New Black Woman

When did homophobia become about protecting white people?

Posted on May 3, 2012 by New Black Woman

That is the question I want to pose to Jodie Brunstetter, the wife of North Carolina State Senator Peter Brunstetter, who has been a big advocate for Amendment 1. The amendment, if approved by voters, would outlaw same-sex marriage in the state. Brunstetter was reported saying to poll workers the amendment is about protecting white folks in some respects.

Chad Nance, a Winston-Salem freelance journalist who is currently active in electoral campaigning, says poll workers outside the early voting site at the Forsyth County Government Center in downtown Winston-Salem reported to him that the wife of NC Sen. Peter Brunstetter remarked today that her husband sponsored legislation to put the marriage amendment on the primary ballot “to protect the Caucasian race.”

Nance said he recorded a conversation with the woman, whose name is Jodie Brunstetter, on video, and that she confirmed that she used the term “Caucasian” in a discussion about the marriage amendment, but insisted that otherwise her comments had been taken out of context by other poll workers.

Nance until recently served as campaign manager for Matt Newton, a Democratic candidate for the 12th Congressional District. Nance announcedon Facebook today that he was resigning from the campaign because of Nance’s reaction to his plans to publicize Jodie Brunstetter’s alleged remarks. The Newton campaign has not responded to an e-mail request for comment about the resignation.

Nance has been working as a volunteer poll worker for the campaign of NC House candidate Ed Hanes Jr. and the campaign against the marriage amendment. He is a primary source for an unrelated story published byYES! Weekly about efforts to manipulate Democratic voters for the benefit of a favored slate of candidates. Nance said an African-American poll worker identified only as “Michael” initially told him about Jodie Brunstetter’s alleged remarks during a conversation with opponents of the marriage amendment.

Nance paraphrased the remarks, as told to him by those who were present: “During the conversation, Ms. Brunstetter said her husband was the architect of Amendment 1, and one of the reasons he wrote it was to protect the Caucasian race. She said Caucasians or whites created this country. We wrote the Constitution. This is about protecting the Constitution. There already is a law on the books against same-sex marriage, but this protects the Constitution from activist judges.”

Nance said he recruited a friend, who works for the Coalition to Protect All North Carolina Families, to witness his interview with Jodie Brunstetter. He said Brunstetter reluctantly acknowledged that she had used the term “Caucasian” and then repeated the statement previously attributed to her, but substituted the pronoun “we” for “Caucasian. Nance said Brunstetter insisted there was nothing racial about her remarks, but could not explain why she used the term “Caucasian.”

Oh. Boy. The woman is denying she said the comments, of course:

Brunstetter denied saying that the purpose of the amendment is to somehow protect the white race from becoming a minority, as the other poll worker had accused her of saying.

“So often when I have talked with the opposition, they will misconstrue” what she says, Brunstetter said.

Brunstetter said she did not bring up race as an issue during the conversation, but that the marriage-amendment opponent did.

A transcript of the conversation between Nance and Brunstetter quotes Brunstetter saying that she “probably said the word” Caucasian during the conversation, but that “if I did it wasn’t anything race-related.”

Brunstetter said she could not verify the transcription, but added that it correctly portrayed her as denying making any racial remarks.

The transcript is on the blog of Yes! Weekly magazine.

Brunstetter said she doesn’t remember exactly what was said in the conversation between her and the amendment opponent.

“I seriously don’t remember,” Brunstetter said. “There was quite a bit of conversation … the reasons for the amendment is for there to be marriage between a man and a woman and it does not matter what race.” (SOURCE)

Part of the transcript is pretty comical:

Me (Nance): You didn’t tell that one lady that it was to preserve the Caucasian race because they were becoming a minority?

Brunsetter: No.

Me: She’s lying?

Brunsetter: No. It’s just that same sex marriages are not having children.

Me: Yeahm but you didn’t say anything about Caucasians, white people, preserving them that’s why it was written?

Brunsetter: No I’m afraid they have made it a racial issue when it is not.

Me: She didn’t say it was a racial issue. She said that you had said that opart of the reason it had been sponsored and written was to preserve the white race. (a moment later) … you didn’t say anything about Caucasians?

Brunsetter: I probably said the word.

Me: You didn’t tell her anything about Caucasians?

(Silence)

Me: I want you to clear it up if you could.

Brunsetter: Right now I am a little confused myself because there has been confusion here today about this amendment where it is very simple. The opponents are saying things that are not true and there has been a lot of conversation back and forth. Right now I have some heat stroke going on. Um there has been lots of confusion.

Me: Did you say anything about Caucasians?

Brunsetter: If I did it wasn’t anything race related.

This more than a bizarre news event; it’s downright…peculiar in that the woman in question admitted to possibly using the word Caucasian, but quickly denied she probably used the term in any sort of race-related connotation. Aside from the recent campaigns against full GLBTQ equality and citizenship being based in homophobia and extreme religious viewpoints, the use of racism in the argument for state-sanctioned homophobia is one that I haven’t heard before.

I truly hope Brunstetter wouldn’t be careless enough to utter such offensive, racist comments in the name of promoting bigotry.

What do you think of Brunstetter’s comments?

Posted in homophobia, North Carolina, race baiting, racism | 1 Comment

Georgia formally joins campaign to strip women of abortion rights

Posted on May 2, 2012 by New Black Woman

Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal has signed a bill limiting the number of weeks women in the Peach State can seek an abortion.

Of course, the measure has been touted as the state’s commitment to protecting life in its most minute forms:

Deal’s signature makes Georgia the latest state to generally ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, cutting by about six weeks the time women in Georgia may have an elective abortion.

Commonly referred to as a “fetal pain” bill, House Bill 954 will tighten medical exemptions for terminating pregnancies and require any abortion performed after 20 weeks be done in a way to bring the fetus out alive. The new law, which goes into effect Jan. 1, makes no exception for rape or incest. The measure says that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, therefore the state has an interest in protecting it.

“Today, we are reaffirming Georgia’s commitment to preserving the sanctity of all human life,” Deal said in a statement released by his office. “This legislation provides humane protection to innocents capable of feeling pain while making an important exception for … medically futile pregnancies.”

Supporters have said the law will save lives and protect more fetuses. “It’s going to save 1,200 babies a year,” said state Rep. Doug McKillip, R-Athens, who sponsored HB 954.

Opponents said the state is legislating decisions that should be made by medical experts and puts doctors at risk who work with difficult pregnancies.

According to doctors’ testimony during hearings earlier this year, medical experts widely believe fetuses do not fully develop connections related to pain before at least 24 weeks.

“Women should not be forced to adhere to legislative directives that are based on unsound medical science,” said Leola Reis, a spokeswoman for the Atlanta-based Planned Parenthood Southeast.

The governor’s stamp of approval moves Georgia into the columns of other states such as Alabama, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma that have so-called “fetal pain” bills, as the article noted. It’s always comforting to know my state leaders are more than willing to rely on inconclusive data to put their God-given plan to chip away rights granted to me and other Georgia women into action. Since the debate surrounding the campaign to reverse women’s abortion rights in Georgia raged on during the Georgia General Assembly’s 40-day legislative session, some concessions had to be made in order to get the destructive and regressive legislation through both chambers.

So, how about that post-racial America?

Posted on April 26, 2012 by New Black Woman

Since people still like to believe we are in some form of post-racial utopia as we’ve elected a black president, some folks just aren’t convinced.

From Fox 5 Atlanta:

Residents are upset about a sign in Paulding County that uses a racial slur to refer to President Barack Obama.

The sign, in front of the Georgia Peach Oyster Bar on Highway 113, uses the n-word to refer to President Obama.

“This world is supposed to be a peaceful world, not a world with hatred. This shouldn’t be here today,” said Carl Norman.

“He needs to wake up and realize it’s 2012,” said Dexter Murr.

Bar owner Patrick Lanzo says he’s posted controversial signs outside his bar and restaurant for 26 years and says he’s practicing free speech.

“I say just because you’re offended by it doesn’t mean you don’t have the right to say something just the opposite,” said Lanzo.

Lanzo said he doesn’t feel any remorse over the sign.

“I don’t feel bad about anything whatsoever. Therefore, they can go out and put their own sign in their own yard and I will not be offended,” said Lanzo.

Here’s a screen shot of sign that contains the racial epithet, which was posted on Black Media Scoop (and is a news report of the TV station I referenced above):

Hm…okay, so if I were to put a sign on my lawn or place of business that said, “Kill whitey,” he wouldn’t be offended. I find that BS hard to believe. Some residents also expressed distaste in the message:

Everybody’s entitled to own thought, it’s not something I’d put in front of mine, but everybody’s got their own opinions about everything,” said Sherry Roew.

Some said they were afraid of the perception the sign gives Paulding County.

“I think it’s terrible,” said Carol Zimmerman.

Paulding County Administrator Mike Jones says he’s well aware of the sign and considers it repulsive, embarrassing and offensive. He says if there was something they could do about it, it wouldn’t be there.

When I first read the story, I knew the name struck a bell. When I did a search on my blog, I found this entry I made about the same guy posting the same kind of racial hatred message on his place of business. From the October 2009 article cited above:

“We’re strictly about free speech,” Lanzo says, “but we’re labeled racist.”

The current sign, which has been outside the Georgia Peach Museum and Restaurant for about six months, takes a critical stand against President Barack Obama’s healthcare plan.

But it’s not just a simple message. It contains an “n” word many see as a racial slur. Find that offensive? Well just keep on driving, says Lanzo, who has run the bar for 22 years.

Lanzo contends the word is only labeled “racist” when it’s uttered by a white person. Similarly, he says white people referring to themselves as “crackers” aren’t labeled racists.

Racist or not, it’s a word Lanzo uses often. Many of the statements on his signs have included the word.

“We’re not at all racist,” says his 19-year-old daughter, Brandi. “We have black people come here all the time. We’re not ugly people.”

Later in the article, Lanzo goes on to say he doesn’t “give a rat’s butt” about Obama’s race and welcomes customers to not only patronize his place of business, but he also welcomed people to call him a cracker because he’ll be just fine with that.

Le sigh…

While Lanzo’s behavior is completely unacceptable and repulsive, this man, who is no doubt a racist, is indicative of the race-based backlash the good ol U.S. of A has witnessed with Obama’s win. It’s also a shining example of how far we are from the so-called post-racial society whiteness likes to force upon us.

Posted in Georgia, politics, President Obama, racism | 3 Comments

“Racist circumcision outrage”

Posted on April 18, 2012 by New Black Woman

Apparently, some folks haven’t gotten the memo that creating a cake and allowing a white person to don black face to imitate a black woman undergoing female genital ~~mutilation~~ circumcision could be possibly perceived as racist.

Case in point:

Swedish minister of culture Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth’s participation in a “racist spectacle” in which she carved up a cake depicting a naked black woman has sparked outrage and prompted calls for the minister’s dismissal.”In our view, this simply adds to the mockery of racism in Sweden,” Kitimbwa Sabuni, spokesperson for the National Afro-Swedish Association (Afrosvenskarnas riksförbund) told The Local.

“This was a racist spectacle.”

Sabuni’s comments come following Adelsohn Liljeroth’s participation in an art installation that took place at Stockholm’s Moderna Museet in connection with World Art Day on April 15th.

As part of the installation, which was reportedly meant to highlight the issue of female circumcision, the culture minister began cutting a large cake shaped like a black woman, symbolically starting at the clitoris.

Makode Aj Linde, the artist who created the installation and whose head is part of the cake cut by the minister, wrote about the “genital mutilation cake” on his Facebook page.

“Before cutting me up she whispered, ‘Your life will be better after this’ in my ear,” he wrote in a caption next to the partially eaten cake.”

Here’s a video link to the cake cutting ~~ritual~~ “ceremony.”

Of course, the minister’s actions have sparked some outrage, but she’s defending her actions: ”I understand quite well that this is provocative and that it was a rather bizarre situation,” she said.

“I was invited to speak at World Art Day about art’s freedom and the right to provoke. And then they wanted me to cut the cake.”

However, Adelsohn Liljeroth said the National Afro-Swedish Association’s anger should be directed at the artist, not at her, claiming the situation was “misinterpreted”.

“He claims that it challenges a romanticized and exoticized view from the west about something that is really about violence and racism,” she said.

“Art needs to be provocative.”

Whenever I see photos and videos of situations like this, I wonder if anyone, anyone in the room has even half of a brain to stop and say, “Wait. This may not go over so well.” How many times will people find themselves in positions in which their actions/comments rub POCs the wrong way, only to hide behind their privilege and blame us for being too sensitive? How many times will people hide behind freedom of expression or speech as justification for their racist (or other -ists, -isms) instead of taking responsibility for their actions?

Also, along with this minister of culture’s missing brain and common sense, where in the hell was her press secretary or public relations representative?!

Posted in female genital mutilation, racism, Sweden | 2 Comments

Company promotes intimate wash to clean, “lighten” your vagina

Posted on April 16, 2012 by New Black Woman

I’ve heard of women bleaching parts of their genitalia, but the only context I was aware of this happening was with women who were involved in the porn industry. However, a new product demonstrates this company’s willingness to capitalize on a woman’s obsession about her vagina and has found a new problem for us to worry about.

A 25-second TV commercial for Clean ‘n’ Dry Intimate Wash is being advertised on prime time television, in India, which shows a woman using the product to lighten her sexual organs to please her man.

The product has attracted condemnation on Twitter and blogging sites, with one (male) user branding it ‘the ultimate insult’ and others bemoaning the extent of discrimination against darker skin tones.

The advertising tagline for the product is: “Life for women will now be fresher, cleaner and more importantly fairer and more intimate.”

Described as ‘unique’, the product is apparently designed to keep the skin ‘fresh and protected from infections all day’ with the added bonus that it will ‘brighten darkened skin in that area…making it many shades fairer.’

Here is the commercial for the product, which is made by a company based in India:

So, let me get this shit straight. Not only are women’s vaginal lips too uneven, too big, pubic mons are too hairy and vaginal canals too lose, now our pubic area is too dark (in my case, which means it’s a deep, dark brown)?! While I wish this was some cruel joke designed to get women riled up over nothing, this sadly isn’t the case.

These type of products are solely being marketed to people of color as these companies are well aware of how far whiteness and white beauty’s tentacles extend into our psyche. These companies are understand how clever the worship of whiteness has on compelling us to buy these products–as well as confirming our own self-hatred.

(More…)