We Give You Youth Ambassador Rihanna

Rihanna

Rihanna

BU has come to the realization pop star Rihanna is a slave to publicity. To be fair to her, the line of business she has made her own requires a script to be followed to sustain success, this a business with a relatively short shelf life and making money is the name of the game.  To quote Rihanna her, she intends to raise the bar by breaking the rules.

One sure way celebrities attract publicity in this world is to bare it all, especially when the body state satisfies the stereotypical view of what is beautiful. There is a view held by many Barbadians we should not be critical of Rihanna because of her unprecedented global success. There is another view – why criticise Rihanna, she does not care or neither does it erode her success.  Theses perspectives are spurious and soaked in false logic. Barbadians on a daily basis offer critique about Presidents Obama and Bush and other non Barbadians so what is the point?

Another reason Barbadians have a right to critique Rihanna’s public persona and behaviour; she was made Ambassador of Youth and Culture by the government of Barbados. If her appointment was rescinded and diplomatic passport withdrawn, we have not been made aware. Barbadians have a vested interest therefore how Rihanna’s behaviour may  influence young impressionable Barbadians. If not why give her an ambassadorship?

The majority of Barbadians love Rihanna BUT it does not mean we have to remain silent if she carries herself in a manner which offends the individual morals of some.  We wear clothes of different styles for different reasons when visiting different places. If Rihanna decides to expose her beautiful body in public because her handlers believe it is an asset to draw publicity, it is her right. It is equally the right of Barbadians  to opine about Rihanna if they feel like it.

BU’s position is unequivocal, Ambassador for Youth Rihanna’s sluttish outfit worn at the Council of Fashion Designers of America last evening brings into question what  moral fibre we want to nurture for Barbados given the willingness of government to attach to her brand.

167 comments

  • “The majority of Barbadians love Rihanna BUT it does not mean we have to remain silent if she carries herself in a manner which offends the individual morals of some.”

    “Individual morals of some”? Anytime this moral cry goes out we instinctively know hypocrisy is in the air. Live your life the way you want to Ri Ri. You are not living in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    AC Boo Boo you got me cracking up. Hahahaha….where de toilet paper….Hahahahaha

    Like

  • Love Tickles Like Magic

    Rihanna is an uppity N don’t know her place*
    (*) note sarcasm u mindless interpreter drones

    Like

  • Love Tickles Like Magic

    Whoopsie I did a boo boo up above

    Like

  • The crux of this issue should not be based on, and has nothing to do with Rhianna’s generosity in giving to her native country, and helping it in any way she so deems. We should separate the sheep from the goat. Her generosity is a subject of its own.

    Rhianna should be applauded for the good she has done and would continue to do in helping the country from whence she came. (It doesn’t seem that anyone is trying to take that away from her.) Sadly, there is too much false and foolish pride that still linger, and will continue to exist in our native land.

    How Rhianna chooses to present herself in public is up to her. She is old enough; she has a mind of her own to do what she believes is best for her, and that will help her to prosper and to further success. Although some of us may not like the arena(s) or situation(s) she finds herself in, we need to consider and render with fair judgment that she is not hurting ANYONE and if she is/does, it is herself. So why are we worrying and so worked up over what she is doing? That would be her parent’s call to intervene, if they choose to.

    Let’s face it, Rhianna’s career in the entertainment industry is where her paycheck comes from to keep her afloat. But for that to happen, she has to take orders from her superiors; there is no room or very little for insubordination. Just like most of us whether we work in an office, or some other setting, we sometimes find ourselves doing a chore that we despise, and have to put up and shut up if we need that job; otherwise there would be a replacement at the blink of an eye. I believe the same goes for her.

    At least she is not ripping off people — taking their money on false pretenses; involve in corruption that we are aware/heard of. She is simply trying to make a $$ doing what she believes and other people see her to be “good” at.

    We as a people simply need to wish her well in all her endeavors and hope that she has a lengthy career, as well as being able to live comfortably after her career comes to a close, whenever.

    Like

  • I keeping with the theme. 3:30 into the video. SINGER WITH LONG LEGS WEARING A SHIRT.

    Like

  • @Hants

    California Chroome, Hamilton.

    On Saturday, June 7, 2014, Barbados Underground wrote:

    >

    Like

  • ”Another reason Barbadians have a right to critique Rihanna’s public persona and behaviour; she was made Ambassador of Youth and Culture by the government of Barbados. If her appointment was rescinded and diplomatic passport withdrawn, we have not been made aware. Barbadians have a vested interest therefore how Rihanna’s behaviour may influence young impressionable Barbadians. If not why give her an ambassadorship?

    The majority of Barbadians love Rihanna BUT it does not mean we have to remain silent if she carries herself in a manner which offends the individual morals of some. We wear clothes of different styles for different reasons when visiting different places”.

    Rubbish expounded.

    So, Rihanna offends you? What about when some eleven year old boy is behind a big woman at Crop Over, as witnessed multiple times on the front pages (but we don’t want them there, because they report what IS,wukking up and encouraged by other grown adults, grinning like idiots?

    Nuh?

    What Rihanna wears is mild compared to that crap.

    Honestly, stop throwing stones from glass houses.

    And furthermore, when corruption is rife, that hurts me more living wise, than whether Rihanna shows off her lovely body to the world.

    Grow up and get real.

    Or is it that wunna still like living behind closed doors, like when the girl of the family aka Plantation house, used to ‘go over and away’ on vacation to have a child?

    Or when a fella goes to Dodd’s now, we hear that ‘Oh, he gone overseas’? And if you don’t read the court pages of the daily, you would know no different.

    Lot of hypocrisy.

    Stupse.

    Like

  • GEORGIE PORGIE

    dat is we culture crusoe
    like calling bullers bullers and wickers wickers

    Like

  • Rihanna almost naked. Pretty lady Nice body. Next.

    Alison Hinds in motion “rollin it” . instant hardon.

    Natalie pa’apa’a …….. toxicologically beautiful.

    Like

  • the stupid oleman GPback again talking nuff sh.te

    Like

  • GEORGIE PORGIE

    interesting notes out of jamaica

    I have been in a running email debate with Jeff Cobham. He convinced me that the University of the West Indies had no other option. Now, Gordon Robinson has reopened that aspect of the case.

    However, there are two other things I have been saying to Jeff. There is now a growing belief among the Jamaican man in the street that, no matter how important and learned you are, no matter how well you have served, if you say or do anything that can be interpreted as being harmful to the aims of the LGBT lobby, you can be hounded out of your job and punished in any way that they can find to punish you. I think that this is an unfortunate impression to have developed and does more harm to their cause than good.

    I have been listening to persons among whom I circulate, and there is a feeling of resentment. A conviction that “de byman dem wah fi tek ova everyting! Yuh cyaan even talk de trute dat dem a de chief spredda a AIDS. Nuh care if yuh a big doctor an gi dem facks!”

    This opinion is given with disgust, even loathing. It marks lost ground because the general opinion had been slowly shifting in the direction of greater tolerance, into one of “mek dem gwaan! As long as dem nuh ovado de public nuffness!”

    HARDENED RESISTANCE

    We have moved towards the obligatory “not in my cabinet!” To the more reasoned attitude of Portia Simpson, who, by her actions, was using her personal popularity and influence to help change attitudes.

    The ultra-aggressive moves of these lobby groups seem to have hardened resistance to their agenda, including important human rights aspects.

    And then there is Dr Brendan Bain, who seems to have been painted by some as a person who could not really show the necessary love and care for the patients he served because of his belief that their sexual behaviour was immoral. Which, all who know him is far from true.

    In ending, I want to ask: If a coalition of prostitutes sued the Government in an effort to decriminalise their practice (a direction in which some states seem to be moving), would the new head of CHART be at risk of losing his job if he testified that the activity involved in the ‘profession’ was a public health hazard?

    Would the human-rights organisations who have joined the LGBT lobby be as whole-hearted in their support of his removal?

    KEITH NOEL

    Like

  • GEORGIE PORGIE

    more notes out of jamaica

    FRIDAY, JUNE 6, 2014
    Gay Lobby May Have Lost Potential Allies (Gleaner Letter) Indeed
    Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
    Indeed we have been losing some allies as evidenced by once seemingly tolerant commentators, persons on the ground and even some of my blog readers have turned on me in a sense with far more caustic responses and dismissals of any suggestion for dialogue or a truce while the dust hopefully settles.

    The talkshow circuit has been bombarded by a coordinated effort by the same groups especially POWER 106FM’s “Justice” hosted by JLP senator and former judge with some anti gay sentiments Marlene Malahoo Forte, callers have been stressing the perceived stifling of freedom of speech more so than the obvious conflict of interest posed by Professor Bain’s testimony when it was the imperative that is the issue not the content of his affidavit per say. Even prior to the Bain matter she hosted the anti gay group JCHS on her show where she asked among other things:

    “…………Do you know what was the basis of that, what it is about anal penetration that would cause lawmakers in their wisdom of yesteryear to say this is something that we need to say not at all?” the JCHS rep dodged the direct question completely by answering from a script I dare say, using terms she couldn’t bother to explain to the listening audience.

    “One of the things that people confuse is that they try to suggest that anal penetration is sex and it is my understanding that the intestine is not a sex organ it can’t procreate, buggery, it is the misuse of the anus ……it can do physical harm to the recipient in terms of the sphincter muscle going, people say you’re not gonna get HIV AIDS if you use a condom but the person being penetrated has on a condom is at risk and harm because the insides of the intestine were not never meant withstand the types of friction from that type of penetration, it tears easily and then you end up with a myriad of sexually transmitted diseases including HIV which is most easily transmitted in this type of environment, it must be noted that HIV is not only an epidemic it is a pandemic …….. The buggery law must remain as a danger sign because it does harm not only to the individual but to society and the world at large ……….”

    Nice run to not let Mrs Forte come in with any rejoinder while deliberately avoiding the direct question, I am shocked however that Mrs Forte allowed her such a long run but I guess fairness must be shown since “freedom of speech” is about to be quashed in the eyes of the JCHS. My mind runs to an older interview with Mrs Forte and Dane Lewis in June 2013 where the same HIV is a gay disease ploy was used in a set of trick questions, she asked for eg about containing conduct if after the buggery law in its present form what would obtain to which Mr Lewis answered “……….. Does the state have a right to legislate what consenting adults do in private regardless of their sexual orientation…..If we address that first then we can begin to talk about where that threshold is and so I speak about consenting adults when we talk about threshold……….. Protecting our most vulnerable which would be our young people.” He also called for the non discrimination clause that was removed in draft from the Charter of Rights.

    But it seems the wind as turned into a storm as the centrepiece of the Professor Bain issue which is the conflict of interest has been lost or clouded deliberately by fanatical religious voices making the rest of the church looking stupid and selective about certain issues as crime, kidnapped kids and the indigent do not get the same kind of erratic response from these powerful voices not to mention the millions the Gleaner especially may be raking in from the groups protesting from full paged advertisements yet people are hungry.

    The letter writer has echoed my point on the hardened positions now taken and there may be no end in sight for now in terms of tolerance or the state of affairs pre May 18, 2014 when the story broke.

    FRIDAY, JUNE 6, 2014
    Gay Lobby May Have Lost Potential Allies (Gleaner Letter) Indeed
    Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
    Indeed we have been losing some allies as evidenced by once seemingly tolerant commentators, persons on the ground and even some of my blog readers have turned on me in a sense with far more caustic responses and dismissals of any suggestion for dialogue or a truce while the dust hopefully settles.

    The talkshow circuit has been bombarded by a coordinated effort by the same groups especially POWER 106FM’s “Justice” hosted by JLP senator and former judge with some anti gay sentiments Marlene Malahoo Forte, callers have been stressing the perceived stifling of freedom of speech more so than the obvious conflict of interest posed by Professor Bain’s testimony when it was the imperative that is the issue not the content of his affidavit per say. Even prior to the Bain matter she hosted the anti gay group JCHS on her show where she asked among other things:

    “…………Do you know what was the basis of that, what it is about anal penetration that would cause lawmakers in their wisdom of yesteryear to say this is something that we need to say not at all?” the JCHS rep dodged the direct question completely by answering from a script I dare say, using terms she couldn’t bother to explain to the listening audience.

    “One of the things that people confuse is that they try to suggest that anal penetration is sex and it is my understanding that the intestine is not a sex organ it can’t procreate, buggery, it is the misuse of the anus ……it can do physical harm to the recipient in terms of the sphincter muscle going, people say you’re not gonna get HIV AIDS if you use a condom but the person being penetrated has on a condom is at risk and harm because the insides of the intestine were not never meant withstand the types of friction from that type of penetration, it tears easily and then you end up with a myriad of sexually transmitted diseases including HIV which is most easily transmitted in this type of environment, it must be noted that HIV is not only an epidemic it is a pandemic …….. The buggery law must remain as a danger sign because it does harm not only to the individual but to society and the world at large ……….”

    Nice run to not let Mrs Forte come in with any rejoinder while deliberately avoiding the direct question, I am shocked however that Mrs Forte allowed her such a long run but I guess fairness must be shown since “freedom of speech” is about to be quashed in the eyes of the JCHS. My mind runs to an older interview with Mrs Forte and Dane Lewis in June 2013 where the same HIV is a gay disease ploy was used in a set of trick questions, she asked for eg about containing conduct if after the buggery law in its present form what would obtain to which Mr Lewis answered “……….. Does the state have a right to legislate what consenting adults do in private regardless of their sexual orientation…..If we address that first then we can begin to talk about where that threshold is and so I speak about consenting adults when we talk about threshold……….. Protecting our most vulnerable which would be our young people.” He also called for the non discrimination clause that was removed in draft from the Charter of Rights.

    But it seems the wind as turned into a storm as the centrepiece of the Professor Bain issue which is the conflict of interest has been lost or clouded deliberately by fanatical religious voices making the rest of the church looking stupid and selective about certain issues as crime, kidnapped kids and the indigent do not get the same kind of erratic response from these powerful voices not to mention the millions the Gleaner especially may be raking in from the groups protesting from full paged advertisements yet people are hungry.

    The letter writer has echoed my point on the hardened positions now taken and there may be no end in sight for now in terms of tolerance or the state of affairs pre May 18, 2014 when the story broke.

    Like

  • GEORGIE PORGIE

    more notes out of jamaicaTwo years ago in Belize, Professor Brendon Bain was called up as an expert witness to give testimony in a case on which a Belizean man challenged that country’s constitution, their buggery laws to be specific.

    Professor Bain was the regional coordinator director of the Caribbean HIV/AIDs Regional Training Network, a job he earned because of his acumen as an administrator and his expertise in guiding projects and research with regard to the monitoring and controlling of the spread of HIV.

    His testimony was based, not on his opinion, but on findings of research on the spread of HIV. To quote a friend of mine, “He asked to relate the causative effects of such practices. He outlined the statistics as gathered by the organisation and why the strategy employed targeted certain groups in education and the rationale behind the allocation of resources.”

    Bias

    Some of that information did not put the homosexual community in a positive light. Now two years later, he was fired from his job because the gay lobby believes his statements during the expert testimony suggested a particular bias. Based on the affidavit I read, he spoke to findings of scientific research, not his own opinion.

    So why is he out of a job today? I am all for gay people being allowed to coexist with heterosexuals without anyone being discriminated against. Many years ago, I, like much of this country, was very much against the gay community, but I grew up and learned to respect the rights of others who were different from me. What a man or woman does in the privacy of their homes is none of my business, and while I might not agree with it, it doesn’t bother me anymore.

    And which is what bothers me about the firing of Professor Bain. The homosexual community has been fighting for respect, fighting for people to accept them for who they are, fighting for tolerance. These, I believe, are all reasonable demands. However, in that fight, I think the gay community and many of their supporters have lost sight of what they were fighting for to begin with.

    What they need to understand is that just like how they need people to be tolerant, they also need to be tolerant and accept the reality that not everything is going to paint them in a positive light. That their sexual practices put them at risk of contracting HIV is a fact established by research. Professor Bain didn’t just make that stuff up. His findings were backed by research that up to this point has not been challenged, or successfully so at any rate. So why was he fired?

    Tolerance goes both ways, and what has happened to Professor Bain could set gay rights back a thousand years. To win the fight, the gay community needs to understand that it needs to make more friends than make enemies. They have to make people believe that even though they might not agree with how they live their lives, it’s okay to let them live theirs.

    Similarly, those people who put pressure on the University of the West Indies to fire a man who is a leader in his field just because he told a particular truth that the gay community finds hard to swallow, need to come to grips that trying to swing everything the gay way is not possible. No matter what you do, not everyone is going to like you. However, if your battles end up making you more enemies than friends, then many similar battles could end up as pyrrhic victories.

    Like

  • GEORGIE PORGIE

    I refer to Gordon Robinson’s contribution titled ‘Caving in to lobby hijackers’ published in The Gleaner of May 21, 2014.

    One hesitates to enter the lists against my friend Gordon, armoured as he is with wit, knowledge and intelligence. However, I will present what I believe to be three facts, and then I will ask two questions which I hope Gordon will answer. First, the facts:

    1. Since the launch of USAID’s HIV/AIDS programme in 1986, the agency has been on the forefront of the global AIDS crisis.
    2. That agency’s position is the same as that expressed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in 2009: “Shine the full light of human rights on HIV. I urge all countries to remove punitive laws, policies, and practices that hamper the AIDS response. In many countries, legal frameworks institutionalise discrimination against groups most at risk. Yet, discrimination against sex workers, drug users, and men who have sex with men only fuels the epidemic and prevents cost-effective interventions. We must ensure that AIDS responses are based on evidence, not ideology, and reach those most in need and most affected.”

    3. The Caribbean HIV/AIDS Regional Training (CHART) Centre is funded primarily by overseas agencies: USAID, Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Health Resources & Services Administration, Global AIDS Programme, and the Global Fund.

    Now, my two questions: Was the expressed opinion of CHART’s head, Professor Bain, in consonance with the stated position of that organisation’s funders? If it was not so consonant, and in the face of very strident opinion expressed by a large number of organisations which CHART is mandated to assist, is it not the prime duty of the UWI to ensure that there is not the slightest possibility that the funding of CHART, this most critically important organisation in the Caribbean’s fight against AIDS, be in any way compromised?

    JEFFREY C. COBHAM

    Like

  • @Crusoe

    Didn’t BU highlight the incident with the little boy and the woman pooching back? No wonder the world is slipping into the sewer.

    On 7 June 2014 21:44, Barbados Underground wrote:

    >

    Like

  • GEORGIE PORGIE

    david
    note that in jamaica the bullers and wickers coalition have been suffering a backlash as a result of the Bain episode

    Like

  • We live in interesting times.

    On 7 June 2014 22:25, Barbados Underground wrote:

    >

    Like

  • David, I hope Hamilton does better than California Chrome.

    Like

  • He will have to pull the choke, he has Vettel in tow.

    On 7 June 2014 23:14, Barbados Underground wrote:

    >

    Like

  • ole man gp give it a rest and stop trying to reverse laws that outlawed years of hatred and discrimination when they rule of law was only to protect the privileged few,,halleujah the world has long jump past those hurdles and we be dammed those of us who stand and fight or HUMAN RIGHTS should so allow a few right wing lunatic nuts take us back to those years ,,,and btw don,t forget to stock up on yuh vaseline just a friendly reminder

    Like

  • The following article supports the point, this was a PR grab, nothing to do with art etc. The masses as usual have been manipulated yet again. The Emperor has new clothes!

    Why Rihanna’s CFDA Awards outfit was brilliant marketing

    One t’ing bout that red girl from Westbury Road though – she know how to mek people talk! The Dress has been dominating social media around the world for the past 48 hours and if you think that was…

    Like

  • hey david u are being watched in todays advocate jeff cumberbatch refers to one blogger on BU as a Christian serial blogger with maniacal rants,against MSM..LOL ……………………………………………………………………………………

    http://www.barbadosadvocate.com/newsitem.asp?more=columnists&NewsID=36817

    Like

  • “All gods are homemade, and it is we who pull their strings, and so, give them the power to pull ours.”
    ― Aldous Huxley

    Like

  • Dancing Shiva

    Like

  • @David,

    Fair enough, corrected on that you did highlight that woman /boy wuk up incident.

    However, I maintain my stance re hypocrisy, not re you but the general people who critique Rihanna, when such as our local reality is different.

    How can we criticize her (and not even getting into ‘that is the industry and marketing’ as you point out), when it is common knowledge of the adult men or the minibus men, with school age girls etc etc for example, just one?

    Yes, those are things needed to be corrected, but the point is, those are things that no effort has been made to correct.

    These are things that run deep. And to criticize Rihanna for superficial actions ludicrous, when our deep-seated problems are of greater concern.

    That is where I am coming from.

    Like

  • @ GP ”conflict of interest has been lost or clouded deliberately by fanatical religious voices making the rest of the church looking stupid and selective about certain issues as crime, kidnapped kids and the indigent do not get the same kind of erratic response from these powerful voices not to mention the millions the Gleaner especially may be raking in from the groups protesting from full paged advertisements yet people are hungry.”

    That paragraph caught my interest and is basically what I think about many issues, not just gay right issues.

    This includes the Rihanna thing mentioned. Where is the energy to discuss the real economic woes, the real morality decisions, the real critical decisions, rather than a proverbial red herring (in my view an individual decision).

    As per some of your notes, the ‘movement’ seems relentless. Nothing wrong with each one’s life choices, but pushing it as an agenda puts it in the position of being a distraction and red herring.

    There is simply too much time wasted on irrelevant issues rather than moving forward with progressive change in how society survives and thrives.

    Like

  • did any one hear rhianna mentioned the crop over festival in the video .i meaning that lots of naked exposure for the barbados economy…,,come on cut the girl some slac…u go girl,,,,,,,who de hell would be talking about barbados on a world wide stage in 2014 except fuh u,,,,,if u got it flaunt,,,don;t let these moral policies who ain;t got nuttin to give u stop uh thunder.

    Like

  • Another member of the slut brigade.

    Nicki Minaj is a queen. A very, very raunchy queen. http://hollywood.li/1nOy7ti

    Hollywood Life

    Nicki Minaj is a queen. A very, very raunchy queen. http://hollywood.li/1nOy7ti

    Like

  • David you should be watching the Miss USA pageant. Nice tight white bikinis.

    All beautiful LOOKING young ladies probably closer to your moral standards.

    Like

  • Dear David:

    I object to your calling our daughters/mothers/sisters/granddaughters or grandmothers sluts.

    Please do not call our aunts or female cousins sluts either.
    Please do not call any woman or girl a slut.

    We do not know who you are. Maybe you are worse than a slut.

    For all we know you may be a mass murderer or a pedeophile.

    Like

  • Take note that Robyn Rihanna Fenty DOES know time and place.

    When she was going to her grandmother’s funeral, she dressed like she was going to her grandmother’s funeral.

    When she goes to the sea, she dresses like she is going to the sea.

    When she is going to the fashion icon award ceremony, she dresses like she is going to the a fashion icon aweard ceremony.

    Some ‘o wunna old men and old women want the girl to dress like she is going to a funeral ever day of the year.

    She isn’t

    Why wunna old men don’t leave the girl alone?

    Like

  • Georgie Porgie “In ending, I want to ask: If a coalition of prostitutes sued the Government in an effort to decriminalize their practice (a direction in which some states seem to be moving), would the new head of CHART be at risk of losing his job if he testified that the activity involved in the ‘profession’ was a public health hazard?”

    Canada decriminalized prostitution long time ago. And their HIV/AIDS infection rate is much lower that ours.

    Is the lower rate due to physicians calling gay people bullers and wickers and shouting ob blogs “STOP THE BULLING, STOP THE WICKING, STOP THE PROSTITUTION”

    Or is the lower rate due to good science, good public health education, good medical support, good sense, and are their practices due to good everyday, practical, Christian love?

    Like

  • @Kevin June 6, 2014 at 10:41 AM “.If Rhianna decided to dress as a nun Bajans will still critique.”

    She dresses like a nun when she is going to funerals. Ok. That ain’t enough fa wunna?

    Ya want de girl to dress like a nun every day of the week.

    If when wunna wives was a young girl looking fa a man..wunna wouldda ask she a question if she did dress like a nun?

    Stupseee!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Like

  • @Lemuel June 5, 2014 at 5:54 PM ‘I was not making any comments here, but the way the girls gunning for you. I suggest you borrow that 2X4 that Island murduh her father with”

    Island didn’t murder she father. She only issued a minor correction…nothing more than he deserved. The old man died of old age or his own bad habits or something so.

    Like

  • @GEORGIE PORGIE June 5, 2014 at 7:02 PM “THE EVANGELICALS ARE HAPPY……….BUT THEY NOT GAY!”

    I hate to shock you but some of the evalngelicals are BOTH happy and gay.

    Like

  • @Simple Simon
    Canada decriminalized prostitution long time ago. And their HIV/AIDS infection rate is much lower that ours


    When did Canada decriminalize prostitution? Apparently you haven’t been paying attention to the news up here, the Supreme Court of Canada made a ruling against the prostitution laws in Dec.2013 and gave the Gov’t 12 months to come up with a solution which they have done recently.

    The proposed a bill which will once again address the prostitution issue, Canada did not decriminalize prostitution, there were a series of court rulings that took a bite out of enforcement and the proposed new law will take care of that….until someone decides to challenge that law.

    Like

  • Canada decriminalized prostitution generations ago.

    However soliciting remained a criminal offense.

    As did keeping a common bawdy house.

    And living off the avails of prostitution.

    The proposed bill is designed to punish those who buy sex, not those who sell sex.

    Those who buy sex are largely like Georgie Porgie and David MEN.

    Like

  • The politicians in Ottawa and their rich buddies are selfish.

    They can afford (private) escort services while the average john gine get lock up fuh buying some pun de street.

    Simple Simon as far as I know David is a big up and Georgie Porgie is a Doctor so dem doan have to buy. It does get offered to fellas like dem.lol

    Like

  • @Simple Simon

    Do you know the meaning of the word decriminalize? There was no law prohibiting the exchange of sex for money but many of the activities relating to prostitution were illegal.

    Like

  • I know the meaning of all 500,000 to 800,000 words in the English language.

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Like

  • Rihanna what are you waiting for?

    Like

  • so funny……….

    Like

  • Thanks David. That 2 seconds of twerking was pure delicate Bajan stroking.

    Now for the real heavy duty twerkin check yuh have to wait fuh BAFBFP cropover chicks.

    Like

  • So Hants:

    Why were the happy little squares dancing all over her botsy?

    Like

  • @ Simple Simon,

    I am not interested in squares dancing on Rihanna.

    That exquisite fine stroke twerk caught my attention.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @David

    What type of Johnny could you be. You really infuriated me with shite talk about slut brigades. I admire your contributions on here but this remark makes you out to be real real cunt-hole. You remind me of biblical Solomon In all of his wisdom yet he still end up doing shite that brought his wisdom to nothing. His emotions blinded him in executing sound judgement and what should have been a wise act ended up being a dump move.

    All those friggin women walking about on nude beaches are also sluts too by your standards?
    All those men and women who go to steam baths were the order is complete nudity amongst strangers are all sluts by your standards?

    The little boy screwing the sheep how would you label him (adventurous, bold, need help, a pervert, an actor of societies ills and isms or potential pedophile in the making?) How would you label the school boy and school girl having sex in a class room. Notice that the girl was branded and not the boy. Was the girl a slut and the boy a champion by your standards.
    You are bias is shite in your reasoning on this one. A faulty ass premise base on yesteryear’s’ thinking, is where you have taken this. Do you not know David that women are finding it so easy to walk around beaches topless since they see no difference between the breast of men and that women and its being accepted in many cosmopolitan societies. Its society who presents double sided views yet want taboos on specific integrities to remain intact. They say a women should not expose her breast but yet says there is nothing wrong with her being a lesbian and marrying her lesbian lover. Stuuuupse at you for shitety bias view.

    Ya ban me for cussing you; the SSS doan give a shit.

    Like

  • @SSS

    Yours is an emotional rant and understood. Any comment about a naked body, a sexual act must be placed in a context. A naked body in a situation where it is being used to be sexually suggestive versus frolicking on a beach are two different scenarios but then again you know the point being made.

    Like

  • For example, the student portrayed is not sluttish in behaviour in our opinion, why you ask?

    Photo: As beautiful as this photo is of Karlesha Thurman breastfeeding her baby at her college graduation at California State University, in Long Beach, many took to Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to attack this future accountant for feeding her daughter after she walked off stage with her degree in hand. 

We spoke with Karlesha, and she told us how the insults affected her and why she would take the photo again, despite the nasty comments she received. 

We also spoke with other Black mothers who told us about their efforts to #NormalizeBreastfeeding in America.

FULL STORY: http://newsone.com/3018051/karlesha-thurman-breastfeeding-photo/

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @David

    Yes i know the point being made. However context varies on the basis of acceptance. Its accepted here but rejected there because the environments differ and therefore should be done in respective environments society says is contextualized for that purpose.

    A few months ago the Banks Breweries girls were castigated for their nippy and very revealing swim suit wear. Society had a lot to say, yet the same society would not have condemn the same girls for practically revealing all in the body paint or in the same outfits at the foreday morning jam, if they had attended. CONTEXT.

    A female reveler in a string outfit (because that is all I could describe as) was wukking up during the grand kadooment; some stated when she bent over, nothing was left for the imagination as all was revealed. CONTEXT
    I guess because during grand kadooment an- any and everything goes policy- seem to be acceptable, after all is kadooment.

    The young lady breast feeding her child with most of her breast expose is also context because her actions serves a purpose. That too is context. So for me Rihanna’s willingness to wear the piece created by an admired designer of hers was done also in context as it was an advocacy act intended for publicity – thus CONTEXT.

    It generated much discussion and provided immense exposure from the around the world.

    I guess and maybe Ellen DeGeneres can thank her lesbian life for giving her much exposure and fame when she confessed as well…after all David she is operating with in a context. Thus the context of confession made her an attractive talk show host who was seen as honest and full of integrity. After all its all in the context things.

    Like

  • @SSS

    Your point is understood however because the context can be explained it does not mean it has to be accepted such is the nature of valuing the difference in all of us. Rihanna has a right to accept the award naked if she preferred. Because she is Barbadian, because we embrace her as our own, because she is a youth ambassador if only ceremonial, because she is used to advertise Barbados we have a right to critique her behaviour in the same way you and others prefer to give unqualified support. Capiche?

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @David

    The world accepts what it deems to be fit and applicable and rejects what it considers to be inappropriate and corruptible. We cannot measure the basis for Rihanna’s actions in the context of what is deemed appropriate or not because cultural differences prevail over geographic locations that makes one context appropriate and acceptable and another inappropriate and unacceptable. The Barbadian context is one that condemns and yet condones. Protects what it deems scared and reveals what it considers not so sacred.

    You have a right to critique her behaviour but you do not have a right to be despicable as you were sexist in your view point by the comment “another member of the slut brigade.” Capiche

    Like

  • @SSS

    How do you explain the concept of public morality?

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @David

    Just loving the way you challenging the SSS. Woo Wee. Here we go with my concept.

    The concept of Public morality predisposes the held belief that behaviour and what constitutes the act of normal behaviour is done on a set of establish moral and ethical principles. It is derived from the development of community where norm values and principles culminates into what is followed and practice thus becoming the standard or code set by that community. The principles are perpetuated by time, practice and continuity and normally becomes the establish code for conduct and approval. Any deviation from the norm principles is considered a threat to the establishment of the code and the values of that community that are considered acceptable, appropriate or even sacred. This is the establishment of community which is indicative of a society. The society then establishes mediums or arbitration should the standard or code be broken. It is called Laws.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    Time, influence, pressure and moral differences (if not to say indifference) have significantly and constantly affected the development of perceived establish- moral- and ethical standards and have challenged the accepted norm values and principles of public morality laid back in the day. Thus what was tabooed years ago, e.g extreme sexual depictions are now seen as normal sexual representations. What I mean by this: kissing was to be depicted as a modest and quick depiction representable of the movie format where shock and awe would have been the response of the viewer; nudity was at the level of dress- like- swim suits and was to be considered as a modest depiction not showing too much flesh. Now kissing and flesh like depictions are now an accepted extremity so common place that sexual depictions are nothing short of a “justifiable approved form of pornography”. We approved the nudity and the depiction of love making to the point that we can show the genitals as long as we do not show the actual genitals working in action. In other words, depict the motion and its parts in the strokes but don’t show the actual tools engaging in the pokes. But we know how that is now-a-days.

    The provide a biblical perspective as the basis for the establishment of nearly all public morality stances, the same principles can be applied where the code for conduct and moral living is carefully spelt out in the biblical concept as orchestrated by God. However evolutionary thinking and time has greatly influence the moral code of the bible to the point that it is challenged as a book of fables and out of touch with modernity, though its foundation is still firmly planted as part of the accepted moral code.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    We must come to grips with the fact that the concept of public morality has an evolutionary twist with an incumbent change. We must also understand that taboos of the public- morality -principles are specific implements that normally do not transcend all boundaries and territories. Thus the norm practices of one culture are not the taboos of another. Morality is derived from establish principles and standards that dictates behaviour. But there are not always stagnant and are therefore subject to change and challenge. We must also understand the influences of other cultural norms and value systems on another. These influences are responsible for the differences in opinions which generates much debate and in some instances leading to severe conflicts and wars. This is because the effected society will seek to defend if they perceive a threat that is abnormal, absurd and not advantageous.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    What ever is the outcome the effects of influence will weigh in the balance until perceptions change. As the things of the past concepts of public morality has undergone change from what was considered extreme and vulgar to now normal and sexy, so will perceptions of modern day extremities change. The world’s concept of public morality are evolving. For the acceptance of things tabooed is taking precedence amongst things considered to be normal and approved with great justification and in some instances- forced acceptance (e.g. Homosexuality). Does this make it right in its context? You decide.

    What we need to come to grips with is that as long as public morality is built on the principles of accepted value systems and standards as set by man than expect that man’s concept over time might change to a different belief system. For if what they say about time is true, then expect that: Time changes Everything and know that Everything mostly likely Changes in Time.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @David
    Should have submitted this to you as a topic. Stuuupse

    Like

  • @SSS

    Thanks for the response. It brings us back to the first point of the debate that there will always be tension on the moral dial which will cause it to quiver. This is all part of the process which your research validates. The point: there will be a value norm which based on time etc will be accepted and at the same time there will be the views at the fringe which may or may not be validated by the society over time and the outcome will be tension. It is a dynamic process which precludes the actors stating absolutes to support fringe behaviours. Your research on public morality can be used as a baseline position to debate the wider issue of everyday morality.

    Like

  • Watch another opinion about the Rihanna’s dress from about 6 minutes into the vid.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @David

    i listen to what this woman had to say. She stated an opinion, ask those to clap who approve of Rihanna’s extreme and many clapped. But here is the thing; she provided an opinion on Rihanna so let me tender an opinion about what i think of her.

    I think her fake ass boobs and hair, along with the obvious plastic surgery she has undergone to improve her look is totally inappropriate as well. She totally has embraced the fallacy that big boobs is sexy when the truth is, it makes women look obzockie and overly top heavy. I wonder when she takes off the fake ass hair and the make up what the heck she looks like there after. If i was a man, I would not feel good sleeping next to a modern day Frankenstein knowing that the silicone implants might one day explode in my face if I suck to hard on a nipple.

    You see David, nudity by social definition is excepted within a specific environmental context or occasion hence she criticizes Rihanna on appropriateness. But you want to tell me that altering ones appearance in the name of good looks is an acceptable reality because it does not embrace behaviour that is extreme and inappropriate? You want to tell me that it is OK to highlight lip locking exchanges between same sex couples on prime time television, where children watch and this is all acceptable?

    Two extremes, one accepted the other rejected on the basis of moral suasions when the persuasions tend towards immoral acceptances justified under what I term “commonly justifiable unacceptable behaviours..”

    Like

  • @SSS

    The vid was meant to be proactive, agree with you about Wendy goi g ‘fake’. On a positive note although anecdotal there seem to be a movement to natural in America which bodes well for Barbados?

    http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/05/30/slumping-relaxer-sales-growing-meet-ups-cement-natural-hair-stay/

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @David

    Its called the circle of life; and every aspect of the sphere past, you will find what was, you will go to what is and then you will find yourself back to embrace what use to be. So we will arrive at natural and that will be the new fab for a time, only to go back to some improve fangly dangly youth spray; or tablet that improve drooping breast to full and bouncy again; or some cream of youth that instantly replenishes wrinkle skin and white hair..

    Like

  • Where To Get cheap wholesale Lakers jerseys

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s