Showing posts with label women demand accountability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women demand accountability. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Recent Indigenous Women's Activism: Debra White Plume (Lakota), Louise Benally (Navajo), Ofelia Rivas (O'odham), and the women of Winyan Ituwan

Water and land are radical and profeminist issues. For current news in this regard, please see what follows. And please note in these stories how the US government deliberately and destructively pits oppressed groups against one another for its own greedy genocidal, ecocidal gain.

The following four news stories are brought to my attention thanks to Brenda Norrell at Censored News.You may click on the respective titles to link back to the original site where I found them. And please do, and check out many other Censored News stories.

Debra White Plume: A Thread in the Beautiful Fabric of Resistance


.
Photos by Vi Waln
A Thread in the Beautiful Fabric of Resistance
by Debra White Plume
Censored News
http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com/

Water is finite, and sacred. “Mni wicozani”, through water there is life. We must drink clean, nourishing water to live. Just as Mother Earth is made up of a lot of water, our human bodies are 70% water. That is why at Full Moon, and the tides change, some human beings have strong, unpredictable behavior. To our Lakota people, mni (water) is our first medicine, our first home. There are entire spiritual and social teachings that we learn as we grow up, our Lakota World View about water. Mni is our relative, and Lakota Law compels us to protect our relatives. Mother Earth is our relative.

This belief led our organization Owe Aku (Bring Back the Way), which is involved with cultural preservation and revitalization, Treaty Rights and Human Rights, to begin looking at disproportionate cancer and diabetes rates on the Pine Ridge Homeland. This research took us places we never thought we would be! We examined air and water quality studies, which led us to the Cameco, Inc. in situ leach uranium mine 30 minutes from our southern border. We learned that ISL uranium mining contaminates an incredible amount of water, on a daily basis. Cameco was up for license renewal and had submitted another application to open a second mine. We researched that process, and found we could submit interventions, based on science and law. We did that, and are now plaintiffs in the case against Cameco’s ‘right’ to poison our water. That was 7 years ago. This work continues.

Water protection work requires constant research, in doing so I learned about the tarsands oil mine in First Nations Territory in the Athabascan River Basin where Ft McMurry is, in Canada. Learning about that mine and its’ impacts to Mother Earth was mind jolting, so I began to speak out more about this horrendous desecration of Mother Earth and our First Nations relatives. The tarsands oil mine is decades old, and has become the dirtiest mining operation in the world. The corporations snuck in decades ago, fooling elected leaders into signing contracts of extraction, contracts that are resulting in increased forms of rare cancer, people are dying, so are fish, moose and other animals that the people depend on for food. It has become a food issue. Will it become a famine issue? The pristine Boreal Forest is being clearcut, the Amazon of the North is being destroyed, millions of birds and other animals have died, species have become extinct. The mine uses 3 to 4 barrels of pristine drinking water to create 1 barrel of oil, each day. It creates so much green house gases, the output can hardly be measured.

Studying the tarsands oil mine led to the discovery of TransCanada corporation’s intent to build and operate the Keystone XL oil pipeline from the tarsands oil mine into Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas where it would be refined and shipped out to who-knows-where. We learned the KXL oil pipeline was three feet in diameter, thin, and would high pressure slurry the heavy crude oil that had to be heated to 150 degrees F to liquefy it enough to push through that pipeline. There is a union worker who turned whistle blower when he was fired for declaring the pipe defective, which corporate workers would re-tag as approved. He gave up a lifelong career. I met him in DC.

The pipeline would cross our Rural Water pipeline, which transports drinking water from the Missouri River, 200 miles away, to our communities on the Pine Ridge. The KXL pipeline would cross 200 lakes and streams and rivers. It would be buried in the Ogllala Aquifer, which irrigates 30% of the food grown in the USA, and which provides drinking water for 2 million people, and for cattle, horses, buffalo and other four legged. Trans-Canada would use a lot of drinking water to mix with that heavy crude. Sacred and social teachings about water propelled me into devoting more and more time into fighting the life and death situation that this oil pipeline had become. I knew the threats to our ground and surface from uranium mining, and learning about this oil pipeline taught me that it threatens our very lives, for where would we get enough drinking water for the 50,000 Oglala Lakota people on the Pine Ridge when the pipeline spilled or leaked? Who would care enough to do something about it? The technology does not exist to clean up this kind of heavy crude. No pipe has been created that does not leak or spill.

Friends from the Indigenous Environmental Network contacted me, and we began a dialogue about water protection, contamination, a number of other topics. Tribes along the pipeline route took action to oppose the pipeline. Every Native Nation organization in the USA raised their voice to say No. I decided to go to Washington, DC to participate in a Senate Briefing Hearing, and meet with the State Department officials about Ft Laramie Treaty violations and violations of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted by the United Nations in 2007. I traveled with others to Pierre, SD to testify at a State Dept hearing, but was not able to, as I was number 152. I saw drunken union workers testify about how they needed a job welding. They mostly came from out of state.

Then my family and I decided I would go to Washington DC. I participated in a civil disobedience direct action, trespassed at the White House and got arrested, along with 1200 other people who wanted to help get this issue into the minds of mainstream America and the attention of President Obama. There were a dozen of us Native Nations people who were arrested. The Lakota people on Pine Ridge hosted Tom Weis, who rode a solar powered bike from Montana to Texas to raise awareness along the KXL oil pipeline route. We hosted a Rally for Mother Earth in Pine Ridge, and a march. We hosted a Ride for Solidarity with ranchers, farmers, Lakota people, and an American movie star, Darryl Hannah. We had radio shows, wrote articles, attended events. Next thing I knew, I was on the Tour of Resistance, I flew 10,000 miles in 5 weeks. Halfway through, I lost my hairbrush, my comb, and only had one sock. Good thing it was almost over by then! On January 15, a group of us Lakota people hosted Winyan Ituwan, a women’s gathering with the focus on Mother Earth and Sacred Water, with guest speakers including Kandi Mosset of IEN and Tantoo Cardinal, a Cree movie star from Canada. All to raise awareness and resistance to uranium mining and the KXL oil pipeline and the tarsands oil mine, and protection for our sacred water.

Nebraska started out to protect the Ogllala Aquifer, but became involved in negotiations to allow the pipeline in along an undetermined route. South Dakota GAVE KXL $30 million in tax breaks to come here, Montana made concessions as well. However, individuals and groups got involved, big time. Environmental groups, many other civic groups, thousands of people on both sides of the Canadian/USA border spoke with the same voice, STOP THE PIPELINE. Nobel Laureates, Native Nation and First Nation Chiefs and Presidents, scientists, retired military, Olympic Medalists, Senators, Congressmen, actors, writers, students, people from all walks of life raised their voices and risked their freedom to stop the pipeline. Rarely did USA’s mainstream media cover any of this, but in the little towns and small cities, local newspapers and radio shows did. Word got out, numbers of resisters grew. The last time I went to DC, I spoke at a rally of 15,000 people, we circled the White House 4 times. People came from all over, to speak with one voice. We made friends and allies.

Nebraska politicians had a special hearing to allow KXL to come in, but the White House heard the message to protect the Ogllala Aquifer. Then TransCanada pushed the USA to make a decision, and elected politicians lifted their voices to support the KXL, attached a new bill as a rider to a jobs bill, gave the White House 60 days to let KXL in or to reject the pipeline as against the national interest.

On January 18, 2012, the State Dept and President Obama rejected the pipeline, as 60 days was inadequate to conduct environmental impact studies. However, TransCanada can still apply for a new permit.

Each of us who worked on this life and death situation, we are a thread in this fabric of resistance. Folks wrote letters, gave speeches, cooked food, wrote emails, tweeted, did FaceBook postings, made banners, pitched in gas money, made tshirts, made phone calls, did research, made copies, stood in line to testify, got arrested, lobbied Senators and Congressmen, babysat, loaned out their cars, offered a couch or a spare room, musicians/artists doing pro bono benefits, shared frequent flyer miles, took pictures, raised money, it was truly a collective action to protect our water and Mother Earth.

There is no one person, nor one organization, that stopped the pipeline, this victory that may be temporary, this partial victory, as the tarsands oil mine is still operating. It was the love of the many, for Mother Earth and coming generations, the many prayers and sacrifices that gave this movement its power. I believe love is stronger than greed. I believe that people working together can be just as effective as the world’s richest corporations. I believe Mother Earth wants to live, and we cannot live without Her. I believe our Lakota prophecy, “Someday the Earth will weep, She will cry with tears of blood. You must make a choice. You help Her, or She will die. When She dies, you too will die.”

All over the world, events are unfolding, 200 tornadoes in two days last summer? Earthquakes and shakes where there have been none for hundreds of years? Floods? Droughts? All common weather events, but uncommon in the repeated occurrences or place of occurrence. Every summer has been hotter than the last since 1996. Mother Earth is telling us something, She is crying, and She is rising. Crying Earth Rise Up! Whatever befalls Mother Earth, befalls the people of Mother Earth. Such a struggle is made up of many, many threads, together we form a beautiful fabric of resistance, and protection for our Mother, Mother Earth.

The last time we left DC, my friend and I saw a huge red tailed hawk, he swooped over us, and over the White House, and he flew to the west. The day of Winyan Ituwan Winter Gathering, we saw a bald eagle circle over us, and he flew off to the West. Sacred messages ... if we listen, we can hear, if we hear, we can understand. When we understand, we give thanks. Lila wopila iciciyapi. Hecetuye.

*          *          *

Navajo Louise Benally: Arizona racism and coal fired power plants

Louise Benally during Salt River Project protest,
speaking out against the coal fired Navajo
Generating Station. Photo: Resist ALEC
By Brenda Norrell
Censored News

On First Voices Indigenous Radio today, WBAI New York, Louise Benally, resisting relocation at Big Mountain on the Navajo Nation, described the detriment of coal fired power plants and racism in Arizona.

Louise said regardless of the struggles, Navajos living on the land still live in harmony with the land. Louise described the natural herbs and healing ceremonies that come from the wild, now being contaminated by pollution. "It is doing a lot of destruction." She spoke on the chemical trails settling in the water and environment.

"Those are real problems we are faced with now, because a lot of the vegetation is being wiped out." She said Peabody coal mine releases pollution to the regional watershed on Black Mesa. "It is just devastating," she said, to live in this situation.

Louise Benally confronts Salt River Project staff.
Photo Resist ALEC.
She also described the three coal fired power plants on the Navajo Nation. There are the two in the Four Corners area near Farmington NM which leave a grey haze over the skies. Then there is the Navajo Generating Station near Page, Ariz., producing more contamination. These coal fired power plants carry electricity to cities like Phoenix and Tucson while Navajos suffer with disease and pollution.

"We can't just continue to produce, produce and produce pollution," said Louise, adding that these coal fired power plants are making the ice melt in the Arctic.

Louise described the changes to the climate and how development is creating this. If the land is not healthy, then life is not healthy either, Louise said, describing the Navajos respiratory problems and cancer.

Describing how Arizona just banned ethnic studies, she said, "It is just really sad."

Radio show host Tiokasin Ghosthorse described how the scheme was to make it look like the so called land dispute was between Hopi and Navajo. This scheme kept people from getting involved because they were led to believe it was an internal dispute between the two nations, rather than what it was: A carefully designed scheme to remove thousands of Navajos from Black Mesa to make way for Peabody coal mining, which continues today.

Louise said, "They were pitting tribe against tribe to get at the resources," explaining how they did this to get at the coal and resources.

Louise said the Navajo tribe is not realizing the depletion of the resources, and what Peabody is doing. However, she said the Hopi tribe is beginning to realize the detriment to the natural resources.

She said Native people need to revitalize the old ways and sustainable food. "We can still use the earth as our healing substance."

Tiokasin closed by pointing out that in the city, people don't take responsibility for taking care of the land and say it is the US government's responsibility to deal with it.

Listen to archive later today, Thursday at:
http://www.firstvoicesindigenousradio.org/program_archives

*          *          *
 

O'odham Ofelia Rivas: URGENT Halt Gold Mining in Sacred Quitovac


URGENT: PROTECT SACRED QUITOVAC FROM GOLD MINING
O'ODHAM LANDS -- (Jan. 30, 2012) Ofelia Rivas, O'odham, speaks on the urgent need to protect Quitovac from gold mining. Quitovac is the sacred ceremonial community of O'odham south of the border in Sonora, Mexico.
Funds are needed now for travel in Sonora, and meetings with Sonoran officials, to halt this gold mining by Silver Scott Mines, Inc. Video by Censored News.

READ MORE on genocidal gold mining planned for Quitovac:
http://bsnorrell.blogspot.com/2011/12/traditional-oodham-halt-mining-genocide.html
Donate to O'odham Solidarity Project:
http://www.solidarity-project.org/

Direct cash donations are also essential! Please remember that every little bit helps! Donate to the O'odham Voice Against the Wall
Mail well concealed cash or money order to:
Ofelia Rivas
PO. Box 1835
Sells, Arizona 85634

Ofelia Rivas e-mail: oodhamrights@gmail.com


*          *           *

Vi Waln: Winyan Ituwan Women of Vision


Winyan Ituwan holds first of four gatherings

Photos and article by Vi Waln
Lakota Country Times Editor










.
Photos by Vi Waln: Top - Phyllis Young and Madonna Thunder Hawk; 2nd - Olowan Sara Martinez and Pte San Win; 3rd - Kandi Mossett, Marie Randall, Tantoo Cardinal and Tiana Spotted Thunder; 4th Members of the Cante Ohitika (Brave Heart Society) also attended the gathering in Porcupine, SD. Faith Spotted Eagle spoke about building young women through traditional ceremony. Pictured behind her are society members (L-R) Frances Bullshoe, Brittany Poor Bear, Alex Romero Frederick, Jennifer Takes War Bonnet, Jennifer Drapeaux and Theresa Hart. 5th: More than 200 men, women and children attended. 6th: Regina Brave. Arlette Loud Hawk spoke about being a female Tokala whip bearer. Thank you Vi for the photos!

PAHIN SINTE OWAYAWA – “This is a collective effort to bring women together to share experience, wisdom and vision; our Earth Mother needs us to stand up for her to be a voice for these young girls to walk in our path,” stated Pte San Win, one of the organizers of the initial Winyan Ituwan gathering. “We hope to inspire and encourage you to go home with lots of information for your family.”

Topics discussed at the gathering revolved around the desecration of Mother Earth and water, as well as mining issues facing the people living on the Great Plains of the United States. In addition, the traditional roles and responsibilities of Native women were presented. Over 200 people attended.

Lorraine White Face prayed with her macaw feather fan and blessed everyone with sage smoke. Opening prayer was offered by Esther White Face. Singing a beautiful opening song were duet Tianna Spotted Thunder and Autumn Two Bulls.

“Each and every one of us is special. Faith, hope and love will make a better generation for all of us,” stated Marie Randall. “As women we all carry the water of life and we must care for ourselves because of the children. We must have the courage to change because the gifts that were given to us by Tunkasila are suffering. I encourage all of you to teach the children to love and respect one another. I am not afraid to be Lakota.”

“Water is the first medicine,” stated Cordelia White Elk.

“Tunkasila gave us the guidance to do this,” Debra White Plume stated. “We want to share the love we have for Unci Maka, we are trying to live in a good way.

The power comes from love, the work we do comes from our love of Lakota ways. Pine Ridge has been fighting uranium mining being done south of us. We have challenged their right to mine uranium because we have scientific evidence that the mine site near Crawford, NE is linked to our drinking water. We have been fighting North Trend for 7 years now. We use water in every single ceremony. This is the same water that was here when the dinosaurs were here; it is our duty and privilege to fight for drinking water. These are issues that are genocidal to our people. If water is contaminated where are we going to get water for 50,000 Oglala? What about water for our horses and other animals?”

“We never started out to fight the biggest uranium mine under Cameco; we started out trying to find out why things were happening to our people. It doesn’t matter who tests the water, the results are always the same. We have to fight for the water to keep it clean and keep it good. We have to speak up, we have to take action. They may have a lot of money but we have a lot of love. There can be no more desecrating of Unci Maka; we are going to defend our sacred water. It’s hard to be Lakota because you have to stand up. Our courage is greater than the corporations and government who want to take our water.

“The Keystone XL pipeline expansion will cross the Lyman Jones Rural Water System in many places. It will cross the Mni Wiconi Water System in two places. We are trying to teach our non-Indian allies to call Earth our Mother instead of a planet,” stated White Plume.

The Keystone XL pipeline expansion consists of a 1,912-mile pipeline that would transport crude oil from Alberta, Canada to Texas. The proposed project could transport up to 830,000 barrels of dirty tar sands crude per day right through the Ogallala Aquifer which supplies drinking water to over 2 million people and countless animals, trees and plants. National lawmakers have used their power of politics to force President Obama to decide by February 21 if he will sign the permit needed for TransCanada to build the pipeline.

“Even in the 1800’s geologists in the area already knew what was in that land,” stated Tantoo Cardinal, a Cree actress who grew up near the Athabasca oil sands. “Everything that had to do with our culture was outlawed. I saw people who lived a life of strength off the bush. The outlawing of language and ways was an attempt to sever our connection to the Creator. This made us mean to each other too. When I was young we would go on berry picking trips and we could get our water out of the lake. Our children aren’t going to know that. Now, 10% of the fish coming out of the water are abnormal.”

“The people who come to Fort McMurray have no love for the land, they come for money. Even though we had no ceremonies we had medicine. There’s medicine on that land. A woman from Yellow Knife has medicine to doctor AIDS. There is medicine to doctor AIDS in that land they are killing. We were right from the beginning. Our treaties were established because we know our Mother. We have the blueprint. We have to discern who are allies are, defenders of the Earth come in all colors. In that knowing, in that teaching is where the women stand. Women’s place hasn’t been respected. The Earth is being treated the same way women are being treated.

“Sands are the grit that wears and tears on that pipe,” Cardinal continued. “All we have had are lies from this civilization, so why would they start telling us the truth now?”

“In 1947 the US Government built a dam,” stated Kandi Mossett, a Mandan/Hidatsa/Arikira tribal member who is currently employed with the Indigenous Environmental Network. “We were forced into a cash economy; it was like walking through door never to go back. When women eat mercury contaminated fish it affects our bodies. We are always told that we can’t eat the big fish we catch in Lake Sakakawea anymore. There are many flares or giant candles of natural gas now. Many tribal members were paid $34 an acre for their land versus the $5,000-$6,000 an acre paid to non-Indians.

“Now, every single place you go you see trucks hauling water in and hauling water out. Many people have died in head-on crashes with the trucks. It’s all for oil mining. It’s wrong. The tribally elected leaders at Fort Berthold are not my leaders. Women have to lead, let us show you how to lead. A Tribal Environmental Code was just passed last year. There are many open valves. There are 2,500 chemicals in that fracked water that leaks out of the valves on the trucks. Tribal police have no jurisdiction over the truck drivers. People are getting money now and they are happy because we’ve been poor for so long. Drugs are coming in worse than they were before. We need to stop it at all costs.

“Why should you care what is happening on Fort Berthold?” Mossett asked. People need to care because “it’s affecting you down here. Green water found in Lake Sakakawea was said to be a blue green algae bloom which is toxic.” Also, leakage that “cannot be seen with the naked eye but infrared cameras shows the constant smoke coming from pipes and those round storage tanks along with frack trucks around the reservation. People are not dumb. People just became complacent. I survived cancer when I was 20 years old. I refused chemotherapy, I refused radiation. There’s so much to fight for an as long as I have a breath in me I am going to go anywhere to lift people up. Forget the Keystone XL pipeline; we are going to kill it. As long as there are little kids running around we are going to fight.”

“Kandi Mossett is my hero,” stated Phyllis Young, a newly elected tribal council representative at Standing Rock. “She inspired me to pass legislation against fracturing. Demonstrations are significant; we need to have an Occupy Wall Street type of event in the Black Hills. We have the Standing Rock directors working to beef up the regulations we have. We are also trying to prohibit horizontal drilling. I have been on the tribal council for two months and we will do everything we can to stop the Keystone XL pipeline.”
“What is it going to take for activism in Indian Country?” Madonna Thunder Hawk asked. She is currently working on Indian Child Welfare Act violations in East River South Dakota. “Check the NPR.org website for documents about the Department of Social Services. Lean on your tribal councils because they have to make child welfare a priority. Not one tribe in the State of South Dakota has made child welfare a priority. Kids are kept in the system for the money. They are drugged up and then when they age out they dump them back into the Indian community. I’m hoping there will be younger women who will pick up this fight.”
"I love my people,” stated Regina Brave who is also a long-time activist for the Lakota. “This whole country still belongs to us; I want you to remember that. They want to build Keystone XL through here because they called this a sparsely populated area. We have farmers, ranchers and processing plants. 75% of the groceries people take for granted come from this sparsely populated area. We have a right to protest and shut down TransCanada, we have to stop it. We are a nation fighting for survival. 2012 is the beginning of a whole new era for Indian people, it’s time for women to stand up and start fighting. We waited for a long time for this to happen where we could stand together and fight.”

“I believe this is an historical gathering,” stated Faith Spotted Eagle. “We have a responsibility to recreate societies. In 1994 we revived the Brave Heart Society. We have to build these young women. There are 90 girls scattered across the country that have been through the Isnati ceremony.”

Brittany Poor Bear, a Brave Heart Society member, offered a prayer for the wamakaskan.

Russell Means’ recent bout with cancer “was a powerful and humbling experience,” stated his wife Pearl Means. “But the power of our ancestors and spirituality is hard to express. We are downwind from North Dakota which is where the largest strip mining in the country is taking place.”

Other speakers included Arlette Loud Hawk who spoke as the Whip Bearer for the Tokala Kit Fox Warrior Society. Troy Lynn Yellow Wood talked about the roles of women. Special guest speakers included Alex White Plume, Russell Means, and Lily Mae Red Eagle.

Winyan Ituwan is a collective effort to bring women together to share experiences, vision, and wisdom. There were many door prizes including propane and other gifts. Winyan Ituwan is the first of four women’s gatherings, with one set for spring, summer and fall. People can call             605-899-1419       or connect at Winyan Ituwan on Face Book for more information.

“Each of us has power in our thoughts and in prayer. When we think and pray in a good way that is what we add to the atmosphere,” stated Cardinal.


Tuesday, April 19, 2011

"Objectification is Worse for Men", and other loads of CRAP. A public response to Andre, Alexei, Lawrence, and Dave

image was found here

What follows is from the comments section of a post from Sociological Images *here*, showing many examples of how nude men are being displayed in advertising. My comments are a response to that collection as well as to men's ridiculous patriarchy-denying and CRAP-ignorant comments below.

With thanks to JPLee for her responses to Alexei and Lawrence.


  • Julian 10:18 am on April 19, 2010 | # | Reply

    First, if you’re not among the ten to eleven million who have seen this, I welcome you to see this:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U (or just Google “Dove Evolution video”)
    No matter how thin, no woman wakes up in the morning computer-digitally altered.

    I’ll add that these ads perpetuate the most vile forms of contempt for certain “other” women. AS IF women are all extremely pale, thin, young, and very tall. This particular body type, where it does occur “in nature” occurs in Europe among a very few Caucasians. Not commonly in Asia–and Asia goes from China to Indonesia, and from the “Middle East” to Japan! Not so much in Indigenous populations in Asia and the Americas. Not in any part of Africa, unless among a few whites descendants of colonists. And, in case no one has noticed, the Americas, the UK, and Australia, and other places where Elle magazine and Vogue magazine are sold and distributed, such as most cities, mostly people who are none of those attributes live there, including NYC, London, and Perth.

    Yes, Laura. I totally agree. Why don’t we men organise and not just speak up when it seems “the women are ignoring our pain”? Why don’t men speak out against what pornographers do to men, what pimps do to males of various ages, and advertising execs get rich doing to mostly white people that negatively impacts all people?

    “The fairer” sex also means whiter/lighter, as in “mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the fairest one of all”. (Answer: Snow White… get the racism?) Fair skinned is allegedly “better” than dark skinned. So racism against women runs all through these images. And that is horrendously marginalising and alienating to women of color, to non-superthin women, to older women, and one other category as well… can you guess which category?

    The “type” of woman that rarely gets discussed when discussing ads about women, and is never seen in media at all, unless to denigrate her terribly, is butch women, non-femme women. These magazines won’t go near any woman who isn’t ultra-femme to the point of having to be painted from head to toe, because NO women look like the women above, ever. (See that famous “Dove Ad” on YouTube to know what I mean, linked to above in this comment.)

    So that one man, as mentioned, could be gay, but the women only exist for/draped on the men to do with as they please. They are Barbie dolls. Is he HER accessory, or is she HIS? (Hmmmm: is there a “gay” inference: do naked white-but-tanned men play with Barbie dolls?)

    @Matt: almost no white men have hairless upper bodies AND hairy lower bodies. Possibly some “Aryan”/Nordic men. So you do, and another .001 percent of the population. But “nature” doesn’t work that way for most of us, and men’s chests are now moving back towards being hairy on television, which means those actors won’t have to have that hair ripped or shaved off.

    If you sense agitation in my posts, it’s because I hear from the people who are profoundly negatively impacted by this and other media. The women and men who believe women are “undesirable” and “ugly” and “ought to stay inside” if they don’t have stick-legs, are not “pretty” as defined by pimps and cosmetics companies, and “fairest of them all”. The lesbian women who never see their desire, their aesthetics, depicted anywhere. Even depictions of “lesbianism” in dominant media is “for heterosexual men” to “enjoy”. Ugh.

    These women, above, and men, only exist in relation to one another. For each other. Lesbians and gay men exist too, and we don’t all look like the people in the images above. And NO Black man looks like that polished ebony form above. (Not even him.) If you don’t see the harm, just breathe in the pain and suffering caused by these and all the other images shoved at us 24/7. Feel that pain. Of raw throats from vomiting several times a day. Of not having a clear mind and strong body due to self-starvation for one to twenty years. Of all the girls who don’t have, as Toni Morrison wrote, “The Bluest Eye”.

  • Andre 8:07 am on May 30, 2010 | # | Reply

    I don’t see anyone turned into objects here. I think this concept is misguided if people think being sexy is somehow “bad/wrong”

  • Julian 9:11 am on May 30, 2010 | # | Reply

    @Andre,
    The point isn’t that being turned into objects is bad/wrong. The point is to note how capitalist white male supremacist media market the flesh of white women, white men, women of color, and men of color, while noting as well what it has to say bout heterosexuality and lesbianism and gayness. The issues are discrimination, harm, oppression, and dehumanisation, not being “bad/wrong”.
    You can decide for yourself if racism is bad or wrong. But this blog exists to document misogyny, racism, and heterosexism, among other realities, that do injure people physically and emotionally. You can care or not care about matters of gross exploitation, the promulgation of harmful ideas of “beauty”, and social and sexual subordination. That’s entirely up to you.

  • fox 6:07 pm on June 3, 2010 | # | Reply

    I notice that the same thing often critisized in this blog is present in this post: first there are naked and sexy “men”, followed by a “black man” being objectified. So the first ones are just men, not “white men” – and the last one isn’t just a man, but a black one.

  • Alexei Soares 11:26 am on September 2, 2010 | # | Reply

    How can it be that intelligent authors fail to understand the pervasive and unrecognised nature of the sexual objectification of men in Western culture? It is everywhere, it is blatant, and it is most assuredly NOT exemplified by these pictures. These pictures are a myopic view of the sexual objectification of men as seen through the reality of women.

    A mean [sic] objectifies a woman when he evaluates her worth based mostly on her fitness as a reproductive partner. He bases his decision on proxy-fertility characteristics such as youth, body shape, firmness of behind, and breast shape and size.

    A woman objectifies a man when she evaluates his worth based mostly on his fitness as a reproductive partner. She bases her decision on proxy-genetic characteristics such as dominance, power, intelligence, financial success, and a larger than life presence.

    The best way to understand the objectification of women is the way women who do NOT posses the needed “object-characteristics” are treated as worthLESS. Fat, old, and ugly women are almost completely absent from cultural representation. I flew jetBlue last night, and the free movie was “Prince of Persia.” There was not a single old, fat, or ugly woman in the movie.

    The best way to understand the objectification of men is the way men who do NOT possess the needed “object-characteristics” are treated as worthLESS. Weak, powerless, and commonplace men are culturally represented in HUGE numbers, seen only for an instant (with no face) before being quickly killed off in a humour scene, as thought the death of an “inconsequential” man is worth no more than a laugh. The “Prince of Persia” is filled with funny scenes involving the killing of huge numbers of “weak” common soldiers, often “good guys” killed by the leading “dominant” male by mistake.

    • JPLee 8:30 pm on January 6, 2011 | # | Reply

      Your comment is ridiculous.

      It is NOT “sexual objectification” to evaluate a man’s worth based on his intelligence and financial success…

      What makes someone more valuable as a human being: a perfect body, or a brilliant mind? I don’t know about you, but I appreciate the artists, musicians, philosophers, and scientists of this world much more than I appreciate top models and pinups.

      When you objectify someone, you reduce them to a physicality, like a vase or a bottle of beer. Objects do not have thoughts, and so their purpose is to be USED by others to pleasure and satisfy.

      Of course there is unfair societal pressure on men to be intelligent, strong, or to conceal their feelings, but IT IS NOT THE SAME! You cannot objectify a mind the way you can a body!!
      Both sexes can be shallow when it comes to choosing a mate/judging the opposite sex, but women do not judge men on the same objectifying, intimate terms that have such limited shelf life as men do women.

      Women have it worse…..not pretty, but it’s true.

  • Lawrence 7:37 pm on February 7, 2011 | # | Reply

    I agree. women constantly whine about objectification and then insult us and call us immature if we point out their double standard. You cant watch a TV show or movie without all these athletic cut 20 something guys losing their shirts and many times even more. We have had a push of show showing male genitalia and they have been rated down to R. Show a woman’s pubic hair and you automatically get a NC-17, and you haven’t even shown her genitals. And then we get all these experts saying, “a flacid male organ is not erotic”. So, its still indecent and should garner the same treatment as female genitals. The beefcake in ads has gone way over the top and they know it. Women just want to have their beefcake and eat it too.

    • JPLee 12:28 am on February 8, 2011 | # | Reply

      Yes, we all have to contend with exceptionally hot (and touched up) people on TV. But at the same time…..now you know how we feel!

      Women are still objectified far more often than men (just going by the ads I see everyday). And only recently has the number of scantily dressed people in the media started to even out among the two genders…….I have to wonder why you are so pissed, when it is really just an eye for an eye.

      You really have to consider the long history of women being objectified before you can complain about things not being fair.

      PS. Who the hell are these experts telling us what to find erotic? I think we can figure these things out for ourselves. :P

    • Julian Real 1:26 am on February 8, 2011 | # | Reply

      @Lawrence – You seem not to grasp a very basic truth: that the men objectified are still valued for being powerful; the women objectified are valued for being weak. Why? Because however much men are objectified–including the objectification of white rich men as “wealth objects”, wealth, power, control, and force still remains in the hands of white men in the US. There’s no level playing field onto which such images fall. The field is mined against women of all colors in ways it never has been for men. It is mined against all people of color in ways it never has been for whites.

      If you want to narrow the gaze myopically to this issue of how people are presented in some print ads, that’s your myopic choice. In the real world, however, those images are part of a larger pattern of very threatening and horrific realities which, I would imagine–correct me if I’m wrong–you’ve not had the displeasure to be terrorised by, such as men following you as you walk to a bus station or train stop, or to your car; men pulling their cars over asking you to get inside; men harassing you on the street or at work; men feeling entitled to rape you at home, or to batter your face until bones are broken, or to batter your belly if it carries a fetus; grown men sexually abusing, trafficking, and enslaving thin girls–by the millions. I’ll wager you don’t register these horrors and terrors as “real” at all. And so you can pretend we are only discussing “a few images in some magazines”. You are quite privileged to be able to not make any more connections than that. This is to say, your privilege is showing.

  • Guest 3:46 pm on March 5, 2011 | # | Reply

    The next thing you know male models in ads display themselves while women display clothes.

  • Dave 5:24 pm on April 19, 2011 | # | Reply

    How can eople complain of what happened historically when they are now all dead!! It’s today’s children we should be thinking of and objectification of men is far more rife than that of women. It’s just that women moan about it more when an advert shows a bit of female leg or a film shows a female bum. And yet men are supposed to shrug their shoulders and take it like a man when bombarded with adverts showing shirtless hunks all the time or films and dramas showing detailed shots of genitals.
    It’s a double standard and it stinks. Women are all smug about it at the moment but the middle-aged white male is the last minority group yet to be protected from societies onslaught of male-bashing and male objectification. Give it another 10 years and the young males of today’s generation will put a stop to this because enough is enough!!

  • Julian Real 9:06 pm on April 19, 2011 | # | Reply

    Hello Dave,

    I welcome you to open your eyes to what’s going on globally, and in the West specifically, to women and girls before you jump to erroneous conclusions about how much more objectified men are than women.

    You know, I hope, that father-daughter rape is the most common form of child sexual abuse in the U.S.

    The average age of girls–yes, girl children–entering prostitution and pornography is thirteen, due to male pimps lying to the runaways from incest-perpetrating and otherwise patriarchally abusive homes.
    There are many hundreds of thousands of girls and women being trafficked internationally, primarily for the “pleasure” and profit of men.

    And that men get away with battery and rape most of the time, and most cases of men beating the crap out of women and raping them are not reported at all.

    When men are asked to describe what they do, in day to day life, to avoid being raped, they generally scratch their heads. When women are asked, the list is long and men respond to it by saying “I had no idea!”

    When a segregated group of young men were once asked what they feared most from women, the answer was “being laughed at”. When a group of young women were asked what they most feared from men, the answer was “being killed”. So please stop putting out this nonsense about how things are so, so bad for the doods. Whatever objectification men get, it’s not tied into a gendered political system in which women let that initial interpersonal or industrial objectification be the doorway to terroristically harassing and sexually and physically assaulting men and boys.

    If we understand ‘objectification’ to be part of women’s subordination–as part of the economic discrimination and aggressively abusive activities men enjoy unleashing on and against women and girls systematically and usually with impunity, your argument sinks like lead and stinks worse than the apparently unrecognised privilege in your comment. That would be the privilege to be oblivious and insensitive to what women and girls are enduring the world over that you, Dave, are not.

    Dave 5:16 pm on April 20, 2011 | # | Reply

    Oh for goodness sake, get a grip! Mothers kill their children far more than fathers do. Fact – look it up. I think rape is awful BUT there are other sides to the story that often go unheard. Girls get away with false rape claims all too often and men aren’t protected from this despite the fact that it can ruin innocent lives. Men get raped too, but that’s not as bad, is it!

    There is no support from Governments regarding domestic violence against men either, despit the fact that, arguably, that just as many, if not more, women commit violent acts against their partners – look it up. Quite simply it goes unnoticed because men don’t tend to complain, probably due to their protective instincts. Nobody cares about men. http://www.youtube.com/watch[blahblahblah].

    Life these days is all about women isn’t it. It’s all about how we should protect women, often at the expense of men. Look at the Titanic as a classic example of how men’s lives are treated as second class, expendable etc. Nobody cares about mens feelings. There is less spent on male health. Education these days supports girls (and the results go hand in hand with the trend). Fathers don’t have the same custody rights over their children. White males are victims of positive discrimination in the workplace. They are the victims of male bashing in modern advertising. It’s funny when they get kicked in the groin in a film. You can say anything you like about a man. You can make programmes that strip them of their dignity and make them look foolish because they are a man. The list goes on and on and on…

    Nobody cares about men, not even men. But I’m telling you now, give it 5 to 10 years and the young males in society are going to realise what a stupid, uncilvilised nd unfair society it is that they are part of and, trust me, there will be a massive backlash. THey will not put up with this crap for much longer.

    It makes me laugh how stupid people are and how indoctrinated they have become what with all the feminist brain-washing that has taken place over the last few decades. Look how people complain when a music video shows a woman dancing showing a bit of flesh. See how they are so quick to place it in the sexist objectification catagory. THey say how bad this is for young girls and boys, firstly because it puts pressure on the girls to look good and secondly because the boys are supposedly not allowed to look. YET, those very same complainers are completely and utterly oblivious to the half-naked male hunks flexing their muscles for the benefit of the female audience, despite the fact that this, too, makes many young lads feel shit about their body. But who cares about them, eh! The girls are allowed to see hunky bare-chested men everywhere. Double-standard.

    I could go on but I really can’t be bothered because I happen to know that I’m about 20 years ahead of my time and people like you are 20 years behind. You’ll see, just watch, it’s the next big thing!
Julian's note:
Dave is demonstrating how incredibly privileged and clueless he is. His rant is not worthy of much of a response. Anyone who believes "nobody cares about men" has no grasp of reality. Which gender is wiping the asses of baby boys, then? And which gender is feeding and taking emotional care, physical care, and often economic care of males of all ages? Men's logical phallusy appears to know no bounds. But we already knew that, didn't we?



Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Jake Pavelka vs. Vienna Girardi: Who is Telling the Truth? Is it in the Eye of the Beholder, or Not?

 [photo of Vienna Girardi and Jake Pavelka,
when allegedly happy together is from here]

What do you see, below? Video can function as a sort of Rorschach test. And in this instance, I think there is gendered distinction as to what people see, but that's a hunch on my part, and I'm checking in with y'all to see if that's the case. I believe masculists (antifeminists) will see one reality, and feminists will see another. I'm not saying ALL masculists will see the same thing, nor that all feminists will see the same thing.

I'm going to analyse these videos soon, but wanted first to hear from friends, colleagues, and visitors of A.R.P. Who, if anyone, do you see as being at fault in this break-up? Who do you feel is being more truthful, and who appears to be lying? Who do you believe and why? And what behaviors do you identify as abusive, if any? You can only watch one and comment on that, if you don't wish to watch all three.

I welcome you to name their behaviors, or identify character traits, or describe troubling interpersonal dynamics. I fill you in a bit on the history of  Vienna and Jake below the videos. The host of the program is Chris Harrison.

Part 1:


Part 2:


Part 3:


The TV show currently airing is called "The Bachelorette". For me, this is a hetero/sexist term that I wish would go away, along with the term "bachelor"*.

This season Ali Fedotowsky, a strong, adventurous white woman, is choosing from among many hopeful men, each striving to form a lasting connection with her, which presumably will lead to marriage. (As you may know, heterosexual marriage is legal in all 50 U.S. states. Everyone on this season's show is white except one man who is Latino. Last season Ali was one of the many women--all white--who was being "courted" by a white man named Jake Pavelka, (aka, "The Bachelor" in early 2010). When he eventually narrowed down number of women to whom he was most strongly drawn, one was Ali and another was Vienna Girardi. (There were two other women, Tenley and Gia, who were among those Jake seemed to be considering as his future mate.)

Ali decided to leave the show for the sake of her career, and Jake ended up falling in love (in an unreal way that the production team of the program encourages) with Vienna, a woman from the East Coast who eventually moved in with him on the West Coast. Following the program, they were engaged and he kept his face in the media by performing as a celebrity contestant on another ABC-TV program, Dancing With The Stars. Vienna generally appeared in the audience, supporting her fiance to do well. They certainly seemed to be getting along well.

Recently, news broke that they've broken up and her story has been in the media, with less information from Jake about what happened. Last night they appeared together on TV for the first time since the break-up, to be interviewed by the host of "The Bachelor/ette", to find out what went wrong.

*          *          * 

* "-ette" means diminutive, smaller, lesser, and "more feminine" as in the difference between a statue and a statuette. It is commonly used in English to apply to terms applied to women, even when there's no male corollary. Sometimes it is tacked onto the end of a word that is generally understood to be "masculine" in order to "feminise" its meaning or the group to whom the term applies. This means, in part, making it appear subordinate and inferior to the male version. What is more valuable or "outstanding" generally speaking: a statue or a statuette?

In Western WHM supremacist society this shows up in the term "suffragette", which was not, at the time, what activist women fighting for women's right to vote called themselves. It is what men called them who wished to demean them. They called themselves suffragists. Male supremacist media and later historians changed the term to "the diminutive form" as a way to "feminise" the activists, and make them appear less credible and also less powerful, which is to say, less "masculine" and more silly. Imagine calling feminists "feminettes" and you get the idea of what the WHM supremacist media was trying to do back in the day--that it is still doing in so many ways.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

SEXISM-IN-ACTION, Part 2: "The Masculist Bachelor" Andrão. NOTE: "masculist" means misogynist

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático

aka "The Masculist Bachelor"

This quote is one of his status updates from June 24th:

Truth is like spicy hot sauce;
some people like it on their food, even though it
burns them a bit when they ingest it,
and other people just can't stomach the hot sauce,
so they prefer to eat their food without it.
- Andrae Williams

This story will come together as you read along. The middle of the story is *here, in this recent post*. The content below tells more of the beginning and some of the end of the story, to date.

Here's the history between him and Aganju. They had some exchange privately. Then he posted something anti-feminist/anti-Aganju/anti-woman. She then turned her back to him and walked out of his sorry sexist life. We may note how he's checked out her photos, commented on many of them, and has read a lot about her and summarised what she's said about herself. And he has the audacity to call me a stalker? In his homophobic dreams.

Here's his "pre-misogyny" correspondence to Aganju:

From Aganju to me:

These are 2 emails he sent me when were still cool that show he didn't think views were extreme and pretended to be understanding. Notice how I wasn't a crazy man hater before I blocked him? And this was after he READ & SUMMERIZED ALL MY NOTES!

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático June 21 at 11:10pm Report
By the way..your notes hilarious...lol...and witty at the same time...totally understand where you're coming from on each issue...

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático June 23 at 12:58pm Report
Picky is good. Shows that you know EXACTLY what you are looking for in a person. I get accused of being too picky sometimes too, but, ask me if i give a fuck...÷)

And i basically went thru your whole page when i first added you, so i know that:

1) You dont want kids ever, and you're tired of people (especially black women) viewing you as a second class citizen because u dont.

2) You hate faux male feminists.

3) You hate hiphop because hiphop hates you (women).

4) You hate Michael Eric Dyson and you think he is a sexist pig.

5) Your views are NOT up for debate.

6) You are a feminist and NOT THE FUN KIND (what does that mean by the way?)

...i know where you stand. We're cool. ÷)

*          *          *
Next, his antifeminism comes to the surface.

His status update is a dig at a phrase well-utilised by Aganju referenced by Andrão in point 6 above, which comes from a famous comment by the white Jewish radical feminist Andrea Dworkin, "I'm a radical feminist, not the fun kind". See, for example, *here*.

Note: "Masculist" is a synonym for "misogynist" in the same way that men calling women "misandrists" is code for the truth that the men who use that term are antifeminists." Why don't men who are misogynists and antifeminists just come out of the damn closet and SAY SO? Because "misogynist" and "antifeminist" are WOMEN's terms. And men don't want to be tainted, stigmatised, and made more politically impotent in the homosocially approving eyes of their male brethren by having their identities tarnished by what women say men are (that men are, because women notice it and say it).

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático is a masculist, and NOT THE FUN KIND.

June 22 at 12:42pm · ·
Cassandra Dea
Cassandra Dea
How so? And what's the fun kind?
June 22 at 3:23pm ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Lol....the last part is an inside joke...but i am a masculist in that i think the legal system in regards to marriage, divorce, and child custody proceedings are skewed in favour of women...that needs to change.
June 22 at 3:31pm ·
Leon Norway
Leon Norway
Exactly!
June 22 at 3:40pm ·
Leon Norway
Leon Norway
I wont say I am not for feminism. Just depends on what kinda feminism we are talking about. I do not kiss women's asses and I don't make excuses for men, either. I am an equalist!
June 22 at 6:38pm ·


(Don't get me started on "equalist". Western men are either supportive of feminism or they're antifeminist. That's the choice, men.)

In Andrão's history of looking at Aganju's Facebook images, he had posted several comments under photos. From his FB page:
RECENT ACTIVITY
Andrão commented on Aganju Axe's photo.
Andrão commented on Aganju Axe's photo.
Andrão commented on Aganju Axe's photo.
Those three comments, and two others, read as follows (from Aganju's FB page):
 
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Awesome dress..love it.
June 25 at 2:25am · · Flag
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Interesting style you got there. :)
June 25 at 2:24am · · Flag

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Linda negra mulher...÷)
June 23 at 4:00pm · · 1 person · Flag
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
The one common trait that ALL women seem to have: a love of shopping..lol
June 22 at 11:20am · · Flag

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Thanks for the add fellow Jamaican freethinker. Welcome. :)
June 21 at 4:14pm · · 1 person · Flag


I call him "The Masculist Bachelor" because his behaviors remind me of something I saw on TV tonight, on a show called "The Bachelorette". As I'm sure you know (wink--or not), white "bachelorette" Ali has narrowed down the good white guys to about a half-dozen, down from around 25. In this competition/romance/reality show, there have been some losers, in more than one sense.

I maintain it is impossible to find true love while being filmed constantly and placed in utterly "unrealistic" situations. The successful marriage stats of those who meet and fall in love on this show bear out this claim. This is ABC exploiting people who, yes, are willing to be exploited. I don't doubt the sincerity of anyone going on this show, only their naivete at believing this is the way to meet someone to marry. But hell, they get to travel a lot, and be treated wonderfully, and while this show has shown itself to only be willing to pay for white het people to find romance among the ratings, which usually ends up on the rocks, it is what it is. I watch it, for goodness sakes, so I'm not one in the best position to take this show too much to task.

I want to offer for your viewing displeasure a clip of this week's show, which aired tonight. It's under five minutes long. Issues of men's dishonesty to women and lack of accountability are all packed into the first half hour, rather blatantly and dramatically. But the video is Ali's final challenge to Justin about honesty and integrity.

Here's what you need to know just happened:

The Bachelorette cut straight to the rumors in tonight's episode by immediately revealing to Ali Fedotowsky that Justin, the "Rated-R" entertainment wrestler has not one, but two girlfriends back home, and even included a personal call from one of the women.

Bachelorette host Chris Harrison promptly interrupted the start of the Turkey episode with the big news.
"There's something I do need to tell, something has come to our attention," Chris Harrison said, saying that he producers had received a call from Jessie, a girl who was on the previous season of "The Bachelor" with Ali. "She gave us some information that is legit. I checked it out."

They placed a call from Turkey to Jessie, in Toronto, Canada, and she explained that Justin was no good.
"One of the guys there has a girlfriend, and that's Justin," Jessie said.

"How do you know this?" Ali asked.

"Cause I'm sitting with his girlfriend right now," Jessie said. "Her name is Jessica."

And then she handed the phone to Justin's girlfriend for a tearful rendition of how they collaborated to get Justin on the show to benefit his wrestling career.

"Me and Justin have been dating for the past two years now. He assured me that he would come back and we would be together, and finally get our plans together to get married," Jessica told Ali.

"I helped him buy suits. I helped him get head shots. I really didn't want to do this from the beginning. The fact that you could potentially choose him to be your husband... and then what?"

Jessica also found out that Ali wasn't the only one getting conned.

"A couple days after he left, I found out he had a girlfriend for the past two months. This is really really hard for me to talk about. I don't know what else to say Ali, I'm sorry."

Ali seemed stunned, but relieved. Then she turned angry.

"Justin was acting the entire time he was here," Ali said. "Everything he said was basically a lie. He was so sweet and so nice. He said 'I'm here for the right reasons' so many times. What a jerk. I'm just pissed."
[source: *here*]

Justin's a liar, a fraud, and has gone onto the show to promote himself for the sake of his career and his relationship with the woman back home. He goes on a show that is for men who are open to and interesting in marrying one woman, the "bachelorette" for this year, Ali. She calls his sexist ass out. And you can see how maturely he handles THAT. All this happens in the first half hour.

I believe one of the key means through which het men obtain contact with heterosexual women is by being dishonest, by withholding crucial information about who they are and what they believe, and then when women find out what they ought to have known from the start, many women walk away, appropriately. I believe if women knew the whole truth about men, women wouldn't choose to get to know many of them, and the men know this, and so they lie, they manipulate, they control, in order to obtain contact, proximity, and intimacy founded on their lies.

That more women don't do more damage to the men who are lying jerks is a bit beyond me--Lorde knows men do shit to women for no reason at all. What Ali says about Justin I find to be spot on. I love it when women call men out on their dishonestly. I love having it exposed to the world what lying bastards men can be, and watching men lie through their teeth to defend or further cover up their deceptions. Damn, this is good, except for the fact that this dickwad did, in fact, hurt three women, if not more.

See it here:

I hope this is a big ol' red flag to heterosexually active women generally. When Andrão posted about being a masculist, not the fun kind, he was dissing Aganju, and disrespecting feminism generally. Aganju realised Andrão was a sexist jerk, she said good-bye. He can't take dismissal without resorting to gross forms of public misogyny, accusing her of all manner of things, conspiring with other men to get their misogynist story "straight".

After she exited, he's been showing what an antifeminist and misogynist he really is. He calls me out on speaking on behalf of her, but why doesn't he call himself out on posting misogynist things about her only after she exits his life? Typically, he wants to be free to do whatever he wants, with no accountability, while he'll quickly critique anyone who does exactly as he does them.

A feminist who noticed his misogyny and sexism, Nicki, very respectfully questioned him, noting the sexist double standards at work. He left up her comments to his discussion thread, but at first ignored her and her comments. She called him out on not answering her questions, and he finally offered up some self-serving explanations for his misogynist actions. I called him out after seeing how he was trying to avoid her questions, and he had banned posts by me from the public discussion.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. We have a failure to communicate because he refuses to engage with me publicly, where other people can see and read the exchange and see his tactics for evading accountability. He has communicated to me privately. He presented what were to me, his rather weak arguments for not keeping my critique up on his discussion page, and I did something that I do with men I don't respect: I call them names. Here's that out-of-the-public-eye exchange between us:

As I said before, if you are one of her friends (and it is highly likely that you are), then I will not let someone else do her defending for her. My beef was not with you, so I do not want to "debate" anything with you. You want to call me sexist? Fine. Have at it, because I know what I am and what I am not. Maybe Terry will be up for it, but I won't give into to your ridiculous attempt at calling me out.
Julian Real June 28 at 11:43am
You and your "assumptions". Why don't you debate me on your page on the terms I raise, rather than coming up with lame excuses for not doing so. Do my arguments have merit or not? Can you handle my critique or not? Apparently not. You won't even allow my comments to be read by anyone else! What are you so afraid of? Rather COWARDLY of you, wouldn't you say?
I just checked Aganju's friendslist, and you are indeed a friend of hers. So no assumption here anymore, but fact. You are a "radical pro feminist", meaning that you have your own views solidly imbedded in your mind, also meaning that any "debate" with you is a waste of time, since you believe that your way is truth, and "sexist" men like myself and our views are "typical" and are foolishness.

Call me all the names you want. You will not be allowed to post your radical views on my page, no matter how many names you call me.
Julian Real June 28 at 2:38pm
And that's your response to my challenges? You're a wimp.
A smart wimp who doesn't bow to your immature name-calling.

Goodbye. :)
*          *          *

I know there's a special place in hell for men like me who call men negative names. The names I called him were, if you know anything about me, quite restrained. I called him a "coward"--a term he has used against a Black woman, Aganju, and the term "wimp". Not exactly the harshest language, but not the grounds for forming lasting friendship either. I try and steer clear of using terms like wimp, unless it means W.I.M.P. (see my glossary). I believe he's a coward, a liar, and a misogynist who is not really willing to be accountable to anyone about it. Not Black women, not this one white Jewish guy, and not other Black men. And he is called out by many people.

I'll mention, ever so briefly, his misuse of smiley faces and the term "LOL" on his Facebook page. This is another typical strategy of men behaving as oppressors: for misogynist men it's all just a joke, really it is. I own that I do this too sometimes, sort of as a way to indicate "I'm not furious." Because often, believe it or not, I'm not furious. I'm annoyed and disappointed far more often. So the "lol" is there to ensure the reader that I'm not pissed... at them. But it is used with such frequency by Andrão that it seems to be serving many purposes, and one of them is to be sure he doesn't come across as serious about much, so as not to be taken seriously about what he's doing that is seriously anti-woman.

All he had to do was leave up my challenge to him (see the lower portion of "Part 1"), and, well, respond to the issues raised in it. Instead, he chooses to use the excuse that he wouldn't do so based on me knowing Aganju. This is an interesting argument: this means that misogynists can refuse to be accountable both to feminists and profeminists--if they know each other. If I didn't know her, are we to assume he'd have left up my comments? Well, if someone else wants to ask him the same questions, maybe we'll find out what the truth is.

How utterly convenient to make oneself completely unaccountable to someone just might be able to name the dynamics of what the misogynist is doing. This is a new wrinkle in the patriarchal practice of protecting male entitlements to insult, slander, and degrade women publicly, as he does to Aganju.

I am curious about these methods of patriarchy-protection. I know they are numerous and normal. I seek to identify them, illustrate them, and, when possible, use "real life" examples. So here we are.

Misogynist men routinely deny the realities feminists name. The male misogynists deny it is a reality at all, and they deny any critics the power to name something MEN are doing to WOMEN. Because het men, especially, protect and defend this power to name women's reality with homosocial passion. Het men are homosocially determined to protecting each other's male supremacist entitlements, privileges, and power. There will be exceptions to the rule--hopefully, but the rule is firmly in place, in a patriarchal society. But this is also a white supremacist society.

What does it mean that a white man is calling out a Black man publicly? So far, I haven't seen it arise as an identified issue for Andrão but I'm not in the best position to see if there's a problem here. I know race is never NOT an issue in any interpersonal exchange, including among whites. While Andrão doesn't bring up my race, he does identify my ethnic and sexual identities and social locations. I'd argue, in this case, none of them really are relevant, although, let's face it, white male voices always carry more credibility than voices by men of color. Well, unless the man of color is het and not Jewish and the white man is both. Then it gets a bit trickier as to who has more social status and position, and I think it comes down to context at that point.

This is my analysis about why someone might not challenge the legitimacy of my critique on the grounds that it is white and therefore biased. And I'll state here that I can't know anything at all about what is going on in Andrão's head about this. I don't know, for example, at what point he learned I was gay, Jewish, and white. It may have been well after he deleted my comment. But this I know: Black people in the U.S. are ALWAYS accused by whites, wrongly and racistly, of playing "the race card", as if we whites not only stack that deck, but produce it as well. Whites are the masters, so to speak, of race-card tricks, and let there be no mistake about it.

There was a time when I steered clear of calling out men of color publicly on their sexism and misogyny, as I wondered if doing so was somehow racist. And, for sure, it can be. There are any number of names I could call Andrão that are loaded with social-political meaning that is raced as white supremacist. "Coward" and "wimp", in my experience as a white person who has heard whites call Black people every negative term in the White Supremacist Rule Book, is not high on the list of racially charged terms.

What happened is that my friendships with women of color increased and deepened. And what the women of color in my life have made clear to me is that me not calling out men of color does nothing at all to assist them in their struggles to be free of misogyny and racism. And "alliance" means standing with women, when the misogyny begins to fly, not making excuses for the sexist jerks. This necessitates being able and willing to call out any man if he is being a misogynist. Any man. But not in ways that misuse my power over him due to race privileges. Or any other privileges either.

Andrão brings up me being gay and Jewish at an interesting time in this [lack of] exchange. To me, it shows a need to highlight the places where I don't have institutional/structural power in the U.S., possibly to bring me down a few pegs. Being gay and Jewish places me lower on the intersectional hierarchies of "who is most valued and listened to and validated as having Truth-telling capacity." Were I Black, Jewish, and gay, I'd have even less structural power. Without class privilege, I'd have even less. This is how it works, and I've posted a synopsis of this recently, in the words of someone describing the political/sociological analysis of Patricia Hill Collins. See here for that.

What needs to be noted is how, when men are called out, they duck out of view, find ways to be unaccountable, and lie in order to protect their fictitious and politically self-serving view of reality.

What does me being gay have to do with anything in this situation? What does me being Jewish have to do with anything? I mean I know this guy's a devout Atheist--religiously so--but I'm not religiously Jewish, so there's not even me being an Abrahamic theist for him to critique.

At issue: Andrão deleted my critique of him, not allowing others to read it and reflect on it. So I made sure it saw the light of day. And now there's a special thread just about me (I don't feel honored). But what is it REALLY about? I'd say more it's another diversionary tactic, a sign self-defensiveness, and a belief focusing attention on the messenger will delete the message. Except, well, he's already done that.

He gets to claim I'm stalking him because I'm gay. He's being a homophobic jerk by doing that. Would I be his stalker if I were het? I doubt it. (When will het men realise that not only am I not especially interested in any het men romantically or sexually, but also, I don't find "misogyny" to be an especially attractive quality in men? I had to deal with het male delusions of gorgeous grandeur with MadShangi, who, I'll note, makes Andrão seem like a profeminist by comparison.)

Below is a copy of that brand new thread discussion on his Facebook page about moi, from the following web page:
http://www.facebook.com/andraewilliams?v=wall&story_fbid=134644016553935.

For the record, researching and documenting his homophobia and misogyny isn't "stalking". If he gets to name this as stalking, as other men do, then this is yet one more way to discredit challenges to them. After this thread's comments, I'll offer up some closing thoughts. And after he deleted my comment, I sent it to a few people, including Terry and DaRohn, who I felt ought to see it. I'll applaud, publicly, D. Eric Harmon's concerted effort to hold him accountable to his lies and illogic. You can read for yourself how Andrão deals with this.
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático

Andrão Brasileiro Fanático is being stalked on facebook by a gay, jewish, radical feminist male who thinks I'm a sexist pig...what should I do?



5 hours ago via Mobile Web · ·

-Dakota Hikari Falls-
-Dakota Hikari Falls-
ask him on a date....lmao
5 hours ago ·
Leo Mountcoutia
Leo Mountcoutia
give him my addy let him stalked me lol
5 hours ago ·
Stacey Flournoy
Stacey Flournoy
Lol @ Dakota!
5 hours ago ·
-Dakota Hikari Falls-
-Dakota Hikari Falls-
juss sayin :)
5 hours ago ·
DaRohn Sercey
DaRohn Sercey
I got a message today from him today.
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Leo - His name is Julian Real. Search him on FB...maybe he'll like you...lol..

@Dakota - Hardy har har...very funny..÷)
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@DaRohn - Really? Saying what? lol..
5 hours ago ·
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
when did you start caring...
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
5 hours ago ·
Leo Mountcoutia
Leo Mountcoutia
hehehe thanks but I was only joking
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Bonnie - Um, what was that?
5 hours ago ·
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
About what ppl think..
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Pete - I don't. I am just having a good laugh with this guy stalking my page on facebook.
5 hours ago ·
Joanne Martinez
Joanne Martinez
Curse them out!
5 hours ago ·
Elisha Laynette
Elisha Laynette
Block em and fuck em! (not literally) :)
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Bonnie - Well thank you for wanting to protect me, but please do not talk about killing gays on my page. That is taking it too far...ok? ÷)
5 hours ago ·
DaRohn Sercey
DaRohn Sercey
**here's what the message said**

Here's what two sexist guys can't deal with, and so have censored me off Andrao's FB page... typical. They can dish it out, but can't take it! lol

http://radicalprofeminist.blogspot.com/2010/06/behold-sexism-in-action-when-men-do-it.html
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Joanne - I took the high road and decided not to, even though he was calling me a "wimp" and a "coward" because i wouldnt debate him..lol..oh well.

@Elisha - I thought about blocking him...i might just do that if he keeps this up..
5 hours ago ·
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
@ andrae I feel you.. If I were you I would be laughing too.
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Bonnie - I know, but that was taking it too far..i have gay and lesbian friends...so i dont take that as a joke.
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@DaRohn - Yep, thats the guy...he is mad because i wont debate him and his one-sided views...lol.
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Pete - Thank Q...with people like this, you gotta just have fun at their expense, and not let them get under your skin....÷)
5 hours ago ·
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
Pete-gaye PrettyLady Stewart
preachhhhhh lol oh I forgot you don't like that lol... Tell it or yup..lol
5 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
5 hours ago ·
Samtastic Samz Green
Samtastic Samz Green
oooh you're such a stud montego hahahaha
4 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
4 hours ago ·
D. Eric Harmon
D. Eric Harmon
@Andrao--I read the post you deleted from your original post about the woman you labeled as bipolar and crazy...I for one found his insights and thoughts very salient, and I agreed with almost all of them. I humbly ask you to repost his comments and allow open discussion. By the way, I think that the picture featuring the feminist and the hooters women was a blatant example of sexism. To me, it would be like posting a picture with a progressive black male holding a sign decrying institutional racism with three black-faced minstrels in the back, and then underneath the caption would read: Racism, only uppity niggers complain about it. I also request that you do not delete my post and allow a real discussion to ensue. As a black male who teaches black history and as an atheist who is committed to humanism and social justice, I strongly urge you to consider your decision to delete posts that agree with you...of course this is your page and you have a right to delete anything or anyone you want, so that's why this comes as a humble request. I think this is a discussion worth having, and all views and opinions are needed to gain proper insight.
4 hours ago ·
Samtastic Samz Green
Samtastic Samz Green
lol..i mean you can get guys and girls you should be happy!:D
4 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Eric - I do not only leave posts up that are in agreement with my views. If you truly know the content of my page, then you would know that I debate with Christians here all the time, and, being an atheist myself, they post MANY things that i disagree with. I never delete their posts.

Maybe you missed that part of the blog where i specified WHY this persons comment was deleted. I suggest you go back and read why i did it. It was NOT because i disagreed with what he was saying to me. There was a woman named "Nicki Rivers" who came to my page to debate with me in that same post, and i did not delete any of her comments from my page.

I will keep to my stance, and not let radical close minded feminists bring their bigoted one sided views to my page, because i already know what their thoughts consist of, and they are not open to hearing my side of this issue.

Lastly, the pic was posted for the expressed purpose of providing more fodder for this guy who was stalking my page...i saw the pic on my friends page today (a woman by the way), and decided to post it, to piss him off even more...he can think i am a sexist pig all he wants, and i will continue to joke about it at his expense...
4 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Sam - LOL...i guess?
4 hours ago ·
Samtastic Samz Green
Samtastic Samz Green
lol..well that's my justification for when gays hit on me. "I'm such a stud" hahaha
4 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Well, this guy wasnt hitting on me at all...he is stalking me because he wants a debate...and i wont give it to him...
4 hours ago ·
Samtastic Samz Green
Samtastic Samz Green
Well you're good debate w/ (I'm loving the fact that you're in the middle of a serious convo and I'm breaking it w/ my rubbish hahaha)..Facebook is so political nowadays :D
4 hours ago ·
D. Eric Harmon
D. Eric Harmon
@Andrao--I never accused you of deleting ALL posts that you don't agree with--I am only talking about the one from Julian at this point...I congratulate you that you leave up posts from theists claiming the existence of god in the fashion of open debate, but I also want to congratulate you on allowing Julian the same deference. Again, you can do what you want on your page, of course, but in my opinion (that I know you did not solicit, albeit) I think that Julian's points bring much light to the discussion and deserve to be heard. The woman in question may not be open to hearing your views, but others are, so why not dialogue with them?

As for your explanation for why you posted the pic...I invite you to consider how you would feel if a racist, who denied he was racist but wanted to piss you off, posted an offensive , racist picture. By your response, you KNOW that it is sexist, so are you saying that you would rather piss someone off at the expense of displaying naked sexism, totally disregarding the feelings of woman and men who find it offensive?
4 hours ago ·
D. Eric Harmon
D. Eric Harmon
@Andrao...btw, I am a FB frind of Aganju, and although I do not always agree with everything she writes or how she chooses to express her thoughts, I do agree with almost ALL of her insights on male supremacy and I find her comments refreshing and needed....
3 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Eric - If you had a falling out with someone, and you wanted to find out why the falling out had taken place, would you be ok with a friend of the person you had the falling out with speaking on their behalf? Or would you prefer to speak with them directly?

Secondly, what the person who posted that blog about me failed to show you was the "coward" and "wimp" slurs used by him towards me after i declined to be a punching bag for his bigoted views. I do not engage in debates with people who use ad-hominem attacks against me, period, end of story. He showed his immaturity when he did that, and i refuse to stoop to his level. If he hadn't done that, then I would be more inclined to take your current request to reopen this debate more seriously. I will not do that under HIS terms, but under my own.

I will have a note up soon about this whole ordeal. I will discuss it amongst those on my friends list, including those who disagree with what I did, such as yourself. This radical feminist is not welcome to discuss anything in that note. I will not reward his bullyish tactics by letting him post on my page.

Finally, people find alot of things we do individually as "offensive". I am sure you would agree (being that you are an atheist in a majority christian nation) that not wanting to offend people is not a good excuse for not posting something we find to be relevant. Sure, those who have a skewed view towards feminism would call that photo "sexist", while others, like myself (and the female who i got the photo from), would see the humour in it, which was that mostly unnattractive women are the ones usually championing the "sexism" banner. Your perception is your reality, and my perception is mine. We are both entitled to that.
3 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
@Eric - I know you are a friend of hers. I dare you to go to her page and ask her to "reopen a debate" and see what happens to your facebook friendship...lol..let me know how that goes..
3 hours ago ·
D. Eric Harmon
D. Eric Harmon
@Andrao...I am a bit confused, so please, if you can, clarify a few things...(1) are you suggesting that you removed Julian's response because he called you a "wimp" and a "coward?" If so, did he call you this before or after you removed his post? If he called you this in response to your deletion of his post, how is this an explanation for removing his post? (2) Are you suggesting that anyone who views that photo as sexist has a "skewed" view towards feminism? (3) Are you suggesting that the photo is simply humorous and not sexist? and (4) would you say someone had a skewed view about racism if they found offensive a picture which included a black male progressive with a sign that decried racism, and in the background are three minstrels in black face and huge Afro wigs, and the caption reads:Racism, only uppity niggers complain about it?

BTW, since I agreed with almost everything Julian wrote (except the name calling), I suppose that makes me a radical feminist too....

Also, could you please answer the question about my comparison to your "humorous" picture and my analogy to racism...
3 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
My first paragraph in my last post explains my reasoning why i deleted his post. My second paragraph outlines why he is not allowed on my page thereafter.

Question 2: Yes, especially if they are self proclaimed radical feminists themselves, or married to one.

Question 3: Your perception is your reality and my perception is mine. You choose to see no humour in the photo, and i choose to see no sexism in said photo.

Question 4: The three minstrels in black face and afrowigs would be white people underneath their costumes, right? They are not black, are they? The women in the hooters outfits in the photo are not women in costume only, but ACTUAL women. If they are ok portraying themselves as such, and making fun of "ugly" women who tell them to put their clothes on, who are we to call that "sexist"?

Your analogy, while witty, does not parallel with this photo, sorry.
3 hours ago ·
Capri Vegas
Capri Vegas
WOW.... r u serious??? lol, the rest of this aside, for the PHOTO part, some of what it said on that photo is true, not too sound shallow, but women will complain out of sheer jealousy because they cant look a certain way, whats ugly is peoples attitudes that want to judge other women like myself that work in that business, people have to stop being so conservative and open their minds,stop hating, and i know this because i work in that environment, these women look at it as sexism, i look at it as money, so in all honesty, "sexism" supports me, my kid, my bills, bought me my car, and pays for my university, i get no child support, and have no family to help me out,am not able to get a student loan, so its my way of life for the moment.whoever wants to judge , remember this, your not god, so you therefore have no right to. I dont find that picture offensive at all to be honest, i find it comical and somewhat true!
2 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Thank you Capri...well said...people will see what they WANT to see, at the end of the day...depending on their life experiences, and their circle of acquaintances, their view on things will be shaped by all of those determining factors...
2 hours ago ·
Capri Vegas
Capri Vegas
no prob, bring it on lol
2 hours ago ·
D. Eric Harmon
D. Eric Harmon
@Andrao...thanks for responding and the continued dialogue...okay...I do not feel that you answered my first question...remember, I said I was confused, and you just pointed to your first and second paragraph. I read them, and was confused, hence my question...perhaps I can explain my confusion...I try to ask questions rather than making assertions (ala the socratic method)...but because you did not clear up my confusion, I will make an assertion. Here it is...I find your explanation unsatisfactory in that you claim that Julian's name calling prompted you to delete his post, but he did not name call until AFTER you deleted his post, hence, it seems unlikely that this would be the reason you deleted his post...him calling you a "coward" and a "wimp" was a reaction to your deletion of his post...so if this is not the case, please explain why it isn't (that was my confusion)....I understand that he called you a name and you now refuse to allow him on your page, but again, he called you that after you deleted his post, not before...I am still at a loss, therefore, why you deleted his post in the first place....could you clarify?

I also find it very telling that you find no sexism in the photo...

Now about my analogy...you are incorrect about the minstrels being white people in black face. My analogy is that these are black men in black face and Afro wigs, degrading themselves to entertain the white supremacist power structure. As you may know, several minstrels were actually black men in black face who imitated white men who were doing an exaggerated imitation of black men...this is analogous to women who parade around in scantily clad clothing to service patriarchal desires and who defend their right to demean themselves...as you may well know, this is known as the Stockholm syndrome, and black people, as well as women in general, often suffer from this need to identify with the oppressor and to fulfill the oppressor's vision of what they are supposed to be and act like...so do not alter my analogy, for it holds...

In order for me to see my own sexism, I had to make comparisons to black males and white males via racism...if it is wrong when the analogy holds for racism, it holds for sexism, but since black men benefit from sexism, it is often hard for us to see our complicity with patriarchy...saying that only ugly women have a problem with sexism is the same as saying only progressive, liberation minded blacks had a problem with slavery or Jim Crow...do you agree with that, and can you see the comparison?
2 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
I'm pressed for time right now, so i will respond to your first question, and discuss the photo and sexism issue later, since i have too much to say on that.

For the last time, i deleted that dude's post because i did not want to engage in a discussion with someone who is a friend of the person i have issue with. I did not want anyone speaking FOR her to me, on HER behalf. Again, i outlined this in my private message response, which he posted on his blog, which you said you read. So why are you asking me this over and over again. I do not want to argue with Aganju's cohorts. If she will not engage me directly, i will not settle for one of her radical feminists lackeys arguing for her...

Are we clear on this now? 
2 hours ago ·
Denton Cockburn
Denton Cockburn
Laugh, cause that's kinda comical.
2 hours ago ·
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Andrão Brasileiro Fanático
Exactly what Im doing Denton...lol..
2 hours ago ·

*          *          *

We're almost done. 
I have some questions to Andrão:

1. Why did you bring up me being gay and Jewish? What was your intention in doing so? It's clear you enjoy the company of people who are homophobes, willing to call for the death of non-heterosexual people, and that you are not willing to publicly call them out. You will tell them not to post death threats as if this is a sufficient standard of ethical behavior, re: lesbian and gay rights to be free from threat and discrimination, violence and killing. I conclude that's not nearly sufficient to make you a trustworthy ally to me or any other non-heterosexual person, on this matter of being "pro-queer/SGL", just so you know. Not that you're pretending to me by ally. All you're saying is you have some lesbian and gay friends and so you take homophobic threats of violence and murder seriously. Would you take the threats seriously, seeing them as unfunny, if you didn't have lesbian and gay friends? Just wondering.

2. You claim you saw that Aganju and I are friends. Where? On Facebook? How is it that you can see Aganju's friend's list but I can't? I can only see my friend's in common with her. The same goes for your friend's list. So obviously you're lying. You have no proof I'm her Facebook Friend, as if it matters. Just admit you don't want to engage, rather than promoting your implausible explanations for why you won't publish and respond to my questions and challenges to you. And, if someone ELSE who is NOT a friend of Aganju asks you the same questions, shall I presume you WILL answer/address them responsibly? Or will you find another way to duck out of being accountable to what you do that is misogynistic yet again?

This isn't to be evasive about whether we are or are not friends. WE ARE. This is to call you out on your bold-faced lying, your duplicity, your lack of integrity, and your unscrupulousness. For the record, I never denied being her friend; I only challenged you to answer the damn questions which have validity regardless of my connection to Aganju. But on this matter of you doing your own "research"... coupled with you looking at all Aganju's photos and reading up about her, which one of us now appears to you to be more of a stalker?

What the hell is it with you misogynist het men thinking a gay profeminst is attracted to you and/or stalking you? Really. Seriously. Because me perusing your public Facebook pages for proof that you're a liar and a misogynist, is hardly "stalking", right? And, if that does constitute stalking, then CLEARLY you going to Aganju's page, researching who her friends are, checking out lots of her photos, posting comments under five of them, reading up all about her and summarising what you've read to her, engaging her in conversation and then, when "scorned", berating her publicly constitutes something far more pernicious than "stalking", right? Especially when you use this information to slander a Black woman publicly and conspire with other misogynists to make it seem like the woman, not YOU, has the "issues" that you're not wishing to deal with.

3. Why do het men like you approach or engage with women with whom you politically disagree, when your own sexism and misogyny is obviously not going to be "attractive" to the women you respond to or engage with? Don't you already KNOW your sexism will be called out and otherwise challenged, or that the women will walk away? Or are you just so damned arrogant that you to think that women will want to be with you EVEN THOUGH you are deceitful and sexist?Why don't you spare women the trouble of having to find out by either being honest about your misogyny up front, or not engaging with them to begin with? I direct this question to ALL misogynist/sexist het men, including the two men below.

A friend of Andrão and co-slanderer of Aganju is a man named Terry L. Shed. Here's his pic:
Terry L. Shed

DaRohn Sercey is also misogynistic--I have this from a reliable source. Here's a pic of him:



In closing, I offer this to "The Masculist Bachelor", who appears to like his food bland:

Truth is like spicy hot sauce; some people like it on their food, even though it
burns them a bit when they ingest it, and other people just can't stomach
the hot sauce, so they prefer to eat their food without it.

- Andrae Williams