a reservation. An inside scoop: Hosts, managers, servers, and even the kitchen staff place restaurant guests into one of three categories:

a. Walk-ins - These are the folks that usually make up the majority of the business and their numbers/disposition are wildly unpredictable.

b. Regulars - They come in all the time and get treated like family (not exactly like a guest because there's no need to impress, but with love because the staff knows them well.)

c. Reservations - These are potentially important folks who plan ahead. Guests who make a reservation typically want and deserve a premier dining experience, and the staff expects their arrival and is prepared for it. The best seats are saved for them, the chef and/or manager may visit your table, and special accommodations are more likely to be honored. So even if it's a Monday night, and the forecast calls for rain, if the restaurants accepts them, make a reservation!

2. Order what the restaurant knows how to make. This may sound odd (they should know how to make everything on the menu right?), but listen carefully. Legal Sea Foods is a successful chain of 30 restaurants, not because of their steak or grilled chicken... but because of their seafood! I recommend visiting Yelp or Open Table for reviews and looking for repeated mentions of a food item. Choose wisely!

3. A restaurant is not a lounge. (Unless it's The Park.) Why do I mention this? Because I've seen parties of 15 hang out for over 3 hours in a restaurant as they debate Starbucks vs Caribou Coffee while a line of guests waits in the lobby. I understand that folks are having a good time and I'm all about having a word or three with friends, however, you need to understand... that every minute you sit there, the servers are losing money and other guests are hungry. You may say, "That's not my problem", but I guarantee that you've been out and being extremely disheartened as the host tells you the wait is over an hour. Help prevent long waits! Eat, chat briefly, then roll. Plus, if you've just eaten a hearty meal, you can burn some of the calories by walking and talking.

4. Speaking of large parties, large groups get a special set of rules:

a. Either bring cash (a generous amount to cover your food, tax, and gratuity) or prepare to evenly split the check. (Your best bet is to have one credit card cover the check and everyone give that individual cash, but that takes faith.)

b. If you are a party of 12, then arrive as a party of 12, (not 6, then 1, then 3, 2.) Carpool, coordinate watches, put it on your Outlook calendar... whatever it takes to make it so that everyone is seated simultaneously and eats together. Not only will the restaurant appreciate it, your fellow guests will.

5. Let the hosts and hostesses do their job. They have a reason for placing you in the seat they designated. They know the layout of the restaurant, they are aware that your favorite booth is opening up soon, and they know what seats will fit you and your guests. They know if they sit you in that cozy spot you love, you'll get horrible service because that server already has 7 tables, while another one is bored to tears. In short, they see the big picture, and you don't. One of my biggest pet peeves when hosting was when people would come in, look around, point at a table and tell me where they were going to sit. Unless the host places you in the center of the kitchen, or you have some type of legitimate concern (hearing problems, poor circulation, claustrophobia, et al), then sit there and enjoy your food. If you're at a decent restaurant, they won't really have "bad seats." (Also, another way to get to sit where you want is to follow rule #1 and make a special request!)

6. Please don't snap, prod, touch, or yell at your server. Server and servant are not synonymous. It's rude and isn't the smartest way to treat people who handle your food.

7. Minimize your impact. There's a time and place for your Dougie (Wolf Blitzer House Party), your child's screams (Space Mountain, Disney Land), and your lax cleaning standards (Survivor Season 24). But it's not a restaurant. The restaurant is there to make an impression on you; you are not there to make an impression on them. Behave accordingly.

Bon appetit!

***

That was easy enough right? Do you have any words of advice or suggestions for restaurant attendees? Share the knowledge.

Why I Probably Won't Spank My Kids

2011-05-10T10:07:00.024-04:00

Last Sunday, the pastor at my church delivered a great Mother's Day sermon. He opened with a familiar theme: mothers whooping their kids. Both of my parents spanked/whooped me growing up, so like the majority of the congregation, I laughed in agreement with mixed feelings of nostalgia and relief (no more whoopings!)

But then I started thinking about it, "Am I going to spank my kids?" Probably not. Before I go any further, I'd like to issue the following disclaimer: as a childless woman, I'm no expert in rearing children. I'm armed only with my experiences, a bachelor's degree in psychology (like 93.2% of the women on the planet), and my musings on discipline.

I'll probably do some slaps on the bottom, particularly when my kids are really young and a diplomatic conversation isn't an option, but generally speaking, I don't see spankings and whoopings into the teenage years as a good idea, and here's why:

1. It's not creative. It's the easy way out, not the best way. How much thought does it take to wallop a kid around who's half your size for a few minutes? None, really. Disciplining children and inflicting violence... two things that you really should think about before you engage. Usually when a kid acts out in the grocery store and the parent reaches from deep within her spirit to smack him into common sense, it doesn't seem that a lot of thought went into it. Which leads me to the next one...

2. Discipline isn't a one size fits all practice. That kid in the grocery store will probably (but not definitely) act right for the remainder of the trip up and down the aisles of Harris Teeter, but once the sting of the pain fades, are you sure that smack is going to prevent him from throwing a Skittles inspired temper tantrum again? I doubt it. For every kid, (and every person) there are different incentives/tactics that work best. Some kids respond to:
a. taking away privileges (no more Internet/Gameboy/dessert)
b. adding new unwanted responsibilities (guess who's taking out the trash for the rest of May?! you Johnny!)
c. straightforward diplomacy (seriously, Johnny, running in the street will get you squashed like a ladybug. Don't do that.)
d. the guilt trip (my Mom was a beast at this! "Crystal, tell me what I'm doing wrong... do I not love you enough? Am I not giving you enough attention? How can I be a better mom so you can stop doing xyz")

3. It eliminates an opportunity to teach important critical thinking skills and/or life lessons.

When my dad used to spank me, he'd give me these long speeches beforehand explaining, "I really wish I didn't have to do this. You know what you did was wrong right? You know why? I just want what's best for you and blah blah blah." You know why I remember it as blah blah blah? Because I was too busy shaking in my Light Up LA gears to really hear or consider anything he said. I nodded and shook my head at the appropriate moments, not because what I got what was he saying, but I thought maybe it could be a last ditch effort to escape my ultimate fate. I learned NOTHING in those speeches... except how to empathize with folks being walked to the gallows.

Sometimes, you'd be surprised by how smart children are. Teach them how to be adults and how to think keenly and logically by giving them opportunities to really see the cost and benefits of their behavior. If you're punishing them for legitimate reasons and hope to encourage good behavior, it should be easy to explain said costs and benefits.

One of my friends told me that his father once taught him why chewing tobacco was a bad idea by giving him some to chew. I can assure you that lesson stuck with him better than a spanking would have. To this day, that friend has one of the brightest, tobacco-free smiles I've ever seen.

So You're Still Not Convinced?
People that support spanking their kids usually say the following when defending why they do it:

1. My parents spanked me and look how awesome I am! Research shows that it works just as often as it doesn't. There are lawyers, felons, teachers, murderers, entertainers, and scam artists that have all been spanked. You can't say it works 100% of the time. (See here and here) for more data.
2. The Bible says "spare the rod and spoil the child." This oft quoted Proverb is used to explain why people discipline their kids. Proverbs are there to provide good practice or advice about what we should do, and were written according to the current cultural trend. For example, in Proverbs 31, the Bible says this about a good wife:

"She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard; She makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes."

Anybody know any women buying fields and selling linen garments? What the proverb means is a good wife makes smart fiscal decisions and provides for her household. (This could mean she cooks the meals, pays the bills, etc) Similarly, the spare the rod, spoil the child adage means if you fail to discipline your child (and in their setting, the rod was the appropriate way to do so), then you will spoil your child. I wholeheartedly agree! I'm not sure the rod itself is necessary though.

****
Louis CK, a favorite comedian of mine says, "Kids are the only people in the world that you're allowed to hit...They're the most vulnerable, and the most destroyed by being hit; but it's totally ok to hit them. If you hit a dog, [you'll} go to jail; you can't hit an [adult] unless you can prove they were trying to kill you! But a little tiny person... who trusts you implicitly, %$# em. Let's all hit them."

Like I said, a few well placed swats to a toddler are probably appropriate when you don't have a cattle prod. But alternative forms of punishment versus spanking/whooping your kids should be given some serious thought.

Do you plan to (or do you currently) spank your kids? Why or why not?

Country First: A Myth of Epic Proportions

2011-05-02T10:21:00.011-04:00

So last night (Editor's Note: May 1st, 2011) as we all know, Obama announced that "by his direction", the Navy Seals captured and killed Osama Bin Laden. I watched the news unfold via Twitter and CNN. From my home, a few miles from the White House, I watched coverage of the world's reaction. Most of the comments made were jocular and celebratory, but they all seemed to give credit to our President and his administration. (Remember when Bush did the whole Mission Accomplished joint?) And that's how things go... when bad things happen in the country, we blame the President. When good things happen... we blame the President.

Except, not really. Almost immediately after CNN's John King announced that Osama Bin Laden was dead, a conservative friend of mine tweeted (and facebooked), "I wish George W. Bush was delivering this speech tonight."

Sigh... if we're really country first, does it really matter which president delivered it?? But since it does matter, why won't you give credit where it's due?!?!? This conservative friend then went on to thank our U.S. troops, quote Bush, and drive to the White House in celebration (which is in direct conflict with Proverbs 24:17: Don't rejoice when your enemies fall; don't be happy when they stumble). She continued to profess her elation about Bin Laden's death and still.... no mention of our President, the Commander in Chief. Really?!?!You.went.to.the.man's.house. She and her fellow celebrators probably woke up Sasha and Malia with their shouts and flag waving (where did those flags come from?!!?), but not a single mention of Obama. It seems that no matter what he does, Obama can do no right, and for some people, the right can do no wrong.

Ironically, just before Obama released the Breaking News, I got into a debate with a different conservative, who alleged that "Obama was 'too harsh' on Trump considering he's a sitting president." I guess he missed Trump's profanity-laced speech in Vegas where he dropped several f bombs and called Obama "a nobody in Washington."

This same conservative made what I believe to be one of the most ridiculous statements of the year: "Obama faces little real scrutiny. Only far right GOP questions him." Give me a break! Are you serious! This dude gets criticized by:

1. the left for being too moderate, (see here!)

2. the moderate for being too left or too right (see here!)

3. the right for being too.. ~~Black~~ left. (see here!) (see here!) (see here!) (see here!) Alright, alright, we don't have all day.. lol.

Even I, tree hugging liberal, criticize Obama regularly. (I still think he could have found a way to get out of extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.) But when he does something right (and if you need an example, please visit WhatTheHeckHasObamaDoneSoFar.com), I give the man his props. Even when Bush was president, while I was highly critical of him, I stood behind him post 9/11 and did my best to put partisan concerns aside when appropriate.

Unfortunately.... the "Country First" team doesn't get that. I struggle to get with Republicans and this "Country First" theme of theirs when conservatives spend considerable amounts of time questioning his faith, his intelligence, his experience, and lest we forget.... HIS CITIZENSHIP.

You don't get to say Country First when:
1. you only support the President and the office when the President's from your camp (See outspoken folks from your team -including the Louisiana governor, Bobby Jindal- saying "I want the President to fail.")
2. you yell out in Congress when the President is addressing the country (and Congress).
3. you make people fight for unemployment benefits in the midst of a recession affecting millions and their families.
4. you force the extension of tax cuts for the wealthiest in the country at a time when our deficit is ballooning and we still lull in a recession.
5. You claim to support the troops but REPEATEDLY vote against bills that provide for veterans' medical care and education.
6. you engage in what my friend calls "unreasonableness, double mindedness, hypocrisy and folly."

Own Your Nonsense
My friend over at Hot Biscuits And Gravy says, "I'm an a-hole, but I own it." In that vein, you know what I love about MSNBC? They have a liberal slant and they own it. Their new slogan is "Lean Forward" as a nod to their progressive and leftist way of thinking. Meanwhile, Fox News (the Republican Party's hype man) continues to put forth the most unbelievable slogan ever: Fair and Balanced. Even conservatives know Fox isn't fair and balanced. Give it up.

Just be real with yourself conservatives. That's all I ask. You don't put country first. Republican party: create a slogan you can honestly say you mean and "own". This Country First nonsense makes about as much sense as Trump running for political office.

Your Turn
What slogan do you think truly represents the Republican Party? Do you believe I'm too harsh on conservatives? Do you consider the right, "country first?" Prove it!

P.S. I'm not the only one blogging about this. Check out the following takes:
1. One Nation Under God Incelebration
2. Osama Gone
3. Bin Laden is Dead; Do We Get to Celebrate?

Would You Date Someone with Kids?

2011-04-29T16:42:00.004-04:00

When I asked folks on Twitter, I got a variety of answers. (You can see them in the pink and blue boxes). While some people were resolute in saying, "Absolutely not." or "Sure, why wouldn't I?", most people fell in a gray area.

How Single Parents are Perceived

It seems that the perception of the single parent varied based on the circumstance. If the individual had a child and the situation didn't work out (divorce/breakup/etc) then people seemed hesitant to seriously date the single parent. However, if the individual is a single parent as a result of something that seems a little less out of their hands (death/taking in an orphaned child), then the person usually gets a pass. All of a sudden, the idea of a "hybrid" family doesn't seem so bad.

Other Common Factors Cited

Other things affecting people's decision to date (or not date):

1. How many children does the parent have? The higher the number of children, the more resistant folks seemed to be to the idea.

2. How many other parents are involved? A friend of mine said she met a great guy who said he had 3 children. While it was hard for her to swallow, she was ok with it... until he said, "By three different women." She felt the multiple parents indicated a failure to commit and recklessness.

3. What is the relationship between the two parents? In other words, is there baby mama (papa) drama? Are there unresolved issues about the (hopefully) terminated relationship? Does the parent intend to make life difficult for any prospective stepparents?

4. Is the individual a good parent? Who wants to date someone who can't or won't take care of their responsibilities? One responder said, "if she doesn't take care of her kids, how am I supposed to expect her to treat me right?!"

I think we all have ideas about what we will and won't do, but once we're faced with the situation in real life, our abstract ideas often seem... abstract. Things we never thought we'd do or consider suddenly become not as impossible to conceive. Or is that just me?

What are your thoughts? Would you date and/or marry someone children from a previous relationship? Why? What factors contribute to your decision?

Journal Entry from the Guy Who Created The N Word

2011-04-25T14:18:00.006-04:00

Today's post was not written by me, however, I found it extremely insightful, albeit chilling in its ability to shed light on what dictionary.com describes as "probably the most offensive word in the English language." Please read and share your thoughts on the post. If you don't mind, also share your thoughts on the N word. Do you use it?

FROM THE DIARY OF THE CRIPPLED MONSTER

If anyone ever reads this diary entry, it’s important for you to know that I’m a white man. It is more important for you to know that due to childhood polio, I’ve never had the luxury of being able to use my legs. I have endured much teasing, horrific stares, and blatant disrespect. Today, however, I’m filled with pride, reflecting on my ancestor, 14 generations before me who created the word, nigger. Just today, in Starbucks, I heard some young men in business casual attire using the word to refer to themselves and their friends in a conversation. To know that the word my predecessor created hundreds of years ago is still being used today fills my heart with joy. I bet if he had a journal, it’d read something like this:

I’ve always wanted to leave an indelible mark on the world…you know, something that can’t be erased or forgotten. I tried a few things…
I used violence to capture a people from their homeland and forced them to be my slaves. But, the Egyptians had slaves far before I did…so that’s not original.
I sold them on auction blocks and ripped their families apart without recourse. Not so original either. (My children may have to allow them to be free in order to save my family and myself. Sort of the same thing that happened to the Pharaoh who dealt with Moses and all of those plagues. We’re really struggling with this originality thing.)
What about raping their women to satisfy my lustful desires while simultaneously propagating my slave coffers, thereby increasing my wealth? Eh, seen it before.
Hmm, what if I create a term that can be used to denigrate the people who I’ve subjected to unmitigated torture, incomprehensible suffering, and legalized brutality? Yes, I think I’ve got it.
And they shall be called: NIGGERS!

Didn’t I tell you he was a genius? His plan worked better than he could have ever imagined. This phraseology was widely accepted at its inception and I’m quite proud of it to say the least. The term spread throughout the slave holding states and even caught on quite well up north. Slave auction advertisements even went from saying “African Slaves for sale” to “Niggers for sale.” Unfortunately, some literate mulatto named Frederick Douglass sparked a revolution of sorts, followed by other niggers like Marcus Garvey, Thurgood Marshall, Martin King and Malcolm X. They didn’t like people calling them niggers anymore, and made respectable strides in getting us to stop calling them niggers (publicly at least). Then, there were rumblings that niggers had taken up the practice of actually calling themselves niggers. What a relief it must have been!! Initially, I 'm sure my great x10 grandfather was a bit shocked that a man would call himself a nigger. I mean, the term was meant to cast horrible aspersions upon a people he wanted to remain at the bottom of society. When we say nigger, we're saying “shiftless, ignorant, hopeless, laughable, less than human.” So I find it strange that these folks refer to themselves in that fashion. Let’s plug it in and see if it makes sense. Here’s a plausible scenario of a typical discourse between two of them.

Scenario 1: Hey Mike, this is John. Call me back when you get a chance.

Scenario 2: Hey Mike, this is your nigger John. Call me back when you get a chance.

Scenario 2 Translated: Hey Mike, this is [shiftless, ignorant, hopeless, laughable, less than human] John. Call me back when you get a chance.

I love it. Makes no sense, but I absolutely love it.

Oh wait, I should mention that they’ve taken my family’s word and now it’s a different word. Drop the “er” and add an “a” and you have the new and improved “Nigga.” This nigga is the descendent of the nigger who my family bought and sold like livestock just a few generations ago. We’ve decided to stop calling you this word (publicly) because it’s no longer politically correct and admittedly inappropriate. Nevertheless, I’d like to thank you for keeping it alive. I’m glad we don’t have to use it anymore, because quite frankly, it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. But, when it comes from you, I feel much better about it. So, I congratulate all you niggers and niggas. Your leaders say that people like me used to be known as “Jim Crow.” And now I’m “James Crow, Jr., Esquire” because I evolved into a more latent and less obvious hate monger. Well, you’ve evolved as well! You are now the “nigga” formerly known as “nigger.” Or, maybe you are “Nigga, Esquire.” I’m glad you like the word and I’m sure you’ll keep it alive. (Note to non-nigger readers: Niggers are good at keeping things alive, i.e. “hope”). I’d hate for all of my hard work to go to waste.

Some of the more uppity niggers have told me that they’ve stripped the word of its power by using it themselves. If so, then why are you offended when I use it? I mean, we’re all equal, right “brotha?” Clearly, if you don’t want me to say Nigger/Nigga, you must find some inherent flaw in the word. I thought it had a new meaning? Don’t be mad “my nigga.””

I must say, I am baffled by why you refer to yourself as a Nigger/Nigga, but I can relate. I’ll tell you a story about how I became the Crippled Monster. When I was growing up, due to my affliction, some of the less compassionate kids in my neighborhood called me “the crippled monster.” The name hurt my feelings, initially. But after a long period of strife and fighting, I found it easier just to adopt the name and started using it myself. My mother (much like the African-American civil rights leaders) begged and pleaded for me to stop. She told me “You’re not a cripple and you’re certainly not a monster.” She even went to my school and got into a huge fight with the principal for allowing people (teachers included) to call me this name. This was a great source of embarrassment and sadness for her. I, on the other hand, became comfortable with it. I suppose after everyone calls you a certain thing for such a long time, you start to believe that’s what you really are. Deep down inside, sometimes I really feel like I’m a crippled monster. So, I understand you, niggers. Maybe deep down inside you really feel like the niggers/niggas you are. If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em, right? Exactly. I guess this diary entry was more about me than those who call themselves niggers. I wonder if any self-proclaimed niggers will read this someday and feel my pain. Wait a minute, niggers can’t read. Never mind. Goodnight.

-The Crippled Monster (or The Crippled Monsta’)

It's Not as Black and White as You Think (Interracial Relationships)

2011-04-11T17:18:00.007-04:00

By a large margin, my most popular blog post is "Reasons to Date a Black Man". Many people presumed that I have an unwavering loyalty and dedication to dating and/or marrying a Black man. These people are mistaken.

Every woman (and man) has a list of things they consider important when choosing their significant other. Some things are requirements (a desire to have children) and others are preferences (a college degree). For example, I prefer men taller than me (notice I said taller than me, not necessarily tall). I prefer men who like to read books. I strongly prefer men who are willing to adopt at least one child. This doesn't mean I won't end up married to a man who's 5'7" and can't make it through a magazine article.

An Analogy

Think of it like this. You see a notice for your dream job, you apply and you're in the last interview. The pay is more than you've ever made, the hours are flexible, the commute is steps from your house, and you're passionate about the company's mission. Your potential supervisor is just about to offer you the job when she says, "I hope this doesn't deter you, but we don't offer direct deposit." Well.... the job meets all of your other preferences, but unfortunately they won't do direct deposit. Are you going to turn the job down? Of course not! It's just a preference, not a requirement. And that's how I see race/ethnicity when it comes to what I'm looking for in a significant other.

For some, a specific race is a requirement. That's fine; as my most recent post suggests, I advocate for everyone finding their own path to happiness. However, I do think there are a few facts that generally should be acknowledged that may allow people to see interracial relationships in a different perspective:

1. Humans made the whole idea of race up. That's right. I don't have nearly enough time (or intelligence) to fully explain this here, but I encourage you to research the history of race. In the meantime, I'll tell you this. Race is a social construct, which is a fancy way of saying that some people decided that a good way to figure out 'who was who' was to create categories based around phenotypic traits with influence from people's nationality, culture, and social practices. The DNA within any racial group is more diverse than the DNA of a randomly selected population. Would you really decide who you want to spend the rest of your life with based on the thinking of guys who thought the world was flat?

2. No one really fits into any one racial category. There's a reason why people are a rainbow of shades but only four major racial groups. I'm sure somewhere there exists someone whose bloodline is Irish all the way through, however all the rest of us are mutts. And as the world becomes increasingly global and integrated, we have another quandary.

If people should only date within their race... who do biracial people date? Other biracial people with the same combination as them? Or do they get unlimited access to both races? The world is not made up of people who come in 4 colors (black, white, brown, or yellow). Most people are racially diverse just within themselves! (Don't believe me... invest in getting your DNA traced). My friend is half Fillipino and half Trini. Good luck finding another half Filipino/Trini! In practice, most people just date people who look like they're from a specific race. Which, means you're deciding who you spend the rest of your life with based on an external characteristic... sounds like prejudice to me. (If this was Twitter, I'd say #imjustsaying).

3. Race and culture are two different things. I agree that a common culture, beliefs, etc are important in deciding who you spend the rest of your life with. But while race and culture are related, they are not synonymous. Which formula makes more sense?

I rest my (cartoon) case.

4. In 2050, whoever you marry isn't going to look like they did in 2011 anyway. The things that will matter most in a relationship... the things that will sustain a marriage... the things that will matter in the long run won't be the wooliness of someone's hair or their ability to tan without burning. The things that will matter are their compassion while parenting, their support during your low days, and the inside jokes you'll share. And does any of that really have a color?

What About You?

I'm not writing to tell you who to date; I'm simply sharing my perspective on a widely discussed issue. When I told an acquaintance that I'd gone on a date with a Caucasian man, she jokingly (I think) said, "Sounds like self-hate to me." What do you think? Do you agree or disagree? Is dating outside of the race a bad idea, doomed for failure? Or are interracial relationships indicative of a more contemporary global perspective?

Please share!

Your Path to Happiness (not someone else's)

2011-04-06T16:17:00.002-04:00

When I was 12 my family moved to South Carolina, my mother's hometown. For the first time in my life I got to see my aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents and other extended family almost every day instead of just on the holidays. I loooved it. But even at the age of 12 I knew my time in South Carolina was temporary. I didn't like the slow-moving, country lifestyle. Sure, it's fun for vacation, but long-term.... not my thing. So I worked hard and went to college in DC, traveled across the US during the summer (Chicago, Philly, LA, New Orleans, Minneapolis, etc), and then moved to Los Angeles when I graduated. (Before landing right back in DC).

Meanwhile... my sister is a year younger than me and is extremely smart, friendly and outgoing. She went to college in South Carolina and at the relatively young age of 24 is one month away from her marriage. She has no desire -that I know of- to leave South Carolina and has a much more pronounced Southern accent than I do (I wish I could pull it out when I get pulled over). I used to encourage her to move up to DC or at least visit more often. I was just soooo sure that when she saw a taste of the big city life, that she'd realize one sushi place in the entire county is just not the way to live.

But I was wrong. When she came to visit DC, she was overwhelmed by the crowds and the filth. She was also dismayed by the lack of sweet tea. She was all too relieved to go back home.

But guess what? My sister is... happy. She's the mother to a gorgeous little girl, engaged to the love of her life, and has a strong network of friends and family.

Inversely, here in DC, where you can eat all types of food, meet all types of people , I know a lot of people who complain about the inability to find love, the skyrocketing cost of living, people's rudeness, and who generally seem disgruntled about their lives.

What does this mean? That everyone in a busy metropolis could find happiness if they left the urban sprawl? Not exactly. Anyone that knows me (or reads my blog) knows I love it here and have no plans of heading anywhere further South, especially not South Carolina. But living in DC and traveling to other cities/countries, is what makes me happy. I can't project that onto others.

Overall, we believe that the well-traveled, the "cultured", people with artifacts from around the world, but no domestic obligations like a terrible two or a monotonous 9 - 5 are living the life. These are the people we look to with admiration and sometimes even envy.

Maybe we've got it wrong. I half-jokingly told a friend of mine the other day, "Everyone doesn't want to go see the Pyramids... some people are ok with a picture." It seems hard to fathom to folks like me, but as I get older, I'm starting to realize the value in those little things we're quick to discount as traditional, old-fashioned or outdated.

The feminist movement almost made it illegal for me to say this, but I can guarantee you there are some single women over 40 who are grateful for their multiple degrees, full passport, and professional experiences, but who would trade some of that in for a family.

I say that everyone can benefit from at least a little exposure to something different. But to consider those who'd rather visit Paris through a novel or Thailand with a set of chopsticks, "ignorant and naive" is unfair. I've decided not to judge folks for their choices and I hope you can too.

What do you think? Is happiness a luxury for a select few or can we all find it in our own way?

What's in a Name?

2011-03-22T15:25:00.003-04:00

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

National Council of Negro Women

Congressional Black Caucus

Smithsonian National Museum for African-American History

All of the above represent people from the same racial/ethnic background. I've been called them all to describe my ethnicity, but I've never really been sure which one most accurately describes my ancestry and identity.

Before I left for Liberia, I remarked half-jokingly to everyone who asked, "I'm taking my first trip 'home.'" I've lived all over the US and no particular region of the U.S. felt like home. I often wondered if I'd feel most at home in the "motherland." I got my answer last week.

One of my primary responsibilities in Liberia was to speak to students about American life and answer all their questions. I was a bit overwhelmed by their perception of America as the land of milk and honey overflowing with all things great. In an effort to instill some national pride, I told the senior class something I felt was very important.

"As you all know, our president is Barack Obama a Kenyan American. That's quite a large step for us in America. But of our 44 presidents, not one has been a woman. However, here in Liberia, you all have the first female African president. That's a major milestone! It's something that should make you proud to be Liberian. And you know what else? While I am proud to be American, sometimes I wish I knew a little more about where my forefathers came from. It would be nice to know if I was Liberian or Nigerian or where specifically in Africa my ancestors hailed from. You all have that. Most of you can trace your ancestry back much farther than I can. That is something most of us Black Americans do not have. Be grateful for that."

One of the students, stood quietly and said somewhat shyly, "We have decided. You are Liberian. You are one of us, sister." At which point...I erupted into a sack of tears and snot. It was a very kind gesture on their part and representative of the treatment I'd received the entire time I was there. I was looked at with curiosity, but somewhat like a prodigal daughter.

And yet... I missed the U.S. Not just the amenities like consistent running water, water pressure, 24 hour electricity, street signs, GPS, cell phone reception and wireless internet (although I certainly missed those). I missed... the United States, my home. My complexion makes it absolutely clear that a significant portion of my ancestors came from Africa. Nevertheless, my more recent ancestors have invested so much to ensure that this place we called America is somewhere we can call home. They marched, they protested, they prayed, they worked. They raised families, they saved, they sacrificed, they worked. They pushed, they pulled, they listened, they worked. They bit their tongue, they washed someone else's clothes, they borrowed from neighbors, they worked. And today, my peers and I reap the benefits of their work.

The term African-American is a conscious effort to be culturally sensitive and acknowledge Black people's distant but very relevant history. I appreciate that and I don't think Americans should forget or fail to acknowledge the story of how we got here. (Rewriting or editing of history is something I take major issue with... shots fired at the removal of nigger from Huck Finn... but that's another post.) However at some point, Americans need to recognize that Black Americans, Jewish Americans, Asian Americans and others are not the sprinkles on the American cupcake, we are the yellow...errr chocolate cupcake itself! Do White people consider themselves European Americans... or just Americans? As Smokey Robinson said, "God knows we've earned the right to be called American Americans."

I'm so grateful that I had the opportunity to see Africa and I look forward to visiting again. But I'm also grateful to call America home. African-American is appropriate for my Nigerian, Kenyan, Ethiopian, Egyptian, and South African friends who have moved to the United States, but for me... the term "Black American" fits best.

What say you? What do you want to be called and why? What are your thoughts? While you're thinking about that, please watch Smokey Robinson's Being Black. I think he sums it up rather eloquently:

What Have You Done for [Anyone] Lately? (Ooooooooh oooh yeah)

2011-03-16T06:33:00.005-04:00

Soon, I will be back on American soil full of memories, blog posts, stories and photos to share with you. I feel like I have grown and learned so much more in Liberia than I ever expected to. But in the meantime, I'd like to offer a chance for you to give back yourselves! (And have a great time) This is primarily for folks in the DC Region, but if you're still interested in supporting the children of DC, you are more than welcome to make donations as well.

The news has no shortage of stories of terrifying crime rates, children going hungry, or cuts in funding for critical programs. The problems seem so large that it seems that as individuals there’s little we can do, short of ignoring our own personal commitments. Never fear; I have the solution for you! It is with great excitement that I announce an opportunity to serve a great cause without emptying your 401K or traveling abroad.

On Thursday, March 17^th, 2011, Madam Tussaud’s Wax Museum (located at 10^th and F St NW) will host a St. Patrick’s Day Cocktail Reception from 7 to 10 PM to benefit the renovation of the historic Butler Wyatt Metropolitan Police Clubhouse #2. For decades, Clubhouse 2 has provided a place for kids to play football, basketball, get homework assistance, and participate in leadership and character development programs provided by the Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Washington. However, the facility is in need of an extensive makeover. The proceeds from this event will directly offset the costs to renovate the Clubhouse.

The Event

The event will feature the brand new Presidential Gallery featuring all 44 presidents, Rihanna, Babe Ruth, Madonna, Muhammad Ali, Angelina Jolie and many more. If you’ve never been to Madam Tussaud’s, I can assure you it is an amazing experience! This fundraiser will feature complementary food, drinks, music, and opportunities to win prizes. The best part of it all is that while you will have a great time, you will also have the opportunity to support Butler Wyatt Clubhouse #2, former clubhouse of the current DC Mayor Vincent Gray and Sugar Ray Leonard, world-renowned boxer.

The tickets to the general public are $45, but as a friend of A Word or Three, you have access to a $10 discount code. If you would like to buy tickets, visit http://stpattysdayfun.eventbrite.com, and enter BGCGW in the line for discount code.

If you have any questions about the event, please don’t hesitate to email me. I look forward to having a (jet-lagged) blast with you on St. Patrick’s Day! Please share the link with your family and friends in the area, as we hope to sell out the event. Thanks again for your support of DC’s youth! Together, we can contribute to making Clubhouse #2 a safe haven for DC’s children.

For $35, you get:

unlimited food
open bar
prizes
entrance to the Wax Museum ($21 value)
that warm and fuzzy feeling from giving back. :)

So why haven't you bought your ticket yet?

Photos from Liberia!

2011-03-10T06:35:00.000-05:00

Our first day at the school's campus.

I don't have time to write too much, but I wanted to send pictures to give you a brief idea of what's happening here.

As the youngest person here by far, I've been designated as the scribe of all events, the record keeper, and the videographer, so I have lots of pictures and videos. My other primary responsibilities here in Brewerville, Liberia are to observe the reading classrooms and lead a workshop on creative lesson planning for reading comprehension. Those who know how corny I am and how detailed my curriculums are know that this is a passion of mine!

I'll send you all updates as I can.

Four year olds reading in groups. This young lady explained to me that she was teaching her groupmates how to read becauase she is "ahead". I love the peer to peer work!

With the ROTC Class. Didn't know they had that overseas.

The pump for water (which we aren't allowed to drink) is bigger than this girl, but she had serious determination and obviously lots of experience.

One end of the spectrum.

And the other end... a resort.

Interesting depiction of Jesus.

Forgive the sweat, I am about 3.5 inches from the equator though. :)

My connection is a little too slow for videos, but I will post them later.

The Hair Post (Live from Liberia!)

2011-03-08T09:48:00.002-05:00

In the whirlwind of preparation, I didn't get the chance to let you all know ahead of time, but I am in Liberia with the Lott Carey Mission School, visiting with students. Please forgive the typos, lack of pictures, and any other aesthetic concerns. I have to type quickly while I have electricity!

I've started and stopped this blog post several times because my feelings on hair range from "I am not my hair" to "my hair is a major part of my image and presentation to the world." I've come to realize that both statements are true.

Last week, a very good friend of mine remarked that he saw a black woman and a white woman seated next to each other on the train. with identical ponytails. He said he was "sad." I immediately responded defensively, "With high dropout rates of black boys, I find it hard to be particularly sad about something like a woman's choice in hair style." I added, rather curtly, "Women across the world from all cultures struggle with the concept of beauty; white women tan, Asian women shade their face from the sun, and black women straighten their hair."

My own hair journey isn't particularly unique. I haven't had a relaxer in over 5 years, and about two years ago, I colored my hair for the first time. Usually, my hair is pressed straight, but every now and then I wear my hair in it's natural wavy/curly state. There is a divide within the natural community about whether pressed or colored hair is natural, and while I respect all sides of the argument, I consider my hair natural.

I'd love to say I went natural in an effort to throw a metaphorical punch at the Western standard of straight, silky, soft, and as my friend says "wispy" hair. But that's not true. I'm natural because it's healthier, it rids me of the (expensive) dependency on relaxers, and I love the versatility of being able to switch from wavy to straight. Plus, natural hair is less irritated by heat and color than chemically processed hair.

Typically when talk begins about people straightening their hair to look white and the cultural/political implications of this or that kind of hair, I reflexively reply that "the style of your hair is a personal choice. It's all beautiful if it makes you happy! It's just haaaaair!"

Until....

I landed at Roberts International Airport in Monrovia, Liberia. At the time of writing I have seen dozens of Liberian women in the streets, at the mission campus, and of course at the airport. While their clothing ranges from traditional to American and their features are by no means homogenous, one thing is almost universal: they all have some type of hair supplements. Weaves, wigs, braids, long silky ponytails, lace fronts... you name it, it's here. I couldn't believe it! I've always naively believed that in Africa, I could find a strong contingent of women proud to wear their hair in its natural state. Of course I knew that the world has been infected by the belief that straight hair, fair skin, and light features are most attractive, but I desperately wanted to believe that in Liberia (the descendants of freed American slaves!) there was a dedication to tightly coiled, rich, dark and kinky hair.

As I said before, I dismissed my friend's claim that the matching ponytails were "sad." But I'm beginning to understand the sentiment. In this oppressive heat, I can't imagine being so driven to add more hair to what I already have! What would the world be like if the standard was tightly coiled, kinky hair? Or better yet, what if we lived in a world where an Afro, locks, straight hair, curly hair, braided hair, wooly hair, silky hair, and all other types were seen as equally acceptable?

Could this happen? I'm not sure. Is your hair a reflection of who you are or simply a hassle to deal with in the morning? Is it sad that people feel the need to change the texture of their hair? Share. I will share the comments and this post with my brothers and sisters here in Liberia.

I'm Sorry... Are You Mad at Me?!

2011-02-24T17:19:00.002-05:00

This is the question that was racing through my mind as a colleague and I attempted to place our order at Horace & Dickie's in NE DC. I've patronized this restaurant several times, largely because of it's proximity to my office and its hot tasty fried fish. Nevertheless, I get the impression that I am not wanted. While at this restaurant I (and my poor coworkers) have:

a. had a receipt thrust at us in a hostile fashion with a menacing roll of the eyes.

b. been rushed through our order despite the fact that there was no line behind me.

c. been told, "The tip jar is there for a reason!"

d. been told, "Go get your lemonade over there, I ain't got time for this!"

e. My last visit elicited: "You can leave now!"

Why continue to go, right? Well, I believe that some people have bad days and I wanted to give them a chance to redeem themselves. But my last experience was so harrowing, that my coworker and I decided that we will never go again. I refuse to be hazed just for supporting your business. Which brings me to the question of the hour....

How important is customer service in deciding whether you use a business or service again?

These are my new glasses by the way!

Case Study 1: Allow me to describe my visit to MyEyeDr of Clarendon, in Arlington, VA. I was about 15 minutes late due to Metro delays so I called to let them know. When I arrived a little out of breath, the receptionist said, "You must be Crystal; so sorry to hear you were having trouble on the train. Would you like a beverage?" The manager was extremely patient as he showed me the different brands, picked out a few, and gave me honest feedback on how they looked. The next day, I ran into my doctor at Starbucks on the way to pick up the glasses and she said, "Hey, Crystal how are you? Ready for those glasses?" I certainly didn't remember her name, and yet, she knew mine after a brief eye exam!When I casually mentioned that I worked at a non-profit, they dropped $100 off the price of my glasses. Mind you I already had a significant discount thanks to Groupon. I walked out with the intention of never going anywhere else for my glasses.

Case Study 2: For about 3 years, Leslie at Shear Movement on U Street was my go-to hair stylist. I tipped well, referred friends, and was always on time for my appointment. Unless I lied and said I had a flight in two hours, I was there for several hours. But... I accepted this, because that's what I had come to expect from hair salons. Nevertheless, my last visit took the cake. My appointment was at 2:30. I arrived at 2:15 PM. Leslie was not there, and I thought that odd, but I said ok. A little after 3:30 as I prepared to ask a friend to style my hair, Leslie strolled in casually with shopping bags. She said, "Girl, there was a sale, I just had to go." She ate a Chipotle burrito and then around 4:00 decided to start on my hair. I was angry but I really needed my hair done for an event that night, so I stayed. I sat there fuming and let her expertly style my hair. I paid, left a tip for the shampoo girl, and walked out with the intention of never going back to that salon again.

And I haven't. I've never entered Shear Movement again, but I have referred several people to My Eye Dr of Clarendon and to my new hair salon, Bang at the Verizon Center. There, my stylist Amanda completes my hair in 1 hour dedicated specifically to me (and for cheaper than Shear Movement.) She doesn't eat while she's doing my hair. She doesn't talk on the phone while she's doing my hair. Whenever I enter the salon, the staff knows who I am, greets me by name, "Hey Crystal, glad you're back!" I don't know if they're acting, but they genuinely seem happy to see me.

Why give business to people who act like they don't want you there? Why not support people who seem genuinely gracious to have you? I wholeheartedly believe that a lot of small businesses, particularly minority-owned businesses would experience a great boom in sales if they treated people like they appreciated their business. Send thank you letters to clients, keep them in the loop about promotions, smile when they walk in the door, it's really very simple. I don't ask for much, just an appreciation of my hard-earned dollars.

What about you though? Would you continue to patronize a business with horrible customer service? Have you had any particularly good or bad customer service experiences? What do you consider "great" customer service? I'm interested in hearing your thoughts. But before you do that...

Today's Black History Moment

Black History isn't just about learning about things that happened in the past; it's about making it every day and continuing to build upon a great legacy left by our American ancestors. One way to contribute to Black History is through our support of others.

A dear friend and colleague of mine, Jabari Smith is in a contest to win the title of Paradise Hunter Host. If chosen, he would travel the world for a year leading his audience on a fast paced adventure through paradises across the world. (more information about the job is here.)

I can think of no one more qualified for this job than Jabari. He's one of the kindest, friendliest, and amazing people I know. You ever meet someone and mention some small detail of your life, and then months later, you run into them again, and they say, "How did that chicken pot pie recipe you were working on come out?" That is Jabari. He's got a compassionate heart, particularly for those in his hometown of New Orleans, he consistently supports charitable causes, and he can be counted on as a faithful ambassador of troubled youth.

While I'm sure that he can convince the judges that he is the best candidate for the Paradise Hunter job, he also needs votes from us! His most competitive opponent has quite a following of people supporting her, but I'm sure that between his network and the A Word or Three family, we have an ARMY that will get him to the top spot! Click the picture or click here and share the link with others!

Vote for Jabari!

Why We Can't Wait

2011-02-15T12:25:00.003-05:00

At least once a year, I reread Why We Can't Wait by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, quite possibly one of the greatest non-fiction books I've ever read. It's a work not often talked about but it is often quoted. You may have heard the following:

"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people."

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

Every time I read it, I find a new gem or source of relevant inspiration. My most recent reading proved no different.

On January 25th, protesters in Egypt spoke out loud and clear about their frustration with Egypt's President Mubarak.They marched, led civil demonstrations, and in some cases rioted and clashed violently with nationalists. The world watched as the Egyptian drama unfolded and we all breathed a collective sigh of relief when on February 11th, the President gave in and resigned. Despite his February 1 pledge to not run for reelection, the Egyptian masses said, "No! We can not wait! You must go now."

In my own life... I've had similar revelations. My long-term goals include professional development in the non-profit arena and more stage/film experience. I can dream about these things and hope that it will come to pass, but for them to come to fruition, I have to take action. That means acting classes, saving for a possible move to Los Angeles and seeking opportunities in my office to develop new skills.

Saying that you "will not wait any longer" does not mean that you aren't willing or able to be patient, nor does it imply that you're restless or overanxious. It means you will no longer wait for life to pass you by; it means that you will allow the passage of time to be accompanied by activity, progress and hard work.

In the book referenced in this title, MLK says:

[There] is a tragic misconception of time... a strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Time itself can be used destructively or constructively. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to [wait].

How will you use your time wisely? What goals/plans/discarded resolutions could you be working towards? I implore you to begin to be proactive today. Do something concrete to bring your dreams closer to reality. If it's simply drafting a budget for a savings plan or if it's something bigger, like applying for 501 (c) 3 status for your dream non-profit, it's a step in the right direction.

I'm no mogul or huge financial success encouraging you to take a journey that I've already traveled; I'm simply a fellow human in this thing called life encouraging you take a journey with me, so we can inspire each other. :)

Black History Moment

In my continuing quest to share information about unsung Black Americans this month, I encourage you to check out Guy Johnson, a great writer. Guy Johnson is an example of someone who took several stabs at life. He's held several jobs including managing a bar in Spain, working on oil rigs in Kuwait, photography, and finally.. as a writer. As the child of Maya Angelou, you'd think he know he was born to be a writer, but not so. I highly recommend his historical fiction novel entitled Standing at the Scratch Line. While Why We Can't Wait is my favorite non-fiction, Standing at the Scratch Line tops my fiction list. It gives you drama, romance, action, a lot of history, and even some voo-doo.

Learn more about Guy Johnson here:

1. Guy Johnson at Random House
2. Guy Johnson at Barnes & Noble

As always, I welcome your comments. I'm especially excited to hear about any plans you have for moving your life forward.

You Don't Need Me... You Need the Google Machine

2011-02-09T15:13:00.002-05:00

Technology has made our lives so convenient that the Jetsons world doesn't seem so far away. Just today, I've used my smartphone, my ereader, paid a bill online, and later I'm going to watch a DVR'ed episode of Glee. This is what I humbly consider, a "smart" use of technology. Some people however, haven't mastered the art of allowing technology to help you. Instead of taking the time to use technology that is literally at their fingertips, they take to social media or send a text asking you to find information that is readily available.

I understand asking questions where you'd prefer a personal reference, like, "Whe

re do you get your hair cut?" or "Where can I get some good Italian food?" Sure, you can find those answers online, but it's often better to get a personal recommendation. But in the cases listed below, it's inexcusable.

1. The Weather. A friend of mine who lives about 2.5 miles from me texted me a few weeks ago during the snowy weather and asked, "How long is it going to snow?" (FYI, I'm not a meteorologist). Since I didn't know the answer to his question, I went to weather.com on my phone, got an update and then texted it to him. Moments later, I realized I'd been bamboozled. Why didn't HE just do that? He has an iphone! A few days later, he asked again, "What's the weather looking like by us? Is it snowing now?!" Me: "!!!!!!!!!" Instead of peeking out of his own window, or even using one of his several weather app options, he asked ME if it was snowing out. I may not be a model, but I know I don't look like Al Roker!

2. TV/Movie Schedules. I saw a tweet the other day that asked, "When is The King's Speech playing in Chinatown?" Really?!?! Who randomly knows Chinatown's movie schedule?! No one. So what you're asking someone to do is find out for themselves, and then relay that information to you. No, ma'am.

3. Directions. This one hurts me deeply. Everything comes with a GPS on it.. Phones, GPSs.. pets... If you have the address to where you're going, why rely on shoddy directions from people like, "You're going to pass 3 speed bumps, a McDonald's, 4 Starbucks, and a woman in a poncho on the corner before you make a right."

4. Date/Time. - If you ever use your phone to text someone or to tweet and say, "What's today's date? What day is it? What time is it?", I just... I just... I don't even know what to say. You are the reason polar bears are an endangered species and forced into slavery by Coca-Cola.

Solution - Let Me Google That For You

If you find yourself the victim of the questions listed above, type their question into the following website, and send your aggressor the link. I promise you... they will get the point, and you will get a laugh. Let Me Google That For You.

Black History Moment

As promised, in honor of Black History Month, I'd like to honor someone who has made significant contributions to the American way of life. Because this post is about technology, I thought Jesse Russell would be a good choice. If you've ever used "4G" wireless, this guy should be your hero. Mr. Russell is an African-American inventor and one of the visionaries’ whose innovative perspectives profoundly influenced the wireless communications industry, the driver of growth in 21st century. He holds numerous patents and continues to invent and innovate in the emerging area of next generation broadband wireless networks, technologies and services, which is frequently referred to as 4G. Thanks Mr. Russell! Learn more about him here:

1 Jesse Russell on Wikipedia

2. Jesse Russell on Blackengineer.com

Have you been the recipient of a Google-able question? If so, do share!

Black History Month is for Everyone!

2011-02-01T12:46:00.005-05:00

I'm a little bit of a nerd about Black History Month. I enjoy reading and sharing the facts and contemplating my role in it all. But I never considered it a moment specifically for Black Americans to be proud; I thought it was something for all Americans to be excited about. After all, don't people of all races & ethnicities love peanut butter and blood transfusions? (George Washington Carver & Charles Drew respectively)

Well, I learned that everyone doesn't see it that way. So, A Word or Three is here to clarify a few things:

Brief Brief History

Black History Month is the child of Negro History Week, a celebration pioneered by Carter G. Woodson for the sake of informing Americans (all, not just Black Americans) about Blacks' contributions, something that had traditionally been excluded from history books. February was chosen as the month, in honor of President Lincoln and Frederick Douglass' birthday.

Why BHM Rocks for Everybody

It contributes to our "melting pot" lore. In a recent speech, President Obama said, "We are a nation that says out of many, we are one." And while in practice this doesn't always happen, America tries. But for us to melt into this great-tasting stew, we can't leave any of the ingredients out! The carrot must have respect for the onion. Ok... this metaphor is getting ridiculous, but you get my point.
An incomplete history isn't history at all. Suppose I decided not to discuss or respect our Founding Fathers because many of them owned slaves? Suppose I decided that I'd rather not respect the writers of the Constitution because the original version considered me 3/5ths of a person and rendered me ineligible to vote for 3 different reasons? (I don't own property; I'm not white, and I'm not a man.) American history books have this peculiar habit of putting "Moments in Black History" or "Women in History" in the literal margins of the book versus including them as part of the main body of text. Wouldn't it be odd if history books had a special highlighted section entitled "White Men Who Made History" ? I believe the intent of these highlights and "footnote style" is to give Black History a special shout out, kind of like Black History Month, but it also creates the subconscious idea that Black achievements are secondary to the main story. In reality, without Blacks' contributions in the fields of education, science, fine arts, politics, humanities, and et cetera, America would be a very different place. Black History isn't an aside to the American story; it's an integral part of the major plot!
Black History is an inspirational story of triumph despite overwhelming adversity. If you still haven't committed to believing that Black History is for you, consider this: It's about the stuff that makes for good movies! Slavery, Jim Crow, the Klan, unequal education opportunities, institutional racism, lynchings, and just plain old mean prejudice are a few of the reasons why life for Black Americans has been -and continues to be- a tumultuous ride. When you consider that at different times in America it was illegal for Black Americans to read and write; that a wolf whistle at a woman could get you castrated & lynched; that the National Guard had to accompany a little girl to her equal education, that almost all 60% of former inmates exonerated through DNA are African-American men, that even today, Blacks with comparable education and experience receive less pay than their White counterparts, it really is inspirational!

So let's celebrate this month. Let's celebrate the achievements of Malcolm, Tubman, and DuBois. Let's celebrate the achievements of those whose names aren't etched in history books. Let's celebrate the achievements of people who sacrificed so that it's ok for me to write to you. Let's celebrate the achievements of our fellow Americans. It's patriotic.

In honor of Black History Month, my February posts will honor those you may or may not have heard of. What will you do? Share.

Are Black Women Ok with Misogynistic Lyrics?

2011-01-31T11:51:00.002-05:00

As a thespian, one thing I especially appreciate about the film industry is its rating system. Movies rated R, NC-17, and of course X, are not available to the general public (or not supposed to be.) This is why the Toy Story trilogy is available to a different audience than the Girls Gone Wild saga. This isn't censorship; this is simply ensuring that the appropriate parties receive age-appropriate entertainment.

Music, however doesn't have a similarly successful system. There are "parental advisory" stickers, but those don't do anything for the relatively ubiquitous presence of adult themes represented in popular music on radio, television and other mass media markets. (While I realize that all genres of music have a raunchy side, I'm most concerned about the urban music because it harms marginalized groups that are already suffering crippling blows.) I know the lyrics to songs I don't even want to know the lyrics to. For example, if you want to avoid hearing No Hands, that means no Top 40 radio for you and no walking down Benning Road or any MLK Avenue in America. You can say that No Hands was meant for an adult audience, which justifies its bass line in 21+ venues, but not its presence on the radio.

This conversation is one I've been having for years but almost always with Black Americans. Until last night. I was talking to a Salvadorian-American friend of mine, a studious, keen, and pretty undergraduate studying history and she hesitantly asked me (out of the blue), "How do you feel about female rappers?" I admitted my unstoppable love for Nicki Minaj. She continued... slowly at first, and then gathering speed,

"In my study of the history of women, particularly Black American women... I've seen how they've been portrayed since slavery as promiscuous women of a lesser value... and I just don't understand how they... you... could be comfortable with Black women calling themselves "bitches" and "hoes." It seems like so many of you have worked so hard to be something better than that, and yes... men are misogynistic, but for women to say it about themselves? And be ok with it? Calling themselves the baddest bitch, talking about p***y on sideburns... it's baffling to me. Outside of reggaeton, the Latin community would never allow our music to get so virulently anti-women. The women, we would stop it. Why don't you say something? Are you ok with it?"

I was for a moment... speechless. I've heard those exact sentiments from Spelmanites, Oprah, and my Black peers, but to hear another minority speak so passionately in favor of Black women standing up for themselves was... a whole new experience for me. We could get into the nitty gritty about whether Latin music is better or worse than "Black" music, about how she too is a part of the problem every time she dances to Get Low, but that would be tangential to the main point. She seemed genuinely concerned about what she saw as Black women's betrayal of themselves.

I did take the time to share with her the few things I know:

artists often have little control over the content of their music
Black women have continuously protests against misogynistic lyrics and made several strides (famous case in point: Spelman's Take Back the Music Campaign)
lots of great men and women who portray us in a better light (Common, Will Smith, Janelle Monae, even Nicki has her moments)

But I don't think this answer is sufficient. So let me hear from you:

1. Was Chris Rock right when he said, "If the beat is right, she will dance all night?" Are we perpetuating offensive music by dancing to it, listening to it, and often times in the case of Nicki, Kim, Foxy, Trina, et al, writing it?

2. What's the solution? Should there be a stricter rating system and limited availability of this music to certain markets? Or should people force it off the air by making it commercially unsuccessful?

I don't welcome your responses; I desperately ask for them. Let's discuss.

Women are Chivalrous Too

2011-01-19T13:47:00.009-05:00

I think my friends over at VerySmartBrothas.com provided a great service for the world when they wrote, "The verysmartguide to 21st century chivalry." Most men still open doors without a second thought. (I always find it charming, when guys have a low-key anxiety attack when you're walking on the outside and physically move you to the inside of the sidewalk.)

But some men are grudgingly chivalrous. A friend of mine has asked me at least twice, "What is the female equivalent to men's chivalry? What do you all do that warrants our gentlemanly behavior?"

Short Answer

The short answer is history and precedence doesn't dictate that we have to do anything. For centuries, women weren't allowed to work. "Gentlemen" (usually fathers or husbands) funded "ladies" lives. Even in working-class cultures where men and often children were expected to work arduous hours in factories, some men still didn't want women to work. A woman's job was to take care of house and home. Chivalry arose as a need, not so much as an arbitrary responsibility for men.

Long Answer

I agree with the short answer. But I think that for every chivalrous man out there, there are "chivalrous" women that do the following things for men:

Disclaimer: Just like every man is not a gentleman, every woman does not do these things.

1. Your team becomes our team. I know some women are into sports just as much as men, and they may be a fan of your rival team, so they are exceptions to this one. But otherwise, if you're a Buckeyes football fan, we overnight become Buckeyes fans too. We may not know the difference between a field goal and a touchdown, but we think it's appropriate to make scarlet and gray cupcakes in support of our new team, and we go hard in the paint for a team we knew little to nothing about before you. (But if there's a bad breakup, please believe we will support your rival for life! This is how I became an Auburn fan.)

2. Your passion becomes our passion. Somewhat related to the previous one, this one is also something women do without being asked. I remember a girl friend of mine was up late studying HTML and CSS Code. Why? Because her new Web Designer boyfriend was a total techie who talked about it all the time and she wanted to relate. Sure, a good guy will go with you to a play to show support, but they typically won't study it.

What's crazy is we even support passions that don't look promising. We support long-shot rap careers and pyramid schemes too.

3. We keep bodily functions to ourselves sometimes risking danger to internal organs. I hate to break it to you, but all women pass gas, burp, do #2, and some even have the urge to spit. But most of them don't do it in front of you. Some will sit uncomfortably for HOURS clenching body parts just so that you don't see this very human side of us. While guys usually do this at first too, they're usually the first to let one loose.

4. We remember the little things that you often take for granted. For some odd reason, you may like sitting facing the window when you go out to restaurants. So, when the hosts walks us to our table, we automatically opt for the seat that we know you don't want. Why? Because our brains seem to have this strange function where it retains details that make your lives smoother. And we love doing it. You don't have to ask; it's included.

5. We learn how to make that one dish you love. All women can't cook, and it seems men are reluctantly realizing that it is not a guarantee that they'll find a woman who even wants to learn. But if there's one dish you rave about that your momma makes or that you salivate for, we learn how to cook it (or where to buy it). There are a few dishes in my repertoire I would have never learned to cook if it wasn't for certain individuals' specific tastes.

6. We know how to do things there is absolutely no reason for us to know how to do. Like a Windsor knot on a tie. Or folding your pocket square.

Some people wouldn't consider these things chivalrous, and that's fine. Dissenting opinions allowed. I do think however, just as men do things for women that go above and beyond the call of duty, so do we.

What did I miss? Anything I left out?

Patriotism Has a Funny Look to It

2011-01-11T09:33:00.016-05:00

Last week, the Washington Express' front cover was of a Islam extremist in Pakistani at a rally in support of the anti-blasphemy laws. These laws were recently under fire because a Christian woman, Asia Bibi was sentenced to death for "allegedly assaulting Islam's Prophet Muhammad." Soon after the rally, a Pakistani governor, who supported overturning the anti-blasphemy laws, Salman Taseer was assassinated by a member of his own security for his "liberal" philosophies. In a sappy, patriotic moment, I BBM'ed a friend and said, "I'm so glad I'm an American... where I can be Christian without worry of a death sentence."

Less than a week later, (D) Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was shot by Jared Loughner.

I don't think America's political climate parallels Pakistan.That's melodramatic. However, I do think we can learn a lesson from the mistakes being made in Pakistan and other countries. The loose-lipped political rhetoric from the left and the right is dangerous, and can easily provide fuel for people to justify their fatal actions. We've got Congress members interrupting the President in the chambers, rallies from conservative extremists that get nasty and include racial epithets, Rush Limbaugh saying "I hope our President fails", Bernie Sanders resounding filibuster, and Glenn Beck being... well, Glenn Beck.

Interestingly enough, on the day that the news broke about Rep. Giffords, I was discussing Glenn Beck's responsibility as a voice that speaks to millions. Beck is not a politician, he's an entertainer, which some people believe gives him the right to say whatever he wants with no regards to the consequences. The person I was discussing Beck with insisted that while he is a "hothead", he's a "true patriot." Allow me to walk you through a few of the patriot's comments:

Progressives are using the same tactic as Hitler did in "rounding up Jews and exterminating them"...Obama is the antiChrist... Maybe it's better that [America] doesn't make it because they (who is they?!?) are building a global cage...Woodrow Wilson and Barack Obama don't share any respect for the Constitution... Obama has a deep seated hatred for white people... The health care bill is the end of America as we know it...Bailing out General Motors is FACISM!... America is destined to repeat FACISM! Facism is on the rise!The climate change people are pulling a page from Nazis' Hitler youth.

Say what you want Glenn Beck; you still have that freedom. But don't you dare consider yourself a patriot, when you speak of an impending doomsday for our country and use riotous language.

Whatever happened to supporting discussion and compromise? People consider compromise an ugly word because they construe it as giving in. I wonder if these people ever had to share their toys as a child or traded sandwich triangles. Did you ever say "Have some of my ham and cheese so I can have some of your peanut butter and jelly?" It seems 3rd graders have a better handle on compromise than many of our congress members and adult citizens.

I'm no Glenn Beck with an apocalyptic prophecy for the end of America and the world as we know it, but I will say this. If we want to move forward as a country... if we want our citizens and congress members to be safe, if we want the U.S. to truly progress (which is not a dirty word), we have to cut the crazy talk, stop being so stubborn, listen, and hold people accountable for virulent commentary under the thin veil of "entertainment" or "patriotism."

Disclaimer: I'm not blaming anyone, aside from the individual who pulled the trigger, for the shooting of Arizona citizens, federal judge, and Congress members. However, I do believe that many (Fox, MSNBC, Huffington Post, ex Alaskan governors, Congressmembers, etc) have helped to foster an ugly, angry climate that causes much more harm than good.

What do you think? Is the present political climate healthy or no? Should we cue EPMD's "You Gots To Chillllll"?

Sources:
1. (book)Tears of a Clown: Glenn Beck and the Tea Bagging of America
2. (article) Washington Post: Arizona Shooting Suspect
3. (article) Washington Express: Gone Too Far?
4. (article) Washington Express: Pakistani Extremism
5. (song) EPMD - You Gots To Chill

It's Hard Out There for A Celebrity

2011-01-03T19:07:00.015-05:00

We have non-profits to support all kinds of causes - underprivileged youth, breast cancer research, babies with cleft lips, but none for a cause that has for years affected many individuals.

Celebrity Life.
It's tough. Real tough. Stonewall Jackson.

Imagine this:

Case Study 1: You're a B-list rapper, you just performed at a show to dozens of fans, and you get back to your Extended Stay Hotel... All you want is some sleep and rest. But to your dismay... there are 3 fans standing outside of your door asking to... *gasp* TAKE A PICTURE WITH YOU. How rude is that?!?!? How dare people who buy your music, travel across town, break curfew & their piggy bank, risk punishment for their entire senior year of high school by attending your show and then... on top of that... have the nerve to want to take a picture?!?

This is the sad, horrific life that Wale has to live every day. The preceding story prompted the following tweet from Wale, a DC Native, and hip-hop artist most known for his ability to rhyme motherf***a with motherf****s on the Waka Flocka hit, "No Hands":

It's sad how many people think it's ok to follow an artist to the hotel..and wait outside his room for a picture..really. - Wale.

Case Study 2: You are a musical genius. Everyone's favorite picture of you is one where you're juggling 6 Grammys in your arms for the sorta-eponymous album "The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill." You are the original singer/rapper, way before Estelle and Drake. You're all set to perform for a show at a Brooklyn venue at 8 PM. But you're running late. The audience gets fidgety, but accepts that this is what often happens at concerts. 9 PM rolls around, and people are starting to worry nervously if you're stuck in traffic... 10 PM hits... and the fans are thinking, "Man, I can't believe I rushed here, I coulda stopped at Coldstone and got a Cookie Don't You Want Some" in the Love It Size!" 10:30 PM... The fans are now angry. They search their pockets for a receipt, anything to scribble out a sign to you. One even makes a play off your track Lost Ones and writes, "You Just Lost One." But what reaaaaaallly.... grinds your gears... is that your keyboard player who was ridiculous enough to be on time, puts up a sign that says, "I Was On Time" on his keyboard. You paaay this guy and he has the nerve to side with the fans, the ones who bought your music, and incidentally... his paycheck too... but..... STILL!!! HOW DARE HE! So at Midnight, when you show up, and all these blasphemous signs are thrown in your face by your fans and keyboard player, you are reasonably peeved! As the crowd boos/applauds, you tell them: "If you're unhappy, you're welcome to go back and ask for a refund... I apologize for being late, but there's a lot that goes on in getting this out to you... I don't apologize for that... When I hear people complain, I don't know what to tell you... I know I'm worth the wait."

Case Study 3: Chris Brown. The heartthrob that stole our hearts, made a horrible mistake, apologized, and still can't seem to earn forgiveness. People across America are still mad at him, including Raz-B, former member of B2K. When will this guy get a break? Just because his tweets are read by millions of people, he's required to restrain himself? Just because he can afford someone to monitor his public image, he's required to do so? Just because teenagers across the world, are already gripped by homophobia, many possibly molested, he's supposed to refrain from cheap potshots at someone who requires a full explanation before you even know who he is? ("Whose Raspy? Raz-B? Who's that? B2K?.... Sounds familiar, what they sang?.. Bump Bump Bump? Wasn't that Diddy? Oh they were singing in the background? Oh ok, I think I know who that is. His brother was in Immature. Nah, the other one? Oh...")

It is really hard being a celebrity. I'm so thankful that I'm just a 9-5 peon. We got it made. We don't have to worry about owning Black cards, astronomical bank accounts, adoring fans, and getting booed when we show up for work late.

Tell me why you're grateful you're not a celebrity. If you're interested in seeing a video of how horrible this life is, watch Lauryn tell you:

Most Hated Holidays

2011-01-02T20:37:00.002-05:00

It's 2011, a new year, which means, the opportunity to celebrate all our favorite holidays again. But...my most recent post and the comments have informed me that some people hate certain holidays. More than I hate coconut, domestic cats, and bad hair days. Which ones are they?

3. VALENTINE'S DAY

Why People Hate It:

Every year, I hear theories about how this holiday was created by:

A. Hallmark to create revenue
B. Happily married women who want to make single women feel left out

People hate Valentine's Day because they perceive it as a time to shine on their loneliness and/or because they don't like the idea of spending money to show someone how much you care. They argue that if you love someone, why not show it every day? Why does their need to be a holiday to commemorate your affection?

Why It's Not So Bad: V-Day creates an opportunity/platform for people to be romantic/mushy without being perceived as soft, and gives many emotionally reserved people a specific time to express their love/affection. Plus kind words, affection, and chocolate are rarely ever a bad idea! And it's been around for centuries; it wasn't created by Hallmark. Read more here!

2. CHRISTMAS

Why People Hate It: Christmas gets a lot of flack for a myriad of reasons. Many decry its (similar to V-Day), heightened commercialism, its pagan roots, its Christian roots, and its crimes to reindeer. Poor Christmas.

Why It's Not So Bad: Regardless of the several pagan customs that have been attached to Christmas, Christians recognize Christmas as the celebration of the birth of Jesus. In secular, non-Christian households however, Christmas can also represent positive themes including gift-giving to loved ones, time with family and friends, and peace on earth. If you're personally offended by Christmas, then take it as an opportunity to give to others, volunteer (you're off anyway!), or spend time with your family. Either way, it's a win-win!

For More Words, Please Read: Christmas Controversy or Christmas' History or The Real Origin of "Xmas"

1. THANKSGIVING

Why People Hate It: Traditionally, we're taught that the first Thanksgiving dinner was a meal shared by Pilgrims and Native Americans, who shared their food with hungry Europeans. Thanksgiving Haters have a great point. Commemorating a meeting between the violent, hostile and racist/culturalist/imperialist./everythingelseist New Englanders and the peaceful, friendly Native Americans is barbaric. (Sidenote: The previous sentence contains dramatic generalization, but you catch my drift.) As we all know, the European arrival in America was nothing but tragic for Native Americans/American Indians. So why should we sit down to a dinner and pay homage to these horrible events?

Why Its Not So Bad: I don't eat turkey, cranberry sauce, stuffing, dressing, mashed potatoes, mac & cheese, or ham so you'd think Thanksgiving wouldn't be that important to me. However, in a country where the American Dream includes the urge to keep up with the Jones' and want More, More, More, I embrace a holiday that encourages us to be thankful for what we have. Thanksgiving is one of the few times of year I get to see my family, eat a hearty meal, and be purposeful about reflecting on what I'm grateful for. When else are we expected to literally attempt to count our blessings? Your turkey dinner and acknowledgment of the awesome things you have isn't going to cause a Native American to be scalped somewhere. I recommend for those offended by this holiday's origins, they teach others the ugly side of American history, often swept under the table, but also thank the people in their lives for what we are lucky to have.

Other Hated Holidays include Columbus Day, Halloween, and Martin Luther King Day. I say research them all, and do your best to find the silver lining. Because everyone can use a day off every now and then.

What about you? Do you hate any of the holidays listed? Do you love them? Share a word or three.

Why I Don't Celebrate Kwanzaa

2010-12-20T11:03:00.020-05:00

I'm willing to admit that, in the past, my jocular attitude about Kwanzaa was insensitive. I apologized then and I'm doing it again, publicly. Sorry! I remember learning about it in Sunday School as a child, and wondering why we didn't celebrate it at home. But then, I learned that my family wasn't an anomaly; most African-Americans don't celebrate Kwanzaa, an African-American holiday. Are we shunning a holiday created specifically for us in favor of Western traditions and holidays that were created without our unique cultural needs in mind? I say, no, and before you crucify me, here's why.

What is Kwanzaa?

As most of those who are passively familiar with Kwanzaa know, it is a holiday created by Dr. Karenga to reaffirm African-Americans' rootedness in African culture, to reinforce the bonds between them as a people, and to introduce and reaffirm the value of the Nguzo Saba, the Seven Principles of Kwanzaa. It is recognized between Dec 26 - Jan 1st. So, in all fairness, one could celebrate Hanukkah, Christmas, and Kwanzaa without trampling on each others holiday. How convenient!
(Source: The History of Kwanzaa, Click Here for more info.)

Why I'm Not Down
1. Language Barrier - African-Americans have ancestors in a continent with over 2000 languages. Granted, a good portion of us came from targeted, specific regions, but even those regions represent a cornucopia of divergent and differing cultures.
The only language one can truly consider representative of people that identify as "African-Americans" is English. So to create a holiday using Swahili terms, a language spoken in 10 of Africa's 54 countries, but in fewer than 1% of African-American households, doesn't make sense.

2. Africa's A Country... Right? Remember when the (unproven) rumor leaked that Sarah Palin "didn't know Africa was a continent, not a country"? It's a common yet dangerous myth that Africa is one big country comprised of folks in various shades of dark chocolate, overrun with HIV, drums, lions, and people whose names include clicks. This myth is perpetuated by multiple factors, many we can't control, such as Black Americans' collective yet relatively ambiguous ancestry in a huge land with no specific country to point to. The idea of creating a holiday based in "African tradition" seems to trivialize Africa's diversity. I find it disrespectful, to be honest. It has the potential to make Black Americans feel as if they've grasped an idea of their ancestors, when Kwanzaa doesn't even come close to scratching the surface.

3. Misses The Mark. Dr. Karenga said his goal was to do the following:
a. "give Blacks an alternative to the existing holiday..." What is the existing holiday that we need an alternative to? Christmas, for example is a Christian holiday, not a White one, and is celebrated even amongst the most fervent atheists and agnostics. I need no alternative.

b. "give Blacks an opportunity to celebrate themselves and our history... ." Wait... wait.. this is starting to sound like Black History Month. I think Carter G. Woodson (and later McDonald's) beat him to the punch on the Celebrating Black History Movement. I'm all for celebrating Black History 365 days a year. But do we really need Kwanzaa to do so? And how does learning about principles that represent "the best of African thought" really do that? The principles of Kwanzaa (unity, self-determination, collective work and responsibility, cooperative economics, purpose, creativity, and faith) are all admirable. But a true dedication to African-American history, would teach us, I don't know... history.
c. "...rather than simply imitate the practice of the dominant society." Dominant society. Hmmm. America has made, and continues to make, a lot of heinous mistakes and gaffes in its 234-year long history. It was built by many hands, many of them brown and black. But there's no denying that Black Americans' history is America's history. There's no separating the two. I'm the first to rail against the dominant society and its ills, but I refuse to say that society at large is not ours to celebrate and be a part of. We can't be accused of "imitating society" if we created it! We earned the right to be a part of the mainstream and its society. I will celebrate Christmas, Easter, Mother's Day, and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Day, because they resonate with me. Kwanzaa does not.

As an American with African ancestry, it's my right to be both American and seek to learn more about my African roots. No shade to people who recognize Kwanzaa and its 'creator, Dr. Karenga. I admire all the work Karenga's done. Kwanzaa just isn't giving me what I need.

What about you? Are you part of the 1.4 million to 30 million that celebrate Kwanzaa? (Broad range I know, the numbers vary, depending on who you ask). If you don't, why not? Please share!

Office Theft & Chitterlings (Life in the Office)

2010-12-15T16:32:00.022-05:00

When unemployment is at 9.7% in the United States, it may seem insensitive to criticize a 1st World Problem like "Poor Office Etiquette," but the reality is... folks in Ann Taylor and Brooks Brothers suits have given me more trouble than rowdy 6th graders and rude restaurant guests. (I've also been a teacher and server.) I did an extremely unscientific poll on Facebook and Twitter, and it's clear... this is a problem across America. Maybe you, YES YOU, are doing something extremely annoying, and you don't even realize that your incessant tapping of your pen is analogous to Chinese Water Torture. I'm here to help. Below are some common complaints and solutions:

1. Theft. Quite a few folks mentioned "office thieves" or people that "borrow" things from your unsecured desk. For example, I like to keep an arsenal of items like tuppeware, paper plates, plasticware, and napkins in my drawers, and while I like to eat... something tells me, I didn't go through 150 plates in 3 weeks by myself. Eventually, I printed a note, complete with skull and crossbones requesting people not to remove items without my permission. This did NOTHING to deter theft. I even heard one of my colleagues say, "Get a napkin from Crystal's drawer."

Stealing is taking something without someone's permission. There's no room to assume, "oh Carefree Cindy* won't mind if I use her stapler" or "Diabetic Dan* doesn't need that ice cream as much as I do." I know someone who experienced temporary loss of finger movement because someone took her heater.

Solution: Treat people's office space like you would their home and don't trespass without permission. And if you really need it, and you know Prepared Pamela* has a box of forks, find a way to let Pam know you borrowed one, and refresh her supply next week.

2. Sensory Hostage. You may have never heard this term before. That's because I just made it up. We have to go to work, which means while there, we're forced to smell what's there, hear what's there, and see what's there. I call taking advantage of this forced interaction, sensory hostage.
Smell Hostage: I've never had chitterlings, but I know I don't like them. Why? Because I've smelled them. Where? Most recently, in my office. The funny thing about cubicles is, they don't block smells. Your international palette is certainly impressive, but more often than not, its disturbing.
Solution: If your office doesn't provide a space specifically for eating that is separate from work areas, save foods notorious for their potentially offensive fumes like tuna, heavy onion and garlic, fish, chitterlings, and eye-watering curry for your home.
Hearing Hostage: Right now, I'm a big fan of Glee's Christmas Album, Merry Chrismas II You, Lady Killer and DooWops and Hooligans. But, I don't know that everyone else wants to hear it. I also can't say I'm too fond of hearing everyone's personal drama, gossip, love affairs, and such at work. It's just weird to learn that the lady who doles out the paychecks likes to swing on the weekends.
Solution: Use headphones when necessary, or play music at a level where only you can hear it. If whatever you're talking about has the potential to be harmful, inappropriate, or questionable in taste, keep it to yourself. Most importantly know your audience. It's natural to exchange a joke, chat, or small talk about sports. However, if you haven't established a relationship with the folks you're talking to, or you notice them biting their knuckles in uncomfortableness, drop it.

3. State Farm Colleagues. You know the slogan, "Like a Good Neighbor, State Farm is There." Except... my poll revealed this is how many of you feel about your colleagues... consistently peeping over your shoulder, talking to you but staring at your computer screen, sneaking up behind you while you're at your desk, or engaging in loud, distracting conversations, right next to you. Some are even brassy enough to jump in your conversation or lounge around in your doorway with inane details about their cat and his diarrhea. Similar to sensory hostage, State Farm Colleagues represents space hostage. If you're that guy/gal doing this, you don't know how many people who would have a truly blessed Christmas if you stopped.

Solution: Limit visits to other offices to under a minute, and if you notice that you're consistently visiting other people, but they're never visiting you, it means they're not appreciative of your light banter. Avoid looking at someone's computer unless they invite you to.

There's no way I could cover everything in a post and expect you to read it... after all, it's A Word or Three, not A Word or Fifty... (Not funny? Sorry.) But quickly, a few other items that were mentioned are: email forwards, particularly of the chain variety; "Stupid Staff Meetings"; loud eating; popping popcorn (I'm guilty) and gum; yelling across the office; nonstop complaining; personal calls; retrieving other people's items from the printer; "coming to my office with mail and saying 'Do you want this now or should I just leave it in your mailbox?'; lazy people that cling to you to because of a shared ethnicity; drinking the last cup of coffee, and tattle-tellers.

*Names have been changed to protect the identities of individuals

**Special thanks to Twitter folks @DiamondDee_, @primotennis, @jantastik, @Mercii_Me and Facebook friends, Somer, Krystal, Katherine, Hype, Robin, Najiy, Gina, Saranah, and Tamara for your contributions!

Anything else I left out? Are you guilty of these offenses? Can you relate? Share a story or other thoughts.