Yale’s Belated Unease: University Issues “Disclaimer” Regarding Psychiatrist’s Racist and Violent Diatribe

We recently discussed the racist and violent remarks of New York psychiatrist Aruna Khilanani, who was featured by Yale Medical School. Khilanani launched into a tirade against white people and delivered such remarks as how she often thought of “unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way.” After weeks of intense criticism, Yale has added a disclaimer to the video.

In the speech, Khilanani repeatedly denounced white people as a race: “This is the cost of talking to white people at all — the cost of your own life, as they suck you dry… There are no good apples out there. White people make my blood boil.” She discussed how she dreams of killing white people:

“I systematically white-ghosted most of my white friends, and I got rid of the couple white BIPOCs [Black and Indigenous people and people of color] that snuck in my crew, too. … I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step, like I did the world a favor.”

The addition of a disclaimer was rather belated since Yale officials were fully aware of the content of the video and seem to have tried to restrict access. Indeed, Khilanani previously objected to the failure to publicly release her remarks.

Yale Child Study Center Director of Medical Studies Dr. Andres Martin was listed as “course director” for the talk. Indeed, Martin and others were fully aware of the content since April 6 and saw no need for a disclaimer. Moreover, Khilanani did not hide the thrust of her remarks in the title: “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind.”  It was a particularly glaring title for remarks to Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center.

Khilanani later mocked Yale for pretending to suddenly discover the content of her remarks. She told the Times “They knew the topic, they knew the title, they knew the speaker.” She further insisted that she was “speaking metaphorically about my own anger was a method for people to reflect on negative feelings. To normalize negative feelings. Because if you don’t, it will turn into a violent action.”

Now, after widespread condemnation, Yale has added this disclaimer:

“This video contains profanity and imagery of violence. Yale School of Medicine expects the members of our community to speak respectfully to one another and to avoid the use of profanity as a matter of professionalism and acknowledgment of our common humanity. Yale School of Medicine does not condone imagery of violence or racism against any group.”

The fact is that most such extremist comments are often tolerated (even celebrated) on the left in criticism of whites, males, conservatives, libertarians, or the Republican party.  The problem is not that extreme views are allowed on campuses but the sharply different response to such comments from the left as opposed to the right. I have defended faculty who have made similarly disturbing comments denouncing policecalling for Republicans to suffer,  strangling police officerscelebrating the death of conservativescalling for the killing of Trump supporters, “detonating and gassing white people,” supporting the murder of conservative protesters and other outrageous statements.

Universities have been far more aggressive in sanctioning comments from the right. A conservative North Carolina professor  faced calls for termination over controversial tweets and was pushed to retire. Dr. Mike Adams, a professor of sociology and criminology, had long been a lightning rod of controversy. In 2014, we discussed his prevailing in a lawsuit that alleged discrimination due to his conservative views.  He was then targeted again after an inflammatory tweet calling North Carolina a “slave state.”  That led to his being pressured to resign with a settlement. He then committed suicide.

The media shows the same bias. This week I noted, on the anniversary of the Cotton controversy at the New York Times, that the newspaper recently published a professor who defended the murder of conservative protesters. It previously ran a column by “Beijing’s enforcer” in the crackdown on democracy protesters in Hong Kong.

Yale’s disclaimer is belated but welcomed. However, it does not address the growing view of intolerance on our campuses.  It took weeks to get Yale to even disassociate itself from these remarks after promoting Khilanani. Such a delay would never have occurred with a speaker holding opposing views because that person would never have been given an opportunity to speak at Yale. Imagine what would have occurred if you inserted any other race into these remarks in declaring “This is the cost of talking to [Black or Brown] people at all — the cost of your own life, as they suck you dry… There are no good apples out there. [Black or Brown] people make my blood boil.”  We would have all denounced the remarks as racist and inflammatory.  Yale would not have disclaimed them but removed them and ordered a full and expedited investigation.

As I stated before, I believe that there is a value to having such speakers on campus. The problem is the demonstrably different treatment given speakers based on their viewpoints.


57 thoughts on “Yale’s Belated Unease: University Issues “Disclaimer” Regarding Psychiatrist’s Racist and Violent Diatribe”

  1. People openly expressing murderous thoughts have been known to act on them.

    I would not feel safe around this pathological racist.

    Odd that she seems unaware that as a Hindu she is part of a subset of the Caucasian race. She looks white. Maybe hating whites and looking in the mirror is too much dissonance for her mental stability.

    1. Hinduism is a religion, not an ethnic group. Why do you assume you know her religious beliefs? FWIW, not all Hindus are Caucasian.

      1. Indians who identify as Hindus, particularly upper class people, have genetic sources from Steppe peoples. In males they are often identified by Haplogroup R1a and, in the West, R1b. That is why the ancient Hindu gods have so much in common with the gods of Greece, Rome and Northern Europe and that is why spoken Hindi is an Indo-European language as are most of the languages of Europe, Iran, and many other places. I have no idea what her beliefs are but from her appearance and origin and language I can make a very good guess as to her genetic inheritance. She has more in common with Vilkings than with typical NBA players.

        1. Her parents immigrated from Pakistan, not India. Pakistan is majority Muslim, not Hindu.

          1. Same people, though. Genetics, not religion, determine race. Haplogroup R1a. She is still closer to Vikings than NBA players and I think she would be insulted to be called n-word black. Even Kamala is beginning to shift to being Indian now that she has sucked all she can out the the black card or spout, or whatever.

            1. “Genetics, not religion, determine race.”

              Duh. You’re the one who brought religion into it and assumed she was Hindu. If you make a false assumption, there’s a good chance that I’ll point it out.

              You are guessing her genetics. R1a is not the only haplogroup found in Pakistan.

              1. Sometimes, often, people are what they look like. She looks Indo-European from that region. Until she does a Rachel Dolezal that is what I will assume.

                But whatever her skin color, her soul is black.

          2. You really shouldn’t get into these conversations with your sophomoric grasp of seemingly . . . everything.

            Muslim and Hindu are not races or ethnicities. Prior to the partition, they were ALL Indian – Muslim, Hindu, and Sikh alike. A great many people in Pakistan are of ethnic Indian heritage. Believe it or not, there is great diversity *within* ethnic groups, they do not all sleep in bunkbeds together at night down at the Muslim or Hindu club.

            The modern progressive notion of cultural understanding was almost certainly conceived by a five year-old, and this seems to be a problem that mainly only afflicts white, American Democrats.

  2. It’s too late. Yale will forever be connected to that insanity and will bear the brunt of shame and ridicule when she actually carries out her evil thoughts.

    1. Thoughts aren’t behavior.

      For example, people with suicidal ideation often never act on it.

      1. Thoughts are the prerequisites to behavior and all too often people act on those thoughts. Planting the seeds of criminal thoughts into the minds of some who are so inclined is unconscionable.

        1. Lots of people talk about criminal behavior. Lots of movies and TV shows portray criminal behavior. Each person decides for themselves whether they think that’s “unconscionable.”

          1. It’s been proven that those media sources you mentioned do influence behavior by modeling it. Each person decides but if you insert these things their minds they are more prone to act it out. Yes y appear to think that’s just fine. My question is, why would anyone want to encourage such behavior when there’s a choice of doing so or refraining from it?

            1. Ask the people in Hollywood why they do it. My guess is that an honest answer is: money. They reach a whole lot more people than she has.

              1. Hollywood generally does reach more people than the professor but her commentary has gone quite viral so that’s not a good thing.

          2. Funny then, how the left “claims” Trump is responsible for 1/6/21 with HIS words (none as deliberately hateful or inciteful as the Yale RACIST) but protect the hideous spewing from lefties who call for death and spew RACISM all the time.

  3. Perhaps mostly Yale is nonplussed to have the depth of its rot exposed.

  4. After studying the results of some focus group sessions and consulting with a couple of PR professionals, we of the Yale community have decided to express our strong disapproval of violent racism.

  5. I really hate the word ‘normalize’. It smacks of an attempt to make normal something that maybe shouldn’t be, like rationalizing doing something you oughtn’t do.

  6. I recently finished “The Crisis, The President, The Prophet, and the Shah- 1979 and the coming of militant Islam” by David Harris. The anger expressed by Dr. Khilanani reminds me of the disdain many students exhibited towards the hostages back in the day.

    I would be interested in knowing if Dr. Khilanani would of supported the Iranian Foreign Ministers efforts to end the crisis or would she of called Ghotbzadeh a “charlatan”- page 290- as many of the mullah did. His reputation took a major hit in any case as his actions were deemed deceptive which likely caused him a few votes in the presidential election.

  7. What a pathetic snivelfest.
    Yale sounds like they have the same attitude the Germans who facilitated and worked to support the death camps had.
    “Golly gee, we really didn’t do any actual rounding up and killing so nothing’s really our fault.”
    Come on Yale, grow some.
    Choose and own your choice.
    Either you’re on board or you’re not with the direction this country is deliberately being taken in.

  8. “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind.”
    Does this not sound like Nazi propaganda? Exchange White for Jew and it could have come straight from Goebbels’ office. I used to think it was hyperbole to say life in America was starting to feel like 1930s Germany, but I don’t believe it is any longer. Do remember that communists and fascists are simply two different sides of the same coin.

    From Unser Wille und Weg (The Nazi Party monthly for propagandists) praising the vile movie “The Eternal Jew” in 1940.

    “…we have broken their power over us. We are the initiators of the fight against world Jewry, which now directs its hate, its brutal greed and destructive will toward us. We must win this battle for ourselves…

    Again. Exchange the word “Jewry” for “white race” and this could easily have been written by some of today’s racists against whites. And, quite similar to the Germans, the passivity and acceptance of violence against whites in America will continue to drive the bus off the cliff. Very dangerous times.

    1. Take a knee, beg, good boy, girl, whatever.

      Yes, where once there were allegations of “Jew privilege”, NOW, there is “White privilege” in service to social progress. Critical Racists’ Theory presumes diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment), not limited to racism, sexism, ageism. Surely, evidence of a depraved religion and state of mind.

  9. Yale should lose it’s accreditation as an institution of high learning. If this was Liberty University and it gave a nut case a platform to say he/she wanted to kill all BLM followers, you would agree.. The Left would be saying off with their heads.

    “Yale School of Medicine does not condone imagery of violence or racism against any group.” but If you are knowing giving a person a platform to sprue hatred then you are condoning it and you are an institution of lower learning.

  10. “imagery of violence” — Typical academese.

    In plain English: “The speaker broadcasts her genocidal fantasies.”

    And if Yale had courage:

    “In the language of her own profession — She’s psychotic.

    “P.S. We denounce ethnic cleansing. The irrational fool who invited her has been fired.”

  11. Ahhh, Yale. My former employer. LOL at your attempt to drag them in isolation for a single speaker, Turley, when at any given time they have probably the most diverse group of speakers scheduled anywhere within the next month at any given time during the school year.


    1. Sure, as long as you claim diversity it’s ok to throw in a racist, psychopathic rant.

        1. Please give me a link to anything Ben has said that is ANYTHING like what this RACIST, violent, hater from Yale has spewed……I will be waiting.

  12. This is not white vs black or in any way a matter of racist discussion. This is heavily biased speech that is an encouragement, if not incitement to potential murderous action. I don’t think the statement in any way absolves Yale from the potential actions that some unhinged person or persons may take as a result of the encouragement of such by their own professor to whom they gave a platform. The professor and the university can and will be held liable if such action takes place. Yes, free speech should be supported, but it has consequences too and those who should have the forethought, to consider that regardless of “ rights” must give more than a passing thought to that.

  13. Critical Racists’ Theory presumes diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment), inequity, and exclusion, per chance elective abortion to relieve “burdens”. That said, take a knee, beg, good boy, girl, whatever.

  14. She’s clearly unhinged and is enjoying taunting Yale with more and more provocative and outrageous statements, daring them to do anything of significance. She perceives it as power to make Yale squirm while she humiliates her employer. So far, in her mind, she’s winning.

  15. What “value”, Professor, is there in “having such speakers on campus”? Diversity? Should we seek out more such bigoted violent speakers from all sides to come and teach their “values”? Please explain.

  16. Apart from her shameful display of racism and violence, this shrink seems to think that “normalizing negative feelings” like violence and racism will make them disappear. No, it will only do exactly what is stated — it will normalize them. Once racism and violence are preceived as normal, it’s a small step to acting out the norm. She’s a loser on all counts.

  17. “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

    – Declaration of Independence, 1776

  18. Censor, censor…no benzor…
    Banana fanna for fencer.
    Fee Fi Moe bencer…

Comments are closed.