In Defense of Rumpology

My work in Rumpology has been the object of wonder, amusement, bewilderment and in some cases, outright derision. As with any discipline that is not in the mainstream of American thought, my practice of Rumpology naturally is susceptible to such wonders. And as a celebrity, I am fairly immune to criticism. We in the media business learn early on to ignore certain self righteous and aggrandized critics for what they are, disgruntled people who can complain about the work of others, yet do nothing meaningfully creative of their own.

Normally, I would shrug off the criticism my work has received -- but a posting by a particular website called regretsy.com, authored by someone naming his or herself as "Helen Killer", has caught my attention and I feel, Ms. Killer (if that is her real name) deserves a response. In fact, one is long overdue.

This article is my response to his or her article and clarifies some details about my Rumpology work.

The website in question appears to be more of a blog that sells their own products (no surprise there) and makes a vague association with Etsy.com, a service where people who have handmade crafts can build their own marketplace.

However, the site also claims. to have no affiliation with Etsy, it seems. to use Etsy – and the people who post on Etsy – as a target for sarcasm and derision, based on the author's opinion of the items. being offered for sale. (How did E-Bay manage to elude the author's wit, one must wonder?)

I find it is hard, however to ignore that the name "regretsy" appears to be an attempt at a pun on the word: Etsy, as if to say "regret etsy". While the author may think he or she is being clever, I am not convinced he or she really is. I must wonder, how clever it is to make fun of the work of others?

The website has many articles (thus it appears to be mostly a blog disguised as a website), criticizing the work of handcrafters that, presumably, are for sale on Etsy. Most of the author's remarks are harmless, if derogatory, but sometimes he or she gets out of hand. This apparently delights regretsy viewers, who, picking up on the derogatory tone, continue it in the comments section of each article and sometimes take it a step further, spreading bad news that sometimes gets back to the sellers with upsetting results.

Now, admittedly, there is a lot of questionable material for sale on the Internet – at Etsy or anywhere else. However, all people are individuals and there is no accounting for taste. What revolts one person may appeal to others. This is the core of a free market. That is until we meet Ms. Killer, who apparently has decided to set herself up as judge and jury on what is good and what is bad, what people should or should not buy. One is reminded of Ayn Rand's amazingly over-the-top, blowhard architectural critic character from "The Fountainhead", Ellsworth Toohey.

Of course, while lambasting other people's products, Ms. Killer is also selling her own products, and it is easy to guess that her derogatory articles are her way of attracting attention to her site and products. She tries in some measure to excuse this questionable sales approach by stating that the items. SHE sells are for the purpose of giving to charity. That is a cowardly attempt to wash over her offensive sense of humor and the harm she does to the people she insults in her articles.

When I was growing up, my mother taught me a valuable lesson: "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." This is a lesson that it seems Ms. Killer cannot apply to her own life – at least not in this website anyway – regarding not only the people at Etsy, but myself as well. For yes, Ms. Killer found MY website and decided to have some fun at my expense. We'll see who winds up paying the piper on this one!

You see, not only did Ms. Killer poke fun at my Rumpology work (and yes, I can take a good humored joke) but she crossed the line when she involved my son, Sylvester (who has nothing to do with Rumpology) and took copyrighted images from my website without my permission.

I am breaking my mother's rule here (I have northing good to say about Ms. Killer), but since Ms. Killer was the one who started it, let the chips fall where they may. Ms. Killer has thrown down the glove, and I have picked it up. In the words of my friend Bette Davis - when she played the memorable character Margo Channing in All About Eve -- "Hang on, it's going to be a bumpy night!"

On July 20, 2011, Ms. Killer did two things simultaneously (apparently, she is a multi-tasking derogatory critic of all things she finds questionable).

1. She posted an article about me on her website called: Crack Head (NSFW), (NSFW is supposed to mean "Not Safe For Work". Quite frankly, I don't get the joke, if any, intended by the term.) and at the same time,
2. She broke copyright law by posting, without my permission, five (5) images taken from the Rumpology section of my website, which is a copyrighted work.

I have since told her to cease and desist the use of my website images. I am not holding my breath expecting her compliance. But I can see my lawyers licking their lips and rolling their hands.. I'll try to hold them off.

Now, to begin with, I need to toss Ms. Killer a little thank you. She posted the article in question on July 20^th, and almost immediately, visitors to my website jumped by over 1,000 readers. Publicity like that is hard to buy; trust me, I know a thing or two about publicity! And it just keeps on getting better! In August, Ms. Killer managed to send me over 80 new visitors! So, in fairness, a thank you – but a small one (Ms. Killer doesn't deserve much more than that) – is in order. Ms. Killer may now consider herself thanked.

And on to the specifics.

Ms. Killer starts her article by referencing my son, Sylvester Stallone (I paraphrase here rather than quote to protect Ms. Killer's claim of copyright of her words), claiming that: he cannot get a break, and that as if his movie career and giant piñata head weren’t embarrassing enough, I made it worse by my work in Rumpology. She fails to point out that Sylvester is not mentioned ANYWHERE on the Rumpology section of my website. That would not serve her broad-reaching (should I say, grasping?) insulting sarcasm.

So, this is nothing more than a cheap shot at a well loved movie star for no other reason than to bring him into the fray of Ms. Killer's derision, when, of course, he has no idea who she is, nor does he care (so far...) But that's probably because she is NOT famous or well known for anything in particular, not even misplaced sarcasm.

And, to Ms. Killer and anyone else reading this blog, I tell you now that Sylvester has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Rumpology. So including him in a critique of my Rumpology work is not only offensive and in bad taste, it is blatantly inaccurate. But it appears that accuracy and clarity are not part of Ms. Killer's objective, not when sarcastic derision seems. to serve her so well.

Next, Ms. Killer decides that my website looks like it won a 1992 Geocities website Award. I can only take it from the tone of her entire piece that this is her attempt at insulting my Web designer.

Tsk, Tsk, obviously Ms. Killer is not very familiar with Geocities.

For those who are interested (since Ms. Killer doesn't bother to explain it), Geocities only exists now in Japan. In 1992 however, it had a much broader reach (especially in the United States) and was a service offered by Yahoo that provided registered users with free website space and design help so that they could have a voice on the Internet at a time when setting up a website was expensive beyond many people's means. People who made Geocities websites (and some were outstandingly well done) often gave awards (consider them "peer awards") to other website developers as a form of encouragement and in respect for the work they were trying to do. This was a "grass roots" movement of sorts, one of pure democracy, where people who appreciated the work of others made it known in the kindest way possible. So I consider a 1992 or any other website award to be an honor when it is given in the spirit that Geocities awards were given.

Furthermore, Ms. Killer did not show a full screen shot of my website to back up her attempt at an insult. She simply made her claim and left it at that, thus bypassing any question of her opinion, failing to show the clear and easy navigation of the site, the interactivity, the music. One has to wonder about this, since she had no difficulty taking the site apart and showing images that were part of it. Did she have a twinge of conscience about lifting an image of the entire site, or perhaps is she unable to perform a simple screen capture? I mean, if you're going to steal something, you ought to make a good job of it, shouldn't you?

And, of course, Ms. Killer did not address with her remark WHY the website has the design I chose, how it is designed for SEO optimization (Google: "Jacqueline Stallone Astrologer" and see what appears if you want to see my SEO in action), ease of use across browsers both past and present, and clarity. That would not support her attempted insult to me and my Web designer, another person whom she does not know, but I am sure would insult if she possibly could.

She then makes a complaint about the fee I charge for a full Rumpology reading, $600.

Does Ms. Killer think I am stupid (don't answer that – obviously she does). Here's a tip in selling. If you want to ensure you have only SERIOUS customers who respect your work, you must charge the appropriate fee. Does Ms. Killer want a reading for herself, but cannot afford the fee? One has to wonder why the price bothers her, when clearly, she does not believe in my work.

Ms. Killer goes on to complain that a sentence in my website says -- and I quote from myself here:

"Rumpology (or butt reading) is the art of reading the lines, crevices, dimples, and folds of the buttocks to divine the individual’s character and gain an understanding of what has occurred in the past."

Ms. Killer balks at my concept of understanding the past as a means to a better future, entirely missing an important point. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

What Ms. Killer fails to understand, apparently, is that many people do things and have done things in the past that they cannot explain to themselves or others, and they are often at a loss to explain their motivations. The past builds the present and therefore the future. It is as important to dissect the past and understand it as it is to look ahead. My analysis in Rumpology looks into the individual's past to help them understand their motivations that may affect their future, those motivations being made clear by understanding what went before. (By the way, Palmists do the same things with hands, one hand reveals the past to help clarify the other hand's revelation of a possible future.)

Ms. Killer follows her complaint (or misunderstanding) with an amusing image that she actually did NOT lift from my website, but does not explain so, when every other image is a direct steal. I wonder if she created it herself (and did she get permission to use the source material)? I have to wonder about this because she certainly had NO trouble using my website images without permission, and I find it hard to believe she would respect anyone else or their copyrights either.

Ms. Killer then looks for another joke by saying that I can even read a digital picture but you still have to print it out and mail it to me. She then claims. that I am still on dial-up. Again, how stupid does Ms. Killer think I am (by this point, she must estimate my intelligence to be slightly higher than that of a broken pencil.) By the way, the speed of my Internet connection is nobody's business.

The entire point of my submission requirements is that one can use a digital camera to take a picture (as opposed to using a film camera and risking an embarrassing development – PUN INTENDED). Furthermore, what does Ms. Killer suppose would happen if I invited people to flat out e-mail me a digital picture of their derrière (I NEVER use the word "ass", that is something reserved by Ms. Killer)?

I am NOT that stupid. So of course, I require that people send me a printed copy of their digitally photographed (or any other method) picture. It helps, to put it bluntly, "keep out the riff raff" and curtails the obvious danger in this type of work – that people will send me offensive material as their idea of a joke. Just look at Ms. Killer's work to see why I am so careful!

Ms. Killer then goes on to post several of my example pictures of derrières that appear on my website (all are used with permission of my clients). While this is a complete violation of my copyright (and the privacy of my clients – although I doubt they would be recognized from this angle), Ms. Killer goes on to "guess" at which famous person belongs to which picture. Again, she has no idea WHO these are pictures of.

At this point, Ms. Killer apparently runs out of steam and simply ends her article with an invitation to let her know if she forgot to mention anyone.

This is followed by 220 comments from her readers, some of which get even more insulting. But of course, Ms. Killer has opened the door for insult, so that comes as no surprise. And naturally, she does not moderate comments because that might show some modicum of responsibility, which judging by her copyright violations, Ms. Killer possesses in short supply.

She panders to the worst in human nature, and that is exactly what she gets.

It appears that regretsy.com is a website that attempts to find humor in the belittling of others, no matter who they are or what they are doing. The author, "Helen Killer" (I find that name very hard to believe) comes across in her articles as a belittling, bitter, smug, self-righteous and small minded critic of everything she does not like or approve of.

She has the right of free speech to display herself as such (although, I honestly cannot see how this would benefit her) so I do not criticize her for being what she is. I simply point out the obvious.

However, she has chosen to target me, my son, my website designer and my clients for no other reason than her own personal aggrandizement (and possible profiteering), and she has broken copyright law in her flawed attempt at humor.

• We all like a good joke.
• We don't all like cruelty.

Ms. Killer should consider that because humor is a two sided coin.

When done well, it amuses and lifts the spirit. When done badly, it can disturb and hurt the innocent. Based on the article about me and my work in Rumpology, Ms. Killer has chosen the latter route, which says far more about her than it does me – or anything I have done.

So, I invite you, the reader to see my work on my website and decide for yourself, rather than let Ms. Killer make up your mind for you. See links below!