Comments for Acts of Faith In Love & Life

Comment on What I’ve Been Reading Lately by roslynholcomb

roslynholcomb — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:32:45 +0000

I'm familiar with both author's positiobs, I also know both were best selling authors prior to piracy, so their blues aren't like mine, so to speak. I know that for those of us who measure our sales by the hundreds rather than hundreds of thousands have been egregiously impacted. I know that small publishers, many of them women owned have been driven out of the business. This is not Prohibition tactics, unless you think it's okay to walk out of a store without paying this is nothing new. The notion that someone is entitled to steal my work just because they can is both wrong headed and immoral. Pirate sites profit from advertising. They pay bounties to uploaders who've done nothing but steal. How is that different from fencing a product. We can wrapit up in all manner of high sounding rhetoric, but a thief's a thief.

Comment on When ‘Feminist’ Sites Use The ‘Plight’ Of Black Women (In This Case Regarding TV Show Scandal) To Fuel White Dominance by Faith

Faith — Sat, 25 May 2013 16:44:16 +0000

There has been an ongoing dialog about NOT being the Mammy/Mule to other people's causes. It's a complete shift from business as usual where our reciprocity to others would be the result AFTER everybody else did the heavy lifting, reaching out and showing concern. The reason why you don't see that is because the majority are still putting other people's interests ahead by thinking it's 'righteous' to do so. it's part indoctrination, part 'good girl rescue", part ego/moralizing and simply habit. Once more BW ask why they feel compelled to do things a certain way, compare it to the actions of other groups and sees the difference they will impose more boundaries. I had to stop automatically being inclusive here at this blog. It pained me to do so because I consider myself an advocate. I didn't feel good about it right away either. The first time I got an angry comment from someone telling me I should be fighting for their cause and I was (insert insult), I FINALLY understood how well we've been hoodwinked and browbeat into carrying other people's water. We think we're doing good, 'being Christian' or showing our humanity and consideration and karma will pay it back. No! We're not thinking strategically and leave ourselves vulnerable because no one has our back. There will NEVER be any reciprocity without RESPECT. But if we don't respect ourselves FIRST no one else will. Cue the Staples Sisters! The solutions are so simple, but the mental blocks are profound!

Comment on What I’ve Been Reading Lately by Faith

Faith — Sat, 25 May 2013 16:13:23 +0000

I was specifically referencing tv shows and music, but understand your frustration. Paulo Coelho has famously supported his books being pirated. He showed how it led to bigger book sales. I believe Joe Konrath has discussed it on his site when he releases his book sales figures. perhaps it works out better for some versus others. I usually go to the library, use Overdrive and those with Kindles or a Prime membership can use Amazon's lending library. Prohibition-style tactics don't work and we'd all benefit from a systemic change to benefit creators, right's holders and audiences alike.

Comment on When ‘Feminist’ Sites Use The ‘Plight’ Of Black Women (In This Case Regarding TV Show Scandal) To Fuel White Dominance by JaliliMaster

JaliliMaster — Sat, 25 May 2013 01:30:23 +0000

I'm still trying to formulate a good definition myself, but the best way I can explain it is that as BW, we don't have to take a position on any issue that does not affect us directly, and are better served focusing on things that actually matter/concern us. It as far wider than that, as an idea, but so far, that is the best I can do. In a sense, it is about reciprocity, but going further, BW should not feel guilty about not concerning themselves with things that though not bad for them, might be bad for some other people. Though it may sound selfish to some, we really should focus on our own selves and upliftment.

Sorry if that was a bit clunky, but I'm sure there are others who could do a far better job at it than I did.

Comment on What I’ve Been Reading Lately by roslynholcomb

roslynholcomb — Fri, 24 May 2013 23:50:58 +0000

I can't like the pirate sites as they also host people who upload my books for thousands to download for free.

Comment on When ‘Feminist’ Sites Use The ‘Plight’ Of Black Women (In This Case Regarding TV Show Scandal) To Fuel White Dominance by Faith

Faith — Fri, 24 May 2013 16:04:44 +0000

There was a time when certain groups thought it advantageous to align themselves with Negroes as they moved into dominant positions. If you note, in the original Star Trek Uhuru was the ONLY lead female character. Further, she met the "diversity" quota, but this is where being feminine paid off because the role could have gone to a black male instead. This is also why they are hell bent on sabotaging and cannibalizing us collectively. Gene Rodenberry and Nichelle Nichols had an affair. He probably found her appealing to begin with – which is why they cast her. Barring personal restrictions and with more options available, more men WOULD also choose differently if they know more BW are open to having them. I liked the 1st JJ Abrams reboot of ST for showing Uhuru's intelligence. Her communications skills meant she not only understood many languages, but could make distinctions between dialects amongst other things. There are divisions dedicated to doing just that under the purview of the CIA here and probably across all global intelligence agencies. Speaking of Abrams, I thought pairing Spock & Uhuru was a bit of wish fulfillment on his part of joining the nerdy Jewish guy with an attractive BW as rumors abound that he also has an appreciation for our beauty. He's off the market, but there's plenty of other successful men available. And I had a question: what do you mean by "neutrality"?

Comment on When ‘Feminist’ Sites Use The ‘Plight’ Of Black Women (In This Case Regarding TV Show Scandal) To Fuel White Dominance by JaliliMaster

JaliliMaster — Wed, 22 May 2013 16:29:54 +0000

Yes, I also noticed the new addition in the latest Trek film. I suspect that if not for the fact that: (1) the Uhura character is sort of a ‘historical’ member of the cast and,(2) was being played by someone less famous than Zoe Saldana, certain PTB would have had her altogether replaced by the new addition.

I actually agree with you about BW creating and owning their content. I just think that we should also remind each other to continue to support said content/media.

“Make themselves and their interests the ONLY perspective they’re focused on.”

There is something that I’ve just started researching/reading up on with regards to BWE called “neutrality”. I think your comment ties in quite well with it.

Comment on When ‘Feminist’ Sites Use The ‘Plight’ Of Black Women (In This Case Regarding TV Show Scandal) To Fuel White Dominance by Faith

Faith — Wed, 22 May 2013 03:42:00 +0000

I don’t know. There’s still too much waiting around for other people to take initiative. You have to build networks. I think the advances in technology have made it easier for regular folk to create content. Look at YouTube! While I agree what BW buy/support is important, we can’t only be consumers. We have to OWN something or be the majority stakeholder or featured partner. Across the board. I noticed in the newest Trek film they did add a white female character. And BW need to listen, learn and apply. Make themselves and their interests the ONLY perspective they’re focused on.

Comment on When ‘Feminist’ Sites Use The ‘Plight’ Of Black Women (In This Case Regarding TV Show Scandal) To Fuel White Dominance by JaliliMaster

JaliliMaster — Tue, 21 May 2013 17:03:08 +0000

When the Star Trek film came out (not the one that was just released a few weeks ago), there were quite a few complaints on ‘feminist’ sites that the show was sexist as it had no solid female characters. When Zoe Saldana’s character was pointed out to them, they said that it was only one character, and they felt that there should be more. It is not uncommon that in shows like this, where the main core fan base were adolescent males, there would always be an attractive female character. Their real complaint was that the main female character was not white. There were even quite a few who were surprised that a black actress was cast as Uhura for the films, despite the fact that in the original t.v show, she was black. They just, strangely, assumed that since she was the only female lead, the character was going to be whitewashed. I think that a lot of BW don’t actually understand that their erasure and/or debasement in enetrtainment media is deliberate. They think that by pleading with others to include them, things will change.

It’s fine to say that BW should create their own content/media, but most BW are not in the business. What we CAN do is support the positive images that exist, encourage more of that sort of content, and keep our resources (be it money, viewership, tweets, facebook posts, online mentions, other free publicity, etc) AWAY from those that demean us, and make sure that in all cases, they KNOW the reasons for our support or lack thereof! After Red Tails flopped, I can guarantee that those foolish Negroes would think twice next time before trying to pull that sort of bull again, if it is mainly BW who are going to be watching the films.

Comment on When ‘Feminist’ Sites Use The ‘Plight’ Of Black Women (In This Case Regarding TV Show Scandal) To Fuel White Dominance by Faith

Faith — Tue, 21 May 2013 14:46:21 +0000

There are now many ticked off fans who were expecting that Olitz wedding to proceed and some are venting they will stop watching Scandal. I understand how easy it is to get caught up in drama, but it's a tv show! Black women are identifying with these characters a little too much. The Star Jones situation was interesting in the way the response was to not tell Shonda Rhimes how to write her own show, but it's a message lost by the way people are reacting. I can see where Ms. Rhimes is not going to let supporters or detractors crowdsource her show. I was ready to right write Fitz off entirely during his bitter phase and was rightfully concerned the way the characters were behaving post-Defiance. Then he seemed to get it together.

I think the audience got a preview of what Olitz could be like together when there weren't obstacles and when they weren't desperate to see each other. It was nice and while their separation was clumsy, it was necessary. I don't see how they'll actually be together peaceably until Fitz is out of office. I know that the Mellie character was only intended for three episodes and Ms. Rhimes wants to explore the idea of a Presidential Divorce, but Bellamy Young is so great. I find the triangle fascinating to watch unfold even as I want Mellie out of the way. Those contradictions make for a better show in the long run, so I've personally divested my preconceived notions of what "should" happen and will just brace myself for impact.

If people are paying attention, you can't miss how Olivia's public outing could actually accelerate the timetable for Olitz to be together. As for the celebrity input, the show encourages their feedback. Ms. Jones was the only negative feedback widely circulated and rebuffed that I'm aware of. I'm not surprised by the lack of discernment of some BW in not questioning the motives of others and yes Amanda Tanner was rather plain. I think that was the point. She was easily manipulated by Billy Chambers and didn't expect reciprocity and we saw what happened to her. As I've stated I hope more BW catch a clue where the show is concerned to chill out about the storylines and instead use this moment of increasing viewership to make personal moves in real life. If Kerry Washington is shown as sexy, desirable, intelligent and accomplished now is the time to push for more roles like Pope on tv and in film. Now is the time to follow through.