The Printer’s Creed
Nobody’s Opinion; Well, I was beaten, I was defeated…I had insulted people that I had no intention of insulting. I expressed an opinion, from a woman’s point of view, and even a benevolent and fair one I had thought. What to do?
Then I ran into this wise advice in a book today, pretty much by those strange things in life called serendipities. You know— you are actually not looking for it at all, but the thing you are looking for falls right smack in your lap…just like a gift from God. “What are the chances of that?†you say to yourself. Maybe one in a million. It doesn’t matter.
I ran into the words of Ben Franklin, in a book that I was reading called ‘Infamous Scribblers†by Eric Burns. You see Ben was quite a writer, and owned his own paper called the Pennsylvania Gazette. It is know as “The Printer’s Creed†and here it is:
I request all who are angry with me on the Account of printing things they don’t like,calmly to consider these following Particulars.
- That the Opinions of Men are almost as various as their Faces; an Observation general enough to become a commn Proverb, So many Men so many Minds.
- That the Business of Printing has chiefly to do with Men’s Opinions; most things that are printed tending to promote some, or oppose others.
- That hence arises the peculiar Unhappiness of that Business, which other Callings are no way liable to; they who follow Printing being scarce able to do any thing in their way of getting a Living, which shall not probably give Offense to some, and perhaps to many; whereas the Smith, the Shoemaker, the Carpenter, or the Man of any Trade, may work indifferently for People of all Persuasions, without offending any of them…
- That it is unreasonable in any one Man or Set of Men to expect to be pleased with every thing that is printed, as to think that nobody ought to be pleased but themselves.
- That is it unreasonable to imagine Printers approve of every thing they print, and to censure them on any particular Thing accordingly; since in the way of their Business they print such a variety of Things opposite and contradictory.
- That if all printers were determined not to print any Thing until they were sure it would offend no Body, there would be very little printed.
- I have heretofore fallen under the Resentment of Large Bodies of Men, for refusing absolutely to print any of their Party or Personal Reflections. In this Manner I have made my self many Enemies, and the constant Fatigue of denying is almost insupportable. But the Publick being unacquainted with all this, whenever the poor Printer happens either through Ignorance or much Persuasion, to do any thing that is generally thought worthy of Blame, he meets with no more Friendship or Favour on the above Account, than if there were no Merit in’t at all.
****
Okay, was old Ben contacting me from the beyond? It doesn’t matter it came at the right moment. So after a few words from old Ben Franklin, I have decided to continue posting my opinions, which might or might not be agreeable to many readers. It took the words of a very wise founding father, who taught this very inexperienced writer,the truth about writing “opinions.â€
Thanks Ben, I needed that.
And at this time when it seems America is on a tightrope of survival…I will continue to post on this site…hoping all persons will realize that everyone, like Ben Franklin so eloquently said, is a product of all their life’s experiences, and we are all just trying to ride it out as best we can. So ready or not, I’m back.
Nobody’s Perfect—Okay, I’m a female, who has a tendency to ramble on, maybe saying meaningless things, until she finally hits a maybe answer, because that’s how women are wired, silly! I love trees, dogs, angel food cake, old Beatle songs, twilight, the smell of gardenias, full moons, late night talk shows about the universe, singing, playing the drums, piano, guitar, and I love to make faces at babies. I’m a real sucker for the original artists of Disney, but also love SCI FI. I am also MUCH too sensitive to criticism, but I strive everyday to make my ancestors proud.
I am very upset that I can’t hold liquor, or else I would certainly drink more.
Nobody Knows—Friends are hard to find. Smart ones are even harder. It wasn’t just Ben Franklin who changed my mind, no he was just a “sign’… the real reason was two very special men, who came to my support…they know who they are. Thanks guys, every girl likes the men in shining armor, and I’m no exception. You’re the tops.
Nobody Cares— And hey, I would advise all journalists to go out and read Mr. Burns book. It is about the beginning reporters and writers of our country and just how vicious the newspapers attacked the politicians and England, and how important all the writers were in making the people stand up and defend America and break with England. It was well researched, and like the book, 1776 by David McCullough, one to put on your list. Well, that is if you like that sort of stuff.
I am a nobody. If the different classes of America were color-coded, I would be in your yucky brown, one rink up from the bottom. I grew up in Naples, Florida and live near the Mississippi River now with my husband and two dogs. I am part of the slowly disappearing middle-class. I was a musician most of my life;drummer/singer/keyboards---but I retired before the plastic surgery flu hit. I have no degrees, which could be a good thing...depending on how you view our educational system. I do have three patents...but that really doesn't make me a somebody. The one thing that is constant in my life is my OPINIONS...which I have more of than perhaps even Carl Sagan could have imagined, mostly political. Hopefully other nobodys will put their opinions on my site. But if you are a sombody...you're more than welcomed to help out. I will try to prove that sometimes nobody knows the answers, sometimes nobody cares, sometimes nobody wins, and most importantly...NOBODY is perfect. Please bear this in mind when you read my thoughts. I don't mean to offend nobody, it's all in good fun. | More from Joyanna Adams
Stumble It!
August 25th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
“So after a few words from old Ben Franklin, I have decided to continue posting my opinions, which might or might not be agreeable to many readers. It took the words of a very wise founding father, who taught this very inexperienced writer,the truth about writing “opinions.—
Welcome back, Joyanna.
I’m plumb tickled to read that in the year 2006, an American woman fell back upon the words of a man (albeit one long dead and buried) to support her “right” to give her opinion.
Plenty of American men are married to women who COULD NOT STOP providing their opinions if their very lives depended upon it.
“And at this time when it seems America is on a tightrope of survival…I will continue to post on this site… So ready or not, I’m back.”
You practically leak humorous estrogen through your Internet connection.
I cannot take credit for pointing out your Scarlett O’Hara gambit as another poster earned that.
But you had better believe that you will still get called on it, should the occasion rise. Fool me once……
Have you read David Brin’s Uplift saga?
August 25th, 2006 at 11:18 pm
Welcome back, Joyanna. I’m glad you have the pluck to pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and not just shrink away like a wilted flower.
A hint for the future – lose the snotty “get hold of your testosterone” remarks.
August 26th, 2006 at 12:18 am
“I am very upset that I can’t hold liquor, or else I would certainly drink more.”
An excellent sentiment I must say.
Live, learn, and then carry on. It is like with each football team, analyze what was done right in last week’s game, and what was done wrong. Then prepare for next Sunday’s game. Because next Sunday and that team will not give a damn how well or poorly you played last Sunday’s game.
None of us, well I did not, intend to criticize YOU or attack YOU. We only intended to enlighten you as to the true nature of the ogre we face. It is only because we value you as a member of our team and want an even better contribution out of you.
Now fix your chin strap, clamp your teeth around your mouth guard and go out there and play ball! HOO-AHH!
August 26th, 2006 at 5:57 am
Joyanna, you are female, and therefore (to a lot of these posters) you are the enemy. Even when what you say makes total sense, you will be villified. Not to mention, a lot of these posters are “seminar posters”, plants whos’ job it is to cause fights and strife. You should be proud of yourself – if your words were inconsequential they wouldn’t be here trying to trash you.
August 26th, 2006 at 7:01 am
No one “trashed” her, Hal, they challenged her – that’s not the same thing.
August 26th, 2006 at 7:53 am
Who let a chick on here anyway?
August 26th, 2006 at 8:47 am
“Who let a chick on here anyway?”
Think: eye candy
August 26th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
It still seems you haven’t listened to what the men here said. Let’s try an analogy.
In business, on some occasions I have run into people who did me dirty.
In marriage, likewise I have been done dirty.
Yet – still I will do business. Why is that? What is the difference?
Well, it seems that when I go for legal recourse, in business, I’m covered by the law. I recover losses. Breach of contract is not rewarded. I’m treated fairly. And so on. And so forth. I may not always get everything I demand, but I am not punished for holding up my end of the deal, while the deal breaker skates off scot free, and gets rewarded for cheating me.
Or – let’s try another angle – the great State of Indiana, whether de facto or de jure, begins a policy of favoring residents in cases of lawsuits over non-residents. What’s that going to do to Indiana’s businesses? Think out of state people are going to buy or invest there? Will they do business with me where Indiana law applies? If they don’t, is it because they “hate” hoosiers, or me?
Or is it something else?
August 26th, 2006 at 11:26 pm
In a sense, I get the feeling that the main point of this discussion has been ignored in favor of emotionalism (?). Maybe, we’re talking past each other.
I cannot for the life of me understand why an opinion columnist/ blogger (male or female) would only want an audience (or would only expect an audience) who only agrees with them.
Am I missing the point here, or is this a fair assessment? Am I reading more into this than I should? * confused *
August 27th, 2006 at 12:50 am
Joyanna: That we disagree with you on your “pollyanna” article does not indicate that we hate you or even dislike you (I happen to like your articles, though I do disagree with the pollyanna one).
You shouldn’t mistake robust debate for anyone trying to “trash you” or an attempt to drive you out of MND. It’s how we are and since you plan to stick around, you’re going to need to get used to people disagreeing with you without taking it personally.
I have no patience with people who go around attacking those with whom they disagree, but most of the (public) responses to “pollyanna” did not attack you personally despite having serious disagreements with what you had said
Were there, perhaps, more private responses from authors too craven to air their views in the public forum?
August 27th, 2006 at 10:34 am
Welcome Back!
It’s refreshing to see a female columnist that understands the environment the male posters inhabiting MND have experienced throughout their lives. Learning about this environment can be painful, but also enlightening. Too many women, while admirably attempting to reach across the divide, simply surrender upon running into criticism. It is very difficult for men to explain to other people, who have not personally experienced the tragedy, just how bad our society – especially the “justice†system- has become for men. To be blunt, we have learned to express VERY caustic emotions because this has, apparently, become mandatory to getting the point across. We use our personal stories because it is what we know best and they are so tragic. We are up against an entrenched legal, and attitude, environment that is nearly impossible to comprehend in a political environment that, supposedly, worships “equalityâ€. The “feminists†have unprecedented power in this country, they have the attention of BOTH major political parties.
Take just one myth feminists have managed to get people to believe: the pay “gapâ€. They propagate the myth that women earn less men for the same jobs by NEVER comparing apples to apples. Just less than two years ago the Denver Post did a profile of a Petroleum Engineering graduate from the School of Mines in Golden. This was on the cover of a Sunday Business section – the woman, 22 years old with a bachelor’s degree, started at $80,000. This got my attention as it was equal to my pay, but I was 45 years old, three degrees including engineering, business, and a Master’s of Science in Logistics. I am responsible for 43 employees in a profit/loss environment, have ten years experience as an Air Force officer and another fifteen in other management and leadership roles. My own ex-wife has been making more than I since she was 25 years old, six years younger than I and without the education. I hire and fire people, and I have had a female boss in one form or another ever since leaving the military in 1994. I have yet to see a woman get paid “less†for the same work, but I have seen men be paid less. This myth is one of the LESS offensive ones put forth by women in the feminist movement.
Yes, there are some incredible women out there who are fighting the good fight for equality and justice, many of them are in the law which is a field many of us had given up hope for. They primarily fight for father’s, which is the area that is the most emotionally devastating, but are also starting to stick up for men falsely convicted of being fathers – which would not seem necessary given the level of technology we have. The fact that we must make this fight shows how bad the system has become. More important than those fighting the legal system are the women who help get the word out. Those in media and on the internet, like yourself, are what we truly need in order to turn around the feminists myths. To be blunt, and this will frustrate many of the men here, women have much more influence in media and politics than men. It is true in the corporate world as well, but I’ll leave that for another time.
Again, welcome back and thank you for being strong!
August 27th, 2006 at 6:28 pm
Gonzman makes a very important point here. In business disputes, we have consistent application of the law and usually no party is favored over the other. If you were to spend time in a fully equipped law library, you can read the decision annotations in the Digests under Contracts. The Federal Digest, the Decienniel Digests, the Pacific Digest, the Washington (or your state) Digest, American Law Review, etc. What you find is that the English Common Law regarding contracts, formation, existence thereof, validity, interpretation of language, breach of contract and remedy, etc. are virtually the same everywhere in the United States. A little research of the law beyond our borders reveals that these rules of contract are adopted by the courts everywhere in the English speaking world and in many non-English speaking nations. In addition to the common law, we have statutory business regulation, including the Uniform Commercial Code, adopted by every state for the regulation of the buying and selling of things, consumer protections laws, statute of frauds, minimum wage and overtime laws, labor relations acts, environmental laws etc. While some people chaff at these regulations, what makes them work is the consistent application of the law by the courts.
What Gonzo is talking about.
To wit: If McDonald’s has to pay the minimum wage, so does Jack in the Box. No one (except those who outsource to the cheap labor of the Third World) is allowed to unfairly undercut competitors by getting away with paying less than the minimum wage or illegally dumping its hazardous waste.
If McDonald’s is sued for failing to pay for a shipment of French fries, and McDonald’s counterclaims that the shipment of fries did not meet quality standards set forth in the contract and the food regulations, the court does not favor either party in evaluating the claims and weighing the evidence. That is what the blindfold on the image of justice means, the evidence and law is weighed on the scale without concern for who the parties are.
Unfortunatley, we do NOT have this in marriage and divorce law and the practice thereof.
A woman can breach the marriage contract, file for divorce, and obtain an award for property split, alimony, and child support that destroys her husband, WITHOUT EVER HAVING TO PROVE ANY WRONGDOING WHATSOEVER.
In any other kind of civil case, and of course, criminal cases, wrongdoing must be proven before there is any deprivation of life, liberty, or property. The wrongdoing can be a tort, breach of contract, or a failure to pay wages for services rendered, but it has to be proven nevertheless.
That is what James Madison meant by the phrase “due process of law”.
Proving wrongdoing is hard work and risky.
Deprivation of property, through settlement or judgment, is the part where the attorneys profit.
Which is why divorce practice is so popular with many attorneys and the judges they get appointed. Money is the motivation for one sided family law practice and the dispensing with the due process of law and going straight to the deprivation of property.
Once you understand all of this Joyanna, you then understand what we are up against and why react so to the uninformed advice of the well-meaning.