I was utterly astonished. It had been five weeks since an opinion piece written in this paper by one “Phyliss Patterson” used offensive language to attack Town Council candidates Christine Labelle and Ellen Andeen. After all that time, this paper, as told to me in an email by Charlene Bisson (CEO of The Independent’s parent company), has at long last determined that was not the actual name of the author.

It seems the name of the author will never be known, at least not to readers. Despite the paper telling their readers that “Phyliss” was a “long time resident”, only now has Ms. Bisson come forth and stated the author was “misidentified at publishing”. I honestly don’t know quite what that means. She then doubles down and says: “The Independent supports the use of pennames. Too many people don’t speak up because they fear intimidation or even danger to their families and/or their careers, and we want to reengage them.” Breathtaking, simply breathtaking.

To remind readers, in Phyliss Patterson’s opinion piece, these two bright, strong, capable women with impeccable professional and personal lives are made out to be almost cartoonish characters. The appalling reference to Ms. Andeen using of lip balm was clearly done to create in the reader’s mind a profile of a giggling school girl of no gravitas, which I know has incensed many female readers with whom I have spoken. Ms. Labelle received equally insulting treatment. In her response, Ms. Andeen showed her true colors as woman of faith and shared she prays for “Phyliss” each night. Neither woman, nor their families deserved this and it is a shame the campaign has come to this: successful women of substance having to spend time and energy convincing readers they are not ditzy teenagers. Degrading candidates based on their gender is so base, I can not find the words.

If I were an affluent, caucasian male and held public office and said such things about my fellow female office holders and candidates, my career would be over instantly and deservedly so. “Phyliss’” remarks have many characteristics. They are sexist. They are misogynistic. They are insulting to all woman, not just those in the article. The words are from another era when men could get away degrading women and in turn, women suffered in silence. I thought we were well beyond this.

Since “Phyliss”’ true name will never be known, what “her” motives are, with whom “she” associates or what “she” has to gain, readers are free to assign any characteristics to “her” they wish. It is a natural human reaction, I think, to ask, just who the heck would write such scurrilous things about two capable female professionals trying to get a volunteer job and serve their community?

Just one reader’s opinion, but this doesn’t smell right.

My list is a short one. I don’t know any women who would say such things about the two candidates, so I think the writer(s) is/are male. I think the person/people representing themselves as “Phyliss” may or may not have actually written the piece; they just might be the face of the true author. I further wager the true author is an existing office holder(s) hoping to fend off defeat at the polls. Add to that, he/they would have to have a track record of being just unhinged enough to think using language offensive to women is a good idea. Could I be wrong? Sure. But with an anonymous author, who is to judge? We may have to differ, but at this point, I’m afraid I must respectfully decline to take this paper’s word. When it takes over five week to ID an author you state you already know, and then create a new penname policy around that “misidentification”, that’s moving the goal posts. That’s not right. That’s not American.

Your readers should know, this is the tip of the iceberg. In the five weeks since the “Phyliss” piece, the websites of three candidates were simultaneously attacked by hackers (Pace, Labelle, Andeen) and police reports filed. The other three candidates were thankfully not attacked. Candidate Labelle received scores of web calls from an untraceable source where the caller’s photo had his hand in the shape of a gun, police report filed. Creepy emails, also untraceable, with ominous references - stalker like in nature - also received and reported to PVPD. Campaign signs disappearing, and on and on and on. And this is just the last five weeks! So far as I know, this fate has only befallen candidates Julie Pace, Christine Labelle and Ellen Andeen.

Ms. Bisson summarized by explaining to me: “Independent’s stance is that American newspapers have stifled citizen involvement by insisting that the writer sign all expressions of opinions….Speak Up (the new policy regarding the use of pennames) returns us to the values of the American Revolution (which might never have occurred if anonymous expression of opinions had not been allowed).”

I am writing these words on the Fourth of July and it’s absolutely true pennames were used with good reason during The Revolution. The Federalist Papers were an amazing set of essays written by patriots like Madison and Hamilton, who wrote anonymously because they feared retribution, up to and including death, at the hands of the British Army, the world’s greatest military power of the day. I’ll leave it to others to decide and debate whether the comparison between the writings of future President James Madison and Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton vs. those of “Phyliss Patterson” is an apt one.

As for myself, I do fear intimidation and danger to my family - in fact I came close to not sending in this piece for that very reason. I want to be engaged. I do not wish to be stifled. I would like readers to take my words seriously, as seriously as those of the Founding Fathers. For those reasons, I will be signing using a penname, which is not my own.

Signed,

Pat Winthrop
Phoenix