philosophy meta-forum

Cambridge

Matthew

7 day(s) ago

"How can this possibly be a non sequitur? The point being debated is whether HL was right to out RH, and if so, why she didn't do it sooner."

Lockwood had no reason to think Heck was a serial predator. Even if she did, she's not necessarily morally obligated to speak out instantly: mitigating circumstances can include what sort of retaliation or consequences a victim can be expected to bear. But that's just hypothetical anyway, because she has already said that she thought the incident was isolated.

And if you think "why say it all?" if it's not serious, I can equally say "why not say it all?" if it is not serious. There is no implication from the lack of seriousness to making speaking about it or not speaking about it morally dubious. It's also not the case that Lockwood tried to inflate the seriousness of Heck's actions, and merely speaking about them doesn't mean that she is inflating them. And unlike all the anons here, SHE PUT HER OWN NAME to her account. In naming others she also named herself. Morally, she's light years ahead of you here.

Matthew

7 day(s) ago

Andrea:

"To begin with, that makes no sense because Lockwood (if it was Lockwood) could easily have just ignored the whole thing. What, are there people around Lockwood saying, "Hey, Heidi, there's some anonymous rumor floating around in an obscure thread on the metaforum and you're about to lose all credibility if you don't go on the metaforum and refute it by telling everyone the name of someone who made a pass at you on the way to your car ten fucking years ago?" Of course not. She could just as easily pretend she didn't even see it, and nobody would know or care. And if someone insisted on telling her about it, she could just say that it's beneath her dignity (which it isn't, if she did in fact spill here) to comment on such things. That's what decent people do rather than dragging others' names through the mud."

By your own logic, then, "Justinian" was indecent for dragging Lockwood's name through the mud. And it's not up to you to be outraged on behalf of Heck and May. I suspect that Heck and May are fundamentally decent people who are not outraged by Lockwood's account because they know it to be true.

Vauvenargues

7 day(s) ago

Being drunk is not an excuse.

Can somebody explain to me this part? If being drunk doesn't make the man irresponsible, then why does a woman who had drunk sex get to claim that she was raped? Was she responsible for her choices, or not?

Vauvenargues

7 day(s) ago

Hey idiot, did it ever occur to you that Lockwood spoke up out of fidelity to the truth?

Matthew

How likely is that? Did she also file the infamous affidavit out of fidelity to the truth?

Diodorus

7 day(s) ago

Asher are you saying that grabbing someone’s primary or secondary sexual characteristics is just a “clumsy drunken overture”? I wonder if you’d say the same if a drunken gay man who was bigger and stronger and more socially powerful than you suddenly grabbed your ass or your cock.

Chris

That's exactly what happens when you visit a gay-friendly bar. Are you saying you should call the cops, or what?

Diodorus

7 day(s) ago

I think it clear Lockwood was intending to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She mentioned Heck and May because it was true that they were there.

Matthew

God, you're such an autist. Now I understand your caricature of the metabros: you're projecting.

Diodorus

7 day(s) ago

I suspect that Heck and May are fundamentally decent people who are not outraged by Lockwood's account because they know it to be true.

Matthew

More autism.

Gottlob

7 day(s) ago

Makes sense, Matthew = Lockwood = autistic. And now we also know why she interpreted Boolos' logic papers as containing secret messages to her.

Matthew

7 day(s) ago

I think it clear Lockwood was intending to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She mentioned Heck and May because it was true that they were there.

Matthew

God, you're such an autist. Now I understand your caricature of the metabros: you're projecting.

Diodorus

Diodorus your autism diagnosing skills are so powerful you should give up philosophy and take up psychiatry stat.

Huai

7 day(s) ago

Heidi here again. If you have doubts about whether it's actually me, send an email from your institutional address to my institutional address and I'll confirm.

As I said in the earlier post, I hate sites where cowards sling accusations from behind the veil of a pseudonym, so I'm not going to respond directly to anyone who won't identify themselves here and email me from an institutional address to confirm.

I obviously don't usually hang out on the metaforum (who the fuck has time for this?). The reason I came out here was because a friend texted me to say my name was being tossed around again -- and the reason I've bothered to respond was because Justinian actually made a quasi-reasonable accusation, i.e., that I've been helping others while withholding info about shit that has happened to me.

I'm not inclined to fully engage in a wild west debate with masked figures, but I will add two additional points that might help you all figure out where you stand.

The first point is that although I'm perfectly capable of shrugging my shoulders, shaking my head, and dealing with Heck's subsequent lack of interest in my philosophical work, not everyone would be. I *did* take steps to do what little I could to determine whether there were students who had been harassed by Heck at Harvard or Brown. I didn't go "public" with it because going public with these sorts of problems hasn't been an option until very recently. Hell, the philosophy blogs declined to publish the story of the Boolos allegations when I tried to go public with it as recently as 2014, and I can tell similar stories of stonewalling in major media outlets as recently as 2015.

Fwiw, the reason I wanted to go public in 2014 with the Boolos issue was the same as it is now: to defend myself against spurious slurs. At that point the slurs were due to an inquisition by Ned Block, who was reportedly contacting MIT alumni after I mentioned in the "Extreme Badness of Silence" post on FP that I had been sexually assaulted by an adviser at MIT. Apparently Block was the chairperson when I left. (I wouldn't have known. He never bothered to contact me.) I'm told he began the conversations with alum with a line like, "such-and-such says he doesn't even remember Heidi, so I'm doubting whether she was even a student; do you remember her?" (Ned, if you're reading this: as chairperson, you should've known who was enrolled in the program. I have proof of the fact that I was there. You could've just asked me.)

Also, fwiw, because it pertains to the original question asked by the OP: part of the reason that FP refused to let me go public with the Boolos story in a piece entitled "How (Not) To Support a Survivor" was because Rae Langton sent a message in the wake of the "Extreme Badness of Silence" post asking the editor to remove it, arguing that I was doing damage to the "good" people at MIT by even mentioning that I had left the program due to sexual misconduct, despite the fact that I clearly indicated in the post that the incident occurred a long time ago.

Huai

7 day(s) ago

(Heidi, cont.)

The second point is that the Heck incident isn't the only time I had to deal with socially and emotionally incompetent philosophers while I was a graduate student at Yale. For the sake of consistency, let me go "public" with that one, too. The other incident occurred in 2006, when Shelly Kagan contacted Owen Flanagan to ask for information about Buddhist views for the "Life" course he was creating. Flanagan was the department chair for my undergraduate program. He was so lavish in his praise about my abilities after I took an intro course with him that I opted not to take any further courses from him, sensing that something was amiss. Nothing ever happened between us, but here was the email he sent me, out of the blue, after 15+ years of no contact, when I was a 3rd year graduate student at Yale (and worried about getting a job, etc.):

Dear Heidi,

Gosh, you are memorable blonde-one. It was very cool when Shelly Kagan wrote me

& mentioned you as the source of reports about my interest in Buddhism. You

were different in maturity blah, blah. Maybe I had a crush, who knows, who

cares.

Main thing it is neat to connect, re-connect. tell me about your life -- how

you got back to philosophy. You know Ken Winkler is visiting to test the

waters...I almost told Shelly to try to reunite us.

Moi. [Redacted, out of respect for family]. [Redacted] are best friends but

not really [redacted] which is ok. I am still trying to figure out what to do with

my life.

Love,

Owen

Oh my very private cell # is [redacted]

Owen Flanagan

James B. Duke Professor of Philosophy

Professor of Neurobiology

Professor of Psychology and Brain Sciences

Fellow in Cognitive Neuroscience

When I spoke with some of those who know Owen to figure out whether/how to respond, I was told that he was struggling with some issues, and that I should simply ignore it.

Try, if you can, to imagine what was going through my mind when I received this email as a graduate student, despite the fact that I was also a happily married mother of two:

... relief that I hadn't misinterpreted the signs as an undergraduate (I have always blamed myself for failing to see the warning signs at MIT)... anger that I should have had to avoid classes with a professor who was at that time among the most influential in the department (this is part of what drove me out to MIT to take classes with Boolos as an undergrad)... disgust at the fact that the very first contact would be a solicitation for a non-professional relationship... angst about whether Kagan and Flanagan had engaged in some sort of "locker room talk" about me... frustration at being viewed as an amorous object, rather than as a capable philosopher... etc.

Try, if you can, to imagine receiving a similar email when you were a graduate student from the former chair of your undergraduate program.

And try, if you can, to imagine my reaction when I was informed that the email was "just" a product of Flanagan's medical/mental issues.

As with the incident with Heck, I have spoken with Flanagan. He offered an apology; I accepted it. I'm fine, and hopefully he is too. Still, there's no reason I shouldn't be able to freely talk about things that have shaped the trajectory of my career.

This is just a small trickle from the dam, folks.I won't reveal allegations and evidence that aren't a product of my personal experience and therefore aren't mine to share in a public forum -- but they're out there.

Trust me when I say that many of you in this forum don't want the dam to break.

Nagarjuna

7 day(s) ago

I think it clear Lockwood was intending to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She mentioned Heck and May because it was true that they were there.

Matthew

God, you're such an autist. Now I understand your caricature of the metabros: you're projecting.

Diodorus

Diodorus your autism diagnosing skills are so powerful you should give up philosophy and take up psychiatry stat.

Matthew

That's funny because it's the kind of joke an autist would make.

Catherine

7 day(s) ago

The second point is that the Heck incident isn't the only time I had to deal with socially and emotionally incompetent philosophers while I was a graduate student at Yale.

By this point I am convinced that you too are socially and emotionally incompetent. You are sharing the private correspondence of people who never did you any harm other than having a crush on you (not a harm), and 'not taking your philosophical work seriously' (also not a harm, unless your work was actually very good and they suppressed your genius).

Trust me when I say that many of you in this forum don't want the dam to break.

You know what? I want the dam to break. I want everybody to finally realize how often the labels 'feminism' and 'progressivism' are used to conceal hatred, envy, resentment, and outright mental imbalance. I want it to become clear that most feminists are socially awkward nerds just like the victims of their denunciations.

You feminists constantly complain about your neuroses and about how you need special treatment so you can 'heal' and so on, but you publicly shame a neurotic man just because he made a pass on you.

No wonder the in-crowd rejected your membership application. They could tell you were a loose cannon. Now you've done goofed and everybody knows it.

To anyone else reading this: For the love of God do yourself a favor and avoid feminists and SJWs like your life hangs on it. Because it might.

Catherine

7 day(s) ago

Apparently Block was the chairperson when I left. (I wouldn't have known. He never bothered to contact me.) I'm told he began the conversations with alum with a line like, "such-and- such says he doesn't even remember Heidi, so I'm doubting whether she was even a student; do you remember her?" (Ned, if you're reading this: as chairperson, you should've known who was enrolled in the program. I have proof of the fact that I was there. You could've just asked me.)

So you confess that as a grad student you didn't even know who your departmental chair was, but you think it was the chair who had an obligation to know you? I sincerely hope you're a dedicated troll and not the real HL, because this passage reeks of pathological entitlement.

Saadia

7 day(s) ago

"SJWs", "Progressivism", "in-crowd", "resentment", "feminists referred to as a monolith", I just needed "neo-marxist" and I would have won my "Jordan Peterson bingo" game. Shucks.

Wendy

7 day(s) ago

"SJWs", "Progressivism", "in-crowd", "resentment", "feminists referred to as a monolith", I just needed "neo-marxist" and I would have won my "Jordan Peterson bingo" game. Shucks.

Saadia

QED

Norman

7 day(s) ago

The reason I came out here was because a friend texted me to say my name was being tossed around again

Nobody ever comes to the metaforum except when a friend told them. Funny, isn't it?

I obviously don't usually hang out on the metaforum (who the fuck has time for this?).

Oh no, did you just insult your friend? Luckily he or xe is imaginary... Which is good because otherwise they could have asked you out, in an awkward, philosophical manner, and then you'd have needed another decade to heal!

Hans

7 day(s) ago

If I had any doubts about whether this Heidi Lockwood person I've been seeing in connection with this 'Title IX' thing was dysfunctional after her first story here, that second one seals the deal. 'The dam' indeed.

Galileo

7 day(s) ago

Also, fwiw, because it pertains to the original question asked by the OP: part of the reason that FP refused to let me go public with the Boolos story in a piece entitled "How (Not) To Support a Survivor" was because Rae Langton sent a message in the wake of the "Extreme Badness of Silence" post asking the editor to remove it, arguing that I was doing damage to the "good" people at MIT by even mentioning that I had left the program due to sexual misconduct, despite the fact that I clearly indicated in the post that the incident occurred a long time ago.

Rae Langton and the Feminist Philosophers threw a female graduate student under the bus to protect MIT's reputation.

Walter

7 day(s) ago

"Heidi here again. If you have doubts about whether it's actually me, send an email from your institutional address to my institutional address and I'll confirm."

How very reasonable. You show up here, ranting about people who were briefly romantically interested in you years ago, dragging their names through the mud simply because you can't see a reason not to and it makes you feel good about yourself (I guess the fact that doing something will probably cause significant and permanent harm to others is not, to you, a reason to avoid doing something), and now you want us to disclose our names and affiliations to you in writing. Huh. Great plan. What's the worst that could happen?

So let me get this one straight. You were at one university. Flanagan was at another. You had no contact with him, and he was not your supervisor, or on your supervisory committee, or even a likely letter-writer for you (since nobody in graduate school would reasonably use a referee from their undergraduate program when looking for a job, and you were avoiding him anyway). There is no conflict of interest here, no offer (implied or overt) of a quid pro quo, no threats. He didn't even touch you in any way. He merely sent you, 15 years after you were a part of his department, and hence clearly an adult, chronologically speaking, an affectionate but not at all vulgar email expressing his love and inviting you to reciprocate if you wished. And you were told he was having psychological issues, but chose not to let that affect your judgment or even tact.

And your response to this is to think of yourself as a 'victim' and blab the story to the world now, even being so indiscreet as to quote from it verbatim.

You are not a victim in this. You are not a hero. You are not brave. You are, and have just revealed yourself to be, a self-centered, fragile, obsessive gossip with no consideration for how your actions affect others and no perspective on how to weigh the actions of others or of yourself in the great scheme of things. Only a horrible human being would act this way.

I continue to hope that you are not in fact Heidi Lockwood but a troll seeking to defame her.

Derek

7 day(s) ago

Lockwood is one of the very few honest individuals involved in these incidents and was a victim of sexual harassment at MIT, which led to her being forced out of her graduate degree. But because their interest is power and status, Rae Langton and the Feminist Philosophers threw a female graduate student under the bus to protect MIT's reputation.

Calcidius

7 day(s) ago

I think we've all missed the most important part of the story, which is that Lockwood is alleging that Langton attempted to get Lockwood's blog post removed for even MENTIONING that she had left MIT, a very long time ago, due to an incident of sexual harassment. Why? Because it would damage the reputation Langton, Langton's friends, and other people who had a more recent connection with MIT. That about sums about the character of many of the so-called "feminists" in professional philosophy.

Since Lockwood is alleging that Langton's request was in an email, presumably Lockwood can produce this email, if you were to get in touch with her.

Stephen

7 day(s) ago

This is all very helpful. I think Cambridge will be me fallback.

Dorothy

7 day(s) ago

Feminism is a movement for women who don't fit in human society and refuse to make an effort to adapt to it. Some don't fit because they're masculinized, like Kukla and Haslanger. Others don't fit because they're socially retarded, like Heidi Lockwood.

Calcidius

7 day(s) ago

Apparently Block was the chairperson when I left. (I wouldn't have known. He never bothered to contact me.) I'm told he began the conversations with alum with a line like, "such-and-such says he doesn't even remember Heidi, so I'm doubting whether she was even a student; do you remember her?" (Ned, if you're reading this: as chairperson, you should've known who was enrolled in the program. I have proof of the fact that I was there. You could've just asked me.)

So you confess that as a grad student you didn't even know who your departmental chair was, but you think it was the chair who had an obligation to know you? I sincerely hope you're a dedicated troll and not the real HL, because this passage reeks of pathological entitlement.

Catherine

It's almost like the Chair is being paid a salary to know who the members of his department are, while the grad student is not being paid a salary to know that! Wow!

Let's go back to an earlier question: why do some of you hate women so much?

Dorothy

7 day(s) ago

The chair isn't payed to remember every graduate student decades later.

Luitzen

7 day(s) ago

It must suck when you really want to score victim points, but all you have is shit like this. When you haven't been raped by Shrek or drugged by Fat Albert, and all you've got is a a clumsy drunken pass and a post crush letter, it must be really frustrating. Other people in the news are actual victims! Damn it. They are getting all the attention. Wah, wah. . ..

If we are hearing form HL, this stuff is really embarrassing. How could anyone think that it's appropriate to tell these stories and post these letters. What an evil snowflake!

But, perhaps we are dealing with a very clever troll. Is it some kind of very subtle parody to kill off whatever allegiance some of us might have to feminism. If so, it's working. Excellent trolling or absurdity?

Antiphon

7 day(s) ago

Rae Langton and the Feminist Philosophers threw Lockwood under the bus. Simple.

Mikyo

7 day(s) ago

Pot threw kettle under the bus, says kettle.

Walter

7 day(s) ago

Calcidius: why do you hate philosophy so much?

posts per page.