The Arrogance of Humanism

The Arrogance of Humanism

THIS BOOK WAS WRITTEN BY: David Ehrenfeld, a professor of biology at Rutgers University who wants you to keep your logic and reason away from his emotion. Ehrenfeld feels that "the advocacy of logic at the expense of emotion can be carried to both absurd and evil extremes"(p.146), something that happens far too often in modern life. "Like a fat man in a tuxedo falling into a swimming pool, the result is often funny,"(p.148) but when we laugh, we risk overlooking some of its most grievous abuses. For example, "the Soviet dissenters are a brave and passionate group of people, and I cannot help but wonder whether they are being punished by the masters of reason for the undying and powerful quality of their emotion"(p.153).

WHAT IS IN THIS BOOK? An indictment of the creeping humanism that has infected all modern discourse. Humanism is "a supreme faith in human reason — its ability to confront and solve the many problems that humans face, its ability to rearrange both the world of Nature and the affairs of men and women so that human life will prosper"(p.5). Humanism sounds nice until you realize that "communism is at heart intensely humanistic, for it contains the central idea that rational planning can alter any pre-existing condition of man"(p.153). Furthermore, "Most totalitarian persons and regimes, of whatever label," and we are not naming names, Hitler, but we are certainly casting disapproving glances in your direction, "are strongly humanistic in some of their most important philosophic assumptions"(p.6).

WHAT IS NOT IN THIS BOOK? Sugar-coated facts or unreasonably optimistic projections. Ehrenfeld refuses to downplay the stranglehold that humanism has on modern society. "All public communications media are permeated with humanistic preachings all of the time. Business, economic theory, politics, and technology accept the teachings of humanism, entire"(p.4). Humanists have developed terrifying devices like the "bionic laser cane" (p.42), and their ranks are augmented by "international falcon thieves"(p.180). In the face of this adversary, Ehrenfeld admits "I have given no master plan for individual survival"(p.xi).

WOULD YOU RECOMMEND THIS BOOK TO AN ANTI-VACCINE CRUSADER? Certainly. They should identify with Ehrenfeld's argument that solving problems with applied reason only yields more problems. "Humanism to cure humanism! It is like bathing an infection in an extract of sewage"(p.252). It's time for us to stop meddling. For example, we should stop giving wheelchairs to the disabled, since they might use them to visit liquor stores and strip clubs. And AIDS patients, cancer sufferers, and parents who don't want to expose their children to diseases not seen since the Pilgrims should be ashamed of themselves for daring to imagine that their lives could be improved. Taking corrective action would only introduce problems to their lives, like planning a wedding, taking out a mortgage to buy a home, or seeing their children raise children of their own. 

WOULD YOU RECOMMEND THIS BOOK TO A BURNT-OUT FACULTY MEMBER WHO SNAPPED AFTER ONE TOO MANY RUN-INS WITH MICROMANAGING ADMINISTRATORS THAT ARE COMPLETELY UNVERSED IN HIS CHOSEN FIELD OF STUDY? No, I would recommend that they read Ehrenfeld's lecture to the New Economic Institute on the explosion of management. However, this book does contain plenty of venom for administrators, the "people whose job it is to manage and direct organizations. And these administrators, whatever they are doing, are not producing what Schumacher called the goods and services necessary to a becoming existence. They are a burden upon the real producers in society"(p.247). Administrators and their obsession with control are an evil that transcends ideology or conventional labels. "Organization is organization: it is neither socialist nor reactionary, religious nor secular — just distilled humanism. It is organization, not 'communism' or 'capitalism,' that is attempting to run the world, and a very bad job it is making of it"(p.253).

WHAT WAS INTERESTING ABOUT THIS BOOK? The number of compelling, real-world examples of humanism's destructive influence that Ehrenfeld has drawn from sources such as Isaac Asimov's Foundation series, the E.M. Forster story "The Machine Stops," and H.G. Wells' "Food of the Gods," all highlighting ways that we have dared to tread in the domain of the almighty and toy with the powers of god.
According to Ehrenfeld, the tale of the Six Million Dollar Man is especially important. Unlike Prometheus, who was punished by the gods for attempting to improve mankind's existence, the scientists who rebuild Steve Austin suffer no divine retribution for their actions. The story reflects the fact that in our efforts to attain the powers of the gods, "now that the path to omnipotence is clear, we have discarded the superstitious guilt that was so much a part of the early days of the quest"(p.41).
These instances all highlight the "human tragedy" that is our inability to set aside things that give us power. "The first time I came across a description of this tragedy and was made to understand it was in J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings"(p.248).

SPECIAL AWARD: Bitterly Books is honoring David Ehrenfeld with the Room 101 Judo Award for Hitting Them Where They Live based on the rhetorical tactics he employs in his work.

The main goal of "the humanistic logic and power cult"(p.146) is to have us suppress or push aside our emotions and view everything in unfeeling, rational terms. And the best way to counter humanists is with rats. "Rats have an innate distrust of anything new in their environment. When this occurs in human beings it is called superstition or emotion"(p.133). These rat emotions are the key to opposing "reason and its servant, the scientific method"(p.148).

Claiming that the evils of the world can be fixed if we act more like rats is a bold move on Ehrenfeld's part; it's not the most inspiring mental image. However, readers who feel squeamish about becoming more ratlike are themselves possessed of — and responding with — emotion. The cold automatons who willingly put their revulsion aside to consider Ehrenfeld's arguments solely on their rational merits are the ones who will benefit from them the most.

_{The Arrogance of Humanism by David Ehrenfeld (Oxford University Press, 1978, ISBN: 0-19-502890-2)}

Stopping the Media Elite

Arrogance: Rescuing

America from

the Media Elite

This book was written by: Bernard Goldberg, a reporter and commentator who has seen "white media liberalism at its most hypocritical. I spent a lot of years with these people, and you have no idea what major-league phonies they can be"(p.91). While ideological disagreements may have prevented Goldberg from advancing his career at certain news stations that shall remain nameless, he’s not bitter about it. Of course, "there are times when I miss my old pals from network television news. I miss how those well-educated, sophisticated correspondents, who would sell their children into prostitution if it meant getting more airtime, still root for each other—to get hit by a bus"(p.221).

What is in this book: A remedy for the liberal bias currently afflicting the major news networks, written in a language that they can understand. And Goldberg is really good at speaking their language — so good that he earned an accolade from Andy Rooney: "Bernie Goldberg, he said, 'just has a great knack for being a jerk.'"(p.24). When recommending that news networks relocate from ultraliberal New York City to areas that are more in touch with the American public, Goldberg writes:

"Besides the Elvis Presley Birthpace and Museum and Elvis Presley Lake and Campground, there's the Tupelo Ballet and there is also the Tupelo Symphony. Admit it, you elitist snobs: In a million years you wouldn't have thought Tupelo [Mississippi] boasted either a ballet company or a symphony.
What about food? you say. There's enough in Tupelo to make the elites forget Manhattan in a Mississippi minute. Some Tupelo hot spots are Bar-B-Que by Jim, Heavenly Ham, and Harvey's Sweet Pepper Deli. And did I mention that there are three--three!--Pizza Huts in Tupelo?"(p.243)

This may seem like a mocking, sarcastic dig at the citizens of Tupelo, but Goldberg is only attempting to relate to sneering liberal elitists on their own terms. If you didn't realize that he was using this technique when writing “Mitchell [South Dakota]'s motto is ‘Mitchell More than Ever!’ I'm not sure what that means, but I could not agree more"(p.244), you’d think he was just being an obnoxious douche.

What is not in this book: "This book is not about proving the existence of liberal bias in the media, much less about the phony issue of conservative bias," because Goldberg covered that in an earlier book. However, it is sometimes necessary to revisit that proof to put his corrections into context:

"For the record: I have no problem with tough questions getting asked before a story airs. No problem at all. We ought to ask them all the time. But we don't. When the homeless lobby tells us there are millions and millions of homeless on the streets of America who look just like you and me, we put that on, even though it's wrong. When the gay lobby tells us that millions and millions of American heterosexuals who live in the suburbs are about to get AIDS and die, we put that on, even though it's wrong. And when feminists tell us the American living room becomes a killing field on Super Bowl Sunday, we go right ahead and put that on, too."(p.133)

Hopefully, things will get better now that someone has finally had the guts to speak out against the ingenuous assertions made by the powerful, well-funded homeless lobby.

Would you recommend this book to a woman? No. There is a “campaign launched by mainstream feminists and disseminated by their amen chorus in the media to establish that the lives of even little boys and girls need to be reshaped according to feminist doctrine,"(p.139) and our only hope is the element of surprise. "You want to know how bad it is? Most journalists I've spoken to over the years are in such a fog that they don't even think of the National Organization for Women as a liberal special interest group"(p.128).

Would you recommend this book to anyone who thinks that the U.S. may not be number one? Absolutely. "When an ABC News reporter offers the view that while, since September 11, terrorist has come to mean Islamic and foreign, 'many believe we have as much to fear from a homegrown group of antiabortion crusaders,' someone in the newsroom needs to stand up and say, 'Really? You really believe that many Americans think antiabortion crusaders pose as big a threat to Americans as Osama bin Laden?'"(p.298) Putting aside the issue that bin Laden himself is no longer a threat, it is essential that we question these kinds of statements; since September 11, 2001, we have seen anthrax attacks, a military base shooting, another airplane fatally crashed into a building, and at least two public assassination attempts (one successful), all carried out by American citizens. Anyone who thinks that Islamic foreigners are as much of a threat as Americans is seriously underestimating the capabilities of the greatest nation on earth (USA! USA! USA!).

What was interesting about this book? Goldberg’s examination of media’s coverage of James Dale, a scoutmaster who was fired for being gay. "The whole media discussion was basically dishonest from the start because it all but left out what the issue was really about: the concern that allowing gay scoutmasters to supervise overnights of teenage boys would at least increase the odds of boys being molested"(p.181). This refusal to acknolwedge the relevant issues is only made worse by the language employed by the news outlets, like the way they report on “pedophile priests” instead of “gay priests.”

"Why—as many liberals might ask—shouldn't reporters go out of their way to keep the vast majority of decent gay men from being unjustly stigmatized by the ghastly actions of a relative handful?
First of all, because they are journalists, not social workers or therapists, so their job is to tell the truth. Second, because the truth matters.”(p.183)

The truth is that our children are in danger, and we need to stop stigmatizing the people who want to call attention to it. "At the very least, many reasonable people can hardly be faulted for simply having doubts about sending their sons on an overnight with someone whose stated sexual preference is for males"(p.181), but this doesn’t go far enough. I’m sure that Bernard Goldberg will agree with me when I say that based on compelling evidence, we need to protect our children from contact with anyone whose stated sexual preference is for males. Maybe we can have teachers of either gender replaced by a specially produced line of androgynous robots.

Special Award: For his persistent attempts to bring the elitist liberal media types into contact with the realistic, down-to-earth residents of mainstream America, Bitterly Books is presenting Bernard Goldberg with the Salutatory John Lenin Lennon “Say I’m a Dreamer” Citation for Fostering Inter-Cultural Understanding. After his proposal to relocate various media headquarters to sites like Tupelo, Mississippi, Goldberg outlines a scenario where the two groups have a chance to share ideas and discuss opinions:

"When one of the media people says he's for stricter gun controls, he'll get the other side from one of his gun-loving neighbors. When one of the elites finds himself in a chat at the church social and says he's for 'a woman's right to choose,' his neighbor might say, 'Well, I'm pro-life; let's talk about it.' When one of the journalists says she's for gay adoptions, her new neighbor will say, 'I'm not so sure about that one; tell me why you're for it.'"(p.247)

It is every bit as heartwarming as it is impossible; this crazy pipe dream could never happen because everyone knows that liberal media elites become physically uncomfortable and wracked with spasms when brought within close proximity of a church. The only times you see them at church socials are when they’re ghoulishly canvassing the public for some background on their story about pedophile gay priests.

_{Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite by Bernard Goldberg (Warner Books, 2003, ISBN: 0-446-53191-X)}

Abort, Abort!

Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood

Bonus material available.

This book was written by: George Grant, an activist and pastor who previously worked for D. James Kennedy.

What is in this book: A startling exposé on "the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its sundry institutional cohorts in the abortion industry"(p.xxv), including those genocidal maniacs at the March of Dimes(p.174). It is bad enough that "the [Planned Parenthood] organization continually misrepresents the facts about its lucrative birth control, sex education, and abortion enterprises"(p.83), but they also stand for values that are identical to those espoused by heretical sects of the 13th century. "Virtually every major dogma of those heretical sects is a plank in the Planned Parenthood philosophical platform: promiscuity, greed, deception, revolution, socialism, abortion, sorcery, birth limitation, and materialism"(p.256). That's right, he said sorcery. He's on to you, Planned Parenthood, and he knows all about your secret plan to trick women into getting pregnant just so you can force them to have abortions. "In other words, the Planned Parenthood system virtually guarantees that women will get pregnant—and that they will then be 'forced' to fall back on the birth control lynch pin: abortion"(p.26).

What is not in this book? Clinical detachment. Dr. Grant is an activist who is literally not afraid to get his hands dirty. He opens the book talking about the time he was in a car chase fleeing a hail of gunfire, pursued by a security guard trying to stop him from stealing a dead baby out of the dumpster behind an abortion clinic. And the guard looked like he meant business. "His crisp blue uniform played a stark contrast against the alley's cudulent clutter. The gleam of chrome and polished leather threw flitting reflections of sunlight on the ground, shattered triangles of morning brightness skipping across the discarded baubles and forgotten fascinations that composed the heaps of garbage between him and me"(p.11)

Would you recommend this book to a fan of pornography? No, I would recommend that they get their hands on some of Planned Parenthood's educational videos. Dr. Grant describes one of them:

"'I've never seen pornography before,' Catherine admitted. 'But this film was worse than what I could have ever imagined hard-core pornography to be.'
The film was extremely explicit. An unashamedly brash couple fondled each other in preparation for intercourse. At appropriately prurient moments of interest, the camera zoomed in for close-up shots—sweaty body parts rubbing, caressing, kissing, stroking, clasping, petting, and embracing. At the height of passion, the camera fixed on the woman's hands, trembling with ecstasy, as she tore open a condom package and began to slowly unroll its contents onto her partner.
[....]
Afterwards, several of the girls began quietly sobbing, another ran out of the room and threw up, still another fainted. Mercifully, the class ended just a moment later.
'I have never been more humiliated in all my life,' Catherine said. 'I felt dirty and defiled after seeing the film. [....] It was horrible. It was like I'd been raped. Raped in my mind. Raped by my school. Raped by Planned Parenthood. "(p.127)

I have seen pornography before, but clearly I have been wasting my time with the wrong stuff.

Would you recommend this book to someone about to have an abortion? Yes. It might give them an idea of what awaits them on the trip to the clinic:

"Every thirty minutes for the next two and a half hours, we watched as a fresh clutch of doe-eyed girls were whisked into the clinic by 'pro-choice escorts.' They met the girls at their cars and quickly aimed them up the sidewalk. They snarled at our offers of help and batted away our literature. If a girl displayed the least hint of hesitation, the 'escorts' would take her by the arm and rush her toward the door. So much for 'choice.'
When, despite their best efforts, a frightened and confused teen slipped their grasp and turned aside to talk to one of the protesters, to read a Gospel tract, the 'escorts' flew into a frenzied rage."(p.16)

Try comparing this to accounts from some of the escorts. One side of this face-off is clearly exaggerating for dramatic effect. However, the way that Dr. Grant observes a security guard at the event and notes that "his anger was hidden and subversive. It was tucked neatly into the dark folds of his uniform like a murderer's knife hidden inside an old coat on a closet shelf"(p.17) tells me that he's not normally given to creative embellishment.

What was interesting about this book? Dr. Grant has found Planned Parenthood's response to his book to be wholly unsatisfactory, especially the one that "purports to be a book review—despite the fact that it is less than five paragraphs and three hundred words long"(p.xxvii). According to Dr. Grant, an internal Planned Parenthood memo also issues a request, "please do not encourage Mr. Grant"(p.xxvii).

Special award: Because of his sense of cadence, his ear for aliteration, and his knack for vibrant descriptions, Bitterly Books is awarding Dr. Grant with the Nipsey Russell Commemorative Order of the Warrior Poet.

Did you notice Dr. Grant's use of the made-up word "cudulent" earlier? He also notes that the process of writing this book "surprised me with its fervid fervor,"(p.xxiii) as on his quest to save the unborn "I was confronted with the central anomaly of these modern times: a liberal lust for life, a lavish love of life, a luxuriant litany of life, and yet, simultaneously, a leaden loathing of life."(p.13)
His lyrical prose is capable of inciting readers to action, noting that "we need to battle the blazing concupiscence of Planned Parenthood's sex education programs [....and] rescue our own children from the flickering flames of promiscuity and perdition"(p.146). His work can also contain inscrutable wisdom, cryptically noting how "memory is a madman that hoards my colored rags and throws away my precious gems. Prescience is a school-marm that belabors what I ought to be and ignores what I thought to be"(p.18).
Bitterly Books is thrilled to induct Dr. Grant into the esteemed and august Nipsey Russell Commemorative Order of the Warrior Poet, but the occasion is perhaps best marked by some words from Dr. Grant himself:

"The city's gestalt of raw tension and hungry ambition calves its persona like an Arctic berg—splinters drifting away. The eclecticism is everywhere evident. It is a bright matrix of contradiction unfolding across a tantrum of logic and illogic, of antiquity and modernity, of substance and illusion, of objectivity and bias, of bondage and freedom, of honesty and deception"(p.184)

At least, I think that quotation is appropriate for the occasion. I'm not really sure what it means.

_{Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood (4th Ed.) by George Grant (Cumberland House, 2000, ISBN: 1-58182-057-7)}

If At Firstborn You Don't Succeed

Growing Up Firstborn: The Pressure and Privilege of Being Number One by Dr. Kevin Leman (Delacorte Press, 1989, ISBN: 0-385-29769-6)

This book was written by: Dr. Kevin Leman, author of Sex Begins in the Kitchen. Dr. Leman believes that a person's position in the family (firstborn, lastborn, etc.) influences their personality, and "finding out about birth order could potentially save any business millions of dollars every year. You could figure out which individuals would make the best salespeople, the best sales managers, which are the most organized, and so on"(p.20). Dr. Leman considers James Dobson "my good friend"(p.141), while Dr. Dobson has told Dr. Leman that "before you do anything, whatever it is, run it by [your wife] Sande first"(p.188).

What is in this book: An examination of the unique characteristics present in firstborn children. "If you want something done properly, get a firstborn to do it! No wonder so many firstborns are doctors, lawyers, engineers—they sit on school boards, on city councils, and in the United States Congress in numbers far greater than their percentage of the population as a whole would dictate"(p.8). Furthermore, "more than half (52 percent [as of 1989]) of the U.S. presidents have been firstborns, and if you want a dramatic example of the differences that exist between firstborns and lastborns, consider Jimmy and Billy Carter"(p.22). These traits are developed by the attention and treatment received by firstborn children. For example, they are expected to do most of the household chores, even though "Little Buford may be the youngest, but he can pick up those dog plops in the backyard and toss them over the fence into the neighbor's yard as well as anyone else in the family"(p.6). And "just as the firstborn child of an alcoholic parent offers suffers the most from his parent's addiction, it is usually the firstborn daughter who must deal with being raped and used by her own father"(p.225). This kind of treatment builds the character necessary to succeed in life, so "please give your folks a break and try to understand that they most likely didn't intend to treat you badly. It's just that they didn't know any better"(p.60).

What is not in this book: Indifference to the burdens that women—especially firstborn women—are forced to bear in modern society. For example, the author discusses how the pressure of being the firstborn child drove one patient to overating, and now "Sandra is a very pretty woman, but this is offset by the fact that she is at least 30 pounds overweight. She is a classic example of the overweight woman who has 'such a pretty face'"(p.55). Dr. Leman points out how women are either disappointed that they cannot live up to society's unobtainable ideals, or deluded into thinking that they have achieved them, like the way that on The Dating Game, "the 'bachelorettes' invariably describe themselves as eights, nines, and tens, which a lot of the time makes you think they bought their mirrors from a carnival funhouse!"(p.94). Also, these days "I am seeing more and more single mothers who are trying to raise their daughters without the benefit of a man's presence in the family, and that is an awfully hard thing to do! [....] Unless there is a positive male influence in the family, the girls will often begin to strike out at one another and at their mother"(p.154).
And then there are the women struggling with past sexual abuse. Dr. Leman has dealt with a large number of abuse victims, and "I have come to the point where I ask my female clients, almost as a matter of routine, 'when were you first molested?'"(p.224) He views this as a serious problem, noting that "I think of sexual abuse as being like taking the finest piece of cloth you can buy, ripping it in half, throwing the pieces in someone's lap, and saying, 'Here, take this to a good seamstress, and you'll never know the difference'"(p.228). You can try to disguise it, but it's still ruined.

Would you recommend this book to Isaac? No. I would recommend that he read a book about ventriloquism. Introspection and psychological development may be useful, but when your dad is dragging you up mount Moriah with a knife in his hand and a wild look in his eye, it's a good time to know how to throw your voice.

Would you recommend this book to Goofy? No, but it does offer some fascinating insights into his character:

"The next time you feel angry because you've goofed something up or because someone is putting you down, laugh. You may have to force yourself. It may take every bit of energy and acting skill you have, but put a smile on your face and let it roll off your back. You may be dying inside, but you don't need to let anyone else know that."(p.78)

That "Hyuk" laugh of his probably means that he spends all his time in a seething rage.

What is interesting about this book: The suggestion that not all men want to marry their mother. "The marriage of a firstborn female who has younger brothers to a lastborn male with older sisters has a great chance to be especially happy and harmonious"(p.255) Dr. Leman, a lastborn, cites his own marriage as an example, showing how his relationship with his sister taught him how to interact with women:

I remember one of our early conversations, for instance, which went something like this:
"Do you like girls?"
"No way! Yuck, why would I like girls?" I was busy making a scooter, and I didn't even look up. I couldn't figure out why she was bothering me at a time like this. Yes, sir, these old apple crates were going to be perfect for the body, but where was I going to find the right wheels? Hmm . . . I wondered if Sally's old pair of roller skates might work.
"Do you like me?"
This seemed like the best time in the world to like her very much, especially when I thought about those skates.
"Of course I do!"
"But I'm a girl."
"Well, that's different. You're my sister. And you're not like any of the other girls I know. By the way, Sis, you remember those old skates . . ."
"Well, I want to tell you a few things about girls."
Maybe I didn't really want to hear it, but Sally was going to tell me anyway, and so she did. She told me what girls were like, how they ought to be treated, and how you could go about getting a particular girl to like you.
[....]
I often think that it's no wonder I married a firstborn, when I got the sort of treatment I received from my firstborn sister!(p.246-247)

In fact, Dr. Leman dedicates Growing Up Firstborn to his sister, writing that "You have taught me so much about life that only a big sister can teach a little brother".

Special Award: Bitterly Books is presenting Dr. Leman with the Holy Hat Trick Commendation for Evangelism, Drug Intervention, and the Promotion of Abstinence for turning a potentially hostile situation to his advantage with keen observational skills and good Christian morals.
In Growing Up Firstborn, Dr. Leman recounts how he was appearing on a radio show to promote his book, Sex Begins in the Kitchen. When he looked at the DJ in the broadcast booth, "I noticed for the first time that his eyes were glassy and his pupils dilated. The man appeared to be stoned"(p.161). Dr. Leman took a non-confrontational approach so as not to provoke the drug-addled maniac.
Unfortunately, this put Dr. Leman in a perilous situation when the DJ asked him to answer a question from a 24-year-old virgin who wanted to know if she should save herself for marriage. The DJ "thought I was going to tell this young woman to quit being ridiculous, to get on with 'life,' and probably to give her virginity to the first man who wanted it"(p.162).
Dr. Leman rose to the occasion by giving a morally responsible answer, identifying himself as a born-again Christian, and getting the DJ to admit that "You guys know how I feel about these things—but I kind of like what this guy is saying. I think he's making a lot of sense"(p.163). All while promoting Sex Begins in the Kitchen.
Hopefully, Dr. Leman's message stuck with the DJ even after the drugs wore off, but in the meantime we hope he enjoys his award.

The Guilty Teacher

Guilt is the Teacher, Love is the Lesson: A Book to Heal You, Heart and Soul by Joan Borysenko, PhD (Warner Books, 1990, ISBN 0-446-51465-9)

This book was written by: Joan Borysenko, PhD, a therapist who says that she "had sometimes used powerful mind/body techniques to permit me to do too much and run too fast [....] removing the fail-safe mechanisms that nature had provided"(p. 3). Without the fail-safe mechanisms, she got into a car accident where "my nose had been literally destroyed—opened like the hood of a car and nearly torn off my face—when my shoulder harness failed to catch"(p.2). Dr. Borysenko is also the author of Minding the Body, Mending the Mind, a reference source so valuable that it is cited on pages 11, 13, 55, 76, 99, 102, 131, 140, 174, and 178.

What is in this book: An examination of the healing power of guilt, an often misunderstood force that can move mountains and cause festering sores. Actually, herpes causes festering sores, but guilt can shape those sores into forms that are personally meaningful for us, as was the case with "Peter, a forty-five-year-old patient [...] with recurrent herpes lesions on the buttocks"(p.123). Peter was abused as a child in a strict and religious household, and "when Peter caught herpes as the result of an extramarital affair, his reasonable healthy guilt was overshadowed by unreasonable religious guilt [....] He was sure that the herpes was a punishment for his sins. And his body produced an amazing demonstration—breaking out in herpes lesions that mimicked the pattern of his original beatings, a recall of the original psychospiritual trauma"(p.124).

What is not in this book: New Age claptrap. "Enormous misconceptions and oversimplifications have arisen in New Age thinking,"(p.149) and ideas like the Law of Attraction are actually "a warmed-over version of Western spiritual pessimism"(p.150). This spiritual pessimism prevents us from learning valuable lessons by trying to heal our guilt. "To commit ourselves to healing our guilt is to seek, find, and celebrate our essential humanity in a world that too often seems to be a place of purposeless suffering"(p.6). Once we discover our true nature, we get to yell at retards.
"I once had a Christian spiritual teacher who helped us understand humility through a conversation with a slightly retarded member of our congregation named Mike"(p.188). This teacher "turned" on Mike "with surprising force" and accused him of being full of himself. Then the teacher explained to Mike that "when you complain about not being smart, you are turning down your own unique, God-given place in the scheme of things, and that’s downright egotistical!"(p.188)

Would you recommend this book to a Jewish Mother? Yes, even though they already know that "shame is the master emotion" and that "shame is an adaptive, submissive state that favors survival but creates fear and helplessness"(p.67). This book can show them how to more effectively wield both guilt and shame, which they do out of love. (We’ll thank them for it later.)

Would you recommend this book to Lieutenant Marion "Cobra" Cobretti? No, he only wants to teach you that crime is a disease, and he is the cure.

What was interesting about this book? Dr. Borysenko’s in-depth examination of human nature caused me to re-examine some of my prejudices. I was particularly moved by her story of how "my husband, Myrin, and I had a dispute with our landlord and his wife, who seemed to distrust us on the basis of our long hair [....] The landlords told the judge that our pet guinea pig, 'Squeaky,' was part of a fictitious rabbit colony kept in the cellar by 'two crazy medical scientists' for experimental purposes!"(p.147)
Not wanting to repeat the mistakes of Dr. Borysenko’s landlord, I have realized that it’s okay to trust women with long hair. I’m still wary of women with short hair, though. They look too dykey.

Special Award: Bitterly Books would like to present Dr. Borysenko with the Rachel Ray–Hannibal Lecter Fantasy Award for the Furtherance of Knowledge in the Fields of Sandwichcraft and/or Manslaughter for describing her vivid dream:

In the dream, my mother and I are floating on a raft in the deep end of a large swimming pool. I swim to the other end where several old women are gathered. One is in her nineties and is obviously a woman of great spiritual wisdom. I want to introduce her to my mother so she can share her wisdom with us so I excitedly swim back to the raft to tell my mother. By the time I get back to the wisdom woman, I find her lying close to death by the edge of the pool. Her chest has been opened and the meat carved off like the breast of a turkey. The other women in the pool are eating sandwiches of her meat. I am incensed, disappointed, and bewildered. "Why didn’t you open a can of tunafish?" I scream. "We prefer cold turkey sandwiches" is the terse answer.(p.108)

(Note: This award should not be considered as any type of endorsement, condonment, or approval from—and is not offered in collaboration with—either Rachel Ray or Hannibal Lecter.)

Dilbert Is No Laughing Matter

The Trouble With Dilbert: How Corporate Culture Gets the Last Laugh by Norman Solomon (Common Courage Press, 1997, ISBN: 1-56751-132-5)

This book is written by: Norman Solomon, a journalist and media critic who is known for speaking out against the illusion and doublespeak that shrouds the most sinister actions of the power elite. Solomon needed to write this book because "mesmerized with the sparkle of satire, many [Dilbert] readers have simply assumed way too much"(p.16), and he has come forward to speak the truth in a world where "the cyber-jargon and cyber-technology now pushing each other forward are symbols of how sour the dream of progress has turned; today's computerized office is a curdled replication of yesterday"(p.96).

What is in this book: Lobsters at Nuremberg. Dilbert's creator, Scott Adams, "resembles a lobster who has crawled out of the restaurant tank and now sits at the table, napkin in lap, satirizing the spectacle of creatures climbing all over one another"(p.98). I cannot begin to describe how much I hate it when lobsters do that, but that's beside the point. There's a war on, and if you're not smashing lobster tanks and sticking it to the man, then you're part of the problem.
"The cartoonish Dilbert symbols […] have been conscripted as troops in a never-ending war: to mobilize employees for the corporate quest to enlarge the profit margin"(p.29). The Man may know that "the marketplace wars cannot be fought effectively with corporate soldiers lined up like redcoats"(p.76), but that won't stop him from fighting. "Thus are the arsenals of confusion stockpiled and fired, laying siege to our own futures—until, as Jimi Hendrix anticipated, 'the life that led us is dead'"(p.36).

What is not in this book? The terrible truth about what horrific projects Dilbert's company is really working on. Solomon cites a Dilbert strip from 1994 that explicitly states that they are working on missile guidance chips, but:

maybe Dilbert and his colleagues are working on management software for a global web of apparel factories in places like Honduras and Vietnam and Indonesia, where sweatshops provide optimum profit margins. Or perhaps they're getting the bugs out of nuclear-reactor software. Or complex public-relations algorithms for a firm that dumps toxic chemicals in areas where poor people live(pp.87-88).

This sounds scary at first, until you learn that the management software is going to allow a company with humane labor practices to remain competitive with their less-ethical peers in those regions, and the nuclear reactor is a Generation IV project designed to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. While the algorithm is both troubling and sinister (as are all algorithms, especially public-relations algorithms), some glory-hungry trial lawyers have already brought a class-action lawsuit against the firm.

Would you recommend this book to the kind of sub-literate, knuckle-dragging corporate wage slaves that are enthralled by Dilbert? Yes. They need to know that "the man behind the cartoon has little solidarity for the multitudes of Dilbert fans"(p.8). Hell, you need to know it. "His depictions of the obnoxious and the asinine plainly apply to the jerks who try our patience and waste our precious time because they're so dumb—and, even worse, because they're our co-workers or even our supervisors. Later it might dawn on us that we fall within his big circle of disdain"(p.52).
Then again, it might never dawn on us. "The Dilbert tenor is often contemptuous of garden variety people—mockingly dubbed 'induhviduals'," but "Adams confers special dispensation on those who read Dilbert books, of course; their wisdom is attained by willingness to fork over money in his direction. As a clever marketer, Adams recognizes that the paying customers must be kept out of his nonstop line of fire"(p.51). Don't you get it? Dilbert's creator thinks you're dumb, and you're too stupid to realize it! Thank god this book is here to point out your ignorance. Better yet, thank god Tom Tomorrow's introduction to this book sums up more than 90 pages of Solomon's arguments in a single panel:

Would you recommend this book to Heidi Fleiss? I would actually like to have seen her write portions of this book due to the unique insights she could offer. "Dilbert marketing ventures may seem like logical business transactions. But that's because more impressive talents have so often undergone prostitution in recent decades"(p.67) and I'm sure she has a lot to say about prostituting impressive talents. She'd probably also add that while "a clever satire of inefficiency can go where no whip-cracking is able to penetrate"(p.39) it's a lot easier to find a hooker who can crack a whip, and penetration is overrated.

What was interesting about this book? Although "Scott Adams is an impish yet loyal subject, a court jester who has proven his eagerness to serve the royal highness in a land where cash is king"(p.34), this is no laughing matter. Okay, maybe it is, because "in this court of 'higher immorality,' Dilbert is a jester who elicits some chuckles while kissing the sovereigns and nodding to the corporate throne"(p.86), and what is a jester besides a clown with a good agent and a decent tailor? And who doesn't like clowns? Okay, who doesn't like clowns besides people who are afraid of clowns? Right, I should rephrase that. Who doesn't like clowns besides people who are afraid of clowns and everyone over the age of 8?

Special Award
For its relentless, scathing criticism of Scott Adams and his work, Bitterly Books would like to confer upon The Trouble with Dilbert the "Oh, Snap!" Shirley Hemphill Award for Sassy Put-Downs. Originally, one quote was going to be singled out as the most brutal:

"Dilbert may be 'antiboss.' But so is Blondie."(p.37)

But Solomon really throws down the gauntlet several times through the course of his work:

"Dilbert is among a wide range of products acclaimed for their high jumps over low standards."(p.35)

I wouldn’t want to be Scott Adams when he reads this sentence:

"Dilbert flourishes in the context of mass culture that shores up the status quo by defining the tepid outer boundaries of dissent."(p.13)

But really, if you only take one put-down away from this book, it would have to be this pithy zinger:

Adams pursues a mass audience while repeatedly striving to flatter it as distinct from the mass audience of 'Induhviduals.' He lampoons commercial charlatanism while implementing his own brand for maximum return.(pp.66-67)

Oh, Snap!

You're Not Speaking My Language

Genderspeak: Men, Women, and the Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense by Suzette Haden Elgin PhD (John Wiley & Sons, 1993, ISBN: 0-471-58016-3)

This book was written by: Suzette Haden Elgin, PhD, an expert in applied psycholinguistics and the founder of the Ozark Center for Language Studies. Dr. Elgin has also written several science fiction books, including the Native Tongue series--in which she developed a new language, Láadan, similar to Klingon but less popular.

What is in this book: A way of looking at the way men and women use language differently. These differences are subtle and vary from person to person, but “men are usually bigger and stronger, which means they can often drown other people out; women are more likely to start crying, a different kind of power play that nevertheless brings conversation to a halt”(p.166). Dr. Elgin wants to help people move from masculine or feminine extremes to realize that “Male/female communication does not have to be either armed combat or endless mystifying tedium”(p.xvi).
Dr. Elgin explores nuances and pitfalls of intergender communication with clear explanations, like her declaration that “a man asked to talk openly and easily and in detail about his feelings is like a woman asked to talk openly and easily and in detail about her urination”(p.258). Both are perverted deviants, but there aren’t nearly as many websites where you can pay to hear men talk about their feelings.

What is not in this book: Pacifism. Verbal self-defense may be gentle, but Dr. Elgin is realistic about the violence of the realm in which it must be practiced, noting that “differences in semantics can be as dangerous as missiles, and are often as well hidden”(p.40). This self-defense is an important art to master because “hostile language can kill you as surely as hostile driving can”(p.165). Not only does hostile language pose a health risk, but if you don’t get out there and make friends, you’re in mortal danger. That’s because “research has proved that people who are disliked and lonely have far more health problems than people with a strong social network”(p.167).

Would you recommend this book to Don Roberts? Yes, because “using the Gentle Art techniques will bring you extra benefits—fringe benefits—that are valuable to you on the basis of pure self-interest alone”(p.97), which may inspire him to write "Fringies 2: The Fringe-ening."

Would you recommend this book to Richard Gere? No, he’s done pretty well for himself through his mastery of gerbil self-defense.

What was interesting about this book? Dr. Elgin’s discussion of sexual harassment. “One man will say ‘That’s a pretty dress’ so suggestively that every word in the sentence might as well be one of the classic ‘four-letter’ ones; another can say ‘Nice tits’ as inoffensively as if he had said ‘Yankee Doodle.’”(p.211)
I want Dr. Elgin to teach me how to whistle “Yankee Doodle.”

Special Award
Bitterly Books would like to give the I Just Pantsed Arthur Miller While He Was Giving Eugene O’Neill A Wedgie Award for Excellence in Dramatic Accomplishment to Dr. Elgin for the realistic scenarios, written out in narrative form, that open each chapter of her book. She may have intended Genderspeak to be a nonfiction work that explores intergender differences through the scientifically rigorous discipline of linguistics, but these dramatic, realistic scenarios play out in such a gripping fashion that they almost eclipse the book's analysis of social interactions. Readers follow the trials and tribulations of Mary, who struggles to be understood by her parents, her coworkers, and her boss. Mary also has problems with her husband Frank because it “seems to Frank that even when, as in this case, Mary can see that he’s busy, she doesn’t hesitate to interrupt him and demand that he involve himself in what he sees as her soap opera. He resents this, and does everything he can to discourage it”(p.230). The mindset of John, her boss, isn’t very helpful, either:

“As John perceives the situation, he has no choice but to put up with women in the workplace–the laws require him to do that—but he’s under no obligation to make it easy for them. [....] The sooner he can maneuver her into giving up the idea of a business career, the sooner she’ll be out of all this stress and tension.
He is of course careful at all times to maintain the surface position of a nonsexist male. That’s part of doing business in America today, and he recognizes and responds to that fact in spite of his own more conservative views on the subject. He enjoys the strategic challenge this offers him, and prides himself on his skill in dealing with it.”(p.3)

Dr. Elgin, please enjoy your I Just Pantsed Arthur Miller While He Was Giving Eugene O’Neill A Wedgie Award for Excellence in Dramatic Accomplishment, because you (and your complex, nuanced characters) have worked hard for it.

Award-Winning Excavations

Something More: Excavating Your Authentic Self by Sarah Ban Breathnach (Warner Books, 1998, ISBN: 0-446-52413-1)

This book was written by: Sarah Ban Breathnach, author of Simple Abundance and a woman who has a healthy, well-balanced attitude about men and her relationships with them. “I have always overwhelmed men,” she writes, “I used to think it was because I was lacking. Now I realize I’m the living embodiment of abundance – too much woman, too much love, too much passion”(p.163).

What is in this book: In this book, “You’re embarking on an archaeological dig to excavate your Authentic Self. Our journey has brought us to the sacred site of your soul. The choice of archaeology as our fantasy is very deliberate, because women are born incurable romantics”(p.20). Finding your authentic self “is not easy; if it were, everybody would be doing it,” but Ms. Ban Breathnach notes that “It’s been my observation that only women of great discernment, women with no time to lose or squander, and women who frequently feel too close to the edge for comfort, are the best candidates. Women very much like you and me”(p.8). At the end of each chapter are a set of questions, exercises for the reader assigned as field work. “As the archaeologist of your Self, it will be necessary for you to do some digging in the verdant field of your past, in order to aid the excavation process” (p.14).

What is not in this book: Advice for dudes. Some of the greatest luminaries in archaeology (Heinrich Schliemann, Howard Carter, Indiana Jones) may have been men, but this is a book for women—a fact you may recognize when Ban Breathnach discusses how the movie Bridges of Madison County was “a perfect example—not of passion, but of the habitual betrayal of our authenticity that leaves us lonely, vulnerable, and aching for anything other than a self-imposed sentence of life imprisonment”(p.147). It becomes even more evident when you read about how “You are sent into the Wilderness for one reason, and one reason only: Woman, find thyself”(p.177). Men shouldn’t read this book, and they certainly shouldn’t enjoy it, because “Men treat you badly when they don’t love you, but they treat you even worse when they don’t want to”(p.180, emphasis the author’s).

Would you recommend this book to Wonder Woman? Not really. I’d rather she spent her time reading books about the due process of law, and maybe brush up on some interrogation techniques in case her lasso of truth ever goes on the fritz. Lynda Carter might want to check this book out, though.

Would you recommend this book to a Sandhog? I... I can’t do it. I’m not going to use this space to make a crude, excavation-related double entendre about women and "heavy equipment." No matter how much I want to. I'm better than that.

What was interesting about this book? Sarah Ban Breathnach is a very spiritual writer. “Before making major decisions, I take my question to the spiritual world for consultation”(p.226). Creating the book itself appears to have been an almost religious experience, as she notes that “I laughed and cried as I wrote this book, just as women laugh and cry when we give birth. And I sense that this will be your experience as well”(p.14). Now that it has been completed, Ms. Ban Breathnach reflects on the process by admitting that “I trust the unseen more than the visible, which is why I have come to rely on the spiritual secret that ‘The Book’ always knows more than I do, thank God”(p.327).

Special Award
For the first time ever, Bitterly Books would like to present the WTF Award for Excellence in Literary Juxtaposition to Sarah Ban Breathnach for the following paragraph (p.78, emphasis the author’s):

One of the more horrific ways to die is through internal hemorrhaging, the uncontrollable bleeding buried in the body’s cavity. What makes this particular exit route even more insidious is that internal hemorrhaging is most often painless to the victim. There are no visible clues signaling the tiny trickle that starts when a small blood vessel begins to leak until it’s become a fatal flood, “a blood-stemmed tide,” as the Irish poet W. B. Yeats so beautifully describes destiny.

In his original poem "The Second Coming," Yeats writes of a "blood-dimmed tide." Because of her bold re-interpretation of the poet's original language and her daring linkage of Irish poetry, destiny, and death by internal bleeding, it is with great pride that Bitterly Books announces Sarah Ban Breathnach as the first ever recipient of the WTF Award for Excellence in Literary Juxtaposition. Ms. Ban Breathnach, you’ve earned it.