Think Like a (Blonde) Lawyer ...

Il Dolce Far Niente (or, the Joy of Sitting Around Eating Bon Bons?)

So I hate to admit this, but one of the reasons I haven't blogged lately is that I have been spending a significant amount of time in the past few weeks sitting around in my backyard lounge chair eating bon bons (more often than not, with a glass of vino).

I actually don't really care for chocolate that much.  Nor am I in the habit of sitting around doing nothing. But I really am trying to relax more than I ever used to, and certainly more than my natural proclivities feel comfortable with.

The good news is that I no longer beat myself up over eating a couple pieces of chocolate (who was that bulimic 19-year old??); it's so much harder to get rid of my all-American-angst over the feeling that I'm wasting a lot of time.  (Especially since I've been occupationally programmed to account for my time in 6-minute increments.)

But is "down time" really wasted time?  I've been thinking about this a lot lately, so the scene in Eat, Pray, Love where the Italians lament to Julia Roberts that Americans have completely lost touch with the "joy of doing nothing" (il dolce far niente) really struck home. 

  
 

Much of the world simply does not understand Americans' obsessive drive to constantly be doing something productive.  I recently wrote an email to an executive level Australian acquaintance and received an auto-responder unapologetically explaining that she will be out of the office on vacation for the next month -- period.  How different this is from the typical American message providing cell numbers, alternate contacts, and endless promises to periodically check email regardless of where the person is or what they are doing with their miserly few days off. 

Americans average less than 12 days of vacation time each year compared with the 4 to 6 weeks of mandated vacation in most other Western nations.  Australians actually require that employees be paid a 20% bonus during their weeks off so they can afford to travel.   (Which makes one wonder why Australians are so notorious for being cheap house guests who never go away ...)

 

Here in the land where the pursuit of happiness is constitutionally protected, however, there is no right to time off.  In fact, one law firm I once worked for actually did away with vacation days altogether and replaced these with a personal rejuvenation policy wherein at least in theory, an attorney could take off as much time as she wanted -- provided that she still met her billable hours expectations and didn't miss any important court dates.  Any guesses how many days of "rejuvenation" the average associate was actually be allowed to have?  (Hint: it worked out to even less than the average American receives.  And oh yeah, if the associate ever left the firm, no vacation time was owed.)

But I am getting off topic.  If we Americans really feel so cheated by the stinginess of our employers' policies, why don't we rebel?  I'm guessing here, but I think it has something to do with our good old Puritan work ethic: as a nation, we tend to believe hard work somehow proves our virtue.  At least that's what my guilt monster whispers in my ear on those days when I'm indulging in yet another afternoon of far niente ...

 

But what if down time and true relaxation actually improve our productivity?  Certainly in legal circles you cannot bill clients for those three hours spent lounging on the beach, but what if during those hours you actually experience that creative spark of inspiration that leads to your winning strategy at trial?  What if relaxation is, in fact, the only way to access our much more creative, subconscious minds?  (And I haven't even mentioned the nifty side effects of indulging in playtime such as improved health and relationships.)

I'm certainly not the first person to feel this way.  Timothy Ferriss' The 4-Hour Workweekwas a #1 New York Times bestseller, and Chris Guillebeau's blog, The Art of Non-conformity is equally popular.  Both authors specialize in instructing readers how to escape 9-to-5 and create prosperous, passionate livelihoods -- anywhere in the world, with no boss, and in a lot less time.

I'm still trying to figure out how to achieve this; in the meantime, can someone please pass the bon bons?

I need a (budget) fashion stylist!

 

Now that I'm no longer on the billable clock, I spend a lot more time blog surfing and cannot help but notice the proliferation of sites by would-be fashion divas.  The little ensemble pictured here comes from profashionelle.com and retails for a mere $4,955.

 

I love this look!  And if I had a role on Boston Legal or L.A. Law, I think it would fit right in.  But in the real world, very few law associates ever dress like this.

 

A mid-level BigLaw associate who has somehow survived The Economy and is still doing "well" is likely working 2500 hours per year in order to meet the firm's acceptable minimum billable hours limit (generally about 2000 hours).   However, even though her firm bills clients well over $300 per hour, her actual gross take home salary is likely less than $100 per hour. 

 

In other words, the outfit above costs her an average (50-hour) week's salary.  (If our associate somehow manages to avoid all taxes, that is.)

 

These days, however, most lawyers are earning nowhere near this amount and the attorney job market is still about as bleak as it has ever been.  I occasionally browse the legal listings on Craigslist, and it's pretty discouraging to read ads offering attorney contract jobs for as little as $25-30 per hour.  (It takes a very long time to pay off the average six-figure law school debt at that rate.)

 

But don't despair legal fashionistas!  I'm pretty sure I can put together a designer look for just a few hours' pay, even at today's rock bottom billable rates. 

 

So last week I decided to make a field trip to my local Loehmann's to test their claim to be "the IT store for designer fashion" at 30-65% off department store prices.  My challenge: to put together a designer "business casual" outfit (with shoes & accessories) for less than $500.

 

Here's what I came up with:

 

 

 

 

 

Start with this olive green suede mini dress by Cynthia Steffe. 

Retail:  $525 (My price: $94.48)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

Then add a multi-color leather & suede shoulder bag by Lucky Brand.

Retail: $149 (I paid $62.99)

 

 

 

Plus Michael Kors gold studded tan leather boots

Retail $295 (My price: $170.99)

 

 

 

 

And add a matching leather wallet by Chocolat Blu

Retail $80 (my price $22.26)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finishing touches:  Calvin Klein netted hose ($11 retail; my price $5.39) plus studded cuff bracelet by Punch ($40 retail; I paid $17.99)

 

Total = $374.10* (vs. $1,100.00 retail according to original price tags)

(* Quoted prices include an additional 10% member discount, and do not include state sales tax - 8.75% in California.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One thing I noticed in this little experiment is that fashion photography is much harder than it looks!  I probably should have chosen a better background than my study/guest bedroom, and definitely should have hired a more professional model (but that would have blown the budget):

 

Although I'm happy with the price of this outfit, I have no idea whether I will ever actually wear it!  (It's still a bit much for either blog writing from home or dog walking.)  At least Loehmann's has a liberal returns policy ...

* * * * *

What's your vote?  Should I keep this little ensemble or return it?   How could the look be improved?  And how do you feel about discount/outlet stores generally?  Are the bargains worth the hunt?  Or do you just end up buying more things you will never wear?

The Law of Gratitude (My Audition to Host a Show on Oprah's OWN Network)

(photo courtesy of Orange County Register -- not me, by the way)

Only about 2,000 people showed up for Oprah's open casting call last Saturday at Kohl's in Laguna Niguel (Orange County).  I was number 399.  As you can see, it was quite a circus!  When coupled with the auditions in other cities plus about 5,000 online applications, it looks like well over 10,000 people are desperately trying to become one of ten finalists who will compete in a reality show where the ultimate winner will get to host a talk show on Oprah's new OWN network.

 

So I have a 1 in 1,000 shot.

 

Not bad.

 

According to Ripley's Believe It Or Not, this is about the same probability of being able to twist your tongue upside down (I can do that!) or of getting diagnosed with MS (that too). And it's far better odds than winning the lottery.  But do I realistically have a chance?

 

You can judge this for yourself by going to Oprah's website for the competition.  It's fun to browse the diversity of submissions; my personal favorite is Zach's travel show for people with cerebral palsy.  (It is currently coming in at number two with over 4 million votes!)  You can also see my own last minute entry here with a paltry 400 votes.

 

One thing you may notice is that some of the top vote getters are not exactly outstanding entries.  On the other hand, many of the submissions with fewer than 50 votes are fantastic.  I guess it all comes down to how big our online networks are and how many people we can convince (bribe?) to press the vote button multiple times every day.  (There is no limit on how many times a person can vote.)  This must be why the producers are reserving their right to choose whomever they want for the final competition, regardless of online votes.

 

Nevertheless, a daily sympathy vote (or twenty) from you certainly wouldn't hurt.

 

Not that I went through this exercise because I desperately want to host a show on OWN -- on the contrary, I would have to decline even if I were somehow miraculously selected.  As you may recall, however, one of the original purposes of this blog was to "have more fun" in my post-legal life by trying new things.  I've now been to several casting calls, and I'm not sure that "fun" is the right adjective to describe the experience of waiting around for hours with hundreds of people in a parking lot just to give a 30-second pitch.  These come a little closer:

 

Tired.  Cold.  Nervous.  Thirsty.  Impatient.  Hungry.  Hot.  My feet hurt.  I forgot my pitch.  I have bad hair.  And I have to pee.

 

So by the time they called number 399, my live pitch was far from comfortable and far from perfect.  And my online video was even worse (as you can see!) because I put it together rather quickly on the last day prior to the live casting call.  And unlike many of the contestants who had their videos professionally produced, I have no clue how to edit film and didn't really capture all the clips that would have best explained my show concept or been the most interesting to watch.

 

Pretty pathetic excuses, right?

 

But it really doesn't matter.  Although it would certainly be a great ego boost to have my OWN show on Oprah's network, the point I was really trying to drive home in my audition is that I already have so much. 

 

Yes, I lost my job last summer, and yes, I have MS, but I refuse to be a victim.  I still live in a beautiful place, am married to my best friend, can still see sunsets, and enjoy more material comforts than 99% of the world's population.  In my opinion, the so-called Law of Attraction simply cannot work without fully implementing the Law of Gratitude first.  Before we can attract anything good into our lives, we need to first truly appreciate what we already have.  This is what I was trying to get at in my previous post about a man who appeared to know the real Secret.

 

So I guess my final thoughts about the Oprah experience are that I appreciate the fact that I was feeling healthy enough to make it to the audition last weekend in the first place, and that I was able to meet so many fascinating people there who also gave it their best shot.  Just about everyone there had great ideas about how to inspire others and how to improve our world.  At the end of the day, I was reminded once again that we truly are all one. 

 

And it doesn't really matter who wins the competition, because just by showing up and sincerely trying to live our best lives (Oprah's mantra) we all win.

* * * * *

Have you ever tried to compete for something, only to find something other than the result you sought was your real lesson?  Have you ever (or would you ever) attend a mass casting call just to see what the experience is like?  And what are your views about THE SECRET and the LAW OF ATTRACTION? 

Are You Smarter than a Lawyer?

Of course this is pretty much a rhetorical question if you are happy in your career and do not still owe six figures on your legal education. 

 

I only ask the question because yesterday I obtained a copy of the Contestant Qualifying Test used as part of the screening process to compete on Fox's Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?

 

 

 

If you're interested, you can download a copy of the screening test here: Download 5th Grader Test. 

 

It's only 11 questions long, but if you enjoy taking this test you really might want to consider taking the LSAT.  From what I remember, at least, the questions are about the same level of difficulty except that the LSAT is a whole lot longer and it's timed.  So it's more of an endurance/stress test than an intelligence one.  The LSAT prep courses won't tell you this, of course, but I truly believe that once you've got the basic technique down and done a little home study, pre-test hypnotism will probably result in much higher test scores than any prep course; it's your state of mind on test day that matters more than anything else.

 

But what about the 5th grader test?  Are they really using this test to screen for intelligence, or to screen out potential contestants who might cost the show too much money?  I wasn't sure how to play this, so made sure to get a couple of the questions wrong.  (Well, that's my story anyway, and I'm sticking to it.)

 

All of this testing talk also reminds me of a another testing hurdle all lawyers must leap: the "ethics" test, or MPRE (Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination).  Frankly, I really struggled with this test.  Not because I lack ethics, mind you, but because I disagree with some of the basic tenets of lawyerly ethics and there is no room for moral debate on the 60-question multiple choice test.

 

For example, here is a practice question from an MPRE website:

 

Client carried automobile liability insurance with Insco, an insurance company. Client, while driving his car, was involved in a collision with Driver. Driver filed suit against Client. Pursuant to the contractual provision that it would furnish a lawyer to defend its insured, Insco employed Attorney to handle Client’s case. Attorney found evidence that Client had intentionally run into Driver. Intentional torts are excluded from coverage under Client’s policy with Insco. If Client intentionally ran into Driver, Insco has a “no coverage” defense to all claims against Insco by Driver and by Client. Attorney must:

 

A. inform Insco of the evidence that raises the possibility of “no coverage”

B. withdraw as lawyer for Client and represent Insco in an action against Client for a declaration of “no coverage.”

C. not inform either Insco or the court of the possible “no coverage” defense without Client’s consent

D. inform the court, but not Insco, of the possible “no coverage” defense.

 

The "correct" answer is C.    [According the website where I found this, A is prohibited by Model Rule 1.8(f)(3); B is prohibited by 1.9(a) and (c); D is prohibited by 1.6 and there are no facts stated that would trigger the MR 3.3 exceptions.]

 

But how do you feel in this example if you happen to be Insco?  (Remember who is paying for this attorney's fees?)  I'm not generally a big fan of insurance companies, but is it ethical to just shut up and let Insco pay the claim simply because you are not violating any professional rule?  Is this even the type of question that can be adequately answered on a multichoice exam?

 

I do understand that all self regulating professions need a set of rules by which to conduct themselves.  I guess my problem is when people do not recognize that these rules of conduct are simply that -- somewhat arbitrary guidelines that the professional body at one time agreed would be in the best interests of the profession as a whole.

 

They are not necessarily ethical rules when applied to the individual or the facts of a particular case. 

 

Which is one reason why it's so incredibly easy to write lawyer jokes, so I'll leave you with this one:

 

After drafting a will for an elderly client, the attorney announced a fee of $100.

The client gave the attorney a $100 bill.

After the client left, the attorney saw that the client had in fact paid $200, as two of the client's $100 bills had stuck together.

Looking at the $100 overpayment, an ethical question arose in the attorney's mind: "Do I tell my partner?"

 

* * * * *

 

Do you have any good lawyer jokes?  If you have any blonde lawyer jokes, that would be even better!  And how did you do on the 5th grader test?

The End of the World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine?)

 

So according to the Mayan long count calendar, time ends on December 21, 2012.  That's 931 days from now.  It's also my 45th birthday.   And Jane Fonda's 65th birthday.  Jeffrey Katzenberg will be 62.  (It would also be Joseph Stalin's 133rd birthday, were he still alive.  Still believe in astrology?) 

 

December 21 is also the shortest and darkest day of the year in the northern hemisphere, the Winter Solstice.  If you are a sun worshiper like me, it is the date from which all things naturally get better, as they cannot get worse.

 

But perhaps not in 2012.  If you're interested, you could easily spend all day exploring various theories about 12 21 12 on the web.  Many believe this date truly will be our Armageddon and the predicted disasters range from annihilation by meteor or planetary strikes, massive earthquakes and tsunamis, polar reversal with dramatic climate change, to alien invasion.  Others theorize December 21 merely represents the date our species will evolve to a new and much higher level of consciousness.

 

For your convenience, I've embedded a copy of the official 12 21 12 countdown clock at the bottom of this website.  In 931 days, the minimum number of billable hours an associate in BigLaw will work is 4,974.  So the good news is that if 12 21 12 truly is the end, you law geeks have less than 5000 hours of grunt work left.

 

I'm thinking about throwing a massive birthday party for myself to concurrently celebrate the end of the world and/or our ascension to higher awareness on December 21, 2012.  Should I invite Jane and Jeffrey?  Will you come?  This would be a huge step for me, as my birthday has always been too close to Christmas to throw much of a party.  Not a problem anymore.  Plus, what OC woman ever admits to being over 40?  That won't matter either, if the predictions are right. We'll either all be dead or too highly evolved to care about age.
 

If we really do have less than three years left though, I think I'm going to have to watch the five seasons of Lost that I missed: 

 

Others tell me this would not be worth it because the finale left far too many questions unanswered.  But the part of the final episode that sticks with me is Jack's Dad's statement at Jack's funeral that "Everyone dies, kiddo. Some died before you, and some long after."

 

We all have limited time on this island.  Whether it's 931, 9310, or just 9 days left, will you make the most of it? 

 

And will you come to my 45th birthday party?

 

Sex in the City 2, camel riding fashion, & why every woman needs a gay friend

Earlier this week I went to opening night of Sex in the City 2 with several girlfriends; we hadn't seen each other as a group since the first SITC.  I'm seeing it again later this week with my female neighbors.  Not because the movie is that great (well, the fashion is!) but because it celebrates an aspect life that so many of us neglect when life gets busy -- our friends.

 

Actually, I've been known to neglect my friends even when life is NOT busy. 

 

OK, I basically pretty much ignore my friends all the time, until the guilt monster starts clawing at my back and forces me to start returning calls/emails. 

 

I used to blame this on being a lawyer.

 

Now I must admit it's just due to laziness, or sometimes just preferring the comfort of my own cave over venturing out to join the clan.  Or perhaps I'm living too much in the virtual world?  I do love connecting with my Facebook friends, but let's face it, I've never even met many of you and others are from such distant times and/or places in my life that we might as well be living on different planets for all we know about each others' lives.

 

But then again, I've been absolutely floored by some of the virtual connections I've made  -- especially the one I married.  Sometimes people just click online (no pun intended), and sometimes we get to reconnect with people from our distant pasts.  For example, I recently reconnected with a childhood friend who was the first to support me in fifth grade by joining my 3-member Laura Hating Club (which was rather pathetically formed in response to the hugely popular Katie Hating Club; they must have known I was destined to become a lawyer even then).  My online network includes high school friends I wouldn't have recognized on the street but suddenly now chat with frequently, college roommates living all over the world, prior work friends, acquaintances from the dog park, distant cousins, neighbors, and many friends of friends of friends and others I have not met at all but would like to.

 

I guess that's the beauty of social media and blogging: we just put ourselves and our stuff out there, and people who are attracted to what we have to say become our friends. 

 

Or not. 

 

My husband often teases me that I now have more virtual friends than real ones.   Yet I am nowhere even close to the 5,000 FB friend limit; how is it that so many people so quickly max out on "friends" in the virtual world?  Are all of these media socialites just exceptional marketers?  Or could it be because in many cases online conversations are simply more intimate than in real life?  I know that before the internet I could count on one hand the number of people who even knew about my MS; now it's in the public domain for anyone who cares to know.  And I'm still not sure how to reconcile all this internet exhibitionism with the very private person who once threw her diary away just because her then husband had read a few pages.

 

But back to the movie: in SITC 2, the girls visit Abu Dhabi at the invitation of a sheik.  Needless to say, the glamour is over the top fabulous and a very far cry from my own desert experience many years ago of being stranded in the Western Sahara for six weeks hallucinating about showers and clean sheets.  And even though I've ridden camels in Egypt and Australia, I've never done so in quite the style of the SITC girls: 

 

 

Which brings me to another point: not only do I need to nurture my girlfriend relationships, but I really, really, really need a BGF (best gay friend).  Just look at Miranda's sexy transformation when she attended the gay wedding of Carrie's BGF to Charlotte's BGF:

 

 

You can't see it too well in this shot, but Miranda's dress is open down to her navel.  She's the conservative lawyer in the SITC series, remember?  I just love how she has been transformed into a vixen for this movie and how she is finally able to stand up the abusive male partners in her firm.  (Of course we all know such characters are purely fictional, right?)

 

In any event, go see this movie with your best girlfriends.  Or with women you hardly know but want to become friends with.  Or if you are male, go see it alone and see how quickly you will make friends with the 100:1 ratio of women to men at the show. 

 

And if you have no interest in seeing this movie, that's okay too.  But this Memorial Day weekend,  let's all spend a little less time on Facebook, and give our real friends a little more Facetime.

 

We're off to a BBQ now in real time with some real life friends ...

* * * * *

What are your thoughts about social media networking?  Have you been able to use FB to stay connected with your real friends, or it a distraction that takes away from your real life relationships?  How do you feel about sharing details of your life online when there's a very good chance complete strangers will be reading these?  Have you made fantastic friendships online you would have never otherwise had the chance to make?

Captain Sunshine, Make Me Drink Wine, Make Me Feel Fine ...

 

Unless you're a big Neil Diamond fan, you probably do not recognize the lyrics in today's blog post title.  I actually ran across them by accident today when searching for a picture that would adequately illustrate my profound love of sunshine and wine.

 

It turns out I didn't need to find a picture, though, as my baby sister has already taken care of this by transforming me into a cartoon caricature. 

 

Not that I mind. 

 

My sister is an actual artist (i.e., one who gets paid to create stuff) and a far more experienced blogger than I.  But now that she's gaining recognition as a cartoonist, I'm starting to fear I'm in danger of becoming a parody of myself.

 

I have to admit my sister's drawing is a pretty accurate depiction; I do tend to sit in the sunshine drinking wine when offering unsolicited tidbits of wisdom on the phone to my loved ones.  And if you read my sister's latest comic, one interpretation for this behavior might be that people drink because they are repressing their creativity.

 

But another might simply be because sitting in the sun eating good food and drinking good wine brings a great deal of joy.

 

At least, for me.

 

And in my experience, anything that creates joy (provided it doesn't harm anyone) also creates health. 

 

The research supports me on this.

 

If you've been reading this blog for any period of time, you know by now that I've been living with multiple sclerosis for more than 20 years.  You also know that before I became an attorney, I practiced as a naturopathic doctor and medical herbalist for several years in Australia.  If there is an herb or supplement that has been found helpful in treating MS, believe me, I know about it.

 

The funny thing now is that the distinction between alternative and traditional medicine has become increasingly blurred; mainstream neurologists and medical researchers now agree that Vitamin D levels are extremely important in managing not only MS symptoms, but in preventing a host other diseases including depression, heart disease, diabetes, and a variety of other autoimmune disorders.   Although it is undisputed that many diseases are either caused by or result in vitamin D deficiency, much debate still surrounds supplementation recommendations. 

 

We have been taught to stay out of the sun, always wear sunscreen, and our natural tendency is to just pop another pill or three to address any vitamin deficiencies.  Yet at least according to one researcher, ingested vitamin D can actually block the body's ability to manufacture the hormone, the opposite effect to that of sunshine.

 

"Sunlight is more powerful than any drug; it is safe, effective, and available free of charge. If it could be patented, it would be hyped as the greatest medical breakthrough in history. It's that good."

    ~ Mike Adams, natural health researcher and author.

 

Sounds reasonable to me.  But what about the wine, you ask?  Well first of all, if you are the least bit inclined to believe in energy medicine, you must realize that grapes used in high quality wines are simply highly efficient storage devices for condensed solar energy; I view drinking wine as the perfect complement to sitting in the sun -- a Vitamin D booster, if you will. 

 

No, there is no actual Vitamin D in wine itself, but people who drink good wine also generally tend to eat better diets.  Fish and spinach (both good Vitamin D sources) are two of my favorite and frequent choices to have with chardonnay.

 

You've likely heard of the French paradox and cardioprotective effects of regular red wine consumption, but did you know the antioxidant (anti-ageing properties, Ladies!) of white wine may be superior to those of red? 

 

Moreover, according to a new study recently released by the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, moderate wine drinkers are actually, on average, much healthier and happier than both heavy drinkers and surprisingly, non-drinkers, as well.

 

Well, that's my excuse anyway.   All I know is that some of our very best vacations have been to wine country, like in these pictures from Mendoza, Argentina in 2006:

 

 

I'd love to write more, but I need to go walk the dog and get a little sunshine before happy hour ...

 

*   *   *   *   *

Do you have any habits or indulgences in your own life that you believe contribute to your own health and happiness, regardless of what the "experts" may tell you?  Do you search out reinforcing research such as "coffee prevents dementia" or "chocolate boosts endorphins" to support your habits?  What about Vitamin D?  Are you a religious sunscreen user, or do you believe moderate sun exposure has some health benefits?

What do Tattoos, Deep Fried Oreos, and Organic Salads Have in Common?

   

I'm not sure what I find more appalling, the idea of deep fried Oreos, or that apostrophe in the three signs pictured above.

 

Friday Quiz:  Quick, how many grammatical, punctuation and/or usage mistakes can you find in the following paragraph?

 

So, like, he snuck up and, like, yelled at her to lay down and, like, it literally effected, like, there relationship alot.  You know they should of, like, ended it than because if it was myself I would of, like, told him that him and me were so finished because how can too people like ourselfs, like, insure this will never happen again?  I don't mean to sound judgemental, but its not like I disserve this because I'm not the one literally running around getting more tattoo's "every" weekend ...

 

Okay, okay, I realize this example is over the top, but I have seen every one of these mistakes in places where you would expect better (various consultant websites, blogs targeting business customers, emails from alleged professionals, etc.). 

 

Is it just because I went to law school, or is my intolerance of such mistakes just a sign of my age?  (Even in law school I was stunned by my younger peers' use of the word "like" in every sentence of their responses in class.  Maybe I missed that part of the Socratic method?)

 

True, language does evolve (or deteriorate?) over time.  Take Mom's frequent admonishment to us as kids, "there is no such word as snuck."  Now there is; many dictionaries no longer even state that sneaked is the preferred form.

 

Nevertheless, I simply refuse to order my dog to "lay down" regardless of what the trainer says.

 

But lately I've been questioning my tendency to judge.  Sure, finding mistakes in the speech or writing of others can make me feel smug about perhaps being better educated and (dare I even say) somewhat intellectually superior to others.  (Don't lawyers deserve to feel this way for having endured law school?  No?  What about the six figures most of us are still paying off for the experience?  This has to be worth something ...)

 

But after the temporary ego boost from finding such flaws is over, do these criticisms of others actually boost my own happiness?  

 

Would it really matter if someday we simply got rid of the distinction between its and it's? 

 
 

(I still cringe at the thought, but I'm working on it.)

 

*    *    *    *    *

Do you notice others' mistakes in writing or speaking?  Does it make you think less of them as people?  Would you hesitate to hire someone who has such mistakes on their website?  Do you have any pet peeves?  And how many errors did you find in the quiz?

Negotiating Reality (Lawyers as Deal Killers)

  
Today was closet cleaning day.  I didn't find too many interesting skeletons, but did run across an old file that reminds me of just how much most lawyers are trained to be deal breakers rather than deal makers.  Not only do we tend to have rather combative and unpleasant personalities, but we are trained to be professional pessimists always looking for the worst case scenario and drafting all agreements accordingly.

 

This may or may not surprise you, but The Apprentice is not the first reality show I have ever auditioned for.  During law school I was actually selected to appear on a Fox reality show pilot that aired for several months in select markets nationwide.  The nature of the show is not important, except for the fact that it was definitely reality based and involved real people from my personal life whom I had not seen for many years. 

 

The file I discovered in my closet today contains my revisions to the release the production company wanted me to sign as condition of doing the show. 

 

It was a long list of revisions.

 

A pain-in-the-ass-why-should-we-deal-with-this-woman length list.

 

The kind an entertainment lawyer might draft if negotiating on behalf of a major celebrity.

 

I was not even a minor celebrity.

 

Nor was I even a lawyer, as I had yet to finish my first year of law school. 

 

Nevertheless, I included impressive legalese clauses in my revisions such as:

 

"I do not waive my right to pursue a civil claim in the event of defamation.  Specifically, I do not authorize publication of any details ... regarding my sexual history ... or my family ..."

 

[I bet you're just dying for me to publish these details now ... No?  I guess I'm still not a minor celebrity ...]

 

"[You] acknowledge that I am a private individual for litigation purposes."

 

[This makes a big difference regarding what can legally be publicized about a person; the downside of fame is that it changes the burden of proof for pursuing defamation claims.  I'm almost hoping someone will write something terribly nasty about me right now before I become too famous.]

 

"While I understand you are not strictly liable for personal injury claims, I do not waive my right to file a claim for any physical or emotional injury that is directly or proximately cause by the negligent or recklessness of [You] ..."

 

[What sane person waives claims for negligence or reckless misconduct, I ask you?  Apart from married people in no-fault divorce states, I mean ...]

 

Anyway, you get the idea.   I further refused consent to mandatory arbitration, refused to pay any of their legal costs should litigation become necessary, and demanded adequate compensation for the use of my name, likeness, photographs, and/or voice for any commercial purpose.

 

Miraculously, they hired me anyway.  [They must have been desperate for the story!] 

 

As you can guess, the pilot fizzled after a few months and I fortunately never had to view the show again. [I seriously considered pursuing a defamation/negligent misrepresentation claim based purely upon the very poor lighting and makeup they used ...] 

 

In any event, the reason I bring this up is because I think I may have blown it with the producers of The Apprentice by requesting reasonable accommodations even at their casting call, and redlining various parts of their overly broad release.

 

I'll never know.

 

But I wouldn't be surprised if that deal was broken before it ever had a chance to be made simply because I scared them off by acting too much like a lawyer.  Making deals of any sort generally requires creativity and optimism, not just following rules and skepticism. 

 

So perhaps my new "release" for negotiating with reality should be just that:

 

I release all pain and fear; I release all negativity and pessimism; I release all thoughts and feelings that hurt myself or others; I release my need to control every situation; I release my need to always be right ...

 

I'm sure you can think of more.

The First Step is Admitting You Have A Problem ...

Just as all people who drink do not become alcoholics, not all cats exposed to catnip become addicts.  In fact, many cats are not even able to get high on catnip -- those that do are highly sensitive to a chemical found in the plant called nepetalactone (let's just call it "N-tone", as I can more easily imagine a dealer marketing it this way).

My cat, Blaze, is a therapy cat. This means that once or twice a month, we visit nursing homes or assisted living facilities so the residents can pet her and reminisce about their former pets or otherwise feel comforted by her purring. 

 

But Blaze has a substance abuse problem.

Yes, she is definitely one of the cats with N-tone receptors; she will happily roll around our garden in a catnip induced haze for hours at a time if you let her.  Normally, this doesn't really interfere too much with her lifestyle or job responsibilities. 

But yesterday, rather than visit a nursing home, Blaze and I were invited to visit a drug rehabilitation residence.

It was time to come clean.

But could Blaze do it?  I wasn't sure she would be able to admit her habit, much less change in any way.  Nevertheless, we decided to go.

We met outside the home on a beautiful sunny afternoon with a couple dozen adolescent residents.  As usual, Blaze was the only cat present, as most animals suited for therapy work are dogs.  The atmosphere was casual, the kids sitting in small groups at picnic tables or lounging in the grass.  Some were discussing assignments that were soon due -- one girl mentioned an "anger management" essay she had complete in the next two hours that was obviously causing her some anxiety.  Yet she seemed to forget all about it when I handed Blaze over for a cuddle. 

In fact, several of the kids (even the boys!) were very excited to see Blaze, as they had cats of their own at home whom they missed.  I told some of them the story of how I had taken Blaze to see a pet psychic once, and how my cat apparently swore that she had once been an Indian elephant.  I also told them how Blaze had been meant to be a breeder, but had given birth only to stillborns.  (This didn't stop her, by the way, from raising two amazing adopted kittens.) 

Although the teens were mildly amused by these and other cat anecdotes, I didn't get their full attention until I decided to share the details of my kitty's catnip habit.

Suddenly, they could relate.

And this is something I've been thinking about a lot since starting this blog.  It's weird for me to be journaling so publicly about my own failings -- having MS and being fired are both topics my past self never would have volunteered to share, even with people I know well.  I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about exposing my vulnerabilities to the whole cyberworld, and honestly have no idea where this is all leading.

But I do think there is value in sharing our weaknesses, as well as our strengths.  Or as Michael J. Fox put it when discussing how he retired from acting to become a Parkinson's and stem cell research advocate:

"Ironic that in order to do my life's work, I had to quit my day job."

The first step is admitting you have a problem.

My job as a litigator was a problem. 

MS is a problem.

I've never completed a 12-step program, but isn't there something in there about having faith and handing over that which we cannot control to a higher power?  Or if not to a higher power, at least to other people? 

And maybe this is what the blogging world was created for.  By sharing our stories, we unknowingly just might help someone else on their own heroic journey.

---------

How do you feel about sharing personal information with online communities?  Have you ever been comforted by someone you knew only in cyberspace?  What about blogs?  Are we all just self-indulgent exhibitionists now, exposing far too much of ourselves online?  Where do you draw the line?