A Word or Three

An Open Letter to the President

2013-04-30T08:00:00.000-04:00

Dear Mr. President:

For the past several days, I've been debating an issue regarding your administration with a few friends, all ardent supporters of yours. All of us have read your books; we've donated and voted for you in both 2008 and 2012. Some of us even volunteered for your campaign and we all resisted the urge to unsubscribe from your well-meaning, but relentless emails. One friend in particular, has over time become more and more frustrated with what he perceives to be your selective concern for citizens. He believes that while you may personally care about all Americans, your public concern is limited to specific groups, namely those who wield the most political weight and media opportunities. In short, he believes you have neglected the poor, who are often black and brown. My reflex was to defend you and I did. Yet, the more I discussed the issue with him and others and coupled it with research, I found myself struggling to continue to defend you in good faith.

By the close of the conversations, I felt compelled to address the problem head on by talking to you directly, Mr. Obama. After poring over data, my convictions give me no other choice. But first, I begin with a story:

The year I graduated from Howard University, Oprah Winfrey was the selected commencement speaker. Upon receiving her honorary degree, she made a remark through tear-streaked eyes that has stuck with me: “You can receive a lot of rewards in your life, but there is nothing better than to be honored by your own.”

You, Mr. President have received that distinct honor. As I’m sure you know, 96% and 93% of African-Americans voted for you in 2008 and 2012 respectively. Your supporters voted for you not simply because of your skin color, but because we believed – and continue to believe- that you are genuinely interested in moving the country towards one America, not a divided one. In many ways, you have not disappointed:

The first bill you signed into law was the Lily Ledbetter Act, safeguarding equal pay for women. You extended benefits to same sex domestic partners of federal employees. You certified the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, a discriminatory policy against gays in the military. You became the first president to support marriage equality. You supported the DREAM Act, offering legality to undocumented minors. So as not to tire the reader, I will not attempt to outline the ethnic diversity of the appointments you’ve made – including the historic appointment of the Honorable Sonia Sotomayor. You have made sweeping changes and given a voice to groups not often represented in the political sphere.

Nevertheless, some communities continue to feel voiceless. There are still some communities who believe that their concerns, aspirations, and even their livelihood matter less. In all of the talk of the middle class, your administration and the public often sidelines the poor and those who are black and brown. While there are countless variables where one could find disparities between Blacks, Latinos and Whites, I’d like to focus on three that I believe require your immediate attention:

1. Income

The median household income by ethnicity (rounded, 2009):

§ National: $50K

§ Whites: $52K

§ Asians: $65K

§ Blacks: $36K

§ Latinos: $38K

2. Education

College graduation of high school graduates after six years by ethnicity (2010)

§ Asians: 69%

§ Whites: 62%

§ Latinos: 50%

§ Blacks: 39%

3. Gun Violence

§ Black children and teens accounted for 45 percent of all child and teen gun deaths, but were only 15 percent of the total child population. (2008-2009)

§ Black males 15-19 were eight times as likely as White males of the same age to be killed in a gun homicide. (2008-2009)

The Great Recession affected nearly every family in some way; yet many people of color were hit especially hard. For example, in 2009, Black American families brought in $14,000 less than the national average – a significant sum during tough times. Income inequalities coupled with less education makes for a disastrous concoction, adding a significant barrier to entry into the middle class.

Yet the education and income statistics are not the ones that trouble me most. If America is unable to provide equal education and income opportunities for its citizens, at the very least, it should do its best to secure life. I am not a parent, but you are. I saw your very real reaction to the tragic deaths in Newtown. I shudder to think of how difficult it is for parents who love their children as much you do, to send children out into neighborhoods rife with crime, gun violence, and what may seem like imminent death. A diversity of communities have felt the pain of a child gone much too soon; but the shadow of death darkens the sidewalks and alleys of Chicago, Oakland, Flint, Baltimore, Las Vegas and other cities with chilling consistency.

Mr. President, you have had the unfortunate task of comforting cities and families across this nation as they struggle to understand seemingly indiscriminate violence. You’ve spoken to distraught mothers in Newtown, shaken Bostonians, and stunned survivors in Aurora. While it didn’t bring back a life, your thoughtful eulogies, heartfelt embraces and simply your presence showed those individuals you cared. They knew in that moment, that the country stood beside them in their time of pain. But the violence isn’t indiscriminate. In a cruel twist, those neighborhoods most familiar with death are least familiar with attention.

My defense of you to my aforementioned friends was that "Barack Obama is the President of the entire United States, not merely the Black constituents." I pointed out that the push for gun safety has positive implications for all citizens of all backgrounds. I continued that a President couldn’t attend the funeral of every slain child in America. When I added that you have already been accused of “giving targeted [minority] groups a big gift,” it was then I realized that my arguments were falling flat on even my own ears.

You’re not running for reelection. Your critics will criticize you regardless of what you do. Your supporters will continue to respect you when you do what is right. When you supported marriage equality, you didn’t immediately become the “President of the Gays.” When you supported fairness for women’s pay, you weren’t perceived as “catering to women.” Sensible Americans simply considered you the president who cares.

I don’t believe I’m telling you anything you don’t already know. I also don’t believe that you can wield a magic wand and fix these problems. Black and Latino communities will have to do the hard work of improving the quality of life for their families. Community organizers, parents, law enforcement, local legislators, educators and others will need to work together. People will need to create solutions best suited to their unique needs. But I believe that with your platform, what you can provide is the most inexpensive thing to give. Attention.

So what do I propose as a solution? To start, acknowledge that there are real disparities between ethnic groups often fueled by socioeconomics that our country needs to address. From there, I suggest you consider legislation and initiatives to confront these problems. Your campaign effectively organized people to vote and spread your message; what if those same kinds of strategic yet grassroots efforts were used to organize on behalf of the least of these? I’m not happy with what America has accepted as “normal” for impoverished communities. Are you?

Your voice matters. I don’t believe it’s a coincidence that a few months after you expressed support for same sex marriage, a majority of the country also supported it. A good friend of mine reminded me of the following: President Kennedy didn’t compel the country to “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country” simply because it was good rhetoric. He knew the influence his voice and the office wielded; it is the same influence you have. If you choose to use it, you won’t simply be helping the minorities of our country; you will ensure all of the country benefits from a diverse, educated, financially stable America. And that, Mr. President is your job.

Thank you for reading.

Respectfully,

Crystal Marie

P.S.: Excellent job at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Conan who?

Editor's Note: While I have signed this letter, it was truly a group effort. Much of the insight and perspectives shared here have been provided by my brilliant circle - Mr. Lomax was the catalyst for the discussion, Mr. Murphy and Mr. Jackson intelligently challenged it, and Mr. Baker provided a journalistic assist.

Everyone Does (At Least) One of These Four Things That Annoys Us All. Stop It.

2013-04-17T09:49:00.000-04:00

I know I haven't blogged in quite some time. Please forgive me, but I'm a full time student who also works full time. When I do get a free moment, I usually end up ~~rewatching episodes of Girls~~ trying to catch up on some reading. Nevertheless, you people have inspired me. You people, yes... you, the American people have inspired me to issue an important memo about things we all do that we all hate. Sometimes you don't realize that these things are annoying until it's your birthday and no one wants to come to your party. (But you can cry if you want to; I would cry too if it happened to me).

Let's go:

1. You say "I don't really watch TV." A few months ago, the morning after the Oscars, I asked a friend what he thought about Seth McFarlane's performance.

Him: Who?

Me: Seth McFarlane... the host of the Oscars, did you watch it?

Him: Nah, was that last night or something?

Me: ... Yeah, a few miles away from here...

Him: Oh... cool. Who's that?

Me:... uh... Oscar?

Him: Seth Mc--- what'd you say?

Me: Seth McFarlane, the creator of Family Guy.

Him: Oh... Family Guy. I think I've heard of that. Never seen it. I don't really watch TV.

You lying, B. Mind you, I happen to know he has a television large enough to produce a life-size image of Shaq. I'm not buying it. Especially not from someone whose voicemail says: "I'm probably doing yoga now, but I'll call you back when I'm done. Don't text me; that's impersonal. Namaste." This is all part of your act.

2. You have an email signature too long to make it onto Twitter. I know you want to end every email with an opportunity for people to connect to you via every social network possible and see all of your titles, and to also be moved to tears by a Bible verse or quote you've charmingly added to the end. Also, you know that to get this message across effectively, you believe it needs to be in your favorite cursive font in your favorite color with your family logo. Nah, bruh. I've ~~asked around~~ done research and the results came back: 100% of the respondents would rather you shorten your email signature to two lines. Do you think Barack Obama's signature looks like:

In Service,

Barack H. Obama, President of the United States of America

Father, Husband, Community Organizer, Mover & Shaker, Non-Authorizer-of-the-Carters'-Trip-to-Cuba

Connect with me! Facebook / Twitter / Instagram / Pinterest /Tumblr

***

Let's chat here too!

United States Website / Donate / White House Facebook / White House Twitter / White House Photos
Gun Control Now! / RSVP to the Next State Dinner

My chick bad, my chick hood; my chick do stuff that yo' chick wish she could. - Christopher Bridges

3. You complain about things that aren't really problems, e.g. "Girl I am just getting so tired of having to get my hair trimmed. It's like every month, there's another three inches!" Usually this is said to a poor soul with damaged ends whose hair hasn't grown an inch in a year. Cut it out.

4. You plan a week-long birthday extravaganza with mandatory events. Everyone on the planet has a birthday. EVERYONE. There are 52 weeks in the year, and the average person probably has at least 7 or 8 friends who they are close enough to where it is a requirement that they do something for that person's birthday. So what if they all had weeklong parties/dinners/happy hours/skating events/fundraising/community service that they required you do? You'd spend two months celebrating birthdays, and that's not even including your own. Ain't nobody got time for dat! Except for the milestones (like the big 3 - 0), one dinner where we all awkwardly split a large check at The Cheesecake Factory should suffice. (And if people can't make it, stop giving them a hard time.)

If you've done one of these things, don't feel bad: you're in company with just about EVERYONE. Very few people have been cool enough to skip all of these habits. (I've been guilty of #1 and #3). But the more you know... the more you can stop annoying us all.

#Thanks

Any randomly annoying things you or your friends do that you want to add to this petition? Let me know!

True Southern Hospitality (and Christian love)

2013-02-21T02:31:00.001-05:00

Ah. I love the South.

The sizzle of hot, juicy yet crispy fatback in a cast iron skillet is one of my favorite sounds and always reminds me of South Carolina. Since my grandmother's passing, I haven't had any, and I can't bring myself to ask for it in these hipster California grocery stores. Soul food isn't all I miss about living in the South. It's also the traditional style of Southern Baptist churches. My home church had a strong, vibrant membership but was small enough that if I wasn't there, it was noticed. The hymns I sang there and the motherly love I received was enough to have me humming joyously on my way home.

If the reassuring faith traditions and delectable food hadn't done it, the gracious hospitality, the neighborly love, the "it takes a village" upbringing, the lack of traffic (or need to parallel park), and the rich Southern accents that make you believe it's impossible for a guy like John Edwards to be a bad guy were enough to make me embrace my Southern roots.

Unfortunately, this is not all the South is known for.

The kindness represented in Southern ladies and gentlemen that warms the hearts and souls of both tourists and longtime residents alike, often grows cold when they enter the voting booth... or a discussion about what to do about the poor or the Obama administration's morally bankrupt drone policy that has killed civilians overseas. (Yes, sometimes I disagree with President Obama!)

Like many of my conservative friends, I do believe that a politician's faith has a strong influence on who I vote for. It would seem that we'd be voting for the same candidates right? Not so. I care little about how often a candidate attends a church service or how often she mentions God on the stump. If a Congress member attends worship services every Sunday, but on Monday votes to push forth a budget that drastically cuts resources to the "least of these" *cough Paul Ryan cough*, I struggle to truly see how God's love, grace, and mercy is represented when it truly matters. Faith without works is dead. Loving the poor in your personal life but ignoring them in the voting booth seem like what the Bible would call lukewarm. And God is pretty clear on how much he hates that.

I recently read a sermon where a minister quipped "Nobody gets into heaven without a letter of reference from the poor." This minister was surely inspired by Jesus' statement in Matthew 25:40 that "whatever you have done to the least of these, you have done to Me."

So what does it mean to be a Christian from the South? Does it mean you offer sweet tea with a serving of marriage inequality on the side?

Does it mean you cherish family values, so long as the family we're talking about looks like yours and came from where you came from?

Does it mean that we Christian Southerners meticulously care for our lawns and backyards, but not the environment that our Creator endowed us to take care of?

I certainly hope not.

I leave you with one of my favorite Bible stories. King Solomon, often regarded as the wisest man who ever lived, was presented with quite a conundrum a few thousand years ago. Two women brought forth a baby child, both claiming to be the mother. They wanted King Solomon to assert custody to the rightful mother. So he recommended what any wise King would recommend: "Cut the baby in half! That way, you'll each have a piece!" The lying woman agreed to this plan, but the rightful mother of the child realized that her child's safety was much more important than the right to a dead remnant of a child. She yelled out "No! Let the other woman have her; just don't kill my child!" And that was how King Solomon was able to decipher the true mother of the child. The one who chose safety for her child, even when it meant sacrifice.

Why did I tell this story? Because I have the joy of seeing men and women I grew up with now rearing their own beautiful children. I must admit, my Southern friends vastly outpace my other friends in the family-making department and the love I see in their eyes as they hold the hands of their toddlers is priceless. Yet, while statistics repeatedly show that loose gun control policies at a national (not just state wide) level lead to less homicides and accidental deaths, many folks, particularly my friends in the South, elect to hold onto to their dangerous interpretation of the Second Amendment, versus adopting legislation that may mean sacrificing the right to say... purchase a gun without a background check. See the parallels? Can my fellow Southerners choose life when it is coupled with a sacrifice like universal background checks to save our nieces, nephews, grandkids, and children? Or will we risk another Newtown while holding onto our unchecked right to bear arms?

I'm proud to be from the land of Bojangle's biscuits, spirited high school football, and traditional Baptist services with rich gospel music and Word that feeds the soul.

I'm so proud of the land I'm from that I hold it to a high standard. Only time will tell whether we live up to it.

**

I hope that whether you are a proud Yankee, a tofu-eating Californian, or my favorite, a Southern gentleman with a baritone drawl, that you hear the respect I strove to infuse in my thoughts. I welcome your opinions, dissenting or approving (or somewhere in between).

What the NRA Should Have Said

2012-12-24T04:19:00.000-05:00

I am an idealist. I believe that people typically have the best of intentions. Moreover, I usually fail to follow Oprah’s oft quoted advice that has almost become cliché: “When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” I'm a second chancer.

So when the NRA announced that they were delivering a press conference, breaking their weeklong silence, I saw a glass half full. I expected that twenty six coffins, particularly, the twenty smaller ones, had inspired an epiphany.

I should have listened to Oprah.

The NRA’s call for armed officials in every school is simply shoddy arithmetic. Guns plus more guns doesn’t equal peace; furthermore, several teachers’ associations have expressed their opposition to the NRA's proposition. (You can read the entire transcript here.)

Regardless of how you feel about gun control, it’s important to acknowledge that the NRA's EVP, Wayne Lapierre, spoke words that can be described as nothing short of an insensitive train wreck, as PR experts everywhere have agreed. So while they alluded to some of the points below, they should have driven them home and tossed the rest.

What they should have said:

Our prayers and thoughts are with those affected by individuals who used weapons for evil versus good.

We realize that the violence in America is a serious problem that while complex, must be grappled with. This means that we have to work harder to ensure that the weapons we so love, are used exclusively for sport, leisure, and protection.

Based on our organization’s breadth of knowledge in relation to gun policy, we humbly offer our voice to be included among the task force led by Vice President Joe Biden to help create solutions that protect American citizens.

This is not a time for stubbornness, anger, thoughtless action, or worse, inaction. It’s a time for reflection, serious thought, and a keen plan of action. We are prepared to step up to the plate. God bless Newtown, Aurora, Chicago, Oak Creek, Tucson, Portland, and the countless other cities who have been shaken by senseless gun violence. We’re on your side.

But they didn’t.

Now I know better. I’m still optimistic. I just know that I should have believed the NRA when they first revealed who they were.

There is at least one thing I’m grateful for. The NRA is comfortable with being upfront about their ideas, no matter how ill received and horrendous those ideas may be.

Becoming Olivia Pope is Easy | A True Story about Infidelity

2012-12-20T02:08:00.000-05:00

Though I prefer premium channel dramas like The Wire and Newsroom, it seemed everyone I knew was enraptured by the ABC series, Scandal, so I finally gave in and watched. Not bad. Possibly the most fascinating plot thread is the on again/off again salacious affair between the President of the United States (Fitz) and Olivia, the principal of the Pope and Associates PR firm.

I recently discussed the fictional affair with my cousin -who is happily married- and to my surprise, she declared that she was “Team Olivia and Fitz” because they were made for each other. When it comes to morality and ethics, most people think they have clear-cut lines. They will quickly attest that murder is wrong, but cheer for a gun-wielding Will Smith in his latest summer flick. Some will say gay marriage is despicable, but “awwww” when Mitchell and Cameron of Modern Family make up after a silly fight. I’m sure if I conducted a poll, I’d learn that people believed cheaters were wicked, yucky individuals.

Until it was you.

A few days ago, I was catching up with a friend -let’s call her Melanie- and she casually asked me if I knew anything about a guy named Austin. I did. He’s smart, funny, handsome, charming, and genuinely someone most people would consider a “good guy.” Several months back, while in DC on business, Austin ran into Melanie and they really hit it off. They weren’t physically intimate; but they were up to the wee hours of the morning discussing the election, religion, Katt Williams, and everything else. Neither wanted the night to end, but he had an early flight back to Boston, so they reluctantly agreed to keep in touch. They developed a friendship in the way that twenty and thirty somethings do… via gchat, text and funny forwarded emails. There was always an underlying “What if” but neither pursued it. So imagine Melanie’s excitement when Austin called to tell her he’d be in town again for a conference and was hoping they could grab dinner. They met up. Again… the connection was there, and it was as if no time had passed since their last meeting. Half joking, half curious, Melanie said, “I don’t know how you manage to stay single Austin.” And that’s when he dropped the bomb, “Actually, as of two days ago, I’m not…” Allow me to take creative license here; I presume this is where Melanie calmly set down her wine glass and did her best to appear happy as she congratulated him.

At this point in our conversation, Melanie hesitated and I knew she had more to say. Something in me told me that I had to tell her a story, one I hadn’t told anyone else. So I did. And now, I’ll tell you.

Several years ago, while in college, I met a guy at a house party. The day after we met, we spent the next two weeks together, ordering take out, watching bad movies, taking in DC’s landmarks like tourists, and even a Wizards game. But the timing was horrible. He was graduating that spring and moving home to Atlanta. I still had more school to go. So we let it go. Over the years, we kept in contact, but it was minimal. We were in different cities, and one of us was always in a relationship. And then… I moved back to DC as a single woman, and he was there too, after recently being reassigned by his job. We were so excited to be in the same city and hang out again. But he didn’t come back to DC alone; he had a girlfriend. (Notice a recurring theme here).

I gushed that I really wanted to meet the woman who was making him happy. I thought it would help me to see him as a completely unavailable man. But every time the 3 of us planned to get together, something would come up last minute in her schedule, and it was just us. So we’d go to dinner and talk like old friends or take in a movie. Eventually, I started to think that he was purposefully setting up times for the two of us to hang out, and to my mortified surprise… I was pleased. I liked him. He was thoughtful, playful, affectionate, and a critical thinker. He consistently mused that he didn’t see how someone like myself was single. (Don’t they all say that?) We told each other corny jokes and created inside jokes so funny to us that our sides hurt. He grabbed my hand when we crossed the street. Our “hangout sessions” were starting to feel less and less platonic. I knew this was bad news. I knew that although we weren’t crossing any double lines, what we were doing was dangerous. One day as we weaved our way through Silver Spring to an indy theatre, an older woman stopped us on the street to tell us we were a “couple fit for Hollywood.” He gave me a once-over, turned back to the woman and said, “Ma’am I think I agree with you.” And my stomach flip-flopped.

That night, as he walked me to my door and I fished out my keys, I looked up to offer the obligatory “Good seeing you, I hope to see [your girlfriend] soon.” But the words caught in my throat. He was looking at me intently and before I knew it, we’d kissed. I’d like to say I pushed him away. I’d like to say I was disgusted. I’d like to say I told him off and never spoke to him again. But none of those things are true. I kissed him back and it was one of the most beautiful/ugliest moments of my life. I loved it and I hated it. He apologized. And I did too. And then we kissed again. I managed to snap out of it and bustle inside, alone with my thoughts. For the next few hours, I vacillated between youthful glee, intense guilt, and everything in between. I even found myself thinking, “What we have is special... it’s unique… It’s impossible that he could feel as good with someone else as he does with me… right? Wonder if he’s thinking that right now. Could this work? I’m single, so… technically I’m not wrong right?”

It was this #anncoulterlogic that led me to decide that it was best for us to not be friends at all, because I didn’t trust either one of us to be responsible. After I shared my story with Melanie, she broke down and confessed that towards the end of Austin’s trip, under a haze of alcohol that they'd kissed and it was magical. When they were laughing, talking, and sharing, it was easy to forget the truth. It was easy to believe that what they had was real, genuine and right. But when the club lights come on and sobriety comes in, the truth is a bright glaring light to your hangover, reminding you that you’re a wicked and yucky person, as indicated by the hypothetical poll I took earlier.

So what did I tell Melanie? The same thing I told myself a few years ago. “Create a space between you two. Accept that while what you two may have is special, it’s not enough for him to leave his girlfriend; if it was, he would. When you find yourself reliving those special moments, look up his Facebook profile and let the reality hurt you. Don’t send that text. Don’t make that call.”

The truth is, Melanie deserves better. She doesn’t deserve a piece of someone. Austin and his girlfriend deserve better. They deserve an honest commitment. And while Olivia and Fitz seem caught up in a whirlwind of passion, they deserve better than stolen time, whispered words, and weighty secrets.

It’s easy to become Olivia Pope. But it’s not easy to live as Olivia Pope without making exorbitant sacrifices.

The floor is yours.

4 Things Women Pretend to Love for Guys' Sake

2012-12-12T09:08:00.000-05:00

I’m 100% sure that someone who doesn’t take the time to read all the qualifiers I’ve made to the following generalizations will accuse me of being sexist or something else uncomely. The Internet has given everyone, even the misinformed, a voice. Actually… especially the misinformed. But I’ll take my chances anyway.

A few weeks ago, Fox News trotted out an article so laughable that there was a waiting line of pundits, comedians, and bloggers ready to skewer it. Suzanne Venker, the author of soon to be published How to Choose A Husband, posited that “women aren’t women anymore” and that if women would just “surrender to their nature – their femininity – and let men surrender to theirs”, then “marriageable men will come out of the woodwork.”

Let the record reflect; I think that article is part hogwash, part nonsense, part self-hate, and part desperation for attention. It’s all foolishness. I do however think that some women adopt certain hobbies that they may not otherwise take part in, just for the sake of attracting men (sometimes failing horribly). Again, I said SOME women, but enough women do it for me to take notice and find it amusing.

Here’s my top 4:

1. Sports. Obviously some women really do like sports. They play fantasy football and can spit all kinds of stats on their favorite players/teams. (Personally, I find it mind boggling that people will watch SportsCenter 723 times in one day when it’s a loop of the same thing OVER and OVER again. Plus… it’s usually a highlight reel of a game that you probably already watched. But I digress…)

But I’ve seen some women who could care less become raving, foaming-at-the-mouth Cowboys fans, all because a potential boo was in the room with a star on his chest. The Clark Kent to Super(Sports)Woman is the new hotness. Sadly, it’s usually transparent how fake their fanhood is when a woman yells “And he’s safe!! That touchdown means we’re going to the World Seeeerrriiiieeeeess!!! Woo hoo! I love you Kobe!”

2. Video Games. When I was in college, one of my roommates learned how to play Madden. She made it exceedingly clear that she was learning solely so she could flirtatiously trash talk someone into playing in our small dorm room. Then again, she’s happily married with a kid so maybe she was onto something.

3. Strip Clubs. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems like all of a sudden, the strip club is no longer a place exclusively for gentlemen to pick up the occasional venereal disease. One of my girlfriends seemed surprised recently when I told her I’d never been to a strip club. She very generously offered to take me to a strip club to right this wrong. I politely declined. I’m pretty sure that although they make an astounding amount of money at a faster rate than I ever have, I’d feel compelled to talk the ladies off the pole.

4. Misogynistic Hip-Hop. Years ago, Chris Rock infamously yelled (when is he NOT yelling??), “If the beat is right, she will dance all night!” As stated in previous posts, I have been known to dance to troubling lyrics that I’d rather not repeat. But even I have to draw a line in the sand somewhere and it’s probably around 2Chainz. Sure fellas, I get that “all you want for your birthday is a big booty hoe” but …. Why are the ladies singing along with you? Is a universal love for big booty hoes attractive?

I don’t know. I’m not a guy. But I think at some point, we should acknowledge that it’s ok to prefer Scandal over Sportcenter, Cranium over Call of Duty, and Timberlake over Two Chainz. (Seriously, when is JT gonna drop an album... we need it!)

What have I missed from this list? Ladies, are you willing to admit doing these things to earn cool points with the fellas? Or do you genuinely like skrip clubs? Yes, I meant to say skrip. Fellas, do you like it when a girl likes this stuff?

***

DC Readers: Tomorrow night is Karaoke 4 A Cause, my FAVORITE holiday party! Bring a toy valued at $20 (or $20) and join the party! Celebrate, sing, give. :)

All proceeds benefit the Southeast White House. More info at www.karaoke4acause.com

The Myth of "I Like You Prettiest Without Makeup"

2012-10-15T03:50:00.000-04:00

The other day, one of my friend’s Facebook status proclaimed: “I appreciate a girl as real as her hair.” As a weaveless woman, my reflex was to toot my own horn. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the notion that someone’s “realness” has a correlation to whether her hair was homegrown or not was ridiculous.

My friend’s Facebook status is part of this pseudo-enlightened view that has become cool and hip in the past several years. A few variations of this theory you can expect to hear are:

“I like girls natural… the less makeup, the better.”

“How can you trust a girl with fake nails, fake hair, fake boobs, etc?”

“Sweat pants, hair tied, chillin’ with no make-up on; that’s when you’re the prettiest, I hope that you don’t take it wrong.” Philosopher Aubrey “Drake” Graham

That’s cute. Here’s the thing. I’m not buying it. Before you tell me, “How dare you tell me what men like, ain’t you a woman? Ya’ll always think you know what men want…” and blah blah blah, hear me out.

I’m not saying men are solely attracted to women with Nicki-Minaj inspired makeup, but I’m not buying the argument that men are most attracted to women who haven’t made any type of investments in her appearance. Most women do quite a bit to adjust what you may think is natural. Eyebrows are plucked, waxed or threaded. Legs and armpits are shaved. Some women even bedazzle their hoo-ha. Our bodies smell faintly of lotion, our faces are washed with Proactiv, and our heels are scrubbed with pumice stones. I could write a separate blog post about the deep conditioning, co-washing, trimming, coloring, curling then straightening, voluminizing then smoothing, twisting, and teasing we do to our hair to achieve something appropriate for both the workplace and the happy hour afterwards.

Interestingly enough, doing all of these things to enhance our appearance isn’t considered fake. It’s considered by most to be basic hygiene! Never mind that failing to shave your legs doesn’t increase the incidence of type II diabetes. Ashiness doesn’t lead to asthma, but God forbid you have a gray elbow. Massive manipulation of your own hair is perfectly ok, but if a woman adds extensions so that she can protect her hair from heat damage or she extends her nails by a couple centimeters then not only is her look fake, she is a woman who can’t be trusted! She might just possibly be a liar who goes out of her way to present a false persona so that men will fall into her icky trap. The true sign of an evil woman, to hear some men tell it, is an acrylic French manicure.

Let me tell you what I think men are REALLY asking for. Men want a woman who LOOKS like she’s not trying. They want a woman whose cheeks just happen to have a bit of glow, with lips that naturally produce a sweet tasting liquid that makes them shine, and women whose hair on their head grows like a unstoppable weed, while the hair on the rest of their body appears to have endured chemotherapy.

Here’s the thing; I don’t think it’s completely men’s fault. Photoshop, professional airbrushing, and most recently Instagram, have provided men with endless streams of false reality. Men drool over Zoe Saldana, Republican Stacey Dash, Kerry Washington, Halle Berry, and Gabrielle Union not realizing that they’re drooling over a piece of art, not an actual person.

There’s nothing wrong with having preferences. If you like women without weave, that’s cool. If you prefer women who keep makeup to a bare minimum, that’s cool too. Honestly, all the fake stuff is really expensive; we’d probably appreciate a relief from it all. But don’t pretend that you don’t appreciate any of the 20th and 21^st century’s tools to tweak, remove, add, and enhance women’s natural beauty. That would be really fake of you. *Wink*

P.S. I shared this post with a a guy friend to ensure I wasn't completely off base, and he said that a better post would be about how society defines beauty and why we think plump lips or youthful skin is attractive. But I'm employed and in school and I don't have time to learn all that, much less teach it. One of you should write it!

Overrated Things in the Black Community

2012-10-09T03:53:00.001-04:00

In order to be in good standing with our brethren, us Black Americans have a lot of rules. Not only am I required to memorize the lyrics to Juicy, I have to master Spades, and learn an ever growing list of words specifically related to the care of natural hair. To top it all off, there are some things I’m supposed to LOVE along with the rest of the Blacks. Welp. I have failed at all of the above. Unfortunately, I’m incapable of completely throwing logic out the window to fit in with my alleged ethnicity’s idea of what’s amazing. Below are a few things that as a member of the Black race I am supposed to love, but that I deem overrated:

Awkward Black Girl – The web series premiered in February 2011 and has quickly become a cult classic among Black women. To me, the line between the ratchet music spoofed in the show and the character’s actions and dialogue is certainly blurring. Latching on to ABG because “we all we got” is an insufficient reason for me to tune in. The most recent episode featured use of the ABG invention “Mexinigga.” Funny doesn’t have to take cheap shots or fall on clichéd tools of comedy. In fact, it’s not funny; it’s just tired, overdone, and yawn-inducing.

Tip: Why not support a web series that you can be proud of AND that will make you laugh? Check out info on Very Smart Brothas pilot: The TV Series
Editor's Note: My issue with ABG stems from the fact that I KNOW Issa Rae and Tracy Oliver (the writers) are smart folks who are making what I consider to be easy, time-honored choices versus risky, creative decisions with their work. I initially loved the show. I've seen every single episode and continue to watch in hopes that it will get better. I think as Issa Rae's popularity and following have increased, so has her work load. I actually watched her new series, Roomie | Lovers | Friends and I've noted the growth. I just want her to live up to the accolades that people have given her. I wish her the best and I'm certainly thrilled to hear that she's got something in the works with ABC. We need more filmmakers. Just do us proud; we deserve it! This note has been sponsored by @Hautemommie and @MrAudacity

The Boondocks - If you read the comic strip, then you know why this is a disappointment. The comic strip was a scathing but keen criticism of everything under the sun, with a focus on social issues. The television show was not.

Tip: Instead, you should watch The Mindy Project, a new show on Fox, which is basically Awkward Indian Girl. Except it’s funny.

Waffle House – People leave the South and spread this myth that Waffle House is the pinnacle of good breakfast. They fail to mention that the real reason people go to Waffle House is:

1. It’s usually the only place open at the time most folks stumble in.

2. It’s super cheap.

Here are the facts:

1. It's dirty.

2. The servers are typically surly.

3. The waffles are nothing to tweet about. They're good. But not special.

Tip: Instead, consider patronizing the local mom and pop diner. In most major cities, there’s at least one that stays open late. You’ll support a small business, become a regular, and probably score free drinks.

Roscoe’s – People like Roscoe’s because you only find them in Southern California. They're the hometown favorite. That’s it. The low supply of restaurants with the Roscoe’s logo at the door creates a high demand elsewhere. The chicken is good. The waffles are good. None of it is life-changing. Probably the most hilarious thing about Roscoe’s is if you offer up criticism of the chain, LA natives will say “Well which one did you go to? Mmmhmm, shoulda went to the other one… Now what did you order?.... tsk tsk. Shoulda got the number 9.” How good is a chain if it’s only good if you go to ONE location and order that ONE specific thing? I call shenanigans.

Want good chicken? If you’re in LA, go to Honey’s Kettle Fried Chicken. Thank me later.

Anita Baker - Her voice reminds me of the mom from Gullah Gullah Island. I enjoy Anita’s hits, particularly Sweet Love which is an excellent karaoke choice. I just find the deification by her rabid fans a bit overwrought. And her hair looks like John Mayer’s. It makes me uncomfortable.
Tip: Check out the BEST COVER OF I WANT YOU BACK that I've ever heard. In life.

Sade - Whenever I hear Sade's music, I find myself comparing suicide methods. Once, I got as far as writing the note for my friends and family, complete with the song I wanted to play at my funeral, until my then roommate came in and turned on some Carrie Underwood.
Tip: Wanna hear something different? Something to get your heart rate going? Check out my girl Solange's new video. (And by my girl, I mean.... an individual who I've never met, but whose records I have purchased.)

Welp. Now that I have probably single-handedly pissed off probably 90% of my readers, I’d like to hear your thoughts. Can you think of anything else that’s highly overrated in the Black community? Enlighten us!

5 Most Annoying Groups During Election Season

2012-10-01T02:18:00.000-04:00

One thing liberals and conservatives can agree on is that we're entirely over this election season. I'm pretty sure I saw a Romney hologram in my shower. Talk about denying a woman the right to choose! Geez. In addition to being tired of hearing "I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message," I've got 5 other people I don't want to hear from during the election season. Here goes:

5. Negative Nancys. These are people who don’t have a pro opinion; they are just anti something. The first time I noticed this was in 2004 during the Kerry/Bush election. Many folks (mostly liberals but arguably the majority) were so disgusted with then President Bush they were basically willing to take anyone. This time around, it seems the rallying cry of conservatives, is “Get that Communist/Muslim/Fascist Outta There!” I always question the validity of passion that stands against something instead of FOR something. Why say “I hate this and that! And let’s get rid of that! And he sucks and she sucks too!” Why not say, “I support this! I like that! This is a good idea! Let’s try some of this!”
Pro Tip: Get a Pinterest account. I don't have one, but it's full of examples of people listing things that they actually DO like!

4. One Issue Voters. No one with a working brain completely agrees with a politician on every single issue. There are pro-lifers who support gun control and supporters of capital punishment who also support welfare programs. A keen voter does an elegant balance of ALL the issues and decides from there.
Pro Tip: Create a Pro/Con List.

3. "My Preferences/Personal Choices Should Be Everyone's!" This may seem like a pet peeve only espoused by liberals, but ideologically speaking, it should resonate with conservatives and small government advocates too. If you want government to be small, then don’t suggest more laws that limit other people’s freedoms. For example, if YOU think that women shouldn’t be seen in public unless they’re wearing a burka, that’s cool. The women in YOUR household will wear burkas. But it’s silly to create laws based on your personal religious beliefs and/or preferences.

Note: Do not be the idiot that makes this about a slippery slope and says something like “Soon murderers will want the freedom to kill people; should we give them that??” Obviously I’m referring to rights and freedoms that don’t infringe upon others’ access to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Loser.

Pro Tip: Read the Constitution and pay close attention to the Bill of Rights.

2. Undecided Voters. When people say they are undecided, this is actually a desperate cry for attention. We are not deciding between M&Ms with peanuts or M&Ms without. Don’t say you’re waiting on the debates. The purpose of the debates are really just to serve as televised pep rallies. You don’t walk away from the debates with a new home team; nothing they say will truly change your belief system. Either you think we should balance the budget with Bush era tax cuts or Clinton era tax rates. Either you think we should provide preventative healthcare for the uninsured or they should visit the emergency room, with a bonus ride via an ambulance. You know what the deal is! Pick already!

Exception: The only exception to this rule is people considering a third party candidate like Jill Stein or Gary Johnson. You may strongly believe in your candidate, but wonder about the value in voting for someone that has almost zero chance of being elected in this country’s current two-party system. I get that. It’s a tough call.

Pro Tip: (If you legitimately are like “I don’t know what to do with my hands!” take the quiz at isidewith.com)

1. Non Voters. Your complacency is unpatriotic and somewhat nauseating. Whether you choose to vote or not, your presence on the planet still impacts your community, even if it’s just a census count. Don’t allow decisions that could help or hurt yourself, your neighbors and your fellow citizens be made for you. It’s… so not sexy.

Pro Tip: If you need help figuring out where, when, and how to vote, visit gottavote.com

Your turn to sound off. Let me hear it! :)

Choosing Your Boo Over Your Friends or a Career - a Bad Idea?

2012-09-24T09:46:00.000-04:00

Recently, I was talking to a friend who told me about her plans to attend law school soon. Of COURSE, I suggested that she apply to USC here in Los Angeles. To paraphrase her response, she said, “I know it sounds bad, but I want to stay in DC, close to my boyfriend.” Even after I assured her that there was nothing wrong with that, she continued to explain her decision, as if anticipating pushback. People, particularly women, are often told from the time they can pick up a Ken Barbie to:

“Never make important decisions based on a man.”

A similar mantra taught to both men and women is:

“Never choose your man/woman over your friend. Relationships come and go; friends are for life.”

It sounds good. And it’s relatively true; for most people, our strongest friendships tend to be more static than our romantic relationships, particularly when we’re younger and unmarried. But lately, I’ve come to question these alleged nuggets of “wisdom.” And here’s why:

1. As we get older, it becomes more practical to consider our ambitions and long-term goals comprehensively versus in a linear fashion. This means that instead of tossing out a relationship for a promotion overseas, or choosing your long time homegirl over your potential life partner, consider how each decision fits into your overall plan for your life.

Let’s consider Rachel and Walter, a hypothetical case study. Rachel and Walter have been seriously dating for 2 years. Rachel is 28 and Walter is 32 and while they certainly agree that they eventually want to have a family and settle down, they haven’t made a formal commitment to each other just yet. Rachel is offered a promotion within her company that would require her to move across the country. It isn’t necessarily a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and there will be probably be other promotion opportunities in the area, but it is a great one and it’s significantly closer to her family. Rachel and Walter both have had negative experiences with long-distance relationships and aren't interested in going down that road. I believe the decision to take a new career with relocation should be based on a variety of things including the proximity to her family, the impact of the salary/new role in her quality of life. Furthermore, I would argue that Rachel should also consider her desire to have a family. She should consider if she wants to continue developing a relationship with Walter that has promise to lead to the family they both want. It’s a fair consideration and she shouldn’t be judged harshly for including her plans with him in her decision.

Interestingly enough, a hard lesson many Type A’s and voracious planners grudgingly learn is: our lives don’t proceed steadily along in a straight line, like moving walkways in an airport. Sure, there are outliers. Beyoncé was able to achieve immense success, then love, and then the adorable Blue Ivy. Michelle Obama even did what many of us aspire to do; she completed her extensive education, landed a great job, and then found love as well, culminating with a not too shabby title as First Lady of the United States. While Beyoncé and Michelle are certainly admirable, for most people, life doesn’t occur in a Point A, then B, then C fashion. Many of us complete our education in parts, in between jobs and career changes, and many of us find love all throughout the process; the beginning, the middle, or the end. There’s nothing wrong with that. Instead of trying to create a divine order in which you focus primarily on one goal at a time, consider how each of the pieces can fit together. My friend sheepishly crossed schools in California off her list so she could be close to the man who makes her smile in Washington, DC. Is Georgetown such a bad alternative to USC? I don’t think so.

2. When you are in a committed relationship with a sane person who legitimately has your best interest at heart, that person will only ask you to choose if he or she has good reason. One of my good friends used to lament that whenever her boyfriend was with one of his close female friends, he tended to drink more, smoke weed, and stay out later. When he’d stumble home, it wasn’t his homegirl that had to deal with his sour breath, the illegal army green flakes on his jacket, and the lingering hangover; it was his girlfriend. When she told him that she’d had enough and that he’d need to regulate his behavior around said homegirl or just not hang with her at all, her boyfriend blew up at her for making her “choose.” I won’t tell you what happened in the end, but to me, it seems as though that was good reason.

The caveat is that of course, there are people out there who are jealous, suspicious, and irrational. They don’t like you spending time with your friends; they don’t like that something or someone else is making you happy. These zany folks don’t represent everyone and should be avoided anyway. Your true friends know that your household is peaceful when you alternate the Thursday night pick-up basketball games with date night every other week. They understand.

In conclusion, I’m not suggesting that a relationship should take precedence over every other consideration in your life. I do however, think it is an important consideration and that there is absolutely nothing wrong in putting it on equal bearing, and in many cases, higher bearing than other considerations. In the end, it’s YOUR life. You decide what matters to you most, and if being close to your girlfriend is more important than attending a school miles away, then act on that! It's perfectly ok.

Thoughts? Have you ever felt compelled to choose between a career or a significant other? Have your friends ever accused you of unfairly choosing the significant other over them? Do you think these old adages have more value than I’m giving them credit for? Let me know!

What is Traditional Marriage?

2012-08-03T08:17:00.000-04:00

A few months ago I was kicking it with my friend and her mom called. She grabbed the phone and started yapping, then she said, "OK go ahead and put Dad on before you hang up." I felt an unidentifiable pang in my chest and later came to realize what it was. Envy. Her parents are married, live in the same house, and she can handle her parental duties in one phone call. Sadly, most of my peers and I cannot say the same.

My friends are for the most part, well-adjusted, intelligent adults and while they come from a variety of ethnic and economic backgrounds, most come from "mixed" families. For many, their parents were married and some portion of their childhood was colored by their parents' divorce. For some, they can't even remember their parents ever being together. In 2012, this is the reality of the family unit in America. The idea of a man and woman marrying, having children and living happily ever after often seems to be more fantasy than reality.

This shifting cultural norm is what I was thinking about when a few months ago, I heard an advocate for "traditional marriage" on NPR state that President Obama was attempting to "overturn 3000 years of recorded history by supporting same-sex marriage." I thought it was quite a statement, considering that I don't even think we have the same traditions we had 40 years ago as it pertains to marriage. With all the recent controversy surrounding Chic-Fil-A's CEO Dan Cathy's vocal, moral and financial support of traditional marriage, I wonder as a Christian, what it means to support traditional marriage.

Advocates for same sex marriage call it the equal marriage debate or a human rights and civil rights issue. Opponents to marriage rights for gays consider it a "traditional marriage" debate. These word choices are not small nuances to be ignored; they define the argument and help frame people's opinion on the issue. This post is not meant to illustrate why marriage between two men or two women is right or wrong; it's simply meant to point out the problem of the blanket term "traditional marriage."

What is Tradition?

the handing down of statements, beliefs, legends, customs, information, etc., from generation to generation, especially by word of mouth or by practice; something that is handed down; a long-established or inherited way of thinking or acting; a continuing pattern of culture beliefs or practices. a customary or characteristic method or manner. - Dictionary.com

So knowing that, what is traditional marriage?

The majority of the American crowd speaking out against same sex marriage happens to also be Christian, so I presume they are referring to Christian traditions. What makes something a Christian tradition? Something found throughout the Bible? Consider this:

Polygamy was practiced by many of God's favored sons including:

Abraham - Genesis 25:1
Moses - Exodus 2:21 and Numbers 12:1
David - 2 Samuel 2:2
Solomon - 1 Kings 11: 1-3 (Over 700 wives!!)

These are not men that play minority roles in the Christian faith; Christ was a direct descendant of Abraham, David & Solomon. They are revered in Christianity, Judaism, and other religious faiths. If anyone represents Christian tradition, it is certainly these men.

Teenage girls married adult men in the Bible. It was common practice around Jesus' time and certainly before, for pre-adolescent girls around 9 to be betrothed to a man and to be married around 12 to 14 years old. The virgin Mary was thought to be around 12 to 14 years old when she married a very adult Joseph. Mary is revered by Christian women, particularly in the Catholic faith as the ultimate example of motherhood.

Some folks base their argument for traditional marriage in American history. In other words, "Marriage between one man and one woman is an American value." Considering America's youth -we're only 236 years old- I struggle to really think American traditions can trump any religious traditions, but I'll allow it for the sake of this argument. I won't outline all the varying policies, laws, and practices in America that were considered "tradition" that have since been abolished, (cough 3/5 a citizen cough) but as it relates to marriage, we'd have to include the following values as well:

Banning of Interracial Marriages. Anti-miscegenation laws or laws banning people of different races from marrying each other have been around for the majority of America's existence. They weren't struck down by the Supreme Court until 1967.

Wives as Property. American wives were considered culturally and in many ways, legally, their husband's property. When America and her values were born, wives had to cede all of their property to their husbands upon marriage. In many cases, they had to secure written permission from their husbands to handle any major financial or business transactions.

It seems that the definition of Christian or American traditional marriage is a transient one consistent with a society's current cultural traditions. There's no denying that same sex marriages would represent a shift in how marriage has been legally practiced. While homosexuality is certainly not a novel concept or new phenomenon, same sex marriage is still opposed by 44% of Americans.

And as always, I support the freedom of speech and the right to have a word or three. I believe Dan Cathy and others on both sides of this debate certainly have the right to voice their opinions and make donations as they see fit. I simply have difficulty with the idea that the appropriate phrase is traditional marriage. Tradition it seems is in the eye of the beholder.

What are your thoughts? Is heterosexual marriage appropriately called traditional marriage? Is tradition immovable or can it change over time?

The floor is yours.

P.S. There's one more group of folks I envy: Folks who can still enjoy Chic-Fil-A's yummy chicken nuggets and lemonade. It just doesn't sit right in my stomach anymore.

Stick to Your Guns or Stand by Your Friends?

2012-05-24T11:40:00.001-04:00

On Monday night, I was out with friends when my pal Outlaw told me about another person there who'd made some less than flattering comments about him. Here's the thing: Outlaw is my friend. This random guy running his mouth is not. So from there I went on to joke about the stranger, making assessments about his overall character and so forth. Then Outlaw laughed and said, "We can't really speculate on who he is based on this one comment he made about me. You're just saying all that stuff because you're my friend."

I replied, "Of course I am, duh! That's what friends do."

And I mean it. I believe that's what friends are for; to love you unconditionally and support you when you need it. When your friend gets cheated on and calls you, your job is to pick their side and provide comfort. Now, I'd be remiss not to acknowledge that pesky thing called accountability. When you're wrong, your friends should tell you and hold you accountable. But when you're in a fight --particularly physical ones--you expect your friends to jump in and sort out the details later. Right?

Well, it seems the mayor of Newark, New Jersey Cory Booker was in a bit of a quandary. In case you haven't heard of him, Mayor Booker is a progressive young mayor who enjoys immense popularity in his hometown and across the country. Many believe he has the potential to hold an even higher position; maybe even president! While he's managed to appease liberals and conservatives alike in his home city, he primarily moves rank and file with the President and has been an outspoken and helpful backer of the Obama administration. When the President voiced his support of same sex marriage, Cory Booker took his to Twitter feed (as he often does) to applaud and agree. One could say that Mayor Booker and President Obama are pretty chummy.

Until Mr. Booker was interviewed on Meet the Press last week. Mayor Booker called the Obama campaign's attacks on Mitt Romney's private equity firm, Bain Capital, "ridiculous" and "nauseating". When I saw Mayor Booker's comments flicker across my timeline, I thought that I was surely misreading it. I mean, it's one thing for lil ol me to disagree with President Obama. (I do so pretty often actually). Meet the Press hasn't returned my calls even though I graciously volunteered to be on their show, I'm not the President's pal; I'm not an elected official; I'm not a leading voice in the Democratic party; and I don't have anything close to Cory Booker's 1,150,727 followers.

However, when Mayor Booker calls out the Obama campaign's tactics, it makes us wonder...was it the right thing to do? Should he have stuck to his guns and his morals that said, "The political discourse has gone too far, we've got to get above the nasty fighting and stay above the fray?" Or should he have stood by his friend and fellow statesman who's running in a tight race against a man that Mayor Booker surely doesn't want to win the presidency?

It's a tough call, and one we often have to make in our personal lives. Do you stand by your friend even when you disagree with her cheating on her kind yet gullible boyfriend? Or do you call her on it and threaten consequences if she doesn't shape up and act right?

In this case, I too have some critical feedback for the Obama campaign's tactics. The emails I'm getting from the Democratic National Committee often sound as divisive as a Fox News personality, and there's an ad out that compares Mitt Romney to a vampire for "sucking jobs away from a steel town." That type of rhetoric is polarizing and doesn't resonate with the charismatic picture of our president that draws voters together. Obama's campaign needs to take a couple chill pills. However, I believe that the mayor could have expressed his concerns to the campaign without necessarily sharing them with the world. I can't say for sure if Mayor Booker already tried to do this and had to resort to airing his concerns on Meet the Press, but think about it this way:

Drawing on the previous example, if your friend is cheating on her boyfriend, do you tell her to get right via Twitter or over a one-on-one brunch? Obviously, the right thing to do is the personal, less public option. Mayor Booker, I agree with what you said; I just question if the setting was right.

Welp. I don't know whether Mr. Newark regrets his word choice or comments, but I bet he never expected this would happen: Mitt Romney's campaign has a new star in their most recent attack ads; he's using the words of the one and only Honorable Mayor Cory Booker to attack the President.

Who. Woulda. Thunk? I guess we should be gearing up for a nasty ugly presidential election which is exactly what Booker was trying to avoid.

What do you all think? Where do you draw the line on sticking to your gut versus loyalty to your friends? Do you think there is always a way to choose both or find common ground? Let me know your thoughts.

Happy Mother's Day 2012

2012-05-13T14:46:00.000-04:00

From age 11 to my departure for college, I lived with my younger siblings, Vanessa and John, and with my mother, Kim. My mom is many things, but cooker of large dinners, she is not. Our usual dinner routine was a phone call from Mom around 6 PM as she was on her way home from work, asking: What do you all feel like eating tonight?" One night, we'd opted for Popeye's. When she arrived home with the fragrant fried chicken, biscuits drizzled in honey, and greasy potato wedges, we were more than ready to dig in. Just as my mother was setting the table, there was a knock at the door. At the time, we lived in a community called "Little Africa" which is made up of primarily Black families, many related to each other, and many who had known each other for so many generations, we called them cousin anyway. So when my mother opened the door to reveal a middle aged man, who was more than a little dusty, I mildly recognized the face but couldn't quite place him.

She greeted him and said, "How you doing? You here to pay your water bill?" (My mother worked at the water company where she was known to extend credit so folks' water wouldn't be turned off. Some people who lived in our neighborhood preferred to stop by the house and pay her directly versus traveling to the office.)

He mumbled "Naw. Ma'am, I was wondering if you had something I could eat."

I told my sister to scoot over, anticipating that my mom was going to invite him to share our dinner. My mother did no such thing. Instead, she boxed up all the chicken, biscuits, assorted sides, grabbed some canned items, put it in a bundle and handed it over to him. She said, "Here you go, hun. This should hold you for a while." I don't know that I've ever seen such a grateful face. He accepted the food and headed on out the door.

I was livid. There were 3 hungry children in the house, and here she was just volunteering our dinner to some man that we didn't really know! How dare she?! She didn't even consult with us! Now before you start thinking I'm evil... I should share that I ran track and had the appetite of a linebacker. Furthermore, I knew my mom was struggling to make ends meet so I correctly guessed that PBandJ was in our immediate future. Also, I was a bratty, mouthy brace-faced teenager who was upset that puberty hadn't quite knocked on my door. Judge me if you must. I lashed out and said, "How could you just give away our dinner?! Now what are WE gonna eat? You're just going to let us starve?!?" (Did I mention that I was dramatic?)

The look of compassion left my mother's face just that quickly and she sharply said, "Crystal Marie have I ever let any of you all go hungry? Don't you dare say that again." And that was that.

At the time I didn't recognize it, but my mother was teaching us a lesson in compassion. Yes, you should work hard to get what you need and want from life, but extending a helping hand is what we as humans are called to do. Many people talk about how great their mothers are to them, and I can certainly attest to that. But my mother is kind to complete strangers, a character trait that I don't see too often.

My mother's church attendance is sporadic; but I've never met someone more Christ-like than her.
My mother never graduated from college, but she's more intelligent and keen than most. (Every piece of advice or admonition she's given me has always proven true. Every. Single. Time. It's scary, really)

But most importantly, my mother is a living example of who I want to be. I find myself doing little things that she always does, many of them the very habits that annoyed me most as a kid. As I get older, I'm increasingly more attentive to her perspective on my major decisions. When I get good news, she is the first one I want to share it with. When I get upsetting news, she's the first person I call for solace.

Thank you Mom for being a friend; for checking me when I'm wrong; for reminding me of my value when I feel worthless; and for being a role model that I can call at any hour of the day for a free master class.

I love you. Happy Mother's Day 2012.

Love,

Your CrysCross

P.S. She's also super bad.

You Give Jesus A Bad Name (More than just a Bon Jovi Parody)

2012-05-10T08:00:00.000-04:00

North Carolina is pretty awesome, specifically Charlotte. It’s pretty. They have several Cook-Out locations. Gas is only priced at half past ridiculous. My mom lives there, and my niece is only an hour or so away. But it seems like someone sneaked a couple bigotry roofies in everyone's sweet tea.

North Carolina is often viewed as a “purple state” because it is home to a fair share of both Democrats and Republicans. In 2008, North Carolinians voted for President Barack Obama and went Blue for the first time since Jimmy Carter’s administration. But yesterday, the country was reminded of just how red North Carolina can be.

North Carolina residents were offered a referendum on same sex marriage, and on May 8, 2012, they voted to add “Amendment 1” to their constitution. To give you some background, North Carolina state law already defines marriages as “between a man and a woman.” But Amendment 1 goes a step further and states:

"Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.”

This means that civil unions are not recognized; it also means that “common law” and other heterosexual domestic partnerships are not “recognized or valid.” For gay rights advocates, this was a presumably expected yet still disappointing blow. As interesting as this news was, the general public had no idea that we were in for a historic surprise the following day.

On Wednesday, May 9, 2012, in an ABC News interview, President Barack Obama, following Vice President Biden’s lead a few days prior, stated matter of factly, that he supported same sex marriages. In an email to his supporters, he affirmed his thoughts with the following:

“I believe that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry… What I've come to realize is that for loving, same-sex couples, the denial of marriage equality means that, in their eyes and the eyes of their children, they are still considered less than full citizens.”

*in my Presidential voice* Let me be clear:

I’m a Christian. I’m a liberal. I believe in the separation of church and state. I don’t think using “the good book” as a reference point for any type of legislation is a good idea.

However, I recognize that marriage is indeed a religious institution that should be honored and respected (marriage by the way is present in more than just the Christian faith). So I believe that the best solution is that we begin the tedious but fair process of removing the divisive, controversial term “marriage” from the law books.

All couples, heterosexual or homosexual, who would like their union to be recognized, should be entitled to a strong, legal civil union. Rights currently extended to domestic partnerships and married couples should be extended to all committed couples who enter into a civil union. For those couples who would like to be “married” in the traditional sense, they can be... in a traditional ceremony by their house of worship. In this manner, “marriage” is given its rightful place… outside of government and in the places where people believe it is defined, but we also maintain that all couples have equal rights.

But this will never happen, because people are selfish. I expect hate from groups who have never been discriminated against. Sometimes, if you don’t get it… you don’t get it. But, I’m most disturbed by marginalized groups who have spoken out against gay rights. Do you not realize how hypocritical that is?! I’m sad to report that Black Americans, particularly self-righteous ones, are egregious offenders in this regard. Blacks will pick up a hoodie and march but when someone else needs something, many are often nowhere to be found.

Do people not realize that prejudice is prejudice? Do they not recognize that when we fail to speak up on behalf of undocumented citizens, gays, and other persecuted groups that our silence is just as damning as the persecution itself? And when your cause is on the chopping block, wouldn't it be nice to have some supporters outside of the ones who have a clear personal vested interest?

Is the Bible really a fair go-to source for denying gays the right to be married?? You're basically saying “I don’t support your lifestyle because MY religion doesn’t agree.” Think about that. How would we feel if Muslims invoked their holy book in suggestions for a law? Not so great, I imagine. How dare you invoke the name of Christ to satisfy your self-serving, prejudiced ideas on how other people should live their lives!

Furthermore, what’s the gain?!? What do we get out of telling people what to do in their households? What do we get out of telling gay couples that they can’t welcome a child who needs a home into their loving home? What do we get out of telling gay people that they can’t visit each other in hospitals because “Jesus [allegedly] said so.” Does your heterosexual marriage suffer because gays can be married? Who really wins here?? Consider this; Georgia bans same-sex marriages. And yet, let's just be real; Atlanta is a clear example that anti-gay legislation does nothing to affect the incidence of homosexuality.

While you think on that, why don’t you chew on this nugget my pal shared with me. Was Gandhi talking about you when he said,

“I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ.”

When considering issues that affect someone who doesn’t look like you, love the way you do, or worship the way you worship (or at all), here’s a philosophy that may help:
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” (Must have read this in a fortune cookie or something)

That's my word or three. What's yours?

P.S. Sometimes I write in other places. Check me out!

“Think Like A Man: Think Like Someone Who Enjoys Romantic Comedies”

“Does Jesus Care More About American Lives than Afghan ones?”

Also, my pal Panama wrote about Obama’s stance on Same-Sex Marriage over at VerySmartBrothas.com. Read it here.

The WingWoman is Really Not Your Friend

2012-04-25T10:01:00.001-04:00

I write this post, regrettably out of personal experience. The silver lining is that because I’ve been there, I can easily recognize this syndrome and help fight it. (Note: I was this person a LONG time ago, so for those of you that know me and my friends, there’s no need to speculate about those friendships. Lol)

Have you ever heard the phrase “waiting in the wings?” As an idiom it refers to any person who is waiting, often in anxious anticipation, for their turn at some task or opportunity.

The heart of this post, however, focuses on:

women who are waiting on a man who is currently in a relationship to become single so that they can be the next girlfriend or spouse.

I call them WingWomen. (I realize that men do this too, but I can only write one blog post at a time. I also realize that the original definition of wingwomen/wingmen are people who accompany you on your romantic pursuits so that your friends can meet my friends and yada yada yada... let me live, k?)

Most WingWomen (WWs) don't intend to become WWs; it happens over time. A single woman meets a guy, learns that he has a significant other and (hopefully) places him in the friends-only/hands-off category. She may have met him at work, through a mutual friend, church, or some other innocuous way. As time passes and the woman and man spend significant time working on a project together, shooting the breeze at happy hours, in Bible Study or whatever it is, the two really get to know each other and become more than just associates, they become friends. People that don’t know them may see them out together and speculate that something’s going on, but there really isn’t.

As the woman gets to know the man and realizes that they share similar interests, have complementary humor and vote the same way, she starts thinking, “Man… too bad he’s not single. We’d be perfect together.” (I haven’t decided yet if men are oblivious to when women start thinking this way or not, but I’d like to believe that in their minds, it is a completely platonic relationship.)

This natural attraction is all fine and dandy until women start doing what we’re always doing (subconsciously or consciously); we start planning.

The WingWoman starts thinking, “He really enjoys spending time with me; sooner or later, he’ll realize that I’m the one he should be with!” The woman may even meet the guy’s spouse under the guise of wanting to get to know the woman that makes him happy, but in reality, she’s sizing her up. She’s wondering what she has that the girlfriend or wife doesn’t have and how can she subliminally hint that to him. So she’ll say, “It’s so cute that you’re supportive of your wife even after all the weight she gained. It’s crazy how that works huh? I couldn’t gain weight if I tried.”

The whole time, the guy is thinking, “Wow, she’s such a great friend! She’s randomly dropping off homemade macaroni and cheese, volunteering to pick me up from the airport at 4 AM, and so supportive of my plans to quit my job and pursue a professional foosball career!”

Wrong. Is someone really your friend if their motivation is to eventually get you to be more than friends? I know how this story ends. Believe me.

Ending 1:

The WingWoman continues to be a “great friend” until she hits her breaking point. Maybe the guy gets engaged to his girlfriend or he asks her to help him plan the surprise birthday party for his wife. She snaps. And she gets mad at him for “leading her on.” Everything he does pisses her off and she tells him he’s a bad person/a horrible friend/whatever.

The guy is usually either completely confused or sheepishly wondering why it took so long for her to realize what her role in his life was. This typically doesn’t end amicably for anyone and the friendship is ruined.

Ending 2:

The WingWoman realizes what she’s doing and that her cause is hopeless, and falls back. She continues to be his friend but minimizes her role, which is probably best anyway. Let the girlfriend/wife do all the heavy lifting.

Ending 3:

The guy and his girl have just had an argument/fight and guy calls the WingWoman to vent. The WingWoman suggests they go out for drinks so he can calm down and take the edge off. The WingWoman takes advantage of guy’s drunkenness, makes a move and either the guy gives in to it and immediately regrets it or he’s like “Whoa! What are you doing!?!? You’re like my sister! Eew!" Again, either way it doesn’t end amicably and the friendship is ruined.

So what’s the take away from all this? Well it depends on who you are:

You Might be a WW IF...

1. …one of your close male friends were to take a serious step with his significant other, you’d be upset or angry or hurt.

2. … you think that your close male friend is “too good” for his girlfriend.

3. … you find yourself comparing guys who are actually interested in dating you and SINGLE to your male friend who is not.

What can you do about it? Some people are able to transition their crush to friend category relatively seamlessly. Some people cannot. If you can’t, then tell your friend that you simply are unable to be a friend to them at the time, and move on until you’re ready.

Men, You Might Have a WingWoman If:

1. Your female friend is consistently offering to do really nice things for you and only you. She’s not even the Mother Theresa type; she’s just really nice to YOU.

2. Your female friend doesn’t seem too concerned with your relationship or speaks about it as if it’s just the current trend. “How’s, um... what’s her name Cyndi? Cynthia? I can never remember.”

3. Your female friend believes you are her go-to person for all emergencies no matter what time of day it is. If it’s 2 AM and she catches a flat, she thinks it’s your job to go get her, not one of her girlfriends or other single male friends.

What can men do about it? I don't really know to be honest. All I can really suggest is that you repeatedly but kindly make it clear how serious your relationship is, establish boundaries, and don't rely on the WW as the person to vent to about your girlfriend or wife. You're only fueling the fire.

Moral of the story: Be a friend. Don’t be a WW. And don’t allow your friends to be WWs. No one wins.

The floor is yours.

"I Love Black Men" - Signed a Black Man

2012-04-09T09:32:00.005-04:00

From the title, you'd think this was yet another ode to Black men from the ever-loyal Black woman, right? Not this time! This post comes from a guest, Mr. Garrett James. The post will make you laugh and hopefully... it will make you think.

Here's a word or three from Garrett. Enjoy.

I am a black man and … I love black men.

Calm down. Relax your forehead for me. It’s nothing to do with physical attraction. . And before I get too far into it… I probably should state that again and be slightly clearer… partly for you and mostly for me.

So… (deep breath..) I love black men… Yes, I love strong, positive, passionate, family loving, friend loving, responsible, God-fearing black men!

I love them so much probably because that’s what I want to be and unfortunately, I’m not sure if that’s always who I see in the mirror. And even worse, I’m not certain of where I can obtain a scale by which to measure. I’m a full man now right? Full meaning I’ve been around for three decades, owned a home and a car, almost made babies, had a job for years, survived the quarter life crisis… and still… sometimes I ask myself “Are you a man yet?” I mean, I know I’m male. But am I a man? Do I have the manhood that I should? Honestly, I don’t know at times. And if I DID have a scale, would I even know how to measure it? I know it’s character based, but does one measure character?

So as I’m sitting in my seat drinking a cup of weak brown coffee during a men’s Bible study on a dreary Saturday morning in March, I thought to myself as I watched the men in the room, “Self, I wish I had a dad.”

And by dad I mean ‘daddy.’ Iyanla Vanzant (See one night I was turning the channel and my remote’s batteries died when it stopped on the OWN channel) says your daddy isn’t always your biological father. Your daddy is that male who told you that you were a man; the one that crowned you. The one that showed you what manhood really was, whether directly or indirectly. And so I got sad again (I say again cuz I think about this often) sitting there sippin’ my coffee, because I don’t know who that was for me. Life is my daddy, I guess.

But I want one because I want to BE a father one day. I have mentees and the cycle of bridge building has already begun. But how can we really teach something we’ve never been shown or never lived? I’m sure it’s possible, but the time it takes just scares me. I don’t want to play guess and check with my family. Further, who will teach me how to be a husband and how to lead a family? It’s discouraging not being able to look to my immediate environment. My parents and those close to me don’t have marriages that I want to pattern mine after. Did yours?

Where will I SEE that part of manhood that says you take care of family before all else? Of course I know the concept, but I want to SEE it in action. I want to see how grown men conduct themselves when faced with decisions. How arguments are settled and relationships are kept intact. How grown men show emotions and who they let see them cry. Or as Kanye asked, “How [they] stay faithful in a room full of hoes?”

I was raised to be tough and to show no weakness; to be uncomfortable with close relationships with new men (for fear of the labels). I was raised to associate masculinity and power with lots of money, influence and of course, women. Yes, I was raised to shy away from statements like ‘I love black men.’ Bigger than me, it seems that many of my male friends have learned manhood by trial and error. And take it from me, trial and error concerning relations has cost me relations… and too many people end up hurt, bitter, and writing blogs. #sigh

Funny enough, at that men’s bible study, the leader told everyone to get a prayer partner and if you didn’t have one (in the room) to raise your hand. My hand stayed down even though I didn’t have one. I don’t know those guys; maybe next time.

So yea, I love black men because I love myself. And I love those traits that positive black men have – I just don’t know if I have them. So what’s a grown BLACK man to do?

Fellas, how did you learn the lessons of manhood? If you had to teach yourself, how was the process? Ladies, does the absence of confidence in manhood scare you at all?

Note: If you'd like to hear more from Garrett James, follow him @CMediaUSA or Email Garrett.

Men or Women: Who Decides to Define the Relationship?

2012-02-29T22:31:00.004-05:00

Several months ago I was talking to my dad about a guy I’d gone on a few dates with. A few days later, our follow-up conversation went a little something like this:

Dad: So how’s your boyfriend?

Me: What boyfriend?

Dad: The guy you were talking about the other night.

Me: Oh, um. He’s not my boyfriend. We’re just hanging out, getting to know each other. I’ve only known him for like a month.

Dad: A month?? And you two haven’t at least discussed dating each other exclusively? Are you dating other people? Is he dating other people? What’s wrong with your generation?

I teased him about his old age and told him my generation has options; we weigh them and we get married later in life. He replied that after his second date, he initiated the infamous “Defining the Relationship” conversation with the woman who is now his wife and that was that. I said two dates was way too early. “Dad he could be a serial killer!!” He said that a few months was way too late. “Being in limbo is never good! Make a commitment and work through it!”

I’m inclined to believe that we’re both right in some ways. There isn't a hard and fast rule because everyone’s situations are different; some people need time to develop trust and others feel in their gut within days or weeks when they’ve met The One. (This could also be indigestion, but I digress…) The timing has to fit the (prospective) couple's goals and pace, and that's too subjective to define.

I’m still left with one very important question on defining the relationship though:

Speaking to heterosexual relationships, whose responsibility is it to initiate this conversation? The man or the woman? Or is it up to the person who thinks of it first?

Proverbs 18:22 says “whoever finds a wife finds a good thing”, which to me implies that it’s a man job to do the proposing, but that doesn’t necessarily provide clarity on what to do about a commitment prior to marriage.

So I did what I always do when my curiosity gets to me; I asked my favorite focus group, Twitter and the results weren't at all what I expected. The overwhelming majority responded by saying some form of the following:

@symfonikz: whoever thinks to… learn to be proactive

@ESSENCEinme: the person who wants a relationship title should be the initiator to avoid hurt feelings and wasted time

@Kenya_Inc: the person who has any confusion about their status in the first place. If you have to ask questions, ASK!!

@msrasberryinc: I’d say whoever thinks to talk about it. Shouldn’t depend on gender.

@GNAHHANG: I say whoever feels the need to discuss the status of the relationship should initiate the discussion.

Well, that caught me off guard! In my own relationships, I just waited for the conversation to happen or dropped hints to head it off if I wasn’t interested. My mom taught me the following:

1. When a man is interested in dating you, he’ll let you know.

2. When he wants you to be his girl, he’ll tell you.

3. When he wants you to be his wife, he’ll ask.

On the one hand, it sounds archaic, but on the other it seems practical. I mean what woman really wants to be in a relationship with a man that you strong-armed into one? Women are pretty good at saying, “No thanks, let’s just be friends. You can still change my oil/give me back rubs/escort me to events so I don’t have to go alone but I don’t want you to actually be my boyfriend. Cool?” Guys… not so much. Sometimes, they’ll go along just to get along and say "alright let's do this" just to keep things smooth and then later admit “I wasn’t really sure about this anyway but you pressured me so I just went with it.”

So where do I stand now?

I believe every individual brings into each (potential) relationship 3 things:

a. their personality, (gregarious or quiet, brave or hesitant)

b. their assumed “role”, which is often influenced by traditional gender roles, and

c. their own timeline for long-term plans.

As you get to know someone, you organically share these things over Chinese takeout and episodes of The Office. But there are some things you should make a point to be clear on. If you know that you don’t want to have kids at all, it’s pretty important to get that out there. And at two months in, if you’ve learned that she is the outspoken one who is comfortable having those potentially awkward conversations, it probably makes sense for her to start that conversation. “So babe, where is this going? Are you and I a ‘we’? Wait… can I even call you babe?” But if she’s like me, a little more traditional and unsure in these types of situations, he should put on his big boy pants and kick it off.

My thinking represents the ideal; the Twitter focus group responded with a more realistic point of view. I do believe there is a legitimate concern about wasted time and misconceptions. In some cases, you may have to step out of our comfort zone and bite the bullet to avoid a big confusing mess where the guy thinks the couple is headed down the aisle and the woman is just trying to have fun.

So here’s my question for you: In your current and past relationships, who popped the exclusivity question? How exactly does that conversation go? Should it be casual or serious? Over dinner? Over the phone? Via text or email? I wanna know!

Wisdom from Whitney

2012-02-13T09:40:00.006-05:00

A friend of mine and I secretly joke about people’s dramatic, gushing proclamations after a celebrity death. We often wondered how can someone honestly be “devastated” by the passing of an individual whose music/voice/personality we’ve only digested through a middle man such as the radio, a Letterman interview, or a blockbuster film?

I wondered this until Saturday, February 12, 2012. I was in Baltimore doing community service when MSNBC released a breaking news text that Whitney Houston had passed in her hotel room. My immediate reaction was disbelief. And then the calls came in from my family and friends, checking to see if I knew yet and asking if I was ok. Every call seemed like a damning confirmation and I thought, “Maybe if people stop saying it, it won’t have really happened.” So I got into my car for the long drive home, too numb to really display any emotion. I started the engine and before I could stop it, I heard the pure, clear voice often called “America’s Voice” lean into the gospel classic, I Love the Lord.

Then it hit me.

This was the voice of a woman who was no longer with us.

I could tell you how the tollbooth guy seemed genuinely concerned by my tear-streaked face during our transaction, but I’d rather share something more valuable. Whitney's life and music taught me a few things:

1. Sexy doesn’t have to mean blond and blue eyed or skimpy and short. Whitney burst on the scene in the 80’s with big hair, leg warmers and off the shoulder tanks. With her mother Cissy Houston’s guidance and her cousin Dionne Warwick’s backing, Whitney Houston became the face of the All-American Girl, and she didn’t even have to writhe around the stage or downplay her “Blackness.” The world hasn’t been the same since and it isn’t a good karaoke night until someone sings “I Wanna Dance with Somebody.”

2. Love is a contact sport. As the child of a minister, there were few secular artists whose music made it into our house, but there was no avoiding the big, powerful and family friendly sound of Whitney Houston. Furthermore, my military elementary school in Texas followed the National Anthem with “One Moment In Time” as a form of inspiration, every single morning. Before I got to find out for myself, I learned that sometimes love hurts so bad, love is timeless (I Will Always Love You), and that anxious, nervous, feeling I got whenever I saw that boy from my class was normal (How Will I Know). She even taught us a little self help with The Greatest Love of All.

3. Women can do it all. These days, filmmakers anxious to sell tickets give acting gigs to anyone with a recognizable face, making the “singer slash actress” role almost assumed. Whitney though she did it right. Whitney not only headlined the soundtracks for The Bodyguard, Waiting to Exhale, and The Preacher’s Wife... but she acted in them. Let me say that again, she ACTED in them. Whitney was more than a pretty face who could sing; she was a mother, a wife, a philanthropist, an actress, and a producer. She truly epitomized “I’m Every Woman” and taught me from an early age that I could be too.

4. Everyone makes mistakes. For four years straight, I was Whitney Houston for Halloween and not just because it was a relatively cheap costume, but because she was gorgeous, well-spoken, had an amazing talent and seemed like such fun to be around. She wasn’t human to me; she was larger than life. But while Whitney’s voice inspired and brought joy to millions, her life was often spotted with rough times. Unlike you and me, Whitney didn’t have the luxury of enduring these trials with a finite spotlight cast by her family and friends; Whitney went through it all publicly. While her pain may have been exponentially increased by this glaring spotlight, it served to remind me and much of America that everyone has problems and everyone stumbles. The woman that I most wanted to be like growing up has died at 48 leaving her 19 year old daughter motherless. I won’t speculate about the cause of her death, because big picture wise, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that we recognize the very human quality of the entertainers that enrich our lives.

Whitney’s voice made her unique. But Whitney’s troubles made her one of us. And for that, I am grateful.

I haven’t stopped missing Whitney since I got the news. But while I’m sorry she’s left us, I’m thankful that her music itself provides the salve to the wound in our hearts.

Rest in Peace, Whitney.

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, 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.