I Ain't A "Brother" at Brothers Lounge: A Lesson in Poor Customer Service

The following is an open letter to Mr. Giuseppe O'Connell, general manager of Cleveland-area jazz club Brothers Lounge.

Dear Mr. O'Connell,

As residents of Lakewood and supporters of your club, my husband and I were excited about coming to Brothers Lounge last evening. After we learned that Lounge Kitty was scheduled to play, we planned an evening of dinner and entertainment at the same jazz club we'd patronized before. I regret to say, however, that our excitement was banished by conduct we deem a breach of customer service and positive business practices.

We arrived at Brothers at 8:45pm to learn that a private graduation party was in progresss inside the same music hall that was hosting Lounge Kitty. Due to the crowd in the wine bar, my husband and I determined that our best chance of eating dinner and enjoying our anticipated entertainment was to wait until the music hall doors opened at 9pm. We took our places towards the front of the line alongside many who awaited the music hall's opening.

When a male staffer opened doors, he took $10 ($5 each) from us and pointed in the direction of a "couple tables" he said had recently opened up. Although we could see no open tables in that vicinity, we immediately noticed an empty table straight ahead in the midst of the crowd. As we approached the circular table, we saw approximately 5 to 6 empty chairs surrounding it, one of which had a lone fleece jacket draped over the back. Since we saw no used dishes, half-consumed cocktails, beer bottles, etc. on the table, we logically inferred that it was vacant and that a gentleman had probably left his jacket while chatting with other partygoers. Almost immediately several newly admitted customers asked to use the chairs at "our" table. Since they struggled for space, we consented as my husband kept the jacket over his chair for safekeeping until its owner returned.

Several moments later, the same male staffer approached and asked us to leave the table. "I'm sorry... someone was sitting here." When our bewilderment became obvious, he asked, "Was there a man's jacket sitting here?" I replied that yes, a jacket was on one of the chairs.. but no person occupied any of the chairs and that it would've been wise for at least ONE person in a group to remain seated if they expected to reserve it at the expense of customers like us. He said, "I'm sorry.. someone was sitting here." I counteered that a jacket was sitting there, to which he shrugged and said, "Sorry. It's a private party." My husband and I looked at each other wondering why doors were opened if it was private. We decided to leave. As we exited, we saw several others getting refunds too.

Upon hearing that declaration "It's a private party," we were insulted. As an attorney, I'm quite respectful of contracts and agreements. Thus, I respect any agreement that you might have had with organizers of the graduation party. At the same time, your website assures private event organizers "never [have] a room charge," and are invited to enjoy "complimentary live music" after their party or fundraiser. It would certainly seem that customers like us who paid hard-earned money to gain entry were dissed t the expense of attendees at a private graduation party who (apparently) weren't even charged a fee for the room's usage. Even if party organizers were charged a room fee, the graudation party's exclusive control of the music hall ended at 9pm. When doors opened, all customers should've been on an equal footing as we struggled for space. Additionally, the notion that one fleece jacket can reserve an empty table of 5 to 6 chairs in a room of shoulder-to-shoulder crowds is laughable. If your staff was approached by the jacket owner, a better approach might've been to patiently retrieve the jacket neatly draped over my husband's chair and explain to the gentleman, "I'm sorry sir. We had to open the doors to the public at 9. I apologize if your organizer didn't explain it to folks at the party. These customers paid an admission cost. There's only two of them... perhaps they'd agree to share their table space with you. Would you like me to ask them?" We would've consented to share space. That, Mr. O'Connell, would've been a viable approach to take care of all customers.

Upon receiving our refund and exiting the music hall, we were asked by a couple of customers who remained in line, "Leaving already?" We nodded, explaining that the room was standing only and we were kicked out of an empty table because of a jacket belonging to one of the private partygoers was left. "You're kidding!?" the woman asked. "No, I'm not kidding," I shook my head. We were honest. Therein lies the danger of bad customer service- word of mouth.

Disappointed and hungry, my husband and I left without seeing our anticipated entertainment or eating at Brothers. Since this was our only weekly "date night" as a couple, we were determined to have a fun evening. We found a suitable restaurant to eat a relaxing meal. Needless to say, it left a bad taste in our mouths regarding your club. We're not interested in rationalizations, but we would like to see the matter addressed with your staff so that similar slights do not happen again. At this point we're unsure if we'll return to Brothers, but the least we can do is bring this to your attention so that future customers do not endure the same disappointment.

Sincerely,

Melissa K. Dean-Pardo
Lakewood, Ohio

Lagerfeld Defends Anorexic Status Quo in Modeling

"Fat mummies." That's how designer Karl Lagerfeld describes the magazine editors, journalists, health care professionals, models, and feminists who criticize the gaunt heroin-chic look popularized by high fashion. In Lagerfeld's world, the only conceivable reason any such criticism occurs is due to jealousy women feel when they see angular shapes ambling down catwalks from Paris to New York.

In a recent interview with the German magazine Focus, the designer blasted best-selling magazine Brigitte's decision to use "ordinary, realistic" women instead of professional models. He proclaimed, "These are fat mummies sitting with their bags of crisps in front of the television, saying that thin models are ugly." He further explained the use of underweight models as a pragmatic appeal to women's self-loathing. The fashion industry, he opined, supports "dreams and illusions," and those dreams presumably don't include expanding beyond a size 2. "No one wants to see round women," he declared with the arrogant authority. Guess he missed the numerous fashion shows put on by retailers like Lane Bryant.

Good ole' Karl hasn't been in the photo labs with editors struggling to Photoshop the emaciated appearance of conventional models. Brigitte's editor Andreas Lebert decided to end his photographers' exasperation at airbrushing protruding bones and adding curves to their frame. Effective January 2010, the fashion mag will feature "real" women.

Despite Lagerfeld's denial of widespread anorexia among fashion models, the disease is all too real both in and outside his industry- a fact freely admitted by fellow designer Giorgio Armani, Australian fashion label Marajoara, and Madrid's fashion show Pasarela Cibeles, all of whom refuse to use underweight models. Although obesity seems to take center stage in the United States, the carnage from its dysfunctional siblings (anorexia and bulimia) can't be denied: Uruguayan model Luisel Ramos, age 22, Brazilian model Ana Carolina Reston, age 21, Uruguayan model Eliana Ramos, age 18. When Israeli fashion model Hila Emalich died of heart failure in 2007, the corpse she left behind was the average weight of a seven year old child. Fashion icon Donatella Versace hopes that her daughter Allegra avoids that tragic outcome as she battles publicly with anorexia.

Yeah, Karl. Those of us who criticize this madness are jealous. Jealous of an early grave.

Roman Polanski and the Power of Words

"Minor technicalities." Those were the words Zurich Film Festival president Debra Winger used to describe the American arrest warrant finally served by Swiss authorities upon her buddy, director Roman Polanski. Like other countless Hollywood luminaries, journalists, and commentators, the actress verbally erased the ugly truth behind her friend's belated arrest with a few well-chosen words. Polanski's rape charge has been repeatedly labeled a "sex scandal" rather than a "rape scandal," the result of "inappropriate sex" rather than "rape of a 13-year old girl" a product of "Puritanical aversion to sex" rather than pursuit of justice, "he's living in exile" rather than "fleeing American authorities." Ah, the power of words! Little wonder that many Americans and Europeans alike view Polanski as a victim of antiquated morality.

The photo shoot that Roman Polanski scheduled 30 years ago with a 13-year-old model almost didn't come off, due to the fact her mother wasn't permitted to be present. The mother's fears were allayed by Polanski's agreement to let young Samantha bring a friend. For reasons that nobody seems to know, that friend never arrived. The teen's intuition arose when he asked her to photograph her topless, but she was reluctant to challenge a seemingly acceptable European custom. Polanski didn't quench her thirst with water or soda, but rather alcohol...followed by a quaalude. While she repeatedly said no, she finally dropped her resistance in the hopes of going home. "I was afraid," she later said of the much older director. She figured, "Let's get through this." What ensued was rape, forcible sodomy, and a car ride home punctuated by Polanski's admonition, "Let's just keep this our little secret." That, folks, is not "inappropriate sex," but the drugging and raping of a child. The criminal justice system knew it, and so did Polanski, who admitted his behavior. Shortly after he learned that the judge was about to reject his plea deal, the "artistic genius" fled to Europe, where he has been jaunting between several homes, making movies, winning an Oscar, and having a good old time.

Since the rape, Polanski made financial amends to his victim, and she publicly forgave him. This, we are told by Polanski's fans, should make the justice system forget all about his sentencing. Samantha Geimer, now 45 years old, is understandably tired of media harassment. That exasperation is echoed by her husband, who is nauseated by the mention of Polanski's name in the news. What his supporters forget is that it isn't the justice system, but rather Polanski himself who prolonged the media harassment of the Geimers by staying in Europe. He could've brought closure to the case years ago, but he chose not to. Now they must endure another round of public scrutiny until Polanski faces the music on American soil.

Is the director truly facing a jail sentence for his crime? If Chris Brown's felony case is any indication, it's highly unlikely the 70-ish director will be sent to the pokey. But it's not as if he didn't do anything to merit incarceration. Child rape & forcible sodomy are the reasons the American courts want to talk to Mr. Polanski. And that, Ms. Winger, is not a "minor technicality."

"Apology to Mother"- A Poem That Should Never Die

Several weeks ago, I came across the following poem. As my fiance and I perused the wares at an estate sale, we made our way to the attic. Tucked neatly away in an old armoire was a poem written by a son to his mother. The agency conducting the sale was unaware of the amoire's contents, nor did they care. But the words on faded notebook paper bore witness to a loving declaration made circa 1946. It was a declaration born of guilt and angst, one of forgotten moments. It is a sad reminder of what happens when we wrap ourselves in the whirlwind of daily life that we forget to LIVE and savor our loved ones. It is a declaration that should not be forgotten.

"Apology to Mother"

You, dear mother, was born on the 15th of September.

That is one of the dates I ought to remember.

But I didn't this year,

So there's something I fear.

Perhaps your feelings were hurt this year.

But Mother, dear mother, now that it's gone past,

Forgive me cause the time flew so fast.

Ed Siebenhar

Your Son

The Pentagram, The Priest, and Perception: How Satanic Stereotypes Permeate Our Consciousness

Two nights ago, Cleveland's Fox8 news broadcast a story which featured a Greek Orthodox Church that was the subject of vandalism. Apparently unknown person(s) mowed the shape of a pentagram into their churchyard via a push mower. Aside from the vandalism itself, what disturbed me was the fact that phrases like "Satanic pentagram" and "Satanic symbol" continually rolled off the tongue of both the priest and the reporter. Were these the ramblings of a barroom drunk, I would've let it roll off my back. This was one of those times I felt compelled to correct a stereotype. This time, I responded by drafting the following letter to Rev. Valantasis.

Dear Rev. Valantasis,

I am writing to express my sincere regret over the recent defacement of your church property. Such vandalism was a thoughtless violation of your sacred space, for which there is no excuse. At the same time, my desire for interfaith understanding has led me to share a few thoughts.

As I watched Fox8 News last evening, and read the Canton Repository article regarding the vandalism, I was struck by the persistent use of the phrases "Satanic pentagram" and "Satanic symbol" to describe the emblem left on St. George's property. Although you and the reporter shared equally in this articulation, I wondered whether either of you were aware of the history and common usage of the five point star known as the pentagram. While it's tempting for some to lump the pentagram into an all-inclusive category of "Occult/Satanism/Witchcraft," the truth is not so simple. As a self-identified witch (i.e., not a Satanist), I wear the emblem in an upright position. Accordingly, I do so with a reverence for the five elements of life that each point symbolizes: earth, air, fire, water and spirit.

The five-point star that graces my neck, hearth and home may have originated with worship of the goddess Kore, but that didn't stop Judeo-Christianity from incorporating the emblem. Not only was the pentagram inscribed on Solomon's ring, its five points were said to symbolize the five books of the Pentateuch (i.e., the Torah). Just as Ostara eggs, mistletoe, holly and other pagan holiday customs were adopted by Christians, the pentagram was also appropriated by some churches to symbolize the five wounds of Christ, or alternatively, the five senses. Remnants of its Christian use remain, including the large stained glass pentagram that appears on the Pilgrim Christian Church in Chardon, Ohio. I'm reasonably certain that parishioners would take issue with the description of it as a "Satanic symbol."

It wasn't until the mass paranoia of the Middle Ages that the pentagram was viewed with negativity. As suspected witches were tortured and killed, the pentagram was increasingly portrayed as an inverted sign with the two points upward. Eventually Satanists adopted this inverted pentagram, often shown with a goat's head, as the Sigil of Baphomet. Since Fox8 News did not feature an aerial shot of St. George's grounds, the positioning of the pentagram on church property was unclear (e.g., which points were facing the church). If the vandals positioned the star with the intent to invert the emblem, then it's possible that you are correct and that it is truly a "Satanic symbol." Otherwise, it appears to be little more than an insensitive prank at your parishioners' expense. It should also be noted that many Satanists invert the cross, but I think you would agree that the appearance of a cross around your neck during holy services does not automatically render it a "Satanic symbol."

In addition to wearing a pentagram, I attempt to honor the Wiccan Rede in all aspects of my life: "An it harm none, do what ye will." This is reflected in my dietary choices, personal relationships and community activities. Just as St. George Greek Orthodox has hosted events like the recent Men's Cook-off for Charities, I share your desire to contribute to the community. Not only have I dedicated my life to the elimination of domestic violence and abuse in all its forms, but I participate in events that raise awareness on issues like animal cruelty, breast cancer, and poverty. Per my ethics and interest in healing, I am the type of person who would normally assist you in repairing the churchyard and rejuvenating the sacred space from the vandals' violation.

In closing, I would like to thank you for taking the time to let me share my insights. Interfaith understanding often begins with small steps- steps that are vital in preventing conflict on local and world stages. I wish you peace, kindness, and gratitude.

Blessed be,

Melissa K. Dean, Esq.

Richard McTear Takes Domestic Violence to a Horrifying Level, Killing His Girlfriend's Infant

In theory, we all know that domestic violence is bad. Same goes for child abuse. In a horrifying true tale, Florida resident Richard McTeal proved the combination of both can be deadly.

The 21-year-old man was arrested Tuesday shortly after a violent confrontation with his 17-year-old ex-girlfriend. Apparently upset that he was demoted to "ex," McTear hit Jasmine Bedwell several times and threatened to "kill the both of y'all" before he threw a carseat containing Bedwell's infant son across her living room, causing little Emanuel Murray to fall onto the floor. In an appalling effort to one-up his ex-girlfriend, he snatched the one thing that meant most to her and fled. Moments later, he tossed the infant out of the window of his blue Impala onto Interstate 275 in Tampa, where his little body was spotted by a local television photographer driving by. "[I]t was too big to be a doll," said WTVT's Jason Bird said. "I almost passed out, I started shaking."

Sadly, Emanuel didn't survive the the rage of his mom's abuser (to whom he was not related). A preliminary autopsy indicated he died of blunt force trauma to the head. McTear faces charges of first degree murder, burglary with battery, felony battery, aggravated child abuse, and kidnapping. Thankfully a Tampa judge denied bail for the man whom I've dubbed "the best argument for capital punishment I've seen in a long time."

Miss California To Lose Crown?

Just when you thought it was safe to turn on your television, Miss California Carrie Prejean has hit the airwaves again, although this time not with all the blessings of the religious right. Unfortunately the lass' transformation from beauty queen to anti-gay marriage activist hit a snag this week when photos emerged showing a 17-year-old Prejean posing topless as an aspiring underwear model.

Poor thing! First a victim of political correctness and now this. She'd just come off criticism after it was learned that she requested, and received, a breast augmentation courtesy of Miss California USA pageant officials. Barely a week after defending the confidence-boosting procedure, here she was, busily crafting a wholesome image as a celebrity spokesperson for the right-wing National Organization for (Straight) Marriage, when these pesky teen photos cropped up. Immediately she went into spin control, valiantly explaining the photos were taken when she was attempting to land a gig for Victoria's Secret. While she alleged the photos were leaked in an attempt to "mock [her] Christian faith," it didn't dull the gnawing issue of honesty on her California pageant registration. When asked whether she'd ever posed "nude or semi-nude," she apparently checked no- a response that could cost her the state crown.

A second issue emerged that could become problematic for Prejean's reign. While in the process of becoming an outspoken activist against gay marriage, she made numerous appearances, televised interviews, she forgot one thing. Her contract requires her to obtain prior approval from pageant execs for official appearances- something she neglected to do. Who knows? It could be a forgiveable mistake, or part of her undoing as pageant officials sort thru the mess.

Despite Prejean's cry of mockery at the hands of liberal critics, it is far from mockery that disturbs me. While there's plenty of room for merriment at her expense, it's not her faith with which I take issue. It's her inconsistency and hypocrisy, both of which are fair game. It wasn't a gossip website, but Prejean herself that placed her morals at center stage. Now those floodgates are opened, she may be forced to learn that honesty and fidelity are vital to a contractual agreement. Maybe someday she might even realize that gays and lesbians can honor a marriage contract with greater respect.