CORSET is the go-to magazine for all things sexuality. We embrace human curiosity. We honor sensuality. We celebrate sex. And we want you to join our movement.

So with that, I packed up my proverbial bags and headed on over to sign my professional life away. I have been working with a photographer for the past several month on creating what I hope to become a lesson in observation of erotic nudes of Black women.

We shot some images, I wrote an article and actually used spell check and read that bitch for errors twice and BAM!!

[imagebrowser id=4]I have been looking at porn since the age of nine and fighting the stupid ass conservative opinions of the Blacks I was unfortunate enough to have been raised around since I could form words (true story!).

We’ve never been on the same page, as I, a sexually enthusiastic and curious sort wouldn’t be made to feel ashamed of something that bought me and other people so much pleasure. They were talking, but I wasn’t paying that shit NO attention no matter how bad they felt at the fact that I wouldn’t feel bad about myself.

Physical interactions are like gifts to me, just think of me as a woman that naturally liked to give ‘feel goods’ to whomever I choose.

Overall, the response to my work has been very positive. I’m receiving emails and Facebook messages from my conservative Christian friends who wish they had the balls to do it. Much of the feed back has been that its about time for black women to enjoy self motivated boldness.

Trills Smith, my photographer always delivers images that are both tasteful and intriguing. I can explain any variation of sexual irony in society or sub-culture details and he gets it whether he’s personally invested in my topic or not.

What’s even more interesting is that we’ve got a decade of age span between us and we’re both growing as students of life through our work as photographer and subject.

His insight, comments, and questions are teaching me about myself, subjectively. And I’m sure he’s leaning a thing or two from the crazy shit that I’ve been throwing at him these last few months. We deliver sex and sensuality but if you only knew what goes on behind the scenes.

But they do say laughter is sexy….so…

Of course it would take a wandering Facebook voyeur who doesn’t know me very well to have the nerve to inquire about the well being of my daughter or any ‘children’ of mine (Ha!) who may see this in the future.

I’m concerned about their concern over my display of sensual thumb sucking and how it may affect the morality and future good social graces of my decedents.

So, how does my daughter feel about her mother’s blatant sexual display……?

She’s proud of me because I am ‘a kick ass sex positive Mom’ and my picture is ‘cool’.

She did blush momentarily. I did too, how audacious, right!?

Obtaining the cover of an international magazine is indeed, cool, but having a daughter who understands why I do what I do is even cooler. Having an adult daughter who is sexually freer and more knowledgeable than I was allowed to be is absolutely priceless.

Grab your copy of the upcoming Corset Magazine: The Oral Issue before it goes on sale July 1 and get a second past or future issue for FREE. Find out what I have to say about Oral sex, bask in the glory of several full color visual photo spreads and thigh clenching articles that will make you re-think the meaning of having a filthy mouth.

The post Kids and Sex: How My Daughter Feels About My Sex Work appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

I was met with the typical response from some commenters that sexual ambiguity is a deal breaker and how can one be sure they shared similar values if the other person is ‘like that’. People are hilarious sometimes, especially when I think of the amount of people who are married to what has recently been identified to me as a ‘beard’.

“Beard is a slang term describing a person who is used, knowingly or unknowingly, as a date, romantic partner (Boyfriend or Girlfriend), or spouse either to conceal infidelity or to conceal one’s sexual orientation.”

Now I don’t mean to be mean or anything, but I do find it peculiar that I am personally aware of waaaay more marriages where one partner is perceived as ‘‘questionable’, than I know of married couples where one spouse openly identified as homosexual, though married to a heterosexual.

I’m not saying that couples have to openly affirm their sexual orientation to society, but its not like people aren’t confused when these relationships are vigorously presented as simply a case of ‘boy meets girl’ when the boy in question has never, ever, ever been interested in girl until he decided to marry —->her.

Dating and marrying a thirty year old virgin doesn’t make a man special. Though some would love to think their un-tampered with unicorn’s lack of interest in mating with men before them, just meant they were waiting for ‘the one’ and he thinks she’s that “one”.

I’m not talking about the sexually conservative, or strict religious followers, I’m just talking about what I consider average peculiar behavior.

Arranged marriages and marriages of convenience are nothing new, but since we’re out here promoting marriage as a willing union and not as a business deal what is to be said about those using marriage as a front to hide their sexual orientation?

Everyone asks questions regarding the sexual orientation of one partner or the other; teachers and other family associates inquire as to the gender identity of the parent and at some point in time everyone begins to wonder what the REAL deal is.

While I have no problem with any couple (gay, straight or mixed) that marries for the sake of wanting to be together to take on life as a team what I do have a problem with are people who feel that it’s okay to front for the sake of saving face.

One partner marries someone whom they know could never love them the way they want but they are still willing to take a fraud of a relationship in order to feel special. One partner may sit idly by while the other partner continues to maintain their REAL romantic relationship with a same sex partner who they call their ‘best friend’. Yes, the bills are paid, the family piles into the car to attend church on Sundays and the portraits do look amazing but is this how you saw your marriage?

Surely this satisfies the requirement for some people’s definition of marriage but pardon me if I want more. Using a person as a front is selfish and cruel; allowing yourself to be used as a front shows desperation. Unfortunately, your willingness to be a tool won’t barter you the love you seek.

I’m not a witch doctor hunting down the mythical DL brothers because that facet of life is merely a half truth at best. But just as much as a man or woman has to be willing to lie and deceive others regarding his/her sexuality he/she must also have a partner who is willing to eat those lies and lick the bowl clean. If the wedding ring is more important than being able to look yourself and your spouse in the eye then the marriage isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

You may say these unions are no one business but their own…I disagree.

I do know White couples, Asian couples and some Middle Eastern couples who are married to a homosexual partner in spite of the variation of sexual orientation. They have chosen to live their lives this way for their own reasons, but what I do see is that they care about each other and their relationship is authentic, as it should be.

With the shortage of Black male dating prospects out here I’m sure there are plenty of women who would be willing to look the other way and forgive past transgressions for a man who was willing to ‘get saved’ and change his body language, social circle and friends in order to give a respectable “go” of the marriage.

But how many of them would marry a plain old bi/gay male who was willing to do the same thing but for change his orientation and sexual identity……not many I bet.

When little potential future homosexual children seek examples of who they will be when they grow up it saddens me to know the amount of people out there who are willing to lie and let lie rather than those willing to accept their authentic selves and each other.

With no space to exist some will feel forced to fit into roles that require them to wear a mask and there will be those heterosexual people right there ready for them when they do.

The post Gay People DO Get Married: The Curious Case of the Beard – When “the Gays” Marry Straight People appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

Uh uh, never mind the economy, or the fact that gay people are unemployed and unable to afford stuff like glitter or whatever else “the gays,” happen to purchase; no, never mind that. Instead, what’s important and on everybody’s mind is that Obama wants to make it legal for gays to marry. Keep in mind that this was just his personal opinion and no legislation has been advanced to suggest this becoming a reality. Nope, all that matters is that gays are gonna be married with the full blessings of Obama; and, straight people (whether married or single) will now have to deal with the hassle of not being able to get out of their driveways because they’re being blocked in by the gay married couple giving each other head in a parked car. Yep, forget the whole equal protection under the law thingy in the U.S. Constitution; shit, that’s an old-ass piece of paper anyway.

I mean, who wants to have gay people tossing salads within 500 feet of a school, right? So yeah, as absurd as it sounds, that’s what marriage equality means in the minds of many. That plus the idea that straight people will now have to contend with the obvious embarassment of being placed in a ompromising position, by a gay person getting down on one knee and offering them a marriage proposal in public. Yeah, straight people often get married for the wrong reasons, who wants to add a straight person being hitched to a gay person and having to act gay to  the list.

Yes, this is what people fear; and, it’s the reason there’s so much talk . And you better believe, as far as the politics of fear goes, as much as most try to deny it, this will have an impact on this years general elections. How significant an impact? I’m not sure. However, I am sure that these fears will be exploited by the many ignoramuses  among us over the next several months. Hell, you see how they’re already trying to play divide and conquer by using the black vote, right? Yep, they’re using the black church to divide the black electorate by making same-sex marriage the latest wedge issue. Smart move especially when you think about how black preachers are bent on not pissing off white Jesus in hopes that he would allow blacks and whites to drink from the same fountain if Negroes are allowed in heaven. Yes, it’s that deep for some of the members of the black clergy and the Sunday Communion Kool Aid drinkers they lead. So much so that I’ve heard that some of them are definitely going to sit this election cycle out. I’ve heard from good source that in one particular Obama For America campaign office, people are talking about walking out on the campaign.

It’s good to know that common sense still lives in the church…

The post Wait, is Barack Obama Gay? Uhm, is He Still Black?!! appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

The language on the ballot that NC citizens voted either ‘FOR’ or ‘AGAINST’ on May 8th, or earlier, stated:

Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

It is important to note that prior to May 8, 2012, thirty states have included “same-sex marriage” bans in their constitutions. Legal scholars note that there are three types of language that these marriage bans maintain, and the rarest (and most broad) are language types such that Ohio used. North Carolina has now adopted such similar language, even though the consequences were proven in Ohio and the people of Ohio worked hard (and are still working) toward better legislation.

I am of the opinion that the amendment was framed this way before and during the vote in order to appeal to the emotions of the religious voters of the South. In fact, the people who thought it was about marriage and gays came out and expressed how much bigotry and privilege they maintained, quietly or not. However, the idea of marriage is less the focus in the language of the newly passed amendment, and the phrase the only domestic legal union is. Why? Because the courts have to interpret exactly what that means. Additionally, the newly passed “marriage amendment” is nearly identical to a tragedy that passed in Ohio, that opened the floodgates to consequences for more than just persons of the same sex/gender seeking marriage. In fact, in both Ohio and North Carolina, same sex marriage is already outlawed without the amendments.

Beyond further marginalizing the LGBTQ community, the marriage amendment has the potential to affect domestic violence victims. In Ohio, defense attorneys argued that unwed heterosexual couples did not meet the criteria for a “union”, however the court may decide to define it, and as such does not qualify for certain charges. Defense attorneys were also successful in overturning domestic violence convictions on this basis, and the courts were unclear on whether or not certain protections could be afforded to victims in the form of restraining orders. Also, the courts ruled inconsistently on these matters across the state, and so victims in different regions were not afforded the same protections. Eventually, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional ban did not affect domestic violence laws; however, it took three years for the circumstances to reach the court and for a decision to be made. During those three years, damage was done.

Even more unfortunate is the language in North Carolina’s newly passed amendment is more vague, and potentially more dangerous, than that belonging to Ohio. While there are some extremely progressive parts of North Carolina, there are also very small, rural communities that may have different understandings of the phrase “legal domestic union” and, much like Ohio, provide unequal protection of the law. This matters. THIS MATTERS. This matters because people in rural communities may not have access to many of the resources in the larger cities, and it Amendment One is an issue of classism in addition to anti-gay, religious bigotry.

Along those same lines, Amendment One has a great potential affect legislation where children of unwed parents are concerned. Custody and visitation laws may be affected with parties who have never had a “legal domestic union” as the courts see fit to interpret. Additionally, insurance benefits provided by either parent therein have the potential to be affected. This is incredibly important because, as of 2010, 72% of Black mothers were unwed. Does this mean that in every instance, the father is absent? Absolutely not. In one way or another, either through the courts or voluntarily, I would suggest that it has been my experience that many fathers are around in some form. I do not have a statistic and I will not speculate on a statistic; I am saying this to say that the passing of this amendment and a courts subsequent decision could limit this involvement, ergo harming children and Black families. Amendment One is harmful because, in addition to the anti-gay, religious bigotry and classism, it has the potential to be racially discriminatory and harmful. It harms single-parent families which, by extension, harms the Black community greatly.

Also, it should be noted that in few counties in North Carolina, unwed heterosexual couples are allowed domestic civil unions; this provides that partners can be on one another’s insurance benefits in addition to other benefits. These include assisting with medical decisions, adoptions, will and trusts, and other financial decisions. However, since marriage between one man and one woman is now the only domestic legal union, many people will be at a disadvantage.

We do not know what will happen. I think that is important to say; however, we do know the things that have the potential to happen. Also, the fact that marriage between one man and one woman is the only form of marriage acceptable in the state of North Carolina (and the other states who have amendments) is illustrative of the fact that the governments are using emotional push-buttons in order to further underlying agendas. Moreover, Constitutional Amendments aren’t like trying on new shoes and deciding that we do not like the fit. It takes time, energy, and resources to ‘undo’ this; there is no easy fix. Once this gets out of hand and negatively affects the citizens of North Carolina, the legislature cannot simply pass a statute to remedy it; a new amendment has to be passed and this will be extremely difficult.

Again, as someone from North Carolina who has been on the ground working for just about a year against the passing of this very scary amendment, I’m torn between sadness, disgust, and rage. While not entirely surprised that the amendment passed, I did think that it would be closer; only seven of North Carolina’s 100 counties voted successfully against it. A few weeks before the election, I got a 21-year-old brother registered to vote because he specifically wanted to vote against the amendment. The day of actual vote, I got into many arguments with many religious Black people who felt as though voting for Amendment One was a testament to their religious convictions. Though I attempted to explain, I was devastated at how unchanged their minds were; and they were mostly in their twenties!

I challenged all of my Facebook friends to give me a reason to vote FOR Amendment One that had nothing to do with religion and I got no responses. However, I went to high school with a guy who is apparently becoming a minister, and very much disagreed with my stance on the amendment. He, as a minister, has a child out of wedlock and maybe might just be a Black Republican (I’m not quite sure of the latter). And so, to appeal to his religious nature, I introduced him to Loving v. Virginia, where a married Black woman and white man were sentenced to a year in prison (suspended for 25 years of probation) for their interracial marriage in 1959 because the court found that:

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.

Our government and constitutions should not be used as a sword, and it should not be used to prevent people from equal protection, rights, or benefits under the law. Our constitution is meant to give freedoms and not take them away. While in a way they’ve already begun, they are definitely coming for women and people of color next. Keep your religious opinions away from my constitution.

The post Amendment One: Wasn’t North Carolina The “Good” Carolina? appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

You might even be so desperate for help that you reach out to a local radio show host like one father did recently for this exact same issue.

In response to an email from a listener concerning his daughter’s interest in girls, DJ Dominic Deiter declared over the air that the father could cure his daughter budding lesbianism by, “You should get one of your friends to screw your daughter straight.”

Once a person includes the words ‘father’, ‘daughter’,  ’your friends’ and ‘rape’ in the same sentence it becomes difficult to make things get worse than what they already are. However, the impact of the statement from this asshole gets even more insulting when you realize this is a broadcast from the ‘Rover’s Morning Glory’ radio program airing on WWMS 100.7 FM radio station.

This station is owned by Clear Channel Communications, also the home of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the rest of those red throat-ed eels. Bain Capital, the company that Mitt Romney began and is still involved with, is the majority owner of Clear Channel so as you can see, the gangs all here and doing what they do which is talk hateful and ignorant shit to the masses unfortunate enough to listen to it.

Of course this didn’t go over well with the folks over at GLAAD who had the following to say.

GLAAD’s Director of News & Field Media Aaron McQuade says “It was appalling and dangerous for this show to tell a father that he should have one of his friends rape his daughter. That’s essentially how Dieter responded to this listener, and this is no laughing matter in a world where people are too often the victims of violence and sexual assault based on their actual or perceived sexual orientation. And Dieter gave this vile advice to everyone who was listening, including educators, parents and children – sending the message that it’s okay to physically or sexually abuse people who are perceived to be gay.”

I’m not sure what it is that’s got my head so fucked up these days. As I sit down to write about certain topics I’m forced to reflect on myself and what it is that I’m trying to say to you people.

Sometimes the journey through what “is” and “is not” okay and what “is” and “is not” fucked up is still blurry in my world. Like when I hear about the sexual assault of a person who identifies as gay or is suspected of being gay, I can barely muster the interest to bat an eyelash because its part of what happens when you ‘choose’ to be gay. Being both gay and a woman makes the chance that a woman will be the victim of sexual assault that much more likely.

Dominic Dieter: Radio DJ, Potential Rapist, & Definitely Misogynist

Sexual assault is more prevalent for some people in society than for others and focusing on how wrong rape is immediately makes one also realize how common sexual assault is. The further you go down on the societal totem pole the more likely you are to be a victim of sexual assault.

The chances increase as you add various factors to the situation such as economics, race and especially sexual orientation, because the ladder makes a question of what one does up for public debate. Being gay or perceived as gay is something that is viewed as wrong by closed minded ignorant people of all nationalities, races and gender.

LGBT people insult everyone else with their presence so not only is the act of raping a gay person a sexual assault, it is also a hate crime because the initial motivation for the sexual assault is to exhibit power over another person because of their gender orientation or perception thereof.

Rape is about power.

The rape of a gay person is about power and erasure. It is a double theft of a person’s right to self determination and privacy.

The value of the victim decreases as the biases increase and I’m sure there were plenty of insecure men and quivering homophobics who agreed that indeed, a gay woman (or any woman for that matter) should have ‘the gay fucked out of her’ because there’s nothing more threatening to the world then a woman who isn’t susceptible or receptive to the almighty penis.

The post Female Sexual Assault + Hate Crime = How Men Turn Lesbians Straight? appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

In all my efforts to ignore the Steve Harvey and Michael Baisden nonsense, I was recently directed to the recent advice of a (yes, male) Pastor Jomo K. Johnson’s upcoming book “Call Tyrone: Why Black Women Should Remain Single Or…”:

On its face, “Call Tyrone” is a call for women to embrace being single since, according to Johnson, the Bible condones being single. Even according to the website, the book seeks to offer an alternative to women unable to find a suitable mate of the same race within the church — which is problematic in my mind because of queer erasure and the unspoken cultural mandate that Black women should only date within the community. Pastor Johnson says in an interview, “I know that African-American women make up such a large number of the African-American church, and they’re not finding how to hold relationships, how to hold husbands.”

Admittedly, I’ve not read the book (and will likely not read it); however, quotes like that make the Pastors purported advice and support seem as though he is urging Black women to remain single because we are the problem. Even as confusing is the idea that the Bible speaks fondly of being single; but in another quote, Pastor Johnson says that Jesus, too, was single and was able to embrace such a life in order to serve others. And while the book’s conclusion is supposed to serve as some sort of “wake-up call” to Black (Christian, heterosexual) men in America who are not handling their business, it is heavily marketed toward the single Black (heterosexual and assumed desperate) woman in the church.

Another thing I found interesting in my research of the book are the titles of the chapters, which are posted proudly on the book’s promo website. They are:

Introduction – Poem of Apology
1. Dear Mama

2. Potent Impotence: The Castration of the Black Man

3. The Traditional Broken Home

4. Designing Women: The Rise of the Professional Independent Sister

5. Exodus Into Egypt: Probation, Parole, or Prison

6. Self Lynching: What Commercial Rap is Doing to Our Children

7. Mandingo – The Appeal of the Successful Black Man to White Women

8. A Woman’s Worth – Understanding Self Value

9. A Call To Singleness

10. Asalam Alaykum? Marrying A Muslim Man

11. Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner: Interracial Relationships in the 21st Century

12. A New Frontier: Missionary Relationships

13. A Change Gonna Come: A Revival of the Black Man

I’m not really sure about you all, but I can almost predict the content of each chapter in this book. They are things that have been spoken in the Black Christian community for ages, and it is no surprise to me that the old school (wrong) teachings of our foremorthers and forefathers would be used as positive advice. More problems with this obviously fall in my understanding of the Bible as a former member of the religious group. While Jesus may have been single (or maybe not, in the name of Mary Magdalene), the book seems to be clear about the place of a woman: her worth may be determined in bearing children, and her direction comes from a man as head of the household. Even more than that, because I know that many people will say that the book is written in parables and far too complex for my wee unbelieving mind, the attitudes of (some, not all) church-goers develop a certain attitude about women, especially older and unwed ones, at a certain point. And so, Black women stay losing.

Additionally, what is with all the outside “experts” rushing in to push all of these stomach turning, problematic remedies on Black women for..whatever they find to be our problem? Does Pastor Jomo seem to be doing something innovative, or playing the same old song in a different key? I’m not any more interested in a male-preacher’s advice to call Tyrone and stay single than I am thinking like a man and acting as Steve Harvey defines a woman. (Note: I hear that this entails instituting a 90-day-rule for sex. Puh.)

The post Pastor Jomo K. Johnson’s “Call Tyrone”: Not-so Helpful Dating Advice From the Black Pulpit? appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

Apparently, people are up in arms about the humanist/atheist/non-theist group African Americans for Humanism reaching out to the Black community through billboards during Black History Month. I don’t know if the outrage is mostly because people know that atheists eat babies and drink blood, or because they know that Black people are supposed to be religious.

As in any marginalized and “othered” community, there’s an entire alphabet soup: the catalogue of words and phrases that may seem synonymous to people not belonging to the group but in fact are only closely related. For people that may be outside of religious sects, these terms include ‘atheist’/'nontheist’, ‘free-thinker’, ‘humanist’, ‘agnostic’, ‘skeptic’, et al. In essence, these groups do not place emphasis on religious or religious deities. That might be the only commonality that people who do not subscribe to religion maintain, regardless of the implication that atheists and the areligious are as much a religious group and labeling as all others. The logic just does not follow.

Walking away from religion was not a difficult decision in my personal life. The difficult aspect in being a Black, woman, nonbeliever is being out to one’s family and friends. I don’t know that it was a very specific moment or event; I know that I was very young and it was very logical to me. I come from a religious family, raised in the South; part of my family is Baptist and part of my family is Catholic. I was raised in a Baptist family, immediately, but have attended mass. My immediate family wasn’t uber religious because my father worked a demanding job and my mother spent a lot of time caring for my siblings and I when she was not in school. We were, however, some form of believers. I wasn’t driven away from religion by a difficult epic quest or my hatred of whatever you deem god to be – that this is an assumption of atheists is unreasonable.

When I was 12 years old or so, I remember learning about world religions in my social studies courses in truly the most American way possible; by this I mean that the teacher, without officially acknowledging that we’re all supposedly Christian in American, there are other religious groups in other countries. I wondered, internally of course, how my religion could condemn other people that it didn’t even know, that were probably amazing people as well, because they did not subscribe to the belief system. I somehow felt ashamed to ask this question aloud in school in front of my friends who had a firm grasp of religion, and even more ashamed to take it home with me and ask my parents because I somehow thought that they would take great offense to my questioning their religious doctrine. I gave it more thought at that age and also found that other religions believed themselves to be absolutely correct and denouncing of the others. In my mind, as a child, the logic followed that if what I had been taught was correct, the others could not be correct; if the others are correct, then mine is not. How do I know that what I have been taught is correct is, in fact, correct?

During my initial questions of religion, I was transitioning from private school to public school. The public school was filled with neighborhood children, who I was friends with but had few classes with because I was in academically gifted courses. I loved social studies courses, but was afraid to ask questions of my teachers because I was being ridiculed at school for acting white and sitting with my friends of different ethnicities and religious affiliations already.

Not long after my initial desire to question and research religion, my mother made the decision to move to a different church where much of my father’s family attended. My siblings and I attended summer camp at the church and I was repulsed by the other children’s maltreatment of a boychild who was effeminate and presumably gay. I asked one of the older kids, a girlchild, why they continued to harass my friend, Ricky. Her response was that it was because he would be going to hell anyway for being a fag. I can still remember the feeling of my heart crumbling, and it was the most horrible thing I had ever heard. I wondered, though, why the elder gay men continued coming to church services free-willingly if it didn’t even make a difference. I wondered the point in being a good person if the end result was fruitless. I wondered if I would go to hell for my sexual orientation, or my association with people who were not heterosexual.

I told my mom I didn’t want to go back to summer camp.

I withdrew from religion early, silently, and my parents did not force me to do anything. My larger family says grace when we have gatherings and celebrate holidays, and my heart raced every time they mentioned church. I was wondering if they were going to challenge why I had not participated in church or with religious activities, and I knew that my very judgmental religious family would have issues with my lack of belief in religion; not only was I coming to terms with unbelief in religion, but I was coming to terms with my disregard for whatever people want to define god to be.

In high school, I met a really good friend who also strayed away from her own religion and decided to subscribe to something different. I took comfort in the fact that I was not the only one transitioning in some way from the religion I was brought into. She dropped out, and we eventually grew apart as I was a year ahead and preparing myself for college and AP testing. My high school sweetheart came from a religious family and constantly took issue with my identifying as someone who didn’t care to believe or label myself one way or another. I crawled back into my closet and kept my thoughts on religion to myself, but I was okay with it.

Toward the end of high school and in the beginning of college, I studied different forms of Buddhism and eastern religions. I found that even in college, people were uncomfortable with the idea of not believing. A tragic event happened in my first year of college, and I found that people respected a turn from religion, if they could understand how one could turn their back on god, or whatever. So selfishly, I hid in my tragedy. I wrote for my school newspaper and another writer wanted to interview me for my perspectives on Buddhism, and what drove me there. I found that I enjoyed Buddhism for sometime, but the organizations that I practiced with faced the same gimmicks and issues that I found in the church. I walked away, not just from the religion but from my school and city.

One last moving experience that I remember that made me comfortable in coming out as a free-thinker at the PWI from which I graduated was an incident that occurred in my African American History class: I very much admired my professor. He might have been, at that point, the most intelligent man I had ever met. We were transitioning to a section on Black free-thought and he was discussing W.E.B. Du Bois; he pointed to a student and said, “are you saved?” The student answered, “of course I am!” He said, “how do you know?” He did this to several other students and no one had an answer to the latter question.

I eventually found friends who didn’t believe as much as I. I eventually got very comfortable with the concept of critiquing religion aloud because my friends, who were not of color, supported my expression. I eventually found twitter, and found even more support that included Black atheists and nonbelievers. I found thinkers that respected my viewpoints, and this has been exceedingly helpful in strengthening my coming out (as an atheist) process.

I say this because I’ve often wondered why it is so difficult for some of us to deviate from the idea that is standard to what people assume the Black experience to be. No doubt, religion (and not simply Christianity) has had a major influence in the progression of Black America. Though history did not begin for Black people at slavery in the US, you cannot discount that religious meeting places played a major role in planning revolts and freedom movements because religion was one of very few freedoms eventually afforded to slaves. However, the deny the influence of Black free-thought in America, especially at the height of Black intellectualism post-slavery, is childish and frivolous.

Many of my great influences are religious and very many more are Black and free-thinking. Why is the Black church so threatened by Black free-thought?

…and does it really matter?

The post African Americans for Humanism: Who’s Afraid of the Big, Black Atheist? appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

Nope, never that; instead, I’m just wondering how the already minimal power of the president will be usurped by the King of the United States. Oh, you haven’t heard?

There’s a new King, and yes, he does live in the United States. More importantly, or I should say most importantly, he is a Black man. Oh, and would you believe it? He’s not even the King of Pop, the King of R&B, or even the Blues. Not sure why he’s a King, but he is and we must embrace him.

And did they really carry this Negro around on their shoulders like Strage from the movie Boomerang? Didn’t this fool just settle a civil suit for $15 million over some alleged gay pedophile shit? Oh you thought we forgot about the extra-smedium muscle shit pics?

I’m all for forgiveness and all that, but this shit right here… No disrespect to my friends down in Atlanta, but y’all Negroes have gone down hill since they took away Freaknik, and y’all are obviously bored as fuck. . But hey, maybe unlike Obama, King Eddie Long will bring that awesomely awesome Negro festival back. Hell, somebody has to clean the royal penis, right? I just hope the congrgation at New Birth doesn’t wind up in Africa all dead after some grape-Kool Aid-drinking mass suicide shit. Because at this point, this ain’t church, this is a damn cult of foolishness and fuckery.

It ain’t gonna be funny when dude starts wearing a sparkling lace-front and starts calling himself Jesus.

The post Bishop Eddie Long Anointed King, and the Church Say… Negro Please!! appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

A poem I wrote to highlight the difference between Jesus and false religion. In the scriptures Jesus received the most opposition from the most religious people of his day. At it’s core Jesus’ gospel and the good news of the Cross is in pure opposition to self-righteousness/self-justification. Religion is man centered, Jesus is God-centered. This poem highlights my journey to discover this truth. Religion either ends in pride or despair. Pride because you make a list and can do it and act better than everyone, or despair because you can’t do your own list of rules and feel “not good enough” for God. With Jesus though you have humble confident joy because He represents you, you don’t represent yourself and His sacrifice is perfect putting us in perfect standing with God!

So check out the following video and tell me: can it be possible to love Jesus and hate religion at the same time? Personally, it sounds kind of contradictory to me, and presents itself to be quite the non-secular paradox. I mean let’s face it: there would be no Christianity without Jesus, no? Of course there would be no Christianity without Jesus. Which really makes me question the people who say, “I’m not religious nor do I believe in religion, but I am spiritual.” I mean, what’s the difference? No really? Aren’t they one in the same? I’ono, but wut’chu think about it tho?

You can find Jefferson on Facebook where he carefully clarifies:

If you are using my video to bash “the church” be careful. I was in no way intending to do that. My heart came from trying to highlight and expose legalism and hypocrisy. The Church is Jesus’ bride so be careful how you speak of His wife…. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids.

I truly get what he was attempting to do with the following piece; yes, I really get it.  However, isn’t it a bit hypocritical to think that Jesus can be separated from religion? I could be wrong, but the way I see it, you either accept it all or reject it. After all, there is no such thing as a half-way Christian, believer, or atheist, no? I’d really love to hear your thoughts on this one, folks; yeah, lemme know what’s up, OK? Because from where I’m sitting, Jesus is as man made as religion.

The post Religion: Can You “Hate Religion, But Love Jesus?” appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

Sometimes I want to just speak the way I do naturally about the things I feel about passionately!

And I really feel some way about myself and all things related to my vagina. I love my coochie, it does amazing things for me and others. My vagina and others contributes to your life in ways that you have not often considered.

I often wonder why other people aren’t more concerned with her safety and health, at least concerned enough to want what’s right for her and other vagina?

Sometimes there are no need for fancy ass words and comparisons when I see outlandish shit like this recent article on Aljazeera about the statistics surrounding Cervical Cancer and why the women in certain US states are more likely to die if they are unfortunate enough to develop this disease.

But every year 4,000 American women die from the disease, most of them in the South. For instance, a woman in Mississippi is nearly twice as likely to die from cervical cancer as an average American woman.

The issue is not that states like Mississippi are poorer and therefore have less capital available to provide for such services as cancer screenings.

No, that would be the easy answer. That’s the answer a simple person would come up with, A+B=C, however, things are not as simple as some people need them to be in order to understand the bigger picture.

The seemingly obvious answer is that Mississippi is the poorest state in the US, and therefore must have a lot of residents without health insurance. But when Mississippi is compared to a state like California, which has a similar rate of uninsured people, Mississippi’s death rate from cervical cancer remains extraordinary: 75 per cent higher than that in California.

The issue is not with the population and some dysfunctional underestimation of the severity of cervical cancer, rather the debate is about ideology and some babbling bullshit that has nothing to do with the realities of disease and medicine.

Cervical cancer is a hotly-debated political topic in the United States right now – a debate fuelled largely by Republican presidential contenders. The cancer is caused by strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV), which is sexually transmitted. As a result, discourse on cervical cancer centres around whether or not newly available vaccines to prevent the disease encourage promiscuity.

So why does Mississippi have a 75% higher death rate for cervical cancer then a place just as big and just as wide?

I’m sure the people in Mississippi would love to know. Well the answer is quite simple…

Mississippi politicians believe that unborn and not yet conceived babies have a right to life so in order to protect these babies (that have not yet been conceived or born) the state refuses to provide funding to Planned Parenthood through the Title X program because Planned Parenthood supports a women’s right to terminate a pregnancy, among other service they provide to the uninsured community.

Title X DOES NOT provide funds to Planned Parenthood FOR termination of pregnancy but Pro-Life Advi-holes still somehow confuse you into thinking that Planned Parenthood=Abortion. And it doesn’t, but even if it did. So the fuck what?

Title X is a Federal Program that grants money to states which in turn disperse the money to counties in order for them to provide medical services to those that do not have health insurance.

Some states allow Planned Parenthood to provide the majority of health services to the uninsured and funds them sufficiently which enables the facility to charge reasonable fees for treatment costs such as cancer screening.

Planned Parenthood is also clean, efficient, compassionate and easily accessible to the low income and excluded demographic (read: inner city/poor and/or immigrant population). I don’t even need to get into the validity of having respectable, responsible, and clean facilities; many a state agency could take a que from the quality of service of Planned Parenthood.

What makes Mississippi fail is their decision to keep their Title X money within the state offices and burn it up within the Department of Health and Human Services. California grants their money to the private non-profit Planned Parenthood.

Because of this difference in the allocation of funds California cancer patients have a chance at survival; Mississippi cancer patients not so much.

In Mississippi, a woman you love may be allowed to die because her health care is treated like an administrative nuance.

When you live in a state that runs public clinics that are not accessible and where the staff are ignorant of their own practice policies you will catch cancer or any other reproductive disease and you will more than likely die.

You will die because the decision on whether or not you can or cannot have the medicine that will save your life (before or after your life is in jeopardy) is being made by people that disrespect the vagina for stupid reasons that you silently consent to.

You or a woman you love may die of cervical cancer whether she fucked or not.

The argument is that the vaccine may save your life or the life of a woman you love but may also somehow allow you or her to feel free/able/brave/confident (what’s the word I’m looking for?) enough to one day go out and have sex. The vaccine may cause fucking….you can’t have it because you might have sex. I wonder how that works if you are married? Or not religious?

I wonder why more people aren’t concerned by these phantom moral police that jeopardize the survival of the vagina. Religious fear of the potential future fuck of some random woman is not a good enough reason ONE SINGLE WOMAN TO DIE.

On the other hand, Planned Parenthood’s primary focus is women’s health care. In fact, it is the US’ largest provider of women’s healthcare. It provides birth control, emergency contraception, pregnancy testing, sexually-transmitted infection treatment, breast exams and cervical cancer screening. One in five American women use Planned Parenthood at some point during their lifetime.

Planned Parenthood is the sole provider of care and services to nearly 17 million uninsured women in the United States. 

In February 2011, the US House of Representatives successfully passed a bill introduced by Congressman Mike Pence (R-Indiana) to completely eliminate Title X – and offered nothing in its place. Early next year, when the president releases his proposed budget for 2013, the same is expected to happen again – except that this time, in this campaign season of cost-cutting one-upmanship, the Senate might go along and really end the programme.

People have allowed the ideology of the Right to Life advocates to strangle Planned Parenthood’s existence into near extinction and with that the lives of many women will be lost. I hope not to be one of them.

Why this isn’t an issue for you I do not know. Maybe you don’t like pussy or you hate your Mother for shitting you out. I don’t know.

But if so, FUCK YOU then!

I don’t need an audience to scream and I don’t need back up to know when I’m right and shit is wrong. And that shit is wrong.

I’m not the only woman out here with a vagina.

My daughter has one.

Your Mamma has one.

And I’ll bet my last Newport cigarette on the fact that your Grandmother had one too.

So why don’t you find it counter productive that ideology pretends to be Pro-Life for imaginary unborn babies yet they are willing to jeopardize the women that give babies the lives in which they hold so precious?

Riddle me that, Batman?

The post You’re Pro-Life But Not When It Comes to Women?! appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.