Month: March 2017

Immigration authorities have released a Cambodian refugee living in Minnesota after they prepared to deport him to the Southeast Asian country.

Ched Nin was released last Friday after being held by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for six months, according to a statement published Wednesday by the Southeast Asia Resource Action Center.

Nin, who came to the United States from Thailand in 1986 at the age of 6, grew up as a legal U.S. resident with a green card. He has not yet obtained U.S. citizenship. 

The 37-year-old father of five was arrested in late August after a routine ICE sweep of ethnic Cambodians, according to Katrina Dizon Mariategue, immigration policy manager for the action center. 

“It’s a testament to how tough our current immigration laws and policies are and how unjust and biased the current system is against some of the most vulnerable communities,” Mariategue told HuffPost on Friday.

Mariategue, who helped organize advocacy around his case said that Nin served two years in prison after pleading guilty in 2010 to shooting a BB gun at the back of a vehicle. He was charged with second-degree assault with a dangerous weapon.

Mariategue said a concerted effort that involved asking congressional members to pressure Department of Homeland Security helped make the case for Nin to stand before an immigration judge. Jenny Srey, Nin’s wife, led the organizing. 

While we celebrate Ched’s release, it hurts to see so many other refugee families suffering.”
Southeast Asia Resource Action Center statement

“Community advocacy played a huge role in convincing the court to re-open his case,” Mariategue told HuffPost.

The DHS did not respond to HuffPost’s request for comment. 

Nin was born in a Thai refugee camp after his parents fled the Khmer Rouge, or Communist party, genocide of 1979 in Cambodia. He is part of the “Minnesota 8” — a group of eight Cambodian-American refugees living in the state all facing deportation.

Nin does carpentry work and has two sons and three daughters, one of whom has a congenital heart condition and depends on his health insurance. He is also the primary caretaker for his elderly mother and father, who is immobile.

Though Nin had already served his prison time, a 1996 federal law known as the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act makes it easier to deport immigrants with criminal records, even if they have green cards. Deportable crimes include a host of aggravated felonies such as writing a bad check. 

Among the reasons for Nin’s release was the fact his absence would cause his family hardship and the fact he is married to a U.S. citizen, said Paromita Shah, Associate Director of the National Immigration Project.

Shah, whose organization helped consult on the legal interventions for Nin’s case, told The Huffington Post that the 1996 law doesn’t leave much wiggle room for individual cases. 

“He was put into deportation because of the harsh provisions of the 1996 laws which, in many cases, preclude lawful permanent residents from getting a hearing before an immigration judge if they have certain types of criminal convictions,” Prah said. “This means evidence demonstrating his history as a homeowner, his employment as a high-skilled construction worker, his loving family and his connections to his community would never even come into court.”

Mariategue pointed out that Nin was lucky the court was convinced enough to re-open his case and stated that the DHS under President Donald Trump will not be as forgiving. Trump rescinded a 2014 DHS memorandum under the Obama administration, which focused on deporting immigrants with a criminal record but made the case for individuals who had shown rehabilitation efforts.

She says that means immigrants will need even greater resources down the road.

“While we celebrate Ched’s release, it hurts to see so many other refugee families suffering. We’ll continue to fight on a systemic level for policies that recognize rehabilitation, second chances, and the sanctity of family,” the action center said in a statement. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

Riz MC just dropped some truth about diversity in British media. 

“Rogue One” actor, Riz Ahmed, spoke to UK Parliament earlier this month on the subject. He explained why it’s not only important to cast more minorities in television roles, but also to represent them beyond two-dimensional tropes. 

In the speech, which was caught on camera, Ahmed explored how a lack of representation can affect a person of color’s self-perception and even push minority youth into extremism. 

“If we fail to represent, we are in danger of losing people to extremism. … In the mind of the ISIS recruit, he’s the next James Bond, right? Have you seen some of those ISIS propaganda videos—they are cut like action movies,” he said in the speech, which was hosted by Channel4. “Where is the counter narrative? Where are we telling these kids they can be heroes in our stories?”

And the consequences of lacking diversity aren’t limited to losing people to extremism, the actor explained in his speech. He pointed out that minorities want to know that they’re important to society.

Ahmed described how his mother and sister would excitedly shout “Asiaaaan!” when they saw some representation on TV. He said that, especially to people who don’t usually see themselves on screen, the inclusion of those characters with diverse backgrounds sends a message that “they matter.” Unfortunately, this doesn’t happen enough in the industry. 

“People are looking for the message that they belong, that they are part of something, that they are seen and heard and that despite, or perhaps because of, their experience, they are valued.”

“People are looking for the message that they belong, that they are part of something, that they are seen and heard and that despite, or perhaps because of, their experience, they are valued,” he said. “They want to feel represented. In that task we have failed.” 

Ahmed, who added that there are economic benefits to a more inclusive industry, also mentioned that the scarcity in representation denies minorities the opportunities to be exposed to the true range of possibilities of who they can be. Our imaginations need to be as expansive and as broad as the minority community actually is, he said. 

Ahmed himself had once thought there wasn’t a place for him as an actor and nor did he feel he’d have a future playing the trope “Cabdriver #2.” It was only with encouragement and luck that he said he persevered and succeeded.  

The “Night Of” star emphasized, however, that his success ― along with that of a few other actors of color ― doesn’t point to proper inroads made in the industry’s diversity. In fact, he said these actors represent “exceptions to the rule,” citing data from Creative Skillset. The research showed that from 2004 to 2012, ethnic minority representation in the UK television industry stayed below 10 percent. Perhaps even more shocking, as Ahmed pointed out, it actually dipped from 2009 to 2012. 

“We need to step up decisively and act,” the actor concluded. “Let’s do what’s right, let’s represent.” 

“There’s this body of research and a term known as ‘symbolic annihilation,’ which is the idea that if you don’t see people like you in the media you consume, you must somehow be unimportant.”

While Ahmed was addressing officials in the UK, his remarks carry some truth when applied to the U.S. film and television industry as well. Hollywood is far from perfect when it comes to diversity. People of color nabbed just over a quarter of all speaking roles in 2015’s top movies. And when it comes to the director’s chair, Asian and Blacks were barely represented in the top movies over the past decade. 

Nicole Martins, an associate professor at Indiana University Media School, previously told the Huffington Post that lack of on-screen representation can influence one’s self-perception. 

“When you don’t see people like yourself, the message is: You’re invisible. The message is: You don’t count. And the message is: ‘There’s something wrong with me.’”

And when members of underrepresented communities are cast as stereotypes, minority viewers of color “may wonder if that is all that is expected of you in society,”  Ana-Christina Ramón, assistant director of the Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American Studies at UCLA, told HuffPost. 

So, as Ahmed wrote in a Facebook post, diversity isn’t “an optional extra. Representation is fundamental to what expect from our culture.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

Holly and Rodney Peete have a message to share with their fellow parents ― particularly those who have sons, like they do: Make sure you talk to your boys about consent.

“The concept of consent and letting your boys know when they can and when they cannot pursue a sexual encounter is very, very important,” Holly says. “These are things you have to talk to your boys about long before they go to college.”

The talk must be direct ― “No means no at any time,” Rodney says ― and must also address how to navigate the complicated situations that can arise on any campus.

“It’s all compounded with alcohol and partying and just this notion that when guys go to college, you kind of go there to have your big, fun, ‘Animal House’ kind of parties,” Holly says. “It’s just a really, really scary situation… You can’t mess around with this stuff.”

Amid the drinking and peer pressure, the Peetes urge their children to be their own person.

“You know, you hear these stories about these things happening with three or four guys with one woman,” Holly says. “Our sons need to be the guy that steps in and goes, ‘All you guys are wrong, and this can’t be.’”

“Be the leader in the group,” Rodney adds. “Do what’s right.”

The Peete’s docu-series, “For Peete’s Sake,” airs Saturday nights at 10 p.m. ET on OWN.

Need help? Visit RAINN’s National Sexual Assault Online Hotline or the National Sexual Violence Resource Center’s website.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

When then-presidential candidate Donald Trump boasted during his campaign that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody” and would not lose any supporters, he was right.

He was speaking as bully-in-chief, a man proud of not only his wealth but confident in his whiteness and the rightness of his belief that white people were being harmed by the direction the country was going. He used dog-whistle language to speak to white people who were angry because they felt ignored; part of the angst concerning immigrants and Muslims is tied into the belief held by many white people that too many people of color are coming into this country and that they are threatening the livelihood of white people.

They are white nationalists, a phenomenon which is not new and is perhaps more dangerous than is white supremacy. White nationalists feel like America was “built by white people for white people.” The ideal of pluralism notwithstanding, white nationalists are probably more comfortable with incoming immigrants if they are white and Christian. 

In 1860, Mississippi Senator Jefferson Davis, who would become the first president of the Confederacy, spoke with passion as he argued against the passage of a bill that would have funded education for black people. Davis was incensed, and said, on the floor of the Senate, “This government was not founded by negroes for negroes but by white men for white men.” He said that the bill assumed that black people were equal to whites, and that, he said, was not the case. “The inequality of the white and black races was stamped from the beginning.” (Ibram Kendi: Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, p. 3)

Whites sought to keep power and control in the hands of whites from this country’s inception and are still doing it. The phrase, “Make America Great Again” was interpreted by non-white people, but especially by African Americans, as meaning, “Make America white again.” Globalization had done something to upset the racial make up of this country, and many white people were alarmed. Pat Buchanan made a prediction that by 2063, America would no longer be a predominantly white country. Even that possibility riled white nationalists. Something had to be done. Something was done. A man got into office whose chief strategist is a white nationalist and whose attorney general is known not to be in favor of the influx of immigrants of color into this country.

The fact that the GOP has control of two of the three branches of the federal government makes it easier for the agenda of the white nationalists to get through. It feels like the White House is not a lot different than a small sheriff’s office in the South, where the sheriff knows a white man has killed a black person, but also knows there will be no justice. The good ol’ boys ― including not only the sheriff, but the judge, the attorneys and the jury ― will put the black man where he belongs: in prison or worse.

As the administration ignores the fact that Vladimir Putin is easing his way into the very fabric of American democracy, some of us shudder. As we watch the Republican Congress, and far too many Democrats, slide silently into line behind the president, we shudder. The good ol’ boys are closing ranks, and it feels like there is little anyone can do about it.

When Emmet Till was murdered in 1955, an all-white jury acquitted two white men, Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam, of the murder, though it was clear to all that they had done it, and they confessed the crime to a magazine after their acquittal. When it seems crystal clear that white police have used excessive force, resulting in the deaths of far too many black people, the good ol’ boys close ranks. They protect each other. All-white juries have historically ignored evidence of white guilt and have put far too many African Americans in prison for life or sentenced them to death, often for crimes they clearly did not commit or for crimes for which whites receive far lesser sentences.

It’s the good ol’ boys network.

It is present in the criminal justice system, in the political system and in the economic system. The good ol’ boys have no intention of yielding any of the power they feel was given to them by God at the inception of this country. Many feel that diversity is no less than an attempt to ethnically cleanse white people from America. 

It is not going to happen. The good ol’ boys network is deep and wide, and the club members are white nationalists who will do whatever it takes to keep things as they believe things should be.

We should all hold onto our hats. We are in for the ride of our lives, and America, already pulled from some its ideals, will survive, but will walk with a distinctive limp when this period of history passes. The mark of the good ol’ boys will be made, just as it was during Jim Crow. Rev. William Barber says we are in the Third Reconstruction.

We are, and it is not quite clear where America will be as a nation when the club members realizes its agenda.

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=5892393ae4b0e35f0fb3de8f,589b97dee4b09bd304bfe392

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

Do black British actors “steal” roles from African-American actors?

On Thursday, Samuel L. Jackson sparked this debate in an interview on Hot.97, where he talked about Jordan Peele’s social horror “Get Out,” and questioned how the movie might have been different had the lead black character been played by an American actor, instead of British actor Daniel Kaluuya.

“Daniel grew up in a country where they’ve been interracial dating for 100 years,” Jackson said. “What would a brother from America have made of that role? Some things are universal but [not everything].”

Jackson’s comments drew instant criticism from some people online, including British-Nigerian actor John Boyega who tweeted:

Others weighed in:

Jackson clarified his comments later that day, insisting that he wasn’t trying to slam black British actors, but rather callout the Hollywood machine, which he believes hires Brits because they’re cheaper and “classically trained” at British institutions like RADA. 

“I don’t know what the love affair is with all that,” Jackson told The Associated Press. 

So, are black British actors actually “stealing” acting jobs away from African-American stars? Of course not, but the situation is still complicated. It’s true that some things are not “universal” for all black actors, but that doesn’t necessarily have to be a bad thing. 

David Oyelowo told NPR in 2014 that, part of the reason Ava DuVernay cast him as Martin Luther King, Jr. in “Selma” was the fact that he was British, and thus would go into the role with less “baggage” than a black American actor. 

The line between which black actors can play which roles is far hazier than, say, the idea of a white actor playing an iconic black character. After all, just as black British actors like Chiwitel Ejiofor and Idris Elba have played black Americans on screen, American actors like Don Cheadle, Denzel Washington, and Forest Whitaker have played British characters. And what about African characters?

There have been at least five movies and a mini-series made about Nelson Mandela ― none of the actors who played him (Danny Glover, Terrence Howard, Idris Elba, Morgan Freeman, Laurence Fishburne) were South African. Should we draw a line there as well? Is it OK that African-born actors rarely get cast in African parts? 

This situation is far too complex to start pointing fingers and tallying up all the times a black Brit played an African-American and all the times an African-American played a brit. Because this all boils down to the politics of the entertainment industry, both in America and the U.K. 

As Idris Elba explained in an address to the British Parliament last year, there is a dearth of proper, meaty roles for black actors in the U.K. So many of them go to New York or Los Angeles for better opportunities. Indeed, Elba, David Oyelowo and John Boyega did not see their careers begin to truly flourish until they each made crossovers in American films. 

And as Jackson pointed out in his radio interview on Thursday, these actors tend to cost studios less to hire ― studios which also, according to Jackson, exotify these actors because of their training. 

“They think they’re better trained, for some reason, than we are because they’re ‘classically’ trained,” Jackson explained. 

This clash has a lot to do with the subtle forces of class and respectability politics, which have worked to divide those in the diaspora for decades upon decades. It’s all a question of inclusion, representation, and what opportunities are being afforded to actors of all kinds. Hollywood is still racist, and its racism manifests itself in many ways.

The most damaging way, of course, is that there still continues to be too few roles for a wide pool of talented actors, and the big roles generally only go to those established black actors (like Samuel L. Jackson) who’ve put in 10, 20, even 40 years in the game. A white American actor of Jackson’s stature would probably have a very different perspective about being up for a role against, say, Benedict Cumberbatch, because there would probably be 20 more good roles out there waiting for him.

The debate surrounding context and history and how that affects a black actor’s performance certainly isn’t a useless one. Thinking about how an American actor like, say, Michael B. Jordan would have played in “Get Out” is interesting to think about, but it doesn’t make Kaluuya’s performance any less profound. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

Over three years since Bevel launched, its consumers are “as diverse as one can ask for,” according to founder and CEO, Tristan Walker.

Operated under Walker’s parent company of health-and-beauty brands, Walker & Company, last year Bevel debuted on the shelves of Target and added distribution via Amazon. Consisting of a range of shaving products and signature trimmer, the popular subscription shave system is marketed as a solution for men who suffer from skin-irritation problems.

While Walker started the company to provide shaving tools for the kind of bumps and irritation that are more prevalent among black men, Walker tells HuffPost that since expanding Bevel to retail customers he has noticed more diversity amongst its clientele, which now includes women.

“We’re noticing there are different people who purchase our products offline than online,” Walker said during an interview with The Huffington Post. “I’ve mentioned in the past, a lot of folks think Bevel is just shaving for black men, but we’ve never said that, and that’s never been our thinking. We’re trying to solve a very important issue that black men and women over-index on, but everyone has.”

Though a majority of Bevel’s online customers are black men, Walker went on to add that their offline demographic is slightly skewed from its target market.

“They’re white men,” he adds. “So it’s a really interesting kind of mix of folks who buy our product, and it hasn’t affected the way that we operate either our online or offline business as a result.” 

Walker’s sharp attention to diversity and America’s census data has also resulted as a competitive advantage for the shaving startup. The Stanford University Graduate School of Business alum notes that a majority of the company’s employees includes people of color and women to mirror Bevel’s consumer base.

To that notion, Walker believes more health and beauty companies should make a concerted effort to tailor their personnel to reflect undeserved markets in America.

“You look at the larger companies elsewhere, they don’t look like or reflect the diversity of America. And they sure as hell don’t reflect the diversity of what America’s going to be like in 20 years,” he said. “This is incredibly important. So that’s how we approach it, and that’s how I hope and think everyone else should.”

As part of Bevel’s ambitions to become the industry’s leading brand for all things grooming, Walker said the company plans to release an additional line of skincare products for men and women with a range of skincare concerns, including hyper pigmentation.

Last year, Bevel received a major marketing push for its Bevel Trimmer thanks to brand ambassador-investor Nas’ lyrics on the chorus of DJ Khaled’s single “Nas Album Done.” For Walker, the hip-hop veteran underscored the company’s instinct to uplift and enrich black businesses.

“By [Nas] saying ‘My signature fade with the Bevel blade,’ everybody knows about Nas’ haircuts. So for him giving us the cosign and taking responsibility for his lineup, that’s significant,” he said. “It’s not only significant, it’s authentic. It makes sense. And also, his message is celebrating black business and empowerment and that’s something that we talk a lot about.”

Following the song’s release, the trimmer was named among GQ’s best grooming products of 2016.

“We’re thankful for that and we’re thankful that we have the partners and investors to do stuff like that on our behalf without our knowing,” he continued. “And we’re only gonna see more of that.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

On Friday, the latest onscreen version of the King Kong legend will hit theaters, and with it comes a long legacy of racially-charged undertones. 

“Kong: Skull Island,” which stars Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson and Samuel L. Jackson, will be a reboot of the original 1933 blockbuster “King Kong.” The original was a movie phenomenon in its day, and has spawned several remakes over the years, most recently “King Kong” in 2005. 

The classic “King Kong” story is about a film crew, accompanied by damsel actress Ann Darrow (played by Fay Wray in 1933), who discovers an island inhabited by “savage” natives. Eventually, the men capture a gigantic ape, King Kong, and bring him back to New York City to display him as the “Eighth Wonder of the World.” But Kong falls in love with Darrow, so he escapes and takes her with him to the top of the Empire State Building, where he’s eventually shot down by war planes. 

It’s a straightforward enough adventure story, but historically “King Kong” has been viewed by some film critics as a kind of racist allegory, symbolically depicting white America’s view of black people at the time. Critics have drawn connections between the capture of Kong and the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, with Kong’s disastrous escape in New York symbolic of the perceived “disaster” of granting black people in the U.S. true freedom. 

Of course, with each remake and reboot comes a chance to confront the racial themes in the King Kong legend. “Kong: Skull Island” director Jordan Vogt-Roberts has reportedly taken steps to distance the film from its predecessors. It will be set in 1973 and take place entirely on the uncharted island, rather than bringing Kong to the New York setting, which means there’s potential for Kong to finally shed its racially-fraught past. 

Watch the video above to see the evolution of racial themes in “King Kong” since 1933. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

A mother and daughter have charmed the internet by taking it back to the ‘90s for a viral duet.

On Wednesday, Juanita Bompart, a children’s book author and singer-songwriter known as Jita online, tweeted a video of herself singing with her 15-year-old daughter, Elizabeth Kathryn Bompart. Their song choice was a bit of a throwback; they sang “Impossible” from the 1997 TV movie “Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Cinderella.” The sweet mother-daughter moment has been retweeted more than 8,000 times as of Friday afternoon.

Juanita told The Huffington Post that she and her daughter recorded the video in January and that music is a “huge part” of their lives. They have both written and recorded songs that are available on iTunes and Amazon. 

“Growing up in a house around singing parents, Elizabeth sang as well from the time she could make sounds,” Juanita said.

The proud mom said that the song “Impossible” has special meaning for her and her daughter because it “confirms that nothing is impossible.”

“It was the special remake with the first African-American Cinderella and Fairy Godmother, which were undoubtedly well played by Brandy and Whitney Houston,” Juanita said. “Again, proving that anything is possible!”

Juanita said the reaction to the video has been “indescribable.” Aside from getting thousands of retweets, their duet racked up more than 94,000 views in a day on the Facebook page Because of Them We Can.

The mom and daughter hope to share more clips of their performances in the future and maybe even travel to spread their music. 

“Given the opportunity, we would sing and share beautiful music forever!” Juanita said.

The HuffPost Parents newsletter offers a daily dose of personal stories, helpful advice and comedic takes on what it’s like to raise kids today. Sign up here.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

Marriage therapy only works if both partners are committed to the process. But by the time some couples schedule an appointment, one or both partners has already checked out. 

Below, marriage therapists around the country share seven reasons to head to therapy sooner than later. 

1. Struggling alone does you no favors. 

“The average couple that comes in for therapy has been struggling for about six years. This means they’ve been unhappy for much longer than they needed to be. One reason to get into therapy early is to get ahead of the curve and address issues before they become problems.” ― Zach Brittle, a therapist and founder of the online couples therapy series forBetter

2. “Solvable” problems may escalate to entrenched, bitter hurts.

“Couples who reach out earlier for support when things are amiss often head off a caustic, ugly pattern of hurting each other in ways that are hard to forget or forgive. Marriage therapists should be able to help partners identify the ways they express themselves when they are hurt or angry and to recognize how they may unintentionally put their partners on the defensive.”― Linda Lipshutz, a psychotherapist in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida

3. Asking tough questions now will save you a world of hurt later. 

“In my opinion, the ideal time for couple’s therapy is pre-engagement. Like, way pre-engagement ― pre-ring, pre-asking-for-blessings. When you both agree that marriage to one another is a solid possibility for your future, that’s when to schedule a handful of appointments of pre-engagement counseling. So many of the issues I see from long-married couples stem from fundamental problems that could have been caught long before the wedding: People who suddenly realize two years after marriage they have opposing views on whether or not to have children. Couples who have wildly different stances on spending and saving. Couples who suffer for years due to different attitudes toward sex that emerged long after their wedding. A few sessions with a therapist who can ask the hard questions could save you from years of misery or at least let you know what you’re signing up for.” ― Ryan Howes, a psychologist in Pasadena, California

4. You lose empathy for your spouse the longer you stay bitter.

“When issues remain unresolved, resentment can create a large and ugly divide between two people. This often manifests as lack of empathy, disinterest and at times, even disrespect. Go to therapy before arguments seem insurmountable because one or both of you have become apathetic.” ― Talia Wagner, a marriage and family therapist in Los Angeles, California

5. The earlier you nip problems in the bud, the better. 

“I’d say roughly two-thirds of all relationship problems are perpetual. That means they’ll be around for the duration of the relationship and, for the most part, will be unsolvable. Couples waste a lot of time trying to solve unsolvable problems. Therapy can help you prioritize ‘repair,’ or staying connected over ‘resolution,’ which is often out of reach.” ― Zach Brittle

6. Crisis is a horrible time to work on things. 

“I often share a folksy old saying with my clients: ‘It’s best to fix the roof when the sun’s shining.’ We all know that when we’re in the midst of crisis we make hasty, impulsive decisions that strive for immediate safety instead of long-term sustainability. Maybe you’ve noticed the relationship is strained every time a partner has a job change and you see a new career shift on the horizon. The wise choice may be to go to counseling now, when things are still calm, to learn tools to cope with the changes. It’s OK to go to counseling when things seem ‘fine’ so that you are more resilient when they aren’t. Even the strongest marriages will encounter tough times eventually, and it’s good to be equipped when they come.” ― Ryan Howes

7. And ultimately, life is too short to be miserable in your marriage. 

“Finding yourself regularly feeling disappointed and flat about your relationship is no small thing. Getting help early is more likely to be beneficial than waiting because you’re probably both still open to change and not yet so resentful or tired, to stop wanting to try. Sadly, one of the most common mistakes couples make is to shut their eyes and keep falling deeper into resentment and avoidance of growing distance, hoping things will just magically fix themselves. Most of the time, they don’t. Don’t waste time ― life is too short.” ― Debra Campbell, a psychologist and couple’s therapist in Melbourne, Australia and the author of Lovelands

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related Stories + articlesList=57db09dde4b08cb1409491ad,5817799de4b0990edc32890c,57e9a7e3e4b0c2407cd8d729,5877f15de4b09281d0e9f217

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices

For former inmate and current criminal justice reform advocate Glenn Martin, his journey over the bridge connecting New York City to the infamously violent Rikers Island was the longest ride of his life. 

“There’s something about approaching Rikers and that penal colony that sucks the oxygen out of a person’s chest,” Martin told The Huffington Post on Tuesday.

The facility is one of the focal points of a new Spike docuseries “TIME: The Kalief Browder Story,” which follows the experiences of a young man who spent three torturous years on Rikers Island and made several attempts to kill himself while there.  

The docuseries explores the many injustices Browder ― who remained in Rikers because he was unable to afford bail for allegedly stealing a backpack ― faced on Rikers. Browder was held in solitary confinement and repeatedly attacked by inmates and guards in the prison. Two years after his return home, Browder remained haunted by these memories. He died by suicide in June 2015, at the age of 22. 

Browder’s short life underscores the urgent need for a more humane alternative to Rikers, and Martin has a solution in mind: closing the prison altogether. 

Like Browder, Martin first went to Rikers when he was just 16 years old. So he’s no stranger to the damaging psychological effects the island can have, especially on young minds. 

“Think of everything that makes [you] unhappy and think of all those things being applied simultaneously,” Martin said. “It feels like a merging in all of the worst things this world has to offer and that human beings have to offer.”

“At a time when young people are trying to figure out their identity and who they are in this world, New York City sends them a strong message about their lack of value,” he said. 

On his second day in the facility, Martin said he was stabbed four times as corrections officers laughed and told Martin that if he wanted to receive medical assistance, he’d be looked upon as a snitch. 

Martin said inmates have two choices upon entering Rikers: to become predator or prey.

“You learn how to sleep with your eyes open,” Martin said. “You go into survival mode. Every moment of every minute is about trying to read what’s happening around you to stay alive.”

Think of everything that makes [you] unhappy and think of all those things being applied simultaneously.”
Glenn Martin

After being transferred to a New York state prison, Martin realized that not all prisons operated as Rikers did, and that some could actually be rehabilitative. 

“I was able to see how much of the problem with Rikers is actually Rikers,” he said. 

After being released from the state prison ― where he earned an associate’s degree in liberal arts ― in 2000, Martin began advocating for criminal justice reform, meeting with influential figures like Sandra Day O’Connor and former President Barack Obama. He also met with New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, who would become the focus of Martin’s campaign to shut down Rikers Island. 

After being invited to attend the mayor’s inauguration in 2014 and hearing him speak of New York’s “tale of two cities” ― in reference to the socioeconomic gap among the city’s residents ― Martin was inspired to make an appointment with the mayor to share his vision of closing Rikers. But when Martin approached de Blasio about the issue, he said the mayor pretty much dismissed him.

That year, Martin founded JustLeadershipUSA (JLUSA), an organization dedicated to cutting the prison population in half by 2030.

The org also initiated the #CLOSErikers campaign in 2016. The campaign is one of few grass-roots movements fully devoted to closing the prison and remedying the damage it has caused innumerable New Yorkers, including Browder. Martin said #CLOSErikers is focused on capturing the attention of the one person with the power to close the prison: de Blasio.

Martin said that despite de Blasio’s mayoral campaign promises of wanting to reform the criminal justice system and end the “tale of two cities,” all he’s seen thus far is a “tale of two mayors.”

In February, JLUSA sponsored a commercial calling de Blasio out for what it saw as hypocrisy.

“We’re going to continue to remind the mayor that you can’t continue to say you’re a national progressive leader and have a torture island in your own backyard,” Martin said. 

And he means it. In addition to appearing at de Blasio’s events in NYC, Martin said members of the campaign also show up to de Blasio’s out-of-state events. When the mayor traveled to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a few days ago, Martin said campaign members were right there to greet him.

Commenting on the encounter in Florida, the mayor said he admired the group’s ardency, and that his administration has been looking into everything that would be required to close the prison. 

“I said to [the campaigners], ‘Look, we’re looking at all the possibilities around Rikers.’ I said, ‘Anything we do is going to take time,’” the mayor recounted Monday, according to a transcript his office sent the HuffPost. “It’s going to be difficult. It’s going to be costly even if we got in a position to consider closing Rikers, you’d still have to build additional facilities elsewhere.”

JLUSA also seeks out de Blasio’s biggest donors regularly to inform them about the troubling issues with Rikers Island. 

“He’s going to get enough of us,” Martin said. 

In addition to getting the mayor’s attention on the issue, #CLOSErikers also provides leadership training for those that have been affected by Rikers ― including former offenders ― to publicly communicate to others why the city should end operations at the prison. 

The movement has garnered the support of over 125 organizations, including the ACLU, and attracted attention from celebrities like John Legend and Russell Simmons.

In 2015, the campaign urged the mayor to consider removing 16- and 17-year-olds from the facility, which may have played a role in de Blasio’s 2016 announcement of his plan to transfer anyone under 18 from the island within the next four years. (New York is one of two states in the country that will prosecute anyone 16 years of age or older as an adult.)

While some could find it unrealistic ― or unfair ― to put the responsibility of closing Rikers on a single politician, Martin said he’s fully aware of the scope of the campaign’s request. De Blasio said he “went over some of the complexities” of closing Rikers with the Florida campaigners, but Martin pointed to one of the mayor’s recent proposals.  

“There’s also a lot of complexities involved with building a light rail from Brooklyn to [Queens], and he seems to be really interested in doing that,” Martin said, referring to de Blasio’s push for streetcars that would connect the two boroughs. 

“So if people are getting tortured on a remote island 200 feet away from LaGuardia Airport, I would think that you would invest just as many dollars ― and just as much expertise ― to save people’s lives as you would to get people to work a little bit quicker,” he said. 

But even if Rikers does close, Martin said he doesn’t want the advocacy efforts surrounding the island to end there. He wants to repair the damage it has had on families throughout the state. 

His sentiment echoes that of Browder’s mother, Venida, who died 16 months after her son’s suicide. 

Before her death, Martin was able to share a stage with Browder’s mother at The New School in New York City. Afterward, they had a conversation about her visits to Rikers to see Browder while he was imprisoned there. During the conversation, Martin recalled her repeatedly saying that she wants justice for her son.

“Kalief Browder gave his life for a reason,” Martin said. “His mother said that what she really wants for her child is justice … I think that keeping his story alive, keeping his sacrifice alive, helps us all to be reminded of why we need to be more urgent in our efforts to move toward a fairer criminal justice system.”

Martin has also developed a relationship with one of Browder’s brothers, Akeem, whom he talks to every other day. 

“His brother’s messaging aligns with his mother’s messaging, which is he’s not going to rest until he sees justice for his brother,” Martin said.

“And that no amount of resources in the city of New York is going to repair the harm,” Martin continued. “[But] what will repair the harm is the shuttering of the facility that killed his brother and the emergence of a criminal justice system that doesn’t cause the kind of human carnage that Rikers Island does.”

Seventy-nine percent of prisoners at Rikers are awaiting trial for their alleged crimes and have not yet been convicted. If you’d like to contribute to the #CLOSErikers movement, you can donate or sign up to volunteer through their website. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Source: HuffPost Black Voices