Guest post: Implicit framing

Feb 27th, 2021 2:51 pm | By

Originally a comment by Bjarte Foshaug on What do we lose?

On a related note, one of the take-home messages common to authors who have studied the rise of authoritarian populism (Snyder, Mounk, Applebaum, Temelkuran, Levtisky/Ziblatt etc.) that I think applies to the Gender Wars as well is to not concede the other side’s language with its implicit framing of the issue (the “ordinary”/”real” people who vote for the populist vs. the “elite” who don’t etc.). This is why I cringe whenever gender critical people start talking in terms of “cis” vs. “trans” women etc. As I have previously written, “cis woman” is not another word for “biological female”. Indeed, referring to biological females in Genderspeak is no more possible than referring to political freedom in Newspeak. Even “cis” women are entirely defined in terms of “female”/”feminine” ways of thinking and feeling* (best left unspecified), while anyone who fails to think/feel in the ways required doesn’t qualify as a “woman” of any kind. The only relevant difference is that the “cis” women accept the “gender” they were “assigned at birth” (with all its implicit cultural “baggage”) while the “trans” women do not.

Buying into the “cis” vs. “trans” framework, concedes the idea that there is indeed such a category as “women” (once again, defined in terms of “female”/”feminine” ways of thinking and feeling) that “cis” and “trans” women are both different versions/subsets of, to the exclusion of both “cis” and “trans” men (defined in terms of “male”/”masculine” ways of thinking and feeling), but the “TERFs” are arbitrarily choosing to exclude one subset of “women” out of pure bigotry and hate (hence the obligatory attempts to lump in “trans women” with “black women”, “disabled women”, “working class women” etc.).

Instead of conceding their framing we should make it clear that TIM’s and biological females are not different versions of “women” any more than flying mammals and clubs for hitting baseballs are different versions of “bats”. There is no non-trivial definition that applies to both at the same time. Being a “man” or “woman” is about biological sex or it isn’t about anything at all. If biological sex is not a valid category, then neither is “man” or “woman”. There is no such thing as a “male” or “female”, “masculine” or “feminine” way of thinking or feeling, which means there is no “gender” which means there is no “gender binary”, which means there is no “cis”, which means we’re pretty much all “non-binary” or “gender non-conforming” or – even better – “agender”. If the gender concept applies to people on the trans spectrum (or their allies who will say anything to make the TRAs right and us wrong), they are pretty much the only ones to whom it applies as far as I’m concerned. If trans women are women, they are the only “women”. If trans men are men, then I’m not.

*They are women₂ rather than women₁ as I have previously put it.



Thanks to the sheep

Feb 27th, 2021 12:09 pm | By

A Waterstone’s in a former Victorian wool exchange in Bradford:

No photo description available.


More bullying

Feb 27th, 2021 11:38 am | By

The Sydney Morning Herald:

Almost 100 academics have demanded the University of Melbourne take “swift and decisive action” in response to a website created by one of its lecturers that has been labelled “transphobic” and potentially in breach of the university’s own guidelines on research integrity and inclusion.

And how are the almost 100 academics defining “transphobic”? With the precision and care expected of academics? Or with the wild abandon of Twitter “activists”?

On Tuesday, Holly Lawford-Smith, an associate professor in philosophy at the University of Melbourne, launched www.noconflicttheysaid.org in response to legislation in Australia and elsewhere designed to be inclusive to transgender people but which, she says, “replaces sex with gender identity”.

The site calls for women assigned female at birth (“cis” women) to anonymously share stories about any time they have felt threatened by transgender women.

“We’re worried about the impacts on women of men using women-only spaces,” the website introduction says, “including but not limited to: changing rooms, fitting rooms, bathrooms … rape and domestic violence shelters.”

“I think it’s outrageous that these changes are being introduced and people aren’t even acknowledging the possibility of a conflict of interest,” Dr Lawford-Smith said of her motivation for creating the site. “No governments are gathering data on this, there’s no place in the world for people to report where creepy things are happening in women’s bathrooms or women’s changing rooms or rape support groups.

I do think there’s an inherent pitfall in the project: the fact that the stories are anonymous means they can’t be authenticated. But I also know there’s massive pressure to shut up about any stories, so that’s part of the picture too.

The two dozen writers of the open letter said “they were concerned that material promoted and produced by Dr Lawford-Smith and taught to students “conflicts with the faculty commitment to diversity and inclusion”.”

But what does “diversity” mean? What does “inclusion” mean? Does “diversity” really mean “people who pretend to be what they’re not”? Does “inclusion” really mean women including men in everything, regardless of their need for safety or privacy or solidarity?

Concerns with the site were first raised on Wednesday by fellow Melbourne University academic Hannah McCann, a senior lecturer in cultural studies, who labelled the site transphobic, saying it “promotes the vilification of transgender people”.

There is a photo of McCann, who looks very inclusive.

Dr McCann also believes the site “is in conflict with the values of the university as a safe and inclusive space”.

Safe for whom? Inclusive of whom?



Maternity leave for persons

Feb 27th, 2021 11:19 am | By

One little word.

The [UK] government has agreed to change its bill allowing ministers to take maternity leave, so that it uses the term “mother” rather than “person”.

The Ministerial and other Maternity Allowances Bill would ensure up to six months’ leave on full pay.

But the House of Lords rejected the use of the word “person” in its text.

The government initially argued this was in line with “drafting convention” but has changed its view, saying use of “mother” is legally “acceptable”.

I strongly doubt that it’s any kind of “convention” to use “person” in single-sex legislation. I think the goal when writing legislation is to be as precise and clear as possible, so if a law affects one sex only, what would be the added precision in using “person”?



Think of the children

Feb 27th, 2021 8:26 am | By

The problem isn’t boys on girls’ teams, the problem is bad coaches!

The February 26, 2021 passage of the Equality Act in the US House of Representatives piqued conservatives into a moral panic.

The bill, which would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, had a terrifying potential for Republicans: the presence of trans girls in high school sports.

No, not the presence of trans girls in high school sports, the presence of boys in girls’ sports. And it’s not just Republicans or just conservatives who think this will be unfair to girls.

All this language of the need to “protect,” the need to root out other children from “bathrooms” and “locker rooms,” is hard to square with reality.

It’s not “other children,” it’s boys; it’s not “bathrooms” and “locker rooms” but girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms.

It’s no coincidence that the wording is always evasive this way. It has to be evasive, because if it were precise and accurate, the problems would be way too obvious.

Which means that at some level they know they’re talking shit, and shit that is oppressive to girls and women…but they do it anyway.

Abigail Weinberg then tells some stories of abusive coaches, then wraps it all up.

As scandal after scandal emerges about the pervasive abuse of young athletes, it’s time we reevaluate our priorities. Trans athletes aren’t the problem.

Again, the issue is not trans athletes but boys competing against girls. And that is a problem, and we can pay attention to both problems – abusive coaches and unfair competition.



Booty queen

Feb 27th, 2021 7:32 am | By

Men who identify as women can invade women’s sports, but maybe not those contests where people score women on how fuckable they look in bathing suits. For that kind of thing the customer wants an actual woman, by golly.

Beauty queen Anita Noelle Green competed in the Miss Universe pageant, was the first transgender contestant for Miss Montana USA and title holder for Miss Elite Earth Oregon 2019. Only one pageant has excluded her on the basis that she’s not a “natural born female” — Miss United States of America. A federal judge OK’d that policy on Thursday.

It’s a consumer issue. If you buy a steak at the grocery store you don’t want to unwrap it at home to find it’s pickled herrings.

Green sued Miss United States of America in December 2019, claiming its gender identity discrimination violates Oregon’s Public Accommodations Act and infringes on her First Amendment rights to free speech and free association.

But the pageant claims it, too, has the First Amendment right to free association: in this case, the right to deny access to “non-biological females.” The pageant says in court documents that its mission is geared toward “natural born women” and that including Green would “undermine its vision” and mar its “message of biological female empowerment.”

The pageant’s motion to dismiss repeatedly misgenders Green, referring to her as “a biological male who identifies as female” and “a man who identifies as a woman.”

How is that “misgendering”? Trans women are men who identify as female, so where’s the misgendering in saying so? That’s what “trans” means.

Green clarified in a declaration to the court that she has “always been a woman.”

“I never altered my gender or sex,” Green said. “I simply affirmed my underlying gender identity as female based on a realization of who I deeply was.”

That’s a religious belief, and as such, cannot be imposed on unwilling others.

Green says she wants the voices of all women to be heard in pageants like Miss United States of America.

Oh please. Ugly women? Average women? Short women, fat women, old women? Beauty pageants are not “inclusive”: exclusion is the whole point of them.

Green is debating whether to appeal or not.



“Period,” he said in a statement

Feb 27th, 2021 5:50 am | By

This is so maddening. Go ahead, guys, say you’re trans and presto you can compete against women and be guaranteed to win.

The Biden administration has withdrawn government support for a federal lawsuit in Connecticut that seeks to ban transgender athletes from participating in girls’ high school sports.

Notice what that doesn’t say – that the suit seeks to ban boys from competing in girls’ sports. That would make the reasons way too obvious, whereas if you say “transgender athletes” instead of “boys” it sounds cruel and vaguely homophobic.

Connecticut allows high school athletes to compete in sports according to their gender identity. The lawsuit was filed a year ago by several cisgender runners who argue they have been deprived of wins, state titles and athletic opportunities by being forced to compete against two transgender sprinters.

Same again. The issue isn’t “transgender” this and “transgender” that, the issue is boys competing against girls. Carefully not saying that is dishonest and also sexist as fuck.

The Trump administration’s intervention in the case last year came as state legislatures around the country debated restricting transgender athletes’ participation to their gender assigned at birth. Seventeen states considered such legislation, and Idaho passed a law. The Republican-controlled Mississippi legislature overwhelmingly approved a similar bill earlier this month.

Again, carefully obscures the issue. This isn’t accidental; they know damn well the issue is much clearer if they state it accurately.

Supporters of restrictions on transgender athletes argue that transgender girls, because they were born male, are naturally stronger, faster and bigger than those born female.

Finally they spell it out…but they do so implying it’s some wack minority view that males have physical advantages over females.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said Tuesday he was pleased with the Justice Department’s decision to withdraw Barr’s statement.

“Transgender girls are girls and every woman and girl deserves protection against discrimination. Period,” he said in a statement.

Period yourself. (“Transgender girls” don’t get them.) Transgender girls are boys, and every girl and woman deserves fair competition in sports.



Check the inflation calculator next time

Feb 26th, 2021 3:10 pm | By

Oh Senator.

Yes but that wasn’t last week or last year or ten years ago.

H/t Roj Blake



Not as nice as Cancun

Feb 26th, 2021 11:41 am | By

More on Cruz

“Orlando is awesome. It’s not as nice as Cancun, but it’s nice,” Cruz began, referring to the scandal he sparked when he left storm-ravaged Texas for Cancun with his family last week.

A child died in his bed in storm-ravaged Texas, but heeheehahahoho let’s make jokes about it anyway.

Here are some other highlights from Cruz’s speech:

Mask-wearing is virtue-signaling: “We’re gonna wear masks for the next 300 years,” Cruz said. “And by the way, not just one mask — two, three, four — you can’t have too many masks! How much virtue do you wanna signal?”

There were no “Black Lives Matter” demonstrations in Houston last year because of the Second Amendment: “In Houston where I live, I have to tell you, there weren’t any rioters because let’s be very clear, if there had been, they would discover what the state of Texas thinks about the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms,” Cruz said.

By “rioters” of course he means BLM protesters. He definitely does not mean those nice people who tore up the Capitol and killed 3 cops.



What do we lose?

Feb 26th, 2021 11:20 am | By

No it isn’t.

No, all the people who give birth are women, no matter how they “identify.” Pretending otherwise is not “making room” but deleting, denying, concealing. What you – and, much more important, what all women – lose by doing that is the ability to talk coherently about the issues that affect women. That’s a very big thing to lose.



Everything we can

Feb 26th, 2021 11:03 am | By

It’s asking too much, though.

Democratic plans to include a gradual raise to $15 in Joe Biden’s $1.9tn coronavirus stimulus bill were effectively ended on Thursday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled it should not be part of the package.

Biden campaigned on a pledge to increase the minimum wage to $15. Low-wage workers and unions have campaigned for a rise since 2012, and its inclusion in the coronavirus stimulus bill had been seen as a major victory.

While the proposal faced universal opposition by Republican senators and skepticism from some Democrats, Senator Bernie Sanders and others were confident that it could be pushed through with a simple majority in the Senate, where the Democrats hold a slim majority.

Why skepticism from some Democrats? Why skepticism over paying workers halfway decently?

Other progressive Democrats have proposed a less drastic solution [than removing the parliamentarian] – overruling her.

“The Senate parliamentarian issues an advisory opinion,” congresswoman Pramila Jayapal said in a tweet. “The VP can overrule them – as has been done before. We should do EVERYTHING we can to keep our promise, deliver a $15 minimum wage, and give 27 million workers a raise.”

Total workers in the US are around 155 million, so 27 million is not a tiny fraction.



A country of low-wage McJobs

Feb 26th, 2021 10:41 am | By

I hate this about the US. Hate it. It’s contemptible and awful.

In Europe, many people scoff at the US as a country of low-wage McJobs with paltry benefits – often no paid sick days, no paid vacation and no health insurance. In Denmark, a McDonald’s hamburger flipper averages $22 an hour (with six weeks’ paid vacation), while in the US, fast-food jobs pay half that on average.

Plus no health insurance.

You might wonder: how can the United States, the world’s wealthiest nation, be a low-wage economy? Of the 37 nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the unofficial club of rich and near-rich nations, the US has the third-highest percentage of low-wage workers, with nearly one in four workers defined as low-wage. Only Latvia and Romania are worse. (That study defines low-wage as earning less than two-thirds of a nation’s median wage.) In another study, Brookings found that 53 million Americans hold low-wage jobs, with a median pay of $10.22 an hour and median annual earnings of $17,950.

Yet we’re a rich country. There’s no excuse.

The US also has the lowest minimum wage among the G7 industrial nations in terms of purchasing power. America’s $7.25-an-hour federal minimum is 38% lower than Germany’s and 30% lower than Britain’s, Canada’s and France’s. This helps explain why the US has among the worst income inequality of the 37 OECD nations – only Mexico, Chile, Costa Rica and Bulgaria have greater inequality. And the US has the third highest poverty rate; only Hungary and Costa Rica are worse.

Yet we’re richer as a country than any of those.

Corporations, along with their Republican allies, overwhelmingly oppose a $15 minimum; in doing so, however, they ignore the will of the vast majority of Americans. According to a Pew poll, Americans favor a $15 minimum by 67% to 33%. While low-wage workers would be most vulnerable to any job losses caused by a higher minimum, lower-income Americans shows even greater support for a $15 minimum. Pew found that 74% of Americans making under $40,000 a year support a $15 minimum wage, as do 56% of Republicans making under $40,000. Last November, Floridians – even as their state went for Trump – voted 61% to 39% in favor of raising their state’s minimum to $15, joining eight other states that have approved a $15 minimum.

Despite such strong public backing for a $15 minimum, it looks doubtful that even one Republican senator – even though the Republican party now describes itself as the party of workers – will vote for a $15 minimum.

Well you see it’s like this – the Republican definition of “worker” is “racist white man with guns and MAGA cap.” It’s got nothing to do with wages or unions or benefits.



Big whiny baby

Feb 26th, 2021 10:00 am | By

Hur hur, why would she be scared? Why would she tell us about being scared? Hur hur.

I wonder if it’s at all possible that one reason she was scared is because people like Trump and Cruz and tabloid tv like Fox News have been making her a target ever since she was elected.



Disempowerment

Feb 26th, 2021 8:43 am | By

Insult and injury.

I don’t know how it’s possible that anyone needs this explained, but women don’t want webinars on domestic violence that are chaired by men.



Succinct

Feb 25th, 2021 4:59 pm | By

Well this changes everything!

They do?????????? Gee, they’ve been awfully quiet about it.

Anyway thank god we have huge corporations that make horrible cookies explaining the world to us.



Guest post: Appropriation of someone else’s oppression

Feb 25th, 2021 3:46 pm | By

Originally a comment by Papito on No persuasive evidence.

This is a rough read, but I find it depressingly unsurprising. Privilege knows no bounds. A woman making, at the end of her career, half as much per year as it costs to attend the college is abused and threatened. Why? Because some oppression trumps other oppression. What ever happened to “intersectionality?” If someone is attending Smith College, they ipso facto have privilege vis-a-vis the security, dining, and facilities workers. Colleges can be positively feudal.

“It’s troubling that people are more offended by being called racist than by the actual racism in our society,” he said. “Allegations of being racist, even getting direct mailers in their mailbox, is not on par with the consequences of actual racism.”

This seems similar to the kind of borrowing of oppression that white, middle class trans identifying males do. Because some poor trans people of color are prostitutes, and suffer violent crime at the rate of prostitutes, all trans people are the most oppressed ever, including those white, middle class trans-identifying males (who are actually more likely to be the perpetrators of violent crime, rather than its victims).

Having to speak to the security guard in the building you’re not supposed to be in on campus is not remotely the same as having some cowboy press his knee into your jugular in Kenosha. It is appropriation of someone else’s oppression, and does so much more to trivialize racism than it does to fight it.

Meanwhile, the real suffering of poor workers who have been violently threatened and have suffered professional and medical difficulties are brushed off as mere, inconsequential allegations of being racist. I’m sure the Rev. Rahsan Hall is doing good work in other cases, but in this case he’s bullying poor people from a position of great power. “It’s troubling that people are more offended by being called racist than by the actual racism in our society,” he says. Well, I think it’s troubling that the Rev. Rahsan Hall is more offended by a student being checked up on when she eats in a place she’s not allowed to be than by a woman who was sent to the hospital by the ensuing bullying attacks. Where is the Rev. Rahsan Hall’s compassion?

“It is safe to say race is discussed far more often than class at Smith,” said Prof. Marc Lendler, who teaches American government at the college. “It’s a feature of elite academic institutions that faculty and students don’t recognize what it means to be elite.”

Where my son goes to college, there’s a young female student who readily punches male students in the face when she feels offended. Because she’s Black, she knows she can get away with it. My son has helped the other students understand that they need to drop everything and rush to report the incident, because she will make up a story involving racism and sex, and if that gets told first, they could get thrown out of college. But the idea that any member of the staff would ever hold her accountable is absurd.

It’s clear the same has happened with Ms. Kanoute. Conduct that threatens or endangers a person? Discriminatory harassment? Dishonesty? Disruption? Cyber-Bullying? Unauthorized entry or use? All of these misbehaviors are to be reported to, and adjudicated by the Academic Honor Board. Ms. Kanoute has clearly gone for the grand slam of infractions, and the Academic Honor Board cowers in silence. Some animals are more equal than others.



Whig theory of language

Feb 25th, 2021 12:34 pm | By

“Proud” that what? That people are pretending men can get pregnant and push out children and breastfeed them? How is that something to be proud of? How is it “as society progresses”? What’s progress about pretending both sexes make children in their bodies?

How is it moving forward to pretend that men can gestate children?



Faculty are not required to undergo such training

Feb 25th, 2021 11:48 am | By

The rest of that story. (I got too exasperated to do it all in one bite.)

Anti-bias training began in earnest in the fall. Ms. Blair and other cafeteria and grounds workers found themselves being asked by consultants hired by Smith about their childhood and family assumptions about race, which many viewed as psychologically intrusive. Ms. Blair recalled growing silent and wanting to crawl inside herself.

The faculty are not required to undergo such training.

Ah so it’s only the peons who have to be brainwashed reeducated trained.

The janitor who called campus security quietly returned to work after three months of paid leave and declined to be interviewed. The other janitor, Mr. Patenaude, who was not working at the time of the incident, left his job at Smith not long after Ms. Kanoute posted his photograph on social media, accusing him of “racist cowardly acts.”

“I was accused of being the racist,” Mr. Patenaude said. “To be honest, that just knocked me out. I’m a 58-year-old male, we’re supposed to be tough. But I suffered anxiety because of things in my past and this brought it to a whole ’nother level.”

He recalled going through one training session after another in race and intersectionality at Smith. He said it left workers cynical. “I don’t know if I believe in white privilege,” he said. “I believe in money privilege.”

There are a lot of kinds of privilege. White is one, but it’s certainly not the only one.

As for Ms. Blair, the cafeteria worker, stress exacerbated her lupus and she checked into the hospital last year. Then George Floyd, a Black man, died at the hands of the Minneapolis police last spring, and protests fired up across the nation and in Northampton, and angry notes and accusations of racism were again left in her mailbox and by visitors on Smith College’s official Facebook page.

This past autumn the university furloughed her and other workers, citing the coronavirus and the empty dorms. Ms. Blair applied for an hourly job with a local restaurant. The manager set up a Zoom interview, she said, and asked her: “‘Aren’t you the one involved in that incident?’”

“I was pissed,” she said. “I told her I didn’t do anything wrong, nothing. And she said, ‘Well, we’re all set.’”

She did nothing wrong, she lost her job, she can’t get another. What branch of privilege is that?



No persuasive evidence

Feb 25th, 2021 11:17 am | By

Another battlefront in the Woke Wars:

In midsummer of 2018, Oumou Kanoute, a Black student at Smith College, recounted a distressing American tale: She was eating lunch in a dorm lounge when a janitor and a campus police officer walked over and asked her what she was doing there.

Kanoute was upset and angry, and posted about it on Facebook.

The college’s president, Kathleen McCartney, offered profuse apologies and put the janitor on paid leave. “This painful incident reminds us of the ongoing legacy of racism and bias,” the president wrote, “in which people of color are targeted while simply going about the business of their ordinary lives.”

The Times, the Post, and CNN picked up the story, and the ACLU took her case. But there’s a catch.

Less attention was paid three months later when a law firm hired by Smith College to investigate the episode found no persuasive evidence of bias. Ms. Kanoute was determined to have eaten in a deserted dorm that had been closed for the summer; the janitor had been encouraged to notify security if he saw unauthorized people there. The officer, like all campus police, was unarmed.

So it wasn’t “a dorm lounge,” it was a lounge in a closed dorm. The appeal of that is obvious: peace and quiet. On the other hand there is the risk of people asking you what you’re doing in a dorm that’s closed for the summer. Being asked that is a lot more unnerving if you’re not white, but that doesn’t mean asking is automatically racist.

But they did not offer any public apology or amends to the workers whose lives were gravely disrupted by the student’s accusation.

This is a tale of how race, class and power collided at the elite 145-year-old liberal arts college, where tuition, room and board top $78,000 a year and where the employees who keep the school running often come from working-class enclaves beyond the school’s elegant wrought iron gates.

In other words where the employees who keep the school running are working-class. It’s well known that class has become a very distant runner-up in conflicts over social justice aka identity politics.

The atmosphere at Smith is gaining attention nationally, in part because a recently resigned employee of the school, Jodi Shaw, has attracted a fervent YouTube following by decrying what she sees as the college’s insistence that its white employees, through anti-bias training, accept the theory of structural racism.

I read Jodi Shaw’s much-circulated article on the subject a few days ago, with a lot of ambivalence. It’s complicated. I think I’m not as sure as she is that it’s possible for white people to have zero unconscious racial bias in the US, given the facts of the matter. On the other hand would I relish being forced to undergo “training” as a condition of continued employment? Oh hell no. I don’t trust the people in charge of “training” of that kind to say anything of value.

The “incident” that started all this began with Kanoute getting some lunch in a cafeteria that was closed to students.

Student workers were not supposed to use the Tyler cafeteria, which was reserved for a summer camp program for young children. Jackie Blair, a veteran cafeteria employee, mentioned that to Ms. Kanoute when she saw her getting lunch there and then decided to drop it. Staff members dance carefully around rule enforcement for fear students will lodge complaints.

“We used to joke, don’t let a rich student report you, because if you do, you’re gone,” said Mark Patenaude, a janitor.

Haha, not really a joke. Class meets race. But of course other times class meets race and fills race full of bullets.

Ms. Kanoute took her food and then walked through a set of French doors, crossed a foyer and reclined in the shadowed lounge of a dormitory closed for the summer…

It was closed but she was able to walk in. Maybe there was a sign? Or maybe not.

A janitor, who was in his 60s and poor of sight, was emptying garbage cans when he noticed someone in that closed lounge. All involved with the summer camp were required to have state background checks and campus police had advised staff it was wisest to call security rather than confront strangers on their own.

So he called security. He didn’t say anything about race.

A well-known older campus security officer drove over to the dorm. He recognized Ms. Kanoute as a student and they had a brief and polite conversation, which she recorded. He apologized for bothering her and she spoke to him of her discomfort: “Stuff like this happens way too often, where people just feel, like, threatened.”

But she was in a closed dorm…but it’s not at all clear if she knew that or not.

So anyway she wrote the Facebook post and everyone flipped out.

The president had had her own encounters with social justice “mistakes” and getting shouted at, so she erred on the side of…letting race trump class, I guess.

The school’s workers felt scapegoated.

“It is safe to say race is discussed far more often than class at Smith,” said Prof. Marc Lendler, who teaches American government at the college. “It’s a feature of elite academic institutions that faculty and students don’t recognize what it means to be elite.”

They’ll accuse themselves of structural racism in a heartbeat, but class? What’s that?

The repercussions spread. Three weeks after the incident at Tyler House, Ms. Blair, the cafeteria worker, received an email from a reporter at The Boston Globe asking her to comment on why she called security on Ms. Kanoute for “eating while Black.” That puzzled her; what did she have to do with this?

The food services director called the next morning. “Jackie,” he said, “you’re on Facebook.” She found that Ms. Kanoute had posted her photograph, name and email, along with that of Mr. Patenaude, a 21-year Smith employee and janitor.

“This is the racist person,” Ms. Kanoute wrote of Ms. Blair, adding that Mr. Patenaude too was guilty. (He in fact worked an early shift that day and had already gone home at the time of the incident.) Ms. Kanoute also lashed the Smith administration. “They’re essentially enabling racist, cowardly acts.”

Ms. Blair has lupus, a disease of the immune system, and stress triggers episodes. She felt faint. “Oh my God, I didn’t do this,” she told a friend. “I exchanged a hello with that student and now I’m a racist.”

Here’s where it gets much less complicated. You don’t bully janitors and cafeteria workers. Punching down, remember? REMEMBER THAT?

I worked with a dorm food service worker when I was a student. I got a gig working some afternoons at the tiny snack bar/coffee shop in the dorm, with a real employee as my supervisor. I liked her – she was sharp, funny, sensible. I was always annoyed by students who would just say “Gimme a coke” and she shrugged it off. That’s probably class too – I expected basic manners and she didn’t. Food service workers should be able to expect basic politeness, let alone not being publicly ratted out for things they didn’t do.

Ms. Blair was born and raised and lives in Northampton with her husband, a mechanic, and makes about $40,000 a year. Within days of being accused by Ms. Kanoute, she said, she found notes in her mailbox and taped to her car window. “RACIST” read one. People called her at home. “You should be ashamed of yourself,” a caller said. “You don’t deserve to live,” said another.

Smith College put out a short statement noting that Ms. Blair had not placed the phone call to security but did not absolve her of broader responsibility. Ms. McCartney called her and briefly apologized. That apology was not made public.

Not cool.

Smith officials pressured Ms. Blair to go into mediation with Ms. Kanoute. “A core tenet of restorative justice,” Ms. McCartney wrote, “is to provide people with the opportunity for willing apology, forgiveness and reconciliation.”

Ms. Blair declined. “Why would I do this? This student called me a racist and I did nothing,” she said.

On Oct. 28, 2018, Ms. McCartney released a 35-page report from a law firm with a specialty in discrimination investigations. The report cleared Ms. Blair altogether and found no sufficient evidence of discrimination by anyone else involved, including the janitor who called campus police.

Ms. McCartney offered no public apology to the employees after the report was released. “We were gobsmacked — four people’s lives wrecked, two were employees of more than 35 years and no apology,” said Tracey Putnam Culver, a Smith graduate who recently retired from the college’s facilities management department. “How do you rationalize that?”

Rahsaan Hall, racial justice director for the A.C.L.U. of Massachusetts and Ms. Kanoute’s lawyer, cautioned against drawing too much from the investigative report, as subconscious bias is difficult to prove. Nor was he particularly sympathetic to the accused workers.

So much for the civil liberties of the food service workers and the janitor and the security guard.

“It’s troubling that people are more offended by being called racist than by the actual racism in our society,” he said. “Allegations of being racist, even getting direct mailers in their mailbox, is not on par with the consequences of actual racism.”

So then let’s just pick people at random for public accusations of racism, yeah?



Sorry if you don’t like all this punching

Feb 25th, 2021 9:41 am | By

This guy is very hostile to women.

It is of course in no way “a logical consequence” of Allison Bailey’s view that humans can’t change sex that “a lot of people die.” All people die, and Allison Bailey’s entirely familiar and everyday view that men are not women isn’t going to hasten that (also familiar and everyday and biological reality-based) fact.

Note the radical change from “the logical consequence [of her advocacy and views] is that a lot of people die” and “helping to cause the possible deaths of trans people.” The first claim is that Allison’s advocacy and views will necessarily and certainly result in the death of a lot of people, while the second claim is that they help cause possible deaths. The second claim walks back the first at three points: help cause, possible, and the omission of “a lot of” before “people.” Is Kaveney too stupid even to notice the difference? Or too sly to acknowledge it? I don’t know, but he’s a piece of work either way.

So male, that aggression coupled with righteous certainty. Forget about the clothes and makeup and wig, Roz, and focus on the entitlement and misogyny.