All Articles Tagged "Conservative"
More on Madame Noire!
- Where Are They Now? The Real Hollywood Exes (And Mistresses) Of Music’s Biggest Players
- True Life: I Had To Learn The Hard Way
- Self-Pity? No Thanks: Why I Love The Chocolate Skin I’m In
- Well That’s…Interesting: Mimi Is Writing A Book On Warning Signs Of Dating Men In The Industry
- Ask A Very Smart Brotha: Why Falling In Love Is A Choice (And Why I Hate Romantic Comedies)
- Fall Into Your Feelings: How Autumn Will Affect Your Love Life
- Well, You Don’t Say: 9 Celebrities, Ballers, Authors And Vixens You Might Not Have Known Were Virgin Islanders
More on Madame Noire!
- It’s So Hard to Say…I’m Sorry
- 10 Things Ladies Should Know About False Lashes
- Oh NO He Didn’t: 7 Things That Annoy Women About Men
- WTH: Couple Held At Gunpoint At New Home When Neighbors Assume They’re Robbers
- All Educated With Nowhere to Go: 1 in 2 College Graduates Jobless Or Underemployed
- Another Unsolicited Tyrese PSA: ‘Some Of Ya’ll Have Wack Sex’
- African Fashion Designers Are Breaking Away From The Traditional
- Do I Stay Single Like Jesus Or Do I Call Tyrone?
“Essence readers would be shocked to find that Bullerdick, who under the prodding of Time Inc became the first white male editor at the magazine last year, openly espouses extremist Right-wing views that run counter to what Essence has historically stood for.”
“As editor-in-chief, I’m responsible for all editorial content for Essence. I hired Michael to manage the production schedule of Essence. As head of production, he does not attend editorial idea meetings, nor does he get involved in the editorial direction of the magazine.”By the end of the day, a spokeswoman said:
“By mutual agreement, Michael has accepted a position in another division.”When Essence was questioned about their social media policy, the spokeswoman said employees should follow the current Standards of Business Conduct, which is distributed to everyone at the company. She also said Dan Okrent, who leads Editorial Standards and Practices for Time Inc., has been working with the magazine’s top Editors to develop a specific social media policy, which will be released when it’s completed. There’s no word on what Bullerdick’s new role is within the company, but this shift certainly demonstrates the fine line between an employee being able to express personal views that are inconsistent with those of its employer on social media. Do you think this move is fair? Brande Victorian is a blogger and culture writer in New York City. Follower her on Twitter at @be_vic.
More on Madame Noire!
- Dating Before Divorced! These Folks Just Couln’t Wait…
- Not So Famous Sisters of Famous Black Celebrities Part III
- LASH OUT! The 7 Best Mascaras For Lash Length – EDITOR PICKS
- Relationship Reflections: Things To Think About After The Breakup
- Oh No She Didn’t: Tyra Banks Fires Jay Manuel, Nigel Barker, and J.Alexander from ANTM
- Brooklyn Man Locked Up Nearly a Year for Rape Even Though Victim Recanted Story
- ‘Broke’: New Documentary Looks at How Pro Athletes (Foolishly) Lose All Their Money
- Is Church A Waste of Time?
When Stuart Wilber discovered many large corporations often give a portion of the earnings bought through Internet marketers to conservative Christian organizations, he didn’t see it as a charitable act. He saw large companies funding hate groups. According to the New York Times, Wilber, a gay man from Seattle, believed these large corporations shouldn’t fund Christian groups that proclaimed anti-gay messages. In July he not only started a petition, he also started a heated, online retail battle.
The Charity Giveback Group (CGBG) was the Christian-oriented Internet marketing group that Wilber stumbled upon a few months ago. Through CGBG, he learned that many large retailers, including Microsoft, Apple and Netflix, sell their products and donate a portion of the profits to conservative evangelical groups such as Family Research Council and Focus on the Family, which are known for their strong anti-gay stance.
Outraged, Wilber created a petition on Change.org which gained 520 supporters on its first night alone. In response, Microsoft quickly and quietly stopped its donations. Soon other petitions began to circulate causing Apple, Macy’s and almost 100 other businesses to also stop their donations through CGBG.
A counter-campaign was also started by the conservative Christian groups with the title, “Please Don’t Discriminate Against My Faith.”
“People have been misled. The retailers are not donating to anyone; they are simply paying a commission to get traffic,” John Higgins, the president of CGBG, told the NY Times.
The situation has sparked outrage on all sides. Wilber and other gay-rights activists are shocked to learn that large retailers are contributing to anti-gay messages while often touting diversity platforms. Conservative groups feel attacked for their stance on sex and marriage and companies feel caught in the middle as they attempt to please both sides.
While none of the companies have responded to media over the controversy, Microsoft and Apple have quickly decided to remain away from the CGBGnetwork.
Other companies, such as Delta and Wal-mart, have reconsidered and joined again with CGBG. Representatives from Wal-Mart and its sister company Sam’s Club said that they changed their minds as the company serves over 43,000 organization with a wide range of interests with diverse viewpoints.”
Delta divulged that they realized how important it was to their faith-based clients. A representative told the NY Times that while they support these clients, they do not want to be involved in any political debates, only in flying planes.
I voted for Barack Obama.
And, while I took the opportunity to help elect this country’s first black president (with hopes of something different), I am not a Democrat. Rather, I reside on the lonely island of black conservatives—judged and misunderstood. I believe Shelby Steele described it accurately in “The Loneliness of the Black Conservative”:
The liberal-conservative axis is a bit different for blacks than for Americans generally. Under his American identity a black Republican is conservative, but under his racial identity he may be quite liberal. Many black Republicans, for example, are intense supporters of preferential affirmative action and thus liberal in terms of their group identity. (Colin Powell is a case in point, as is Arthur Fletcher, a black Republican who helped President Nixon introduce America’s first racial preference in the famous “Philadelphia Plan.”) But the “new” black conservatives—the ones who have recently become so controversial—may even be liberal by their American identity but are definitely conservative by the terms of their group identity. It is their dissent from the explanation of black group authority that brings them the “black conservative” imprimatur. Without this dissent we may have a black Republican but not a “black conservative,” as the term has come to be used.
Nearly 85 percent of black Americans identify as Democrats, which I’ve always found to be quite interesting because most can’t tell you why. Without understanding, so many blindly give praise to a party that, in many ways, has enabled them to fail. Case in point, the dissolution of the black family is often blamed on welfare and how it was designed to benefit single mothers thus making marriage less attractive and unimportant. As a result, we currently have a 73 percent out-of-wedlock birth rate and more children with absentee fathers than any other racial group in America. All studies point to that as a negative and poverty speaks for itself. Welfare was a Democratic initiative.
In the latest conservative fumble, Politico reports that an Iowa based group is now retracting a line in its marriage vow which suggested that black children born into slavery had a better family life than black children born today.
The marriage vow, created by Family Leader, came out last week and was signed by Michelle Bachmann. The original preamble read “slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.”
The group’s officials said that “after careful consideration and wise insight and input from valued colleagues,” they decided to remove the offensive language from their preamble. They still maintain that all must work to strengthen marriages between one man and one woman.
Bachmann’s spokeswoman said that she signed the candidate vow, which made no reference to slavery, and relayed the congresswoman’s belief that “slavery was horrible.” It’s unclear whether or not Bachmann actually read the preamble.
Of course, as with any other outrageously offensive comment, the group claims it wasn’t meant to be racist, “just a fact that back in the days of slavery there was usually a husband and a wife.”