Ex:
1. Woe is I.
2. Woe is me.
Pick one. The grammatically correct one is #1, but really. Would anyone say or write that? See what I mean. This rule is an ass, too.
In the case at hand, genius doesn't DO anything. Genius may allow someone to DO something, but genius itself doesn't do ANYTHING. If grammar rules force a person to compose a sentence that says that genius, rather than the person, is doing something, the rule is an ass.
Common sense overrules grammaticians any day of the week.
"If that's the rule, then the rule is an ass."You are right "Woe is I" is indeed gramatically correct. What offends is the sound of the statement rather than the grammer.
"Woe is me" is really a phrase derived originally from the Bible. "Alas, woe is me". It has been around, repeated for thousands of years and has become so entrenched in the language the gramatically correct version is offensive to our sensibilities.
The sentence, "[W]oe is me" can't, technically, use an object form because the verb "is" won't take an object; it can be linked to a predicate nominative, which would be "I." On the other hand (take a deep breath), no one talks like that. The phrase "Woe is I" is actually the title of a popular book — Woe Is I: The Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English — by Patricia T. O'Conner. I don't own the book, so I don't know what O'Conner says about this titular phrase, but I suspect it's like the detective who discovers, at long last, the murder victim's body: "My God, it's her!" he's going to shout, not "My God, it's she!" (which would be grammatically correct). Perhaps O'Conner makes an argument for why "me" would, in fact, be correct.
In short, because of the history of this phrase and others, it has become an exception to the rule but does not negate the rule.