UVA Microaggression case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure if he’ll win or lose, but boy is he a jerk - minute 28.45 https://m.soundcloud.com/user-381804527/microagressions-presented-by-amwa

Well, first amendment applies to jerks too, not just exemplary citizens.

He is free to stand on the corner and rant about microaggression. But organizations also have a right to hold you to account for your speech if it is antithetical to its values.

Exactly. Especially a medical institution that must ensure all its patients are treated with respect and dignity regardless of their racial background. I work in healthcare and I wish more doctors received training on microaggressions. Lots of implicit bias among healthcare workers.

I mean, I'm not sure what this final comment means. The medical field is still considered a ticket to a UMC lifestyle, especially among immigrants. Lots of diversity and increasing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He asked 3 questions to a presenter. This issue was presenting one account of anecdotal evidence as scientific fact. You learn in elementary science fair to have more than one example.

Doctors must know how to read scientific journals and trials to parse out fact from ‘placebo’.

If asking 3 valid questions about what is supposed to be a well funded research project gets the wheels spinning to get a student kicked out of school by deans and professors, there is a much greater problem here.

If this goes against the ‘values’ of a school, was that made clear before starting the school. Was ‘do not question’ a value they stated that could lead to expulsion?

The professors explained that they were using anecdotes to illustrate not as scientific proof.

He asked his 2nd question and the presenter said it would be his last question. 2 is reasonable in this situation, one and follow up.

After she answered his 2nd question he insisted on another follow up. Another professor stepped in to answer the 3rd question and noted he seemed frustrated and moved on to another person’s question.

So his question(s) were not his issue, his issue was his unprofessionalism.

Also, if you listen to the 2nd audio with the dean he sounds unstable. He tries very hard in both situations to keep his voice calm but his breathing and tone are agitated.

His problem is that he lacks the ability to control his emotions when somebody disagrees with him.

When offered counseling which can help with this, he refused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure if he’ll win or lose, but boy is he a jerk - minute 28.45 https://m.soundcloud.com/user-381804527/microagressions-presented-by-amwa

Well, first amendment applies to jerks too, not just exemplary citizens.

He is free to stand on the corner and rant about microaggression. But organizations also have a right to hold you to account for your speech if it is antithetical to its values.

Exactly. Especially a medical institution that must ensure all its patients are treated with respect and dignity regardless of their racial background. I work in healthcare and I wish more doctors received training on microaggressions. Lots of implicit bias among healthcare workers.

I mean, I'm not sure what this final comment means. The medical field is still considered a ticket to a UMC lifestyle, especially among immigrants. Lots of diversity and increasing.

You don’t know what implicit bias is in health care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He asked 3 questions to a presenter. This issue was presenting one account of anecdotal evidence as scientific fact. You learn in elementary science fair to have more than one example.

Doctors must know how to read scientific journals and trials to parse out fact from ‘placebo’.

If asking 3 valid questions about what is supposed to be a well funded research project gets the wheels spinning to get a student kicked out of school by deans and professors, there is a much greater problem here.

If this goes against the ‘values’ of a school, was that made clear before starting the school. Was ‘do not question’ a value they stated that could lead to expulsion?

The professors explained that they were using anecdotes to illustrate not as scientific proof.

He asked his 2nd question and the presenter said it would be his last question. 2 is reasonable in this situation, one and follow up.

After she answered his 2nd question he insisted on another follow up. Another professor stepped in to answer the 3rd question and noted he seemed frustrated and moved on to another person’s question.

So his question(s) were not his issue, his issue was his unprofessionalism.

Also, if you listen to the 2nd audio with the dean he sounds unstable. He tries very hard in both situations to keep his voice calm but his breathing and tone are agitated.

His problem is that he lacks the ability to control his emotions when somebody disagrees with him.

When offered counseling which can help with this, he refused.

The fact pattern also suggests there was a pattern of this sort of unhinged behavior, and his actions SINCE only support that.

I suspect this touches a nerve for some DCUM posters because they confuse "free speech" to mean "the right to hijack any discussion with your own agenda and demand that people listen to you until you are done speaking."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another take

https://whitehotharlots.tumblr.com/post/647740298162831360/a-movement-that-cannot-be-criticized-cannot?fbclid=IwAR3_k1UpF1u1Ov3PG61173ri2Ps1tp8NA5uAKwkNPfIzi2OxNXIY4f3uZx4

I am listening to the audio. He is being hostile. His voice is almost trembling in anger to my ears.

He is using polite language but the delivery is hostile. Also she also said she was moving on to another questioner but he interjected again.

Also clearly the presenters try to politely defuse him several times but he just keeps objecting in a dogged manner.

So basically he behaved poorly, he was called out, and he doubled down on behaving poorly.

I think he made his point in his first or second "question" that in his opinion this is pseudo science, not based in fact, based in opinion, and that he does not respect the presenters as authorities on this topic. He just wouldn't stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Microaggressions" are unknowable and unidentifiable except to that individual and highly dependent on the situation and perhaps even mood. Essentially each individual has their own unique set of laws that govern themselves as a sovereign entity.

They're completely ridiculous.

Sure, evaluating the tone of voice and body language of a human being, and the intent of their comments, is subjective and therefore not scientific. And yet, even if the words are polite, you often know when someone is being a jerk to you, right?

Add the additional layer of the REASON for bad behavior and now it's really complicated and undefinable. I get it.

And yet, nevertheless, I believe microagressions are a real thing that happen because of biases and assumptions about certain groups of people. And they are always deniable right because we can't prove someone's motivations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He asked 3 questions to a presenter. This issue was presenting one account of anecdotal evidence as scientific fact. You learn in elementary science fair to have more than one example.

Doctors must know how to read scientific journals and trials to parse out fact from ‘placebo’.

If asking 3 valid questions about what is supposed to be a well funded research project gets the wheels spinning to get a student kicked out of school by deans and professors, there is a much greater problem here.

If this goes against the ‘values’ of a school, was that made clear before starting the school. Was ‘do not question’ a value they stated that could lead to expulsion?

The professors explained that they were using anecdotes to illustrate not as scientific proof.

He asked his 2nd question and the presenter said it would be his last question. 2 is reasonable in this situation, one and follow up.

After she answered his 2nd question he insisted on another follow up. Another professor stepped in to answer the 3rd question and noted he seemed frustrated and moved on to another person’s question.

So his question(s) were not his issue, his issue was his unprofessionalism.

Also, if you listen to the 2nd audio with the dean he sounds unstable. He tries very hard in both situations to keep his voice calm but his breathing and tone are agitated.

His problem is that he lacks the ability to control his emotions when somebody disagrees with him.

When offered counseling which can help with this, he refused.

The second audio is not just a meeting with the dean, it’s with an entire panel of people and it’s his expulsion hearing. He is one young person in a room of older people that are deciding his future.

It’s not easy for most people to control their emotions when they are being railroaded and their future is at stake, especially in your early 20s when you haven’t had the experience to handle such situations.

I don’t know why everyone here thinks a med student is supposed to be a perfect person, they’re still young, they have no real job experience, they’re lives to that point have been study in high school to get into college, study in college to get into med school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He asked 3 questions to a presenter. This issue was presenting one account of anecdotal evidence as scientific fact. You learn in elementary science fair to have more than one example.

Doctors must know how to read scientific journals and trials to parse out fact from ‘placebo’.

If asking 3 valid questions about what is supposed to be a well funded research project gets the wheels spinning to get a student kicked out of school by deans and professors, there is a much greater problem here.

If this goes against the ‘values’ of a school, was that made clear before starting the school. Was ‘do not question’ a value they stated that could lead to expulsion?

The professors explained that they were using anecdotes to illustrate not as scientific proof.

He asked his 2nd question and the presenter said it would be his last question. 2 is reasonable in this situation, one and follow up.

After she answered his 2nd question he insisted on another follow up. Another professor stepped in to answer the 3rd question and noted he seemed frustrated and moved on to another person’s question.

So his question(s) were not his issue, his issue was his unprofessionalism.

Also, if you listen to the 2nd audio with the dean he sounds unstable. He tries very hard in both situations to keep his voice calm but his breathing and tone are agitated.

His problem is that he lacks the ability to control his emotions when somebody disagrees with him.

When offered counseling which can help with this, he refused.

The second audio is not just a meeting with the dean, it’s with an entire panel of people and it’s his expulsion hearing. He is one young person in a room of older people that are deciding his future.

It’s not easy for most people to control their emotions when they are being railroaded and their future is at stake, especially in your early 20s when you haven’t had the experience to handle such situations.

I don’t know why everyone here thinks a med student is supposed to be a perfect person, they’re still young, they have no real job experience, they’re lives to that point have been study in high school to get into college, study in college to get into med school.

His default appears to be one of barely controlled rage. He should have been on his best behavior at an expulsion hearing rather than belligerent.

[Anonymous]

He’s got massive issues. The audio is damning. JFC.

[Anonymous]

PP here, I am listening to the second audio as well.

The student may be technically correct and may prevail in his suit.

But the guy clearly has massive issues. I would not want him for my doctor, would you?

Also I am thinking about VA Tech. Can you imagine if this student did go violent and the school had done nothing in response to repeated hostile interactions with students and faculty and guests?

Settlement money spent is worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here, I am listening to the second audio as well.

The student may be technically correct and may prevail in his suit.

But the guy clearly has massive issues. I would not want him for my doctor, would you?

Also I am thinking about VA Tech. Can you imagine if this student did go violent and the school had done nothing in response to repeated hostile interactions with students and faculty and guests?

Settlement money spent is worth it.

Assuming UVA settles -- and I would doubt it -- it would almost certainly contain a NDA/gag order. The irony. Because I don't think this guy can shut up about it. He's been crusading for two years.

[Anonymous]

Can someone link the audio?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone link the audio?

It's in the hotharlot link posted several times in the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He asked 3 questions to a presenter. This issue was presenting one account of anecdotal evidence as scientific fact. You learn in elementary science fair to have more than one example.

Doctors must know how to read scientific journals and trials to parse out fact from ‘placebo’.

If asking 3 valid questions about what is supposed to be a well funded research project gets the wheels spinning to get a student kicked out of school by deans and professors, there is a much greater problem here.

If this goes against the ‘values’ of a school, was that made clear before starting the school. Was ‘do not question’ a value they stated that could lead to expulsion?

The professors explained that they were using anecdotes to illustrate not as scientific proof.

He asked his 2nd question and the presenter said it would be his last question. 2 is reasonable in this situation, one and follow up.

After she answered his 2nd question he insisted on another follow up. Another professor stepped in to answer the 3rd question and noted he seemed frustrated and moved on to another person’s question.

So his question(s) were not his issue, his issue was his unprofessionalism.

Also, if you listen to the 2nd audio with the dean he sounds unstable. He tries very hard in both situations to keep his voice calm but his breathing and tone are agitated.

His problem is that he lacks the ability to control his emotions when somebody disagrees with him.

When offered counseling which can help with this, he refused.

The second audio is not just a meeting with the dean, it’s with an entire panel of people and it’s his expulsion hearing. He is one young person in a room of older people that are deciding his future.

It’s not easy for most people to control their emotions when they are being railroaded and their future is at stake, especially in your early 20s when you haven’t had the experience to handle such situations.

I don’t know why everyone here thinks a med student is supposed to be a perfect person, they’re still young, they have no real job experience, they’re lives to that point have been study in high school to get into college, study in college to get into med school.

Even my teen knows how to act in a hearing with adults that is being recorded. Say very little, collect information, listen, figure out how to fix your mistakes.

He is odd, he is trying to control the meeting. He keeps going back to the “microaggression” meeting even though they are t really concerned about that so much as his growing inability to manage his aggression.

He needs therapy, he thinks he’s too smart for therapy, he sound like a sociopath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone link the audio?

https://m.soundcloud.com/user-381804527/microagressions-presented-by-amwa

There are 2

28:45 on the 1st one