Guest lecturer at Yale fantasizes about shooting white people in the head

[Metaphor]

So she's not a psychology lecturer. She's a psychology lecturer. Got it.

I'm afraid you don't.

I did not know that psychiatrists weren't academics.

They're not, unless they are a psychiatrist who is also an academic. Doctors in clinical practise are not academics. They are doctors.

I learn so many things from you. Who knew that lecturers invited to hold a lecture wasn't a lecturer. Wow.

Khilanani is not a lecturer. She is a clinical psychiatrist. Delivering a guest lecture does not make you an academic or a lecturer, any more than my many presentations at my workplace make me an academic or lecturer.

Special pleading. She's both an academic and lecturer. Her getting invited by Yale to hold a lecture makes her a lecturer. A guest lecturer is still a lecturer.

No. Performing a one-off lecture does not make you a lecturer, any more than my running for the bus makes me a 'runner'. But even if it did make Khilanani a 'lecturer' (it doesn't), I'm not worried about her lectures. She is a practising board-certified psychiatrist, who prescribes medicine and sees patient as part of her practise. Like any medical doctor, there is a power differential between Khilanani and her clients. Khilanani is ministering to the mental health needs, in one-on-one therapy, of her clients. And I think it is reasonable to wonder if somebody who fantasized about killing white people, thinks white people's mental problems arise from their colonial guilt denial, has cut 99% of white people from her life, and is continually enraged by white people--and has not denied any of this but publically aired it and then doubled and tripled down--can deliver the best possible therapy for her clients.

FYI, "psychologist" isn't a protected academic title. "Psychiatrist" is.

Whether 'psychologist' is a protected title depends on the jurisdiction, but I am not objecting to your use on the basis it is 'not protected'. I'm objecting to it on the basis that Khilanani is not a psychologist or a lecturer or an academic, and I think it is legitimate to raise concerns about the white people she is practising medicine on.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I'm afraid you don't.



They're not, unless they are a psychiatrist who is also an academic. Doctors in clinical practise are not academics. They are doctors.

I learn so many things from you. Who knew that lecturers invited to hold a lecture wasn't a lecturer. Wow.

Khilanani is not a lecturer. She is a clinical psychiatrist. Delivering a guest lecture does not make you an academic or a lecturer, any more than my many presentations at my workplace make me an academic or lecturer.

Special pleading. She's both an academic and lecturer. Her getting invited by Yale to hold a lecture makes her a lecturer. A guest lecturer is still a lecturer.

No. Performing a one-off lecture does not make you a lecturer, any more than my running for the bus makes me a 'runner'. But even if it did make Khilanani a 'lecturer' (it doesn't), I'm not worried about her lectures. She is a practising board-certified psychiatrist, who prescribes medicine and sees patient as part of her practise. Like any medical doctor, there is a power differential between Khilanani and her clients. Khilanani is ministering to the mental health needs, in one-on-one therapy, of her clients. And I think it is reasonable to wonder if somebody who fantasized about killing white people, thinks white people's mental problems arise from their colonial guilt denial, has cut 99% of white people from her life, and is continually enraged by white people--and has not denied any of this but publically aired it and then doubled and tripled down--can deliver the best possible therapy for her clients.

FYI, "psychologist" isn't a protected academic title. "Psychiatrist" is.

Whether 'psychologist' is a protected title depends on the jurisdiction, but I am not objecting to your use on the basis it is 'not protected'. I'm objecting to it on the basis that Khilanani is not a psychologist or a lecturer or an academic, and I think it is legitimate to raise concerns about the white people she is practising medicine on.

You don't understand how academia or academic titles work.

 

[Metaphor]

You don't understand how academia or academic titles work.

Okay. I can see I wasted my time correcting you.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You don't understand how academia or academic titles work.

Okay. I can see I wasted my time "correcting" you.

I fixed it for you

 

[Metaphor]

You don't understand how academia or academic titles work.

Okay. I can see I wasted my time "correcting" you.

I fixed it for you

I agree that I didn't manage to correct your false understanding of Khilanani, who is neither an academic, nor a lecturer, nor a psychologist.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I fixed it for you

I agree that I didn't manage to correct your false understanding of Khilanani, who is neither an academic, nor a lecturer, nor a psychologist.

Have you tried looking the words up? You'll be enlightened. It's not hard.

 

[TSwizzle]

Ok, so I did. And I look her up and read about her. She seems like a loony. But she is a psychology lecturer.

She is a loony but not a lecturer. At best she was a "guest speaker" giving a presentation.

Having fantasies and acting on them is a world apart. If this is a psychiatrist speaking it is entirely appropriate to be open and honest about every aspect of her inner life.

Is it appropriate ? I am not so sure.

I too have homicidal thoughts sometimes about people. Especially those who cut the line in the grocery shop.

No doubt. But if you were to go on social media and make your homicidal fantasies public, say a fantasy about shooting every motherfucker in the supermarket, or your workplace or college campus or you say you fantasize about going into a black neighborhood and shoot every black person or go into a mosque, synagogue or church and shoot every muslim, jew or christian, or go into a massage parlor and shoot every Asian, don't be surprised when questions are asked regardless of your occupation or academic qualifications.

If we demand from our psychology lecturers to present us a carefully manicured version of their mental interiors, (IN PSYCHOLOGY LECTURES) how the fuck are we supposed to learn anything new about human psychology?

All we learned is that this woman is unhinged and a racist. What's the value in that ? Other than she might actually be dangerous and is possibly unfit to be a practitioner in her field.

It wasn't like she spammed this out over social media. Other people did that. She just held her lecture.

Actually her social media is littered with this nonsense.

I support her right to say this 100%. I don't have a problem with people publicly saying offensive things. In this political climate it's more important than ever to defend anybody daring to be edgy.

She can say what she likes, nobody is arguing against that. The question is directed at Yale, why on earth did they invite someone so obviously unhinged and racist to give such a stupid presentation. And she's not edgy, she's an unhinged racist gobshite. Anyway, Yale seem to be experiencing some buyers remorse.

 

[DrZoidberg]

She can say what she likes, nobody is arguing against that. The question is directed at Yale, why on earth did they invite someone so obviously unhinged and racist to give such a stupid presentation. And she's not edgy, she's an unhinged racist gobshite. Anyway, Yale seem to be experiencing some buyers remorse.

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions. Isn't this the most appropriate environment possible to be exposed to extreme and fucked up perspectives like hers?

Universities shouldn't be brainwashing camps. They should provoke students to test their opinions on things. Students should be forced out of their comfort zones, with cattle prods if necessary.

If universities don't do this they serve no purpose anymore. Which a lot of people in academia do argue is the situation right now.

 

[TSwizzle]

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions.

I don't oppose it. But then Yale may as well invite any deranged homeless person high on meth to give presentations throughout the semester. I'm not seeing the value in the incoherent ramblings of Khilanani. And I think even Yale has come to realize this. She will not be invited back.

 

[Derec]

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions. Isn't this the most appropriate environment possible to be exposed to extreme and fucked up perspectives like hers?

These days, that only applies if you are on the left. If you are not on the left, you will get cancelled/fired for something as innocuous as pointing out that Jacob Blake had a sexual assault warrant.
Arizona State University radio station votes to remove manager over Jacob Blake tweet


In general, I find it very disgusting how forcefully leftist posters on here defend this blatantly racist psycho, and claim that there is nothing wrong with her views or statements.

 

[Trausti]

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions. Isn't this the most appropriate environment possible to be exposed to extreme and fucked up perspectives like hers?

These days, that only applies if you are on the left. If you are not on the left, you will get cancelled/fired for something as innocuous as pointing out that Jacob Blake had a sexual assault warrant.
Arizona State University radio station votes to remove manager over Jacob Blake tweet


In general, I find it very disgusting how forcefully leftist posters on here defend this blatantly racist psycho, and claim that there is nothing wrong with her views or statements.

That’s because they’re neoracists. Who? Whom? is all that matters.

 

[ideologyhunter]

As opposed to the right wing...whose think tanks and pols are working 24/7 to disincentivize the voting of...whom?

 

[DrZoidberg]

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions.

I don't oppose it. But then Yale may as well invite any deranged homeless person high on meth to give presentations throughout the semester. I'm not seeing the value in the incoherent ramblings of Khilanani. And I think even Yale has come to realize this. She will not be invited back.

She's a highly qualified and experienced academic with years of experience. Not all homeless people have that.

We might not agree with her, but I still defend her saying it.

We want our academics to push boundaries of opinion and beliefs. That's their jobs. Wherever it may lead.

Me personally I think the woke bandwagon is now overstretched and just before the collapse of the movement we're bound to see the craziest shit. Which is woke academics trying to outdo eachother in being the most woke.

I think it's good studerents are exposed to these lunatics.

 

[DrZoidberg]

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions. Isn't this the most appropriate environment possible to be exposed to extreme and fucked up perspectives like hers?

These days, that only applies if you are on the left. If you are not on the left, you will get cancelled/fired for something as innocuous as pointing out that Jacob Blake had a sexual assault warrant.
Arizona State University radio station votes to remove manager over Jacob Blake tweet


In general, I find it very disgusting how forcefully leftist posters on here defend this blatantly racist psycho, and claim that there is nothing wrong with her views or statements.

I'm leftist. So I guess you're talking about me?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions. Isn't this the most appropriate environment possible to be exposed to extreme and fucked up perspectives like hers?

These days, that only applies if you are on the left. If you are not on the left, you will get cancelled/fired for something as innocuous as pointing out that Jacob Blake had a sexual assault warrant.
Arizona State University radio station votes to remove manager over Jacob Blake tweet


In general, I find it very disgusting how forcefully leftist posters on here defend this blatantly racist psycho, and claim that there is nothing wrong with her views or statements.

I'm leftist. So I guess you're talking about me?

Who the fuck knows. Has anyone watched or read the entire transcript (or a large enough portion?) to even address the accusations being made against the speaker? I'm an engineer and often didn't have much respect for the lib arts students who were partying all the time, waiting to the last second to get work done, etc... etc... My Government seminar class teacher was so unbelievably unimpressive (unlike my Constitutional Law prof) and it isn't that hard to imagine lofty and soft brains for speakers in the lib arts. But I'd be damned if most of the complaints made have turned out to be fully false or grossly misleading as well.

 

[Trausti]

As opposed to the right wing...whose think tanks and pols are working 24/7 to disincentivize the voting of...whom?

Do you judge people as individuals or members of groups? That’s the issue.

 

[TSwizzle]

She's a highly qualified and experienced academic with years of experience. Not all homeless people have that.

Now she's an academic ?! Not hardly.

I think it's good studerents are exposed to these lunatics.

Hopefully the exposure to this lunatic isn't a bullet to a white student's head.

 

[Emily Lake]

So she's not a psychology lecturer. She's a psychology lecturer. Got it.

I did not know that psychiatrists weren't academics. I learn so many things from you. Who knew that lecturers invited to hold a lecture wasn't a lecturer. Wow.

Special pleading. She's both an academic and lecturer. Her getting invited by Yale to hold a lecture makes her a lecturer. A guest lecturer is still a lecturer.

FYI, "psychologist" isn't a protected academic title. "Psychiatrist" is.

Dr. Z, this is semantic finagling for the purpose of maintaining the position of "Metaphor is wrong".

Khilanani is a practicing psychotherapist. Her work is not in academia, it is in practice. Calling her a "psychology lecturer" and an "academic" because she was invited to give a lecture as a guest at Yale is misleading at the very least.

A person giving a lecture doesn't make them a "lecturer" in the way that you imply. Your implication is that lecturing is a core and fundamental part of her job. I've given lectures, I've run seminars for other actuaries. That doesn't make me an "actuarial lecturer" - it makes me an actuary who gave a lecture. I've had articles published, that doesn't make me an "actuarial author". Those are ancillary things that I've done in the course of my career, they aren't core aspects of my career. I'm a practicing actuary.

And FFS, if I were to give a lecture that called into question my ability to serve my direct clients objectively - I would damned well HOPE that someone called me out on it, not just handwaved it away as "oh it's just a lecture".

Khilanani was giving a lecture in a professional capacity as a clinical practitioner. Furthermore, she was giving this lecture to professionals who deal with children. And in her lecture she presented SKIN COLOR as a PATHOLOGY.

Are you actually okay with the content and message in her lecture? If this hadn't been brought up by Metaphor, would you be so stridently defending the content? Would you still claim to be perfectly fine with this person actively treating patients of the skin color that she actively views as an untreatable pathology?

 

[ZiprHead]

As opposed to the right wing...whose think tanks and pols are working 24/7 to disincentivize the voting of...whom?

Do you judge people as individuals or members of groups? That’s the issue.

Obviously the GOP does.

 

[Emily Lake]

She can say what she likes, nobody is arguing against that. The question is directed at Yale, why on earth did they invite someone so obviously unhinged and racist to give such a stupid presentation. And she's not edgy, she's an unhinged racist gobshite. Anyway, Yale seem to be experiencing some buyers remorse.

This is what I don't understand about your opposition to this. Its a university. The one place on Earth where we, above all value, out there and off base opinions. Isn't this the most appropriate environment possible to be exposed to extreme and fucked up perspectives like hers?

Universities shouldn't be brainwashing camps. They should provoke students to test their opinions on things. Students should be forced out of their comfort zones, with cattle prods if necessary.

If universities don't do this they serve no purpose anymore. Which a lot of people in academia do argue is the situation right now.

Interesting.

How fully do you support your own position? Ferinstance...

Would you support a practicing social worker giving a guest lecture to a group of students in social work about the inherent inferiority of black people and how their laziness and lack of intelligence is the real cause of their lack of economic progress? Do you think that would be a topic that is reasonable to present as a teaching element to people who will be working in that field? Should the content of the lecture be protected from criticism, and the guest lecturer defended?

Would you support a practicing OB/GYN giving a guest lecture to a group of medical students about how women are ruled by their hormones, and that their monthly cycles make them emotionally unstable, naturally unfit for leadership positions, and fundamentally clinically hysterical? Would you view both the topic itself and the doctor giving to be above criticism? Would you further argue that this lecture in no way affects his ability to compassionately and objectively treat his patients?