June 2012
In Flo-Rida’s song “Low” he states that Shawty is wearing the apple bottom jeans, the boots with the fur AND the Reeboks with the straps, what is she some kind of four legged morph woman? In all honesty I’m not surprised the whole club is looking at her
you forgot the baggy sweatpants
Michigan Passes Bill Saying It's OK to Not Treat Gay Clients, Because Religious Freedom →
autostraddle.com
Almost two years ago, Jennifer Keeton, a counseling student from Augusta State Universityclaimed that her religious beliefs meant that she should be allowed to treat gay patients according to her faith-based principles. Namely, that she should be able to espouse that homosexuality is a choice and gender is fixed, and treat patients in accordance with that belief. She argued that the school was infringing upon her First Amendment rights by requiring that she treat gay patients correctly and respectfully, and by mandating that she take a remediation program designed to educate her about tolerance. Courts backed up the university on multiple occasions. But now, the state of Michigan has just passed a bill that would have championed Keeton’s cause.
The “Julea Ward Freedom Of Conscience Act,” as it’s appealingly named, says that students of counseling don’t have to provide any services that conflict with their religious beliefs, which can include treating gay clients. The religious belief does have to be “sincerely held,” according to the wording of the bill, but that’s little comfort when the bill so absolutely grants students the right to refuse to counsel anyone their faith deems inferior.
A public degree or certificate granting college, university, junior college, or community college of this state shall not discipline or discriminate against a student in a counseling, social work, or psychology program because the student refuses to counsel or serve a client as to goals, outcomes, or behaviors that conflict with a sincerely held religious belief of the student, if the student refers the client to a counselor who will provide the counseling or services.
The bill’s namesake, Julea Ward, has a story very similar to Jennifer Keeton’s. She was kicked out of Eastern Michigan University’s counseling graduate program when she “refused to affirm a client’s gay orientation” because of her interpretation of Scripture. And much like Jennifer Keeton, when she sued, the courts upheld the university, not her. But whereas Keeton was roundly demonstrated to be in the wrong by every institution she came into contact to, Ward had the legislative body of the state of Michigan step up to the plate for her.
The Julea Ward Act only applies to students of counseling, psychology, or social work, not licensed practitioners in those fields. For the time being, licensed counselors are still called upon by the law to provide legitimate services to all their clients. But licensed counselors can be hard to get appointments with; for many people, especially if they’re in a university setting, the easiest (and most affordable) counseling resource they have access to might be a local university’s counseling and psychology center, which is often staffed by students. Michigan’s legislature has created a situation where a struggling gay person, possibly even one in crisis or thinking of hurting themselves or others, can be turned away when they finally get the courage to reach out and try to get help.
In November, Michigan almost passed a bill that also essentially sanctified all bullying and verbal abuse, also in the name of “sincerely held religious beliefs.” Now it would appear they’ve finally succeeded at creating legislation that, while it doesn’t quite legalize hurting gay people, legalizes refusing to help them. It will be a comfort to Jennifer Keeton to know that all she has to do is move states in order to have all the respect for her religious beliefs she could ever ask for, and a comfort to all the prejudiced counselors out there that their personal faith is more important to the legislature than the wellbeing of queer people.
When you hit delete trying to erase a letter but your computer takes you back a page instead
“
A black male could not offer his hand (to shake hands) with a white male because it implied being socially equal. Obviously, a black male could not offer his hand or any other part of his body to a white woman, because he risked being accused of rape.
Blacks and whites were not supposed to eat together. If they did eat together, whites were to be served first, and some sort of partition was to be placed between them.
Under no circumstance was a black male to offer to light the cigarette of a white female — that gesture implied intimacy.
Blacks were not allowed to show public affection toward one another in public, especially kissing, because it offended whites.
Jim Crow etiquette prescribed that blacks were introduced to whites, never whites to blacks. For example: “Mr. Peters (the white person), this is Charlie (the black person), that I spoke to you about.”
Whites did not use courtesy titles of respect when referring to blacks, for example, Mr., Mrs., Miss., Sir, or Ma’am. Instead, blacks were called by their first names. Blacks had to use courtesy titles when referring to whites, and were not allowed to call them by their first names.
If a black person rode in a car driven by a white person, the black person sat in the back seat, or the back of a truck.
White motorists had the right-of-way at all intersections.
” —Jim Crow Etiquette Just a little more history for the folks who think slavery was the end of racism in America. (via karnythia)
My suburban white friends were so confused that my parents introduced themselves as Mr. and Mrs. and that I always addressed adults that way. They just don’t know. And I don’t know how popular of a trend this was, but some Black folks gave their children honorifics as first names so white people would have no choice but to call them ‘Mister’ or ‘Sir’. Like, I know tangentially of a woman who’s first name is Doctor.
(via blackraincloud)
“<p> Blacks were not allowed to show public affection toward one another in public, especially kissing, because it offended whites.</p>”
Can we look at this one right here real close?
POC in intimate relationships showing each other affection *was considered offensive*. I am kinda wondering, given the absence of intra poc relationships in mass media, if it still is considered as such.
(via deluxvivens)
PRECISELY WHAT CAUGHT MY EYE. DA FUCK?????????????????
(via searchingforknowledge)
Well looking at this post, yes
http://ai-yo.tumblr.com/post/25570734067/deluxvivens-karnythia-deluxvivens-snip
(via ai-yo)Reblog if talking to strangers on the internet has helped you meet awesome people who add positively to your life.
“There are no jobs for more than two out of every three unemployed Americans.”
—
How about we remember that the next time we’re getting all self righteous, saying things like “Why should we help people who are too lazy to get a job?” or “I’m helping them by NOT helping them - I’m teaching them the importance of getting a job!”
Yeah, you assholes know who you are.
(via elledeau)
I don't own my child's body →
thehairpin.com
Would you want your daughter to have sex with her boyfriend simply to make him happy? Parents who justify ordering their children to kiss grandma might say, “It’s different.”
No, it’s not, according to author Jennifer Lehr, who blogs about her parenting style. Ordering children to kiss or hug an adult they don’t want to touch teaches them to use their body to please you or someone else in authority or, really, anyone.
“The message a child gets is that not only is another person’s emotional state their responsibility but that they must also sacrifice their own bodies to buoy another’s ego or satisfy their desire for love or affection,” said Lehr.
The article is on CNN, but the comments there are terrible, whereas Hairpin comments are wonderful and informative.
There’s no reason to force your child to hug someone, to submit to tickles, or to go along with the overenthusiastic family friend who picks them up and swings them around without their consent. If your child wants to touch someone, they will. If, like me, they prefer their personal bubble, that’s okay, too. Grandma will deal.
My parents should read this.
ruvy:
I think that people forget that condoms protect you from more than just pregnancy.
And there is no morning after pill for HIV.
ACTUALLY THERE IS.
It’s called post exposure prophylaxis.
http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/prophylaxis/en/
If you’ve had unprotected sex and are afraid of possibly being at risk for HIV, please go to the emergency room and ask about POST EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS.
Works for up to 48 - 72 hours after exposure to HIV.IMPORTANT THINGS, Y’ALL
FYI
Hi I’m reblogging this again because it’s important.
another way sex ed has failed. i’ve never heard of this until today
ok I need people to understand that this pill (also known as PEP) is the utmost of everlasting last resorts if you are exposed to HIV. the side effects of taking the pill is constant constant vomititng, diarrhea, headaches and nausea. The constant side effects rages from mild to severe and are so bad you need to take time off work and other activities. A lot of patients stop taking it as their body became unable to cope with the side effects in such a short period of time. the effects stop once you no longer take PEP.
You are not meant to use it like a morning after pill, that is grossly wrong information. Doctors do not give it out whenever you don’t have unprotected sex.
The reason PEP isin’t so widely known (unless you’ve been diagnosed with HIV in which case your doctor should tell you about it) is because of worry that people will become lax about preventative measures and think PEP is an easy solution and stop being cautious about using condoms etc.
#I took training in sexual health for LGBT people last year and this year
Standing While Brown: A White Lady Tried To Get Me To Valet Her Car
Representing Pocho.com, I was a panelist along with a table full of young, savvy Latino digital media types as part of last week’s Digital LA Latino Content event.
Afterwards, I finished up networking and headed outside to leave. As I waited to get my car in front of the host restaurant in Beverly Hills, you’ll never guess what happened: A white lady tried to give me her car valet ticket. Twice.
You’ve heard this story a thousand times before; it’s a Latino cliché. Or is it a tradition?
Anglo person assumes brown person is a worker, there to serve them.
An old Chicano chestnut goes something like this:
I’m a Mexican-American, am married to a white woman, and I was mowing our lawn in front of our nice, big home. A white lady pulled up in a car and asked, “How much do you charge to mow a lawn?” My answer: Nothing. The lady of the house lets me sleep with her.
One of my own family members, a brown-skinned attorney, was approached demandingly by a white office worker in their high-rise parking garage. “Where’s my car? Where’s my car!?” she shouted at him. He answered, “Hey lady, I’m an attorney!” I guess she took that as a legal threat, because she ran off in fear.This story does not surprise me at all. I honestly believe if you’re a PoC, this has happened to you at least once in your life. Before I had my son, I could not walk into a store without someone assuming I worked there. While it doesn’t seem like a “big deal” to some, it is infuriating when it happens on a daily basis.
I’ve had this happen so often it’s not even cute.
I was 9 months pregnant, grocery shopping while wearing a Punisher t-shirt & sweats when some guy tried to report me to a manager in Walmart for my poor customer service skills. The look on the manager’s face was classic. I’m not sure some white people realize that POC have lives beyond the stereotypes they like so much.