end of the Dave Shoji era

The legendary UH volleyball coach Dave Shoji has retired a few days ago!

Honolulu Magazine

Dave Shoji

He led the UH women's volleyball team for 42 years, and spent a few years coaching the men's team too!

Back when Shoji started, UH women's volleyball team only existed for a few years. It was only a few years after Title IX became law. That law banned gender discrimination from all schools receiving federal funds. This greatly expanded women's athletics at schools across the country. 

(Hawaii connection to Title IX: the law was co-written by Hawaii's representative Patsy Mink)

At the time, women's volleyball (and women's sports in general) was seen as a fringe activity that very few care about, an afterthought for fans more concerned about tackle football and men's basketball!

But with Dave Shoji coaching the team, the team was very successful. With a mix of local & imported talent, the team was winning championships.  When that started happening, even former sexist skeptics started joining the bandwagon! Everybody loves a winner.

The team started off playing in Klum Gym, an old gym on campus with wooden seats and no air condition.  (it's still like that, but now just used for intramurals and visiting high school teams).

But Klum Gym was small and crowded. Meanwhile, the men's basketball played off campus at Neil Blaisdell Center.

The success of the women's volleyball team led to demands for a new on-campus arena. That arena became the Stan Sheriff Center (named after the athletic director who supported the arena but died before its completion).

And in that new arena, with more seats and air condition, the UH women's volleyball team started breaking national records for attendance. 

They also make front page of the sports section after every game, as well as the highlights shown on the local news.  

The players are local celebrities, with fans greeting them in public.

Of course, maintaining that success is not easy.  There's always local players who want a change of scenery for their college years. Getting outside players to move thousands of miles from home and experiencing culture shock can be a challenge. Also, the other universities have more money to impress recruits with grand facilities, whereas the UH Athletics Department is struggling with travel costs that other universities don't have. 

But with a great coaching mind and an enthusiastic fanbase, Dave Shoji has been able to recruit quality players who can bring the team to the NCAA tournament. Some even become Olympic talent, like Kim Willoughby, Heather Bown and Robyn Ah Mow-Santos (she'll be the new coach, she'll be mentioned in greater detail later in this blog post).


==============


Dave Shoji was not only a great coaching mind and a great recruiter of talent, he was also a role model when it came to promoting gender equality in Hawaii.

Local opinion writer Lee Cataluna had this great article on that topic!


Lee Cataluna, “Women, girls knew pride and respect with Shoji,” Honolulu Star Advertiser, February 22, 2017,
http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/02/22/hawaii-news/lee-cataluna/women-girls-knew-pride-and-respect-with-shoji/?HSA=a5b8b20f84fe7910a4943fffec86266849b0155b

Shoji provided an example to men of how to work with women, how to talk about women, how to balance the power of authority with the wisdom of respect. He was not threatened by powerful women, and though he was strict, he did not seem threatening. His players over the years were such strong individuals — there was no one perfect Shoji Wahine — he worked with all kinds of female athletes, let them be their best selves, didn’t force anybody into a mold that didn’t fit.

He coached a women’s team that had legions of male fans — not because of how the girls looked, but because of how they played and how they won. Monday morning discussions about the Wahine were about toughness and skill and strategy, not about their outfits or their hairstyles. Think about how amazing that is, how revolutionary. And we lived through that without really noticing and without anybody having to push hard to make it so.

Being in Hawaii, I can tell you that is NOT an exaggeration.  Yes, male fans had crushes on a few players, the few lucky ones dated them.  But they were in the arena to watch a team that can win! When listening to the male fans who were at the game (or saw it on TV), they compared the talents of each players, about who can hit and block, who can win under pressure and also who didn't live up to the hype. And also complaining about the coaching and the referees if things don't go their way. Just like talking about any other sports team.

Patsy Mink fought to enact Title IX. Dave Shoji was like the field general making it happen.

Shoji ran a program that was without scandal for 42 seasons. When the Rainbow Wahine volleyball team made headlines, it was because they won a game, not because there was trouble.

(that last paragraph had some sugar coating:  Kim Willoughby and Lily Kahumoku had trouble with the law for beating people up; Jane Croson was notoriously difficult to deal with.  But other than that, the players have been generally well-behaved and were great role models).

continuing on

Dave Shoji would not like this column. He would say it was only about the game and the players all those years and that he wasn’t thinking about the status of women or such lofty political, social things. But that’s what makes his example so beautiful, isn’t it? He wasn’t trying. He was doing.

==============


And now for Shoji's replacement!

There was talk of bringing someone with head coaching experience.

There was talk of whether the new coach have Hawaii experience that goes beyond just visiting!

There was talk of whether the team will have another male coach, or will it have a female coach.

Wait no longer, the decision has been made!

The new coach is Robyn Ah Mow-Santos, who was a former member of the team, and also a former assistant coach for the team. 

Star Advertiser

Robyn Ah Mow-Santos

She is a local girl, and a graduate of McKinley High School  - Go Tigers! 

She was one of the legendary UH volleyball players of the 1990s, and a US Olympic team captain!

She spent time as an assistant coach for both the men's team and the women's team.

She is now the ultimate role model for local girls, someone who grew up like they did, become a great player and now the head coach for their team.

She can recruit local players by telling them about the greatness of playing for their state's flagship university!

Being that she had Olympic experience, she can also recruit imported players by helping them adjust to culture shock as well as the greatness of the university and state where she come from!

Now the big question is: Can she continue the winning tradition? 

Fall 2017 is the time to find out! 

Hawaii Athletics

===================

PS: learn more from the following news articles

from the UH Athletics website

http://hawaiiathletics.com/news/2017/2/20/shoji-announces-retirement-ah-mow-santos-named-new-womens-volleyball-coach.aspx

http://hawaiiathletics.com/news/2017/2/20/womens-volleyball-coach-shoji-through-the-years.aspx


==========

from the Honolulu Star Advertiser (note: some article might require a subscription to access)

http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/02/21/sports/shojis-retirement-marks-an-end-of-an-era/

http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/02/21/sports/ah-mow-santos-to-take-the-reins-as-shoji-retires/

http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/02/21/sports/ferds-words/ah-mow-santos-character-sealed-the-head-coach-deal/

Problem Discussion: writing vs talking

A person can only be silent for so long!  Problems don't go away on their own! Traumas don't fade just because you want them to!

But how do we approach it?

Many people avoid discussions on these issues because it's hard to do so without crying (which gets you labeled a "crybaby") or yelling (which gets you labeled as "crazy" and "dangerous"). 

Also, whenever people disagree, there will be interruptions. It's one thing when there's interruptions over minor issues (ie. last night's game) but when it comes to emotional issues, those interruptions can turn loud & ugly fast!

Also, spoken conversations favor the smooth talkers, the loud talkers, those armed with quick witty comebacks.  Those who have speech impediments, those who process thoughts slowly, and those who are timid are placed in an extreme disadvantage!

Spoken conversations also favor the side that has more numbers.  3 against 1 isn't a fair fight!

So what to do?

I write letters and/or emails.

I wrote them to parents. I wrote them to employers and co-workers. I wrote them to friends.

I write them because when I'm writing, I can take my time to write my thoughts with the most effective words possible!

I write them because when I'm writing, the other person isn't pressured into a quick response which leads to interruptions, yellings, and words that would be regretted later. 

I write them because when the other person reads them, I might not be nearby, so that person has to think before responding. 

I write them because I put my strongest feelings out there, so by the time I see the person again, my strongest thoughts were already expressed and I won't have to the urge to yell it anymore!

I write them because if I was to say it in front of other people, it would cause un-needed embarrassment and drama. Especially true when there are children nearby!

I write them because I want to say all my thoughts, have my feelings & thoughts understood without interruptions.

I write them because it helps the other side understand how I feel and it helps them feel empathy for my side.

------

Now sometimes, those letters do segway to a spoken conversation. Those spoken conversations are enhanced by the previous letters because the most important points were already made, we're now just asking clarifying questions and discussing the finer details. 

Even better, those letters can sometimes lead to mediation.

For example, when I wrote angry letters expressing my thoughts about my parent's decisions, that led to us going to a counseling session with a trained psychologist. Having a neutral person in the discussion is very important in that stops interruptions, allows  multiple sides a turn to talk, and helps both sides to develop empathy for each other. 

(I discuss that issue further at http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2017/02/not-too-late-to-call-out-people-for.html) 

------------

A few years back, I found this article from Psychology Today about how some couples have been able to discuss issues better through email rather than talking!

Dr. Guy Winch, “Why Some Couples Should Argue Via Email,” Psychology Today, August 4, 2014

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-squeaky-wheel/201408/why-some-couples-should-argue-email

 Once I had them both on the phone, I suggested something I usually try to avoid—I told them to communicate about their disagreements only via email—not in person, on the phone, or via text. (Texting is a very different medium than email, one that promotes briefer, more impulsive exchanges; we tend to be far more thoughtful when composing emails.)

When I saw them three months later, Brittney quickly announced, “Arguing over email has totally saved our marriage!” Brent agreed: “We get through things now. We actually figure stuff out.”

Having productive arguments via email is better than having destructive ones in person. 

the article also posted some advantages of "arguing over email"

Arguing over email presents advantages for couples who have the following patterns:

1. One or both members of the couple have a quick temper. Being too reactive in an argument, getting heated quickly, or having facial expressions that instantly shift from calm to irate, makes it very difficult to have a productive discussion. Arguing via email allows the reactive partner(s) to take a breath, calm down, and be more reflective before responding. It also allows them to reread what their partner wrote and be more likely to respond to their actual points or concerns. Horsemen avoided: Criticism, contempt and defensiveness.
    
2. Couples who don’t know how to de-escalate arguments. Many couples do not know how to calm things down once they get heated. But while they might not be able to use restraint in the "heat of battle," they are more likely to be able to pull off a calming tactic via email (e.g., “Look, I really don’t want to fight about this,” or, “I know you’re upset; I am too, so let’s try and figure this out”). Horsemen avoided: Contempt and defensiveness.
    
3. One person is verbally over-matched. It is common for one person in a couple to be much better at arguing and expressing their needs and emotions than the other. This often makes the less verbally-skilled person clam up, become overwhelmed, say the wrong thing, or just shut down. Arguing over email allows the less verbally-skilled person to think through what they feel, what they think, what they want to say, and how they should best express it—thus leveling the playing field and allowing for a more productive exchange. Horsemen avoided: Defensiveness and stonewalling.

-----

Yes, there might be some downsides to writing letters instead of spoken conversations.

Written words can be misinterpreted.  The tone might be mistaken by the reader, whereas in spoken conversations, the tone of voice and facial expressions can show the listener that the speaker is serious or joking. 

As mentioned in the same Psychology Today article

Arguing via email is far from ideal as a form of couple communication. The absence of tonal and facial cues makes it much more difficult to convey a nuanced message—and easier for the reader to misinterpret the sender. 

Not being able to see the other person’s eyes well up with tears is a barrier to empathy and understanding. Missing their half-smile means that an attempt at humor can be interpreted as sarcasm. Not being able to reach out and hold the other person’s hand makes it difficult to soften or de-escalate an argument.

Sometimes, email and letters can be viewed as hostile by someone not accustomed to it!

(example at : http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2015/04/problems-at-hsl.html)

In some workplaces, you might be able to request to speak about something in private where nobody else can listen in. That can work!

However, some people are just not open to reason!

But if they are open to reason, give a written letter a try! It works wonders for me!

PS: But do not confuse letters with facebook/online arguments, where people are writing at each other at full-speed, feeling pressured to come with a quick response and over-looking the fine points the other person said 

The legacy of Barack Obama

Barack Obama's presidency has been over for a month now.

Many worried that being the first African-American president would make him a target of assassination attempts. While there were threats, as well security breaches at the White House, Barack Obama survived all  8 years without anyone shooting at him or even getting close enough to physically harm him in any way. This is a testament to the Secret Service's security measure as well as America's overall acceptance of an African-American leader.

Some might still dispute America's acceptance of having an African-American leader by pointing out the racially charged memes, jokes and comments about him, as well the continued abusive policing against African-Americans, and most of all, the election of Donald Trump man whose main appeal is anti-immigrant resentment.

While it may be a while before the USA is ready for Mexican-American or a Muslim-American president, overall, the USA has proven ready for an African-American president by voting for him twice.

But there's more to Barack Obama than just being the 1st African-American president. For one thing, he was a president, meaning he had major decisions that affected the lives of many. Let's talk about them

1. Health Care

Health care has long been one of the biggest expenses that people worry about.  Millions are one injury or illness away from being totally bankrupt.  Medical procedures don't come cheap, doctors want to be paid for all the education they received, and medications aren't made for free. 

Some believed that a "single payer" health care system is a solution. However, "single payer" is just a euphemism for government monopoly in health care.  Government Monopolies restrict choices in ways that not even the most heartless corporations could. 

So "single payer" wasn't going to be a feasible solution.

However, there were massive concerns about the following

• insurance denying coverage to new enrollees who had pre-existing conditions 
• insurance charging men & women different rates
• insurances not covering certain procedures
• younger people not buying insurance, depriving insurance companies of revenue

Any law that just stated "no denying insurance based on pre-existing conditions, no gender disparities in insurance rates, everyone buys insurance" would've passed easily.

But politicians being what they are, like to add exceptions, privileges and other nonsense to the laws they made. Politicians want to satisfy their donors who want special treatment.   So what could've been a simple-worded law became a thousand-plus page law.

This type of stuff pisses off a lot of people, They can see that there is something to hide. 

Learn more about how corrupt this law-making procces is at
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2011/06/your-senator-doesnt-want-to-read-bill.html

Supporters of Obama's plans call their opponents "racists", as if disagreement is racist, as if a few opponents who post racist memes represent those who have legitimate concerns about a thousand-plus page bill.

Obama promised if you like your coverage, you can keep it, That promise was broken. 

Also, premiums went up. After all, if insurance companies have to cover more situations, they'll need to charge more. Services aren't free. Before  ACA was passed my yearly increases in health insurance was relatively tiny compared to the rate increases that occurred after ACA became law.

Based on all the health insurance (Kaiser Permanente) and bank records I have kept, here are my health insurance rates over the years

2007 - $86.00
2008 - $90.00    (just a $4 increase)
2009 - $96.00     (just a $6 increase)
2010 - $104.00    (an $8 increase)
(note: ACA aka Obamacare goes into effect)
2011 - $126.25  (whoah, notice the steeper increases..... a $22 increase)
2012 -$157.82    (again, another steep increase     . this time by $31)
2013 - $197.27   (again, another steep increase................ about $40 increase)
 2014- $227.31   (again, another steep increase        up by about $30)
2015 - $231.28    (increase finally slows down)
2016 - $234.06
2017 - $243.94

However, being that ACA did end insurance restrictions on pre-existing conditions, and did add subsidized services, many people were helped by ACA.

Therefore, Donald Trump's attend to abolish ACA face serious backlash, even from some of his voters who wanted ACA reformed instead of abolished.

Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders wants more mandated government benefits without thinking much of the costs of the employers.

https://townhall.com/columnists/jeffjacoby/2017/02/15/what-obamacares-drafters-could-have-learned-from-a-hairdresser-n2286409

The subject was the burden imposed by the Affordable Care Act on small businesses — especially those with fewer than 50 employees, the threshold at which the law's employer mandate kicks in. Audience member LaRonda Hunter, the owner of five hair salons in Forth Worth, posed a question:

"We employ between 45 and 48 employees," she began, explaining that she wanted to open more salons and employ more people. "However, under Obamacare, I am restricted, because it requires me to furnish health insurance if I employ more than 50 people. Unfortunately, the profit margin in my industry is very thin, and I'm not a wealthy person. . . . My question to you, Senator Sanders, is how do I grow my business? How do I employ more Americans without either raising the prices to my customers or lowering wages to my employees?" 

Here was a real-world example of Obamacare's impact. By compelling companies with 50 or more workers to offer health insurance to everyone they employ, the law creates a powerful disincentive for business owners to expand beyond 49 employees. A business owner like Hunter faces an impossible dilemma: either give up on growing her enterprise, or try to make ends meet by charging customers more and paying workers less.

2) Drug & crime policy

Obama once smoked marijuana and even cocaine during high school. He eventually quit as most people do. He was lucky he wasn't caught or he would've been locked up for a long time.

However, those who are unlucky enough to get caught end up being sentenced to years in jail unless they "snitch" on who else was involved in that drug's distribution, which can be very dangerous thing to do. Plus many users and low level pushers don't have much information to give to the police, whereas those ranked higher get smaller time since they have much more information to give to police.

Barack Obama hinted at reforming the justice system. The problem was he moved way too slow.  He was worried about being seen as "soft on crime", something that hurt the Democrats in the past. Being that Mike Dukakis lost because of the "soft on crime" label in 1988, Bill Clinton passed harsher sentencing laws in the 1990s to show everyone that Democrats can be tough on crime too!

However, by the 2000s, there has been many news stories of low-level offenders being stuck in jail for decades. Many activists have been lobbying for criminal justice reform. However, the trauma of the 1988 elections was still on Obama's mind as he refused to aggressively push for a more lenient drug policy the way he did for his health care policy.

Only within the last few months of his presidency did he start pardoning and/or commuting sentences many low-level offenders, people who waited and suffered 8 years of Obama doing nearly nothing!

http://reason.com/blog/2017/01/19/obama-squeezes-in-one-more-round-of-comm

One last act of mercy before hitting the road: President Barack Obama today announced one more final round of federal sentence commutations.

He's going out big: He granted 330 commutations to people in federal prison primarily for drug-related crimes. That's the most he's granted in one day. Combined with his Monday announcement commuting sentences for 209 people, that's more than 500 people granted mercy in his final week. His overall final total stands at 1,715 (and 212 pardons), meaning almost a third of his commutations came at the very end. And the overwhelming majority of his commutations came in the final two years of his second term (check out the chart here).

 The saddest part of Obama's legacy was that he was too timid to do what he knew was the right thing: 

• to push a more lenient drug policy, 
• to end the militarised drug enforcement policy!
• to legalized marijuana on the federal level

3) foreign policy

Barack Obama, was a longtime critic of the Iraq War.  He was an opponent back in 2003 when nearly everyone was ready to go to war and overthrow Saddam Hussein. All the big name Democrats (ie. Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Joe Biden, and more) were supporting President Bush's plan to invade Iraq and overthrow Hussein once and for all!

However, at the time, Obama was an Illinois state legislator representing Chicago's South Side. He represented a population that was skeptical of a militarized foreign policy, and therefore took no political risk to oppose the war.

By the time he became a national celebrity, the country's enthusiasm for the war in Iraq faded.

And by 2008, Barack Obama was seen as "ahead of his time" for his initial opposition to the war, whereas Hillary Clinton was seen as just another follower instead of a leader. Therefore Barack Obama became the nominee and Hillary got the consolation prize as Secretary of State.

Obama kept his promise to withdraw troops from Iraq, while sending more troops to Afghanistan to fight Al Quaida. The troops finally found Osama bin Laden in nearby Pakistan.  With that, Obama showed that he wasn't a foreign policy wuss.

However, things were getting worse in Syria and Libya, and there was calls to "do something", with Hillary Clinton, with her hawkish tendencies, leading the call!

US sent warplanes to support Libyan rebels ready to overthrow Muamar Qaddafi! Qaddafi was overthrowned, but just like what happened in Iraq after Hussein's overthrow, there was a power vacuum and chaos!  There was an attack on the US embassy in Benghazi and the US government wasn't honest about the circumstances.

Obama announced support of the rebels wanting to overthrow of Syrian dicator Bashar al-Assad. Assad is still in power, but there is massive chaos in what was once a 2nd-world country with a stable middle class. No there are million refugees escaping towards what they hope to be safer grounds!

The situations in Syria and Libya shows the limit of American intervention.

The situations in Syria and Libya shows the limit of  "doing something",

IF the US government is going to "do something", it should either do it with maximum strength! If not, don't even bother "doing something"



Obama could've done more to withdraw troops from trouble spots and should've told allies in Europe, Asia and Middle East that  it's time to pay their own defense and handle their business without US help!

http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2011/07/defend-america-1st.html
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2011/10/make-rich-pay.html

It's ironic that the very erratic Donald Trump actually gives a rare note of sanity when he stated that the US has been taken advantage of by its allies who don't pay a fair share of their defenses!

At the same time, Trump is going to fall into the same trap as Obama did! Trump talks about "bombing the **** out of ISIS" and is asking for Russian help!  In other words, another quagmire for the US!

4) race relations

Obama's victory in 2008 was seen as a sign that America's race relations was improving, that race was no longer an obstacle to achievement!

Yes, there were haters who thought Obama should go back to Africa, even though he had never lived there and only visited there a few times in his life!  Donald Trump was experimenting with pimping racial resentments by demanding Obama show his Hawaii birth certificate, even though he already did!

But still, Obama won the popular vote and the Electoral College votes in 2008 & 2012.


However, one man's success doesn't mean everyone is equally benefiting.


Being that Obama didn't do enough to reduce the militarization of police, the police still do what they do, which is to over-react and go overboard when faced with opposition. And police still get the benefit of the doubt in court, allowing bully cops to get away with almost anything.


Incidents in Ferguson and Baltimore caused protests, riots and a movement called Black Lives Matter (BLM).  BLM felt that despite Obama's presidency, that most of American society still treat African-Americans with disrespect.

BLM was different from previous civil rights movements.  Whereas the civil rights movement of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were male dominated and revolved around religion, BLM was a secular movement with more female leadership, and even LGBT leadership.  Whereas previous civil rights movements emphasized that the protesters dressed conservatively, BLM fashion statement was "anything goes, white man not going to like us either way".


BLM did their traditional marches, but also alienated potential allies by blocking traffic and screaming in coffee shops & libraries and shaming non-black patrons for not doing enough.

Meanwhile, there have been movements on college campuses against "cultural appropriation", "microaggressions" ( I HATE that word as you may learn at this link),  Halloween costumes as well as demands for "safe spaces".  Much of it is focused on forcing unearned guilt on European-Americans for doing anything, for even just existing.

Yes, Obama did take a strong stance against political correctness on campuses, demanding that students listen to opposing viewpoints. He also noted that people shouldn't take things so personally!

However, Obama should've also defended "cultural appropriation" being that he grew up in multi-cultural Hawaii as well as spent a few years in Indonesia!  Come on, a person from that background will know how silly this whining about "cultural appopriation" is, which is why he never criticized "cultural appropriation". But it would be classic if he said "hey, cultures always mixed, it's OK if Iggy Azalea does hip-hop or an Anglo wear a sombrero".

So unlike what the conservatives say, I don't blame Barack Obama for the "worsening race relations" because a president can only control so much!

Yes, Barack Obama wants "white America" to understand the pain of racism, but he never defended the excess of political correction, never defended the tactics of the Phony Justice Warriors.



Meanwhile, there is a Conservative Correctness movement of Donald Trump, Ann Coulter, Richard Spencer and Tomi Lahren, that screams rants against BLM, refugees and "illegals" that are truly poisoning race relations. These Alt-Right Fascists are the flip-side of the Phony Justice Warriors! I think those morons are just made for each other! Obama has nothing to do with either!

5) limits of political appeal

Barack Obama is a historic figure and will continue to be a political celebrity! He will be in high demand for a lucrative career in making speeches and writing books. 

At the same time, his appeal has its limits!

So while people love him, it doesn't mean they have the same love for his political party!

The Democrats have been in decline in both Congress and the state legislatures nationwide!

Meanwhile, his endorsement could only do so much to help Hillary Clinton.  She is her own person, a person isn't appealing beyond  her base of worshippers (who tend to be liberal women over the age of 40, as well as Hollywood/Manhattan limousine liberals).  She alienated younger liberals with her hawkish tendencies and her Wall Street ties.  They wanted radical change and were excited by Bernie Sanders, a man old enough to be their grandfathers.  

Democrats need to step their game up! Riding on Obama's coattails is no longer an electoral strategy! Time for new leaders to step up!

Time (not just money) down the drain

2 years ago, I had this blog post titled "Money Down the Drain"
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2015/01/money-down-drain.html


Basically, the blog post saying going to strip clubs is money down the drain. 

I haven't been there since 2006. This is 2017!  It's a decade already! I don't miss it, and I don't plan on going back!



 i used to go strip clubs in my early 20s, but I stopped because the way it's set up, it's set up to get the customer to spend more than planned since the dancers don't work for free.

It's money down the drain for the customer, but I don't blame the strippers for it, they're just trying to get their bills paid. it's like the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game"


Of course, nearly every teenage boy dreams of going to a strip club.  I'm like "maybe go a few times in your early 20's to get your curiosity out of your system, but if you're still going in your 30's, then you're a sucker".

I think the same thing about watching porn and going to hostess bars. Money down the drain for chumps! 


Watching porn when you're  in your 30's? Really? Yeah, that's every teenage boy's dream, you may experiment with in your early 20's, but after that............................... get a life! You're a big boy now, live in reality, get off your couch, stop wasting your night looking at a screen, stop wasting your money! 
Go to a real nightclub and dance with some real women instead of just wasting your time watching fantasy!  

If you spend at least a decade dancing with women at a regular nightclub, you develop a memory bank of real life experiences  that no amount of porn can impress you anymore!   Why would it, real life experience will always over-ride watching fantasy!





And stop pouring money and time down the drain at hostess bars! Why waste money to pretend you're a "playa" at a hostess bar when you can go to a real nightclub, develop your dancefloor skills and get women to dance with you for free! 


Some of my former classmate still do those things (strip clubs, porn, hostess bars) and the last time I talked one of them, I told him he'll get much more satisfaction (and less expenses) just going to regular nightclubs and dance with women

And don't tell me "I don't know how to dance" (dammit just do something, anything, when you're on the floor"). 

If the night is right, you might even get a girl willing to "bump & grind",  which isn't that hard, it's free and doesn't cause pregnancies or STDs.

Start living real life! 

Stop wasting your time and stop pouring your money down the drain!

Live the real life! 

Impress people with your personal coolness instead of paying people to pretend they like you! 

You don't have much time in this world! Spend it wisely

===========


PS: I mentioned some of this to one of my female friends on facebook and she stated this

Ha ha true Pablo but I guess alot of men never figure this out so strip clubs are still a boomin business 😁 I've heard some guys say similar things like "Why would I pay to go and get teased and then left hanging? " but then again some ppl probably do like gettting teased etc.

In others, don't pay money to be a sucker! 

Gruesome pictures don't tell the whole story

It is said by many that a picture is worth a thousand words!

I mean, why describe something when you can show something!

As stated in my final paper for my internship report
http://media.wix.com/ugd/c8d67a_956c39e745ee45e7841d2172c04e8eec.docx?dn=LIS%20690%20Final%20Report.docx

A written description can indirectly clue the person on what a building looks like, but the image itself directly shows the person what a building looks like. Also, images have an advantage over words in that words require knowing a specific language.

That said, a picture maybe worth a thousand words, but some issues are so complex that they require a million or billion words.


Here's that I posted yesterday on facebook

On the right, some activists over-simplify the issue of abortion with the use of gruesome images and shaming tactics.

On the left, some activists over-simplify the issue of eating meat with the use of gruesome images and shaming tactics.

I'm not trying to ridicule those of you who sincerely want to protect the unborn or to protect the animals. I understand there's a protective quality to those stances which are admirable to a certain extent.

However, the issue of abortion and eating meat is much more complex than most propaganda using gruesome images. There's so many different sides of the issue that just can't fit into a facebook post, so maybe I might write a blog post on it if I have extra free time!

======


Let's start with abortion!

Yes, abortion ends the life of a fetus, a life of somebody that could be born and have the potential to be a great person!

At the same time, a fetus is still a body part! A fetus isn't a separate living being! A born baby is!

Some anti-abortion activists have sincere feelings about saving the fetus, and some have set up orphanages and other social services for struggling mothers!

Other anti-abortion activists are just trolls who are more about slut-shaming women, morality fascism and projecting an aura of self-righteousness!

Either way, many of them use pictures of bloody fetuses to promote their anti-abortion propaganda!

But as I said earlier, gruesome images don't tell the whole story!

Many who were raised in pro-life families and churches received a mostly one-sided depiction of abortion.

What happens when they see the other side.

I did have a blog post about pro-life protesters who end up getting an abortion
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2009/11/even-anti-abortion-protesters-have.html


Also, some links about former pro-life protesters in desperate situations getting an abortion
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a53809/pro-life-to-pro-choice/


About how common it is for abortion doctors have clients who used to protest against their clinics
http://www.salon.com/2015/11/30/our_protesters_came_in_for_abortions_fear_slut_shaming_planned_parenthood_and_the_truth_about_right_wing_religious_hypocrisy/

but I'll just take it from the following article (because I just saw it yesterday) from someone raised in a pro-life family and church who late became a pro-choice activists

"How I Moved From Being A Pro-life Evangelical to Become a Pro-choice Feminist" by Tucker Fitzgerald

https://medium.com/@tuckerfitzgerald/how-i-moved-from-being-a-pro-life-evangelical-to-become-a-pro-choice-feminist-e211a2d3c4b0#.e0t1gcg86

The article mentioned about his environment growing up, his early support of Republicans,and his later disillusionment with Republicans when it came to military policy, and his confusion when those who shared his concerns over the US military policy killing family overseas happen to be the same ones who supported abortion.

What if the embryo has a medical condition that will only allow it to live in extreme pain for a short time? What if the mother might die by carrying the embryo to term? What if the mother will certainly die by carrying it to term? I personally don’t know anyone so conservative (although they are certainly out there) that they would deny a mother an abortion that would keep her alive.

Which is to say that the vast majority of us, even enthusiastically pro-life folks, have made peace with abortion having some healthy role in our lives. Have made some peace with an adult woman’s life being more important than an unknown embryo years away from self-awareness. 

And even the most pro-choice among us have made with peace with it being better to place a newborn child for adoption rather than discard them in a dumpster (although child abandonment does happen for complex reasons).

(skipped paragraphs)

These were thin threads. And in retrospect, my complete inability to imagine why anyone would have an abortion was one of my big clues that I didn’t actually understand what was happening.

(skipped paragraphs)

Most middle class people can’t wrap their minds around the plain and simple economics of much of America. It’s not that it’s too expensive to have a baby. It’s that there’s no way to pay for it at all. You see, the challenges facing a single mother with children when facing an unexpected pregnancy are primarily about being able to feed her current child or children.

And when a mother has to chose between her current child that she is attached to, and a potential child growing inside her, she’ll choose her current child.

This is first and main thing anti-choice activists misunderstand about who gets abortions. The majority aren’t looking to avoid having children. Because the majority of women who get abortions in the United States are already mothers. And the decisions that they are making are about being able to feed and house current children.

The author goes on to acknowledge that there are social services to help struggling mothers, but not only do they only provide limited services, but that many "pro-life" conservatives want to cut funding to such services!   (note: discussions about whether such services should be done by government or by the private sector is a topic for a different blog post)

Another group on the ground that turned out to be so different that my church described them is the activists, the clinic workers, and the doctors that keep abortion access hanging by a thread in this country. The image of murderous doctors gleefully funding their sports cars by tricking naive women into abortions so they could sell the body parts to radical feminists who stuff them like big game trophies to hang over their fireplaces turned out to be a bit… off.

Rather the people on the front line of providing abortions tend to be passionate, financially sacrificial, down-to-earth, and deeply committed to serving poor women who have the least access to the education and contraceptives that would have allowed them to avoid an abortion. And like George Tiller, the doctor (who provided abortions) who was shot to death at his church, it turns out they can be religious. Devout even.

Unlike the church of my youth, which fantasized about being in a deeply sacrificial battle on behalf of their neighbors, I’ve continually experienced abortion providers as willing to sacrifice lucrative medical careers, risk incredible social ostracization, and literally risk their lives (in a way Evangelical Christians can only pretend that they are) in order to make the world a better place. And rather than being smug or condescending about the deep complexities of abortion, they seem to be more aware of the terrible balancing act that the women they serve must navigate than their critics.

===========



Now to segway from abortion to eating meet, here's some paragraphs from the same article by a former pro-lifer turned pro-choicer

And then there was the more fuzzy question, the one I’d had about animals. What about potential life? What about all of the years that a pig missed out on so I could enjoy a little bacon? How do we weigh or account for missed years of life?

And then another thought, something I hadn’t considered with the pig, what about the suffering to others in their death? What about the other pigs that would certainly miss the companionship, warmth, and snuggles of the lost pig (if they were lucky enough to be raised in a situation that allowed animal contact)? What about their grief in the loss of another animal who was known and enjoyed (loved?) by them. We tear up at stories of dogs waiting for their dead master’s trains, or lying on their dead master’s graves… animals grieving.

The reason I put that in this blog post is because one of my vegan friends who post a lot of gruesome videos from slaughterhouses was also the same person who got an abortion after she was raped by an abusive boyfriend.  She was then shamed by an anti-abortion vegan activist who called her a "fake vegan" and a "murderer". Yikes!

Anyways, I'm not against showing those gruesome videos because they do shine a light on what it is going on! 

I do not condone much the abusive treatment that goes on in some of the slaughterhouses and animal farms. Some of those videos are heart-breaking.

At the same time, those videos give the false impression that all slaughterhouses and animal farms operate in the same manner.

Temple Grandin has shown videos of animals farms with much more humane conditions and where the only harm comes at slaughter time where the animals take a quick electric shock to the head.

Temple Grandin on beef operations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMqYYXswono&feature=youtu.be 

lamb operations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoB3tf9Q2AA

turkey operations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=852zxDEAR-Q


pork operations  (being that pigs are more senstive and squeal a lot, this video isn't comfortable viewing,  but still, PETA won't share it because it's not gruesome enough)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsEbvwMipJI

Also, in some religions, (for example:  Islam and Judaism), animals can only be slaughtered in a certain way to minimize pain. 


But even with that, even with relatively humane slaughter methods, it is understandable that vegans are sickened by all killing of animals! 

One even admitted that she was uncomfortable watching how lions kill their prey!

I do not want to mock such sensitivities, nor will I ever want to pressure vegans to eat meat. 

However, the shaming tactics (ie. "you corpse munchers") is just so similar to the way anti-abortion activists call women at abortion clinics "murderers", "sluts" and "whores"

Also, calling animal farms "concentration camps" and "slavery" is a bad way to promote a vegan philosophy to historically oppressed communities.

Just one example of why that is was a well-written article by Melissa Harris-Perry (a former MSNBC host). The article started off by mentioning the Micheal Vick case, then about how animal rights activists alienating some African-American students by their posters comparing the meat industry to slavery & lynching, 

https://www.thenation.com/article/michael-vick-racial-history-and-animal-rights/ 

Given this history we might think that African Americans would be particularly strident animal rights activists, seeing their interests as profoundly linked. But the relationship between race, rights, and animals is more complicated. Dogs, for example, were used by enslavers to catch, trap and return those who were trying to escape to freedom. Dogs were used to terrorize Civil Rights demonstrators. In short, animals have been weapons used against black bodies and black interests in ways that have deep historical resonace.

Not only have animals been used as weapons against black people, but many African Americans feel that the suffering of animals evokes more empathy and concern among whites than does the suffering of black people.  For example, in the days immediately following Hurricane Katrina dozens of people sent me a link to an image of pets being evacuated on an air conditioned bus. This image was a sickening juxtaposition to the conditions faced by tens of thousands of black residents trapped by the storm and it provoked great anger and pain for those who sent it to me.

(note: Yes, I understand that most "white" vegan activists are offended by Micheal Vick's action and not by the color of his skin, though some of the outrage by right-wing pundits had more to do with Vick's skin color than with animal cruelty.  My blog post on the topic: http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2007/08/more-on-michael-vick.html)


---------


But let's get back to why the shaming tactics by vegan activists alienate potential allies.

Let's put it this way: if the shame tactics doesn't work with me a blogger who occasionally writes about abusive policing as well as racial/gender justice, then how do you expect to reach those who voted for a guy like Donald Trump? 

People gotta eat what they can! You just can't just shame people to follow a politically correct diet. It doesn't work that way! It doesn't work with me.



But more importantly, the shame tactics don't work, basically because humans are biologically omnivores. 


Vegan activists claim that humans weren't meant to eat meat. However, humans were evolved to gather plants and hunt animals for food. We eventually evolved to farm so that humans don't have to spend so much time in tough terrain searching for food.  Even though most of us no longer hunt/gather/farm, we still eat a diet based on thousands of years of evolution.

Granted, the current meat consumption by many in the  1st & 2nd world countries is probably way above what humans were meant to eat. There are negative health conditions that come with excessive meat consumption. Colon cancer and heart disease are just two of them! 

As a precaution, I am having several meat-less meals a week. This is new to me!

At the same time, going vegan would be hard for me because I grew up as a picky eater, as I mentioned on a recent blog post titled "Picky Eater"
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2017/01/picky-eater.html



The post also mentioned "cultured meat" which uses animal cells but doesn't slaughter the animals to make the meat!

some videos
https://www.facebook.com/garytvcom/videos/938772706177978/?hc_ref=SEARCH
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsjKIIz6CCI

From the Wall Street Journal

"Sizzling Steaks May Soon Be Lab-Grown"

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sizzling-steaks-may-soon-be-lab-grown-1454302862

Several startups are racing to be the first to fill U.S. consumers’ plates with laboratory-developed hamburgers and sausages that taste just as good as the kind from cattle and pigs.
Memphis Meats Inc., a San Francisco company founded by three scientists, aims in three to four years to be the first to sell meat grown from animal cells in steel tanks. Rivals including Mosa Meat and Modern Meadow Inc. also aim to bring such “cultured meat” to market in the next several years.

and

The startups’ lofty goal is to remake modern animal agriculture, which the United Nations estimates consumes one-third of the world’s grains, with about a quarter of all land used for grazing. The companies say that growing meat with cells and bioreactors—similar to fermentors used to brew beer—consumes a fraction of the nutrients, creates far less waste and avoids the need for antibiotics and additives commonly used in meat production.

“The meat industry knows their products aren’t sustainable,” said Memphis Meats Chief Executive Uma Valeti, a cardiologist and medical professor at the University of Minnesota. “We believe that in 20 years, a majority of meat sold in stores will be cultured.”

I like to see that happen!

People can still have their favorite meat dishes, but also less animals tortured!