GUTLESS WONDERS

One of Crikey's star recruits, Scott Bridges, yesterday threatened to devastate me by releasing an email exchange from late last year. The post hasn't appeared so he's obviously decided releasing the emails isn't in his best interest so I'll do it for him.

Scott emails:

Dear J.F. Beck,

I wish I knew your real name for the purposes of this correspondence, but in the absence of that information I hope you don't mind if I call you Beck. I'm writing in regards to a post that appeared yesterday on your website (http://rwdb.blogspot.co /2008/10/filthy-minded.html), in which you quite clearly imply that I have paedophilic thoughts.

FILTHY MINDED

School teacher Scott Bridges, who found sexual innuendo in a brochure for school children, now sees a penis in a soft drink bottle. Gee, I wonder what goes through his mind when he sees a child drinking from one of the supposedly phallic containers? Yep, it's a worry.

Not only is this implication completely false, it is offensive, insulting and has the potential to be extremely damaging to my reputation and career. Especially given that your use of my full name makes it more likely that this post will appear in a Google search for my name.

This is not the first time that you have made such an accusation about me. Two weeks ago you wrote (http://rwdb.blogspot.com/2008/10/editor-has-head-arse-as-usual.html):

Update III: The Editor, apparently a Victorian school teacher, finds double entendres in the contents pages of a 1994 booklet, co-authored by the University of Technology Sydney's Janette Griffin, one in a series published jointly by the Science Teachers' Association of NSW and ICI:
Exploratory activities p.12
What does my body look like? p.12
What's inside your mouth? p.13
Swallowing hard p.14
That a school teacher finds sexual humour in the innocent entries of a 14 year old booklet is, well, disturbing.

In the comments to that post I indicated (writing as "The Editor") that I found the suggestion unacceptable and asked you to be more careful.

The Editor said...
By the way, Beck, I enthusiastically support name-calling on the internet, but I'd be very careful with what you're implying in this sentence: "That a school teacher finds sexual humour in the innocent entries of a 14 year old booklet is, well, disturbing."

The 'P' word is a very serious one, and I'm sure you understand that it crosses a line of sorts.

You have ignored my first request, Beck, so I am now formally asking you to remove these two extremely defamatory and damaging statements from your website immediately, and to never make such statements about me again. Political name-calling is one thing, but accusing a school teacher of having paedophilic thoughts is different territory altogether.

I look forward to your prompt reply.

Regards,
Scott Bridges

My response:

Mr Bridges,

I do not think you are a paedophile or that you have paedophilic thoughts. If you like, I will update my post to reflect this.

In your post on the brochure for students did you not describe yourself as having a "filthy mind"? What would any "normal" person (a parent, for example) likely conclude about your thought preocesses on reading your post? Is it a good idea for a school teacher to write such things on a public forum?


Regards,

JF

Scott:

JF,

I appreciate your quick reply and your assertion that you don't believe me to be a paedophile or have paedophilic thoughts.

In relation to your first post, I did describe myself as having a "filthy mind", but I did not describe myself as having a filthy mind in the context of school students or other underage people. Your use (twice) of the words "school teacher" in the first post make that suggestion. I would be satisfied in this case if you removed "apparently a Victorian school teacher" and "school teacher", adding "person" so that the update read:

Update III: The Editor finds double entendres in the contents pages of a 1994 booklet, co-authored by the University of Technology Sydney's Janette Griffin, one in a series published jointly by the Science Teachers' Association of NSW and ICI:
Exploratory activities p.12
What does my body look like? p.12
What's inside your mouth? p.13
Swallowing hard p.14

That a person finds sexual humour in the innocent entries of a 14 year old booklet is, well, disturbing.

In relation to your second post, I find it difficult to see how anything other than complete removal would be satisfactory. Even if you add a disclaimer to the post as you suggest, a person who Googled my name and came across the post would be left with a very negative impression of my character, despite the disclaimer. The only acceptable revision would read:

Scott Bridges, who found sexual innuendo in a brochure for school children, now sees a penis in a soft drink bottle.

Both of my proposed revisions state facts only, and don't contain an implied suggestion of paedophilic thought. I'm happy to own my words, but not when they've been twisted.

I appreciate your willingness to discuss this matter with me in a civil fashion. Of course, I would be more than happy to listen to any concerns you have about anything I've written about you.

Regards,
Scott

My response:

Mr Bridges,

How about this for a compromise? In my second post I replace "children" with "people".

Scott:

I think that's a fair compromise, JF. Let's also make a gentlemen's agreement to both be careful when writing about each other. As I said before, I'm all for name-calling but only as long as it's not going to affect lives outside the blogosphere.

Regards,
Scott

My response:

Mr Bridges,

Just to clarify a few points. I have no interest in prying into your life or in extending this little stoush into the real world. Thus I couldn't care less where you work, where you live, what or how much you drink, who you hang out with, etc.

A while back Irfan Yusuf got all hot and bothered because I posted his phone number and address. I posted the information simply because i felt Yusuf was trying to intimidate Daniel Lewis by repeatedly referring to the suburb in which Lewis supposedly lives � I was trying to make a point. In any event, Yusuf's details were readily available online.

Anyway, please be assured that I am not about to nose around in your life.

My posts on you were intentionally vague in order to allow readers to draw their own conclusions. That you feel readers might conclude you have paedophilic thoughts perhaps indicates that it is you who crossed some imaginary line.

Now whereas I don't think you are sexually attracted to children I do think your posts - especially the first - were perhaps inappropriate coming from a school teacher. But in the cosmic scheme of things, my thoughts are irrelevant. What would your students' parents think if they read your posts?


Regards,

JF

Scott:

I see your point, JF, but ultimately that's my problem to sort out. However, I genuinely appreciate your willingness to alter the post. Thanks again.

Cheers,
Scott

Scott Bridges didn't post this exchange because it's obvious I made a very minor change to one of my posts out of pity for a school teacher who was exercising poor judgment in repeatedly posting sexual content that, on reflection, he thought might adversely affect his career.

Interestingly, Scott's Grods.com colleague Ant Rogenous thinks I'm the nasty one:

As far as bottom-feeders go, little-known blogger J.F. Beck was the most unctuous to weigh in to yesterday’s Pure Poison attack. Beck’s blog has for years been little more than an exercise in ingratiating himself to Tim Blair with creepy personal pot-shots Jeremy Sear and ham-fisted attacks on Antony Lowenstein. Not surprisingly for someone of Blair’s ego, it seems to have worked — the two exchange links (and cuddly emails) with almost the same loving frequency as Blair and Bolt.

I won’t bother posting a link to Beck’s site because it (like the man himself, who all those years ago stalked Jeremy until he’d uncovered his identity) truly is a steaming pile of shit.

And these clowns are going to critique the commentary of others. Antony Loewenstein looks a genius by comparison.

Update: Yet more disappointment form Scott who yesterday offered to forward screenshots but is yet to deliver.