Author: Shawn K. Quinn

Anatomically correct, politically incorrect

I’m not too sure the outcome would be much better in my native Houston, Texas. Hope springs eternal. (And I realize the story is a bit dated, but I just now found it.)

The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reported and followed up on the case of a set of nude statues by artist Itzik Asher entitled Journey to the New, which depict a father, a mother, an infant, and an older child. The pieces are on display at a shopping center. The nudity is subtle, the pieces are somewhat abstract. But the anatomically correct statues are making a few parents a bit nervous, given that the shopping center is not too far from an elementary school. Quoting from the article:

“My daughter has been joking about it,” said Jeffrey Cohen, whose 6-year-old daughter attends summer camp there. “She shouldn’t be talking to me about this.”

Some, like Richard Caster, who owns the shopping center where the statues are on display, describe the work as “natural and beautiful.” Others are pressuring Caster and Asher for the prompt addition of fig leaves, or even the relocation of the statues entirely.

This is not the first attempt to censor Asher’s work: there was a prior incident in 1995 which resulted in the temporary installation of cardboard fig leaves.

The school, which is due to start classes shortly, has left the issue up to the parents to resolve with the property owner. Which is exactly what I think they should be doing; there is no reason for the school to get involved in a dispute which does not directly involve them.

As to what should become of the art display? Sooner or later the kids are going to have the “birds and the bees” talk. I remember we had our first “sex ed” talk in fifth grade; the private school I was going to at the time required parent confirmation and I was one of two kids that got to spend those hours in the library. Thankfully having to wait another year before I learned about the penis, vagina, etc. had no lasting ill effects on me. I don’t see how it would have been any worse had I learned sooner rather than later. The great artists of the Renaissance did not censor their work; I would see such censorship today as being a step backward, not forward.

This is justice? For who?

WCPO-TV in Cleveland, Ohio, reports on what can only be described as a sad case for everyone.

Eric Cropp, a pharmacist at the time of the incident, gave an overdose of saline to a two-year-old cancer patient, resulting in her death. His sentence: six months in jail, six months house arrest, and three years probation including 400 hours of community service. (The article does not mention a fine.)

It’s sad for the family, who saw their young daughter almost make it through cancer treatments, only to perish in a truly unbecoming fashion.

And it’s sad for Cropp, who is not only facing a forced career change after losing his license, but now has to deal with what will now be uncomfortable questions about criminal background when applying for other jobs.

Now, some of you out there will go on about how he only got three years probation, so he got off easy, etc. But the true sentence here is not the three years’ probation and the jail time.

Even if not actually convicted (it does not state whether he has gotten some kind of sentence that is not supposed to result in an actual conviction, such as deferred adjudication like we have in Texas), Cropp is getting what is in effect a life sentence. Even after having completed his probation it is likely that despite anything his lawyer told him, he’ll still have a record. If Ohio’s public records system is anything like the one in Texas, the average person unwilling to actually chase down the details will not even know that the record for Cropp is a “not-a-conviction-that-looks-like-one.”

The really sad part? According to a USA Today story from 2008 February, Cropp isn’t even the one that actually made the fatal mistake of substituting a 23.4% saline solution bag for a 0.9% bag. The error was actually made by Katherine Dudash, the pharmacy technician. But Cropp bears the full brunt of responsibility because he missed the error and because Ohio does not regulate pharmacy technicians.

I don’t excuse the mistakes that Cropp did make, or to say it’s okay for anyone to make the kind of mistake that results in loss of life. But neither do I excuse the unfairness towards Eric Cropp and the completely backwards laws that let Katherine Dudash get off scot free.

The only happy ending to this, is apparently Dudash also now holds a non-pharmacy job (she went back to work at CVS after the incident and changed careers some time later). But she’s not going to have to deal with having to check yes to job applications that ask “have you ever pleaded guilty or no contest to a felony?” or similar questions. That’s unfair and thoughtless towards someone who spent years training to become a pharmacist. That’s what makes me sick.

An unusual case of generosity

A recent NPR story tells the story behind Richard Leroy Walters and his legacy. To make a long story short, the late Richard Leroy Walters was an engineer who left behind an estate valued well into the millions of US dollars. He left it to several different nonprofits, including a Catholic mission in Phoenix and NPR.

The distinguishing factor between Walters and other millionaires? Walters was homeless; his physical possessions fit inside a backpack. He slept on the grounds of a local senior citizen’s center, ate at a hospital, and used telephones at both places.

I can’t honestly think of words to describe how I reacted to reading this story. Having never been truly homeless for longer than a day, it’s difficult to grasp how Richard could willingly just walk out of his last residence and take to the streets.

Maybe it was the sense of adventure, or a desire for freedom from not owning the material possessions of the rest of the world. Money can’t buy everything.

Apparently, two things were more important to Richard than anything else: leaving a legacy and dying a happy man. I have no doubts he fulfilled both, but I don’t think his choices are right for just anyone.

Penn & Teller’s organic food gaffe

A recent Green Blog article comments on an unfortunate gaffe by Penn & Teller.

In a recent episode of their TV show with a well-known and profane title often abbreviated to the letters “B.S.” in more polite circles, Penn and Teller question a so-called “food policy analyst expert” about organic food. (Not surprisingly, the YouTube copy of the video was pulled for a copyright claim, even though it’s arguably fair use to cite a portion of it for the purposes of Green Blog’s commentary, and mine. But, that’s another rant for another day.)

They fail to mention that their so-called expert, Alex Avery, is paid by the Hudson Institute, which is essentially a right-wing lobbyist organization funded by corporations like Monsanto which have an interest in discouraging the purchase of organic foods by consumers.

As if that was not enough, Penn and Teller are members of the Cato Institute (also see Sourcewatch entry for the show), which is also considered right-wing and funded by ExxonMobil.

It is inexcusable for a high-profile act like Penn & Teller to knowingly use their fame to mislead the public. The fact that the body of their work is entertainment as opposed to journalism does little to help their credibility. Usually, someone who works in television or radio will pick one or the other and stick with it.

So yes, I call “B.S.” on Penn & Teller.

Do we really need a blogger badge for integrity?

A recent post on Neil Kramer’s blog, Citizen of the Month discusses the rather controversial Blog With Integrity group/movement and its associated badge.

While obviously sparked by the FTC ethics edict requiring full disclosure of paid or sponsored articles. The mainstream press appears to describe Blog With Integrity (henceforth referred to as BWI to save wear on my fingers) as a “mommy blogger” group. Given my previous rant on sexism, and how anti-male sexism is not only ignored but in some cases accepted and praised, this is the first reason I have for distancing myself from the current Blog With Integrity group. And I will admit it is not a reason I am particularly proud of.

The second issue has to do with the use of the loaded phrase “intellectual property” as quoted here:

I believe in intellectual property rights, providing links, citing sources, and crediting inspiration where appropriate.

A clearer explanation of exactly which laws are being referred to would make this portion of the pledge much easier to understand and not play quite as neatly into the hands of those who are trying to turn things like copyright into perpetual ownership instead of a time-limited grant of exclusivity as was originally intended. I am guessing the BWI pledge mainly refers to copyright and trademark, as I don’t see how a blog post could infringe a patent. I wrote to the contact e-mail given for BWI on 2009-07-23, even citing the Free Software Foundation’s “words to avoid” page and have received no response so far.

Finally, the third issue is with these words in the pledge:

I always present my honest opinions to the best of my ability.

On its face this doesn’t seem evil, but do we really need to pledge to be honest? How much trust do I really gain by actually taking this pledge? Either people believe I am honest person or they don’t. And I must admit that my situation is a bit different: some are willing to say I am dishonest simply because of certain events in my distant past, that speak much more of who I was then versus who I am now.

I agree with the essence of Neil’s arguments, and in particular, this paragraph which I quote here (slightly edited for language):

As much as I respect the sentiments, I hope this badge doesn’t become too popular. I would hate to see a two tier system on the blogosphere, where one person displays a badge of integrity, like a preacher carrying the Holy Book for all to see, while the rest of us are branded as lying heathens in Sodom, [getting intimate with] goats. Isn’t the logical conclusion — the hope of the promoters — that marketers will notice this badge and work with those displaying it? Do we really want that to happen? Ask Sophia’s parents about life in the Soviet Union, when people had to take pledges before getting jobs and apartments.

Indeed, the thought that one segment of bloggers is “holier” than the rest of us for taking the pledge doesn’t sit well with me. Like Neil, I think it is enough that I earn the trust of my readers by my words, not by taking a pledge.

I have always welcomed civil feedback on what I write, on both of my blogs (soon to become “all three of my blogs” in the next month or so). I will usually even publish comments from those that disagree with me.