'White African-American' Suing N.J. Med School

[Nova]

This would be an interesting test case for whether or not there is a place for racial identification in our world...is it necessary for any reason beyond a need to categorize and define in the simplest terms?

believe, you and adnoid are right: everyone should be color-blind and the concept of race shouldn't exist.

And when you two find a way to make that happen, then we can talk about whether there should be "categories" and whether the government should recognize differences.

 

[angelmom]

Oh, please, the defendant here knew exactly what he was doing. He wasn't "self-identifying" as an act of personal immancipation (pun intended); he was being deliberately provocative.

Now that's no crime in my book and I still agree it's ridiculous this ever got to the point of suspension (or any administrative action whatsoever), but let's don't pretend that what this person did is the same as what minority groups do when they claim the right to name their own labels. For one thing, blacks didn't decide to announce they were "gay," nor did gays as a whole just decide to announce they were "Jews."

Have you read the part (which I have typed over and over, but I think you keep skipping because it disproves your point) where he was asked, in a discussion on culture, how HE defined HIMSELF????

Why is that provocative? I can see how it might raise an eyebrow, beg an explanation (which makes perfect sense when he shares his birthplace and new citizenship), perhaps even make one reassess their views. I can imagine it might make someone uncomfortable or even, perhaps unfairly, not like him. But I cannot imagine any way possible for someone to tell him that he cannot define himself in this way, and I really cannot believe that some smug PhD, stuck in his ivory tower, had the nerve to tell him never to say it again, and I am flat astonished that they suspended him!

What a bunch of BS! If they were actually learning and doing real work instead of having some touchy-feely discussion about culture (in which, apparently, only politically correct answers are acceptable and won't get you thrown out of the university) then maybe they wouldn't be getting sued!

BTW, this brings up a question I hadn't really thought of recently. What is the PC appellation for "African Americans" in other countries? Are they African Canadians and African Mexicans and African Irish? African Australians? I'm not being a smartass. I really have no idea, and I think it is relevant to the conversation.

 

[believe09]

Sorry, but you're behind the times and the latest research on this one.

What we call "race" IS a cultural issue, albeit one that was long falsely and pseudo-scientifically attributed to biology.

And, yes, "African-American" is a cultural term with cultural roots, as everyone here knows perfectly well and as the defendent in this case knew, too.

Its meaning derives from usage, not from the defendant and some posters here dissecting its component parts, as if they'd all just discovered their first dictionary.

Enlighten me-because in my naive little ivory tower being Cuban does not make me a race or Jewish for that matter, or European. How is it that the term African gets a pass?

There are people who I love in my life that define themselves as Black, not African American. Never have, never will. Consequently, the people in their lives that are not black are white, yellow etc. No room for this perspective or are they also behind the times? How shall I tell them that the words they use to define themselves are dated and culturally insignificant? They are Americans, which is also how they define themselves.

It intrigues me that you so vehemently insist that the defendant was attempting to stir the pot. And the benefit to him was what?

 

[angelmom]

No disrespect to my beloved husband or Mrs. Adnoid, but I love you.

 

[kittenish]

The person standing there can have tattooed 30 inch biceps, a crew cut and their plumbing filling up their banana hammock, but if they're applying for a job and say they want to be called Diane that's what you are required to respect and do.

Banana Hammock made me laugh. I don't think I've ever actually heard someone use it in a sentence. :clap:

 

[fortytwo]

What happened to everyone's "hinky-meter"?

Did they all go out of warranty at the same time?

I'm very fond of the folks on this board, most especially for the evidence of critical thinking and the normal lack of gullibility, but somehow this article hit people like a fantasy movie and set off a tidal wave of 'willing suspension of disbelief".

As I read the article I became more and more suspicious that all was not being shared with the reader. Two sources are quoted, the plaintiff ...and the plaintiff's lawyer.

I took a little extra time and scanned through some of the nearly 400 comments that followed the article. Here are a couple of excerpts.

Link:

A correction to Mr. Lewis's comment. The students don't feel that he should have been kicked out, and he wasn't, he was suspended. We all know how difficult medical school is and can appreciate the hard work that he put into his medical education. However, the comments he made towards students and faculty would be considered derrogatory, sexist, and racist. After being given numerous opportunities to rectify the situation, he chose not to relent, and to push the situation further, leaving the administration with no other choice but to take disciplinary action. As much as I can sympthatize with Paolo, I can also sympathize with the driving force behind the school's decision.I, and I am sure many of my classmates would agree, feel that the biggest unjustice in this article is the portrayal of our medical school. ABC News, with this article, has villianized our medical school, and as a result, demeaned our education. Due to what i believe is a very biased and poorly reserached view point, they may have done more than tarnish the reputation of several doctors and an entire medical school, they may have lead to the loss of several jobs, hurt a residency program that produces 100s of doctors on a yearly basis, and a medical school that produces a more diverse group of physicians than almost any other school in the country.Moreover, the people that stand to get hurt most by this, are the already underserved citizens of Newark. As one of the only institutions that supports underpriveleged and uninsured patients in New Jersey, the loss of quality physicians, who genuinely care for underserved patients is nothing short of criminal.
Posted by:
NJMSer09 May-14

link:

This article is extremely one sided. As a student at New Jersey Medical School and a former classmate of Paulo Serodio, I witnessed the numerous incidents that culminated in Paulo's suspension. The disciplinary action was widely supported by the student body because of Paulo's overt racism and blatant disregard for the viewpoints and feelings of others. The suspension had nothing to do with Paulo identifying himself as an African American, but rather was based on repeated, offensive comments he made in public forums of the NJMS community.Paolo published an article in the NJMS Plexus (school newpaper) belittling the significance of African American history and slavery. In addition, he wrote that most blacks had no right calling themselves African Americans, as they have never been to Africa, and posited that only people like himself were worthy of the label African-American. Fellow students were understandably incensed at being told how to identify themselves, and numerous rebuttals followed. Furthermore, he went on to make racist and sexist jokes in scribe notes (notes taken for the entire class during lectures) as well as emails, further belittling black culture. As a means of responding to his critics, one memorable public email referred to the course director as "Ms. Piggy" and referenced a "lynch mob" being after him. The obvious parallel to public lynchings of blacks in times past did not go unnoticed.

It appears to me that there is more to this than a surface reading would suggest. Mr. Serodio could have been discussing breakfast cereal, but if he chose to do it in a sufficiently disruptive and offensive fashion, and refused to consider less confrontational and ad hominem approaches then the school could easily have found itself without other options.

I think most of us here have seen such behavior necessitate the suspension of individuals from participation in some communities. This one (WS) for example.

The subject of race and labeling deserves discussion, and I am in sympathy with most of the ideas expressed in this thread, but perhaps the real value of the discussion is potentially lost in a sense of outrage that may be unfounded.

 

[Angels_Not_Forgotten]

call me crazy, but I think i may have done all of the above after being told to NEVER say i'm African American if i was raised in Africa and become an american.

 

[fortytwo]

call me crazy, but I think i may have done all of the above after being told to NEVER say i'm African American if i was raised in Africa and become an american.

What if you had done "all of the above" and you hadn't been told to "NEVER say i'm (sic) African American"? Would the behavior still be appropriate?

I think we can reasonably surmise that the article cannot be accepted as a perfectly accurate rendition of the facts.

 

[believe09]

The debate was worth the time however, regardless of how well the facts have been represented.

 

[fortytwo]

My various meters all work fine, thank you for your concern.

There is a statement that the school officials were asked for comment but declined. That is their right, but the reporters cannot report their position if they will not give it. There is a link in the article inviting those with additional information to contact the editors, so we shall see if any one does so and if so what comes of it.

As far as the comments, I also read all 400 and you have been able to identify the couple that claim the author knows the situation and claim that the plaintiff was suspended for other reasons, not those stated in the article. I could write a comment like that, too - there is no verification of who I am in the comments section. Doesn't mean they are not who they say they are and the facts are not as they stated, but I have seen no backup to their claims while there seems to be plenty of corroboration (and no denial from the defendants) for the plaintiff's claims at this point.

I'm not trying to take a position for or against in this. My comment is directed toward the apparent rush to judgment which the article has unleashed. Quite frankly if circumstances are as presented I will be equally if not more outraged.

The lawsuit was filed on Monday, the article was published on Wednesday. I am not surprised that the school's spokesman said,

UMDNJ spokesman Jeffrey Tolvin told ABCNews.com that university officials had not yet seen the lawsuit.
"We have no comment on this matter," he said

I expect that they hadn't seen the lawsuit yet. I can certainly understand that they had not had time to review it and prepare a response.

More disturbing to me is that the reporters did not seem to make any effort of their own to investigate the circumstances beyond a rather perfunctory and pro-forma call to the school. Any diligence whatsoever could have uncovered some contribution beyond that of the principals of one side of the dispute.

As presented the article describes an almost cartoonish incident proving the evils of ultra-liberal multi-culturalism and runaway left wing extremism. This is exactly why I questioned its perspective. I developed a sense that the authors might not be without an agenda of their own.

You were more thorough than I was, as I did not read all of the 400 comments, but as I said merely scanned through them. I'll have to accept your statement that the two examples I found were the only ones of that sort.

Equally telling to me was that I saw no comments from students or others who claimed familiarity with the issue that were supporting the suit. Nearly all the comments were in support, as were the comments here, but I didn't see any of those which claimed first hand experience.

I will follow this with great interest and, as I said, if it proves to be as presented in this article I shall deplore the situation with as much vigor as anyone has so far, but I am unwilling to draw any conclusions from what data has been presented so far.

There might just be more than one side to this coin.

 

[angelmom]

What happened to everyone's "hinky-meter"?

Did they all go out of warranty at the same time?

If the behavior described in the comments is true, then by all means the man should have been disciplined. Of course our discussion was based only on the article, for which the school refused to comment at all.

Perhaps my hinky meter didn't flicker because my experience with academia has led me to believe that outrageously overboard political correctness isn't all that shocking. Professors (and higher court judges, for that matter) tend to be egotistical and detached from the real world to an astonishing degree.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Why do you think it is silly?

Unless a person immigrated from Africa to the United States it simply isn't a valid label.

If a person, any person is born here...that person is American. Period.

 

[Linda7NJ]

So this one dude from Mozambique has the right to self-identify, but millions of African-Americans don't? That's interesting.

(Before you start, I am aware that not all black people like the term "African-American." But it seems to be the most common choice at the moment.)

Yes, it does seem to be the most PC choice at the moment.

BUT When people go so far as to term ALL black people in the ENTIRE world African American...well I find it HILARIOUS and IGNORANT. Only in the USA

 

[Nova]

Yes, it does seem to be the most PC choice at the moment.

BUT When people go so far as to term ALL black people in the ENTIRE world African American...well I find it HILARIOUS and IGNORANT. Only in the USA

I knew we'd find our "point of agreement," Linda. Black people outside the U.S. are not African-Americans.

But the misuse of the term illustrates how language differs from math, and how the term "African-American" is more than the literal meanings of its component adjectives. (I'm not saying we should start calling Kenyans "African-Americans," of course; I doubt they'd appreciate it. I'm just saying the misuse reveals something important about how people process language.)

 

[Nova]

If the behavior described in the comments is true, then by all means the man should have been disciplined. Of course our discussion was based only on the article, for which the school refused to comment at all.

Perhaps my hinky meter didn't flicker because my experience with academia has led me to believe that outrageously overboard political correctness isn't all that shocking. Professors (and higher court judges, for that matter) tend to be egotistical and detached from the real world to an astonishing degree.

Perhaps you have more experience than I, though I've spent quite a few years at some supposedly "ultra-liberal" schools. In my experience, by the time a "P.C." issue reaches the press, it has been oversimplied to a ridiculous degree. As it appears may be the case here.

 

[Nova]

Have you read the part (which I have typed over and over, but I think you keep skipping because it disproves your point) where he was asked, in a discussion on culture, how HE defined HIMSELF????...

I didn't mean to skip it, I just didn't find it as important as you do.

Because I don't believe for one moment that this defendant actually defines himself as African-American. He was just being a jerk, demanding the right to personally control the language. I could guess as to his motives, but what would be the point?

Now if someone told kittenish that she has no right to identify as African-American because she appears European-American to many people, then I'd be the first to man the barricades in support of her right to self-identify.

But she wouldn't be playing word games just to piss off people.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I knew we'd find our "point of agreement," Linda. Black people outside the U.S. are not African-Americans.

But the misuse of the term illustrates how language differs from math, and how the term "African-American" is more than the literal meanings of its component adjectives. (I'm not saying we should start calling Kenyans "African-Americans," of course; I doubt they'd appreciate it. I'm just saying the misuse reveals something important about how people process language.)

Bottom line...people can not own words. They're just words. Nothing more.

Years ago, many black people attempted to take back and own the "N" word and by doing so called each other that regularly like it was a good thing. IMO that was scary. I tried to understand it...but can't.

Let it go people...it takes me back to childhood and the "sticks and stones" Why is it children can GET IT and adults can't? Any one can call me whatever they like...it means zero to me. Why do some attribute so much power to a word, any word?

I know I am rambling...sorry in advance, I am a tad tired...

 

[Texana]

May I just add to kgeaux's and scm's thoughtful posts above that the reason black Americans use a continent for their hyphenate ("African-American") is that many, if not most, have no way of knowing where in Africa their ancestors originated.

The plaintiff in this case could have solved the issue by showing a little sensitivity to those who feel strongly about the African-American label and identifying himself as Mozambican-American.

That said, I don't see the ground for suspension. I also think the lawsuit is silly, except to the extent the plaintiff feels it necessary to expunge this from his record.

In most cases I've seen where academia gets all crazy-PC, there's somebody just as obstinate on the other side insisting he or she is right. Usually, a simple "okay, I see your point of view" is enough to nip these things in the bud.

Hey Nova, How Ya Been? Long time no see! (I just realized that's probably PC incorrect as well.)

The guy probably couldn't identify himself as Mozambican-American.

We did a government mandated survey this week where the children had to identify themselves as basically African American, Asian, White, Hispanic, or Other. I had one kid looking like crazy for some European designation because his parents had told him his ancestors originally came from Germany or somewhere like that.

Obviously, the idea that "African-American" equals black conflicts with reality. So which side should give in, those with the perception and labels, or those who are actually from those continents or ethnic groups?

I dated a South African boy in college; my mother had great fun telling my father I was dating an African-American; my father, while fairly liberal in many ways, did not think for one minute that was funny.

 

[Nova]

Enlighten me-because in my naive little ivory tower being Cuban does not make me a race or Jewish for that matter, or European. How is it that the term African gets a pass?

There are people who I love in my life that define themselves as Black, not African American. Never have, never will. Consequently, the people in their lives that are not black are white, yellow etc. No room for this perspective or are they also behind the times? How shall I tell them that the words they use to define themselves are dated and culturally insignificant? They are Americans, which is also how they define themselves.

It intrigues me that you so vehemently insist that the defendant was attempting to stir the pot. And the benefit to him was what?

First, believe, I'm sorry my post appeared so condescending. The fault was in my choice of words and I should have chosen my phrases better.

Increasingly, biologists (in particular those who conducted the worldwide DNA project) are arguing that the genetic differences between so-called races are so miniscule the term should be discarded as scientific nomenclature.

What matters, what affects individuals and groups is the way "race" is constructed from culture to culture.

As I'm sure you know, those cultural differences are enormous historically, to the extent that the same individual can be said to belong to different races, depending on which culture's rules are to be invoked.

 

[Nova]

Bottom line...people can not own words. They're just words. Nothing more.

Years ago, many black people attempted to take back and own the "N" word and by doing so called each other that regularly like it was a good thing. IMO that was scary. I tried to understand it...but can't.

Let it go people...it takes me back to childhood and the "sticks and stones" Why is it children can GET IT and adults can't? Any one can call me whatever they like...it means zero to me. Why do some attribute so much power to a word, any word?

I know I am rambling...sorry in advance, I am a tad tired...

I don't think you're rambling, but I do hope you get some rest.

If words don't matter, what are we all doing here?

In theory, all of our nationalist hyphenates are oxymorons, since very few people actually hold a British and an American passport, say, simultaneously. Nonetheless, that's the language we as a culture have devised to describe ourselves; and it's a tad more accurate than my calling myself Scottish, for example, when my ancestors have been in this country for nearly 200 years.

I don't think anyone should be crucified for simply using one of these terms incorrectly. But as I predicted pages ago, it's beginning to appear that isn't the whole story in the case of this lawsuit.

Use of the "N word" is controversial, as is use of the word "queer" by a different group. But odd things happen to language, especially during periods of social change.