Current Events > Has this been posted? Feminist professor sexually harassed her student

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/nyregion/sexual-harassment-nyu-female-professor.html

I think it is worth reading all of it, but this part stuck out to me as a 'welp' moment

Professor Ronell and some who are backing her have tried to discredit her accuser in familiar ways, asking why he took so long to report, and why he seemed so intimate with Professor Ronell if he was, in fact, miserable. Maybe, Professor Ronell suggested, he was frustrated because he just wasnt smart enough.

His main dilemma was the incoherency in his writing, and lack of a recognizable argument, Professor Ronell said in a January 2018 interview submitted to the Title IX office.

Diane Davis, chair of the department of rhetoric at the University of Texas-Austin, who also signed the letter to the university supporting Professor Ronell, said she and her colleagues were particularly disturbed that, as they saw it, Mr. Reitman was using Title IX, a feminist tool, to take down a feminist.

I am of course very supportive of what Title IX and the #MeToo movement are trying to do, of their efforts to confront and to prevent abuses, for which they also seek some sort of justice, Professor Davis wrote in an email. But its for that very reason that its so disappointing when this incredible energy for justice is twisted and turned against itself, which is what many of us believe is happening in this case.

kind of crazy how exactly the arguments trying to defend this sexual harasser mirror the arguments defending other sexual harassers given who is espousing the views in this case
---

Yikes. I didn't read the entire thing, but I hope there is enough evidence to lean one way or the other. Professors should not be marginalizing his feelings either way though.
---

The fuck is the department of rhetoric?
---

Self-righteous hypocrisy is pretty much a staple of SJW-ism, so this isn't surprising.
---

what was he wearing?
---

Drowning__Fish_ posted...

Yikes. I didn't read the entire thing, but I hope there is enough evidence to lean one way or the other. Professors should not be marginalizing his feelings either way though.

Feminists shouldn't be using those arguments, period.
---

Balrog0 posted...

kind of crazy how exactly the arguments trying to defend this sexual harasser mirror the arguments defending other sexual harassers given who is espousing the views in this case

It makes sense for the accused to take whatever defense is available.

It makes far less sense for the dept chair--who should be a neutral party and respectful of the arbitration process--to do the same.

Obviously trying to suggest that feminists are incapable of wrongdoing or that Title IX is exclusively for protection of women from men is utterly ridiculous, and I understand the use of ridiculous defenses from the accused, but not from bystanders/those in positions of authority above them.

They found his case had merit, so her year suspension makes sense to me. Frankly, it's surprising they didn't fire her.
---

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

Self-righteous hypocrisy is pretty much a staple of SJW-ism, so this isn't surprising.

This. They are honestly too fanatical to be wrong. They're like a less violent IS.
---

TheCyborgNinja posted...

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

Self-righteous hypocrisy is pretty much a staple of SJW-ism, so this isn't surprising.

This. They are honestly too fanatical to be wrong. They're like a less violent IS.

You don't know anything about IS if you're making serious comparisons like this
---

tag for later
---

Considering more, a one year suspension actually seems a very rational conclusion. They ruled in favor of him when the evidence supported his argument, against when it didn't--exactly the kind of equality we should want in the system.

Her peers in academia are clearly not thinking about it from a legal perspective, but rather an ideological one. Dangerous path, and exactly what higher education is supposed to drill out of those who have completed graduate study.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Considering more, a one year suspension actually seems a very rational conclusion. They ruled in favor of him when the evidence supported his argument, against when it didn't--exactly the kind of equality we should want in the system.

Her peers in academia are clearly not thinking about it from a legal perspective, but rather an ideological one. Dangerous path, and exactly what higher education is supposed to drill out of those who have completed graduate study.

yeah, they only ruled in his favor in one out of the four accusations he made

I just thought it was a really crazy thing for any person to say that kind of thing. As you've mentioned, it makes sense if you've been accused to say whatever you need to, but for a feminist to come out and say that its bad that Title IX is being used to go after feminists just seems like ... well, crazy
---

Balrog0 posted...

I just thought it was a really crazy thing for any person to say that kind of thing. As you've mentioned, it makes sense if you've been accused to say whatever you need to, but for a feminist to come out and say that its bad that Title IX is being used to go after feminists just seems like ... well, crazy

Indeed, and it is actually very much incompatible with the concept of feminism per academia.

Recognizing women have agency for their successes means they also have agency for their failures. Where feminism allows us to see female heroes, it must also allow us to see (and punish) female villains.
---

Balrog0 posted...

Professor Ronell and some who are backing her have tried to discredit her accuser in familiar ways, asking why he took so long to report, and why he seemed so intimate with Professor Ronell if he was, in fact, miserable. Maybe, Professor Ronell suggested, he was frustrated because he just wasnt smart enough.

Ha! I haven't read the article yet, but I love this part.
---

In the Title IX final report, excerpts of which were obtained by The New York Times, Mr. Reitman said that she had sexually harassed him for three years, and shared dozens of emails in which she referred to him as my most adored one, Sweet cuddly Baby, cock-er spaniel, and my astounding and beautiful Nimrod.

lol
---

Darkman124 posted...

Frankly, it's surprising they didn't fire her.

Lol.
---

Nobody's gonna mention how the dude's name is Nimrod?

Also, looked her up and she's an old hag...no wonder our dude was feeling uncomfortable.

Balrog0 posted...

he and her colleagues were particularly disturbed that, as they saw it, Mr. Reitman was using Title IX, a feminist tool, to take down a feminist.

And there it is. "This wasn't created for justice. This is a weapon only we can use to bludgeon people into submission."
---

Bacon_Pancakes posted...

Nobody's gonna mention how the dude's name is Nimrod?

Also, looked her up and she's an old hag...no wonder our dude was feeling uncomfortable.

he's gay and she is too, supposedly, which adds another wrinkle
---

Comment in the article I liked:

I couldn't quite put my finger on what made this case so disturbing. It's not the hypocrisy (though obviously these feminist academics are gleefully violating their own fundamental rules that they have been shedding tears for years).

I think it's the dishonesty of the whole enterprise and the academic pretension that they work on such a different intellectual plane that they cannot be forthright about their motives and tactics.

To these folks, Title IX is not about equitable funding and participation; it's a "feminist tool" to bring legal challenges to social inequities. #MeToo is not a vehicle to protect victims of sexual misconduct; it is a tactic to attack the imbalance of power in gender relationships. Sexual harassment actions are not about redressing abusive situations; they are about "challenging the patriarchy" by bringing their power to bear against powerful men.

In this context, the veracity or justice of particular claims is irrelevant. Whether or not Prof. Ronell acted badly in this case or whether Emma Sulkowicz was actually raped or whether the UVA, Duke, UMass or any other case is actually true is beside the point . Their larger point is to exercise power to challenge an objectionable social dynamic regardless of the consequences of individual bystanders.

It's a disturbing and ugly moral compromise and one that we should not support. If the way to attack it is to call out the rank hypocrisy on specific issues such as this, so be it.

---

If a boy tells you a teacher sexually assaulted him, you should believe him no matter what.
---