Colleague posts picture of herself in underwear on social media

[Caracal]

I am not saying that I AGREE that these things should happen, but it will cause discussion around these aspects and in her work setting. What I am saying is that WE DO live in a sexist world where there ARE double standards (I am a woman btw). That's why I am worried. There is a nuance here that I cannot express in written format, I don't understand why I am being so misunderstood. I am all for free and liberated women, but in the context of academia and the world we live in, she will get into trouble that she does not deserve :/ Since I know other things about her that I won't disclose here, I do believe it.

The disconnect is that your perception of the seriousness of the situation seems wildly off base. I can list on one hand the  things a grad student could post on facebook that would actually get them in trouble. (Personal information about students, sexual pictures of people under 18, wildly offensive racial content) Grad students aren't faculty members and  don't face the same level of scrutiny and judgement. You're right about double standards and all the rest, but this isn't a situation where someone is dynamiting their professional life and you need to worry about it. Just roll your eyes and move along.

[polly_mer]

Adel,

What do you want from us?  You've already gotten the agreed upon actions of ignore, disengage, or have a private conversation about professionalism if you care that much about this person's career.

We're not all going to agree with you and that's just how it is.

You've already spent more time here arguing why you're right than any of the actions require.

Let this be and go do any of the things that will help you make progress on your PhD or any of the other professionally-related actions about which you've asked us.  I guarantee you that people are discussing your actions as posted on social media here.

[adel9216]

I got the answers I needed. I wanted to know if I had to tell her. The short answer is no.

So let's move on. I am on vacation and am allow to spend my vacation time as I wish. That does not mean that I am not working on my research. Again, assumptions. No one should work 24/7...

Thanks everyone for the input

[Ruralguy]

Well, isolating this to just the questions regarding your friend, I'd have recommended moving on from the beginning. I have to admit I have a bit of libertarianism in me, and just want to let adults be. She might be hurting herself a bit, but that's really her problem. I doubt very many students, if any, or administrators, are getting worked up over it, even if they know.

[ciao_yall]

On a similar-ish note, I have a colleague who posts links from her official professor account to some very controversial websites about an issue on which she is very politically active.

These websites are not in her field of study. They clearly take a position that might make some students feel discriminated against for their religion or nationality.

She says that this has nothing to do with the students themselves. It is about actions that a particular government has taken which she vehemently opposes. She says students are welcome to ask her for clarification on her position if they are concerned about her opinions of them. She believes she is very "approachable" and students have never commented to her.

Other faculty have taken offense and asked her to take these links down, but to no avail. Other faculty claim to have received emails from students concerned about how they will be treated by her in their class, but she claims these are "hoaxes" because the faculty "won't name names."

I don't disagree with anyone on this issue. She has a right to post information she believes is important. I believe in her heart of hearts she means well and would not discriminate against a student. Her colleagues and students have a right to disagree with her politically. And, they can be concerned that her stance is so strong it might color her perceptions of them, individually.

But at least she doesn't post pix of herself in her underwear.

[Wahoo Redux]

Well, isolating this to just the questions regarding your friend, I'd have recommended moving on from the beginning. I have to admit I have a bit of libertarianism in me, and just want to let adults be. She might be hurting herself a bit, but that's really her problem. I doubt very many students, if any, or administrators, are getting worked up over it, even if they know.

I wonder, and worry a great deal, that we as a society are becoming increasingly censorious. 

There are valid reasons for censoring what we say and share (violence towards women, racism, etc.), particularly in the workplace, but we are also in danger of shuttering our expression.

Prudishness and censorship were, among other things, reasons for the great hippy turmoil of the '60s and 70s. 

[polly_mer]

I wonder, and worry a great deal, that we as a society are becoming increasingly censorious.

Becoming?  Where have you been for the past N centuries?

The problem I see is that broader audiences and real diversity of voices collide with the need for healthy organizations to have agreement on the big picture. 

You only need rules to prevent people from doing things they want to do that the group doesn't want done.  One way to tell who is really part of the group and who is not part of the group involves watching who keeps running afoul of the rules and therefore wants the rules changed and who works well within the current structure and sees no need for changes to the rules.  Someone who reports every tiny details that is overruled at the decision-maker level also isn't part of the group in terms of power and acceptance by other group members.

I bet folding money that anyone like ciao_all's colleague who is an activist will indeed treat students differently if those students have the 'wrong' views.  I've had to sit on multiple committees investigating student complaints on that very topic.  Those situations happen enough to give academics as a whole a bad reputation for doing that very thing.

It's pretty entertaining to watch political commercials that are nationally funded that completely biff on message to the locals in any large group.  Yep, the really liberal liberals love the incumbent and the really conservative conservatives love the incumbent because the incumbent has indeed delivered for the district. 

Trying to paint the candidates as being on the wrong national team misses our local reality and thus actually hurts the other candidate.  I don't know if that's the intent of the ads by the outside groups, but that's the result every bit as much as the year the national ad company featured a saguaro* in the New Mexico contest.

* New Mexico does not have saguaros, that's Arizona and Nevada.

[Wahoo Redux]

Thank you, Polly.  You are soooooo insightful and experienced.  So many stories----You really worked in a place with truly awful, evil faculty.  At one time or another you have investigated virtually every evil thing a faculty could do.  How interesting.

[polly_mer]

Thank you, Polly.  You are soooooo insightful and experienced.  So many stories----You really worked in a place with truly awful, evil faculty.  At one time or another you have investigated virtually every evil thing a faculty could do.  How interesting.

It is pretty interesting how many faculty insist that certain things never happen and yet I've encountered more than one case in all of them in under twenty years of experience.

It's almost like some folks have a distinct lack of experience by being just teachers in college with minimal experience in the glorious whole of academic experience.

[Wahoo Redux]

Sure.  But most "just teachers" are lifetime adjuncts, many of whom know a good deal more than you seem to give them credit for, unlike those of us who have been involved with the life of the university, like you and me, Polly.  Nice try.

And this is pretty funny, "You only need rules to prevent people from doing things they want to do that the group doesn't want done," followed by "I bet folding money that anyone like ciao_all's colleague who is an activist will indeed treat students differently if those students have the 'wrong' views."

Hmmmm. Where do you fit in that paradigm, Polly?

[Ruralguy]

Actually, the main problem with Ciao's friend is that she's doing this from a college computer. At my school, that would probably violate some policies even if the views were tame. I would lean towards supporting her right to post such things so long as they didn't violate college computer use policies. If they do, she has to switch to her own computer or a Wordpress site or something.  Even then, I suppose anybody could cross a line. Also, she must realize that certain political views are so controversial that its just too difficult for the two parties on either side of the issues to think impartially.

So, without saying that either woman should stop what they are doing (the revealing pictures woman or the political firebrand woman), they are engaging in risky behavior  that might eventually cross a line that could get them in real trouble. Are they already there? I can't say. Probably not, although they obviously are getting attention.

[ciao_yall]

The problem I see is that broader audiences and real diversity of voices collide with the need for healthy organizations to have agreement on the big picture. 

Why is that a problem?

Broader audiences and diversity create a need to develop agreement. Because sometimes there are disagreements. Because... diversity.

You only need rules to prevent people from doing things they want to do that the group power structure doesn't want done.  One way to tell who is really part of the group power structure and who is not part of the group power structure involves watching who keeps running afoul of the rules and therefore wants the rules changed and who works well within the current structure and sees no need for changes to the rules.  Someone who reports every tiny details that is overruled at the decision-maker level also isn't part of the group power structure in terms of power and acceptance by other group power structure members. Marginalization, discrimination, and oppression are ways of saying that someone's feelings, opinions, and voice don't matter.

Isn't everyone a part of the group? Your para makes more sense with the edits above.

The problem I see is that broader audiences and real diversity of voices collide with the need for healthy organizations to have agreement on the big picture. 

So, we negotiate. What is the "big picture?" Who is harmed or offended by leaving content up versus removing it? What are alternatives to the current state that has someone concerned?

[Juvenal]

Raise your brow; roll your eyes; move on.

Were they nice undies?

[secundem_artem]

Undies schumdies

At least she's not done anything truly unforgivable like pretending she's a POC from which there is just no coming back.

[Wahoo Redux]

Undies schumdies

At least she's not done anything truly unforgivable like pretending she's a POC from which there is just no coming back.

I suppose we could blame her if her undies helped her get one of the coveted TT jobs in academia which relates to her undergarment expertise and her lived experience as an underwear-wearer.