First Think, THEN Ink.

The most controversial part of the Q interview, that I pointed out yesterday, is the element surrounding his good friend, Bill Cosby.

Marchese: We’ve obviously been learning more lately about just how corrosive the entertainment industry can be for women. As someone who’s worked in that business at the highest levels for so many years, do all the recent revelations come as a surprise?

Jones: No, man. Women had to put up with fucked-up shit. Women and brothers — we’re both dealing with the glass ceiling.

Marchese: But what about the alleged behavior of a friend of yours like Bill Cosby? Is it hard to square what he’s been accused of with the person you know?

Jones: It was all of them. Brett Ratner. [Harvey] Weinstein. Weinstein — he’s a jive motherfucker. Wouldn’t return my five calls. A bully.

Marchese: What about Cosby, though?

Jones: What about it?

Marchese: Were the allegations a surprise to you?

Jones: We can’t talk about this in public, man.

In other words, Q knew.

Let's think about that for a minute, then put that in context.

Joe Paterno was the long time football coach for Penn State University. Jerry Sandusky, his assistant, was a serial rapist, continually molesting little boys and teenagers throughout the duration of his tenure at the school.

Paterno was held partially responsible for his assistant's actions, was stripped of the accolades the university had previously bestowed upon him and was sent packing in disgrace, all because he did nothing.

While Quincy Jones is not in the same position with Bill Cosby, in that he didn't hire Cosby for jobs or didn't bring Cosby into circumstances specifically, the way Paterno did with Sandusky, the parallels make one pause. Why wouldn't you blow the whistle on someone, even for their own sake, to get THEM some help, let alone stop them from harming more people? Why would you ignore those actions knowing that these actions are illegal at least, immoral at best?

I'm not certain that anyone is going to come after Q for this, but it definitely made me sad.

I know that a lot of elements involved in the realm of politics are confusing, arcane, even designed to be misunderstood by the general public. But can we at least get this one basic fact right:

An affiliate of a political party's actions vis a vis sexual misconduct is not a "partisan" issue. Just because a man has acted in a way that is sexually abusive toward someone else that action is, in no way, reflective of a political party.

There are enough examples on both sides of the aisle to support this concept. So, I hope that we can at least agree on that. We can run down the names if you want, but we can easily do that. And the point that needs making is these are just the things we know. There are abuses that have been buried for ten, twenty, thirty years that are just beginning to come to light. Assuredly, as with all the previous cases, those that have committed these acts will not all be from one political party.

But by making it into an accusatory element that somehow reflects on the politics of one party or the other does two negative things. First, it turns the issue into something that it is not. This isn't about being a Democrat or a Republican. This is a method of power and abuse that these men, not just in politics, but as we have seen, in Hollywood, in big business, in small business, in colleges and universities and even in high schools, have used to have their way with other people who have been in positions of weakness against someone who had an image of an upstanding citizen who achieved success for the general public.

But it also diminishes the issue that we need to examine, which is how our society permits men to act in ways that are more related to our caveman ancestors than to persons from a modern day society.

The "Boys with be boys" excuse still gets used and that not only allowed "boys" (aka adult men), to act in this way, it made women and girls feel there was nothing that could be done! This is just reality so you better just lie back and enjoy it.

And really, that was the system of control, tolerance, and method of oppression that occurred for centuries. Women were not seen as equals to men, so what they said, what they thought, how they acted, likewise were not treated equally.

Here's the issue that needs to be examined. Our society has helped to perpetrate this system. In many ways, it's like racism. The oppressed group is diminished, treated like an "other," is frequently assumed to have "participated" in some way which allowed this to happen, and is questioned as if they are the perpetrator, not the victim.

And the problem we see, when we have a system that functions like that is that more and more men will want to participate in it. It becomes an expectation, an opportunity, a right. I can do it because every man in every generation before me did it.

That brings me to the crucial element that we must keep in mind. And the problem is the same for sexism and racism if we want to actually dismantle these cruel aspects of our society.

We need to have closure for victims, and for that, at the very least, apologies should be forthcoming from those that have acted inappropriately, or criminally, no matter if the Statute of Limitations has expired (because, after all, the victims have lived with these actions all this while). But to make the changes in our society that need to happen to stop it, to close the door on this behavior in the future, requires us to dismantle the elements that have permitted it, and that is a different element.

In that sense, we have to look less at individual acts, specifically because this is a macro problem that needs to be resolved. It involves teaching small boys about how to behave, what is appropriate, why certain actions should never be done to someone else without asking. It's about teaching children that if you were physically abused by someone, you need to say so and that adults will believe you. We need to begin this immediately because the longer we wait, the more abusers can still be created.

Ultimately, there is a cultural issue here. These guys may not have been taught that they have permission to do what they did, but they learned it by osmosis, based on how our societal norms treated others who acted the same way. And that's where the main focus needs to be if we are to bring an end to these issues. In no way does this absolve anyone who did anything before, but the most important idea we need to collectively focus on is keeping it from happening again to anyone. That means all of us need to start changing our behaviors for the sake of all of us.