Jump to content

Menu

Psychiatrist's Lecture at the Yale Child Study Center


Fritz
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

If you aren't familiar with Bari Weiss the former writer for New York Times you really should check out her reporting on substack.com. This particular lecture from this professor is pretty sickening, but needs to be pointed out.

The article further down the list about doctor's not being allowed to speak the truth for fear of retaliation is disturbing as well. This craziness of scientists/doctors not being allowed to tell the truth for fear of losing their jobs or research funding (Covid-19 origin cover up for example) has to stop.

 

https://bariweiss.substack.com/

Changed the title. I'm sure that will not stop the deflection from the subject at hand and personal attacks on Bari Weiss, but I have come to expect nothing less from some people on this board. 

Edited by Fritz
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

For those of you/us who can't use volume for whatever reason, here's articles. [I'm linking 3 because I don't know individual paper bias' and don't want others to assume I chose a source based on that. Here's the top 3 google search results.]

Yale is choosing to distance themselves with a statement and make the lecture video available to Yale-only people with a trigger warning. While I'd prefer a stronger condemnation but not restricting the access, this is better than trying to erase from the internet.

https://news.yahoo.com/yale-restricts-access-lecture-psychiatrist-160557742.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/yale-says-lecture-fantasy-about-shooting-white-people-antithetical-school-n1269884

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation-world/ct-aud-nw-nyt-yale-psychiatrist-shooting-white-people-20210607-6bu54qqttze6bgn3wtgb6vncpq-story.html

I think the internet culture of over-sharing is actually a positive thing in this regard: things said to small but influential audiences is no longer being hidden. Especially in the medical profession, this seems a big deal. 

I'm concerned about the culture at the school/s that would allow someone with these views to talk and not be immediately condemned or isolated in the first place: waiting only for a media storm. I mean, the title of the talk should have been red flags enough before hosting; talks DH has given in a less prestigious industry and to less prestigious groups went through a 3 step vetting process, so I don't see too much wiggle room. Sure you give experts their head, but I'd expect some touch points before speaking at a place like Yale.

eta: It wasn't a "Yale psychiatrist" --> she was invited to speak at Yale but has no other affiliation there; I don't see Yale listed as a school she attended.

Edited by Moonhawk
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now's the time that everyone will clutch their pearls about what this doctor said and no one will even attempt to address the reality of her experience. Do you wonder why non-white people feel like this doctor? Will anyone bother to listen to their perspectives of this? 

But no we'll get Bari Weiss blowing up the doctor's life while Weiss believes herself to be a champion of free speech. 

The dishonesty of this never ending cycle is so telling. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had to worry about my son or my husband getting profiled, pulled over, and shot dead for no reason by those in authority, I'd be beyond upset and angry. And then if people in privileged positions started saying, "Oh, get over it, racism isn't a thing anymore," I'd be furious. And that's what people are having to deal with.

So, yeah, she shouldn't have said it. But I can't blame her for *feeling* that amount of rage.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Fritz changed the title to Psychiatrist's Lecture at the Yale Child Study Center
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Now's the time that everyone will clutch their pearls about what this doctor said and no one will even attempt to address the reality of her experience. Do you wonder why non-white people feel like this doctor? Will anyone bother to listen to their perspectives of this? 

But no we'll get Bari Weiss blowing up the doctor's life while Weiss believes herself to be a champion of free speech. 

The dishonesty of this never ending cycle is so telling. 

 

I mean, the fact that she has experienced racism and has formed her opinions based on that is true. And awful in and of itself.

To erase me and say that I am the problem because I'm not the right "type" of minority isn't going to fix it.

What she's experienced is inexcusable and needs to be called out. Feeling anger and having fantasies about anger can be cathartic. Being heard about your experiences is validating and needs to be done.

Encouraging and calling for the less-than-human treatment of others is not a solution. And should not be presented as a reasonable way to solve things.

eta: also, I'd expect this from us "regular folk", not a psychiatrist. I think that is what makes me a little more outspoken on this: as a psychiatrist giving a lecture on this topic in this manner, she isn't bringing light to the issue as much as she is advocating for a way to act, giving her expert medical opinion on what should be done. This doesn't seem like a psychologically healthy process; if I said this type of stuff in a therapy session, my counselor/psychologist would see it as something to work through, not as a sign I'm finished.

Edited by Moonhawk
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Moonhawk said:

I mean, the fact that she has experienced racism and has formed her opinions based on that is true. And awful in and of itself.

To erase me and say that I am the problem because I'm not the right "type" of minority isn't going to fix it.

What she's experienced is inexcusable and needs to be called out. Feeling anger and having fantasies about anger can be cathartic. Being heard about your experiences is validating and needs to be done.

Encouraging and calling for the less-than-human treatment of others is not a solution. And should not be presented as a reasonable way to solve things.

eta: also, I'd expect this from us "regular folk", not a psychiatrist. I think that is what makes me a little more outspoken on this: as a psychiatrist giving a lecture on this topic in this manner, she isn't bringing light to the issue as much as she is advocating for a way to act, giving her expert medical opinion on what should be done. This doesn't seem like a psychologically healthy process; if I said this type of stuff in a therapy session, my counselor/psychologist would see it as something to work through, not as a sign I'm finished.

It wasn't a lecture in the way that you're probably thinking of. She was invited to Grand Rounds to educate clinicians. She was presenting what she felt as a way of helping clinicians to understand how their patients might feel. It wasn't provided as expert medical advise. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some things you think in your head.  There are some things you say out loud.   This person should be smart enough to understand the difference.   I guess not.  🤷🏻‍♀️   
What she said is awful, but I can understand people thinking it or even saying it to their spouse or bff but it’s foolish to say it at a lecture.    
I do think she has a right to be angry, of course.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ordinary Shoes said:

It wasn't a lecture in the way that you're probably thinking of. She was invited to Grand Rounds to educate clinicians. She was presenting what she felt as a way of helping clinicians to understand how their patients might feel. It wasn't provided as expert medical advise. 

 

How many were in the lecture? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WildflowerMom said:

How many were in the lecture? 

Not sure but it was probably a very small audience. 

Of note, now there are many people calling for her to lose for medical license. 

Isn't that always the case? "Cancel culture is terrible!" "Oh wait, that person said something that I don't like? They should lose their medical license or their job."

Next day...

"Cancel culture is terrible!" 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Yale’s response makes clear these are this individual’s views and don’t represent Yale in any way. I find the violence she speaks of repugnant as well. I see that racist white folks are loving this story right now, though. This plays right into their narrative, which is why I wouldn’t personally help them out by amplifying it. The issue du jour seems to be the evils of critical race theory and how schools are teaching kids to feel guilty for being white. I’m wondering which talk shows hosts have been promoting this. I have had two people in the past two weeks respond to hearing that we homeschool by saying they would have/will do the same thing because they don’t want their kids being taught all that race theory stuff “and that they should feel guilty for being white”. So, those folks are going to love this story, even though this particular woman only represents her own opinions. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

It wasn't a lecture in the way that you're probably thinking of. She was invited to Grand Rounds to educate clinicians. She was presenting what she felt as a way of helping clinicians to understand how their patients might feel. It wasn't provided as expert medical advise. 

 

Ok: if it's presenting as the internal monologue and experience of someone oppressed, I get it. If it's given as a psychiatrist talking about possible feelings of a patient, I get it.

But when it gets to the parts where she is talking about white people being useless on this topic -- and, incidentally, anyone that isn't pure minority, and I'm making an assumption that even some minorities aren't the right type -- then we are getting into a more difficult scenario.

So either she went outside of her actual topic purpose or that wasn't the purpose. Given the title of the actual talk I am not so quick to think she was only asked or expected to be giving a talk on the oppressed person's state of mine.

I'm afraid I can't find a full transcript of the talk to get a more accurate view, or any fliers/summaries given before the talk that would better outline the purpose. So I may not understand the full situation, that true, and thanks for giving me more context. But that there are at least things not explained away even if she was presenting how their patients might feel. 

much later eta: strike out above, the original link from OP had a flier advertising the event. Link again here for the scroll-avoidant. The purpose stated was to educate, so based on the quotes given plus the stated intent of the objectives on the flyer, I am not sympathetic to the intent of the speaker. I think the first objective is correct, and even maybe laudable. The rest I consider flawed "proofs" that are being actively taught, not just a sharing of experience, and so I don't think it can be excused as just "presenting...understanding how their patients might feel." Not that my opinion matters, lol. 

Edited by Moonhawk
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone give me the  Cliff notes on this issue?  Yes I feel lazy today.

I have heard snippets of the OK Governor making laws where teachers can't make students 'feel uncomfortable about their race or make them feel guilty for things their ancestors have done.'.....what kind of nonsense is he spouting.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Can anyone give me the  Cliff notes on this issue?  Yes I feel lazy today.

I have heard snippets of the OK Governor making laws where teachers can't make students 'feel uncomfortable about their race or make them feel guilty for things their ancestors have done.'.....what kind of nonsense is he spouting.  

I’m sure someone will do much better, but the super, super brief version is that some people think that teaching kids that minorities in this country, particularly Black Americans, have faced systematic oppression and racism (and continue to) will make the white kids feel bad, so it shouldn’t be taught. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, KSera said:

I’m sure someone will do much better, but the super, super brief version is that some people think that teaching kids that minorities in this country, particularly Black Americans, have faced systematic oppression and racism (and continue to) will make the white kids feel bad, so it shouldn’t be taught. 

That is exactly what it sounded like OK is trying to get put in place.  Ridiculous. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Can anyone give me the  Cliff notes on this issue?  Yes I feel lazy today.

I have heard snippets of the OK Governor making laws where teachers can't make students 'feel uncomfortable about their race or make them feel guilty for things their ancestors have done.'.....what kind of nonsense is he spouting.  

No teacher, administrator or other employee of a school
district, charter school or virtual charter school shall require or
make part of a course the following concepts:
         a.   one race or sex is inherently superior to another race
              or sex,
         b.   an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is
              inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether
              consciously or unconsciously,
         c.   an individual should be discriminated against or
              receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of
              his or her race or sex,
         d.   members of one race or sex cannot and should not
              attempt to treat others without respect to race or
              sex,
         e.   an individual’s moral character is necessarily
              determined by his or her race or sex,
         f.   an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex,
              bears responsibility for actions committed in the past
              by other members of the same race or sex,
ENR. H. B. NO. 1775 Page 2

g.   any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish
              or any other form of psychological distress on account
              of his or her race or sex, or
         h.   meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are
              racist or sexist or were created by members of a
              particular race to oppress members of another race.
 

Here is a section of  the OK bill.

it’s 4 pages but not very dense pages so it might take you 15 minutes to read, more or less.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

13 minutes ago, pinball said:

No teacher, administrator or other employee of a school
district, charter school or virtual charter school shall require or
make part of a course the following concepts:
         a.   one race or sex is inherently superior to another race
              or sex,
         b.   an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is
              inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether
              consciously or unconsciously,
         c.   an individual should be discriminated against or
              receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of
              his or her race or sex,
         d.   members of one race or sex cannot and should not
              attempt to treat others without respect to race or
              sex,
         e.   an individual’s moral character is necessarily
              determined by his or her race or sex,
         f.   an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex,
              bears responsibility for actions committed in the past
              by other members of the same race or sex,
ENR. H. B. NO. 1775 Page 2

g.   any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish
              or any other form of psychological distress on account
              of his or her race or sex, or
         h.   meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are
              racist or sexist or were created by members of a
              particular race to oppress members of another race.
 

Here is a section of  the OK bill.

it’s 4 pages but not very dense pages so it might take you 15 minutes to read, more or less.

This quoted part sounds pretty reasonable to me, and not the same as this sum up:

47 minutes ago, KSera said:

I’m sure someone will do much better, but the super, super brief version is that some people think that teaching kids that minorities in this country, particularly Black Americans, have faced systematic oppression and racism (and continue to) will make the white kids feel bad, so it shouldn’t be taught. 

Is there another part of the bill that says something about not being allowed to teach about minorities facing systemic oppression?  Or just the quoted part above, about not being allowed to teach that kids are responsible for the actions of their demographic group?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Condessa said:

 

This quoted part sounds pretty reasonable to me, and not the same as this sum up:

Is there another part of the bill that says something about not being allowed to teach about minorities facing systemic oppression?  Or just the quoted part above, about not being allowed to teach that kids are responsible for the actions of their demographic group?

I’ll link you the page.

click in pdf link...it says download near top of page

https://legiscan.com/OK/text/HB1775/2021

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Condessa said:

 

This quoted part sounds pretty reasonable to me, and not the same as this sum up:

Is there another part of the bill that says something about not being allowed to teach about minorities facing systemic oppression?  Or just the quoted part above, about not being allowed to teach that kids are responsible for the actions of their demographic group?

Most of it sounds 'reasonable' but also head scratching....WHY does a new law need to  be written to prohibit teachers from teaching racist concepts?  And then part about not teaching kids to feel discomfort about their own race.....again just sounds very fishy...especially in 2021 when Tulsa is commemorating 100 year anniversary of the race massacre and reparations are being discussed.  It VERY much sounds to me like they are saying they don't want white children being made to feel bad about what happened to black people 100 years ago.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Most of it sounds 'reasonable' but also head scratching....WHY does a new law need to  be written to prohibit teachers from teaching racist concepts?  And then part about not teaching kids to feel discomfort about their own race.....again just sounds very fishy...especially in 2021 when Tulsa is commemorating 100 year anniversary of the race massacre and reparations are being discussed.  It VERY much sounds to me like they are saying they don't want white children being made to feel bad about what happened to black people 100 years ago.

Should they feel bad about it, as in feel horror and sorrow that it happened, and determination that it never happen again?  Absolutely.  Should they feel bad about it, as in feel guilty for what happened because they belong to the same demographic as those who committed it?  Absolutely not.  But I have a close relative who believes they should feel the latter as well as the former.  If she were my children’s schoolteacher and were teaching them to feel guilt for the actions of others, I would have grave concerns.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Most of it sounds 'reasonable' but also head scratching....WHY does a new law need to  be written to prohibit teachers from teaching racist concepts?  And then part about not teaching kids to feel discomfort about their own race.....again just sounds very fishy...especially in 2021 when Tulsa is commemorating 100 year anniversary of the race massacre and reparations are being discussed.  It VERY much sounds to me like they are saying they don't want white children being made to feel bad about what happened to black people 100 years ago.

Many children are naturally empathetic, and have a strong sense of justice and will feel pain when others are hurt. 

Teaching about racial injustice (like the Tulsa massacre) will be cause children pain, and they will naturally feel bad about it.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pinball said:

Many children are naturally empathetic, and have a strong sense of justice and will feel pain when others are hurt. 

Teaching about racial injustice (like the Tulsa massacre) will be cause children pain, and they will naturally feel bad about it.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to?

 

The entire thing feels much more about politics than it does actual education of children on race matters.  I am just thankful my kids are out of school and I don't have to navigate all of that.  

Of course some children will feel discomfort when they learn about horrors of what one race has done to another.  The law reads like teachers are suppose to make sure they don't feel discomfort.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Should they feel bad about it, as in feel horror and sorrow that it happened, and determination that it never happen again?  Absolutely.  Should they feel bad about it, as in feel guilty for what happened because they belong to the same demographic as those who committed it?  Absolutely not.  But I have a close relative who believes they should feel the latter as well as the former.  If she were my children’s schoolteacher and were teaching them to feel guilt for the actions of others, I would have grave concerns.  

Agree that no one should put that on a child or an adult for that matter.  If a teacher is doing that than they are already not following educational standards so really a law like this is just written for grandstanding and to make people feel all warm and cozy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Agree that no one should put that on a child or an adult for that matter.  If a teacher is doing that than they are already not following educational standards so really a law like this is just written for grandstanding and to make people feel all warm and cozy.

And to be a political tool to obstruct anything "inconvenient" to talk about.

I know that the psychiatrist at Yale is talking about racial topics, and the OK bill (and others) is trying to control racial teaching, so these two things are related, but they are not the same issue. 

If we want to learn from history and not repeat it, we have to actually...teach history. White washing it (hah) isn't going to do anyone a service and longterm is going to perpetuate and strengthen the problems some are so intent on pretending don't exist.

That doesn't mean we need to take on personal guilt, as much as personal responsibility to not let it happen again. 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Re: critical race theory and the OK bill. Something that was just said to me this past week now makes sense.

I'm going to be teaching a co-op class on native American cultures. Someone said to me, "Do you just teach about the Indians, or about [white people], too?" I said that my focus was on the native cultures, but since I was including history, of course some of it would involve learning about the interactions between the two groups. This person said, "But you can you teach it like you want to? Or do you have to teach it like the schools say?" Ah...then I knew what they were getting at. They wanted to make sure I could make white people look good, which is a really ironic concern in itself--and it's interesting that they assumed that's what I'd *want* to do. I just said something like, "Well, I teach the unvarnished truth of history" and then passed the bean dip and started talking about our crafts and games. 

Same person was upset about Civil War monuments being torn down. And her biological daughter is biracial (black dad). I don't really understand it. Wouldn't that make you more sensitive to racial issues? I am not judging her, although I disagree with her positions--I just really don't get it.

Edited by MercyA
  • Like 7
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't listen to the lecture, so I only know the snippets that I've read online, but I am generally loathe to restrict speech in academic settings. If we can no longer withstand debate, critical thinking, and the free exchange of competing ideas in academia because we have such fragile sensibilities, we have serious issues as a country.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Of course some children will feel discomfort when they learn about horrors of what one race has done to another.  The law reads like teachers are suppose to make sure they don't feel discomfort.

I don’t read it that way, just as preventing the teaching of my relative’s viewpoint that people should feel racial guilt, like the wording of the bill says.  
 

A school trying to use this bill as an excuse for not teaching true history including all the injustices would be a huge problem, too.  It wouldn’t stand up to a legal challenge, though, since that’s not what it actually says.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Condessa said:

I don’t read it that way, just as preventing the teaching of my relative’s viewpoint that people should feel racial guilt, like the wording of the bill says.  
 

A school trying to use this bill as an excuse for not teaching true history including all the injustices would be a huge problem, too.  It wouldn’t stand up to a legal challenge, though, since that’s not what it actually says.

Again though to we need a law to ensure that happens?  If a teacher is trying to convince her students they are personally responsible and should feel guilt and shame for something that happened 100 years ago, then that is a huge problem that probably needs to be addressed with THAT teacher.  

I find it highly insulting to make a law telling teachers something like that.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the Katie Herzog interview with the psychiatrist?  (I know the article about medicine is by Herzog - OPs link not working for me).

If it is, for those who need the journalist's bona fides before assessing the work, she's a white, progressive gay woman who likes to write on the unexamined corners of social issues. She's known (and harassed for) writing about detransitioners.

I thought the interview was really well done. Not going to get into what I think about psychiatrists revealing their white murder fantasies - therapy is better when the professional is warm, and has positive self-regard for the individual in front of them - and knowing your therapist had murder fantasies about your race disrupts that, somewhat, if you happen to be a white client. I think psychiatrists can also be activists, but there's a fine line. 

I am going to leave a link to an alternative approach to CRT. People here who organise DI stuff at work may be interested. 

Also a link to Bari's wife's newsletter. Nelly Bowles writes 'Chosen by Choice' about converting to Judaism - it's a fab newsletter, and I am not planning to convert to Judaism or anything else! 

https://theoryofenchantment.com/

https://chosenbychoice.substack.com/

I don't know why other progressives indulge in so much Weiss hate - I don't love everything she does, but she does come in for disproportionate hate.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Re: critical race theory and the OK bill. Something that was just said to me this past week now makes sense.

I'm going to be teaching a co-op class on native American cultures. Someone said to me, "Do you just teach about the Indians, or about [white people], too?" I said that my focus was on the native cultures, but since I was including history, of course some of it would involve learning about the interactions between the two groups. This person said, "But you can you teach it like you want to? Or do you have to teach it like the schools say?" Ah...then I knew what they were getting at. They wanted to make sure I could make white people look good, which is a really ironic concern in itself--and it's interesting that they assumed that's what I'd *want* to do. I just said something like, "Well, I teach the unvarnished truth of history" and then passed the bean dip and started talking about our crafts and games. 

Same person was upset about Civil War monuments being torn down. And her biological daughter is biracial (black dad). I don't really understand it. Wouldn't that make you more sensitive to racial issues? I am not judging her, although I disagree with her positions--I just really don't get it.

This is exactly what I feel like is going on.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do absolutely support the psychiatrist's right to speak at Yale, however, and think a tw is stupid. Universities should stand by their invited speakers, controversial or not. 

The more perspectives the better. Not a fan of this narrowing of speech business. 

I am not personally concerned or offended by the speech. It's just not very compatible with professional provision of services. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

I didn't listen to the lecture, so I only know the snippets that I've read online, but I am generally loathe to restrict speech in academic settings. If we can no longer withstand debate, critical thinking, and the free exchange of competing ideas in academia because we have such fragile sensibilities, we have serious issues as a country.

Chicago principles all the way. Amen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Is this the Katie Herzog interview with the psychiatrist?  (I know the article about medicine is by Herzog - OPs link not working for me).

If it is, for those who need the journalist's bona fides before assessing the work, she's a white, progressive gay woman who likes to write on the unexamined corners of social issues. She's known (and harassed for) writing about detransitioners.

I thought the interview was really well done. Not going to get into what I think about psychiatrists revealing their white murder fantasies - therapy is better when the professional is warm, and has positive self-regard for the individual in front of them - and knowing your therapist had murder fantasies about your race disrupts that, somewhat, if you happen to be a white client. I think psychiatrists can also be activists, but there's a fine line. 

I am going to leave a link to an alternative approach to CRT. People here who organise DI stuff at work may be interested. 

Also a link to Bari's wife's newsletter. Nelly Bowles writes 'Chosen by Choice' about converting to Judaism - it's a fab newsletter, and I am not planning to convert to Judaism or anything else! 

https://theoryofenchantment.com/

https://chosenbychoice.substack.com/

I don't know why other progressives indulge in so much Weiss hate - I don't love everything she does, but she does come in for disproportionate hate.

Thank you for both of those links. I converted to Judaism in my early 30s, so I enjoy reading what other converts write.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a little confused by the direction this thread took. The articles seemed to be about what the psychiatrist said in her lecture, which was that she felt a great deal of rage toward white people because of her continued experiences with racism and that rage occasionally manifested in a fantasy of killing white people. It seems to me that this is valuable for people to understand that being under continued racist attacks and pressure can lead to a level of unprocessed anger that is extreme. I didn't hear exactly what she said, but it doesn't sound like she advocating carrying anything like that out. It sounds like she was discussing something important to understand about the lived experiences of Black Americans. If we can't talk about the fact that being under siege from racism day in and out can lead to extreme anger and resentment, then we're not going to get anywhere.

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a conflict between her discussion of her white-directed rage ( valid) and her role as a psychiatrist, presumably with clients from all ethnicities. 

Professional codes of conduct exist for a reason. 

If she is a teaching and not treating psych, it matters less. 

That's the only 'controversy' I see - that and Yale's weird reaction to bad publicity. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

Thank you for both of those links. I converted to Judaism in my early 30s, so I enjoy reading what other converts write.

Nelly will sometimes feature the stories of other converts, and it's so interesting to see the similarities and differences in path. It's often very moving. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Farrar said:

I'm a little confused by the direction this thread took. The articles seemed to be about what the psychiatrist said in her lecture, which was that she felt a great deal of rage toward white people because of her continued experiences with racism and that rage occasionally manifested in a fantasy of killing white people. It seems to me that this is valuable for people to understand that being under continued racist attacks and pressure can lead to a level of unprocessed anger that is extreme. I didn't hear exactly what she said, but it doesn't sound like she advocating carrying anything like that out. It sounds like she was discussing something important to understand about the lived experiences of Black Americans. If we can't talk about the fact that being under siege from racism day in and out can lead to extreme anger and resentment, then we're not going to get anywhere.

Here’s the quotes from the link, based on your post that you didn’t hear exactly what she said...

  • This is the cost of talking to white people at all. The cost of your own life, as they suck you dry. There are no good apples out there. White people make my blood boil. (Time stamp: 6:45)

  • I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body, and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step. Like I did the world a fucking favor.  (Time stamp: 7:17)

  • White people are out of their minds and they have been for a long time.  (Time stamp: 17:06)

  • We are now in a psychological predicament, because white people feel that we are bullying them when we bring up race. They feel that we should be thanking them for all that they have done for us. They are confused, and so are we. We keep forgetting that directly talking about race is a waste of our breath. We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero, to accept responsibility. It ain’t gonna happen. They have five holes in their brain. It’s like banging your head against a brick wall. It’s just like sort of not a good idea. (Time stamp 17:13)

  • We need to remember that directly talking about race to white people is useless, because they are at the wrong level of conversation. Addressing racism assumes that white people can see and process what we are talking about. They can’t. That’s why they sound demented. They don’t even know they have a mask on. White people think it’s their actual face. We need to get to know the mask. (Time stamp 17:54)

Here’s the poster from the event. Among the “learning objectives” listed is: “understand how white people are psychologically dependent on black rage.”

  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Moonhawk said:

This doesn't seem like a psychologically healthy process; if I said this type of stuff in a therapy session, my counselor/psychologist would see it as something to work through, not as a sign I'm finished.

You phrased this well. Generally, if I return in therapy to revenge or punishment fantasies, it's an indication I'm avoiding dealing with my own emotions. Red flag for 'hey, what's really going on?'

The fantasies are v different from a healthy and appropriate expression of anger.

I'd be interested to know how the psychiatrist receives mentoring, support and therapy herself, given she apparently works in private practice. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, pinball said:

Here’s the quotes from the link, based on your post that you didn’t hear exactly what she said...

  • This is the cost of talking to white people at all. The cost of your own life, as they suck you dry. There are no good apples out there. White people make my blood boil. (Time stamp: 6:45)

  • I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body, and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step. Like I did the world a fucking favor.  (Time stamp: 7:17)

  • White people are out of their minds and they have been for a long time.  (Time stamp: 17:06)

  • We are now in a psychological predicament, because white people feel that we are bullying them when we bring up race. They feel that we should be thanking them for all that they have done for us. They are confused, and so are we. We keep forgetting that directly talking about race is a waste of our breath. We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero, to accept responsibility. It ain’t gonna happen. They have five holes in their brain. It’s like banging your head against a brick wall. It’s just like sort of not a good idea. (Time stamp 17:13)

  • We need to remember that directly talking about race to white people is useless, because they are at the wrong level of conversation. Addressing racism assumes that white people can see and process what we are talking about. They can’t. That’s why they sound demented. They don’t even know they have a mask on. White people think it’s their actual face. We need to get to know the mask. (Time stamp 17:54)

Here’s the poster from the event. Among the “learning objectives” listed is: “understand how white people are psychologically dependent on black rage.”

But again, if you view this from the perspective of trauma-informed care, this is a medical professional speaking of her lived experienced as a woman of color dealing with the trauma of racism to other medical professionals. Her lived experience may be relevant to help teach medical professionals the enduring depth of the trauma that systemic racism continues to perpetuate -- even in the lives of other medical professionals. These are physicians or soon-to-be physicians -- they are intelligent enough to discern from the lecture what are appropriate lessons to apply to their practice. Why do we need to censor this type of speech in an academic setting? Because it's mean to the dominant race in American society? Too bad, so sad, IMO. Seriously, grow a pair. Don't attend the lecture if it's offensive or doesn't apply to your practice.

Edited by SeaConquest
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bari Weiss is disliked by progressives because she's a hypocrite. She complains about cancel culture and then engages in it herself. 

What she did here is such a good example of her MO. What does it serve? But because of her Substack about this obscure doctor, people are attacking the doctor. People have complained to the state saying that she should lose her medical license. It's so cynical and dishonest. 

Nellie Bowles is disliked for several reasons including opposing increased union dues when she is a very well paid and comes from an incredibly wealthy family. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, pinball said:

Here’s the quotes from the link, based on your post that you didn’t hear exactly what she said...

  • This is the cost of talking to white people at all. The cost of your own life, as they suck you dry. There are no good apples out there. White people make my blood boil. (Time stamp: 6:45)

  • I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body, and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step. Like I did the world a fucking favor.  (Time stamp: 7:17)

  • White people are out of their minds and they have been for a long time.  (Time stamp: 17:06)

  • We are now in a psychological predicament, because white people feel that we are bullying them when we bring up race. They feel that we should be thanking them for all that they have done for us. They are confused, and so are we. We keep forgetting that directly talking about race is a waste of our breath. We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero, to accept responsibility. It ain’t gonna happen. They have five holes in their brain. It’s like banging your head against a brick wall. It’s just like sort of not a good idea. (Time stamp 17:13)

  • We need to remember that directly talking about race to white people is useless, because they are at the wrong level of conversation. Addressing racism assumes that white people can see and process what we are talking about. They can’t. That’s why they sound demented. They don’t even know they have a mask on. White people think it’s their actual face. We need to get to know the mask. (Time stamp 17:54)

Here’s the poster from the event. Among the “learning objectives” listed is: “understand how white people are psychologically dependent on black rage.”

As a white person who is trying to wrap my brain around the systemic, oppressive racism and the deep wounds it causes in my fellow human beings, this sounds like a fairly accurate description to me.

I am not at the same level of conversation. I try my best to understand, and I will always fall short, because I can't possibly fully understand their lived experience.

Do I feel bullied? No. Do I know many, (way too many) people who do? Unfortunately, yes.

Now, because these snippets are out of context, I may be way off base in my understanding of what the actual message is, so this is only my reaction based on the quoted snippets above. 
 

I very rarely tread into any race discussions because I probably would sound demented. I can listen, read, learn and try to correct misguided thinking within my own circle of influence (such as the difference between BLM and All Lives... and why there is a BLM movement, kneeling at football games, etc. and why I support that movement.)

In my own country, we are currently being more educated with our own horrific past, so I listen, read, learn and educate my circle who are less inclined to study and more inclined to react based on one media story or headline.

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, fraidycat said:

As a white person who is trying to wrap my brain around the systemic, oppressive racism and the deep wounds it causes in my fellow human beings, this sounds like a fairly accurate description to me.

I am not at the same level of conversation. I try my best to understand, and I will always fall short, because I can't possibly fully understand their lived experience.

Do I feel bullied? No. Do I know many, (way too many) people who do? Unfortunately, yes.

Now, because these snippets are out of context, I may be way off base in my understanding of what the actual message is, so this is only my reaction based on the quoted snippets above. 
 

I very rarely tread into any race discussions because I probably would sound demented. I can listen, read, learn and try to correct misguided thinking within my own circle of influence (such as the difference between BLM and All Lives... and why there is a BLM movement, kneeling at football games, etc. and why I support that movement.)

In my own country, we are currently being more educated with our own horrific past, so I listen, read, learn and educate my circle who are less inclined to study and more inclined to react based on one media story or headline.

Yep. When it comes to race discussions, I am in a lot of decolonizing/antiracist homeschooling/medicine/nursing groups and mostly I just STFU and listen/learn. I only talk about these issues when trying to help other white people sort through these issues. I would NEVER tell a POC that she could not speak about her lived experience because it hurt my feelings/made me feel bad about myself as a white person, yadda yadda.

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Bari Weiss is disliked by progressives because she's a hypocrite. She complains about cancel culture and then engages in it herself. 

What she did here is such a good example of her MO. What does it serve? But because of her Substack about this obscure doctor, people are attacking the doctor. People have complained to the state saying that she should lose her medical license. It's so cynical and dishonest. 

Nellie Bowles is disliked for several reasons including opposing increased union dues when she is a very well paid and comes from an incredibly wealthy family. 

Yeah, no, the hate she gets is is disproportionate compared to the hypocrisy abounding in journalism as a whole. 

I'm not sure if it's a little tainted by misogyny or lesbophobia or what...

In any case, so far as I'm aware, Bari didn't do the interview or write the article. Herzog cannot reasonably be considered as a hypocrite on free speech. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KSera said:

I think Yale’s response makes clear these are this individual’s views and don’t represent Yale in any way. I find the violence she speaks of repugnant as well. I see that racist white folks are loving this story right now, though. This plays right into their narrative, which is why I wouldn’t personally help them out by amplifying it. The issue du jour seems to be the evils of critical race theory and how schools are teaching kids to feel guilty for being white. I’m wondering which talk shows hosts have been promoting this. I have had two people in the past two weeks respond to hearing that we homeschool by saying they would have/will do the same thing because they don’t want their kids being taught all that race theory stuff “and that they should feel guilty for being white”. So, those folks are going to love this story, even though this particular woman only represents her own opinions. 

Yep, yep, yep.     They are salivating over this.  

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pinball said:

Here’s the quotes from the link, based on your post that you didn’t hear exactly what she said...

  • This is the cost of talking to white people at all. The cost of your own life, as they suck you dry. There are no good apples out there. White people make my blood boil. (Time stamp: 6:45)

  • I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body, and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step. Like I did the world a fucking favor.  (Time stamp: 7:17)

  • White people are out of their minds and they have been for a long time.  (Time stamp: 17:06)

  • We are now in a psychological predicament, because white people feel that we are bullying them when we bring up race. They feel that we should be thanking them for all that they have done for us. They are confused, and so are we. We keep forgetting that directly talking about race is a waste of our breath. We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero, to accept responsibility. It ain’t gonna happen. They have five holes in their brain. It’s like banging your head against a brick wall. It’s just like sort of not a good idea. (Time stamp 17:13)

  • We need to remember that directly talking about race to white people is useless, because they are at the wrong level of conversation. Addressing racism assumes that white people can see and process what we are talking about. They can’t. That’s why they sound demented. They don’t even know they have a mask on. White people think it’s their actual face. We need to get to know the mask. (Time stamp 17:54)

Here’s the poster from the event. Among the “learning objectives” listed is: “understand how white people are psychologically dependent on black rage.”

If you switched the races white person saying this about black people we’d be horrified surely?  

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

If you switched the races white person saying this about black people we’d be horrified surely?  

Well in the US, black people have to hear all the time about how confederate flags and statues aren't offensive and how if they just were compliant, police wouldn't be killing them.  There are signs and signals constantly that most white people don't remotely pick up on.   The CRT outrage again is about making the white people feelings the most important in the room.  Even though black history has been ignored and downplayed for generations and no teacher worth their salt would direct guilt to individual children.  Where do they even get that.  If you really want some history of oppressions of blacks and direct experience, I recommend Isabel Wilerkson's books (The Warmth of Other Suns, Caste).  The author directly compares how the Holocaust is treated in modern Germany vs. Enslavement in the US.  And if you can't understand how someone who ended up in this country due to slavery might feel it compares to the holocaust, I don't know what to tell you.  

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

If you switched the races white person saying this about black people we’d be horrified surely?  

Dr. Khilanani addressed this idea in the interview with Katie Herzog, from the link in the first post. Bolded is question fro  KH, nonbolded is doctor’s answer.

(i censored the swear word)

Let me pull up the email you forwarded me from the dean real quick. The message is from someone in the department to the dean and it says: “Good morning, I was surprised to see the announcement for tomorrow’s grand rounds. I imagine replacing the words ‘white mind’ with ‘Asian mind’ or ‘gay mind’ as we work towards equity and inclusion and unity. I wonder what impact this presentation will have.” Let's just address that. “Imagine replacing the words ‘white mind’ with ‘Asian mind’ or ‘gay mind’ as we work towards equity and inclusion and unity.” What’s your response to this? Does this person have a point? 

I think part of the anxiety is my using the word “white” and them having to reflect on that. And there was the use of the word “equity.” When I’m breaking this down psychologically, what they’re saying on some level is like, “We need things to be the same. If you can say ‘white,’ we can say ‘Asian.’” Psychologically, they’re actually making a false equivalence. What they’re doing psychologically is obliterating the difference between white and Asian, and if you obliterate the difference there’s no f**king problem here so shut up, you're the real racist. That’s how it functions psychologically. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...