Attitude towards successful men: Part 1

It is difficult to convincingly label Judge Philpot as either misogynist or anti-male through his public actions because there are more subtle layers of bias underlying his decisions in individual cases. His dichotomous attitude towards women has already been explored from the Madonna/Whore complex perspective in this blog: (http://judgephilpot.blogspot.com/2017/01/dichotomy-in-judge-philpots-attitude.html).

Judge Philpot’s conscious and subconscious attitudes are not doubt shaped by his own conflicted upbringing, which he freely discusses in nearly every public speech.  

His latest book (Judge Z) provides glaring and inescapable truths about his attitude to other men, particularly in the context of their ethnicity and his perception of their material success or achievement. Almost every male character who is not firmly on the judge’s team ideologically speaking, is portrayed negatively and only one achieves any kind of redemption. The males who are not White, Anglo-Saxon Protestants are especially demonized. Disparaging characterization is particularly blatant when the author describes a male who is more materially successful than he is. These characters are depicted as moral defectives who have acquired their success through lying, cheating or blind luck.  In addition to a host of personal flaws each of these male characters is shown to have a broken relationship with his children. Judge Philpot appears to be channeling the angst of his own childhood, and however valid that may be as therapy or an art form , the fact that he is so oblivious of the problems as to document them in print, raises serious doubts about his objectiveness and impartiality as a judge in family court.

Listed below is a synopsis of the barely disguised male characters excoriated by Judge Philpot: 

1. Jackson Anthony Stirling

Jack Stirling, they only male character who finds redemption in the story is a 45 year old

White, Catholic State Farm agent and former Cincinnati Reds baseball draftee. He is having an affair with a tattooed and voluptuous hairdresser named Brandi and hires the attorney Harry Wolff to obtain quick uncontested divorce from his wife Mary even though they have been counseled by Rev. Donna Cunningham counseled for months. He comes to his senses and relinquishes divorce after the judge imposes a hearing to determine whether their marriage is indeed “Irretrievably Broken”.

2. Harry Wolff

Harry Wolff, aged 50 is an aggressive divorce attorney who represents Jack Stirling in the divorce and is the judge’s nemesis in court. The judge is jealous of his successful practice, higher income and cliental; all the things the judge had to relinquish for his position on the bench. He has been divorced three times and has two estranged children. He hires an associate attorney Anna Ollie “ as a favor to her dad, who spent a fortune on Harry to divorce Anna’s step-mother.

Later in the book, Judge Z says: " I have also known you for thirty years. We met at UK in undergrad. Remember those days? We had a drink together on occasion. You were even married then, remember?”

3. Augusto Fernando

Augusto Fernando is a wealthy, self-absorbed  playboy from a Catholic Venezuelan family who has the misfortune to be divorcing his Kentucky Baptist wife in Judge Z’s court. He is punished by the judge for frolicking with apparently underage girlfriends and porn actresses, and remains under the judge’s heel even after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees and filing multiple appeals. He is  hated by his children Augusto Jr 17, and Lydia 14, who do not wish to spend time with him.

4. Bernard Bates

Bernard Bates is a wealthy Catholic businessman described as an "X-rated sinner". He is alienated from his two children and is being divorced by Judy, his wife of 23 years.  The vindictive wife successfully commits perjury to obtain a restraining order against him from the Judge. He counters by hiring "courthouse pit bull" attorney Kirk DeMoss.