I was offered a job interview a while back. I was very well prepared. I was able to name everyone with his/her first name and last name in the building. (Those who witnessed me memorizing over 50 strangers' names in a
performance in RVA would know my wacky memory. I missed
just one name because "Debby" came in in the middle
of the performance) I knew the past and current positions of everyone working in the organization. I was very aware of all the financial reports available associated to the organization.
However, during my researches, I discovered a trail of questionable practices
conducted by one specific person. It all started from a bio. I
had a question about a statement from that bio, and it lead me to ask more
questions and more researches. I was shocked by my findings because they suggested contradictive scenarios to the stories this organization openly stated.
I had a really good and long interview, and I thought my interviewer might have felt like offering me the job before I started my questions. My interviewer just told me that "the gut feelings" granted no doubts about this person's work ethic or integrity, and my interviewer refused to see any evidence I'd prepared. Having loved so many people associated with the organization, I couldn't stand the thought of one short sighted person driving the reputation of the entire team into the ground just for some personal gains which may turn to dust at the end according to my further research. Knowing that I would very unlikely be offered the job because of the uneasy feelings I left with my interviewer, I then, felt obligated to share the information with someone else, a friend in my definition, also with decision making power.
However, the story I am telling today is not about a person, a company or a job interview. It's about what I've received after sharing my knowledge with a few trusted friends. Surprisingly, "I AM NOT SURPRISED" was the most common first response after learning my findings. It turned out that the questionable figure had lots of questionable actions distributed among lots of people. Until I shared my information, most of my friends just tolerated this person's behavior or left. Every time I heard "I am not surprised", I feel a little bit encouragement as "I am not crazy" and growing frustration because more people have been wronged for a long time.
Why is it so hard to expose anyone's wrong doings? Why wouldn't we even tell our close friends when something uneasy or unjust happened to us? It's because exposing someone takes serious amount of energy, resources, courage,..., and sometimes even the cost of lives. These are the reasons or excuses we commonly use to justify when we tolerate wrong doings:
1. That was nothing
We tell ourselves that what happened to us was too small to address. Or sometimes we tell ourselves that this must be a one time event which doesn't need more attention. Guess what, the big bullies started from small bullies. They've taken things for granted and learned that most people would let them get away so they've kept bullying. Eventually, we ended up with mega bullies.
2. This person is a nobody
We tend to just let it go when the wrong doings are done by whom we define small physically or influentially. Take my daughter for example. I let her baby-punch or ninja-kick me until one day this started to hurt. At first, she felt angry because I stopped her from doing something she'd done for months. Luckily, our 21 mo soon came to reason and stopped. (For those over 21 mo who can't be reasoned, shame on you!) So are the grown ups. I now believe this person probably started with small wrong doings from way back.
3. Sympathize with the person or this person's friends/family
"This will ruin his/her life" or "This will ruin his/her family" are also very common. The truth is that if this person cared about lives of anyone, it should have stopped him/her from wrong doings. So, if this person didn't care about his/her own family/friends, why should anyone else be responsible?
4. Fear of consequences - people who can't be reasoned after evidence or facts being provided -
The person we intend to expose is a public figure or someone seemed to be influential. A lot of time, the fear is not necessary to the person directly and is to other people who have helped make this person influential. Others who have endorsed this person may take whistle-blowing too emotionally as some personal attack. Especially, when we have evidence presented with our cases, many people would feel extra offended immediately, because they might feel these actions as accusations to their lack of insight. Instead, these people should know that the reason they were presented with the evidence this time was because someone still had hope in them to do the right thing.
The truth is that no one is perfect. Has anyone never been deceived ever? It takes a lot of courage for people to come forward, and it also takes lots of courage (if not more) for those people to acknowledge the mistakes they might have helped make. And sometimes, the mistakes might feel so big or so spread out that no one wants to make the wake up call. Once things hit the press, depending on the press which might have also helped endorse this person or not, it could backfire on the whistle blower or even the whistle blower's family and friends. But then again, those who have got away with their wrong doings may very likely to risk again. We end up having a much bigger snowball that we still have to deal with later.
5. Shame of being a victim
Many people blame the victims for being the victims. Knowing this as a possibility, victims have more struggles to go through before going public. A friend of mine was sexually harassed by her colleague, when she tried to report to the school, the school convinced her not to ruin this guy's career by dropping her case. At the end, the school accused her for ruining this guy's reputation, because her dropping the case meant that she made the whole thing up. My friend ended up leaving the school. I encouraged her to expose this perpetrator and the school and told her that I would help since she was foreign, but she got married and moved to a different country. At least, she is happy now.
I like to think that most of us are responsible beings who can be reasoned with facts, logic, and evidence. And I like to think that when we are presented with reason, we choose the right thing to do. In the past, I once told potential employers that they had to make amend to a very likely mistreated person before I could accept the job. All I did was kindly asking if they had worked with such person, and if they had records compensating this person for the service this person provided. They started the investigation, found out that person did work there without any records of payments, and they apologized and paid this person. With a simple gesture like this, the public complaint from that person stopped, and I had respect and hope for the collaboration with the people in this organization.
As most of organizations which have many employees, occasional individual slips happen. Since making mistakes is inevitable, when I look at any organization, it’s as vague as a brand name, because people who work in the majority of organizations change all the time. And, the people who currently work in the organization define what the organization stands for. I’m not looking for any organization with an impeccable history. I’m looking for an organization with people who would take responsibility fixing problems even when the problems were caused by sometimes, others. That is a really good sign, and that is the hope for a better future.
Not as many people could recognize the name, Harry Markopolos. He persevered for over a decade when no governmental agencies ever wanted to accept his logical and mathematical evidence about an international financial scheme. If anyone he had approached would just follow one step he suggested, the multi-national investment scheme that shook up the world would have been stopped earlier. Markopolos never stopped trying. He brought more and more evidence to visit one agency after another. Eventually, the recognition came, not because of someone finally understanding his findings, but because of the public urge to blame somebody for falling for the scheme. Markopolos' name was mentioned in the public hearings several times. Many were asked if they were approached by Markopolos with his findings, and so many failed to verify just one step. Because they were involved, they were told or threatened not to get involved, they were too busy to verify, or they were too lazy to do anything?
When a whistle blower came forward with information that happened in the past, sometimes distant past, many people would choose to question the whistle blower first instead of figuring out whether the claim was true or not. The truth is that people like Markopolos are very rare. (He wrote a book titled, "No One Would Listen - A True Financial Thriller") For most cases, we are the ones ended up with uneasy feelings, we are the ones stopping ourselves from going further, and we are very likely the ones that would say, "I am not surprised" when someone else finally shares their stories with us. (Didn't #MeToo prove this point?)
As for today (Sep 27 2018), Dr. Ford came forward to tell her story of being sexually assaulted by the latest Supreme Court nominee. Since her, there were more voices surfacing up accusing the same person for sexual misconducts. Instead of asking them why they came forward at this moment, we should investigate immediately for the nominee's reputation and for the future of justice in this country. NO ONE WANTS A SEXUAL PREDATOR SITTING ON THE BENCH FOR LIFE! And personally, I don't even want any "suspected" sexual predator sitting on the bench ever. Is it too much to ask for a nominee without any accusation of sexual abuses? At the same time, if anyone ever thinks about destroying someone by making false claims, think again! Because, truth after tests remains true, but lies break sooner or later.
From this moment on, I urge everyone to at least tell one trusted
friend (make your best judgement) when we notice any injustice or wrong
doing. If you don't have any trusted friend, at least, try to preserve as much evidence as possible, because you or someone else may appreciate your effort one day. We can't let any small bullies go easily. After leveling up, these small bullies may turn into MEGA-BULLIES that we can't get rid of anymore.
I recently heard a joke about a deceased having "I had the right of way" on the tomb stone after being struck by another driver who didn't give the deceased the right of way as the deceased should have had by law. (The point was "You only have the right of way when you are given the right of way even though you may very likely be entitled with the right of way by law" for the defensive driving idea) Regardless of what the joke was about, I started to wonder what I like my life to mean. What would you like the world to know you for?
"I am not surprised" ?
*英文的吹哨者(whistle blower)通常指發現刻意被隱瞞的惡行並將之公諸於世的人
前陣子得到個工作面試，自認準備周詳。把該機構所有相關人事物，包括財務報表全部看過。面試當天，我能連名帶姓叫出所有人名字，記得所有人之前的工作與現在職位。（在維琴尼亞里奇蒙看過我某場表演的人能幫我的記憶力背書：除了某個中場後才進場的觀眾「黛比」來不及燒進我的記憶體，我成功一一叫出其他，共超過五十個陌生人的名字）
在資料閱讀準備面試的同時，我發現某個特定人物造成一連串很可疑的事件。我的好奇心始於某人自傳中的一句話，因為那句話，我查了更多資料，產生更多問題。當我連結所有事件中之後，受到很大的刺激，因為這些任何人都能輕鬆在網路上找到的資料放在一起，就會知道該機構的實際作為與台面上號稱的差距很大，有些甚至是背道而馳。
我的面試進展順利，自覺面試我的人在面試過程中有真的考慮僱請我。至少，到我提問前。當我針對某人的提出疑問時，面試我的人堅持他百分之百相信該人的職業道德與操守，拒看任何我準備好的證據。由於我對該機構中一些舊友的感情，我無法接受讓這一個短視近利的人為了私利而不顧所有同行者名譽的惡行。（由於更詳盡的資料檢索，我稱之為短視近利，因為該人的謀利很可能會泡沫化）明知自己已讓面試我的人不舒服，自己不太可能會得到該工作，我覺得還是得盡告知責任。於是，我把所有資料交給另一位我自覺是朋友也同時具有該機構決定權的人。
不過，今天的重點不在這個人、這機構，或這面試。我想點出的是跟幾個信得過朋友分享自己發現後，他們最常反應的第一句話是「我不意外」。我接著得知原來這個行事可疑的對象，更早前就有讓許多人倒彈的行為。只不過到我分享自己所知以前，這些朋友都自認倒霉選擇放棄或離開。每聽到「不意外」對我是精神上的鼓勵（證明我不是妄想），也有點心寒，因為我所知的一切還可能只是冰山一角。
為什麼公諸惡行這麼困難呢？為什麼不公義的事情發生在我們身上時，我們連最親近的朋友甚至家人都不願意分享？簡單講，舉發行為需要極大勇氣、精神、資源，⋯，有時甚至生命。以下是我歸納出，置之不理最常見的理由或藉口：
一、這是小事
我們常告訴自己發生在我們身上的不值得一提，或告訴自己這只是很稀有的偶發狀況，所以不需要特別注意。結果，小霸凌習慣霸凌，久了就變成大霸凌，甚至超級霸凌。
二、這人是小角色
我們也常抱持「不跟這種小人物計較」的態度，小人物的定義可能來自體型或影響力。拿我女兒當例子，我毫無怨言讓她當標靶練習手刀和忍者踢，直到某天她體型大到我開始會覺得疼痛於是得制止她。她的第一反應是生氣，因為她無法理解為什麼我突然阻止她做她從出生以來就沒被制止過的舉動。幸好，二十一個月大的她很快理解我的原因就停止之前習慣。（說到這，比二十一個月大還不可理喻的人，真該感動慚愧）對於大孩子或大人也一樣，我因此認為這個行為可以的人大概從小時候就開始累積訓練。
三、同情施壓者或其家人朋友
「這會毀了他人生」或「這會毀了他家人與朋友」也很常見。事實上，若這個人在行為前有考慮自己家人與朋友，通常不會選擇冒險。若他自己都不在乎自己家人朋友，如何能期待別人為他自己的家人與朋友考慮？
四、對於連鎖反應的恐懼—總是有無法被證據與事實說服的無理人—
當我們發現行為可疑的對象是公眾人物或有影響力的人時，被報復的恐懼不僅來自該對象，更來自幫助過或支持過那個人得到影響力的周邊人物。這些人可能會把舉發者的行為，解讀為對自己的人身攻擊。尤其在我們能提出證據時，這些人常因此更覺得我們在批評他們不夠仔細。其實，這些人該感到欣慰，因為這個階段表示我們對這些人還抱持希望，表示事情還在能有效災難控制的階段。
沒有人是完美的。有人真的一輩子沒被誤導過？舉發者需要強大勇氣，接受現實而改變有時需要更大勇氣。有時候，錯誤的規模可能大到沒有人願意喊醒其他人。而當事件進入媒體層之後，還要看這媒體之前是否幫過這個行為可疑者背書，舉發者或甚至自己家人朋友可能遭到回擊。回歸之前所提，這些選擇旁門走道成功過的人，很有可能會繼續滾更巨規模的旁門左道雪球。無法早制止，我們有可能還是得面對且更可能被埋沒。
五、受害者的自卑
太多人怪受害者受害，而受害者比旁觀者需要更大的勇氣完成舉發行為。我某朋友在學校受到同事性騷擾，她像學校通報後，學校勸她放棄以免毀了這位同事下半輩子的教學生涯。她一念之仁撤回舉報，最後學校反以此指責她誣告毀謗同事名聲（理由是「你一定是心虛所以撤回告訴」）。我得知後鼓勵她往外通報也同意幫助人生地不熟的她連結資源，但她後來碰到白馬王子嫁去別的國家過幸福快樂的生活，於是這件事就此告一段落。
我選擇相信人具有被證據與邏輯說服的能力，因此能在證據與邏輯呈現之後做正確的決定。過去，我曾在承接工作前告訴告訴雇主他們可能得先為某人平反。 我請他們確認是否有請過這個人，再找出這個人收到報酬的證據。他們得調查結果是的確有請過這個人人，但找不到付錢的證據，於是他們很快道歉並付清。如此簡單行為，這個人停止在公眾場合婊該機構，我也對與該機構裡人共事有期待與希望。
大多數機構有數位僱員，偶發人為錯誤是正常現象。既然錯誤無法被完全避免，我看待任何機關行號的名稱就如同品牌一樣虛無，因為實際上操作者可能一直變換。品牌名稱本身沒有意義，機關行號內的人員才是機關行號實際行為代表。也就是說，我不期待任何機關行號擁有完美歷史，我想看到的是目前機關行號內的人員有自我修正，甚至為別人造成的錯誤修正的責任感。這樣的態度，象徵未來的希望。
少數人認得出Harry Markopolos的名字。Markopolos偶然發現跨國金融弊案，希望以邏輯與數學實證點醒政府機關，一個不聽，抱著更多證據再來或換對象通報，堅持了逾十年。若任何他接觸過政府單位人士只要實行他建議確認的一小步，後來重挫全世界的假投資崩盤，很可能提早以小規模損失收場。Markopolos的發現終於被重視，但被重視的原因不是為了阻止惡行，而是在崩盤後，損失的投資人需要尋元兇幫兇咎責。Markopolos的名字在公聽會的問題中出現數次，很多人被問「Markopolos先生曾向你通報過他的發現嗎」？很多人都聽過Markopolos的發現，但這些人全都選擇沈默。也許他們自己也陷入太深，也許他們被脅迫，也許他們太忙無法分心，也許他們太懶，也許他們只是選擇不相信。
當舉發者舉發的事件是過去式或有點遙遠的過去時，很多人的第一反應是指責舉發者為什麼不早說，而忽略重點是事件真實與否。現實中跟Markopolos一樣能堅持過一載的人不多（他後來以該事件寫了本書名「沒人願意聽—真實的金融恐怖片」），我們這些普羅大眾通常是自己受傷、自己勸退自己，然後成為別人分享個案後說出「我不意外」的那個人。（#MeToo不就是活生生的實例）
打這篇文章的同時（2018年九月二十七日），福特博士在議員見證公聽會下指責最近的最高法院大法官被提名人，是八零年間試圖性侵她的暴徒之一。自她出聲後，更多受害者浮出檯面指責同對象對她們造成類似的傷害。我們該專注於事件的真實度，而不是質問這些人為什麼選擇現在發聲。(為什麼現在發生其實是很蠢的問題，現在還不發聲，這個人可能會變成下個終身職的超級大法官耶！)調查是一定要的，這關於大法官被提名人的名聲，也危及這個國家的未來—「沒有人想把最高法院大法官這種終生職交給性侵犯」！我個人可能太小氣了，但期待超級大法官被提名人連「是否為性侵犯」的懷疑都沒有為條件，真的有這麼困難嗎？同時，我也想警告任何意圖誣告毀謗的人三思。真相經過考驗還是真相，但謊言早晚會穿幫。
自此，我鼓勵所有的人在發現不義或惡行時，至少告訴一個信得過的朋友（誰信得過與否就靠自己判斷啦）。若真的沒朋友或不想拖累朋友，至少，盡可能保存證據，因為某天自己或別人可能用得到。我們不能讓任何霸凌輕鬆過關，因為這些人在修練等級後，會變成超級霸凌大魔頭，到時候還是得面對又提高善後難度。
最近在自保駕訓課程中聽了個笑話，在理當有道路權的某Ａ被沒遵守道路權的某Ｂ撞死後，墓誌銘寫著「我明明有道路權」。（這笑話是為了強調法律規範的「道路權」也需要其他駕駛實際上「給予」道路權的狀態下，才有安全駕駛的結果）無論該故事重點，我開始思考自己對自己人生的期許。在此想問讀者，你希望世界如何看你？
「我不意外」 ？
