comment 0

Quentin Tarantino and other men remained complicit while Harvey Weinstein sexually harrassed women

Quentin Tarantino knew since 1995 that Harvey Weinstein was sexually harassing and raping women.

I used to like this filmmaker for movies like Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds, but now I don’t.

Quentin Tarantino choosing to remain silent & complicit about Harvey Weinstein’s choices to sexually harrass and rape has changed my appreciation of his movies to disappointment with Tarantino as a man.

I can’t like a guy’s work or movies when he has chosen to keep quiet and complicit about another guy sexually harassing and raping women.

Men being quiet about other men’s behaviour of harrassment and rape is a bad thing.

Being complicit and choosing to work with an abuser for decades is just as bad as that abuser’s behaviour of harrassment and rape.

With all this said, there is one other guy besides Quentin Tarantino who I don’t like because of his work with Harvey Weinstein while Weinstein was paying women to keep quiet about his sexually abusive behaviour: I don’t like Woody Allen.

I don’t like his own weak condolences shown in his sympathetic statement about Harvey Weinstein:

From the BBC:

Even when he clarifies, Woody Allen still seems sympathetic to Harvey Weinstein because he worries that there will be a witch hunt of his peers.

This worry comes from Mr. Allen because he was involved in a scandal of inappropriate sex. 

In the early 1990s, the filmmaker had sex with one of his girlfriend’s (Mia Farrow’s) two adopted daughters, Soon Yi-Previn, and he overall had his affair with this girl. That was gross.

But he also did something else: The second adopted daughter, Dylan Farrow, had stated (in her letter in the New York Times) that Woody Allen was sexually abusive of her.

From the New York Times:

In 1993, accusations that Woody Allen had abused his adoptive daughter, Dylan Farrow, filled the headlines, part of a sensational story about the celebrity split between Allen and his girlfriend, Mia Farrow. This is a case that has been written about endlessly, but this is the first time that Dylan Farrow herself has written about it in public.

An Open Letter From Dylan Farrow

What’s your favorite Woody Allen movie? Before you answer, you should know: when I was seven years old, Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother’s electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we’d go to Paris and I’d be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.

For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didn’t like. I didn’t like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him. I didn’t like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didn’t like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didn’t like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldn’t keep the secret anymore.

When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. I also didn’t know the firestorm it would trigger. I didn’t know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me. I didn’t know that he would accuse my mother of planting the abuse in my head and call her a liar for defending me. I didn’t know that I would be made to recount my story over and over again, to doctor after doctor, pushed to see if I’d admit I was lying as part of a legal battle I couldn’t possibly understand. At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldn’t be in trouble if I was lying – that I could take it all back. I couldn’t. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.

After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut – due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the “child victim.” Woody Allen was never convicted of any crime. That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up. I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself. That torment was made worse by Hollywood. All but a precious few (my heroes) turned a blind eye. Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, “who can say what happened,” to pretend that nothing was wrong. Actors praised him at awards shows. Networks put him on TV. Critics put him in magazines. Each time I saw my abuser’s face – on a poster, on a t-shirt, on television – I could only hide my panic until I found a place to be alone and fall apart.

Last week, Woody Allen was nominated for his latest Oscar. But this time, I refuse to fall apart. For so long, Woody Allen’s acceptance silenced me. It felt like a personal rebuke, like the awards and accolades were a way to tell me to shut up and go away. But the survivors of sexual abuse who have reached out to me – to support me and to share their fears of coming forward, of being called a liar, of being told their memories aren’t their memories – have given me a reason to not be silent, if only so others know that they don’t have to be silent either.

Today, I consider myself lucky. I am happily married. I have the support of my amazing brothers and sisters. I have a mother who found within herself a well of fortitude that saved us from the chaos a predator brought into our home.

But others are still scared, vulnerable, and struggling for the courage to tell the truth. The message that Hollywood sends matters for them.

What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?

Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.

So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.

Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?

comment 0

Why did the University of Florida pay more than $500,000 for security at Richard Spencer’s public talk?

You have got to love paying the bills for security because the First Amendment of Free Speech in the U.S. Constitution is the only reason for this expense. 😅

So the University of Florida — because of being a government funded university — had to host a White Supremacist public speaking event and pay the majority of the bill for security?

This ridiculous amount of money will only make private Universities more attractive 🤔:

comment 0

Richard Spencer’s University of Florida public talk

Richard Spencer booked a venue at the University Florida to give a public speech on October 19th.

Anti-White Nationalist & Supremacist protesters came to the university to shout down Richard Spencer as he spoke.

Spencer was often interrupted.

He appeared to have few supporters among those who sat in the audience to listen to his public talk.

About 15 white men — dressed in white shirts and khaki pants — raised their hands when he asked who identified with the Alt-right.

The Alt-right is a group of mostly White Men who reject North American politics that are defined as politically correct, and several of them are neo-Nazis, white supremacists and anti-Semites.

The Anti-Richard Spencer protestors mostly shouted at as well as punch the Alt-right guys who walked out of the venue once the public talk was over.

But there was one exceptional Black man who did an extraordinary thing:

Randy Furniss who was wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with swastikas on Thursday, October 19th, was surrounded by a crowd of Antifa protesters who screamed, punched and spat on him before Aaron Courtney gave him a hug.

“I could have hit him, I could have hurt him … but something in me said, ‘You know what? He just needs love.’

Speaking to the New York Daily News early Friday, Aaron Courtney said, “It’s a step in the right direction. One hug can really change the world. It’s really that simple.

Good for you, Aaron Courtney. 👏

Now can other Antifa protestors do the same gesture of a hug instead of being violent toward the white guys who attend Richard Spencer’s public talks?

I see a cycle of violence happening during these protests.

comment 0

Quentin Tarantino stayed silent about Harvey Weinstein sexual harrassment since the mid 1990s

Since 1995, Quentin Tarantino has known about Harvey Weinstein sexually harassing women. Weinstein had harrassed Mira Sorvino, whom Tarantino dated from 1995 to 1998, which is how Tarantino had first learned about the sexual harassments.

So it seems like a hollow call to arms for Tarantino to call other men in the Hollywood business to do something besides make a statement of apology for being complicit like the statement that Tarantino had just made:

comment 0

Twitter’s Nazis hate speech filter: This is why Gab is now used by Nazis and by the less Nazis-ish Alt-Right

Gab is the social media haven for Nazis and the Alt Right.

Gab is filled with racism from White Racists, anti-Semitism & Racism from Neo Nazis, and anti-Feminism from angry white guys.

It would be nice if the free speech coming from the White Racists on Gab wasn’t hate speech, but being hatefully racist seems to be the only speech that these angry white guys can communicate.

Free speech must be viewed by the Alt Right on Gab as a license to speak freely as a racist Jerk. 😆

This is why the institution of free speech gets regulated eventually in many countries: People believe that to communicate their ideas freely they have the right to speak hateful racism all the time. 😅

Why can’t someone say something that’s nice with their Free Speech? Or is the point of Free Speech to fume your beliefs, which happens to be hatefully racist? Is Free Speech the right to rant about the race of people who upset you?

Andrew Torba, the Gab CEO, doesn’t like Twitter because it (as an American business) is removing hate speech as those tweets are reported by people using Twitter.

Andrew also doesn’t like the country of residence setting that Twitter offers as a feature:

The two countries of France & Germany — when you have either location as your Twitter account’s address — block the Racist Facist Twitter accounts:

Also from blogger, Kevin Marks:

comment 0

Are Hoop Earrings cultural appropriation?

By the logic of three students at Pitzer, College, Claremont, California who identify themselves as Latina, only girls and women with skin that is either brown or black are permitted to wear Circle Shaped Earrings? They wrote: “White Girl, take OFF your hoops!!!” on March 4th 2017.

So my mom (whose skin is brown) can wear Hoop Earrings but I can’t? 🤔

This identity politics with Hoop Earrings looks to me like colourist racism simply because this is racism with skin colour coming from women who have brown skin directed toward women with pink skin.

Last time I checked, Hoop Earrings are actually Circle Earring Jewelry.

This circle shaped ear jewelry has been worn by any woman in any society because circles as earrings are a simple design to make.

Example: Ancient Egyptian Woman wearing Hoop Earrings

The Greek Women wore Hoop Earrings, the Roman Women wore Hoop Earrings, and so on. Women of any skin colour have worn circle shaped earrings because these earrings are a basic design that are simple to craft.

Also please, just please don’t quip at me that because the Sumerians were brown skinned, this is definitive evidence that only women with brown or black coloured skin can wear circle shaped earrings because a very old discovered pair of hoop earrings were Sumerian made:

Sumerian Hoop Earrings, 2600-2500 B.C.E., Gold, Diameter of 1.1 Centimeters, Brooklyn Museum

This belief that circle earring jewelry is only for brown or black skinned women is plain colourist racism.

The next question to ask would be: Are the size of the Hoops the perceived problem of cultural appropriation?:

If the Big Hoops are the problem of misappropriation, then this question of “Size Matters” is very much like a question about Penis Size.

If you see the Penis Size Debate as silly, then why are Women with brown skin thinking like Black and White men debating their Size Of Penis and that the biggest size of Dick belongs to only Black men and the Smallest belongs to Asian men? 😄

Comparing Hoop Earrings to Penises sounds silly because one is jewelry and the other is a sex appendage. However demanding that only the Big Hoops be worn by brown skinned Latinas is also just as ridiculous because it’s racist to demand that Big Hoop Ear Jewelry are only for brown & black women within a multi-cultural nation where influence by one culture to another always occurs.

Influence, sharing and exchange is actually a very good thing in a country where relations between people of different ethnicities can devolve into fractious in-group and out-group politics. Sectarian clique politics is a bad thing for a society of different cultures. The bad thing would be public civil fighting because of sectarian or segregation politics.

However, let’s ask the question about nose jewelry like studs and rings:

Many White women wear nose studs and nose rings.

Because cultural appropriation is now “No Cross Culture Sharing Whatsoever” — which means no trade, no cross cultural exchange & sharing of jewelry — does this mean that White women are also forbidden from wearing a nose ring?

They now cannot wear a nose ring simply because their skin is pink?

Many White tattooists wear nose rings, and I wouldn’t attempt to tell them they are forbidden from wearing a nose ring simply because Latinas with a brown skin colour only want brown or black skinned people to wear the nose ring.

I can say for certain that all White tattooists would tell me to “Fuck Off” if I attempted to tell them that they can’t wear a nose ring. 😅

Or look at it this way:

Tattooists are people who decorate their bodies because what they wear is aesthetic to them, or is art, and they see what they wear as their choice.

comment 0

They were kidnapped for 5 years because of backpacking as tourists in Afghanistan

I know that anyone who isn’t an Afghan is a target while being in Afghanistan. The reasons are obvious:

  • Afghans are fiercely concerned about foreign people occupying their land as either military, an NGO, or as another organization
  • It’s absolutely understandable why Afghans do NOT want any foreigners living in any form of a large organized community of people in their homeland because that is colonial.
  • Afghans have a long national history of foreign armies showing up and occupying their land
  • Afghans can be racist like anyone else and will obviously spot and racial profile that foreign person who’s in their country either as a reporter, military personnel or as a tourist.

With this said, I wonder why this married couple, Josh Boyle and Caitlan Coleman (a Canadian husband & American wife) decided it was an awesome idea to actually backpack as White Western tourists in Afghanistan?

That idea was very naive because, of course, they were a foreign people and were an easy target to spot for the Afghans who were Taliban or Haqqani.

The idea of experiencing an exotic country, a beautiful people and delicious food unfortunately ignores the reality of those people you romanticize.

If those people have a long history of being occupied by foreign armies, then pay attention to that fact and don’t gloss it over with your optimism or hope.

I strongly suggest that you cannot make your own race and origin irrelevant to that people so that they will welcome you, and do what you had imagined they would do if you were really an intimate friend or a family member.

Those people are beautiful but you’re not one of them, and are also not a member of their community. So you really can’t transcend your foreigness when the people you want to positively experience have a long history of foreign people showing up and occupying their land.

You ignore the facts about that people and their politics. Pay attention to a society’s politics. 😳

So when Josh Boyle and Caitlan Coleman were kidnapped precisely because they were foreigners (and White Western foreigners) who had backpacked into Afghanistan as tourists, I have a percent of me that isn’t sympathetic:

90 percent of me feels sorry for this married couple while 10 percent of me says:

You were being stupid. Don’t be stupid. Being stupid gets you kidnapped or killed. And, look, you got yourselves kidnapped.”

Afghanistan is not a tourist destination. I don’t know when it will be a safe tourist destination for anyone who’s a Westerner.

However, Josh & Caitlan and their sons get to experience a happy ending to their kidnapping. They were rescued days ago by Pakistani soldiers. They’re now back in Canada, Smith Falls, Ontario, with his parents. 😃

comment 0

Sarah Silverman: Funny about her White Privilege or is she just awkward?

I never found Sarah Silverman as a funny comedian. I’ve honestly seen other women doing a better job as female comedians. The few to immediately name would be Whoopi Goldberg, Leslie Jones, Melissa McCarthy, Amy Poehler & Rebel Wilson.

So can Sarah Silverman actually be funny with the political topic of White Privilege in the United States? Probably not.

Sarah Silverman is just awkward when trying to be funny about White Privilege. 

Awkward isn’t funny when it’s done as a portrayal of a White woman bumbling as she too often censors herself when she talks with a Black person, an Asian person, and so on.

To me, the portrayal of constant self-censorship is actually only annoying.

Sarah Silverman’s portrayal of her stumbling self-censorship with her words of address when talking with someone who is Asian, Black, etc., is really annoying to watch.

Example: Being awkward in your small talk with a Black person with which words to use as the racial identity for them is annoying.

2nd Example: Small talk is not a conversation between government diplomats representing different ethnic identities. A Serbian diplomat fumbling with words is funny because of the possible large consequence that would happen when the other diplomat is referred to as a Bosniak instead of a Croat.

A short conversation on a street that involves commenting about the weather isn’t the conversation that involves an awkward searching of words to address the other person’s race, racial experience and your White Privilege. 😅

Can you imagine a random White woman coming up to you while you’re on a street and she starts fumbling with her words about what ethnic identity to refer to you as, your racial experience and her White Privilege as she begins talking with you??? That would be very annoying. I would ask are you okay? 😂

The weather is frequently the main topic in a short conversation between strangers at a bus stop on a Canadian street. But usually people don’t talk. Instead they read their phones.

comment 0

The Philippines domain registry did revoke the use of “.ph” from Andrew Anglin for his

Andrew says otherwise because he’s full of garbage and likes to portray himself as a man who’s in control of the website domain that he uses:

The Philippines domain registry has two offices: 

1) The administrative & helpdesk support is in an office at Hong Kong,

2) The Head Quarters — which is the PH Domain Foundation that’s responsible for the ph domain — finally has its office in Manila, the Philippines: