Yesterday I wrote a satirical piece mocking the loathsome, thuggish, and hysterical Dr. Karin Calvo-Goller, a professor who responded to a rather mildly negative book review with a criminal libel proceeding in French Court.
Last night I got the following email:
Finally someone who is able to see beyond the picture presented so far by the media.
Whatever the outcome, once I have the judgement, I will have it translated and send you a copy.
I am a French national.
I Googled the address this email came from — firstname.lastname@example.org — and found that it has repeatedly been used by Dr. Michael Calvo, Dr. Karin Calvo-Goller's husband.
This raises several fascinating possibilities.
1. Someone who wishes to make one or both of the Doctors Calvo to look like morons has some minor skill with spoofing email addresses.
2. Dr. Karin Calvo-Goller may or may not use her husband's email address to email random obscure bloggers.
3. Dr. Michael Calvo may or may not be flitting about the internet posing as his wife for uncertain purposes.
4. Dr. Karin Calvo-Goller, and/or her husband Dr. Michael Calvo, might be too stupid to recognize satire, even the sort of broad, even-an-idiot-can-recognize-it satire for which I am known. This is consistent with them writing a poorly-reviewed book that is primarily made up of regurgitation of the statute and rules of the ICC, and the sense of dull-witted entitlement necessary to file criminal charges for being criticized.
5. Dr. Karin Calvo-Goller, and/or her husband Dr. Michael Calvo, might have a rudimentary sense of humor, and be pretending to take the satire at face value for comic effect. Though having a sense of humor, particularly at one's own expense, is a virtue, indulging that sense of humor rather than accepting responsibility for bad behavior is not. This possibility suggests that not only is Dr. Karin Calvo-Goller a censorious douche, she thinks it's amusing that people object to her being a censorious douche. That makes her a notable asshole, even in the realm of academia.
I suppose that by saying all of this, I, too, run the risk of being summoned by a French court, if Dr. Calvo-Goller files a criminal complaint against me in France. I don't have the free time or inclination to take Professor Weiler's approach of traveling to France to fight such a case. I suppose I'll have to avoid France. I had planned on visiting again some day, but I can make do without. There are plenty of people here who will sneer at my accent. We have home-grown censorious turds in America; I don't need to travel to Europe to observe them. There are plenty of people who are inexplicably superior locally. And certainly in America we have folks who are agitated about the intrusion of foreign languages, despite the prevalence of elements of their own language across the world. I can get overpriced and overrated food here served by oddly haughty waiters (here they're haughty because their screenplay is totally getting read at Paramount, but the principle is the same). And now we have people protesting over their swollen sense of entitlement to have taxpayers continue to pay their benefits without question. Why would I need to visit France?