Onjalazbroz- Testing the Foundation of Knowledge

Madison Griffiths' new book Sweet Nothings has sparked renewed debate about the ethics of professor-student relationships. While Griffiths presents these relationships as inherently problematic—especially for young women—her arguments rely on emotional anecdotes, gendered assumptions, and a troubling disregard for personal agency. This response will systematically dismantle her core claims, demonstrating why her perspective is not just flawed but potentially harmful to genuine discussions about consent, power, and adult relationships. At its heart, this debate isn't really about protecting students. It's about controlling consensual relationships between adults under the guise of moral concern. By examining Griffiths' arguments alongside broader societal trends, psychological research, and historical context, we'll see how this moral panic reflects deeper biases—and why it ultimately undermines women's autonomy. 1. The Myth of "Unique Harm" in Academic...

 Kenya, a nation endowed with immense potential, continues to struggle under the weight of tribalism, corruption, and failed leadership. The hope for a better future dims with each passing administration, as those entrusted with power prioritize self-enrichment over national progress. To understand why Kenya’s situation appears hopeless, we must revisit the mistakes of the past—beginning with the election of Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto in 2013. A Nation That Rewards Impunity In 2013, Kenyans made a grave mistake: electing two individuals facing charges at the International Criminal Court (ICC) for their alleged roles in the 2007-2008 post-election violence, which claimed over 1,000 lives. Despite Kenyan law barring individuals with criminal charges from vying for office, Uhuru and Ruto were allowed to run—a clear disregard for the rule of law. Worse, they won, signaling that a majority of Kenyans were willing to overlook serious allegations if it meant their "tribal champions...

 Introduction Recently, I engaged in a heated debate with a colleague, Mr. Ian, who argued that had colonialists stayed longer in Africa, the continent would be more developed today. His argument hinged on the case of South Africa, where apartheid-era infrastructure—such as Johannesburg’s O.R. Tambo International Airport—appears more advanced than what many African countries have today. According to him, colonialism, if prolonged, would have accelerated development. I vehemently disagreed. While it is true that colonial powers built railways, ports, and administrative systems, these were never designed for African prosperity. They were extraction tools—meant to exploit resources and labor for European benefit. The real question is not whether colonialism built infrastructure, but for whom it was built, and at what cost to African dignity, opportunity, and self-determination. This article dismantles the myth of “beneficial colonialism” and argues that Africa’s future lies not in nos...

The passing of Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o is not just the loss of a great writer; it is the silencing of a voice that spoke truth to power, a voice that shaped my understanding of history, resistance, and the enduring struggle against oppression. To me, Ngũgĩ was more than an author—he was a teacher, a historian, and a revolutionary whose works ignited in me a fierce opposition to neocolonialism. His novels, essays, and plays were not just stories; they were weapons of truth, exposing the brutality of colonialism and the betrayal of Africa’s independence dreams. A Grain of Wheat: Unmasking the Mau Mau and the Cost of Freedom Of all his works, A Grain of Wheat stands out as the novel that most profoundly shaped my political consciousness. In it, Ngũgĩ does not just recount Kenya’s struggle for independence; he humanizes it. He shows how the so-called "Mau Mau" (a derogatory label imposed by the British) were, in truth, the Kenya Land and Freedom Army—freedom fighters who sacrificed eve...

  T he discussions surrounding gender should become increasingly complex since the focus on social constructions stifles conflicting perspectives and evolving ideologies. Despite neglecting conflicting perspectives , one prevailing issue emerges—role confusion. Over the years, the feminist movement has championed the cause of gender equality, advocating for women's rights and dismantling archaic stereotypes. Yet, despite strides made in education, employment, and social recognition, a significant portion of women seems hesitant to embrace roles historically attributed to men. T here remains a palpable reluctance among women to ascend to roles traditionally associated with men, particularly that of the provider or breadwinner. This phenomenon raises profound questions about the prevailing social construction perspective on gender . It signals that there could be more to the explanation of this gender phenomenon. Probably, it is time to seriously consider the biological pers...

  "Euphoria," the critically acclaimed HBO series, is a masterful exploration of the tumultuous lives of modern adolescents, delving into the complexities of addiction, relationships, and identity. In Season 2, Episode 4, the narrative takes a profound turn as it focuses on the character Carl Jacobs, a symbol of individualism in stark contrast to his family, representing societal norms and expectations. This pivotal scene, in which Carl enters his home intoxicated and urinates on the floor, serves as a powerful allegory for the clash between the pursuit of personal freedom and the conforming pressures of society. A Defiant Act of Rebellion: Carl's Urination on His Family's Pride Carl's audacious urinating on the floor of his family's home in "Euphoria" Season 2, Episode 4, carries profound symbolic weight. This house, built with his sweat and toil, represents the epitome of societal achievement and conformity. However, Carl's act is a sta...