A Black Person's Guide to Surviving a Police Stop

 According to The Guardian, police have killed nearly 600 people during traffic stops since 2017. Roughly 10% of these stops involve minor traffic infractions which equates to 110  murders annually for traffic violations. Unfortunately, deadly encounters with law enforcement during traffic stops, including minor infractions, disproportionately affect people of color. While there has been a call to reduce low level traffic stops, 25 people have been killed so far this year as of April 2022 during routine traffic stops. As most of us already know, police traffic stops have very little (if anything at all) to do with public safety. It has been shown to us time and time again that the benefits do not outweigh the deadly outcomes of these police encounters. With these statistics in mind, I am going to use my expertise as a law school graduate, police academy graduate, and minority who has been the subject of a violent police stop to explain how to survive one. The Black community ignores me; and White America constantly oppresses. No one came when my grandmother was murdered by a white EMT worker, so my perseverance is for her.

Evolution of Policing and The Reasonable Suspicion Standard:

Since the 1920s, police have been used for traffic enforcement. However, the role has evolved primarily to stop, detain, and search people they believe to be involved in criminal activity. The traffic stop is now merely the catalyst setting into motion the chain of custody, providing the officer with the required reasonable suspicion standard necessary to affect an investigative detention later on leading to an arrest if lucky-an undignified death at worst. Merriam-Webster defines reasonable suspicion as an objectively justifiable suspicion that is based on specific facts or circumstances and justifies stopping and sometimes searching (as by frisking) a person thought to be involved in criminal activity at the time. The supporting argument for this definition hinges on the false notion that this standard is in fact objective and based on specific information known to the officer at the time. While it sounds good on paper, objectively justifiable on its face is merely a compound adjective meaning action and/or behavior (in this case, suspicion) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in the representation of facts that is also defensible. 

I. Fourth Amendment

Or to put it not so gently into the words of our legal system, as long as a collective group of bigots (i.e., a jury of the bigot's peers) can allege that their bigoted actions are not influenced by personal feelings or emotions in considering and representing facts, it's okay so long as their bigoted position is defensible-moreover, it will be defended snd upheld as the supreme law of the land. The standard is aimed at confirming or dismissing the officer's suspicions which are hardly free of objectivity and defensible irrespective of the officer's erroneous morale.  This is not justice, and I'm pretty sure I state the obvious when I say this is not right. The Fourth Amendment, one of the pillars of criminal law, is supposed to be designed to protect people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. In Terry v. Ohio, the U.S. Supreme Court declared open season on minorities by giving police officers not the power to stop an alleged suspect on the street (innocent until proven guilty right?) under the 4th Amendment, but also the power to frisk them without probable cause to arrest IF they have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed (reasonable), is committing (less reasonable), or is about to commit a crime (completely unreasonable) and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous". What is considered reasonable varies from person to person and while it is reasonable to stop and frisk someone who has committed a crime (probable cause), no police officer is reasonable in violating someone's rights prior to the commission of a crime. In this 1963 landmark case, the officer was said to have reasonable suspicion based on three men pacing in front of a jewelry store and refusing to give the officer their names.

1. If You Are Stopped:

i(a). The Street: If you are stopped on the street outside of a vehicle, always remain calm. On paper, the law appears fair and just in terms of its parameters for allowing police to collect evidence and conduct investigations. Generally, there are three levels/types of police encounters: (i) voluntary/consensual encounters, (ii) investigatory stop, and (iii) an arrest. I preface this information by saying that most            police encounters are not consensual and this should be placated by the fact that this article concerns          surviving a police stop (i.e., encounter). However, we will start with consensual encounters. I repeat,        remain calm. A consensual encounter involves someone being approached by the police and the police        officer initiating a conversation with the individual being approached. Typically, and this is where it gets dicey, the officer will ask to see a form of identification, the same as they would during a "routine" traffic stop. The encounter SHOULD involve the person approached being able to walk away, having the right to decline identifying themselves to the police, and being able to voluntarily communicate to law enforcement that they do not wish to speak to them. It SHOULD NOT involve police barking out commands, any kind of physical commands, the police turning on lights or sirens, restricting a person's  ability to move freely, or the use of physical force. More often than not, this is not the case. The next type of encounter is an investigatory detention, or Terry Stop: The police are allowed to briefly stop someone when officers have reasonable suspicion that a person may be involved in criminal activity. The problem with investigatory detentions is that they give law enforcement the right to preemptively stop someone if they believe a crime has been committed (reasonable), in process (less reasonable), or is about to be committed (completely unreasonable). And lastly, there are arrests. An officer needs probable cause (i.e., a police officer's good faith belief that a crime has been committed and the person being arrested committed the crime) in order to affect an arrest. Good faith, or blind ignorance?

i(b). Violation of Rights on The Street: During a so-called consensual encounter, Remain calm, and since critical thinking has been removed from the American curriculum, scan your surroundings. Scanning gives a person the advantage of fully accessing the totality of their circumstances and actively checking the surrounding area for indications as to whether or not his or her rights are being actively violated. Furthermore, if you are a savvy individual who knows your rights and armed with the proper information to articulate them, while not a safeguard against violation of those rights, it is an excellent tool for prevention. If your life is not in immediate threat of danger and there is 100% certainty of your innocence and the laws applicable to your situation, DO NOT COMPLY. If it is matter of life and death, live to fight another day. However, simply complying with illegitimate acts of violence against members    of the American public legitimizes illegitimate, corrupt power. To quote the honorable Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere". The key things to remember during a consensual encounter is to ask yourself, "Would an average person feel as though they were free to leave the situation"? This is the legal standard by which the law will judge your circumstances. 

Next, are investigatory detentions. As previously stated, you are not free to walk away during an investigatory detention so long as the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person may be involved in a crime. The detention however, must be brief. NOTE THE TIME OF THE STOP, record whenever possible, and have a trusted friend or witness present either by phone or preferably, in-person. Remember, officers only have the right to Terry Frisk for weapons without probable cause and this is a limited search for weapons ONLY. A Terry Frisk is a limited search for weapons. Generally, of the outer clothing, but may also consist of areas within the person's control and which pose a danger to the officer. Here, biases will be challenged, does a person pose a danger because of their location, skin color, clothing, education, or demeanor based on their own unique human experiences?

ii(a) Inside A Vehicle: If you are stopped by the police while inside a vehicle, remain calm. Stop the car in a safe place, preferably one with adjacenet cameras and lots of pedestrian activity. Next, shut off the ignitition, turn on the internal cabin light,row down the window part way, and place your hands on the steering wheel. It is sad that civilians have to come up with a solid gameplan to survive a traffice stop and work hard to ensure that our protectors feel comfortable in order not to take our lives. However, this is the sci-fi around us and I suppose we all have to adjust accordingly if we wish to live. Vehicular stops are unique in that the same oppressive tactics are used, the case law simply changes. In Carroll v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that is legal to search a vehcile without a search warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe that evidence is inside a car or exigent circumstances exist where officer believes vehicle may be removed from the area along with its contents prior to being able to obtain a search warrant.

II. Fifth Amendment:

The Fifth Amendment protects people against double jeopardy, being compelled to bear witness against themselves, or depriving a person against deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. It protects against other things as well, but for purposes of this article, I'm only exploring its most applicable functions. In 2004, nineteen years after Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, that laws require citizens to disclose their identities to police officers and that the person must comply when the police officer has reasonable suspicion of a crime that is about to be committed or has been committed or the citizen will be charged with obstruction of justice. Once again, given the amount of people being wrongfully profiled and murdered by police, it is past time that America revisits what is considered as reasonable. Chambers v. Florida made a feeble attempt to resurrect the self-incrimination clause of the 5th Amendment essentially by outlawing torture as a means of extracting confessions out of alleged suspects. Furthermore, not only is physical torture of American citizens not an ethical way of getting information, but physical pain has the tendency to make confessions unreliable. Moreover, even after an arrest, a person is to be read their Miranda Rights which includes the right to remain silent. The things we say, even when we are innocent with good intentions, has the potential to affect our lives in either a positive or negative aspect. 

III. Sixth Amendment:

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of the criminally accused to a public trial without unecessary delay, an impartial jury, the right to seek counsel, the nature of the charges, and confront all accusers. The most important of these guarantees in criminal law are, the right to a public trial without undue delay and the right to an impartial jury. Sadly, due to a lack of funding in public education and resources, it has been commonly accepted that no more than about 5% of all crminal cases ever go to trial. The other 95% are either dismissed or a plea bargain is arranged between defendant, the defendant's attorney, and the prosecutor for a "compromised" disposition. The bigger picture being, only 5% of the American people are actually making thier accusers and prosecutors work to prove that they are in fact guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In a crminal case, the prosecution must prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt which means that the arguments and evidence presented by the prosecution establishes the defendant's guilt so clearly that they must accept be accepted as fact by any rational person. This is a very difficult stanadard to meet. It only seems rational that Defendants would actually may the government work in order to satisfy it. However, the numbers show this is far from the case. The most important takeway from this article is to never surrender your rights without being informed of your rights and the process in which to take them.

IV. Conclusion

I tried not to bombard the reader with my own story and the injustices therein, but experience is an excellent teacher. I learned that sometimes knowing the law, the process, and what my rights are within these parameters will still not be enought to prevent inequities from occurring. However, knowledge will prevent them from prevailing. Police were unable to file charges after harrassing and physically assaulting, and towing my vehicle. I did not receive any financial compensation for the harms committed against, but I did gain a lot of dignnitiy and a victory knowing that I changed the situation through knowledge instead of allowing the situation to change me or my criminal record.

“Reasonable suspicion.” Merriam-Webster.com Legal Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/legal/reasonable%20suspicion. Accessed 22 Nov. 2022.

Things to Ask Employer's When You've Been Laid-Off or Terminated

Whether you believe it's either a pandemic or a "scam-demic", the truth remains that reservoirs of employees are being hired to work for industries deemed essential during these extremely uncertain times. Of course, the most controversial of these crucial commercial enterprises being the cannabis industry considering the fact there are too numerous an amount of Black, Brown, and poor Whites still incarcerated from the "war on drugs" era dating all the way back to the early 1970s. That's right, people are still serving prison sentences nearly five decades later doing what local governments (and soon-to-be the federal government) deem to be mandatory services. However, I digress. On one hand, there are jobs and typically (under much different circumstances), this would be considered a good thing. On the other hand, employees are being hired under false pretenses (i.e., unfulfilled promises of permanent job placement, full-time employment, advancement, etc.).

These COVID-19 related mass hires and fires are egregious and since unemployment insurance is generally funded with taxes paid by employers, it is a strong indication that there are profits to be gained via lay-offs. Expendable, pandemic employees only serve to fuel the billows of corporate smoke coming from the profit chimneys. In other words, temporary employees are being hired for predetermined periods of time to meet the needs of the pandemic and for additional manpower only without these companies having any true intentions of investing in these workers. All of this without the knowledge or consent of the new hires...A classic story of profits over people. I recently had the despairing privilege of joining the ranks of these workers who've been used, abused, and discarded to meet the needs of the pandemic. Ralphs Grocery Store laid me off on the day of the historic Juneteenth Holiday without cause. Days leading up to the lay-off, supervisors began to look for classic performance related reasons to justify their wrongful actions such as falsely accusing me of taking long breaks, trying to deem me incompetent for the job, etc. Lucky for me, I graduated from law school and have taken significant strides toward investing in my future. Ralphs was never a long-term plan and considering that I've worked in the grocery retail business since I was in high school without a single performance issue,  it's safe to say that laying me off days before completing my probationary period was unwarranted.

My education and background also left me with a plethora of knowledge at my disposal. Unlike, most laborers, I knew the correct questions to ask in order to ensure that I was not taken further advantage of during the layoff process. I would also like to add at this time that these questions are important to ask regardless of whether the termination or layoff was justified or not. The questions and information are designed to ensure that you are treated fairly, fortify your financial security during a time of great transition, and that you leave your job with all the necessary paperwork needed for the next step.

1. How Many Days Do You Have to File a Grievance or Dispute?

Oftentimes, there is a finite period of time for employees to file a grievance or dispute. If you've been wrongfully discarded by your employer, it is highly unlikely that they are going to divulge this information to you willingly. If your workplace is unionized and you fail to ask this question at the time of the layoff or termination, call your union representative as soon as possible. In most cases, you may still be able to file a grievance beyond the deadline, but be aware that you may lose certain rights and protections by missing the given date.

2. What is the Exact Reason for the Lay-Off or Termination?

Please keep in mind that if you work in a "right-to-work" state, employers may hire, fire, or lay you off essentially as they please (with very few restrictions).  Even if you live outside of an anti-employee labor law state, employers who lay-off or terminate an employee during the probationary period are within their full rights to leave you without an answer. Employers will generally state a broad reason for their decision (i.e., redundant position, cost cutting, changing demands, poor job performance, violation of a company policy, etc.). At any rate, it is important to distinguish between being laid and fired because the difference affects your rights, the means of recourse, finances, and your future job search. The most important distinction is that a lay-off occurs generally through no fault of the employee while a termination is typically specific to the person and their performance.

3. How About a "Pink-Slip"?

A pink-slip, formally known as a separation notice is generally a piece of paper (pink in case you were wondering) that employers give employees who've been separated from the company receive at the time of separation. The purpose of the separation notice is to advise employees of their rights under state employees laws and provides employees with the necessary paperwork to present to unemployment officials in determining their unemployment benefits. State regulations will oftentimes require employers to issue these notices.

4. Names and Data.

If you intend to file a grievance against your employer or enter into any kind of dispute resolution, it is imperative to get the names and written statements of anyone who may be helpful to your cause. Furthermore, while retaliatory terminations are prohibited, it's important to get this information as discreetly as possible because employees may not be willing to speak up when their livelihood is at risk. Anyone who may be helpful in the resolution of your dispute should be contacted.

5. Don't be Afraid to Speak with an Attorney.

Do not be afraid to speak with an attorney or other legal services in the event that you feel or know that a company has done you some kind of legal harm or you feel like you've been laid-off or terminated based on some kind of internal illegalities within the company.

6. Can I be Relocated or Transferred?

If you truly cared about the job, see a future with a company, or are in a desperate situation where you absolutely need to work for this company, ask about being relocated or transferred to another position within the company or one of its subsidiaries.

7. When Will I Receive My Last Check, Payments for Sick-Time and Vacation?

It is important to ask when will you receive your last paycheck AND how will you get it. Typically, this needs to be done immediately or within the next pay cycle. More importantly, regardless of whether you were laid-off or terminated, chances are you've accumulated sick-pay and vacation time. Ask upfront if you will be receiving these benefits, how, and when? At any rate, your employee handbook will outline whether or not you are eligible to receive these monies, you should be because you earned it.

8. Insurance and Other Benefits?

Unfortunately, healthcare is going to be a huge issue, especially for those living in the U.S. Be sure to ask your employer about how long your healthcare benefits will last and how long you have before you need to file for a Continuation of Health Coverage (not sure how this equates to the acronym "COBRA", but it does). Personally, I've never used COBRA, but I've heard that the premiums are typically more expensive. Your employer should provide you some contact information regarding COBRA.

9. Am I Eligible for Rehire?

This question is paramount because it will give you an idea of how the employer is categorizing your separation if they are being vague about the terms. If you are eligible for rehire, then it's a layoff, if they're saying you are not eligible for rehire, then it means they're listing you as fired which will impact your unemployment benefits.

10. Who Else is Being Let Go?

This question is important because it will allow you to determine what the cause of your separation, legal rights associated with mass layoffs because they differ in some ways from isolated layoffs, terminations, etc.

11. Is it Me?

Remember, unless you were truly an awful employee who failed to place even the most minimal effort into complying with company policies, treating clients and co-workers with respect, and contributing something to the company, this lay-off or termination has nothing to do with you so don't take it personal. That time moping, complaining, and feeling sorry for yourself might cause you to miss the next opportunity which is probably sure to be better than anything you feel that you've lost at this time.

COVID19 is Just Another Flu Pandemic

The coronavirus, similar to the 1918 flu pandemic that U.S. propaganda and blame game tactics dubbed the "Spanish flu", is just another flu pandemic. People have grown so accustomed to the evasion of serious discourse and the inevitable, that the idea of people dying during a pandemic incites fear. The 1918 flu pandemic lasting from January 1918– December 1920, infected more than 500 million people. The timing in the nation could not have been worse, less than a month after the bloody close of WWI, this influenza claimed more lives than on the battlefield at 50 million (potentially more) worldwide with at least 675,000 of these deaths occurring in the U.S. In fact, more people died in a single year from the influenza than in the fours years comprising the Black Death Bubonic Plague from 1347–1351. The 1918 flu pandemic was a global disaster.

This isn't the first time the U.S. has dealt with a flu pandemic. Case and point, the 2009 H1N1 virus. While the corona virus is being linked to a different family of viruses than the 2009 flu pandemic, the underlying principles remain and people should take comfort in the fact that a little common sense, in addition to taking appropriate health precautions will decrease a person's overall likelihood of contracting the virus. It is extremely disheartening to see people emotionally distorted and giving credence to the media's fearmongering. The truth is, plagues are caused by people not living in harmony with the world around us. For example, animals have been the primary scapegoats for these global catastrophes. According to the CDC, the 1918 pandemic was caused by birds, in 2009 pigs were implicated in the cases of H1N1 infections, and bats are allegedly to blame for the most recent viral outbreak of 2020. While I do not have a background in science beyond a fond curiosity for this branch from the tree of knowledge, one thing is certain: Irrespective of whether these diseases originated in animals, they are forms of zoonosis, meaning animal diseases that are communicable to humans. We are the beasts who dehumanize, and fight with so-called monsters, when we are in fact behaving as monsters.

Thus, by destroying so many animals' natural habitats, senselessly slaughtering or housing animals in the most inhumane ways imaginable with supermarket shoppers blissfully ignorant of how the meat made its way to their tables, and the large amount of fast-moving people now on Earth, the transmission and resurfacing of diseases should come as no surprise. Rather than fret over the recent spread of the coronavirus, recognize it for what it actually is: Another pandemic and signaling to human-beings that y'all ain't living right. While it's uncomfortable to admit the devil in the mirror may appear to look a lot like you, this is a unique time on this planet. This virus represents a pivotal time in our society beckoning us toward positive change if we seize the moment to make it so. There has been a revival in the simplistic, a renewed love for being outdoors, and an amazing uptick in generosity. They say there is nothing new under the sun, and history has proven that crises are societal vehicles for change. Let this time remind us that the government CAN and SHOULD do more for the American people moving forward. We need to hold them accountable for climate change, one of the contributing factors to the spread of the virus.

Let there be less political polarization because this divisiveness is what has led us down this path in the first place. The societal chain is only as strong as its weakest links and right now, regardless of race or socioeconomic status, we have an extremely frail, irresolute chain. It is comprised of people who've brought into the false ideology of individualism and being able to pull oneself up by the bootstraps without stopping to think about the fact that manufacturer defects are possible, and some people's boots have been issued without straps. Particularly, Black Americans and how we have been the societal scapegoats since this country was founded. Yet, Martin Luther King Jr. wasn't assassinated until he had a universal message that resonated with ALL Americans: Not only is he a civil rights hero, but he also demanded worker's right for ALL. This isn't a Black and White issue, it's an evil, inhumane thing to ignore the pain and suffering of any segment of the population. And, irrespective of race, the fact of the matter is, America at large is okay with a segments of the population not having access to the things that once made America great. The elderly are vulnerable, college graduates coming out with exorbitant amounts of debt are vulnerable, poor people are vulnerable, prostitutes are vulnerable, and the list of disadvantaged peoples just goes on and on...

The one thing that these groups don't have in common is a race or ethnicity because while Blacks are disproportionately part of all of these groups, the vulnerabilities that all of the aforementioned groups experience transcend racial lines. WE MUST STOP FIGHTING AMONGST OURSELVES. This is what the ruling classes clink their wines glasses together to everyday, the sound of discord among the common people. If we want to be honest, certain groups of people in this country have been practicing social distancing through segregation and societal devaluation. We confine society's elders to senior homes, we throw our mentally ill into prisons, we lock our poor up into debtor prisons, we ostracize our troubled youth, and we displace people of color onto the outskirts of the city after confining them there for such a long period of time. Migrating people in and out of poverty, and this corona virus is only creating momentum for more inequality ahead unless something is done about it. This is a time for reform and I hope this time has shown us that we are not immune from catastrophe and perhaps we will finally awake from a place of complacency and fear to see this time in our history as a time for radical change, a break from the rules, and new view on what is actually possible for the world at large.

#COVID19 #Equality #USA #SanDiego #California #LGBT #Black #EqualRights

Not All Queers are Polyamorous and that's OK

It was Sunday night and I had gathered alongside 6 others queers to watch the season finale of the L Word: Generation Q. It had become somewhat of a weekly ritual, and while I didn't join the watch party until nearly mid-season, I had still become invested in the characters, story lines, and the lively discussions we would have after the conclusion of an episode. I know for a fact that 5 out of the 7 of us identify as non-monogamous. I would also like to premise this article with a disclaimer: This article is in no way to be construed as a value judgment on the many different ways people choose to define their relationships with others. It is niether an attack on polyamory, nor polyamorous individuals. It is to be presumed that people who engage in relationships involving more than two people are consensually non-monogamous. Moreover, I do not view monogamy as a matter of being better or worse than non-monogamous couples. It's truly about what works best for people as both, individuals and as partners. Notwithstanding the aforementioned disclaimer, before several people tune this article out merely because it doesn't side with their viewpoint or someone sadly mistakes an opinion for a personal attack, please hear me out.

This article may be triggering for some, but please know that it's not my intention to do so. My goal and objective is to merely present my opinion on a topic. That is the beauty and guarantee of the First Amendment. Government regulations that target the content of speech (i.e., draws distinctions based on the message being delivered/communication of specific ideas) must pass a very high level of scrutiny in order to be held valid. The goal is not to have a chilling effect on speech. Anyway, I digress. The season finale wrapped up with Alice Pieszecki, one of the main characters on the show, exiting a "throuple" (i.e., a relationship of three) and returning back to what the queer viewing party perceived as "the mundane world of monogamy". This was highly troubling to me because rather than admiring the fact that the character was open and receptive to the needs of her partner, in addition to being willing to try a relationship in which her primary partner's ex-wife was introduced into the relationship, all the group saw was a historic loss for polyamory everywhere. Instead, the group made comments about "toxic monogamy" and how it is ruining relationships. The character simply set a boundary upon discovering that she was unable to have her needs met in the relationship and exited the partnership leaving her partner free to make her own choices.

Upon hearing these comments, I felt invalidated, misunderstood, and as if I were being stripped of my queer cardholder privileges. The best argument against monogamy is its current success rate (it's not doing so well) and ineffective execution. More importantly, that the rate of failure stems from a lack of communication and the misconception that societal pretenses take priority over authenticity. It is more evident than ever before that monogamy may not be for everyone (e.g., there are too many affairs, alternative marital arrangements, sex workers (this is not to say that healthy individuals do not also seek out sex work), mistresses, and sex therapists). I highly encourage people to only enter into arrangements and partnerships that make the most sense for all parties. Any relationship, including ones with ourselves require emotional intelligence, time management, honesty, love, compassion, boundaries, positive conflict resolution skills, romance, core principles, intellectual growth, fun, perseverance, communication, and fun. Of course this list will vary for everyone, but after spending some quality time with myself (i.e., single four years and counting), these are the things I discovered that I need for the long haul. I also know that I want a long-term, MONOGAMOUS relationship with someone. That doesn't mean that I'm trapped in toxic monogamy (e.g., expecting one person to complete me, the normalization of jealousy as a love language, equating time spent as an indicator of the relationship's value, accepting controlling behaviors, refusing to understand my partner's need which may exist outside of me, and seeing my self-value as being directly linked to a relationship).

The truth is, maybe I'm  just a traditional LGBT or Queer gal like Alice. I see and respect unions of all kinds and truly believe in living a life where I make space for ideas, thoughts, lifestyles, and other things that don't necessarily mirror my views because I have found that I grow most when I'm out of my element and my value systems are challenged. However, I know what my needs are. That doesn't mean that I can't still oppose forced heteronormativity, believe in nontraditional gender roles, protest for better treatment of trans people, equal pay for women, vigilantly fight to end racism, resist the commoditization of Black people in the LGBT community, support education, ending the stigmatization of mental health issues, advocate for animals, and still want a monogamous relationship at the end of the day. I think it's important for people fighting for equality and tolerance to still remember to pay the same courtesies forward to those giving love and respect back. It's okay to be queer and still not be polyamorous, and that's a safe boundary to have and hold regardless of what's trending and what's best for others.

#monogamy #polyamory #equality #lgbt #sandiego #california #sex #queer #single #sexeducation #safespace

Inequality in Equal Spaces

Amed S. Mullins
December 20, 2019

11:11 AM PST

The San Diego LGBT Center is as out of touch with its Black members as someone watching a foreign film without subtitles. First and foremost, when in doubt about which foods to serve at a predominantly Black event, go with neutral pizza. It’s the smorgasbord or ice cream of large volume meals for meetings, there’s a little something (usually) for everyone. Personally, I did not think soul food was an appropriate choice for a place that has apparently lacked soul for quite some time. I have only been in San Diego going on four years, but I heard one gentlemen remark that this crowd, amongst whom I had the honor of participating in, was the most Black people the Center has seen inside its doors in over 47 years. While there were round tables of Blacks enjoying the stereotypical soul food the Center thought appropriate for its Black patrons, a decision like most decisions concerning Black matters, was most likely made without consulting a single Black person. I digress­–While there were tables spread out across the room of novel Black faces,  if we were all to have been seated in rows, we would not have covered even half of the large events space. That is to say that there were very few Black people in attendance, and those few were the most that had been seen in almost over 47 years.

In other words, this town hall should’ve been given the sensitivity and care deserving of such a momentous occasion. An occasion where important personnel were in present, a moderator facilitated meaningful dialogue amongst participants, and the meeting given the same levels of preparation as any other event would’ve received. Instead, groups were forced to come together in order to share questionnaires, and then given a highly unreasonable time to respond to even one of the five or so prompts. I believe we were given two full minutes. Moreover, there wasn’t any kind of question and response format in place whatsoever. The Black Town Hall descended into chaos while the Center representatives sat back and essentially smiled as the house burned. It also didn’t help that an already fragmented and socially neglected Black San Diego was not prepared to talk about its pain and suffering. Most stood up and told stories of blatant, discrimination that had generally been experienced  to some degree by every Black person in the room. Stories that have become the rudimentary norm in the world’s biggest influencer, America. Let the generations of psychological pain sink in for a moment. Others spoke truths about the past and a dire need for a generation willing to fight as hard as our strong Black leaders of the civil rights era, a lot of whom would still be with us if not for perpetual white violence. A small few made attempts to paint the Center as a welcoming place. Whether this is in fact the case, or these individuals suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, one simply cannot say.

The night ended just as it began: A lot of hurt and unresolved issues laid strewn about, intermingled in with the soul food. Whites perplexed and shut down by their dystopian ideas of diversity and inclusion being challenged. The shock of having to be open to the idea of unfairness when it is not a relatable concept to those who always benefitted from things being systematically kept this way. To add injury to insult, the night also brought about the dismal news that the Center would be furloughing a second meeting concerning the town hall until further notice. A terrible decision which has the detrimental impact of causing such a much-needed movement to lose a large amount of much-needed support. As of now, the follow-up to the fall town hall is scheduled for January of 2020.

The LGBT Center of San Diego conspicuously allowed for a Black movement, opportunity for  change, dialogue, opportunity, equality, and true progress to be calendared out for months. In my opinion, this is tangible evidence showing that the Center has does not have any true intentions of helping the Black Community here in San Diego. Or, at minimum, a strong desire to keep the symptoms alive in hopes of distracting people from the realization of a cure. The Black community should be demanding fair access to resources, including jobs, and making the Center a place where it won’t take another 47 years to assemble a small group of Black individuals. I spoke at the town hall advocating for vocational and job placement opportunities for everyone, especially LGBT Black youth who are continually serving as the faces homelessness and a disproportionate number of arrests in the city. I also suggested having more POC inclusive groups and diversity training for the staff. All of these suggestions appear to have fallen on deaf ears because it wasn’t until I personally was a victim of the Center’s neglect that I realized how important it is for things to change. And this is not to say that everything about the Center is inherently good or inherently bad.

To reiterate, the aim and objective of this piece is not to simply bash the Center, but to raise awareness about things going on within the community. It is a cry for help in hopes of getting other people to care about a social issue that doesn’t necessarily impact them directly, but has dire consequences for everyone. The continual neglect, abuse, and exploitation of Black people (We are still being traded into slavery in 2019 on our own continent to place that claim into context) is how we got to the point of having Donald Trump as president. I want to vomit every time I hear people speak about being disgusted over this fact because all he does is serve as a greater manifestation of the hatred and racism existing amongst the American people. Rather than being angry at his appointment to office, where is the outrage over the nation’s retrogression back into slavery, a state that the country never truly left? Police across the nation still declaring open season on little Black boys and girls? Black trans folks dying left and right? Children dying in ICE detention camps? But if only we were truly outraged, then we would’ve demanded something be done a long time ago, and since all of America to busy being asleep at the wheel, our country’s leaders have had to wipe the drool from our faces with this proffered impeachment hearing “hankie”. And please believe that it wasn’t done for the benefit of the American people.

He has always been above the law. His creation of a hostile workplace via misogyny, overt racism (i.e., “shithole” countries remark, Trump’s role in the Central Park Five trial, advocating attacks against four non-white congresswomen at a rally in Greenville, North Carolina, his affiliation with domestic white terrorist organizations), etc.), embezzling money away from his own publicly-funded charity intended to support veterans groups, his affinity for dictators, an appalling response to the Hurricane Irma and Maria in Puerto Rico, and the list just goes on...To bring this all home, if this is what is happening at the federal level, then let it come as no surprise that this kind of behavior is going on inside people’s communities. All of this being based on the popular legal fiction that governments and communities are a reflections of its people. It is time that we demand change and better from these institutions and contemplating the creation of our on in times of extreme neglect rather than waiting for change that has a historical record of never being within reach without the implementation of self-help, especially for the Black community.

#sandiego #usa #california #sd #padres #sports #sunshinestate 

A Letter to Todd Weiller R-Woods Cross

This image was put in place of the one depicting an adult male Utahan wearing a shirt that reads, "Porn Kills Love". I didn't want to risk any kind of legal backlash...enjoy.

I'm assuming you've never had sex before, and that your four children are the benevolent products of immaculate conception. Declaring pornography a "public health crisis" not only undervalues the public's right to choose and our First Amendment Rights, but it also marginalizes the importance of sex and relationships. If we all want to be adults about this, your futile attempts to censor the internet isn't about sex or children at all. It's all about control of information being received by the population. I don't know if the words sex and children in the same sentence elicits the same amount of vomit in the back of your throat as it does mine, but we all know Utah is infamous for using children as human shields for bigotry.

I hear a lot of politicians in this state yelling, "Protect our children!", yet the age of consent here is 16 for women. And you still have the audacity to say porn is normalizing violence and abuse against women? Not to mention there are only 50 states, and we are #50 in education spending! I'm sure people didn't think it could get any worse, oh but it does: Utah is also #1 in the nation for child sex abuse. So yes, if this is the state's idea of "children are the future", as the song goes, "teach them well and let them lead the way". Spend the least amount of money on their education as possible. It seems to equate to a straight from school to porn-star pipeline. Perhaps the slogan for an upcoming campaign I'm sure.

Aside from children, it's also affecting adults which are supposed to serve as the pillars of our society. We are #1 for prescription drug abuse as well. This state continues to put up statistics completely contradictory of the things the state's morality police claim to be fighting. So yes, if you want to declare a war on child pornography, by all means, PLEASE GET CHILD PORN AND PEDOPHILES OFF THE STREETS. I hope that's at least one thing we can agree on. The thing is, instead of using this as an opportunity to do some societal good, you're bludgeoning your way through an army of law abiding adults wishing to watch materials involving two (or more) other consenting adults with a child strapped on to your shield arm. It's not like the average person invites all of their friends over to watch a flick, or as you'd like to believe, McDonald's needs to put blocks on its wifi because kids are using the free internet to look at porn. Pardon my language, but who the f#*! goes to McDonald's to look at porn? Who on Earth do you know personally who has done this?!

And the porn industry isn't exactly innocent either. Have you all ever thought about advocating for the right of other men and women who wish to have sex for money and profit for themselves with the absence of a studio set, microphones, bright lights, and the guarantee of being exploited by a business? Some people would call these individuals prostitutes or harlots, so does this make the industry pimps? However, since you guys are paying two people instead of one person for sex, it's different. I guess we're all being exploited, however, the law seems to work in favor of those holding the coin purse (pun intended), so this way, there's also a loophole.

Anatomical Real Estate for Sale

               

https://www.gofundme.com/amedmullins

Have you ever dreamt of having a walking billboard advertisement, a unique canvas for your art, or campaign ads guaranteed to reach your target audiences? Well here's your opportunity to make this happen and support a worthy cause. I'm willing to tattoo anything (within reason) on my skin from the neck down to help cover my law school expenses until death do us part! Since this is permanent and law school isn't cheap, the price is $50,000 per piece, unless some generous donor would like to put an end to my desperation by giving $232,050.00 to cover 6 semesters of school expenses.

While I'm extremely grateful for my Merit Scholarship of 5k, I'm still a far cry away from 232k+ I need to pay for school (TJSL School Budget). To cut back on additional expenses, we've downsized to a one vehicle family household and started renting out rooms in our house. We've also completely eliminated the word "fun" from our vocabulary. A small, but notable sacrifice. I am literally selling body parts for education...does that put me in the same category as a prostitute? I'll let you be the judge! You can also simply donate to my GoFundMe campaign if you feel compelled to open your hearts (as well as your wallets) and don't wish to see me covered in advertisement graffiti. Every bit counts, so even if you can only give a dollar, I'm still one dollar closer than I was yesterday to paying off the biggest debt I'll accrue over my lifetime. At this point, I'm trapped in a never-ending, spiraling abyss of debt. Which also means I risk the potential possibility of being dropped from my degree program before I even finish!


I've continued working a full-time and part-time job to save toward my academic endeavors, but I'm afraid it still isn't enough. Not to mention, I've also applied to every scholarship known to man. It goes without saying, I obviously do not come from a privileged background. A  single mother raised me, and while she would love to help me and my partner during our time of great need, she simply does not have the financial means necessary to do so. I am the first in my family to graduate from college, POST (police academy), and now the first to ever go to law school as of fall 2016. I am constantly reminded of where I come from and how much farther I have to go: After living out of my car my junior semester of college while continuing to work a full-time job, I've done volunteer work for other displaced Nashville residents (e.g., writing résumés, developing job/interviewing skills, and job placement). My brief time as student teacher taught me that a lot of students needed just as much help oftentimes, if not more, at home or family court as they did at school.

As an attorney, I plan on continuing to advocate for impoverished people and education. However, I need the love, support, and kindness of strangers to help me achieve this goal. As the proverb goes, "It takes a village to raise a child, but life has also taught me that sometimes the villagers need help too". Please help me to become a positive romodel for children and other villagers in the struggle! Feel free to email me amulllins.stradivarius@gmail.com if you have any questions, concerns, ideas, or words of encouragement.