“The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind”

[PikminOC]

I agree that being transparent doesn't change the views being expressed, but at least you know what you're getting when you see something from Ann Coulter. You can rightfully disregard the overwhelming majority of what she says. I'm pretty right-leaning and listen to a lot of "right-wing" commentators and I pay zero attention to Ann Coulter. She's a provocateur that makes money being provocative, not actually offering some kind of meaningful conservative vision or policy prescriptions that most people take seriously to address actual, real-world problems. She isn't worth listening to.

To bring it back to the OP, I'm less interested in what the speaker said (despite the polemic firestorm being discussed about this in many conservative commentator circles) because she presents herself quite plainly, and you can interpret her views and overall thesis accordingly. I'm more concerned that an institution that prides itself on being the pinnacle of scholasticism and, supposedly, intellectual inquiry thought that approving a grand rounds with academic objectives that are prima facie provocative and arguably racist and a needs assessment that included the fact that there are too many "Karen" (sic) in the world was a good idea. That this was a CME event lends additional cache to the content being presented in spite of Yale's subsequent attempt to backpeddle and distance itself from the event. That speaks to a bigger problem that is worth examining, IMO.

Yale prides itself? You do know they had Dr Bandy Lee right? And backed for a long time for her comments about Trump?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WisNeuro]

My local analytic center would like a word.

There is definitely some good stuff here and there, but I haven't seen a lot of consistent, methodologically sound pieces. Seems more like reading a philosophy journal.

 

[SeniorWrangler]

Good example of why you should never say anything controversial under your own name. Somebody will repost it into a hostile environment to create outrage, and then you’re public enemy #1 to some vocal group of people on Twitter. Who needs it?

 

[SmallBird]

Yale prides itself? You do know they had Dr Bandy Lee right? And backed for a long time for her comments about Trump?

It is worth noting, not to temper but to more accurately direct our reactions, that the child study center is not part of Yale Psychiatry at all. They really are totally separate.

 

[Eudaimania]

Dr. Khilinani is clearly in need of help, not much more to say about that. Whats more more concerning to me is how the institution approved a grand rounds titled "The psychopathic problem of the the white mind" in the first place. Clearly they got more than they bargained for, but would appear the psych department at Yale is fairly open to entertaining blatant anti-white racism. Makes me glad not to be associated with them or another similar ivy, but very concerned about that sort of sick woke ideology spreading.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I'm iffy on the "she's in need a professional help" read, as mental illness is not inherently violent or hateful, and violence and hate isn't inherently mental illness. You can be hateful and bigoted and not mentally ill, and assuming that someone who is hateful and bigoted is mentally ill only further serves to stigmatize mental illness.

 

[Crayola227]

I'm iffy on the "she's in need a professional help" read, as mental illness is not inherently violence or hateful and violence and hate isn't inherently mental illness. You can be hateful and bigoted and not mentally ill and assuming that someone who is hateful and bigoted is mentally ill only further serves to stigmatize mental illness.

This is actually a great point.

 

[PikminOC]

It is worth noting, not to temper but to more accurately direct our reactions, that the child study center is not part of Yale Psychiatry at all. They really are totally separate.

Lee received her M.D. from the Yale University School of Medicine in 1994 and a Master of Divinity (M.Div.) from Yale Divinity School in 1995.[15...
Lee was director of research for the Center for the Study of Violence and with Kaveh Khoshnood, founded Yale University's Violence and Health Study Group.[16] ...
In April 2017, Lee hosted a meeting at Yale University medical school to discuss the ethics of speaking about the mental health of Donald Trump.[17]...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandy_X._Lee...

.....
Seems grown by Yale and backed again by yale

 

[PikminOC]

I'm iffy on the "she's in need a professional help" read, as mental illness is not inherently violent or hateful, and violence and hate isn't inherently mental illness. You can be hateful and bigoted and not mentally ill, and assuming that someone who is hateful and bigoted is mentally ill only further serves to stigmatize mental illness.

So the 9 11 terrorists were or were not mentally ill?

 

[WisNeuro]

So the 9 11 terrorists were or were not mentally ill?

The data on this is fairly clear. People with mental illness are not more violent than the general population, but are more at risk of being victim's of violence. The MH status of terrorists is irrelevant to that point.

 

[LimpSpatula]

So the 9 11 terrorists were or were not mentally ill?

They probably had depressive and anxiety disorders.

And no one takes Ann Coulter seriously because she made a name for herself by “owning the libs” but got pwned.

 

[PikminOC]

The data on this is fairly clear. People with mental illness are not more violent than the general population, but are more at risk of being victim's of violence. The MH status of terrorists is irrelevant to that point.

Show me the stats. Those are two different issues.

 

[octopuszebra]

The data on this is fairly clear. People with mental illness are not more violent than the general population, but are more at risk of being victim's of violence. The MH status of terrorists is irrelevant to that point.

This is not consistent with what I've read. Most academic studies I've read have suggested that people diagnosed with mental illness (especially SUD and schizophrenia) are at increased risk of being violent compared to the general population. For example, here is a quote from a recent review:

Relative risks are typically increased for all violent outcomes in most diagnosed psychiatric disorders compared with people without psychiatric disorders, with increased odds in the range of 2–4 after adjustment for familial and other sources of confounding. Absolute rates of violent crime over 5–10 years are typically below 5% in people with mental illness (excluding personality disorders, schizophrenia, and substance misuse), which increases to 6–10% in personality disorders and schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and to more than 10% in substance misuse.

Am I missing something?

 

[WisNeuro]

SUD soaks up a TON of the variance, once that is out, the numbers look a lot different. Some variable data in the SPMI population, though probably mediated by med compliance and SUD as well. So yes, small and specific subsets may have a higher risk of violence, but in general, outside of that, not really.

Psychiatry Online

ajp.psychiatryonline.org

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/325...VcEGCToZtWj7R9X79efe63is5aJaajRbxLwJ_w2jvOZxQ

Violence and mental illness: an overview

This paper evaluates the relationship of mental illness and violence by asking three questions: Are the mentally ill violent? Are the mentally ill at increased risk of violence? Are the public at risk? Mental disorders are neither necessary nor sufficient ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://jech.bmj.com/content/jech/70/3/223.full.pdf

Mental illness and violence: Debunking myths, addressing realities

Research is helping to tease apart why some people with serious mental illness are prone to violence while others are not, and how clinicians and others can help through improved treatment and informed myth-busting.

www.apa.org

 

[deleted1100659]

For the people out there who associate our field with "crazy", she sure isnt helping to disprove them...

 

[Mitch Connor]

Can you imagine if a white male psychiatrist said something like that about a group of people? The blow back would be way worse than it has been for her. Someone mentioned above that she needs help. Definitely yes. Personally I think what she said is a violation of medical ethics and I don't know how she can continue to "help" people.

 

[erg923]

I'm confused that some people here don't think she needs psychiatric help? Really? She is a physician who has biases and beliefs and is exercising poor judgment (to say the least) that would affect her ability to practice safely/competently.....AND fantasizes about killing people (which seems to have come from being mad at her therapist?). Fellow physicians/John Q. Citizens are referred to mental health professionals ALL THE TIME for either of these things, no?

Definitely belongs in a smelly home for the goofy for a while if you ask me.

 

[nexus73]

I'm confused that some people here don't think she needs psychiatric help? Really? She is a physician who is has biases and beliefs and is exercising poor judgment (to say the least) that would affect her ability to practice safely/competently.....and fantasizes about killing people (which seems to have come from being mad at her therapist?). People are referred to mental health professionals ALL THE TIME for either of these things. Definitely belongs in a smelly home for the goofy for a while if you ask me.

She’s caught up in woke ideology. Not clearly mentally ill. It’s like the sovereign citizens who think they can drive with home made license plates because of something in the Magna Carta. Not to say it’s not dangerous, but hard to say mentally ill.

 

[erg923]

She’s caught up in woke ideology. Not clearly mentally ill. It’s like the sovereign citizens who think they can drive with home made license plates because of something in the Magna Carta. Not to say it’s not dangerous, but hard to say mentally ill.

I said she needs help. We try to help people who aren't "mentally ill" all the time.

 

[LimpSpatula]

She should run for office. Fit right in.

 

[LimpSpatula]

Where most white people lose black people is being so outspoken about wokeness. They’re quick to point out these people but don’t have this reaction when there was literally a white nationalist president blowing a dog whistle on the daily.

 

[erg923]

Where most white people lose black people is being so outspoken about wokeness. They’re quick to point out these people but don’t have this reaction when there was literally a white nationalist president blowing a dog whistle on the daily.

What are you talking about? There was national outrage about Trump on a daily basis for 4 years.

 

[LimpSpatula]

What are you talking about? There was national outrage about Trump on a daily basis for 4 years.

Not about the white nationalism.

 

[erg923]

Not about the white nationalism.

That was the primary concern (amongst 100 others) for 4 years. It was all over the news....

 

[LimpSpatula]

That was the primary concern (amongst 100 others) for 4 years. It was all over the news....

It absolutely was not the primary concern, saying amongst 100 others just goes to show. It was certainly the primary reason for his supporters though. And thats why white people will lose black people on criticizing far end of wokeness. It will continue until things change.

This is an inflection point. Minorities and racists are not going to budge. Non-bigoted whites are in a difficult spot, and they’ll have some choices to make. It is what it is.

 

[erg923]

It absolutely was not the primary concern, saying amongst 100 others just goes to show. It was certainly the primary reason for his supporters though. And thats why white people will lose black people on criticizing far end of wokeness. It will continue until things change.

This is an inflection point. Minorities and racists are not going to budge. Non-bigoted whites are in a difficult spot, and they’ll have some choices to make. It is what it is.

I'm lost. How does "not enough whites complained about Trump" relate to this nutzo psychiatrist's ability to practice according to current standards/ethics? She's impaired by her explicitly stated racism. Its her own words, for goodness sake.

Yea, yea, I'm sure it was partly shock-jock stuff and all that. But when you have a medical license and have people's lives in your hand, there are limits to what you can espouse and expect not to be questioned about your abilities/competence, right? The layers of cognitive distortions, intermediary beliefs, and core beliefs would be a field day for any novice CBT therapist, right? I mean, this person cant do psychotherapy now, right? Much less prescribe dangerous substances. Geez!

And I dont know what you mean about "choices." Sorry.

 

[LimpSpatula]

I'm lost. How does "not enough whites complained about Trump" (I strongly disagree, btw) relate to this nutzo "psychiatrist ability to practice acording to current standards/ethics?

Yea, yea, I'm sure it was partly shock-jock stuff and all that. But when you have a medical license and have people's lives in your hand, there are limits to what you can espouse and expect not to be questioned about your abilities/competence, right? The layers of cognitive distortions, intermediary beliefs, and core beliefs would be a field day for any CBT therapist, right? I mean, this person cant do therapy???? Much less prescribe dangerous substances. Geez!

And I dont know what you mean about "choices." Sorry.

I’m not defending this person. I just don’t care. And other Black people aren’t going to care and join up in arms against her.

 

[erg923]

I’m not defending this person. I just don’t care. And other Black people aren’t going to care and join up in arms against her.

Why? You don't care about racism? Thought that was your whole beef here?

 

[LimpSpatula]

Why

Because of what I said earlier. Shes also a huge outlier, and anyone can see that.

 

[Mass Effect]

Where most white people lose black people is being so outspoken about wokeness. They’re quick to point out these people but don’t have this reaction when there was literally a white nationalist president blowing a dog whistle on the daily.

Not about the white nationalism.

Uh, you are terrifyingly misinformed.

 

[erg923]

I’m not defending this person. I just don’t care.

This response is bizarre because it seemingly dismisses the issue you (and all of us) are passionate about. Thought we hated Trump because he says racist things/is a racist? But...you "don't care" if Dr. Khilanani says racist things/is a racist? What's this about?

 

[wamcp]

It absolutely was not the primary concern, saying amongst 100 others just goes to show. It was certainly the primary reason for his supporters though. And thats why white people will lose black people on criticizing far end of wokeness. It will continue until things change.

This is an inflection point. Minorities and racists are not going to budge. Non-bigoted whites are in a difficult spot, and they’ll have some choices to make. It is what it is.

Could you kindly explain why minority and persons of color support for trump increased from 2016 to 2020?

US election 2020: Why Trump gained support among minorities

Joe Biden won the election, but support for Donald Trump increased among black and Latino voters. Why?

www.bbc.com

I think non-whites are more fed up, than whites, with all the mainstream woke nonsense

 

[LimpSpatula]

Could you kindly explain why minority and persons of color support for trump increased from 2016 to 2020?

US election 2020: Why Trump gained support among minorities

Joe Biden won the election, but support for Donald Trump increased among black and Latino voters. Why?

www.bbc.com

I think non-whites are more fed up, than whites, with all the mainstream woke nonsense

Yes. Hispanics clutching to not being Black. Blacks in swing states literally saved Democracy. Howboudat?

 

[WisNeuro]

Yes. Hispanics clutching to not being Black. Blacks in swing states literally saved Democracy. Howboudat?

I mean, depends on how you want to spin it. We could also say that the suburbs saved democracy. That's where the needle moved the most in many places.

 

[FlowRate]

Could you kindly explain why minority and persons of color support for trump increased from 2016 to 2020?

US election 2020: Why Trump gained support among minorities

Joe Biden won the election, but support for Donald Trump increased among black and Latino voters. Why?

www.bbc.com

I think non-whites are more fed up, than whites, with all the mainstream woke nonsense

To paint with a VERY broad brush, I think people generally can tell when they're being patronized or pandered to and also there's something about authenticity (being REAL) that seems to strike a chord with some communities more than others. Trump, despite being a terrible person, was apparently being his true self and was not pandering to racist stereotypes on minority political preferences (white savior Democrats.) There's also the reaction to the excesses of the woke left as well as Kamalah Harris having a reputation for prioritizing her career over appropriate treatment of minorities in the criminal justice system. That's my guess, at least.

 

[Crayola227]

To paint with a VERY broad brush, I think people generally can tell when they're being patronized or pandered to and also there's something about authenticity (being REAL) that seems to strike a chord with some communities more than others. Trump, despite being a terrible person, was apparently being his true self and was not pandering to racist stereotypes on minority political preferences (white savior Democrats.) There's also the reaction to the excesses of the woke left as well as Kamalah Harris having a reputation for prioritizing her career over appropriate treatment of minorities in the criminal justice system. That's my guess, at least.

I think some of this gets to what I said about when Obama and Hillary were running against each other. Are we more racist or more sexist as a country? And the answer believe it or not is more sexist.

This is why you see a lot of minority males voting for Trump. They don't identify with his racism, but they do appreciate his sexism. You would think they wouldn't identify with Trump at all, but the truth is for many minority Trump voters at least half his racist sexist message appeals to them, whereas you can see why with the more neutral Dems they might not relate.

Also the financial "hopefulness" of poor white voters identifying with the GOP doesn't end there with just poor whites. Economic stockholm syndrome is the urban dictionary entry of note here.

Plus the fact that many of whom we consider "Latino" voters like Cubans, don't identify with Hispanics and see themselves as white.

Even if they don't, despite many minorities having experienced discrimination, doesn't necessarily make a message like Trump's that is nationalist and less tolerant, any less appealing necessarily. Minorities and immigrants, I will assert controversially, can also oppose immigration, immigrants, and be bigoted against many outsiders might otherwise think they are a in class with. They may not see it that way.

This is what I've read on the topic, because it was definitely a fascinating outcome of the last election, the minority voters for Trump.

 

[Stagg737]

To paint with a VERY broad brush, I think people generally can tell when they're being patronized or pandered to and also there's something about authenticity (being REAL) that seems to strike a chord with some communities more than others. Trump, despite being a terrible person, was apparently being his true self and was not pandering to racist stereotypes on minority political preferences (white savior Democrats.) There's also the reaction to the excesses of the woke left as well as Kamalah Harris having a reputation for prioritizing her career over appropriate treatment of minorities in the criminal justice system. That's my guess, at least.

Not to get too off-topic, but the last point is something that I've wondered about in regards to her being VP with Biden. During the primary debates, she was vicious towards Biden more than once and had no problem using tactics of a lawyer to attack his past. I was pretty surprised by the lack of commentary when he selected her as his running mate and still wonder how much of an impact that may have made with voters.

To bring it back on topic, I also wonder how quickly Dr. Khilanani moved Harris into the "white BIPOC" category when Kamala accepted to be his running mate.

 

[Mad Jack]

I don't think anyone would disagree that Ann Coulter is provocative and a thinly-veilled troll. She has socially conservative views - I don't know that that inherently makes her a bigot, but maybe some would view her that way. Her comments about immigration are off-color, but when interpreted with the knowledge that she is deliberately being provocative and trying to "own the libs," I find her to be far less concerning figure in the commentariat than others. At least she's transparent about her views, whatever you may think of them.

Being racist to be provocative is in no way better than just plain being a racist

 

[Mad Jack]

I agree that being transparent doesn't change the views being expressed, but at least you know what you're getting when you see something from Ann Coulter. You can rightfully disregard the overwhelming majority of what she says. I'm pretty right-leaning and listen to a lot of "right-wing" commentators and I pay zero attention to Ann Coulter. She's a provocateur that makes money being provocative, not actually offering some kind of meaningful conservative vision or policy prescriptions that most people take seriously to address actual, real-world problems. She isn't worth listening to.

To bring it back to the OP, I'm less interested in what the speaker said (despite the polemic firestorm being discussed about this in many conservative commentator circles) because she presents herself quite plainly, and you can interpret her views and overall thesis accordingly. I'm more concerned that an institution that prides itself on being the pinnacle of scholasticism and, supposedly, intellectual inquiry thought that approving a grand rounds with academic objectives that are prima facie provocative and arguably racist and a needs assessment that included the fact that there are too many "Karen" (sic) in the world was a good idea. That this was a CME event lends additional cache to the content being presented in spite of Yale's subsequent attempt to backpeddle and distance itself from the event. That speaks to a bigger problem that is worth examining, IMO.

I mean if there's one thing we can all agree upon it is that there are too many Karens

I wonder what the general opinion of those at Yale was before the media found out about this...

 

[Fano]

So no one sees an issue with her describing herself as a "mean-spirited bigot".

I'm not sure how Ann Coulter became a topic here but I'm not aware that she has admitted fantasizing shooting immigrants or others in the Left's protected classes. Regardless, I'm OK with her admitting her faults. IMO, we're all bigoted to varying degrees. For example:

“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”
― Jesse Jackson

 

[Eudaimania]

It absolutely was not the primary concern, saying amongst 100 others just goes to show. It was certainly the primary reason for his supporters though. And thats why white people will lose black people on criticizing far end of wokeness. It will continue until things change.

This is an inflection point. Minorities and racists are not going to budge. Non-bigoted whites are in a difficult spot, and they’ll have some choices to make. It is what it is.

The "choice" you seem to be suggesting is to embrace tribalism and ignore one form of racism while permitting another. Your dichotomy between "minorities" and "racists" is a false one. Racists of all color need to be ardently opposed, no matter who they direct hatred against.

 

[Psych Person]

I’ll just leave this here.

“The white liberal is the worst enemy to America, and the worst enemy to the black man. Let me explain what I mean by the white liberal. In America there is no such thing as Democrat or Republican anymore. In America you have liberals and conservatives. The only people living in the past who think in terms of I’m a Democrat or Republican, is the American Negro. He’s the one that runs around bragging about party affiliation. He’s the one that sticks to the Democrat or sticks to the Republican. But white people are divided into two groups, liberals and conservative. The Democrats who are conservative, vote with the Republicans who are conservative. The Democrats who are liberal vote with the Republicans that are liberal. The white liberal aren’t white people who are for independence, who are moral and ethical in their thinking. They are just a faction of white people that are jockeying for power. The same as the white conservative is a faction of white people that are jockeying for power. They are fighting each other for power and prestige, and the one that is the football in the game is the Negro, 20 million black people. A political football, a political pawn, an economic football, and economic pawn. A social football, a social pawn. The liberal elements of whites are those who have perfected the art of selling themselves to the Negro as a friend of the Negro. Getting sympathy of the Negro, getting the allegiance of the Negro, and getting the mind of the Negro. Then the Negro sides with the white liberal, and the white liberal use the Negro against the white conservative. So that anything that the Negro does is never for his own good, never for his own advancement, never for his own progress, he’s only a pawn in the hands of the white liberal. The worst enemy that the Negro have is this white man that runs around here drooling at the mouth professing to love Negros, and calling himself a liberal, and it is following these white liberals that has perpetuated problems that Negros have. If the Negro wasn’t taken, tricked, or deceived by the white liberal then Negros would get together and solve our own problems. I only cite these things to show you that in America the history of the white liberal has been nothing but a series of trickery designed to make Negros think that the white liberal was going to solve our problems. Our problems will never be solved by the white man. The only way that our problem will be solved is when the black man wakes up, clean himself up, stand on his own feet and stop begging the white man, and take immediate steps to do for ourselves the things that we have been waiting on the white man to do for us. Once we do for self then we will be able to solve our own problems. The white conservatives aren't friends of the Negro either, but they at least don't try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps the Negro always aware of where he stands with them. But the white liberals are foxes, who also show their teeth to the Negro but pretend that they are smiling. The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure the Negro, and as the Negro runs from the growling wolf, he flees into the open jaws of the "smiling" fox. One is the wolf, the other is a fox. No matter what, they’ll both eat you.”

-Malcolm X

 

[LimpSpatula]

I’ll just leave this here.



-Malcolm X

You can see it plain as day in this thread.

 

[Mitch Connor]

Not about the white nationalism.

I am always confused when people say white nationalism. What exactly does that mean? I take that to mean having pride in your country and wanting everyone in it to succeed while at the same time being white.

 

[LimpSpatula]

I am always confused when people say white nationalism. What exactly does that mean? I take that to mean having pride in your country and wanting everyone in it to succeed while at the same time being white.

LMGTFY - Let Me Google That For You

For all those people who find it more convenient to bother you with their question rather than to Google it for themselves.

lmgtfy.app

 

[deleted1100659]

Im just going to say racial divide is probably (in part) perpetuated because of the insane amount of profit many people make from it. It seems that many people who claim to hate racism, have also gotten quite rich off it.

 

[WisNeuro]

Step 1: Racism
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Profit!

 

[wanderer534]

 

[nexus73]

Step 1: Racism
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Profit!

Outrage gets attention. And attention can be monetized.

 

[mojetter]

I am always confused when people say white nationalism. What exactly does that mean? I take that to mean having pride in your country and wanting everyone in it to succeed while at the same time being white.

"having pride in your country and wanting everyone in it to succeed while at the same time HAVING EVERYONE ELSE WHO IS SUCCESFUL being white"

This is moreso what the definition of nationalism is IMO

About this lady, well I'm black and have no idea what shes talking about so this isn't shared even in black activist circles...the Ivies have a habit of allowing genius and insanity to exist at the same time hoping to figure it out along the way....they failed this time and I hope she gets the help she needs to become a productive member of the conversation...this doesn't help