Right hooks, Uploads, and Consequences

'>https://www.youtube.com/v/A6Mpq6Zn9zU?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0">

“So run away with your fist fight ways; Mutha***** this aint back in the days….Things done changed.” Notorious B.I.G.

Many of us have been there. Glasses hit the floor, voices raise, everyone’s attention shifts, bouncer rudely rush through the crowd, the music either decreases or stops altogether, and that one annoying girl/woman either screams or yells something stupid like “Oh my God” or the ever so clever “Stop!!!” (because that always works). Yes people, it’s a bar/club fight – welcome. Or at least that was what a bar/club fight was like; these days the scenes and happenings are a bit different.

Bravado or machismo has never been so costly. These days, fist fights turn into hospitalizations, national embarrassment (more on that later), permanent bodily damage, or in worst cases – death. Wow, how could I forget jail time? Actually, a close, married friend of mine with child was incarcerated for a little over a year, for his participation in a fight just outside of a night club here in Manhattan. He not only lost a year of his life and invaluable quality time with his son and wife, he lost his job and his clean record. In another incident, a childhood friend’s father was involved in a fist fight that lead to a hospital bed and thousands of views on the internet’s popular video sites “Youtube.com” and “Worldstarhiphop.com”. Although there are obvious connections between these two incidents-like the fact that both of them took place in Manhattan, involved violence, and had horrible outcomes-there are two that people may overlook: the ease with which these incidents begun and why they carried on as long as they did.

In the first event, my friend, let’s call him “Rob” was only trying to protect his brother “Reggie.” We now live in a time where the very idea of a “fair fight” is obsolete. Teens, and adults alike, “ratpack” or “jump” their enemies for fear of what nasty outcome awaits their friends or family members. Outsiders may blame low self-control; I don’t know that I disagree, perhaps it is a combination of both–see, although, I’m always right, I can allow others to feel that same satisfaction… sometimes. Nonetheless, it was this very fear-as Reggie and Rob were outnumbered-that lead to Rob actually joining in and protecting his brother. Some people will lie–or tell the truth in few cases- and say that they would have called the cops before they joined in, but if my younger brother were involved and outnumbered there is no way I’m simply spectating. Unfortunately, many of you are like me, and can agree that you would have done the same thing, and thus been involved in a life changing debacle.

In the second situation with my friend’s father -let’s call him Tony’s dad-it was the ever–so- common war of egos. You’ve seen it or been a part of it: what starts off as a trivial disagreement, features one or two comments too many that take the heated conversation to a series of verbal chest bumps, and soon both parties are too deep into a battle to retreat. Well to make matter worse, in this scene Tony’s dad had an audience of instigators who were absolutely no help to the situation. You know the kids who talk a huge game until you say something like, “well why don’t you fight them?” and their pile of excuses is almost as big as the pile of excrement they are-I know “excrement”? really? Sorry, my mother reads this blog. Let’s just call them “punks”. If one were to watch this video-yes the video
was quickly uploaded and received several tens of thousands of views in its first week on both of the aforementioned websites-we can see that Tony’s dad was trying to appeal to his opponents more rational side by asking him if they were really about to fight over the (Mcdonald's public) bathroom. With the instigators and the challenging comments made by both parties, he was unsuccessful in his efforts, and was on the bad end of a street fight turned beat down. While watching this video, it was easy to see how this escalated into a situation neither man may have anticipated.

The only thing that could have stopped those two men from fighting was a cooler-headed bystander, and in an ideal world that bystander would have showed up and stepped in. In our world, however, fear of a weapon has become much more powerful and paralyzing. It seems that it is easier to find a gun or a knife than it is to find a hero-and in no way am I calling for a hero because capes aren’t bullet proof. The only thing more alarming than our paralyzed heroes is the sad fact that people would rather record an assault than stop one. I can honestly say, I’ve seen more fights in the past 365 days than I have in my 20 years before that – yes I’m only 21 in my mind…ugh the digression-thanks to the internet and the many who find violence entertaining. Maybe we are all victims of reality television. It’s unscripted and unexpected violence and drama has become a source of both adrenaline and amusement. If only reality T.V. were all about the Kardashians, perhaps the world would be a better place…no?

Whatever the case is, I fear for my children who I want to be tough enough to defend themselves but smart enough to walk away. For what good is the pride we try so hard to protect, if we are deceased or brain dead?

Undesired higher standards

“With great power comes responsibility,” aint that how it
goes?

When one thinks about the wars, let’s say in the early half of the 20^th century, he/she envisions fallen soldiers, air raids, proud platoons, single-shot weapons, cigarette smoke, young- fresh faces, old-scarred faces, trenches, fatigues, and grenade induced explosions. Problems back then consisted of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), lost limbs, tense and/or strained marriages, absentee fathers, and at worst, death. Of course, none of the aforementioned images and/or problems was the main or most consistent. For a person never knew what his/her loved one was going to experience when he was hauled off to war. That, of course, was due to the fact that there was only one rule in warfare: There are no rules.

The "all's fair" rule is still in effect today. Sure, the Geneva Convention’s very purpose was and is to prevent overly inhumane acts from happening during warfare. But let’s be honest, war itself is an inhumane act. In fact, we can only expect worse in the atmosphere of modern warfare – by the by,(I told myself I wouldn’t digress as much moving forward but despite my super hero ways, I am only human!) Modern Warfare is an excellent game series and in the latest installment of the game, I am currently ranked between 500-700 internationally in Free-For-All...yea I'm that good-ok I'm done. Unfortunately, in modern warfare the use of technology enables humans to play God from distances that are all but a world away. With this technology we see less of that up-close and personal violence that tends to fold for compassion. So of course, humans are to be less prepared to yield to their own guilt when confronted with a chance to have a one-on-one with an enemy-be he alive or not.

With all of this said, it is a bit unrealistic for people to be shocked at the marines who desecrated the deceased bodies of the Taliban members. I would argue that there have been worse things done when the cameras were recharging their batteries, and soldiers were thinking of their lost brothers rather than their mission objectives. How many of us have wanted to castrate the penises of molesters and rapists, or torture the murders of loved ones, or the drug dealers who sold our aunts, uncles, moms or even fathers their last pill of destruction? As humans we often want some sort of violent compensation for a life or lives lost. It is more natural than it is not. Is war not full of the same feelings. Are many of our current soldiers not fueled by some patriotic duty that has its foundation in revenge for events like 9/11? War, itself, is not intended to be pretty or made for T.V. ; it’s intended to sacrifice peace and life for a gain that was deemed necessary and worth the means by people of power.

So do we punish the marines who were filmed urinating on the dead members of the Taliban? If so, why do we punish them? Do we punish them for the act of peeing, or because they are marines and they should be held to a higher or super hero standard? Or are we punishing them because they were caught on film and others now have access to this evidence? Or how about this, do we punish them so we don’t set precedence, because we fear that there may be worst repercussions than we’ve already experienced in our dealings with the Taliban? My answer: We punish them because don’t promote the desecration of dead bodies on any soil by any military, and we certainly don’t condone our elite officers-the marines- acting as untrained and animalistic as normal civilians would in such conditions. Essentially, if they do it, what's to stop lesser soldiers from doing the same if not worse-unless of course they are already partaking in such actions...hmmm. It sounds and feels hypocritical but we must hold them to a higher standard because our marines are held to the standard that athletes, politicians, celebrities, and the like are held to; we must punish them for forgetting that they cannot make mistakes. They deserve it just as much, if not more than Bill Clinton did for cheating – we’ll go with the impeached for lying excuse…- and Newt Gingrich deserves to be ostracized for wanting an open marriage with his ex-wife, and Michael Jackson (may he Rest In Peace) deserved his decades of abuse from the public. Why? The answer is simple. When you place yourself in the public eye or at the top of a social/financial ladder you must remember you can’t make the mistakes that we mere humans make.

In short, go ahead and punish the marines they deserve it. But be aware of the real reason behind their punishment.

Link for Marine video - http://youtu.be/CNxc37O4-NI

Relationships and double standards

When you break a relationship down to its birthday suit, there's no need or invitation for double standards...but they exist nonetheless?


The true purpose of a relationship is to find someone whom you are attracted to on more than just a physical level. Essentially, we're all looking for someone we can hang out with and experience new, fun, and exciting things with -wait, did I forget to mention get frisky with occasionally (or frequently if you're in shape and your drive is like that of a young handsome male who moonlights as a rapper and/or blog writer...there I go digressing again)- for however long time and circumstance permits. When one thinks of relationships in a 50-50, buddy buddy with loving benefits, kind of way, double standards and socially constructed roles seem unnecessary or, dare I say, dangerous.


Perhaps these roles and double standards date back to when women couldn't vote and therefore did not make as many decisions as men; or maybe even further back when men went off to war to defend the country and women were expected to stay home and keep the dinner warm and the children fed; or perhaps we can break these roles down the hunter and gatherer and his woman relationship; or maybe, just maybe all of this started because Eve, after receiving the rib of life from Adam, showed her appreciation by manipulating her man into eating that damn apple (can I say damn while referring to stories of the Bible? No? Okay, I definitely will not then) and was therefore doomed to be on the short end of the double standard stick for the remainder of eternity. Whatever the case is, these roles only add stress to a relationship whose sole purpose is to add enrichment and joy to the two individuals involved. Somewhere down the line, however, the following double standards came about:

-The man is the chaser and he must prove himself worthy to the woman before she accepts him. This usually includes lots of courting, chivalry, and patience. Why does the man have to chase? my theory: because a woman has to physically (when you think of our adult dancing equipment) open up and let a man in. So, while a man is free to roam, explore, and "poke" around, a woman has to be more cautious than a man. Therefore he must chase.

-If a man hangs out with his woman too much he is seen as clingy or "soft" because, of course, men are supposed to dislike hanging out with their women for long periods of time; It's unmanly.

-Women are to suspect their men of being mischievious, unfaithful, and unworthy of angel like behavior 95% of the time. This can be summed up in one idiom - All men are dogs (note: this idiom has taken on many forms in different communities i.e. "All men are pigs" or the ever popular "Men aint sh**"-that one is popular wherever many of my ex-girlfriends are...)

Now don't get me wrong, There are a few double standards that are negatively geared towards women, like those mentioned above are negatively geared towards men. Here are a few:

-If you cheat, we're done. Even if you've accepted the fact that I've done it 20.5 times (that half time means I day dreamed about cheating with your gorgeous cousin, who thinks i'm just the nicest person because I make sure she's invited to all of our family functions...errr...I'll stop there)
Now we could possibly attribute this double standard to the past when a man was a man and anyone who tried him or his family was to be shot or beaten to within inches of his life; where six shooters, and bar brawls were the only way to settle differences between men; where we road horses and used spittoons for our tobacco, where Wyatt Earp took on an entire gang and survived because men were men! So of course with that kind of foundation, having a woman who was unfaithful was never even thought of. She'd have more than a Scarlet A burned into her skin, because you just didn't break a MAN'S heart in those days. But the truth of the matter is our egos and our pride will never let us forget that our woman, our only weakness in the world, actually found a man who was just as, if not more appealing and attractive than we are. So we call her a "hoe" and a "slut" because she forced us to live out our worst nightmare and focus on all of the insecurities that we use our money, muscles, and attitude to overcompensate for and hide. ...There I said it!

-The woman in the relationship must be the first to cook, clean, and take care of the children while the man goes out and does what he deems necessary for himself first and the family second. This one obviously dates back to the good old days when women did it all at home and the men were free to come and go as they pleased because they were the bread winners. (I feel like there's a typo in that last sentence I just can't figure out which word should not be there...if you find it let me know.)

All in all, the double standards and the expectations are responsible for 75% of the unnecessary stresses we see in our relationships; the other 25% can be attributed to poor decision making. When you think about it, a relationship is hard work anyway. Two different people from two different upbringings are conjoining their lives and trying to maneuver through life and all of its traps, opportunities, and challenges. I tend to naively think that my gay friends have better relationships and less issues than we heterosexuals do because they don't have to deal with some of these silly gender-based-double standards; which might I add is only because gay relationships have been taboo throughout our history for some odd neanderthalish reason (Legalize gay marriage everywhere please and thank you!) If you're in a relationship, or you plan to be in a relationship anytime soon, be sure that what you're doing is because you genuinely want to do it either with or for the person you are with. Don't just do things because society has decided you are supposed to do it. It's your relationship, and as my mother always says, "You'll have to trust that you will get out of it, what you put into it."

P.S. there are plenty of other double standards, I just listed the first ones to come to mind. Feel free to add some in the comment section. Happy Loving, people.

It's been a long time...I shouldn't've left you....

If you're wondering what I've been up to and why in the world I haven't been catering to my first love - writing - it's because I've been cheating. But the cheating is for the better of our relationship (fellas that line never works in real life, please don't try it). I've been back on my music grind - and by grind I mean hard work that requires time and energy. I've been doing hip hop shows in and out of state; I released two mixtapes in 2011, each of which featured 19+ tracks (and can be found on www.datpiff.com if you search for Son of Sin; radio interviews, hip hop cyphers for Youtube videos; helped a few close friends develop their sound in music; attended meet-and-greets to make my face more familiar in places where it needs to be; linked up with my music partner Landie Love; created a new sound for myself (more on that later); been in music videos; recorded more music in one year than some artists do in a lifetime; all while maintaining a 7am - 5pm job and taking care of a family that includes twin-2-year-old sons who are attending school (not day care but actual school WITH HOMEWORK!). Now say all of that three times fast (while spinning on your knee shouting "I'm a B-Boy standing in my B-Boy Stance!"... I digress). I've done all of this to make my life richer with experience and to fully embrace my return to music. See writing? I did it all for you; I do love you, boo! (If she could, "writing" would probably slap me for that line.)

In my return to music, I've decided to forgo worrying about getting a major record deal, or being famous. I'm satisfied with making music and having it heard by the people who support me in whatever I do. To those people I say, thank you and I love you for always sticking by me and pushing me to do my best. With that said I've brought back the old Son of Sin who's a battle rapper gone introspective. Reflecting on past experiences from a few different perspectives. 2011 was dedicated to Son of Sin as well as Sdot Odot Sdot. Sdot Odot Sdot is the part of me that is more playful, easier to relate to, and can be played for a demographic ranging from 13-35. 2011 was the year of the Timeless Music Movement that I originated, and the name says it all.

2012 is dedicated to Sdot and his part in the W.A.S.H. Music Group's movement. Sdot is the playful partier who aims to have fun at any expense; for life is too stressful to keep the playful side of me trapped inside. We'll see how well my supporters take this other side of me. 2012 is dedicated to trying a new lane with my W.A.S.H. Music Group.
I don't know what life has in store for 2012, but I'm going to make sure whatever it is, is the result of hard work and dedication. Stay tuned.

P.S. - Whether it's school or home, my sons' vocabulary is well over 100 words and they can count to about 25...I will brag about them before anything else, I love my kids!!!