Alex Baron is offering you to have website «HuffingtonPost» remembered
Do you want us to remember the «HuffingtonPost» website?
Yes No
×
Прогноз погоды

Blog

Richard Pryor's Daughter Opens Up About The Racism Her Family Faced In Beverly Hills




When Rain Pryor was born in 1969, her father, Richard Pryor, had already begun transitioning from a relatively mild joke-telling comedian to a fearless, outspoken comic whose routines doubled as raw social commentary. As Pryor’s comedy was shifting, so was the country, moving toward more progressive values. But, as his daughter Rain points out, blatant racism still affected countless families, including her own.


Speaking with “Oprah: Where Are They Now?”, the 47-year-old actress opened up about her childhood, setting the scene for what her interracial family faced during that time in their Beverly Hills community.


“My dad’s Richard Pryor. My mother, Shelley, was a poor Jewish woman,” Rain says. “Imagine, if you will, Beverly Hills in the early ‘70s. Here I am, this mixed-race child [with] my golden skin, my big poufy hair ― because Mom knew nothing about a pressing comb ― [and] my mom’s blond-haired, blue-eyed, looking like Cher, wearing dashikis.”



For context, this time period was just a few short years after the famed Supreme Court case of Loving v. Virginia, which made laws against interracial marriage unenforceable. Prior to that, interracial couples in certain states faced jail time if they wed. 


“My parents were only married four years after [the Lovings] were allowed to legally marry,” Rain says. “So, here I am, now born into this. I’m a product of this thing that everyone was against.”


Despite her father’s success and their home being in an affluent area, Rain says her family endured racist horrors.


“What was ironic is to then be in this house in Beverly Hills and having crosses burned on our front lawn in the middle of the night,” she says. “And the word n***r painted on the side of our home.” 


Rain details more of her childhood and growing up as Richard Pryor’s daughter on “Oprah: Where Are They Now?”, airing Saturday, Aug. 20, at 10 p.m. ET on OWN. 


Another interracial couple’s struggle:


Tamera Mowry recalls shocking comments about her interracial marriage

-- 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.

 


aug 18 16, 15:47
0 0

Very Extra 4-Year-Old Outshines Pre-K Class In 'Moana' Performance




Some 4-year-olds are destined to shine.


Sophia Urquijo sang a show-stealing rendition of “How Far I’ll Go” from Disney’s animated film “Moana” during her preschool graduation ceremony in Miami earlier this month.


As seen in the video above, Sophia stands out among her classmates as she belts out the catchy Disney song with passion, emphasizing her high notes with dramatic arm movements reminiscent of a tiny Whitney Houston.





The class’s performance of the “Moana” song was meant to be a surprise for the graduates’ parents, which made Sophia’s performance even more fun to watch, Michelle Neshin, Sophia’s mom, told “Inside Edition.”


“I was like really shocked,” Neshin, 28, said. “I had no idea it was coming.”


Sophia’s larger-than-life performance has been viewed more than 13 million times since Neshin posted the video on Facebook on June 10. 


And if you couldn’t tell from the video, Neshin said that Sophia has a “huge, huge personality.”


“She’s usually spunky and has a corky personality, but that was something else even for her,” Neshin told ABC News.


If you need a little more joy in your day, watch Sophia’s performance one more time in the video below.




-- 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.

 


jun 21 17, 06:23
0 0

'Wheel Of Fortune' Contestant Robert Santoli Demolishes The Competition With Epic Run


Pat Sajak and his team better watch out because “Wheel of Fortune” contestant Robert Santoli is stealing the show.


Santoli amazed Sajak -- and TV viewers -- last Friday when he had one of the most amazing "Wheel of Fortune" appearances most have ever seen. Before making off with $76,000 in winnings, Santoli impressed the audience by doing things like guessing the answer to a phrase with just one letter on the board.  


Eventually, Sajak sounded weary every time he called on the 23-year-old whiz (although we feel bad for the people Santoli was competing against!). 





A native of Yorktown, New York, Santoli told a local news site that he dominated mainly because he studied a lot for the show beforehand after finding out it would have a nautical theme. 


“The instant I got my theme, I immediately came up with an ever-growing list of puzzles themed toward cruises, sailing, fish, boats -- anything on or in the water," Santoli told Tap Into.


Santoli said he first tried out for the show when he was 19. Though he's obviously proud of his performance, the game show winner said he apologized to his fellow contestants and wished them "no hard feelings" after the show.


And yes -- he's aware he appeared a little over-enthused on the show, but who can blame him? 


"I know I look like a bit of a dork on the show with my high-pitched ‘Yeahs!’ and my childish jumping up and down after winning the Bonus Round, but I was really, to quote the Round 4 puzzle, 'Living in the Moment,'" Santoli told Tap Into, adding that he was anxious and shaking the whole show. 


The "Wheel of Fortune" champ said that he will pay off his college loans with the winnings and possibly buy a car, fulfilling the dream of millennials everywhere. 




-- 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.











 


mar 30 16, 20:51
0 0

Margaret Atwood Speaks Out Against Anti-Abortion Legislation In The U.S.


Since her classic 1985 novel The Handmaid’s Tale was adapted into a TV series for Hulu, Margaret Atwood has used the story as a jumping-off point for discussion around current events.


In a recent call for more public library funding, Atwood reminded fans there are no libraries in Gilead, her fictional authoritarian regime. (“It’s no coincidence,” she added.) Atwood noted that a free press was not protected in Gilead, either, in a letter distributed by PEN America earlier this year regarding censorship and free expression.


Most recently, the author brought up Gilead at New York City’s BookCon 2017 this past weekend, likening recent abortion legislation in Texas to “a form of slavery.”


Atwood spoke on a panel alongside “The Handmaid’s Tale” showrunner Bruce Miller, discussing the historical precedents for Gilead and the intersection of their art and activism.


“I’m not a real activist,” Atwood explained, because activists get paid for their work, and she, on the other hand, doesn’t “have a job.” Her perch as an artist, she continued, makes it possible for her to say the things that others want to say, but feel unable to. For this reason, she said, she would never survive a fascist society because artists are usually targeted first.


“So, you are not yet living in a fascist society,” Atwood told BookCon crowds. “Whoopee.”



When the panel opened up to audience questions, Atwood was asked to put her speculative fiction abilities to use to predict what’s in store for the United States.


“I’m not a clairvoyant,” Atwood said. Instead, she said she looks at what’s happened in the past ― and what’s happening in the present ― when creating future, fictional worlds.


“I was born in 1939,” she said. “What was going on in 1939?”


Atwood continued to explain that she’s read a great deal about fascism, and is an avid reader of prisoners’ diaries. In fact, when asked what further reading she would recommend to fans of her book, she suggested The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: a History of Nazi Germany by William L. Shirer.


So, The Handmaid’s Tale arose from her imagining what fascism would look like in America. “It wouldn’t be atheistic,” she said.


While she didn’t feel qualified to comment on America’s possible future, she did provide a lengthy, impassioned comment on the current state of affairs ― regarding a question about abortion legislation in Texas.


“I’m [...] waiting for a lawsuit that says if you force me to have children I cannot afford, you should pay for the process,” she said. “It is really a form of slavery to force women to have children that they cannot afford and then to say that they have to raise them.”


Atwood also addressed the ways in which the Hulu adaptation of her book takes seriously the issue of climate change. Pollution and other environmental concerns catalyze the establishment of Gilead in the book, but in the show, the changing climate is more central to the plot.


The update to the show, Atwood said, was made to reflect what’s currently happening in the world. The author cited the example of everyday plastics affecting male fertility.


“But you’re not allowed to say that,” she noted.


Fans of The Handmaid’s Tale ― both the book and the TV show ― will know that her comments fit with the world Atwood wrote about. In her fictional Gilead, women bear the burden of society’s fertility issues, while male infertility is either ignored or dealt with in secrecy. That Atwood ensured her story was drawn from events and trends already existing in real life makes her vision of a possible future that much more frightening.







 


Editor’s note: The author of this article moderated the BookCon panel featuring Margaret Atwood and Bruce Miller.

-- 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.

 


jun 5 17, 19:48
0 0

Brazilian Artists Pay Tribute To Olympic Refugee Team In Stunning Murals





Two Brazilian graffiti artists — Rodrigo Sini and Cety Soledade — have decided to pay tribute to the Olympic refugee team by painting large-scale portraits of the athletes in Rio de Janeiro’s Porto Maravilha district.


Competing in the 2016 Olympic Games are 10 refugees — two Syrian swimmers, two judokas from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and six runners from Ethiopia and South Sudan. The athletes currently reside in such countries as Germany, Belgium and Kenya, as well as the Olympic host nation of Brazil.



BTW, did you see this mural in Rio's centre dedicated to the refugee athletes? There is Rose. #TeamRefugees

pic.twitter.com/oNqWgXJoa1

— TeamRefugees (@TeamRefugees)



“For me they are the true winners thanks to their spirit, determination and courage to leave their war-torn countries and start new lives somewhere else,” street artist Rodrigo Sini, who has previously used graffiti to draw attention to racism in Brazil, told the news agency Agência Brasil.





The stunning murals are located in the Porto Maravilha Arts Corridor, a platform for urban art that opened on Aug. 16.


The project brings together the work of more than 20 Brazilian artists, with a vision for urban revitalization.


Scroll down for more portraits of the refugee team:











A version of this piece originally appeared on HuffPost Brazil. It has been translated into English and edited for a U.S. audience. 


For more Olympics content:


-- 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.

 


aug 18 16, 20:41
0 0

How Feminism Taught Jane Fonda The Importance Of Female Friendships


Jane Fonda is more than an actress-fitness-guru-antiwar activist. She is officially "an embodied feminist."


In the March 22nd Lenny Letter newsletter, Fonda wrote of her journey to "blood and bones" feminism, and growing beyond her public and "theoretical" feminist identity. 


Fonda initially discovered the feminist movement in the 1970s. As she became a prominent voice in the antiwar movement, she heard a feminist speak to a group of active-duty soldiers in effort to educate them on the women's movement. This served as a major turning point for her. She realized that feminism was not about women hating men, but about empowering them both.


"Although," she said,"it would be many more years before I would be brave enough to look within myself and locate the multiple ways in which I had internalized sexism and the profound damage that it had done to me."


Of this internalized sexism, she discussed the implications that harmful gender stereotypes had on her:



The culture that incubated in me since childhood insists that to be loved, a female has to be perfect: thin, pretty, having good hair, being nice rather than honest, ready to sacrifice, never smarter than a man, never angry.



Fonda spent much her adult life with an eating disorder -- "probably to fill the emptiness" -- and using romantic relationships with men to validate her self-worth. But that changed completely when she reached a milestone age.


"When I turned 60...I decided that, no matter how scary it was, I needed to heal the wounds patriarchy had dealt me," she said. It was during this time of her life that she shirked the security of romantic relationships:



For me, the personal meant becoming a single woman, no longer silencing my voice, slowly becoming the subject of my own life. My friendships with women grew deeper and more fulfilling...In the process, I discovered that what I’d thought were just my issues were, in fact, shared by other women.



Her friendships grew stronger, her comprehension of feminism deeper, and -- arriving at this wholehearted feminism 30 years after discovering it -- she finally gave herself permission to be a late bloomer.


"It's OK to be a late bloomer," she concluded. "As long as you don’t miss the flower show."


 

-- 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.











 


mar 22 16, 21:06
0 0

Megyn Kelly To Alex Jones In Leaked Tape: 'I'm Not Going To Be Barbara Walters'






Adding fuel to the controversial buildup to Megyn Kelly’s upcoming interview with Alex Jones, the conspiracy theorist released late Thursday a secretly recorded conversation with the NBC host.


And it is not flattering to either party, nor Barbara Walters, the celebrated journalist and former NBC “Today Show” host, whom Kelly appeared to diss.


“I’ve never done this in 22 years,

,” Jones said in an earlier video on Thursday, which included parts of his off-the-record talk with Kelly. “I’ve never done this but I knew it was a fraud, that it was a lie.”


Jones, who has an audience of millions for his InfoWars show, later posted the extended version (below) of their conversation, in which he injects commentary between his exchanges with Kelly before the interview.


Kelly can be heard telling Jones that the show, due to air Sunday, is not a “gotcha” piece. She finds him “fascinating” and more than a “one-dimensional guy,” she says. Kelly promises Jones that she wouldn’t attack him but suggested she wouldn’t be soft either. “Of course I’m doing a fair interview,” she says. “I’m still me. I’m not going to go out there and be Barbara Walters.”





Jones contrasted a preview clip of the actual interview in which the former Fox News host grilled him about his infamous denial of the Sandy Hook massacre with an off-the-record audio clip of him acknowledging to Kelly that “people died there.” 


Echoing what his defense claimed in his divorce trial in April, Jones told Kelly he plays devil’s advocate on his show. “I don’t literally believe what I’m saying,” he says.


After leaking the footage, Jones said of NBC, “What are they going to do, when I’ve got the tapes of what really happened?” 


Jones said he taped NBC’s actual interview as well and would call out the network if its edited version betrayed him.


The InfoWars host added that Kelly was “obsessed” with him.


J.P. Morgan Chase has pulled its local TV ads and digital ads from all NBC News programming, including Kelly’s show, over the interview. And Sandy Hook victims’ families have threatened to sue NBC if it airs the interview Sunday.


An NBC spokesman confirmed in a statement to HuffPost Friday that the network still planned to broadcast the interview, as planned.


“Despite Alex Jones’ efforts to distract from and ultimately prevent the airing of our report, we remain committed to giving viewers context and insight into a controversial and polarizing figure, how he relates to the president of the United States and influences others, and to getting this serious story right,” the spokesman said.

-- 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.

 


jun 16 17, 15:08
0 0

Donald Trump Opponents' Path To Victory Is Dark And Full Of Terrors




Let's be honest. If the Republican front-runner was anyone other than calloused anger-pillow Donald Trump -- if it were a bog-standard Republican senator or governor, or anyone else in the field, frankly -- there wouldn't be much resistance to the idea that the party's nomination was locked up. Based on the states won, the delegates claimed and polls suggesting where the future is headed, we'd all think it was looney-tunes that there was a gaggle of other competitors thinking they still have a shot.


Especially when you consider who those other competitors are. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz came out ahead in his home state and Oklahoma on Super Tuesday -- no mean feat -- but his theory of the "SEC primary" delivering scads of evangelical voters to his doorstep didn't pan out, and remaining states don't neatly accommodate his evangelical turnout theory. Cruz finds himself having lost his base of support at the very moment he needs to be expanding it.


Florida Sen. Marco Rubio can now say he has won a state outright: College-educated, middle-of-the-road voters finally delivered for him in Minnesota. But for all the mammoth investment in Rubio as the establishment darling, he failed in some fundamental ways on Super Tuesday -- most glaring, he didn't clear some crucial 20 percent thresholds in states with rich delegate rewards.  


At this point, Ohio Gov. John Kasich is pretty much a no-hoper, with few states he can compete in and not enough of a campaign war chest to aid in the competition. And Ben Carson... well, he's out of the race as of Wednesday afternoon. Plus, nobody was ever really sure his was an authentic attempt to mount a White House run, as opposed to a campaign simulacrum kept alive long enough to siphon donations and sell books.


But before we dismiss Cruz, Rubio and Kasich, let's remember that Romney -- who amassed a large delegate lead by winning six of 10 Super Tuesday states four years ago -- proceeded with three other competitors until May, all of whom clung to a difficult-to-imagine theory of how they could win. 


So what's behind the persistence of Trump's competitors? There are three components:


1. They just need more time, man! While anti-Trump diehards may be whistling past the graveyard, they look at Tuesday's results and see hope in the offing. They'll point to the fact that except for in Massachusetts, Trump largely underperformed compared to what his poll numbers had predicted. They'll note that Rubio and Cruz, for all their woes, nevertheless made up ground in several states that might have ended in Trump blowouts had they not abruptly, and belatedly, trained their guns on him in the pre-Super Tuesday debate. And they'll point out that in just a few hours, they'll get a chance to hit Trump again on the debate stage.



If you would have told me that Trump would lose 3, possibly 4 states, and come within 3 of losing 2 more, I'd have told you to fly a kite.

#NeverTrump (@PatrickRuffini)





@politicalmath Two notes; first, we are only three days in to Marco really hammering Trump. Second, Trump fell well under his RCP avgs.

— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson)



The idea here is that if ground can be made up in five days, surely a sustained effort could narrow the gap further as the primary season lopes to the middle of March. The goal: keep making the case that Trump is a fraud-slash-con artist, and keep his ceiling low. Of course, it may not be possible to prevent Trump from expanding his support if the remaining candidates do what political science generally suggests they should do. 


2. An alternative theory of winnowing. Typically, when the best-case scenario of defeating Trump has been presented, a key element involves the anti-Trump field narrowing to a single competitor -- someone who can be entrusted to become the safe harbor for voters who'd rather not see a reality-television nincompoop become the presidential nominee. But what if the only way to beat Trump requires the remaining candidates sticking it out together as some sort of Marvel team-up?


The truth is, voters that support Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson do not reorder themselves in a neat and organized anti-Trump fashion when their candidate leaves the race. In February, MSNBC's data team took an account of what voters do when the GOP field narrows. Its findings indicated that many of the benefits that flowed to the other non-Trump candidates were offset by a stream of those same voters to Trump.


Obviously, some ceded more voters to Trump than others. According to MSNBC's numbers, Cruz keeps a lot of voters who would flow to Trump pinned to himself just by staying in the race. While one-third of his supporters would gravitate to Rubio, 26 percent would move to Trump.


Even the so-called "establishment" candidates lose voters to Trump. Rubio would send 31 percent of his backers to Cruz, but the 17 percent that would go to Trump would limit the benefit. Kasich would send 16 of his crowd to Trump by dropping out.


And file this away, now that Carson is bowing out of the race. MSNBC found that his supporters would break nearly evenly between Cruz and Trump -- 24 percent to 22 percent. Rubio is expected to pick up 16 percent of the doctor's supporters, and another 17 percent aren't sure where to go. Carson's departure could, right now, be enough to nail the door shut on the anti-Trump movement.


A big caveat to these numbers is that they're dated: They were taken at a time when former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush was still an alternative candidate. But the point is that we may be past the moment where winnowing to a single anti-Trump avatar does the trick. What big gains exist for Trump's opposition are offset by significant migrations to the reality-television star. It resembles one of those NCAA Tournament matchups where the 14-seed battles back from 24 points down, to close it five, and the three-seed breaks its back with a well-timed pair of three-pointers.


So it could be that what people in the anti-Trump field need the most right now is each other, an idea Jon Podhoretz endorsed in Wednesday's New York Post:



[Rubio's senior campaign managers] told donors that it was likely Trump could not be defeated outright and in that case the only recourse would be to stay in the race to deny Trump a majority of the Republican delegates, take the race to the convention floor in July, and see if a counter-uprising can be staged against the Trump movement.


This can’t be Rubio’s strategy alone. It has to be Cruz’s strategy as well, and that of Ohio Gov. John Kasich.



Of course, this means we know where this is headed.


3. This will be decided in Cleveland. Of course, now that we've arrived at the realization that the anti-Trump forces have to array themselves as three men in a desperate death pact to deny Trump the chance to notch the nomination outright, there's only one way this gets resolved -- on the convention floor in Cleveland. This will not be a pretty sight.


First of all, this is where a lot assumptions will finally be put to the test. Will Trump's delegates really prove to be disloyal to him? Are they actually likely to jump ship to other candidates on successive ballots? And will Trump really get out-worked on the convention floor by the presumed-to-be-more-experienced operators working for the other campaigns?


And what of all the assumptions that have been made about the Republican establishment? Will they be resolute in backing an effort to take down Trump in a floor fight? It could very well be that Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus sees possibilities in a Trump presidency -- that it's something his party could make the best of, if it came to swearing him in. Wouldn't it be much worse for Priebus' career to preside over a busted convention that birthed a Trump independent run?


I'll put it like this: If my life depended on the RNC's top machers proving themselves to be made of sterner stuff than Chris Christie, I'd be putting my worldly affairs in order right now.


Additionally, once the campaign hits the convention floor, Trump's competitors will no longer have the luxury of putting off the winnowing of their ranks. It's tough to imagine how and under what conditions either Rubio or Cruz cedes the nomination to the other. Who'd broker the deal, and what would a deal look like? How many rounds of balloting would it take, at this late stage, to bring about a surrender? What happens if Bush jumps back into the mix? There's no guarantee. This scenario just essentially defers all of the pain of the primary season until the convention is convened in July.


One last thing that needs to be accounted for. OK, let's say that all the theories that permit Trump's competitors to dare to dream of a future in which they dispatch him hold, that sticking together keeps Trump from notching the delegates needed to claim victory, and that a floor fight results in Trump being handily dispatched. And for the sake of argument, let's also say that Trump's threatened independent run was a bluff -- that he lacks both the work ethic and the liquid assets to run a campaign on his own. Now what?


The largest irony of the mad plan to save the GOP from the potential damage of Trump's predations is that the effort may yet result in mortal damage to the Republican Party. If it's the will of a sizable portion of the GOP base to elect Trump as the nominee, on the basis that the GOP establishment is a clapped-out, insular gang of elites that no longer relate in any way to the needs of the conservative blue-collar grassroots, what happens when those same elites snatch the nomination from Trump in the ultimate Beltway backroom deal?


The answer: nothing good. This desperate gambit likely leaves the most restless and activist portion of the GOP base feeling angry and disaffected and vengeful. Those people will stay home in November, imperiling both the GOP's presidential nominee and their downticket endeavors, and it's going to be knives out for the establishment thereafter. The central gamble of those who see Trump as a cancer on the conservative movement is that the movement will still struggle to survive the chemotherapy.


One last irony: If what it takes to defeat Trump is to pluck the nomination from him as his electoral success is cresting, those that succeed in evicting him will never be able to claim that Trump's toxicity made him uniquely unelectable.


In two successive election cycles, the notion that the Republican Party could nominate a polite, presentable candidate and win has failed to pass the proof-of-concept test. This has engendered a longing in the GOP base for a more extreme, aggressively conservative alternative -- and they believe they've found one in Trump. Should they now come to be denied their desires and see the GOP defeated a third time, they'll be back in four years, baying for another divisive, slur-spewing, fascism-flirting, nativist dreadnought, because no one will have proven that they aren't wrong to want one.


Defeating Trump in this nominating contest is going to be difficult in the extreme. It will require a daring high-wire act and a few rounds of brutal wheeler-dealing at the Republican National Convention. And yet, even if this heist is pulled off, worse days could lie ahead. In the end, the mark Trump has left on the Republican Party could prove to be more indelible than the man himself.


~~~~~


Jason Linkins edits "Eat The Press" for The Huffington Post and co-hosts the HuffPost politics podcast "So, That Happened." Subscribe here, and listen to the latest episode below.




-- 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.











 


mar 3 16, 00:27
0 0

Watch This Disabled Burlesque Performer Own Her Sexuality






Jacqueline Boxx is a burlesque performer, dancer and cat-owner. Oh, and she also happens to be disabled. 


The Scene recently featured Boxx in a short documentary where the burlesque dancer discussed her love for performing and how she deals with her disability on and off stage. 


“As a disabled person, I have a body that isn’t often celebrated,” Boxx told The Scene. “A lot of times it feels like disability means that your body should be hidden. Like I shouldn’t be pleased and happy and feel sexual as a disabled woman.”


When Boxx was in college, she was diagnosed with a rare and incurable syndrome called Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome which makes the joints in her body dislocate easily. She had always been a dancer, and was actually teaching dance at the time of her diagnosis. Boxx had to stop dancing and accepted the fact that she would never perform again.


It wasn’t until a few years later that she went to a burlesque show and remembered how much she missed dancing.   


“I went to a burlesque show and I thought how much I missed being there,” Boxx told The Scene. “I remembered the glitter and the rhinestones and how powerful I felt; and I thought ‘Man, it would feel really nice right now to feel powerful.’” 


So, Boxx started choreographing a burlesque performance ― from a wheelchair. She quickly found out that performing burlesque made her look and feel damn good.  








“When I’m performing I am showing that I love and accept my body as it is,” Boxx told The Scene. “The way in which burlesque is so in-your-face-aggressive about owning your body is inspiring. I think that the time has come for that to include disabled bodies.”


Boxx hopes viewers take away two things from the video. For disabled people, she hopes they can “start viewing their own bodies as sensual and sexual and confident.”


And for everyone else? “I don’t necessarily want to be know as the disabled burlesque performer,” Boxx said. “I want to be known as a burlesque performer who is a disabled women who lives authentically and encourages others to live authentically.” 

-- 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.

 


may 24 17, 23:56
0 0

Artist Protests Dolce & Gabbana's Ties To Trump While Walking The Runway

One man took a stand against Dolce & Gabbana’s ties to Donald Trump at the brand’s fashion show in Milan this weekend. 


While all eyes were on Miley Cyrus’ feud with the designers, Atlanta-based musician Raury protested D&G while walking the runway for the Italian design house. Near the end of the runway, Raury took off his D&G top ― revealing the phrases “Protest D&G,” “Give me freedom,” and “I am not your scapegoat” ― and raised a closed fist to the sky. 


He posted the powerful photo on Instagram and wrote about the emotional experience in the caption.


“I never felt so alone, so terrified, yet so alive...Found myself in tears when I realized the people understood, and I’m not just screaming in the dark anymore...” Raury wrote. “If ur in this industry remember that there is a god, and god protects the good... so do the work when aligned to. following my heart from this day forth knowing that I am living truth... If it ever means my end so be it.” 






In an interview with GQ, Raury said he was unaware of Dolce & Gabbana’s support of the Trumps ― and their recent “boycott” campaign that makes fun of protesting and people who don’t agree with D&G’s politics ― until the day before the brand’s “Millennial” fashion show this past weekend in Italy. 


“Me, as a young man from Stone Mountain, Georgia, the birthplace of the Ku Klux Klan, I really felt this mockery of boycotting,” Raury told GQ. “Who knows, if boycotts didn’t happen, if Rosa Parks and M.L.K. didn’t step up…who knows if I would even exist. Boycotting matters. Boycotting is real. Dolce’s entire campaign says it’s not real.”






Already in Milan, but armed with knowledge about D&G’s upsetting campaign and their support of Melania Trump, Raury didn’t know whether or not he wanted to walk in the runway show anymore. 


“I know that if I walk out there and support or endorse anything that sits next to Trump—or support someone who even makes dinner for Trump or whatever—then that means that I support Trump also,” he told GQ. “I don’t support Trump. So I’m trapped, and I have to let people know that I don’t support Trump and I don’t support those who are trying to undermine the voice of the people.” 


Some of his friends at the show told him not to take a stand, but Raury did it anyway. And he’s glad he did. 



“It was very insulting to know that Dolce & Gabbana was selling all of this millennial, pro-forward shit, but everything that they’re doing and saying is a step backwards,” the musician told GQ. “They’re speaking for the 1950s. They’re saying our voice doesn’t matter, and they fuck with Melania and Trump.”


He added, “I felt like if nothing happened, then they would be right. And that T-shirt would be right. Dolce would think they can talk shit about people boycotting, support the first lady of a president who is very parallel to Hitler, and bring the millennials and put them in that shit and nothing would happen. But it’s basic math. One plus two equals three. And this is what will always happen.” 


Miley Cyrus also called out the brand over the weekend after her brother, Braison, walked in D&G’s show. After saying she strongly disagreed with the brand’s politics, Stefano Gabbana lashed out at the singer on Instagram.  


“Ignorant,” the designer said of Cyrus. “For your stupid comment never more work with him.” 


Sounds like the feeling is mutual. 


HuffPost reached out to Raury and representatives for Dolce & Gabbana. 



The HuffPost Lifestyle newsletter will make you happier and healthier, one email at a time. Sign up here.



type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related... + articlesList=5942ed90e4b06bb7d271eb20,5947c670e4b06bb7d2747b0f,58e4f6e6e4b03a26a3681a54

-- 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.

 


jun 21 17, 19:11
0 0
Topics from 1 to 10 | in all: 100000

Last comments

no comments
Like

Site search