** October 18, 2010Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates.
Announcement – Nov. 30, 2011 — I have GOT to make a new front page here. This one is old, even if the material is still very relevant. comments are closed only to THIS post or old posts. You may comment on new and recent posts. Don’t even think to lecture me. I’m probably old enough to be your mother so don’t even go there. This blog is NOT about adoption, anti-adoption, adoption reunion, or adoption reform. It is to shed light on the BEHAVIOR of a BULLY, an adoptee named Joan M. Wheeler and to refute her many lies in her book and on the internet. With her many harassments and lies about me and my family, Joan has trampled on our human and civil rights. AND OUR HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS ARE NOT NEGOTIABLE!
ANNOUNCEMENT – May 12, 2011:
ON MAY 9, 2011, THE BOOK FORBIDDEN FAMILY BY JOAN M. WHEELER WAS PULLED FROM PUBLICATION BY THE PUBLISHER DUE TO IT’S SLANDEROUS AND LIBELOUS CONTENT! Since I do NOT have an arrest record, or criminal record AS WRITTEN IN HER BOOK, Joan Wheeler slandered and libeled me in her book. THAT IS WHY HER BOOK WAS PULLED FROM PUBLICATION!
Go ahead, Joan get your lawyer to look at the FACTS – the FACT of the matter is that YOU SAID IN YOUR BOOK THAT I, RUTH PACE HAVE AN ARREST RECORD AND A CRIMINAL RECORD WHEN I DO NOT! THAT IS NOT YOUR POINT OF VIEW, THAT IS EITHER A LIE OR A DELUSION ON YOUR PART – AND ANY LAWYER IS GOING TO TELL YOU TO GO TO HELL! — or — they will call the authorities to have you committed. -Anybody who has NEVER been arrested, writes in a book that they themselves were arrested, then says the book was just her “point of view” that they were arrested is NOT sane! — If you were arrested, you’re going to know it. There’s no “point of view” involved. It’s either/or. Face it Joan – you need some serious professional psychiatric help.
I do not work for, nor know anybody who works for the publisher of this book. I have no power to stop the publication of any book. It is up to the publisher of a book to cease publication and cancel the contract IF the author has violated certain conditions. In speaking with the publisher on Monday, May 9, 2011, the publisher told me that yes, the book contained many slanderous and libelous statements, as well as not having the proper authorization to publish a certain photograph on the back cover, as the author did NOT have copyrights to it, nor permission to use the photograph. The book also contained hate language and obscene language, both prohibited by the terms and conditions that the publisher requires. Joan violated the terms and conditons set forth BY THE PUBLISHER, not The Three Sippel Sisters, collectively, or individually.
If Joan Wheeler’s precious book got pulled, it is due to the gross misconduct of only one person: JOAN M. WHEELER. That’s what she gets for LYING and stealing MY photograph.
My post Reality is Truth. But all Joan Wheeler knows is self-delusions, fantasies, and lies amended July 16, 3:00am
My post Suffer the wrath of the wronged birth sister who had nothing to do with Joan Wheeler’s adoption amended June 22, 2011, 3:00 pm
My post, My letter (Jan 18, 2011) to Nicole S. Urdang, therapist, who thought the trash book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler was a good book, but then pulled her review of it off amazon dot com. amended, June 15, 6:00am
My post, I am so sick of Joan Wheeler’s whining about her adoption and her birth certificate and nobody understands her and –and — I’m going to throw up now has been amended. – June 12, 2011
On May, 20, 2011, a visit to Joan Wheeler’s Forbidden Family website, under the tab “About and Buy” this book is still listed for sale, 10 business days AFTER this book is no longer available for sale. Ms. Wheeler is given this directive: REMOVE THIS LISTING, BECAUSE YOU ARE NOW GUILTY OF FALSE ADVERTISING! The Better Business Bureau, the New York State Attorney General, and others will be notified if this is not done.
These two screen shots are of her site, and the publishers site, taken on May 20, 2011, ten business days after the book was pulled from publication.
I hate a liar more than I hate a thief because a ” thief ” is only after my salary but a liar is after my reality…. Quoted by 50 Cent
Tags: abuse, adoption, adoption reform, adoption reunion, being downright nasty, blaming people for your own mess, contradictions, embellishing the truth, false accusations, harassment of an adoptee's birth family, Lies, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, spreading untruths, whining
My additional comments to Gert McQueen’s Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family – Personal psychodrama, lies and other things that don’t belong in a book.
On page 155, Joan tells us how upset she was that our father had decided to formally adopt his youngest stepdaughter. Joan is incapable of seeing things from another person’s viewpoint, all she can do is wallow in her own misery, feel sorry for a bad break in life that she received as an infant – the death of her mother, and her father giving her up for adoption.
When my father met his current wife (and they just celebrated their 40th wedding anniversary), Ginette was a divorced mother of 2 girls, ages 4 and 10. Her ex-husband cared nothing for the girls, Ginette was on public assistance, receiving no child support from the girls’ father. Within months – actually it was around Christmas 1970 – 2 and a half months – of my father’s and Ginette’s marriage, her ex-husband came around – probably because his male ego felt threatened. I was there the day he came over to our house. Jos (Claire in the book), aged 4 years old, and knowing my father for only 6 months, stood behind MY father. She was scared of her biological father – she did not know who he was. Mar, my older stepsister, did remember her father and there wasn’t a problem there, but Jos did not go to her father. She hung onto MY father’s legs and began to cry.
A couple of times during the next year or two, Mr. Ansermin would show up and assert his “fatherly rewards.” He demanded visitations with his daughters. He was always behind in child support, but would front some money so that Family Court would send a notice to my father and Ginette that Mr. Ansermin would be taking the girls on such and such date. Mar had a fairly good relationship with her father, but Jos would cry – she did not want to go with Mr. Ansermin. It finally got to the point that my father and Ginette told Family Court that it was upsetting Jos and if it took their refusal of any more of Mr. Ansermin’s money to get him out of Jos’ life – then so be it. This is why my stepmother went back to work in late 1972, It wasn’t as if Mr. Ansermin’s sporadic child support was helping the family anyway. And this was one of the reasons I moved back into my father’s house after being on my own for a year and a half – to help watch the kids while my father and stepmother worked (I was working too).
By 1977, Jos was now 11 years old. She had absolutely no contact with her biological father since 1972. The only male role model in her life was MY father. The only father she has EVER known is MY father. It was HER idea to be adopted – SHE asked my father for her last name to be changed from Ansermin to Sippel – SHE wanted my daddy to be her daddy! And what could be wrong with that?
Yes, it is an wierd twist of fate, that in 1956, Leonard Sippel Sr. gave up a girl-child for adoption, and 21 years later would adopt another girl-child. Life certainly is strange. But does Joan see that behind each adoption, there was LOVE there? LOVE for Joan in 1956, to be given to a couple who could properly care for her, when in 1956, there WERE NO DAYCARE CENTERS OR WELFARE SYSTEM TO HELP MY FATHER OUT! What was my father supposed to do with a three month old infant while he was at work all day? Let her lie in a crib all day unattended? Can’t Joan get that through her thick skull?!!!
And there was absolutely nothing but LOVE behind the decision for my father to adopt Jos. Can’t Joan see that? Of course not – because with Joan – it’s all about Joan. She cares only for Joan. She has no sense of another human being’s feelings. She is consumed with only herself.
On page 158, Joan has me and Gert saying “Oh Joanie, really! You’ve got to stop being so hung up on adoption! It’s no big deal, get over it.”
WRONG! I never said that. That’s Mama Wheeler talking – and yes, Gert and I have seen several times in the book where Joan has us saying things that we never said, but it is the exact wording, (or a very close paraphrase) that Joan quotes her mother as saying in a different part of the book. This is just another chance for to put us down, because we welcomed Jos, not only as our stepsister, but now our legal sister, and in Joan’s mind, an act of betrayal of us to her. Is THIS why in just 3 short years, she would start the interference and harassment and lying about us? As a punishment because we didn’t side with her against Jos?
I NEVER – and to this day, HAVE NEVER TOLD JOAN TO STOP BEING SO HUNG UP ON ADOPTION! Why would I have said this to her in 1977, then turn around in 1980 and accompany her to WGRZ Buffalo Television station to be interviewed with her by reporter Rich Kellman if I didn’t support her adoption cause?
Further down on page 158, she has her mother saying to her “What gives you the right to blab our private business to the whole world?” What did I just say 2 paragraphs above? – That Joan quotes her mother on one page, then puts the same words in my mouth. And she did – on pages 276-278 … when Prof. Rene Hoksbergen supposedly came to my house (a lie, he never was at my house).
On page 163, Joan goes into a completely disgusting and unnecessary description of my mother’s death. So I guess my father decided to tell her of my mom’s death. I heard the same story from my dad – EXCEPT this part: “She opened her eyes, looked up in front of her, took in a deep breath, closed her eyes, exhaled, and she was gone. Immediately, there was a terrible stench of rotten flesh. The doctors told me later that her sides had split open; that even the bandages didn’t hold it in, and all of her that had been dying, fell out.”
What the hell?!! Let me say that although I am not a doctor, I have worked for 38 years in a hospital and what Joan relates here may certainly be plausible, it is highly unlikely. First, my mother did NOT die of kidney cancer – it was UTERINE CANCER. The immediate cause of death, was kidney failure, but that’s because her organs had started to fail, and her kidneys were the organs to go first. On the bottom of Page 162, to the top of page 163, she has my father saying that the cancer had spread all over her body. This is called metastasis Joan, the “medical expert” that she is, does not mention this important word. Second, when they did the exploratory surgery in January 1956, and suspecting UTERINE CANCER, they would have made an incision in the lower abdomen. If they suspected kidney cancer, incisions would have been made in the lumbar/sacral area of her back. If my mother was indeed 89 pounds at the time of her death, then she obviously was not given fluid pushes,which would bloat the body. Now as to the “description” that my father supposedly told Joan, unfortunately, yes, this could have happened. But her sides splitting open to the point the bandages would not hold her insides in? This sentance is highly suspect – she would not have incisions along her sides – and unless she was bloated with fluid pushes, her sides would not have split open. And for a doctor to be telling my father this AFTER the fact – no, a doctor would not have said this. Doctors have compassion, they would not tell a man who just lost his wife these gory details. – I know- I work in a hospital – in several different areas – 4 years in the Medical Intensive Care Unit, (I’ve seen some gory stuff there), 5 years in the Hospice Unit, (I’ve witnessed many deaths in front of my eyes, I know what the smells are), and right now on the renal KIDNEY floor – and work with KIDNEY transplants and see just where their dam incisions are. And they are NOT on their sides! Joan – stop watching so much CSI and Forensic Files!
But, let’s say this all really did happen – why is this in her book? What does this have to with Joan’s adoption, her reunion, and her adoption reform work? Her book is supposed to be about those 3 things – not giving a graphic, gory rendition of a young woman’s lose of life. What the hell is the matter with Joan? This is called honoring our mother? This crap does not belong in this book – it serves no purpose of advisement for or against adoption – it is purely sensationalism, and embellishment on Joan’s part. Joan should be ashamed of herself for abusing the memory of our mother in this way.
On page 164, Joan relates that she learned to drive at the late age of 22. So? What does this have to do with her adoption? I learned to drive at the VERY late age of 24 – so what? Is this necessary to know? By the way, I was 24 in the year 1976, therefore, I could not have been driving Joan around in 1974. Joan, please get your facts straight when you are reporting about MY life. Also a good thing to do when you are writing a “truthful” book. Do some research. Or search your faulty memory – it was Gail who drove you around in 1974 to Uncle Mikes, not me.
On page 168 Joan relates that after she got laid-off, the welfare people told her to move back in with her parents – no, they would not have told her this. They may have suggested it, because they don’t want to hand out the benefits, but they probably told her that she would have to wait about a month to begin receiving benefits – which is standard – they don’t just automatically hand out food stamps and cash assistance to someone who just walks in the door! Joan just words it this way to get her readers to feel sorry for her. By the way, what was she doing asking for welfare anyway? She got laid off, did she not go look for another job? She says this was shortly before Christmas – um, stores are hiring temporary seasonal workers then – and there are ALWAYS openings in the health care field! If you’re that hard up for cash – go empty bedpans – it’s good steady work – pays good, and keeps you off the welfare rolls or in your mommy’s purse! Guess what? Dr. Christaan Barnard, who performed the world’s first heart transplant, paid his way through medical school by working as an orderly – one of an orderly’s duties is to EMPTY BEDPANS! Don’t have the stomach for it? Then get a job as a cleaner ANYWHERE, hotel maid, whatever, just don’t get laid off from your first job, run down to welfare, then run over to mommy! And it’s not like her first job was all that glamorous – she worked packaging on an assembly line in a pharmaceutical company.
On pages 173 – 176, Joan combines two events that had nothing to do with each other. First on page 172, she relates how she tried on our dead mother’s wedding dress. She doesn’t quite tell the story of the wedding dress right. She leaves the story of the dress and begins to tell the story of my brother’s First Holy Communion Party and the fight she got into with my stepmother’s friend Elaine. Then she goes back to the wedding dress – the wedding dress had nothing to do with the party. But I will tell what REALLY happened. I will take this ONE event at a time, because in truth, the two events were separate, and happened at quite different times.
On the morning of Steve’s Holy Communion, I had a fight with Abdo (my first husband). It stemmed from an incident that had happened the previous night, when we were out with his brother and his brother’s girlfriend. S. and I did not get along, and some words exchanged between us. Then Ali got involved, and Abdo was upset with me because I was fighting with his brother. So the next morning, I went to the church by myself. Gert and her kids did not come to the church service, but met up with me at our father’s apartment, and Gert had brought along Abdo, as she lived only two blocks from us.
The church service was followed by a brunch in the school auditorium and then we went on to my father’s apartment for a nice afternoon and a nice dinner. After the dinner, I was sitting in the living room talking with Gert. Joan had gone downstairs with my brother and youngest stepsister. (My father lived on the 12 floor of the apartment building). Elaine left a little bit after Joan. Shortly afterwards, Abdo and I, Gert and her two children all left together. Shortly after 6pm, and the sun was still shining. The only guests left wer Bob and Sonja.
We had parked in the parking lot in the front of the building, and apparently Joan, Steve, and Joselyne were in the back of the building. But we did not see her or the kids as we drove on the one-way street that completely encircles the apartment complex. I remember I was home for about an hour when my phone rang. It was Gert. She just received a call from Joan, who had just gotten home herself – and apparently Joan had a fight with Elaine. Now, we have only Joan’s version of the fight as told to me and Gert. – so apparently as Joan was leaving to go downstairs with Steve and Joselyne, she made a comment to my stepmother. Gert and I were in the living room – we didn’t hear it. What the comment actually was, we don’t know, but in the book, on page 173, Joan said to Ginette, “Well, this isn’t as extravagant as the party you had for Claire, (Joselyne), considering this is a smaller space, but I had a lovely time and thank you for inviting me.” … I didn’t know it because she didn’t tell me, but Yvonne (my stepmother Ginette) cried after I left.” — This is nonsense! Although I didn’t hear what was said, I could see Ginette, because me and Gert left shortly afterwards – and Ginette was fine!
Well, according to the phone conversation, Elaine was downstairs and confronted Joan and berated her for not helping Ginette with the dishes. Elaine then went on to say that the Sippel sisters were rude to Ginette and we were all lazy for not helping out with the dishes. Well, we were guests – just like Elaine. But Gert and I were pissed at Elaine, because we made the observation that our oldest stepsister, Mar, who was 19 at the time, also did not help out with the dishes. We both felt, and to this day, I still feel, that Elaine was out of line – if the daugthers of the Sippel family are supposed to help out with clearing up dishes after a party, then the Sippel stepdaughter should too.
After Gert and I hung up, my phone rang – it was Joan – and she told me the story of the fight – and I told her my opinion of Elaine and Mar. So Gert, Joan and I were united in our feelings of outrage that we were being singled out. I don’t know what Gert said to my father, if anything at all, but for myself, I didn’t say anything. Because this was typical behavior of Elaine. I wasn’t going to get into a fight over this ignorant woman. My stepmother and I had a good relationship – we both worked the Bingo games and served on the Women’s Committee of the Greek Orthodox Church. We frequently went out to lunch. When my brother was 10 and had a accident with his bike and plowed face-first into a parked van, and his mouth was bloody, she didn’t call 911 – she called me – to take them to the emergency room. And I have already related how I moved back in my father’s house in 1973 to help watch over the kids while my stepmother went back to work. So Elaine’s opinion of me didn’t really matter to me. I was concerned that she obviously was trying to plant a wedge between us and our stepmother and stepsisters.
As to Joan’s description of my father’s tyranical behavior – well, sad to say, that is typical of my father – it’s funny – I got along better with my stepmother than I did with him! My way of coping was to ignore him – as I did with Elaine – if Ginette had a problem with me, Gert and Joan not cleaning up dishes – she never said so. I noticed no difference in her behevior towards me after the party. And as I said, when Gert, Abdo, Gert’s kids and I left, Ginette seemed just fine. So it makes me wonder – just what was the fight between Elaine and Joan REALLY about? According to Joan, on page 173, the Sippel girls had been mistreating Ginette since 1971! Really? News to me, since I had moved out of my father’s house in 1971, but moved back in – in 1973. Ginette was going back to work on the afternoon shift, I worked night shift, my father worked days. This way, an adult was present in the house at all times to watch the kids. And I spent many wonderful days with her other friends Millie and Arthur, who lived outside of Dunkirk, NY. My goodness, if I mistreated Ginette so much, how was I entrusted with her kids to take them down to the beach swimming? How when Steve was 3 and running in the house and tripped and opened up a gash on his forehead, why would she come running up the stairs to wake me up to help take him around the corner to the emergency room. And I held her as she heard him screaming, when he was getting his stitches. Oh – but I mistreated her? Elaine knew better than to say that. But I never liked Elaine. I suspect she went back upstairs with Steve and Jos and said something to Ginette and my father – and brought up the subject of us not cleaning up the dishes.
But me and Gert, like fools, believed Joan – we hadn’t yet seen through the manipulations that Joan was doing. Like I said, I don’t know if Gert said anything to Dad – I doubt she said anything. I know I didn’t say anything – but not Joan – no – instead of having some dam good sense – and wait until the following day to speak to Dad – she runs right upstairs to start an argument with him in front of his remaining guests! Then wonders why he’s pissed at her!! As for his statements (however misguided they were) about him not wanting him to upset his wife and kids – well any husband and father would stick up for his wife and kids. Unfortunately, my father forgets that Joan, Gert, Kathy and me are also his kids.
I want to make a point about my “mistreatment” of my stepmother – I have already said that we had a good relationship – working Bingo together, having lunch, etc. Joan knew all this – but she does not report about it in her book. What she says in response to Elaine’s comment about us Sippel girls mistreating Ginette is: “I don’t think I should be lumped together with my sisters for something, or a bunch of somethings that they did.” But she KNEW that Ginette and I got along. Joan has no problem with relating Elaine’s and my father’s outburst – but strangely, she didn’t defend Gert or me. Why not? Oh, it just wouldn’t do to portray Gert or Ruth in a positive way – because that would negate her dam book – that her birth sisters are bitches! She even accused us on page 176 for delibrately leaving our plates on the coffee table so that JOAN would get in trouble! “It’s as if they wanted to teach me a lesson,” she says.
For crying out loud! For that to happen, there would have to have been a full conspiracy! Yeah, that’s it – Gert and I and Abdo left our plates sitting around. We then got hold of Elaine, and told her to go downstairs and bitch at Joan about our plates. We then got hold of our stepmother and told her to be mad at Joan for what we did. Then we got hold of our father and told him to be sure to yell at Joan after Elaine yelled at her, and he should be prepared for Joan when she came back upstairs — etc. etc. etc. Oh yes, Gert and I planned the whole thing. Do you people see how stupid this all is? But not Joan – instead of seeing what this all was – Elaine being a troublemaker – Joan getting unfairly yelled at by our father – Joan’s bottom line is: GERT AND RUTH WAS THE CAUSE OF IT ALL! – why is always OUR fault when Joan screws up? why can’t JOAN TAKE REPONSIBLITY FOR HER OWN LIFE?
Yes, Elaine treated Joan unfairly – but that is NOT my fault, nor Gert’s fault. I never liked Elaine – for just this reason – I had some words with her mother in the summer of 1971, BEFORE Ginette married my father – She was visiting Ginette’s house at the same time I was – I was 17 years old, and upstairs with my soon-to-be stepsisters, aged 4 and 10, and we were fooling around, being loud. Ginette yelled up the stairs for us to be quiet. As bratty kids sometimes do, we did not comply right away. Ginette yelled at us again, and we settled down. A while later, Elaine’s mother Agnes got hold of me outside and ripped into me. I felt that she had no business yelling at me. I would take discipline from Ginette, as she was going to be my stepmother, but I would not take orders from Agnes. Apparently Agnes told her daughter about this – and I was conscious of Elaine’s dislike of me everytime I saw her. Both Elaine and Agnes were overbearing and nasty to me and Kathy (before she moved to England). What was my reaction? I ignored them – they were Ginette’s friends, so I had no place to say anything – besides, by 1974, I moved out of my father’s house for the second and last time – I now had my own apartment – I was an adult in my own right – there was no need to interact with them again. When I did see them at my father’s house – I was polite, that was all. I just kept the peace. But did Joan learn how to live in peace? No! After Elaine insults her, she stomps back upstairs to confront my father, KNOWING FULL WELL THAT HE HAD GUESTS! Perhaps if she had waited until the following day to talk to him, she would not have gotten yelled at by him. And by the way – she says on page 174, she “kept my head down in humiliation as I ran passed the living room of people. I felt their hot stares on my back.” First, everyone had gone, except Bob and Sonia, so the living room was not full – and yes, she should have felt humiliated – she had already left the party – she should have gone home – but nooooo – she just HAD to go back upstairs and confront our father.
She also relates that it was raining, and by the time she got back to my father’s apartment she was soaking wet and the wind and rain froze her lungs. Bullshit – please see the picture at the bottom of this post – it is a photocopy of the microfilmed copy of one of the newspapers in Buffalo, New York in the late 70’s, The Buffalo Courier Express, for Sunday, May 20, 1979. Please see the weather report – which states the day to be “partly sunny, mid 70’s.” Even if a scattered rainshower had occured, and Joan got wet, her lungs would not have been “frozen.” Not at 75 degrees. Give me a break! Geez Joan, you must have a low opinion of everyone in the world to expect them to buy that nonsense!
And getting back to her little remark she made to Ginette – on page 173, she says “I didn’t mean to hurt her feelings, but I guess I did.” and “I told him (my father) that I was sorry I said something to hurt her and I didn’t think what I said was so wrong. ….Evidentally, Yvonne (Ginette) thought I was insulting her.” But earlier in the book, when she was talking about events in 1974, she berated me for sarcastically telling her that she spelled our last name wrong on a xmas card she had sent me. (I have already said before that I have no memory of this).
Here we see Joan’s double standard of behavior – how she perceives how people should treat her, and how she should treat people. – Nobody had better insult her – even if it were a simple slip of the tongue. She relates a slip of a tongue on HER part, and doesn’t see why anyone should be upset with her – but oh boy! Let RUTH inadvertanly insult JOAN, and it’s a capital punishment! But as you see, Joan HAS to paint Ruth as bad, bad, bad, because that is the whole purpose of her book – to trash me and my family. Ruth is not afforded the slightest possibility that she said something by mistake – but Joan makes absolutely NO mistakes.
Now let us discuss my mother’s wedding dress. The events she describe on page 172 are essentially correct. – She says that while visiting at my house I showed her the dress, and she has me saying, “Dad gave each of us something that belonged to Mom.” Joan says she immediately felt jealous, she felt left out. Why must she always be whining about something? And did she not already say in the book that Dad DID give her something? A LOCK OF MOM’S HAIR! Why is she then whining about a dress?
Ok, I will admit, I didn’t take good care of it. Joan says it was in a black garbage bag, no it was in a large paper bag. And while we are discussing this – My father did NOT actually give me the dress – I TOOK if from the attic of our house! It was still in the same cardboard box that my mother had put it in. I was 16 years old when I TOOK it. This was then the year 1968. From 1946 to 1968, it was still in the same box – and after moving residences 3 or 4 times, the box was crushed, the top had a oval cut out of the cardboard with a clear piece of plastic in the oval, and this plastic was missing. The dress was getting dirty. I was only 16 years old. I knew nothing about taking care of a wedding dress. I folded it up and placed it in a large paper shopping bag. I did have the sense to cover it with some tissue paper.
Earlier in the book, Joan relates the first time Gert came to visit her at her house in 1974, and sees the usual teenage sloppy room. Gert remarked that my room looked the same way. Joan forgets that she had a mother to teach her how to take care of clothes – I didn’t. And when, I brought the dress out to show Joan, I told her that the dress needed cleaning and pressing, and in the back of the dress – the buttons were fastened by a large rope of fabric that was stiched and looped into “buttonholes.” This “rope” was pulled out of place in spots – I didn’t know how to repair it. Joan told me that her mother was a seamstress – had sewed many of Joan’s clothes for her when she was growing up, and even made Joan’s prom dress. Joan said, “My mother would know how to fix this up.” So I LOANED it to her to have it fixed up.
On page 175 Joan combines these two events – she says while she was arguing with my father about the Holy Communion party, he tells her on the phone, “oh and by the way, Ruth wants Mom’s wedding dress back.” Joan then describes how she grabbed it off the hanger, rolled it up in a black garbage bag, drove to my house and threw it at my feet. She then berates me for involving Gert and my father in the dress, and yells at me to take better care of the dress.
Nope, this never happened! She says she had the dress for 4 weeks. Nope – She had the dress until 1984 for a total of 5 years! And no, I never called Gert for help to get the dress back, because Gert had moved to Binghamton in 1982. I did call my father because Joan REFUSED TO RETURN THE DRESS, AND FURTHERMORE, SHE STOLE BEADWORK OFF THE DRESS!
In early 1983, Joan found out that she was pregnant – and her and Colby decided to get married. The wedding date was set for sometime in May and she asked me to be one of her bridesmaids. She found a seamstress to make the gowns and asked me for my permission to have Mom’s wedding dress altered to fit her. I said no. So her seamstress made a copy of the dress, and put in extra material to cover Joan’s pregnancy.
My mother’s wedding dress has some beadwork, small concentric circles of white seed beads, sewn on a small ribbon of fabric that lined the v-shaped bodice of the satin main dress. Over this bodice is a smaller section of a more sheer fabric leading from the bosom to the neck.
On Joan’s wedding day, 45 minutes before we were to leave for the start of the wedding, we were at her house, the matron of honor helping her get dressed, a photographer in attendance. If memory serves, I was one of 3 bridesmaids, one of them her future sister in law. I was dressed, putting on fresh coat of nail polish. All of a sudden here comes the bride! “Oh Ruth. I just wanted to tell you. With all the work on the dresses, there wasn’t time to make a copy of the beadwork on Mom’s dress. So we took it off, and sewed it onto mine. When we get the copy of the beadwork done, we’ll just swap the ribbons. And this is so wonderful, as I will be able to go down the aisle with something that Mom had on her wedding day.”
Now I ask you. What would you have done? What could you have done? Make a scene in front of all those people and ruin the brides day? NO, there was NOTHING I could have done.
Months later, she refused to return the dress itself. I finally had to get my father to get the dress back. It was not cleaned, not pressed, the buttons in the back NOT repaired, even though Joan had the dress in her possession for 5 years. And it was still crumpled up in the same paper shopping bag that I had kept it in, but without even tissue paper to help keep dust out. When I returned home from my father’s house, (and incidentally, he never said a word about it being all crumbled up), I noticed that the ribbon of beadwork was still not back on the dress. I called Joan – she then DICTATED to me that when she and her seamstress got around to making the copy of the beadwork ribbon, she was going to keep the original beadwork, because it was something that belonged to HER mother. Mind you – this was also a full year after her wedding – I think Joan had no intention of ever returning the beadwork to me. But we all know now that Joan is a thief!
I told my friend Francine about this conversation and she asked me what was I going to do? I said “There’s nothing I can do right now. She’s got me over a barrel. If I make a stink, I will never get the beads back. But don’t worry – I will get them back.” So I waited a few months and then the call came that I was waiting for – Joan needed me as a babysitter. I headed on over to her house with a pair of scissors in my purse. After Joan and Colby left the house – and I had my nephew in the highchair, feeding him dinner, I went on the hunt! I found Joan’s dress and right there on the front of her dress was the beadwork ribbon that belonged on my mother’s wedding dress. I laid the dress out on the bed – and had my nephew positioned so I could keep an eye on him. I fed him a couple of spoonfuls and went back into the bedroom and got to work. After I got the ribbon off the dress – I put Joan’s dress back in the closet. I made sure my nephew was safe – then I ran downstairs and locked the beadwork ribbon in my car’s glove compartment. I was taking no chances that I might drop my purse and Joan would see what was in it.
Now in her book, on page 175, she describes her return of the dress to me by her flinging the dress at my feet. She berates me for abusing the dress. But did she not abuse it herself by “throwing it at my feet?” But that never happened. She took the dress to my father’s house, and he in turn, gave it to me. Why would someone lie like that? By saying that she threw the dress on the floor, is admitting to a possible abuse of the dress. The very same thing she accused me of. (always with the accusations of me). But the reality of it is – she removed trim off the dress AFTER I told her NOT to touch the dress, she tried to keep that trim for herself. She had the dress in her possession for 5 years and she never got it cleaned, pressed, or the back repaired as she promised. She kept it in the same paper bag that I had it in – so she abused the dress as well.
I am sure my mother’s spirit understands my not keeping the dress correctly – I didn’t know any better – but what excuse does Joan have? She had that dress for 5 years, one of those being a full year AFTER her own wedding – HER wedding dress was hung in the closest, but she left my mother’s dress all crumpled up, even though she promised to restore it. And further to mutilate it and try to STEAL something off of it. No, Joan’s crimes against the dress were far worse than mine.
To recap and add a timeline to Sunday, May 20, 1979 – The church services attended for my brother’s Holy Communion, consisted of a full Catholic Mass, which started around 10am, included the children receiving their First Holy Communion Sacrament. When the children finished receiving the Body of Christ, the rest of the congregation partook of the Eucharist. When the mass was finished, those who wanted to, went to the school auditorium next door for a light brunch. Joan did not attend either the mass or the brunch. After the brunch, our family members, Elaine and her mother too, went to our father’s house, where Ginette began the finishing touches of the dinner – she frequently cooks some things ahead – we ate, probably around 4, had desert – the party began breaking up around 6.
Here is the weather report taken from the Buffalo Courier Express for Sunday, May 20, 1979, the date of my brother’s First Holy Communion, and to which Joan attests to that date on page 172, and on page 173, she reports that “the wind and rain froze my lungs.” in 75 degree weather! oh, really? The pictures are of my brother in the church, bearing a basket of bread to be blessed. See the sunlight in the windows. The next picture is of Mariel and Elaine’s daughter Michelle – see the spaghetti straps of Mariel’s dress – appropriate attire for a warm and sunny spring day – where there was NO chance to get frozen!
Gert – October 16, 2010
again, thank you Ruth for all the details.
I would like to state here for the record in case anyone thinks that Joan is the only sister that I personally have had a problem with, she is not.
I did have some serious problems with Ruth and we did not speak or have any kind of a relationship for quite a long time but we did RECONCILE and we REPAIRED the tear in our relationship and we FORGAVE each other!
That is the big difference here with Joan, for Joan DOES NOT WANT TO RECONCILE WITH HER SISTERS.
Joan’s ENTIRE LIFE IS THAT BOOK, HER VERSION OF REALITY. Don’t confuse Joan with any facts, she has her reality and she will NOT PART WITH THAT.
So if there is anyone out there who thinks that can get Joan to stop attacking her sisters, think again…you are being used and you will eventually will pay a price for befriending Joan…
We three sisters are only interested in telling the TRUTH, not Joan’s truth, but OUR TRUTH.
My mother as my spiritual benefactor by Gert McQueen October 5, 2010Posted by Ruth in Dreams, Inconsistent Angel Things.
Tags: Buddhist, Disrespect, emotional abuse, Guided Meditation, Lilydale NY, Meditation, Reiki
Over the past 10 years or so I’ve studied various self-healing techniques including Reiki, a hands-on transmission of universal healing energy. In June 2006 I attended a Reiki 1 session, where I learned the basics of what reiki is, the basic hand positions and to receive an ‘attunement’ that ‘connects’ me with the universal ‘love’ energy. During all my research and putting into practice many techniques I have always been a bit shy of this ‘love’ energy because basically it sounds too much like various forms of christian love. Nonetheless I’ve remained open to the fact that christianity doesn’t have a monopoly on any love energy and I know there are other gods, goddesses and spiritual guides that I could call upon for help and guidance.
So at this attunement, in 2006, I am remaining open to receiving some guidance and love from a spiritual benefactor who would help me in learning and using reiki energy. I had no particular vision or impression of anyone or anything. So here I am in a semi-meditative state of awareness as the Reiki Master is ‘attuning’ me with Universal Reiki. All of a sudden I have this immense and intense sense of being ‘held and rocked’ in great arms of love and then ‘knowing’ that I am being held by my mother, who is in spirit form. Tears fell from my eyes for what seemed like a long time as I rocked back and forth, physically, as my mother, rocked me spiritually. It was a very profound experience. That was the first time I have ever experienced that and I knew that she was now guiding me with the reiki energy. I no longer felt uneasy when others expressed reiki in christian terms, for I now know differently.
I also have been studying and practicing various forms of Hindi and Buddhist meditations techniques for many years. Again, while I understand and can appreciate ‘loving kindness’, ‘forgiveness’ and ‘compassion’ and actually practice forms of these practices I still am shy and reluctant to go the full measure of extending the ‘love’ to certain people, including a particular family member. The practices are difficult, they take lots of time to understand and even with much practice they are not easy to do for they do require you to ‘see’ everything as it really is, not the illusions that we believe them to be. In just coming to terms with forgiving those that have harmed me I’m still working on it. Forgiving doesn’t means forgetting nor does it mean allowing negative or harmful behaviors to continue.
On June 5, 2010 I attended a Buddhist discussion and meditation workshop that focused on meditations of being open, being more aware, loving kindness to self, accepting that loving kindness and then sending that love to others. These practices are not easy and it is helpful to have a teacher to help you in the practices. It is not always easy for you to ‘accept’ the ‘love’ for yourself, let alone send it to others. I’m trying to get there.
Then it happened, again. I was in a state of calm, relaxed, deep meditation, floating in colors that went from red, red/orange, orange and going into orange/yellow, when suddenly there is this immense and intense sense that my benefactor was there, my mother was there. After a physical shutter my body reacted with a steady flow of tears, my breathing got deeper as my mental, emotional and spiritual bodies took in the loving kindness that my mother was showing me and giving me. That unconditional universal love/healing energy that has many names was flowing from my mother to me. I was still connected with all of this while I reached for my tissues and settled the body back down as the teacher was giving more instructions. Once I had made the connection of accepting the love from my benefactor, my mother, I was being asked to send that love to others I loved. That wasn’t so difficult, my daughter Karen and my sisters Kathy and Ruth. Then I heard ‘and Joan too’. I took a deep breath and said ‘yes to Joan too’ and send her love. After a few minutes more I was out of the meditative state still crying for a minute or so.
What I’m learning is that yes it is very hard and difficult to give love to someone who has harmed you. I can and for the most part, do separate the person from the behavior. Just because I love Joan doesn’t mean that I will sit back quietly and let her words and deeds go without comment. I only person I can fix is myself, and my mother is helping me in this and more. Thank you, Mom.
Thank you Gert for sharing this with us. I also had a similar experience when I attended a workshop at Lilydale, NY. in 2004. The guided meditation I attended was conducted by Tara Sutphen, wife of Dick Sutphen. The Sutphens have had their own self-help, self-hypnosis, guided meditation company for years. I have many of their CDs and tapes. I’m not going to get into all that here – if you are interesed in the Sutphens, just google them.
I also am not going to get into the whole meditation that I attended, just want to share that during the meditation, I felt my mother’s spirit surrounding me. I also wept, and was rocking back and forth. It was very profound. At the close of the meditation, several of the participants shared their experiences, I could not. It was deeply personal. I could see concern on Tara’s face, because I had been crying. But she did not pry.
Our sister-in-law Marty posted on our Family Stories site that something occured shortly after our brother died in 2003. She was in contact with his spirit and she asked him who had come for him. He told her “my mother.”
We have known for years that our mother’s spirit has not left the earthly plane. She has been with us all along. Many different psychic readings to not just us, but to cousins, all have come with the same thing – that a “Jenny” is watching over you.
This is why I said last month, and I said again yesterday, to Joan – that she can lie to herself, and she can lie to her friends, but she can’t lie to our mother’s spirit. And for shame Joan, for what you put on your blog – and I’m not talking about the front page – but that little slur against us on your cyber-bullying page – calling your sisters fools in the same sentance as professing your love for our mother. How do you think she feels about that Joan? And for you to attack us yet again, and stooping so low as to invoke our mother – for shame. And that is emotional abuse to us. But we are far stronger than you know. For we have spiritual help and guidance.
Writing this blog is our way of standing up to a bully – the bully named Joan Wheeler. She has gone in public with our private lives. We have the right to talk about OUR lives, do we not? If Joan can publish a lie about us, we have the right to tell the truth about us. Joan and her bully friends will not intimidate us.
UPDATE Dec 2015; as older posts are being seen I’m updating with links to my second blog and a Facebook page wherein I expose AGAIN the lies, fabrications and hate that Joan M Wheeler says about me and family. After the first book was pulled from publication by the publisher, May 2011, she has ‘self-published’ yet again, her ‘story’, NOW called ‘duped by adoption’. There is NOTHING in it for adoption reform, for she is totally against adoption and her two families. To learn more see…
To Rus – the fool October 5, 2010Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates, Having Fun with Disfunctionality, mental illness.
Tags: delusional trolls, idiots, trolls acting like fools
This is the last time I am going to respond to the troll Rus –
you only see what you want to see – you say what you see on the front page of Joan’s blog was very nice – oh but you did not go to her cyberbullying page to see all the filth she has written about us – and for the remembrance of our mother’s death – she calls us fools.
Rus, you have a lot of nerve lecturing me and my sisters to rid ourselves of our negativity – but go and look at the garbage written by Joan – it is full of negativity – and dear Rus – YOU are one to talk about negativity – weren’t YOU the one who called me a bitch? Not only was that very negative, but it shows you for what you are – a hypocrite!
Your posts are marked as spam – you do not get any more attention – you are nothing. If you don’t like what is written on this blog – why are you here? If there is nothing but negativity here on this blog – why are you subjecting yourself to it all? What are you? A Masocist? Or you get your jollies from cat-fights? lol. Whatever – YOU don’t matter. YOU will not stop us. YOU don’t know what you are talking about – because YOU don’t have the courage to have an open mind and actually READ what we are blogging.
Myst said to put ourselves in Joan’s shoes – no, how about YOU people put yourselves in OUR shoes – Do you think we are making this stuff up? When I have scanned and posted actual court documents that prove that Joan is a liar? How can I make something up like that? Or when Joan says she has had no contact with us and I post PHOTOGRAPHS of us and her –
Rus, I think you are delusional. And you’re acting like a fool. oops, what’s the matter Rus? dont’ like being called a fool? Well neither do I. And yesterday, Joan said that, all the while pretending to honor my mother. And here’s the proof: a screenshot of her cyberbullying page, that I took just 20 minutes ago. And you are really the fool Rus for believing what Joan said last month that she wants to keep the peace. By calling us fools, she is NOT keeping the peace. Joan is a Master Manipulator and she is just pulling your strings. Not only are you a fool, but a little wooden puppet with sawdust for brains becaus you obviously are not thinking for yourself. well, doesn’t bother me anyway. lol I’m off to bed! have a nice day Rus!
There will be no more said on this matter. Spammers will be ignored because they have nothing intelligent to say. And no intelligence to research things before they post. That’s why they are called Trolls Acting Like Fools.
Joan Wheeler – Forbidden Family Chapter 14 – Refutted! October 4, 2010Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Uncategorized.
Tags: abuse, adoption, adoption reform, adoption reunion, bigotry, contradictions, creating problems where none exist, Disrespect, domestic violence, embellishing the truth, harassment of an adoptee's birth family, inter-racial relationships, Lies, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, whining
In Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family Chapter 14, she tells of her college days and her struggles with being in an inter-racial relationship, her wanting to go to Egypt or England, and her budding anti-adoption thoughts. We are not interested in her adoption or anti-adoption concerns, because they do not concern us. We are discussing how her “autobiography” involves US, in particular raking us in her hatred of her adoptive parents. Gert McQueen has already written her take on this chapter in her post, What is a Birth Certificate Used For? Thoughts on Chapter 13 of Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler Gert answers Joan confusion and questions about birth certificates in the short Chapter 13, then goes onto addressing Chapter 14.
Here is a brief segment from Gert’s post:
The times were the mid-1970s, Joan was a very immature sheltered girl who had no experience living with the racial tensions and riots that swept across the country. I, like many others, did. Interracial couplings were NOT the norm, they were scandalous and NOT for every family. The movie Guess who’s coming to dinner appeared in 1967, most families in America were NOT like the family portrayed in the movie. In real life the late 60’s and early 70’s were filled with much violence as the Civil Rights movement was stabilizing. Many whites might have been okay with mix-race couplings but many were not and the same can be said for the Blacks, if they did they were a minority keeping a low profile, something Joan knows nothing about. In many families the idea of crossing racial lines was just not done and the issue was entirely up to an individual family as to how they reached those decisions. When a child goes against the established core values of their family and the wishes of the parents, for shock value, for acting out, for rebellion, the situation never works out well.
This is what Joan did, she did it for rebellion reasons and she gives ‘lip service’ to it when she says ‘…years later that perhaps I used racial issues as a smoke screen – something to focus on instead of what was really bothering me.’ Again, too bad for me that she didn’t come to that conclusion sooner before she interfered with my parental authority and told my 13 years daughter that ‘your mother doesn’t know anything, don’t listen to her, if you want to date a Black boy do it’! But that’s a story for a later. She says that the interracial relationship and adoption issues ‘drove a wedge between her parents and herself…they fought bitterly.’ That is her adoptive parents.
As I stated in a previous post, as very young children, my parents and us 4 children, lived in the same house with a Black family and we were raised not as racists or bigots. My father, in particular, always allowed us to make our own decisions and if we were happy he was happy. My sister Ruth has had long-term relationships with other races and they were and are accepted within our family. My personal views were that it was not right for myself, or my children, even though they, my children, were free to have friends of different races and religions. As a parent I have the right to make the ‘established core values of the family’ and no one has the right to contradict them to my minor children, as Joan did.
On pg 122 Joan tells of a phone conversation with me, ‘the eldest…which made her an authority figure’, in which I tell her that ‘it’s your choice and you alone will have to live with the consequences, but you are young and don’t know what you’re doing…you can’t dislocate yourself from your family…society isn’t ready for it and you have to live with the rules of society’. That’s correct, I said it or something like it and it was sound advice, then and now. But to Joan, she ‘…hung up the phone in disbelief…Gert must have been chosen to be the spokesperson to represent the entire Sippel, Herr and Wheeler family clans.’ Not true! I was stating my own personal opinion and speaking as a parent myself. It is only Joan who feels the need to find someone to point the finger at to say that they are the cause of her problems. So Be It!
So she gets back to having more dramas. ‘There was a Reunion in Progress but no one knew how to proceed.’ Did she? no she just lets more of her inner life talk to her and she comes up with ‘my families hated blacks, therefore, they hated me. I was a sinner in need of repentance….’
ok, let’s talk about race, bigotry and Joan and how she CREATES problems where none exist.
MY personal choices in MY personal life are none of Joan’s concerns and I don’t see why MY personal choices of MY life is in Joan’s book. In 1974, I was living in my own apartment, paying my own rent – (with no help from ANYone), working a full time job, AND taking part time college classes. (so much for Joan’s put-downs of me that I never went to college). I was at this time, 22 years old and exploring MY own life and all that goes with it – the dating scene, etc. In late 1974, a very nice Palestinian man was admitted to the hospital where I worked. We had several talks. In spring of 1975, I was walking to work one night. (I did not own a car, nor knew how to drive – contrary to Joan’s assertions that I drove her around to family reunions in 1974). As I passed the window of a restaurant – there was Farouk. He tapped on the window, waved, and motioned me to come in to the restaurant. He was with a couple of friends, and he bought me a cup of coffee and then drove me to work. We exchanged phone numbers and then began casually dating. The friends he was with were part of a large group of friends that hung out together, and I joined the group. Many of these people are still friends with me today.Some have passed away, others have moved to other parts of the country. Farouk and I dated for about 3 months, and then went separate ways. One of the group, Abdo, asked me out in June 1975, and we fell in love, moving in together just 3 weeks after meeting each other. Our relationship lasted 10 years. He went back to his home country in 1985, and even when he came back to Buffalo in 1994, and I was with my present husband, Abdo and I remained close friends, and I was the one who handled all the legal issues and paperwork concerning his death in 2003.
So we see again Joan not geting details of my life right, even though she deems herself an authority on it. On page 122 of her book she reports that I had been “seriously dating an Arab man,” in May of 1975. Who was she refering to? Farouk or Abdo? NO, she has to bring up the fact that I was involved with an Arab man, because she was involved with a black boy in college and her parents were not accepting it. Instead of writing about her problems with her parents, she has to drag ME into it. I am nobody’s role model. I knew Joan for one year at this point in time, what I did with my life then, now and for all times in the future and the past is NOT Joan’s business and she has no right to hold MY relationships up to scrutiny in her book. Or, as I suspect she did, to use as an arguing tool with her parents. She says her parents hated blacks. Really? well, then why 20 years later why was my current husband John, a black man, accepted by her mother as Uncle John to Joan’s kids (her grandchildren) and accepted into the family?
As to Joan creating problems where none exist – on pages 120 – 124 she is relating her views of inter-racial relationships, even stating “I wanted equality for all people- black, white, women, men, adoptees and non-adoptees.” But she picks and chooses who should have equality. For example, for all her saying that my husband Abdo (Basim in the book) was a nice guy, she shows her prejudice against Arabs twice in her book and once in real life.
In late 1979 Abdo had gone to his home country for a visit of several months. In early 1980, Joan was dating a Jewish boy named Rich. One day, she was visiting me and asked me if there would be a problem when Abdo returned to Buffalo and found out that she was dating a Jewish boy. Oh? She wanted equality for all people? Then why the ASSUMPTION that Jews and Arabs don’t get along? Yes, we all know about the ongoing enmity in the Middle East between the Isrealis and the Palestinians. Abdo is not Palestinian. He is Yemeni. And just because there is a mess in the Middle East, and people living here in America may POLITICALLY choose sides, this does not mean that they are bigots. Joan automatically assumed Abdo was a bigot. On page 123 -124, she says that she almost went on a year long exchange program in Egypt, but was advised by her college advisors that she would have to escorted everywhere. She says she was terrified of living for a year in a country where outspoken women would be a target for ridicule, assault and rape. Yes, sadly, Joan and her college advisors were correct, however, to paint all Arabs as such, and to paint all Arabs as Jew-haters, especially one who she had known for 4 years is reprehensible.
Perhaps she thought Abdo would have a problem with Rich because there was a definite problem once with Manuel, the black boy. They both came up one weekend for a visit – in his car. We all went to Voelker’s bowling alley. I was in the ladies room and Joan came running in, scared out of her mind. Manuel had just threatened her. He had alreay beaten her up, and she was terrified he would do so again. Oh boy, more drama. What to do? So I spoke to Abdo. Before we left the bowling alley we told both Joan and Manuel that we did not want any problems. It was decided that Joan would sleep on our couch, and Manuel was told to sleep in his car. (it was warm enough). Manuel had no problem with smacking around Joan, but he listened and obeyed when Abdo laid down the rules. The next morning, Manuel came upstairs, we had breakfast and the two of them left to drive back to college. I never saw that boy again and good riddance. Abdo did not have a problem with Manuel being black, but did have a problem with him hitting Joan and possibly creating a problem in our house. And when Abdo returned to Buffalo in 1980, Joan had already stopped seeing the Jewish boy, but I told him about Joan’s question. He couldn’t believe she would think that of him! Abdo was one of the sweetest persons on this planet and wouldn’t hurt a fly. Yes, we had our fights, as all couples do, and both our tempers got the best of us, but on the whole, Abdo was kind, quiet and gentle. There is another anti-Arab slur in the book, but I will deal that when we get to it. We are still discussing her college years and her problems with dating the black boy.
What’s with this statement of Joan’s on page 123 “My families hated blacks.” Where does she get this crap? Mayber her adopted parents had a problem with interracial relationships, but her birth family did not. At least her father and siblings. SOME, not all of my mother’s family don’t approve of interracial relationships, but have never held my choice in a life partner against me.
But this statement is included in a long winded paragraph, where she is going off on a tangent about her parents not happy with her choice in dating a black boy. Joan then comes up with this intelligent conclusion: “my families hated blacks, therefore, hated me.”
Where does she come up with this shit? Who the hell EVER said they hated her? In 1975, that is. All Gert did was talk to her on the phone about the possible repercussions of inter-racial relationships. Gert was giving her good advice, that if she wanted to date a black boy, she had better be prepared for any backlash. And I don’t mean from anybody in her families, I’m talking about society in general. In the 23 years that I’ve been with John, I have never been the target of any racial slurs, but on 3 occasions, all in restaurants, we did get some filthy looks, two occasions from whites, and one occasion from a black lady. John and I are mature enough to handle that, in 1975, Joan obviously was not mature enough to handle anything like that. My god, she couldn’t even handle me supposedly telling her around Christmas 1974 that she spelled our last name wrong, and she’s got herself imagining her families “hating” her because she’s dating a black boy. Is Joan a mind-reader? Or is she like Deanna Troi on Star Trek the Next Generation, who can sense other beings emotions! – Oh, yes, she already said in reporting on how she was a bridesmaid at the age of 18 for an adoptive cousin and she “sensed” people talking about her. Deanna Troi comes from the planet Betazed. Is Joan from that planet as well?
But see, this is how Joan embellishes things and blows them out of proportions. I don’t doubt that her parents were not accepting this relationship and some harsh words were exchanged – but how does she conclude that the Sippel family hated her? At this point in time, Kathy was living in England, not having even met Joan. I have no idea what my father or brother thought of her relationship – I don’t recall her even asking me about my relationship. so she gets some advice from one member of the Sippel family, and right away, the whole Sippel family hates her. And you know what? The Sippel family probably could care less who she was dating. We were all living our own lives, my family accepted Abdo and in turn John.
But hold on! Joan says at the top of page of 122 – “My sisters and older brother accepted my inter-racial relationship.” She then goes on to say that her natural father was outraged.” – Baloney! Gert has already explained that my father raised us NOT to be bigots, and since I was already involved with a man of a different race, why would he be outraged at Joan? This makes no sense! Maybe he was showing concern because his daughter was getting smacked around this particular black boy! Did Joan ever think of that? That our objections to Manuel was because of his behavior towards her? That we actually were concerned for her safety? Oh no! Because that would show that we actually CARED ABOUT HER – and this would go against her ASSUMPTIONS that we all hated blacks and therefore we hated her. And this would not make sense in her book, because her book is all about showing how the whole world and her families, detest her and give her nothing but grief!
And getting back to Joan’s statement about Gert when she advised Joan on the phone: “Gert must have been chosen to be the spokesperson to represent the entire Sippel, Herr and Wheeler family clans.” we see Joan’s propensity for BLOWING THINGS OUT OF PROPORTION! Somehow I doubt that a vote was taken by every member of my mother’s family, (the Herrs) the Sippel family, and the Wheeler family and they all chose Gert to speak to Joan about dating a black kid. What a ridiculous statement to make! Gert hadn’t met even one tenth of the Wheeler family, was busy raising her own two kids, didn’t see half of the Herr family, and the Sippels didn’t take a vote to elect her either! Why must Joan constantly speak in the superlative? Because she likes to embellish things – she likes to make things bigger than what they are. And if the reality doesn’t fit her fantasy of how things should be – she will just go ahead, make stupid conclusions, and publish them as facts. Hence the purpose of this blog – to point out Joan’s mistaken “facts” and present the true story of the Sippel family.
On page 122 Joan says there was a Reunion in Progress. (her capitalizations). She whines elsewhere in the book that now that she’s reunited with her birth family, she had these people to get to know. There was tremendous pressure on her, she was on display, they all knew her, but she didn’t know them, and blah blah blah.
At the time of our “reunion” with Joan, I myself was on a voyage of self-discovery. So was Joan, having found her birth family. Joan makes it out that she was the only one confused by meeting new people, etc. etc. Well, so was I. I was living in my first apartment, making choices in my life, including scholastic, career, sexual, and social. Are these not struggles for EVERY person on the planet in young adulthood? What makes Joan so dam special? She isn’t and the sooner she gets that through her thick skull the better she will be able to cope with life. I mean, come on! This happened in 1974. It is now 2010. THIRTY-SIX YEARS LATER – and Joan is still whining about how she was sooooo put out about her CONFUSION in meeting a whole new family!
Oh for crying out loud! When a person gets married – they have a whole new family of in-laws to meet and get to know and integrate into their life – you have to learn how not to piss off your mother-in-law, don’t serve meat to a cousin-in-law, because they’re vegan, don’t invite aunt-in-law and sister-in-law to the same party because they don’t get along. EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET THAT GETS MARRIED HAS TO MEET A NEW FAMILY AND LEARN ABOUT THEM! So when will Joan stop whining about having to learn about a whole new bunch of people! We weren’t axe murderers for crying out loud! Joan says nobody knew how to proceed with the reunion. Really? I did. I simply ACCEPTED HER! I RESPECTED HER. Was I perfect? NO! Did I inadvertently hurt her feelings when I corrected her misspelling of our family name? I don’t know. I don’t remember doing it. I am simply a flawed human being. HOWEVER, I never went out of my way to hurt her. The problems between us began in the 80’s when she began to disrespect me and go out of HER way to hurt me. But we will get to those later. I do want to touch on a statement of Gert regarding this “reunion in progress.”
“Joan never gave anyone the opportunities to continue with the ‘in progress’ because she was so argumentive and aggressive in her positions and would not allow others, particularly the adoptive and birth families, to have their own opinions and views on any social issue, it was always about Joan. “
Oh, yes, this is so true. Joan always was opinionated and she never learned to back off and let other people have a say. And by god, don’t you EVER take an opposing viewpoint to Joan’s. And I’m not talking about adoption – it’s EVERYTHING! She doesn’t like this, she doesn’t like that – everybody has to stop what they’re doing or thinking about and cowtow to Dictator Joan. Now you blog readers may or may not know that in the 1980’s I was a professional belly dancer. I had a scrapbook of pictures of belly dancers, and one day (in the early 80’s) Joan was at my house and she was looking at the scrapbook. She said, “I don’t approve of this skimpy costume.” What? Who asked for HER approval? Oh, well, every belly dancer on the planet – get rid of your dance costumes because Joan doesn’t approve of them. Oh, but wasn’t she complaining because if she lived in Egypt, SHE would be singled out for being an opinionated outspoken woman? So here she is singling out OTHER women because of their dance costumes? As I said before – she picks and chooses who should have equality. Does she have a problem with ballet dancers? Gosh, I can see every curve and bump on a male ballet dancer – and those tutus! Shocking! I can see all the way up to the dancer’s crotch! – oh, well they’re covered up with a leotard. Well, how about the staute of David – nude drawings by all the famous painters – The Vetruvian Man – Venus de Milo with her breast exposed – IT’S CALLED ART! Dance is an artform of the human body. I have seen nude dancers – and I’m not talking about the exotic dancers in strip joints – I’ve seen modern jazz dancers IN THE NUDE! Golly Gee, they didn’t even have on a skimpy belly dancing outfit! Let’s burn them at the stake! Why? Because Joan Wheeler would not approve of them.
Another time – it was 1983 – Joan, her husband Colby and I went to see the new Star Trek movie – The Search for Spock. Towards the end of the movie, there is a scene in a temple, with your usual Hollywood style temple maidens – all dressed in see-through white flowing dresses. Oh boy! In the car ride home that was the whole topic of conversation!
Okay – let me expound on something here. I have had a crush on Leonard Nimoy and the character of Mr. Spock since the summer of 1966 when I saw the very first commercial for Star Trek. I didn’t even wait for the show to begin – I saw 5 seconds of him on a commercial and was hooked! In the 1982 Star Trek movie, The Wrath of Khan, Spock died in the end. Oh that hurt me. BUT we science fiction fans could see in the film’s last 5 minutes how they set it up for Spock’s return. So we knew he was coming back – we just didn’t know HOW. So now in The Search for Spock, we see Spock come back to life. And it was a pretty good movie! I was walking on air when we left the movie. In the next 10 minutes, during the 5 mile drive back to my house, all I heard was all about those disgusting white dresses and blah blah blah and I couldn’t wait to get the hell out of that car. I got in the house and I had a headache! Abdo asked me what was wrong. I said “I have a headache – that bitch just ruined my mood – Spock came back to life and all because of that idiot and her f’ing big mouth I have a headache!”
Even today, I am a huge Star Trek fan, and I also head up a local Star Trek fan group, called the USS Ari, a starship, formerly of Starfleet International, now an independent ship/group. FORTY-SIX YEARS OF LOVING STAR TREK and when Captain Ruth Pace, commander, USS Ari NCC 1723, comes out of a Star Trek movie with a headache and just wanting to run in the house – you have to wonder why! BECAUSE JOAN IS A PSYCHIC VAMPIRE! She sucks all the air out of the room. And when her mouth starts going and her voice starts getting shrill – all you want to do is get the hell away from her. I left her daughter’s fourth birthday party because she and her mother, in front of the birthday princess and all the guests – started SCREAMING at each other. My ears were hurting – I got John and said “I have to go. I can’t stand this noise.” So we left.
Another time on the phone, (around 1993, so much for her saying she hasn’t had contact with me) we were talking and all of a sudden we started arguing about the money she stole from me. She started yelling at me, I tried to tell her to stop, she kept on going off on a tangent – then she said, “and I know you hate the word, but I’m going to say it anyway: adoption, ADOPTION ADOPTION.” Then she hung up. WTF? first, I never said I hated the word, just dam tired of it. Second, the conversation was not about adoption, it was about the money she owed me. Third, her statement “I know you hate the word, but I’m going to say it anyway..”shows how SHE DOESN’T CARE ABOUT HOW ANYONE FEELS. SHE HAS NO RESPECT FOR ANYONE. Fourth, just like the rambling long paragraph on pages 122 and 123, where she starts out about her dating a black boy, gets off on a tangent about a woman dying leaving five little kids, throwing out stuff like “respect your elders, “What.,she’s angry? and concludes that everybody hates her! She gets herself worked up and when she gets going she can’t or won’t stop and ends up pushing people away from her. I have had way too many outbursts like that from her and for my own peace of mind – and the sake of my ears – (not to mention her stealing money from me, stealing the beads off my dead mother’s wedding dress, her disrespect of my wishes of not talking about infertility after my miscarriage and other things) – by 1990 I didn’t want any more “reunion in progress” with her – she ruined it. I don’t associate with people who treat me like dirt. Do you?
oh and Joan, your addition to your cyberbullying page – geez! This is how you honor Mom on her birthday? Slapping her obit up there and saying: “Mom, I’m sorry your older daughters are making fools of themselves. I love you, Mom. I’m sorry you died too soon. If you had lived, we would be a loving family.”
See how Joan keeps trashing her sisters YET AGAIN on October 4, 2010 (got that Rus – see how Joan wants peace, yet keeps yakking about us?) Anybody who would put up such a birthday rememberance is NOT honoring the dead woman – anybody with brains can see what Joan is doing – USING a dead woman’s obituary and trying to say she loves her, and trashes her sisters in the same sentance. No, Joan, everybody can see who the fool is. And I said before – you can lie to yourself, you can lie to your friends, but you can’t lie to Mom. She’s not that stupid you know. and neither are we. roflmao!
1. Gert – October 4, 2010
Every human being is going to DIE, that’s a fact of life! Missing someone who has died is also a fact of life! To wish for things to be different is also a fact of life!
But…to use the dead and their memories to PROMOTE one’s (Joan’s) personal vindictive campaign against one’s own blood…and to invoke the dead against blood family…in the form of BULLYING…is not only dishonorable…it also shows the true nature of the one who is promoting their vindictiveness…Joan wrote and invoked our mother to use against us…shame, shame, shame!
Today, Oct 4, is our mother’s birthday! It is NOT a date for Joan to continue her lying and bullshit…Joan what do you really think our mother is thinking about you right now? Would she be proud of you?
Why don’t you just stand up like a woman and answer your blood relatives as to your actions against them? Why don’t you allow our mother to rest in peace?
Joan, you are a very sick person.