A Tale of Two Thomases

It was the worst of Thomas, and it was the best of times.

The worst, (Justice) Clarence Thomas, once again smearing Anita Hill in an attempt to hustle his book and polish his rep. The best, Ms. Hill reclaiming her dignity.

The worst, (basketball executive and former playa) Isaiah Thomas saying that while it's always wrong for a white man to refer to a black woman as a "bitch" or a "ho", it is no such restriction on a black man. The best, the Knicks and Mr. I. Thomas getting socked for $11.6 million in damages for sexual harrasment.

Orlando Patterson wrote a thoughtful piece in the NYT in the context of the Jena 6 case (and OJ, again), in which he says

...something that has been swept under the rug for too long in black America: the crisis in relations between men and women of all classes and, as a result, the catastrophic state of black family life, especially among the poor....a fact of life for too many black women who must daily confront indignity and abuse in hip-hop misogyny and everyday conversation. What is done with words is merely the verbal end of a continuum of abuse that too often ends with beatings and spousal homicide.

Gentlemen do not talk to ladies like the two Thomases did, or like Don Imus has. We need to expect better of our men. All of the time.

White Guy Can't Rap

To the category of over-developed sense of importance I would like to add the white guy who wrote about how if he didn't buy those hip-hop joints with bad messages, then hip hop would clean up. You know, less guns, less drugs, less 'hos and the n-word all because he--and other influential white folk--are going to stop buying it.

Hey, Dude, you didn't invent the Internet, either!

While you can listen to hip hop, that doesn't mean you make it. And while your $16 for a CD adds to the bottom line, hip hop don't need you. You need hip hop--for whatever has been drawing you to it for the past 20 years.

Stop whining about the fact that your 3 year-old can't listen to your IPod. Duh. It makes sense that you listen to music--see movies, read books, and partake in other adult activities--that you wouldn't share with your children. You are the grown up.

Did you hear Nickelback's Rockstar? It follow the classic, formula rock song about the dreamlife of drugs, big cars and houses, and easy women. But you don't classify that as a problem--why is the problem rap not rock?

Is it okay because white people are not susceptible to "bad" music messages aimed at them? Are whites only immune to the plight of poor, urban African Americans? Don't we also ignore poor whites, Latinos, Asians and, of course, Native Americans?

Here you go, that's the way you do it!



Practically, did you know that most artists don't make money on record sales? The record companies do. The artists make money on tour and from merchandise. So you can put away your white man's wallet and skip the CD and not make a penny's worth of difference to 50 Cent's bottom line.

BTW 50 has decided that the market is too hot for "hard-core" joints, with the Don Imus thing and all. So he released the "softer" Curtis CD. You know more family-friendly songs like "My Gun," and respectful lyrics like "We got to share the same b*tch, okay I go first."

White Guy, it's okay for you to buy--or not buy--whatever you like. It's okay for you to be offended by music you like. I, too, have cringed at lyrics that escape my lips. But you can probably do more to make a difference in your community by doing a good job doing your job--don't sweat the music, and good luck.

Bullied About

I am very sorry to have to admit this. I am chastened and embarrassed to say it. I am confused and somewhat annoyed with myself, too.

I just don't get it.

I came home to see the 15-year-old beating the brains out of someone with a baseball bat. All in the name of good, clean fun.

That is good, teen (T) fun--at least according to Boys' Life and reviewers from Amazon and Wired. He was playing Bully.

So somehow, I just missed the idea that a game is not over the top, and is somehow redeemed because the violence is bloodless. Brains are not smeared on the sidewalk, so it's okay. See, I just don't get it.

I am watching the kids (my kids) pulverizing someone. And they are laughing. They are excited. They are egging each other on. Telling the 15-year old to have his character--named Jimmy--take another swing at the boy lying on the sidewalk with his hands in front of his face trying to protect himself. I, alone, am cringing. See, I'm not getting it, still.

It's supposed to be good because "Jimmy" helps kids being bullied. By using extreme violence. And the game is good because it doesn't reward Jimmy for bullying. See, if he beats up his bad-guy classmates he earns new ways to beat up the bad-guy classmates. This is, not considered extreme violence because his main weapons are his fists and an occasional trash can lid. No guns, knives or blood. See, I can't tell the difference between extreme and not so extreme. Still not getting it.

I interrupted the beating. "Hey, I thought that this game wasn't supposed to reward violence." The kids turned around and sheepishly smiled, then returned to the melee. I had to walk away. Not getting it.

"Doc!" you say. "Why were you surprised that a game with a name of Bully brought to you by the same folks who made car-jacking and killing cops into gameplay would be a bit violent? What were you thinking??"

One good thing happened, though. The kids misplaced the game. Get it?