Jump to content

Predatory Professor or Scheming Student?


Wooja
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3690 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

The recent OBR event relating to the incidence of sexual violence against women raised my awareness of this story.

What is your view? Despite the complete lack of evidence, do you think the Professor took advantage of his supposed  position of authority over a naive young student, or do you think that she went into the situation with eyes wide open, anticipating a free pass on her grades, and when that was denied, she decided to claim against the university so she wouldn't need to tend bar for four years to pay her bills?

I suggest that you read the details very carefully, and you might wish to do some research on the background of the two individuals involved before you express any impetuous views.

Wooja . . . expecthertohavecalledthepolice

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic


Wooja wrote:

 

I suggest that you read the details very carefully, and you might wish to do some research on the background of the two individuals involved before you express any impetuous views.

 

And I would suggest that you research the OP's post history, noting also who is following their posts like an imprinted duckling, before feeding the troll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Theresa Tennyson wrote:

And
I
would suggest that you research the OP's post history, noting also who is
following their posts
like an imprinted duckling, before feeding the troll.

 

I enjoy a sense of humor.  The OP had only one post when I responded on a different thread.  This was his third.  Are you suggesting something else? 

 Cooja . . . explain

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


LaskyaClaren wrote:

I think anyone who has been on the forums for any length of time is likely to conclude that the OP has, actually, a very long post history, albeit under different names.

Perhaps yes, Laskya, but the OP only had 1 post when I responded.  I ain't Merlin the wizard. 

PS And it was, imo, a very humorous 1st post.  So I lol'ed.

 

May I call you Lassie?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Storm Clarence wrote:


LaskyaClaren wrote:

I think anyone who has been on the forums for any length of time is likely to conclude that the OP has, actually, a very long post history, albeit under different names.

Perhaps yes, Laskya, but the OP only had 1 post when I responded.  I ain't Merlin the wizard. 

PS And it was, imo, a very humorous 1st post.  So I lol'ed.

 

May I call you Lassie?

 

 

 

LOL

If you'd like. :-)

I've certainly been called worse things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


LaskyaClaren wrote:

I think anyone who has been on the forums for any length of time is likely to conclude that the OP has, actually, a very long post history, albeit under different names.

Pot, meet kettle.

Wooja . . . jumptoconclusionsafterjustonepost

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Wooja wrote:


LaskyaClaren wrote:

I think anyone who has been on the forums for any length of time is likely to conclude that the OP has, actually, a very long post history, albeit under different names.

Pot, meet kettle.

Wooja . . . jumptoconclusionsafterjustonepost

I'm not sure I appreciate being called a "pot." Couldn't you find a more flattering analogy?

Laskya (And if my writing and post style is distinctive, so is yours.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Wooja wrote:

The recent OBR event relating to the incidence of sexual violence against women raised my awareness of

What is your view?
Despite the complete lack of evidence,
do you think the Professor took advantage of his supposed  position of authority over a naive young student, or do you think that she went into the situation with eyes wide open, anticipating a free pass on her grades, and when that was denied, she decided to claim against the university so she wouldn't need to tend bar for four years to pay her bills?

I suggest that you read the details very carefully, and you might wish to do some research on the background of the two individuals involved before you express any impetuous views.

Wooja . . . expecthertohavecalledthepolice

 

But do we know that there is a "complete lack of evidence," (my bolding above)?

What is lacking is evidence available for public scrutiny.

According to this article, it is claimed the Officer taking the report found the student's claims were credible.

"The student’s attorney, Kevin O’Connor, said Wednesday the student had filed a police report about one year after the night in question. Political science Prof. Jacqueline Stevens said Thursday she went with the student to file a report with the Chicago Police Department about a year after the incident occurred.

“When we gave the report, it was clear to me that the officer who was actually with (the student) in person, writing down what had happened and taking notes on this for over an hour was …  outraged by the University and its failure to alert the police immediately,” Stevens said. “He found her entirely credible.”

However, according to this article,

"The student filed a report with Chicago police on April 27, 2013, in connection with the alleged February 2012 incident, but apparently did not pursue criminal charges, a police department source said."

So what we have are many allegations but very few, if any, substantiated facts.

I did take a brief look at the Professor's background which I found very interesting especially because of the current public debate about whistleblowers and hacktavists.  It could create the impression the Professor is being targeted for other reasons, especially if one believes in conspiracy theories. 

So again, with the lack of substantiated facts (I could cite other articles here) it is very difficult to make a judgement.  What I do know is this, that sometimes very smart people do very dumb things and there is a likelihood here that if the Professor is guilty of anything, it may be this.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

She went to a restaurant and a few bars and declined to tell the server she was underage, got drunk and went to his apartment.

She is sueing the school but didn't call the cops and press charges..

You do the math.

Wow, Drake. It's like you were there or something! You must tell me how you got hold of all the details of the university report, because it's pretty clear that you know EVERYTHING. that happened! 

This is why we have actual investigations and trials, rather than jumping to conclusions based on brief media reports.

I have no better an idea than you what happened. But if the university's Office for Sexual Harassment Prevention DID investigate, and found that a professor engaged in "unwelcome and inappropriate sexual advances," then they at least should have acted.

Instead, it seems as though they sat on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

I have no better an idea than you what happened. But if the university's Office for Sexual Harassment Prevention DID investigate, and found that a professor 
engaged in "
unwelcome
and inappropriate sexual advances," then they at least should have acted.

 

The "social media communications and text messages" the student allegedly sent the Professor in the days after the incident, which the university might have been provided access to and which might have indicated that advances might  not only be welcomed, but encouraged, might have had something to do with the university (not) acting as they did.

Wooja . . . putmoneyonwhoisgoingtowinthisone

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Wooja wrote:


LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

I have no better an idea than you what happened. But if the university's Office for Sexual Harassment Prevention DID investigate, and found that a professor 
engaged in "
unwelcome
and inappropriate sexual advances," then they at least should have acted.

 

which the university might have been provided access to and which might have indicated that the advances were not only welcomed, but encouraged, might have had something to do with the university (not) acting as they did.

Wooja . . . putmoneyonwhoisgoingtowinthisone

 

Maybe. We can't really know, can we? But if they didn't act (and it's not even clear that they didn't, in fact), then they appear to be ignoring the evidence and conclusions offered by their own Office of Sexual Harrassment Prevention. Unwelcome advances or touching of a sexual nature offered by a professor to an undergraduate student is pretty serious stuff. 

There is an enormous power imbalance here, remember: a professor can quite literally hold a student's future career or educational prospects in her or his hands. In some cases, for instance, doing poorly in a particular course can result in expulsion from a programme of study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

 But if they didn't act (and it's not even clear that they didn't, in fact), then they appear to be ignoring the evidence and conclusions offered by their own Office of Sexual Harrassment Prevention.


I'd love to see the email that Joan Slavin, the Director of the OSHP, actually sent. She is so in the firing line, however this goes down - and she's a lawyer, so she should know better.

Incidentally "lawyer" is #2 in the list of professions chosen by unempathic psychopaths, which probably explains why she would communicate such an ambiguously vacillating decision to an apparently hypersensitive student by email, rather than face to face.

Wooja . . . wantthatjobnoway

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Wooja wrote:


LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

 But if they didn't act (and it's not even clear that they didn't, in fact), then they appear to be ignoring the evidence and conclusions offered by their own Office of Sexual Harrassment Prevention.


I'd love to see the email that
, actually sent. She is so in the firing line, however this goes down - and she's a lawyer, so she should know better.

 

 

Yes, agreed.

I am interested in how this plays out for a number of reasons, but my most immediate interest is what happened in that office.

Another aspect of this story too that actually shouldn't matter, but that probably does, is that philosophy, as a discipline, has a loooooong history of exclusion and misogyny; of all of the fields in the humanities, it has by far the lowest participation by women, and the consensus has developed, probably with good reason, that many philosophy departments offer extremely hostile environments for both female faculty and female students. The discipline, in North America anyway, has been hit with some very nasty scandals of late, such as this one:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/03/arts/colin-mcginn-philosopher-to-leave-his-post.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

In fact, the entire Dept. of Philosophy at U of Colorado (Boulder) has been censured for its sexism:

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/02/sexual_harassment_in_philosophy_departments_university_of_colorado_boulder.html

Again, that shouldn't be a consideration here, but these recent scandals have made Ludlow's case far more high profile that it probably should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


LaskyaClaren wrote:


<snip>

Again, that 
shouldn't
be a consideration here, but these recent scandals have made Ludlow's case far more high profile that it probably should be.

 

Anything to do with sex is ripe for exploitation by the Media, especially if there is any grandstanding by the parties involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


LaskyaClaren wrote:


<snip>

Again, that 
shouldn't
be a consideration here, but these recent scandals have made Ludlow's case far more high profile that it probably should be.

 

Anything to do with sex is ripe for exploitation by the Media, especially if there is any grandstanding by the parties involved.

That is certainly true. But I, for instance, don't read the Chicago Tribune. I know about this story through various philosophy blogs (such as The Leiter Report), which are covering this very thoroughly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


LaskyaClaren wrote:


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

She went to a restaurant and a few bars and declined to tell the server she was underage, got drunk and went to his apartment.

She is suing the school but didn't call the cops and press charges..

You do the math.

Wow, Drake. It's like you were there or something! You must tell me how you got hold of all the details of the university report, because it's pretty clear that you know EVERYTHING. that happened! 

This is why we have actual investigations and trials, rather than jumping to conclusions based on brief media reports.

I have no better an idea than you what happened. But if the university's Office for Sexual Harassment Prevention DID investigate, and found that a professor 
engaged in "
unwelcome
and inappropriate sexual advances," then they at least should have acted.

Instead, it seems as though they sat on it.

Everything I stated came from the story that was in the OP. 

She stated she went to a restaurant and a few bars and "was forced to drink". If she told the server she was underage they would not serve her. 

If she had called the cops that would be public record and the Chicago Tribune could have that info, they don't so it's a safe bet she didn't file a report.

ETA

She is suing the school and not the guy  that allegedly assaulted her.. That speaks volumes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


LaskyaClaren wrote:


Perrie Juran wrote:


LaskyaClaren wrote:


<snip>

Again, that 
shouldn't
be a consideration here, but these recent scandals have made Ludlow's case far more high profile that it probably should be.

 

Anything to do with sex is ripe for exploitation by the Media, especially if there is any grandstanding by the parties involved.

That is certainly true. But I, for instance, don't read the Chicago Tribune. I know about this story through various philosophy blogs (such as The Leiter Report), which are covering this very thoroughly.

If they are reporting on the story are they not then exploiting it also? 

What I read on the Leiter report went beyond an ethical discussion of a situation.

In fact, while I can not cite a specific reason, I found the tone of the Leiter Report leaning in the Professor's favour.  Could there be a bias there?  (I don't consider it worth my time right now to decipher why I felt that way reading it).

Regardless, I still go back to what I said, I don't have enough facts to make a judgement beyond the one I stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:


If she had called the cops that would be public record and the Chicago Tribune could have that info, they don't so it's a safe bet she didn't file a report.


An ongoing Investigation or even the fact there is an ongoing Investigation is not automatically considerred public information.  It only becomes public when the authorities choose to make it so, which is usually only after charges have been filed.

Police Blotters are usually very generic, never citing any names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:

If they are reporting on the story are they not then exploiting it also? 

What I read on the Leiter report went beyond an ethical discussion of a situation.

In fact, while I can not cite a specific reason, I found the tone of the Leiter Report leaning in the Professor's favour.  Could there be a bias there?  (I don't consider it worth my time right now to decipher why I felt that way reading it).

Regardless, I still go back to what I said, I don't have enough facts to make a judgement beyond the one I stated.

Well, of course they are "exploiting" it. They have an agenda as well. There's something of a civil war going on in the entire discipine of philosophy right now, and they're all looking for ammunition.

My sense of Leiter is that he was ambivalent -- and, given the arrival of a notice from Ludlow's lawyer, also damn cautious.

But generally I agree: there aren't enough facts to know anything for sure, except perhaps that the university's failure to act on the facts reported by the Office of Sexual Harrassment Prevention seems odd, ill-advised, and probably unethical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3690 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...