Claudine Gay resigns under pressure

[Concertaholic 6,592]

I must say those saying it’s because of her race are being ridiculous. Liz Magill, a white woman, and President of UPenn, was also pushed out and resigned over the same controversy.
 

And quite frankly, as a current graduate student who works my a** off to not plagiarize, it is offense that such egregious misconduct would be overlooked. Claudine Gay’s plagiarism alone disqualifies her from serving as the university’s president. Here’s just one of the many examples of blatant plagiarism in her doctoral dissertation:

[PartySick 172,975]

3 minutes ago, Concertaholic said:

I must say those saying it’s because of her race are being ridiculous. Liz Magill, a white woman, and President of UPenn, was also pushed out and resigned over the same controversy.
 

And quite frankly, as a current graduate student who works my a** off to not plagiarize, it is offense that such egregious misconduct would be overlooked. Claudine Gay’s plagiarism alone disqualifies her from serving as the university’s president. Here’s just one of the many examples of blatant plagiarism in her doctoral dissertation:

I never understood plagiarism tbh. If I'm writing something, I want it to reflect my thoughts. Citing or quoting somebody else is fine but totally lifting things like this would kill my whole flow

[Dennis 8,391]

7 minutes ago, Concertaholic said:

And quite frankly, as a current graduate student who works my a** off to not plagiarize, it is offense that such egregious misconduct would be overlooked. Claudine Gay’s plagiarism alone disqualifies her from serving as the university’s president. Here’s just one of the many examples of blatant plagiarism in her doctoral dissertation:

And the worst part of it all for me was the rumors that Obama was lobbying Harvard to keep her as president
https://nypost.com/2023/12/22/news/obama-pushed-harvard-to-keep-embattled-claudine-gay-report/

I hope these reports are not true. Because I'm starting to lose respect for this man.

[PartySick 172,975]

59 minutes ago, Dennis said:

I agree that people misuse the word gen*cide a lot. But in this case it was a straightforward question. That's the issue. And it exposed the fact that many universities these days do not afford the same protection to Jewish students that they offer to other students in the name of DEI. 

A student attending an American university should never have to answer for the actions of anybody thousands of miles away. It does not need context.

So in such a straightforward hypothetical answer, there should've been a clear answer, that no it's not okay. Now if she hypothetically tries to bring up Israel or criticism of Israel and conflate that with a call for the genocide of Jews, that's when you make your point and reassert the meaning of genocide.

But that's not how she answered and she was asked a simple hypothetical question and she answered terribly. She acknowledged her mistake which is appreciated.

Eh, again, I doubt the intentions of the initial question

45 minutes ago, Dennis said:

Or she could've simply answered "yes" to this question. 

We all here know too well that if Jewish was replaced with Black, Muslim, or any other ethnicity, the answer would've been different. And when people treat this double standard as normal, that's when you know we really have a big problem, which is actually helping conservatives prove their point. 

The hypocrisy isn't on our end though, that's my point.

The right claiming to be concerned about antisemitism while standing under nazi flags, flashing white power symbols, and voting for a man who stereotyped jews for years is ridiculous.

I made the comparison to gender affirmative care 'cause I see this "concern" as coming from a similar place. They want to portray anyone who isn't unquestionably supportive of the US' biggest military base as an antisemite in the same way they want to portray LGBT activists as groomers and pedophiles.

Could you tell me though, what sparked the initial question? Was it a student demonstration? And if so, what were the students saying?

[Dennis 8,391]

9 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Eh, again, I doubt the intentions of the initial question

The hypocrisy isn't on our end though, that's my point.

The right claiming to be concerned about antisemitism while standing under nazi flags, flashing white power symbols, and voting for a man who stereotyped jews for years is ridiculous.

I made the comparison to gender affirmative care 'cause I see this "concern" as coming from a similar place. They want to portray anyone who isn't unquestionably supportive of the US' biggest military base as an antisemite in the same way they want to portray LGBT activists as groomers and pedophiles.

Could you tell me though, what sparked the initial question? Was it a student demonstration? And if so, what were the students saying?

I don't disagree with you. I know the right-wing people are hypocrites too. But just because they are doesn't mean I have to be.

I always try to challenge my own beliefs and put myself in the other side's shoes. I can't with a straight face pretend that all of a sudden I'm a proponent of absolute free speech when I know very well that our side has always believed in moderated speech and protection for minorities.

I know that if this terrible answer was given about muslim students they wouldn't have cared.

But I also know that if this terrible answer was given about any other minority that we care about, people would be outraged.

I really don't know how much I can say without being censored  so you gotta bare with me with the vague statements.

 

[PartySick 172,975]

Just now, Dennis said:

I know that if this terrible answer was given about muslim students they wouldn't have cared.

But I also know that if this terrible answer was given about any other minority that we care about, people would be outraged.

The context and literal actions matter though, that's the thing. Like I said, I can safely assume they're portraying something as antisemitic that just plainly isn't antisemitic  and when people pose ridiculous questions as they try to push some kind of twisted agenda and make you an unwitting pawn in that narrative, they should be shot down rather than taken seriously.

"Is calling for gen*cide against the school's rules?"

"Nobody is calling for a gen*cide, stop being crazy"

That's the right answer imho and until I'm told why this question came up at all, that's the opinion I'm standing by

4 minutes ago, Dennis said:

I always try to challenge my own beliefs and put myself in the other side's shoes

Oh ew. I was raised by these MAGA people, I've been on that side before. They are not to be taken seriously, I promise you.

5 minutes ago, Dennis said:

I really don't know how much I can say without being censored  so you gotta bear with me with the vague  statements.

I swear I'm getting rid of these censors even if I have to begrudgingly take back my mod star

[SharkmanthaC 115,066]

2 minutes ago, PartySick said:

I swear I'm getting rid of these censors even if I have to begrudgingly take back my mod star

I was about to remove them but if this is the case, maybe I won't. 

[Dennis 8,391]

6 minutes ago, PartySick said:

"Is calling for gen*cide against the school's rules?"

"Nobody is calling for a gen*cide, stop being crazy"

The thing is the question was asked as a matter of policy, to understand the policy of Harvard. So even if there aren't people who are actively calling for the gen*cide of Jews, the legislator wants to know what's the policy of Harvard. There was no reason she had to be this evasive.

Policy is made and written to account for different hypotheticals.

So when people see that they struggle to answer such a simple question, it validates the concerns that Jews are excluded from the DEI protections, which is a point that I now have to concede to conservatives. In my opinion, they've proven the fact that there is an issue with the way we don't treat minorities equally. They've set a trap for her, she walked right into (by her own admission) and they won this fight, which is why she resigned. Because she didn't get backlash from conservatives only, but also from NYT and liberal media outlets.

 

 

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,699]

1 hour ago, Dennis said:

Or you could simply say that you're unable/unwilling to address the issues that I pointed out with your logic and we move on.

You know absolute free speech never existed. And you know that many right-wing speakers were repeatedly disinvited from universities because of hateful things they said. And you know the left itself never defended absolute free speech (and rightfully so).

Pretending otherwise is simply intellectual dishonesty.

And meant exactly that. 

[PartySick 172,975]

2 minutes ago, Dennis said:

The thing is the question was asked as a matter of policy, to understand the policy of Harvard. So even if there aren't people who are actively calling for the gen*cide of Jews, the legislator wants to know what's the policy of Harvard. There was no reason she had to be this evasive.

Policy is made and written to account for different hypotheticals.

So when people see that they struggle to answer such a simple question, it validates the concerns that Jews are excluded from the DEI protections, which is a point that I now have to concede to conservatives. In my opinion, they've proven the fact that there is an issue with the way we don't treat minorities equally. They've set a trap for her, she walked right into (by her own admission) and they won this fight, which is why she resigned. Because she didn't get backlash from conservatives only, but also from NYT and liberal media outlets.

 

 

Ok, so I looked it up

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/01/03/christopher-rufo-claudine-gay-harvard-resignation-00133618

The whole thing was a coordinated plot by some of the worst conservatives in the country to take down a seemingly progressive leader in education.

So again, I don't feel there's an honest and legitimate reason to be asking her this question period. It quite literally was manufactured as part of a plot to get rid of her.

For better or worse, it worked.

Now comes the time when they convince donors and such to implant a leader that'll discriminate against LGBT students and topics, women, and go after "critical race theory"

[PartySick 172,975]

11 minutes ago, SharkmanthaC said:

I was about to remove them but if this is the case, maybe I won't. 

Just remove them

Or I'll ghost this whole site again!!!

[Dennis 8,391]

Just now, PartySick said:

So again, I don't feel there's an honest and legitimate reason to be asking her this question period. It quite literally was manufactured as part of a plot to get rid of her.

She is the president of a leading educational institution in the U.S which does receive some tax-payer funding too. So of course the public, donors or legislators have the right to ask her questions. And it's literally her job to answer such questions in a way that reflects well on the institution and its staff. That's what she's paid for.

We can blame conservatives or we can actually correct the issue that conservatives used to make their point. That's my only disagreement with you. You prefer the former, I prefer the latter.

 

[Future Lovers 7,680]

The usual suspect once more missing the reality of the situation

[Ladle Ghoulash 54,016]

1 hour ago, Dennis said:

Or she could've simply answered "yes" to this question. 

We all here know too well that if Jewish was replaced with Black, Muslim, or any other ethnicity, the answer would've been different. And when people treat this double standard as normal, that's when you know we really have a big problem, which is actually helping conservatives prove their point. 

She answered that she found it personally abhorrent, but that the specific circumstances would dictate whether or not it violated the code of conduct. Pretty uncontroversial answer, imo 

[Dennis 8,391]

1 minute ago, Future Lovers said:

The usual suspect once more missing the reality of the situation

The way you, roughhouse dandy and a few others developed an obsession with me is kinda hilarious. 

I know I'm not "left enough" for you guys, and we tend to disagree. But maybe keep an open mind?