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

[TSwizzle]

A disturbed individual;

A New York-based psychiatrist who was invited by Yale University to give a talk titled Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind told the audience that she had fantasized about 'unloading a revolver into the head of any white person' who got in her way. Dr Aruna Khilanani, who runs her own practice in Manhattan, delivered the talk virtually to medical students and faculty back in April after being invited by Yale School of Medicine's Child Study Center. “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 f**king favor,' Khilanani said during the talk.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...k-called-Psychopathic-Problem-White-Mind.html

I wonder if Khilanani will face any consequences or will she be allowed to carry on like nothing happened. I hope she has the conviction to stand by what she said.

 

[Derec]

Is this going to be enough for people to finally realize that blacks can be racist, that racism is bad no matter what race does it and that CRT is nothing but anti-white racism?

 

[Trausti]

Is this going to be enough for people to finally realize that blacks can be racist, that racism is bad no matter what race does it and that CRT is nothing but anti-white racism?

But it’s progressive racism. Black is good; White is bad. Why can’t you redneck yokels understand that, bigot?

 

[Arctish]

I made a silent bet with myself that not one of you had listened to her speech. When I got to the part right after her talking about the fantasy where she said she had the opposite feelings with her white patients I knew you hadn't.

She says "I felt unbearable pain sitting with them and feeling what they were going through. White suffering is desperately painful, even if white people don't know that the origin of their suffering is racism". She then goes on to say why that is and how hard it is to talk about.

It's quite an interesting perspective. Too bad you guys prefer getting huffy over mined quotes to discussing the substance of a speech like hers.

And now if you'll excuse me, I owe myself a latte.

 

[Trausti]

I made a silent bet with myself that not one of you had listened to her speech. When I got to the part right after her talking about the fantasy where she said she had the opposite feelings with her white patients I knew you hadn't.

She says "I felt unbearable pain sitting with them and feeling what they were going through. White suffering is desperately painful, even if white people don't know that the origin of their suffering is racism". She then goes on to say why that is and how hard it is to talk about.

It's quite an interesting perspective. Too bad you guys prefer getting huffy over mined quotes to discussing the substance of a speech like hers.

And now if you'll excuse me, I owe myself a latte.

And if she said this about any other race you’d be okay with it. Sure. Whatever.

 

[Arctish]

I made a silent bet with myself that not one of you had listened to her speech. When I got to the part right after her talking about the fantasy where she said she had the opposite feelings with her white patients I knew you hadn't.

She says "I felt unbearable pain sitting with them and feeling what they were going through. White suffering is desperately painful, even if white people don't know that the origin of their suffering is racism". She then goes on to say why that is and how hard it is to talk about.

It's quite an interesting perspective. Too bad you guys prefer getting huffy over mined quotes to discussing the substance of a speech like hers.

And now if you'll excuse me, I owe myself a latte.

And if she said this about any other race you’d be okay with it. Sure. Whatever.

Given the substance of her speech and the points she was raising, sure, whatever, especially since she addressed that very thing in the final paragraphs of the OP article:

A person in the Dean's department contacted her a day before the talk questioning the potential impact of her presentation given it was specifically about the 'white mind'.

The email read: '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.'

Asked about the person's concerns and if they had a point, Khilanani said part of the 'anxiety' was around the use of the word white and 'them having to reflect on that'.

'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.'

You should listen to her speech. And read the entire OP article.

 

[Derec]

I made a silent bet with myself that not one of you had listened to her speech.

Why should I listen to the speech by that racist piece of shit any more than I would want to listen to a speech by some KKK grand wizard? A racist of any other color smells just as foul!
Even without her racist murder fantasies, the very title of her talk is incredibly racist, and Yale would never have invited a white psuchologist to talk about the "Psychopathy of the black mind".

She says "I felt unbearable pain sitting with them and feeling what they were going through. White suffering is desperately painful, even if white people don't know that the origin of their suffering is racism".

If your therapist is a racist, I can see that leading to suffering, but I don't believe that's what she meant.

It's quite an interesting perspective. Too bad you guys prefer getting huffy over mined quotes to discussing the substance of a speech like hers.

Substance? Even with the snippets you posted in this post and the next one, I fail to see any substance. It's a mix of blatant racism and PoMo speak, where you say a lot of words and mean nothing at all. Like with the PoMo generator. In fact, PoMo generator could be tweaked into Whatsherface generator easy enough - just add some racist language!

 

[Trausti]

Given the substance of her speech and the points she was raising, sure, whatever, especially since she addressed that very thing in the final paragraphs of the OP article:

A person in the Dean's department contacted her a day before the talk questioning the potential impact of her presentation given it was specifically about the 'white mind'.

The email read: '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.'

Asked about the person's concerns and if they had a point, Khilanani said part of the 'anxiety' was around the use of the word white and 'them having to reflect on that'.

'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.'

Here are some of the quotes from the lecture:

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)

You should listen to her speech. And read the entire OP article.

Here are some of the quotes from the lecture:

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)

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-psychopathic-problem-of-the-white

Hitler may have been kinder to the Jews in Mein Kampf.

 

[Metaphor]

She says "I felt unbearable pain sitting with them and feeling what they were going through. White suffering is desperately painful, even if white people don't know that the origin of their suffering is racism". She then goes on to say why that is and how hard it is to talk about.

It's quite an interesting perspective.

It's a disgusting perspective, but it is completely in line with the thinking of somebody whose perspective has been callously deranged by critical theory.

The entire talk is here, with an additional interview appended:
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-psychopathic-problem-of-the-white

Khilanani thinks the origin of white suffering is racism, a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people. A couple choice snippets from the lecture and interview:

White people have an intense level of guilt. I have never seen a level of guilt that I see among white people. I mean, white people don't eat bread.

Exactly how Khilanani has determined this, given she has cut out nearly all white people from her life, is not clear. But I can tell Khilanani I do not suffer 'white guilt'. She is thinking of white guilt progressives and nobody else.

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.

People of color, myself included, suffer from being positioned in the world, psychologically, and the stuff that goes with it: violence, this, that. Now, white people suffer from problems of their own mind. They suffer with trust, they suffer with intimacy, they suffer with closeness, shame, guilt, anxiety. They suffer with their minds. Don’t get me wrong, people of color are also neurotic and have their own stuff and ups and downs. But there is a fundamental issue I think that is very unique to white suffering and I think that’s their own mind.

 

[Arctish]

Why should I listen to the speech

So you won't be arguing from ignorance.

by that racist piece of shit any more than I would want to listen to a speech by some KKK grand wizard? A racist of any other color smells just as foul!
Even without her racist murder fantasies, the very title of her talk is incredibly racist, and Yale would never have invited a white psuchologist to talk about the "Psychopathy of the black mind".



If your therapist is a racist, I can see that leading to suffering, but I don't believe that's what she meant.

It's quite an interesting perspective. Too bad you guys prefer getting huffy over mined quotes to discussing the substance of a speech like hers.

Substance? Even with the snippets you posted in this post and the next one, I fail to see any substance. It's a mix of blatant racism and PoMo speak, where you say a lot of words and mean nothing at all. Like with the PoMo generator. In fact, PoMo generator could be tweaked into Whatsherface generator easy enough - just add some racist language!

You have to listen to the speech to comprehend the substance. I'm not going to feed it to you in little baby-sized spoonfuls.

If you want to talk about what Dr Khilanani said in her presentation at Yale, listen to what she said and then we'll talk about it.

 

[laughing dog]

Given the substance of her speech and the points she was raising, sure, whatever, especially since she addressed that very thing in the final paragraphs of the OP article:

A person in the Dean's department contacted her a day before the talk questioning the potential impact of her presentation given it was specifically about the 'white mind'.

The email read: '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.'

Asked about the person's concerns and if they had a point, Khilanani said part of the 'anxiety' was around the use of the word white and 'them having to reflect on that'.

'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.'

You should listen to her speech. And read the entire OP article.

But why let facts get in the way of rational thought when out if context quotes confirm one’s biases?

 

[Trausti]

Given the substance of her speech and the points she was raising, sure, whatever, especially since she addressed that very thing in the final paragraphs of the OP article:

A person in the Dean's department contacted her a day before the talk questioning the potential impact of her presentation given it was specifically about the 'white mind'.

The email read: '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.'

Asked about the person's concerns and if they had a point, Khilanani said part of the 'anxiety' was around the use of the word white and 'them having to reflect on that'.

'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.'

You should listen to her speech. And read the entire OP article.

But why let facts get in the way of rational thought?

Good point! "We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero, to accept responsibility" can be easily taken out of context!

 

[Arctish]

It's a disgusting perspective, but it is completely in line with the thinking of somebody whose perspective has been callously deranged by critical theory.

The entire talk is here, with an additional interview appended:
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-psychopathic-problem-of-the-white

Khilanani thinks the origin of white suffering is racism, a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people. A couple choice snippets from the lecture and interview:



Exactly how Khilanani has determined this, given she has cut out nearly all white people from her life, is not clear. But I can tell Khilanani I do not suffer 'white guilt'. She is thinking of white guilt progressives and nobody else.

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.

People of color, myself included, suffer from being positioned in the world, psychologically, and the stuff that goes with it: violence, this, that. Now, white people suffer from problems of their own mind. They suffer with trust, they suffer with intimacy, they suffer with closeness, shame, guilt, anxiety. They suffer with their minds. Don’t get me wrong, people of color are also neurotic and have their own stuff and ups and downs. But there is a fundamental issue I think that is very unique to white suffering and I think that’s their own mind.

Did you listen to the whole speech, or are you relying on quotes provided by others to inform your view?

Also, how is saying the origin of white suffering is racism a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people? Do you think she's saying that only white people suffer from racism?

 

[Metaphor]

It's a disgusting perspective, but it is completely in line with the thinking of somebody whose perspective has been callously deranged by critical theory.

The entire talk is here, with an additional interview appended:
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-psychopathic-problem-of-the-white

Khilanani thinks the origin of white suffering is racism, a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people. A couple choice snippets from the lecture and interview:



Exactly how Khilanani has determined this, given she has cut out nearly all white people from her life, is not clear. But I can tell Khilanani I do not suffer 'white guilt'. She is thinking of white guilt progressives and nobody else.

Did you listen to the whole speech, or are you relying on quotes provided by others to inform your view?

Also, how is saying the origin of white suffering is racism a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people? Do you think she's saying that only white people suffer from racism?

No: she is saying that white people's problems are because of their guilt from perpetrating past and present racism and "colonialism".

This is a disgusting perspective. When my father and brother died, I was not suffering grief because of racism or anything. I was suffering from the fact of their deaths.

 

[Trausti]

It's a disgusting perspective, but it is completely in line with the thinking of somebody whose perspective has been callously deranged by critical theory.

The entire talk is here, with an additional interview appended:
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-psychopathic-problem-of-the-white

Khilanani thinks the origin of white suffering is racism, a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people. A couple choice snippets from the lecture and interview:



Exactly how Khilanani has determined this, given she has cut out nearly all white people from her life, is not clear. But I can tell Khilanani I do not suffer 'white guilt'. She is thinking of white guilt progressives and nobody else.

Did you listen to the whole speech, or are you relying on quotes provided by others to inform your view?

Also, how is saying the origin of white suffering is racism a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people? Do you think she's saying that only white people suffer from racism?

Good grief. How is this not religion?

 

[Arctish]

It's a disgusting perspective, but it is completely in line with the thinking of somebody whose perspective has been callously deranged by critical theory.

The entire talk is here, with an additional interview appended:
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-psychopathic-problem-of-the-white

Khilanani thinks the origin of white suffering is racism, a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people. A couple choice snippets from the lecture and interview:



Exactly how Khilanani has determined this, given she has cut out nearly all white people from her life, is not clear. But I can tell Khilanani I do not suffer 'white guilt'. She is thinking of white guilt progressives and nobody else.

Did you listen to the whole speech, or are you relying on quotes provided by others to inform your view?

Also, how is saying the origin of white suffering is racism a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people? Do you think she's saying that only white people suffer from racism?

No: she is saying that white people's problems are because of their guilt from perpetrating past and present racism and "colonialism".

Can you provide the minute mark when she says that? I'd like to discuss it in detail but first I want to transcribe her words.

This is a disgusting perspective. When my father and brother died, I was not suffering grief because of racism or anything. I was suffering from the fact of their deaths.

I didn't hear her say that racism is the only cause of suffering, or even imply it. Can you provide the minute mark where she says that, too?

 

[Arctish]

It's a disgusting perspective, but it is completely in line with the thinking of somebody whose perspective has been callously deranged by critical theory.

The entire talk is here, with an additional interview appended:
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-psychopathic-problem-of-the-white

Khilanani thinks the origin of white suffering is racism, a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people. A couple choice snippets from the lecture and interview:



Exactly how Khilanani has determined this, given she has cut out nearly all white people from her life, is not clear. But I can tell Khilanani I do not suffer 'white guilt'. She is thinking of white guilt progressives and nobody else.

Did you listen to the whole speech, or are you relying on quotes provided by others to inform your view?

Also, how is saying the origin of white suffering is racism a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people? Do you think she's saying that only white people suffer from racism?

Good grief. How is this not religion?

How is what not religion? Are you talking about the blind faith in the Daily Mail's Inerrant Word and Revealed Truth that some posters appear to have? That does look a lot like religion.

Or are you referring to my question "how is saying the origin of white suffering is racism a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people"? If you have an answer, I'd like to hear it.

FWIW, I think racism is the origin of almost all suffering that isn't weather or disease related, and that it affects pretty much everyone, everywhere, although the level of suffering for individuals varies tremendously.

 

[Trausti]

Good grief. How is this not religion?

How is what not religion? Are you talking about the blind faith in the Daily Mail's Inerrant Word and Revealed Truth that some posters appear to have? That does look a lot like religion.

Or are you referring to my question "how is saying the origin of white suffering is racism a direct denial of the shared humanity of all people"? If you have an answer, I'd like to hear it.

The link I posted wasn't from the Dailymail. But I recall growing up the televangelists preaching that the reason people are suffering is because they've forgotten God and need Jesus. Secular religion is still religion.

 

[Trausti]

Here she is. Feel the love.

 

[laughing dog]

But why let facts get in the way of rational thought?

Good point! "We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero, to accept responsibility" can be easily taken out of context!

Thank you fir proving my point. You rail against a quote taken out of context and refuse to look at the complete context because it might educate you. Pretty ironic coming from someone whining about the secular religious views of others,