Kavanaugh/Blasey Ford Sexual Assault Allegations Hearing

[GreyhoundFan]

"Fight over Kavanaugh nomination finds its oddest front yet: Wikipedia pages"

Spoiler

Whoever was answering the phones in what was supposedly Sen. Lindsey O. Graham’s office Thursday evening was clearly tired of getting calls.

“Hello, FBI!” came the shouted greeting to a reporter’s call. “You must have the wrong number,” the woman on the phone said when asked about the online disclosure of senators’ personal information as Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh spoke before a Senate committee earlier in the day.

Have you received a lot of calls tonight?

The unwilling receptionist’s patience — already thin — had worn out and the line went dead.

Graham (R-S.C.) was one of three Republicans whose purported personal information was leaked as he questioned Kavanaugh. The Republican senators from Utah — Mike Lee and Orrin G. Hatch — were also “doxed” when an anonymous Wikipedia user edited their pages, adding phone numbers and home addresses. The information was quickly removed and aides contacted authorities.

The doxing, done in a seemingly partisan fashion, took an increasingly caustic clash over Kavanaugh’s nomination to its oddest front yet: the world of Wikipedia revision wars.

It came hours after emotional testimony from Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who alleges Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her, and during Kavanaugh’s fiery response, which quickly devolved into a partisan brawl.

The Washington Post confirmed the accuracy of most of the addresses added to the senators' Wikipedia pages, both in Washington and in their home states; but calls to the posted numbers elicited a range of replies, the most colorful coming from the number listed for Graham’s office.

Another phone number listed for Graham, this one identified on Wikipedia as his “home” line, was actually the number for a D.C.-based LGBTQ advocacy organization. Most other numbers went straight to voice mail or were disconnected.

Graham’s spokesman, Kevin Bishop, said the senator’s office was aware of the leak but did not comment further.

A member of Lee’s staff, who did not identify himself, answered the number listed as the senator’s office line and said he had spoken to Capitol Police about the incident, but declined to comment further. Lee’s spokeswoman, Jillian Wheeler, said her office couldn’t confirm any details about the incident and also declined further comment.

A spokeswoman for Capitol Police, Eva Malecki, said the department does not comment on ongoing investigations. Some of the information posted could also be found in publicly available documents, and it’s unclear what, if any, crimes may have been committed.

But the action put the senators in danger, said Hatch’s spokesman, Matt Whitlock.

“It’s shocking that someone would post Senator Hatch and other Judiciary Committee Republican’s home addresses online, putting their families at risk,” Whitlock said. “That it happened as they were asking questions in a Supreme Court confirmation hearing is just another indication of how broken this process has become.”

“This is outrageous,” Raj Shah, a White House spokesman, wrote on Twitter. “Please stop.”

The Wikipedia entries began circulating on Twitter thanks to an account called @congressedits, a social media “accountability bot” that tracks edits to the online encyclopedia made from IP addresses assigned to the U.S. Capitol. When someone makes edits to a page using one of those IP addresses, the bot takes a screen shot of the change and tweets it out to its 65,000 followers.

According to the bot, the Republican lawmakers’ articles were “edited anonymously from US House of Representatives.”

So, too, was the entry for “Devil’s Triangle,” a drinking game that Kavanaugh, under questioning from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), said he played in high school. An anonymous user added a new definition to the “Devil’s Triangle” entries: “a popular drinking game enjoyed by friends of Judge Brett Kavanaugh.”

If these edits were meant to intimidate Republican senators or embarrass Kavanaugh, a rebuttal edit — also reported by the @congressedits account as having come from the House — was intended to shame the rogue reviser (or revisers) into abandoning the effort.

The Wikipedia article for the U.S. Congress received the following edit: “Wikipedia should block all congressional IPs if some little rich-boy socialist interns can’t be responsible online.”

The “intern” part of that edit may have been a reference to past escapades @congressedits exposed (or, perhaps more likely, facilitated). Last year, the Wikipedia article on internships was edited from a House IP address to include the plea “please pay us.”

(In an article for the Daily Beast, former Hill intern Kate Kohn shed some light on the intern editing practice and copped to making changes herself.)

Thursday evening was the second high-profile instance of doxing for Graham in the past few years. The first came from a notable member of his own party.

On the campaign trail in 2015, then-candidate Donald Trump famously recited Graham’s cellphone number during an event in South Carolina. Asked why he gave out Graham’s personal number, Trump said, simply: “So people can call him.”

That day, Graham seemed resigned to his fate, tweeting: “Probably getting a new phone. iPhone or Android?”

 

[Howl]

Yes, there is terror on the part of the Republicans over what might be found out, and likely what many Republican operatives already know. 

My only solace, facing the likelihood that Kavanaugh is confirmed, is to remember that there are tons of people out there who are searching, searching searching for information and dirt and they will not quit.  Like the Tweeter who found out that Mark Judge's grandma's house, that is identical in layout to the house that Ed Whelan noted, is 1.1 miles from the country club, but also has the narrower stairway described by Blasey Ford. 

The entire Blasey Ford hearing has also eclipsed any serious investigation on glaring issues over finances, possible alcohol abuse and gambling addiction, which I personally think is the main reason to force a vote.  You can't "he said, she said" over finances or gambling debts. 

Edited September 28, 2018 by Howl

[AmazonGrace]

 

Yale weighs in: 

 

[SassyPants]

The only people who win by pushing through this candidate without performing any further investigations and interviews, or yield any period of cool down time,  are Republicans and the Trump admin., no one else. Everyone else in  America is held hostage to a corrupt group of very powerful and elite men.

Edited September 28, 2018 by SassyPants

[AmazonGrace]

This would be great but such an article doesn't seem to exist

Edited September 28, 2018 by AmazonGrace

[GreyhoundFan]

"Here’s where Kavanaugh’s sworn testimony was misleading or wrong"

Spoiler

As he began his questioning of Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Thursday, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) asked Kavanaugh about a point of procedure in criminal trials.

“As a federal judge, you’re aware of the jury instruction falsus in omnibus, are you not?” Blumenthal asked. “You’re aware of that jury instruction?”

Kavanaugh said he was, but he deferred to Blumenthal on a direct translation.

"False in one thing, false in everything,” Blumenthal replied. “Meaning in jury instructions that we — some of us as prosecutors have heard many times, is — told the jury that they can disbelieve a witness if they find them to be false in one thing.”

Blumenthal's point was that the exceptional hearings centered on the credibility of Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, who alleged that she'd been assaulted by Kavanaugh at a house party in 1982 when both were in high school. Over the course of his testimony, though, Kavanaugh offered several answers to questions that stretched or misrepresented the truth.

Here are those responses — and some for which he's incorrectly been accused of having been untruthful — in chronological order.

Kavanaugh’s opening statement

“Some of you were lying in wait and had it ready. This first allegation was held in secret for weeks by a Democratic member of this committee, and by staff. It would be needed only if you couldn’t take me out on the merits. ... This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit...”

Kavanaugh here refers to how Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) had received a letter in July detailing Ford’s allegation, and that it was released publicly only this month. He implies that the letter was withheld until a politically expedient point as part of a political “hit.”

Feinstein has said that she was unable to move forward with the allegation because Ford wanted to remain anonymous. On Thursday, Ford testified that she decided to step forward once the media learned about the letter. (Feinstein also denied leaking the letter.)

“I never attended a gathering like the one Dr. Ford describes in her allegation.”

The word “like” is carrying a lot of weight in that sentence, but it's clear from Kavanaugh's later testimony and the personal calendars he submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee that he attended parties like the one Ford describes — up to the point of the alleged assault. More on this below.

“She and I did not travel in the same social circles.”

Ford testified that in the spring and summer of 1982 she was going out with Kavanaugh’s friend nicknamed “Squi,” who appears more than a dozen times on Kavanaugh’s calendar of social events.

“Dr. Ford’s allegation is not merely uncorroborated, it is refuted by the very people she says were there, including by a long-time friend of hers. Refuted.”

As we noted Thursday, Kavanaugh’s presentation of what the others have allegedly said about Ford’s accusations is misleading.

At various points in his testimony, Kavanaugh said that the two male friends alleged to have been at the party, Mark Judge and P.J. Smyth, had sworn under penalty of perjury that the party didn’t happen. Both actually said that they didn’t recall the party as described, and Judge’s statement to that effect didn’t carry the weight of sworn testimony. (After Kavanaugh’s testimony was complete, he submitted a letter that met that standard.)

At other points, Kavanaugh refers to the fact that the four witnesses that Ford alleges were at the party all rejected her account. One of those four witnesses is Leland Keyser, who told The Post in a brief interview that she believed Ford’s allegation, although she didn’t remember the party. Another of the four witnesses is Kavanaugh.

“The event described by Dr. Ford presumably happened on a weekend because I believed everyone worked and had jobs in the summers. And in any event, a drunken early evening event of the kind she describes, presumably happened on a weekend. ... If the party described by Dr. Ford happened in the summer of 1982 on a weekend night, my calendar shows all but definitively that I was not there.”

Ford never said when the alleged incident occurred. It’s also not the case that Kavanaugh’s social circle restricted its drinking bouts to weekdays in the summer. Judge, Kavanaugh’s friend, wrote in a book about his battle with sobriety that he would often show up to work either hung over or still intoxicated from the night before.

"The calendars show a few weekday gatherings at friends' houses after a workout or just to meet up and have some beers. But none of those gatherings included the group of people that Dr. Ford has identified. And as my calendars show, I was very precise about listing who was there; very precise. "

There’s one entry, on July 1, that indicates that Kavanaugh, Judge, Smyth and the boy Ford says she was going out with were headed to a friend’s house for “skis” — acknowledged by Kavanaugh during his testimony as a gathering that involved drinking.

It’s hard to judge how detailed the attendee lists presented on Kavanaugh’s calendar are, but on multiple occasions he refers to parties in the abstract or to events that he acknowledged included people beyond those mentioned. (An example: When he’d go lift weights at a friend’s house.)

“My friends and I sometimes got together and had parties on weekends. The drinking age was 18 in Maryland for most of my time in high school, and was 18 in D.C. for all of my time in high school. I drank beer with my friends.”

Kavanaugh is being misleading.

The drinking age in Maryland was 18 when Kavanaugh was a freshman, sophomore and junior in high school — when he was 15, 16 and 17 years old. In the summer of 1982 — on July 1, in fact — it was increased to 21.

At other points in his testimony, he claimed that seniors could drink legally when he was in high school. That was true — until he was a senior.

“[O]ne of our good female friends who we would admire and went to dances with had her names used on the yearbook page with the term “alumnus.” That yearbook reference was clumsily intended to show affection, and that she was one of us. But in this circus, the media’s interpreted the term is related to sex. It was not related to sex.”

Kavanaugh here is referring to yearbook mentions of a woman named Renate Schroeder Dolphin, who had joined 64 other women in signing a letter of support for his candidacy. She then learned that Kavanaugh and his friends had referred to themselves as “Renate alumni” in their yearbook, which she recognized as an insinuation that she was promiscuous and had engaged in intimate relationships with each of the boys.

Bolstering Dolphin’s perception of the meaning of the term was a poem one of Kavanaugh’s classmates included in his yearbook entry: “You need a date / and it’s getting late / so don’t hesitate / to call Renate.” She told the New York Times that the insinuation “horrible, hurtful and simply untrue.”

Kavanaugh's argument that the term was meant to show she was “one of us” is hard to believe — especially since she only learned of it after news reports chronicled it this month.

Responding to questions

Rachel Mitchell, the Republicans' prosecutor: “Dr. Ford described a small gathering of people at a suburban Maryland home in the summer of 1982. She said that Mark Judge, P.J. Smyth and Leland [Keyser] also were present, as well as an unknown male, and that the people were drinking to varying degrees. Were you ever at a gathering that fits that description?”

Kavanaugh: “No, as I’ve said in my opening statement.”

In a later set of questions, Mitchell asked a similar question.

Mitchell: "Is there anything [on your calendars] that could even remotely fit what we’re talking about, in terms of Dr. Ford’s allegations?

Kavanaugh: No.

The latter response is noteworthy because Mitchell had just asked about the July 1 gathering (which included drinking) that Kavanaugh acknowledged was attended by Judge and Smyth.

Both answers seem to depend on the inclusion of Keyser in the question. In response to an earlier Mitchell question, Kavanaugh said this about her: “I — I know of her. And it — it's possible I, you know, saw — met her in high school at some point at some event. Yes, I know — I know of her and, again, I don't want to rule out having crossed paths with her in high school.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.): Judge, have you -- I don’t know if it’s “boufed” or “boofed” -- how do you pronounce that?

Kavanaugh: That refers to flatulence. We were 16.

Whitehouse: Okay. And so when your friend Mark Judge said the same -- put the same thing in his yearbook page back to you, he had the same meaning? It was flatulence?

Kavanaugh: I don’t know what he did, but that’s my recollection.

Later:

Whitehouse: Devil's triangle? 

Kavanaugh: Drinking game.

Whitehouse is referring to comments in Kavanaugh’s yearbook that read, “Judge — have you boofed yet?” and simply “Devil’s Triangle.”

Some have claimed that this is a clear reference to vomiting, suggesting drunkenness, or perhaps that it refers to a form of alcohol ingestion meant to avoid the smell of alcohol on one’s breath. Others have said that “devil’s triangle” refers to a sexual encounter involving three people. There is not contemporaneous documentation of those terms available online that would suggest those meanings were Kavanaugh’s real intent. (Sites like Urban Dictionary emerged only in the Internet era and may not be instructive about past slang.)

High school slang is often very specific to small groups of people, so it’s hard to say that Kavanaugh was misleading here. We’ll note, though, that the New York Times’s David Enrich says that he spoke with a number of Kavanaugh’s former classmates and that he therefore thinks Kavanaugh was not being truthful.

To Whitehouse: "[W]e in essence were having a party and didn't pay attention to the game even though the game was the excuse we had for getting together."

“I think that’s very common. I don’t know if you’ve been to a Super Bowl party for example, Senator, and not paid attention to the game and just hung out with your friends. I don’t know if you’ve done that or not. But that’s what we were referring to in those -- those two occasions.”

Kavanaugh was responding to questions about two other yearbook entries, one reading “Georgetown vs. Louisville — Who Won That Game Anyway?” and another reading “Orioles vs. Red Sox — Who Won Anyway?” The “party” referred to in the beginning of his response refers to the Georgetown game. The Orioles game is documented on his calendar; he attended it in person with a number of his classmates.

He claims that in both cases his awareness of the victor was impaired not by drunkenness but by distraction. This is a central point that Kavanaugh reiterated repeatedly: He had no issues with drinking to the point of forgetting. If he did have such issues, of course, it would undercut his allegation that he can say with certainty that the alleged attack on Ford didn’t happen.

So he's left in a position of twice suggesting that he didn't know who won the sports events because he was simply having too much fun with his friends. It's an iffy excuse in the abstract, but in context it's obviously untrue.

Why? Another example:

Whitehouse: Let's look at, "Beach Week Ralph Club -- Biggest Contributor," what does the word Ralph mean in that?

Kavanaugh: That probably refers to throwing up. I’m known to have a weak stomach and I always have. In fact, the last time I was here, you asked me about having ketchup on spaghetti. I always have had a weak stomach. ... I got a weak stomach, whether it’s with beer or with spicy food or anything.

Beach Week was and is known as an event focused on having fun and drinking. Kavanaugh is suggesting that the “Ralph Club” is because he vomited a lot — but that this had more to do with his constitution than his drinking.

Over and over, Kavanaugh dismisses the yearbook entries as being unrelated to his drinking. But he wasn’t asked about other entries, including “Keg City Club (Treasurer) — 100 Kegs or Bust.” It’s hard to think that this is about anything other than beer. So either his yearbook entry is littered with repeated references to drinking, being sick from drinking and forgetting things because of drinking — or each has an innocent explanation that doesn’t jibe with the most natural understanding of the term.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.): "Judge Kavanaugh, have you taken a professionally administered polygraph test, as it relates to this issue?"

Kavanaugh: “Of course, those are not admissible in federal court, but I’ll do whatever the committee wants, they’re not admissible in federal court because they’re not reliable.”

Kavanaugh's presentation of the effectiveness of polygraph tests is accurate. But it's worth noting that this hasn't always been his position.

“As the Government notes,” he wrote in a 2016 decision, “law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses and criminal defendants. Those agencies also use polygraphs to ‘screen applicants for security clearances so that they may be deemed suitable for work in critical law enforcement, defense, and intelligence collection roles.’”

“The Government has satisfactorily explained how polygraph examinations serve law enforcement purposes,” he summarized.

 

[Rachel333]

Trump says Dr. Ford's testimony was compelling, that she was a credible witness, and that she's "a very fine lady" but was also impressed by Kavanaugh's testimony and has not considered replacing him. So basically his nice words about Dr. Ford mean nothing.

[Cartmann99]

Kavanaugh is going to be furious at this delay. Once again, I hope his wife and girls are not with him right now.

[GreyhoundFan]

12 minutes ago, Rachel333 said:

Trump says Dr. Ford's testimony was compelling, that she was a credible witness, and that she's "a very fine lady" but was also impressed by Kavanaugh's testimony and has not considered replacing him. So basically his nice words about Dr. Ford mean nothing.

Dumpy said that some nazis are "very fine" people. I don't think being called "very fine" by him is something most people would want.

[Audrey2]

My thoughts might be triggering, so I'll put them under a spoiler.

Spoiler

Kavenaugh has two daughters. What would happen if, God forbid, something like this happens to one of them. Would they be too afraid to tell their parents? Would Kavenaugh call the authorities on the boy(s)? Or would he blame his daughter? Would he say, "Boys will be boys? We don't want to ruin his life? She asked for it?

Again, I pray nothing like his boorish teenaged behavior happens to his daughters, or anyone else. I'm just wondering where he would stand if one if them was assaulted or raped.

 

[Vivi_music]

I am a Canadian who is watching this from afar. I have not seen the whole hearing live but the canadian news have covered it pretty extensively. My first thought was actually how amazing Dr. Ford was. Such courage, and bravery.

I felt so much emotions watching her speak. I myself remember sharing difficult traumas in therapy. It was a context of trust and the safety of my therapist's office, which I had been seeing for almost 1 and half year. And even so, I was scared, shaking and crying. I can't imagine retelling that story in front of the world. I remember my therapist telling me it takes courage to speak. It struck me because courageous wasn't how I viewed myself. So watching Dr. Ford on the news yesterday provoked so many feelings. I was impressed by her strenght, because it takes so much will to do what she did. For that moment, I felt so proud of Dr. Ford, despite the fact I have never heard of her before a few days ago. I only hope she will be able to go back to the privacy of her life. 

 

Oh and KavaNAH is a pig.

Edit: My bad, pigs are nicer and friendlier than that. So sorry.

Edited September 28, 2018 by Vivi_music
Pigs are nice

[fraurosena]

Oh guys, this is hilarious. As it's not a cartoon or a meme, I'm just leaving it here.

Sound on.

(no it's not beer beer beer)

Edited September 28, 2018 by fraurosena

[fraurosena]

Interesting and rather revealing.

Every time Ford and Kavanaugh dodged a question, in one chart

Quote

There were several noticeable differences between the Senate testimony of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and the woman accusing him of sexual assault, Christine Blasey Ford.

The most obvious was the tone each took. Ford was polite and quiet in recounting her accusation against Kavanaugh; he was angry and loud in his denials of the allegations against him.

Beyond the style of their testimonies, there was a striking difference in the content of their words. Both Ford and Kavanaugh fielded questions from senators and the prosecutor hired by Republicans, Rachel Mitchell.

But only Ford made an effort to answer every single question.

Kavanaugh actively dodged questions. He often repeated the same non-answer over and over. Other times, he insisted on answering a question with “context” — which inevitably was a long story about his childhood — but never actually answered the question.

We went through the transcript of the hearing and noted every single time a question was asked of Ford and Kavanaugh. (We didn’t include the times a questioner didn’t ask an explicit question.) Then we noted every instance in which answered the question or said they didn’t know the answer — and we also noted every time they either refused to answer or gave an answer that didn’t address the question. Here are the results:

 

[fraurosena]

Good question. 

Answer: Nothing will happen. The vote will simply go to the floor and confirmation will follow.

[formergothardite]

I have know he is getting confirmed, but it is just so depressing. Short of some sort of McCain type miracle they aren't going to let this man go. Sure there are other judges who are against abortion, but I bet they aren't as corrupt as this particular judge. They want him because they own him. 

[fraurosena]

Oh Rufus, I do love Aunt Crabby!

 

[Rachel333]

37 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Good question. 

Answer: Nothing will happen. The vote will simply go to the floor and confirmation will follow.

Fortunately Trump has ordered an investigation.

[SassyPants]

1 hour ago, formergothardite said:

I have know he is getting confirmed, but it is just so depressing. Short of some sort of McCain type miracle they aren't going to let this man go. Sure there are other judges who are against abortion, but I bet they aren't as corrupt as this particular judge. They want him because they own him. 

Kavanaugh is clearly a coward and a puppet. His behavior yesterday was nothing more than a copy out of Trump's play book. Act tough and be belligerent; fake it til you make it.

[Rachel333]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

Oh guys, this is hilarious. As it's not a cartoon or a meme, I'm just leaving it here.

Sound on.

(no it's not beer beer beer)

 

On 9/27/2018 at 3:51 PM, Rachel333 said:

She had an odd, sad look on her face when he said he still likes beer that made me wonder how familiar she is with him as a mean drunk.

That moment is 30 seconds into the video here.

[ViolaSebastian]

I was talking to my therapist (it's been a rough week, yo) about this travesty today and we were exploring why I was having so much difficulty with it, as, I should note, are many, many other women. One of the things that she pointed out is that in Kavanaugh's rebuttal, he used many of the same tactics that abusers use against their victims. For example, trying to twist the scenario to make himself look like a victim, using gaslighting, anger, denial, and making an emotional production out of the whole thing. The tears, in particular, got me, because that was a tactic frequently used on me to make *me* feel like I was the victimizer because I "made him feel bad"--and hey, it's all even now, right? I thought it was quite insightful and did a Google search when I got home--it seems that she wasn't the only one to make that connection.

https://medium.com/s/story/seeing-through-kavanaughs-tears-f34e199b199b

[GreyhoundFan]

The latest by Alexandra Petri is wonderful. It's a definite departure from her usual humor and worth a read: "The train will continue, and you will be crushed"

Spoiler

“I was … wondering whether I would just be jumping in front of a train that was headed to where it was headed anyway, and that I would just be personally annihilated.”
— Christine Blasey Ford, on whether to come forward

I am so tired.

The train is very, very urgent. It is moving a man’s career forward. It is very difficult to get the train to stop.

The presumption is that the train will not stop. The presumption is that you will be a scream thrown on the tracks. That it will require a great many of you to be thrown onto the tracks before the train will grind to a halt. It can never be just the one; it must be several at once. Someday we will know the precise conversion. We will tell them: Do not bother unless there are 20 others like you, because the train will continue, and you will be crushed.

It is painful to watch a woman caught and torn in the gears of a man’s progress. To watch the meaning of her name change into a thing that happened to her once. To watch the first sentence of her obituary get rewritten. To watch her name be linked to this man’s name (Anita, accuser of Clarence; Christine, accuser of Brett). All she asks is for the train to stop.

To make the train stop, you must throw yourself in front. Your whole self. Your fear of flying. Your family.

You must throw yourself in front of the train, but still it may not be enough. These trains move very fast. We must not ask why.

Maybe the train will stop for a week. That seems fair. A week, just to make sure. A week, to take this seriously, at a gentleman’s request.

But I am so tired.
I am so tired of this constant parade of pain.

In the Bible, Thomas says he will not believe what Jesus has survived unless he can stick his hand into the wounds. But this is not a reasonable thing to ask of someone who is not God, to stick your hand into their wound. I am tired of watching people become wounds. Half the Internet is a wound. Have you stuck your hand in it enough? Do you believe yet? The #MeToo movement lurches forward over a path of scars. The change is so slow and the sacrifice it demands so great.

Even as she testified Thursday, Christine Blasey Ford kept apologizing. (“I’m sorry,” she said. “I can read fast!” she said. She was here to be “helpful,” she said.)

Someday I want to not be tired.
Someday I want us not to apologize.

Women are used to squinting to see our own stories in the stories of others. To reading ourselves into the words “all men are created equal.” To being the thing tied to the tracks to raise the stakes.

I am so tired of the moment when you discover how little your weight counts against the train’s.

I want us to be the train and not the thing thrown under it.
I want us to be the thing too urgent to be stopped, not the thing that must curl up apologetically to make room for it.

Is it too much to ask to be the train sometimes? Not all the time, just sometimes.

I am so tired of watching us jump.
I am so tired of watching the trains keep going.

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

The source https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/28/17914308/kavanaugh-ford-question-dodge-hearing-chart

[luv2laugh]

Great article. The Kavanaugh hearings are a commentary on Mormonism according to this article: https://rewire.news/religion-dispatches/2018/09/28/kavanaugh-hearings-are-a-commentary-on-mormonism/

 

Edited September 29, 2018 by luv2laugh

[fraurosena]

17 minutes ago, luv2laugh said:

Great article. The Kavanaugh hearings are a commentary on Mormonism according to this article: https://rewire.news/religion-dispatches/2018/09/28/kavanaugh-hearings-are-a-commentary-on-mormonism/

Shockingly, I have watched with disgust as both my mother and my grandmother have been hoping “that woman won’t take down Kavanaugh”. After they watched her testimony, they’re now saying things like “She’s credible and my heart goes out to her but I don’t believe Kavanaugh did this. I think she has problems and is troubled.” I am tired of women being the villains or if they are believed, they’re labeled mentally ill and troubled. I have seen many Republicans in the media call Dr. Ford troubled and its insanely insulting!!!! I have tried to reason with the female Trumpsters in my family and discuss how women have been oppressed for so long. In fact, it’s shocking that my grandmother would be in support of this since she suffered domestic violence from her drunk ex husband and was harassed for being a working woman in the 70s!!! It shouldn’t surprise me given their politics but women need to support other women and this is exactly why Trump got elected—- not all women support & believe other women. It’s depressing that America has not come far as I once thought it had. 

Women have been gaslighted so long, it's not surprising they believe their abusers. I feel sorry for your grandmother, she seems to believe the gaslighting done to her by her abusive husband, but also the gaslighting done by society. Society has (and often still is) gaslit women for centuries. It's hard to break away from something that you have heard all your life, and have believed for so long. 

That doesn't mean it can't be done. Attitudes can change. Attitudes have changed already. More than people think.  There's a long way to go yet, but it's happening.

Here is a thread I would like to share with you all. Please click and read.

It's about women, but more importantly it's also about men.

 

Edited September 29, 2018 by fraurosena
adding thoughts

[AmazonGrace]

I have been thinking back about my younger days when I hung out at night clubs and parties. There were several young men who groped or tried to kiss me without consent but I never even thought about reporting any of that because it was so common and you learned to think it was nothing. I couldn't report any of that now because I don't remember any names or faces specifically, it wasn't something that stood out from the normal, so to speak, there was usually at least one who  grinded on women on the dance floor.

It never occurred to me to call the cops on the dude who showed me his dick  in the underpass because it was common knowledge that he did it all the time and nothing ever happened to him as a consequence. I don't remember his face just the dick.

I didn't report the man  who followed me in his car and offered me a hundred to have sex with him because he drove away eventually and I wasn't hurt. I don't remember his face or what his car was like. 

I talked to  my  husband for the first time in the corridor in front of the bathroom I'd just been hiding in  to get away from a drunk guy who asked me to come read him bedtime stories, grabbed my waist and lifted me up so I hit my head on the ceiling. It never occurred to me to report him either. And I couldn't anymore, I don't remember his name or his face or what else he said, other than that his girlfriend was out of town

I'm sure they don't remember me at all

Men have been getting away with a lot of this shit because women have been conditioned to shrug and keep quiet and let it go.

And it was so common that there must be a lot of male coworkers and relativesvand neighbors and clients and friends and fathers of young sons and daughters who did this shit at some point in their lives and thought nothing of it afterwards because they got away with it