Message Body:
Back in the days at St. Jago it was fun running. twitter.com/YohanBlake/sta…— Yohan Blake (@YohanBlake) January 31, 2013
—

The other side of incest
Women molesting their sons
BY DONNA HUSSEY-WHYTE All Woman writer [email protected]
Monday, January 28, 2013

PERSONS in a small district in rural St Andrew still recall the story that had tongues wagging for months after it was discovered that a woman they had grown to admire was sleeping with her teenaged son, who some thought had mental issues.
The revelation came to light after the woman became pregnant despite almost totally confining herself to her house, with no male visitors.

1/1
“When people found out, the son was about 19, but everybody realised that she was sleeping with him for years,” a neighbour, Washington, explained. “Is just she and him live and she didn’t allow him to go nowhere. The boy never have no friends at all. In fact, he hardly talked to people. We think him did all crack in him head to how him behave.”
He said those who took keen notice, realised that she treated him the way a woman would treat her husband.
“It looks like she was even jealous over him too, ’cause it’s a youth that was well built and his body looked good,” he said.
He said it was with the pregnancy that people confirmed that the mother was really sleeping with the son.
“We knew then for sure that she was sleeping with her son and it looks like is it help mad the boy,” he said. “But people never really do nothing ’cause they were two big people, plus everybody thought they were mad.”
Child psychologist Dr Ganesh Shetty said mothers who molest their male children fall into three categories: drug addicts, the mentally challenged, and hypersexuals.
“The situations I have seen of that happening, the profile of the mothers are usually drug addicts who are intoxicated, the mentally retarded, or hypersexuals,” he said.
Dr Shetty said a child who has been molested by his mother may experience shame, guilt, depression, have the wrong concept of sexuality, and could even become hyposexual, and may hate women and sex. He said because of the shame involved, the situation may be contained. However, teen boys may be willing participants when the situation does occur.
Psychologist Dr Leahcim Semaj said while the situation does in fact exist, it is less common than that of fathers molesting their daughters.
“It is much more rare,” Dr Semaj said. “The issue about the father and the stepfather situation is a much more common situation. There are more factors that mitigate against the mother-son. But the fact is that it does happen,” he said.
Dr Semaj said, too, that mothers who engage their sons in sexual activities are those with serious psychological problems.
“Because it’s her decision to do that, to engage her son in sexual behaviour. It’s more a deep seated psychological problem that she is manifesting why she is doing that.”
He pointed, too, towards mothers who may not necessarily have sex with their sons, but view them as love objects.
“There are some mothers who won’t necessarily engage their sons in sexual behaviour, but they genuinely believe that no woman will be good enough for their son,” he said. “And they do everything to disrupt, disturb and destroy any kind of relationship that the son would engage in. They almost see him as a love object. So those are the forms that that one tends to take on. But it does happen.”
But, the psychologist said, while it may not be a common occurrence with the mothers, this type of molestation also manifests itself through caregivers, babysitters and helpers of little boys.
“It does happen that there are older women who are babysitting, who take care of little boys and so on. And many boys in Jamaica are introduced to sex by older women,” he explained.
“Now from the standpoint of a boy, people dismiss it as a part of initiation and early socialisation and it does not usually have the same kind of impact on the child as when a male relative betrays a trust. It is more rationalised and accepted so that is one of the reasons why you don’t have much of an outcry, even when it goes beyond that exploration,” he said. “We hear those stories but we don’t treat it for what it is, it’s a form of child abuse. And the boys who experienced it look back at it and see it as ‘boy mi did wicked man’, ‘mi did wild’. And more boys have the opportunity to do that than girls, because you wouldn’t really leave your little girl with the man next door, but you would leave your son with the woman next door, and you don’t know anything about her psychological state,” he said.

Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/magazines/allwoman/The-other-side-of-incest_13457546#ixzz2JI17gw62

Cletus Mushanawani |Manica Post | THE United States of America’s Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Mr David Bruce Wharton received more than he had bargained for when a female demonstrator stripped naked in protest over the illegal sanctions imposed on the country.

Mr Wharton had to make a hasty retreat after Ms Sheila Mutsenhu confronted him in her undergarments during his brief tour of the American Corner at the Turner Memorial Library near the Civic Centre.

The visit was Mr Wharton’s first official visit to Manicaland after he presented his credentials to President Mugabe in November last year and his visit saw him coming face to face with the wrath of angry Zimbabweans who want the illegal sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe lifted immediately.
The Mutare demonstrations come barely 24 hours after villagers in Makoni District forced him to abandon his tour of Sangano Diary Farm on Tuesday. The villagers were also protesting against the illegal sanctions imposed on the country by the US and its Western allies.

In an interview, Ms Mutsenhu said as patriotic Zimbabweans they wanted to send a clear message to all those who imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe that they were hurting ordinary people.

ZANU PF demonstrator, Ms Sheila Mutsenhu (in her undergarments) telling US Ambassador, Mr David Bruce Wharton in no uncertain terms that sanctions against Zimbabwe should be removed forthwith.
“Our beautiful country is reeling under the effects of illegal sanctions imposed by the West, yet we have an Ambassador coming here to tour what they say are developmental projects. How can they say they are developmental projects which employ a few people, yet the majority of Zimbabweans are wallowing in abject poverty due to the effects of sanctions? Poverty is well documented in most communities because of the sanctions, our hospitals have no medication and unemployment is rife everywhere, yet we have an ambassador who is doing nothing to have the sanctions lifted.

“We can not wine and dine with the enemy and the message we are sending to them is that enough is enough, we want the country’s economy to be back on track and this can only be achieved if the illegal sanctions are lifted,” said Ms Mutsenhu.

She said Zimbabwe was prepared to work with positive-minded nations.

“We cannot continue to be slaves in our own land. The US Ambassador’s visit is a bit suspicious because it comes a few months before the elections. He is on a spying mission and this is the time to tell them that we are fully aware of their mission and they will not succeed,” she said.
Another demonstrator, Mr Ernest Tazvida, said he was a victim of companies’ closure in the province.

“I am a family man and I am struggling to make ends meet. My family is surviving on handouts, yet at one time I was gainfully employed.
“You cannot expect me to have a smile when coming face to face with the architects of my misery. I want the best for my family and not the miserable lives we are leading. We will not entertain such visits until sanctions are removed completely. They are spending millions of dollars on trivial issues and not caring about our welfare. Gone are the days of the master-servant relationship,” he said.

In an interview, the embassy’s deputy public affairs officer, Ms Jillian Bonnardeaux, said the demonstrations were an expression of the people’s feelings.

“People should be able to express themselves like what they are doing through these demonstrations. We are here in Manicaland to have a feel of what is happening in the province as well as touring some of the projects being sponsored by the US government. We got the message being expressed by the people that they are looking for jobs and they are blaming that on sanctions.

“There is a difference between the Zimbabwe Transition to Democracy and Economic Recovery Act and targeted sanctions. Our secretary of State, Mrs Hillary Clinton recently said sanctions will only be removed if conditions change, but nothing has changed for the sanctions to be lifted. We will continue assessing the prevailing situation, but we are never happy to see people suffering. The sanctions were not intended to make the people of Zimbabwe suffer, but they are targeted,” she said.

The Ambassador was expected to tour Sakubva District Hospital yesterday.

Is Everything That Happens God’s Will?

Although Job knew that the calamity that had befallen him was not due to sin in his life, he did not understand why God (the only possible source of his suffering based on his understanding of life) had afflicted him. Throughout the book of Job, he continues to ask God, “Why me?” and often does so very angrily.

Does God answer Job’s questions? Not in Job’s lifetime, nor throughout the Old Testament Scriptures. Jesus Christ, however, taught truths that do answer Job’s questions. Kushner has some excellent insight on the record of Job:

To try to understand the book and its answer, let us take note of three statements which everyone in the book, and most of the readers, would like to be able to believe:

A. God is all-powerful and causes everything that happens in the world. Nothing happens without His willing it.
B. God is just and fair, and stands for people getting what they deserve, so that the good prosper and the wicked are punished.
C. Job is a good person.

As long as Job is healthy and wealthy, we can believe all three of those statements at the same time with no difficulty. When Job suffers, when he loses his possessions, his family and his health, we have a problem. We can no longer make sense of all three propositions together. We can now affirm any two only by denying the third.

If God is both just and powerful, then Job must be a sinner who deserves what is happening to him. If Job is good but God causes his suffering anyway, then God is not just. If Job deserved better and God did not send his suffering, then God is not all-powerful. We can see the argument of the Book of Job as an argument over which of the three statements we are prepared to sacrifice, so that we can keep on believing in the other two.

Job’s friends are prepared to stop believing in (C), the assertion that Job is a good person. They want to believe in God as they have been taught to. They want to believe that God is good and that God is in control of things. And the only way they can do that is to convince themselves that Job deserves what is happening to him. [1]

Job, for his part, is unwilling to hold the world together theologically by admitting that he is a villain. He knows a lot of things intellectually, but he knows one thing more deeply. Job is absolutely sure that he is not a bad person. He may not be perfect, but he is not so much worse than others, by any intelligible moral standard, that he should deserve to lose his home, his children, his wealth and health while other people get to keep all those things. And he is not prepared to lie to save God’s reputation.

Job’s solution is to reject proposition (B), the affirmation of God’s goodness. Job is in fact a good man, but God is so powerful that He is not limited by considerations of fairness and justice. [2]

Kushner correctly states that Job considered himself an innocent victim and that Job thought that God afflicts both the righteous and unrighteous. Often Job attested to his own innocence. He said, “I had not denied the words of the Holy One” (Job 6:10b); “Show me where I have been wrong” (Job 6:24); “I am blameless” (Job 9:21); “You [God] know that I am not guilty” (Job 10:7); “Can anyone bring charges against me? If so, I will be silent and die” (Job 13:19); “As surely as God lives, who has denied me justice” (Job 27:2); and “Let God weigh me in honest scales and He will know that I am blameless” (Job 31:6). Job made his case that God does whatever He pleases and afflicts both the innocent and the guilty: “…I say, He destroys both the blameless and the wicked” (Job 9:22).

Under this assumption, Job wished there were a mediator or an umpire that could help him out. “If only there were someone to arbitrate between us, to lay his hand upon us both” (Job 9:33). Of course, no umpire or mediator appears. What does appear is a storm, and God Himself speaking from it (Job 38:1). What did God say to Job in answer to his pleading questions? Well, one thing is clear— God did not give Job any reason for the problems besetting him.

Many theologians and Bible teachers rightly point out that God never gave Job an answer to the question of [why he was suffering]: “…God never answers question one about Job’s predicament…” [3] “With all due respect to the many capable and godly preachers and writers who have taught that the major question as addressed in Job is why do the righteous suffer, we note that if this is the question, it is never answered in the Book of Job.” [4]

Why not? Because the truth about the Devil as the source of human suffering was not revealed in the Old Testament. It was Jesus Christ who first openly revealed the true source of mankind’s suffering.

Interestingly enough, Rabbi Kushner comes to the same conclusion we do, that proposition (A) is the proposition that is in error — “God is all-powerful and causes everything that happens in the world. Nothing happens without His willing it.” We do not, however, agree with his overall understanding of the book of Job, by which he arrives at this conclusion. We arrive at our conclusion from the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament. Nonetheless, we applaud Kushner’s insight about people’s reaction to this conclusion. He states:

There may be a sense of loss at coming to this conclusion. In a way, it was comforting to believe in an all-wise, all-powerful God who guaranteed fair treatment and happy endings, who reassured us that everything happened for a reason, even as life was easier for us when we could believe that our parents were wise enough to know what to do and strong enough to make everything turn out right. But it was comforting the way the religion of Job’s friends was comforting: it worked only as long as we did not take the problems of innocent victims seriously. When we have met Job, when we have been Job, we cannot believe in that sort of God any longer without giving up our own right to feel angry, to feel that we have been treated badly by life.[5]

The New Testament makes it crystal clear that not everything that happens is God’s will. For example, Jesus instructed his disciples to pray that God’s will would be done on earth (Matt. 6:10). If everything that happens is God’s will, such prayer is superfluous. In Romans 1:10, Paul said he prayed for “a prosperous journey in the will of God” to see the believers there. Another meaningless prayer? No. The will of God for an individual, whether revealed in the written Word of God or by direct revelation, generally comes to pass only when that person understands it and, by his own, acts accordingly.

Rather than sit passively by waiting for God’s will to happen, we must make a diligent effort to learn God’s Word and then aggressively obey it. God’s will, for example, is that people do not steal, but rather that they work to earn what they need (Eph. 4:28). Very simple. We just do what He says. But are some people stealing? Yes. If everything that happens were God’s will, then nothing would be sin or disobedience. What a travesty of logic!

Going a step further then, if it is so easy for us humans to disobey God, what about the Devil and his spirit army? Can humans sin by choice while evil spirits cannot? Obviously spirit beings can sin, since sin was the reason the Devil and his hosts were thrown out of God’s presence to begin with. Via Adam’s sin, the Devil was legally given authority over the earth. The Devil did not and does not obey God. The Devil has been sinning for a long time (1 John 3:8). The Devil is a murderer (John 8:44), a liar (John 8:44), and a thief (John 10:10).

The Feminization of Hip-Hop: Is It a Plot To Undermind the Power of Hip-Hop and the Image of the Black Man ??!!
January 30, 2013 | Filed under: Commentary | Posted by: johnhennry

By: John “Hennry” Harris

Hip-Hop used to be one of the most feared entities on the planet that forced America and the World to take notice and LISTEN. You had a suppressed people with a platform to motivate, change, and provide a voice to the voiceless. This machismo was exhibited in the language and fashion of hip-hop and its participants. Fast-forward to 2013, and you have artists rocking skinny jeans and other “suspect” clothing like the outspoken Kanye West and newcomer A$AP Rocky wearing dresses as “fashion”. Even Diddy has been spotted rocking a kilt onstage !! o.O !!!!

Recently, Lord Jamar of revered hip-hop group Brand Nubians spoke of the new trend trying to infiltrate hip-hop.

“First of all, it’s not just jabs at Kanye West,” Jamar explained to SOHH. “It’s anybody promoting the feminization — of the Black man in hip-hop culture. Anybody that I see out there, rocking dresses and all of that type of sh*t, I might shoot a jab at. But Kanye is one of the ones right now that’s representing that movement. He’s one of the first ones that you see in a skirt. Now you got other people following suit and rocking full-out dresses or they’re trying to rock kilts. We’re not Irish. We’re not Europeans. Rocking kilts and all that is just another excuse to introduce that skirt style. You understand what I’m saying? And I’m not with it. This has nothing to do with sexuality, who they choose to be with and all that, I’m not even talking about that. I’m talking specifically about, what is hip-hop? And that’s not hip-hop. Rocking dresses with mean faces, that’s not hip-hop.” (SOHH)

Hip-Hop has taken the lead in setting the trends for youth in this country for some time. During the ‘Golden Age’ of rap, conscious lyrics spurred its listeners to be aware, acquire knowledge, and to live in a responsible manner. Gangsta Rap used to be our CNN reporting on the injustices going in our inner cities not recieving the light of mainstream consciousness. The LEAD that Hip-Hop used to take, has been replaced with marketing plans and stylists more interested in conforming to the status quo. Even if it means wearing a dress.

What man can really be taken seriously wearing a dress ?? I think the trend needs to heed the words of Brand Nubian’s classic song and Slow Down !!