Academia

University of London Professor Loses Racial Discrimination Claim Over a Recommendation of a Local Sushi Restaurant
Professor Nana Sato-Rossberg at the University of London has lost a novel claim of racial discrimination against her superior, Provost Claire Ozanne. The offense? Ozanne simply said that Sato-Rossberg, who is Japanese, might enjoy a local sushi restaurant.

 

 

Sato-Rossberg brought an internal claim alleging race discrimination, race harassment, victimization and retaliation for whistleblowing. The university dismissed the claim and she then filed a formal complaint of employment discrimination.

Employment Judge Jillian Brown ruled that it is not discriminatory to suggest a sushi restaurant in the area. Brown noted that Ozanne “was making small talk and trying to establish a point of shared interest. Ms Ozanne said nothing detrimental about Japan.”

Judge Brown added:

“The tribunal decided that [Prof] Ozanne mentioning a sushi restaurant and her family’s love of sushi was not a detriment because a reasonable person would not consider themselves at a disadvantage when a manager, trying to be friendly and find common ground, was enthusiastic about food from the person’s country of origin.

A reasonable person would not take offence at such complimentary and friendly words.
In this case, [Prof] Ozanne’s words were not even ‘unfortunate’. They were not reasonably seen as hurtful or misjudged.

On the contrary, [Prof Sato-Rossberg’s] objection reflected [her] own hypersensitivity and predisposition to find fault with Ms Ozanne.”

This is not the first time that sushi has triggered a controversy in higher education. We previously discussed how Oberlin students protested the offering of sushi in the school dining hall as “cultural appropriation.”

Indeed, Japanese cuisine has been at the heart of other academic controversies. Previously, a Yale dean was canned for writing a negative review of a Japanese steakhouse. June Chu, dean of the school’s Pierson College, was called classist for such comments as “This establishment is definitely not authentic by any stretch of any imagination and perfect for those low class folks who believe this is a real night out.”

Chu issued a public apology that said “There are no two ways about it. Not only were they insensitive in matters related to class and race; they demean the values to which I hold myself and which I offer as a member of this community.”

Many academics privately complain about a culture of hair-triggered hypersensitivity with colleagues and students. Often there is little consideration of possible innocent, non-discriminatory intentions behind statements.

The site College Fix analogized the London case to an earlier controversy involving Rutgers University Professor Kyra Sutton who wrote an article on microaggressions that she has experienced in just going to conferences. In one such example, she was in an elevator and realized that she did not have her key. A white male pressed the button and suggested that she might want to get a new key. She wrote “Just then, I found my room key and decisively pressed the button. When the elevator stopped at the other guest’s floor, I stared at him and waited for an apology. He left without a word.”

I have been critical of microaggression policies as ill-defined and subjective. That is not to say that faculty and students cannot be thoughtless or ignorant of how their words may be taken by others. It is important for us to consider how others may take a different meaning from our words. Most of us do not want to make others feel uncomfortable and try to avoid such moments.

Yet, there can also be a hypersensitivity and politicalization in some objections. University rules increasingly premised violations on how words are taken as opposed to how they are intended. Rather than addressing such concerns informally, they are often moved into a process for formal investigations and potential sanctions. There is also a culture in higher education that fuels this sense of being triggering and victimized.

I have always been proud of my alma mater, The University of Chicago, for its commitment to free speech. However, my proudest moment came when President Robert Zimmer sent a famous letter to the class of 2020. The letter warned students that they will not be shielded from views that upset them or given “safe spaces” on campus.

What is most striking about the University of London case is the insistence of Professor Sato-Rossberg in litigating this passing comment in a formal complaint of racial discrimination. It is a manifestation of the same hair-triggered hypersensitivity that some of us have been writing about for years in higher education.

85 thoughts on “University of London Professor Loses Racial Discrimination Claim Over a Recommendation of a Local Sushi Restaurant”

  3. Sorry, I ususally enjoy and (mostly) sgree with these columns, but this one is little more than weak, namby-pamby horse feces. If you find speech made in your presence, but not directed at you, to be offensive, ignore it. If such speech is directed at you, discuss your objections with the speaker, go somewhere else, or grow tougher skin. Civility is one thing, but demanding that everyone around you anticipate your neurotic reactions to any topic on which you could possibly be oversensitive is patently absurd.

  4. Cf. the classic Seinfeld Cigar Store Indian episode — where Jerry asks the postman (whose face is hidden but turns out to be Chinese) for a Chinese restaurant recommendation.

  5. i think i’m turning japanese i think i’m turning japanese i realy think song

  6. My personal observation would be folks with advanced degrees, or those on that path are often full of themselves. I see it blossoming in four of my six children who worked beyond the Bachelors Degree. I sit back and observe as the elitist sensitivities grow.

  7. Why is Turley writing about this obscure story.

    I googled the professor’s name just now. The ONLY place where this story is being reported outside of the UK is in Rupert Murdoch’s NY Post. Surprise, surprise. The NY Post is basically the written arm of Fox.

    Turley is obviously taking his orders from Fox. He is bought and paid for by them. At a minimum they are instructing him what to write about, but more likely, they are actually writing this stuff and publishing under his name. This story fits the obsession of the hard right that higher education is a hot-bed of “leftist” indoctrination that has to be attacked at all levels, at all times, in all places.

    Turley is nothing more than a hired tool of Rupert Murdoch’s “news” empire, which has along history of distortion and outright lying about current events. The most recent evidence of this is the $787 million settlement with Dominion Voting, where they admitted their lies about the last election.
    Murdoch was basically forced out of the UK in 2011 when his newspaper, News of the World, was forced to close after 168 years of publication. The paper was engulfed in a scandal after it was discovered that its news gathering methods including hacking the phones of celebrities and the Royal Family. Murdoch simply shut down the paper to avoid criminal prosecution, and walked away losing his entire investment.

    2. It is of interest simply because it is an exact equivalent of the insane manifestations of the hypersensitivity rampant in most of the West. Don’t suggest a pasta place to an Italian!

    4. Do you ever notice the funny sound the salient points make as they go whistling over your head?

    5. “Why is Turley writing about this obscure story.”

      Because it is about free speech and that is a fundimental value of Prof. Turley’s

      Is there a consequential story on free speech – particularly one that has legal elements that Turley has not covered ?

      BTW the FBI has been caught hacking peoples phones.

      And AI can run video form you of EVERY major Democrat – Peolosi, Obama, Biden, Schumer tell us that we should not trust these black box electronic voting machines.

      Democrats attacked Republicans for allegedly rigging Voting machines in Ohio in 2004 – the Series Scandal uses a fictionalized version of that as its core.

      Until 2020 Democrats have been Deeply suspicious of Dominion – as there history ties them back to the Bush’s.

      1. You are missing my point.
        How did Turley find out about this story. The only “news” outlet reporting on this in the US is Murdoch’s NY Post.

        It is crystal clear that Turley, at a minimum, is just taking orders from Murdoch. Much more likely is that someone at Fox or NY Post is writing this stuff and just publishing under Turley’s name.

        This is not an example of Turley’s principled stand on free speech or any other right. It is just a Fox / NY Post propaganda piece.

  9. How many of these bs lawsuits are filed by women? As a woman, I think I have the right to point out that my fellow XX chromosomers need to get a grip. All the stereotypes that the first wave feminists rejected are simply reinforced by so many women behaving like a bunch of hysterical clucking hens. The elevator lady “decisively pressed the button?” I don’t even know what she was mad about. I’m increasingly glad that “Biden” has decided to destroy America as we know it, and just wait until after the next totally free and fair election gets totally not at all stolen again. Then people will have real problems. When there’s nothing to eat and you can’t pay your mortgage, you stop worrying about fake made-up non problems.

    1. I had trouble figuring what I was supposed to learn from someone pushing a button decisively. Odd.

  11. Marxism morphs and is rebranded time and again and presently it takes on the form of DEI. The premise is to find a target and apply the warped lens of class, class warfare, oppressor and the oppressed. Through a convoluted process of tortured groping they arrive at their victims and their oppressors. It is us and them.

    The faithful and mindless believers are incapable of considering two opposing views nor are they capable realizing that life presents complexity and exceptions.

    This is why such thinking falls lockstep into cult mentality. We are right and you are wrong. “The science is settled.” Such are the people who are like clay in the hands of manipulators such as George Soros, Jim Jones, Charles Manson, Hitler, etc.,

    In the age of instant information, bad actors can slip in little half truths and stir up the pot and whip a mob into action. If only the bad guys wore bad guy suits, life would be much less complicated.

    We’ve seen this again and again throughout history, only now it is in the realm of instant. (and often manipulated) information. The mindless lemmings are clueless and think and do as they are told.

  12. Everything is a “microaggression” except banning PAYING Jewish students from a school library, yelling at Jews to go back to Poland, Screaming at Jews who are fellow students etc etc etc etc etc.

    The great thing about this loser in London is that she is now in the great and mighty Google machine and it will be hard for ny prospective employer to hire this walking talking law suit.

    1. The above comment regarding microaggressions not applying to Jews was me, HullBobby.

    2. The left indiscriminately uses words to punish those whose minds think independently. Their use of the term microaggression is nothing more than a threat of eventual violence when another doesn’t heed their warnings.

  14. There are descriptive words that describe the sequence of the Lady Professor in the elevator and they don’t include the word Lady but I won’t besmirch this blog by saying those words. Hypersensitivity in the highly educated is nothing new and has been around at least since I was in college during prehistory (1966-1970). To question certain professors was an affront to their reputation and lofty status and they attempted to reduce you to a quivering jar of jelly. Unfortunately that worked with too many young students. Some of us were made of sterner stuff.
    I always thought that students should have gone out and started working in the world for 2-3 years and than attend college because you would have a better idea of what you needed and you were hardened enough to deal with primadonna professors. The problem, at that time, was that if you went right to work you had a great chance of being drafted and sent to Vietnam. The veterans, I noted, did not respond positively to the affronted professors.
    But there are the overly sensitive people in all walks of life. You see that in medicine sometimes in the severely poor. Most are just thrilled that they have a doctor that actually listens to them and try to solve their medical issues.
    There were a group, often very poor, who were hypersensitive about anything you said and would lash out at the slightest provocation or even none. So you had to walk on eggshells to solve the problem. I felt that they had had to deal with getting screwed so much because of their economic status or race, that they were reacting to that and not me personally. You simply had to work harder to earn trust but it could be done and the problems solved.
    Hypersensitivity in the highly educated is unforgivable. You are supposed to be enlightened and spread your knowledge out to the people for the betterment of all.
    And then there are those who are just jerks and they live in all strata of society.
    I never demanded or asked my patients to address me as Dr. If they said Mister, or my name or anything inoffensive like “hey You”, I was fine with it. Some Doctors though would literally go though the roof if they were not called “Doctor”. Sort of like Jill Biden.

    1. @GEB: There are descriptive words”……………..Some 60 years ago the faculty teaching a course I was registered in at NYC’s Queens College proudly uttered the following in response to a comment a student made….”Oh…..we don’t have TV’. That pretty much summed up everything about her from appearances to demeanor which spoke to where she was at socio-politically and economically in the tenor of those times that were ‘a’chang’ing].

  15. Twenty-somethings in the UK had best consider carefully what is in the bests interests of the rest of their lives and that of any family they aspire to. Where the hell they can expect to flee to is now the next question. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

  17. I have been critical of microaggression policies as ill-defined and subjective.

    That’s the point of all the lefts agenda.

    That’s how is so easy to cancel a person for innocent actions or statements.

    The latest is the KC Chiefs place kicker getting smeared across all medium platforms, for being invited to commencement and delivering a message. A message that resonated with the audience, received a standing ovation.
    But the media, being nothing but a mindless cabal of the perpetually aggrieved, has gone apoplectic. Why, because he opined maybe the young female graduates should take their degrees and venture forth. But the should also listen to the hearts and their faith and consider the higher calling of motherhood and homemaking. Because he was lucky enough to meet such a person that has enriched his soul, more than he could have imagined.

    That’s the controversy. One mans opinion about the advancement of the human race.

    1. The little girl that poses as a “reporter” for CNN asked KJP THREE TIMES if the place kicker, Butker, would be invited to the WH with the Chiefs for their obligatory meeting with the zombie president. Three times the little girl asked as a way of implying that what he said is beyond polite conversation and therefore he should be shunned.

      The little girl at CNN never once asked if any of the wife beating, drug taking, gun toting felons on a championship team should be banned from the WH. In fact the zombie’s son Hunter is on trial for a gun charge right now, has been filmed taking drugs and is a defendant in a tax case. But they should ban the guy that is religious. Christian religious.

      The little girls in the WH press pool are making a complete mockery of their profession. But not to worry, the real reporters will be back next January 20th.

  18. When you remove G-d, or any established system of belief in something greater than self you end up with people in desperate search for a meaning to their lives and the results are people obsessed with whatever trivialities they can manufacture. This is a prime example, similar to the cults of gender or climate change. They have manufactured their own “religion” of sorts and find their passions devoted to these obsessions.

    2. “. . . belief in something greater than self . . .”

      If you think that whiny (rhymes with “witch”) has a self, you are sorely mistaken.

      A person with a strong sense of self is not touchy and does not play the victim.

  20. I wouldn’t call this “sensitivity” or even “hypersensitivity.” It reeks of exhibitionism, attention-seeking, and in some cases, greed (how much can I get from a racial discrimination lawsuit!). These people aren’t about sensitivity — it’s all about narcissism and its accompanying mental and social disorders.

Comments are closed.