Facebook
I haven't written on Amplify in a while. It's been so long, in fact, that I had trouble figuring out how to actually post a new blog post. But I have something important I'd like to say:
There is too much hate. And David Kato was killed from it.
There have been several blog posts (particularly here on Amplify) about the anti-gay sentiment in Uganda, a country which has welcomed controversial homophobic legislation. In Uganda, there was a "report" published that listed the names, pictures, and address of 100 gay citizens, followed by the suggestion "Hang Them!"
It's terribly saddening, borderline pathetic, that we still live in a society where hate crimes are so common. The Rolling Stone magazine in Uganda (no relation to the American magazine) was the media outlet that published the list. They issued a statement apparently denouncing the attack, and saying they wanted the "homosexuals to be hanged" after they had gone through the "legal process." You know, the legal process that actually permits for execution for the crime of homosexuality.
We need to band together and overpower this hate. It's possible too. We've done it before, and now it's more important than ever that we move forth with our mission.
(Sorry about the short-ness of this blog. I'm literally in a lecture and in the front row, so I should get going. More to come!)
Ernesto Dominguez got it right when he wrote:
We may not understand the impact of our words, but it is clear that these words push folk away…
He goes on to write that when we use hate speech to degrade those who are HIV positive, we add to the social stigma that comes along with having HIV. And as a result? People don’t get tested. They think that going to get tested means that they “sleep around”, or that they’re “slutty”.
I haven't blogged on Amplify in a while (way too long!) but I'm proud to say I am BACK and with an AWESOME story for you all!
I recently came back from San Antonio where I and several other of my colleagues, plus Sarah (shout out to Advocates for Youth!) conducted a workshop called "Let's Talk About Sex". The turnout was simply great: there were over 60 (I almost want to say perhaps over 70) participants. The number of people who showed up is important for a few reasons: it provided us with an understanding of how many youth are interested in sexual health, and it rejected the myth that young people are apathetic to the issues.
We discussed the statistics about how Latin@ youth are disporportionately affected by pregnancy and STDs. We discussed healthy relationships and how to detect whether or not you're in an unhealthy relationship. But perhaps more importantly, we gave the participants an opportunity to ask questions. And they did. They were interested in our presentation and I'm confident that they left the workshop armed with knowledge that they will *hopefully* always remember
A recent study that included over 400 guys ages 18 to 67 found that many men refuse to wear condoms because they don't fit right. Some men claim the condom often breaks, so they opt not to wear one at all. Others claim the condom is too big, and their egos wont allow them to buy a "small" or a "medium" at their nearest pharmacy.
Well, that's a problem. And here's why:
1) The fact that the condom might break shouldn't deter men from wearing one and protecting themselves. "The condom will break anyway -- so I just wont wear one." That isn't even logical. Wearing a condom shouldn't have to be a chore. You should want to protect yourself, and your partner. Proponents of abstinence only education preach that condoms are ineffective -- but you shouldn't buy into that. Use your noggins and wear a condom.
2) A man's ego is fragile -- we get that. We're even sensitive to the issue (ie, nobody talks about how our boyfriend John is balding, and we rarely talk about faking an orgasm because George couldn't get us going). But putting yourself, and your partner, at risk for an unintended pregnancy or an STI just because you refuse to wear a condom that fits is beyond stupid. Clearly you lack the mental capacity to make good decisions when it comes to your sexual health. This definitely warrants some ego busting, boys.
3) Sex is fun. HIV is not. Condoms are typically effective in protecting people from HIV. According to Advocates for Youth,
So, what did we learn today? Protect yourselves. No matter how big, or small, you are. When it comes to our sexual health, we can't afford to screw around. No pun intended.In a two-year study of sero-discordant couples (in which one partner was HIV-positive and one was HIV-negative), no uninfected partner became infected among couples using condoms correctly and consistently at every act of vaginal or anal sex versus 10 percent of those using condoms inconsistently
“Marriage eludes high achieving black women"
What does that headline say to you? Before I delve into the article itself, let's explore the implications this headline has to offer: either marriage discriminates, or high achieving black women aren't getting married.
I'll go with the latter.
Even when I asked my boyfriend what he thought the headline meant, he said "[The headline implies that] marriage is hard for successful black women." So, before I even read the article, I had this preconceived notion that this was going to be based on the stereotype that all women are supposed to get married. But I was wrong.
According to the article on msnbc.com, the "fact" that most successful black women are choosing not to get married defeats the purpose of affirmative action. Now, I've heard the arguments that single women are statistically less happy than married women, or that women who do not bear children are contributing to a population decrease detrimental to society, or that married women live longer than single women. But never have I heard that single (and successful) black women are defeating the very purpose of affirmative action. It's an original (and ridiculous) argument.
"This defeats the goal of affirmative action...The idea behind assuring that blacks had access to higher education and graduate school was that after a generation or so, African-Americans would reach a kind of achievement parity after generations of suffering educational and career restriction. But if black women, who comprise 71 percent of black graduate students, do not have children, the rate of achievement reaches a kind of familial dead end."
Well that's a nice way to put it: a familial dead end.
Their body language led me to feel unwanted in my community, since my town is a very quiet suburban area. This sort of racist and sexist situation happens every day, and it's beginning to creep into the White House.
Where can the line be drawn between simple dislike for President Obama and racist hatred for him? Is there even a bright line separating the two feelings? For years now conservatives have been coming out with negative commentary on “the left” and even moderate liberals; their negative commentary somehow evolved into something deeper than a few attack ads on the TV… it’s spreading to the Free Republic blog and it’s attacking the children—the young girls—of President Barack Obama.
An article by the Vancouver Sun says it all.
“A typical street whore.""A bunch of ghetto thugs.""Ghetto street trash.""Wonder when she will get her first abortion."
