Gender and Sex

Wisconsin Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, Butt-Head

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

 

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner

Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin) achieved the rare and near impossible yesterday: he issued an unethical but presumably sincere apology.

You see, prior to his issuing a statement apologizing to Michelle Obama for saying that she had a big butt, I

a) …didn’t know that Sensenbrenner had said this, because I, like most people, couldn’t care less what Sensenbrenner says.

b)…never had given a moment’s thought to the size of the First Lady’s butt, just as I never thought about Laura Bush’s butt, Ladybird Johnson’s butt, or Pat Nixon’s butt. I don’t think about First Lady butts. Frankly, I worry about anyone who does.

Apparently on two occasions Sensenbrenner regaled small groups with unflattering comments about Michelle’s rear end, on the ridiculous theory that her campaign against child obesity was somehow hypocritical because the First Lady isn’t built like Zooey Deschanel. You see, this is why most people pay no attention to Sensenbrenner: he says things this dumb with some regularity. What does Mrs. Obama’s figure have to do with the health risks of child obesity? Even if she looked like Newt Gingrich in drag, how would that make her campaign hypocritical? Overweight people can’t express concern for the health risks of being overweight? Overweight people know the health risks better than anyone; the fitness advocates that you want to slug are the natural ectomorphs who can eat all day and not gain an inch. So the Congressman’s wisecracks were 1) rude, 2) mean, 3) boorish, 4) uncivil,  and 5) stupid. Also 6), untrue, because there is nothing wrong with Michelle’s butt, now that I’ve done some research. Great—now I’m thinking about First Lady butts. Continue reading →

Love Your Lawyer? Bad Idea. Love Your Client? Even Worse.

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

This is all your fault, Arnie!

A Connecticut lawyer under fire for commencing a lawyer-client relationship with a woman with whom he was romantically involved made the novel argument that it is good to be in love with your client.  This indicates a profound misunderstanding of human nature and the nature of a lawyer’s duties.

Almost ten years ago, the American Bar Association recommended that state bars include a direct prohibition against lawyers having sexual relations with their clients, and the majority of the states did so. As I have mentioned before, it’s a dumb rule, too broad and too narrow simultaneously, a classic example of how some kinds of unethical conduct do not lend themselves to precise rule-making.  The main problem with the no-sex rules is that they are unnecessary. The legal ethics rules are replete with exhortations to maintain objectivity, independent judgment and to avoid conflicts of interest. Common sense suggests that it is irresponsible to confuse one relationship by adding another; professional standards dictate that combining a professional relationship of independence and with romantic relationships is wrong.  As the D.C. Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct point out in its comments to Rule 1.7, Conflicts of Interest: Continue reading →

Ethics Dunce:The Baseball Writers Association of America

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

"Well, yes, there was THAT, but what really matters is that he was one hell of an assistant coach!"

The high-profile Sandusky/Paterno/Penn State child molestation scandal has shaken the foundation of the sports world, and in the process, given resolve to past victims of child abuse to identify their molesters. The most recent example is veteran Philadelphia sportswriter Bill Conlin, who abruptly resigned from his job as a columnist for the Philadelphia Daily News when he learned that four adults had come forward to accuse him of molesting them when they were children in the 1970s. This created am immediate crisis for the Baseball Writers Association of America, who had this year bestowed its highest honor on Conlin, the J.G. Spink Award. It never looks good when the person you have declared to represent the best of your profession is revealed as drug-dealer, a serial killer, a foreign agent, or a child molester.

Here’s how the BBWAA dealt with the matter on its website, in this “official statement”: Continue reading →

Obama, Sibelius and Plan B: Bad Science, Bad Ethics, Bad Policy

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

After FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg advocated that all women of child-bearing age be allowed to buy Plan B, the so-called “morning after pill,” without a prescription, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sibelius overruled the FDA with President Obama’s imprimatur. Sibelius said..

“After careful consideration of the FDA Summary Review, I have concluded that the data, submitted by Teva [the Plan B manufacturer], do not conclusively establish that Plan B One-Step should be made available over the counter for all girls of reproductive age. The average age of the onset of menstruation for girls in the United States is 12.4 years. However, about ten percent of girls are physically capable of bearing children by 11.1 years of age. It is common knowledge that there are significant cognitive and behavioral differences between older adolescent girls and the youngest girls of reproductive age. If the application were approved, the product would be available, without prescription, for all girls of reproductive age.”

What’s going on here? What’s going on here is that the Administration wants to avoid a direct clash with those who regard human life as being created from the moment of conception. Sibelius’s implies without saying that a pill that ends an unwarranted pregnancy within 72 hours is an abortion pill, or at least she is crafting HHS policy for the pleasure of those who believe this. No science supports the contention that a fertilized egg that has yet to travel to the uterus—what Plan B prevents— is a human being; the position is a moral/religious one that exists independently of science. Continue reading →

Bachmann and Elijah

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

"Psst! My mom is gay and doesn't need fixing. What's 'gay'?"

Rep. Michele Bachmann’s views on homosexuality are antediluvian and ignorant. Almost anything that causes her discomfort as a result of her bigotry is to be fervently desired. Almost anything. One exception is a mother using her child as a weapon against her in a war he doesn’t understand.

In the video conveniently taken by a friend of 8-year-old Elijah’s mother and subsequently posted on YouTube, the child reluctantly, after much prodding, whispers “My mom is gay and she doesn’t need fixing” in the strange Minnesota Congresswoman’s ear. If it makes some people happy to believe that Elijah did this on his own, I suppose that’s a plus; this makes two plusses when added to Bachmann’s probable pique. Sorry, it’s not enough. I know it wouldn’t create a viral video if Elijah’s mother delivered her sentiment herself, but that’s just too bad: children are not puppets, props or trained terriers, and using them to deliver political messages is unethical—unfair, irresponsible, a breach of trust, and an abuse of power. Placing a child’s programmed act on Youtube, where it will haunt him forever, just adds to the offense,

Elijah’s message was inaccurate. His mother does need fixing, just not in the way Michele Bachmann thinks she does.

 

Was Butch Cassidy a Sexual Harasser?

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

The story out of South Boston about a young student who fought off a bully’s school bus attack by kicking him in the groin and is now being investigated by the school for sexual harassment (inappropriate touching, don’t you know!) made me think of many things.

It made me think of the Chinese proverb that “When the only tool one has is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.” And its longer version, which adds “especially if you are a school administrator….”. And the even longer version, which concludes with “who has the IQ of a gerbil and the judgment of Lindsay Lohan”.

It made me think about how the education profession might end the long reign of journalism as the Ethics Alarms “Most Unethical Profession” winner this year. That would be remarkable, since journalists have been especially vigorous in disgracing themselves in 2011, but education is certainly making a spirited year-end rally.

Mostly, however, it made me think of Butch Cassidy. Continue reading →

What’s Fair To Herman Cain Now?

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

I love this Cain-trapped-in-amber image, except that the idea of a future entrepreneur creating an island attraction where former disgraced presidential candidates are cloned from their preserved DNA to roam free is terrifying.

Herman Cain has withdrawn from the GOP presidential nomination competition in the wake of Ginger White’s claims that he and she engaged in a 13-year long romantic affair. He withdrew in a particularly deceitful way, saying that his campaign was being suspended. Like most of his recent conduct and statements lately, this resort to face-saving euphemism does not speak well of his character. Yes, it’s true, his quest for the White House is suspended. It is also what is technically called toast. A more honest, courageous, candid and accountable man would have said so. I think we can safety say that one way or the other, this campaign took the measure of Herman Cain, and found him to be as wanting in character as he is inexperience and diligence. The system, ugly as it is, worked.

What else can we now fairly say of Herman Cain? I believe we can fairly conclude that… Continue reading →

Ethics Quote of the Week: David Argenter, of the Illinois Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism

/ Jack Marshall / 1 Comment

"Yes, she's my legal secretary. Yes, she's exactly what I advertised for. Why are you looking at me like that? What??"

“Often, issues of ethics and professionalism raise complicated questions, involve shades of grey, and require serious thought and contemplation to resolve.  Sometimes, however, all it takes to figure out whether a given action or decision is the right one is to ask: ‘Is this stupid?'”

—David Argenter, attorney and member of the Illinois Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism, commenting on the mind-boggling case of a lawyer recently suspended from the practice of law for one year for several ethics violations, including one that will live in legal ethics infamy.

Hold onto your hat.

The lawyer in question sought secretarial assistance for his law office on Craigslist.  Oddly, he posted his ad in the “Adult Gigs” section of the site, with the heading “Loop lawyers hiring secretary/legal assistant.” The ad continued…

“Loop law firm looking to hire am [sic] energetic woman for their open secretary/legal assistant position. Duties will include general secretarial work, some paralegal work and additional duties for two lawyers in the firm. No experience required, training will be provided. Generous annual salary and benefits will be provided, including medical, dental, life, disability, 401(k) etc.”

The ad also requested asked for “a few pictures along with a description of your physical features, including measurements.”

Hmmm!

When an applicant  responded with an e-mail inquiring about the “additional duties” referred to in the ad, the lawyer responded,

“As this is posted in the “adult gigs” section, in addition to the legal work, you would be required to have sexual interaction with me and my partner, sometimes together sometimes separate. This part of the job would require sexy dressing and flirtatious interaction with me and my partner, as well as sexual interaction. You will have to be comfortable doing this with us.” Continue reading →

Ethics Dunce: Sports Grid Blogger Dan Fogarty

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

Civility is doomed. Civilization is doomed. Propriety is doomed.

What's the concerned father of the injured cheerleader thinking about? Why, what any cool dad would think about---how good her butt looks!

And Taylor Young, a cheerleader for the Michigan State Spartans, may well be doomed, as it is impossible to tell how badly her character, values and common sense have been warped by being brought up in a household containing her father, Charles. After Young took a hard fall during the halftime show in a game against Florida State, requiring her to receive medical attention (she was OK), her father posted this astounding Facebook comment, which, naturally, has gone viral:

“I’m glad to see your booty isn’t gettin big ….. no one likes a chick with a big butt ….. love you.”

Idiotic? Check. Sexist? Check. Insulting to women? Check. Embarrassing to his daughter? Double check. Demonstrating a stunning lack of understanding of the internet? Check. Displaying a disturbing tendency to sexualize his own daughter?

Check, and Yuck.

But to Dan Fogarty, writing on Sports Grid, this offensive post proves that Young is a “cool Dad,” and Young goes on to cite other “experts” who believe this is “quite possibly the funniest ‘Dad Moment’ in Facebook history.”

Really? Is this really the current state of the culture? A father makes salacious comments about his daughter’s “booty,” suggests that “chicks” without similar booty quality are unloved and unlovable, and that’s cool?

If Fogarty is in step with the culture and I’m not, 1) then American society is coarsening faster than I thought, and 2) which way to Mars?

My condolences to Taylor Young for the boorish conduct of her father, and if she sees nothing wrong with it either, she has my intense condolences—because she has been severely damaged.

As, perhaps, have we all, if Fogarty is right.

Now THIS Is What They Used To Call “Appearance of Impropriety”…

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

"So, Miss Scarlet!! At last you confess your guilt in this heinous crime! Now that that's over with, would you care to join me for dinner tonight?"

The prohibition against attorneys engaging in conduct that creates “the appearance of impropriety” was eliminated from the legal ethics rules (though not the judicial ethics rules) a long time ago, almost 30 years.  Periodically a case will arise in which its absence is felt. The nice thing about the appearance of impropriety category is that it was flexible enough to use to sanction lawyers who figured out ways to make the profession look slimy without running squarely afoul of other rules…like  San Diego prosecutor Ernie Marugg.

Marugg, it is alleged, used his defendants list as his little black book…seeking romantic relationships with the women he prosecuted after their trials were over. His habit was investigated one, but no specific ethical violation could be found. What would it be? Was he too easy on the women he was duty bound to prosecute zealously? One woman who pleaded guilty when Marugg prosecuted her  is now suing him, claiming that his personal  interest in her  caused him to be biased against her. Huh? How does that work? “You always hurt the one you love,” as the old song says? Continue reading →