Our mission is to expose and remedy corruption in the Probate Court of Cook County, Illinois. We assist, educate and enlighten families of the dead, the dying, the disabled and the aged to better understand their rights in order to protect themselves from the excesses of the Probate Court of Cook County. ProbateSharks.com is dedicated to networking the human element of people to people. We join together in reforming the corrupt Cook County Probate Court system.
– Judge Bill Weisenberger, in an alleged statement made to Eric Rivers, a mentally disabled black man, after allegedly striking Rivers in the head on May 8, 2014, at the Canton Flea Market in Mississippi. Weisenberger was released on a $10,000 bond, and faces up to five years in jail if convicted of the felony charge of simple assault on a vulnerable person.
This story starts as a sperm bank horror story. A lesbian couple wanted to have a baby, and decided artificial insemination was the way to go. They pored over donor profiles, discussed with family and friends, and finally picked one specimen of biological material that was right for their family.
But the sperm bank sent over the wrong specimen, and didn’t figure out the mistake until the woman, Jennifer Cramblett, was well into her pregnancy. Terrible, right? The sperm bank apologized and gave her a refund, which probably doesn’t even scratch their legal liability. But the woman carried the baby to term and gave birth to a beautiful baby girl.
Now, two years later, Cramblett wants to sue. The sperm donor mixup really should be enough to support her claims for wrongful birth and breach of warranty. But Cramblett has added a surprising twist to her protestations of harm. It turns out that the incorrect donor was black. Cramblett now claims emotional distress because her family and town are too racially intolerant for her to raise a mixed-race daughter in their midst…
The Chicago Tribune reports on Cramblett’s “fears” and “anxieties” about raising her daughter:
Cramblett was raised around people with stereotypical attitudes about nonwhites, the lawsuit states, and did not know African-Americans until she attended college at the University of Akron…
She fears that her “all white and unconsciously insensitive family,” which has never been able to fully embrace Jennifer’s homosexuality, could have a negative effect on her daughter, according to the lawsuit.
“Though compelled to repress her individuality amongst family members, Payton’s differences are irrepressible, and Jennifer does not want Payton to feel stigmatized or unrecognized due simply to the circumstances of her birth,” the lawsuit states. “Jennifer’s stress and anxiety intensify when she envisions Payton entering an all-white school.”
Ha. Haha. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.. WELCOME TO THE SUCK, JENNIFER CRAMBLETT!!! It’s confusing, ain’t it, trying to figure out how to raise a non-white baby around all these crazy-ass white people. It is… EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSING!
Sorry, sorry, it’s just, you have to try to see it from my perspective. This woman is suing people because she’s being forced to live the life of every black parent in this country. This woman couldn’t last two years in the shoes that millions of African-Americans walk every day before crying uncle. A suit like this illustrates how completely freaking clueless some white people are about what it’s like to be black in America.
Let me highlight just one part of her complaint that is just a small window into how the other 14% live:
24. As just one example, getting a young daughter’s hair cut is not particularly stressful for most mothers, but to Jennifer it is not a routine matter, because Payton has hair typical of an African American girl. To get a decent cut, Jennifer must travel to a black neighborhood, far from where she lives, where she is obviously different in appearance, and not overtly welcome.
No, getting a young daughter’s hair cut is INCREDIBLY STRESSFUL for most mothers… most African-American mothers, at least. Go watch Chris Rock’s movie Good Hair to get just a glimpse of the contradictory and frustrating social messaging black women and their daughters have to deal with. When do you relax your young daughter’s hair, if at all? You know if you do it too young, the chemicals can damage the still fusing skull. And that’s living in a world where you are constantly worried that somebody is going to call your daughter “ugly” or “nappy” because her hair doesn’t come out of Norse myth.
And this lady is bitching about having to drive across town and have black people look at her.
Cramblett says that she used to live in a racially diverse town, Akron, but moved to someplace called Uniontown, which is not diverse because it had better schools. Now, her psychologist suggests that she move to a different town. The complaint also states: “Jennifer is well aware of the child psychology research and literature correlating intolerance and racism with reduced academic and psychological well-being of biracial children.”
YES. Sometimes, black parents have to make a whole different set of life choices just to avoid raising their kids in all-white communities. Do you know how long I looked for a racially diverse elementary school that also didn’t suck in an area I could borrow enough money to get into? WOULDN’T IT BE GREAT if racism were unacceptable in certain communities instead of having the mixed-race children be unacceptable!
Cramblett thinks her problem is the racial mismatch between her and her daughter. But her complaints are not really about the issues of raising a baby that doesn’t immediately look like the same race of the parent (a “problem” that every mixed-race couple has to overcome). Her issues are those that every parent of a non-white child has to deal with, regardless of the race of the parent. Diverse communities, good schools, racial antipathy from others, that’s just the world of raising a non-white baby.
Remember, this baby is still hers. It might be a shade darker than she anticipated, but genetically this baby is half hers and half some guy’s that she doesn’t know. She doesn’t have to raise the baby any differently than a “100% white” baby, but for the racism of those around her.
In essence, Cramblett isn’t suing because the sperm bank gave her the wrong sperm. She’s not even suing because she doesn’t like black babies. Cramblett is suing because the sperm bank turned her into a black person. They made her have to think and worry and stress like any other parent of a non-white child. The sperm bank took from her the white privilege that she thought was her birthright. Cramblett knows, just as well as I do, that her baby will be treated differently than a white baby. She just didn’t think she’d ever have to deal with it.
And, of course the sperm bank should pay for that. I hope they pay. Again, I’m inclined to think that simply mixing up donors would be enough to win this lawsuit; but since she brought race into it, I want to know what, precisely, we think it’s worth to go from being a parent of a white kid to being a parent of a non-white kid. How much economic loss are we willing to ring up for that? TELL ME. Then pay her. Then open up the f**king treasury and pay ever black mother the same goddamn price.
There’s a line in Remember the Titans (a great, saccharine, historically inaccurate movie) where the white guy is bitching at Denzel because his daughter was visiting when somebody threw a brick through Denzel’s window. Denzel tells the man that maybe he just got a glimpse into what his black daughters have to go through every day.
That’s how I feel about Jennifer Cramblett. I’m sorry for her distress, but welcome to the club. Lawsuit: Wrong sperm delivered to lesbian couple [Chicago Tribune]
How many racist emails does it take to brand someone a racist? My personal rule is “one.” If you send one horribly racist email that actually manages to leak out into public discourse, it’s probably not your only one. Seeing a racist email from someone is like seeing a mouse in your apartment: there’s never just one. I believe in temporary insanity, but I don’t believe in sudden onset racism that magically appears once and only once and then disappears forever.
Of course, whenever anybody gets caught in a racist email scandal, they always say that it’s the only one. It’s always “Whoops, that email was racist, but I’m not racist.” The racist email is always allegedly “out of character,” and the person always claims to have shown “poor judgment.” And that person always has some apologists, as if sending one or two racist emails is just something that “happens” in the normal course of business to non-racist people.
That’s what Judge Richard Cebull claimed. In 2012, he was busted sending around a racist email about President Obama. He claimed that he didn’t mean to be “racist” — he just meant to voice his displeasure with the president (as if it wasn’t bad enough for the judge to be taking public opinions about the sitting president).
Some people bought the Cebulls**t. Not me. And Cebull eventually retired. But the investigation into his misconduct continued, and now that investigation has been made public. Surprise, Richard Cebull sent a ton of racist, sexist, and otherwise inappropriate emails…
The Judicial Council of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals conducted an investigation into Cebull’s behavior in 2013. When Cebull retired in May of that year, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski decided to withhold the report, noting only that the committee found “similarly inappropriate” emails attributed to Cebull.
I tend to think secrecy helps nobody. Just how racist was this guy who was ruling over people in Montana?
Turns out, pretty damn racist. The U.S. Judicial Conference’s Committee on Judicial Conduct ordered the Ninth Circuit report to be made public. And it’s pretty damning. From the San Francisco Chronicle:
In its now-public report, the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council said a subsequent search of court computer tapes dating from 2008 found hundreds of disparaging e-mails sent by Cebull to “personal and professional contacts and court staff.”
Many messages were political and expressed “disdain and disapproval for liberal political leaders” or commented on legislation on topics like gun control and civil rights, the report said. It said a significant number included jokes or commentary disparaging African Americans, Native Americans, Latinos – especially illegal immigrants – and women, and a few were antigay.
The report did not quote any of the offending e-mails.
Hundreds! Cebull initially defended his racist email as being “simply” anti-Obama, but it seems he was sending a lot of awful things that have nothing to do with the president. Somebody must have seen these other Cebull emails. If you have them, please send them along to us via email.
The review found “no evidence of judicial bias,” a statement that I do not believe for a second. Racism does not have an on/off switch. You don’t fundamentally believe that blacks or immigrants or women are inferior to you, and then have that not come out in your professional life. Especially when your professional life involves judging people. If the Ninth Circuit didn’t find evidence of judicial bias, then I think that the Ninth Circuit wasn’t looking hard enough.
Of course, the Ninth Circuit had no reason to really look hard enough. Cebull was a federal judge for 15 years. Did the Ninth Circuit really want to call into question 15 years of federal opinions? They’d be dealing with Cebull-based appeals for the rest of their lives. It’s much cleaner for the court to say, “The man’s retired, let’s move on.”
And really, there are probably tons of people who are just as racist as Richard Cebull floating around the federal judiciary. Nobody actually wants to wrestle with all of the instances of judicial bias in our system. It’s better to encourage judges to not be racist than to look back at all the racist federal judges who have come before.
Just remember Richard Cebull the next time somebody waxes poetic about the importance of stare decisis. Some of our “well settled law” was settled by racist-ass people operating with unaccountable impunity. Excuse me if I don’t think those people deserve a lot of deference. Earlier: Judge of the Day: Montana Chief Judge Forwards Racially Charged Joke About Obama Richard Cebull Day Two: Time for the Cebullsh** Apology
As 2013 draws to a close, let’s look back at the 10 biggest stories in the legal profession over the past year. This is an annual tradition here at Above the Law, which we’ve done in 2012, 2011, 2010, and 2009. We’ll fire up the old Google Analytics machine to get data on our most popular posts, based on pageviews, and share the results with you.
Before turning to specific stories, let’s look at the top general discussion topics here at ATL. For 2013, our most trafficked category page was Biglaw, which bumped Law Schools out of the top spot — a spot that Law Schools held from 2010 through 2012. Now that the word is out about the perils of getting a law degree, leading to plummeting applications, perhaps it’s time to move on from the “don’t go to law school” narrative.
After Biglaw and Law Schools, our third most-popular category page was, as usual, Bonuses. This wasn’t a terribly exciting year for bonuses — there were no spring bonuses, and Cravath and its many followers paid out the same bonuses as last year — but people still want to know the score.
Our fourth most-popular category page was small law firms. Small firms, including boutiques, are an area of increasing focus and readership for us — and also where many of the job opportunities are these days.
Moving on from the topic pages, what were the 10 most popular individual posts at Above the Law in 2013?
Here are our top 10 stories for 2013, in ascending order of popularity, measured in pageviews.[1] Click on the title of each post to be taken to the original story.
10. The Racist Law Firm Ad Update — The Maligned Law Firm Speaks: After a racist law firm advertisement went viral, we played a role in clarifying the situation. We published a statement from the law firm in question — McCutcheon & Hamner, a small personal-injury firm in Alabama — denying its involvement in producing the highly offensive YouTube clip.
9. Did Lamar Odom Cheat On Khloe Kardashian With A Lawyer? Reality TV star Khloe Kardashian recently declared that she’s “excited for this year to be over” — just like her marriage to NBA player Lamar Odom, which ended in 2013. A contributing cause: Odom’s alleged affair with a gorgeous California lawyer, Polina Polonsky, who allegedly asked Odom to help her review client files. Oy!
8. Nationwide Layoff Watch: Major Cuts Come To Weil Gotshal: The Kardashian-Odom split wasn’t the only soap opera that generated headlines this past year. People tuned in for As The Weil Turns — upheaval at the high-powered law firm of Weil Gotshal, kicked off by large-scale layoffs in June. The following months witnessed a slew of partner defections, especially in Texas (although the firm maintains that this is strategic and intentional shrinkage). Can Weil stop the bleeding in 2014?
7. Breaking: Cravath Announces Year-End Bonuses; Let the 2013 Bonus Season Begin! The bonus announcement of Cravath, the extremely prestigious and profitable law firm that sets the market for Biglaw bonuses, always lands in the top 10 stories (last year it was #5). This year, Elie Mystal and I argued over whether the bonus glass was half-empty or half-full.
6. Which State Has the Most Difficult Bar Exam? Professor Robert Anderson of Pepperdine Law developed a methodology for ranking bar exams by toughness. Which state’s test took the top spot? Hint: it wasn’t New York (which didn’t even make the top 10).
5. Lawyer: Apple Should Protect Me From My Porn Addiction: Blocking web users from accessing porn: there’s an app for that? Well, if not, there should be — or so claims lawyer Chris Sevier, who filed a pro se lawsuit that, as Joe Patrice put it, “seeks damages and injunctive relief against Apple for making devices that can display porn, or as the rest of us call it, the Internet.” More recently, Sevier sued President Obama for alleged involvement in the Duck Dynasty debacle.
4. The 2014 U.S. News Law School Rankings: Lawyers love rankings — and U.S. News’s closely watched law school rankings are the biggest game in town. As law schools fight over a shrinking pool of law students, a law school’s position on the prestige totem pole is more important than ever.
3. Biglaw Memo From Top Firm Advises That Women ‘Don’t Giggle,’ Don’t ‘Show Cleavage’: Clifford Chance, a member of the elite Magic Circle, is one of the world’s top law firms — not just in profits and prestige, but also in generating juicy memos. Last year, its famous Law Firm Mommy Memo took the #3 spot; this year, the firm holds on to third place, with a controversial collection of “Presentation Tips For Women” that Staci Zaretsky described as “one of the most sexist Biglaw memos we’ve ever seen.”
2. The ATL Top 50 Law School Rankings (2013): The U.S. News law school rankings might be the biggest game in town (for now), but they aren’t the only one. In our inaugural law school rankings, we stripped out dubious factors like library size or money wasted spent per student to focus on what really matters: employment outcomes, i.e., jobs for graduates. Based on the great traffic and reader feedback we received, our rankings were a huge hit, and we’ll be doing them again in 2014.
1. A Great Response to a Cease and Desist Letter: The cease-and-desist response heard round the world, this rip-roaring rebuttal — a delicious combination of snark and substance — went viral. What could be more satisfying than watching a bullying lawyer get a taste of his own medicine? The letter kicked off a trend of awesome C&D responses — see, e.g., here and here.
We hope you enjoyed this look back at the 10 most popular stories of 2013. If you have a favorite Above the Law story from the past year that didn’t crack the top ten, please feel free to give it a mention in the comments.
And now for a brief programming note: Since Wednesday is the federal holiday for New Year’s Day, we won’t be publishing much (if at all) between now and Thursday, January 2. Happy New Year, and we’ll see you in 2014! [1]For purposes of this listing, intended to serve as a look back at 2013′s biggest stories, we did not count posts published in 2012 that racked up major traffic in 2013 — e.g., Cam Girl Pleasures Herself In A Top Law School’s Library. Earlier: Above the Law’s Top 10 Most Popular Posts of 2012 Above The Law’s Top 10 Most Popular Stories of 2011 Above The Law’s Top 10 Most Popular Stories of 2010 Above The Law’s Top 10 Most Popular Stories of 2009
Over the holiday weekend, there’s been a lot of activity surrounding the racist law firm advertisement we wrote about on Wednesday. First, the firm’s Facebook page declared that the firm was the victim of hacking and that they absolutely did not sanction the ad for their firm posted on YouTube.
Then the head of the production company who posted the ad — and who employs the stereotypical character in multiple ads — wrote a missive swearing that it was hired by the firm and that they provided the script. The production company is also butthurt that Above the Law labeled the ad racist, even though the YouTube post openly trolls viewers to lighten up about its content. I wonder why they’d expect people to be up in arms over their content. Certainly not because they expect people to think it’s racist.
Now the law firm has sent us a direct statement, and this whole tale is super crazy…
When we first saw this story, covered by Angry Asian Man and FindLaw, we had no reason not to take the disclaimer on the Definitive Television YouTube channel at anything but face value. They’d had the video up for almost a month and swore that the firm commissioned them to make the ad. While the character was not the firm’s, the production company said the firm signed off on the script.
Now we have reason to doubt this tale. In response to a query from Above the Law, McCutcheon & Hamner issued this statement:
For the past two weeks, we have worked diligently to determine the source of this video. Within hours of first being notified of the commercials existence, we traced the producer to Definitive Television and its owner Jim DeBerry. We insisted that the video be removed and that he disclose the party that allowed my partner and I to be portrayed in such a negative and misleading light. After a personal review of our financial records which conclusively established that this video was not paid for or authorized by any party associated with our law firm, McCutcheon & Hamner, P.C. posted our response specifically disavowing the video as well as issuing a cease and desist letter to Mr. DeBerry and Definitive Television. Of course, Mr. DeBerry has refused and we are currently investigating our legal options. At this time, we have been instructed by our legal counsel to refrain from comment.
Due to your stereotypical response concerning the State of Alabama, however, I felt compelled to respond. It is obvious that no matter my firms lack of involvement and repeated denials relating to this video, that people are quick to judge based upon their initial observations regardless of whether they know Tom and I personally. You don’t know me. You don’t know my family or my friends. You have never contacted me or spoken with me. You know nothing of my life and yet you stereotype me as promoting racism based upon this video. The State of Alabama has had it’s share of race problems, that cannot be denied. This State has addressed those problems and continues to do so. Quite frankly, if the video had portrayed a “southern redneck” I doubt you or anyone else would have even cared. But racism for people like you is ok, as long it is not directed at you. Quite frankly, maybe you should look in the mirror and not be so quick to judge those you don’t know.
Sincerely,
Joel R. Hamner, Esquire McCutcheon & Hamner, PC
This is all still being sorted out, but if this is true, I feel sincerely bad for the firm. Getting tagged with this kind of negative imagery through no fault of their own would be horrible. If the firm’s story is true, at least this whole affair brought the offending video to light instead of letting it fester for weeks or months longer. Both through updates to the original post and this follow-up, we’ve been quick to bring to the public the denials of McCutcheon & Hamner and to give a complete view of the unfolding story.
And while I personally feel for the firm if this is true, a couple lines deserve note. First, regarding the statement that “racism for people like you is ok, as long [as] it is not directed at you” — in fairness, I don’t think the “southern redneck” stereotype is actually “racist.” It may be prejudicial, but it doesn’t carry with it the same debilitating consequences as race-based stereotypes. But for the record, no, racism is not OK when not directed at me. (Actually, as a white heterosexual male, discrimination is pretty much never directed at me, but I still think it’s bad.)
Second, it’s good to hear that Alabama is taking steps to address its historical and persistent race relations problems. It’s not too long ago we were reading about voter suppression laws there, so something still needs to be done, no matter what Chief Justice Roberts says.
Hopefully the state will continue to address it as vigilantly as it addresses holes in FG return coverage.
This weekend, a black man got into a car accident, climbed out of the wreckage through the back window of his vehicle, went looking for help, and was shot to death by the police. I should also mention that the black guy was unarmed.
In a surprise twist, the police officer has been charged with voluntary manslaughter. I’m sure that the people who think it’s okay when black people get shot to death will find a way to defend the officer, and they’ll deny that race played a role in the shooting. But I’d like to think that even the people who don’t think this guy was killed because he was black can at least agree that the police can’t be allowed to gun people down in this fashion.
The police are supposed to protect and serve, not shoot to kill…
Here’s the situation, as reported by Charlotte-Mecklenburg police Chief Rodney Monroe in the Charlotte Observer:
[Jonathan A.] Ferrell was driving a vehicle that crashed into the woods near Reedy Creek Road in northeast Charlotte.
Monroe called the accident severe, adding that Ferrell would have been forced to climb out of the back window to get out. Monroe didn’t know the cause of the crash, and he didn’t say whether Ferrell had injuries from it.
Ferrell apparently walked to the nearest house, about a half-mile from the accident, and was “banging on the door viciously,” Monroe said. The woman who lives there thought the man at her door was her husband coming home late from work.
But when she saw Ferrell instead, she shut the door and called police because she thought he was trying to rob her.
Officers received a call shortly after 2:30 a.m. about an attempted break-in at a residence in the 7500 block of Reedy Creek Road.
The three officers from the Hickory Grove division who responded to the scene came across a man matching the description of the possible suspect, and they surrounded him. The man “immediately charged” at the police, Monroe said.
One officer attempted to Tase Ferrell, but apparently he missed. A second officer, Randall Kerrick, then shot at Ferrell, hitting him multiple times, and killing him.
I’m not going to jump up and down on the woman in the house. I mean, she probably isn’t getting a humanitarian award, but she was put in a tough spot. It’s late at night, her husband isn’t home, a stranger is at her door claiming that he’s been in a car accident and needs help, but she has no way of knowing that for sure. I’d like to think that I could distinguish between intruder and car accident victim, but whatever. The way people are in this country, I’m just happy the lady didn’t pull out a shotgun and blow Ferrell away. It seems to me that she did the right thing by calling 911. Law enforcement is supposed to be able to distinguish friend or foe in this situation.
I’m saving my “this racism is killing me inside” outrage for the cops, of course, but also for Ferrell’s former football coach. Ferrell used to play at Florida A&M, and so Deadspin got a reaction from his former coach, Earl Holmes:
“I was saddened when they told me.” Holmes said. “They told me he was murdered. I said, ‘What? Murder? That doesn’t sound like him. Not the Jonathan I remembered.’ The Jonathan I remembered was a soft-spoken kid, quiet and to himself.”
Come on, man. Only boisterous, loud-mouth black people get murdered? Holmes is black, by the way. And the statement reminds me that the fundamental problem here is that a lot of people — black and white people — think that there is some “way of acting” that will keep you from getting racially profiled to death. I can hear the apologists now: Maybe if he had politely “knocked” on the door, instead of “banging” on it “viciously.” Maybe if he had calmly “walked” towards the officers instead of “immediately charging” them. Maybe if he had just stayed in his vehicle screaming, “Oh Lawd, massa I needs some hep,” then this white cop wouldn’t have had to shoot him to death.
I’m not sure what Randall Kerrick’s defense will be, and I’m not sure how many people will buy it. But regardless of how the legal process plays out, I’m just don’t know what black people are supposed to do to protect themselves from police officers. CMPD officer charged in fatal shooting [Charlotte Observer] Unarmed Former Florida A&M Player Shot Dead By Police [Deadspin]
"We need an expanded civil-rights movement with an anti-ageist edge, to combat all the exhibitions of alienation and disgust and to entirely renovate our culture's funny bones."
In "The Tribal Rite of the Strombergs," Jeremy has to kill his father because for the first time ever his father has lost at Scrabble. He himself will club his father to death. Several of the eldersaskto be offed. "Eat my weakened body," his father says. "For I have become too old to live." He undresses and prostrates himself before his son, his "naked, flabby arms stretched out in supplication." The entire arc of the father consists of humiliations, gleefully rendered.
This is written by a young man, so maybe it is some Oedipal twitch. But since killingallthe failing older people one after another is the joke, the victims here are women as well as men. They fed his aunt to a horse. His mother shoved his grandmother onto an ice floe when she forgot the name of a TV actor. "Bathe me in sacred oils," she commanded. "And cast me out to burden you no more." Equal-opportunity ageism.
The reluctance of the younger adult children -- "glossy" eyes, scanty protests, seems (ahem) insincere. Lewis Carroll nailed this, in the tears of the Walrus as he was eating the little trusting plump oysters in Alice in Wonderland.
"I weep for you," the Walrus said:
"I deeply sympathize."
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.
Satire is a difficult genre, as Swift and Orwell knew. "It would have been more satirical if the son insisted his father give up his life after losing at Scrabble. This is closer to what happens every day," Dorothy Miller, a writer and independent scholar wrote to me. "An 'older' person forgets her glasses, a name, etc. and several people view this lapse as a symptom of aging, which can lead to mistrust or disregard for the person since she/he is 'losing it.'" In the academy as elsewhere, younger people are told that they can get jobs only if midlife people leave them. But that's okay because the midlife scholars are deadwood. (Jeremy's father's latest book "wasn't his most original." It was a "retread.") Perhaps Jeremy should have surreptitiously checked his father's will before he pointed out that Dad could have used his "Z" to win the game. Who are the author's satirical targets except the histrionic elders who are willing to die prematurely? In fact, no study shows that the long-lived wish to have died younger.
"The Tribal Rite of the Strombergs" also fails as satire because it is displays only one family's cruelty, when anthropology demonstrates that it is entire cultural systems that generate bias. Anthony Trollope set his dystopian novel, The Fixed Period, where everyone will have to die by the age of 68, in a new country called Brittanula. More grimly up to date, the justifications the New Yorker piece gives for suicide or "euthanasia" are all versions of real charges made now, repeatedly, against midlife and older people. If you don't know all these petty, erroneous, or mean-spirited charges, this piece will teach them to you, one after another. Aunt Susan (fed to horse) fails a young person's request for help because she has lost all contacts at Bravo: She's too old to date anyone there anymore. Jeremy's uncle is shamed and dies because he uses an unfashionable server (AOL). ("Mort's wrinkled face flushed with shame.") There's a lot to cringe at here.
I winced often while reading the New Yorker piece, not because I identify with these caricatural parents, but because I know that ageist stereotypes do a lot of harm to younger people too. The humor lets the guilt pass for reading about besting and killing elders and laughing, or thinking with pleasure about your future inheritance, or feeling disgust when you see a bald head or condescend to a 50-year-old woman who can't wield any kind of workplace power. People are shamed for being slow adopters only if they are old. If they are young Luddites, they are treated as skeptical show-me types. Older people -- especially women -- can be ashamed for having wrinkles or not dating. This social pressure has been a theme of feminism for decades.
Our current age culture indeed deserves scorn. "The Tribal Rite of the Strombergs" appears in 2013 against an American backdrop of offensiveness, ignorance, and careless disregard. The right wing claims that older people are a "burden" through the deficit, Social Security, and their pensions. Women live longer than men; we are poorer and get even poorer the longer we live, so we need more assistance and are thus likely to be used as butts. Some with cognitive impairment and a chronic condition are permitted to die. Older people are being invited to refuse medical treatment so as not to "burden" Medicare. Shame may cause people to refuse medical care they might otherwise want. (The author may have believed his allusion to the Eskimo on the ice floe was a satire on the "duty-to-die" crowd. That was one of the few times I could see our culture through the joke and felt he could name the values he intended to satirize.)
The New Yorker likes to shock, but usually in a PC way -- (on the cover, Michelle and Barack do a fist bump, a rabbi and a black woman kiss). So why does a piece like this get accepted? "Shouts and Murmurs" makes some space for theSaturdayNight Live vibe, often egregiously incorrect. "Cougar" jokes are the sexist-ageist equivalent of "little moron" or "Polish" jokes, updated to the tastes of men fantasizing they may stay young forever. The author of "The Tribal Rite of the Strombergs," Simon Rich, writes for SNL. For many people, ageism (a term invented in 1969 by Dr. Robert Butler) still does not exist in conscience in clearly focused ways. Stephen Katz, a historian of gerontology and a professor at Trent University, suggests that the larger problem of unconsciousness may be generational. Rich, "considered to be one of America's best but youngest comic writers, represents a generation so distanced from aging and old age, that the old are sources of 'material' to lampoon." Yet simultaneously, undergraduates, male and female, are now studying ageism along with other intersectional prejudices, and graduate students and junior faculty are writing the next books that will challenge the Otherness of old people.
Some Humor Gets Lame
The first people to attack racist, homophobic, sexist "humor" etc., were time and again seen as missing the point. Even 50 years on, it is necessary to explain what's not funny. Ellen Goodman -- still distributing her clever and well-researched "Equal Rites Awards" --singled outad humor for sexism. Her "Mad Men Award" went to two senior execs "for their ad bragging about Figo's trunk space. They showed women bound and gagged and stuffed into it. Ho. Ho. Ho. We send them a pickup truck full of renovated funny bones."
A feminist gerontologist, Kate de Medeiros, comments, "If he were killing his father for any other reason than being old -- political beliefs, sexual identity, disability that is not related to older age -- there would be disgust and an outcry. I can't image having a humor section based on a woman being stoned because she didn't cover her face properly. The fact that this topic falls under the purview of a joke is really appalling."
Humor can sometimes help us to change, but it often reinforces cruel ideology. Sometimes the ideology is dying or contested, like racism. So an author can assert he is kicking it as it dies. But ageism is worsening, not dying; and there is scarcely anyone contesting "funny" hate speech. We need an expanded civil-rights movement with an anti-ageist edge, to combat all the exhibitions of alienation and disgust and to entirely renovate our culture's funny bones.
Margaret Morganroth Gullette is the author of prize-winning books, including Agewise: Fighting the New Ageism in America (Eric Hoffer Book Award) and Declining to Decline ("best feminist book on American popular culture"). She is a Resident Scholar at the Women's Studies Research Center, Brandeis and writes frequently for national and international audiences .
On one page, comedian Dave Chappelle appears as Tyrone Biggums, the stumbling junkie with crack residue around his mouth.
On other pages of an official North Chicago police handout, a smiling African American man is handcuffed in an orange prison jumpsuit and another is portrayed as bug-eyed and slack-jawed in a mugshot. The handout — given to participants of the new North Chicago Citizen Police Academy last week — was intended to illustrate trial procedures. It had a much different effect.
Waukegan activist Ralph Peterson called the handout “outrageous.” Jennifer Witherspoon, president of the NAACP’s Lake County branch, said the handout reinforces “every negative stereotype blacks as a people have been fighting against.”
Also in the brochure: Bumbling TV cop Barney Fife, Judge Judy and Lindsay Lohan. On the cover: Lake County State’s Attorney Mike Nerheim opposite Tom Cruise as a military defense attorney from “A Few Good Men.”
Nerheim called the handout “incredibly disturbing.”
“Unprofessional is probably the nicest way to put it,” Nerheim said. “It was obviously done without my knowledge and consent. I definitely see how it could be offensive to people. It’s not something that should be coming out of the police department.”
Nerheim said he called North Chicago Mayor Leon Rockingham after receiving the handout by email on Thursday.
North Chicago Police Chief James Jackson said that the material, created by an African-American officer, was not authorized. The brochure also contains images of Indiana University basketball coach Tom Crean, big-bellied white police officers and infamous murder defendant Casey Anthony.
“We should have caught it,” said Jackson, who characterized the handout as an ill-considered attempt at humor.
Peterson isn’t laughing.
“It’s another red flag,” Peterson said. “It’s more bad judgment. For officers to pass out a pamphlet like this screams a need for sensitivity and that this department is not capable of policing the black community.”
He said it showed continued insensitivity toward the city’s majority African-American community in the wake of the Darrin “Dagwood” Hanna police brutality case, in which North Chicago and its police department are embroiled in a federal wrongful-death suit. Peterson brought the handout to the attention of the North Chicago City Council last week.
Peterson also questions why the department is using officers who were involved in the Hanna arrest, along with others who have been the subject of excessive force complaints, as instructors in the academy.
Jackson defended his decision to use veteran officers who volunteered to lead the 10-week course.
“We’re trying to get more interactions with the community,” Jackson said. “We don’t want to discourage that.”
Meanwhile, the “Trial Procedures” handout has been scrubbed from the curriculum, and police Lt. Tony Thies, who is in charge of the academy, apologized to participants who showed up Thursday for the third class.
Rockingham said he had talked to two academy participants about the circular. “One said they didn’t find it offensive, the other said it could have been taken the wrong way,” he said.
But Witherspoon said: “Someone needs to be held accountable.”
“Imagine if you just came to America and saw this,” Witherspoon said. “This is not who we are. We are doctors and lawyers. I don’t understand why this wasn’t reviewed by the chief or mayor before it went out.”
Academy student Paula Carballido, of North Chicago, said an officer explained that the images were taken from movies and TV and were not meant to offend.
Carballido, who said that about half of the dozen or so participants are African American, praised the course, which offers an in-depth view of law enforcement procedures. She said the course was informative and “respectful.”
“It’s changed my perspective about police officers,” Carballido said. “Officers are human and they can make poor choices. But the officers in the academy want to restore trust.”
This story starts as a sperm bank horror story. A lesbian couple wanted to have a baby, and decided artificial insemination was the way to go. They pored over donor profiles, discussed with family and friends, and finally picked one specimen of biological material that was right for their family. 
How many racist emails does it take to brand someone a racist? My personal rule is “one.” If you send one horribly racist email that actually manages to leak out into public discourse, it’s probably not your only one. Seeing a racist email from someone is like seeing a mouse in your apartment: there’s never just one. I believe in temporary insanity, but I don’t believe in sudden onset racism that magically appears once and only once and then disappears forever. 
Over the holiday weekend, there’s been a lot of activity surrounding the 
This weekend, a black man got into a car accident, climbed out of the wreckage through the back window of his vehicle, went looking for help, and was shot to death by the police. I should also mention that the black guy was unarmed. 
