PrivateTim

Nice to see Brad getting ready to move on, but it still isn't going to be easy. The trauma of losing a partner in 9-11 won't go away easily especially with the annual name readings, the TV coverage on the anniversary and the rest that goes along with it. A cool chapter, but I wonder where we go next.

Hey call me a cynic, but I think Brad is in Tribeca plowing that little tramp Mendoza

If he is a work in progress, who is he learning from? He doesn't seem to listen to anyone, not even Stef or JP when he disagrees with what they are saying to him. Anyone who tries to talk to him and take contrary positions his he escalates quickly into anger and has been like this since PMS. No one has taken the bait to answer if they think Tonto would have handled Zach the same way and Wally & Clara the same way because they know the answer is no, yet so many are wanting to lay Tonto's mantle on him. They forget it took Tonto years (age & life experience) to get there. I don't think anyone has told Mark how to write anything. Simon Legree, David Copperfield, Phil Connor and many other fictional characters evoked strong emotions in people and launched reform movements and even a war. It is a testament to the skill of the writer that such emotions and discussions of real life issues can take place. You change directions quickly and never with textual evidence to back the change of directions. There is no text on exactly how or why Zach wound up at Don Bosco, but it doesn't appear Wally & Clara initiated it nor objected to it. I think if they had objected that Robbie would not have crossed their wishes to help Zach move. Who ever gave Zach the idea of going to Don Bosco probably helped set up the host family as well. Since Robbie helped Zach with the process, I am going to assume Robbie vetted the host family and Wally & Clara trusted his judgment since they wouldn't know much about prep schools and the like. If Robbie felt Zach needed a car in NJ, he would have bought him one, but he probably would have made that decision in concert with Wally & Clara. And yes, I recognize I am assuming a lot here too based on a few sentences of Chapter 51, but we do know that the NJ opportunity came up quickly and that Robbie helped and that going at all was Zach's decision. As to why Zach made the decision to move, I think it is pretty obvious. He didn't have any friends in Claremont and no one was going to accept his Road to Damascus conversion. He didn't need to worry about that at Don Bosco where he'd have a blank slate. I called Zach a troublemaker because Will has and Zach has admitted to it, but says he has changed. That "change" is barely three months old, if that. I am still open to hearing about how Will went from hating Zach on Sept. 28, to buying him a car before Oct. 2. Will goes on to admit he got the deluxe model Durango partly to annoy Wally and then he mentioned it was "as nice as Gathan's" to annoy everyone more. Will Will listen when someone points out that was a shitty thing to do? Rub salt in the wound? How is he supposed to learn and grow if there is no one he listens to?

I am struggling to see Zach's "accomplishments". Since Zach isn't a main character we don't know the exact circumstances under which he wound up at Don Bosco, but it "happened pretty quickly" which to me means it happened during summer which means two or three months ago? And before that Zach admits he was doing steroids, "partying like a rock star" and screwing anything that moved. So through the content provided in the story he has been this changed person now for three months? He doesn't even have his first semester grades yet so what has he accomplished in the past few months that warrants the reward of a car for the "changed person" he is now? Wally & Clara have nothing to judge the new and improved Zach on yet. As to visiting Zach. Wally is a blue collar guy with a Midwest blue collar mentality. Do we even know if Wally and Clara know how to travel? How to book flights into Newark, get a rental car, etc? Guys like Wally don't like taking days off work to play around (which is how I think he would view taking time off work to go see Zach play) because they feel it lets down fellow workers. Yes Wally might have old fashioned ideas like children shouldn't drink and do drugs, that they ought to obey their parents and that they ought to have to work for things they get, but that doesn't give someone, who has really known Zach less than a month, the right to interfere in the relationship. I like Will, he is still my favorite character, but the way he has been portrayed in the story recently reminds me of some of the kids and their families that I have to interact with in my professional life; rich kids and popular actors who have no grasp of reality, are enabled by their adult handlers, think the rules of common courtesy and respect don't apply to them and look down on people who aren't them. My comments were not so much directed at Mark since there is always a method to his madness, but at the "Saint Will" supporters who think Will is the second coming of Tonto, that he is this wise, sage 15 year old who is always smarter than any adult in the room and understands everyone and everything perfectly and only he has the clarity of thought to know the exact right thing to do in every situation. I enjoy the banter of the forums, it is a virtual book club where we sit down and talk through the story with Mark playing the part of Oprah. Of course they are fake people, but I was just as passionate in my dislike for Holden Caulfield and said so in my 10th grade English class when all my classmates loved him. Zach has been a trouble maker, as we saw in previous stories. Do we know that his parents have put him down, or have they expressed disappointment in his behaviors and said they didn't think he could handle having a car? Zach might not feel he has any true friends but Will, but whose fault is that? Zach chose the loser friends he had in Claremont. He has only recently come to the realization that they are losers and that he himself was becoming or was a loser. There is also zero textual evidence that Wally & Clara shipped him anyplace. In fact, from the text it appears that it is Zach who wanted to leave and get a fresh start and that after initial reluctance, Robbie helped him. What problems are there with Zeke, Brent and Trent that Brad would need to step in and "help" them?

From my review of the newest chapter. Now, down to business. Can I just say what a complete, immature fucking little asshole Will is? Besides being a snob (he admits he is one, but comforts himself with the thought he isn't as bad as JJ) he is rude, thoughtless and arrogant. He has that special brand of arrogance reserved for teen boys who think they know better than more experienced, older people. Less than a month ago (Sept.28) he hated Zach, but a couple of good lays and within 3 days they are bestest buddies and Will buys him a car. Four weeks of talking on the phone, half of which is phone sex, doesn't give Will more knowledge about Zach than the man who raised him the past 16 years. Knowing what class Zach likes better or which host parent he likes better (as if a teen boy would talk to his father about that) isn't the measure. Will still doesn't understand he did wrong to Wally and Clara. A simple apology to Wally and Clara when Wally brought it up would have diffused the whole situation, but instead Will acts as if it is Wally in the wrong and Will gets mad and ruder. Is that how Tonto would have handled the situation? How JP would have? Isidore? Will was all self-righteous about Isidore & Claire being snobs, then gave the family shit about making Austin feel unwelcome, but this is how he treats Wally and Clara? Two good people who raised four kids of their own and took in Ella and Gathan from their awful home life? These are the people whose parenting skills Will is questioning? Someone needs to straighten the brat out.

First things first. Thanks for the chapter, it is always a treat to see a new one pop up Now, down to business. Can I just say what a complete, immature fucking little asshole Will is? Besides being a snob (he admits he is one, but comforts himself with the thought he isn't as bad as JJ) he is rude, thoughtless and arrogant. He has that special brand of arrogance reserved for teen boys who think they know better than more experienced, older people. Less than a month ago (Sept.28) he hated Zach, but a couple of good lays and within 3 days they are bestest buddies and Will buys him a car. Four weeks of talking on the phone, half of which is phone sex, doesn't give Will more knowledge about Zach than the man who raised him the past 16 years. Knowing what class Zach likes better or which host parent he likes better (as if a teen boy would talk to his father about that) isn't the measure. Will still doesn't understand he did wrong to Wally and Clara. A simple apology to Wally and Clara when Wally brought it up would have diffused the whole situation, but instead Will acts as if it is Wally in the wrong and Will gets mad and ruder. Is that how Tonto would have handled the situation? How JP would have? Isidore? Will was all self-righteous about Isidore & Claire being snobs, then gave the family shit about making Austin feel unwelcome, but this is how he treats Wally and Clara? Two good people who raised four kids of their own and took in Ella and Gathan from their awful home life? These are the people whose parenting skills Will is questioning? Someone needs to straighten the brat out.

I think so too. I just wanted to be on the record before this next chapter

I think the section I quoted showed pretty clearly Zach is not on the outs at all with Wally & Clara. What text can you point to that would lead you to believe he was? Now if Will had said, "Gathan is coming", okay I could see that, but it seems the only person in the family Zach has an issue with is Gathan. Zach didn't get sent away to school by Wally & Clara, Zach chose to go away because he got the scholarship to a school where he could get recognition and get away from bad influences in his life. As to the other quote, I took it as a rhetorical question because the question was so general and the general answer is obviously, no, you don't and I haven't recognized ALL my mistakes within minutes or even hours. BUT, that isn't the case here. If I did something and within hours my two grandfathers, my father, my cousin and other family members were pointing out the mistake and the implications of the act I would stop and ponder it. I wouldn't go into passive aggressive attack mode, deflect off me, call the people I had wronged and disrespected idiots and blame them for the actions I took. Being 16 and not having a car doesn't mean you are trapped and being controlled. Will was a victim of his own logic. He says basically that Zach hates being "controlled" by the family in NJ and it is because Zach doesn't have a car that the family can control him. 1) Zach didn't have a car in Claremont, but Wally & Clara clearly didn't and couldn't control him 2) MOST 16 year olds do not have cars and yet manage to get around and are not captives in their homes So yes, Will clearly had the opportunity to reflect on his mistake, but even after it was brought up to him I still don't think he has called Wally & Clara to apologize for stepping all over their prerogatives as parents. Will is free to think they are idiots and don't know how to raise kids, but it isn't his place to interfere.

The trouble with that philosophy is that it assumes there is some normalized standard of right and wrong, but when you get to draw your standards where you want them and I get to draw my standards where I want there is going to be conflict when the standards are different. As with Kitt and the discussion on Mendoza we can't get into this "well I wouldn't do that, but I am not going to tell someone else it is immoral." Hell yes you should. You shouldn't sleep with a relative's love interest, you shouldn't try to have sex with someone still mourning their spouse; there are all kinds of moral certitudes we ought to have, but when you start trying to divorce yourself from those moral norms to do what you want, you can't stuff that moral toothpaste back in the tube. You just have to live with the consequences of your own moral relativism.

Oh and in rereading some passages just to make I hadn't missed something I came across this gem from Will.

Then takes makes him a douchebag, one of the 10% What is the freaking question?????? You still haven't said TWICE now!

I don't recall talking about Matt a lot in the last three stories, maybe not since Matt was a narrator, because at this point I regard him as a pretty minor character, ditto with Gathan, despite the fact that both were once narrators. Which question did I ignore? This? "If you were on the outs with someone in your family and they showed up without any warning would you be comfortable with it?" I would be curious what evidence you have that Zach is "on the outs" with someone in his family, especially his parents? It seems I answered that, even indirectly, with the quote. "I like it when they come to my games." As to Mendoza, I think you are acting as if it is a 50/50 on would someone hit on someone who'd lost their partner just six weeks ago. I have to believe that it is more like 90/10 or higher.

First the tiptoeing, the text of the story: Brad was tiptoeing to not piss off Will. All Brad did initially was offer to go a long and provide a ride. To answer Mark, the analogy is you are 15 and don't drive so you are riding your bike to a party and someone comes along and offers you a ride in their limo. And why was Will being totally selfish? Again, the text of the story: Why was Will disappointed? Because he thought the parents being along would cut into his fuck time with Zach. It is pretty clear where Will's head was. And again, you can not fall back on the "he is only 15" argument because the whole point of Will's emancipation is supposedly his maturity beyond his years. We won't even discuss the Mann Act implications of WIll's visit. Lastly Mendoza. He certainly would have known that Brad & Robbie were partners because that would have been big news both nationally and even more so locally even if there were not textual evidence that he did know. From the text of the story it seems pretty clear that he most definitely did know.

From my review of the Christmas chapter I am at a loss though as to why anyone thinks Will is "maturing" based on this chapter? He still threatened to torch Matt's car, he has his father tiptoeing around about whom he can invite on his plane and why would Will have any say on Wally & Clara visiting their son to begin with? Zach called it, partly Will was worried about whether or not he'd be able to get his noodle wet with his new best bud Zach if Wally & Clara were along. Instead of being happy for Wally & Clara getting to see their son play, Will is thinking about Will. Also, what up with Mendoza making a pass at a guy who lost his life partner in a horrible tragedy just 5 weeks ago?

Thanks Mark for the Christmas gift! I am at a loss though as to why anyone thinks Will is "maturing" based on this chapter? He still threatened to torch Matt's car, he has his father tiptoeing around about whom he can invite on his plane and why would Will have any say on Wally & Clara visiting their son to begin with? Zach called it, partly Will was worried about whether or not he'd be able to get his noodle wet with his new best bud Zach if Wally & Clara were along. Instead of being happy for Wally & Clara getting to see their son play, Will is thinking about Will. Also, what up with Mendoza making a pass at a guy who lost his life partner in a horrible tragedy just 5 weeks ago?

I was hoping to hear from Westie on the automatic respect shown to Nana by Ethan and Joe, and why that is, and why the other commenters here seemed to accept and approve of that respect given to her from someone she has never met before. As I said in my review, I am wondering where the great compassion of Will is towards Ethan? Everyone cited what a compassionate person Will was in buying Zach a car because he understood or empathized with Zach? Freakin' holy A what about Ethan who has never had a family or a father!? Will spent one third of one book wallowing in self pity that no one in his family loved him, despite all the evidence to the contrary and did far more than pound his fists on a soccer field in his frustration and a lot of people here were perfectly fine with his outsized actions before he ran away. I don't think Will's restraint in not telling Ethan off because he is bugging him is an equivalent show of compassion as buying someone, an asshat to boot, a car. Then, Will doesn't want Matt to do Tony in some territorial BS, but what about Will with Joe? What kind of host does a guest's guest? Will has no idea if Ethan and Joe are an item or even if they are not an item, if Ethan has feelings for Joe? It is typical of Will in his self indulgent, "I want what I want, but you can't want what you want" arrogance that he doesn't even THINK about Ethan and Joe that way. I do love Will and his narrations, but I wish more people would call him out on his bullshit rather than excuse it or rationalize it.

Great chapter, loved the three way drama (Claremont, Wade & Will), but where is Will's vaunted compassion? Ethan has had life ten times worse than Zach. Is it because Ethan isn't a hottie he wants to fuck? I don't know how many chapters this book is planned for, but I hope it goes for awhile with the interesting story lines that are developing. This chapter was so good, I didn't think of awful ways for Tony to die once! (okay, well maybe once.... but for sure not twice!)

So doesn't all that affirm my point that there are, or ought to be, accepted societal norms (standards) for right and wrong behavior and that not everyone gets to create their own moral code (moral relativism)? My point with Will is he wants to use the moral code rule that says a family member shouldn't sleep with the boyfriend/love interest of another family member to his benefit, but not adhere to the moral code rule that says you don't sleep with someone in a "committed" relationship, or the moral code that when a family member asks you to back off in a situation, you do. Will may have come to the realization that he was wrong sleeping with Eric (or with Tony when he had a girlfriend, which I don't think he has acknowledged yet) late, but at the time he had no problem in justifying it. He hasn't yet seen anything wrong with going around Wally & Clara to buy Zach a car (and a lot of others here don't either) and he may never see that as a misstep. I hope I live long enough (and for Arbour to live long enough and want to write still) to see Will have children and see how he reacts when people get in between him and his kid, maybe it will happen with Maddie. I do get that Will is in the process of growing up and maturing, but one of the reasons everyone gave to justify Will's emancipation was his "maturity" beyond his years so it seems disingenuous to fall back on excusing his actions on "well he is young still."

The call to arms was the last paragraph of the paper. And since Dr. Lewis designed the regression analysis of the answers given by respondents in the GSS and given his standing as former Chair of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Political Science Caucus, American Political Science Association I am inclined to look askance at his objectivity, especially when he ends the paper the way he did.

The trouble with Lewis's paper is that it was already dated when he published it. Quoting sources and studies from the 1950's and 60's has no relevance to what the world was like by 2001, especially in states like CT that were early adopters of gay rights. Even studies that were done later that he cites were dated. The proper title should have been, A History of Barriers to Security Clearances for Homosexuals, since by 2001 those barriers were gone. What the bottom line was for Lewis's paper was it was a call to arms for his fellow academics out of fear that the new Bush administration was going to discriminate against gays in its administration, which didn't happen. And to me, it is part of the dichotomy that is Will and all who believe in moral relativism vs standards, whether they be universal or societal. He doesn't believe in right or wrong until he needs right or wrong to serve his purpose. In the same moral space where Will ignored JJ's request for sexual restraint in Norway, ignored the social norm that says you don't become "the other woman" in a relationship as he did with Kyle & Eric, now he wants Matt to practice restraint and he laid out boundaries for Tony, who he isn't even in a committed relationship with. Will chafes when people want to put constraints on him and maybe even pushes the envelope because of them. I hope he catches Tony in bed with Matt and puts a bullet between his (Tony's) eyes..... it would warm the cockles of my heart.

I am intrigued as to what is happening in the plants in TX & OH based on Jordan's comments. I always find it funny that Will thinks he can define for others (Matt) what their behavior should be, but he goes nuts when someone puts limits on him. He had no moral qualms about sleeping with Eric (or was it Kyle?) and said it wasn't business to police their relationship. I am a little disappointed that Cam has disappeared from the story, I thought he was a potential friend/hook up for Will and now we have Josh in that roll. I thought maybe Noah would be another one, even with his involvement with Marie, a lot of guys still have beards, but he is another character that floated in, looked like he could be significant, then faded. As to post 9-11 profiling, there was none, especially not with respect to gays, that I am aware of. I think that was more poetic license to move the story than anything. In fact, there were specific directives against profiling, even the very effective type of profiling that El Al does.

Thank you for proving my point that you neither understand respect, nor the legal system. The respect for the office of the judge is automatic, it is completely automatic. No level of disrespect is allowed at all no matter how egregious a ruling might be. Any display that shows disrespect for the judge is dealt with swiftly and often harshly. And the judge doesn't have to do a single thing to earn the respect, he merely needs to BE the judge. Judges don't earn offices, they are given them. Some states elect lower level judges, but all federal judges are by appointment. It is part of the rules of society that it is this way. Here is some light reading for you. Courtroom Decorum - Rules of Practice Now to parental rights, they may not exist - in your mind - , but unfortunately they do exist. You might was well say the sun does not exist - in your mind - , but it is still going to rise tomorrow. As to rights in general, there are the rights given by government and the rights given by God (or Natural Rights if you prefer). The difference is that what government giveth, government can taketh away. It is to Natural Right that we owe our liberty since government has no right to take those rights they did not give. More light reading. Second Treatise Concerning Civil Government If the Urban Dictionary is an appropriate source to define respect, how much more appropriate is the incomparable Aretha Franklin's definition?

I hope you see the irony and incompatibility of those two statements.

In point 1 you have two different aspects of respect and it dovetails nice on the point of parents. You have to respect the office of the judge just like you have to respect the office of the parents. It is possible to not respect the officeholder, but that can't spill over on official duties. If you told the judge in the affluenza case (does anyone doubt Will is a sufferer?) in their court that the was the most idiotic thing you'd ever heard, at best you'd be pulling out the checkbook and at worst, cooling your heels in a holding cell. In point 2, I wish it were true that courts did not defer to parental rights when parents have been negligent or abusive, but you'd would be horrified at what it takes to get a child to be removed from an abuse or negligent household.

You're the kind of guy, I perceive, that is rather callow and doesn't understand respect. There are many forms of respect that don't need to be "developed" or earned. Respect for parental rights would be one form that doesn't need to be earned or developed. A spiteful Wally and Clara could remove the car from Zach and get a restraining order against Will without too much problem because the law still has respect for some relationships, even if individuals don't. Similarly when you are in court, the judge doesn't need to "earn" your respect, he has it automatically otherwise disrespect is dealt with swiftly and surely. Children have to respect their parents authority whether or not they respect the people and the law recognizes that as well. The reason that you respect your elders is that with age comes wisdom. And please spare me anecdotal stories about unwise older people. Society has accepted for millennia that age brings experience and experience wisdom.