Reader wants more recog­ni­tion of women’s in­stru­men­tal role in so­ci­ety

The China Post - - LIFE -

DEAR AN­NIE: I ap­pre­ci­ate the pa­tri­otic in­tent of your Fourth of July col­umn, but what would my daugh­ter and seven nieces make of the men­tion of 27 men but just two women? The au­thor over­looked Saca­gawea, Har­riet Tub­man, El­iz­a­beth Cady Stan­ton and the myr­iad other fe­male con­trib­u­tors to our na­tion’s progress.

Maybe next year you could share some­one’s writ­ing that does a bet­ter job of rec­og­niz­ing the mean­ing­ful roles many coura­geous and ca­pa­ble women have played and con­tinue to play in shap­ing our na­tion. All credit to Ginger Rogers’ high heels, but Saca­gawea did ev­ery­thing Lewis and Clark did, but she did it post­par­tum and car­ry­ing a new­born on her back.

If no one has writ­ten any­thing more bal­anced since Mr. Whi­taker’s piece ap­peared in 1955, con­sider the gaunt­let tossed.

— A Loyal Reader

Dear Loyal Reader: We agree that an up­dated ver­sion is long over­due. Sev­eral read­ers sug­gested a writ­ing con­test and we love this idea. So read­ers, put your cre­ative caps on and send us a poem or es­say that ex­presses the con­tri­bu­tions both men and women of all races and re­li­gions have made to our coun­try’s history. You have plenty of time to work on it. This also might be a good pro­ject for teach­ers to give their stu­dents.

Send your won­der­ful and bril­liant ef­forts to An­nie’s Mail­box at cre­ators.com or Face­book.com/ AskAn­nies. We will ac­cept en­tries start­ing to­day, and the dead­line will be March 1, 2016. If we re­ceive sev­eral good ones, we will print as many as we can. And we will print the best one on the Fourth of July next year, along with your name.

DEAR AN­NIE: Do you think a judge should ex­press his sor­row in per­son or through the at­tor­ney of a client?

I was in court for a hear­ing re­gard­ing my grand­chil­dren when the judge be­gan read­ing the case. As I lis­tened, I re­al­ized that he wasn’t read­ing the cor­rect case and blurted out, “wrong case.” The judge then re­al­ized his mis­take and stopped. He fin­ished with the case he was al­ready read­ing, but be­cause it was graphic and about abuse, the young chil­dren were asked to leave the court­room. We marched out.

Later, our at­tor­ney met with the judge and the other at­tor­ney, at which time the judge had the sec­re­tary from the law of­fice re­lay that he was sorry for what hap­pened. I don’t think that is suf­fi­cient. What is the proper way for a judge to ex­press sor­row for mak­ing this kind of mis­take?

Dear Grandma:

— Grandma

Your anger is un- der­stand­able, but mis­placed. Judges are not ob­li­gated to ex­press sor­row for mis­read­ing a case, ei­ther di­rectly or in­di­rectly. The fact that this par­tic­u­lar judge chose to do so, even through the sec­re­tary from the law of­fice, showed that he was sen­si­tive to your grand­chil­dren’s po­ten­tial re­ac­tion. While it’s un­for­tu­nate that he didn’t no­tice the graphic na­ture of the case file sooner, it was un­in­ten­tional and could easily have been the er­ror of a clerk. Please let this go. An­nie’s Mail­box is writ­ten by Kathy Mitchell and Marcy Sugar, long­time ed­i­tors of the Ann Lan­ders col­umn. Please email your ques­tions to an­nies­mail­box@cre­ators.com, or write to: An­nie’s Mail­box, c/o Cre­ators Syn­di­cate, 737 3rd Street, Her­mosa Beach, CA, USA.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Taiwan

© PressReader. All rights reserved.