Potty-Mouthed Parents and the Resume-Padding Dean

Prepare yourselves for my take on these two issues: 1) the outing of potty-mouthed parents and 2) the firing of the resume-padding MIT dean.

1) The Public Crucifixion of Potty-Mouthed Parents

The celebrity world, and the larger world that follows it, has long been abuzz with Alec Baldwin's voice message to his daughter. As may be expected, different people have weighed in on the issue, with the majority response being "oh my goodness, Alec is a horrible father, and a threat to his daughter." The judge in charge of the Baldwin's custody case seems to fall squarely on that side of the fence, as she issued a restraining order shortly after being informed of this message.

I know there are different possible angles with which to look at and comment on this matter (i.e. parental alienation), but I've no interest in any of them except for one - the public judgment of Alec Baldwin. Let me make clear, now and forever, that I am no fan of this actor. The only movie I remember seeing him in is Notting Hill, and he lost my favor completely and irrevocably when he made poor Hugh Grant take out the trash in that scene with Julia Roberts. What I will say though is that the public condemnation of this guy, based on that one phone message, is largely undeserved.

I think that people do not have the right to judge the parental qualities of another based on an isolated incident. (I'm saying this was an isolated incident because all the criticism seems to be focusing on that one voice message.) It's very difficult to take an action out of context and to judge it as such. Even the killing of another human being can be either justified or excused (depending on how you look at it) based on the context in which it was done. I'm not saying that I advocate this particular way of raising a child, or that I think that every act is inherently subjective and cannot be judged on its objective merits alone. All I am saying is that this one act is not representative of him as a father, and it is no one's business to judge his character, and to take action, solely because of it.

I also think that people are being highly intrusive for weighing in on this issue. There are privacy rights, and the right of parents to raise their children as they deem fit is one of the most well-established rights in juvenile law. Different contexts call for different responses. More, not everyone can be expected to be as politically correct as, say, Steve Covey when their blood is boiling and when emotions are running high. I think Alec was wronged when that phone message was made public. And I think it was in bad taste for it to have ever been published in the first place.

This is exactly how I feel about another similar issue, that of the YouTube video of a religious mom who's upset upon hearing her son say he's an atheist. For one thing, I think whoever filmed that video and posted it online was out of place in doing so. What upsets me even more is to read about how some people have been so self-righteous and judgmental about this incident.

In an article for The Harvard Crimson, Jimmy Y. Li weighs in on this video, saying

“You’re an atheist? Give me a fucking break.” That’s not exactly the kind of language you ever expect a mother to use, especially when talking to her own son. Yet, at the beginning of “Pissed Catholic Mother,” an alarming video posted on YouTube earlier this month, the mother says those exact words to her son—who looks to be about 13—after he tells her that he’s an atheist. ... “Pissed Catholic Mother” is shocking and disturbing to say the least, and it’s probably safe to assume that most parents would not respond with such hurtful and abusive language if their child were to tell them he or she is an atheist.

For the full article, click here.

I didn't even go on to read the rest of the article. I just stopped at that part. What was the point in loading the statement with judgments? What was the point in playing a Dr. Be Calm and using this as an "alarming" example of horrible mothering? Well, I know what his point was - he wanted to come up with a good intro. But my point is that he should not have chosen to make this point by blatantly insulting the character of the mother.

People make mistakes in private. They do stupid things, they use foul language (yes, even mothers), they say things they later regret. They shouldn't have to be called to account for that behavior in public - except of course if the behavior has been either tortious or criminal. The public knows nothing of who they are apart from their publicized behavior, nothing about their relationship with the people involved, nothing about whether everything related to that incident has been atoned for. People shouldn't capitalize on these private-made-public mistakes to make them feel like better people. That's just uncalled for and very intrusive.

Alec, you shouldn't have made that public apology. Just like you shouldn't have made Hugh Grant take out the trash.

2) The Resume-Padding MIT Dean of Admissions

The admissions dean of MIT invented her educational credentials. An anonymous caller blew her cover. She resigned.

Here is an excerpt from her personal statement:

I misrepresented my academic degrees when I first applied to MIT 28 years ago and did not have the courage to correct my resume when I applied for my current job or at any time since.

Full text of the statement here.

I feel bad for this lady. From the different accounts I've read of her, she seems to have been well-respected in the academic community, and people don't seem to have questioned her capacity to do her job well. I guess her mistake is that she thought no one would check, and no one would find out. It had been 28 years since she first gave that resume out after all.

I understand the position of MIT in this matter, and I think they did the right thing. But I also sympathize with her. Once you get into a job based on a fake resume, there's no going back. You reveal the dishonesty, you lose your job. People don't like being made fools of.

On an entirely different note, I wonder what's going to happen to her now. Will people hire a former MIT admissions dean who might not even be a college graduate?