Another professor bites the dust

[smallcleanrat]

Main thought: It was a comment worth calling out, but IMHO there was no good reason for things to have gone past that.

There is a word people online commonly use to draw attention to the (possibly unintentional) negative connotations of a post: "Phrasing!"

Anyway, some secondary thoughts:



Criticism - Context Matters

1) I have absolutely no problem with holding a department chair at one of the most prominent universities in the country to a higher standard than some random clickbait twitter account.

1a) That includes expecting this professor to be able to recognize signs of factually questionable clickbait and to exercise better judgment when deciding what to retweet.

1b) "Think more carefully about the connotations of the language you use," is not an unreasonable admonishment to aim at a professional in the field of psychiatry. He's not a 'shock jock'-style podcaster or a comedian performing a set. I think it's fine to expect him to take considerations of bias and stigma more seriously than the average person does.



Professional Consequences - Intent Matters

2) There are so many reasons I find the university's punitive response unfair, highly disproportionate, and harmful, not just to the professor but to the larger social goals of combating bias.

2a) There's got to be some distinction between hostility and thoughtlessness. Consider that the prof acknowledged the criticism. He did not snipe at the critics and double down on his statement, like some would have.

2b) I have seen no mention of previous "problematic" statements from this prof, so thus far there is no reason to think this remark is part of a pattern of behavior. Pouncing on someone to this extent for a "first offense" (so to speak) doesn't leave much room for a person to make an honest mistake, learn from it, and do better.

2c) I have seen no mention of any behavior within his professional roles (department chair, professor, psychiatrist) which indicate any underlying problems related to his character or his attitudes towards colleagues, students, or patients.

IMHO, this is the level things need to reach before serious consequences like suspension or firing should even be up for discussion (let alone carried out). Someone may say something 'off-the-clock' that might raise concerns, but concerns that there might be bad behavior on the job are not the same as actual bad behavior on the job...

But I acknowledge a fair amount of ignorance regarding the general rules, procedures, and best practices for this type of administrative decision-making.



Backlash against Backlash

3) The university is the entity with the authority to suspend or fire this prof.

The university is the entity that bears the responsibility to wield that authority fairly and responsibly.

The university is the entity that made the firing decision.

The university will NOT be the sole (or even primary) target of anger and contempt for this decision.

Backlash against stories like this often generalizes to practically anyone who thinks the initial 'insensitivity' or 'bias' worth discussing. It all gets classified and dismissed as 'cancel culture' or 'woke madness.'

I don't have a grand conclusion to this last point. It's just an additional reason I find stories like this discouraging.

[Ruralguy]

My feeling is that the suspension for several weeks (but hopefully without pay) would have been sufficient punishment. A permanent demotion is marginal, but I get it, and I don't think firing him, if that's what is decided , is fair at all. That would be disproportionate.

Still, it was very sloppy for someone of that stature to comment on twitter at all, and specially not on anything racial, and a re-tweet at that. It seems like he fell into every trap there is.

[ergative]

He treats schizophrenia.  How will any of this help his patients? 

I mostly agree with you, but I'd like to push back on this point. How will prosecuting a life-saving surgeon for embezzling help her patients? How will arresting a hostage negotiator for domestic violence help hostages? How will firing a professor for bank fraud help her students? People who help people in one domain do not get a free pass for bad actions in another domain.  Y'know, like how brilliant research professors should still be fired if they harass their students.

[mahagonny]

For those who are keeping score, (and you will have noticed already) she has pretty privilege. She has a career that would be out of the question for the vast majority of us, modeling, as well as any everyday advantages that come your way from being attractive.  So if the idea is, people who have privilege  are just fragile whiners  (which white people have been asked to accept), then...

ETA: the professor doesn't win any grace and tact points, but neither does the model. Not with this 'In an interview Wednesday night, Gatwech said "Coming from somebody with so much power, that was so disappointing. I was like, this is straight up racism."'

What about the power in calling someone identified as 'Caucasian' as racist? The media, academic world jumps like a trained seal. It's mud you can sling that always sticks. The only way to beat that one is to be Steve Bannon or Donald Trump. (That's partly why he was elected; people have called every republican candidate racist since Ronald Reagan). I can see why she'd clear the air about the Guinness Book of World's Records rumor, but that wasn't his fault.

In this photo she does not look as dark as she does in the photo where she is sitting on the bed.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/columbia-suspends-psychiatry-head-after-freak-of-nature-tweet-about-models-skin-color/3569382/

Whomever actually is the darkest person on Earth is probably not also a beautiful model. If anything she's gotten extra attention from the rumor, and someone else could claim credit, if anyone cares.

[Caracal]

He treats schizophrenia.  How will any of this help his patients? 

I mostly agree with you, but I'd like to push back on this point. How will prosecuting a life-saving surgeon for embezzling help her patients? How will arresting a hostage negotiator for domestic violence help hostages? How will firing a professor for bank fraud help her students? People who help people in one domain do not get a free pass for bad actions in another domain.  Y'know, like how brilliant research professors should still be fired if they harass their students.

Yes, and actually in those hypothetical examples, those things are relevant to their jobs. . I don't want the person cutting me open in the hospital to be someone who is embezzling money. That either suggests they've been driven to extreme measures by personal problems which might be very relevant for me as a patient, or that this is someone who doesn't think they need to abide by rules, which is also not really what I'm looking for in the person who cuts into my body while I'm knocked out.

[marshwiggle]

Backlash against stories like this often generalizes to practically anyone who thinks the initial 'insensitivity' or 'bias' worth discussing. It all gets classified and dismissed as 'cancel culture' or 'woke madness.'

I don't agree. Everyone that I've seen on here has agreed that the comment was ill-advised or inappropriate.  No-one has suggested that people were wrong for being bothered by it. All of the criticism has been related to the calls for action against the prof.

So, "discussing" it hasn't been discouraged; demands for retribution is what have gotten "backlash".

[Wahoo Redux]

He treats schizophrenia.  How will any of this help his patients? 

I mostly agree with you, but I'd like to push back on this point. How will prosecuting a life-saving surgeon for embezzling help her patients? How will arresting a hostage negotiator for domestic violence help hostages? How will firing a professor for bank fraud help her students? People who help people in one domain do not get a free pass for bad actions in another domain.  Y'know, like how brilliant research professors should still be fired if they harass their students.

Are you equating a poorly worded tweet meant to celebrate, no matter how clumsily, the beauty of an African American model (which is what this poor dork was trying to do) with embezzling from patients, domestic abuse, and bank fraud?

Come on.

I respect you, ergative, but please.

[ergative]

He treats schizophrenia.  How will any of this help his patients? 

I mostly agree with you, but I'd like to push back on this point. How will prosecuting a life-saving surgeon for embezzling help her patients? How will arresting a hostage negotiator for domestic violence help hostages? How will firing a professor for bank fraud help her students? People who help people in one domain do not get a free pass for bad actions in another domain.  Y'know, like how brilliant research professors should still be fired if they harass their students.

Are you equating a poorly worded tweet meant to celebrate, no matter how clumsily, the beauty of an African American model (which is what this poor dork was trying to do) with embezzling from patients, domestic abuse, and bank fraud?

Come on.

I respect you, ergative, but please.

No. I'm saying it is faulty reasoning to imply that bad behavior in one domain should be forgiven by virtue of good behavior in another domain. I use extreme examples because they highlight the flaws in the reasoning.

[Wahoo Redux]

This is the trouble: Lieberman meant no harm.  He worded a Tweet poorly.  A TWEET!  And this is a supermodel, after all, not a student or some random kid walking on the street.  She is known as "Queen of the Dark"; put that into Google; Nyakim Gatwech embraces it.  She is making more money than any of us by parlaying her skin-tone into a booming career.

So no, firstly don't exaggerate.  You are nowhere in the realm of a doctor who embezzles from hu's patients.  Why even try that hyperbole?  It is ridiculous.  Is a comparison to Hitler next?

Secondly, Lieberman really did nothing wrong. He was talking about her pulchritude (for those who read the other thread).  He was making no racist statement.  And Nyakim Gatwech is a remarkable human because of her pigmentation.  We still have no real response to Andre the Giant's journalistic description as a "freak of nature"----someone opined that no one should ever be called a "freak," which is fine, but where is the mania for punishment?

Thirdly, have we lost all right to an opinion outside of work?  Most people seem to think that it is perfectly reasonable that a dweeb tweet should have ramifications.  But where is the threat to students or patients here?

No, this one is simply part of the mania for stomping out (the perception) of racism on campus.

Meanwhile, the Proud Boys are training to fight.  Anyone want to take them on?  Or would we rather cannibalize our own ranks?

[smallcleanrat]

Backlash against stories like this often generalizes to practically anyone who thinks the initial 'insensitivity' or 'bias' worth discussing. It all gets classified and dismissed as 'cancel culture' or 'woke madness.'

I don't agree. Everyone that I've seen on here has agreed that the comment was ill-advised or inappropriate.  No-one has suggested that people were wrong for being bothered by it. All of the criticism has been related to the calls for action against the prof.

So, "discussing" it hasn't been discouraged; demands for retribution is what have gotten "backlash".

'Everyone on here' is not everyone.

For one thing, there are people elsewhere who are saying people are wrong for being bothered by this.

But that's not what I was talking about with 'backlash against backlash.'

There are people who will place the blame for outcomes like this on anyone who expressed disapproval or criticism, because nothing would have happened if no one had said anything in the first place.

I know people like this personally. I've been on the receiving end of their rants and accusations. People who think this way do exist, and stories like this just embolden them.

It's not the fault of people who criticize the 'cancel culture' aspect of these stories, but it is a thing that happens.

[mahagonny]

Backlash against stories like this often generalizes to practically anyone who thinks the initial 'insensitivity' or 'bias' worth discussing. It all gets classified and dismissed as 'cancel culture' or 'woke madness.'

I don't agree. Everyone that I've seen on here has agreed that the comment was ill-advised or inappropriate.  No-one has suggested that people were wrong for being bothered by it. All of the criticism has been related to the calls for action against the prof.

So, "discussing" it hasn't been discouraged; demands for retribution is what have gotten "backlash".

'Everyone on here' is not everyone.

For one thing, there are people elsewhere who are saying people are wrong for being bothered by this.

But that's not what I was talking about with 'backlash against backlash.'

There are people who will place the blame for outcomes like this on anyone who expressed disapproval or criticism, because nothing would have happened if no one had said anything in the first place.

I know people like this personally. I've been on the receiving end of their rants and accusations. People who think this way do exist, and stories like this just embolden them.

It's not the fault of people who criticize the 'cancel culture' aspect of these stories, but it is a thing that happens.

Well then, aren't you getting what you want? This guy is getting raked over the coals.

You can't trust photos these days. They are not evidence as we once considered them. It's very easy to doctor them to produce all kinds of changes. Some photoshopping or whatever it is is meant to be detected and some is not. I am still marveling at how much darker she looks in one of the photos than in the other.

[smallcleanrat]

Backlash against stories like this often generalizes to practically anyone who thinks the initial 'insensitivity' or 'bias' worth discussing. It all gets classified and dismissed as 'cancel culture' or 'woke madness.'

I don't agree. Everyone that I've seen on here has agreed that the comment was ill-advised or inappropriate.  No-one has suggested that people were wrong for being bothered by it. All of the criticism has been related to the calls for action against the prof.

So, "discussing" it hasn't been discouraged; demands for retribution is what have gotten "backlash".

'Everyone on here' is not everyone.

For one thing, there are people elsewhere who are saying people are wrong for being bothered by this.

But that's not what I was talking about with 'backlash against backlash.'

There are people who will place the blame for outcomes like this on anyone who expressed disapproval or criticism, because nothing would have happened if no one had said anything in the first place.

I know people like this personally. I've been on the receiving end of their rants and accusations. People who think this way do exist, and stories like this just embolden them.

It's not the fault of people who criticize the 'cancel culture' aspect of these stories, but it is a thing that happens.

Well then, aren't you getting what you want? This guy is getting raked over the coals.

You can't trust photos these days. They are not evidence as we once considered them. It's very easy to doctor them to produce all kinds of changes. Some photoshopping or whatever it is is meant to be detected and some is not. I am still marveling at how much darker she looks in one of the photos than in the other.

If that's what you think after reading my posts, I really don't know what to say to you.

[mahagonny]

I hear you as being worried about something, but I don't see what could be done that would help. And I'm tired of people, especially fortunate ones, standing in line for their turn to complain about the hurts of having to share a world with un-woke white persons.

[smallcleanrat]

I hear you as being worried about something, but I don't see what could be done that would help. And I'm tired of people, especially fortunate ones, standing in line for their turn to complain about the hurts of having to share a world with un-woke white persons.

I think I was pretty clear in that a major 'something' I was worried about was people being "raked over the coals" for things like this.

It would help if people avoided assuming the worst of others and paid more attention to what they actually said.

That would include people failing to acknowledge this prof's apology and lack of hostile intention, and people who assume someone who says that a tweet was worth criticizing must be "getting what they want" to see the person who posted the tweet "raked over the coals."

[mahagonny]

I hear you as being worried about something, but I don't see what could be done that would help. And I'm tired of people, especially fortunate ones, standing in line for their turn to complain about the hurts of having to share a world with un-woke white persons.

I think I was pretty clear in that a major 'something' I was worried about was people being "raked over the coals" for things like this.

It would help if people avoided assuming the worst of others and paid more attention to what they actually said.

That would include people failing to acknowledge this prof's apology and lack of hostile intention, and people who assume someone who says that a tweet was worth criticizing must be "getting what they want" to see the person who posted the tweet "raked over the coals."

Can't follow your writing. Maybe I'll get it tomorrow.