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.
Sounds a little fishy
Now that’s funny! Thanks!
I would imagine that any future encounters between the provost and the good professor will be rather chilly. As the provost has certain responsibility for managing the faculty, it would be interesting to know if the personnel file for the good professor will contain a summary of the unsuccessful lawsuit and summary findings to be provided for any future evaluation. Since the professor’s academic specialty is translation, perhaps she is too attuned to the presence of determinative nuances and may fail to recognize ambiguities.
The mature approach would have been a candid but brief discussion about intent and meaning. Something that one would think a linguistic professor would be skilled at.
So glad I’ll be leaving this planet soon.
STOP BELIEVING THEIR BULL—-!
_____________________________________
“It doesn’t work if you don’t believe.”
– Violet, The Skeleton Key
This just demonstrates the hell into which the Left has turned western universities. There is no grace, peace, goodwill, or humanity. There is only law and condemnation. And what law there is, is unjust.
PROPONENTS HEREIN ARE PROPONENTS OF DICTATORSHIP
__________________________________________________________________
Discrimination is a natural and God-given freedom and right.
To discriminate is the essence of freedom.
Freedom of speech includes freedom of thought, discernment, and opinion.
That one does not enjoy or appreciate speech neither precludes nor denies the freedom of speech, thought, opinion, etc.
Freedom of speech includes speech that insults the King and every inferior subject or citizen.
Harassment is annoyance that is persistent, which is a crime.
__________________________________________________________________
Merriam-Webster
harass
verb
transitive verb
1b(1): to annoy persistently
_______________________________
Success and acceptance are not natural or God-given rights, freedoms, privileges, or immunities.
Success and acceptance are not warrantable by any human corpus juris, which would require the denial of the freedom of speech, thought, and opinion of others.
People must adapt to the outcomes of freedom.
Freedom does not adapt to people…
Dictatorship does.
Over a restaurant suggestion?
Okay. I give! Lets make the Ukraine a NATO member, kick off WWIII and get this stupidity over with. I need a instant tan for beach season.
Hoping the English Rule is applied here – that is, that the plaintiff must pay the defendants costs of litigation.
It depends on the context. Were Sato and other talking about restaurants in general? Did the other pipe in sarcasm, ” You should try that Japanese restaurant ” or saying to a black person, hey, there’s a rib joint down the block or to a Latin there’s a taco truck around the corner can be a slur.
I wasn’t there.
Sorry, this just reveals the horror of these laws.
No it does not depend on the context.
Your personal offense at the speech of other should NEVER rise to the level that you can sanction them and therefore silence them.
I do not give a schiff if the proffessor in question is a blatant racist.
“If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”
The context is clarified by the excerpt Prof Turley quoted from the court’s decision. It was a pleasant, friendly exchange. That’s what the court concluded, so presumably that’s what the evidence showed.
Taking trolling to new depths:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_A_platform
I see what you did there.
Kansas Elder — Please explain it to me.
Greetings MAGA losers and suckers,
What do you think about the latest numbers for Trump fundraising in the first quarter.
Amount raised: $220 million
Expenditures:
$70 million for “costs of fundraising”
$69 million for legal fees
$66 million for ACTUAL CAMPAIGNING
Cash on hand : $15 million
32% was spent on “fundraising costs”. This the money spent on “consulting”, direct mail costs, fundraising fees paid to the companies operating his digital operations and so on. Basically the leeches and hangers-on that he surrounds himself with.
31% was spent on legal fees defending your cult leader in all his criminal prosecutions.
30% was spent on actual campaign expenses.
So basically 63% of your hard earned money that you all are sending in to this con-man is either going straight into his pocket for legal expenses, or into the pockets of all his “consulting” hangers-on.
Not a lot being spent on campaigning. Have you noticed all those ads he has been running on TV. No??? Neither have I.
In contrast Biden raised $365 million, spent $138 million on actual campaigning and has $227 million cash on hand.
Trump has $15 million cash on hand, Biden has $227 million.
You are nothing but a bunch of suckers and losers for wasting your money on Trump !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What do I think ? I could care less.
I do not give money to political candidates.
Regardless, What business is it of mine ?
Biden has outspent Trump by 15:1 in swing states and that to be behind in EVERY SINGLE ONE.
That I find interesting. Why ?
Because it confirms something I have beleived for a long time – that political spending is subject to diminishing returns.
It is certainly true that a candidate with no money will lose – no one will have heard about them.
But Trump beat Clinton and she outspent him 2:1
I doubt this election will hinge on the amount of money that Trump and Biden raise or spend.
We all KNOW what we are buying with each of them.
Just for the record the popular vote in 2016 was:
Clinton: 65,853,514
Trump: 62,984,828
Clinton got 3 million more votes than Trump. He lost the election, but was lucky enough to win the utterly undemocratic and outdated Electoral College, because he got about 40,000 votes in the right place.
So when you look at it realistically Trump is already a 2 time loser.
The polls are meaningless, as proven in the last 3 election cycles. Do you remember the Giant Red Wave of 2022. No ???? Neither do I.
The polling companies freely admit that it is almost impossible to do an accurate poll anymore. They report response rates of less than 1%. Why??? Because very few people have landline telephones any more, which has always been the mainstay of accurate random polling. Most people have cell phones now and there is no directory of cell phones. Pollsters can try dialing randomly, but most calls are ignored because you can see who is calling on a cell phone. The people who still have landlines are mostly grumpy old, poorly educated white people who can’t afford a cell phone. In other words MAGA cult members.
Please give us all a rest from your multi personality disorder and ignorance.
‘Never Biden’ voters more numerous than ‘Never Trumpers’ this election season
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/presidential/3008919/never-biden-voters-more-numerous-than-never-trumpers-this-election-season/
Trump is polling better with Hispanics, young voters between the ages of 18-34, and is up with Blacks by 22%.
The Asian community has pretty much ditched the Democrats.
Jews are none to fond of Biden.
Muslims not only chant “from rive to sea,” but “F!ck Joe Biden!”
The polls are meaningless. Read what I said.
Do you you remember the Giant Red Tidal Wave of 2022 ????????????
Neither do I.
MORE PANIC HERE!
No panic. Extremely comfortable that we will see the greatest landslide in history with Democrat control of WH, Senate and House.
The key to this election is women. Most of the red states have draconian abortion restrictions. Many of these states also have women’s reproductive rights initiatives on the ballot. These initiatives will drive women to the ballot in unprecedented numbers, and I am sure they will be absolutely delighted to vote for republicans who have decided that they can control women’s bodies.
We will see the greatest popular turnout of voters in history.
You heard it here first !!!!!!!!
MORE PRATTLE HERE!
Your deep, thoughtful comments and analysis and are greatly appreciated.
MORE PANIC, PRATTLE, AND BLITHERING HERE!
I can’t possibly thank you enough for your deeply thoughtful comments. The insight you provide is breath-taking.
Thank you once again !!!!!!!!!!!!
Many of us believe this is an unjust land politically motivated prosecution designed to prevent Trump from campaigning. In that context, defending himself is appropriately, a justified expense,.
So you are perfectly happy to send all your hard earned money to a MULTI-BILLIONAIRE to spend on his cronies and legal bills.
I seem to remember in 2016 he said he wouldn’t need money from anyone because he was so rich.
People need to get a grip. To be agreived at every turn must be exhausting.
I agree. This constant outpouring of a sense of victimization by the hard right over trivial things is becoming more than a little tiresome.
You are right, it really must be exhausting to keep up this constant barrage.
I wish they would just get on with their lives and stop complaining.
Life is more than wallowing in a sense of victimization and self-pity.
My Thai friends always want to eat Chinese. Are they diversitists?
My Taiwanese friend prefers the all-American Grand Slam and steak served medium-rare. Is he a diversitist?
My Russian colleague drinks English tea. Is she a diversitist perchance guilty of cultural appropriation?
Should I report them to the DIE (sic) task farce (sic) for indoctrination or cancelation? For exercising parody without a liberal license in a progressive climate (PC)?
Should’ve recommended the bangers… bratwurst… sausages…. whatever.
n. n. said; “Should’ve recommended the bangers… bratwurst… sausages…. whatever.”
Bangers snugly nestled in a bed of chips would have done it, don’t you think 😉
:Most of us do not want to make others feel uncomfortable and try to avoid such moments.”
Many of us are beginning to enjoy it. I am thoroughly sick of these hypersensitive pansies.
Keep in mind the situation of most academics: they are (hopefully) specialists in a particular field and they are, generally, motivated to achieve the security of tenure. Unfortunately, crossing the moat of tenure leads into the land of mediocrity for most academics (job security and pay without any substantial threat to either for the ‘rest of their natural life’). And tenure feeds mediocrity so the spiral down continues as mediocrity consumes all before it. (Think of the DC Circuit. the unionized federal bureaucracy, teachers unions, etc.)
As in all areas of human endeavors, there are only a few academics that truly achieve distinction. Yet, the moat of tenure is not only the goal for the sake of security in the vast majority of academics, it is a CV enhancer. And those inside the tenure moat work to maintain the standards of the moat via seemingly accepted standards and virtue signalling. And historically, to the detriment of the academic community and the citizenry as a whole, there have been periods where virtue signalling has outweighed academic standard in terms of maintaining the moat. As in the memorable outcomes of Gleichschaltung or more subtle recent manifestations like Claudine Gay and Minouche Shafik (in over their heads and/or just virtue signalling appointments?).
Under these circumstances, is anyone truly shocked that Professor Nana Sato-Rossberg, a Professor in Translation Studies, would claim “race discrimination, race harassment” over a sushi recommendation? Not if you realize that the way you get inside and stay inside of the moat is either threaten the integrity of the moat or the other moat tenders with popularized virtue signalling weapons, no matter how trivial.
“Unfortunately, crossing the moat of tenure leads into the land of mediocrity for most academics (job security and pay without any substantial threat to either for the ‘rest of their natural life’). And tenure feeds mediocrity so the spiral down continues as mediocrity consumes all before it. (Think of the DC Circuit. the unionized federal bureaucracy, teachers unions, etc.)”
I have a part-time job working for people like this, and I feel sorry for them. Not an original thought from any of them, yet they are convinced of their own intellectual superiority, all while missing some of the most blatant deficiencies in their system. Hopeless to try to talk to them. I have reduced my work from 4 nights down to three nights per week. I think it will be easier for me to pretend to be stupid if I only have to do it three nights per week.
PETA urges people to shame meat eaters at Thanksgiving with a special PARTITION that shields vegans from the sight of turkey – and states all birds on the table have been MURDERED
PETA is selling a $24.99 ThanksVegan Dinner Partition, a three-sided divider that will shield a vegan’s eyes from seeing turkey and other food made with animals
The side facing the rest of the table features an image of a turkey with a bloody knife and the words: ‘Holidays shouldn’t be murder on turkeys’
The inside includes ‘comeback’ suggestions for friends and family who try to pressure the vegan to eat meat
If someone says, ‘You’re really missing out on this turkey,’ PETA suggests saying back: ‘The turkey you’re eating is really missing out on life’
This year, the controversial animal rights organization is also selling a tofu-scented candle and one with the ‘distinctive scent of wet dog’
Anonymous said: “PETA”
Someone should start a non-profit org named “People Eating Tender Animals”, and send out press releases promoting vastly inceased consumption of animal flesh, featuring a letterhead acronym “PETA”. Should sow a bit of interesting confusion and a ton of enjoyable ill will from the original nut cases.
Everyone should watch last years special on TV writer/producer Norman Lear.
Lear, who is a Jewish Democrat, wrote “All in the Family” featuring the lead bigoted character “Archie Bunker”.
Today in 2024, it would be impossible to create a TV show like this since it’s not politically correct. The show illustrated how ridiculous bigotry, racism and anti-semtism are (not promoting bigotry but making fun of it).
This show actually educated children in racist communities to oppose bigotry and racism.
America is the wrong track. Sometimes you need to show the ugly truth and expose it, instead of pretending it doesn’t exist. Today’s universities have no concept of what free speech really means and why you never censor it.
The show illustrated how ridiculous bigotry, racism and anti-semtism are (not promoting bigotry but making fun of it).
Lear was upset Archie became the most loved character on the show.
ALL were humans with with human flaws. Archie was the most loved in the end.
And yet in All in the Family Archie for all his problems was a sympathetic character and had actually contributed more to society than theRob Reiner Meathead character
Even in “All in the family” – the danger to society came from the left.
While I think that All in the Family had significant influence – Because it cast Bunker as sympathetic but at the same thime over time allowed Him and those watching to shift towards more understanding views, I do not overall think Television is that influential.
This country has – both since the 70s and throughout its entire history slowly shifted towards placing higher values on diversity – though I would note that Diversity has been a baked in value in this country from its start. North America was populated by Indians, it was settled by nearly every country in Europe. By every flavor of Christianity there was. People had to be tolerant or they would be constantly at war with each other.
With each generation in this country tolerance has increased, racism has declined, diversity has increased. And the people in the country have done ever better.
American greatness comes from our diversity and the liberty that requires. A diverse people do NOT share nearly as many values.
Diversity REQUIRES greater tolerance of different values of others. It REQUIRES greater individual freedom.
My Grandfather was a racist old codger in comparison to my father. But he was enlightened in comparison to my great grand father.
One of the massive problems we have today is that the left sincerly beleives we are in the most racist country in the most racist moment of existance. Further they beleive that ALL the values they have inherited from the past must be burned to the ground because some of them are less than perfect.
The FACT is that in nearly every way we live in the best country in the world, at the best moment in time.
Many of us – not on the far left, want to back away from SOME of the garbage the left is trying to force on us.
But almost no one actually wants to go back to Archie Bunker much less Jim Crow.
We do not wish to go back to the 50’s. But we do want women to be able to CHOOSE traditional roles and traditional families – if they wish.
We do not want to go back to homosexuals being criminal and in the closet.;
But we do not want Every super hero to have to be gay or Trans – we would like our children to be able to be children – they will grow into our hyper sexulaized world all too soon.
We want our daughters to be able to compete in sports without having to compete against men -= we passed Title IX specifically for that purpose.
We want our society as a whole to be diverse, while at the same time allowing for spaces that women can be women, men can be men.
We want to be able to celebrate Columbus day, or St. Patricks day without a DEI lecture.
Taunting Joe or Hunter Biden could also be arranged (as well a full list of Dems) – The coming Debate(s) could have a similar tact.
Let the Congressional Committees have at it, Everybody deserves a turn.
New ad taunts Trump to take stand in hush money trial – or admit he’s a coward
Despite ex-president teasing he will testify in hush money trial, his lawyers have not confirmed if he will give evidence in his own defense
By: Ariana Baio ~ May 17th, 2024
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-ad-coward-trial-stand-b2546989.html
OMG, many years ago, I asked an acquaintance, who was the first violinist for the Dallas Symphony and of Japanese descent, for his recommendation for the best place for sushi since I was clueless on the subject. I don’t think he took offense. I guess when we go into a Chinese, Vietnamese, Thai or Japanese, etc. restaurant and see a lot of patrons with Asian features, we can no longer conclude the food there must be really good.