Features — 04 November 2008 — by Colin bh
Solid piece (It’s a rough hard road), Mr. Frankie Rhys, until you went and spoiled it all in your final two paragraphs. Braa, you were way off base last week when you wrote: Rape is not a sex crime. It is a power crime. There is nothing “sexy” about forcing a woman to do what she doesn’t want to do. For the grain of sense there, there are ninety-nine reasons why that argument is full of holes.
That argument holds water only if we qualify it by saying that for males who are as sober as a judge, rape doesn’t hold any sexual secrets. Minds are as varied as the faces we see around us: no two are exactly alike. Ouch, there are men who like their daughters. Is it about power, or is it about misplaced lust? Daam, there are men who like little children. Is it about power, or is it about misplaced lust? Yikes, there are men who like…males. Is it about power, or is it about misplaced lust?
We can get picky and somewhere find an “intersect” where power and lust approach on the curve. But it serves absolutely no purpose. The female body is designed by the Almighty to stir males in the loins, for order of procreation. Naturally, skin creates excitement in the male. Girls have been known to work on ships with sailors (male) without incidents amorous or incidents of rape, because they dressed the part of a male. No cleavage, no trouble.
The point of this piece, girls, is that among your thousand admirers there are crazy men, or not so sober men looking at you. Know that that skimpy presentation is titillating the locos too.
I am about uncluttering the truth, not asking anyone to cover up like a Muslim. God didn’t order the flowers of the field to hide anything. But, flowers of the field are not known to cause sexual desire…and at full exposure drive some men stark, raving crazy.
Hey, I think “the rape is about power not about sex argument” is made with the motive that men will tek shaym and control themselves. A straight up argument that rape isn’t nice would serve just as well…for those that are as sober as judges.
By the way, we can’t ignore the power of fragrance in the works. Flowers attract honeybees and hummingbirds with their looks…and their sweet scents. Yap, the same way the aroma of fried chicken hits you in the stomach (even when you are not hungry), some perfumes turn the mind to romance. No, I am not suggesting that women cut down on sweet perfumes. I’m just about wondering why some mothers put on sweet scents on underaged girls.
Oil relief will be brief
I think former American president, Mr. Bill Clinton, said that we can look for the price of oil to start rising again after the present US presidential elections on November 4. I won’t speculate as to what the US presidential elections has to do with the price of oil, why it has fallen 50% in recent weeks after having been in the stratosphere just a month ago, but I can say, just like you, that as President Clinton says, the price of fuel will start climbing again very soon.
The only way the price of oil stays below a hundred dollars a barrel for the next six months is if an alternative source of fuel rivals it. It is a near sure thing that there isn’t any such hero on the horizon.
By far the main story in the US election is Democrat philosophy versus Republican philosophy. If Mr. Barack was in Mr. McCain’s Republican skin, and he in Barack’s Democrat skin, except for a few the SAME people who are voting Democrat in ’08, would vote Democrat. Ditto Republican.
It is natural for color and race to be a factor in any equation like this one. As a percentage of the population, there is an equal amount of blacks who don’t like white, and would not vote for white if they could help it, as there are whites who would not want to vote for a black.
Check it, if Mr. Colin Powell was running for the Republicans, some whites (not all) who can’t help themselves where race is concerned, would have swallowed very hard…and voted for him. The reason is that there are some serious issues in these elections. Unlike Belize, where there is no clear philosophical divide (one side accuses the other of teef; the other accuses of incompetence and bad mind), in the US there are issues that cut to the core.
The Democrats tax the rich and famous; the Republicans are soft on the rich and famous. The Democrats of recent are less hawkish, slower on the trigger (both Iraq wars were started by the Republicans). The Democrats seem more sympathetic to our Caribbean brothers and sisters in Cuba.
Apart from that, but equally consequential, the Democrats are soft on homosexuality, soft on stem cell research, and soft on abortion. The Republicans are not soft on homosexuality, not soft on stem cell research, and not soft on abortion.
The Democrats have had the “vote” in Belize for a long time. The Catholic Kennedys have always been favorites here. (JFK reportedly had a deal with Guatemala, but Belize has blamed that on bad advisors.) It is recorded that President Lyndon Johnson did tremendous work to improve the conditions of people with African lineage in America. And President Jimmy Carter is just flat out one of the world’s greatest human beings. Thus, the natural affinity here for the Democratic Party in Belize.
How a win by the Democrats would work out for us on the economic side is unknown. If you read the article A 21st – Century Bretton Woods in last week Friday’s Amandala (if you haven’t, it is imperative that you do), it probably doesn’t matter. But most likely it would work out better for Belize in the matter of our national security. See, if Mr. Barack wins, President Carter would get back his respect in the US. We can lobby him to help us out with this grossly unfair Anglo-Guatemalan dispute which we inherited.