The King's Law on Kanye West

Okay.... so I haven't written about anything in a while... but what better way to break the writer's block than to discuss something that's just in my head right now. So ride on this roller coaster of thought with me, I might just make a point or two.

WT-Fuck is up with this nigga Kanye?

Let's talk about the positive shit first, so we can discount any counter-thoughts or accusations of "haterdome". Kanye is what many regard as a "musical genius" (which is debatable). Dude really does have a way for finding the right sound for a beat. He innovates the recreation of sounds through sampling and he usually pairs it with the artist very well... even when he is that artist... especially when he is that artist... his beats are tight.

Many regard his lyrical approach to be outstanding as well. While I don't agree with this statement, I can see why people would say it. I feel him sometimes, but he's usually so bent on feeling himself that I can't get into it (thus is the same for most other rappers... bravado is respected, but not when it's not clever). AT ANY RATE... he knows how to reach people... how to get their attention and how to keep it. He usually doesn't fail to meet his audiences expectations... I have been a fan of his for a minute. I stopped right before 808s and Heartbreak just cuz I've been on a pseudo-boycott of autotone for a minute... T-Pain was an exception, I just dont like everybody else using it.... that's why it got played out. Kanye was contributing to that, I thought him to be more creative than needing to follow the fad... EVEN IF HE DOES IT WELL AT TIMES... there was now nothing that really differentiated him from other artists at this point.

But this rant isn't about the plight of a "shining star" or an artist who lost his creativity and became a trend-dick-rider over time.... it's about a dumbass who apparently didn't understand the concept of Gladiator when he saw the movie.

Maximus had to learn that it wasn't because of his success and his unquestionable ability that he ended up being a champion... it was because the people loved him for it. Kanye... you are losing the love dude. You are seriously showing yourself to be the kind of person that I don't want to defend... or support... because of my CD buy money contributes to the attitudes you have towards people in general and somehow justify your dumbass choices... I want no part in it.

Now what am I saying? Am I saying that it's wrong to like his music... no, I love his music at times.... But this is getting old. We were on his side back during Katrina when he ousted baby Bush for his lack of concern for the historically and then-currently disenfranchised and oppressed ethnicity of the land. It made sense... it was a message... it didn't place him on the platform, rather it utilized the platform to send a message and get people moving. It was actually quite strong a statement... it motivated students across the nation to raise money for the Katrina Relief effort and donate to third-party assistance because the Red Cross didn't give a fuck either. Kanye actually motivated some good... I respected that. It actually helped that it was a racialized incident because it fueled political movement.

Then 2 years ago, when he was actually at a peak in his musical career... both in sales (cuz he beat out Fiddy on a bet that hes not gonna honor) and in creativity (cuz... hey... Graduation was the shit... and so was the Glow in the Dark Tour Concert). His fans had his back... even when he went to the VMAs and had an on-camera bitch fit for the world to see... crying about not getting a VMA, as if it is the pinnacle of public recognition. Even if he THINKS he puts his heart and soul into his videos and he THINKS they are so great, the VMA people don't. Get over it dude, you and your career will live without them. If you are as cocky/confident as you say you are in your music, you'll build a bridge and get over this shit... but no... you cry and bitch on camera and draw your fans in to have your back: "Kanye does deserve an award" "He's the voice of the new generation" "[insert verbal Kanye fellatio here]" "He didn't win because he's Black..." Okay... hold the press... this became racialized too, and while some rolled with the punches, I didn't think it was... I just thought it was because they don't like him. Kanye acts like a DIVA (and yes I'm going there in this blog) all the time... people like him are hell for stage managers to deal with because he thinks he knows the best way to do everything, and can do it all himself... invariably, he probably has fucked up something in the past or pissed somebody off because of it. It is quite possible for him to make great music and simultaneously be disliked by people who know him.

The truth was, he lost me there... if his goal is a VMA, not a Grammy... not maybe even starting a separate standard for what is considered awardable... but a VMA? GTFOH ... it's MTV!!! Do they even show music videos anymore? Why does their credibility matter? Wait.... they have credibility?

Impeccably, this is also when he decided to start going autotune... going more commercial to fit in the new industry standard of "successful hip-hop"... not by doing something on the next level from Graduation... but to fit in with T-Pain, Wayne, Yung Berg, and everybody else who has failed to meet the standards of anything made by the late great Roger Troutman of Zapp.

Either way... 2 years later, on 9/13/09... this muthafucka forgets how to hold his Hennessy and basically ruins a moment for one of America's top selling pop artists. He decided to show his undying fan hood for Beyonce on stage with an improvised exhibition of ratchetness...

THE KING'S LAW ON BEYONCE LOVE: If you are a heterosexual male it is decent to be a Beyonce fan. However, if it isn't limited to her phyiscal appearance, her singing ability, or her sex appeal, you are probably not heterosexual. In no way amd I condemning you for it, but just understand that it is no longer a secret to the rest of the world that you are in fact gay.

Some argue that his intent was 'sound' because Beyonce's Video was better than Taylor Swift's... I can't argue that, I actually don't watch television... and if you know me, I'm just not gonna argue in Bey's favor in most cases. But after making an ass of himself, he was swiftly escorted out of the VMAs... he apparently when home and drunk-blogged an explanation, further inducing the night of Kanye-infected Sambocity. And my prediction... once the white people start making this a racial thing by calling him out of his name, the Black people will run to the defense again.

Well... not me... regardless of some of the Bullshit comments I'm reading on twitter where folks are using "nigger" very freely... regardless of how much I hate that, and would usually fight against it.... I will not support this nigga no more neither.

I hated it on campus when shit would happen, and we (black students) would always feel or be charged to react and comment and defend. It was the motivation for many unfruitful advocacies... having to argue against YCT Affirmative Action Bake Sales, or ethnic-costume themed parties, or insensitive comments that offend multitudes... it was never fun, and we never ended in a better place at the end of the day. But we did it because we had to, because we were defending the right to be ourselves, and to own and respect our cultures.

Well if Kanye keeps putting me in these situations as a black man... maybe he needs to end his career. Maybe the limelight is too much for him and he can't take it. Maybe he just needs the attention because all of the people who were willing to deal with him are gone or they have died (RIP to his mother). Maybe he is suppressing his homosexuality to a point that he has to draw attention to himself just to prove to himself he's not gay... that's why he wants to be seen on camera with a woman for the first time in his career, but oops... she's bisexual which means at times, she actually prefers a woman over you. Suspect.... i think so.

At the end of the day, I don't care what his motivations for gaining attention are, i just think he doesn't deserve it. So I actually hope not to comment much on dude after this rant. Just wanted to explain to myself in writing (just in case I forget ... i can come back and read it), why it is I don't like Kanye's bitch ass, and why i think his career needs to end.

Hater? no... I'm just really annoyed... you cant observe popular culture without dealing with shit like this so it shouldn't be new... but if I don't pay attention to Perez Hilton, Britney Spears, or anybody else who finds their name on Mediatakeout.com way too often... why would I continue to entertain this fuck boy Kanye...

I can't... I wont.... if you do. That's fine. Just don't be disillusioned by his success... accept that he's actually a lame at heart; he's just a dumbass that makes good music... don't lie to yourself or the world... it's not what Michael Jackson would have wanted.

Time Machine: The Black Greek Problem Pt. 10

Of all of the things Greeks proclaim to be, IGNORANT would be the most fitting... but nobody will own up to that. the truth of the matter is the ignorance is natural... to simply not know something or know better is actually natual, because you can't change what you don't know unless you understand that it is available to be learned.

But the All-Knowing, All-Powerful, and somewhat ever present culture of Greek life is far beyond disrepute... for we all know a few things (even if we act like we don't), for example:

1. The first inter-collegiate black greek organization was originally created for the purpose of helping black students graduate from a PWI during a point in history where society didn't support the idea of blacks being educated.



2. Every BGLO since has been founded on similar principles of strengthening their membership within and allowing that to affect their communities in a positive way.



3. These organizations were created to enhance the undergraduate experience of its members... thus we are expected to submit to the NPHC in order to add substance to our campus unity... (I repeat ". . .")



4. These organizations and the influence they hold are a privilege (earned) and not a right (self-substantiated)... or are they?

------------------------------------------------------
I'll start today's rant/discussion by talking about the inconsistencies of national tradition. Originally, these organizations were meant to employ efforts from qualified applicants who could add to the greater good of the organizations' purpose - to better the organization and the community it resides within. Over the years you would see the BGLOs claim victory either through not-so-visible national initiatives or through the success of their individual members (who technically didn't do it for the organization)... This proves one thing... these orgs love the STATUS... a synonym for significance (as opposed to substance). It is what they tout, it is what they brag about... it is what they perpetuate.

While these organizations were founded by and for undergraduates, in the status quo it seems it is more made for the business of graduate members... the socialites and bourgeois folks that would like for these organizations' selection process to be so discriminant that they appear to be elite(ist) organizations...

Don't get it twisted, if you go hang around the women at Boule and Delta Nat'ls, I guarantee you their general demeanor is going to be vastly different from the individuals you have met at the undergraduate level. In fact, they act as if they'd rather some of the undergraduates NOT be members.... kinda weird especially when the orgs were made for the undergrads but the graduates are attempting to control everything.... and what's more is that half of active graduates were never active as undergraduates and thus don't (and don't try to) understand the plight, purpose, or pursuits of the undergraduate members anymore. Delta's current President is the first undergraduate member to be Pres in a very long time...

The initiatives of the BGLOs isn't so much directly affected by this divide, but it is indirectly affected by the lack of relationship (or desire for one) between the two groups... The truth of the matter is this... GRADUATE CHAPTERS WOULD PREFER TO KILL THE UNDERGRADUATE PORTION OF GREEK LIFE.
--------------------------------------------
Frankenstein's Monster


Written in 1818, Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" explored motifs of responsibility and abandonment while telling the tale of an abhorrant creation. Catch a full summary of the book here.


Dr. Victor Frankenstein literally created a monster... frightened by its appearance, Frankenstein left his monster behind, not claiming any accountability for its creation or existence until the monster started harming others (in fact KILLING them)... Frankenstein eventually vows to kill the monster in order to keep it from harming others and in order to gain retribution for the blood that is actually on Frankenstein's hands.


So odd, that a white female from the UK could compose a fictional novel in 1818 that would forshadow the current phase of BGLO Life (that started in 1990). For more history behind why the transition happened, I'd recommend reading Black Greek 101 by Walter Kimbrough.


Before I discuss this analogy in further detail... let's get something straight... just like on my blog on "haters", it is asinine, ignorant, and not characteristic of educated (college) people to redefine words for their own benefit. Let's define a word that will be used in this blog from here on out, but only in the way it is TRUELY defined.

pledge (v.) - To offer or guarantee by a solemn binding promise; To commit

While "pledging/business" is a concept all on its own, to pledge seriously ONLY means to commit oneself (which is why I DONT pledge allegiance to the American Flag... I'mma follow a flag?... get serious). Back in the day, when people committed themselves to Greek Life, it was to service, tradition, brotherhood, and success... there were very high standards from individuals who were members of BGLOs. They were expected to contribute to the org and to the community outside of the org, submit to VERY STRICTLY CONTROLLED/"set" rituals and traditions that facilitated their submission to and participation in brotherhood/sisterhood... and all the while, they were expected to do great things and GRADUATE.


What happened? I mean really? If it was all GOOD, why did it ever become a BAD thing... simple reason... cuz PEOPLE STARTED DYING. People started realizing the threat and severity of the actions performed while people were attempting to commit themselves to a "greater purpose". At no point in my preliminary research on Greek Life did they metion military service, armageddon, or saving the world (in the sci-fi movie sense)... so YT-FUCK would I be dying for this?... please... please... try to defend people DYING for greek membership on my comments, I swear I'll dedicate a blog just for your dumb ass.


I digress.... pledging became seen as bad.... It went from a traditional practice to strictly against the law (and against the bylaws of BGLO constitutions) over night... now this is where things get iffy. Thousands of members from EACH organization have participated in, supported, and perpetuated the act of "pledging" on their campuses and even in grad chapters (not anymore usually)... then once it went bad, they tried to tell the undergrads to stop "hazing/pledging"... the undergraduate response was to resist the notion of this being okay for fear that if they didn't they would be ridiculed and not respected by the older members of their organizations (regardless of if they told them not to pledge). Thus pleding continued in something that is now called the "underground process"; it gained this name because people used to pledge in public before then.


Throughout this time, people(undergrad and grad) celebrated in the fact that their traditions were being upheld. Simultaneously, graduate chapters continued to conduct intake but they significantly decreased their frequency of "underground processes"... as a result you have a generation of one doctrine active at the undergrad level, and a generation of another doctrine at the top. As a result of this dichotomy of intake methodology, labels were created to distinguish the difference between those who committed themselves traditionally (Made/Real) and those who SOLELY participated in the newly revised national education processes (Paper). I would say that the two are not completely mutually exclusive because MOST people who are made are certified members of their organization (meaning they have things in common with the Paper folks), but the things that the Paper folks do NOT endure is what separates them... further more the phenomon of Ghost/Renegade (those whom were "made" but never had an approved application...) members would affect the playing field as well. For the most part, the "paper" community would have no voice in undergrad for a long time.


And then... more bad shit started happening... more investigations, more hospital visits, and thus more law suits. The institution of pledging was now not only considered dangerous but expensive. Dues rates in BGLOs would steadily increase over time in order to pay for insurance, court fees, and punitive damages to plaintiffs who sued as a result of pledging becoming illegal. The BGLOs have since taken a hardline stance on hazing/pledging:

1. They don't condone or recognize hazing/pledging as related to their membership intake processes.



2. They require all aspiring applicants to sign a waiver stating that they will not participate or allow hazing/pledging activities to occur.



3. If a plaintiff files suit, they will refer to the waiver, and thus send liability to the specific chapter (usually undergrad)



4. If a chapter is pinned, the graduate structure/national organization will turn narc on their brothers/sisters (thus getting them expelled from school, thrown in jail, or removed from the organization) in order to "save" the national organization.

While this makes logical sense... This is so STUPID. How is it that the graduate members (Frankenstein) don't want to own up to the fact that they THOUGHT they were doing something good in the past, and it went wrong... why is it that at the end of the day it was tradition and expected when they did it, but now it is an individual choice that deserves severe consequences? Why is it that the people who started, perpetuated, defended, promoted, lived with a certain tradition are able to abandon it as if they didn't create it??? and then when it becomes a problem, rather than trying to work through something to halt it... they attempt to KILL it... and not even it, the people who are practicing it. How is it that the graduate chapters share NO ownership?....


Frankenstein in this case will do anything to save their own necks, and keep their pockets from thinning... if they say it's because they are cutting off the arm in order to preserve the body, it's a LIE... the body still has members who were hazed, did haze, and do believe in hazing... you would have to kill the organization to eradicate all traces of the malevolent process. If they tell you that they are preserving the true sanctity of brotherhood/sisterhood, it's a LIE... they will throw people to the wolves in order to secure their longevity (I'll show that on future blogs), and the national organization (as an entity) does NOT have control over whom will accept whom as their brother/sister... the divides still do exist, and will continue to until gradute entities take more responsibility for the monster (pledging) that they have created.

This would FIRST start with them fully revamping their intake processes... if they think it's acceptable to change a (let's say) 8 week, 6 day, 1 hr, 35 minute, and 0 second process into 3 days... they're WRONG. You can't become acquainted with individuals, learn information, or familiarize yourself with business at the same level if you reduce the timeframe to 4.7% of the original time invested. This is the dillema between "paper" and "made" individuals... papers attempt to commit themselves to the work of their orgs, and made folks look at them as if they have a 95.3% desparity in commitment. For the graduate population to act as if that is insignificant means that they must not be paying attention to the community dynamics.... but why should we expect them too... they're not even furthering the purpose of their orgs anymore.
----------------------------------------
Grad folks effin' up...


Back in 2007, did you that Zeta Phi Beta's National Executive Board expelled a member who discovered embezzlement activities by the then current President? How is it that somebody who is doing their job... being committed to her sisters and stewarding their funds... can be expelled for informing her sisters that one of their own is stealing from them? Furthermore... how did the Executive Board allow this to happen??? maybe because the Exec Board Chair would later become the President... and regardless of her reputation in the world of comedy, She would bring a wide range of criticism to the sorority of "finer womanhood" due to her long history of vulgarity.

And then... this story about a narcissistic "leader" who wanted to imortalize herself with a wax statue, actually thought it would be okay to use $900,000 of AKA's money to get this done.

And again... last year, Fraternity/Sorority Presidents, namely Darryl Matthews of Alpha Phi Alpha, tried to denounce the "n word" on behalf of their entire organizations... how do you do that? What authority allows this kind of audacious promulgation?

I'm guessing Greek Life gives people big nuts to feel that they can do/say whatever they want...

Most recently, a remake of Jay-Z's D.O.A. has been released referring to "paper greeks" has been virally marketed over the internet... the saddest thing about this song is the UNREALISTIC belief that pledging will outlast the national intake processes from this point on... Furthermore, people just do NOT/canNOT seem to learn that if you would like to prolong the traditional ways of intake, the only way that will happen is if NOBODY KNOWS ABOUT IT (which in turn will lead to them diming on you too). Bringing attention to the fact that you "pledged" only brings attention to the graduate structures, the school administration, the community (who will dime you if they'd rather be paper), as well as the police... yes... they are getting involved now-a-days...


Furthermore, these processes used to add to the substance of their organizations and their members... the need to brag about it or share it with the public is evidence of feelings of low self worth and esteem... they want everybody to know they pledged in order to gain significance, because the truth is their substance doesn't substantiate their importance anymore.... yep i said it... most greeks now a days are trash and dont deserve it.

------------------
So what's the point... in short....


Black UT is a mircrocosm of our society in the U.S... if all this confusion and disarray was happening, it was bound to hit UT as well... some of us had thought we were already seeing it... Fall 07 would prove otherwise. This continual abuse of powers used to take advantage of those who would submit would eventually place some in a place to be scapegoated as the individuals at fault... all the while, nobody is looking for any type of solution.

The King's Law on Society: Promiscuity

**EXPLICIT CONTENT**

So... I have an honest confession to make... I enjoy sex.

Now that we have gotten that out of the way... I feel I can be honest about others now.
----------------------------------------------
PROMISCUITY DEFINED AND ANALYZED

We live in a very sexualized society. The concept that "sex sells" is nothing new, however it is now permeating into venues that were once sectioned off from its carnal influence. Now we got former Disney pop stars telling folks to "If You Seek Amy" (eff-u-see-k em-ee), current teenage Disney stars attempting to be sexy, Lil' Wayne using his daughter to convey how much he wants to fornicate with "Every Girl" (a song mentioning said teenage Disney star), and increasing wedlock childbirth rates that have turned a taboo topic into a TV Reality show (16 and Pregnant). Sex is still a selling point, so much so that now it doesn't hint at a lifestyle that was once expected to remain secret, it hints at a lifestyle that people would like to be more open to public acceptance... This includes anything from the fight for homosexual rights in America to women's fight with the sexually conservative public to feign disrepute as an effect of their sexual lives; the latter fight is what we will discuss today.

Women, or at least those women who would like to have the same degree of openness with their sexuality that men are afforded, have tried to force this issue by being honest about their sexuality (it's nature, it's preferences, it's frequency)... so much so that some don't care if you know who they are getting banged by right now... which is all fine and dandy, but if the people in your society "right"/write the "rules" on what is acceptable, and you are aware of the status quo... YOU CANNOT COMPLAIN WHEN YOUR ACTIONS ARE LABELED...

Promiscuity (n.) - miscellaneous mingling or selection of persons or things : indiscriminateness

So, the truth: Men have had and will forever have a strong reputation for being sexually promiscuous. However, we live in a society that has and seems to forever will forgive this as a natural occurrence as opposed to a sequence of bad decisions. To illustrate my larger point, I'll have to begin my discussion by explaining evolutionary psychology...

Evolution, for those of you living under rocks or are too religious to learn about it, is the THEORY that over time any species will adapt genetically to better survive in their environments. This is evidenced by the THEORY of "natural selection" in which individuals within a species will choose to only mate with those who will produce healthy (well-equipped to survive) offspring.

Even if you don't believe in evolution, you have to recognize that this THEORY of natural selection makes perfect sense. It's the reason why people date people who are attractive them... every feature that gets evaluated and judged are subconsciously ingrained as requisites for suitable mating.... facial features, hair quality, hairiness, height, muscle build, potential for obesity, genetically inherited disease potential, intelligence, inhibition and impulse control... all qualities that a mate would like to have us much control over when choosing the traits of their children and the individual who will help raise them.

The issue with humanity is that we are so "intelligent" that we have concluded that it is beneficial to use sex as an agent of dual functionality: procreation and enjoyment. Intelligence is reference here because as human we've determined that the one of the most intelligent non-human species would be the dolphin, (correct me if i'm wrong) the only other known creature to have sex for non reproductive reasons.

This is where "intelligence" gets somewhat nonsensical in relation to evolutionary psychology. As a society, we have pushed sexuality to a point we rely on scientific achievements (prophylactics and other forms of contraception) in order to divert the true purpose of sexual activity... so much so now that the purposeful result of sex, reproduction, is(now more so than not) an unwanted consequence of the action... Society is in the process of trying to understand sex to be more than what it is actually intended for, and as a result places a significance upon it that exceeds its substance.

**The true end to this is that the action that is intended to produce life is now manufacturing discomfort/death (via STDs), and society is trying catch up with its own destructive choices by finding cures for the sexually spread plagues.**
---------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, even though it is not right that men have a variety of sexual partners overtime, it does correlate with the sexual behavior of a healthy breeding animal (I guess this is why women like to call men DOGS... which always bothers me because inference leads me to believe that "Dogs" only have sex with "Bitches", in the literal since at least). Women on the other hand, the gatekeepers of breeding, are supposed to choose the most suitable partner after observing what ever existing mating rituals, which for humans includes courting, talking, spitting game, establishing familiarity, etc. (ultimately - dating). Even while having non-reproductive sex this had been a standard in our society because the risk of pregnancy was significant enough to make natural selection of sexual partners more discriminating.

In short, people used to care who they were having sex with. This meant that the supply of sex from females was shorter than the demand... some dude technically shouldn't be getting any... of course our intelligence has also allowed a barter system that monetizes the value of the sexual experience, prostitution - if you can't prove you deserve it, go out and buy it.
------------------------------------------------
The truth of about WHOREs

Waged Helpers of Open Relation Ejaculation - they get paid to do what most will do for free, yet it comes free of commitment, no strings attached... it's the oldest profession in the world, it's foolish to think this is ever going away. Beyond the religious aspect of it being a career rooted in sin, prostitution is shunned by society because it contributes to actions that produce an unmarriageable society... male or female, nobody wants to marry anybody who has been overly promiscuous.

However, with procreation on the backburner, what women are really competing for is their right to exclusive partnership. In order to have a competitive advantage over the WHOREs, they offer sex earlier in the relationship and this TEMPORARILY keeps their partner's attention... that is until people came along that didn't need the WAGES or the RELATIONSHIP... drop the W and the R... what do you get? HOEs.

HOE is the label for the individual whose purpose in society is to Help Others Ejaculate... this is a key reason why the term is somewhat exclusive to females, because promiscuous males aren't necessarily helping others get off... they're getting themselves off. While HOEs might enjoy sex, what HOEs are really doing is providing sex for others to enjoy... at least WHOREs get paid to do this...

Have you ever met somebody who is very sexually active? so much to the point that they don't even always enjoy it, they're simply doing it to keep somebody else's attention? I think those are the real HOEs, the ones who are completely indiscriminant in their sexual life... but the word is used to label a larger group than just these women... some women are called HOEs when they're just sexually liberated and the make their decisions similar to how men make theirs... this is okay right?

From a male-chauvenist point of view, NO... but I actually don't think it to be much of a problem personally... It's actually the other women who have a problem with it. Women are much quicker to label another woman a HOE than a man is (another reason why the word is reserved for them and not men). Women are so competitive and at times feel entitled to what they desire so much so that they will HATE on other women and malign their reputations... the sad thing is, most women don't want to be HOEs but they want to be in the HOEs' shoes. Women, more so than men, determine how much promiscuity will get you labeled a HOE... if it's not vindictive women in competition for the men in question, then it's the women that are already in that man's life - their mother, sister, aunt, grandmother... If you are loose, you will never meet their standard.
-----------------------------------------------------------
So what does this all mean?

I'm writing these rules, but I don't write these rules, I just observe what they are... promiscuity is NOT something to be pursue in order to drive a message of social gender equality into people's heads... that is a surefire way of having them discredit anything in your message to begin with. Even if you're the type of HOE who enjoys what you do, at the end of the day if you can be considered a HOE rather than a companion, something is wrong.

Women could actually run this world if they knew how much power they had... and not just sexual power (although the rest may stem from that), women have the ultimate power of persuasion... if they came together, they could have the world believing that open sexuality is the way all of us should live... but that will never happen. As quickly as a woman will stand up to declare her sexual liberty, another one will call her out of her name and tell that HOE to sit down.

While our intelligence has provided us venues to entertain and utilize the existence of HOEs, it has also provided barriers to ensure HOEs aren't viewed in high regard. Not only is it the (somewhat, if not blatantly oppressive) standard of acceptable womanhood that men have projected, but its the standards that women promote for themselves as well.

I guess the question really is... are we as a society too harsh on labeling HOEs, or not harsh enough?

LEAVE COMMENTS... WE'LL DISCUSS MORE NEXT TIME

Time Machine: Us and Them Pt. 8 (Comprehensive Observation)

For those of you who are reading my thoughts but don't know who "the thinker" is, I feel it's important that I bring you up to speed.

I am King Anthony Derrell Williams, I. I call myself "King" because I treat my son as royalty, a "Prince" if you will. I tend to try and live up to the name, but I guarantee you that regardless of how arrogant/cocky I may come off (or may actually be), I'm much more than a ball of ego-waste.

Growing up as an Army kid, you learn not to create strong attachments with anything outside of your home, because nothing else is constant... You're going to have to move away at some point and leave behind your school, your friends, your regional hobbies... this means I never got too involved in school activities before we finally settled in TX (in other words, I've never played organized sports).

Moving to Texas would further prevent any involvement in extra-curriculars. We were renting a house in San Antonio while trying to sell our former homes in Clarksville, TN and Woodbridge, VA. Paying 4 rents (my dad lived in an apt. in Marlyand) with one household income means alot of things...

1. Moms was working 2 jobs...


2. I had no ride to/from school other than the bus


3. no ride meant no extra-currics/sports for me


4. The extra hours weren't going to leisure buys, so I was still that dude in school with only one new pair of shoes per year and no name brand clothing.

By the time I was in high school, the fam's financial situation started to improve, however it was too late to do sports because of the way things are in SA. If you don't play in middle school, you'll never get PT in HS, simply because the coaches want as many students as possible to get scholarships, so they push the best/most proven ones forward. The reason they can't just promote everybody is because there aren't enough scouts that visit SA; there aren't very many flights that arrive straight into SA (as opposed to Austin, Dallas, or Houston), so when scouts do arrive, their attention is boss-hogged.... I digress... It wasn't a problem, I just realized that I couldn't play sports... that doesn't mean that I couldn't be cordial with my fellow students... right?
-----------------------------------------
I would soon find that regardless of if I looked like them, knew the same people they knew, or hung out at the same places they did... we didn't belong around each other. Tony and athletes (mainly football players) and like oil and water. I've always been very vocal about my contempt for those people... i was about to say "individuals" but that's the problem... if they were "individuals" I wouldn't feel the need to lump them into a special category of random coons I'd rather ignore... "individuals" who plays sports have always had my respect. However, people who are simply a part of the athlete pack don't really get much attention from me unless I'm observing the dumb shit they're getting into.

But how is that right Tony? How can you "hate" on them like that? What did they do to you?

I've always had to field these questions to the people who try to defend the others, as if they're helpless. Essentially, it's not right for me to perpetuate another unjustified venue of self-segregation within the Black community... and if you're a reader, you know that I don't HATE these coons, I just dislike them and I believe that to be harmless... but what did they do to me? Some answers aren't as concrete as an event, or a justification.... sometimes it is possible to just not like a muthafucka...

I mean over the years, I tried (... I really tried...) to find redeeming qualities for the GROUP that I have repeatedly exhibited verbal disdain toward. I'm reminded of a time where sports brought large populations together for a common trivial purpose, to be entertained by competition. The entertainers/athletes began to realize their importance to this trivial cause. Some used it as a platform to liken themselves to superhuman/hero status... others actually became heroes...I'm reminded of Black athletes breaking important ground in arenas where we were once not allowed to play... I remember stories of INDIVIDUALS such as Paul Robeson, Fritz Pollard, Arthur Ashe, Jackie Robinson, Muhammad Ali, Jim Brown, Tommie Smith and John Carlos... I mean I'm reminded of a time where these really were heroes because some leagues, and more specifically some teams (and other teams) just didn't want US playing in their sport... I think somewhere between Malcolm and Martin being taken from us and forced integration, people forgot about the struggle... and not what it means to struggle, but the fact that we ever had one... Instead we're stuck with a bunch of Pac-Man Jones-ass dudes walking around campus like the concrete they walk on is sacred.

Ever since High School, they (the one's who helped me form my negative opinions about them all) have been offered care-free rides through the same paths that I had to achieve my way through. They end up being spoiled and handed everything where in the past their requests/needs would've been completely ignored, but they ignore that fact. And while other students are on campus trying to ensure the retention of our rights and privileges as Black students (including the athletes), we got these coons making a case for anybody with views in opposition to our contention....and I'm supposed to be cool with these muthafuckas?!? WELL BREAK OUT THE FRIED CHICKEN AND LET'S HAVE A PARTY... THE ATHLETES ARE HERE!!!

It also doesn't help that my intelligence is always challenged or insulted by this mob that lacks individuality. If there is one thing that I will always take as disrespect without exception, it's a shot at my intelligence. I will never be anybody's fool or be considered stupid. And if I am to you, that's fine as well... I just don't respect your system of thinking because I know that to be an irrational conclusion... I will admit (on my part) that it is childish/harsh to assume them all to be of one mind/likeness, but I avoid more potential ignorance that way... there are times that I'd like to be proven wrong... this is one of them, but I remain correct based on my 9 years of "student-athlete" observation.
------------------------------------------------
Student v. Student-Athlete (Athlete-Student, maybe?)

By definition of purpose, as opposed to action, a student is somebody whose objective is to be educated and recognized for the completion of set curriculum. What this means is if you are at least trying or you at least want your degree you are a student. The issue with this is that most athletes don't seem to care about any type of scholarly advancement... it's usually about getting to the league/getting paid, getting women (at least they don't discriminate by race), or getting attention... no matter how retarded they have to act or sound in order to receive it.

I'm not the only one who has felt this way, that's why over time the black community has developed an "agree to disagree" social construct with the athletes in order to minimize irresolvable disputes... they do them, we do us... and as result, they aren't too much considered "students" by those on the other side of the veil. The athletes may not use the same logical brightline to dichotomize our groupings, however they understand it as well... they hang out amongst themselves the same way we do. This is to be expected though, sports organization is modeled after familial structures which facilitate strong social bonds between teammates. This helps to build their trust for one another and makes cooperative game play more likely and more effective.... they don't to much like applying this theory to anybody who's not on the team though... they don't rely on the same comforts in racial/ethnic similarities that the rest of us do, cuz "Massa" aka Coach, got them covered.

Anybody not accompanying them on the team (via assumption theory) is

1. a benefactor - somebody who gives charitably in order to impart well wishes upon the recipient


2. a bopper - somebody looking to get something from the person in question; these advances are usually only entertained when it's a sexual favor


3. a hater.... because natural if I don't want to give you anything or dont want to take anything from you... I don't like you...????


4. a nobody... and they'll attempt to treat you as such.

Because it's their job to be physical, they run an automatic assumption of physical superiority... this assumption happens to get exposed periodically... most recently/frequently in 2005-06, there were the Football Afterparty fights. Since then, personal beefs have been squashed and we have returned to the "agree to disagree" based segregation of social interests in the community. Sadly, I think things are actually best that way.

Some may be offended by what I'm saying, or question my ability to be cordial/friends with any athlete if these are my opinions... as I stated before, there is a difference between somebody who owns their own identity and happens to play a sport, and somebody who lets the sport define them and who they are (significance v. substance). The issue he is, because of our segregation, the things that define their significance/substance are not the same things that would determine ours... while institution that pays for their "education" lumps them in as a part of the general black demographic (as to suggest they are a part of the community), the truth couldn't be more scarce if you tried to infer from those context clues.

Over time, instead of relying on each other for advocacy, support, camaraderie , or general comfort based on our similarities... students and student athletes have decided to let the differences keep us apart in hopes that we don't bump heads to often.

The main agents in this segregation however would be the students... the ones who avoid contact, conversation, and cordiality with the athletes... yup that'd be people like me. Why? cuz they're not here for what I'm here for (usually). I don't feel the need to give anybody the benefit of the doubt about their motives or their stance as a black college student when they ignore community issues that they could influence (for the better in most cases). I don't underestimate the student-athlete's potential influence... I just refuse to overestimate the relevance or significance of their presence in the community... a National title doesn't help make the campus a place that WE can all "home".... it simply takes more than that.

... While this seems like a random rant, it would end up being a heated debate in the future semesters at UT... especially once Dr. Moore came over from LSU.

**For the record, these observations are of male athletes... I will chill with somebody from the Womens Track Team ANYDAY**

Why you wanna playahate on me???

EXPLICIT LANGUAGE WARNING!!! This is NOT a batch of wisdom... it is truly a rant.
---------------------------------------
It is "human" for us to question and criticize that which is presented to us to be the unrefutable truth. The most highly regarded and supported text is also the world's most scrutinized text.

With that said... why is it ever a surprise to the masses that somebody will have an opinion? Is it not my (or others') right to think for themselves? Is it not your right to disagree? Sure... but your disagreement SHOULD NOT come to the following conclusion everytime you don't understand the disagreement...

"You're a hater"

I hate the word "hater"... I hate it more than the word "swag"... I hate it more than I hate stupid people... cuz it's usually when I hear somebody use the word that I realize how stupid they are.

HATE is a very strong word... just as love is. Both are very much overused, however that doesn't justify their overuse. Hate isn't a trendy word/concept/topic... it's been around forever and will not go away. Words like "tight" "crunk" "mark" (I went old school with that) "swagger" "Perez Hilton".... these will all go away, so feel free to play them out as much as possible... but please save yourself the embarrassment of utilizing a malapropism because you're confused about the nature of human/public opinion.
---------------------------------------------
Hate (n.) - to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest

Notice all those adjectives and adverbs in the definition? that means you don't hate something if you simply dislike it. People love to throw the word "hater" around when they really mean "disliker"... but nobody's gonna say that cuz it actually sounds worse. Somebody realized this to the point that the created the phrase "hate on" in order to make the thought sound more unique to what they were trying to convey... however it still misuses the word. There is still a difference between an actual HATER, and a "hater".

I'll use the best example I have to prove my point... if you know me, you saw this coming before you go this far down the blog...

Beyonce.

Wow... now let me start with the good news. Beyonce is an enormous talent. You cannot deny the strength of her singing voice, her success as a member of one of the most successful female RnB groups, her dedication to becoming a better all-around entertainer, or her business savvy and the way she cheats her fans out of money by re-releasing the same albums over and over again. HOWEVER... that does not mean I have to enjoy her music.

All these Beyonce-lovers are walking around looking, waiting, wanting to walk out of the front door of "stuck on her nuts mansion" to tell somebody why they'll never be invited in the clubhouse... I care... I really do... please sense my sarcasm.

Fans of Bey, understand that her music is made for single women (usually embittered by bad relationships), women with low self-esteem (and need to hear a message that makes them feel like they're in charge of their situation), or people in general who like to shake their ass (cuz she has decent production occasionally). I am none of the three... so if you call me a Bey-"hater" (which really means disliker), why would that matter? OOOHHHHH ... you THINK it matters cuz you think I really HATE her... but wouldn't that be my prerogative as well???? And why is it your damn business? If it isn't affecting her, why do you need to defend her? Is my lack of desire to hear her music going to kill her career? Does that upset you? Don't answer that, save the oxygen for people who have meaningful shit to talk about.

People have opinions.. I happen to be very opinionated. People who call other people "haters" are opinion-"haters"... they want the rest of the world to think like them.... they share traits with Hitler and Stalin and Bill O'Reily.... but hey they're entitled to their opinions too. Why is nobody calling them "haters"... OOOOHHHH, that's because they actually are HATERS. I guess the term is reserved for those whose opinions are simply just that... and people whose opinions actually lead to bad shit are excused.

Slaveowners were HATERS, the Turks are some HATERS (read about the Armenian Genocide), North Korea is ran by a HATER, Teri McMillan is a (man)HATER (just cuz she doesn't know where to place her love...), PETA is a HATING-ass-organization (for a good cause, but HATE none-the-less)... Do you get my point... hate actually means something, and dumbfucks like YOU (if you use the word) are killing it's meaning.

And if LOVE is the antithesis of HATE, and it's losing its meaning, you wonder why LOVE is losing its... HATE implies that I wish bad things would happen to you, that I wish you would die, or that I wish you would just stop existing...

I HATE racism, I HATE really hot days outside, I HATE when Financial Aid is late with my money, I HATE LOVE-HATERS, I actually HATE HATEFUL people... Be and her fans/underachieving women of the world who wish they had "haters" do not command that kind of attention...

***Side-Note... Bey is the best example... these words also apply to all of you Wayne and Jay-Z Stans in the world... it's okay to like somebody that other people don't like. The world will not end if I prefer to not hear what I believe to be gimmick rap.... especially when D.O.A. is nothing but a "hater" track... it's cool when he does it, right?***

People are walking around listening to this young lady thinking that they are her... excuse my Russian but "hoe sit down." Nobody is "hating" on you and your sad attempts to be "significant" enough to be "hated"/disliked.... and it's not attractive either. Whatever dumbass came up with this theory that "haters make me greater" need to fall back too. True - adversity can make you stronger, but if it takes somebody telling you that they don't like you for you to get your shit together, you just need some Jesus (or a Brain, shoutout to the Scarecrow from the Wiz). If somebody really HATED you, there's a good chance you'd be dead by now or at least somebody would've made an attempt at taking your life... ask people who had REAL HATERS that... MLK, Malcom X, Harry Potter, that guy in Smokin' Aces... Getoveryourself.com
----------------------------------
It never occurs to "hater"-"haters" that some of these outside opinions might have merit though. Like if I tell you your tracks look old and you should consider getitng your hair re-did, that doesn't mean I'm talking down, or I don't like you, or that you're a better person now because I called you out... IT REALLY MEANS YOUR HAIR LOOKS LIKE SHIT. Damn... it just goes to show you that people really dont know how to handle honesty... and you wonder why people walk through life lying to your punk-ass.

In summation... "hater" is a fake concept, and isn't even worth using, because if it's wrong to have an opinion, then it's wrong to be human... Your stance on calling somebody a "hater" makes you a "hater" too... but pots love to call the kettle black tho...

At the end of the day, I'mma blast my MJ and ignore his "haters"... ignore the "hater"-"haters" that think I'm a lowly person cuz it's not Bey I'm jamming... and I'mma enjoy my day. You should try it. Focusing on "hate" is part of the reason why people can't focus on substance... so busy worried about having people DISLIKE you that you cant do something that actually matters... Not to say I've never been guilty... but maybe I'm just "hating"