Monday, February 19, 2018

comments on #metoo (social awkwardness edition)

Best believe I've had a lot of social awkwardness in me over the years! It's a part of being human!

As a kid, I've learned inappropriate humor from an early age and thought of it as a best way to entertain peers. As we got older, less and less peers got entertained, and I've eventually learned to distance myself from inappropriate humor. Now it's to the point where I cringe when I hear others used the same inappropriate humor I once engaged in!

[note: this issue has been addressed in my 2016 blog post "Outgrowing Inappropriate Humor"]

As a teen, I noticed that the more popular boys would poke girls on the side, and teased the girls which got them giggling. I was thinking "this is how you get chicks".  I tried that, and usually got disastrous results. Lost the respect of some girls. Others giggled when they asked me to stop the pokes/jokes,  and they later accepted my facebook requests. I still wonder if they think I'm a hypocrite when I posted links to blogs/articles about sexual harassment. Too afraid to ask!

As you can see, the rules of social engagement can be complex.

That sentence alone can get many feminist activists very angry!

Let me be clear!

There is absolutely ZERO excuse for forcing sexual intercourse on a person!

There is absolutely ZERO excuse  take advantage of anyone who is too drunk/drugged/passed-out to consent. 

There is absolutely ZERO excuse to pressure anyone to take drugs or drink alcohol!

I might sound "humble-bragging" but I have done NONE of those previous 3 things!

However, things like humor, expressions of sexual interests, and figuring out how the other person could react to either really is complex!

At the nightclubs, some women will intentionally rub their rears against a men standing near them.  Mentioning this isn't "slut-shaming" or "blaming women", it's reality!  It's a fun reality if you're a man into that kind of thing! And yes, those women do enjoy the man "taking the bait".

However, sometimes women will start dancing and shaking without noticing that a man is behind her! The man might think "ooh, this girl is near me, that means she wants me to bump & grind her. After all, the last time I was at this club, another woman did intentionally rubbed her rear on my front and enjoyed it, so this woman wants the same".  But it turns out this woman dancing in front of him really doesn't know he's behind her,  and he's now rubbing his front on her rear and ............. oh,oh, BIG MISTAKE on HIS part! The girl gets freaked out, walks away and her friends give that man a hostile glare! 

And yes, the situations in the 2 previous paragraphs happened with me.  That's why at the club, I have to make sure the woman knows I'm near before I make any moves. If I'm not sure she knows I'm near, I'll just take a few steps back to avoid contact and awkward situations. 

As you can see much of the nightclub interactions rely heavily on nonverbal cues. After all, the music is so loud, you can't really have much of a conversation. You can try talking into the other person's ear, but even that  can lead to wondering what they other person just said!

And with nonverbal cues, they can be misinterpreted.

It's not just about the nightclub, but also in the bedroom (honestly, I have more experience with nightclubs than bedrooms). 

That became the topic of conversation when an anonymous woman claimed that she had a bad dating experience with male comedian Aziz Ansari.  While Ansari didn't really assault her, he was accused of pressuring her into doing certain sexual acts and of not catching her nonverbal cues of discomfort.

This was mentioned in a dating advice article titled 

"A Tale of Two Dates: 15 Lessons from the Aziz Ansari Case"

Lo Sharkey, “A Tale of Two Dates: 15 Lessons from the Aziz Ansari Case,” Em & Lo, January 16, 2018,

On facebook, my response to the article was this

The article has "What We Can Learn From HIS Behavior" and "What We Can Learn From HER Behavior"
I especially like [QUOTE] Don’t rely on your non-verbal cues to do the talking. [UNQUOTE]
because men on average as less able to pick up on nonverbal cues (especially being that men have higher rates of Asperger syndrome than women, and those who have it sure isn't going to admit it to you), and you have to be blunt with them.

and I also mentioned this

also this [QUOTE] Do not use alcohol to try to get the sexual outcome you desire out of a date. [UNQUOTE]
there's no need for it, no excuse for it! Been clubbing for years, and NEVER bought a "drink" for a girl. That's some creepy Cosby ish, and totally uncalled for!

Not only have I NEVER bought a girl a "drink", I don't even drink alcoholic beverages myself!

Some people claim that alcohol helps them deal with social awkwardness, but what it really does it makes you a different type of socially awkward!

Some shyness is good! It keeps you from making stupid mistakes that can upset people!

I'm not much of dater, not really a smooth talker. But at the nightclub, when the music is pumping and a great song is on, I'm on the dancefloor. I might have a few clutzy moments (I don't have the fancy footwork of a MC Hammer or Micheal Jackson), but I'm pretty good with the rest of my body. 😉I let the music guide me! 

There's no need to be drunk or buzzed! There's no need to drink alcohol to get rid of social inhibitions on the dancefloor! The music should be enough to guide you! 

And I don't buy drinks for women, period. Exclamation Point!

For what? You think that will get her to like you?  It doesn't work that way! You don't impress her by buying drinks, you impress with your personal coolness! I do it on the dancefloor!

Also, buying her drinks will also get her into the habit of accepting drinks from strangers. You're not going to be the last stranger, and the next stranger might have some really bad intentions for her!  You don't want her to get into the habit of accepting drinks from people like that!  


Now on to the workplace.

In the workplace, I'm all business! 

(full disclosure: Though there was a few cases of me poking females in the workplace back in 2004 & 2005. I'm saying this now, before anyone claim I'm a hypocrite for writing about sexual harassment/assaults issues now in 2018)

So yeah, after 2005, I've became all business! 

And being in a mostly female work environments, I wouldn't even dare attempt what many males have been getting away with in male-dominated environment for centuries. I couldn't even get away with even 10% of what females can get away with in a female work environment!

And being that much of my work involve schools, the environment is very hyper-vigilant when it comes to anything that reeks of sexual harassment. Certain conversations and jokes just don't happen there, not even in the worker's lounge! Anyone who tries that is not only stupid, but super-stupid! Even though political pundits claim that "teacher unions are liberal" (being that they mostly support Democrats),  the Al Franken styled jokes aren't tolerated at all!  So there is some form of social conservatism among mostly pro-Obama teaching workforce!

Even among male workers there, you aren't going to hear about "getting chicks", because let's face it, presenting yourself as a pervert or a creep will end your career at the schools really fast

Working in that environment (plus having more mature friends) got me to the point where a long-lost friend who I reunited with on 10-year high school reunion year was so shocked when he learned I no longer participate in inappropriate humor and that I no longer go to strip clubs and I no longer watch porn

[note: I explain more in the following blog posts

That being said, much of the #metoo movement focused on workplace harassment. 

This from a #metoo skeptic Cathy Young

Cathy Young, “Is 'Weinsteining' getting out of hand?,” Los Angeles Times, November 1, 2017

More broadly, the #MeToo movement, which tends to lump together a wide range of male wrongdoing from rape to "creepy" or boorish behavior, raises a basic question about human relations in the working world: Can work and sexuality or romance ever mix? For many supporters of this campaign, the answer seems to be no.
Concerns that the post-Weinstein climate may lead to witch hunts against any man who flirts with a female colleague have been met with angry comments along the lines of "flirting in the workplace IS HARASSMENT." A tweet by singer/songwriter Marian Call that got more than 2,000 retweets and nearly 6,500 "likes" asked, "dudes are you aware how happy women would be if strangers & coworkers never 'flirted' with us again … this is the world we want."
But is it? It's certainly not the world I want: Except in college, nearly every man I have ever dated was either a co-worker or, once I switched entirely to free-lancing, someone I met through work. This is not unusual, even in the age of dating websites and apps. An informal 2015 survey for the online magazine Mic found that men and women under 35 were almost twice as likely to have met their current significant other through work (17.9%) as through online dating (9.4%). Similar findings have emerged from other such surveys.

and more from Cathy Young

Although it is difficult to imagine a woman whose actions come even close to Weinstein's, women do engage in sexual harassment. A male friend of mine who worked for a small magazine as a recent college graduate in the 1980s has less than fond memories of a female co-worker, his senior in both age and position, who sometimes greeted him with jokes insinuating that he was sexually aroused and once groped him under the pretext of straightening out his posture in a motherly way.

[note: best believe that some of that goes on at the nightclub too. I actually had to stop at least 2 women from stop putting their arms around  the back of my neck, a sensitive spot for me. Twice, women offered drinks and giggled when I accepted what they said was water, making me think "oh shit, a reverse Cosby", I walked away safely but literally had a headache afterwards. Another one where I posed for a picture and an unknown woman put made a hand symbol near my pants where her two fingers are so close together it could be interpreted as "he got  small ____" even though she never seen "it". ]

[note #2: not at a club, but also annoying: one older woman did come from behind me to "fix my collar" without even asking me first! I was so pissed that I told her to "go away".]

[note #3: while none of those incidents are anywhere near what Harvey Weinstein, they also disprove this nonsense than "men don't know what it's like to be inappropriately touched or sexually harassed". And those feminist stereotypes are a super-mega-huge insult to men who have been sexually abused by scumbags like Kevin Spacey or Jerry Sandusky]

  As Cathy Young noted, much of married couples meet at work, and for every case that happens, there some attempts at flirting that might've socially awkward (maybe the woman preferred someone who looked like Mario Lopez instead), but that isn't really predatory, it was just a wrong guess and social awkwardness. 

And I'm very skeptical of rules that don't allow managers to have sexual relations with adult employees or professors to have sexual relations with adult students!

Sometimes, manager &  adult employees, and professors &   adult students have sexual attractions for each other. 

Sure it might bring a conflict of interest, but to act as if every manager who has sexual relations with an employee is some kind of Weinstein-like monster is just stereotyping! 

Let's look at this funny example written by Claire Berlinski

Claire Berlinski, “The Warlock Hunt,” The American Interest, December 6, 2017

The things men and women naturally do—flirt, play, lewdly joke, desire, seduce, tease—now become harassment only by virtue of the words that follow the description of the act, one of the generic form: “I froze. I was terrified.” It doesn’t matter how the man felt about it. The onus to understand the interaction and its emotional subtleties falls entirely on him. But why? Perhaps she should have understood his behavior to be harmless—clumsy, sweet but misdirected, maladroit, or tacky—but lacking in malice sufficient to cost him such arduous punishment?
In recent weeks, I’ve acquired new powers. I have cast my mind over the ways I could use them. I could now, on a whim, destroy the career of an Oxford don who at a drunken Christmas party danced with me, grabbed a handful of my bum, and slurred, “I’ve been dying to do this to Berlinski all term!” That is precisely what happened. I am telling the truth. I will be believed—as I should be.
But here is the thing. I did not freeze, nor was I terrified. I was amused and flattered and thought little of it. I knew full well he’d been dying to do that. Our tutorials—which took place one-on-one, with no chaperones—were livelier intellectually for that sublimated undercurrent. He was an Oxford don and so had power over me, sensu stricto. I was a 20-year-old undergraduate. But I also had power over him—power sufficient to cause a venerable don to make a perfect fool of himself at a Christmas party. Unsurprisingly, I loved having that power. But now I have too much power. I have the power to destroy someone whose tutorials were invaluable to me and shaped my entire intellectual life much for the better. This is a power I do not want and should not have.
Over the course of my academic and professional career, many men who in some way held a position of power over me have made lewd jokes in my presence, or reminisced drunkenly of past lovers, or confessed sexual fantasies. They have hugged me, flirted with me, on occasion propositioned me. For the most part, this male attention has amused me and given me reason to look forward to otherwise dreary days at work. I dread the day I lose my power over men, which I have used to coax them to confide to me on the record secrets they would never have vouchsafed to a male journalist. I did not feel “demeaned” by the realization that some men esteemed my cleavage more than my talent; I felt damned lucky to have enough talent to exploit my cleavage.

In other words, some women are filled with joy when a man in authority (or even just a male peer) assertively pursue her.

This isn't to minimize the seriousness of sexual harassment as Ms Berlinski later said

Do not mistake me for a rape apologist. Harvey Weinstein stands credibly accused of rape. He must face a real trial and grave punishment if convicted, not “therapy and counselling.” Tariq Ramadan, likewise. No civilized society tolerates rape. Many of the men whose professional reputations have recently been destroyed sure sound like they had it coming. The law will decide whether the accused are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but I don’t require such arduous proof: I’m already convinced that Roy Moore is a sexual predator and so is Bill Clinton. Neither my certainty nor anyone else’s should be allowed to displace the law. I may be convinced, but I might also be mistaken.

and also this

Given the events of recent weeks, we can be certain of this: From now on, men with any instinct for self-preservation will cease to speak of anything personal, anything sexual, in our presence. They will make no bawdy jokes when we are listening. They will adopt in our presence great deference to our exquisite sensitivity and frailty. Many women seem positively joyful at this prospect. The Revolution has at last been achieved! But how could this be the world we want? Isn’t this the world we escaped?
Who could blame a man who does not enjoy the company of women under these circumstances, who would just rather not have women in the workplace at all? This is a world in which the Mike Pence rule—“Never be alone with a woman”—seems eminently sensible. Such a world is not good for women, however—as many women were quick to point out when we learned of the Mike Pence rule. Our success and advancement relies upon the personal and informal relationships we have with our colleagues and supervisors. But who, in this climate, could blame a venerable Oxford don for refusing to take the risk of teaching a young woman, one-on-one, with no witnesses? Mine was the first generation of women allowed the privilege of unchaperoned tutorials with Balliol’s dons. Will mine also be the last? 

In other words, she wants feminist activists to realize that we should differentiate between social awkwardness and sexual abuse! Yes, they can be on a same spectrum, but we have to be proportionate too!

Socially awkwardness can be targeted by stern words, but the truly sexual predatory behavior requires severe punishment and severe humiliation.  

Proportions matter!

Sunday, February 18, 2018

comments on #metoo (excessive forgiveness edition)

I started writing on issue of excessive forgiveness back in 2012, with a blog post titled 

excessive forgiveness can damage you (and others)

Earlier this month, I had a blog post titled "clarification on forgiveness", which mentions how religion's demand for forgiveness causes psychological damage to abuse victims, and benefit sex offenders

"Clarification on forgiveness"

Also, earlier this month, I had finally started a series on the #metoo movement

Part1 : comments on #metoo (Al Franken and Dan Inouye edition)

Since I started my a #metoo series, I wanted to go back to the issue about excessive forgiveness.

Let's start with Salma Hayek's description of her experience with film producer and sex offender Harvey Weinstein.

Salma Hayek, “Harvey Weinstein Is My Monster Too,” New York Times, December 12, 2017

Part of why it took a while for Hayek to go public about her experience with Harvey Weinstein was because she was brainwashed from an early age to forgive even the worst abuses

In reality, I was trying to save myself the challenge of explaining several things to my loved ones: Why, when I had casually mentioned that I had been bullied like many others by Harvey, I had excluded a couple of details. And why, for so many years, we have been cordial to a man who hurt me so deeply. I had been proud of my capacity for forgiveness, but the mere fact that I was ashamed to describe the details of what I had forgiven made me wonder if that chapter of my life had really been resolved.
When so many women came forward to describe what Harvey had done to them, I had to confront my cowardice and humbly accept that my story, as important as it was to me, was nothing but a drop in an ocean of sorrow and confusion. I felt that by now nobody would care about my pain — maybe this was an effect of the many times I was told, especially by Harvey, that I was nobody.

It was this brainwashing to forgive that had made Salma Hayek reluctant to go public about a monster who verbally, physically and sexually abused. It was this brainwashing to forgive that have allowed Harvey Weinstein to not be called out publicly, which made it easier to have more unsuspecting victims for him to attack!

Feminist writer Ijeoma Oluo had this to say to those who demand excessive forgiveness with her article "When Forgiveness Isn't a Virtue"

Ijeoma Oluo, “When Forgiveness Isn’t A Virtue,” The Establishment, December 16, 2015

We often talk about healing from wrongs committed against us as being a part of the revenge/forgiveness binary. Your base nature wants revenge for the crimes against you. You obsess and rage and it causes you pain. The only way to free yourself from this is forgiveness; you must let go of the harm done to you and to wish those who harmed you well, therefore releasing the both of you from the prison of anger and pain. Some take it even further to say that you must push past forgiveness and even into reconciliation — making amends with the person who harmed you, so you and the person who harmed you can become better people.
This may work for the person who stole your laptop — maybe even the person who stole your boyfriend — but is this really the only path to healing when you have been abused? When you have been assaulted? When someone you love was murdered? When your rights have been repeatedly violated? When your trust has been repeatedly or grievously broken?
When you have been grievously wronged, the pain it causes is real, and your feelings of hurt, anger, and fear are valid. In Psychology Today, Deborah Schurman-Kauflin PhD. reminds us that “Grieving and healing is a slow, slow process that cannot be hurried or skipped.Not only is this process slow, it’s unique to each person and situation. You may have times you wish for revenge, times you wish for reconciliation, times you are numb with depression, times you are paralyzed with fear. That is all valid. But trying to push through all of these to get to forgiveness short-circuits the very necessary healing process.

and more from that article

Schurman-Kauflin recalls the types of pressure she has seen with many of her patients: 
“Family members tell them that if they don’t forgive, then they are going to Hell. In some cases, I’ve seen families turn their backs on victims of sexual abuse because the victims wouldn’t go along with the program and keep their mouths shut. They are told to forgive their attackers and let it go. If they cannot do so, then they are banished from the family unit.
I’ve also seen women who stand up to their abusive lovers only to be eventually cut off by their children because they won’t simply forgive and let bygones be bygones . . . Under such pressure, victims will give in and comply. They say they have forgiven when in their hearts they have not. With time, they see that not only haven’t they forgiven, but now, they are trapped by their words. After all, they have said they forgave and were moving on. They are accused of dredging up the past should they speak out, so back to isolation they go.”
Instead of focusing on healing and comfort, many survivors find themselves obsessing with forgiveness, trying to will away their trauma in order to “move on.” When they can’t do this, not only are they judged by those closest to them, they judge themselves as weak and trapped. The shame of being unable to forgive compounds the pain of the original hurt.

This is the pain caused by the demand of excessive forgiveness!

Those who demand excessive forgiveness truly don't care about the harm caused by physical, sexual, verbal and psychological abuse!

In fact, I say that the demand for excessive forgiveness is abuse, and therefore evil and satanic

Notice that I did NOT say  "forgiveness is always evil".

I say the demand for excessive forgiveness towards abusers is evil!

I easily forgive those who accidentally bump into me. I easily forgive those who accidentally cause inconveniences for me. I eventually forgive those who said the wrong thing in the "heat of the moment" who later realized it was the wrong thing to say!

But to demand that people forgive their rapists is the act of lowlife scum!

To demand that people forgive abusive spouses/parents/bosses/peers is the act of lowlife scum!

Because you know what?

Rapists LOVE IT when their victims are told to forgive them! 

Abusive spouses/parents/bosses/peers LOVE IT when their victims are told to forgive them!

They LOVE it because it protects them from being held accountable and facing real consequences.

This makes abusers feel happier than anyone who just won a championship!

This makes abusers feel happier than anyone who just won a lottery!

This makes abusers feel happier than anyone who just won a full scholarship to a college of their dreams! 

This makes abusers feel happier than anyone who just reunited with a long-lost friend

We shouldn't give abusers that kind of joy!

We should give abusers pain and social stigma! 

And the people who demand excessive forgiveness are themselves people with something to hide.

For example, when former NFL player and actor Terry Crews went public about film producer Adam Venit grabbing his privates,  he was told by music producer Russell Simmons to forgive Adam Venit

Russell Simmons asked Terry Crews to "give the agent a pass, ask that he be reinstated" and ended with his phony spiritual statement "with great love, all things are possible"

Russell Simmons loves to present himself as a vegan yogi who meditates and says profound things.

It turns out that Russell Simmons has multiple rape allegations!

It seems like Russell Simmons wanted Terry Crews to publicly forgive Adam Venit, because Russell Simmons was SCARED that otherwise, Terry Crews might inspire Russell Simmons victims to go public!

Well, it's public knowledge now! Russell Simmons brings unsuspecting women to his office and crib and forces himself on them!

His vegan yogi persona was just a shield to deter his victims from coming forward! That shield doesn't work anymore! 

Russell Simmons just turns out to be the vegan yogi version of Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein

People like Russell Simmons,  Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby are now put on notice that they can't turn on the TV, radio or the internet without worrying about more embarrassing information about them! 

 For too long, those scumbags benefited from their victims worrying about embarrassing information about them (the victims) going public.

The party is over! Just like Hitler when was about to lose the war, just like Japanese rulers when Hiroshima got nuked, just like the apartheid leaders when it was clear apartheid was about to end, people like Russell Simmons,  Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby learned the hard way that their time is up!

Meanwhile, their victims finally have an opportunity for real healing, the type of healing that can NEVER come with excessive forgiveness!

Monday, February 12, 2018

comments on #metoo (Al Franken and Dan Inouye edition)

(note: I was going to write one blog post in response to the #metoo late last year, but had some serious time constraints. Being there's so many thoughts, but so little time,  I'll just start a series on #metoo, starting with this one. Not sure how many more in this series or when the next ones will be published. Stay tuned)

Last year, when it was publicly revealed that film producer Harvey Weinstein has sexually harassed and even sexually assaulted some famous actresses,  it was a major turning point in gender relations! 

It was like Waterloo, Midway, Stalingrad all in one! The tides have turned and the once powerful were about to get pounded big time!

 It was only a year earlier that revelations that Donald Trump not only bragged about grabbing women's privates, but that he also walked around women's  dressing rooms at a teen pageant,  forcibly kissed women alone in his rooms, raped his ex-wife out of anger, and raped a 13-year old victim of sex trafficking. None of those allegations stopped him from winning presidency. It didn't help that his main opponent, Hillary Clinton, who presents herself as a feminist hero, also continued to be married to longtime husband Bill Clinton who not only had affairs, but also had multiple groping and even rape allegations against him. 

With Trump's victory, there was a women led protest the day after his inauguration. It was a reaction against a nation voting for a sexual predator. 

However, while it was easy for liberals to loudly denounce Republican sexual predators, there was still much silence about Democrat sexual predators.

That is, until the story about longtime Democrat donor (and guest to Clinton and Obama fundraisers) Harvey Weinstein became public. 

At that point, liberal had to look themselves in the mirror and say "NO MORE" to enabling sexual predators in their midst.

It made it so much for that to happen when the Democrats were out of power, as noted in the Medium article by Charlie Peach

Charlie Peach, “The Big Thank You that Hollywood, Liberals and Feminists Owe Trump…,” Medium, December 17, 2017

Liberals and Feminists should be thanking Trump for his election because we all know that had Hillary won, they would all be gleefully partying right now in the White House with Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose, Kevin Spacey, Larry King, Russell Simmons, Dustin Hoffman, Brett Ratner, Louis C.K, George Takai, Al Franken etc.,….all of these men would be on the Clinton White House Celebrity guest list, and all of the women and feminists in Hollywood would be adorned with their most expensive couture gowns for the evening, with Anna Wintour writing how In Vogue and unprecedented it was and Huma Abedin prancing and posing, while trying her best not to be accused of being inappropriate and uncouth as they did to Desiree Rogers, during the Obama Administration. Harvey Weinstein would have carte blanche from all in attendance, everyone from Hillary down to the maids would know of his ilk, yet all would pretend otherwise.

We know that Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein, would have already picked out the hottest blondes to take back to the Lincoln bedroom for the night. All of Hollywood & Wall Street execs, would’ve paid for their night of sexual bliss and male chest pumping in one of the many bedrooms that the Clinton’s had no shame in selling before. If it were not for Trump, white women in Hollywood would still be silent counting their money and Hollywood success, while white men like Weinstein would continue to victimize any woman who dared seek his attention or support. 

One of the listed names, Al Franken, was once thought to be good opponent against Donald Trump for the 2020 elections.  He was seen as someone who isn't afraid to tell Donald Trump to "f--- off" and not back down when Trump yells out his usual insults.

However, like Donald Trump, Al Franken has his own trail of sexual harassment allegations. However, there is physical evidence, with a photo of him groping a sleeping Leann Tweeden while on a ride back from their USO Tours!

Even with that, Democrats were reluctant to demand Al Franken resign!

The Hawaii  representatives in US Congress (all Democrats who call themselves "progressives') were all reluctant to demand Al Franken resign, as noted in this meme that was posted on Hawaii Republican Action - HIRA facebook page on 11/17/2017

Why won't Mazie, Colleen, Tulsi or Little Brian call on proven sexual harasser Al Franken to resign? Maybe because he's a Democrat too?

But this wasn't the only sexual predator that Hawaii Democrats have been protecting.

All those listed on the memes (Mazie Hirono, Colleen Hanabusa, Tulsi Gabbard and Brian Schatz) have been SILENT about the sexually predatory actions of Dan Inouye.

Dan Inouye, a longtime Democrat senator, is seen as a "saint" by many, due to his inspiring story of overcoming anti-Japanese racism after the Pearl Harbor attacks, losing his arm on the battlefield during World War 2, and coming back to start a long political career in which he rose to the ranks as a US Senator with the seniority to bring federal funds to Hawaii. 

This addiction to federal funds have keep people voting for Dan Inouye who remained in office until his death in 2012!

This addiction to federal funds has also kept many people from criticizing his very public sexual predatory allegations surrounding Dan Inouye and the hairdresser Lenore Kwock!

Denby Fawcett, “Denby Fawcett: Would Dan Inouye Have Survived 1992 Sex Allegations Today?,” Civil Beat, November 28, 2017

In 1992, Inouyeʻs hairdresser, Lenore Kwock, alleged that the senator forced her to have sex with him and that he groped her in a hair salon after that. Inouye denied the allegations, as well as unsubstantiated claims that he had abused nine other women.
After a brief flurry of news reports, Inouye won re-election and emerged from the scandal largely unscathed.
In an interview Monday, Kwock said she thinks people might be more understanding today of what happened to her because many women now are are telling similar stories of sexual harassment by powerful men.
“Back in those days, it was how some men treated women,” she said. “It was purely selfish on their part without concern for the woman’s feelings.”

and more details

Kwockʻs claim that Inouye sexually abused her came in October 1992, when he was running for re-election to a sixth term in office. In a news conference, Kwock told reporters the senator had coerced her to have sexual intercourse with him in his Waikiki apartment 17 years earlier when she was 22 and starting her career as a hairdresser.
She said her boss at the hair salon at the Ilikai Hotel where she worked sent her to Inouyeʻs apartment on an errand. Kwock said as soon as she walked through the door, “he grabbed me and proceeded his advances on me.

She remembers today, “Even though he had only one arm, he had strength. I tried pushing him but I didn’t get anywhere.

“I was very young, inexperienced and scared,” Kwock said then. “I felt overpowered by him and the fact that he was Daniel Inouye. He removed my clothing and Iʻm just thinking, ‘This is going to happen.’”
She said back then she didn’t consider it rape because although she tried to push him back, she gave in to him. She said she was too afraid to to do anything else.

She was quoted at the time in The Honolulu Advertiser saying, “I told Inouye ʻNo I donʻt want to get pregnant’ … and he opened up the drawer and got out contraceptive foam, which I had never seen and I donʻt know how to use it so he did everything.”

Kwock said that after the incident, when Inouye came in for a haircut, as she was shampooing his hair in a partially partitioned room he reached his hand up her dress. She says he tried to do the same thing in other hair appointments, but that she was able to evade him by moving over to the right side of the basin, the side of his missing arm, so he could not reach out to grab at her.
She said sometimes he made lewd remarks, reminding her about the sexual encounter in his apartment. He repeatedly asked her to go out to dinner with him at expensive restaurants, but she says she always refused. 

Look at what was highlighted in red!

These details have long been public!

Yet our Congressional delegation  (Mazie Hirono, Colleen Hanabusa, Tulsi Gabbard and Brian Schatz) who all love to present themselves as "progressives" have been SILENT about these sickening and predatory actions by Dan Inouye!

So-called progressive feminists Mazie Hirono, Colleen Hanabusa, Tulsi Gabbard and Brian Schatz have been silent about Dan Inouye forcing a powerless, passive women to have sex against her will!

So-called progressive feminists Mazie Hirono, Colleen Hanabusa, Tulsi Gabbard and Brian Schatz have been silent about Dan Inouye gaslighting and taunting the same women after his sexual assault!

So-called progressive feminists Mazie Hirono, Colleen Hanabusa, Tulsi Gabbard and Brian Schatz are all phonies when it comes to advocating for sexual abuse victims!

So-called progressive feminists Mazie Hirono, Colleen Hanabusa, Tulsi Gabbard and Brian Schatz  are all phonies when it comes to standing up to powerful men who prey on vulnerable women!

All Four of them present themselves as progressive, feminist Democrats. All Four of them are silent about the sexual predatory actions of their "saint" Dan Inouye!
original photo by Anthony Quitano of Civil Beat
captions added by Pablo Wegesend courtesy of Paint

Former state legislator Anelle Amaral (who was a former cop who taught rape prevention) was willing to publicly criticize Dan Inouye at the time, but she didn't get much support from other female politicians

Amaral was even more dismayed when women lawmakers rejected her suggestion that they get involved in the issue.
The same women who had run to the microphone at every possible opportunity to support Anita Hill in her battle against (U.S. Supreme Court nominee) Clarence Thomas all stood back and didn’t say a word about this poor, powerless hairdresser. It just stunned me,” she said.
Amaral said nine other women called her office to say they had received similar unwanted sexual attention from Inouye, but they declined to come forward publicly.

Fast forward to this decade!  Dan Inouye is so viewed as a saint that they are naming schools, buildings, telescopes and even Honolulu's airport after him.

The University of Hawaii was ready to build an unofficial shrine (it was to be a new building named in his honor that was intended to be building dedicated to the social sciences) but only backed off due to the university's maintenance backlog and a more urgent need to build a new life sciences building. 

This rapist has schools, buildings, telescopes and airports named after him!

original photo by Brian Tseng of Civil Beat
captions added by Pablo Wegesend, courtesy of Paint

Dan Inouye is lucky to be dead by 2012. This protects him from the new round of outrage against him that would've been inspired by the #metoo movement!

I mean, look, Al Franken (plus John Conyers) were later pressured to resign when it looked like Republican sexual predator Roy Moore was about to win a US Senate seat in  a mostly Republican state of Alabama!  Democrats needed to present a "high ground" to show that they were truly serious about going after sexual assault allegations against Roy Moore! They wouldn't have been able to do it had Al Franken, John Conyers and Dan Inouye remained in office!   It was only because Inouye was dead, and that Franken  & Conyers resigned that gave the Democrats the credibility they needed to defeat Roy Moore.

Dan Inouye would've resigned in disgrace and be seen as a joke had he lived long enough to experience the #metoo movement. Who knows, maybe a local comedian would've finally had the guts to  taunt  Dan Inouye in a viral comedy  routine the same way Hannibal Burress taunted Bill Cosby!  

Mazie Hirono, Colleen Hanabusa, Tulsi Gabbard and Brian Schatz were serious about the issue of sexual predatory behavior, they would demand his name be scrubbed off  the places named after him. Or at least scrub his name off the airport, and rename it Honolulu International Airport again!

Meanwhile, Dan Inouye, just like John Conyers, was also protected by the fact that people were scared of being called "Uncle Toms" or "race traitors"

Kwock says after she told her story she got phone calls from people threatening her. Some of her Japanese-American clients seemed especially dismayed.
“They said to me, ‘Don’t take him down.’ Dan Inouye was their hero,” she said.
And people who came forward to support Kwock faced accusations of disloyalty.

In other words, racial tribal loyalty was more important to some people than actually judging people based on the content of their character!  

As for the common male fear of false accusations, there was this

Political columnist Neal Milner, interviewed by The New York Times in 1992 when the Inouye allegations were leveled, said then that Democrats in Hawaii “don’t have to worry about defending themselves. All Inouye has to say is, ‘No I didn’t,’ and that’s enough to protect him.”
That was despite the fact a pre-election poll showed 42 percent of the likely voters believed Kwock and only 20 percent believed Inouye. And Kwock passed a lie detector test when Inouye refused to take one.

All I know is that if someone made a false allegation against me, I would definitely take a lie detector test. I would multiple lie detectors conducted by multiple different testers just to make sure there's credibility on my side! 

But Dan Inouye didn't! Why? Because he's Dan Inouye, the rules don't apply to him! 

Well, since Dan Inouye claimed to be a Christian, he's sure being held accountable in the afterlife! 

clarification on forgiveness

I have recently posted this on facebook

I have actually lost friends for pointing out how dangerous it is to demand forgiveness towards abusers! For mentioning this, I was falsely accused of believing that "forgiveness is evil", which is so far from what I'm actually saying! 

There's a HUGE GIGANTIC DIFFERENCE between forgiving someone who bumped into you by accident versus forgiving a rapist.

There's a HUGE GIGANTIC DIFFERENCE between forgiving someone who gave you a stink-eye versus forgiving a violent bigoted bully!

It's not comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing apples to uranium!

Now, I'm not interested in restarting old beefs!

I am interested in having peace talks with those friends I have lost over that issue! With those peace talks, we can come to an understanding.  In fact, I am even willing to ............. forgive them!

The only reason I am bringing this up is because I came across this article dealing with a gymnast who testified against a team doctor who sexually molested her!

Carol Kuruvilla, “First Woman To Accuse Nassar Says Church Can Be One Of ‘Worst Places’ To Go For Help,” Huffington Post, February 02, 2018,

article also available at

The article mentions how religious leaders demanding that their followers forgive their abusers cause even more harm to the abused

“Many churches hold poor interpretations of Scripture that imply the victim is somehow at fault for dressing or acting a certain way ‘immodestly,’ that speaking up about abuse is ‘gossip’ or ‘slander,’ and that forgiveness is moving on without demanding justice for the victims,” Easter told HuffPost. “These stances are a stark contrast from Jesus’ ministry to the marginalized.”

(skipped paragraphs)

Meanwhile, other aspects of evangelical Christian theology, such as the emphasis on forgiveness of sin, can enable covering up sexual abuse. 

You see, evildoers will do anything to prevent themselves from being held accountable!

[note: evildoers refer to severely abusive bullies which can include but not limited to those who commit rape, hate crimes, genocide, terrorism and more. They can also be school or workplace bullies who constantly terrorize their peers and subordinates. The term "evildoers" do not refer to those who accidentally offend others.]

Evildoers LOVE IT when their victims are pressured to forgive, because that makes it less likely for the victims to find ways to hold them accountable! 

This makes it less likely for victims to report evildoers to the authorities!

This makes it less likely for evildoers to face REAL consequences!

These evildoers TRULY DON'T CARE if others are saddened by their actions.

The only thing these evildoers understand are power, strength, fear and humiliation! 

The only thing that will stop them is Real Painful Consequences which ran range from losing their jobs, social isolation, imprisonment, public humiliation and even death!

Evildoers laugh in the face of squeamishness towards giving them Real Painful Consequences! 


There is a place in this world for forgiveness!

I easily forgive those who accidentally caused inconveniences for me.

I have forgiven who made jokes that offended me because they didn't know those jokes would offend me!

I have forgiven elementary bullies that have learned to respect me at the end of our elementary years.

I have forgiven my own students who have given me headaches with their  misbehavior.

I have forgiven people who in the heat of the moment, talked to me in a less than ideal tone of voice, because I now know they didn't mean it that way! 

I have forgiven my parents for making less than ideal decisions that made life harder for me growing up!

I have forgiven people I have had heated disagreements with.

However, I have given forgiveness NOT because of pressure from others, but because of time passed and the understanding of context of the situations. I have given forgiveness because the other person  showed he/she earned it! 

However, demanding forgiveness from people who are still going through their grieving process only increase the pain! Not only does it increase the psychological pain, it super-magnifies the pain! 

Demanding forgiveness super-magnifies the pain because the underlying message is "f*** your feelings"

 Demanding forgiveness super-magnifies the pain because the underlying message is "your hurt isn't real"

Demanding forgiveness super-magnifies the pain because the underlying message is "let the other people do what he/she wants to you"

Demanding forgiveness super-magnifies the pain because the underlying message is "what that other person did isn't so bad"

Demanding forgiveness super-magnifies the pain because the underlying message is "holding others accountable for what they did to you is worse than what they did to you"

If that's the message you are sending, then you are helping evil! 

It doesn't matter if you are trying to sound spiritual or loving when you saying, you are still helping evil when you demand forgiveness of severe evil!

If your tone of voice gives out that you are more outraged at the lack of forgiveness than you are at the troublemakers, then you are the problem! 

It's fine if you want peace and the reduction of conflict! It's fine if you want to do some mediation (in Hawaii, we call it hooponopono), but DAMMIT let the victims complete their stages of the grieving process!

And dammit, at least have some sincere outrage towards the troublemakers and evildoers!