Monthly Archives: April 2008

U.N. PREPARATORY COMMITTEE MEETING ON RACISM STARTS

A two-week meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the 2009 review conference on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance opened in Geneva on Monday. It is the first “substantive” meeting in a process that began in early 2006 and is likely to continue for at least another year.

The purpose of the Preparatory Committee is to prepare for a conference, planned for 2009, that will review progress and assess implementation – at national, regional and international levels – of the Declaration and Plan of Action adopted by the 2001 World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. The review process will also identify concrete measures and initiatives for combating and eliminating these phenomena. It will also assess the effectiveness of the existing follow-up systems and other relevant UN mechanisms, promote universal ratification and implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and identify and share good practices.

“The Durban review conference is not, and should not be seen as, a repetition of the 2001 World Conference,” said UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour in her opening statement to the PrepCom. “…It is rather a platform to evaluate progress, an opportunity to reinvigorate commitments, and a vehicle to fine-tune responses in a purposeful and contextual manner.”

The original World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance was held from 31 August to 8 September 2001, ending just three days before the terrorist attacks in New York and Virginia. A devastating tragedy in its own right, 9/11 has also had a profound impact on many of the issues that will be discussed during the review process, which – in accordance with a 2006 UN General Assembly Resolution – will culminate in the review conference some time in 2009.

Progress since 2001 has been patchy. On the plus side, the President of the Preparatory Committee, Ms. Najat Al-Hajjaji of Libya, highlighted the fact that the Durban Declaration and Plan of Action had been “instrumental in prevailing on a number of countries to establish individual State bodies to implement its recommendations, to adopt concrete measures as national legislations and affirmative action policies.”

Progress on the ratification of key international treaties that address issues related to racism and related issues has been less impressive, Arbour pointed out, citing a recent overview which revealed that across the world, states “still fail to recognize the existence of the phenomenon of racism. National laws and measures to ensure its elimination in most countries are either inadequate or ineffective. As a result, vulnerable groups continue to suffer aggression while abusers enjoy impunity… Very few states have adopted national action plans to correct all these serious shortcomings and effectively prevent discrimination.”

The 2001 World Conference was a huge event attracting some 18,000 people in all. The main conference alone was attended by around 10,000 people, with 2,500 delegates from 170 countries (including 16 heads of State, 58 foreign ministers and 44 other ministers), nearly 4,000 NGO representatives and over 1,300 members of the media. A total of some 7,000 NGO representatives attended the parallel NGO Forum, that began a few days before the main conference, and contained hundreds of workshops and other events.

After a wide-ranging – and at times difficult – debate, the conference adopted by consensus its ground-breaking Declaration and Plan of Action, which are generally viewed as providing a very useful blueprint for guiding governments, NGOs, and other individuals and institutions in their efforts to combat racism and similar forms of intolerance. It is these documents which lie at the heart of the review process – not the various controversies that swirled around the 2001 conference, and at times threatened to engulf it.

During the process, inflammatory statements were made on a variety of different issues. However, the main source of lasting controversy involved some individuals and groups who imported virulently anti-Semitic materials and slogans into certain events taking place within the NGO Forum. Their activities were shown on TV around the world, and the furore that followed has left a stain on the reputation of the Durban Conference – even though the main conference itself was not infected in the same way and there is no trace of anti-Semitism in the Declaration and Plan of Action. Indeed, Paragraph 61 of the Declaration and Paragraph 150 of the Programme of Action clearly portray anti-Semitism as a negative force that should be combated.

Despite this, Arbour warned that the controversy had still not entirely abated and the rest of the process would not be easy: “There is no hiding the fact,” she said, “that the Durban review conference, even before moving its first, preparatory steps, has already elicited criticism and continues to raise concerns which, if not squarely confronted and resolved, may ultimately jeopardize a successful outcome of this process.”

Several states representing regional groupings, which spoke during the initial session, also stressed the vital importance of the review conference and the need to continue the process of consensus that had in the end prevailed in Durban, and is reflected in the Declaration and Plan of Action.

 

SOURCE:   http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/PreparatoryCommitteeRacism.aspx

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT OF 2007 NOW AVAILABLE

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has issued its yearly report on its human rights work around the world. The 2007 report provides a comprehensive overview of the activities carried out and initiatives undertaken last year, and assesses the results achieved to date and challenges ahead.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OHCHR’s “2007 Report on Activities and Results” is now available

The report, the last under High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour’s leadership of OHCHR, is made available this week on the OHCHR website.

“Implementation of human rights standards must be the guiding principle and objective of all components of the human rights institutional machinery, both at the national and the international levels,” the High Commissioner writes in her foreword to the report.

The 2007 report documents OHCHR’s support for the key mechanisms of the international human rights system, such as the Human Rights Council, the human rights treaty bodies and the special procedures, as well as its contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights at the country level through fieldwork.

It also reviews the Office’s programme of research into a wide range of thematic human rights issues and progress in developing new methodology to support human rights investigations, monitoring and training.

Highlighted in the report are cases where OHCHR’s intervention has helped bring about new laws improving human rights protection or the creation of national human rights institutions. For example, in 2007:

  • Human rights-related laws were drafted or adopted in Afghanistan, Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Cambodia, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Kosovo (Serbia), Mexico, the Philippines, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka and Tajikistan.
  • Measures to prevent torture were introduced in Cambodia, Guatemala, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, the Maldives, Thailand and Uganda.
  • New national human rights institutions were established in Sudan and Sierra Leone, and steps were taken to strengthen the capacity of existing institutions in Azerbaijan, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Madagascar, Uganda, and Timor-Leste.

In 2008, the year in which the world celebrates the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the High Commissioner is encouraging all Member States to make a financial contribution to support the work being carried out by OHCHR to give practical effect to the ideals enshrined in the Declaration.

“The commemoration of the 60th anniversary will serve as a reminder that, despite undeniable progress in refining our knowledge of human rights standards and their application, and despite our increased ability to sharpen our tools, and to deliver support, the tasks ahead of us remain as daunting as they have always been,” the High Commissioner noted.”

April 2008

SOURCE:  http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/OHCHRAnnualReport2007.aspx

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

OSAMA-OBAMA SIGN REMOVED FROM SOUTH CAROLINA CHURCH

Posted: April 22, 2008 12:56 PM CDT
Updated: April 23, 2008 06:43 AM CDT
SC church draws fire for Obama-Osama sign

JONESVILLE, SC (AP) – A South Carolina church has removed a sign linking Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden.
On Monday, the sign in front of Jonesville Church of God said, “Obama, Osama, humm, are they brothers?”

WYFF-TV reports the sign had been changed Tuesday to, “How will you spend eternity, smoking or no smoking?”

Pastor Roger Byrd has said the Obama-Osama sign was not political and he just wanted to make people think. But he did say he was surprised at the attention the sign received.

The TV station says Byrd was not available for comment Tuesday.

Obama attends Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Fifteen percent of respondents to a recent Associated Press-Yahoo News poll said they thought the Illinois senator was a Muslim.

Jonesville is a town of about 1,000 people in northwestern South Carolina near the North Carolina line.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

SOURCE: http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=8209229&nav=0RaP

RELATED LINKS:

SOUTH CAROLINA PASTOR POSTS SIGN LINKING OBAMA WITH OSAMA:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/22/america/NA-POL-US-Obama-Church-Sign.php

SIGN IN FRONT OF JONESVILLE CHURCH THAT LINKS BARACK OBAMA TO OSAMA BIN LADEN IS STAYING PUT: http://www.thestate.com/scpolitics-wire/story/382564.html

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

FROM THE ARCHIVES: U.N. COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS – REPORT ON RACISM/RACIAL DISCRIMINATION/XENOPHOBIA: MISSION TO BRAZIL (JANUARY, 1995)

It is not just in America that black women suffer the hells of devaluation and degradation. Outside of America is just as treacherous and harsh for black women. Just as black women in America are the canary in the coalmine in how America treats (or better yet, mistreats) its women, so too are black women in Brazil a gauge of how a country treats the ‘least’ of its citizens. The least being those who have the least power in their hands. Here is an excerpt from a report on the racial conditions in Brazil, a report that addresses the social, economic, educational and political conditions of the black citizens who live in that country.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME OF ACTION FOR THE THIRD DECADE TO COMBAT RACISM AND RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

G.  The situation of coloured women

51. The Inter­American Trade Union Conference on Racial Equality, held in Salvador on 20 November 1994, declared that Black women receive the lowest salaries (four times lower than those of a White man), are employed in the most unhealthy locations, work a triple working day and face threefold discrimination. For these reasons, Black women are a barometer of Brazilian society: the degree of political evolution of Brazilian society is directly related to the political conquests of Black women. 

52. The vast majority of Black women are domestic servants (for example, in the State of Bahia 90 per cent of domestic servants are black and 80 per cent of them receive less than the minimum wage of 110 reals),  nursemaids or samba dancers in nightclubs. They make up the majority of the informal sector (street vendors, for example). Many Black domestic servants are ill­treated by their employers and suffer physical and moral violence. Black women have the lowest level of education. As a result of their lack of qualifications, but also because of racial discrimination on the labour market (job advertisements frequently require people to be “of good appearance”) many of them become prostitutes.

53. It has also been found that more Black women are sterilized than White women. Some people believe that this method of contraception or family planning contributes to the gradual whitening of Brazil’s population.  According to data provided by the Brazilian Geographical and Statistical Institute for 1986, in the State of Bahia, 75 per cent of women who had been sterilized (aged between 15 and 40) were Black or of mixed parentage, while for the country as a whole the percentage is estimated to be 61.8. 

54. These women, who are often poor, naturally do not wish to have any more children because they are unable to provide them with a decent standard of living, but they are not offered any alternative means of contraception; however, they may even be sterilized without their knowledge when they give birth. They are also encouraged to accept sterilization by politicians who promise to help them if they are elected; there are also material incentives (money, food) to accept sterilization, and until 1995 employers could demand a medical certificate certifying that female workers had been sterilized.  This fact is also confirmed by the observations of the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations which, in its report to the eighty­second session of the International Labour Conference (June 1995) noted with regard to the application of Convention No. 111, Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958, “that, despite the detailed information provided on administrative and statutory provisions to ban discrimination based on sex, the Conference Committee keenly regretted that Bill No. 229/91 (prohibiting employers from requiring a medical certification attesting to the sterilization of women workers, which constitutes discrimination on the ground of sex in respect of access to employment) has still not been adopted”. 

55. According to the explanations obtained from the Ministry of Health, sterilization of women is not an official practice encouraged by the Government. Generally speaking, contraception, including sterilization, is a method which Brazilian women have adopted voluntarily. If many women resort to sterilization, that is because it is a simple and cheap method; those who resort to it do not always consider the consequences. Significantly, it is women from the poorest sectors of the population who use sterilization, but that does not mean that there is a sterilization policy targeted at Black women. The Government has had an act against mass sterilization adopted.  The Act in question is Act No. 229/91, referred to above by the ILO Committee of Experts, which has now come into force.

READ THE REST OF THE REPORT HERE:   http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/commission/country52/72-add1.htm

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

SOPHIA DANENBERG: STANDING ON THE ROOFTOPS OF THE WORLD

You have probably never heard of her. You would not recognize her name if someone mentioned her to you. Heck, even her own hometown did not recognize her monumental feat:  the first black American and the first black woman to climb to the summit of Mount Everest.

The first black woman to ascend to the ‘Rooftops of the World’.

She withstood bad weather during the night that delayed some other climbers in her party. The high altitude of the Himalayans can create strong wind forces, not to mention below freezing temperatures, cold enough to freeze contact lens to the corneas of the eyes; cold enough to freeze spit from ones mouth, in a matter of seconds.  She was not alone in her ascent. Like Sir Edmund Hilary before her, she had the most trusted and experienced of mountain-climbing guides in the world to assist her when Ms. Danenberg stood on top of the tallest mountains in the world.

Pa Nuru Sherpa and his brother Mingma Tshiring were the only climbers to witness the triumphant event. Her oxygen mask clogged, still reeling from frostbite on her cheeks, and enduring the effects of bronchitis, Ms. Danenberg made her way into the history books of many firsts.

May 19, 2006, at 7:00 AM, C.S.T., Sophia Danenberg reached the top of Mount Everest, making her the first Black American woman to stand on the top of the world:

“So I was like, cool, I made it,” she says. “I have to get this oxygen mask fixed before I get off this mountain.”

 

Sophia Danenberg

Sophia Danenberg

Since 1953, some 2,500 people have stood atop the 29,035 foot Everest. The first black man  to stand on Mount Everest is South Africa’s Sibusiso Vilane arrived there in 2003. Vilane made news around the world for his feat, an accomplishment just as memorable as Ms. Danenberg’s.

But no American local paper or TV Station recognized Ms. Danenburg. No New York Times, no Washington Post, no New Yorker—not even any well-known black newspapers. No CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, or NBC reported her feat of a first milestone to the viewing public, except for this site (  http://www.blackoutdoorsman.com/ ), and here:

UP EVEREST, QUIETLY

Sophia Danenberg was the first black woman to sit on top of the world and nobody noticed.

By Jeffrey Felshman
July 14, 2006

AT 7 AM on May 19 Sophia Danenberg reached the summit of Mount Everest, making her the first African-American—and the first black woman from anywhere— to stand at the top of the world. Bad weather during the night had delayed other climbers, so Danenberg and the Sherpas she’d hired, Pa Nuru Sherpa and his brother Mingma Tshiring, were the only people there. She wasn’t as elated as you might expect: she had bronchitis, a stuffed nose, and frostbite on her cheeks, and her oxygen mask was clogged with snow and ice. “So I was like, cool, I made it,” she says. “I have to get this oxygen mask fixed and get off this mountain.”

Three weeks later Danenberg, who’s 34, was at Disney World with her sister, niece, and nephew, headed for Expedition Everest, the park’s newest ride, though the threat of a hurricane had kept plenty of people away. “On the real Mount Everest and on the Expedition Everest ride everybody always talks about the lines and the crowds,” she says, laughing. “I was on both without the lines and the crowds.” Afterward she flew to Chicago to visit her father in Homewood, where she grew up, then home to Connecticut and her job troubleshooting and tracking environmental regulations for a jet-engine manufacturer.

Since 1953 some 2,500 people have stood atop 29,035-foot Everest, though the first black man, South Africa’s Sibusiso Vilane, didn’t get there until 2003. Vilane made news around the world, but no one noticed Danenberg’s ascent—not even her local paper, though it listed people from Connecticut who’d made the summit while she was still in Nepal. But then she kept a low profile before, during, and after her climb. She wasn’t sponsored and didn’t send satellite photos or dispatches to news organizations, as many climbers do. The only people she kept in touch with, by e-mail, were her sister, her husband, and a colleague at work.

Danenberg, whose father is black and mother Japanese, says most people are surprised to hear she was the first African-American to scale Everest, but not other climbers. “There aren’t a lot of African- Americans—or black people from anywhere, American or otherwise— in high-altitude mountaineering,” she says. She’s never met another black person on any big mountain in the world, and when the subject comes up with other climbers, most of them white males, they usually haven’t either. She says climbers are pretty much oblivious to race, though not gender: “They won’t really notice that I’m a black woman, but with a bunch of guys isolated somewhere, and there’s only 15 women, yeah, they’ll notice you.”

Danenberg got into mountaineering in 1999 after a childhood friend encouraged her to try rock climbing. For two years she did technical climbs, meeting her husband, David, on one of them. “He was near the top of a cliff,” she says. “He noticed me walking in below.” When the friend took her up Mount Rainier in 2002, she decided she liked the challenges of a wide variety of terrains even better, and over the next couple years she and David scaled every mountain they could together, including Mount Baker, Mount Kenya, Kilimanjaro, Mount Rainier, Grand Teton, and Mount McKinley, or Denali. In 2005 she scaled five peaks, two of them without David: Mount Tasman in New Zealand and Ama Dablam in Nepal.

Danenberg wasn’t looking to be the first anything when she began planning a spring climb this past January. She wasn’t even considering Everest, though she did want to go higher than she’d gone before. She’d signed up for a three-month leave from work and was contemplating the sixth-highest mountain in the world, Cho Oyu, which straddles the border of Nepal and Tibet. She was comparing prices of tours with mountaineering companies when a guide recommended she try Everest. “He said, ‘Given your experience, I don’t think you’d have a hard time, and you’d probably end up getting at least as high on Everest as you would on Cho Oyu,’” she says.

Some people spend years planning their Everest expedition. Danenberg thought about it for a week and was on her way five weeks later, flying out of Hartford alone on March 19. David couldn’t get off work, but she says he wasn’t that interested anyway. “And he’s technically a better climber than me,” she says, adding that he looks for mountains that are “more challenging, not in terms of endurance, but in terms of skill— more challenging, less dangerous.”

An ascent of Everest is still one of the more hazardous undertakings in the world, even though the experience has been cheapened by all the companies offering guided tours for rich people who aren’t terribly skilled climbers. In 1986 four people made it to the summit during the three-week climbing season, which usually runs from mid-May to early June; this year around 300 did. By 2005, 192 people had died on the mountain, and this season there were 11 more. David Sharp, an experienced 34-year-old British climber, died while Danenberg was on the mountain; he was on the north side and was passed by several people who might well have been able to save him but kept climbing. On the southern or Nepal side, which Danenberg had chosen, three Sherpas were killed when a tower of ice five stories high fell on them. In some ways Everest wasn’t as difficult technically as some of the other peaks Danenberg had scaled, which she knew was a good thing. “In my opinion, you should be technically a lot more competent than the level of the mountain,” she says. “A lot of people go there and they can just barely climb that. I would be terrified if that’s all I could climb.” The great difficulty of Everest is the altitude, which magnifies every problem. Most people wind up sick, and getting stuck away from camp overnight can mean death. As she explains, “You just can’t survive at that altitude for very long.”

Danenberg, along with eight people she didn’t know, signed up for an “unguided” climb with an outfitter. For the $36,000 fee she would get a tent site at the base camp and each of the four camps along the southern route up the mountain, the help of two Sherpas, weather reports, food, and oxygen. But she would carry her own gear and pitch her own tent, and there would be no guide making decisions for her—she would have to decide what route to take, when to try for the summit, when to turn back.

Getting acclimated on Everest requires climbing up to the first of the four camps, staying there briefly, going back down to the base camp, then back to Camp I and on to Camp II. Then down again, back up, and on to Camp III. During the climbs other Sherpas would stop Pa Nuru and marvel at his companion, who was setting an average pace for a man but a good one for a woman. Danenberg remembers one saying, “Hey, this woman is really strong.” They also said she looked a little like them, because at five-foot-two she’s short and she has dark skin. One Sherpa told her, “You look Nepalese, only with better hair.”

(Oh, I love that hair comment 🙂 )

When she got to Camp II the third time she decided she wanted to try for the top. “I actually waited one day,” she says. “For me that was the biggest struggle, because you really only get one chance at the summit. When you leave Camp III you’ve committed to summit on a certain day. You can’t really delay at those high altitudes and come back down.” Many who die on Everest do so on the descent, exhausted from the effort of going up. She asked Pa Nuru whether he thought the weather would hold, whether she should go for it. She says he just looked at her and said, “It’s your decision.” She wanted to leave Camp IV at night, but it was cloudy, snowing, and windy. But by 10 PM the weather above the camp seemed to be clearing, and a few people from her outfitter started up. Shortly before 11 PM she and a man from her group decided to go up, and they knew people from other outfitters were considering that as well.

The weather was still bad lower on the mountain. At one point Danenberg heard thunder below her and looked down. “I could see this floor of clouds, you know, because the mountains are up above it, and I could see forever because I’m really high up,” she says. “I could see the lightning coming out of the clouds below me—going down. It was the most amazing sight.”

She passed the climbers who’d left just before her, and eventually the man who’d left at the same time she did decided to go back down. As she kept climbing in the dark she couldn’t see any other headlamps. “I thought everyone except us had turned around,” she says. “I thought we were the only people on the mountain.”

But she and the Sherpas felt strong, so they kept going. “It never crossed my mind that we could be going so much faster that they could be that far behind us.” When she made the summit at 7 AM she saw that no one had come up the north side, though she could now see people coming up behind her. “I was two hours ahead of everybody on the south side,” she says. “So I was completely by myself.” She cleared the snow and ice from her mask, took photos, and watched the Sherpas take pictures of each other. She says they joked about hopping from Nepal to Tibet—the border runs across the summit—but they were all too tired. A quarter hour later they headed back down.

Danenberg has enough time off this year to make one more climb, but she hasn’t decided where she wants to go. “Most of the mountains I want to climb are very pretty,” she says. “The whole time I was checking up and looking at Everest I was thinking, ‘Why am I climbing this mountain?’ Because I don’t look at it as a very pretty mountain.” She pauses. “It’s really very pretty at the top part of the mountain. But you can’t see that from way down.”

SOURCE:   http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/stories/ourtown/060714/everest/

But, she climbed Mount Everest, and now Ms. Danenberg’s name is there with the many others who have climbed a mountain that represents the pinnacle of mountain-climbing.

Most people would be surprised to have heard of Ms. Danenberg. Most people do not think of black women as achievers, creators, inventors, as explorers of the unknown, as testers of their endurance—-most people would be backwards in their thinking of black American women. Black women have faced insurmountable odds, black women have resisted the many forces that have sought to destroy them, and they have prevailed.

Prevailed enough to believe in themselves, as Ms. Danenberg has, to climb close to 30,000 feet above sea level, to stand and look in four directions and be so close to the heavens. When many people think of mountain climbers, inevitably the image of white male climbers comes to mind.

“There aren’t a lot of African – Americans or black people from anywhere, American or otherwise in high-altitude mountaineering.” She’s never met any other black people on any big mountain climbs in the world, and when the subject comes up with mostly white male climbers, they agree. She says, “They don’t really notice that I’m a black woman, but they’ll notice you as a woman.”

Now. . . .there is a new image that shall come to mind.

SOPHIA DANENBERG.

SOME PAST MOUNTAIN CLIMBS OF MS. DANENBERG:

 Aiguille du Chardonnet (France), Forbes Arete, September 2007
Matterhorn (Switzerland), Hornli Ridge, September 2007
Mount Rainier (Washington, US), Liberty Ridge, May 2007
Everest (Nepal), South Col, May 2006
Mount Tasman (New Zealand), North Shoulder, December 2005
Ama Dablam (Nepal), SW Ridge, November 2005
Grand Teton (Wyoming, US), Exum Ridge, September 2005
Mount Katahdin (Maine, US), Armadillo, July 2005
Mount McKinley (Alaska, US), West Rib (attempt ~16,200 ft), June 2005
Aconcagua (Argentina), Polish Direct (attempt ~21,000 ft), December 2004
Aconcagua (Argentina), False Polish, December 2004
Iztaccihuatl (Mexico), Ayoloco Glacier, November 2004
Mount Kenya (Kenya), SE Face (attempt ~16,500 ft), December 2003
Cotopaxi (Ecuador), Normal (attempt ~18,700 ft), November 2003
Illiniza Sur (Ecuador), La Rampa (attempt ~16,800 ft), November 2003
Mount Shuksan (Washington, US), Sulphide Glacier, June 2003
Mount Baker (Washington, US), North Ridge, June 2003
Mount Rainier (Washington, US), Emmons-Winthrop, June 2002
Kilimanjaro  (Tanzania), Western Breach/Arrow Glacier, December 2001

 

 

Visit Ms. Danenberg’s official website here:  http://www.sophiadanenberg.org/

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘GLORY, DEATH, SHARE STAGE ON EVEREST’:  http://www.mountainguides.com/pop_news_newstribune_06_05.shtml

‘AFRICAN LADY CLIMBERS IN PREP FOR MOUNT EVEREST’: “KEEP ON DANCIN’ ” (VIDEO):  http://www.mounteverest.net/news.php?id=15083

 

Everest kalapatthar crop.jpg

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

ON MCCAIN TOUR, A PROMISE TO FIND ‘FORGOTTEN AMERICA’

Mary Altaffer/Associated Press
Members of the Gee’s Bend Quilters Collective joined Senator John McCain on Monday on his bus in Camden, Ala. It was the first day of a tour to include Appalachia and New Orleans.
  •  
Published: April 22, 2008
 
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — Senator John McCain opened a weeklong tour of the nation’s “forgotten places” in the Alabama Black Belt on Monday by acknowledging the challenge he faced in appealing to African-Americans and admitting that “I am aware of the fact that there will be many people who will not vote for me.”
Dave Martin/Associated Press
Senator John McCain at a town hall meeting in Thomasville, Ala., on Monday.
 
 

But in a speech delivered against the backdrop of one of the great symbols of the civil rights movement, the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, promised to hear voters’ concerns and be “the president of all the people,” including those who supported his competitors.
 
Mr. McCain was framed in camera shots by the bridge where white police officers beat black demonstrators trying to march to Montgomery in 1965, and where Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama converged last year in a political spectacle to commemorate the footsteps of the marchers.
 
“There must be no forgotten places in America, whether they have been ignored for long years by the sins of indifference and injustice, or have been left behind as the world grew smaller and more economically interdependent,” Mr. McCain said to a largely white and friendly crowd on the banks of the Alabama River.
 
Mr. McCain’s trip, which seems a mix of Mrs. Clinton’s “listening tour” in her 2000 Senate race in New York and President Bush’s efforts to portray himself as a “compassionate conservative” in his presidential campaign the same year, is to take him to Appalachia; the economically depressed steel town of Youngstown, Ohio; and the Ninth Ward of New Orleans, the area hardest hit by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
 
Mr. McCain’s advisers devised the weeklong trip as an effort to show that a Republican could appeal to some traditional Democratic voters, or at least to get Mr. McCain credit for trying. The trip is also trying to attract a fraction of attention to Mr. McCain’s campaign in a week when the political center of the world is the Democratic primary showdown in Pennsylvania between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama.
 
Democrats dismissed Mr. McCain’s trip as a deluded belief that a Republican could appeal to poor people hard hit by seven years of Republican policies. “It’s like an arsonist turning up at the scene of the fire,” said Paul Begala, a former Clinton White House adviser and a Democratic commentator.
 
But some Republicans said that Mr. McCain, who has often bucked his own party and is seeking to attract independents and some moderate Democrats in the fall, had a rationale for the trip. “I don’t know if I would have picked the same locations,” said Tony Fabrizio, a Republican pollster and strategist, “but it is not crazy for McCain to think that he can get Democratic votes that were unavailable to Bush in 2000 and 2004.”
 
At the least, the trip is providing video for Mr. McCain’s campaign commercials. Later in the day, for example, he was serenaded with old spirituals by the quilters of Gee’s Bend, Ala., in a slow-moving ferry ride on the Alabama River.
 
While a campaign camera crew recorded the scene from a pontoon boat, Mr. McCain stood on the ferry surrounded by a dozen black quilters who sang “The Old Ship of Zion” to the vaguely embarrassed candidate. He had just come from visiting their quilting center.
 
One quilter, Mary Lee Bendolph, said she was leaning toward supporting Mr. Obama, but she praised Mr. McCain for turning up in Wilcox County, which locals say a presidential candidate has never visited. “He came here and he did something, and you know what, nobody else did,” Mrs. Bendolph said.
 
The vibrant Gee’s Bend quilts became famous after they were exhibited at the Whitney Museum of American Art in 2002 and 2003. Mr. McCain bought three on Monday.
His campaign would not say what he paid, but quilts of the similar large size in the Gee’s Bend center were $2,500 each.
 
Monday was the first time Secret Service agents joined Mr. McCain’s campaign. It was unclear how many agents were assigned to Mr. McCain, but there appeared to be a handful. The number is likely to increase as the election nears.
 
SOURCE:  The New York Timeshttp://www.nytimes.com )

RELATED LINKS:

  • McCain, in Alabama, Courts Black Voters

    the challenge he faces in appealing to African-American voters. places” in Alabama’s Black Belt on Monday by acknowledging the challenge he faces in

  • McCain in Selma – The Caucus – Politics Blog

    He and the GOP want the Black middle class (which is in play this time around). Like it or not, African Americans are listening to McCain.

  • 3 Comments

    Filed under Uncategorized

    FROM THE ARCHIVES: BARBARA HILLARY

    I put this post up last year, and even until today, I am still in awe and respect of Ms. Hillary for her not letting anyone tell her, “No, you cannot”.

    She made it to the Top of The World.

    Would that so many more of us would say with our words, our actions, our beliefs:

    “Yes, I will.”

    Go head on, with your bad self, Ms. Hillary.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

     

    INTREPID CANCER SURVIVOR, 75, SKIS TO TOP OF THE WORLD

    MAY BE 1ST BLACK WOMAN TO MAKE IT TO THE TOP OF THE WORLD

     

     

    By Meghan Barr,Associated Press  |  May 7, 2007

     

     


     

    barbarahillary.jpg
    When Barbara Hillary heard that there had never been a black woman at the North Pole, she took that as a challenge. So on April 23rd, she set off on skis with two guides and became the first -despite the fact that she is a 75-year-old cancer survivor who has never learned to ski til preparing for this trip! 

    NEW YORK — The bone-numbing trek to the North Pole is rife with perils that would make a seasoned explorer quake: Frostbite threatens, polar bears loom, and the ice is constantly shifting beneath frozen feet.

     

    But Barbara Hillary took it all in stride, completing the trip last month at the age of 75. She is one of the oldest people to reach the North Pole, and is believed to be the first black woman on record to accomplish the feat.

    Hillary, of Averne, N.Y., grew up in Harlem and devoted herself to a nursing career and community activism. At 67 and during retirement, she battled lung cancer. Five years later, she went dog sledding in Quebec and photographed polar bears in Manitoba.

    Then she heard that a black woman had never made it to the North Pole.

    “I said, ‘What’s wrong with this picture?’ ” she said. “So I sort of rolled into this, shall we say.”

    Hillary made the trip through Eagles Cry Adventures Inc., a Georgia-based travel company that leads thrill-seekers like Hillary to the farthest corners of the globe.

    Paying customers can be taken to the North Pole in various ways, including cross-country ski trips from four to 18 days, polar skydiving jumps, or simply being dropped off at the Pole via helicopter. The trip costs about $21,000 per person.

    Hillary insisted on skiing, even though she had never been on the slopes before. “It wasn’t a popular sport in Harlem,” she quipped.

    So she enrolled in cross-country skiing lessons and hired a personal trainer, who finally determined that she was physically fit for the expedition.

    “She’s a headstrong woman. You don’t tell her ‘no’ about too many things,” said Robert Russell, founder of Eagles Cry Adventures.

    Her lack of funds didn’t stop her, either. Hillary scraped together thousands of dollars and solicited private donors.

    On April 18, she arrived in Longyearben, Norway, where it is common for people to carry guns to ward off hungry polar bears.

    “Before I arrived, the word was out that soul food was coming,” she joked.

    The travelers were then flown to the base camp — which is rebuilt each year due to melting ice — and pitched their tents.

    On April 23 Hillary set off on skis with two trained guides. Russell, fearing for her health, had persuaded her to take the daylong ski route to the Pole in lieu of the longer trips.

    As the sunlight glinted off the ice, distorting her gaze, Hillary struggled beneath a load of gear and pressed on. In her euphoria at reaching the Pole, she forgot the cold and removed her gloves, causing her fingers to become frostbitten.

    Standing at the top of the world, she couldn’t have cared less. The enormous expanse of ice and sky left Hillary, for once in her long life, speechless.

    In 1909, Matthew A. Henson, a native of Maryland, made history as the first black man to reach the North Pole, though his accomplishment was not officially recognized for decades.

    Henson’s feat was overshadowed by the presence of his white colleague, Navy Commander Robert E. Peary, who led the expedition that climaxed with the discovery of the Pole on April 6, 1909 . Peary and Henson used dogsleds, driven by Inuits.

    Ann Bancroft, a physical education teacher from Minnesota, was the North Pole’s first female visitor in 1986 as a member of the Steger Polar Expedition, which arrived unassisted in a re-creation of the 1909 trip.

    Various scientific organizations said no record exists of a black woman matching Bancroft’s feat, although such record-keeping is not perfect.

    “It’s not like there’s a guest book when you get up there and you sign it,” Russell said.

    He interviewed fellow polar expedition contractors and dug through history books, but failed to find a black woman who had completed the trek.

     

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

    PENNSYLVANIA PRIMARY ELECTION 2008

    Results

    Democrats

    158 pledged delegates, 30 unpledged
    Candidate Vote % Delegates
    Hillary Rodham Clinton 1,258,245 54.7% To be determined
    Barack Obama 1,042,297 45.3   

    Republicans

    74 unpledged delegates
    Candidate Vote % Delegates
    John McCain 585,447 72.7% To be determined
    Ron Paul 128,188 15.9   
    Mike Huckabee 91,211 11.3   

     

    Profile of the Voters

     

    Democrats

    Based on questionnaires filled out by voters across the state.

    % of total Clinton Obama
    23    High school graduate 64    36   
    25    Some college or associate degree 51    49   
    21    College graduate 46    53   
    26    Postgraduate study 48    52   
    55    The economy 56    44   
    28    The war in Iraq 44    56   
    14    Health care 54    46   

     

     

    Details of the Nominating Process

     

    Democrats

    April 22, 2008

    158 pledged
    delegates

     

    30 unpledged
    delegates

     

    Primary (Closed)

    Based on the results of the April 22 primary, 158 pledged delegates are awarded to presidential candidates; of these, 103 are awarded proportionally based on the results in each of the state’s 19 Congressional districts, and 55 are awarded proportionally based on the results statewide. The remaining delegates attend the national convention unpledged; of these, three are selected by the state Democratic committee, and the rest are either party leaders or elected officials.

    Republicans

    April 22, 2008

    0 pledged
    delegates

     

    74 unpledged
    delegates

     

    Primary (Closed)

    Three delegates are allocated to each of the state’s 19 Congressional districts, and some districts receive bonus delegates. Other delegates are selected at large statewide or serve as party leaders. All delegates attend the national convention unpledged; votes for presidential candidates in the primary do not directly affect the selection of delegates.

     

    Winners of Previous Primaries

    Democrats

    2004 John Kerry
    2000 Al Gore
    1992 Bill Clinton

    Republicans

    2000 George W. Bush
    1996 Bob Dole
    1988 George Bush

     

    SOURCE:  http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/states/PA.html

    RELATED LINKS:

    ‘CHANGE MAKES A CALL AT LEVITTOWN”:  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/06/magazine/06race-t.html?scp=17&sq=&st=nyt

     

     

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

    BROWNFEMIPOWER SPEAKS!

    Some context.

    I wrote what I wrote in response to all those feminists who, during the Full Frontal Feminism blow up, kept insisting over and over again that if “WOC” want book deals, they should “go get it them themselves.” That publishers weren’t skimming through the blogosphere looking for just anybody who’s a good writer. That you had to work for a book deal—you had to fight for it, show a little initiative, stop complaining, just do it. JUST. DO. IT.

    As if there were no such thing as racism—as if there was no such thing as racism that is alive and well and present in the most cellular of spaces. As if simply opening a proposal and viewing the odd name at the top of the proposal doesn’t influence how the person reading that name will understand the rest of the proposal.

    I wrote what I wrote to all those people, to all those feminists, who insist that short of refusing publication (and what good is that?) there is little to nothing feminists can do to stand in solidarity with other feminists who are not as privileged as they are.

    I wrote what I wrote to say that there either is a feminist movement or there isn’t—and if feminists can’t even be called on to point to the work that other feminists are doing—if simply pointing to a whole sphere of pro-immigration bloggers (because, to be clear, I stated pro-immigration bloggers and men and women bloggers of color NOT brownfemipower) who have been blogging incessantly about this is too much work for feminism—well, then there’s no fucking feminist movement.

    That if dabbling into and getting to know an actual community working in a certain way is too much work for feminism, then there is no fucking feminist movement.

    That is what I said.

    What I did NOT say:

    I never said that I own the idea that gendered violence is the way to understand immigration.

    I never said that I want credit for coming up with the idea that gendered violence is the way to understand immigration.

    I never said that I came up with the idea myself.

    I never said that it’s important to recognize that I had the idea first. I don’t give a shit who came up with the idea first—even if it WAS me. I don’t give a shit who thought of what first. I don’t fucking want credit for anything outside of existing. (For those who care, what I really said: There’s a lot of women of color (and men of color!) who have talked about immigration. There’s a lot of women of color and men of color who have examined how sexualized violence has been the foremost result of the “strengthening” of borders. There’s been a lot of us who have insisted for a long time now that immigration is a feminist issue, goddamn it, get your head out of your ass.

    I even wrote a whole speech about it (link not available–BUT for those who DID see the speech, do you happen to recall that long list of LINKED work at the beginning of the speech?).

    Which is why it was startling to read a recent article about how sexualized violence against immigrant women is directly linked to using dehumanizing terminology like “illegal alien” without one attribute to any blogger of color, male or female, in the entire essay. There is even an earnest declaration about how paperwork is the true problem of immigration (bureaucracy of paperwork anybody?) coupled with a declaration that immigration is a feminist issue.

    I do not accept that the author of this article made a mistake in not publishing any links to the work already being done by pro-immigration bloggers, nor do I accept that the author came up with these ideas all on her own.)

    I did not name X because although I was pissed off, I did not want a discussion about “what is stopping feminists from coming together as feminists” (aka movement making) to be turned into “bfp hates X and bfp is ugly and fat and bfp is jealous and bfp should shut up and get her own fucking book deal and bfp is trying to patent the fucking idea that hyper militarization of borders=sexualized violence against women.”

    This was NEVER ABOUT FUCKING BROWNFEMIPOWER except in the sense that I BELONG to immigrant communities and I BELONG to pro-immigration blogger community and I BELONG to the women of color community and I THOUGHT I belonged to a feminist community.

    This was about women of color constantly being written out of feminism, being written out of our own communities BY feminism—then being beaten up by feminists with JUST DO IT, JUST DO IT, JUST FUCKING DO IT YOU LAZY SPICS.

    (I want to pause here to note three things: 1. Do you realize how fucked up it is that for some reason it is “wrong” for a woman of color to want the same advantages that white women get for doing the same work? 2. Do you realize how much it sucks (worst thing possible) that I have written about media justice for two fucking years and there is STILL a whole group of assholes who claim to have been regular readers and can somehow manage to say with a straight face that I want to “own” ideas and/or steal ideas from others? and 3. Do you realize how much it sucks (worst thing possible) that even when I do my best to state my anger WITH THE FULL RECOGNITION that what I am saying may hurt somebody and thus ACTIVELY work to PROTECT that person while still expressing my anger–I am STILL berated for being angry, mean, judgemental, too harsh–and furthermore–I should EXPECT the attacks that I get? Do you recognize the problems with telling a woman of color that she can not even show anger at *anonymous*?)

    To move on–In my post I wrote the following analogy:

    It would be like Jung learning everything he learned from Frued, opening a school in which he teaches all of Frueds theories, and then refusing to attribute anything he teaches to Frued, refusing Frued a job even though Frued can not find a job any place else, denying all of Frued’s students entrance into his school–and then keeping all the millions of dollars he makes off of using Frued’s excellent ideas to himself.

    Now, people have chosen to focus on the end point_-”keeping all the millions of dollars he makes off of using Freud’s excellent ideas to himself.” People have chosen to say that THIS is what I must have been most concerned about. That I want the millions of dollars myself. That I am Freud and I own psychoanalysis. I can understand why people would think that—(no, wait a minute, I can’t, because anybody who is a regular fucking reader should know better, especially given my continuous “Move outside the master’s house” posts that I’ve done) but I will give that it is what we are trained to think of as the most important thing in this world. And I was not around to clarify what I meant.

    But, just as with black amazon and her fateful “fuck seal press” comment—it’s interesting that I wrote a whole post in which I clearly stated:

    1. there are clear racialized reasons why women of color are never and will never be the sought after by big companies, named as the leader of feminist movements, asked for interviews etc

    2. that white feminists bear a responsibility (that they are NOT accepting and in fact are actively rejecting) to negotiate power and create spaces (while working alongside or a step behind marginalized communities) in which power is de-centralized

    3. As a result I do NOT consider myself to be a part of any fucking “feminist movement” because to me, feminism requires diversity (We have a responsibility (especially in the undergraduate years) to demonstrate to ALL students, no matter what their identity is, how to interact with the critical thinking of people who think differently than they do. To bring this a step further, however, feminist academics who are actively aware of how power plays out in very negative ways in the classroom, have a very specific responsibility to those students who have little to no power. The very basis of feminist scholarship/academic training is to dismantle and/or redistribute the power structure within a classroom and the academy. Women’s studies is nothing more than an articulation of this demand–women WILL be studied. Men will NOT be the focus of all academic work. Thus, women’s studies professors (and all other ethnic studies, disability studies etc depts) have built the commitment to diversity within a classroom into their very existence–so I feel no qualms at all about insisting that women’s studies professors (and instructors, lecturers, adjuncts etc) are *required* to show diversity within the classroom through the texts that they teach.)

    And even though I wrote this whole post about those three points–the only thing people heard was “She thinks she’s Freud and she wants money/power/recognition.”

    No, actually, I know I’m brownfemipower and I want to end violence against women. And I wanted to do that with all the women who keep insisting to me that we are all in this together and we have common problems that we have to work against and we’re all sisters, and there is such thing as a commonality of experience between us all—as I said in my original post—I thought feminism was important because it brought women together (I had thought at one time that feminism was about justice for women. I had thought it was about centering the needs of women, and creating action in the name of, by and for women. I had thought that feminism has its problems but it’s worth fighting for, worth sacrificing and sweating and crying and breaking down for.)

    But how can it have “brought us together” when my implicit goal in feminist centered media justice is to write erased communities into existence—and the result of the work of the ’sister’ down the street is the erasure of the same communities I’m working to write into existence? (And no, I do NOT accept that I or any other fucking Latina out there should just be “grateful” that our work is being talked about while we remain hidden in the shadows. Even now, as a person who explicitly rejects feminism, I KNOW that Latinas have the right to demand that the work we do not be hidden in some dark silent space that nobody talks about and everybody avoids even as everybody else eats all the fruit that we pick. Yes, even Latina writers have the right to fucking unionize and come into the light.)

    There is no “feminist movement” because the work being done is not just conflicting with the work of other “sisters”—it’s directly negating it.

    For me, this shit has all been about community. I did not expressly state this in my original post. I was angry enough at the time that I really didn’t flesh out my ideas fully. Having since had the time to think things through more carefully and surf around several of the blogs that are talking about this—part of what I was trying to say was that feminists have a choice in deciding what community they belong to. And they are implicitly choosing to stay away from and otherwise distance themselves from communities that make them uncomfortable or worried for any reason. This has consequences for the communities that they refuse to work with. Most importantly, it has consequences because WOMEN belong to those communities that they refuse to work with.

    A former commentor on my blog that I used to really respect (labyrus) made several comments over at Hugo’s about how I am really stealing all my ideas from the anarchists and the indy media makers out there. That he doesn’t think that “WOC” have the right to decide for the rest of the blogosphere what is “stealing” and what isn’t. These are not uncommon sentiments. I’ve seen the same sentiment coming from a lot of people I thought would at least ask me what I meant.

    The fallacy in Labyrus’ (and other people who support and agree with Labyrus) argument is the unstated idea that my connection to the indy media making community is in any way similar to X’s connection to pro-immigrant bloggers or women and men of color bloggers.

    I work with the Allied Media Conference—the largest gathering of indy media makers in the U.S. If Labyrus had paid any attention to my blogging, he would know that I actually do most of my organizing with the AMC these days not Incite!. As a result, I constantly linked to Indy Media makers throughout the world, have a working relationship with several indy media makers offline, always pushed work coming out of indy outlets about any major happening in protest/resistance making before going to mainstream sources, listed “alternative news sources” in my blogroll, promoted indy media events like the AMC before I was even a part of it, and have actively worked to intermingle my idea of “media justice” as I understand it (which was heavily informed by the theories of Andrea Smith—as I stated NUMEROUS times on my blog) with “media justice” as indy media makers understand it. An example—when I was blogging heavily about Oaxaca—I rarely, if ever, had extended commentary of my own about any of the events. I spent most of my time scouring indy media sources for links to articles and pictures. Narco News and El Enimigo Comun being the two biggest sources for information.

    And finally—when I came back from WAM—the first post I wrote ended with a grateful thank you to Indy Media folks that I organize the AMC with and who were instrumental in recruiting me to their ranks. Oh, and look it that—I even went over to the AMC website and wrote a post over there thanking them for creating the space that they created. https://alliedmediaconference.org/node/1268

    I have chosen to be a part of the indy media community. I have chosen to say—I will settle my organizing roots in this community because for whatever problems it has, it is a community that I believe in and that I think has the answers. And because I am a part of the indy media community, I am aware of the way power works for and against indy media makers and I am constantly on the look out within my own media making for ways to negotiate the power that works against and attacks indy media makers. By way of example, I spent a lot of time blogging about how indy media makers in Mexico were and continue to be violently attacked by the Mexican government. A large part of the reason I refuse “media reform” is because I see the extreme violence indy media makers are dealing with simply because media reformists refuse to make mainstream media accountable to the people rather than the governments and corporations they serve. And while I personally refuse media reform—I also don’t necessarily think it is all or nothing—I have given props to “indy media makers” working within mainstream news (such as Seymour Hersch and others). I see what they are doing and think they aren’t actively working against indy media makers, even if they are “mainstream’. To me–that’s what a “movement” is–it’s agreeing on a common goal and working together towards that goal. It’s agreeing that if you choose NOT to be a part of common goal making that you do not actively work *against* that goal.

    The thing is—I thought that those who were a part of a “feminist community” were held to the same sort of standards. That when a woman of color says that she will not be published thus the white women who are published need to spend more time than they feel comfortable talking about the needs of women of color—THEY WOULD DO IT. That they would say “It’s the least I can do” or “What else can I do” rather than JUST DO IT, JUST DO IT. Because we are all in a community together and we all are working to create something that challenges and dismantles gendered violence and inequality, right? And if it takes writing a book that does not assume all women are staying away from feminism because they are white and privileged and just don’t get it—well, ending gendered violence and inequality is worth it, right? Working together towards a common goal, right?

    It just took reading Hugo’s response for me to realize that I was fucked up wrong. That feminism’s goals and my goals are completly and totally opposite of each other. That in feminism’s eyes “dismantling” gendered violence= “shifting” gendered violence.

    How else can you explain, “You better prove it” “What am I supposed to do, silence myself?””She thinks she’s Freud” and “She just wants the million dollars without actually working for it.”

    JUST DO IT YOU STUPID SPIC.

    And when “it” (as in, the ‘movement’) all boils down to Just Do It—what other choice do women of color have but to say, fuck it—this is no longer about a “movement” but about making sure that you don’t ever fucking steal my shit ever again?

    I support and honor the several women of color who’ve posted that the answer is not to leave, but to fight harder, with lawyers if necessary. I support and honor those women because they are fighting, they refuse to back down, they are organizing, they are sharing their strategies of not backing down with other black women and women of color alike.

    But for me—a person who believes in media justice–the point was never to say I own this fucking material—but to say we must build a movement because the only way I and my community will ever have peace is if there is a movement. Those women of color who say they will not back down because they own the material—they are building a movement, just in a way that is different than I what I am doing. It may be different, but it’s not directly conflicting with what I am doing. And if they choose to call themselves feminists–well, I have a mouth and eyes that I can use to find out what they mean.

    “Feminists,” on the other hand, are not movement building, they are actively destroying women and blaming those women for the destruction. They are saying the point of feminism is “equality with men” without even thinking to acknowledge that “equality with women” is just as admirable of a goal and maybe even possibly the first step to achieving the goal of equality with men. They are saying, Just do it, just do it, JUST FUCKING DO IT.

    And so I withdraw myself from this “movement”.

    And I reject and rebel at the label “feminist.”

    I reject and rebel at the label “feminist” because I reject and rebel against silence and erasure.

    I purposefully and deliberately burn all bridges to all people/movements with the purposeful and deliberate awareness that I will build bridges again, but ONLY WITH a person/movement and only if those bridges require no body parts to build.


    And I do so without rejecting the absolute necessity of a gendered analysis of media justice, violence against and within communities of color, etc. Because if you think I haven’t noticed the gendered dynamics written all over this fucking blow up, you’d be 100% wrong.

    One last note—to all those who are concerned that I’m just “giving up.”

    I appreciate the sentiment. It’s one that I struggle with. I don’t want to just give up, I don’t want to “let them win.”

    But at the same time, my goal has never been to “not let them win.” My goal has been to end violence against women of color. And while I think that erasing an entire community through words is violence—at the same time, I personally don’t think that making a battle about me and X and winning is the route I want to take to achieve my goal. I want to do something different—but I need time to think about what it is that I want to do. And I want to think about it from a position of health and strength—but let’s be real. Sifting through comment after comment and post after post about how I obviously think I’m Sigmund fucking Frued does not promote health and strength and clarity. It does nothing for me but waste time and energy and personal resources.

    Furthermore, I can not relax and contemplate while I worry about how my own words are being used to destroy me in the blogosphere (yes, I noticed all the little rodents sniffing around my archives looking for evidence that I am a plagiarizing bitch that is just out to get white women).

    Trust me when I say that I have treated my archives gently and with the respect they deserve.

    I realize now that “feminism” and I stand in direct opposition to each other—that the feminists who aren’t actively working against me and my community are, like Seymour Hersch, few and far between.

    This has caused a radical shifting in my thinking. A shifting that I have no desire to work through online—but that I need to think through before I can act. I am not giving up. I am just thinking. And resting. And reading my beloved books and soaking my tired dogs.

    Cuz giiirls, my dogs are TIRED.

    As I said in my last post—I will find you, and you will find me.

    there is life here. anyone reading this is breathing, maybe hurting,
    but breathing for sure. and if there is any light to come, it will
    shine from the eyes of those who look for peace and justice after the
    rubble and rhetoric are cleared and the phoenix has risen.

    affirm life.
    affirm life.
    we got to carry each other now.
    you are either with life, or against it.
    affirm life.

    Love~~xo

    ETA: I just want to say that it’s been made clear to me that in using the term “woman of color” or “women of color” to describe my experiences I am silencing and talking over other women’s experiences, namly other women of color who have no problems with the feminist movement as it stands.
    I do NOT take back what I said about the feminist movement explicitly rejecting an anti-racist agenda. But I do profoundly regret that in saying “woman of color” and/or “women of color” I contributed to the silencing of women of color within mainstream feminist movements and the work that they are doing within that movement. I am very sorry to those women who have expressed this idea and please know that I am also thinking about your words as I consider what my future holds.

     

    SOURCE:  http://bfpfinal.wordpress.com/2008/04/16/3/

    THANK YOU, BROWNFEMIPOWER.

    SALUTARE.

    1 Comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

    CLINTON LOCKED IN CLOSE RACE WITH OBAMA IN PENNSYLVANIA

    Published: April 23, 2008
     
    The Pennsylvania primary appeared too close to call on Tuesday night as the polls began closing, as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton tried to stave off a stronger-than-expected showing by Senator Barack Obama on a potentially decisive night for the Democratic nominating contest.
    Mr. Obama played down expectations on Tuesday that he would win Pennsylvania, where Mrs. Clinton has been heavily favored for months.
     
    But his campaign is likely to seize on a tight race as evidence that Mrs. Clinton’s support has significantly faltered in recent weeks.
     
    April 22, 2008    
     
     
    Ozier Muhammad/The New York Times
    Senator Barack Obama greeting a voter in Pittsburgh on Tuesday.
     
     
     
     
    Voter turnout was very heavy in parts of the state.
     
    Returns from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, the state’s two biggest cities, are not expected until later Tuesday night, with both expected to break toward Mr. Obama. Rural districts are also expected to report late, meaning Mrs. Clinton could see a late surge in support from their large working-class white populations.
     
    Mrs. Clinton, who trails her opponent in the overall delegate count, is looking for a wide margin of victory in the Keystone State to justify extending her campaign through the next round of contests, in Indiana and North Carolina on May 6.
     
    Her campaign spent Tuesday arguing that any victory against Mr. Obama’s fund-raising juggernaut should be considered a turnaround. But a photo finish could undermine donors’ confidence in Mrs. Clinton’s ability to mount a comeback.
    April 22, 2008    
     
    Béatrice de Géa for The New York Times
    Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton met supporters at a polling station in Conshohocken, Pa.
    Officials said the turnout was shaping up to at least double the 26 percent recorded in the 2004 primary, and perhaps approach that of a general election, even though there is no presidential contest on the Republican side. “It’s a crazy day,” said Stacy Sterner, chief clerk in Lehigh County, who noted that one polling place had 100 people waiting to vote when it opened at 7 a.m. Eastern time. “If I didn’t know better,” she said, “I would think it was November.”
     
    “Let’s just say it’s very busy,” said Joseph Passarella, the director of voter services for Montgomery County, sounding a little harried. “Our phones have been ringing since 6:15 this morning and have been ringing nonstop. We’ve never had a primary election this busy.”
     
    Trailing Mr. Obama overall in both the popular vote and in the competition for delegates, Mrs. Clinton’s advisers said they were girding for a tough spring. The Indiana and North Carolina primaries are up next, two weeks from today, and Clinton advisers said that if Mrs. Clinton were to lose Indiana — a state where she has campaigned steadily and has some endorsement advantages — several advisers would urge her to quit the race.
     
    “She has to win Pennsylvania and Indiana — pretty much everyone in the campaign agrees on that,” said one senior Clinton adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the campaign’s electoral expectations.
     
    Mr. Obama, meanwhile, played down his chances for victory in Pennsylvania, calling the state’s primary “an uphill battle.”
     
    “A lot of it will depend on turnout,” he told reporters earlier on Tuesday in Pittsburgh. “It is a beautiful day. We think we have the best organization on the ground, so who knows.”
     
    Democrats voting in Tuesday’s primary were fundamentally concerned about the economy, noting that the country is currently in a recession, and they said they were looking for a candidate who can bring about needed change, according to exit polls conducted across the state by Edison/Mitofsky for the networks and The Associated Press.
     
    Asked to choose the most important issue facing the country, just over half of Democratic primary voters cited the economy, while just over a quarter cited the war in Iraq. A little over 1 in 10 said health care.
     
    Only a quarter of the voters said they decided who to support within the last week, while about three-quarters had made their choice before that. A plurality — about 4 in 10 — of Democratic voters said both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama attacked the other unfairly.
    On Tuesday afternoon in Philadelphia, Mr. Obama sought to clarify a daylong, dizzying game of expectations-setting.
     
    “Let me cut to the chase,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with XM Satellite Radio. “A win is 50 plus 1. So if Senator Clinton gets over 50 percent, she’s won the state. I don’t try to pretend I enjoy getting 45 percent and that’s a moral victory. We’ve lost the state.”
    Still, Mr. Obama’s lead in the delegate race remains difficult to surmount. Mr. Obama’s advisers say that in the coming days, they also plan to roll out additional endorsements from superdelegates, the party leaders and elected officials who have an automatic vote in deciding the nomination and the discretion to choose a candidate.
     
    Mrs. Clinton is particularly hoping to score sizable margins of victory in the popular vote in upcoming contests, in the hopes of edging closer, and perhaps overtaking, Mr. Obama on that score.
     
    Clinton advisers said they were already picking states, cities, and towns to dispatch staff members and volunteers from Pennsylvania, and budgeting for television advertising in the upcoming contests. They are also planning a busy travel schedule for Mrs. Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, their daughter Chelsea, and an army of surrogates. The campaign is expected to focus heavily on Indiana, and to a lesser extent on North Carolina, where Mr. Obama is widely seen as strongly positioned.
     
    Clinton advisers said they were also counting on a Pennsylvania victory to boost her fund-raising efforts to help counter a sharp financial disadvantage and an intensifying desire among party leaders to settle on a presidential nominee. Even though Mrs. Clinton raised $21 million in March, her campaign continues to struggle with a cash squeeze as her unpaid bills mount and she spends more money than she is taking in, according to new campaign finance filings.
     
    Mrs. Clinton, of New York, currently has $10.3 million in outstanding primary debts but only $9.5 million available to cover them, leaving an $800,000 shortfall at the end of March. By comparison, Mr. Obama of Illinois, who raised $42 million in March, had $43 million in cash for the coming primaries and a campaign debt of less than $660,000 at the end of March.
     
    Mr. Obama, in Philadelphia, noted that he has “won twice as many states” as his opponent. “We’ve won the popular vote by a fairly substantial margin,” he said. “We’ve got a very big lead in pledged delegates and we’ve competed in every state, win or lose.”
     
    Outside a polling station in Conshohocken, northwest of Philadelphia, Mrs. Clinton was asked about the margin of victory she sought in the state.
     
    “A win is a win,” she replied. “My opponent is outspending me 3 to 1, maybe 4 to 1. I think a win under these circumstances is a terrific accomplishment.”
     
    “Why can’t he close the deal?” she said about Mr. Obama’s spending advantage. “Why can’t he win a state like this?”
     
    Mrs. Clinton is planning to hold a victory celebration in downtown Philadelphia, while Mr. Obama is scheduled to fly to the next battleground as the polls close in Pennsylvania at 8 p.m. Eastern time. He is due to appear at a rally in Evansville, Ind., with the rock singer John Mellencamp; Indiana and North Carolina hold Democratic primaries on May 6.
    Julie Bosman, John M. Broder, Kate Phillips, Megan Thee and Leslie Wayne contributed reporting.
     
     
     
     

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized