Communion Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, folkhoax said: Wait, what part of this: "DEI empire" is "supporting affirmative action" (despite DEI =/= affirmative action) and "believing race is a ideological construct"." ...is not factually correct? And Gay built the DEI empire in Harvard, which is fact. It proves DEI is simply acknowledging factual reality of America as a racist society and your fear-mongering and usage of it like a scare-term is white supremacist boogeymaning.
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 26 minutes ago, Communion said: The article you're citing is literally by Chris Rufo. You're exposing your intentions by citing him. You want this so badly to be about race even though the first one to be fired was a white woman. The 3rd one who's under scrutiny is also white. So what's the excuse now?
Communion Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Also: 1 minute ago, folkhoax said: Gay built the DEI empire is serving "PAINTING MURALS OF BLACK PEOPLE IS INSTITUTIONAL REVERSE RACISM!" This is embarrassing. Genuinely you're my least favorite type of conservative. At least the anti-abortionists can claim to be sincere. Crying about imagined anti-whiteness like a 2014 atheist Youtuber who was just one 1M view video away from becoming a Republican neo-nazi.
Communion Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, folkhoax said: though the first one to be fired was a white woman. Fired for defending people for protesting against anti-Palestinian racism and genocide.
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 4 minutes ago, Communion said: It proves DEI is simply acknowledging factual reality of America as a racist society and your fear-mongering and usage of it like a scare-term is white supremacist boogeymaning. Don't you see the hypocrisy here? First, you pull out the race card and say everyone who is celebrating her firing is racist even though the first people who mentioned race is probably you. Never mind her antisemitism or plagiarism...it has to be about race, like wtf. Harvard presidents have been fired for less offenses. Second, you're calling America a "deeply racist" country just because many people don't believe in DEI.
Communion Posted January 12 Posted January 12 2 minutes ago, folkhoax said: Don't you see the hypocrisy here? First, you pull out the race card and say everyone who is celebrating her firing is racist even though the first people who mentioned race is probably you. Never mind her antisemitism or plagiarism...it has to be about race, like wtf. Harvard presidents have been fired for less offenses. Second, you're calling America a "deeply racist" country just because many people don't believe in DEI. Not believing that America is founded on and operates within institutional white supremacy is deeply racist, yes. Are you saying this statement is false? "America is a nation defined by “systemic racism,” “police brutality,” and “white supremacist violence.""
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 13 minutes ago, Communion said: Fired for defending people for protesting against anti-Palestinian racism and genocide. Did you even listen to their response? You can't make this up. Chanting "from the river to the sea" is context-dependent? Lol. The question was not about protesting in support of Hamas (a terrorist group according to US and European intelligence) but about the actual calls for Jewish genocide of the people protesting.
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Communion said: Not believing that America is founded on and operates within institutional white supremacy is deeply racist, yes. Are you saying this statement is false? "America is a nation defined by “systemic racism,” “police brutality,” and “white supremacist violence."" False. Those are not qualities that define America. I mean, sure there are pockets of people with extreme beliefs but I wouldn't generalize that for the whole country.
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted January 12 ATRL Moderator Posted January 12 1 hour ago, folkhoax said: She is literally the: Wilbur A. Cowett Professor of Government and of African and African-American Studies Please explain what this has to do with her resignation as President? You keep referring to her research qualifications to claim she doesn’t deserve the title of a position that has nothing to do with research. Make it make sense.
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted January 12 ATRL Moderator Posted January 12 51 minutes ago, folkhoax said: You want this so badly to be about race even though the first one to be fired was a white woman. The 3rd one who's under scrutiny is also white. So what's the excuse now? You made this about race by saying she was hired for being Black.
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 3 minutes ago, Bloo said: You made this about race by saying she was hired for being Black. When did I say that?
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 6 minutes ago, Bloo said: Please explain what this has to do with her resignation as President? You keep referring to her research qualifications to claim she doesn’t deserve the title of a position that has nothing to do with research. Make it make sense. You claimed she wasn't a "professor". I simply corrected you with facts that, in fact, she was and still is.
Bosque Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) She was obviously incompetent and untenable in her position. Shes neither a prominent researcher (worse, a plagiarist), nor an effective fundraiser as evidenced by her catastrophic communication skills and damage control leading to many donors withholding their support. I wish people would stop defending leaders like this. There are thousands of incompetent white CEOs and “leaders” who get fired and deposed constantly and no one feels the need to defend them out of some sort of principle. Sometimes people are just incompetent charlatans. Edited January 12 by Dephira 1 2
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted January 12 ATRL Moderator Posted January 12 35 minutes ago, folkhoax said: You claimed she wasn't a "professor". I simply corrected you with facts that, in fact, she was and still is. How is that relevant in a conversation about her dismissal as president which is an entirely different role? The people that are so gung-ho on her dismissal bring up such irrelevant points to defend the decision. Your opening argument about her research record being bad as proof she was a DEI hire is patently irrelevant given the role of President. The root of the issue is so clearly about you (and others) perceiving a Black woman being in a position of power as “obviously” being a diversity hire. Nobody serious in academia deeply cares about someone having an insufficient citation on well-known facts in a domain nor when an author insufficiently cites themselves. The idea that improper formatting of a reference is a damning offense is so beyond laughable, it’s absurd.
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 12 minutes ago, Bloo said: How is that relevant in a conversation about her dismissal as president which is an entirely different role? The people that are so gung-ho on her dismissal bring up such irrelevant points to defend the decision. Your opening argument about her research record being bad as proof she was a DEI hire is patently irrelevant given the role of President. The root of the issue is so clearly about you (and others) perceiving a Black woman being in a position of power as “obviously” being a diversity hire. Nobody serious in academia deeply cares about someone having an insufficient citation on well-known facts in a domain nor when an author insufficiently cites themselves. The idea that improper formatting of a reference is a damning offense is so beyond laughable, it’s absurd. Being a professor in an academe is part of her identity. Did you really think that part of her career is irrelevant to her hiring? LOL. And really, "nobody serious in academia care about insufficient citations"? Harvard students get suspended or expelled if they get caught doing what she did. The Harvard Crimson and the student body called for her resignation mainly because of her plagiarism. And what's laughable here is that you though she only committed "improper formatting of a reference". LOL, like were you aware that she plagiarized, word for word, the acknowledgments section in one of her papers? Of all the things to plagiarize, acknowledgments, really? Again, I NEVER mentioned race being an issue. You and communion kept on going back to her race, insisting this was the reason, even though literally no one here thought so. You keep digging your own grave her by insisting this was about race. You're not fooling anyone here.
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted January 12 ATRL Moderator Posted January 12 18 minutes ago, folkhoax said: Being a professor in an academe is part of her identity. Did you really think that part of her career is irrelevant to her hiring? LOL. And really, "nobody serious in academia care about insufficient citations"? Harvard students get suspended or expelled if they get caught doing what she did. The Harvard Crimson and the student body called for her resignation mainly because of her plagiarism. And what's laughable here is that you though she only committed "improper formatting of a reference". LOL, like were you aware that she plagiarized, word for word, the acknowledgments section in one of her papers? Of all the things to plagiarize, acknowledgments, really? Again, I NEVER mentioned race being an issue. You and communion kept on going back to her race, insisting this was the reason, even though literally no one here thought so. You keep digging your own grave her by insisting this was about race. You're not fooling anyone here. The point of plagiarism is stealing another person’s ideas and claiming them as your own. There is nothing interesting about “stealing” a thank you to your academic advisor in the acknowledgements of your thesis. That’s why, yes, it’s not that important in the grand scheme of things. No student would be expelled for something so stupid. I work in academia. I have seen cases where students have been caught copying homework assignments and it’s often resulted in them getting 50% credit or a 0. Calling a Black woman a diversity hire or a DEI hire is the loudest dog whistle imaginable. The shallowest and laziest defense is, “Well, I never technically said the word ‘Black’.” If your criticism was solely focused on her lack of academic ethics as seen in the (laughably weak) plagiarism examples, then there’d be no need to even comment on her being a DEI hire. But you chose to besmirch her in that very specific way. But, by all means, deflect. 1
folkhoax Posted January 12 Posted January 12 4 minutes ago, Bloo said: The point of plagiarism is stealing another person’s ideas and claiming them as your own. There is nothing interesting about “stealing” a thank you to your academic advisor in the acknowledgements of your thesis. That’s why, yes, it’s not that important in the grand scheme of things. No student would be expelled for something so stupid. I work in academia. I have seen cases where students have been caught copying homework assignments and it’s often resulted in them getting 50% credit or a 0. Calling a Black woman a diversity hire or a DEI hire is the loudest dog whistle imaginable. The shallowest and laziest defense is, “Well, I never technically said the word ‘Black’.” If your criticism was solely focused on her lack of academic ethics as seen in the (laughably weak) plagiarism examples, then there’d be no need to even comment on her being a DEI hire. But you chose to besmirch her in that very specific way. But, by all means, deflect. I work in academia too, and even published a good amount of original papers. But let's just hear from an actual insider who votes on these things: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/12/31/honor-council-member-gay/#:~:text=She is accused of plagiarism,been copied from another work. Also. I NEVER called her a diversity/DEI hire. I said she was selected specifically because she was a DEI champion and, therefore, an easy target by conservatives who oppose her ideologies. It doesn't even matter how she was hired - she had a horrendous response to antisemitism in her campus and she had this baggage of plagiarized work that was distracting her from doing her job. Maybe she would have been a great president at a different, less political time (she would certainly be a great fit during Obama's presidency), but now is not it.
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted January 12 ATRL Moderator Posted January 12 21 minutes ago, folkhoax said: Also. I NEVER called her a diversity/DEI hire. I said she was selected specifically because she was a DEI champion and, therefore, an easy target by conservatives who oppose her ideologies. It doesn't even matter how she was hired - she had a horrendous response to antisemitism in her campus and she had this baggage of plagiarized work that was distracting her from doing her job. Maybe she would have been a great president at a different, less political time (she would certainly be a great fit during Obama's presidency), but now is not it. I went back and checked, it appears you’re correct. My apologies for getting confused and forgetting the history of conversation over this span of time. I’ve seen so many claims of her being a DEI hire along with the attacks on her qualifications regarding number of publications. So I guess my brain associated the common DEI comment with your argument. For that, I apologize. I still disagree about the importance of having extensive research for being important qualifications for a university president. But I’m not super interested in debating that. I have seen mixed opinions on the legitimacy of the plagiarism complaints. I think it’s dodgy enough to not take too seriously, personally, having gone through them. That said, I’m gonna leave it here since I hallucinated my main issue. Again, apologies for that. 1
Recommended Posts