faboo mama

Image by jmtimages via Flickr

am not going to try to write a long intellectual entry on what happened last night. I can only post snapshots on we witnessed.  My feelings are still too raw.  I woke up this morning, like in 2000 and 2004, with a knot in my stomach; expecting a different outcome.  I rushed to grab my morning paper to make sure it was all real.  That today wasn’t Election Day and I just dreamt that Sen. Obama had won over 330 Electoral Votes.

It was real.

It did happen.

Senator Barack Obama is our President-Elect.

My 5 year old, who has been an Obama fan since last Spring, kept asking me this morning, “Did Obama really win?”  Through tears, I said “Yes. Yes he did.”

******

I spoke to some of my older family members last night.  The constant refrain was, “That young man did it.  He ran a great campaign and didn’t let anyone tear him down.  I never thought I’d live to see this day.” They reminisced on growing up in segregated towns in the South and Midwest.  One 92 year old cousin, in Arkansas wept as he talked about he had to keep his head down, just so he would stay out of trouble, “Today, I hold my head high, like Obama did throughout his campaign.”  I cried.

******

Sen. McCain’s concession speech, was the most classy concession speech I think I’ve ever witnessed.  Even though from July on he ran the exact same campaign Sen. Clinton did, his concession speech was exactly the one she should have given in June.

******

The first black President won this election without the Self-Appointed Godfathers of Blackness.  We didn’t have to see Rev. Jesse Jackson or Rev. Al Sharpton pontificating on our TVs last night for the first time in my lifetime. Rev. Jackson was shown, tears streaming down his face, as he stood with thousands in Grant Park.

******

Scholars will study the Obama campaign forever.  Not just political scholars, but in business classes, PR majors, technological studies.  Every tool out there was used, even abused if my text messages and emails are any indication. The branding was simple and consistent, from slogan to font, to color.  The business acumen of where and how to raise and spend money, would make many major corporations jealous.

******

Social media came into its own this election cycle. Twitter broke most stories before even blogs had a chance to write up something.  This election cycle belonged to black bloggers.  It seemed that they alone were taking advantage of social media tools, not just to announce new posts, but to organize GOTV and appearnces.  It was a simple way for them to stay in contact with their readers outside the blog and get more on-the-ground reporting from around the country.

******

I still haven’t received my shirts from the Obama-Biden campaign. I’m sad.

******

The ground campaign of Obama’s was probably the best of any campaign ever.  Speaking to friends who worked for the campaign and speaking to people who volunteered from the campaign, they all said the same thing, “This is the first election where people from DC who had never stepped foot in my town, didn’t come in to tell us how it is. They gave us ownership and listened.”

******

A few weeks ago, Republicans started whining about how Democrats shouldn’t have a majority because that would be dangerous for the country.  All of a sudden they despise the idea of one party controll the Administrative and Legislative branches of government.  I’m still trying to find where they were so distraught about this in 2000 and 2004.  It’s a disengenious arguement and insulting to my intelligence.  Republicans need not fear. Democrats do not govern to abuse power.  A Democratic majority will have it’s hands full rolling back and repairing the damage of the last 8 years.

******

Best quote of the night, after the election was called for Sen. Obama: “Meanwhile, in D.C., two guys named George and Dick have placed the single largest order for industrial strength paper shredders that Office Depot has ever had to fulfill.”

******

When I had heard that Fox News (!) had called Ohio for Sen. Obama, I thought I was going to faint.  When I saw that he had also won Florida, I had to sit down.  Thank you to both states.

*****

I can only hope that we never have to hear or see the hatefulness that is Gov. Sarah Palin.

******

And finally, we’ll never learn what Republican voters liked about Sen. McCain.  It’s a testament to spin, that when asked the most intelligent offering was the tired, “Obama’s a socialist/radical/communist/Muslim”.  That never explained McCain’s appeal.

I finally visited his blog and saw one of the best posts written so far this yea.  B-Serious asks us to wonder if certain situations in this presidential campaign were a little different:

• What if Obama lost all of these states by such huge margins (we’re talking 25-35% in many states)?
• What if it was Obama who, despite running on name recognition as the inevitable candidate, could only claim his home state and California as major (hard fought) wins thus far?
• What if Obama had negatives in the low to mid 40s?

There’ s more thought provoking questions over there like:

• What if Obama lost a majority of the swing states on Super Tuesday?
• What if Obama trailed in PLEDGED delegates and could only claim a slim (misleading) lead by counting super delegates (party insiders who can change their mind at the drop of a dime and show loyalty through political favors)?
• What if Obama lost 6 out of 8 primaries (perhaps even 8 or 9 in a row) as Hillary Clinton is expected to lose this week?

You have to visit his site.  There’s more questions B-Serious posits.  So readers, what you do think would happen?  What do you think the media narrative would be?  What would the DNC do? Wouldn’t you expect to see someone like Sen. Reid or some Congresswoman on TV bemoaning Obama’s string of losses?

All those whiners who are complaining that Sen. Clinton gets such bad press, do they honestly think the media would treat Obama so tenderly, just putting out the press releases from the campaign with no serious questions asked?

UPDATE: Please consider reading this excellent piece: Dear Gloria Steinem: Ain’t I a woman, too? from blogger whattamisaid.

*****

Indulge me a bit in posting on “old news”, but there’s a discusion going on in the blogosphere about the Senator, with the basis in feminism. On BooMan Tribune, Arthur Gilroy has decided that women, particularly left-leaning, blogging women, hate Clinton because:

They resented her success. They resented the template ITSELF. To some degree, the fact that this woman had become a truly DOMINANT woman…not just independent,. but dominant over the lives of many, many men as well as children and women pressed buttons in both of their heads that had been implanted in their early “I ENJOY being a girl!!!”, “Play with those damned dolls or ELSE” youth.

You have to read the entire post to fully appreciate that women, according to Gilroy, can not make a decision regarding Clinton because we’re preconditioned.

Hijole!

Over at BlogHer, there’s been a very robust discussion on the Senator. Morra Aarons submitted the entry Why Thirtysomething Women need Hillary Clinton, and Why She Needs Us. She exhorts us to vote for Clinton for president, because “it’s time”. Ironically, the same arguement Gilroy used for why lefty, blogging females hate Clinton, Aarons uses as to why women should vote for Clinton:

I think many young women are coming around to Hillary because despite our hesitancy to re-join the Feminist Majority, we know it’s time. Oddly enough, I think it took a reminder from the godmother of feminism, Gloria Steinem, to wake us up. As (male) uber-blogger Markos put it: “You underestimate that sympathy at your own peril. If I found myself half-rooting for her given the crap that was being flung at her, is it any wonder that women turned out in droves to send a message that sexist double-standards were unacceptable?”

It’s time. Older women have understood that and overwhelmingly support Clinton, but younger women have been slower to support Hillary. I think, though, we are realizing that perhaps having a woman in the White House will let us breathe a little easier at work.

These posts, in and of themeselves would be interesting enough if I was white. But I’m not. I’m black and there is a high level of disinterest of how racism AND sexism can effect a woman’s outlook among white females. Especially of white females of certain economic classes and educational levels.

Gloria Steinem, the so-called Godmother of Feminism, wrote a piece for the NYT titled, Women are Never Frontrunners. Somehow, this title was chosen, despite the fact that Sen. Clinton has been the frontrunner since she announced her campaign. Indeed, the media declared her the frontrunner before she announced her campaign. Steinem’s article does what most white feminist do, dismiss race. After all, black men were given the right to vote before women were. She neglects the Jim Crow south. She doesn’t mention the inherent privilege that Hillary Rodham Clinton grew up with.

So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects “only” the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more “masculine” for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren’t too many of them); and because there is still no “right” way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what.

I’m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That’s why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that.

Yes, we should remember that, but Steinem spends the rest of the article, carefully not remembering that. At Jack and Jill Politics, dnA gives us a post titled Access to Power with the conclusion:

Women like Steinem are quick to invoke “the sisterhood” as a reason to vote for Hillary Clinton, but black women see few of the same benefits that white women do; yet they’re still expected to feel (and act on) gender solidarity with people who essentially ignore the issues facing them. Unless it involves some high profile figure like Imus.

Indeed, that is exactly what Aarons did in her BlogHer post. I responded to the BlogHer post (my post is most definitely longer):

Gloria Steinem’s NYT article was clearly directed to young, white females. Of privilege. She lives in a headspace that I could never occupy, would never want to occupy. Her arguments were specious at best and all I took away from the article was that her oppression was greater than my oppression. (I’m sorry…I should stop here and mention that I read the article yesterday and got pissed. As the day wore on, I was downright livid at Steinem’s presumptions, assumptions and petty pitifulness.)

Over at TalkLeft there was a post Steinem’s article. One person noted that Steinem seem to declare that racism is dead. I posted:

But Steinem is so incredibly wrong on this front. White women are more often “given” much more leeway, advantages and opportunities than any minority regardless of gender and if anyone should know that she should. For someone like Steinem to actually say that is laughable and insulting. Look at feminism, as a movement. Did Steinem ever have to face police dogs, fire hoses and be scared of lynching to get equal rights for women?

Didn’t think so.

Other than that, the subject wasn’t broached, yet ageism became the focus. On liberal blogs, in general, the subject is very rarely touched. And pointed comments like mine are usually ignored.

rikyrah’s response at BlogHer gives you a little political perspective on how white women have more access than blacks in general.

There are, what, 9 White Female Governors?

1 Black male Governor.

NEVER a Black Female Governor.

There are what, 15 White Female Senators.

1 Black Male Senator.

Only 1 Black Female Senator.

Who are the biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action?

Sure in hell isn’t Black folk..

Oh yeah, WHITE WOMEN.

Black women are only ‘Sisters’ when it’s convenient. If not, our concerns are not addressed, like in that Steinem piece. Black women were INVISIBLE in that piece. She completely and deliberately ignores White Privilege - how convenient for her.

I usually like to keep my isms separated as, the liberal blogosph
ere has a horrible habit of ignoring one argument to bring up another to make a point. In this case, it’s a little difficult, as the Clinton campaign has been quite active in the racism front. Does she get a pass on this because she’s a woman? Because she’s white. Judging from the media coverage and unreaction in the liberal blogosphere, it seems the answer is ‘yes’ to both. Female bloggers who are dismissing the sexism regarding Clinton’s choking up moment, are extremely quiet on the campaign’s race-baiting statements.

That’s not to say that I would expect them to speak up. After all, someone like Jane Hamsher, who would be a Clinton contemporary, now has a very strong reputation as a racist in the black and Latino blogosphere. Her site seems to largely condone racism and since I’ve been oh-so-lucky as to meet some of the guest bloggers there, I’m going to say that this is something that is entrenched. I’m certainly not going to disabuse anyone of the notion that FDL is a blog with racist bloggers, when my experiences with face to face meetings reaffirms that.

While female bloggers recently gave us entries on Feminism, all of them took Steinem’s lead with dismissing or ignoring racism. We’ve gotten rallying cries, as women, to back up Clinton, because she is female. These are the same women who tell me that black people who vote for Obama because he’s black are short-sighted. I fail to see why that’s not quite a double-standard. However in the comment sections of media sites, to blogs, to random discussions, these double-standards are enforced to the point of becoming conventional wisdom.

I think it’s important for people to understand that many black people don’t put the Clinton’s a pedestal as the media and the Clinton’s will have you believe. As I wrote on BlohHer:

But let’s take that experience at face value and ignore the fact that she’s basically asking us to elect her to a 3rd term…When someone like Clinton wants something from me, my first (selfish) question is, “What have you done for me lately?” With Clinton (Bill or Hillary), it’s “What have you done for me period?” Because every core supporter they could have had (Blacks and Gays specifically), they threw under the bus long ago to strengthen their insider ties. At least Bill could make you feel good while he screwed you over. His mantra was always, “Later…your time will come later.” Well, it’s “later” and Sen. Clinton has most certainly picked up that refrain. What exactly are we waiting for? More backroom deals? More compromises that still leave many Americans with unequal rights?

With the race-baiting tactics from her campaign this past month, are black women supposed to ignore that and history and still back Clinton because she’s a woman?

Let’s keep in mind that Clinton is not the first woman to run for president and that Obama is not the first black person to run president. Indeed, in 1972 Shirley Chisolm was the first black woman from a major party to ran for president. In 2004, Carol Moseley Braun another black woman ran for president.

Would Steinem still back Clinton if Clinton was a black woman? Did Steinem back Moseley Braun’s candidacy for president as she did her run for Senate?

Would the white women of New Hampshire have rallied behind Clinton if she was black?

Would female bloggers even be discussing Feminism if Clinton wasn’t white?

For my part, just poking around these internets, I’m going to say the answers to all of my questions is ‘no’.

Just read over at Jack and Jill Politics that Baratunde will be on CNN with…drumroll…the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

Jesse Jackson, Rainbow PUSH
Baratunde Thurston, Jack & Jill Politics
possibly more.

8pm eastern
Out in the Open with Rick Sanchez
CNN

This is good…Baratunde Thurston is an awesome speaker and pretty funny too boot. This is pretty momentous. Not only does Thurston represent a younger front in Black politics, he also is repping the Afrospear on a major cable news channel. We can only hope that tonight will represent a changing of the guard of Blacks on TV. That we will no longer be force fed the likes of Jackson, Sharpton or Juan Williams, instead be represented by people who came of age in this faux culture war of the right. People who don’t presume to speak for all Black people, who have different experiences and have made their way in this world like any other American.

Sigh…I’ve been trying to write this since October. That’s when I read in the LA Times, that Eso Won Books, a major Black bookstore in Los Angeles, is on its last legs like so many other local bookstores around the country. When I read the article, written by John Mitchell, I gasped and wondered what I could do. Immediately, I started to blog on it, but then something akin to guilt got in the way. See, I haven’t been to Eso Won in ages. I mean, “bookstore ages”. The last time I was there, my daughter was 3 mos. old.

Part of the reason I stopped going was sheer traffic. Anyone who lives in near West Hollywood can tell you what a pain the patootie it is to drive down Fairfax Ave. Why would I waste 30 min. of my life to go 3 miles when I can just shop online? Right? You know you do it too. We contribute to the closing of our local bookstores. I buy about half of my books online. Usually from Powell’s, sometimes from Alibris. I buy for covers, I buy special editions, but I’m also supporting pretty liberal businesses and that makes me happy. When I have a list of bookstores here in Los Angeles I must peruse to get used books. Used. Occasionally, if we have the cash, I’ll buy a trade paperback by a favorite author. I’ve got to be deeply invested in an author/series to buy brand new hardback. When I do get a hardback, I use my Barnes & Noble discount (did you know that if you have the store order a book for you, it’s cheaper than buying it online OR in a store?).

The challenge facing the Leimert Park shop is neither new nor distinctly black. Independent bookstores have been on the endangered species list for years.

Twenty years ago, the threat was from chains, like Crown, then mega-stores like Borders. Now the competition is online; one-third of all books sold in this country today are ordered through the convenient clicks of Amazon.com.
(LAT)

The other reason I stopped going is that I don’t read Black-focused books. I get these catalogs from Black publishers all the time and just toss them. Why? I’m not a single professional graduate of an HBCU, looking for love and career success. I’m not interested in erotica, no matter who the subject is. I’m definitely not interested in reading novels with a strong Christian message (that I can get just getting lectured to by my family). Otherwise, there is very little in the way of “Black literature” that speaks to me and my interests.

But you know what? All that’s just an excuse. Eso Won doesn’t just carry Black literature. Eso Won has an awesome selection of books that you’ll probably never see outside a college library or The Bodhi Tree. Just because Eso Won focuses on selling books by Black people, that doesn’t mean they only sell Black-focused books. And I know that.

Back in October, John Mitchell wrote:

Eso Won has grown famous by hosting book-signings by nationally recognized figures and entertainers seeking to pitch memoirs, but it hasn’t grown prosperous.

After 20 years of hawking books — some by popular authors; others, scholarly works, with rare and exotic titles — L.A.’s leading independent bookstore specializing in writings by African Americans is facing bankruptcy.

Eso Won, has always been the place to go to see Black authors. Whether it was for book signings or discussions, you knew that you were in the center of it all. I’ve met some interesting and wonderful people there. People who’ve given me suggestions on book I might have ignored. I’ve witnessed some of the best, most enlightened conversations in LA at that bookstore (the Starbucks on La Tijera Blvd. comes in at a very close second). What I’m saying is that Eso Won is a little more than a bookstore.

Sandy Banks wrote about her recent visit to the shop, and in that reminisced over her own special bookstore.

When I moved here from Ohio at 25, I spent months feeling lonely and lost. I found a family at Bread and Roses, a women’s bookstore in Sherman Oaks. The store became my favorite hangout, with cozy sofas, an endless supply of cookies and coffee, and shelves stocked with everything from pregnancy primers to dress-for-success manuals to politics-of-lesbianism manifestoes.

But it was less the books than the people that drew me in. When I couldn’t get my baby to sleep through the night or wondered how to ask my boss for a raise, I relied not only on advice I read, but lessons I learned from the women I met there.

When I was a teen/young adult, that’s what Eso Won was for me. It was one thing to sit with my aunts and hear them talking. It was yet another sit with the women at the mosques and hear them talking. Going into Eso Won, gave me another level of interaction, I never received from my elders. They weren’t shooing me out the room to “talk grown folk business”. They treated me as a peer. They understood my need for knowledge and lead me down a path. That’s something I have never received from any other bookstore.

Last night, I read an article at the LA Sentinel’s website by Jasmyne Cannick. I clicked because of the subject matter. Then I recognized the byline but couldn’t quite place it, until I went to her site and realized that a few weeks back, I had found her blog via NaBloPoMo. Cannick’s piece for the Sentinel is, in a word, brilliant:

On Black Friday while the rest of America was camped outside of Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, and their local mall, many in freezing temperatures, I had the good fortune to be first in line at my local Black owned bookstore Eso Won. Not only was I the first in line, I was the line. Sadly, Eso Won didn’t open up until 10 o’clock Friday morning. I guess one person in line on Black Friday didn’t warrant opening the store up at 4 a.m. Which is not to put a negative reflection on the bookstore, I’m sure had there been hundreds camped outside of the store waiting to buy books that the owners would have gladly opened up early. I must point out though that this is the same bookstore that the community rallied around a month ago when there was talk of the store possibly closing down. When I came back later that afternoon with a friend to do some shopping, the only difference between then and my 4 a.m. trip was that the store was open and the lights were on, but besides the owner and us, Eso Won was a ghost town.

If that’s not enough to get you down to Eso Won, only the closing of the article is better. I’m sorry, but you’ll have to click over to read the entire piece yourself. Cannick laid it out. There isn’t anything to add and she’s completely right.

But this also extends beyond Eso Won. Black bookstores are closing down everywhere. Hell, independent bookstores are closing down everywhere. That means that certain books are destined to never be accidentally discovered or read, unless as an assignment in school. As much as I like Powell’s and Alibris, books about or by Black people (historical or fiction) aren’t their focus. I see glaring holes in both stores offerings. Don’t even
get me started on ghettoization of places like Borders or Barnes & Nobles.

You have options, but are they the ones you want?

No, let me rephrase that: Can we get some Black leadership? Now??? I just popped over the Jack and Jill Politics and was greeted with a post regarding recent comments made by Andrew “I ? Wal-Mart” Young. Seems, Mr. Young isn’t ready to support Senator Obama for president until 2016 (which means that at 75 years old, Young seems pretty optimistic about being able support Sen. Obama when he’s 84). Why doesn’t Young support Obama?

“It is not a matter of being inexperienced,” Young told an Atlanta crowd this fall. “It is a matter of being young. There is a certain matter of maturity … You have to have a protective network around you… Leadership requires suffering. And I would like to see Barack’s children get a little older, see, because they’re going to pick on them.”

Awww…Uncle Andrew is concerned about the children! Well. That makes sense. I mean, clearly at 46 years old AND a US Senator, what Sen. Obama lacks is maturity. At the same age, Youmg had been mayor of a city, a US Congressman and was appointed UN Ambassador–that’s all ignoring his civil right’s work. It’s a shame he had to limit himself because of his immaturity. But this is Young we’re talking about, so let’s see what else he has to say:

“Barack Obama does not have the support network yet to get to be president…,” he said. He reflected on his days serving as one of many lieutenants to Martin Luther King Jr.

He also said that while Obama’s rival Sen. Hillary Clinton is surrounded by quite a few black advisors Obama has very few.

Ah. I see the problem here: Senator Obama has the audacity to actually get into politics without calling up the Godfathers of Soul. If he had kissed the ring of the Holy Trinity of Sharpton, Jackson and Young, then this would probably be a different story. What Young just said was, “Obama didn’t ask us for our opinion or help. Therefore, we Dinosaurs of Blackness are going to try to withhold ALL Black people from voting for the Senator.”

But the article actually gets even more offensive and Young, being Young naturally had to step in it and smear it on the walls. I’ll let rikyrah lay it out because I’ve already posted enough f-bombs today:

But, the icing on the cake for me was this:

“Bill is every bit as black as Barack,” he said. “He has probably gone out with more black women than Barack.”

For that alone, Andy Young needs to go stand in the Handkerchief Heads for Hillary bleachers.

Negro, Please.

I highly suggest you read rikyrah’s piece.

It’s a shame that Young doesn’t realize that’s he’s irrelevant right now. The young voters mobilized for any candidate probably won’t even know who Andrew Young is and if shown a picture, they’d comment on his ‘fro. People my age, this so-called Generation X who were force-fed a steady heaping of how great and wonderful Andrew Young was, are finally realizing that we can’t rely on these fossils any more. They don’t and never have lived in our world. They’re not going to have to live in this world in 20 years, in 30 years. I don’t know if Obama should be president, but we need someone in our age group to stand up and be counted and move us away from the self-appointed Kings of Blackness. We need “youthful” Black leaders who understand the way life works today. Just because Young says it, doesn’t mean that Black people will fall in line and agree. The media makes the mistakes that Black people are of one mind. It’s a shame that Young, seems to think the same way.

We need to let Andrew Young and his contemporaries that we thank them for their service and for everything they’ve done, but it’s time for a new generation to take over. It’s time for someone who understands that things aren’t so Black and White…but also Latino, Asian, Indian, Arab…

h/t to Kudzu, Mon Amour. If I hadn’t read her blog, I honestly wouldn’t have known this series was going to air. I don’t watch TV, and you couldn’t pay me to watch a “investigative series”. After reading her blog and What About Our Daughters, I had to at least watch the clips available online.

Sigh…This morning, I woke up at 2:30am, unable to get back to sleep. I went through most of the videos online and they were, as several bloggers noted, very disappointing. I was shocked at how horrible it was and kept thinking, “Well, this is only a 3 min. clip of what may have been an one hour show.” But then I thought that if this was the best they could pull out of an hour, I didn’t miss much in the first place.

More black women taking care of business

Monday was dedicated to Black women in business. MSNBC told us stats that we already knew about Black women and entreprenuership. I guess this is a surprise to them, but even a quick look at Black female bloggers would show a very high level of self-employed people. But we already knew that most small-businesses, are run by women and that women are starting their own businesses at a higher rate than men. Then, for whatever reason, MSNBC decided to show a stat that Black women outnumber Black men at colleges 7 to 1. What they neglected to mention was that women outnumber men at colleges, regardless of race.

Trading briefcases for diaper bags

This clip was one of the few I watched that spoke to me. I am a Black mom and I have not worked outside the house since I found out I was pregnant with my first kid. While I particpate(d) on online birth club boards, despite the inherent accepted racism at places like BabyZone or BabyCenter, the biggest divide was with what was accepted and expected of me as a Black woman. Other white women who stayed at home with their children, did so because their husbands made enough to allow that to happen. In most cases I was The Black Woman on the board and as a self-employed, college-educated Black woman, that stunned quite a few of them.

Obviously, finding camaraderie there wasn’t going to happen. So, I turned to playdates. Now, I get guff from my Black female friends telling me that only white people do playdates. I joined a playgroup for women of color. What fun and what a relief finding a group of women who understood not only what I was going through, since they lived in the same (or similar) community that I did at the time, but they were also college educated Black women who were also professionals and/or self-employed. Nothing was more frustrating posting at places like BabyZone or BabyCenter, where people seemed barely literate and they were definitely insulated and close-minded. It was a breath of fresh air to be able to have intelligent conversations with adult women. It also just so happens that many of them were also married to men who weren’t black.

Which leads me to another web-exclusive:

Love, in black and white

Black women marrying and dating interracially. Yawn. I’m sorry, but who cares? I know, my husband is Romanian/Hungarian and I may be a little too close to all this. I fail to see how this is news or a topic. Will there be a news story about the large amount of Asian women who dated/marry white men? Doubt it. People marry interacially. That’s what happens. What makes this clip so outdated is that they state “interacially”, yet only focuses on Black women/white men. I know Black women married to Latinos, Asians and Indians, so why the tight focus?

I must admit that clip killed me. The lady in the clip said that she only dated white men. That was it for her. I think that’s a little closeminded, but whatever. Then at the end of the clip, she said it was sad to think there were people who would only go out with someone because of the color of their skin. Say what?

Over a Kudzu, Mon Amour, Queen Esther writes:

i decided a long time ago that when it came to dating, i wanted someone that was basically a good guy, and i really didn’t care what race he happened to be. finding a smart, decent, cool, God-fearing person would prove to be difficult enough. why cut my chances of meeting that special someone by setting up racial barriers? to my way of thinking, it just didn’t make any sense.

I think that many people think that way. I certainly thought that I way. My first engagement was to a Black guy (okay, that was kinda forced on me by our mothers), then I thought I was going to marry this fine assed half-Jordanian/half-Mexican guy who was raised in Australia. That didn’t work when I figured out he was gay, then after months of denial he agreed. The point was that I, too, wasn’t going let skin color dictate who I marry and I kinda feel bad for people who do. For example, I know this Syrian guy who dated everyone, but when he got married he was going to marry a nice Syrian girl. From Syria. Muslim guys in America…that’s another blog post…anyway, when he decided he was ready for a wife, he went all the back to a country he had visited like 5 times since birth (yeah, he was born in The Valley) to find this “ideal Syrian girl”. That was in ‘94. He finally got married in ‘03. To a Chinese girl he went to college with. Why? Because it turned out that “nice Syrian girl” he built up in his head didn’t exactly exist, but the person he loved happened not be Syrian. My point, is that NBC, chose to focus on biracial dating from a Black woman’s standpoint, but once again neglected to mention that this is yet another rising trend across the board.

I admit to not watching the health clips. These clips always make it seem like Black women either just sit around, not exercising, eating greasy fatty foods OR that no matter what due to the fact that were Black women, we’re just going to get whatever disease. What I do know that rates of HIV is rising in America, especially among Black women and very few shows are willing to dedicate the time to focus on why that is. So you can read Stereohyped for a synopsis.

Courting black women voters

Then Friday rolls into my forte: Politics. This was interesting, as now the media has determined that I am a Special Interest Group. Funny how we, as Black women, have been ignored in politics, by politicians for the longest time. Republicans love the “welfare queens” image drawn by their Patron Demon Reagan , which shows the inherent racism in Republicans in that they all just knew he meant “Black women”, and it does kill me that 99.9% of the people I know on welfare today are white, married people. Digressed again. Basically, what I learned from this clip is the reason Democrats are talking to Black women is that they finally caught on that Black women vote. Once again, nothing new. No matter where I lived, there was always a group of Black women who volunteered their time or house for elections. I have not gone into a voting booth without at least 3 Black women volunteering and I’ve never lived in a predominantly Black neighborhood. Politicians have always spent so much time avoiding the issues that Black women focus on, that I was stunned earlier this summer when the Democratic candidates did start talking to Black women. (Note, that I specify Democrats, because we all know that even though they’re for torture, the GOP candidates are too scared to actually talk to Black people.)

What made that clip just ugh, was the last line that went something like: “Which is why these women are getting all dolled up…they know they can determine this election by a hair.” Who writes this crap?

At any rate, I’ve watched all those clips, save the health ones, two - four times and each time, I’m a little more disgusted and disappointed that this is what they chose to run. There was nothing new here, nothing of interest. I saw bloggers mention that they didn’t see themselves at all in the series. I’d have to agree.

As noted:

No. 4 daria says:

“Monday’s segment on education left me feeling like the network wanted a pat on the back for finding out what we already know.”

Note that the title is “Where They Stand,” not “Where We Stand.” The report wasn’t intended for you.

Posted: Nov 29, 2007 at 9:59 am