Things that make you feel uncomfortable

I wasn't going to do another blogpost, but I felt inspired.

They're trying to get To Kill a Mockingbird 'dollied' up in the same way Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was edited a few years back. In a school in Mississippi (The irony), the former was removed from the facility for the use of the word nigger, though they didn't specify what words were used, you can put two and two together.

Some of the students said they felt uncomfortable reading the literature with the word present. To be honest, it's not meant to be comfortable. It's a story dealing with heavy elements such as rape, racism, and sex. Stories like that are not meant to be comforting, they're supposed to put a mirror to real world events at the time. To Kill a Mockingbird is a vital book in the history of this sorry-ass country in how it exposed the behaviors, social structure and state of America in the south. The book has always had controversy over its subject matter, this isn't really anything new. In a county in Virginia in the 60's, the book was banned for the plot centering around rape.

But let's talk about another subject: Why are you banning books for uncomfortable reading? If you feel unsettled reading a book, why not just put it down and read another? Same with a television show with 'questionable' material. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Turn the channel. I never understood that. These groups and individuals don't like something, so it has to be banned? I can imagine how many books were destroyed and burned over someone's comfort zone being invaded because they didn't like it. It's not just television and literature, music too has been hit by these watchdog groups.

Hip-hop and Rock n' Roll are two genres that have been attacked, but the former especially with its material around the turn of the 90's. I remember that reverend that ran over Snoop Dogg's CD with a steamroller. For what purpose? Because he's talking about situations that are represented in his environment? That's what Hip-hop does (or did): It talked about the state of the environment the Master of Ceremony in particular was in. The push of gangsta rap must have made all of America and the book banners/burners shit themselves. NWA, 2pac, etc., all of those groups shifting to a violent tone in their music wasn't because they were glorifying it, it was a literal reflection of their lives, the same as To Kill a Mockingbird and Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, to an extent. Real life inspires writers, even with fictional stories. To ban books and music because they dare try to put real-life elements in their stories is foolish and it shows how sheltered these people are, willfully or not.

As a writer myself, I try to incorporate real-life elements in Mission, not directly but taking a few pages and cues and molding it in my vision. I don't hold back and do not intend on holding back as the story goes on. It may make people feel uncomfortable, and I say to them: read another book. If you want some safe, comforting book you can always read a picture book. There are no harmful words and happy colorful illustrations that encourage positivity and hope.

Back to Hip-hop, with many artists having their work criticized and even censored via 'clean' versions, one artist comes to mind with how many people he pissed off and ran up the wall.

I guess when a white guy says the things blacks have been saying for around two decades, then it's a problem. Another artist comes to mind, or more or less the outro of the track I'm referring to (3:42). You can't get angry when you shelter your kids from books with the word nigger and other obscenities and they suddenly stumble upon an Eminem or Wu-Tang album and learn about things they never heard about. Is it the artist's fault for talking about killing people and beating their girlfriends or is it it the other way around?

Hmm.

I still can't wrap my head around the actions of some people. Today, we have social justice warriors attacking video games and other media for depicting women in a sexualized manner, like that hasn't been done before.

The worst part is, it's working. Too many companies and developers are buckling down and pandering to their demands and when games outside the west are translated, they censor them. Do these women know the difference between reality and fiction? I don't think seeing Ayane from Dead or Alive is going to make me think of women as objects, when she's been getting the dicks of pre-teens and teens hard for almost twenty years. You're only now complaining about it?

On that note, the oh-so controversial topic of lolicon is in the same circle. It's simply fiction. Some people are attracted to little girls. The countless doujins and erotica with lolicon is simply a reflection of that topic. If you don't like it, simply tab out or if you have a doujin in hand, put it away. Don't burn or destroy it. Just put it away. They even put the R18 on the front page for a reason. Not everything with a colorful character is for kids, bringing me to my next point: censoring of anime and manga. Not the same as banning books, but why not jump into this one, too.

In Japan, standards are different from North America. It's why you'll see manga and anime touch upon death or violence commonly. Those two elements are a natural occurrence in real life. As of today, standards and practices are different but back in the 70-90's, you had a lot of violent matter in anime, blood, gore, you name it. When these works came to the western audience, they were toned down with the notion that being animated means it's for kids.

Well, to an extent that IS true. Most shows like Dragon Ball and the second half of the manga adapted as Dragon Ball Z had a lot of violence being a shonen series, targeted towards boys but in general targeted towards children.

Image courtesy of Chris Psaros

The image there shows Muten Roshi about to grab Bulma's chest. Notice the top left corner? That's the equivalent of shows like Batman: The Animated Series, Spider-Man and so on. Those shows barely touch upon the level of blood and violence that both adaptions of the Dragon Ball manga show regularly. Even then, the adaption was toned down compared to the manga. But in Japan, that's considered normal for children.

Yet in America, uncut series will warrant a TV-PG rating. When Cartoon Network showed Dragon Ball Z uncut back in 2005, the PG rating was consistent, even with some of the more brutal scenes. It helped that it was on cable and aired around 10:30, so maybe they could get away with that rating. I remember Princess Mononoke aired uncut on Toonami with a TV-14 rating and no one complained. Just throwing that out there as well.

Wouldn't the standards for Japan not be akin to America? Why not simply have the increased rating in the states? Sure, you may not get a big audience as you'd like, but you wouldn't have to put with dancing around death with bullshit analogies or wasting time painting blood over with a scene that requires the characters to be bloody. And on that same note, Kids WB! had Batman for one season and there was blood on the character's mouths when the scene called for it, yet Dragon Ball Z, Sailor Moon and a personal example, One Piece couldn't get that same privilege. Hell, some old cartoons that are classics with kids have cigar smoking and guns. Why aren't those edited?

I'm getting off-topic here, but my point stands with the original message: If it makes you feel uncomfortable, move away from it. If you feel you have to shield people from subject matter that makes YOU feel uncomfortable, it says more about you than the material in question. Censorship, no matter what form or what media it targets stifles creativity and progress. Those children you seek to protect grow up eventually.

Eventually, they'll have to get a taste of reality.

I don't celebrate Black History Month.

It's February. Know what that means? Next to my second most hated holiday(And I may write a piece on that one), it's also Black History Month. Let me just say for the record, I do not hate Black History, nor do I look down on those who celebrate or acknowledge it. It's just the fact that for a whole month, we suddenly have to stop and take a look at what accomplishments black Americans have made, when we can do that all year round. And I do just that.

Black History Month to me, is just a ploy to remind America that it was and still is an incredibly racist and shitty country to be in. Did you know that Marcus Garvey Carver made over 300 inventions from peanuts? He didn't make peanut butter, though. Shocker. Did you know that you always hear the same old tales of black triumph from commercials featuring hip-hop artists and celebrities whose videos, music and the like shit on the legacy of those who fought and got beaten so they could have the right to shower phat ass hoes with money and champagne? I already know I'm gonna see at least five of these commercials with a normal black personnel, if not an athlete or an artist talking about Rosa Parks for the umpteenth time. So, here's some lesser known stubs and trivia you'll never hear on these adverts.

-Did you know that Jesse Owens, when he received the gold medal in the Berlin Regime, was acknowledged by Adolf Hitler when he was alive? Some say he shook hands with the infamous dictator, others say he received a nice wooden cabinet. It is confirmed that Germany treated him far better than America. And the recent movie about Owens will likely make it so that Hitler snubs him completely. Can't have Mein Fuhrer in a good light, now can we?

Hey, it was more than FDR did.

-Richard Wright. He was an author who would write a number of books, one notable title being Black Boy. He loved to read, but had a grandmother who was pussywhipped by the belief in God who saw said pieces of literature he loved, and possibly the thought of reading above a kindergarten level to be the Devil's work. He pretty much had an adventure and a half during his youth, and became a well-known author, traveling to parts of Europe and Africa during his adult years. He also mentioned hunger as an analogy for wanting more out of life. And we got a lot of hungry people out there (Myself included). Basically he decided to be his own man, do his own thing, became successful and pissed off a bunch of his fellow Negro kin. He died in 1960.

-Jack Johnson. He would become a professional boxer, and the first black professional heavyweight boxer.  He was a big black man who could knock a white man into a coma and loved alcohol and white women. And no one could say or do a thing to him. Even more proof, when he defeated James J. Jeffries, white people all over America came rioted and attacked black folks for celebrating Jack's triumph, when they could have just captured and lynched him on the spot. You sure showed them, white America. He was also the reason the Mann Act came into effect, after marrying and having sex with his white wife when he beat the shit out of Jeffries that same night. Take notes, Mayweather.

-Greenwood, Tulsa. Prior to 1921, Greenwood was a utopia for black America. You could find grocers, hospitals, a fire department, a police force and just about everything else in a typical American town. And all of it was black-owned and operated! It even got the name "Black Wall Street". Basically, they got their shit together and worked for a good community, in the prime of lynchings and KKK mobs. What do we have now that can even compare to that? Empire? The NAACP? Nigga please. The damage in the Tulsa race riot was so immense, we never saw another like it. I'm serious. Three billion dollars in synthetic hair, yet none of it comes back to us.

-Another relation to blacks outside America, in WWII, most of the black soldiers were treated very well, and respected. Almost like humans. Who knew? One instance in Britain had English soldiers tell off the American soldiers for treating their own allies like dogs. Your shame is documented all over the world, America. Do something about it.

-Someone, somewhere, will say or do something racist in protest to Black History Month. If it's not a politician, a right-wing idiot or some random white person, it's usually all of the above. To me, they may as well be. Let's see who makes the front page this month.

-As someone who considers video games to be a detrimental part of his life, I've been playing Dynasty Warriors and similar games in its style. Did you know that the Civil Rights Movement has enough activists to make a roster bigger than the current Dynasty Warriors game? Koei-Tecmo, if you're looking to expand into other historical pieces for ideas, try American (Black) History. There's more drama, despair and honor (maybe not so much of that) to be found than in every soap opera and major motion picture ever released. You could even do a hypothetical route where MLK lives and pursues his attempted killer with a siege spear, have Emmett Till's (whoops) fictional brother avenge his death, or have the Bloods and Crips band together and make the Purple Bandana Rebellion. Maybe even have Cash Money Records be nothing more than a figment of one's imagination.

-Hip-Hop is forty years old! And it only stayed great for twenty.

But look at me go on. The point I'm making is, Black History Month doesn't decide when I celebrate black history. I do. I always remember Jack Johnson and Malcolm X, along with Rosa Parks and Sojourner Truth. And if I catch wind of anyone else who paved the way for me to make a tasteless joke relating a video game series to the struggles of Civil Rights Leaders and similar people (Give it a millennia, it'll be okay then), I'll look them up and acknowledge them there and then, instead of waiting until February to be told I'm allowed to acknowledge them. Happy New Year to you lot.

P.S: Robert Smalls was a bad motherfucker.

Things won't change.

In the wake of the Charleston Shooting, the confederate flag flying over the Statehouse Grounds along with the flag itself flying over our heads seems to be the hot topic of today. But it makes you wonder, will this really change anything?

Now, I'm all for removing the flag. I see it as a hopeless piece of memorabilia by a group of people bitter over losing a war, and as a symbol of what my ancestors endured and would have continued to endure had the South had its way. But as history has shown us, it won't really change a thing. People won't change. Blacks will still be hated in America, and the 'rebels' will just have a reason to actively attack them. Hell, it's in their name, rebels. What rebel is just gonna take losing their national emblem's right to fly freely in the skies? They'll keep wearing it, and they'll keep holding their outdated values.

The flag has a lot of different meanings to everyone. To the one group that's truly affected by this, they see it as a symbol of hate, ignorance and human degeneracy. The flag's meaning is harmless - to the ones that it was intended for. We were never a factor in your fight. You kept us around for the one thing we were brought to this country for - expendable labor. Someone to do your job for you. Pick that cotton, work them fields, shoot that traitor, be my shield. This is from my perspective, as a black male in this country. Your perspective is different, one that isn't the result of living in the black experience. And you'll never know that experience. That's more dangerous than anything else: The lack of knowledge. If something hurts someone, shouldn't said matter be addressed? Why are you ignoring it? La-la-la'ing the problem won't make it go away. Sweeping it under the rug will only make a bigger mess. You may just think this is someone ranting and raving, and it is. It's just that - a personal opinion and viewpoint on this whole matter.

Racism still exists and will exist for all eternity. Dylan's actions were the result of racism, not mental illness. He knew full well what he was doing and seeing those braindead mouthbreathers on the media say otherwise proves my point: Not knowing about an issue or blatantly choosing not to know about a matter is dangerous and only makes way for more atrocities to happen. What's to say someone else won't try the same thing again?

Let's flip the pages. Say a black man came in a church and opened fire on a group of white people, killing them. And let's say he had a mental disorder. Would they address that? Or would they go on and say the attack was racially motivated? Knowing them, they'd try to say that we need more gun control or we need to take care of the crime rates in America, avoiding the issue at hand.

Even worse: It won't be about the individual in question, it'll be about the entire group glorifying a culture of ignorance and violence. The rappers and inner city youth are to blame, AKA black people.

As I stated earlier. Address the real problem: The attack at the Charleston South Carolina Church was racially motivated, explicitly stated by the gunman and that's all there is to it. Taking down that flag won't change a thing.

Want to change a thing? Simply address the real issues at hand.

Nothing more, nothing less.