Do We Need Sexual Liberation for all, or "Gay" Liberation for a few?

“Moreover, and paradoxically, the “spirit” of sexism - the euphemism for Male Supremacy, is male homosexuality.”

Dear friends,

The Gay Liberation Movement which was actually endorsed first, on a national level, by the Black Panther Party, as I remember, around the early spring of 1971, today, is not the same movement, by any stretch of the imagination, as the one that we supported back then. Likewise, neither is its Women's Liberation counterpart that would officially establish itself as a force, much to the dismay of many, if not most, men, during the summer of 1971, when Black activists like Fannie Lou Hamer, Myrlie Evers, and U.S. Representative Shirley Chisholm, along with others like Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, and Bella Abzug founded the National Women's Political Caucus (NWPC). We (the Black Panther Party) vigorously supported that group just mentioned, as well.

Unfortunately, the leadership of both the Gay and Women's Liberation Movements in this country started “digressing” as opposed to “progressing”, within a couple of years, after losing their control to, for the most part, mean-spirited European American women, calling themselves “lesbians”, whose agenda had nothing to do with liberating anyone.

Oddly enough, it has been the specter of Male Supremacy that has been at the heart of these two movements becoming misdirected away from “liberation”, and, instead, being trivialized as, for instance, with women - “equal pay for equal work” - and for so-called “gays”, gay marriage. (By the way, who in this society has marriage equality?)

Moreover, and paradoxically, the “spirit” of sexism - the euphemism for Male Supremacy, is male homosexuality. Therefore, at least to me, it is, at best, insincere for either gay men or lesbians to proclaim to be sharing similar paths, let alone goals. If that’s not true, then why is that, perhaps, the most common lament by gay guys is: I don’t trust anything that bleeds for a week and doesn’t die. (By the way, a number of non-human animals bleed longer and more frequently than female humans...smh)

Additionally, whereas the original Women's Liberation Movement confronted Male Supremacy head on, the earlier-mentioned “lesbians” usurped that movement, as well as the Gay Liberation one, long ago. Then, they distanced themselves from the large presence of the African American pioneers who were mentioned earlier and their sisters - great artists/educators like Barbara Love, Nicki Mathis, Toni Cade Bambara, Sonya Sanchez, Nikki Giovanni, Audre Lorde, hundreds of Panther sisters, and so many others. Does anyone hear White Supremacy? Euphemistically, it is called racism, And, in fact, it is the racist arrogance of Europeans and their offshoots in the Americas that makes them trivialize the centuries-long oppression and exploitation of African American people, particularly, by comparing the plight of so-called gays to our circumstances.

Therefore, another problem is: In a socially-stratified society like ours, one can be a member of an oppressor group and an oppressed group at the same time. the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill debacle proved that point quite adequately. Likewise, males and females who call themselves both "gay" and "white" fit that bill. Consequently, again, in their racist arrogance, such "white" people trivialize our historical struggle for freedom, justice, and equality, as being analogous to two males piercing and thrusting their erections inside each other's anuses as if they are a "loving" pair, thus deserving of the same respect as heterosexual couples, when it is actually an expression of power and sexual greed in its extreme form, which itself is also, at best, a form of voluntary rape.

So, instead of strengthening the recognition of the need for all of us to have sexual freedom, the Gay Liberation Movement became the Gay Rights Movement and ceased to recognize the connection between the various cultural institutions in our country such as those of religion, the mainstream media and our schools, in relation to how they tie in with the overwhelming majority of Americans being sexually-repressed (especially those who call themselves “homosexual”).

Considering all that has been mentioned thus far, both movements have become little more than silly petty-bourgeois causes that do not recognize the fact that it is, essentially, the lack of appreciation for our very “human” identity as sexual beings that allows females to be treated, in a variety of ways, that males would never accept for themselves. In fact, the multi-billions of dollars porn industry recognizes males as sexual beings, but females as sexual objects.

Still, it is the disallowing of the right of females to be fully human, due to the fact that, from birth, for the most part, their own female elders brainwash them into believing their destinies are best served in relation to how skilled they are at deferring to equally brainwashed males (who have so foolishly deluded themselves into thinking that they are "superior" to anyone or anything) that is the cause of this whole situation. That’s the real deal! It is not simply a matter of demanding “equal pay for equal work”.

Proof: Named Steve Harvey, an African American, semi-literate, self-hating buffoon who makes Steppinfetchit look like Malcolm X, recently had a best-selling book called “Act like a Lady-Think like a Man”. Ouch!

The worst part of all that just mentioned is: both African- and European American women purchased such idiocy. [It’s funny. I doubt that any reputable publisher would have let a European American male have a book with such a disgusting title.] Moreover, I remember, during the Black Consciousness Era (roughly 1965 - 85), when speaking to Black men who had just moved Up South to places like Philly, NYC, and Boston from Down South (places like Baltimore, ATL, and Houston), it was not uncommon to hear such fellows advise, “Man, you gotta think like the white man.” Not to put any brothers from the South in the same category, Harvey, obviously of the same pedigree as those aforementioned Black men, somehow, saw a similar solution for all women. Wow!

At any rate, issues like abortion are only given recognition in the context of anti- and pro-, because women are not considered to be sexual beings - as men are. Worse yet, and unfortunately, in their intelligent response of feeling resentment towards Male Supremacy, far too many women, especially middle-aged European American ones, feeling that they are no longer part of the personality market, conveniently, have declared themselves to be “lesbians”, a totally reactionary stance against human progress that has nothing to do with sexuality, much less liberation.

In fact, I have found few things more humorous, but pathetic, than to see female European American Octogenarians holding signs at so-called “Pride” parades that read: I am a lesbian. What? Huh? When was the last time that that person had sex with someone else, of either gender?

Still, many argue that they do not "choose" to be gay; they just are. It is not a matter of behavior, they say. First of all, aside from the fact that a proposition cannot be proof of itself, behavior is anything that we do. Period. It involves a "choice" that people make. For instance, the greatest natural urges are those that remind us that we are hungry and/or thirsty. In our society, unless one lives in abject poverty in a desert or on the hills, s/he, usually, has access to, at least, water - whether clean or dirty. To be sure, the "choice" to eat and/or drink, is a wise one, since without consuming nutrients of some sort in periodic intervals a person would succumb.

Another strong "natural" urge is the sexual one. Yet, no one needs another person or outside element like food or drink to satisfy that frustration. Everyone has the ability to solve that problem by himself or herself – and everyday, billions do. Therefore, said one makes a "choice" to go to someone else in hopes of having that person or persons join in the sexual activity. Unfortunately, this urge, because it is so strong and can be satisfied, often, at so little cost - if any, has had a great deal to do with both power and sexual greed becoming the basis for sexual/social relationships in this society.

Of course, "choice" requires a conscious decision rooted in "will, judgment, and commitment". After all, one cannot "naturally" feel a certain way towards a potential sexual partner. Not even prostitutes take on any "John". Those who do are, unfortunately, at least, sometimes, the ones who are murdered.

Nevertheless, regarding one's "sexual" orientation, what difference does the gender, so-called "race", income level or any other orientation make, if, once you are with the type of person to whom you claim to be "oriented", either you wish that you weren't there - or s/he wishes that YOU weren't there?

In other words, can the complexities of creating mature personal relationships be trivialized so easily? In fact, other than some type of "tattle-tale" or "kiss-n-tell" revelation, how does one know what anyone has done sexually, or whether or not a person is "gay"? Even then, rumor is not enough, since a person does not have any idea what has happened with another sexually, unless s/he witnessed the act. Besides, due to the tug-of-war interactions that often happen in the bedrooms in any society, who knows what went down? Dig?

Sexual preference? We already have a name for such people. We call them rapists. One does not have sex with whom s/he prefers. Rather, a whole set of interactions must occur, approved consensually, by all parties involved. Otherwise., there is violation going on which, at that point, falls within the purview of law enforcement.

And then there are those, particularly males, who insist that they are "a woman inside of a man's body". This is a serious mental health issue. However, there are low-life surgeons, the descendants of the pre-legal abortion butchers, who will provide such psychotic individuals with "counseling", then an operation that gives the latter an artificial vagina, for example The problem with that is: The surgeon never informs the "patient", beforehand, that what distinguishes a woman from a man is not a vagina, but her monthly periodicity (although I must qualify that some females do not menstruate). No man can ever imagine what it feels like to menstruate. Such mistreatment of the patient's psychosis is in no small measure due to the fact that, for the most part, the US health care industry - one of the very worst in the world - mostly recognizes "physical" - not "mental" health. Did someone say "the market"?

At any rate, generally, it can be said that the inability to share erotic love with someone of the other sex comes largely from either a lack of ability to be a loving person or fear and mistrust. Additionally, erotic love is, sometimes, combined with either brotherly or sisterly love. Psychologically, that makes many homosexual relationships a form of incest. Moreover, as social relationships presently stand, in this society, most of the people pushing the gay agenda are women, particularly, European American ones - who call themselves "lesbians". While women as a whole justly resent men for society's patriarchy and sexism, it should be remembered that those same two evils exist and are perpetuated by so-called "gay" men as well. As a matter of fact, that's why, as I stated earlier, I believe that the spirit of sexism is male homosexuality.

Nevertheless, it appears that what sometimes occurs when two women, for example, sit around and commiserate with each other about what men have done to them or two men cry on each others' shoulders about what women have done to them, before long, one person ends up putting her or his face in the other one's lap. To be sure, that type of action breaks social custom. Worse yet, when people are breaking social customs, in order for such behavior to proliferate, the practitioners must necessarily develop obsessive and perverted habits, in order to motivate themselves and justify their very being. Otherwise, the aforementioned practitioners will cease the behavior, having no incentive to continue it.

In his now famous manifesto called "Letter from Birmingham Jail", the great Dr. King wrote, in part, " In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action." None of this ever happens with the so-called Gay Rights Movement. In fact, regarding their claim of being "homosexual", dialogue never happens, in any form. Instead, gay “pride” parades and other pathetic and obnoxious activities are thrust upon the public. We are simply told to accept this group, without any recognition or respect for the rest of the community. The so-called homosexual community is not a "community within a community". Rather, it is people who want to sit on both sides of the fence, when it comes to "inclusion".

Finally, those who oppose "gay culture", as it were, are personally attacked and childishly lambasted with a kind of moral terrorism, as gays use words and phrases such as "homophobia" and "mob rule". Also, gays use phrases like "straight allies". In other words, we have a national security issue here, since a certain amount of the population is at war with the rest of us. Gay violence has surfaced in New York City where, a few years back, a group of four women who call themselves "lesbians" brutally attacked a man, and have since been convicted of the heinous crime. There was even talk about a Korean American young man who murdered 32 people, at Virginia Tech, as claiming to be a tortured homosexual. Not a peep, about either incident just mentioned has been denounced by the "gay" community. The reason for their silence, at least to me, is due to the fact that their so-called Gay Rights Movement is not about sexual liberation at all. Rather, it is about sexual repression and destruction of the commonweal. Peace.

G. Djata Bumpus Read full post

The Prison/Industrial Complex (originally posted 10/2010)

“The fastest growing form of incarceration in the United States is immigration detention…”
Dear friends,

In the past, I’ve written about the Crime Industry. Well, just as 19th Century oil conglomerates would be the predecessors of today’s Automotive/Aerospace/Oil Complex, the aforementioned Crime Industry has led to te development of the “Prison/Industrial Complex”.

To be sure, this all keeps us aware of the reality that, in a society where our values are a reflection of the market, instead of vice versa, new markets must constantly be created in order to feed the insatiable greed of the market as it now stands.

In any case, on the link below is a Website that provides some very important takes on the durrent role of prisons in our particular advanced political economy - or process of social reproduction, as it were. Please check it out.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.diversityinc.com/article/8063/The-Prison-Industrial-Complex-Biased-Predatory-and-Growing/
Read full post

A True Warrior in African American History

>"At about 3 a.m. Smalls commandeered the 147-foot vessel from a dock fronting General Ripley’s home and office. Smalls and his crew sailed to a nearby dock, collected family members from another ship and headed toward sea..."



Dear friends,

There seems to be a tendency for people to ignore the heroism of individuals who represent a part of the struggle of African American people to resist oppression. The Civil Rights Movement was a brief period where accommodating, instead of resisting gained a lot of attention. However, the story on the link below defies that notion.

Moreover, one point to be remembered is: Our Black forebears, along with European American troops, fought for their freedom - with guns. No one "freed" them! In other words, they weren't just sitting around singing and waiting to be freed, as most school literature and the government- and corporate-controlled media outlets love to portray it.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.robertsmalls.org/
Read full post

Georgia, Georgia, no peace I find... (Originally posted 8/17/08)

Dear friends,

When Ray Charles sang "Georgia on my mind", the listener cannot imagine any other place than from where some sweet Southern peaches originate - as well as, "strange fruit", unfortumately. Certainly, in recent years, Aaron Neville has "covered" Brother Ray's classic more than effectively.

However, there is another sound about Georgia, on the minds of millions, right now, that is becoming more familiar these days. It comes from Eastern Europe. And, it is from a country - not a state. Not long ago, it was part of the Soviet Union. Now, after the dispersement of that communist federation which started in Russia, it seems, at least to me, that Russians may be moving back towards the direction that their original founders intended...

Yet, one of the problems that average citizens have, when they try to understand recent events, is: the entire US educational system, its teachers and professors, as well as many of our journalists and politicians, especially since the late-Reagan era, have been analyzing the experiences of the Russians as the latter have simply gotten smart and embraced capitalism. This is the lie or sheer naivete that all of the abovementioned have been claiming.

A genuine revolution is a process. It is not an event that concludes with the change of the personalitiies who represent a government. The North American Civil War, almost one hundred years after the "founding" of this nation, by the so-called American Revolution, proves that simple truism adequately. Let us face it. There were only thirteen colonies after our forebears ran out the British rulers, and they were largely in what is now called the "Northeast Corridor". However, unlike in the beginning of our nation's history, most of the territory that was the United States, seventy years later, was in the South.

Additionally, durng that time, the enslaved of African descent had outgrown those of European descent, in the South. It was not like that, at the founding of the nation and before, when it has been estimated that 75% of the Europeans who came here did so as "indentured servants". That is, those people sold themselves into slavery, usually for a period of four years, in order to pay the transportation cost to the ship's captain who brought them here.

As a matter of fact, in the Commonwealth History of Massachusetts, Vol.1, it is pointed out about early New Englanders, including the famous "Pilgrim" group, that landed at Cape Cod, that there was a small servile population among them. “Both Indian and Negro, besides white servants were bound out to a master for a term of years and received no wages. Of these there were a few in the Pilgrim group.”

Now, since there was no one here to accept the aforementioned Pilgrims other than the Early American Natives (so-called Indians), then that means that the slavemasters were aboard the Mayflower too. So it is obvious that the lie that our schools deliberately pass on to American children, generation after generation, about the "Pilgrims" coming here for religious freedon, is no different than the lie that the 1917 revolution in Russia was a conclusive event.

But what about revolutions? The intellectual giant Franz Fanon confided (paraphrased here), "I don't trust revolution. Revolution means fire. And I don't trust fire, because it is too difficult to control." I agree with our belated brother. I myself was once a revoluutionary, as a member of the Black Panther Party. I know, firsthand, the "fire" that revolutionnary activities make happen, in any given society.

However, for the past three decades, I have embraced conservative innovation, instead of revolution, and, thus, consider myself a conservative innovationist - not a revolutionary. Of course, by conservative, I do not mean what so many of these reactionary right-wingers, so-called Christian fundamentalists and their ilk who means-spiritedly promote "going back" to the period in our history when injustice for many was rampant. Rather, my understanding of the word conservative means that one takes informed risks. In other words, I do not just jump into anything, without careful thought and consideration. As well, I am an innovationist, in the literal sense, inasmuch as I choose to vigorously engage new ideas, that are based upon real experiences, as well as experimentation, in order to improve that which is already established; in other words, that which already exists.

In any case, the forward motion of the process that is the Russian Revolution was interrupted and made a "counter-revolution" by the likes of Mikhail Gorbachev and his supporters. But others have done that before, and to a worse extent. A man named Joseph Stalin, in fact, changed the whole direction of the initial process that was started by Vladmir Lenin, Leon Trotsky,, and their more faithful (than Stalin) Bolshevik comrades. To be sure, men like Stalin and, later, Gorbachev (colluding with multi-national corporations), even though counter-revolutionists, were/are part of the revolutionary "process" as well. Still, it seems, at least to me, that, today, the Russian people may have decided to take a different course than they did during the Gorbachev years. And so, the process (i.e., the Russian Revolution) continues...

Therefore, meaningless tough talk by George Bush, and his mouthpiece, Condoleeza Rice, will not change the fact that, aside from the reality that the Russian Revolution has not ended, the United States has its hands full already. I, therefore, suspect that it would be wise for the Bush administration to keep talking tough, but doing nothing. Right now, the game that the Bushies are playing, with their tough talk, is not much different than the incessant posturing and pontificating that we see between the "Democrats" and "Republicans" of the US Congress amongst themselves.

Moreover, we are dealing with two bodies (Russia's government and that of the US) who, under no circumstances, will engage one another militarily. Besides, many Americans are already asking: Why is it wrong for the Russians to invade a country but not the US? In other words, with unconscionable greed, at the expense of US soldiers and our tax dollars, the oil man Bush's administration has continued allowing: 1) The useless invasion of Afghanistan. 2) The yet-to-be defined "War on terror". 3) The "oil grab" in Iraq - along with that country's colonization by the US; and 4) An Iranian nuclear program for which the Russians will surely provide capacity if the president and the US Congress become too belligerent and send our courageous young warriors into the Georgia conflict. (And I am sure that Israel shudders at that thought.)

The United States needs to seek a different course. Perhaps, if the Bush administration considers joining with other nations, not as the usual "bully", but as a true partner, they may be able to gain enough support to make Russia back down. Nevertheless, with Russia positioned inside of Georgia at present, there are cries being made, by some, for the US to become involved and stop Russia from advancing further into Georgian territory. However, at least to me, the Russians have more to gain, in terms of their citizens backing them, than the Bushies do. When are the American people going to get tired of the lies and get rid of the Bushes, the McCains, the Clintons, and the rest of those to whom Brother Malcolm X referred as being nothing more than "Jesse James, Frank James, and the what-you-ma-call-it brothers"?

This whole concern for Georgia is more than just a huge contradiction for the US. Let us not forget that 19 Saudis invaded this country with plane-bombs, murdered thousands of people, injured tens of thousands more, and destroyed many billions of dollars worth of property, along with causing thousands of businesses to close permanently. Yet, not one hair on one head of any person from the oil-rich Saudi Arabia has been touched. Puh-leez. Still, President Bush, who himself refuses to set a timetable for when US troops wil leave Iraq, even though that is what the Iraqis want, says, "The United States stands with the democratically elected government of Georgia and insists that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia be respected." Right.

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post