He who Laughs Last . . .
Mary Wollstonecraft, (1759-1797), English author and feminist, probably born in London, ran a school and worked as a governess in Ireland. After moderate success with her first novel, she returned to London, where she joined an intellectual group that included William Blake, Thomas Paine, Joseph Priestly, and Henry Fuseli. She consistently appealed for equality of education and opportunity between men and women.
Wollstonecraft wrote: “If the abstract rights of man will bear discussion and explanation, those of women, by a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same test: though a different opinion prevails in this country.” She must have had Rita J. Simon in mind as a future detractor from that philosophy.
I researched and wrote the essay, She that Lies with the Dogs, Riseth with Fleas, at the personal behest of Rita J. Simon. Knowing that I hold press credentials as a freelance journalist, she approached me at a professional meeting in Washington DC (04 May 96) and asked that I write an article for Women’s Freedom Network Newsletter.
I reluctantly agreed because Simon said that she could not pay the regular stipend. I reminded here that I write in an ironic genre and she said that she did not have a problem with that.
I agreed to research and write the article without fee on condition that she agreed in advance to publish it. As a writer of long-standing, I know about frivolous commissions. I wanted to make sure that if I wrote for the public good and granted her a licence to publish one time in her newsletter then she would use my byline.
Simon did not honor her commitment. Instead she acted in a totally irresponsible and unresponsive manner. She arbitrarily abrogated the agreement. Other writers should not trust her in the future. Her behavior projects negatively onto other women. I have, therefore, published the article here. In a way, it describes her arrogance and opportunism.
I informed Simon in an email message (28 Jun 96), that I had finished the article and sent her a conditional copyright release. She replied and asked me to send the draft by US Mail to her Washington, DC, address. I sent computer disks containing the electronic data, hard copy, and two illustrations in color as she requested. About a week later I received a telephone call from her assistant Beth Bangert. She informed me that she could not find the material that I had sent. I sent duplicate copies.
Six weeks after Simon accepted the draft for publication, I received a peremptory email message from Bangert (13 Aug 96) who told me that she could not publish the article because of “space limitations”. I complained to Simon in an email message (14 Aug 96) that I found Bangert’s statement incredible and contrary to publishing ethics for commissioned articles. Simon ignored my message.
I sent a letter by certified mail to Simon for which her office signed a receipt. She again neglected to respond. Bear in mind that she had by this time involved me in expenditures in excess of $5,000.00 for research and writing and another $1,500.00 for graphic design and illustration. In my letter I told her that she had two options either to publish the article as contracted or pay for the work that she commissioned.
I enclosed an invoice for a nominal amount of $600.00 for the writing and $1,110.00 for the graphic design so that she could end the matter if she had changed her mind about publishing. She neither responded nor settled the account.
If Simon decided not to publish then she could have found an ethical and professional solution. She neither indicated any problem nor settled the account. Instead, she chose to ignore the whole matter.
I have published the piece so that Women’s Freedom Network subscribers know how Simon manages their affairs. If Simon wanted to challenge any particular point that I made then she could have contacted me to discuss it. Her insolence in getting a secretary to call with a ridiculous claim to “space limitations” remains inexcusable.
If Simon wanted to prevent publication then she has only achieved that to the small readership that she had in 1996. The article probably has a much greater circulation now than it would have when originally scheduled for the printed edition.
This medium has more than 100,000/hits some months. It goes to prove that one cannot censor material indefinitely and there is always retribution for unethical practice and in this case downright fraud.
In satire, he who laughs last laughs longest and hypocrites least of all. This addendum contains less than a 1,000 words which Rita Simon can consider as yet another gift.
[Nmesis]
