Not often do I get to say these words: Lawyers are fabulously funny people!
Okay, I am saying this with a touch of sarcasm. Surely I should have realized that the tide would come into port again sooner or later. Once Andrew’s article, ‘How to handle legal issues like a man,’ and my article, ‘Gender Crisis: handling issues like a gentlePERSON,’ had finally been picked to death, I should have bet that some lone wolf would write. What I didn’t expect was to be so poorly represented as to be completely silenced.
You would think that lawyers, especially left-leaning lawyers, would be careful about protecting their twisted misunderstanding about the First Amendment, what is widely known today as “free speech.” Most liberals pride themselves on tolerance of differing viewpoints. Unfortunately I found neither of these qualities in our trite responder.
No, sadly Andrew and I were stunned today when we learned that JHS - she does not reveal her identity online - verbally slapped my husband and implied that he sexually harassed every woman on earth by writing that men should be gentlemen. Oh yes, you heard correct. Apparently Ms. J believes that a man telling other men to behave like gentlemen and not like little boys or pigs is a terrible thing. A tragedy of society that mocks women and will cause the degradation of us all!
I still don’t follow this logic of Ms. J, though she probably considers the mere fact of my common courtesy of “Ms.” to be derogatory. Pardon your years of etiquette, Mother and Grandmother, I am sure you meant well when you were teaching me!
On top of this huge reputation blow for Andrew, we also learned that Ms. J has little need for those pesky ethics. Rather than attribute quotations to their appropriate writer, she took the worst sentences she could find on the comments section below Andrew’s article, found ones made by other writers and attributed them directly to Andrew. Of course when I say the “worst” comments, they really are not that terrible, but they certainly were not made by Andrew.
Naturally Andrew and I both pointed these errors out to our California counterpart, but to no avail. Andrew originally posted this on Ms. J’s site, but she later cut out the tidbit about the quotations being from Mark:
I am the author of the post linked to above: How to Handle Legal Issues Like a Man. I respectfully ask that you please correct your article. The two quotes that you attribute to me were actually posted by a commenter named Mark in this comment. Please correct this error. Finally, please note the very first sentence of the article that I wrote: “Unfortunately many males in our society do not handle their problems like true men.” The article was solely intended to encourage people of the male gender to conduct themselves in a well-mannered, civilized fashion.
Thank you for promptly correcting the mistakes in your article. Andrew
All of the top blog etiquette writers agree that standards of journalism should be kept in blogging as well as every effort of writers to correct erroneous errors in posts, and many of them agree that editing or deleting comments simply because they disagree with you is poor etiquette indeed. In a second attempt to ask Ms. J to correct her errors, Andrew politely emailed her the same information above. Regretfully he was met with a hostile email and has yet to see any corrections to the post copy:
From:
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: Inquiry from a Colloquium Reader: Your article that mentions meI am at work and do not have time to double-check that now. If you had simply emailed me in the first place, I would not have had to edit your comment. I will deal with your issue later tonight. My recollection is that I quoted your response to a comment. If necessary, I will clarify.
By this time I began writing my own response to the day’s events. Here is what I left for Ms. JHS in her comment box:
Dear J,
I am taken aback by your post, especially in lieu of your atrocious misuse of Andrew’s character. Andrew’s article never directly said nor indirectly implied that women should “take it like a man.” Your carte blanche implication that he is sexually harassing every woman on the planet simply by asking men to be a little more decent in their daily dealings is out of line. Perhaps you read the wrong article of his, but when is a little politesse - on the part of a male, female or any other person - such a bad thing? Sorry, but it isn’t.
On a journalistic note, your post admonishes writers to be mindful that they “have a responsibility to treat our readers with respect.” Certainly you lacked that decorum in this post. You not only attributed quotations from another individual to Andrew, you also edited his commentary asking you to correct this error. Twice the journalistic no-no. Please be more careful of serious errors such as these before you attempt to ruin someone’s professional reputation. It simply does not fit with your espousal of civility, integrity, honesty and competence.
Admittedly a bit stern, but sometimes a touch of firmness is needed when boundaries are crossed; even more so when professional reputations and ethical standards are at stake. Sadly my comment was deleted without even a brief, contrite, derogatory, or ‘other’ explanation. I received no email from Ms. J as to why she rejected my comments. I do not actually care what the substance of her response is, but etiquette is just so darn polite!
I know it is simply impossible to talk to walls, but it is always fun to try. Thankfully Andrew and I are good humored about today. We have done a fair amount of laughing and eye rolling, but if a small town lawyer from Lodi, California truly desires to come across the U.S. and challenge my husband to a man-eating contest, well she better have a big mouth because he happens to be 6′3″!
Where to begin?
Nah, never mind. It’s so ridiculous that it isn’t even worth the effort.
Comment by JHS — June 5, 2008 @ 1:34 am
You have quite abit of interaction going on here. However, as your mother and mother in law talking, it still is great that Andrew opens doors, stands up when a women enters the room, offers his seat on the sub or bus, and offers to help carry packages. Likewise, a women should always say thank you and hold the door if someone is carrying something in for them. Now, what does you correspondent say about helping the elderly?
Comment by Leslie — June 5, 2008 @ 8:06 am
Dear J,
Thank you for the reason as to why you deleted my post, albeit by emailing my husband. I do actually know the definition of “sexual harassment.” I don’t need an attorney to tell me what it is and belittling me does not make me think you are smarter than I am. Sexual harassment ranges from the simple definition of “unlawful discrimination on the basis of sex,” to the more complex definition of “any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, or verbal or other physical conduct directed at an individual or individuals because of gender and motivated by animus.”
When you couched your post with the introduction of ‘North Country’ and then went on to mirror it with Andrew’s article on ‘How to be a gentleman,’ you directly implied that there was a direct correlation. You furthered that misdirection when you used terms like “misogynistic,” “outdated,” “stereotypical,” “demeaning,” “degrading” and so forth. Obviously you had an agenda to create a parallel between the harassment that the women suffered in the coal mines and the make-believe suffering you would like women to think they suffer at the hands of men who open doors and tip their hats.
I am truly sorry for your medical condition, but I hope that you are more vigilant now about your writing. Ethics are “the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group.” In this case we are naturally speaking of the journalism rules. When you are notified by the author of an article that you have made an error in quoting him, it is terrible to simply delete his correction and go about your day as if nothing happened. There was simply no need to edit Andrew’s comment. The Society of Professional Journalists has the clearest code of conduct; one that all print and online media persona should abide by diligently.
Comment by admin — June 5, 2008 @ 1:16 pm
Dear Mom,
I do not believe that Ms. J addresses the elderly in terms of helping them on a daily basis. From what I understand, Ms. J deems herself an “end of life” attorney. She is against euthanasia and assisted suicide. Her stance on daily interaction and etiquette with the elderly, however, is not plainly available on her websites. Andrew and I are always happy to offer assistance, open doors, lend a seat, or whatnot when we are with the elderly.
Comment by admin — June 5, 2008 @ 1:37 pm
1. Reasonableness is defined, in part, by not jumping to conclusions and demanding results within unreasonable time frames. Guess you missed the part about my being AT WORK. Therefore, blogging, a mere hobby, had to wait. Get over it.
2. I deleted portions of your husband’s comment — and your nasty comment in its entirety — because it was neither germane to the discussion nor appropriate. Had he simply emailed me and politely asked me to double-check and correct a simple, but ultimately irrelevant human error (it did not alter the point of the discussion even in the most minuscule fashion), there would have been no hard feelings. Instead, he chose to post an inappropriate comment and you, not satisfied to wait a reasonable period of time for a response (see #1), had to come on over to my site and start trying to fight his battle for him. Ridiculous behavior all around.
3. I am not an “end of life” attorney nor have I ever been. On the contrary, I have spent years fighting for the sanctity of all human life.
FYI: Part Two of my article will appear this weekend.
Comment by JHS — June 6, 2008 @ 12:43 am
Dear Readers,
I apologize for Ms. J’s flaming, but you know well my policy that I don’t delete or edit comments except for vulgar language, spamming, pornographic content, or excessive/non-related links. I have not and will not enter into this supposed battle with Ms. J. However, I will correct inaccuracies as I see them, but I do them on my own site and not on Ms. J’s.
My original comment to Ms. J was of a completely different nature then Andrew’s comment as you saw in my article above. We could have had a healthy discussion of opposing viewpoints, but I was never allowed that opportunity due to the fact that my comment was automatically deleted because it simply disagreed with the author. After finding my comment deleted, I chose to write my own post on the subject. It was not my intention to “fight Andrew’s battles.” I hardly think what he said was “inappropriate,” but that is for him to comment on. If he would like to take up his armor, he has his own sites to post on or he is welcome to post here and defend himself.
As for my comment directed specifically to my mother, the term “end of life” was used by Ms. J in her own “Meet the Author” section of her blog. She goes on to link to one of her largest cases which is solely about end of life care. I appreciate the clarification, though, and am overjoyed that she fights for the legal rights of all life.
I do not control who reads my blog, nor do I wish to. I appreciate the open forum and wide range of discussion that the web gives us. I posted once on Ms. J’s site. My site has had several visits and comments from my California counterpart. Andrew too has had quite a number of similar unsolicited e-mails as the post above. If she would like to write “part 2 of [her] article” and keep throwing flames that is her business, but I assure you all that at this junction it is one way. For our family, we have stopped responding to her.
Again, my apologies to all my readers.
Faithfully yours,
Nicole
Comment by admin — June 6, 2008 @ 12:09 pm