Some samples of this evening’s work:

Respect > roses

love your guts

consent = sexier than lingerie

yes! yes! yes!

Some other slogans we came up with but didn’t show here:

LOVE ME EVERY DAY – END VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

FEMINISM IS FOR LOVERS

RESPECT: SHE ASKED FOR IT

and of course (we don’t take credit for this one):

If you’re inspired, grab some printer labels and permanent markers, organize a team if you can and get a local campaign going in your area. Feel free to use any of our slogans or come up with your own.

got some colored sharpies, oh yeah

Visit the V-Day Website, check out more art of cultural resistance here, and leave your thoughts about Valentine’s Day in the comments!

because we prefer to have a plan.

We’ve devised a simple flowchart to assist in the difficult decision-making processes of intimate relationships. Use in conjunction with below resources for best results.

Complementary resources:

Revolutionary Dating Assessment Form (RDAF)

Revolutionary Lovers Guide

How to Leave a Bad Relationship

While the Jan 18th blackout was historic, our Internet freedom is still being threatened. It’s not over for SOPA and PIPA and we must Stop ACTA now!

Lowkey takes a stand against injustice (photo credit Henna Malik http://www.hennam.com/ )

In sharp contrast, Westwood lacks even the most basic understand of the history of hiphop and he has actively promoted the military occupation of Afghanistan. His insensitive and unsuccessful attempts to imitate, steal or misappropriate a mainstream version of hiphop culture, despite his evidently rich, white and privileged background, are cringeworthy.

Below, we have cross posted an excerpt from Lowkey’s article in the brilliant Ceasefire magazine  (@ceasefire_mag) explaining why he refused to appear on Westwood’s show.

Lowkey rightly focuses on Westwood’s involvement in war propaganda but Sisters of Resistance would like to briefly share an anecdote which confirms that artists with moral integrity such as Lowkey have no place in the company of such morally bankrupt careerists as Westwood. Many years ago, I attended a Westwood event at a club in East London. Westwood spent the night screaming “b*tch” and “wh*re” down the microphone in a desperate and unsuccessful attempt to create an image of street credibility and gain acceptance from the predominately black crowd. The “joke” began when Westwood offered free champagne to the first woman to present herself to the stage. When no one responded to his request, Westwood repeatedly begged for a woman to come to the stage simply to pick up some giveaway champagne. When a young black woman did eventually approach the DJ booth, Westwood played the then popular (I said that this was a long time ago) Ludacris song “Ho.”For the rest of the evening Westwood spewed racist and sexist hatred on the mic creating a strong atmosphere of misogyny in the nightclub. 
Westwood is only interesting in promoting himself. Many have never forgiven him for his delayed response to grime music and homegrown UK talent, refusing to play or promote it for many years. And as Lowkey makes clear, Westwood’s promotion of the military occupation of Afghanistan is inexcusable and a further reason for true hiphop heads to completely ignore the increasingly irrelevant, politically offensive BBC DJ.

**************************************

Lowkey: Why I had to say no to Westwood TV

Earlier this month, Lowkey, one of the UK’s leading hip hop artists turned down an invitation to appear on TimWestwoodTV, the influential YouTube channel hosted by Tim Westwood, arguably UK Hip Hop’s biggest name. In an exclusive piece [for Ceasefire] , he explains why.

by Lowkey (@lowkeymusic1)

Being not only a Hip Hop artist but a life-long fan of the genre, I have, like many others, been very familiar with Tim Westwood. As a young boy, I remember listening to his show on Capital FM and have since spent the majority of my almost decade-long musical career trying to get a spot on his BBC Radio1/BBC 1xtra show. For a long time, an appearance on the show was – and, to some extent, remains – the benchmark for any aspiring Hip Hop or Grime MCs. For many rising artists, you were only considered relevant if you had been acknowledged by Westwood. Moreover, whenever Westwood chose to champion a particular artist, throwing his weight behind their career, big success was almost guaranteed.

Yes, his clout as the self-described “gatekeeper” has declined over the past three years, due to the rise of independent media like SBTV and Grime Daily and, more recently, the progression of Radio 1’s Hip Hop DJ Charlie Sloth. Nonetheless, turning down an invitation to appear on Tim Westwood TV, as I have done this month, was not a decision I could take lightly.

As far as I am aware, Tim Westwood’s first visit to the occupying military base ‘Camp Bastion’, in Afghanistan, was in early February 2011. In contrast to his later trip in May 2011, this one seemed to be in a more personal capacity, he had remarked of the British troops stationed there that they were “really making a difference to the world” and that he felt he had a “moral duty to come out”. He also vowed to “come back with Radio 1”. And come back he did. [...] Why should BBC Radio 1Xtra listeners be subjected to this propaganda?  [...] The reality is that the MOD and the BBC need to sell an increasingly unpopular military adventure to the youth of this nation, so they use a character of dwindling relevance by getting him to broadcast his live show from the heart of the occupation itself.

FOR THE FULL ARTICLE PLEASE VISIT http://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/lowkey-no-to-westwood-tv/

“Shit White Girls Say to Black Girls,” parts 1 and 2, by actress and comedian Franchesca Ramsey are recently released YouTube parodies of the “Shit Girls Say” series that have gone viral. Predictably, the videos are causing an uproar amongst white people attacking what they see as Ramsey’s “racism”, when in fact what she is doing is illustrating, in no uncertain terms, some of the many ways racism continues to be inflicted on people of color.

Sisters of Resistance read an excellent article over at New Black Woman critiquing these kinds of responses, some of which we would like to share with you here. In it, she explains why white people have reacted so vehemently to what Ramsey has brought to the surface with her videos, which are the”microaggressive” forms of racism experienced by people of color on a daily basis. She also reminds those who took offense of the historical and structural context that makes it impossible for Black people and other people of color to commit racism against white people. We encourage you to read the whole article for its insightful analysis.

And for further info on the topic, check out this article by Jamilah King, over at one of our favorite anti-racist news sources, Colorlines.com, and hear what Franchesca Ramsey herself had to say about the reactions.

********

Why “Shit White Girls Say To Black Girls” strikes a nerve

New Black Woman

It’s no coincidence that backlash has been brewing against Ramsey’s video. Whenever whiteness is criticized or when people of color point out  racism, whiteness retreats into defense mode and often lay the racism claim at the feet of people of color, as the commenter stated in her response on The Huffington Post.

You can talk to any black person and they will tell you they’ve had white people, both men and women, boys and girls, make these same comments to them. You can talk to any white person, woman or man, girl or boy, and they have probably made comments similar to the examples in the video to a black person at one point in their lives.

The reason why this video strikes a nerve among black women is it puts a clever spin on the many microaggressive forms of racism we face on a daily basis. This video puts a face on the racism we have to negotiate each day. All people of color each day wrestle with whether or not to challenge and confront both conspicuous or microagressive forms of racism. It also brings to light of how harmful these microagressions are when they are committed by people who claim to not see color or don’t believe race is a big deal.

The reason why this video strikes a nerve among white people is it puts a mirror up onto the racial slights many of them have committed. This video forces white people to think about how much whiteness, forms of oppression and othering of people of color has been embedded into their brains. The video and the examples of the microaggressions shatters the flawed notion that racism can only be classified as the obvious acts–the cross burnings, the hate crimes, the painting of racial slurs on property–and not the small, everyday occurrence that can often break a person of color’s spirit…

Since racism equals power and privilege, there is no equal form of treatment people of color can inflict upon white people that would perpetuate our racial superiority. There is no term that can be hurled at white people that reminds them of their racial inferiority.There is no ideology that gives people of color the power and privilege to decide what white people can or can’t view as racist. There is no institution similar to whiteness that allows black people to make our thoughts, feelings and opinions the center of discussion when it comes to the plight of white people. There are no political, economic, social or academic institutions in place that reminds white people of their inferiority by way of voting rights restrictions, stumbling blocks to receive aid, the decline of investing in public schools and the fight to block universal access to quality health care.

There is no historical context that belittled white women for having big butts or white men for having a sexual appetite bordering on rape and violence. There is no historical context in which gave black people the authority to enslave and brutalize an entire race of people. There is no historical context in which protecting black womanhood was used to justify terrorizing, maiming, killing, torturing and subjugating white men.

Franchesca Ramsey’s videos could be the starting point on a discussion on racism, both in its obvious and microaggressive forms. However, just like all events that could spur an honest, candid discussion on racism, this opportunity will pass without a budge because whiteness continues to turn the other cheek on a system that promotes its advancement.

Read the full article here and follow New Black Woman on Twitter.

Wu-Tang Clan Says: Meat Ain't Nothin ta F*ck Wit .

GZA, Vegetarian Ambassador of Hip-Hop.

Check out this interview with him on Eater.com where the double-platinum artist discusses raw food and other edibles, being veggie on the road, and recommends his favorite vegetarian spots throughout the US.

Thanks to Kevin Tillman of Upsetting the Setup for posting.

by The Wailing Souls (1980)

Yes! Who now, who now, who now!

(Kingdom rise an’ kingdom fall)
Who yeah, now, now!
(Babylon back is against the wall)
Babylon trying to fight a solution!

(Kingdom rise an’ kingdom fall)
Who yeah, now, now!
(Babylon back is against the wall)
Yeah!

Economics has got them in desperation.
(dis ya modern famine)
And poverty is causing,
Dangerous political tension.
(dis ya modern famine)
Depression is down in the land.
(dis ya modern famine)
And inflation, is holding down,
Strong, strong, strong.
(shi dup, shi dup)

(Kingdom rise an’ kingdom fall)
Who yeah, now, now!
(Babylon back is against the wall)
Babylon trying to fight a solution!

(Kingdom rise an’ kingdom fall)
Who yeah, now, now!
(Babylon back is against the wall)
Yeah!

False rulers, we know them.
(dis ya modern famine)
Speaking about human rights.
(dis ya modern famine)
Yet they deal with pure inhonesty.
(dis ya modern famine)
And the people, they still can’t walk,
The streets as they like.
(shi dup, shi dup)

(Kingdom rise an’ kingdom fall)
Who yeah, now, now!
(Babylon back is against the wall)
Babylon trying to fight a solution!

(Kingdom rise an’ kingdom fall)
Yeah! Who yeah, now, now!
(Babylon back is against the wall)
Oh yeah, oh yeah!
Lyrics Provided By: Jah Lyrics: Reggae Archives

For our final post of 2011, we would like to thank all of the readers who have made Sisters of Resistance a success in our first year by sharing with you this important film that we believe captures or touches upon many of the issues of injustice currently facing the world at large. “The End of Poverty?” is a 2008 film by Philippe Diaz that traces the history of global poverty from 1492 and the beginning of colonisation to the neoliberal, neocolonial economic policies of today. Featuring numerous interviews ranging from indigenous workers in Bolivia to the former vice-president of the World Bank, this film details the way the Global South has been systematically privatised and pillaged and the majority of its people locked into profoundly unjust economic conditions, facing generation after generation of debt.

We recommend this film for anyone who desires a more thorough understanding of the intersections and relationships between colonisation, capitalism and structurally enforced poverty and violence. It is also intended for those who are not yet familiar with the systemic oppression we oppose, in solidarity with the masses of the Global South and indigenous people worldwide who continue to resist, living and dying daily to preserve their cultures, way of life, and relationship to the land.

Thanks also to revolutionary MC and educator @akalamusic for hipping us to this film. We express our sincerest intention for greater solidarity with marginalised peoples and allies in the year to come, and continued resistance to oppression, until we are all free.

Further resources:

Toolkit for Intersecting Violences: Globalization and the Feminization of Poverty. Central American Women’s Network

His Selective Communication

Originally posted by Yashar Ali on 12-12-2011 here || Like Yashar’s fb page  ||Follow Yashar on Twitter

There’s no doubt that the primary way in which we now communicate is via text-message, email, and social media. Phone calls have fallen by the wayside.

Electronic communication has changed the dynamics of how we interact, creating both benefits and problems.

One problem that continuously arises in romantic relationships is the way in which men control the conversation by selectively ignoring texts and emails.

I like to call this behavior cafeteria responding.

That’s right. Just like when you go to a cafeteria, and walk around, picking and choosing what you want to eat, men who engage in cafeteria responding are also picking and choosing the messages and responses that appeal to them most. Leaving you hanging…

Melodie, age 35, has seen this pattern of behavior play out in her last two relationships. Anytime she would text or email something that made these men uncomfortable, whether she was attempting to address an argument that had taken place, ask for clarification about the relationship, or request something that they didn’t want to do, they would ignore the text. Either, they would go silent right away and wait for her to text again, or they would text her a few hours later, about some other issue, as if nothing had happened.

The point is, no matter what the issue, whether it was something major or something small, if it was a concern or question her boyfriend didn’t want to deal with, the solution was simple: ignore. They pretended like the message was never sent and would move on to the next issue.

But the silence became a vicious cycle as Melodie began confining these issues–the ones she knew were touchy and uncomfortable–to text message. She figured that if they didn’t want to answer or talk about it through text, they definitely wouldn’t want to answer in person, “If he didn’t respond by text, there’s no way I would have the courage to ask him in person. I just felt like I would be ambushing him.”

Of course, in lacking an outlet and someone with whom to discuss the issues that were important to her, Melodie was left feeling frustrated and emotionally unfulfilled. So, she was sacrificing her own emotional health for her boyfriend’s emotional comfort.

Lisa, 47, found that she would deal with her discomfort, in reaching out to her husband about emotional matters, by burying the question or comment in one or two other texts, “I just felt better if I didn’t hit him with the issue directly.”

Of course, her husband responded to her other messages and ignored the emotionally difficult text.

Kristy, 32, often faces this challenge when she reaches out to her boyfriend about emotional matters. And what does he say when she confronts him about being a cafeteria responder?

“I always get the excuse from him that he doesn’t know how to respond to stuff ‘like that.’ Maybe I should forward his own long emotional emails, that he wrote to me, back to him. The emails he writes when HE was scared of losing me and poured HIS heart out…”

Many of the women I spoke to felt that it’s always better to get a response to their questions–even if it’s a response that is not to their liking–than to be completely ignored, “I feel so hurt when he literally just ignores something I have said or asked. Am I not worth it? And why do I keep trying? Why can’t he just come out with with an answer?”

We men (and I am including myself in this) often get a free pass when it comes to crappy communication skills. Some of the women in my life who have dealt with this sort of behavior make excuses for the men in their lives, “Oh, he’s just tired,” or “He’s shy. He’s just so busy,” or “It’s hard for him to get emotional.”

You know what? I take a hard line on this: be an adult, grow up, and stop acting like a child. Trust me, and I speak broadly here, women do not get the same free pass as men do. They don’t have the privilege of acting like a teenager.

Alison, 39, gets a raft of guilt from her boyfriend if she doesn’t respond to his “important” messages, “He acts as if I have just committed a major offense, like cheating. It’s one of the worst things I could do to him. I get texts like ‘hello???? where are you?’ Sometimes minutes after the initial text. But if I say something about his regular tendency to ignore me, he just makes me feel like an overly sensitive nut job.”

The women I interviewed for this column generally admitted to not calling their men partners out on cafeteria responding because they didn’t want to seem crazy or needy, “I’m not going to be that woman, the one that I’m scared of becoming: a nagger. But it’s hard because I feel entrapped because I can’t discuss what I want to discuss…ever.”

This isn’t about someone being busy and occasionally not responding to a text or email; when we’re all in a frantic rush, we forget to follow up. And it also isn’t about someone who wants to express themselves emotionally and has a difficult time.

This is about a consistent pattern of behavior. It’s about controlling the conversation.

And of course, there’s no better or easier place to control communication than through electronic means. Most of us would have difficulty (and yes I know there are exceptions to this) literally ignoring someone if he/she were sitting directly in front of us. However, the awkwardness of ignoring someone in person disappears when we’re talking by text or e-mail.

A failure to confront or a conscious ignoring of an issue is part of the human condition. It’s so much easier to avoid rather than react, but when it comes to romantic partnerships, so much of a man’s cafeteria responding is rooted in male entitlement, power over women. Men may feel okay about ignoring others, but when it happens to them, they openly complain about it and everyone around them scrambles to fix the situation. Talk about male privilege.

Slowly, but surely, after dealing with a partner who is consciously ignoring their questions and concerns, some women live in a world where they somehow manage to convince themselves that they are being good partners–that in some areas of the relationship, they have to compromise. Goes back to my least favorite phrase, “It’s just the way he is.” No one said compromise means compromising your opinions and emotional health.

And there’s always an excuse, right? His phone was not working, no reception, your email was in his spam, he didn’t have his phone with him, etc.

But that’s all bullshit. When there is a message men want to respond to, the response is instantaneous. This can be said for all of us, both men and women. But in terms of relationships and the male-female dynamic, women are left holding the bag when it comes to this cafeteria responding.

And day-by-day, that bag seems to get heavier–doesn’t it?

_________________________________

Check out the original article: http://thecurrentconscience.com/blog/2011/12/12/his-selective-communication/

And Yashar’s other articles: http://thecurrentconscience.com/blog/author/yashar/