American Mid-term Elections Results: The Real Losers.

There is a popular adage by the Yoruba (in Africa) that says: “Ticks always think they are killing a dog when, in reality, they are actually committing mass suicide.” This is because when the victim of ticks (dog) dies, all the ticks in its body will also die from starvation. This adage aptly describes certain categories of people who did not vote during the American Mid-term elections.

It’s safe to state here that the outcome of November 4th's elections amounts to a repudiation of President's Obama's policies. Yet, it's not because the policies were bad in themselves but because a large number of people refused to exercise their rights to vote. According to the news, there were poor turn-outs of voters in many states. But what are the implications of the Republicans' success at the polls and their control of both houses? Here are some examples:

1). The Affordable Care Act otherwise known as the Obamacare, which provides medical insurance for those with none, is in immediate jeopardy.

2). The proposed immigration reform act aimed at protecting those immigrants who are staying illegally in this country. This especially applies to those young people who (through no fault of theirs) were brought to this country as kids. This reform may soon end up in a trash can inside the congress chambers.

3). And lest I forget. There are those who are termed low-income people and living on “welfare” and food stamps (which the Republicans often call government’s "handouts") and those on subsidized housing benefits (section 8) may have to stay at alert henceforth. These are stuff that the Republicans hate and they may subject them to an urgent “reviews” soon.

Ironically, all of these things are likely to be repudiated because many of those who are benefiting from them refused to go vote! So, it was not President Obama or the Democratic candidates that lost. The real losers were the beneficiaries of the current dispensation.

 

How Rihanna Taught Me To Say No To Nudity by Ifeoluwa Olawole.

I saw an article this evening. The author titled it "On Rihanna Teaching Me To Say No To Modesty Culture." The writer explained—very coherently, I must add— that Rihanna used fashion as a buffer against the meanness of others. Should you get naked to prove a point? I wondered. You should not get naked to get back at bullies. No, you EXCEL. Nothing beats excellence! Getting nude as a result of self-confidence is either a type of sick joke or a paradox or something only Rihanna can claim to be doing.

The writer states that teenagers are held to very high standards when it comes to dressing, especially at school and are expected to be very modest. She says it is wrong to make females feel ashamed because men are turned on by their form of dressing.

You see that is the problem, teenagers do not dress in scandalous outfit because they are feminists or because they are confident in their bodies. It is in fact the exact opposite. Some teenagers use their bodies as objects. Men do not objectify women as much as women themselves do.

We, as women, have believed somehow that our bodies are weapons. That is the same reason that even though a girl is fully aware that her “crush” does NOT like her, she still goes ahead to have sex with him. Because she has spent a substantial amount of time convincing herself that somehow, her body and sexual prowess may be enough reasons for him to change his mind.

And no, not just teenage girls. Adult women also convince themselves that their “cleavages” can help them get a man. Yes, some perverts objectify women but what is worse is women objectifying themselves.

Oh, I'm sorry but if your social media’s name is "My ass is badder than yours." or "sexybooties" or  any of those other crude names I can't readily think of right now, don't go around complaining that men only identify you with your physical attributes and endowments and nothing more. Scream until your face turns blue but that is the perception you and only you give. So, “no nudity” does not mean you are confident or sexy. Unfortunately, it means the opposite.

Honestly, I understand that male entitlement exists. I sometimes hate that people only suggest modesty in women because of men. It's unfortunate that a woman is expected to make choices on what to wear for fear of being violated by a man. I also hate that men have been reduced to dogs who have no self-control whatsoever. It's this type of disgust I feel when women get into marriages and proceed to expect that the poor husband is definitely going to cheat. 

So, I am not suggesting to anyone to dress modestly just to avoid being raped. Dress modestly, because it is your choice to do so. Because you understand that even though, God has blessed you with those beautiful physical attributes, you are MUCH MORE than that. There is more to you than uploading or sending tasteless nude pictures of yourself. Yes, you have been very physically blessed, but there is so much more going on for you than a big behind. Dress tastefully because you are very intelligent and insightful and will refuse to be known for just having a “bangin body”.

The truth is I think that rapists have a sort of mental problem that clothes can't solve. So, for the most part, this is not about them or any other person. It's about you and what you decide to represent. It's about respecting yourself enough to realize that the rest of the world has no business knowing what your breasts look like.

Love,

Ife.