Saturday, March 22, 2014

That Anita Hill Doc and UC -and what else happened this week...

Daily Cal coverage of the: documentary on UC Pres. Napolitano's then-client Anita Hill (Chas. Ogletree's client,too) -the documentary is on the SCOTUS Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, aftermath, and present day gender equity issues. It includes reference to Hill's short stint at Cal.

The trailer here:


and a NYT piece on it that includes: "Conservative state lawmakers wanted her fired; fortunately, she had tenure. Even years later, she felt “a discomfort,” she said. One dean confided that he had tired of hearing colleagues at other schools remark, “Isn’t that where Anita Hill is?”

__
So let's do mini-round-up-mash-up of recent Title IX pieces perused...
this AP piece from a week ago:
Felch's Dec. 7 article said Occidental College didn't disclose 27 alleged sex assaults in 2012, as it should have under a federal law requiring campuses to publish serious crime reports on or near campus. The Times said a review found that the incidents did not meet the law's disclosure requirements for a variety of reasons. The error was repeated in two subsequent stories, the Times said.

Go to this LAT for more clarity: in the Editor's note UPDATE!: Go to The Wrap coverage on this- important questions raised about the editors and also points out the relationships charts issues sometimes part of higher education coverage.

Should remember Felch also worked on: this story and wrote: Chasing Aphrodite- good read.

The errors only point to one aspect of the entire story. A fuller reminder from NYT- here.

Occidental is particularly interesting to watch b/c of followup like: this piece that shares some prof experiences, fallout.
__
And: this read (by a prof) touches down in different parts of the country and different Title IX experiences over two decades, see Ms.Mag: The Rusty Taste of Shame
Sexual violence followed me to my first faculty position at the University of Pittsburgh, where I took a job in a department that hadn’t yet tenured a woman. I was the second woman to be awarded tenure; the first quit her job shortly after being tenured because, as she tearfully told me in her office one afternoon, the climate was just too toxic. Three faculty members were having sex with graduate students in the department. I complained about the climate these relationships were creating, only to be told by one faculty member, “We can’t help who we fall in love with.” The remaining two women faculty members were in and out of senior administrators’ offices for over a year before going public with our complaints during an external review of the department. When one of the external reviewers wrote in her report that the “climate was dangerous for female graduate students,” the university responded by investigating the women who had complained. Along with the other remaining woman in the department, I left at the end of spring semester, fleeing rather than fighting for a Title IX lawsuit, at a point when lawyers advised us it was an uphill battle.
__
Do you understand what was communicated in this paragraph in this old CHE commentary?:

But they are forgetting that many victims want to fall through the cracks, at least initially. Title IX is intended to empower victims, not make them into observers who merely watch from the sidelines as administrators get carried away with resolving complaints that the victims never made.


huh?,
'they are forgetting that many victims want to fall through the cracks, at least initially.'
huh?!

That led to goin' to that author's association website- more confused by messages there, the site describes the profession -for which they have created an association- like this:
Title IX compliance is all over the map. Nearly 30 years after the Department of Education mandated that school districts and colleges designate Title IX Coordinators, we’re still not entirely sure what the appropriate role, functions and expectations of Coordinators are.

-comforting right?! How do you train for that work with that job description?

(Looked at the training sessions they hold in AZ and this interesting message they posted at the bottom of that page:

As you may know, last night Arizona Governor Jan Brewer vetoed the anti-gay discrimination bill passed by the Arizona legislature. We were watching that decision with our breath held because we planned our next Certification event over six months ago to be in Phoenix this coming September, not knowing they were about to take another dip in the deep end of the legislative crazy pool. Despite the financial hit to ATIXA, we were prepared to cancel the event to protest this deplorable discrimination. We needed to know whether to cancel our Phoenix event or open it for registration, but held off on deciding until Brewer acted. Last night, we decided to move forward despite torn feelings about hosting an anti-discrimination training in Arizona, given that the legislature would even pass such an offensive act. Brewer did the right thing to veto it, and in part, our decision to proceed with the conference is a thank you to the Arizona (and especially Phoenix) business community that lobbied heavily and in fact threatened Brewer with dire business consequences if she signed the law. While those businesses were protecting their financial interests, they were also making a statement that all customers are welcome and wanted in Arizona. ATIXA is one of those customers, and so will you be, if you attend. During the Arizona event, ATIXA will introduce and publicize a statement condemning the Arizona legislature for its bigotry, and asking that Arizona add sexual orientation and gender-identity to its state-protected classes. We know that some of you will not feel comfortable coming to Phoenix, and we respect and understand that. We hope that you will join us in Phoenix and add your voices of protest to ours. We won’t ever consider an Arizona location again until they change their laws. Not doing the wrong thing is not the same as doing the right thing.

--Six months ago...wonder what former AZ Gov. Napolitano can make of that statement.

While we're at it see this WSJ on 'lower tiered parts of UC' : "Prop. 209 has shown that there are other ways to increase black and Hispanic enrollment than racial preferences. For instance, the University of California grants the top 9% of students in each high-school class automatic admission, though not necessarily to their first school choice. Blacks and Hispanics are now more likely to enroll at lower-tier campuses, but they graduate at higher rates."

and OC Register with this: “I remember how there was a myth even as I was applying to college that my ethnicity would disadvantage me in getting into UC,” said Chen, a 22-year-old who serves on the board of UCI’s Asian Pacific Student Association.)
__
Maybe other kinds of training etc. need to be created in California for California-- and, maybe there could be a Vital Dialogue on it (deadline to apply for grants March 31?, 2014)-- talks, trainings, lectures, townhalls on Title IX, (Yudof should have left more than six figures) -- because it looks like layers and layers of confusion around tackling the issue...to the detriment of all.

Or, maybe a Title IX 'compact at Chez Panisse' could be created... if that's the way things are really done.
__
see:
The full Rand Paul thing here (he mentions US Senator Bernie Sanders, VT at the beginning, it would be good to see Sanders give a talk at Cal as well -- equal time.):

__
Hardball's Chris Matthews sometimes does university and college based broadcasts for his show during election years, but Hardball has not held one at Cal (or UC?), yet. Fun to listen to him talk about what he thinks UC Berkeley 'was' and might 'be' in the present day, and wonder what the Paul visits (remember Doe Library?) might or might not portend- re: Berkeley and Millenials. Maybe he should pay a visit, talk to students- right? He also brings up Lewinsky- and raises a point in the video clip that begs the question: if you bring up Lewinsky - is it the same as bringing up Anita Hill?
Just to take his point further-- is it appropriate/fair game/normal nat'l politics to make it an issue to be addressed in any future potential Hillary campaign? And, if Hill has to answer for Bill then does Rand have to answer for Ron?

__
This story of a Cal prof suicide resulting in potential hazard concerns-- it broke during the regents' sessions. Is there a need for services for emeriti profs? What about UC's female emeriti faculty specifically, how are they doing as a group?
__
This latest on the UNC whistle-blower retaliation?, academic fraud?, athlete literacy, etc.
__
On the UC side of important athletics stories, there's the weddings and the linemen
__
Other miscellaneous headaches:
The seismic headache and Mine Shaft History on Cal campus more on that here.
and
A headache for/via UCSF...

And, once again, the regents on med centers and salaries, the regents on potential tuition increases soon, the regents on campus climate report.

The President of the UC Regents- Gov. Brown- gets this response on controversial new CA water moves: "You've launched your war; we'll fight the battle," said Rep. John Garamendi, D-Fairfield. and dealing with this revelation and the fracking opposition and that big housing story last week and the comments on pot heads 'old folks' to try to advance the choo-choo, ugh. Looks like he wants to accomplish 'big, new' things as the legacy - but maybe 'fix existing' things is the legacy folks want most?
__
Now, Slate: "Lipstick and Nail Files Won’t Draw Women Into Science"

- it never ends.

No comments:

Post a Comment