Psychology professor removed from his own keynote address following racist/sexist remarks

[foreverbull]

It shouldn't have to fall on the group with less power to have to both navigate the interactions and carefully weigh them in context AND educate the group with more power about the dominant group's lack of sensitivity to the power imbalance. We see this unfair expectation in many contexts (sex/gender, race/ethnicity, etc.). The group with less power is unfairly burdened with having to educate the dominant group in a very careful and nondefensive way so as not to offend those in power (even so, many in power don't "see" a problem and it's easy to just deny it when it comes from those with less power).

Those in power should take responsibility, be more aware, and educate themselves rather than expect others to show them how to act appropriately. If you have power, you shouldn't abuse it by ignoring the effect of your power/interactive style on others around you.

Yes it is bidirectional and there should be openness on both sides, but I believe more of the burden should fall on the folks in power to learn how not to abuse it rather than those at the mercy of people in power.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[foreverbull]

I would also note that lack of witty comebacks in the moment doesn't necessarily imply a lack of social skills, but a different speed of processing information. Some folks aren't able to think as quickly as others and process the information right away, but have good interpersonal skills and are thoughtful communicators.

 

[mlwg1]

Power is fluid. Offense is in the eye of the beholder. And, being offended is a form of power.

This seems like a deflection that absolves the “offender” of culpability for their actions.

 

[WisNeuro]

This seems like a deflection that absolves the “offender” of culpability for their actions.

Maybe in a binary world devoid of continuum on the topic of offense.

 

[ClinicalABA]

...more of the burden should fall on the folks in power to learn how not to abuse it rather than those at the mercy of people in power.

Let me humbly correct that for you: "MOST, if not the vast majority, of the burden should fall on the folks in power to learn how not to abuse it rather than those at the mercy of people in power."
Fortunately for those of us in power, there are several relatively easy things we can do to bear this burden. Many are passive (e.g., don't make sexist/racist/genderist jokes; don't get involved in sexual or romantic relationships with anyone who you supervise clinically or adminstratively or where there is even the slightest chance that the powere differentiation could have any impact on the decisions of the person with lesser power (e.g., don't just not hook-up with your own students/supervisees, but don't hookup with other people's students/supervisees either).

Other strategies require a little more effort, but not much. For example, send an emal out to students/supervisees prior to beginning of class/supervision asking them if they prefer that you use non-outward gender conforming pronouns. Most will ignore/not understand the message, but for someone, eventually, it will send the message that, despite the power differential, this might be a safer environment than they are used to. Another thingh you could do- Go through your lecture or presentation slides and change any text or images that might, most likely inadvertently, convey gender roles where they aren't needed. For example, I was teaching a section of a research design class where the main materials were created by someboday else. There were several slides that were emphasizing the need to think scientifically, and these used clip art of of a white male in a labcoat. I added some clipart of females and non-whites in lab coats (not a big deal, but it's something). Other slides related to science an human behavior appropriately had pictures of scientific pioneers like Skinner, Fred Keller, and Jack Michael. I added a picture of Mary Cover Jones (look her up- pretty impressive stuff). This isn't saying that Skinner doesn't belong there, or even the Cover Jones' contributions to the field were equal to his (few would argue they were). My goal was for people to learn and apply this stuff, and I think there is some research support for the idea that if it's presented as coming from somebody like them, they are likely to pay more attention.

Some strategies are much more difficult (at least for me). These are things like reading opinion and research related to this topic (including threads like this one). Also acknowledging to myself and others that I am biased by who I am, and that my initial reactions and positions need to be at least questioned, and often edited. Even more difficult is recognizing that I have benefitted from who I am. That doesn't mean I haven't and don't work really hard, it's just a recognition that people who don't look like me could work just as hard as I do and be less likely to contact the same amount of reinforcement.

 

[mlwg1]

Maybe in a binary world devoid of continuum on the topic of offense.

I never claimed to live in such a world, but your call if you choose to take it that way.

I would argue that the statement "being offended is a form of power" has binary implications. It's not that black and white.

 

[WisNeuro]

I never claimed to live in such a world, but your call if you choose to take it that way.

I would argue that the statement "being offended is a form of power" has binary implications. It's not that black and white.

Your retort from the quoted statement would imply otherwise. Regarding the second point, I imagine some would argue that it also falls along a continuum. Of course things aren't black and white, but, there are many who would like to make the issue so.

 

[ClinicalABA]

I agree with these things with the caveat that it is inappropriate to ascribe power to being male or white across all contexts.

Agreed, but I find it's a good default assumption, modified as necessary in the face of objective evidence to the contrary.

And, even so, we are dealing with adults and one can do all of these things and still offend someone as you cannot control that. Some are looking out specifically for offense for offense to be used to achieve power. Some people have personality disorders and simply misperceive social behavior.

Again, agreed- such people do exist. Such cases need not be considered when deciding on our own actions because, as you say, we "cannot control that." I think most of us would agree that basing our behavior on the answere the question "how would someone diagnosed with BPD react" is not a great heuristic.

I would, however, argue that people with those views or objectives can easily find evidence in support of at least the premise of their postions when so called "big names" in the field (such as Richard Malott), refer to women as "little bitches" in public professional forums, and the (at least rumored) response is, "yeah, not a big suprise." It's not my fault that that jerk said the things he hid, nor am I directly complicit in my field being a place where such behavior may have been historically or currenlty reinforced. I just find it helpful to me and people who come into contact with me to consider that, just maybe, I have benefitted from looking like people who look like him. Honestly- I don't work too hard or spend too much time on this. A little goes a long way.Fortunately, I have surrounded myself with people who I can ask "would I be being a jerk if I did this" and who give me an honest, constructive response.

 

[ClinicalABA]

On a more empirical note...

I was fortunate in graduate school to take a Social Cognition class with Susan Fiske. IIRC, she was at the time (or maybe it was somebody else she was talking about) doing a lot of expert witness stuff regarding discrimination lawsuits. Seems there's a body of social-cognition research that (gross oversimplification/potential misrepresentation coming) found that outgroup bias and potentially discriminatory behaviors is kind of something that humans do automatically (rather than intentionally), and that was often the defense used in this suits. Her research (or maybe somebody elses- sorry about the details) showed and her testimony emphasized that, while that may be the case, adding some simple steps to processes (such as just asking yourself or being forced to ask "hey, am I being biased here") was enough to get rid of some of that automatic bias. I don't remember much else from that class, but find myself thinking of that often and using that technique.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Ok, I’ll bite. “Just give Marsha Linehan a mic in twenty years and who knows what she will say.”

Are you serious?

I’m amazed that, in the absence of any actual evidence, and for the sake of “having a bit of fun,” you casually denigrate one of the most impressive women in our field, whose accomplishments are centered in changing the male-defined conceptualization of female “hysteria.”

Seriously, do better.

I count myself as one of Dr. Linehan's staunchest admirers and have spent thousands of dollars to participate in conferences that she has given because of that. I was not meaning to denigrate her in anyway, just making the point that when people get older it seems to be pretty common to say more outlandish things. Albert Ellis was kicked out of his own institute when he was 95 for saying stupid things.

 

[WisNeuro]

Albert Ellis was kicked out of his own institute when he was 95 for saying stupid things.

Oh, there was a bit more than that going on in this particular situation.

 

[ClinicalABA]

I count myself as one of Dr. Linehan's staunchest admirers and have spent thousands of dollars to participate in conferences that she has given because of that. I was not meaning to denigrate her in anyway, just making the point that when people get older it seems to be pretty common to say more outlandish things. Albert Ellis was kicked out of his own institute when he was 95 for saying stupid things.

On the topic of creepy conference behavior, I remember a very bizarre symposium with Albert Ellis at an AABT conference back when I was in graduate school. It was kid of a career retrospective type of talk. He began by say something along the lines of "I've done a lot of things in my career, and had lots of sex." Just weird. During the same talk, some audience member (who I think had gone through Ellis's training institute or something, stood up and literally sand a song of praise to Ellis, who did not seem impressed. It was all very bizarre.

 

[ClinicalABA]

I'd rather the null be no assumption based on visually recognized racial/sex/ethnicity components.

Me too! I find that I often quickly move to this point, I just think it’s a less dangerous assumption for me to start elsewhere. Regardless, I appreciate the discussion and your perspective, and will certainly ruminate on it a little more. After all, I was expressing my opinion, and as such it could be flawed do limited history and incomplete data (which, as a result of your posts are now less limited and more complete).

This default assumption is a due process failure in the space of accusations.

Sorry- I don’t understand this statement.

It also, in my opinion, has contributed to the deepening of polarization on identity issues in personal and political spheres. I think it is a damaging perspective. And, not just to the white men that you assume to have power based on their visually recognized sex/racial characteristics. It can damage how people relate to each other. It creates louder out-group divisions that contribute to out-group bias.

I appreciate and seriously consider your opinions. I think you are giving me too much credit here. This is largely a cognitive exercise I engage in to attempt to counteract and identify my own biases based on my learning history, and then typically in the context of supervision and teaching. This is not a general world view that dominates my thinking and other behaviors. I’m in a women dominated field (at least on the applied end of things) and currently all my students and supervisees are early career females. Maybe I overcompensate as a result, but I think that contributes to a better learning and work.

You may also be suffering because of people that look like him.

If I am, im not aware of it! Though now that you mention it, it was a white, hetero, cisgender, male who I ran into playing hockey and tore my rotator cuff a few weeks ago (Something tells me that’s not what you’re talking about).

Thanks for the discussion and your thoughtful and thought provoking replies.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Oh, there was a bit more than that going on in this particular situation.

I guess that’s what I am missing is where there is a lot more going on. All I know is some guy who is apparently a big name in ABA referred to women in ABA as little b’s and referred to the Mexicans in the back of the room. On the surface it does sound to me like really stupid things to say and pulling his mic was an appropriate response and by stupid I mean racist and sexist. If you mean that this guy has a history of being a racist and a sexist or worse, then it is true that I don’t know about that since I don’t know anything about the guy. It is also true that I wouldn’t know if there is racism and sexism inherent in the ABA folks since I am not involved in that either.

 

[Pragma]

This default assumption is a due process failure in the space of accusations.

Sorry- I don’t understand this statement.

This is the most important interaction that I have viewed in this thread in many ways. The other debates are important, but this reflects the crux of it in my humble opinion.

 

[ClinicalABA]

This is the most important interaction that I have viewed in this thread in many ways. The other debates are important, but this reflects the crux of it in my humble opinion.

It’s the words/lingo/jargon I don’t understand- the sentence itself, not the underlying concept (as I think you’re implying). If this is the “crux of it,” as you say, than it all comes down to me not understanding the words. I’m pretty sure that’s not what you mean.


Perhaps I don’t fully understand the underlying concept conveyed in that sentence, and maybe that is a flaw in my argument/position, but, honestly, at this point, it was the combination of words I don’t understand. If you want to spell it out, I’d appreciate it (and perhaps agree with your position)

 

[WisNeuro]

I guess that’s what I am missing is where there is a lot more going on. All I know is some guy who is apparently a big name in ABA referred to women in ABA as little b’s and referred to the Mexicans in the back of the room. On the surface it does sound to me like really stupid things to say and pulling his mic was an appropriate response and by stupid I mean racist and sexist. If you mean that this guy has a history of being a racist and a sexist or worse, then it is true that I don’t know about that since I don’t know anything about the guy. It is also true that I wouldn’t know if there is racism and sexism inherent in the ABA folks since I am not involved in that either.

I wasn't referring to the ABA thing n my comment, I was referring to the Ellis situation. It was somewhat complicated and had been brewing for a while. It made Albert's 90th bday party somewhat awkward at times.

 

[Pragma]

I agree with these things with the caveat that it is inappropriate to ascribe power to being male or white across all contexts.

Agreed, but I find it's a good default assumption, modified as necessary in the face of objective evidence to the contrary.

First of all, making default assumptions aren’t good for anybody. Stereotyping is bad. Assuming that a large proportion of the population (white men) are homogeneous is bad. Assuming that white men always hold power in interpersonal dynamics is also problematic. That’s certainly not the case at my institution in terms of position (my boss and all upper level administrators are women or POC - to give an example).

“Due process” if I interpret Jon Snow correctly is referring to fairness. If I am a white guy, you can make any kind of assumption you want about me with regard to power, privilege, if I got irritated a little more easily on the subway due to power/privilege/maleness (vs. my bankrupt divorced alcoholic parent relapsed last night and I hardly got any sleep because I was trying to make sure they were alive and also tried to make sure my child slept okay), etc. It’s not fair to default to “See how he kind of raised his voice? That’s a microaggression and he’s just an entitled, aggressive, unaware white guy misusing his power.” It’s not fair to assume intentionality or attribute a negative interaction with someone based on their color/gender/sexuality/religion. Default assumptions aren’t a good thing. Do that to a non-white male it’d be stereotyping or bigoted. But people can do that to white men and it is okay?

It also, in my opinion, has contributed to the deepening of polarization on identity issues in personal and political spheres. I think it is a damaging perspective. And, not just to the white men that you assume to have power based on their visually recognized sex/racial characteristics. It can damage how people relate to each other. It creates louder out-group divisions that contribute to out-group bias.

All of this.

 

[cara susanna]

I think it's important to acknowledge that this behavior doesn't occur in a vacuum. Although we want to be kind and treat people equally, certain historical and societal contexts do make us view behavior differently when it's a man behaving towards a woman, as opposed to the opposite scenario. And I'm not sure that's really a bad thing.

 

[smalltownpsych]

I wasn't referring to the ABA thing n my comment, I was referring to the Ellis situation. It was somewhat complicated and had been brewing for a while. It made Albert's 90th bday party somewhat awkward at times.

 

[Pragma]

I think it's important to acknowledge that this behavior doesn't occur in a vacuum. Although we want to be kind and treat people equally, certain historical and societal contexts do make us view behavior differently when it's a man behaving towards a woman, as opposed to the opposite scenario. And I'm not sure that's really a bad thing.

In which ways would it be a good thing? I’m just curious which areas you are referring to. I say that as a man that is frequently considered to be behaving more like the woman in my relationship in the traditional gender role sense.

If you are referring to some form of negative behavior, I find it hard to imagine how it could be a good thing when reversing woman/man.

 

[cara susanna]

In which ways would it be a good thing? I’m just curious which areas you are referring to. I say that as a man that is frequently considered to be behaving more like the woman in my relationship in the traditional gender role sense.

If you are referring to some form of negative behavior, I find it hard to imagine how it could be a good thing when reversing woman/man.

Not a good thing in terms of promoting certain behaviors, but I do think that it's important for us to view certain behaviors within the context of society and history. For instance, I would certainly view someone attributing a male patient's behavior to "toxic masculinity" differently than I would them attributing a female patient's behavior to "hysteria."

 

[Pragma]

Not a good thing in terms of promoting certain behaviors, but I do think that it's important for us to view certain behaviors within the context of society and history. For instance, I would certainly view someone attributing a male patient's behavior to "toxic masculinity" differently than I would them attributing a female patient's behavior to "hysteria."

I can see that point (not a fan of the term but it has utility in things like prison research). I also am not suggesting that context doesn’t matter.

What bothers me is suggesting that we can infer so much at a societal level based on demographic characteristics. It is so complex. When people start assuming and attrubuting negative things for a huge, heterogeneous group based on simply skin color and sex, they aren’t valuing context either, or are only choosing certain contexts to pay attention to. This contributes heavily to polarization and in my view is harmful to promoting positive relationships in society.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Can I just say that as someone from third-generation southern Italian immigrants and who has had many more female bosses than male that I really hate being classified as a privileged white male and being pressured to acknowledge some type of complicity in behavior of other men whether current or historical. I am grateful that my ancestors and my own ethnicity has been less discriminated against than others have been and I didn't grow up in an inner city or on a reservation. I work with one of the most disadvantaged groups of people around, Native Americans. In fact, they are so disadvantaged that no one really seems to care much at all when it comes to any type of national coverage. When I am watching my patients literally dying due to the effects of cultural disintegration and no one really seems to care to find out what could really help these people, I just feel very sad. I really could care less about Dick in a box because I think it is more of a distraction than anything else.

 

[mlwg1]

Who is the "offender?"

We are dealing with power dynamics. It isn't binary. If someone is "offended" because someone wears a MAGA hat, who is the offender? If someone is "offended" because someone wears an "I'm with her," shirt, who is the offender? If someone is offended because a perceived to be white woman voices an opinion at a "resistance" rally and isn't "woke" enough because of her race, who is the offender? If someone is offended because a black person shows up at a restaurant, who is the offender?

I actually put the term in quotes specifically as an acknowledgement that the term is relative.

And to be honest, I don’t have a problem with the concept that being offended *can be* a source of power. People were offended that they had to be sent to the back of the bus because of their skin town. This ended up collectively resulting in a social movement. The person who is offended by seeing a black person restaurant can attempt to exercise that power by objecting. People advocate to have their own power acknowledged by the greater society. The extent to which a certain actor can exercise the power of offense will be determined by the current cultural climate, which has been changing recently. I see this as part of the human experience.

I find it interesting that you’re basically saying that power dynamics switch back and forth. I absolutely agree. I do think that some of the issue here is that members of society who traditionally have not exercised the “power of offense”, such as women and minorities, have done so in more public platforms recently and people aren’t used to it.

I hope people can understand that the feeling that accompanies being blamed for all of society’s ills, of being unwelcome or different compared to those in your local social context (e.g., perhaps as a white professor outnumbered by the liberal political leanings of young females) is something many of us have experienced in this country for decades, even centuries, in one form or another.

I think it's important to acknowledge that this behavior doesn't occur in a vacuum. Although we want to be kind and treat people equally, certain historical and societal contexts do make us view behavior differently when it's a man behaving towards a woman, as opposed to the opposite scenario. And I'm not sure that's really a bad thing.

100% agree. Hence the importance of the type of self-examination that ClinicalABA was describing. We can all benefit from it.

 

[cara susanna]

I can see that point (not a fan of the term but it has utility in things like prison research). I also am not suggesting that context doesn’t matter.

What bothers me is suggesting that we can infer so much at a societal level based on demographic characteristics. It is so complex. When people start assuming and attrubuting negative things for a huge, heterogeneous group based on simply skin color and sex, they aren’t valuing context either, or are only choosing certain contexts to pay attention to. This contributes heavily to polarization and in my view is harmful to promoting positive relationships in society.

I agree with you in that this is a very complex issue.