Meghan Daum, author

		2008 columns
		2006 columns
		2005 columns
	Back to Home

	12/29/07 - The gift card shuffle
	12/22/07 - Tracking the mild coyote
	12/15/07 - Knocked up but not out
	12/08/07 - Save the world: stay married
	12/01/07 - The Red Cross' latest emergency
	11/24/07 - No more reading the readers
	11/17/07 - Pictures imperfect
	11/10/07 - Shelter Mag Blues
	11/03/07 - The Tao of Blowhards
	10/27/07 - Cliche and cataclysm
	10/20/07 - The Porn Age's unsexiness
	10/13/07 - Art as child's play
	10/06/07 - Did 9/11 kill feminism?
	09/29/07 - Everyone's a 'genius'
	09/22/07 - Live and let live -- nah . . .
	09/15/07 - Should kids be seen?
	09/08/07 - Defending Jerry Lewis
	09/01/07 - Our wonder of Wonder Bread
	08/25/07 - American Apparel's ick
	08/18/07 - Death by numbers
	08/11/07 - When Hillary met Robert
	08/04/07 - The case for conspiracies
	07/28/07 - A) Do you love polls, or b) are you weird?
	07/21/07 - Good ... and smug
	07/14/07 - The little black dress of 'responsibility'
	07/07/07 - Little voices of distraction
	06/30/07 - Who killed Antioch? Womyn
	06/23/07 - 40-love, or 20-love?
	06/16/07 - Our blond obsession, from Di to Paris
	06/09/07 - Down the aisle and over the top
	06/02/07 - Dr. Death, American icon
	05/26/07 - Curse of the normal
	05/19/07 - Without smoking, films lose some fire
	05/12/07 - Palm Tuesday
	05/05/07 - Write free and get locked up
	04/28/07 - Does getting him a beer count as work?
	04/21/07 - Try this wrinkle: Grow up
	04/14/07 - NBC flop could be a hit -- on HBO
	04/09/07 - Why doesn't Harvard love me?
	04/02/07 - Attack of the Killer Memoir
	03/26/07 - Dreaming your dream house
	03/19/07 - Documentaries or propaganda?
	03/12/07 - Sleep at your own risk
	03/03/07 - What a card!
	02/24/07 - Echo Park in Mexico
	02/17/07 - Fame-iness
	02/10/07 - I'm with Cupid
	02/03/07 - What Hillary's humor reveals
	01/27/07 - Doggy gentrification
	01/20/07 - Wanna be happy? Expect the worst
	01/13/07 - Adam Carolla's genius -- spoiled
	01/06/07 - The books that read women

The little black dress of 'responsibility'
Perfect for every occasion when you have to avoid the heat, the rap or the blame.
July 14, 2007
IN CASE YOU haven't heard, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa takes full responsibility for his relationship with Telemundo newscaster Mirthala Salinas. Not some responsibility, not partial responsibility, not indirect responsibility. Full.
His exact words: "It is true that I have a relationship with Ms. Mirthala Salinas. As I've said, I take full responsibility for my actions…. "
Which actions does he mean, exactly? Is he talking only about cheating on his wife? Or is he referring to actions specific to his relationship with Salinas? Is a marriage, or any relationship, an action? Can one person take full responsibility for a relationship involving another consenting adult? Is it possible to achieve such interpersonal unilateralism without tying somebody up?
A person can, of course, be "accountable," "chiefly responsible" or (here's an idea) "the one to blame" when something bad happens. But somehow, "I take full responsibility," with its presumptuous bombast and its inherent oversimplification of the issue at hand, has become the preferred sentence of apologists everywhere.
"I take full responsibility" sounds arrogant, but also suggests that words are being uttered under duress. It conjures the image of a teenager who's father has marched him to the neighbor's house to confess that he broke their window. Maybe that's why the unfortunate rumors that Salinas might be pregnant (she's not) gave the whole saga the air of an "ABC After-School Special." In that teen-and-trouble genre, "I take full responsibility" is code for, "I knocked her up and boy is her dad (and my wife) gonna be upset."
The "full responsibility" phrase has been uttered with such astonishing frequency by people who mean precisely its opposite that it's become conversational filler, a throat-clearing noise so inconsequential that most listeners forget that they heard it as quickly as the speaker forgets that he said it.
Consider these events of relatively recent history. Can you guess which ones were accompanied by the "I take full responsibility" mantra?
a) President Bush discusses the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina. b) Los Angeles City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo admits that his wife drove and damaged a city-owned vehicle on a suspended license. c) Republican Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio is sentenced to 30 months in prison for soliciting and accepting bribes from corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff. d) Paul Wolfowitz talks to the World Bank staff about how he secured job promotions and raises for his longtime girlfriend. e) A St. Louis computer consultant admits to wearing a Navy Cross medal he did not earn. f) Sprint car driver Shane Forte feels bad about tapping Travis Rutz's car, causing Rutz to collide with a third driver during a race in Elma, Wash. g) Mets pitcher Dave Williams feels bad about losing to Houston last week. h) Yankees General Manager Brian Cashman feels bad about the Yankees.
If you guessed "all of the above," you're right! In each of these cases, the subject announced that he "took full responsibility" for his ineptness, misjudgment, inappropriate words or loss in sports.
As phrases go, "I take full responsibility" is more than versatile, it's downright Renaissance. It is as comfortable 'fessing up to humanitarian disasters as taking the blame for a bad day on the ball field, like a little black dress that's perfect for every occasion.
What's its secret? "I take full responsibility" is simultaneously over the top and utterly inadequate, allowing self-aggrandizement to distract from the actual wrongdoing. By elevating mere responsibility to full responsibility, failings are transformed into bragging rights.
Worse, by so casually tossing around the term "responsibility," we undermine not only the word but the entire concept. And not even the biggest ego wants to take responsibility for that.
© Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times

© 2008, Meghan Daum