Ain’t Gonna Bump No More (With No Big Fat Woman) - Joe Tex

What They Hittin Foe? - Ice Cube

Assembly Line - The Commodores

Do What You Wanna - Ramsey Lewis

Who Says A Funk Band Can’t Play Rock - Funkadelic

Penitentiary Philosophy - Erykah Badu

A Day Of Superman Lover - Redman

It Never Entered My Mind - Miles Davis

Happy Feelin’ - Earth Wind & Fire

Someday Baby - Memphis Slim

Bird of Beauty - Stevie Wonder

Jive at Five - Count Baise

Got To Give It Up - Marvin Gaye

My Adidas - Run-D.M.C.

Son of Shaft/Feel It - The Bar-Kays (from Wattstax)

Mary Mitchell, probably my favorite newspaper columnist, now has a blog at the Chicago Sun-Times. In today’s post, she asks readers to help her in identifying exactly what racism is. You would think that we would know by now, but in reality, I think that’s a very good question, because I don’t think we know what it is. I think that we have some idea of the continuum on which it exists, but I really don’t think we can point out the critical elements and snap our fingers and say “BAM! That’s it.” Oh, it’s obvious in some cases, but I think that too often we don’t really allow for the nuance that such an important question deserves.

It’s funny, because I was recently talking to a colleague of mine who was born in the Eastern Bloc nations and she confided to me that she was having a difficult time teaching Warriors Don’t Cry becuase she didn’t think the students were really differentiating between the different white people in the book. After all, even in Little Rock in 1957, not all white people were segregationists. But what she really couldn’t understand was why the story of the Little Rock Nine is so relevant today - or at least why race seems to be as big a deal here, when it wasn’t the same thing in her home country.

I didn’t try to address that question then - it was too early on a Monday morning to start something that heavy - but suffice it to say that racism in this country has a different dimension than other types of cultural oppression. In other words, it’s true that every nationality has been systematically discriminated against. Even if it’s not true, I’ll let that one walk to win the bigger point. The difference is that in this country with “whiteness” as the standard (and here I’m talkin more sociopolitically than phenotypically, although that plays a role too), most of those other groups were able to assimilate into and become indistinguishable from the “authentically” white. Obviously, we can’t become indistinguishable phenotypically (not en masse, at least), and while I think we have greater access to sociopolitical power, status, prestige, etc. than we’ve ever had, there are still certain elements that would seek to keep us out.

See, I’m of the opinion that if you really want to understand what race in this country is about, then you can’t look at us, because when you bring us into it, you start thinking about phenotypical stuff and you get questions like “why do they…” or whatever. In reality, race - at least socially - is about power. Racism is an attempt by one group to exert and maintain power over another group. Fairly simple. Given that, I think the first place to look in studying racism is in the history books of in-and-out group dynamics among European groups. You see what was done to the Italian immigrants when they came here? The Irish? And did it happen to us? Yup. That’s racist.

But see here’s the thing, I think that acknowledging a lessening in prevalence is not the same as saying that it no longer exists - and that cut two ways. In other words, just becuase there’s less overt racism doesn’t mean that it’s time to dance around and act like racism no longer exists. Likewise, acknowledging that things aren’t as bad as they were in 1965 isn’t some type of capitulation to the man. Times have changed. Some. Not completely, but some. Maybe not enough, but some. But one thing that doesn’t seem to have changed is that people still want a demon to believe in. So as long as there’s an organization like the klan, or as long as some fool is out there flying the defeated secessionist flag, there’s a benchmark, both for people who want to say that racism is still as prevalent as it ever was and for people who want to act like the only racist acts are the most overt and the most egregious.

I’m sure than over the course of the series, Mary Mitchell’s readers are going to give her lots of interesting anecdotes, filled with situations that provide examples of some type of racism, both real and perceived. The only thing is, I don’t know how useful those stories will be in providing some workable definition.

As most of you all reading this know, this is Stereo 3.0. Stereo 1, which I affectionately refer to as Solid State, was my spot at Blogger from a couple years ago. Stereo 2, or High Fidelity, was when my government was my domain name. (That joint’s still out there somewhere, and there’s a little toggle that I’m overlooking. I know that’s all it is.) And now here we are at Stereo 3, which I guess I’ll call Ave Digital. At any rate, as I was looking back through Solid State, I saw that I had some relatively new comments for some relatively old posts. One comment in particular was particularly thought-provoking, so I wanna get at that for a couple minutes.

In response to my post on misogyny in hip-hop, a reader wrote

You may claim that not [all] women is a bitch, hoe or chickenhead, but that’s bullshit. Once this thinking sets in and men believe they have a right to call women by these names, it becomes clear to me that all women are bitches and hoes in their eyes until proven otherwise, and who the hell are they to judge and categorize women, it all goes back to male (sic) privilege once again.

Now the idea that people set fixed categories is interesting to me, but I think that there are several levels at which this concept can be discussed. First of all, I think that all people categorize others and believe in their own system of categorization until proven otherwise. That’s not necessarily to defend what’s going on in this case, but it is to say that categorization and definition are neither unique to nor the exclusive property of those who we might call “privileged.” The ability to “do” something with the label is a little different, but in the case of this particular phenomenon, I would say that the actual kinetic enegry is a lot less than seems. Second, I think that the idea that once a person labels some women as “bitches, hoes, chickenheads,” etc. he labels all women as that is false, even on its face. Here’s what I noted in the original joint:

Now, I can say from personal experience that gold-digers, hoes, and chickenheads do, in fact, exist. But it’s not a question of whether or not there’s any veracity to what the rappers are saying, it’s a question of the accuracy. Dres of the Black Sheep once wrote, “I talk about a ho/ because a ho I know/ and if you knew the honeys too/ then I guess too you would talk so.” Only thing is, all women aren’t hoes. If you listen to the “definition” records, the rappers even make sure to point out this fact, and delineate the difference between a “bitch” and a “sister” or a “queen” or a “lady.”

Or to quote Common, “naw that ain’t nothin’ I would call my mother/ nor do I call every nigga my brother.” Okay, see first there’s the level one, obvious fact that for the overwhelming majority of the guys who do spell girl with a “B,” their mother is an exception. Same thing goes for other female relatives. And the women who hold a special place in their lives. So obviously, all can’t literally mean all. But even if we dismiss that as the obvious and limit the potential referents to women the dude could date, then what? And I’m asking that question from the perspective of that line from Dres. At what point does a person not have the right to define that which he sees? Think of it like this: (you’ll pardon the analogy, of course) there are two American snakes that are virtually identical, the coral snake and the king snake. Both have red, black, and yellow bands. The only way to distinguish them is to know the order in which the bands appear. That’s why I memorized the line, “red next to yellow will kill a fellow. Red next to black is a friend of jack.” Now me, since I’ve only seen either of those snakes behind glass (either on television or at the zoo), I have a different type of understanding than somebody who may have found out about red-next-to-yellow the hard way, but I do know that somebody, probably somebody who had seen red-and-yellow and lived to tell the tale, was able to differentiate and committed it to a rhyme. As well he should have. So if we kinda transfer the concept, I don’t think there’s anything intrinsically wrong with somebody saying “you gotta watch out,” which is how I see the “definition” records. Like with 2Pac. Is it Keep Ya Head Up, or is it Wonder Why They Call U Bitch? More than likely, it’s both.

Now, where I see a severe limitation is in the fact that there’s an oversaturation of the “definition” records. We know that every woman is not a bitch or a ho or a chickenhead or whatever. I would say that most aren’t. To some people. Like I said before, some of us know how to bring it out. Regardless of that, I think that in the same way that we feel there’s a certain lopsidedness in the portrayal of Black people in general in the media writ large, in hip-hop in particular, there’s a lopsidedness is in the portrayal of women. Granted, it could go back to the experience of the rappers, who may only know bitches and hoes (with the exception of their mothers), or it could be that they only write about them, leaving the nice girls they know unmentioned. I don’t know, but I wish it would stop.

Of course, if we take it a little further, I think there’s a whole lot of room to talk about the difference between what a person says and what they do. In other words, we’re quick to say that actions speak louder than words, so if a person says things using politically correct jargon but does things that we think are [insert your favorite]-ist, then we go by what they do. But if a person says the wrong thing but does the right thing, then what? I keep coming back to this point because the more I look, the more I think it’s being overlooked. At the beginning of this little piece, I pointed out that as people, we label people automatically. We take a few pieces of information that another person gives us and then we fill in the blanks on our own. Just as my commenter assumes that men who spell girl with a “B” consign all women to that category until proven otherwise, I think that most of us have our own pet categories where we put people “until proven otherwise.” But if it’s bad in one instance, it’s probably just as bad in another.

Cobb has an interesting post on the relationship between hate crimes and terrorism. By his descripiton, “terrorism is the coordination of hate crimes by conspiracy or syndication.” I like that. I like that a lot. I think it makes a lot of sense on its face, but it also helps me see the line of demarcation for a hate crime more clearly. In a way. Personally, I think that the commission of any crimes in the process of gang activity could probably go down as a hate crime or terrorism. After all, blue killing red isn’t just about the specific individuals, it’s killing for the purpose of group intimidation, among other things.

What that really makes me think of, though, is the fact that terrorism is not exactly foreign to the way we do business here. Any attempt to label the klan as anything but a terrorist organization should be dismissed as crack-induced blathering. Now I ain’t gon pretend that I see the klan as some spectre hovering over our community, thwarting us at every turn. I think that they have limited power these days, but I also think that from a historical perspective, it’s worth noting that terrorism is not new, nor is it unique to people from across the sea. Americans do it. We’ve been doin it. And when somebody decides that he’s not getting his way, he’s gonna do it again.

Just a thought.

I copped the 200^th issue of The Source today, mostly as a relic of days gone by.  About 10-12 years ago, I used to swear by The Source.  I think I kept that subscription going for at least three years.  During that time, I guess I was beginning to get disillusioned with the direction hip-hop seemed to be headed, but the way I felt then is nothing compared to the way I feel now.  Back then, I at least held out the hope that certain artists would come through for me and that the genre as a whole could be saved from itself.  Evidently, I wasn’t the only one with those concerns.  James Bernard, former Co-Editor-in-Chief writes,

We have failed, at our central challenge: becoming a social force, not merely a cacophony of merchandising and promotion.  To be fair, this was always a tall order.  Nobody else has gotten this right, so why hold Hip-Hop to a higher standard?  Because we could be different.  Because we owe it to our communities.  Because we owe it to ourselves to become greater than the sum of our parts.  Did we miss our moment?  Perhaps.  Did we even have a moment? Yes.  Can we create another opportunity to become greater than we are?  Not looking good.

And again I say, the best critiques of hip-hop do not come from people outside.  As much as I like McWhorter, Crouch, and some of the other vocal critics, they ain’t sayin’ nothin that hasn’t already been said by somebody who actually enjoys and cares about the art form.  James Bernard is a hip-hop critic, not a cultural critic – at least, not in the sense that Crouch is.  Only thing is, for all our nuanced critiques of the direction that hip-hop is headed, where has it gotten us?  I’d say nowhere.

The ‘toldja so’ part of me wants to say that I always knew that hip-hop never really had any revolutionary potential, but if I said that, I’d be a bald-faced liar.  I ain’t gon’ lie, man, I used to believe. Being completely honest, hip-hop played a major role in my development of a political consciousness – to the extent that I have done so.  At the time, I thought, or even expected that the same thing was happening for lots of other people.  Maybe it was.  But even if it was then, it had certainly stopped by the time I stopped subscribing to The Source.  Did we miss our moment?  I’d say yes.  As much as I believe in capitalism, I think that it’s like fire.  It can be used for some fantastic things if properly harnessed, but if it’s left uncontrolled, it holds extremely destructive potential.  In the attempt to build a bigger fire, hip-hop seared its soul.  For the most part.

Honestly, I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that hip-hop as a genre is so based in the present.   The emphasis on newness is both the life and death, but combined with the fact that the most nihilistic tendencies are rewarded with the highest sales, it’s like the eviscerated shark that keeps eating its own entrails.  Can it get better?  I don’t think so.  The box is open.  If there ever was a chance for hip-hop to be a vehicle for making some significant difference, I that opportunity has passed.  A part of me believes that another opportunity will come along, but if it does, I wonder if we’ll be able to recognize it and properly take advantage of it.  Or will we commodify it and burn up any potentially transformative properties for the sake of profit?

Even though this story is unique because the caller is so young, I think we need to recognize the fact that more often than not, 9-1-1 works.  That’s why we get so outraged when we hear cases of it not working.

6-year-old ‘hero’ comes to mom’s rescue

A 6-year-old Calumet City boy was described as a hero Wednesday for placing a 911 call that may have saved his unconscious mother’s life. While preparing her son Jawan Davis for camp Wednesday morning, Nicole Erving, 26, grabbed her chest and collapsed on the floor of their home in the 900 block of Greenbay Avenue.

Jawan dialed 911 from a cell phone around 9:40 a.m. and calmly fielded questions from emergency dispatchers.

“It’s possible he saved her life,” said Calumet City Fire Chief William Galgan. “Had he not called, you never know what the outcome could have been. . . . The young child did act quite heroically.”

That’s how it’s supposed to go.

What’s a hate crime? Or rather, what’s the purpose for that specific designation? Is “goofy-looking white boy” enough of a pejorative to demonstrate some special animus over and above whatever animus is necessary to jump somebody and put him in the hospital? Well, we know that the answer to the third question is no. At least, not in Chicago. And really, even thinking about “white boy” in that context, it still seems to be more descriptive than epithet. But what that case really does is demonstrate the limitations of hate crimes as a legal designation.

See, here’s my beef: a crime committed by a member of one group against a member of another group has the potential to earn the hate crime designation, along wiith the added jail time. Members of the same group? As far as I know, there’s no such thing. It’s just that crime. All these young brothers gettin killed are just young brothers gettin killed. Nobody’s calling it a hate crime or anything more than that, even though I’d bet big money that during the commission of said crimes, pejoratives that would warrant the “hate crime” designation if the perpetrator was of a different race are thrown around. (Really, a lot of those might be said to be self-hate crimes, but that’s another discussion.)

*****

Mo’Nique is trying to organize (?) a boycott of United Airlines. I have my doubts on the effectiveness of calls for large-scale boycotts as it is, but my perception was that the offense should go beyond just one individual. From the report I’m looking at, it seems that she got upset about the way she was treated when someone she was traveling with tried to put something in her overhead bag. She claims that she’s boycotting because difficulties of that type “happen to Black people all the time” but the rest of us don’t have the platform she does to speak out about it. I don’t know. I know a lot of Black people who fly, and I’ve never heard of anything happening to any of us who got on the plane and sat down - at least, not out of proportion to anybody else. This ain’t about us, it’s about her own personal beef. She’s just trying to get the rest of us to tag along. See, I wouldn’t even have a problem with it if she was just like, “I’m not gonna fly United because blahblahblah…,” but she’s like, “WE shouldn’t fly United cuz look how they treat me, and I’m FAMOUS!”

*****

Billy King has said that he’s not gonna trade Allen Iverson. Not right now, at least. All that means is that he hasn’t gotten the right offer. If he does, I’m afraid AI is gone. No matter what Billy King is saying right now.

I know Andy Reid is notoriously stubborn about the players he brings in, but dag. Can he put together a package to get some B+ level talent at the skill positions? Ashley Lelie wants out of Denver, Jerry Porter wants out of Oakland, Chris Brown wants out of Tennessee…I’m sayin. We know Donovan can do well with unheralded players, but this ain’t a couple years ago. The division is stacked. We need at least one player that could start on another team in the league. Not that we’re gonna get anybody I mentioned, or anybody else for that matter, but I can wish.  I’m still seeing them with about 10 wins this year.

Zig Zag - Rose Royce

The Power of God - LL Cool J

Standing on the Verge of Getting It On - Funkadelic

Baby Elephant Walk - Henry Mancini

Baby You’re Right - Joe Tex

How I Got Over - Aretha Franklin

Fascinating Rhythm - Oscar Peterson

Da Funk - Redman

Make The Music With Your Mouth, Biz - Biz Markie

Getaway - Earth Wind & Fire

Friend or Foe - Jay-Z

Young, Black Male - 2Pac

Storm King - Bob James

Stakes Is High - De La Soul

Get Off Your Ass And Jam - Funkadelic

Funky Woman - Parliament

Traveling Music - J-Live

Four Women - Nina Simone

They say necessity is the mother of invention, and I suppose that’s true, but in this case, I kinda had to get knocked off the pot to do something I’ve been meaning to do for a long time. I think I first mentioned that I would be moving to illtelligent.com last September. Here it is almost a year later, and I’m finally getting around to doing it.

So what’s the difference between Stereo at at.com and Stereo at Illtelligent? Not much. Still me. Still livin’ and jivin’ and diggin’ the skin I’m in, just savin my name as a domain name for something important. Like if I were to do somethin crazy like run for office. Or maybe use it for business or somethin’. I suppose it was pride and vanity that kept me using my eponymous domain, but at this point, I’m not sweatin those couple little hits I was gettin. Although I think this change will motivate me to write a little more, because I’ve finally moved from the Nucleus platform to WordPress. I’ve been meaning to do that forever and three weeks. Finally done it.

So sit back, relax, and let’s get back in the groove.