Another Black Eye for Penn

[Anonymous]

She takes zero agency for anything. Everything is someone else’s fault. She’s just a “kid” and a “victim” while we’re talking about a grown a** 22 to 25 y/o woman when this is all occurring? Penn forced her to lie to reporters, Penn forced her to retweet NY Times columnists? Lol imagine believing any of this. Now the update is she’s freeloading off cat lady profs? Years and years of shameless audacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is buying this, you can stop spamming the forum. The rich spoiled layabout needs to get off Twitter and DCUM and go get a real job. Imagine the gall to pretend to be poor kid and you’ve never worked a day in your life.

Yes, because graduating with honors and supporting yourself through college isn't work?

Turns out that scared teenager writing in her journal was 100% right. People will often side with the abusers.

So ... that journal was electronic with timestamps that can be verified, correct? Not a handwritten journal that she happened to think about producing after she lost the formal appeal?

Just checking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please run that long post through some identification software and compare it to some of Mackenzie's previous writing?

Hey loser, you do it. This story reminds me of Monica Lewinsky. Essentially a kid held to a higher standard than the adults and institutions around her. And we know how well that story aged. It’s widely accepted now that Lewinsky was the victim of a higher coordinated bully campaign. Shameful. And that goes to those posting here relentlessly trying to deflect blame away from where it is deserved—her diabolical mother, her mother’s abusive boyfriend, the legal system, UPenn.

I'm the pp who said that I don't think Mackenzie deserves all the blame. She had a long psychiatric hospitalization. She definitely came from a dysfunctional family.
This doesn't excuse her from manipulating the system, but it doesn't mean that she was the victim in every possible way imaginable either.

The real truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

DP. Oh, agreed.

And I also don't want someone with that history -- and who is still doubling down and attacking others -- getting any support for moving into politics or being licensed to work over vulnerable people. She needs support for dealing with her history and damage. Her mother may well need to address her own issues, too.

But in no way does any of this make her either ready or somehow deserving of power or responsibility. She needs help.

She definitely needs help. Our society tends to like to paint people as angels or monsters. She can be sick and need kindness, not necessarily for the reasons she claims to need them, but for other reasons.

Frankly it's kind of tragic that someone so intelligent has managed to ruin their life like this at the age of 25. It wouldn't surprise me if they were familial issues contributing as well. This would not have gotten this far if her mother had spoken up way earlier.

Yeah. I don't have any problem believing there are few (if any) healthy people in this story. That includes the Penn profs who have been supporting her, as much as the mother.

I don't think we need to demonize someone to acknowledge that they did not qualify for a position that they achieved by untruthful means. You don't even have to "prove" it was deliberate to acknowledge that. I do think some posters here elide the two -- as if saying she shouldn't have X means you are either demonizing her, or that you are saying she was evil. But I think they think eliding it makes their argument stronger, somehow.

Nope. Just not qualified for it, by the specific qualifications of entry.

Except she was. By Penn and Questbridge’s very definitions. There’s no disputing that.

Why was it that the Rhodes committee asked her to withdraw her application, again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She takes zero agency for anything. Everything is someone else’s fault. She’s just a “kid” and a “victim” while we’re talking about a grown a** 22 to 25 y/o woman when this is all occurring? Penn forced her to lie to reporters, Penn forced her to retweet NY Times columnists? Lol imagine believing any of this. Now the update is she’s freeloading off cat lady profs? Years and years of shameless audacity.

Gross. I can't take an adult seriously who uses phrases like "grown ass."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please run that long post through some identification software and compare it to some of Mackenzie's previous writing?

Hey loser, you do it. This story reminds me of Monica Lewinsky. Essentially a kid held to a higher standard than the adults and institutions around her. And we know how well that story aged. It’s widely accepted now that Lewinsky was the victim of a higher coordinated bully campaign. Shameful. And that goes to those posting here relentlessly trying to deflect blame away from where it is deserved—her diabolical mother, her mother’s abusive boyfriend, the legal system, UPenn.

I'm the pp who said that I don't think Mackenzie deserves all the blame. She had a long psychiatric hospitalization. She definitely came from a dysfunctional family.
This doesn't excuse her from manipulating the system, but it doesn't mean that she was the victim in every possible way imaginable either.

The real truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

DP. Oh, agreed.

And I also don't want someone with that history -- and who is still doubling down and attacking others -- getting any support for moving into politics or being licensed to work over vulnerable people. She needs support for dealing with her history and damage. Her mother may well need to address her own issues, too.

But in no way does any of this make her either ready or somehow deserving of power or responsibility. She needs help.

She definitely needs help. Our society tends to like to paint people as angels or monsters. She can be sick and need kindness, not necessarily for the reasons she claims to need them, but for other reasons.

Frankly it's kind of tragic that someone so intelligent has managed to ruin their life like this at the age of 25. It wouldn't surprise me if they were familial issues contributing as well. This would not have gotten this far if her mother had spoken up way earlier.

Yeah. I don't have any problem believing there are few (if any) healthy people in this story. That includes the Penn profs who have been supporting her, as much as the mother.

I don't think we need to demonize someone to acknowledge that they did not qualify for a position that they achieved by untruthful means. You don't even have to "prove" it was deliberate to acknowledge that. I do think some posters here elide the two -- as if saying she shouldn't have X means you are either demonizing her, or that you are saying she was evil. But I think they think eliding it makes their argument stronger, somehow.

Nope. Just not qualified for it, by the specific qualifications of entry.

Except she was. By Penn and Questbridge’s very definitions. There’s no disputing that.

Why was it that the Rhodes committee asked her to withdraw her application, again?

So you agree she met the definition at Penn? The place she is suing for wrongfully withholding her MSW?

[Anonymous]

She should not be demonized. She is a victim here, although I also believe she engaged in fraud. Victims can engage in fraud; it doesn’t take away from the abuse she suffered, and I believe she truly did suffer at least some abuse. The gum story seems ludicrous, but I also don’t believe the facts of the hospital stats are what she claims based on some inconsistencies.

But it does really bother me that if she were a young Black man or Latino man (or boy, since many of you infantilize her), she wouldn’t be getting fawning articles in major media or vociferous defenders or (admittedly creepy) professors going out of their way to help the kid. She is benefiting from systemic racism and specifically the treatment of pretty young white women. That aspect is really terrible, and I think fury about that is part of the anger people see directed to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is buying this, you can stop spamming the forum. The rich spoiled layabout needs to get off Twitter and DCUM and go get a real job. Imagine the gall to pretend to be poor kid and you’ve never worked a day in your life.

Yes, because graduating with honors and supporting yourself through college isn't work?

Turns out that scared teenager writing in her journal was 100% right. People will often side with the abusers.

You are a broken record circling back to fake inflated grades. Nobody cares about a rich spoiled brat’s As and Bs at a ritzy day school or As and Bs in a soft major at Penn CAS. Or the soft master’s. No mention of standardized test scores because they are dire, which exposes her for the midwit leech she is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please run that long post through some identification software and compare it to some of Mackenzie's previous writing?

Hey loser, you do it. This story reminds me of Monica Lewinsky. Essentially a kid held to a higher standard than the adults and institutions around her. And we know how well that story aged. It’s widely accepted now that Lewinsky was the victim of a higher coordinated bully campaign. Shameful. And that goes to those posting here relentlessly trying to deflect blame away from where it is deserved—her diabolical mother, her mother’s abusive boyfriend, the legal system, UPenn.

I'm the pp who said that I don't think Mackenzie deserves all the blame. She had a long psychiatric hospitalization. She definitely came from a dysfunctional family.
This doesn't excuse her from manipulating the system, but it doesn't mean that she was the victim in every possible way imaginable either.

The real truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

DP. Oh, agreed.

And I also don't want someone with that history -- and who is still doubling down and attacking others -- getting any support for moving into politics or being licensed to work over vulnerable people. She needs support for dealing with her history and damage. Her mother may well need to address her own issues, too.

But in no way does any of this make her either ready or somehow deserving of power or responsibility. She needs help.

She definitely needs help. Our society tends to like to paint people as angels or monsters. She can be sick and need kindness, not necessarily for the reasons she claims to need them, but for other reasons.

Frankly it's kind of tragic that someone so intelligent has managed to ruin their life like this at the age of 25. It wouldn't surprise me if they were familial issues contributing as well. This would not have gotten this far if her mother had spoken up way earlier.

Yeah. I don't have any problem believing there are few (if any) healthy people in this story. That includes the Penn profs who have been supporting her, as much as the mother.

I don't think we need to demonize someone to acknowledge that they did not qualify for a position that they achieved by untruthful means. You don't even have to "prove" it was deliberate to acknowledge that. I do think some posters here elide the two -- as if saying she shouldn't have X means you are either demonizing her, or that you are saying she was evil. But I think they think eliding it makes their argument stronger, somehow.

Nope. Just not qualified for it, by the specific qualifications of entry.

Except she was. By Penn and Questbridge’s very definitions. There’s no disputing that.

Why was it that the Rhodes committee asked her to withdraw her application, again?

So you agree she met the definition at Penn? The place she is suing for wrongfully withholding her MSW?

She’s lucky Penn didn’t claw back the bachelor’s too and sue her for all the aid she got.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is buying this, you can stop spamming the forum. The rich spoiled layabout needs to get off Twitter and DCUM and go get a real job. Imagine the gall to pretend to be poor kid and you’ve never worked a day in your life.

Yes, because graduating with honors and supporting yourself through college isn't work?

Turns out that scared teenager writing in her journal was 100% right. People will often side with the abusers.

You are a broken record circling back to fake inflated grades. Nobody cares about a rich spoiled brat’s As and Bs at a ritzy day school or As and Bs in a soft major at Penn CAS. Or the soft master’s. No mention of standardized test scores because they are dire, which exposes her for the midwit leech she is.

WTF is wrong with you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please run that long post through some identification software and compare it to some of Mackenzie's previous writing?

Hey loser, you do it. This story reminds me of Monica Lewinsky. Essentially a kid held to a higher standard than the adults and institutions around her. And we know how well that story aged. It’s widely accepted now that Lewinsky was the victim of a higher coordinated bully campaign. Shameful. And that goes to those posting here relentlessly trying to deflect blame away from where it is deserved—her diabolical mother, her mother’s abusive boyfriend, the legal system, UPenn.

I'm the pp who said that I don't think Mackenzie deserves all the blame. She had a long psychiatric hospitalization. She definitely came from a dysfunctional family.
This doesn't excuse her from manipulating the system, but it doesn't mean that she was the victim in every possible way imaginable either.

The real truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

DP. Oh, agreed.

And I also don't want someone with that history -- and who is still doubling down and attacking others -- getting any support for moving into politics or being licensed to work over vulnerable people. She needs support for dealing with her history and damage. Her mother may well need to address her own issues, too.

But in no way does any of this make her either ready or somehow deserving of power or responsibility. She needs help.

She definitely needs help. Our society tends to like to paint people as angels or monsters. She can be sick and need kindness, not necessarily for the reasons she claims to need them, but for other reasons.

Frankly it's kind of tragic that someone so intelligent has managed to ruin their life like this at the age of 25. It wouldn't surprise me if they were familial issues contributing as well. This would not have gotten this far if her mother had spoken up way earlier.

Yeah. I don't have any problem believing there are few (if any) healthy people in this story. That includes the Penn profs who have been supporting her, as much as the mother.

I don't think we need to demonize someone to acknowledge that they did not qualify for a position that they achieved by untruthful means. You don't even have to "prove" it was deliberate to acknowledge that. I do think some posters here elide the two -- as if saying she shouldn't have X means you are either demonizing her, or that you are saying she was evil. But I think they think eliding it makes their argument stronger, somehow.

Nope. Just not qualified for it, by the specific qualifications of entry.

Except she was. By Penn and Questbridge’s very definitions. There’s no disputing that.

Why was it that the Rhodes committee asked her to withdraw her application, again?

So you agree she met the definition at Penn? The place she is suing for wrongfully withholding her MSW?

Noooo ... you (or someone) jumped to Penn, which is not what I had said. I had made a general claim, not specific. But I'm not so sure the essay for her Penn application wasn't embellished on a day she felt "a little bit melodramatic." I bet it can get sorted out in detail in the courts.

Now, back to the question you were evading response to -- Why was it that the Rhodes committee asked her to withdraw her application, again? TIA.

[Anonymous]

I “feel” first generation. I “feel” poor. Yes, I was a rich spoiled private school lifer but my doctor mom was mean and now I “feel” working class. Surprised Becky she doesn’t “feel” Native American for good measure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is buying this, you can stop spamming the forum. The rich spoiled layabout needs to get off Twitter and DCUM and go get a real job. Imagine the gall to pretend to be poor kid and you’ve never worked a day in your life.

Yes, because graduating with honors and supporting yourself through college isn't work?

Turns out that scared teenager writing in her journal was 100% right. People will often side with the abusers.

You are a broken record circling back to fake inflated grades. Nobody cares about a rich spoiled brat’s As and Bs at a ritzy day school or As and Bs in a soft major at Penn CAS. Or the soft master’s. No mention of standardized test scores because they are dire, which exposes her for the midwit leech she is.

WTF is wrong with you?

"Why do you care so much?" Again, the closed circle of response.

You are not allowed to question the story of Mackenzie Fierceton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is buying this, you can stop spamming the forum. The rich spoiled layabout needs to get off Twitter and DCUM and go get a real job. Imagine the gall to pretend to be poor kid and you’ve never worked a day in your life.

Yes, because graduating with honors and supporting yourself through college isn't work?

Turns out that scared teenager writing in her journal was 100% right. People will often side with the abusers.

You are a broken record circling back to fake inflated grades. Nobody cares about a rich spoiled brat’s As and Bs at a ritzy day school or As and Bs in a soft major at Penn CAS. Or the soft master’s. No mention of standardized test scores because they are dire, which exposes her for the midwit leech she is.

WTF is wrong with you?

Why is it so hard to reveal ACT/SAT or GRE/GMAT scores? She’s an open book right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She should not be demonized. She is a victim here, although I also believe she engaged in fraud. Victims can engage in fraud; it doesn’t take away from the abuse she suffered, and I believe she truly did suffer at least some abuse. The gum story seems ludicrous, but I also don’t believe the facts of the hospital stats are what she claims based on some inconsistencies.

But it does really bother me that if she were a young Black man or Latino man (or boy, since many of you infantilize her), she wouldn’t be getting fawning articles in major media or vociferous defenders or (admittedly creepy) professors going out of their way to help the kid. She is benefiting from systemic racism and specifically the treatment of pretty young white women. That aspect is really terrible, and I think fury about that is part of the anger people see directed to her.

Bingo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please run that long post through some identification software and compare it to some of Mackenzie's previous writing?

Hey loser, you do it. This story reminds me of Monica Lewinsky. Essentially a kid held to a higher standard than the adults and institutions around her. And we know how well that story aged. It’s widely accepted now that Lewinsky was the victim of a higher coordinated bully campaign. Shameful. And that goes to those posting here relentlessly trying to deflect blame away from where it is deserved—her diabolical mother, her mother’s abusive boyfriend, the legal system, UPenn.

I'm the pp who said that I don't think Mackenzie deserves all the blame. She had a long psychiatric hospitalization. She definitely came from a dysfunctional family.
This doesn't excuse her from manipulating the system, but it doesn't mean that she was the victim in every possible way imaginable either.

The real truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

DP. Oh, agreed.

And I also don't want someone with that history -- and who is still doubling down and attacking others -- getting any support for moving into politics or being licensed to work over vulnerable people. She needs support for dealing with her history and damage. Her mother may well need to address her own issues, too.

But in no way does any of this make her either ready or somehow deserving of power or responsibility. She needs help.

She definitely needs help. Our society tends to like to paint people as angels or monsters. She can be sick and need kindness, not necessarily for the reasons she claims to need them, but for other reasons.

Frankly it's kind of tragic that someone so intelligent has managed to ruin their life like this at the age of 25. It wouldn't surprise me if they were familial issues contributing as well. This would not have gotten this far if her mother had spoken up way earlier.

Yeah. I don't have any problem believing there are few (if any) healthy people in this story. That includes the Penn profs who have been supporting her, as much as the mother.

I don't think we need to demonize someone to acknowledge that they did not qualify for a position that they achieved by untruthful means. You don't even have to "prove" it was deliberate to acknowledge that. I do think some posters here elide the two -- as if saying she shouldn't have X means you are either demonizing her, or that you are saying she was evil. But I think they think eliding it makes their argument stronger, somehow.

Nope. Just not qualified for it, by the specific qualifications of entry.

Except she was. By Penn and Questbridge’s very definitions. There’s no disputing that.

Why was it that the Rhodes committee asked her to withdraw her application, again?

So you agree she met the definition at Penn? The place she is suing for wrongfully withholding her MSW?

Noooo ... you (or someone) jumped to Penn, which is not what I had said. I had made a general claim, not specific. But I'm not so sure the essay for her Penn application wasn't embellished on a day she felt "a little bit melodramatic." I bet it can get sorted out in detail in the courts.

Now, back to the question you were evading response to -- Why was it that the Rhodes committee asked her to withdraw her application, again? TIA.

The lawsuit is against and about Penn. That is the topic here. Is she suing the trustees for the Rhodes Scholar program?