i hate how i see these posts and thinkpieces and speeches and shit about how all women are infantilized… i’m like “noooooope”!
black women have been labeled women from birth. why do you think we can’t be princesses? we always have to be “queens”. why do you think it’s so “important” for us to have big booties and a huge sexual appetite? why do you always see portrayals of us as either wrathful (Sapphire), overtly sexual (Jezebel), or motherly (Mammy)? why do you think, when learning about ourselves and exploring our gender identity, just like any child does, a negatively sexual connotation is added onto our actions? why do you think that, even as young children, men would prey on us and the reason would be that it was expected of us to be sexually available to them?
infantilization is not a part of the black woman’s identity. we were always “grown”. we were never given the opportunity to be children. we had no choice but to accept womanhood.
The surveillance tapes supposedly shows Michael Brown “robbing” a Ferguson convenience store market. But in spite of the fact that the “robbery” was carried out without the brandishing of a weapon, and in spite of the fact that this was really more a case of petty theft shoplifting, this Friday, for the first time, the owners of the store have said that they never said they believed Michael Brown was the individual who stole the item from their store.
In fact, while the owners are speaking out through an attorney about the surveillance video, the mainstream, corporate media are largely ignoring everything they said, pretending that this video definitively identifies Michael Brown as the strong arm shoplifter.The owners claim that this is a claim the police have come up with on their own.
Through their attorney, the owner of the store also even dispute the claim that they or an employee called 911. They say that a customer inside the store made the call. This is pretty strange if this was indeed a “robbery”.
As well, in addition to clarifying that they never said they believed, nor identified the suspect with Michael Brown, they claimed that the St. Louis County issued the warrants for the hard drive of surveillance video Friday, based on the police claiming that Brown fit the description of the person in the video… the person who the owners and employees of the store were not even going to call the police on. Again, the owner clarifies that neither the management, nor any employee ever identified Brown as the suspect in that video.
They simply never said they believed that, this was a claim made by the police alone. So the real question is why the media has been taking the word of the police on this matter, even over the word of the eye witnesses and the store owner?
See this hat? Tis’ my cat.
I had a dream the other night that they made a Night Vale movie and that Cecil was introduced with a very dramatic shot of him walking down the station hallway until it pans down and you see he’s wearing light-up sketchers
lying awake thinking about how a white man can shoot up an elementary school or a movie theater or a college neighborhood and he’s misunderstood, he needed help, his victims should’ve been more understanding
meanwhile a black boy supposedly steals some cigars and apparently that’s enough to justify his execution (by a cop who didn’t even know he was a suspect when he shot him)