https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBf3vcs1ycI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K4JpvIjgJo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mVdqsG58Fk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSPhaJmWt2Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wsxXCkk8O4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfexXVVTExY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjFYwil7qC4

Monicam:
Hello! Just stopping by to say "Hey!" This is the product I used to help grow my natural hair. I did the big chop 20 months ago, and now I'm at shoulder length!

www./GrowLongHair2day

Enjoy!

thanks for the post

[b]According to E!Online, Charlize Theron did not try to get Tia Mowry banned from their fitness class.

More specifically, the site reports:

“Charlize Theron may have played an evil queen, but she isn’t going around lording it over people at SoulCycle. In response to a report that Theron wants Tia Mowry banned from the celeb-favored spinning franchise in the wake of an alleged exchange-gone-wrong between the two of them, a source assures E! News that “this is totally fabricated and completely not true.”

Phewsh, well that is a sigh of relief! I thought for a second we might have to get Iyanla Vanzant to shake a calabash full of cowry shells around those two or something. Of course, there is still the matter of the original incident, where Mowry alleges Theron rudely cut down her introduction with an “Oh My God!” But honestly, who cares? Amirite?

Seriously, who really cares that Theron didn’t speak to Mowry at SoulCycle? For one, what the hell is SoulCycle? I don’t know, I do Zumba. And secondly, is there some sort of law, which requires us to speak to the Mowry sisters all the time? Because if so, I want that law struck down and the Congressman, who introduced it, impeached and tried for treason.

What I’m saying is that there could be hundreds of reasons why she didn’t speak to Mowry. Theron could be an introvert, who doesn’t particularly like strange and unfamiliar women interrupting her SoulCycle class for her. Or she could not have recognized the one-half of the stars from “Sister, Sister.” Or she simply could be she is just not a fan of the goodie-two shoe twin spawns of Claire Huxtable’s respectability and just really wanted her to go away. That is a huge possibility and I wouldn’t be mad at Theron in the least if that is the case. Or Theron could just be a big, fat (physically skinny) racist. That could be a possibility right?

No. Well, why not? Eye roll. Oh yeah, the African thing…

What most annoys me about this story is reading comment thread after comment thread of Black folks in particular, denouncing even the possibility that racial bias played a part in Theron’s rude behavior simply because Theron grew up in South Africa. Now, I’m not saying that Theron is racist or even her exchange with Mowry was racial. I’m saying that we shouldn’t instantly exclude the possibility of racism – or even give her a pass – simply because she might know some Black people in Africa.

Yes, this is totally petty. But it is pettiness spawned out of years of hearing Black folks make ridiculous claims about Theron’s relationship to blackness. The belief, as it has been told to me since this White woman stepped on the scene confusing everybody, is that Theron, who was born and reared on a small farm in Benoni, Transvaal Province, South Africa, is more African than most African Americans because she was born in South Africa around native Africans, so by default, she’s African too – or more specifically, an Afrikaan. Sounds confusing. Yeah, well you know how I feel every time some one says this to me.

And yet Black folks specifically repeat this sophistry proudly and with a straight face. And also without the least bit of irony. You know the kind that might make one think about colonialism and imperialism. At the very least, the apartheid system in South Africa, which by design, was created to keep native African culture separate and subjugated under whiteness including the Afrikaners

And especially the Afrikaners.

For those, who don’t know, the Afrikaan language and culture is a derivative of the language and culture of early Dutch European “settlers” (‘cuz folks were already inhabiting those lands they “settled” into), who arrived along the coast of modern day South Africa in the mid 1600s. You can read this Wiki page for the full history of the Afrikaners (and definitely check out the annotations at the bottom of the page in case you need more insight).

But just to highlight some points: despite being in a land of Black people, the Dutch “settlers” were kind of separatist (some owned Black slaves) and made sure to keep themselves insular from the natives, hence the “founding” of two provinces called Orange Free State and Transvaal, which later became the birthplace of everybody’s favorite African American, Charlize Theron. As well as the creation of their own language, Boer-culture and even religion, known today as Afrikaan. And by 1948 this “culture” and its Afrikaan Nationalist Party would gain control of the South African government and begin restricting Africans (the Black kind) from having access to housing, education, employment, citizenship (got-damn citizenship on their own land) and even voting rights in the government.

Now the point of this rushed history lesson is to get folks thinking of the ridiculousness of calling an “ethnic” group, which intentionally existed separately from actual Africans, African. An “ethnic” group, which still has largely white-only enclaves in apartheid South Africa. An “ethnic” group, which contains a loud and vocal subgroup of “ethnic” Whites called the Boers, who even to this day feel that they are entitled to homeland in South Africa because God supposedly told them that. And a group, who also to this very day, is identified South African National Census – not as Black or coloured or Asian – but as White.

Because even in Africa, a white person is to be still treat and regarded as a white person. And yes, there is also a Wiki page for that.

So yeah, Theron might be an Afrikaner from South Africa but she is no African. Now does her Afrikaan heritage make her a racist? In all truthfulness, one can make a very good case that the whole culture was formed out of White supremacy, so therefore, yeah! Not to mention her tone-deaf response to Viola Davis’ comments about the lack of roles for Black women in Hollywood. At the very least, she is pretty aloof.

With that said, she also adopted a Black baby boy, so that means something right? But now that I think more about it, so did Madonna. And Strom Thurmond had a Black kid too. His was even biological. Point is, using a non-Black person’s affinity for Black folks, including their abilities to not be racist, based on arbitrary reasons like who they might live by, date or even call family is a huge mistake. One made with foggy blinders on, which probably got cloudy during SoulCycle class.[/b]
http://madamenoire.com/456792/no-charlize-theron-is-not-african/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0czsuSBXM0

CAMNEWTON4PRES:
Good Less paedophiles

lol

Fulaman198:


Looks like my bro beat me to the punch

Yup he did lol

bigfrancis21:


Done.

Thanks big francis

Fulaman198:


Odd, clear your browser's cache, and try again please

Fulaman can you bann this thread: https://www.nairaland.com/2718774/why-east-africans-better-looking

Why he is on nairaland baffles me but I feel anytime he post deragatory threads against Nigerians he should be banned

Can this thread be banned and the op: https://www.nairaland.com/2718774/why-east-africans-better-looking

fifteen1:

Why r u asking? Do u want to rub them.

No I don't want to rob them but I guess you do since your mind is there

Vixxie:
When i was in Turkey, i was also treated differently. Sometimes, traders will not collect a dime from me after serving me tea or food (cheap items of course). At other times, strangers will give me free rides.
I really don't think it's a Nigerian thing. People are generally more intrigued by foreigners and sometimes give them special treatment.

I agree, I think in most countries in old world continents that is expected, their not used to it

SpYiceY:
ABOUT THE PENIS....
Tips to keep yo penis clean, sweet and healthy.
As a man, keeping your penis healthy and sweet is
important. Your sexual organs are very valuable
and must be cared for.
1. A clean penis is very important so wash your penis with warm water at least twice a day. Clean
the scrotum and under the penis shaft gently and
scrub your scrotal sac too.
2. Leaving too much hair around the penis is not
cool. During sex,the hair can cause cuts on the
organs and condom. Also, hair around the base of the penis can be breeding ground for boils and
cause bad odour so Shave or keep it short and
clean.
3. Don't pamper the penis too much, As soon as
you notice an infection, boil, rashes, please get help
immediately. 4. Many guys wear one boxer for a whole week or
even a month but for health reasons pls change
your boxers everyday. Dirty boxer may give your
penis a permanent bad smell and a bad taste.
5. Guys what you eat affects the taste of your
semen or penile juice. Avoid too much garlic, onion, alcohol,coffee and spicy foods. Eat fruits that are
high in natural sugar like oranges apples, mangoes
and please eat honey too. They all make your
sperm taste good to feed the egg for a healthy
baby.
6. A woman's face may need makeup but not your penis. Avoid using powder around the penis. If you
do, especially after shaving, you might have to deal
with serious irritations. The penis doesn't need
perfume to smell good so don't spray perfume
around your penis.
NB: For those who are not circumcised, that is, the "koteB-)tor guys", yours is a serious case so pull
back the the foreskin and wash underneath with
warm water everyday.
Always remember, a clean penis is mightier than
Goliath's sword..
**SpYiceY saYinG "whatsapp" 08143018284

good advise for men but I would think this is common sense for men(something taught when they are young in their parents house), so based on your write up, is shows some men didn't know or lack sense that they have to be clean down there in the first place, ewwwwww

Johnnoah1st:
Go and do pennis enlargement surgery and ur own will surely come instead of giving up and discouraging girl from sampling big diccks. my2cent

lmao

they ended it cause the practice didn't really come in their favor in the end of the day like they wanted it to

onila:
Jumping the broom, an African culture practiced by African Americans

jumping the broom is not part of African culture, it is a African American culture practiced in African American weddings, just wanted to clarify that to you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_broom#African_American_custom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf8NdFPQpkg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btm8mhNgWkA

OkutaNla:
Prestige Luxury Apartments, Ibadan

Nice

Ilekeh:


Already posted.

Ok thanks for telling me

Oh jeez, not this nutty nonsense again

Can someone post the pictures of the Ibadan park. It was on FP last year or so.

Where is anonymous6 the YorubaAmerican when you need her.

Wow I guess I came late lol, I'll try and find pics

Bump

Sundiatakieta:


I noticed that many Africans have no idea how American society works or how much it passionately hates them. (I mean white American society.)

Sir saying all we know of is Egypt is a stereotype and propaganda. In fact I'veve been working all year long on a book of fabulous African kingdoms. You must understand that there's an unspoken white policy of denigrating and ignoring your kingdoms. Here the average map of ancient kingdoms throughout history leaves Africa blank except for Egypt. So please understand this is why. They also lie about African history and attribute everything u did to themselves and Arabs, even Zimbabwe and Swahili Coast history. That is what we and YOU are dealing with and why Im writing my book.

I have thousands of photos of African artifacts and thousands of pages of African history I have collected over the years.

As for Egypt, you must understand there is a deep propaganda campaign going on to attribute that society to Arabs and Europeans. This is why they keep Egypt ambiguous. I wrote a thesis on this already, the Bardarian and Nagada people gave birth to Egypt and they were as black as you, trust me, this has been established but this is irrelevant now.

Anyway, its just the Egyptian advocates are loudest about Egypt because there is a covert war to establish African history as white history. There are even white men here who say no black African EVER stepped foot in North Africa, never mind the fact that the original black Berbers remain to this day. This is why they invented the term "Sub-Saharan" African" which is simply an educated way to say "niggers." This is a racist term and repeating it simply empowers them. Anyway, it gets deeper than that and these are my two cents. Thank you sir.

We'll I understand that America is a white society cause I was born and raised in America but my parents are Nigerian so I understand what you mean about how the successes of african kingdoms at one point we're being connected to non-black Africans until recently the truth is out. To be honest you are a rarity when it comes to african Americans knowing other african kingdoms and I commend you in what you are doing with you african kingdoms book. The african Americans I have met when the discussion leads to Africa, all they talk about is Egypt soley. So this where I based it off from.

https://www.nairaland.com/797242/bbcs-documentary-bronze-cast-head
https://www.nairaland.com/845399/european-distortion-black-african-history

Sundiatakieta:


Interesting article Im African American and I can tell u that most black Americans have never even heard of any of this at all. The American mainstream media simply will not cover that because they have created a phony narrative that Africans hate AAs, which is yet another euroclown lie. As for me there is no need to apologize to me because an African never enslaved me and a white man never enslaved me either. Perhaps they should apologize to the ancestors, they are apologizing to the wrong people. Im sick of hearing of these racial issues and the boring topic of slavery its over ok. Lets be in solidarity with the Ethiopian and Eritrean bros and sisters being trafficked enslaved and or beaten down by Arabs in the middle east. the videos are shocking. And there is Mauritania also. Therefore we should be in solidarity with them rather than apologizing to free people that are enjoying life.

I have to say I respect your opinion and I agree with you that apology should have been to the ancestors not present people now it makes no sense

When it comes to the article, I didn't know this bad many Nigerians don't either but I was surprised nigeria was brought up as a example

[b]In June of 1961, Ambassador Malick Sow of the newly independent African nation of Chad was en route to Washington, D.C. to present his credentials to President John F. Kennedy and stopped for coffee at a diner on Maryland’s Route 40. The diner’s white female owner greeted him with the announcement that black people were not welcome there. When asked about the incident by Life magazine, she felt no need to apologize, explaining, “He looked like just an ordinary run-of-the-mill nigger to me. I couldn’t tell he was an ambassador.”

Sow’s experience was not unusual even for an ambassador. A string of similar incidents had already occurred along Route 40 as Jim Crow rolled out the unwelcome mat for African ambassadors traveling between New York and the nation’s capital. As the embarrassments accumulated, international observers saw duplicity in American claims of liberty and equality, as Cold War competition for influence in Africa made the continent a high priority for the U.S. and Soviet Union. Under the circumstances, the Kennedy administration was forced to offer an official apology to the many offended African ambassadors. Soon afterward, the president appointed a federal task force to enforce desegregation along Route 40.


But where international politics succeeded in securing an apology for the discrimination suffered by a handful of black African statesmen, more than 50 years later, black Americans still haven’t received a state apology for subjugation and discrimination at the hands of their own country. This is not because of some national stance against apologies. In 1988, for example, President Ronald Reagan signed legislation, complete with reparations, extending a formal apology for Japanese-American internment on American soil during World War II. In 1997, President Bill Clinton offered a presidential apology for the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study that the U.S. Public Health Service launched in the 1930s, to study the disease in hundreds of infected black men while falsely claiming to be providing them proper treatment. By contrast, congressional resolutions apologizing for slavery, passed separately by the House in 2008 and the Senate in 2009, were never reconciled or signed by the president. Far from constituting a state apology, they carry all the weight of resolutions passed to congratulate Super Bowl victors.

Ta-Nehisi Coates’s recent article in The Atlantic on “The Case for Reparations” has reignited the debate about the politics of American remorse and forgiveness for its treatment of black people. As Coates and many others have pointed out, reparations are not only—arguably not even mostly—about remuneration, but about unequivocally acknowledging the wrongs the state has inflicted on black people. They’re about apologizing.

In this context, Sow’s experience is instructive for what it reveals about international politics, state apologies, and racial discrimination. Social scientists who study these issues argue that apologizing is an essential component of reconciliation between an offending state and its victims
But apologizing on the state level entails real costs, just as it does on the individual level. In both cases, an apology signals a shift in the power dynamic between offender and victim in favor of the latter. Moreover, as Azuolas Bagdonas of Turkey’s Fatih University has written in a paper on the subject, state apologies “require changes in state identity. … [S]tates refuse to apologize when apologizing would significantly disrupt their self-narratives.” Given America’s narrative of freedom, self-determination, and success for all who work hard, apologizing for the intentional suppression of liberty forces the nation to confront the fundamental truth that we weren’t who we thought we were.

Given these costs, Kennedy apologized only because it would have been more costly not to, given U.S. hopes of preserving its position on a Cold War battleground. In other words, the apology to Sow and others came from a calculation of national interests. It did not arise from a sense of moral obligation—which would have mandated an apology to all black Americans, who had suffered far worse.

So what would it take for the U.S. to see an interest in apologizing for slavery?


The experience of several African countries is instructive here. Many West African nations have now acknowledged the role they played in the enslavement of black people in the Americas. Some have apologized on behalf of members of previous generations, who captured black men, women, and children from neighboring tribes and bartered their lives away to European slave traders. But they have offered or withheld apologies for different reasons.

Nigeria, Ghana, and Benin have taken different approaches to the question of apologizing for slavery. The resulting models reveal what interests might compel, or prevent, a U.S. apology for slavery, and how such an apology could get the buy-in of the American people.

In Nigeria, some tribal leaders have taken the position that since slavery occurred long ago, the perpetrators of the crime own their sins and did not bequeath remorse to their descendants. In 2009, when Nigerian tribal chiefs sought a constitutional amendment formalizing their influential role in the country’s governance, the Civil Rights Congress of Nigeria, a human-rights organization, encouraged them to apologize for their role in the Atlantic slave trade. These efforts failed—in declining to apologize, one elder told a Nigerian newspaper that his people were “not apologetic about what happened in the past,” explaining
that the slave trade was “very very legal” when his forebears were involved in it. Henry Bonsu, a broadcaster researching African apologies for slavery, told The Guardian at the time that among those he interviewed in Nigeria, “People aren't milling around Lagos … moaning about why chiefs don't apologise. They are more concerned about the everyday and why they still have bad governance.” Public opinion polls reflect this concern. The corruption watchdog Transparency International ranks Nigeria among the most corrupt countries worldwide; in 2013, 72 percent of Nigerian respondents to the NGO’s corruption-perception survey reported that the problem was getting much worse.

Ghana’s 2006 apology to African-Americans for slavery, by contrast, was largely a business decision. It formed part of a strategy to forge a stronger tourism economy, and closer ties to America, by making it easier for black Americans to visit, emigrate, own land, invest, and start businesses in Ghana. The initiative, called Project Joseph after the biblical character sold into slavery by his brothers, sought to portray Ghana to black Americans as Israel presents itself to the Jewish diaspora. Ghanaian tourism companies even offer “ceremony of apology” packages that black Americans can purchase to accompany visits to ancient slave castles. Explaining that healing and reconciliation would play a prominent role in the 50th-anniversary celebrations of the country’s independence in 2007, Emanuel Hagan of Ghana’s Ministry of Tourism and Diasporean Relations told a local news organization that the history of slavery was “something that we have to look straight in the face because it exists. So, we will want to say something went wrong, people made mistakes, but we are sorry for whatever happened.” And Ghana’s efforts worked. Around 10,000 black Americans visit the country every year, and around 3,000 now live in Ghana’s capital—triple the number estimated to have lived in the entire country in 2007.


Benin, too, apologized for its role in slavery, not only to African-Americans and the black diaspora, but also to the world. The apology coincided with then-President Mathieu Kérékou’s efforts to repair his, and Benin’s, international reputation after a series of corruption scandals that imperiled the country’s access to foreign aid money. In 1999, Kérékou began a global apology tour, including multiple stops in America. He and members of his government appealed to the religious conception of forgiveness to frame the act of reconciliation as a divine pursuit that would make whole the relationship between offending states and the victims’ offspring. “We cry forgiveness and reconciliation,” said Luc Gnacadja, Benin’s minister of environment and housing, on a visit to Virginia in 2000. “The slave trade is a shame, and we do repent for it.” Kérékou didn’t stop there. Benin also convened the Leaders’ Conference on Reconciliation and Development, where speakers from around the world, including two American congressmen, apologized for slavery. Benin’s initiative has been the most cited and revered state apology for slavery to date. And though the government’s motivation for its act of contrition was political, the spiritual terms in which the state delivered its apology lend it an element of sincerity that can’t be matched by other models.


If America were ever to apologize for slavery, Benin’s approach would be the most logical to follow. Not only does the model appeal to America’s deeply ingrained religious sensibilities, but it would cost taxpayers virtually nothing. As a result, such an endeavor might prove personally rewarding for citizens and politically palatable because it wouldn’t come across as a race-based entitlement. Most importantly, it would be a confession of wrong in service to a higher belief, and thus devoid of the normal interpersonal implications that attend apologies. Research has shown, as psychology professor Cindi May wrote in Scientific American, that “those who refuse to express remorse maintain a greater sense of control and feel better about themselves than those who take no action after making a mistake.”

Yet embracing the Benin method would require a political impetus for an apology to occur at all. A recent YouGov poll shows that 54 percent of Americans do not support a formal government apology for slavery, and another 18 percent are unsure. Further, 68 percent do not support reparations payments to descendants of slaves, and 57 percent don’t even support reparations in the form of education or job-training. For many Americans, like many Nigerians, the country is facing more pressing concerns than the ills of slavery or racism. Besides, as some thinking goes, voting in a black president twice must count for something.


Slavery itself did not end because of U.S. moral obligation or Lincoln’s sense of guilt, but because a large swath of the country felt it was in the nation’s strategic, and eventually military, interest to emancipate black people. It is not a coincidence that America’s chief European peers and rivals abolished slavery decades before the Civil War. Likewise, even Western nations’ prohibition on international slave-trading was a product of political and economic calculus, not born of moral imperative.

Similarly, segregation was not outlawed because the U.S. suddenly felt black people were equals, but because integration was in the national interest. During World War II, Germany dropped leaflets on black American troops reminding them that they were fighting for a country that subjugated them. Japan established “Negro propaganda operations” that sought to damage America’s international reputation, destabilize the U.S. by deepening its racial divide, and dissuade black soldiers and sailors from fighting in World War II. The Soviet Union utilized racial propaganda during the Cold War; for example, the Russian newspaper Trud circulated a story of a Louisiana lynching where “a crowd of white men tortured a negro war veteran … tore his arms out and set fire to his body,” and “the murderers, even though they are identified, remain unpunished.” As a 1961 issue of the Afro-American noted: “As long as any type of racial discrimination remains in the United States, the world will know about it, for, this senseless and indefensible practice is superb fodder for anti-West propaganda mills.” Over time and in combination, these trends spurred America into action and led to a decade of civil-rights legislation and Supreme Court rulings that served America’s national interests in repairing its image as a nation of liberty and justice for all.

In 1961, after Kennedy apologized, a couple of black newspaper reporters decided to test the desegregation order along Route 40 and dressed as African ambassadors to see if they’d be accepted in the restaurants there. With some consternation from frustrated owners, they were served at each stop they made. However, they were disconcerted to learn that local black college students had been refused service as recently as the night before the reporters’ experiment.

The change, in other words, had only reached as far as the international politics and national interest required. Absent these catalysts for an American apology for slavery, even the power of spiritual reckoning will be insufficient to summon the nation to action.[/b]
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/how-to-apologize-for-slavery/375650/

aim5:


He was and about Egypt, yes Egypt had a black presence, but somwhere, down the line, Arabs and others came and took over, resulting in the modern day Egyptians you see today. I also don't get the fascination with Egypt it was very powerful then, but it seems like most African Americans don't know of any other African kingdoms.

spot on, That's the only African kingdom African American's like to talk about. It is just recently people are mentioning sub-Saharan African kingdoms now from BBC and Aljazeera, sub-Saharan African kingdoms are starting to get their recognition now

bigfrancis21:


A lot of what the guy said were totally false. I almost choked when he said they were rulers in Africa before getting to America as if that gives hi, some sense of superiority over native Africans. If that gives him confidence in himself or makes him feel good, so be it. He also mentioned AAs coming from Egypt. Like seriously? What? African Americans come mostly from West and Central Africa and Egypt is in North Africa/Middle east. Maybe he thinks Africa is small country where everybody lives close to one another and the entire Africa engaged in he slave trade. Moreover, Egypt had turned white by the beginning of the slave trade, also ruling out the lie that AAs came from Egypt.

LOL I agree, He is not the first AA to mention and claim Egypt, I don't know why many (NOT ALL) African American have this infatuation with Egypt to the point they will argue tooth to nail that they are descendants of them, I just don't get it and I have witness many Egyptian's and other north Africans, plus arabs online argue with African Americans about this, to the point where they have flatly disrespected them. I also agree with you Egypt was white way before the slave trade, almost all of them are multiracial; they are of Arab, black African and European decent. Have you've noticed anytime they mention the middle east they include north Africa but when they say Africa they exclude north Africa, its because all that is culturally and racially native African in north Africa has been basically wiped out in replacement of middle eastern/Arab culture. Even in the world cup back in 2010 when the Top African soccer teams from Nigeria, Ghana were mention people forgot to mention north African teams and I heard some north Africans were irritated about it.