Clothing culture appropriation as a costume for Halloween

Indigenous, First Nation or Native American powpow clothing is not a Halloween costume.

The clothing or regalia worn during a powpow shouldn’t be misappropriated as a costume that’s worn during Halloween:

Also, don’t dress as a victim or evacuee of a war like World War 2:

Not cool.

It’s very morally disrespectful to dress for your Halloween costume as a child victim or as a child evacuee of the Holocaust that was done during WW2.

The historic clothing can be used for a respectful situation like a theatrical play or movie that is about the children who were killed or who were luckily evacuated during the Holocaust.

Or think of it like this:

Inappropriate situation: Wearing the clothing as a costume for your personal entertainment.

Appropriate situation: Actors & Actresses wearing the historic clothing to tell a story about the war that happened.

Masuma Khan: She’s wrong about White Fragility

Masuma Khan is now infamous to me for being racist toward her White student peers at Dalhousie University.

From the Globe and Mail:

A student at Dalhousie University is facing disciplinary action for a Facebook post she wrote about Canada 150 celebrations, after another student complained that her post discriminated against white people on the basis of skin colour and ancestry.

Masuma Khan, a vice-president of the Dalhousie Student Union, wrote the post on June 30, in response to another post by the Nova Scotia Young Progressive Conservatives (NSYPC). The NSYPC message criticized a motion by the student union not to participate in Canada 150 celebrations on July 1 and to label such events “an act of colonialism.”

From Vice Canada:

Khan said terms like white fragility are regularly used in academia, including in classes that she’s taken at Dalhousie. As for the reverse racism allegation, Khan said she’s tired of having to explain why the concept isn’t valid. 

“The people at the top don’t look like me and they have never experienced anything like what I’ve experienced. They will never know what that feels like,” said Khan. “No one who looks like me will have the power to oppress folks with privilege. It’s me who’s not getting the job because my name is different, it’s me who won’t be able to get that mortgage because people don’t want me in their community, it’s me who has to go through extra security checks at the airport, and gets called a terrorist when I walk down the street.”

From the CBC:

I will never accept that reverse racism isn’t real and can’t be done.

Masuma Khan is righteously certain that only she and others with brown skin will get racism targeted at them in Canada.

Academics, like Peggy McIntosh & Robin DiAngelo, also created the concepts of White Privilege and White Fragility.

The current spirit of the age in U.S. & Canadian universities is to state that White Privilege and White Fragility is a fact and not a biased ideology.

Beliefs or ideologies are especially biased. Even more so when the belief is about which race of people are getting the best of everything because they have Privilege and Fragility. People start an ethnic conflict or war because of who is labelled as the cause of a country’s social problems.

I don’t take truth from any academic research papers and essays on White Privilege and White Fragility simply because these two concepts are the same as early 20th century racist consensus on Black Africans.

Once upon a time, there was a popular opinion held by professors that Black Africans had a brain shape that was smaller in size, which meant intelligence, when compared to White European brain shape. Skull capacity was equated with intelligence. This 19th & early 20th century racist opinion came from the academic preoccupation with cranial morphology.

There were a bunch of in vogue racist academic opinions in the early 20th century about Black Africans. Now, in the 21st century, it’s White Privilege and White Fragility that are the racist topics that university professors, students, and Ph.d. candidates view as fact.

I know that racism is done by any human being simply because racism is done by people being exclusive and territorial in order to ensure that the land, resources and the culture suit their preferences. Racism is done by anyone, anytime, anywhere.

Racism is also done as actions of retribution because of history, the memories we keep of it, and because of our stories of which race of people had injusticed which other race of people.

What angers me is that currently in the countries of North America — Canada & the U.S. — the academic professions drivel that racism is only done by people who are White or who are European descendants. 

Meanwhile people who are Indigenous, Black or African American, or those who have brown skin can never be racist, nor speak racist slurs, nor do racist behaviour toward people who are descendants of Europeans.

Guess what? I had an experience of racism directed at me while I was in a parking lot in downtown Edmonton.

I won’t forget the racism that was yelled at me by an Indigenous Canadian man who was taking a walk.

The guy was a stranger. But he took the time and effort to yell his racism at me.

The whole story goes as this:

I was in the parking lot that’s behind the Allin Clinic in downtown Edmonton, Alberta, and I was trying to pay for parking my car.

I was approached and asked for coined money (or change) by an Indigenous lady.

I said ‘No’ because 1) I actually had no coins, and 2) I don’t give money when asked in the parking lot and on any street in downtown Edmonton.

Across the parking lot, and on the sidewalk, an Indigenous man then yelled at me, saying, “This is her land, you stole this land from herYou don’t give her any money, but you stole this land from her.”

That man targeted me for my perceived race (European descent), and then yelled his racism at me because of my perceived ethnicity.

So racism is done by anyone from any ethnicity within a multi-ethnic country like Canada.

Masuma Khan is so damn sure that only she with her Afghan ethnicity and brown skin will experience racism on a street in Canada or in social media.

I will sit with her and dead-pan to her that people in Canada who are seen as White or who are descendants of Europeans can experience racism directed at them and do experience racism directed at them. I for sure did.

I will also not accept the garbage from Masuma Khan that my experience of racism yelled at me from an Indigenous Canadian man cannot be racism nor reverse racism.

I won’t accept that this racism directed at me was an exception, a rarity, or an anomaly, and couldn’t be called racism. It can’t be called racism because it doesn’t fit the 21st century narrative of what racism in North America should be by university professors, by social justice protesters, and by people like Masuma Khan.

I wouldn’t have been targeted by this Indigenous Canadian guy if I wasn’t looking like I was White & European descended.

Quentin Tarantino and other men remained complicit while Harvey Weinstein sexually harrassed women

Quentin Tarantino knew since 1995 that Harvey Weinstein was sexually harassing and raping women.

I used to like this filmmaker for movies like Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds, but now I don’t.

Quentin Tarantino choosing to remain silent & complicit about Harvey Weinstein’s choices to sexually harrass and rape has changed my appreciation of his movies to disappointment with Tarantino as a man.

I can’t like a guy’s work or movies when he has chosen to keep quiet and complicit about another guy sexually harassing and raping women.

Men being quiet about other men’s behaviour of harrassment and rape is a bad thing.

Being complicit and choosing to work with an abuser for decades is just as bad as that abuser’s behaviour of harrassment and rape.

With all this said, there is one other guy besides Quentin Tarantino who I don’t like because of his work with Harvey Weinstein while Weinstein was paying women to keep quiet about his sexually abusive behaviour: I don’t like Woody Allen.

I don’t like his own weak condolences shown in his sympathetic statement about Harvey Weinstein:

From the BBC:

Even when he clarifies, Woody Allen still seems sympathetic to Harvey Weinstein because he worries that there will be a witch hunt of his peers.

This worry comes from Mr. Allen because he was involved in a scandal of inappropriate sex. 

In the early 1990s, the filmmaker had sex with one of his girlfriend’s (Mia Farrow’s) two adopted daughters, Soon Yi-Previn, and he overall had his affair with this girl. That was gross.

But he also did something else: The second adopted daughter, Dylan Farrow, had stated (in her letter in the New York Times) that Woody Allen was sexually abusive of her.

From the New York Times:

In 1993, accusations that Woody Allen had abused his adoptive daughter, Dylan Farrow, filled the headlines, part of a sensational story about the celebrity split between Allen and his girlfriend, Mia Farrow. This is a case that has been written about endlessly, but this is the first time that Dylan Farrow herself has written about it in public.

An Open Letter From Dylan Farrow

What’s your favorite Woody Allen movie? Before you answer, you should know: when I was seven years old, Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother’s electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we’d go to Paris and I’d be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.

For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didn’t like. I didn’t like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him. I didn’t like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didn’t like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didn’t like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldn’t keep the secret anymore.

When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. I also didn’t know the firestorm it would trigger. I didn’t know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me. I didn’t know that he would accuse my mother of planting the abuse in my head and call her a liar for defending me. I didn’t know that I would be made to recount my story over and over again, to doctor after doctor, pushed to see if I’d admit I was lying as part of a legal battle I couldn’t possibly understand. At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldn’t be in trouble if I was lying – that I could take it all back. I couldn’t. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.

After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut – due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the “child victim.” Woody Allen was never convicted of any crime. That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up. I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself. That torment was made worse by Hollywood. All but a precious few (my heroes) turned a blind eye. Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, “who can say what happened,” to pretend that nothing was wrong. Actors praised him at awards shows. Networks put him on TV. Critics put him in magazines. Each time I saw my abuser’s face – on a poster, on a t-shirt, on television – I could only hide my panic until I found a place to be alone and fall apart.

Last week, Woody Allen was nominated for his latest Oscar. But this time, I refuse to fall apart. For so long, Woody Allen’s acceptance silenced me. It felt like a personal rebuke, like the awards and accolades were a way to tell me to shut up and go away. But the survivors of sexual abuse who have reached out to me – to support me and to share their fears of coming forward, of being called a liar, of being told their memories aren’t their memories – have given me a reason to not be silent, if only so others know that they don’t have to be silent either.

Today, I consider myself lucky. I am happily married. I have the support of my amazing brothers and sisters. I have a mother who found within herself a well of fortitude that saved us from the chaos a predator brought into our home.

But others are still scared, vulnerable, and struggling for the courage to tell the truth. The message that Hollywood sends matters for them.

What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?

Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.

So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.

Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?

Why did the University of Florida pay more than $500,000 for security at Richard Spencer’s public talk?

You have got to love paying the bills for security because the First Amendment of Free Speech in the U.S. Constitution is the only reason for this expense. 😅

So the University of Florida — because of being a government funded university — had to host a White Supremacist public speaking event and pay the majority of the bill for security?

This ridiculous amount of money will only make private Universities more attractive 🤔:


Richard Spencer’s University of Florida public talk

Richard Spencer booked a venue at the University Florida to give a public speech on October 19th.

Anti-White Nationalist & Supremacist protesters came to the university to shout down Richard Spencer as he spoke.

Spencer was often interrupted.

He appeared to have few supporters among those who sat in the audience to listen to his public talk.

About 15 white men — dressed in white shirts and khaki pants — raised their hands when he asked who identified with the Alt-right.

The Alt-right is a group of mostly White Men who reject North American politics that are defined as politically correct, and several of them are neo-Nazis, white supremacists and anti-Semites.

The Anti-Richard Spencer protestors mostly shouted at as well as punch the Alt-right guys who walked out of the venue once the public talk was over.

But there was one exceptional Black man who did an extraordinary thing:

Randy Furniss who was wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with swastikas on Thursday, October 19th, was surrounded by a crowd of Antifa protesters who screamed, punched and spat on him before Aaron Courtney gave him a hug.

“I could have hit him, I could have hurt him … but something in me said, ‘You know what? He just needs love.’

Speaking to the New York Daily News early Friday, Aaron Courtney said, “It’s a step in the right direction. One hug can really change the world. It’s really that simple.

Good for you, Aaron Courtney. 👏

Now can other Antifa protestors do the same gesture of a hug instead of being violent toward the white guys who attend Richard Spencer’s public talks?

I see a cycle of violence happening during these protests.

Quentin Tarantino stayed silent about Harvey Weinstein sexual harrassment since the mid 1990s

Since 1995, Quentin Tarantino has known about Harvey Weinstein sexually harassing women. Weinstein had harrassed Mira Sorvino, whom Tarantino dated from 1995 to 1998, which is how Tarantino had first learned about the sexual harassments.

So it seems like a hollow call to arms for Tarantino to call other men in the Hollywood business to do something besides make a statement of apology for being complicit like the statement that Tarantino had just made:

Twitter’s Nazis hate speech filter: This is why Gab is now used by Nazis and by the less Nazis-ish Alt-Right

Gab is the social media haven for Nazis and the Alt Right.

Gab is filled with racism from White Racists, anti-Semitism & Racism from Neo Nazis, and anti-Feminism from angry white guys.

It would be nice if the free speech coming from the White Racists on Gab wasn’t hate speech, but being hatefully racist seems to be the only speech that these angry white guys can communicate.

Free speech must be viewed by the Alt Right on Gab as a license to speak freely as a racist Jerk. 😆

This is why the institution of free speech gets regulated eventually in many countries: People believe that to communicate their ideas freely they have the right to speak hateful racism all the time. 😅

Why can’t someone say something that’s nice with their Free Speech? Or is the point of Free Speech to fume your beliefs, which happens to be hatefully racist? Is Free Speech the right to rant about the race of people who upset you?

Andrew Torba, the Gab CEO, doesn’t like Twitter because it (as an American business) is removing hate speech as those tweets are reported by people using Twitter.

Andrew also doesn’t like the country of residence setting that Twitter offers as a feature:

The two countries of France & Germany — when you have either location as your Twitter account’s address — block the Racist Facist Twitter accounts:

Also from blogger, Kevin Marks: