Is Mixed Race better?- Black Genetics(Part 2 of 4)

My last post was about who is black/African. But for part two I wanted to address the idea of race mixing.  It has been an issue for hundreds of years.  And for black people at this moment in time it’s a serious issue.  Black people have been taught by this racist society that looking African is a bad thing.  We are taught that being black means being ugly and inferior.  So I ask the question…is being mixed race better? is being less black-looking better?  In this racist culture many people would say it does.  many black people that are full of self hatred would agree for sure.  This video(above) is very disturbing for many reasons.  This black women has obviously lost her damn mind.  This braindead fool thinks a “super race” will be created by race mixing. She doesn’t believe in black power or black unity.  She talks about the greatness of having melanin and seeing the greatness in yourself.  Which is no a bad thing.  But she’s talking only about the greatness of black women and how they will birth the new “super race”.  She talking about giving the black womb to other races of men other than black men. Is this black greatness?  is making mix raced babies the answer to racism? She sounds very intelligent and articulate.  But I’m not falling for her nonsense.  It sounds like just an excuse to hate black men and promote swirling. This woman is clearly delusional.

Biracial mixed....

One Drop rule.....

Light Bright...

Then of course there is the issue of the “one drop rule”.  This is the belief that a if a person is even partially black they must be considered a black/African person.  The video above is very good.  The narrator explains in a very analytical way how the one drop rule is destructive for black people. The definition give for the one drop rule is the following:

“The one-drop rule is a social and legal principle of racial classification that was historically prominent in the United States asserting that any person with even one ancestor of Saharan-African ancestry (“one drop” of black blood) is considered black (Negro in historical terms). This concept evolved over the course of the 19th century and became codified into law in the 20th century. It was associated with the principle of “invisible blackness” and is an example of hypodescent, the automatic assignment of children of a mixed union between different socioeconomic or ethnic groups to the group with the lower status.

We can no longer fall for this propaganda.  This is an obvious attack on melanin and black genetics. I would love to hear your thoughts.

Black Storytellers: Should they have a Black spouse?

I saw this trailer about a month ago.   It’s for a six-part mini-series called Guerrilla on Showtime.  It’s about an interracial couple who are activists in London during the 1970’s.  It kind of  reminds me of the Black Panthers or Black Liberation Army movements.  It stars actor Babou Ceesay and actress Freida Pinto. Actor Idris Elba also is in the series. But I thought it was strange that the film had Indian actress Freida Pinto has the lead actress.  And I saw virtually no black women in the trailer.  Black women have been fighting against racism and sexism since forever.  Is this the erasure of black women? And even if there are some black women in it…why is the lead female an Indian?  I guess some will say that it’s to show that Indian people struggle with racism as well.  But why can’t we ever show black men and women working together against their oppression?  Why can’t we see many more films of black men and women loving each other? What are we  supposed to take from films like this?  That it’s better to fight racism and oppression if you’re having sex with a  non-black person.  This is utter nonsense! And we can no longer fall for this trap. Black unity and black love  is the answer.

Freida Pinto...

Who needs Assata Shakur? Yaa Asantewaa is not needed either.  Freida Pinto will lead black people to freedom!  She is the savior for black people! This would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

John Ridley....

So after seeing the trailer I wanted to see who was the creator of this series.  I found out that the executive producer is John Ridley. Ridley is a screenwriter,novelist and director. He won an Academy award for his screenplay of 12 Years a Slave. He also is the producer of the show American Crime.  The picture(above) is of Ridley and his Asian wife Gayle.  His wife isn’t black so is this why he didn’t cast a black woman as the lead in his new series?  And why are all these men without black wives telling black stories?  And he’s not the only one. I have noticed black actors,directors and producers telling black stories without black wives.

Steve McQueen.....

This is director Steve McQueen.  McQueen grew up in London. He’s good friends with John Ridley because he directed 12 Years a Slave.  This picture(above) is McQueen and his Dutch wife Bianca.

David Oyelowo...

Actor David Oyelowo is another black British man.  He has been in films like The Butler,The Help,A United Kingdom and Jack Reacher. He even played Martin Luther King in the film Selma. Should this man be playing black historical figures?  This is a picture of him and his white wife Jessica.

Get Out poster....

Jordan Peele....

Actor/filmmaker Jordan Peele got a lot of praise for his horror film Get Out.  It broke box office records making over $160 million.  Some say it was a great horror film.  Some say it was a film that had a much more deep psychological meaning to it.  It definitely had a lot of subliminal messages regarding racsim,occultism and organ harvesting.  But some may not know that he’s biracial.  Peele has a white mother.  And his wife Chelsea is a Zionist Jew.  So even though he told some truths in the film Get Out..will expose it all? Will he tell black people everything that racists whites are doing in Hollywood?  Is wife is a Jew so I know he has some insider information.  But the question is…who is he loyal to?

Underground...

John Legend...

The television drama Underground takes place during slavery.  It has been getting good reviews from critics.  One of the executive producers is singer/songwriter John Legend. He will even play Frederick Douglass in an upcoming episode. His wife is model Chrissy  Teigen.  Her mother is Thai and father is white.  That makes her a hapa. If you don’t know what that is go look it up.

Nate Parker....

Of course we can’t forget actor/director Nate Parker. Parker directed the controversial slave rebellion film The Birth of a Nation.  The film had some good elements and some truth in it.  But it was mostly controversial because back when he was in college Parker was accused of raping a white woman. He claims he was innocent and that people should support the film.  I’ve seen him in interviews and he seems intelligent and articulate. But he can’t be too smart because if that white woman caused him so much grief why did he go and marry a white woman.  What sense does that make??? Some negroes never learn. Anyway this is a picture of him and his ugly ass wife Sarah.Sunken Place....

I bring up this issue because I wonder can they be trusted. Can they accurately tell the black experience?  Can they express our pain and struggle?  Can they express the truth about our oppressors if they’re married to them?  Can they be about black love but not married to black women?  These are the questions that come to my mind. But I think they hire these type of men because they know they’re not about black empowerment. They will always be intellectually dishonest about the black experience.  They know that since they have non-black wives they have already been compromised. The interracial element just adds more confusion to the black psyche. We must be careful watching anything by these men. These films have a way of  distorting black consciousness. And keeping us stuck in the “sunken place”.

Plantation Retreats- Black Degradation and White Depravity

Flag1..

Retreat1..

Those who have loved and dated across the color line have to negotiate the realities of race in our society, and by extension, its impact on their relationships. For many, this is done through explicit conversations. For others, these dialogues come implicitly, through gestures, and taken for granted shared assumptions.

But how many folks actually talk about how race impacts their own sexuality, attraction, physicality, or notions of the erotic?
We live in a society that is structured around many different hierarchies of power, authority, and difference. As Foucault brilliantly observed, Power is not sitting out there in the ether, an abstraction that we just talk about in philosophy classes. Power acts through and upon bodies. Certain people are racialized in American society for example. Their bodies are locations of power–and yes resistance. Likewise, certain types of bodies are marked as “normal,” while others are deemed “different” or “abnormal.”
The “popular” imagination holds many assumptions about particular types of bodies. The black male body is something to be policed, controlled, and feared. It is both envied and despised. The Asian female body is “erotic” and “submissive.” The black female body alternates between being fecund, always available, and out of control, while simultaneously being marked as “masculine,” asexual, and unattractive. Latinas are “hot” and “sexy.” White bodies of a certain type are taken as the baseline for what is considered “beautiful” or “normal.”
Mandingo2..
Ironically, the bodies of black and brown people which are considered beautiful or attractive by the white gaze are judged as such either by how “different” they are from white norms (the exotic or savage) or how close these racialized bodies–almost like impostors or stand-ins–are to the normalized white body.
The very language we use to discuss race, the physical, and the sexual, is a quotidian example of Power in action. But, how are matters complicated when a significant part of a given person’s sexuality, and sense of the erotic, is centered on playing around with the dynamics surrounding dominance and submission?
Consider the following passage from the Colorlines article “Playing with Race”:
Bed wench...

Contrary to popular notions, BDSM is not about abuse. It’s consensual and trusting and people refer to it as “play” (as in “I want to play with you”). The point of BDSM is not sexual intercourse. In fact, when Williams recalls her first experience as a masochist seven years ago, she says she met her partner, a white man, at a bar and “fell in love at first sight.” They made their way back to his hotel. “For the first time I felt someone could see who I really was.” And that was someone who found it erotic to be a submissive to her partner.

In recent years, Williams has added another element to her repertoire as a masochist. She’s begun to engage in what is called “race play” or “racial play”—that is getting aroused by intentionally using racial epithets like the word “nigger” or racist scenarios like a slave auction.

Race play is being enjoyed in the privacy of bedrooms and publicly at BDSM parties, and it’s far from just black and white. It also includes “playing out” Nazi interrogations of Jews or Latino-on-black racism, and the players can be of any racial background and paired up in a number of ways (including a black man calling his black girlfriend a “nigger bitch”). White master seeking black slave, however, seems the more popular of the combinations.

I could not engage is such types of role-playing. My personal politics would not allow it; my libido would not respond.

That is my choice. I do not deny others their pleasure.

Mandingo3..

However, as someone interested in the relationship between race, politics, and racial ideologies, I am fascinated by how individuals negotiate white supremacy and Power.

Are people like Williams or Mollena more “evolved” and “progressive” than those of us who cannot decouple the realities and burdens of race from their bodies and psyches in the present? Alternatively, could this deep sense of both owning and living in a racialized body, be turned into a location for pleasure and catharsis:

Vi Johnson, the black matriarch of BDSM, has presented on race play at kinky conferences and she believes the appeal is different for each person. “When you’re being sexually stimulated, you’re not thinking that what’s stimulating you is a racist image, ” she says. “You’re just getting turned on.”

So, for some, she says, race play is about playing with authority and for others, it might be humiliation.

Well-known sexuality and SM educator Midori, who is Japanese and German, often presents her theory that humiliation in BDSM is linked to self-esteem. Take the woman who likes it when her boyfriend calls her a “slut,” Midori says. Perhaps the woman internalized the idea that “good girls don’t,” but she enjoys her sexuality. Because the boyfriend sees her in all her complexity, Midori says, when he calls her a slut, “he is freeing her of the social expectations of having to be modest.”

That’s different than having some stranger (and jerk) calling you a slut. The stranger doesn’t see the full woman. It’s similar with race play, Midori says. By focusing, for example, on a black man’s body, while he’s bound as a slave, she’s bolstering his own perception of himself as strong and powerful…

Her workshop demonstrations have included full auction scenes mimicking those of the Old South. In them, she is the plantation mistress inspecting a black man for “purchase.” He’s in shackles and “I slap him on his face and push him down on the ground, make him lick my shoes,” she says, emphasizing that she only does the demonstration after the “psychological” talk.

In the interest of transparency, I am a sex positive person (at least according to the survey on yourmorals.org). In many ways, I am also a bit of a libertine and a hedonist who is comfortable in both exclusive and open relationships. I also have certain predilections and tastes that more “vanilla” folks could find “kinky” or “different.” Ultimately, I am just myself, and do not know how to pretend to be anyone else.
I am also full of contradictions and complications as sexuality and the erotic are not neatly bounded constructs (for example, I do not like watching interracial porn where white men have aggressive sex with black women as chattel slavery looms too large in my mind; however, I have no problems watching black men have aggressive sex with white women). I have also dated many women from a range of racial backgrounds: I love women; I love variety.
I share those details not to titillate; rather, because while I am rendering a judgement of sorts, I would not want to sound “judgmental.” The difference is a subtle, but nonetheless, an important one.
One of the questions I will be asking Viola Johnson from the Carter Johnson Leather Library when I interview her in the next few weeks (fingers crossed) is how do we separate more “healthy” types of race play from those encounters that are rooted in disdain for the Other and white supremacy. Are these just inter-personal contracts or do these types of sexual relationships gain power (and are made erotic) precisely because of how they signal to larger societal taboos?
If the website Fetlife is any indication, there is apparently a not insubstantial number of people who engage in sexual roleplaying and BDSM using the motif of chattel slavery in the antebellum South. A cursory review of the member profiles suggests that many of these people are white supremacists. This is apparently not a deterrent to the black men and women who want to “serve” these white masters.
Race play...

Here a white “slave owning” master offers some insight on race play and “plantation retreats”:

My major kink-interest is in chattel slave-ownership in today’s world but following the historical models of 8,000 years of historical slave-ownership tradition (from Greek-Roman through modern day)…along with everything that might relate to it (which sometimes can go pretty far into the realm of BDSM activities, depending on the partner). I’m very knowlegble in the field of historical slavery.

Some of my other non-kink interests include history and philosophy, classic cars, music, science, singing and writing lyrics, architecture, comparative culture, language, reading and counseling..

I get a lot of questions about “Plantation Retreat”…so here are some basic facts:

My goal in creating and hosting Plantation Retreat is to provide a safe and welcoming, private place (and opportunity) for White Masters and plantation slaves/niggers to meet and explore their mutual fantasies. I get a lot of questions and answer many individual questions. To simplify things…here is some general basic information:

The gathering lasts for up to 2 weeks this year, with the main gathering around the 4th of July…folks can stay as long or as short a time as they want (some stay even longer). Masters can stay at the compound here or in a hotel if they want to (as can any personal slaves that they bring with them or any other slave that is ordered to do so).

Slaves arriving on their own stay here and are considered (and protected) as property of the plantation or my personal property.

Slaves sign up for a specific length of service. Slaves can specify what their limits are or that they will serve in any way the Master/guests desire. Sex is not required, but depends on individual choice (as do other activities). Most Masters desire to use slaves sexually in addition to normal domestic services. Some slaves are used only for hard labor. A slave’s assignments and duties are based on its experience and ability-level (some require whipping or punishment). Masters have their own king or queen bed (up to 5 available); slaves sleep where they are told to sleep (unless they are ordered into a Master’s bed and allowed to sleep there). Normally a slave sleeps at the foot of a Master’s bed, but some can be chained or caged elsewhere.

The minimum requirement for slaves is that they be obedient and respectful of all Masters and work to give the Masters and enjoyable time. This can be anything from preparing and serving drinks and meals, doing housework or yard work, to providing sexual relief on demand, to hard labor in the compound (depending on the slave’s previously-stated limitations). Slaves should expect Masters to be totally comfortable and free in using humiliating or degrading racist speech in referring to or speaking to mud-slaves. It’s not all punishment and misery for slaves…there is plenty of time for camaraderie and playful fun also. Some slaves even form a brotherly bond with the other slaves that serve with them. Masters also form lasting bonds and friendships based on their mutual interests and sharing slaves.

It’s just a small friendly gathering of White Masters at my house/compound….being served by mud-slaves as might have been in a modern version of slave-days. one might call it a situation of consensual non-consent/slavery. Slaves can set their limits and the time they will be in service as slaves in advance…. and also what they expect to learn and experience from the experience. The more that a slave lets me know about itself in advance, the better I can guide its growth from the experience.

Backstage racism mates with BDSM, the eroticization of the black body, and finds a place online through a variant of cyber-racism. Amazing. We do in fact live in interesting times.

White supremacy is a mental illness. Western (and global) society is sick with it. All of us, across the color line, have been impacted by white supremacy and white racism. But who are we to judge how adults in a consensual relationship decide to work through its pain and ugliness?
As is per our tradition at WARN, here are some concluding questions.
Have any of you engaged in race play? For those of you in inter-racial relationships, how do you negotiate these bigger questions of race and the erotic? If our kinks and sexual predilections are in some way a function of life experience, trauma, early childhood experiences, etc. what happened in the life of a black person who is willing to play a slave for the pleasures of white racists?
Article by chaunceydevega

Get Out- Interracial/Horror Film(Hidden truths)

get-out-poster

Jordan Peele’s directorial debut Get Out proves a fascinating engagement with the racial truths of the contemporary world. The film centers on interracial couple Chris and Rose who are traveling to meet Rose’s parents in a New York City Suburb.

Prior to their visit, Chris asks Rose if she told her parents that he is black. Rose makes a mockery of this query, a query that encompasses the film’s many acts of foreshadow and dramatic irony. Get Out proceeds to illustrate that it is Chris’ blackness that makes him Rose’s prey. The couple’s visit to meet Rose’s parents proves a sick and calculated effort to abduct black bodies and re-appropriate them as a means to enhance the lives of a white counterpart. In short, the film’s resonance lies not in the images themselves but what lies beneath.

1.White Liberal

One of the most demonstrative illustrations in the film is its portrayal of the “white liberal.” Rose, Chris’s girlfriend not only dates a black man but defends him in the face of overt discrimination. Chris is racially profiled by a police officer on the way to meet Rose’s parents. The policeman asks Chris for his identification, to which they receive Rose’s wrath. After the incident, she states that she won’t let anyone “F%ck with her man.” But little does Chris know, Rose is merely protecting Chris the object and not Chris the person. This objectification becomes clear in the silent auction that takes place in Rose’s parent’s garden. What they disguise as “Bingo” is an auction where interested white buyers place bids for the black body Rose brings home. So questions like “Is it better?” referencing black male sexual performance, is the query of a prospective buyer desiring a worthy investment.

Rose portrays a physical embodiment to the phrase “every shut eye ain’t sleep and every goodbye ain’t gone.” An assumed ally can very well bear oppressive feelings towards a marginalized body. Assumed allies often veil self-interest in seemingly supportive gestures. Namely, Rose does not verbalize her prejudices yet is not any different or better than her parents or their “garden party” guests.

2. The Poisonous Apple

Get Out depicts Chris, a black man,  as an Eve-like figure and Rose, a white woman, as the poisonous apple that exploits his vulnerabilities and renders a series of irreversible consequences. The film intertwines physical hypnosis to induce black acquiescence to a  new identity. Rose acts as a form of hypnosis in her pursuit and pseudo-love for the black male. In seeking to consummate white acceptance and assimilation in his romantic relations with white women,  the black male body enters a vulnerable state exploited by his “prize.” Thus, Rose uses her external appeal to sink her thorns deep into the black male psyche. Just as their love seems to bloom, it is not Rose who dies, but her black lover–illustrating the measure of a rose’s beauty is the ability to distract admirers from its thorns sinking into their flesh.

get-out3

3. Science and black experimentation

The Armitage family abducts blacks, hypnotizes them, and uses the black body to improve white quality of life. The procedure leaves a small portion of the black brain but replaces the majority with a white brain. Thus, the black person becomes “a passenger” in his own body. This procedure seems synonymous to the abduction of African bodies and displacing them onto indigenous soil. This displacement renders the black body a passenger in the western experience as each generation proves more distant relationship to their African origins. While the African brain may not be physically extracted, it becomes westernized so that descendants of abducted Africans feel more American than African–making the black body a commuter in their own oppression.

Interestingly, upon first meeting, Chris and Rose disclose that they hit a deer on their way up. In response, Rose’s father remarks that they “did a service” by hitting and ultimately killing the deer. It is this same ideology that prompts the white conservative to seek out black bodies to dismember for their own personal benefit. In their minds, the Armitage family does a service to blacks abducted for their procedure, as their procedure affords the black body a purpose believed to not exist outside of serving whites. Prior to preparing Chris for the procedure, Mr. Armitage asks him “What is your purpose, Chris?” To pose this question prior to their intended procedure suggests that their use of his body incites a purpose otherwise non-existent.

It is this same ideology that prompted white doctors and scientists to use black bodies to test out medical procedures. Henrietta Lacks’ doctor felt entitled to the contents of her vagina, so much so that he did not even consult her next of kin prior to abducting her cells. The pearl-like substances that killed her would acquire purpose in the lives Lacks would come to save following her death. Thus, just as the Armitage family deems the black body purposeful in servicing whites,  Henrietta Lacks’ story similarly illustrates the black body as purposeful solely when appropriated for western motives.

Slavery and the contemporary world implement a similar ideology as the most celebrated black figures: athletes, entertainers, and actresses all serve whites. Thus, the television, radio and even the education system all act as an informal hypnosis implemented as a means to control black bodies and place them on a dead end path to white servitude.

Film Review Get Out

4. The unassumed intellect

Get Out channels Charles Chestnut’s “The Goophered Grapevine” and “Dave’s Neckliss” in illustrating the unassumed intellect in Chris’ TSA friend, Rod Williams. For those unfamiliar with Chestnut or these stories, a prevalent style of Chestnut is to implement a character who due to their vernacular speech prompts most to assume that he is intellectually deficient. The unassumed intellect uses these preconceived notions to his advantage and deceives his “intelligent” counterparts by the story’s conclusion.

Similarly, Williams provides comedic relief to audiences in his delivery. Yet the dramatic irony evokes laughter from some and frustration from others as audiences know that Williams is the sole party in the film that knows the truth. This depiction functions positively, as it evokes a caricatured black image as a means to exploit presumed western conceptualizing of black intellect. In a perfect world, caricatured imaging of blacks would disappear completely. However, it is an act of advancement to include stereotypes in a way that prompts contemplation, or that performs in a way to challenge western predilection for the compartmentalized black body.

The Final Verdict

The most resounding part of the film for me is when the black male body reappropriated as the Artimage grandfather, snaps out of his hypnosis and not only shoots Rose but shoots himself. This depiction illustrates black detachment from a controlled identity as a necessary component to disabling mental enslavement. Furthermore,  blacks not only have to rid themselves from physical obstacles but the part of ourselves that encompasses these harmful ideologies.

My least favorite component of the film was the means in which the hypnotized black body reverts back to semi-consciousness. Although the black body is held hostage by a white brain, it a flash or white light that snaps them back into consciousness. Thus, although it is a black man who physically saves himself from his pending imprisonment–it is a stroke of white light that enables his escape.

Thus, while seemingly a cautionary tale to interracial dating, or to the black body trusting whites in any capacity–the film evokes a white savior in representation rather than form. At surface level, the film seems to evoke the separatist ideology implemented by civil rights leaders like the late Malcolm X. However, the authorship of said movie makes this close reading impossible to take seriously. For this reason, Get Out reminds me a lot of Birth of Nation.

After viewing both Birth of a Nation and Get Out, I left the theater somewhat content. These feelings faded almost instantaneously as I realized that these movies while depicting the complexities of the historical and contemporary black experience can only resonate but so deeply. Namely, both Peele and Parker write and produce movies that should be revolutionary, but are not.

Jordan Peele and Nate Parker both conclude their films in the same manner. Specifically,   Birth of a Nation and Get Out end with all central white characters are murdered by blacks. While fatalities at the hands of blacks substantiate black bestiality, it also functions to depict white bodies as factors that must be eliminated to free blacks from an oppressive state. Like Birth of a Nation, Get Out is authored and directed by a black male married to a white woman. This dynamic casts said black authors as significantly less harmful and least likely to actually eliminate the white demographic because to do so would be to not only murder their wives but the mother of their children. Furthermore, with their interracial unions, the black male writer and director assumes a non-threatening stance in which the murder of fictive white characters seems an artistic choice rather than a means to uplift the black collective.

While the western world attaches a taboo labeling to interracial unions, these unions function favorably to foment white supremacy. The strongest black leaders are strong not because of what they say but because of what they do. Thus, these films are noteworthy, not revolutionary, as it is not enough to implement images that suggest an ideology disconnected from the thought and action of the author.

Writer and producer Jordan Peele also complicates the ability to take Get Out seriously with his comedic background. Thus, his depiction of a white family who abducts blacks and uses their bodies for their own benefit—becomes a well-executed joke rather than reflective of a past and present horror not limited to a New York City suburb.

Article by C.C. Saunders

 

A United Kingdom-Interracial propaganda Film

united-kingdom

Looks like Hollywood has the perfect film just in time for their Greco-Roman, pagan,orgy-inspired holiday known as Valentine’s Day.  The interracial propaganda is relentless.  When President Obama was in office there a big increase in interracial couples in television dramas,sitcoms and films.  By him being biracial,he was used as a symbol of some type of racial harmony. Of course we know this is nonsense. There can be no racial harmony when one racial group has more power than another group.  This is where the propaganda comes in. I   have covered  this subject many times in the past.  And it looks like I’ll have to continue to do as long as they keep putting these films out.  Now we have the film A United Kingdom. The basic synopsis :

“The film is based on a true story. Seretse Khama (David Oyelowo) is the Prince of Bechuanaland (now Botswana). In 1948 he meets and falls in love with London office worker Ruth Williams (Rosamund Pike). But their interracial relationship is not approved of by either of their families, nor by the British and South African governments. Seretse and Ruth must defy family, apartheid and the British empire to return from an imposed exile to their African kingdom, and assume power after independence.”

This trailer(above) is very hard to watch.  Here you have an African prince and he wants to marry a white woman??  This is total insanity.  This is self hatred to the fullest!  I don’t want to hear any crap about color blind love.  This is nothing but propaganda to make us love our oppressors.  A white woman as a queen in an African nation is blasphemous! This is a slap in the face to black love.   Seretse Khama is a disgrace to African people. Khama sold out his nation.  He is no prince!  Isn’t it interesting that Hollywood can find money to make this film but not about real African heroes.  There were African men and women that did great things in the past.  What about a film about Thomas Sankara?  Patrice Lumumba? Yaa Asantewaa? Queen Tiye? Marcus Garvey? Haitian revolution?  Queen Nzinga? Nope!  Instead they give a stupid ass love story between a brain dead Negro who gives his fortune away to a common white woman.  This film is stupid  and insulting on so many levels.

This is a very interesting interview with the stars David Oyelowo and Rosamund Pike. Pike says that the film tackles racial prejudice from both sides.  She says that it’s about two people that are color blind.  Give me a break!  This white woman is lying through her teeth.  She knows damn well no one is color blind.  And our society is nowhere near that.  The world is comprised of racial groups.  Color blindness is a myth. Then Oyewolo goes on to say that the way to “unite a kingdom” is through love. And that Botswana has control of “most” of it’s resources.  How did they lose some of their resources?  How took them? I think you know the answer. And he says that Botswana sees itself has post-racial.  This is man is insane! How can Africa be post-racial when you got Europeans trying to steal land and resources?  He also says that his white wife has a small part in the film.  She plays a…..racist!  How fitting is that.  You can’t make this stuff up. Black love and black unity is the way to fight white racism.  The answer is not marrying and making babies with your oppressor.  This film is designed to confuse black people about racism.

amma-asante1

This picture(above) is  of Amma Asante and her husband.  She is a screenwriter and director. She is the director of A United Kingdom. Why would a black woman do an interracial love story?   Well that’s an easy answer.  Just look  at her husband and  it’s easy to see why this so-called universal love story is close to her heart.

when-hands-touch

Amma Asante is a very sick woman!  This black woman has lost her damn mind.You don’t think so?  Well check out the picture(above).  That is a photo of the upcoming film When Hands Touch.  It’s a World War 2 “love story”. It stars Amandla Stenberg who plays a biracial girl who falls in love with a Nazi youth.  What the hell??  Even though Stenberg is biracial in this racial context she will be seen as just a black girl.  I will cover the problem of biracial women representing black women in a later post.  But anyway this film has taken “love they enemy” to a whole different level!  They want us to love Nazi’s now???  What’s next?  A  love story with Adolf Hitler and Angela Bassett?   Or maybe Denzel Washington falling in love with a female skinhead?  I wouldn’t put it pass Hollywood at this point. Amma Asante has sold her sold for the chance to corrupt the minds of black people.  She is a female version of Lee Daniels.

david-oyelowo

I understand better now why  David Oyelowo was chosen for the lead role.  In Hollywood he’s the go-to Negro at the moment.  He’s been in other anti-black propaganda films like The Butler,Red Tails and The Help.  And judging by the pic(above) of Oyelowo and his family,I think he was perfect for the role.  Oyelowo and Asante are one in the same.  They are both from the United Kingdom.  And neither one of them believes in  black love or black unity.  They believe the way to defeat racism,oppression, and colonization is to just love your oppressor.  Both of them are brain dead swirlers. But whatever you do,don’t support this film.  Save your money and stay far away from this garbage of a film.

George Lopez: Don’t marry somebody Black!

george-lopez2

It seems that comedian George Lopez has caused quite an uproar recently. Earlier this week he was doing a comedy show in Phoenix,Arizona and offended a woman in the audience.  The controversy started when Lopez was telling a joke.  During the routine Lopez said :

“There are only two rules in a Latino family. Don’t marry somebody black and don’t park in front of our house.”

Apparently there was a biracial woman in the audience that got upset.  From what I hear she was black/Mexican.  And gave Lopez the middle finger.  Then Lopez began to insult her using profanity. Lopez told her:

Sit your f—king a— down! Sit your f—king a— down! I’m talking b—h,” said Lopez, while the audience cheered. “You paid to see a show, sit you’re a– down. You can’t take a joke, then you’re in the wrong motherf—king place. Sit your a— down or get the f—k out of here.”

Why is this shocking to black people?  Don’t we already know many Hispanics don’t like black people?  This goes for many Mexicans,Cubans,Dominicans and Puerto Ricans.  Yeah I know there are blacks in many Latin countries.  But you know who I’m talking about. I’m talking about those European latinos.  These people worship whiteness. They will work with you in the workplace but most don’t like their children marrying black people.  Most of them have a strong anti-black sentiment.  That’s why the mostly Hispanic audience laughed at the joke.  Lopez didn’t say don’t marry a white person.  Why not??  It’s because most the Mexican audience love white people. If you look at Mexicans they look closer to white than black for sure.  But see I have a different take on it.  I’m not upset at him because he only told the truth.  None of these Hispanic groups want their sons or daughters marrying black people. I think most of them hate our dark skin and African(nappy) textured hair.  They see blacks as inferior and don’t want to mix with us.  Some Mexicans even disown their sons and daughters for marrying blacks.  It’s only you brain dead negroes who hate yourself that are offended.  Why do we want to be accepted by those that hate us? Why can’t we love ourselves?  I’m not offended because I already knew this.  I knew black guys in high school that dated Mexican girls.  Some of the guys told me they weren’t allowed in their girlfriend’s house.  Either the Mexican father didn’t approve or the mother.  Sometimes it was both.  Black people need some self love and black pride.  Then you wouldn’t be offended by the jokes from some ugly pizza-faced washed up comedian.  I don’t want mixed babies so I don’t gave a damn if he wants me in his family.  I remember when he had his talk show a few years ago.  He did a DNA test and found out he was 55 % European,41% Native American and 4% African.  I don’t trust most of those DNA tests anyway.  But even if it’s true it shows he is more European than anything else.  So maybe that’s why many of these so-called Latinos hate black people.  They are mostly European so what would you expect?  Being white and anti-black goes hand in hand. I keep trying to tell black people that these “people of color” are extremely anti-black.  Everyone that has some melanin is not your friend.  Don’t be fooled because someone has brown skin.  This goes for Hispanics and brown-skinned Indians as well.. As a side note,I actually met Lopez about fifteen years ago at a mall.  He was there promoting a radio show he used to host.  He really is an ugly looking mestizo in person.

george-lopez

Look at this pic(above) of Lopez.  Dressing in drag???  Not only does he have a problem with black people but I guess he’s an undercover homosexual as well.  These latinos are funny to me.  Lopez says he hates Donald Trump because Trump is a racist towards Mexicans.  Yet Lopez has the same racist attitude towards blacks. Blacks haven’t done anything to Mexicans.  We never had a war with them.  We never had them as slaves or colonized their land.  So why do they hate us?  Why do all these racial groups hate on black people? Sounds kind of hypocritical to me.  Maybe it’s just racial pride.   Some people want to preserve their race and culture.  I can respect that since I’m the same way. I love being black and I love my African culture. I don’t want to mix with them anyway. But I just don’t like the fact that all these races use black people as a punching bag.  Everyone likes to shit on us!  And I’m really getting tired of it.  Trump wants to build a wall to keep the Mexicans out.  I used to be against this idea.  Now it’s starting to sound like a good idea.  The only problem I have with the wall is I keep asking myself…is it to keep the Mexicans out?  Or to keep us in?  Anyway let me know your thoughts on Lopez. Was he right?  Were you offended?  Or was racism expressed by Hispanics something you already knew?