Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. That's my post. I don't condone being unethical but we are surrounded by examples of this kind of behavior. I don't think the student is a victim. I really don't. Tacky, cheating relationships are age independent. The dean also had terrible judgement. Feel free to roll your bus over both of them.

Do you believe in anti-fraternization policies, whether or not Stanford had one formally in place at the time? Why do you think such policies exist?

I support anti-fraternization policies in general but I also think they have evolved as we've shifted the age of consent up, women have entered universities en masse, etc. I believe there are logical legal reasons for setting age rules but I also know from experience that people who are ethically challenged at 16 remain so at 18, 21, 24. I also have zero sympathy for Jill Ciment (as covered in another thread).

I'm going by the representation in the younger person's writing that it was believed by both that the relationship was scandalous but not forbidden by policy. Their relationship was titillating and consensual. And stupid.

I really don't like that the younger person wrote it up for clicks. I get when victims need to reveal their victimization to recover or win support for their struggle. But the piece was more of a tell all for attention in my opinion. Embarrassing for both.

I’m glad that she exposed JLH as a fraud.

That woman has milked the parenting advice circuit and made a ton of money off of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They handled that in a very mature manner.

Right, this type of thing had gone on since time immemorial in academia. It sounds like when the affair I occurred , the student was 22 and the school had no policy against it.

I was asked out by my professor at the U of Michigan, in grad school. And when I was at Johns Hopkins, a married department chair started an affair with a student he was supervising . It was wrong, but absolutely known by the whole department.

I am happy that such situations have been officially banned now, in some universities . But that is a recent development and people are naive if they did know how common (and condoned) this has been historically.

(For shocked posters, read up on Emmanuel Macron’s marriage!)

Yes, it was against stated policy for undergrads, which is what this student was.

Look at the dates of when that policy was passed, and when the affair occurred. I suspect it was in response to this scandal.

Yes, the policy change was in direct response to the abusive relationship.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 22 year old can vote, die in a war, rent a car. They are old enough to make adult decisions. To say otherwise is to infantilize them. So this relationship does not seem problematic to me.

Agree. Let adults do what they want. There are imbalances of power EVERYWHERE.

I am positive that if this was a straight relationship between a white male dean twice her age and a young student, the people defending this would be calling for the head of the dean.

I would feel the same way if it were a white male dean. This relationship should not have started and it was the Dean's responsibility to halt that....both as the "adult with power" and for the professionalism/integrity required of a Dean. But given the relationship that ensued and the student ending it on their own with positive feelings of the relationship no complaints - I still would not agree with the parents reframing her relationship in the way that they did. They infused a lot of psychological damage and doubt. I think the Dean acted fully inappropriately but I think they both had genuine positive relationship (that's true whether the Dean was a white male or a woman of color).

Those of you continuing to blame the parents for "reframing the relationship" in ways that affected the student's thinking:

Are you also the poster(s) who insist that the student was a full adult with agency, and therefore able to make her own choices, etc., so this relationship was fine?

Because you can't really have it both ways. "She is an adult" who knew what she was doing and chose it, does not really fit with "Her parents twisted the relationship" and she, weak-minded, caved to what mom and dad brainwashed her into believing. If you hold both those positions and don't see the hypocrisy, well, look again.

corrections -

I am the only person mentioning the parents reframing the relationship and harming the daughter's mental health. I am not the person saying she was an adult so it's all fine and no problem. You can re-read all my posts that say the Dean was wrong in this and the relationship should not have happened and it was her responsibility to hold back. I do think their relationship was genuine and I think you're naive to believe that a young adult could have a positive relationship (not just a power imbalance like this one) who is adult enough to have a relationship would still not be affected by negative parental opinion on the former partner/relationship or that it wouldn't mess with a daughter's confidence and self worth. I know people who are far into adulthood whose parents opinions mess with their minds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 22 year old can vote, die in a war, rent a car. They are old enough to make adult decisions. To say otherwise is to infantilize them. So this relationship does not seem problematic to me.

Agree. Let adults do what they want. There are imbalances of power EVERYWHERE.

I am positive that if this was a straight relationship between a white male dean twice her age and a young student, the people defending this would be calling for the head of the dean.

I would feel the same way if it were a white male dean. This relationship should not have started and it was the Dean's responsibility to halt that....both as the "adult with power" and for the professionalism/integrity required of a Dean. But given the relationship that ensued and the student ending it on their own with positive feelings of the relationship no complaints - I still would not agree with the parents reframing her relationship in the way that they did. They infused a lot of psychological damage and doubt. I think the Dean acted fully inappropriately but I think they both had genuine positive relationship (that's true whether the Dean was a white male or a woman of color).

Those of you continuing to blame the parents for "reframing the relationship" in ways that affected the student's thinking:

Are you also the poster(s) who insist that the student was a full adult with agency, and therefore able to make her own choices, etc., so this relationship was fine?

Because you can't really have it both ways. "She is an adult" who knew what she was doing and chose it, does not really fit with "Her parents twisted the relationship" and she, weak-minded, caved to what mom and dad brainwashed her into believing. If you hold both those positions and don't see the hypocrisy, well, look again.

I am the only person mentioning the parents reframing the relationship and harming the daughter's mental health. I am not the person saying she was an adult so it's all fine and no problem. You can re-read all my posts that say the Dean was wrong in this and the relationship should not have happened and it was her responsibility to hold back. I do think their relationship was genuine and I think you're naive to think that a young adult could have a positive relationship (or any kind) that parental opinion on the former partner could mess with a daughter's confidence and self worth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. That's my post. I don't condone being unethical but we are surrounded by examples of this kind of behavior. I don't think the student is a victim. I really don't. Tacky, cheating relationships are age independent. The dean also had terrible judgement. Feel free to roll your bus over both of them.

Do you believe in anti-fraternization policies, whether or not Stanford had one formally in place at the time? Why do you think such policies exist?

I support anti-fraternization policies in general but I also think they have evolved as we've shifted the age of consent up, women have entered universities en masse, etc. I believe there are logical legal reasons for setting age rules but I also know from experience that people who are ethically challenged at 16 remain so at 18, 21, 24. I also have zero sympathy for Jill Ciment (as covered in another thread).

I'm going by the representation in the younger person's writing that it was believed by both that the relationship was scandalous but not forbidden by policy. Their relationship was titillating and consensual. And stupid.

I really don't like that the younger person wrote it up for clicks. I get when victims need to reveal their victimization to recover or win support for their struggle. But the piece was more of a tell all for attention in my opinion. Embarrassing for both.

Anonymous wrote:PP. That's my post. I don't condone being unethical but we are surrounded by examples of this kind of behavior. I don't think the student is a victim. I really don't. Tacky, cheating relationships are age independent. The dean also had terrible judgement. Feel free to roll your bus over both of them.

Do you believe in anti-fraternization policies, whether or not Stanford had one formally in place at the time? Why do you think such policies exist?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


After reading the essay, it seems like two equally awful people found each other. This is what compelled the author of the essay to confess to her long-term boyfriend that she was cheating on him with the dean- " I started to imagine a life with him, and I fantasized about the lifestyle afforded by someone with his job in tech...Thinking my confession would lead to a swell of strings in a climactic scene of profound connection and self-actualization, I shared my secret...He sobbed and wouldn’t touch me."

+1 nothing illegal, just unethical. Unfortunate the younger is trying to get more attention for her writing by spilling her guts.

So... "just" unethical is fine?

And another example here of throwing the then-student under the bus and making her a villain, while letting the former dean off the hook as "just" unethical.

PP. That's my post. I don't condone being unethical but we are surrounded by examples of this kind of behavior. I don't think the student is a victim. I really don't. Tacky, cheating relationships are age independent. The dean also had terrible judgement. Feel free to roll your bus over both of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They handled that in a very mature manner.

Right, this type of thing had gone on since time immemorial in academia. It sounds like when the affair I occurred , the student was 22 and the school had no policy against it.

I was asked out by my professor at the U of Michigan, in grad school. And when I was at Johns Hopkins, a married department chair started an affair with a student he was supervising . It was wrong, but absolutely known by the whole department.

I am happy that such situations have been officially banned now, in some universities . But that is a recent development and people are naive if they did know how common (and condoned) this has been historically.

(For shocked posters, read up on Emmanuel Macron’s marriage!)

It’s discouraged but I don’t think it’s universally banned nor should it be. Some of these relationships end happily in long term relationships. As long as the dynamic is not coercive and there is no harassment, I don’t see the problem. It seems wrong to dictate to grown adults who they can and can’t fall in love with.

Okay Woody Allen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They handled that in a very mature manner.

Right, this type of thing had gone on since time immemorial in academia. It sounds like when the affair I occurred , the student was 22 and the school had no policy against it.

I was asked out by my professor at the U of Michigan, in grad school. And when I was at Johns Hopkins, a married department chair started an affair with a student he was supervising . It was wrong, but absolutely known by the whole department.

I am happy that such situations have been officially banned now, in some universities . But that is a recent development and people are naive if they did know how common (and condoned) this has been historically.

(For shocked posters, read up on Emmanuel Macron’s marriage!)

Yes, it was against stated policy for undergrads, which is what this student was.

Look at the dates of when that policy was passed, and when the affair occurred. I suspect it was in response to this scandal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused a professor and a student had sex?

And what else?

I think the main point here which people are afraid to name is the dean is not even slightly hot.

You are an oblivious idiot. (And I wish good luck to your spouse, because there will come a time when they are “not even slightly hot,” and it sounds like you will then have no inclination to stay with them.

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused a professor and a student had sex?

And what else?

I think the main point here which people are afraid to name is the dean is not even slightly hot.

Anonymous wrote:It's abuse of power and it extends beyond the affair. I don't understand people who hand waive this behavior away like it's no big deal.

Yeah, it's abuse of power even absent an age difference.

I think the relationship was yuck and she resigned. So .. whatever.

But her career is basically as a Ted-talking, advice-giving person of authority whose special area of authority centers on how to better deal with older children/young adults and improve on the parent behavior she saw while at Stanford.

She should also resign from *that* position.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 22 year old can vote, die in a war, rent a car. They are old enough to make adult decisions. To say otherwise is to infantilize them. So this relationship does not seem problematic to me.

Agree. Let adults do what they want. There are imbalances of power EVERYWHERE.

I am positive that if this was a straight relationship between a white male dean twice her age and a young student, the people defending this would be calling for the head of the dean.

I would feel the same way if it were a white male dean. This relationship should not have started and it was the Dean's responsibility to halt that....both as the "adult with power" and for the professionalism/integrity required of a Dean. But given the relationship that ensued and the student ending it on their own with positive feelings of the relationship no complaints - I still would not agree with the parents reframing her relationship in the way that they did. They infused a lot of psychological damage and doubt. I think the Dean acted fully inappropriately but I think they both had genuine positive relationship (that's true whether the Dean was a white male or a woman of color).

Those of you continuing to blame the parents for "reframing the relationship" in ways that affected the student's thinking:

Are you also the poster(s) who insist that the student was a full adult with agency, and therefore able to make her own choices, etc., so this relationship was fine?

Because you can't really have it both ways. "She is an adult" who knew what she was doing and chose it, does not really fit with "Her parents twisted the relationship" and she, weak-minded, caved to what mom and dad brainwashed her into believing. If you hold both those positions and don't see the hypocrisy, well, look again.

Anonymous wrote:She resigned only after the student’s parents informed Stanford about what happened. And to try to cover it up and keep it quiet, she resigned rather than be terminated.

She is a thoroughly unethical leader.

+1 and not only that but she claimed a different reason for leaving (pursuing an mfa) and then the student watched as the dean was celebrated and congratulated for this "career choice" by a community that was apparently unaware (except within the dean's office) that she'd been carrying on this illicit affair with a student.

I don't think what she did is illegal but it did violate Stanford policy and yes "unethical leader" is the right phrase.

The problem with relationships like this is that not only does it raise questions about the power dynamic between the dean and the student (although that matters) but it also raises questions about the schools environment and whether OTHER students are treated fairly or receive the same opportunities. In my experience in a similar environment the "leader" who does this also engages in lots of favoritism focused on the people with whom they are romantically involved (and likewise might engage in vengeful politics against people who decline sexual advances or against former lovers). It all comes down to the fact that when a person wields a large amount of control and authority in an organization (as a dean does as a university) it is deeply unethical for them to engage in covert romantic relationships with some individuals in the organizations. It raises questions about their judgment and the fairness of their decisions as well whether the organization is operating as it is intended or is being twisted to serve the private goals of the person in charge.

It's abuse of power and it extends beyond the affair. I don't understand people who hand waive this behavior away like it's no big deal.