Here we go again. How many times will I say that in regard to people being shits? This time it’s Citigroup brokers and bank managers who gave BellSouth retiree misleading information about how much money their investments would earn if they invest in Citigroup accounts. Many employees gave up secure and well-paying jobs on the basis of promised made about rates of return. They invested their life savings in Citigroup accounts.
Instead, their nest eggs disappeared and their dreams of retirement turned into nightmares according to a spokesman. The 200 employees lost a total of more than $12 million.
Citigroup employees gave seminars to BellSouth employees between 1994 and 2002 and told them that they could expect returns of at least 12% per year but typically much more if the retirees opened accounts with Citigroup.
They neglected to tell the retirees that fees would be at least 2% and that their investments would have to earn 14% to make the promised 12%. They did not inform them of the risks.
Citigroup said only a small group of employees were involved and that their actions do not reflect upon the high integrity of other employees and the investment firm itself. The employees were suspended and fined but not fired.
Citigroup paid $3 million in fines and more than $12 million in restitution. So, the retirees got their money back but they earned no interest, nothing in the years they had given their funds over to the firm.
Citigroup neither admitted or denied the allegations of misleading information. Apparently, "Mistakes were made." Right.
The agency that regulates such matters is NASD (the National Association of Securities Dealers).
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
When Cover-Ups Work
What to do when some is successful at being a shit? Psychiatrist Sally Satel gives a few hints. In her practice, war veterans who didn’t want her services put her off by asking, If you weren’t in the war, how can you possibly understand me?
This worked. Sally and other psychiatrists on her team were stopped in their tracks. They apologized. They couldn’t think of a thing to say. Bingo! The wily vets had hit hot buttons. The shrinks backed off. The vets had succeeded in their cover-ups.
Eventually, the psychiatrist found that the men had reasons for putting them off. One man was covering up a heroin addiction.
Another veteran addressed his psychiatrist as “College Boy” at the beginning of each session. It turned out the veteran thought his own life was a mess.
Yet, another veteran peppered Sally with questions about the Viet Nam War. What date was the Tet offensive? Who was court marshaled for My Lai? Have you ever lived in a tunnel?
Sally reacted defensively at first. Then she told the veteran that she didn’t know these things and asked him to tell her all about his war experiences.
He did. They formed a bond. Eventually, he opened up about his troubles with his daughter. As they worked together, things got better between him and his daughter.
The same tactic worked with veterans who said psychiatrists weren’t in the war and questioned whether psychiatrists understand what it's like. The psychiatrists learned to say that they didn't, but I'd like to know what you went through.
This might not always work. No one went wrong when honest and direct in gentle ways.
A tactic for the veteran who called the psychiatrist “College Boy” would be to say, Yes, I am a college boy. What do you think of college boys?
Rarely does it work to get angry and defensive at cover-ups. It’s better to acknowledge the truth of someone else’s point of view and ask for elaboration.
In some cases, people are not covering up unkind deeds. They are covering up something that they are ashamed of, which is different from refusing responsibility for hurting another person.
Maybe they are not shits at all, but something else.
I wonder what would be a good name for them?
Shame can be consuming. People can ruminate on what is bothering them so much that they shut other people out. Then they get deeper into themselves and more cut off. They may get to the point where they see no way out.
The next time someone reacts angrily, think, What is going on here? Is this person covering up?
Most of us are too quick to blame ourselves. How self-centered we are when we blame ourselves for someone else's actions and words.
We are not the center of the universe. We do not cause other people’s behaviors. We are not that powerful. We are not that important.
De-center. Think about the other person. What is going on for that other person. Be willing to look at your own contributions. Often someone else's angry cover-ups have nothing to do with you!
See Sally Satel's article in today's New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/health/psychology/12essa.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
This worked. Sally and other psychiatrists on her team were stopped in their tracks. They apologized. They couldn’t think of a thing to say. Bingo! The wily vets had hit hot buttons. The shrinks backed off. The vets had succeeded in their cover-ups.
Eventually, the psychiatrist found that the men had reasons for putting them off. One man was covering up a heroin addiction.
Another veteran addressed his psychiatrist as “College Boy” at the beginning of each session. It turned out the veteran thought his own life was a mess.
Yet, another veteran peppered Sally with questions about the Viet Nam War. What date was the Tet offensive? Who was court marshaled for My Lai? Have you ever lived in a tunnel?
Sally reacted defensively at first. Then she told the veteran that she didn’t know these things and asked him to tell her all about his war experiences.
He did. They formed a bond. Eventually, he opened up about his troubles with his daughter. As they worked together, things got better between him and his daughter.
The same tactic worked with veterans who said psychiatrists weren’t in the war and questioned whether psychiatrists understand what it's like. The psychiatrists learned to say that they didn't, but I'd like to know what you went through.
This might not always work. No one went wrong when honest and direct in gentle ways.
A tactic for the veteran who called the psychiatrist “College Boy” would be to say, Yes, I am a college boy. What do you think of college boys?
Rarely does it work to get angry and defensive at cover-ups. It’s better to acknowledge the truth of someone else’s point of view and ask for elaboration.
In some cases, people are not covering up unkind deeds. They are covering up something that they are ashamed of, which is different from refusing responsibility for hurting another person.
Maybe they are not shits at all, but something else.
I wonder what would be a good name for them?
Shame can be consuming. People can ruminate on what is bothering them so much that they shut other people out. Then they get deeper into themselves and more cut off. They may get to the point where they see no way out.
The next time someone reacts angrily, think, What is going on here? Is this person covering up?
Most of us are too quick to blame ourselves. How self-centered we are when we blame ourselves for someone else's actions and words.
We are not the center of the universe. We do not cause other people’s behaviors. We are not that powerful. We are not that important.
De-center. Think about the other person. What is going on for that other person. Be willing to look at your own contributions. Often someone else's angry cover-ups have nothing to do with you!
See Sally Satel's article in today's New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/health/psychology/12essa.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Reactors, True Believers, and Clever Foxes: Three Categories of Being a Shit
There are three general categories of being a shit: those who react without thinking and are out of touch with the effects of their actions on others, those who believe their own concoctions and dismiss the effects of their actions, and, those who know exactly what they are doing and enjoy themselves while doing so. Each of these three types has a better chance of success when social customs and traditions justify their behaviors.
Type 1: Reactors
Despite humanity’s long acquaintance, we know little about being a shit. Those who misunderstand the true nature of their actions cannot enlighten because they react without thinking. They are unable to report to others why they behave as they do because they have no thoughts to report. Self-focused and clueless about the effects of their behaviors, they show little caring and empathy for the recipients of their unkind deeds. Finally, they have no sense of humor.
When their unkind deeds come to light, their spontaneous responses are blunt, blaming, and loud. They are incapable of insight into their wrong-doings and would sell out their mothers rather than admit they did something wrong.
These are Type 1 enactments of being a shit and the persons who act them out are Reactors. Reactors are the most spontaneous, least reflective, and least skilled of the enactors of being a shit, and, yet, they could be the most common.
Type 2: True Believers
Those who believe their own concoctions represent the second type. They may explain their behaviors at length, but their explanations are distorted and untrustworthy. As a result, they cannot contribute to a theory of being a shit because from their perspectives the meanings and import of their conduct are self evident. They have no empathy for those they hurt by their unkind deeds. They gleefully mock others and mistake mockery for good-natured humor. They are willing captives of their own perspectives.
When recipients object to their unkind deeds and cover-ups, a favored response is dismissive: “You’re too sensitive.” “Where’s your sense of humor?” “I was only kidding.” Other typical responses are indignation and even outrage. Their incapacities to see the points of view of others and their intolerance of alternative explanations confuse those who take them seriously.
Unlike Reactors who have few or no reasons for why they do what they do, this second type of enactor has explanations that are logical to them, but, when viewed with a clear eye, their explanations are partial and distorted. Therefore, they, too, cannot shed light on the true nature of their behaviors and cannot contribute to a theory of being a shit. These are Type 2 enactments and those who act this way are True Believers.
Type 3: Clever Foxes
The third type are those who know exactly what they are doing and enjoy themselves while doing so. They will not contribute to a theory of being a shit because they do not want to give up the pleasures, joys, and other advantages that they gain from their unkind deeds and cover-ups. They have well-developed skills for humor, irony, bluffing, bullshit, obfuscation, prevarication,[1] and other higher order talents.
They have a special type of empathy in that they can spot the vulnerabilities of others, but instead of sympathizing, they take advantage for their own gain. These enactors are more complex and, some may say, more interesting than True Believers and Reactors whose strategies are typically the in-your-face style. This third style is called the Clever Fox.
[1] These are lies, or statements that can have more than one meaning, such as I never had sex with that woman, with the speaker defining sex as sexual intercourse” and the audience defining sex as “sexual touching” such as mouth—to-penis contact
Type 1: Reactors
Despite humanity’s long acquaintance, we know little about being a shit. Those who misunderstand the true nature of their actions cannot enlighten because they react without thinking. They are unable to report to others why they behave as they do because they have no thoughts to report. Self-focused and clueless about the effects of their behaviors, they show little caring and empathy for the recipients of their unkind deeds. Finally, they have no sense of humor.
When their unkind deeds come to light, their spontaneous responses are blunt, blaming, and loud. They are incapable of insight into their wrong-doings and would sell out their mothers rather than admit they did something wrong.
These are Type 1 enactments of being a shit and the persons who act them out are Reactors. Reactors are the most spontaneous, least reflective, and least skilled of the enactors of being a shit, and, yet, they could be the most common.
Type 2: True Believers
Those who believe their own concoctions represent the second type. They may explain their behaviors at length, but their explanations are distorted and untrustworthy. As a result, they cannot contribute to a theory of being a shit because from their perspectives the meanings and import of their conduct are self evident. They have no empathy for those they hurt by their unkind deeds. They gleefully mock others and mistake mockery for good-natured humor. They are willing captives of their own perspectives.
When recipients object to their unkind deeds and cover-ups, a favored response is dismissive: “You’re too sensitive.” “Where’s your sense of humor?” “I was only kidding.” Other typical responses are indignation and even outrage. Their incapacities to see the points of view of others and their intolerance of alternative explanations confuse those who take them seriously.
Unlike Reactors who have few or no reasons for why they do what they do, this second type of enactor has explanations that are logical to them, but, when viewed with a clear eye, their explanations are partial and distorted. Therefore, they, too, cannot shed light on the true nature of their behaviors and cannot contribute to a theory of being a shit. These are Type 2 enactments and those who act this way are True Believers.
Type 3: Clever Foxes
The third type are those who know exactly what they are doing and enjoy themselves while doing so. They will not contribute to a theory of being a shit because they do not want to give up the pleasures, joys, and other advantages that they gain from their unkind deeds and cover-ups. They have well-developed skills for humor, irony, bluffing, bullshit, obfuscation, prevarication,[1] and other higher order talents.
They have a special type of empathy in that they can spot the vulnerabilities of others, but instead of sympathizing, they take advantage for their own gain. These enactors are more complex and, some may say, more interesting than True Believers and Reactors whose strategies are typically the in-your-face style. This third style is called the Clever Fox.
[1] These are lies, or statements that can have more than one meaning, such as I never had sex with that woman, with the speaker defining sex as sexual intercourse” and the audience defining sex as “sexual touching” such as mouth—to-penis contact
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
What? No Cover-Up?
With great expectations for the greatest cover-ups ever, I read a news article today about the many entrepreneurs in China who are adding inert or dangerous fillers to animal and fish feed and to food for human consumption. Babies, cats, and dogs so far are known to have died.
I was just crushed. Not once in that very long article was there one cover-up. Not one. Imagine! Doing this much harm and not having a ready-made cover-up.
These perpetrators of dastardly deeds are amateurs. Any self-respecting shit or bastard would have had three public relations firms and seven media consultants working dawn to dusk to come up with cover-ups such as "I can't recall" or "Someone else put it there," or "They had pre-existing conditions." "Even mistakes were made" and "I didn't do it" are better than nothing. How about, "I knew nothing about it?"
The writer thought perhaps the entrepreneurs had greed as their motivation. Hm.
A more in-depth article would have interviewed the entrepreneurs if for no other reason than to add to the world's repertoire of cover-ups.
The article was woefully inadequate without cover-ups.
I was just crushed. Not once in that very long article was there one cover-up. Not one. Imagine! Doing this much harm and not having a ready-made cover-up.
These perpetrators of dastardly deeds are amateurs. Any self-respecting shit or bastard would have had three public relations firms and seven media consultants working dawn to dusk to come up with cover-ups such as "I can't recall" or "Someone else put it there," or "They had pre-existing conditions." "Even mistakes were made" and "I didn't do it" are better than nothing. How about, "I knew nothing about it?"
The writer thought perhaps the entrepreneurs had greed as their motivation. Hm.
A more in-depth article would have interviewed the entrepreneurs if for no other reason than to add to the world's repertoire of cover-ups.
The article was woefully inadequate without cover-ups.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
United States Court of Appeals and the FCC
They had me going for a while. I thought I would be fined $325,000 each time I used the word shit in my book On Being a Shit. My gosh! I use it hundreds of times in the book. Imagine if the Federal Communications Commission had gotten wind of that.
I would be in the hole for at least $65,000,000. I would have had to take that job I got offered last week as CEO of a health care organization that only paid $100,000,000 a year, but I could get by on that. I think.
I turned down the CEO job because the salary would compromise my values. But if the FCC had fined me, I would have had to shelve my higher self and stoop to take that job.
I’m off the hot seat now. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiffs that included Fox News, NBC, CBS, and others and against the FCC.
Until the ruling, the FCC was poised to fine the utterance of shit and fuck $325,000 each. This is a way for the FCC to “clean up” the networks, another brilliant initiative of the Bush administration. What did former President Carter say recently about this administration?
The court’s opinion cited Bush’s use of shit at a meeting of world leaders last year and Vice President Dick Cheney’s suggestion to a U.S. Senator: “Go fuck yourself.” The court reasoned that neither of these words referred to sexual acts or bodily excretions but were "fleeting expletives" of frustration.
I believe that deleting shit from my book “would have altered the nature of the … work and diminished the power, realism and immediacy of the [book’s]… experience for..[readers.]”
This quote is adapted from the FCC’s ruling to allow the film Saving Private Ryan to be shown complete with its use of fuck, shit, and other such words.
My argument indeed for my use of the word shit.
When someone dumps on us and then tries to cover up, a typical reaction is "You shit!"
What’s good for king shits is good for the rest of us. Heaven forbid that we use those words to refer to sexual acts or bodily excretions.
I would be in the hole for at least $65,000,000. I would have had to take that job I got offered last week as CEO of a health care organization that only paid $100,000,000 a year, but I could get by on that. I think.
I turned down the CEO job because the salary would compromise my values. But if the FCC had fined me, I would have had to shelve my higher self and stoop to take that job.
I’m off the hot seat now. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiffs that included Fox News, NBC, CBS, and others and against the FCC.
Until the ruling, the FCC was poised to fine the utterance of shit and fuck $325,000 each. This is a way for the FCC to “clean up” the networks, another brilliant initiative of the Bush administration. What did former President Carter say recently about this administration?
The court’s opinion cited Bush’s use of shit at a meeting of world leaders last year and Vice President Dick Cheney’s suggestion to a U.S. Senator: “Go fuck yourself.” The court reasoned that neither of these words referred to sexual acts or bodily excretions but were "fleeting expletives" of frustration.
I believe that deleting shit from my book “would have altered the nature of the … work and diminished the power, realism and immediacy of the [book’s]… experience for..[readers.]”
This quote is adapted from the FCC’s ruling to allow the film Saving Private Ryan to be shown complete with its use of fuck, shit, and other such words.
My argument indeed for my use of the word shit.
When someone dumps on us and then tries to cover up, a typical reaction is "You shit!"
What’s good for king shits is good for the rest of us. Heaven forbid that we use those words to refer to sexual acts or bodily excretions.
Saturday, June 2, 2007
"Mistakes were Made" is Another Cover-Up
"Mistakes were made" or "Mistakes were made all around" are cover-ups that politicians use. These cover-ups also have great potential in divorce, raising children, and in any other dispute where one party wants to cover up misdeeds by spreading the blame around.
Don't buy it! You are responsible for your own actions. Other people are responsible for their own actions. End of story. Even children, if they are lucky, have parents who teach them that they are responsible for their own actions.
Children, and many adults, however, do not know where their own responsibility ends and another person's responsiblity begins. We adults have to figure this out for ourselves and teach children how to tell the difference.
The spouse who has an affair says I wouldn't have done it if s/he had not been so cold. Cold or not, the wandering spouse is dishonest is s/he does not look at her or his own motives and actions. Rule 1 in marriage: do not inventory the deficits of your spouse. Inventory your own. Your spouse will do the same.
People take advantage of other people's vulnerabilities all the time. What wandering spouse wouldn't want to get off the hot seat? Pointing the finger at someone else works when the target of the finger feels guilty.
Why do people cover up? Fear of exposure. Fear of shame. Fear that others will think less of them. Fear of consequences if misdeeds come to light.
Consequences can be harsh if wrong-doers tell the truth. Floyd Landis's manager was fired after he admitted that he had made a threatening phone call to Greg LeMond to intimidate LeMond into not testifying at Landis's doping hearing.
What might the consequences have been if the manager had gotten away with the intimidation?
Don't buy it! You are responsible for your own actions. Other people are responsible for their own actions. End of story. Even children, if they are lucky, have parents who teach them that they are responsible for their own actions.
Children, and many adults, however, do not know where their own responsibility ends and another person's responsiblity begins. We adults have to figure this out for ourselves and teach children how to tell the difference.
The spouse who has an affair says I wouldn't have done it if s/he had not been so cold. Cold or not, the wandering spouse is dishonest is s/he does not look at her or his own motives and actions. Rule 1 in marriage: do not inventory the deficits of your spouse. Inventory your own. Your spouse will do the same.
People take advantage of other people's vulnerabilities all the time. What wandering spouse wouldn't want to get off the hot seat? Pointing the finger at someone else works when the target of the finger feels guilty.
Why do people cover up? Fear of exposure. Fear of shame. Fear that others will think less of them. Fear of consequences if misdeeds come to light.
Consequences can be harsh if wrong-doers tell the truth. Floyd Landis's manager was fired after he admitted that he had made a threatening phone call to Greg LeMond to intimidate LeMond into not testifying at Landis's doping hearing.
What might the consequences have been if the manager had gotten away with the intimidation?
Friday, June 1, 2007
"I cannot recall" as a favored cover up
Saying "I cannot recall" is a favorite way that enactors cover up unkind deeds. Nick said that when Cara said he had been cruel. This is the story of how they got back in touch with each other.
Two months after Nick sent Cara the birthday card and Cara concluded that Nick was clueless, Nick got in touch through email. He began with, "I probably should not be doing this but what the hell...been playing on Google Earth and tried to bring up your house but without success."
He said he looked for "the circle around the tree" in Cara's front yard. He said he was "beginning to feel old and mortal." He complained about work. He had done an internet search to see what Cara had been up to. He said his search "suggests you are busy. " Then he asked if Cara had any news.
Cara wrote back a week later. She told him that his email had come just at a time when she was missing him especially and she wondered about psychic connection. She continued,
"We've had such wonderful times together that I said to myself this week I find it hard to believe that these times were not wonderful for you, too. I cherish my memories of us together and would like the barriers between us to dissolve. I can't see how that is possible, although there was a time when I would have done all I could to have seen that happen.
"I'm glad you think of me, and I hope you cherish the memories."
She told him a bit of news about friends who had had a commitment ceremony the week before. She said that the words the two women exchanged were words "I wish you and I could have said to each other: Loving what we know about each other and trusting what we do not know."
She continued, "My wish for you is that you say those words to someone who is worthy of them.
"You have a full life with Moira and her family. Unless things change drastically and you finally come clean, I see little hope that I would want even an email friendship with you. There is far too much unexplained cruelty from you to me for me to ignore. You did say once, 'I hurt you,' and you were contrite. I actually need much more explanation than that."
She said that she cannot see how even an email friendship is possible when there is so much that she wants Nick to explain.
Nick responded right away. He said, "Ok. I thought we could have had an email orrespondence but I read your words 'I cannot see how we can maintain a connection even via e-mail' and I respect them. We did have wonderful times and they keep coming back to me when I least expect them, and yes I also 'cherish' those memories."
He said "I cannot recall" the cruelty or it was about. He continued,
"Sometimes you cannot explain everything in this world. I hope that will always be the case. We need some 'unknowns' even when it's our own behavior. The world is healthier with some mystery in it, even self mystery."
If Cara needed more reason to conclude a relationship between them was hopeless, she had it.
A few months later, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified under oath before a Senate committee that he "cannot recall" the events that led up to the firing of 8 U.S. federal attorneys.
"I don't remember" is a variation of "I cannot recall."
There must be a school for shits that expert recipients know nothing about. Where is that school? How do people learn to be shits? Does anyone know?
Two months after Nick sent Cara the birthday card and Cara concluded that Nick was clueless, Nick got in touch through email. He began with, "I probably should not be doing this but what the hell...been playing on Google Earth and tried to bring up your house but without success."
He said he looked for "the circle around the tree" in Cara's front yard. He said he was "beginning to feel old and mortal." He complained about work. He had done an internet search to see what Cara had been up to. He said his search "suggests you are busy. " Then he asked if Cara had any news.
Cara wrote back a week later. She told him that his email had come just at a time when she was missing him especially and she wondered about psychic connection. She continued,
"We've had such wonderful times together that I said to myself this week I find it hard to believe that these times were not wonderful for you, too. I cherish my memories of us together and would like the barriers between us to dissolve. I can't see how that is possible, although there was a time when I would have done all I could to have seen that happen.
"I'm glad you think of me, and I hope you cherish the memories."
She told him a bit of news about friends who had had a commitment ceremony the week before. She said that the words the two women exchanged were words "I wish you and I could have said to each other: Loving what we know about each other and trusting what we do not know."
She continued, "My wish for you is that you say those words to someone who is worthy of them.
"You have a full life with Moira and her family. Unless things change drastically and you finally come clean, I see little hope that I would want even an email friendship with you. There is far too much unexplained cruelty from you to me for me to ignore. You did say once, 'I hurt you,' and you were contrite. I actually need much more explanation than that."
She said that she cannot see how even an email friendship is possible when there is so much that she wants Nick to explain.
Nick responded right away. He said, "Ok. I thought we could have had an email orrespondence but I read your words 'I cannot see how we can maintain a connection even via e-mail' and I respect them. We did have wonderful times and they keep coming back to me when I least expect them, and yes I also 'cherish' those memories."
He said "I cannot recall" the cruelty or it was about. He continued,
"Sometimes you cannot explain everything in this world. I hope that will always be the case. We need some 'unknowns' even when it's our own behavior. The world is healthier with some mystery in it, even self mystery."
If Cara needed more reason to conclude a relationship between them was hopeless, she had it.
A few months later, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified under oath before a Senate committee that he "cannot recall" the events that led up to the firing of 8 U.S. federal attorneys.
"I don't remember" is a variation of "I cannot recall."
There must be a school for shits that expert recipients know nothing about. Where is that school? How do people learn to be shits? Does anyone know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
