Cynique

I find it somewhat amusing how all the TV talking heads, between admitting how clueless they were about the mood of the nation, are now empathizing with those who elected Donald Trump, and whom he has referred to as the "forgotten people". In suddenly discerning this voting bloc, white pundits are now seeking to sanitize it by saying the members of it were not motivated by racism or xenophobia or homophobia, but were simply worried about the economy, job security and terrorism, and were tired of being overlooked. Yeah, right. It's not as if everyone else didn't have these same worries. And who more than black folks are tired of being overlooked? The difference was that, unlike his followers, other groups didn't identify with the racist, fascistic, homophobic, xenophobic, misogynistic Donald Trump as someone who would turn things around. Maybe the media got it wrong when they predicted Hillary would win, but its original assessment of Trump and his mob as being bigots was correct.

Just because black voters had reservations about Muslims and the LGBT community doesn't negate the fact that these groups were significantly repulsive to most Trump supporters. Also, the economy is not that dire, and Trump got a large share of employed blue collar workers and middle income white collar ones, law and order people who think cop's lives matter as much as black ones, and that Muslims and Mexicans pose a threat, and that LGBTs are a menace to society. Another common thread running through Trump's supporters is the threat of having their whiteness devalued, plus an indignation over being dismissed by the Liberal intelligentsia and the Hollywood celebrity, something that was especially offensive to white rural America. Furthermore, I and a lot of other people don't believe that a 72-year-old progressive Jew like Bernie Sanders could've overcome Trump's momentum and defeated him for the office. I happen to think people were more disappointed than surprised that Hillary lost because she never accumulated a really big lead and was so blatantly disliked. I, personally, never thought she was a sure thing. What wasn't foreseen was that white Republican women voters would be so absent in their support of her. I wonder if Trump, himself, expected to the win the presidency because he didn't look particularly jubilant in victory. Like Donald Trump, General Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected to the presidency without ever having held political office. He, however, had the wisdom to realize this shortcoming and made the decision to delegate authority which was why his leadership style was referred to as "ruling by committee". Maybe Trump will have sense enough to surround himself with capable people concerned with the common good. Meanwhile the Democratic party has been cast in the role of a phoenix, left to rise from it ashes, speaking of which I, likewise, find myself burnt out. And so it goes...

Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote. So her entrenched constituency came through for her. Her problem was that she didn't make any converts. Apparently, the "undecided" voters ended up going for Donald Trump because they were fed up with the Black lives matter movement, with the LGBT community, with Plannned Parenthood, with Mexican Immigrants, with the Muslim presence, with Native American protests, with the assumption that celebrities would influence how they voted, and last but no least, with the idea of Hillary Clinton perpetuating the liberal agenda that Barak Obama represented. Opposing all of this is what they truly believed would make America great again. This country has referred to itself as the Land of Opportunity, and in this election millions of its citizens took this opportunity to register their intolerance of others or, as Martin Luther King phrased it, "a dislike for the unlike". So Trump's election is a victory for the "great white hope". Others can only hope that he will develop the integrity to make his presidency one that is inclusive, rather than exclusive. The future of the United States depends on this. IMO

Well, I went out and did my civic duty by exercising the right those who came before me fought and died for. Casting my vote for a women for president now belongs right up there with the the other historical milestones I participated in when I voted for John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic president, and Barack Obama, the first black one, not to mention being a witness to the Chicago Cubs winning their first world series in 108 years. Now what? Is the turmoil that America is currently experiencing the natural result of a republic where the diverse population gradually evolved into "a house divided against itself". Can we stand? Are we overacting? Will this hectic presidential campaign turn out to be "much ado about nothing" and the transition, instead, turn out to be an orderly one. Or, is the country about to become a runaway train that we're all aboard, with the next stop being Mayhem? Only Time will tell, and Time doesn't take sides. Me, I'm ready to take cover.

Who did President Bill Clinton rape? And did he force his attentions on Monica Lewinsky and Paula Jones? Seems like he spent most of his time with his mistress, Gennifer Flowers, which makes him an adulterer more than a sexual predator. Whatever. In any case, as you say, it is all about the power men have been exerting over women dating back to the cavemen days when they carried a club and dragged their mates by the hair. And by now everybody agrees that Hillary Clinton is far from perfect. Her ardent black supporters, however, will tell you all about the good programs she established for women and children and other helpful legislature she got passed during her term as a senator, and how she has been a target of vicious right-wing conservatives for 30 years, characters who are just as devious as she is accused of being. And crusader Michael Moore will tell you how, during her husband's term of office, she put her heart and soul into an attempt to bring about affordable health care in this country, and was crucified by the Republican congress for doing so. Barak and Michelle Obama will tell you that no one is more capable than she is. The question remains: If Hillary is elected president, what will we have to fear? That she won't keep the campaign promises that include implementing the progressive input from Bernie Sander's platform? That she will favor the rich and continue her conniving ways and try to capitalize on her position as chief executive by making secret deals to increase her personal fortune? That she will put a hit out on her enemies or drive them to suicide? My gut feeling tells me that this 69-year-old senior citizen is now ready to put her crafty talents to work for the good of the country. But, others cling to the spitefulness that they try to pass off as "integrity". So let them penalize her by casting their ballot for Trump, or by wasting their vote on either the Green or Libertarian party candidate or any other name they choose to write-in if this will make them feel good about themselves. And, of course, Trump supporters can tick off all the reasons why they believe their candidate would be best for this country so it obviously boils down to one's world view. Such is life.

The Clinton saga is all about the spin-doctoring of his haters and defenders. What we have proof of, is that Bill Clinton balanced the budget, kept us out of war and gifted workers with the family leave bill. What we can observe is that none of the half-truths made by his detractors have benefited from objective scrutiny and - by the way, he is not who is running against the unprecendented, unqualified Donald Trump. Bill Clinton's wife, who has endured 30 years of unrelenting demonization by those who blindly hate her, is the one seeking the office, eager to focus her considerable skill sets on fixing the country, - now that she has feathered her own nest. Bill Clinton is, however, guilty of believing he was doing the black community a favor by what he thought would deter crime. He has since admitted his good intentions "paved a pathway to hell", and the old guard of black civil rights veterans have apparently decided to forgive him. Moreover, in 2016 all of those incarcerated in the 80s are out of prison, and many of those remaining are being pardoned by Obama, the injustices committed against them inspiring Democrat promises to get rid of the stop-and-frisk laws, harsh sentences for victimless crimes, and an overhaul in policing procedures. And what party do you suppose the Walmart family dynasty, who engages in slave labor, belongs to?? As the omniscient, oracle known as Oprah has declared, nobody is asking voters to like Hillary or invite her into your house for tea. The election is pitting a "demagogue against democracy", and the choice is clear. The venerable Bernie Sanders emphasizes that this is not the time for a protest vote! It's about what will best serve the country. Even if Hillary does nothing more than maintain the status quo which at least acknowledges that reform is necessary, that is far better than what a Trump presidency with all of its mean-spirited, foolhardy goals will be.

What crime did Bill Clinton commit? And, running for president does have something to do with qualifications. Every chief executive in modern day history, with the exception of Trump, has had qualifications in the form of the experience that comes from having held a previous political office, as well as holding a law degree. Whether these leaders make the office, or the office makes them, depends a lot on the whims of the Legislative branch of the government as well as the Judicial. It would be more accurate to say that in the ruthless arena of politics, what qualifies one to be President is an ability to wheel and deal at home and abroad. The Presidency is not the Papacy. It is a job that requires someone who can walk it as well as talk it. Donald Trump's only qualification is that he embodies all of the malcontents who this country reeks with. A vote for Trump is either a vote for a return to the oppression of the past, or an exercise in narcissistic obstinacy manifested by taking pride in oneself for being judgmental about Hillary, fixated on all the unproven accusations, while blaming her for the sins of her husband. IMO

Well, The Chicago Cubs ended their 108-year drought and finally won the world series! I went through the motions of celebrating because this year's team really was the best in the league and deserved the honor. But me, my late husband, and one of my sons have been Chicago White Sox fans since day one, and it's extremely hard for die-hard Sox backers to cheer for the Cubs. And vice versa, as demonstrated by the Cub supporters in my family who were luke warm when the White Sox won the pennant in 2005. But, if ever Chicago needed a shot in the arm to deaden the shame of the reputation it has gained as the murder capital of America, it is now. This is a good time to remind everybody that with the Cubs taking it all, they have joined the exclusive ranks of Chicago's other winning teams, the Bears, the Bulls, the Black Hawks and the White Sox, making it a city where all 5 franchises have brought Championship trophies home! So, go Chicago! But this joyful interval cannot dispel the gloom that has cast a pall over me because even my entrenched cynicism has been unable to sneer at the absurdity of the presidential campaign. The thought of Donald Trump becoming president totally depresses me, and the possible volatile repercussions if Hillary wins, fill me with dismay. I grieve for this country even as I struggle not to hate what it has become. All I can hope for is that any upheaval that ensues will not prevent me from retreating into the 4 walls of a private tomb where I will contemplate the vicissitudes of this thing called "life".

Is anything what it seems anymore??? The world has become so superficial. Truth and honesty have become casualties in the public arena, and the power of suggestion is mesmerizing the masses. Intellect and creativity are taking a backseat to the materialism that captivates the victims of consumerism. Meanwhile, the smug Millennials are enslaved to their smart phones, totally deserving of the screwed-up country they are going to inherit. Too bad election day won't be the end, instead of a prelude to the next phase in this hot mess.

Pioneer said: "...there isn't a school in the United States offering a 'sex education" class that actually TEACHES the students how to have sex. It'll all peripheral knowledge that skirts around actual intercourse itself. Which is why nudity let alone the actual act of having sex is strictly forbidden on public airwaves in the United States while it's readily seen in other Western nations like Canada and Germany." Cynique replies: LOL What sex education classes do teach is how to put on a condom, using any penis-like object to demonstrate. The particulars of male and female anatomy are also taught. As for sex, that's self-taught. Couples learn from on-the-job training, while experimenting with what works. And the porn that is readily available on-line and cable TV features plenty of nudity.

Ava DuVernay’s 13th: It’s About Hope, Not History By: Martha S. Jones,Presidential Bicentennial Professor at the University of Michigan where she teaches history, Afroamerian Studies and Law. www.marthasjones.com @marthasjones_ Before you sit down to watch 13th, director Ava DuVernay’s new film about mass incarceration, take off your historian’s hat. This is no scholarly lesson about the past. Instead, DuVernay takes us on an exploration that she hopes will, first and foremost, shock. Once it has your attention, 13th mobilizes the power of the visual and the sonic, along with human stories, to teach about hope and our capacities to work toward change in a way that no historical text could. 13th is foremost an act of visual politics. When its narrator explains how images can “shock,” we learn some of what the film hopes to accomplish. The shock of horror, of recognition, of awakening to a system of racialized, inhuman degradation is what the film hopes to provoke. There is a history to this, DuVernay reminds us. Like 19th century anti-slavery advocates who used gruesome images — the former slave Gordon and his scarred back — 13thmakes us feel as well as think our way to action. As the civil rights movement relied upon images broadcast on the nightly news — young protesters set upon by fire hoses and police dogs — so too does 13th bring the inhumanity of mass incarceration into living rooms, where the sight may mobilize us. This is an African American tradition that historian Aston Gonzalez explains has its roots in the prints and photographs of early 19th century black artist-activists. Once awake, we must choose how best to act. 13th is open-ended, inviting us to find a place among the advocates DuVernay features. In this sense, the film is more primer than manifesto. DuVernay is content to allow each of us to find a way to action. Some will choose reform; gritty, close to the ground change within the criminal justice system as embodied in the work of a District Attorney such as the late Ken Thompson. Others of us will become abolitionists, concluding that the prison industrial complex is rotten to its core and must be wiped away, as Angela Davis has long urged. Congress member Charles Rangel hints at a third path. The way forward may be by a human rights approach, one that hold mass incarceration in the United States up to international standards, monitors, and remedies. I watched 13th with the Criminal Law Society at Michigan Law where I teach. We hoped, I think, that DuVernay would point out a role for lawyers. She does. But her examples suggest that overcoming mass incarceration may require getting beyond the conventional. Lawyer and Equal Justice Initiativedirector Bryan Stevenson fuels our shock by asserting the immoral equivalence of early 20th-century lynching and today’s criminal justice system. But Stevenson has moved beyond lawyering to become a cultural worker, building a memorial and national lynching museum in Montgomery, Alabama. Intriguing is the example of Michelle Alexander, whose book The New Jim Crow has done more than any text to bring mass incarceration to light, at least before DuVernay’s movie. Alexander is the most clear and nuanced voice in the film. But, since being interviewed for 13th, she has taken off her lawyer’s hat to join New York’s Union Theological Seminary. Perhaps faith is another avenue for those moved to action. For DuVernay, the filmmaker, those who work beyond legal and policy circles have an important role to play in the fight against mass incarceration. Most striking about 13th is how DuVernay is able to fuel hope. In many ways, this is a deeply pessimistic film, one that treats the degradation of black Americans as a permanent, intractable feature of the nation. In this are echoes of historian Mary Frances Berry, legal scholar Derrick Bell, and writer Ta-Nehisi Coates, all of whom have suggested that there is little more for black Americans to hope for than struggle. Perhaps it is in DuVernay’s elegant cinematography, which renders ordinary scenes lush and deep. Perhaps it is in how she deploys music — rhythms, beats, lyrics — to punctuate and drive the narrative. Surely hope is in 13th’s final images — don’t miss them. Underneath the closing credits, DuVernay arrays snapshots. Ordinary, everyday images of black Americans at home, at play, and wrapped in joy, love, family, and the simple pleasure of striking a pose. In these are our best hopes, hopes that have seen black Americans through history’s trials. These images give us another vantage point on those caught in mass incarceration’s clutches. It is a counter-narrative of beauty as only the visual can render it. The 13th Amendment’s loophole gave license to a system that has brutalized black and brown men and women in the United States. DuVernay’s 13thresponds by asserting a fierce, relentless humanity that neither law nor the systems it has set in place can extinguish.

Feminists and misogynists represent the extreme opposites when it come to views on many subjects. I suspect that the women dissing "The Birth of a Nation" are women from the feminist community. The film obviously has merit or it wouldn't have received critical praise, and it should not be totally dismissed because it offends certain females. Somewhere in the middle is probably the fairest assessment of this work. Nate Parker's acquittal of rape charges and his subsequent "repentance" count for something. Everybody makes mistakes. And women often cry "rape" to either to gain something from doing so or to feign innocence when caught in compromising positions. Rape inspires such a knee jerk reaction, that it's hard to sort out. In my personal estimation, there's a difference between a female being sexually assaulted by a stranger, and the molestation of a provocative, sloppy drunk girl, voluntarily in the the company of horny young male acquaintances with no self-control. "No, doesn't mean "no" if you are too intoxicated to utter it. I know, I know, I'm making light of a serious subject; always a hazard when you are seeking the truth. And of course, my cynical attitude is why many women don't come forward after being violated under such circumstances because they end up becoming even more stressed from being made to feel that they are partly to blame for what happened when boys were being dogs. Non-consensual sex is invariable a "he did/she did" dilemma. Hollywood favorites, Roman Polanski and Woody Allen come to mind as 2 celebs Hollywood perennially excused from accusations of their past "inappropriate behavior" with young girls. So Nate is not the first and will not be the last. Recently NBA star, Derrick Rose, beat the rape charges brought against him by a former girlfriend. High profile athletes seem to be particularly prone to such incidents. And, along these lines, Rolling Stone magazine is currently involved in a law suit for running a story about an anonymous college coed claiming to have been gang raped at a University of Virginia frat house. Her story turned out to be concocted and the repercussions from this have tainted the reputations of Rolling Stone, who had to print a retraction of it, the journalist who wrote the story, and a U. of Va. Dean who was crucified on social media for her handling of the case, and who is also the person suing this magazine. Dirty business.

I recently read something said by Patrick Buchanan, a staunch Republican conservative and political pundit, who has finally decided to cast his vote for Donald Trump. He said that Trump's promise to make America great again was what won him over. He further stated that the reason everything ran smoothly in the past was because everyone stayed in their place, - implying that separate but equal was better than racial integration, and that when women remained in the home where they belonged families were better and that, where gays were concerned, "don't ask, don't tell" was the best policy. He also said that having white men in charge was how it should be because they obviously knew how to run things. Buchanan has also written a book about how Hispanics are turning the country brown as their numbers expand, making them the largest minority. He expressed fear and dismay that whites might soon become a minority and were endangered of becoming obliterated in America, the country they had built. All I could do was shake my head. This man's observations, however, are purely subjective so it shouldn't be too surprising that he would feel the way he does. And an argument could be made giving his views a modicum of merit. What can also give substance to Buchanan's opinion is that a multi-cultured, diverse society does not work over a period of time. America is not and never has been united by its differences, but rather divided by them and the fact that we have managed to remain the United States this long is the real success story. Tolerance of others is what held things together, along with the realization that we could learn from our differences. But after a while everybody started to show their true colors.The populace tried to embrace the noble idea of democracy, but doing so proved to be an increasing inconvenience. Capitalism was more compatible with the mind-set of the people because everyone wants to achieve the American dream of making it big by competing with others in a race to acquire a lot of money and lead the affluent life that would enable ascendancy into a higher class. Now this nation is at odds with itself. Like Buchanan, every body thinks their way is the best way, and birds of a feather are starting to flock together, leaving the American eagle sitting on the fence. How will it all end? Is America on a collision course with political upheaval? Will the result of the presidential election neutralize or ignite revolt? And, above all, what is the role of black people in this scenario, - black people who think neither party serves them well, but who have been unable to forge a strong coalition with other minorities who have shown little enthusiasm for the "black lives matter" movement? Will this situation inspire blacks to come together for their own survival? Will black leaders step up? Will a miracle happen? Tune in tomorrow for the next exciting episode! Maybe in the natural course of events, things will work themselves out. We shall see. Or, rather, y'all shall see. At my age, I probably won't be around when Time resolves these problems. And guess who doesn't care. This 'ol girl is tired of it all. Ready for a new adventure in a different dimension!

@TroyI'm not just talking about incarcerated murderers. There are also rapists, robbers, thieves, drug Lords, stalkers, child molesters, wife beaters and those guilty of attempted murder in prisons. Prisons are not Sunday school classes. Inmates of them are the outlaws of society. I do agree, however, that this does not absolve WalMart for callously doing what those who acquire power are able to get away with. I would also note that like all the other ills in this world, slavery is nothing new. Just another example of man's inhumanity to man.

Are you suggesting that the gang bangers who indiscriminately kill innocent and guilty people of their own race, usually in turf wars over drug trafficking, are poor innocent black people? You are just parroting the patented old "bleeding heart liberal" argument. Yes, the criminal justice system is biased and blacks are disproportionately jailed, and all imprisoned blacks are not hardened criminals but are, instead, nonentities who have fallen between the cracks. But it should not be overlooked that prisons are also full of white supremist skin heads and hispanic gangleaders. It also behooves critics to consider that checking the background of all the black men incarcerated, will reveal that close to 90 per cent of them grew up in families where a father wasn't present. Prisons, are just a receptacle for all the ills that inevitably plague an imperfect society. Much of this can be traced to the complicated issue of law enforcement whose purpose is to maintain order. Without order there would be chaos, so a very delicate balance has to be struck between keeping order and abusing power. Easy to say, hard to do. Making things even worse is how an ongoing unstable economy exerts a great impact on crime. Jobless people commit crimes. Law breakers are caught and sent to prison where they become exploited by unscrupulous corporations. None of this is by accident. It is all about cause and effect. All about a world where shit happens. Furthermore, reforming the prison system is a goal that has been around for decades. Indeed, there are many organization dedicated to bringing about change. We'll see whether the abuse perpetrated by privatized prisons will inspire enough outrage to finally turn things around. Again, I just call 'em like I see 'em.

I would be remiss as a polemicist if didn't make the observation that, ironically, many of the black prisoners being exploited by private prisons are incarcerated in these institutions because of gang-related offenses like the robbing, and maiming and killing of other black people whose survivors would very likely be among the ranks those who work for WalMart. Yes, the alliance between the prison industry and the flawed justice system is shameful. But a callous Society warns offenders that "crime doesn't pay". When you're on the wrong side of the law these are the unfortunate consequences. And it's not like prisons haven't always been guilty of paying their inmates slave wages for the labor they perform while locked up. In Illinois, prisoners making less than a dollar an hour used to makeup the workforce who produced license plates. And might still be. It should be further noted that the underclass of black people working for WalMart are doing so to supplement the government benefits they receive in the form of Section 8 rent vouchers, free health care which includes the WICCA program that make free milk available for their babies, plus the plastic "Link" cards that have replaced food stamps. These people have learned how to work The System, a system that provides employment for the middle-class blacks who have the credentials to be employed by state agencies that administer to the needy. It's just one big symbiotic entity. I am not being judgment about any of this, however, I am just making observations as to how things go. Reformers are to be commended for exposing things, but whether anything will change or if widespread outrage will occur is questionable because in a capitalistic country, this is business as usual.

What society are you talking about?? No one in this country is trained to look upon sex as evil and disgusting. In the present, sex is regarded as a pleasurable, healthy, natural indulgence and those who don't regard it as such are diagnosed as having either biological or psychological problems. Moreoever, whatever goes on between 2 consenting adults behind closed door is not frowned upon. Yes, minors are encouraged to be chaste but if they choose to experiment, school hygiene classes simply advocate their being responsible enough to use condoms or other forms of birth control. Sex is glorified in movies and music, on TV and the internet, and even commercials. Why? Because it sells! Even the porn business is openly thriving. The Catholic church may give lip service to selective abstinence, but none of its members pay any attention to this, including its priests. Other religions are also very lax in disparaging sex, probably because the clergy like it as much as their congregations. Eastern civilization, as represented by Islam, is who is still sexually repressive especially when it comes to unmarried females. Indians, on the other hand, long ago have elevated sex into an art form via the Kama Sutra. Japan also has creative sexual practices. Love and sex go hand and hand, and this has become universally accepted, not to mention "friends with benefits" relationships.

@TroyI'm assuming that if you had your way, companies would not be in business to realize big profits by providing the supply for a demand. Instead, they should mainly concern themselves with making life easier for those who are not as fortunate as they are. In other words, you think WalMart should function as a charitable organization. And, in keeping with maintaining your image as a player in the publishing industry, I'd be willing to bet that you spend your money at high-end, name-band stores - who outsource their work load. I'm not that big a fan of WalMart's merchandise but where I live, its location is convenient, and I can usually find what I'm looking for there. And as I have previously stated, all its black workers seem perfectly content with their unskilled jobs which provide them with the money for hair weaves and extensions, body piercings and colorful acryllic fingernails. So, who am I to burst their bubble?

LOL I do understand why men "treat and talk about women the way they do"; because they are horny control freaks, something I mentioned in my previous post. Sexual harassment is also rampant in the work place and the military. But, men don't always get away with their indiscretions. Lately there have been quite a few high-profile politicians and top-ranked military men whose careers and reputations have been ruined because of their extramarital escapades. Trump, himself, has jeopardized his bid for the presidency because of his lewd boorishness. "The bigger they are, the harder they fall". There are biblical and mythological references to Alpha males "lusting in their hearts" for female seductresses. Prostitution is the oldest profession in the world for a good reason. Men crave sex and power. None of what's happening today is new.

Wonder if Bill Clinton hooked up with the underage girls during his presidency or after, when he was free to be a dirty ol man? My take-away from all of this is that testosterone turns a male's brain to mush. So many of them risk everything, - their careers, their marriages, their reputations just to score a piece of ass. It's like they can't see past their penises and their self-control defers to their primitive instincts. Either that, or their need to control prevails and they force themselves on a woman. And then, of course, there are the men who woman use sex to control. Whatever the scenario, sex has earned its reputation of being the third primary drive, right up there with hunger and thirst. Pioneer may admire pimps, but I admire men who are able to resist forbidden fruit, keeping in mind the regret it can serve up later.

I have posted a response to the above post 3 times, and it just keeps disappearing into - cyberspace, i guess. Very curious. I'll try again. @TroyWe are not talking about the reaction of wives. We are talking about the disrespect for all woman, implicit in the demeaning references made about them by lecherous predators engaging in "locker room" conversation with other men. IMO. Donald Trump is no different from Bill Clinton or John Kennedy because he cheated on his wives also. Plus Trump's inherent misogyny demeans half the population in the country he seeks to become president of. This is not to be taken lightly. And I disagree that the personal insults I hurled at Kola and sara during our arguments, if taken out of context, would leave the impression that I hated all black women. Race was rarely a factor in these exchanges; that's why I called them cat fights because we attacked each other's intellect and character and looks, too, sometimes .

@Troy Yes, people in the south during the Montgomery bus boycott did endure inconveniences but rarely lost their jobs because this would have inconvenienced their white employees. And, yes, things were different back then. Racism was more blatant in the Jim Crow south and people were more motivated and full of hope for reform. Now racism is more subtle and black people are skeptical rather than hopeful, many just resigned to getting in where they fit in. What I don't think the generations following the civil rights movement realize is that this crusade was driven by just a core segment of the black population made up of those who were dedicated activists. Just as many black folks were sympathetic to the marches and boycotts and demonstrations but did not participate in them, instead giving moral and often financial support, leaving the footwork to the folks in the trenches. Here's where you, Troy, may have been misled by the media who made the world think the entire black population was mobilized and aggressive during this time, But it wasn't. Half of them were simply spectators who were rooting others on. And many didn't agree with some of the drastic demonstrations. Martin Luther King was criticized by some blacks, and ironically, Malcolm X was admired because he believed in just telling it like it was instead of trying to appeal to the conscience of whites by dramatizing black grievances with demonstrations

What Kola and sara and I engaged in were slamfests within the context of "cat fights". Both Bill Clinton and John Kennedy were womanizers but there a difference between having affairs with woman and making crude remarks about them to other men. There is an aspect of discretion that some men don't get. Words can sting more than groping. Groping is a sign that a man finds your body appealing. Besmirching you to someone is a sign that a man has no regard for you as a person. I don't think that engaging in a personal feud necessarily disqualifies a competent person from running for office. But Donald Trump doesn't have his priorities together. He's more preoccupied with degrading women, than with upgrading his qualifications to serve as President.

I read that It was a white girl who Nate and the co-writer of this film allegedly gang raped during their college days. But they were never charged and the woman later committed suicide. I'm not sure whether it was Roxane Gay who said it, but also I read somewhere that a black female historian was very critical of the film saying it was riddled with inaccuracies and out right falsehoods and appeared to have been given the "Hollywood" treatment to spice it up.

@TroyTrump's dissing of women shouldn't be way down on the list of the things you have against him. His male chauvinism is as bad as racism.