Editors note: This post first appeared in July 2009 and remains one of the most honest pieces we’ve been privileged to host- it also gives great insight into the heart and mind of our new regular contributor, Stephanie Jones who is a phenomenal writer.  Settle in, and take a deep breath…

Tonight at work there was a physical altercation between two men. Each of them easily a foot taller than me, yet it was my job to “redirect” as they like to call it in the social worker realm. What this means is, do my damnedest to get two grown men who are wielding chairs and fists to stop.

When my friend Jeff heard of it, his response was “You signed up for it”.

What I signed up for was to advocate, organize and agitate around social justice issues.

What I signed up for was to make change in the lives of people who are disenfranchised, marginalized, warehoused, and kicked to the curb – literally, sleeping in the curb.

The people I work with are mentally ill, chemically addicted, developmentally delayed, previously incarcerated, and resilient.

I work with people who have been abused, beat up and neglected.

I work with women who sell their vaginas because they’ve been molested so damn many times that they’d rather sell what they have of value than continuously have it taken from them. In order to get through this dehumanizing event repeatedly, they stay high.

Yes, I call them women – you probably call them crack whores.

I work with men who have been taught at age 10 that they have to “take care of their momma” because the man she’s getting high with is beating her up. How does a 10-year-old make money to cover the electric bill? Not legally. Nor does he have time to attend school. His “choices” were taken away from him a long time ago.

Yes, I call him a man, you call him a dope dealer or a pimp.

So, yes, I signed up for this.

What is the responsibility of the rest of you who didn’t sign up for this?

Sable Verity has been writing about NIMBY. “Not In My Back Yard” You know, don’t put that shelter, public housing, work release, recovery center, jail or half-way house in my backyard. So, if you’re so good that it shouldn’t be in your neighborhood, who – in your estimation – is unworthy enough to have it in THEIR backyard? Because it’s going somewhere. There are people who through no fault of their own have diminished chances of ever working, supporting themselves or leading a “normal” life.

Yes, there are others who are assholes, that’s not the topic of this….diatribe.

Yes, I signed up for this fight.

But you’re responsible as well.

You may choose to watch TV, or drink, or shop your ills away.

You may choose to ignore the homeless person, the mentally ill person, you may go to hire someone and find out they’re a felon and turn them away, you may see that prostitute and disparage her, but all these folks are still your responsibility.

You live with them.

“They” are part of our community just like “we” are part of the community.

A new look at the cross section of race and empowerment as it relates to black men has spelled out a new theory that one sociologist dubs “black male privilege.” Host Michel Martin speaks with L’Heureux Lewis, assistant professor of sociology at the City University of New York, for more on why he thinks black male privilege exists.  Listen below for details.

20100304_tmm_04

Wrong Howard.  Lest we forget, we’re talking about an Academy Award nominated actress- hell, even Cuba Gooding made more movies after his Oscar nod (much to our disappointment).

Sidibe is going to appear in a recurring role on Showtime’s upcoming series, The Big C. Sidibe will play a sass-talking student in central character Cathy’s class, a teacher suffering from terminal cancer, hence the title of the series.  Certainly the roles will continue to flood in for her.

It’s tempting to toss out everything Howard Stern says just because he’s Howard Stern, and while he is wrong about Sidibe’s professional prospects in the future, on his other, crass statement, he hit a solid nerve: Gabourey Sidibe is probably too large to call herself healthy.

One doesn’t have to be skinny to be in shape or healthy, but let’s be real- Gabourey is obese, and for the most part Hollywood doesn’t care.  I’m not referring to the industries desire to redefine the appearance of women in film- they have no desire to do that.  What I mean is they don’t care that her weight will, eventually if not already, adversely affect her health.  They look at Sidibe and see dollar signs, nothing more.

I’m sure some will say that it’s totally mean and cruel of me to say that this young woman is fat, that she is obese, that her body is unhealthy.  After all we love Gabby, right?  We love her raw talent, we love her fearlessness in playing Precious Jones and in putting her real self out there for all of us to see.  She is a breath of fresh air.  She is a role model for girls that don’t fit the status quo.

She also needs to do something about her weight.  No, she doesn’t need to turn herself into a stick figure- but she does need to lose weight.

Severely obese persons are approximately 6 times as likely to develop heart disease as those who are normal-weighted. Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States today, and obese persons tend to develop it earlier in life, and it shortens their lives- for African Americans it’s even worse.

Severe obesity damages the body by its mechanical, metabolic and physiological adverse effects on normal bodily function and affect nearly every organ in the body in some way, and produce serious secondary illnesses, which may also be life-threatening.

For her part, Sidibe is aware that she has a weight issue, and confided on Oprah months ago about her struggle to manage her weight from an early age.  Hopefully that means she is continuing to do the work necessary to give herself a healthy quality of life, because let’s face it, she’s just too big for her own health and well-being.

We can’t throw out that detail just because Howard “dumbass” Stern called her “enormous.”  We can’t rationally jump to her defense and say “there is nothing wrong with her body”, when the truth is, there is.

The effects of obesity don’t disappear just because we’re talking about a celebrity- Gabourey is a person, nothing more.

At all three schools, the district plans to pilot a new evaluation system for teachers, in which teachers will be judged in part according to how much their students learn.

Should teachers be evaluated?  I think we need to know if a teacher is not effective in the classroom.  On the other hand, do teachers have all the resources to successfully teach students?

I know a few teachers in Seattle who say “no”.  Severe budget cuts the past ten years have stripped resources, materials and staff to unacceptable lows- yet the demands on teachers to reduce the education gap, get students to pass standardized tests, graduate to the next grade level and leave high school with a diploma continue to rise.

But Seattle Schools says it aims to prepare kids for the future.

And how exactly are they doing that?

School officials have spent years traveling the country looking at successful models of teaching minority students as successfully as their white counterparts, but they rarely ever pick one and stick to it long enough to see whether it really works.

An attempt to open charter schools in Seattle and across the state was met with almost irrational opposition. Voters were so convinced Black and other minority students would be mis-educated or taken advantage of, the battle was over before it was fought.  It didn’t help that Seattle’s failed African American Academy, well, failed.

It was supposed to successfully educate Black children where other schools couldn’t. It didn’t.  It was supposed to be a model for success.  Instead critics used it as an example of why schools targeting specific populations are a waste of tax dollars.

Even though Seattle continues to struggle, there are examples all over the country of successful charter models that do have success getting students past a diploma and into college.  That’s what public education should do- have every student college-bound.  We don’t send our kids to high school so they can leave with a diploma and find a random job making minimum wage.

Chicago’s Urban Prep Academy Charter High School made history when it opened in 2006 as the first all-boys charter school in the nation, determined to take African-American boys from “tough backgrounds” and get them into college.

Four years ago, every member of the freshman class was given a wrist watch and told they had no excuse to be late for class.

Now those students are seniors in Urban Prep’s first graduating class.  They are the true test.  Did a new model of teaching and a new level of rigor get at least some of these kids into college?

Of the 107 students, how many do you think have been accepted to a 4 year college?

None?  Half?  Half would be good, right, I mean, it is their very first graduating class.

But it isn’t half of the class.  It isn’t even two thirds.  It’s all of them.  Yes, all 107 students in the senior class and Urban Prep have been accepted to at least one, four year college.

In four years this college figured out what needed to be done to achieve student success.  Then they figured out how to do it.  Then they did it.

They have a recipe for success, while Seattle Schools can’t even find the kitchen.

In our attempt to bridge the “gender gap,” and explore sexuality in contemporary media, we have solicited assistance from the Twerk Team. This is a group of three young women, out of Atlanta, GA, who have become quite famous through posting their dance videos on YouTube.

For those who don’t know, “twerking” is a particular dance style in which young ladies will move their bodies, in erotic splendor, to the rhythm of bass-intensive rap audio. Generally, the “twerkers” body movements are isolated to the “gluteus maximus” region, creating visual euphoria for witnesses. Twerking, done well, instantly captures the attention of young male onlookers; I can attest to this personally.

If memory serves me correctly, I was trying to find some UGK late last year…and that’s when I found the stumbled across the Twerk Team. My introduction to them was through their video “Let Me See It.” Let’s just say, after that first viewing, I knew I would return.

Anyhow, their publicity seems to be consistently increasing. They seem to have an organized production team behind them; they have a number of videos posted and producing more on a regular basis; they have “imitation groups” copying their brand; and they have recently been mentioned by Ludacris on the George Lopez show. As their popularity has increased it seems they have found themselves embroiled in a battle with Karine Steffans, a.k.a. SuperHead. Steffans allegedly made an off-hand comment about them in an interview, and being keen business opportunist, they produced the following video as a response to the slight:

Now, though there is plenty to discuss within these 3-4 minutes. I would like to focus my commentary on the way in which they use SuperHead’s notoriety as a sexually “loose” woman to degrade her while simultaneously using their sexuality to build a “career” platform as well.

Ms. Twerk: “Suck a dick and write a book? Bitch you scarred for life!”
“…and your little blog sucks. Suck at something you like.”

This rhetoric is, of course, meant to suggest that SuperHead is less than virtuous. She is loose. She is nothing short of a prostitute. But, then, in somewhat contradictory fashion, Ms. Twerk boast of her own sexuality and ends her rap by stating:

Ms. Twerk: “Let me move my PoppaStoppa—-Suck my mic!”

Though I must admit, she moves her PoppaStoppa quite well—I’m left ever so slighty confused. If SuperHead is “less than” for building a life on promiscuity and the subsequent power of her sexuality, then how is Ms. Twerk doing anything different from that? I think they answer this question later.

Lady L: “…on Media Take Out, we killin’ on YouTube.
No Suckin’. No Fuckin’.–all the shit that you been through.”

Betty Butt: “OK, let’s see, how should I start this?
You got your career from suckin’ off Mr. Marcus.
You will suck a carcass to get to Neiman Marcus.”

It seems that I (and others) should understand they are validated in referring to SuperHead as a “bitch” and a “hoe” because she has repeatedly “sold” herself for actual sexual intercourse. Her behavior is unlike that of the TwerkTeam, because, alas, they just DANCE—no suckin’…no fuckin’. Consequently, they are of higher quality than their rival as they only “suggest” sex through dance. Here’s the thing though, ladies, to all the young men traversing the internet at night, there is not much difference. We remain the same PHYSICAL distance from both the TwerkTeam and SuperHead–very far away. But, the PSYCHOLOGICAL distance, or better yet PSYCHO-SEXUAL distance, between you is very MINIMAL.

…and for all the young ladies reading this blog and watching these videos, who are pondering on the THIN LINE between DANCING sexually for money and HAVING SEX for money: IT’S A SLIPPERY SLOPE, LADIES! Just ask all the young strippers who slide down this slope every year…

What is even more disturbing is the nature of the sample they use throughout the audio track. Throughout the track you hear a little girl cussing someone out. The Twerk Team producers have sampled this girl’s voice, and used these profanities and vulgarities to attack SuperHead. The following video is of the young girl used in the track:

So, here we witness a much deeper problem. This is NOT a mass media production; though unfortunately, with today’s technology it is “media that has reached the masses.” It is NOT a fabrication of a production studio. It is NOT an artifical media battle between some young erotic dancers [driven by money and notoriety] and a young woman [driven by money and notoriety] who led a very solacious lifestyle with countless celebrity men.

This is a Little Girl. This is a Little Girl. This is a Litte Girl—who exists in a Real World. She is learning how to cuss, intimidate, and degrade other Little Girls, who most likely, look just like her. Even more disturbing, she is learning these lessons from her caretakers. She is learning how to play a role that many people feel is all she is worth playing anyway. And let’s not be mistaken, she is not as RARE as we would like to think. There are thousand Little Girl’s growing up just like her. It’s not new, either. This Little Girl has existed way before the Twerk Team, NWA, Snoop Doggy Dogg, YouTube, and any form of mass media motherfuckers wanna lay blame. This Little Girl has existed just as long as the Ghetto has existed–and it is going to take “we the people” to correct the problem.

It is our fault. It is not Lil’ Wayne’s fault. It is not 50 Cent’s fault. It is not SuperHead’s fault. It is not the fault of the TwerkTeam. It is OUR FAULT. Take some responsibility. Let’s take care of our daughters.

The effect these images, words, and thoughts have on Children is what really matters. Adults can not afford to be negligent with the responsiblity of mananging, producing, critiquing, and articulating the differences between reality and fiction. We must come to some type of healthy consensus on what this material means and the power it has to influence the minds of our youth. Adults must understand these materials first, and then be careful to manage it accordingly. We can enjoy it as we deem fit. But, we must enjoy it responsibility. We CAN NOT afford for our daughters to actually feel as though this language, aggressive posturing, or sexuality is the true and correct way to live.

Happy Women’s History Month.

There’s barely a single trip I take around town where I don’t see some idiot yappin’ away on a cell phone in one hand, while also trying to operate a multi-ton vehicle with the other.

Don’t you just want to scream at those people?  They risk their lives- and all of ours too- with that reckless, distracting behavior.  They should be spanked.  Yes, spanked.

I used the airwaves to beg our lawmakers in Olympia to take action and empower law enforcement to pull those fools over and write them a fat ticket by making this behavior a primary driving offense.

And now here we are, the last week of the regular legislative session and we’re this close to getting a statewide law with some teeth.

But like most issues taken up in Olympia this year, we’re just as close to getting a law that’s actually rather pathetic.

The Senate, led by Sen. Tracey Eide, a Democrat from Federal Way, tried to improve the law, passing legislation that makes texting and talking on a handheld phone a primary offense.

The law also forbids all 16 and 17 year olds from talking on a cell phone while driving- whether it’s hands free or not.

Now that’s an awesome law.  Can you imagine?  Teenagers unable to talk on their cell phones while driving?

Who could object to this package of safety measures?  Anyone?

His name is Dan Roach, a Republican from Bonney Lake.  Dan’s a pretty cool dude, so, I can’t understand for the life of me why he amended the bill to take out making hands free driving a primary offense.   But he did.

Maybe Dan wants to go down in flames when he’s up for re-election.  Any serious or fatal accident caused by a cell phone holding driver would rest on his shoulders.  Potential opponents would have a field day- so would the media.

So now it’s up to the Senate.  If they adopt the amendment as written by Roach, they will be saying they only maybe sorta maybe care about safety on our roads- and- that’s not really caring.  Is that acceptable to the rest of us?  Ummm, no.

These are your marching orders.  Go online to leg.wa.gov/senate, and tell your senator to pass a cell phone ban that makes driving hands-free a primary offense.

Anything less puts lives at risk.

In 2004 the Kent School District came under fire when the Seattle King County NAACP took issue with the District’s practice to allow security guards to handcuff students. Complaints at the time showed a disproportionate number of Black students were targeted by security guards and handcuffed for what the NAACP determined was mostly minor, non-violent behavior.

Six years later, with District security still using handcuffs on students, the Washington State arm of the ACLU is taking up the issue in a forthcoming report.

Background:

The NAACP filed a multi-million dollar claim for damages in 2004 against the district on behalf of the families of three female students who said the girls’ civil rights were violated and  they were physically “violated and humiliated with undue use of force, handcuffing and physical and mental abuse.”

“Clearly we’re appalled.” said NAACP President Carl Mack in 2004.  When you start handcuffing children and throwing them up against lockers you’ve reached an all-new low with us.”

The claim was denied by the District’s insurance company, and a civil lawsuit was later dismissed.

As then Superintendent Barbara Grohe and Mack battled over the airwaves- the School District refused to call for an all out end to handcuffing students and the practice continued.

The Kent School District insisted at the time the NAACP claim “that excessive force was used is simply untrue,” via spokeswoman Becky Hanks.  “Security officers are taught to address situations as they arise,” she said. “It’s not about race or gender. It’s about the safety of the students.”

Nevertheless, in 2004 the District ordered its own review of the handcuffing policies and practices, to be conducted by a independent panel made up of individuals appointed by the District.

The findings of the panel were clear: stop handcuffing students.

Additionally, the panel told the school board that it appeared the district’s security officers performed as if they were law enforcement instead of acting like security officers keeping students and staff safe.

Under review were more than two dozen security reports of discipline by security officers where handcuffs were used to restrain youths.  The panel, which did not include any administrators or district employees, recommended guards should immediately halt the use of handcuffs and advised schools to call in the police if restraints are needed to address a physical threat.

In total, the panel recommended more than 50 changes to district policy, and called for “a reorientation of the security culture in the Kent School District.”

However, in a letter accompanying the final report, Grohe questioned the recommendations, asking what potentially could happen if security officers were left waiting for police to arrive and raised the hot button issue of Columbine.

Ultimately the School Board disregarded the recommendations by the panel and reaffirmed its use of handcuffs by security guards in an August 2004 Board meeting.

“Our bottom line is to provide a safe, secure learning environment and working environment for all of our students and all of our staff,” board member Sandy Collins said before the unanimous vote in favor of the practice.

Today

According to the Kent School District, prior to the 2008/09 school year, no policy was in place to specifically address use of force issues in general or specific to handcuffs, particularly since the District did not define handcuffing as use of force.  Prior to 2008 security officers followed guidelines from their department manual which outlined acceptable responses to everything from search and seizure to use of force.

From the Kent School District:

In 2008, Kent School District participated in the Washington State Use Of Force Task Force which addressed the need for district policies relative to use of force.  Funded by the state legislature,this effort was coordinated by the Washington State School Directors’ Association (WSSDA) and was under the charge of the state legislature. After the task force completed its work, KSD Board of Directors adopted Policy 3246 and 3246 procedures which are patterned after the WSSDA model policies.

Policy 3246 says, in part:

Physical force is reasonable when needed to prevent or minimize imminent bodily in­jury to self or others. If de-escalation interventions have failed or are inappropriate, reasonable physical force may be used to protect district property.

Mechanical restraint or chemical spray is reasonable only when used by authorized and trained district staff after de-escalation interventions have failed or are inappropriate a) if the student’s behavior poses a threat of imminent bodily injury to self or others or b) to prevent significant property damage.

It goes on to say “physical force, mechanical restraints, chemical spray or less than lethal devices will not be used as a form of discipline or punishment,” one of the original concerns raised by students, families and the NAACP in 2004.

“Kent School District has implemented a school safety services model which focuses on healthy, safe, and nurturing learning environments for students and staff,” said Hanks of the District’s new policy adopted in 2009.  “As part of this, the safety services officers engage in continual training ranging from cultural competency skills to building successful and nurturing learning environment to verbal de-escalation skills and alternatives to the use of force and handcuffing. While handcuffing incidents are very rare, each is scrutinized and reviewed for reasonableness and to determine if any other alternatives could have been used.”

Given the changes the District says it has made, not much is known about the details of the pending ACLU report, or if any of the previous concerns highlighted in 2004 play a role.  Communications Director Doug Honig would only confirm the ACLU of Washington State is in the process of completing a report on the Kent School District’s handcuffing of students- no release date for the report was given; sources say it will be sooner rather than later.

Its mere existence could spell headaches for Kent’s relatively new Superintendent Dr. Edward Vargas, who started the current school year in a two week stand off with striking teachers and frustrated families.

Police have arrested at least 6 people in the attack which happened in front of 3 security guards contracted by the county to observe and report–but not intervene–when situations like this happen.

Since then, we learned the victim has been in past trouble with the law, twice charged with assault against others, including, ironically, a security guard.

Many people condemned her once this information came out; as if her past behavior was just cause for the beat down.

What a terrible standard to set.  No one said she was a saint.  But did she deserve what happened to her because of her past crimes and poor judgment?

No.

Still, some suggested the girl got what she deserved, as if the Metro tunnel situation was some kind of universal retribution for what she did.

Come on people.

Do you ever take office supplies home?  A pad of paper, maybe a box of pens?  Well then, if someone breaks into your house and jacks all your stuff while you’re away, is  that universal retribution?

Of course not.

Just like what happened to the 15-year-old girl in the Metro tunnel is not her fault.

Society is so quick to focus on a person’s mistakes, to rationalize bad behavior, and ultimately, to blame the victim.

Aren’t we taught growing up two wrongs don’t make a right?  Apparently some of you missed that lesson.

More importantly, do we want a criminal justice system that only prosecutes crimes where the victims are perfect angels?  What is a perfect angel, and who gets to create that definition?

Being protected from crime, or seeing justice in the aftermath is a right we should all have.  It should never be contingent on a narrow, irrational criteria based on the victim’s past, present or future.

It’s “justice for all”, not justice for some.

I just read your post http://www.sableverity.com/time-for-another-episode-of/ and would like you to correct two spots.  You write “Just like he has always fought the waterfront tunnel–which he is still fighting, by the way–he will fight light rail on I-90. “

The mayor supports light rail on I-90 and on 520.  It is inaccurate to write that “he will fight light rail on I-90.”

It is also inaccurate to write that the mayor is “still fighting” the waterfront tunnel.  The mayor is fighting to protect Seattle residents from being on the hook for all cost overruns, as both state law and legislative intent currently stands.  He respects the Council’s 9-0 vote to go ahead with the tunnel, though he thinks the tunnel is a bad choice for our city.

Could you please make these two corrections?

Thanks,

Aaron Pickus

Communications Staff

Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn

ORIGINAL POST

Well, another week has gone by; you know what that means… another town hall has been proposed by Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn.

This time Hizzoner wants us all to come together and Kumbaya over lightrail and the 520 bridge.

What’s that you say?  We’ve already handled this regional transit issue?

Newsflash…we haven’t made any decisions if we haven’t made them the “McGinn way.”

McGinn fluffed up his chest feathers in a letter to Microsoft head Steve Balmer, inviting him to join in on a town hall with Microsoft employees.

Nevermind the voters approved putting light rail to the Eastside on I-90.  No, no, the Mayor wants it on 520.

A classic case of the newbie throwing his power where it doesn’t belong.  We have already debated, deconstructed, and most importantly decided the plan for light rail over Lake Washington.

It took ten years of meetings, forums, planning sessions and political wheeling and dealing just to get where we are now.

Now the City Council plans to study “redesign and operational changes”.  I hope that doesn’t really mean they just want to rehash this and not make a decision that moves us closer to actual construction.

Newsflash: sometimes you have to make a decision and stick with it.  Ten years is long enough.

Back to McGinn and his town hall.

It is a given that folks who want light rail on 520 or don’t want it on I-90 will be in the room, and they will be vocal-just like opponents of the tunnel replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct.  The Mayor is counting on it.

Just like he has always fought the waterfront tunnel–which he is still fighting, by the way–he will fight light rail on I-90.  Because he wants it on 520.

Will the mayor get what he wants?  Will City Council get distracted by his rhetoric and push for a do-over? Will Balmer face off with McGinn in prime time?

Join me next week, same batty time, same batty channel, for another episode of …As Seattle City Hall Turns.