PostBourgie

Your Monday* Random-Ass Roundup: Untitled

blackink12 — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:37:46 +0000

Since I’m late – very late – there’s no need for lame jokes or witticisms. Let’s just get into the randomness, shall we?

1. Gov. Mark “Appalachian Trail” Sanford f aces more than three dozen ethics charges stemming from, well, you know. (G.D.)

2. From the Dept. of Really Bad Ideas: Republicans have begun circulating a 10-point resolution of conservative principles that are in opposition to “Obama’s socialist agenda.” The resolution has a provision that calls for cutting off Republicans who agree with the party on seven items of less. (G.D.)

3. Joe Lieberman: He is who we thought he was. (Blackink)

4. Rep. David Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat, has called for a “war surtax” if President Obama sends more troops to Afghanistan. Who knew that wars cost money? Anyway, Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein approve. (Blackink)

5. President Obama met with his half-brother during a visit last week to China. That’s all well and good but you should definitely check out the comments in this AP story posted at the New York Post. (Alisa)

6. How the collapse of California’s once-formidable Republican Party has neatly dovetailed with the state’s economic crisis. (Blackink)

7. From the Boston Globe, “Harvard researchers examined 40 years of data from dozens of countries, trying to sort out the economic impact of religious beliefs or practices. They found that religion has a measurable effect on developing economies – and the most powerful influence relates to how strongly people believe in hell.” (Belleisa)

8. Although The American seems more interested in taking stabs at Muslim regimes, this is conservative take on a similar subject that compares the “strong relationship between economic prosperity and religious liberty.” (Belleisa)

9. In “The Evolution of the God Gene,” there is evidence that “religion has the hallmarks of an evolved behavior, meaning that it exists because it was favored by natural selection.” The writer refers to this hypothesis, determined from the study of hunter-gatherer societies as “the new view” (Belleisa)

10. Fishbowl DC has obtained a memo from Fox News management to FNC staffers that acknowledges “a series of mistakes on FNC in recent months” and warns that going forward “there is zero tolerance for on-screen errors.” Um, what took them so long? (Blackink).

11.From Prospect (a UK monthly): “No words are more typical of our moral culture than ‘inappropriate‘ and ‘unacceptable.’ They seem bland, gentle even, yet they carry the full force of official power. (Belleisa)

12. Cindylu found herself digging into the 49-year-old Master Plan after the Regents of the University of California approved a 32% fee increase for UC students last week. Here, she makes the case for why the fees should remain low or, better yet, be lowered. (Blackink)

13. Meanwhile, Dante Atkins of Calitics pens an open letter to students of the UC. (Blackink)

14. David Axelrod tells Dems that since the president’s approval numbers — which have dipped below 50 percent for the first time — will be a big factor in whether they get re-elected, they might as well hurry up and pass health care. (G.D.)

15. A former GOP flack tries to get her career back on track after being embroiled in the Jack Abramoff scandal. Let’s cue up that violin music, please. (Blackink)

16. Also re: Emily Miller, Jezebel ponders whether she was a victim of sexism or her own abrasiveness? (Blackink)

17. A Q&A with “higher education experts” from an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education titled “Are too Many Students Going to College.” Apparently college isn’t for everyone, and according to some experts it shouldn’t have to be. (Belleisa)

18. Horrifying: A Belgian man diagnosed as comatose for 23 years was discovered a few years ago to have been conscious all along. “But while he could hear every word his doctors spoke, he could not speak to them, nor could he move his body to communicate with them in any way.” (Blackink)

19. Cracked.com has compiled a list of seven popular chick flicks that actually “hate women.” One particularly thoughtful commenter named gorelord1 offers his (or her) own suggestion: “THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE: MODERN WOMEN ARE STUPID.” (Blackink)

20. Jezebel flags this line from a Wall Street Journal story about body makeup artists on the set of shows like “Dancing with the Stars”: “On ‘Dancing With the Stars,’ in season six in 2008, Miami Dolphins linebacker Jason Taylor, who is African-American, had to get a spray tan because his Polish dance partner, Edyta Sliwinska, had over-tanned and was darker than Mr. Taylor, says Mr. Green, the producer. A spokesman for Mr. Taylor says his client didn’t get spray-tanned.” (Blackink)

21. “The Chronicle Review” makes the case for a Philosophy of Journalism course. (Belleisa)

22. The Guardian has “New Rules for Journalists.” (Belleisa).

23. Sarah Palin’s nemesis drops it like it’s hot. Get it, Katie. (G.D.)

24. An Illinois man who was adopted as a boy recently embarked on a mission to discover his biological parents. The bad news is he found them: his father is notorious serial-killer Charles Manson. Understandably, he’s been depressed ever since. (Blackink)

25. Here, learn about the “Christian Side-Hug.” It’s an embrace for those – people who make really boring dates — who find normal hugging too sinful. (Blackink)

26. The owner of Brooklyn’s controversially named Obama Fried Chicken restaurant has refused to allow MTV to show the store’s marquee during airings of the Clipse’s new video, “Back By Popular Demand.” His decision had more to do with money than with principle, which is not all that surprising. (Blackink)

27. If you were a fan of MTV’s “Making the Band” series, too bad. Day 26, the made-for-TV R&B group, has split from Diddy’s Bad Boy record label but is still signed to Atlantic Records. They’re still planning on releasing another album and, um, a women’s shoe line. (Blackink)

28. Since Ari Fleischer did such a great job of bolstering the public image of President Bush, the Bowl Championship Series has hired his public relations firm to do the same for college football’s postseason system. No, this is not a joke. (Blackink)

29. GauthamCity reminds us that “redskins are people too.” This is true even though people tend to forget this while rooting for that thoroughly mediocre NFL franchise in the District of Columbia. (Blackink)

30. One of the most coveted recruits in the history of women’s basketball has resurfaced at the University of Delaware after transferring from powerhouse UConn and spending some time playing volleyball. (Blackink)

Enjoy the holiday week.

* This qualifies as Monday. Just barely.

Posted Without Comment.

G.D. — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:22:59 +0000

The Unbearable Lightness of Agreeing.

shani-o — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:36:10 +0000

~~Marc Ambinder points the way~~ (or, did, but the post is down now) to a study (PDF) which concludes that when presented with a picture of a biracial candidate for a job, those who agree with his stated positions are more likely to view a lighter picture of him as an accurate representation of his appearance. Meanwhile, those who disagree with the candidate are more likely to view a darker skinned picture of him as more accurate.

The study, which tests participants’ feelings about a novel biracial candidate and then Barack Obama, took place around the election last year, and noted voter intentions as part of the results.

Those who planned to vote for Obama thought the lighter picture of him was the most representative, and the authors write, “Our results suggest that voters themselves may alter how they see a racially ambiguous candidate, depending on their own level of support and their corresponding desire to see the candidate favorably.”

That is, instead of viewing a lighter skinned image of a person as ‘better’ due to media conditioning, people may be choosing all on their own to ‘lighten’ a candidate they like. This isn’t particularly surprising. (As I wrote about at TAPPED, racial prejudices and perceptions of skin color follow us everywhere, even into the virtual world.)

My first question — one that Ambinder didn’t ask, and one that wasn’t mentioned in the study results — was who were the participants? The results, which were actually tabulated from three separate studies, say that black people participated in two: they accounted for 3% of the participants in one, and 10% of participants in the other.

In the methodology, it’s noted that “we did not have enough Black participants to test reliably for differences between Black and White participants. Because we base our predictions on the participants’ political group membership (and not their race), we have not excluded any participants based on race in the results we report here. None of the results meaningfully changes when Black participants are excluded from the analyses.”

But wouldn’t the results have meaningfully changed if black participants had been included in the study in representative numbers? And if they didn’t, if black liberals lightened their preferred biracial candidate as well, then that would still be more interesting than another study on how white voters view black candidates.

Frankly, I suspect the lack of interest in the racial identity of the participants is due to an assumption that they were all white. But by excluding people of color in any meaningful way, and subsequently, the possible differentials, this study perpetuates the idea that whites are the sole arbiters of a biracial person’s political success — and that is deeply troubling.

Friday Random Ten

blackink12 — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:36:31 +0000

Since we’ve done a little fall cleaning around here, we figured this is as good a time as any to come up with a list of songs celebrating the spirit of change and novelty and newness.

You might even say we’re beyond cutting edge.

Without any further ado:

1. Brand Nu by Sista (Brokey)

2. Newness by Musiq SoulChild (Belleisa)

3. Brand New Colony by Postal Service (Shani-o)

4. How You Like Me New by Kool Moe Dee (Blackink)

5. I Feel Pretty from “West Side Story” (Quadmoniker)

6. Some Kind of Wonderful by Talib Kweli (Belleisa)

7. New by No Doubt (Brokey)

8. Welcome Back Home by The Dramatics (Blackink)

9. So Fresh, So Clean by Outkast (Brokey)

10. Golden by Jill Scott (Belleisa)

Is brokey, our resident R&B expert, the only person left who remembers Sista? I mean, really. That’s putting the “random” in the Random Ten. With a bullet.

And before we close out, I’d be remiss not to mention that blogmate slb is celebrating a birthday today. So please wish her ponies and unicorns and rainbows and the whole nine?

Until then, have a great weekend.

Breast Cancer and Health Care.

quadmoniker — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:33:08 +0000

The problem with the new guidelines from the United States Preventative Services Task Force recommending only biannual mammograms for most women once they reach age 50, rather than annual ones for all women over 40, is that we all believe doctors should perform test after endless test and that, if they do, they can always save our lives. I blame it all on Fox’s hit House, and on Hugh Laurie’s devilish charm.

The faith in tests and the ability of the medical system to always stop death may explain why so many doctors and insurance companies are already objecting to the new standards. We just don’t believe it’s not better to screen. That idea is so ingrained that I heard someone chatting on NPR about how the panel’s study did not account for digital screening over older methods, but the panel did say there was not evidence that digital screeners performed any better than older tools. Rachael Larimore over at Double X (or XXFactor, whatever it is now) called it early health care rationing. Get ready ladies, no more preventative screening for us.*

All of this undermines the findings of the panel, which pointed out how real the risks of overtreatment are. We tend to want to stop cancer at all costs, but every time we let a surgeon cut us, there’s the potential for harm. That doesn’t count costs that might seem mundane in life or death situations, like the co-pays for uninsured women, which really matter for a woman on the edge of solvency. If she’s much poorer in the ensuing years, that might harm her health, too. The truth is, reducing the breast cancer rate by 15 percent for the 40 to 50 age group might not be worth the harm it does to other women.

Try telling that to the 15 percent who might have their lives saved. The problem is, everyone personally knows of a woman who got breast cancer at weirdly young age and had no risk factors. She either was saved or not. Either way you laud or blame the doctors involved, but things are a lot more open to chance and human ability than we care to admit.

As Igor Volsky pointed out over at The Wonk Room, this might have broader implications for the kind of comparative effectiveness research policy-makers hope will be part of health care reform. When Americans are asked, they might say that people have a right to health care whether they can afford it or not, but I’ve yet to meet anyone who says that the health care of the entire nation is more important than their own health or the health of their families.** Maybe that explains that, while people polled support the idea of reform, many people think it’ll make their own situation worse. If you’re lucky enough to have employer-provided health care, which the majority of Americans still are, the kinds of health care concessions you make might seem to be in your control. The government is just more open about the fact that concessions are necessary than private insurance companies are. It all depends on which kind of imperfect situation you think is better. We know what science tells us, but it’s a hard sell.

* Incidentally, studies found a few years ago that doctors perform too many pap tests, too.

** This isn’t unique to Americans.

Kick Your Shoes Off…

shani-o — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:00:35 +0000

…and stay a while.

Welcome to the ‘new’ PostBourgie. The new design has been up for a couple of days, but I thought we’d welcome you all formally to our new digs. On the front end, things are bright white, and on the backend we’ve moved to a new host. That’s right, y’all, we’re official.

G.D. and I spent many hours tinkering with things, and we’d like to thank our co-bloggers for their helpful yeas and nays. And of course, many thanks to the lovely and talented Taytana Fazlalizadeh for the banner which we get to feature even more prominently. (Do go check out Taty’s work. I bet she’ll even trade you some of it for money!)

And finally, I’d like to welcome our new readers (and wave hi to the regulars). Feel free to settle in, read, talk to us, and to each other.

They Don’t Even Understand the Language of People With Short Money.

G.D. — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:45:53 +0000

From Leigh:

1% of Americans are millionaires, compared to 44% of Congress (237 elected officials, to be exact). The median income in the Senate is just under $2M, in the House it’s just over $600k. Median household income in the US is $50,303.

Just because an individual is rich does not preclude them from pursuing pro-poor or equitable policies, nor does it suggest that they cannot relate to poverty or economic inequality. But when the group norm is staggering wealth compared to the typical American, including in countless districts these officials represent, then it is understandably difficult to consider or develop policies that truly address economic hardship. Add to this wealth disparity the reality that 9 in 10 House incumbents and 8 in 10 Senate incumbents are re-elected each election year, and my despair over Congressional legislation benefiting the average American certainly deepens.

She’s not trafficking in easy populism here. Like she said, members of Congress live in a world with relatively high job stability. They pull in $170, 000/yr and make use of an extremely generous healthcare plan in which the government pays up to 75 percent of the premium. The major legislative players in health care reform have never worried about their employers switching to an inferior plan with a higher contribution or dropping their insurance outright. Their plans have no lifetime caps, they face no rescissions or any of the constellation of obstacles that are par for the course for their fellow insured Americans (to say nothing of the folks with no coverage at all). And then there are folks like John McCain, who despite his considerable wealth would have a hard time getting covered on the individual market thanks to his history of cancer, and has been insulated from from that reality by receiving government-funded care as a member of the Armed Forces, a veteran, and a U.S. Senator. Or Dick Armey, the former House majority leader-turned-professional-healthcare-reform-obstructionist, who received public health care as a young professor at a state university in Texas before spending the next several decades in Congress.

If the impression you’ve gotten from the way our lawmakers have handled the health care debate is that this whole thing is a big abstraction to them, that’s because it probably is.

Leftovers.

G.D. — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:29:15 +0000

Stuff we missed:

Nate Silver thinks Palin has a shot at winning the Republican nomination in 2012. His blogmate Tom Schaller isn’t having it.
The incredible disappearing Negroes.
AP: “Don’t blame fast food: Mummies had heart disease too.”
Radley Balko offers some pretty good ideas that would improve American health care in ways the Obama bill does not.
Dapper in the Motherland.

The Greatest Quotes from ‘The Wire.’

G.D. — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:45:41 +0000

The homie blackink12 said he was just finally getting down to watch ‘The Wire.” Better late than never, right?

Looking back at this clip got me all amped. How did this show get us to root for all the people we ended up rooting for? (Not the middle schoolers in season four; you had to root for them.) Stringer Bell? Prop Joe? Man.

My favorite quote isn’t here. When we first meet Bodie, he’s just a short-sighted, headstrong foot soldier. By the time we get to that scene with him and McNulty at the Arboretum a few seasons later, he’s just completely ground up. “I feel old,” he mutters to no one in particular. In context, it’s absolutely devastating.

What do you think is missing from this?

Like Being Inside Google Reader.

G.D. — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:45:55 +0000

You ever have one of those dreams wherein you’re taking your pet polar bear for his evening walk, strolling past random people you sort of know while Chubb Rock stands on the corner politely asking passersby if they can spare some Lemonhead money? And then you wake up and realize it’s because you left your tv on? That’s what last weekend was like, but in real life.

On Saturday, Alyssa Rosenberg and Shani headed to a Howard football game to watch the Bison get murked. (But Alyssa was really feeling the band.) Later that night, a motley contingent that included myself, quadmoniker, Spencer Ackerman, Matt Yglesias, Shani, belleisa, Mark Goldberg and Rhome Anderson repaired back to Alyssa Rosenberg’s apartment after a planned bar outing was thwarted when Jamelle’s I.D. failed to meet the completely arbitrary guidelines set forth by the District of Columbia. (His Virginia I.D. is vertical, and D.C. bars were recently prohibited from honoring them because they’re easy to fake or some such bullshit.)

But lo! Fun was had! Tweets were hastily tossed out into cyberspace. The rest of the folks arriving for the Cold Drank Summit were advised to meet us. Dayo Olopade rolled through, as did Dave Weigel and Ezra Klein. Ann Friedman, Phoebe Connelly and Alex Gutierrez dropped by. (Shani to the six-foot-four-ish Ann: “You tweet like a much shorter person.”) Gautham Nagesh and l bonded over our love for 90’s hip-hop, while Anna John professed her love for Rasheed Wallace. The next morning, I woke up ran five miles on city’s edge with Adam Serwer. Just two bloggers who jog, yo. Or…joggers who blog. (Yo, wtf? Does that not sound like some freely associative REM sleep shit?)

All the thanks to this goes to Alyssa, who made the bold decision to throw this bloggy get-together, and the no-less audacious decision to down a beverage comprised of grape drink and vodka. (Ain’t no vitamins in that shit.) Seriously, not a bad way to spend a weekend.

Ridiculous Moments in R&B, Part 2.

Brokey McPoverty — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:15:56 +0000

It took 12 years, but here we go again! Ridiculous Moments in R & B, part deux! In no particular order, the winners are:

1. Who let your drunk uncles in the studio?? I have no idea how ‘Float On’ by the Floaters came about, but I’m guessing it went something like this:

Larry: Ay! Ay y’all, this where my nephew Ronnie J come in here and do his music shit at…I think he got some beer in a fridge here somewhere down here since Paul done drank up all the everythang.

Paul: You cain’t put that on me, man! You know I don’t drink no beer if it ain’t malted anyway, you hear me??! *pimp runs around the room*

Charles: WHERE THE ‘YAC AT??!

Ralph: Shut up, fool! Hey Larry, what you say Ronnie ‘nem do in here? Music? Aw, shit, we could do that! We can make somethin’ for the ladies, man!

Charles: AIN’T NO MAD DOG OR NOTHIN IN HERE, MAN!

Larry: Yeah! Say, man, that ain’t a bad idea! There’s this redbone that work at the Snackin’ Shack I been tryin’ to get at for the longest!

Ralph: Awwww yeah! I’ma get on that microphone, talkin’ bout some “I’M A SCORPIO! DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEAN, GIRL??!” *inappropriate hip gyration*

Charles: THIS SOME BULLSHIT!!!

Gotta hand it to ‘em though. The foot action is *crazy* and this song is better than ANYTHING that Trey Songz will ever do in the history of his life.

2. Boyz II Men doesn’t mind STDs all that much. Boyz II Men, I’d argue, is one of the most successful musical acts ever, and definitely one of my favorite. I’m sure ‘End of the Road’ still holds all kind of record-breaking chart performances and whatnot. What was awesome about Boyz II Men is that they were hip, they were new and fresh and they made good definitive 90s R&B, but they still retained a classic R&B feel. I think we can find that classic influence best in the spoken breakdowns they put in their songs. My favorite, by far, is the one in ‘End of the Road’ because it’s just so inappropriate. I understand bein’ so in love that you can’t function or see straight or none of that. But really, there comes a point where you really should try to, because this:

All those times of night when you just hurt me
And just ran out with that other fella
Baby, I knew about it, I just didn’t care

I’m not out to go out and cheat on you all night
Just like you did baby but that’s all right

I read that and I hear: “I know that this is no longer a monogamous relationship, and I know that monogamy is an important thing to have when trying not to get the clap, AIDS, and other STDs, and I know that by willingly continue to take anything you give me, including your now soiled vagina, I am putting myself at risk, but I just don’t care.” He then goes on to say that he’ll be there for her until his dying day. Well with that attitude, that day may be closer than you think, buster! Invest in some standards!

3. Jimmy Cozier has self-esteem problems. Speaking of low standards, remember Jimmy Cozier???? He actually made some pretty good music for the 2 weeks he was relevant! The song he did with Alicia Keys was my jam for a good 3 days. His big song (I think?) was ‘She’s All I Got,’ the one that went ’sometimes I looove heeeeer/sometimes I love her noooooot/I ain’t lettin’ her gooooo/cause she’s all I goooooot.’ Now on the surface, I thought this was sweet: he loves her so much that even though they have problems, he feels that she’s the only constant in his world, the only thing he can bank on to be there for him because they’re such a perfect fit. How poetic!

But upon closer inspection…I think it’s more accurate to say ‘this bitch is crazy and he doesn’t think he can do any better.’ I mean hell, in the first verse he’s singin’ about how she just blacks out sometimes? WTF? She likes startin’ shit just to see how far she can go before HE flips out?? Um, that’s not cute. That’s unhealthy. Come on, Jimmy. You weren’t that bad lookin’, boo. I believe in you.

4. Quincy Jones is a delight! Literally! If Wikipedia is to be believed, Quincy Jones’ middle name is ‘Delight.’

…

Quincy Delight Motherfuckin’ Jones. Junior. He’s a junior, so that means there is another Quincy Delight Jones out there in history. Ridiculous.

Hi! I'm Brian McKnight, and I will regret this fashion decision in 10 years!

5. Who knew Brian McKnight was so 90s??! Okay, I forget how and when I stumbled across this song and video, but it definitely wasn’t long ago. I think I caught it on VH1-Soul during old school hour or something. I NEVER knew this song existed!! It’s GREAT! If I had known this song existed when we did the ridiculous moments in new jack swing post, it TOTALLY would have been on there. This is like, the apex of 90s R&B videos. It has it all. Let’s examine, shall we?

1. Shadowy girl in spandex dancing against a white background? Check.

2. Randomly hanging out in an alley for no apparent reason? Check.

3. Huge shadow of an industrial fan in said alley, also for no apparent reason? Check. <– why did they do that so much??!

4. S-curl? Unfortunate check.

5. Ridiculous fashion? HOLY MOTHER OF CHECK. This is the real reason that I decided to put this on the list. When you’re watching the vid, skip to the 1:16 mark. What do you see? Your eyes are not deceiving you. That is Brian McKnight wearing a motherfucking vest under a motherfucking pair of overalls with no motherfucking shirt beneath either of them.

Motherfuck.

6. Is it still stalking if she never sees you? …yes, creepy-ass Lionel Richie, it is. The video for his song ‘Hello’ has ALWAYS weirded me out. I think that’s partially because Lionel Richie himself just kinda makes me feel weird. Imagine being out in the wild and you see a ferocious lion…who just happens to have a Jheri curl. You’d be confused, right? You wouldn’t know whether to be afraid and run for your life, or walk up to it and try to show it a better way of doing things. That’s what Lionel Richie looks like to me. Very talented guy but… something is always just a little off.

Watching him stalk a blind student of his in this video didn’t help settle any of that for me. I mean first of all, even if you weren’t a creepy stalker, she’s still your student which is, at the very least, hella immoral. But considering that you ARE a creepy stalker and are in ALL this girl’s classes watching her dance and shit, rubbin’ on walls while she pirouettes…inappropriate, Lionel. Very much so.

She was a pretty talented sculptor though; she captured his juicy lion-ness perfectly.

7. Holy Cameo’s codpiece, Batman! I… I actually don’t know what to say about this. Larry Blackmon of Cameo wore a codpiece. In the 1980s. A time when nobody had any business wearing a codpiece. Why? Why did that happen? Do you think he still has it on now? It’s very unsettling and über distracting. to illustrate how distracting that sumbitch is, I will tell you that I’m so turned off by the codpiece that I don’t even have any ill will toward the Steve Harvey/Kid from Kid n’ Play hybrid lacefront hair piece on his head. That’s pretty major.

There is some good to come of the codpiece, though (…pardon the pun?). It’s an insult factory! Somebody snappin’ on you and you need a comeback? Consult the great codpiece of Cameo. Walk into a dirty room and need a way to let people know how you feel about the state of affairs? ‘Ugh, it smells like Cameo’s codpiece in here!!’ Ladies, being pursued by someone who repulses you? ‘Ugh, I’d rather lick the inside of Cameo’s codpiece!’ Somebody being generally foolish and u need to let them know it? ‘Ugh, you oughta be smacked in the face with Cameo’s codpiece!!’ And so on and so forth. You can use those. I give you permission. (But if they somehow make you famous, IM COMIN AFTER YOU FOR MY SHARE OF THE MONEY!)

8. Tank could have some personality disorders. And possibly ‘roid rage. Aaaah, Tank. I LOVE me some Tank. Not too terrible on the eyes. Got the nice ex-stripper body goin’ on. I’m guessing his biggest song, and definitely one of my favorites (to be all the way real, I think I only know two of his songs), is ‘maybe I deserve.’ I love this song because the concept is creative, he’s got a nice voice, and he randomly snaps as he’s singing. Like I really think he was in the studio havin’ some post-traumatic flashbacks and slips up and lets the anger go a couple of times. The first time is around the 1:51 mark when he asks her WHO THE HELL YOU TRYNA IMPRESS? (LOL). Oh, and then there’s the part where he tries to choke her out not long after.

…!

It’s okay though! After that he leaves the manic stage and admits that it’s all his fault! He’s insecure! But then she admits cheating on him and suspiciously, that’s where the story ends! WHERE IS SHE, TANK??! WHAT’D YOU DO WITH THE GIRL, HUH??!

Also, remember the song ‘Slowly?’ OMG. This is my favorite Tank song, and one of the songs that I’d like to conceive my first child to. in this song, that whole aggressive I-could-snap-your-neck-if-I-wanted-to thing really works in his favor, cause u know he’s not gonna snap it this time, just grip it gently. Maybe run his thumb across it while he does. ….*ahem* so! I’m video surfin’ on YouTube one day, and I realized id never seen the video, so I look it up expecting something super, super sexy to match the super sexy song and what I got instead was 8 minutes of shit that don’t go together at all. I won’t go into detail; I’ll just let you see for yourself. I will say that I blame R. Kelly for this video format, though.

9. Oh shit, David Ruffin is back from the dead? And making reggae music?! You know, I have trouble separating the great Leon from the characters he portrays. My favorite, by far: well, it’s a toss up between Little Richard in the Little Richard Story and David Ruffin in the Temptations movie. I usually call him David Ruffin though, and that up there in the bold print is what I said when I ran across this: Leon got a group!

LOL don’t they look like a broke down Arrested Development?

I tried to listen to the music seriously, but every time Leon finishes a verse I see him doing the David Ruffin spin and I just can’t take any of it seriously.

10. That’s just… nasty. Okay. I listen to some ignorant ass music. I listen to some stuff that stands in explicit contrast to my actual factual personal convictions and beliefs. Misogynist, violent, homophobic, unabashedly whorish. But it’s art, right? I think it’s possible to enjoy things that are out of your personal character for art’s sake.

Sons of Funk’s ‘Pushin’ Inside of You’ is pushin’ my limits though. I mean..lol. There’s sexiness in being direct, but just spelling it out like that? You have to sing a song about how you’re pushin’ inside of me? Someone didn’t learn the fine art of being coy. I mean why stop there? Let’s just use the clinical terms if we’re gonna spell it out! ‘Female, I enjoy/the sensation that I experience/when my penis is inside your vaginal waaaaalls/I am in favor of/the various sounds you emit/as I engage in coitus with yooooou.’ Might as well!!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wlB3DGePAM&feature=player_embedded]

…id totally make out with somebody to this song in a club though. Let me not act like I’m 100% too good. More like 87%. Also, Barack Obama seems to like it. (<-WTF?)

Stumping for Marriage: Bundles of Joy?

Alisa — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:30:56 +0000

In a recently published study, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers assessed the subjective happiness of women and found that despite greater opportunities, higher wages and increased education, their perceived feelings of well-being have decreased steadily over the last 35 years. In addition they identified a widening gap in the levels of subjective happiness experienced by men and women. This finding touched off a flurry of responses and rebuttals, in the attempt to determine whether we really are unhappy and if so, why. Among the popular hypotheses for female misery was the stress of motherhood due to the disproportionate role of women in child-rearing, along with the lack of supports within society for those who are struggling to balance parenting and careers.

Did all this depress you? Need a pick me up? Then maybe you should forget everything you just read and go pop out a baby instead of popping pills.

Confused?

There’s a new study on the block by Dr. Luis Angeles, suggesting that that having children enhances feelings of life-satisfaction, and that this effect increases with each new addition. But before you race for the bedroom (or the sperm bank) you’ll need to make a pit stop at the altar – the positive effects were only noted for married couples. Dr. Angeles asserts that “married individuals are arguably the most appropriate group to study the effects of having children on happiness, as the act of marriage can be interpreted as a signal of the partners’ willingness to experience parenthood” and having children may enhance the lives of people “under the right conditions”. As Bonnie Rochman over at DoubleX accurately points out, the findings and the conclusions drawn from them seem less about touting the benefits of having children and more about the supposed benefits of marriage.

So, get married, have babies, be happy, right? Not so fast. Upon reading the study it becomes apparent that to reap the benefits of being a parent it isn’t enough to simply be married, one must have a certain kind of marriage. Dr. Angeles attempted to account for individual differences of marital status, gender, age, income and education. On the surface, none of the results are surprising. What is surprising are the reasons put forward for these results.

With regards to marital status, people living together as unmarried couples did not report the same increases in life satisfaction as married couples. Dr. Angeles claim that this finding “dispels the idea that the positive effect on married individuals is due uniquely to the fact that they can pool together resources, such as money and time, to raise their children.” He also goes further to claim that “what separates married and unmarried couples is arguably not the possibility of pooling resources for the aim of raising children but the willingness to do so in the ﬁrst place.” This interpretation conveniently ignores the fact that marriages are a norm that are rewarded and reinforced within our society whereas other family structures are not. It could be that people within marriages are happier because they are validated by the world around them and benefit from being a part of unions that are honored and privileged. What about people whose unions are not currently recognized, such as members of the LGBTQ community?

Examination of the data for income and education reveals similar trends regarding the reinforcement societal ideals and the rewarding of those who happen to meet the criteria. For those persons who earn less then 50% of the average family income in the sample and did not complete high school, having more children had a negative effect on their feelings of life-satisfaction. The greatest positive effects were seen among those respondents that Dr. Angeles describes as “the middle class” – those earning 50%-150% of the average family salary who possessed a full high school education. Class as manifested via socioeconomic markers such as income and education as a mediating factor concerning the choice to marry or not is something we have been talking about on this blog for a long time . And just as marriage is more likely an indicator of middle class status than a catalyst for attaining it, increased life-satisfaction upon procreation within one such union is more likely an indicator of general prosperity as opposed to the cause of it.

The consideration of age and gender also led to conclusions that bear closer examination . As in prior studies it was found that women are the chief beneficiaries of increased life-satisfaction when they become parents. Dr. Angeles findings supported this, in keeping with the popular notion that women are “more keen on having children” than men. However, since life-satisfaction is measured via self-report I am wary of this measure and possible interference due to internalized attitudes developed in response to fear of social censure. The recent furor over Penelope Trunk tweeting her miscarriage is great example of why women may feel uncomfortable expressing or ascribing anything other than positive feelings to motherhood. Because the whole condition is constructed as sacred, to be critical of it for some is a dereliction of your “duty” as a woman to carry and nurture children. We don’t see the same effects with men because notions of rearing children are not intimately linked with maleness in our cultural consciousness the way they are with femaleness.

Dr. Angeles admitted the data was not ideal for exploring how age interacts with having children to affect life-satisfaction. The persons considered were those who had children under the age of 16 still living at home. However, prior research by Kohler (2005) found that positive effects of children on happiness, which had been obtained on a sample of individuals aged 25–45, tends to disappear when the investigations are carried out with individuals aged 50–70. Dr. Angeles claims that when people are asked “simple” questions about the most important things in their lives, their children are at or near the top – is this how they really feel or simply what they know they’re supposed to say? This may be related to the point on gender, in that once children have been successfully raised to adulthood there is sufficient evidence to rebut any claims of negligence on the part of parents, particularly mothers. Hence the passage of time may allow for greater candor about how being a parent affected them.

After reading this study, I am wondering what the utility of it is. Itpoints out that people who are doing reasonably well in life and have a partner are potentially made happier when they have kids. I don’t think this is new information. What I want to know about are the prospects of people whose lives and loves don’t fit into the model presented as the ideal. The more worthy question is this: how do we create the world where they can also attain happiness whether by means of increased equity or greater support and acceptance of the validity of diverse life choices? Is there a way to construct the calculus surrounding fulfillment and self-actualization without a zero-sum equation with “conventional” choices on one hand and ” liberal” ones on the other? At 27, unmarried and childless with no prospects, I sure hope so.

Read the rest of the “Stumping for Marriage “ posts here and here

Shouts out to our much beloved play-cousin and member-in-good-standing of the Grape Drink Mafia, Jeremy Levine for helping me get my hands on the journal article.

Your Monday Random-Ass Roundup: Go Away, not Rogue.

blackink12 — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:50:39 +0000

Dave Weigel for the win on Twitter this afternoon: “Weird, Oprah has some unemployed conservative blogger on today”:

For a second, I was confused. I thought he was talking about Lou Dobbs.

Regardless, once I finish this round-up, I’m putting together a proposal to make our next book-of-the-month selection “Going Rogue.” I hear all the kids are reading it:

1. The NYT’s Michiko Kakutani reviews Sarah Palin’s much-hyped memoir. “Just as Ms. Palin’s planned book tour resembles a campaign rollout — complete with a bus tour and pit stops in battleground states — so the second half of this book often reads like a calculated attempt to position Ms. Palin for 2012. She tries to compare herself to Ronald Reagan by repeatedly invoking his name and record. She talks about being ‘a Commonsense Conservative’ and worrying about the national deficit. And she attempts to explain, rationalize or refute controversial incidents and allegations that emerged during the 2008 race.” (G.D.)

2. By now, you’ve heard that Sept. 11 co-conspirator Khalid Shaik Mohammed and four others will face trial in New York for their roles in the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Glenn Greenwald, Juan Cole and Amanda Marcotte offer their takes on the completely predictable right-wing whining about the Obama Administration’s failure to indulge totalitarian notions of justice. (Blackink)

3. Nearly half of all the country’s homeless vets are black. (G.D.)

4. More about vets: Tara McKelvey uncovers how Bush-era officials substituted pop-Christianity for treatment of post-traumatic stress disorders and depression. “God doesn’t like ugly,” one political appointee told Paul Sullivan, an analyst in the VA’s Veterans Benefits Administration, in a clumsy attempt to reduce the cost of caring for psychologically traumatized veterans. “You need to make the numbers lower.” (Blackink)

5. 538 echoes the point that geographically-compact districts leave Democrats underrepresented in Congress and state legislatures. (Blackink)

6. As campaigning for the 2010 Senate race cranks up in Florida, the state GOP is on the verge of civil war. Hopefully, they’ll all secede when it’s over. (Blackink)

7. Leigh does the math on the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of D.C.’s threat to shutter programs aimed at helping the city’s poor if its lawmakers decide to move forward with same-sex marriage. Shani’s take is over at The American Prospect and Jamelle’s take on the Church’s politicization is at Spencer Ackerman’s spot. (G.D.)

8. Speaking of Shani, she put in serious work last week over at TAPPED. We salute her and her efforts. A link to the Web site is here.

9. Also, the FANTASTIC (emphasis is Shani’s) Majora Carter – will be blogging there for the next two weeks. Here’s a sample. (Shani-o)

10. So chocolate milk is good for you. Now all we need is an excuse to lace it with vodka a la Roger Sterling. (Alisa)

11. Speaking of Roger and the gang – WANT. (Alisa)

12. Steven D. at Booman Tribune has a righteous rant about the epic fail of abstinence-only sex education. (Blackink)

13. Residents in a rural Maine town (really, is there any other kind?) are opposing a multifamily housing complex that would expand housing options for immigrant laborers. The aforementioned Dobbs would be proud. (Blackink)

14. The Philadelphia-area swimming pool that was embroiled in controversy during the summer for allegedly discriminating against minority campers has filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. (Blackink)

15. John Cho on race and acting. (G.D.)

16. Over at Bitch Ph.D., M. LeBlanc has an interesting post about pseudonymity and sexual shame. “I look back and think, man, if I were writing under my real name, would I ever have written any of those things, all of which I’m proud of? I know I wouldn’t have. But why?” (Blackink)

17. Why Amanda Hess hates “I love women.” Chris Brown and Wendy Williams are involved. (Blackink)

18. Double X will be absorbed back into Slate. Can’t say I’m that sorry when good pubs like the Washington Blade are dying. (Shani-o) *Ironically (if that’s even the word, this item was a last-second addition to the round-up. I initially had the NYT Magazine’s profile on Megan Fox here. Guess I still do).

19. It’s a given that 50 Cent is always badly in need of attention. Now he seems to want some from Jay-Z. (Blackink)

20. For those of us who couldn’t make it or weren’t invited, here’s Spencer Ackerman’s abridged account of the Cold Drank Summit. Blog sis Alyssa also talks about her trip to Howard with Shani. (Blackink)

21. If you watched last night’s epic renewal of the Patriots-Colts rivalry, you should know that the math agreed with Belichick. (Blackink)

22. A new study shows that cynicism and negativity may actually enhance the experience of the game. No wonder I love football so much: I grew up rooting for the Oilers. (Blackink)

23. Would football be safer – i.e. prevent more head injuries – without helmets? Possibly. (Blackink)

24. Milwaukee Bucks rookie point guard Brandon Jennings on the challenge of the NBA: “‘Sometimes it feels like Oak Hill (Academy) out there,’ he said. For Jennings, the NBA is already akin to high school. Rookie dominance seems assured. Stardom is the next stop.” (Blackink)

25. And finally, on a much more somber and tragic note, I want to learn a lot more about Shaniya Davis than Sarah Palin over the next couple of days. But not really. If you all know what I mean.

Until the next time, stay up.

Book of the Month Discussion: The Blind Side by Michael Lewis. [Sticky Post]

belleisa — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:00:39 +0000

The story of Michael Oher’s intellectual development is also the story of his body type. Michael Oher is rare. Huge. A freak of nature. He’s also an anomaly of nurture and it has taken a village to raise him. The Blind Side by Michael Lewis chronicles Oher’s turbulent childhood, his unlikely ascent into professional football and the importance and evolution, largely monetary, of the left tackle position in the N.F.L. The position Oher would come to play in college for Old Miss and, currently, the Baltimore Ravens.

Using a mixture of stark language and deftly placed insight, Michael Lewis describes the evolution of the left tackle with the language and rationale of free market capitalism. In the early nineties, the N.F.L.’s free agency system meant that teams could “buy the players they needed,” but as would soon become obvious, not all positions were created equal. “The price of protecting quarterbacks was driven by the same forces that drove the price of other kinds of insurance,” Lewis writes. “It rose with the value of the asset insured, with the risk posed to that asset.”

The person charged with protecting that million-dollar golden boy needed strength, speed, agility and bodily bulk— a massive butt and legs as well as long arms—to give the quarterback a few extra seconds in the pocket was unlike the other offensive lineman. It’s rare for someone to have all these specific physical traits, and for the players who had them, the price was high. Very high.

Oher’s athletic potential catches the attention of important folks at Briarcrest, a predominantly white, Christian private school in a very different part of Memphis from the one in which Memphis grew up. Initially, it’s the high school’s football coach, Hugh Freeze, who has big ambitions. But Oher also lands on the radar of Sean and Leigh Anne Tuohy, a wealthy white couple with children at Briarcrest who eventually become Oher’s adoptive parents. Reviewers aren’t colorblind, so there’s a tendency (as I did) to focus on the race of the wealthy Republican family taking in a poor black kid with the sad life story he’s not keen on sharing. Yet the book is peppered with the idea of a Christian imperative to help those who cannot help themselves; that is, socially conscious practice proctored by religious belief that is sometimes at odds with Republican talking points.

For example, Briarcrest principal Steve Simpson, having admonished himself for initially giving Oher “false hope” that the poor, nominally sheltered Oher could attend his school, conditionally admits Oher in order to “clear his conscience.” According to Simpson, “it was really unusual to see a kid with those kinds of deficits that wanted an education…a lot of kids with his background wouldn’t come within two hundred miles of this place.” It’s a line that makes me shudder. Simpson, I say to myself, a lot of kids with Oher’s background wouldn’t have the resources to come within two hundred miles of your school.

Sean Tuohy, a self-made man who is less motivated by religion the other people in the book, feels a certain kinship to the black students at Briarcrest. He knows what it is like to be the odd man out; in fact, Tuohy often relishes it. His affinity to Oher is akin to both his impulse to conquer and the intimate understanding of what it means to go without basic resources. Sean’s wife, Leigh Anne, is an impossibly willful woman and a far cry from the docile stereotype of the good Christian woman. She is a straight talker and also Oher’s emotional guide. (In another shudder moment she puts on a station that “plays black music” in an effort to get Oher to relax and open up to her.)

With the help of a private tutor — and teachers and coaches who figured out that Michael learns through observation — his GPA would rise from a 0.9 to a 1.54 in a school year. That wouldn’t amount D’s. The jump in Oher’s ability to process information is emblematic of a blog post written by Malcolm Gladwell called “Race and IQ ” which was a companion piece to an article he wrote in the NewYorker on the same subject. “There are studies showing that if a child of a very poor family, [is] adopted at birth into a wealthy family, [that child] will have a much higher IQ than his or her siblings, or his or her parents, who remain in poverty.” Oher’s eventual academic achievement and intellectual growth — his I.Q. jumps from mild mental retardation to the normal range after a few years with the Tuohys — underline Gladwell’s point.

So here are some questions. When the motives appear (mostly) pure* but the approach is slightly prejudiced, does it tarnish the outcome? And what of the value of his body? Had Freeze and Sean Tuohy not seen Oher’s athletic potential would they have taken such an interest in him? Is the miracle of this story that the universe thrusted Oher into the community of people who had a very particular use for his intimidating presence?

*Oher eventually settles on Ole Miss, a college that might not have had a serious chance at landing Oher were it not for the fact that it was the Tuohys’ alma mater. If one wanted to read it cynically, their adoption of Oher could be framed as a way for a prominent university booster to mold and deliver a blue chip recruit to his team.

Friday Random Ten.

blackink12 — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:27:19 +0000

This weekend, in the District of Columbia, there will be the long-awaited meeting of The Families. The Grape Drink Mafia and the Juicebox Mafia.

The Cold Drank Summit.

The Internet should be very scared.

I’m sure there will be lots of talk about health care reform, “30 Rock” and good hair, which neither blacks nor Jews are credited with having much of. And there’s really not much more that can be said in this space.

But if we had a seat at the table, and say, Alyssa or Jamelle or Adam turned on the iPod, this is what they would probably play:

1. Gin and Juice by Snoop Dog (Quadmoniker)

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6TUhx2wX0M&hl=en_US&fs=1&]

2. Sippin’ tha Barre by Paul Wall (Jamelle)

3. Drink to Me by Johnny Cash (Quadmoniker)

4. I’m On It (Kryptonite) by the Purple Ribbon All-Stars (G.D.)

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVuxD7iLu9k&hl=en_US&fs=1&]

5. Only When I’m Drunk by Tha Alkaholiks (Blackink)

6. Drink with Me by Mairus and the rest of the revolutionaries in ‘Les Miserables.’ (Brokey)

7. Juice (Know the Ledge) by Eric B and Rakim (Blackink)

And we have to do Shani’s submissions in order, lest you all miss the joke:

8. Sugarwater by Cibo Matto (Shani-o)

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghCSeXHs-68&hl=en_US&fs=1&]

9. Don’t Drink the Water by Dave Matthews Band (Shani-o)

10. Purple Rain by Prince (Shani-o)

Get it? Anyone?

Eh … just be glad I couldn’t find a video for “Love 40.”

Until the next time, have a great weekend. And pour out a little liquor for those of us who couldn’t make it to D.C.