lucy wightman

Jeffrey L. Seglin

The time could come when I identify the forming of some outrage… Looking at this picture I most certainly have never been on ANY kind of date with this “man” of ethics…

I was sifting, getting angles for a story, angles that might add depth and inspiration, historical contexts and information I could land on.  It gelled while putting pieces together for an article on four South Shore Charter Public School students who graduated this month, when Torri should have, where she should…

I landed a web site or blog for a nine year old boy who wishes to climb ten of 4000 foot mountains to benefit his school… the same school my daughter, Torri Wightman attended.  I thought to myself, “Wow, what an amazing thing, this kid.  Maybe I can write an article about him because I think I might feel a little bit moved right now.”  Like maybe being touched by another child is amazing as a stand alone event witnessed by my own private God.

Little did I know the grandfather of this boy was a faceless cyberwriter who had fabricated, objectified, and ignored the purity of ethics he espoused. Jeffrey L. Seglin is an active adult in the South Shore Charter School’s life, a grandparent, a parent, and present when we lost Torri.  There was nothing offerred from May 16th, 2006 forward.  His major offerrings came in his urgent need to “blog” about me.  I have smiled at him, never knowing who he was.

Imagine the sensations as I, astonished, happened upon his grandfather’s (“Papa’s”) site.  Of course I am thinking what am outstanding family he must have to breed such out-of-orbit determination and clarity. The site comes up under some acronym for the South Shore Charter Public School but then it says something about the New York Times and ethics.  Confusing.  Who is he?  Is he who he does not say he is?

It is called “The Right Thing”.  Quirky.  Clever. I have not seen him interviewed by O’Reilly.

I had to triple check, making sure.  Was this the same guy who, under the cover of the New York Times, and under a blog title like “The Right Thing,” actually felt proud to lie about my going on some “double date” with him?  And even prouder to then summarize inaccurate, sparse facts about my life all the while calling me “THE STRIPPER”?  Yeah, the stripper, but not his date!

 “About 25 years ago I went on a double date with a stripper. The stripper wasn’t my date     — she was the across-the-hall neighbor of a female friend whom I was taking to see a play     called “The Shadow Box.” The stripper and her date joined us.

The stripper went by the stage name of Princess Cheyenne and, at the time, was a fairly well-known personality in Boston. I occasionally would read about her in the newspaper thereafter, but sometime around the mid-1980s she seemed to disappear from the scene.”

I never saw a play called “The Shadow Box,” and have never been on a double date.  I think “thereafter” is a fabulous word!  

Oh I am so sorry.  Where is my Q-tip because you know what?  I need to get the wax out and then I will keep the lips moistened because I have some things to say..  The blog is in fact titled The Right Thing and subtitled “the blog for the weekly ethics column by Jeffrey L. Seglin from the New York Times Syndicate.”  THE blog.

Oops I am so sorry!  Again!  Should I have modified my daughter’s name to THE DAUGHTER OF THE STRIPPER?

Then it entices its readers, or THE readers to submit ethical questions, not to Jeffrey Seglin himself, but some obscure email address at something called The New York Times Syndicate.

Yes, I have an ethical question to THE New York Times SYNDICATE.  How can you allow someone like this to use the name of the fabulous New York Times?  Especially when this person who poses as an ethical expert then lies, objectifies and exhibits blatant and drooling titillation?

Oh… wait… excuse me… I am sorry AGAIN.  Did he send a card? Or maybe he made a special effort at the wake to come forward?  No.  Shame on him.

Maybe he was the person who objected to any mention in any substantive way of Torri’s existence on what would have been her graduation day.  Maybe not. 

Maybe Jeffrey Selgin should revise the blog entry he tried to author on February 5, 2006 that was titled, ARE YOU WHO YOU SAY YOU ARE by spitting and shining the mirror and turning it towards himself.  I would suggestion this best be done in the daylight. I imagine the dialogue to be rather bland and empty, with generous use of proper pronouns.  I could be wrong.  

Google me,and blog pops up on page one.  Now I am pleased to couple us and promote THE BLOG here.

I will summarize the very UNETHICAL (as in… unscrupulous, unprincipled, dishonorable…) entry myself since THE MAN saw fit to define my reality.  Feel free to read it yourselves.  I know Joanne did.

Here comes THE MAN who publishes a blog, not on his name alone, but with THE NEW YORK TIMES syndicate as his back up.  He has justice scales as part of his logo.  Maybe he is a lawyer?

Syndicate not withstanding, THE MAN is apparently an ethical expert (but I have not researched him) backed by THE NEW YORK TIMES syndicate.  Wise use of the word “allegedly” does little to de-saturate the tone of his blurb.  The word is not a kryptonite band-aid.

Jeffrey Selgin’s introduces the phrase, “when in reality,” implying absolute knowledge of what it is/was to be me in my life.  He surmises that there is a divide between me and what is genuine (even though I never ever went on a “double-date” with this person or anyone else ever).  He accuses me of calling myself a NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST.  According to THE MAN I did not have training to perform testing and he points out I did not have a license which is, of course, (phew! finally) a truth.

Ha ha ha THE MAN is such a crack up, I don’t know why he is not on SNL because he gets all muddled between two issues – his false story about some “double date” and my being indicted.  And it is so hysterically funny.  Oh but his wife earned the same degree that I did!  He mentions this in the context (oops impulsive me… the context of feeling just super all the time!) of the indictment causing “quite a stir” in his household.  Should I feel honored?  It caused “quite a stir” for me too, but I can handle it.

The Seglin household must ooze ethics because the stir was about the obligations we do or do not have when hiring anyone to help us.  THE MAN says that everyone who knew me should have checked out my credentials, qualifications and license.  I do agree with THE MAN here and was always willing to provide names of supervisors etc.  The license part, well, that makes no sense at all since I was up front about not being licensed and the reasons why.

The cutest part of the faux-New York Times piece is when Jeffrey Selgin mentions being “duped by a clever hoaxster,” and how we fall prey to such “posers.”  His Mensan solution is to make it difficult for “deception to succeed.”  That last line is a clincher.