Microagression

A Medical Student Questioned Microaggressions. UVA Branded Him a Threat and Banished Him from Campus.

Kieran Bhattacharya's First Amendment lawsuit can proceed, a court said.

|

Kieran Bhattacharya is a student at the University of Virginia (UVA) School of Medicine. On October 25, 2018, he attended a panel discussion on the subject of microaggressions. Dissatisfied with the definition of a microaggression offered by the presenter—Beverly Cowell Adams, an assistant dean—Bhattacharya raised his hand.

Within a few weeks, as a result of the fallout from Bhattacharya's question about microagressions, the administration had branded him a threat to the university and banned him from campus. He is now suing UVA for violating his First Amendment rights, and a judge recently ruled that his suit should proceed.

Here was what the student said.

"Thank you for your presentation," said Bhattacharya, according to an audio recording of the event. "I had a few questions, just to clarify your definition of microaggressions. Is it a requirement, to be a victim of microaggression, that you are a member of a marginalized group?"

Adams replied that it wasn't a requirement.

Bhattacharya suggested that this was contradictory, since a slide in her presentation had defined microaggressions as negative interactions with members of marginalized groups. Adams and Bhattacharya then clashed for a few minutes about how to define the term. It was a polite disagreement. Adams generally maintained that microaggression theory was a broad and important topic and that the slights caused real harm. Bhattacharya expressed a scientific skepticism that a microaggression could be distinguished from an unintentionally rude statement. His doubts were wellfounded given that microaggression theory is not a particularly rigorous concept.

But Nora Kern*, an assistant professor who helped to organize the event, thought Bhattacharya's questions were a bit too pointed. Immediately following the panel, she filed a "professionalism concern card"—a kind of record of a student's violations of university policy.

"This student asked a series of questions that were quite antagonistic toward the panel," wrote Kern. "He pressed on and stated one faculty member was being contradictory. His level of frustration/anger seemed to escalate until another faculty member defused the situation by calling on another student for questions. I am shocked that a med student would show so little respect toward faculty members. It worries me how he will do on wards."

According to Bhattacharya's lawsuit, the concern card generated interest from an assistant dean in the medical school, who emailed him and offered to meet. The assistant dean assured him that "I simply want to help you understand and be able to cope with unintended consequences of conversations."

Bhattacharya responded that contrary to anyone's assertions, he had not lost his temper or become frustrated with the panel:

Your observed discomfort of me from wherever you sat was not at all how I felt. I was quite happy that the panel gave me so much time to engage with them about the semantics regarding the comparison of microaggressions and barbs. I have no problems with anyone on the panel; I simply wanted to give them some basic challenges regarding the topic. And I understand that there is a wide range of acceptable interpretations on this. I would be happy to meet with you at your convenience to discuss this further.

Then a dean of student affairs asked to meet as well.

Meanwhile, the Academic Standards and Achievement Committee met to to discuss the concern card. This committee voted to send Bhattacharya a written reminder to "show mutual respect" to faculty members and "express yourself appropriately." The committee also suggested that he get counseling.

On November 26, this suggestion became a mandate: The student was informed that he must be evaluated by psychological services before returning to classes. Bhattacharya repeatedly asked university officials to clarify what exactly he was accused of, under whose authority his counseling had been mandated, and why his enrollment status was suddenly in doubt, according to the lawsuit. These queries only appear to have made UVA officials more determined to punish him: Bhattacharya's mounting frustration with these baseless accusations of unspecified wrongdoings was essentially treated as evidence that he was guilty. At his hearing, he was accused of being "extremely defensive" and ordered to change his "aggressive, threatening behavior."

He was ultimately suspended for "aggressive and inappropriate interactions in multiple situations." On December 30, UVA police ordered him to leave campus.

UVA's administration engaged in behavior that can be described as "gaslighting." Administrators asserted that Bhattacharya had behaved aggressively when he hadn't, and then cited his increasing confusion, frustration, and hostility toward the disciplinary process as evidence that he was aggressive. And all of this because Bhattacharya asked an entirely fair question about microaggressions, a fraught subject.

His lawsuit contends that UVA violated his First Amendment rights by retaliating against him for speaking his mind. UVA filed a motion to dismiss the case, but a district court judge ruled that the suit could proceed.

"Bhattacharya sufficiently alleges that Defendants retaliated against him," wrote the court. "Indeed, they issued a Professionalism Concern Card against him, suspended him from UVA Medical School, required him to undergo counseling and obtain 'medical clearance' as a prerequisite for remaining enrolled, and prevented him from appealing his suspension or applying for readmission."

It is vital that UVA lose this case, and lose badly. Students must have the right to question administrators about poorly formed concepts from social psychology without fearing that they will be branded as threats to public order. That's the difference between a public university and an asylum.

Update: This post initially identified Sara Rasmussen as the professor who filed the complaint, but it was Nora Kern, a co-organizer of the event. Both are defendants in the lawsuit.

NEXT: Industrial Policy Failed With Vaccines Too

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Are the UVA admins crazy? How did this get beyond the seminar?

    1. Haven Monahan wouldn’t shut up about it…

        1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
          on this page…..VISIT HERE

    2. It’s not even that as much as the Behavioral Intervention Team, the super-secret star chamber group that almost every university now has. They met in secret and decided his fate, this has BIT written all over it. “Cognitive Aggression” and the rest.

      Google NaBIT and be scared — be very scared….

      1. So that’s what they’ll be calling their STASI.

      2. I googled it. There was nothing.

        1. I Duck Duck Goed “Behavioral Intervention Team”. There’s a ton of stuff. Looks like NABITA also works. The Dr. forgot the A at the end.

          1. My bad — although DuckDuckGo will find it without the “a” although you have to sort through the results. And Google well may be censoring it, who knows…

            Here is the org’s url: https://www.nabita.org/

      3. NABITA is a part of the NCHERM group. ATIXA, the Title IX Association that supports trans men in women’s sports and is professed to be hostile toward Christians and their views (see here https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/20a/Idaho-anti-trans-bills-passed/Title-IX-administrators.html), is also part of NCHERM. They are a group of radical liberal lawyers who have their talons in most major colleges and universities across the nation. They must be exposed and called out for their insanity. Their president, if you check online, has a history of stupid statements. ATIXA and NABITA are not pro-free speech and they promote radical ideologies.

    3. Sounds like UVA used …. Micro-Agression to retaliate?

      1. I believe requiring someone to get counseling under the color of authority would be considered a macroaggression.

        1. That shit’s right out of the Soviet playbook. Lefturds have a really nasty habit of trying to smear all opposition as mental illness. Snotty little cunts.

          -jcr

          1. ” Lefturds have a really nasty habit of trying to smear all opposition as mental illness.” Projection.

        2. Micro or Macro, aggression in response to a talk centered around any type of aggression seems overly aggressive to me. Glad I am long out of the college world. I fear for my grandchildren in this kind of learning environment.

      2. No. They surely only toy with M. Bhattacharya to see whether all the time wasted asking those questions and negotiating meaning actually taught him how to identify microaggression.

        Maybe it did not, or he would be on to them that the situation may be defused by addressing the nature of the condition and working way up to The One With The Patience.

        To my thinking, the accusation outstanding can be addressed as the sort of medical problem that it happens to be.

    4. Lost me at “Professionalism Concern Card”…Is that like a Red Card for independent thought violations?

    5. It’s getting scary. These people clearly do not believe in the very first amendment, the most important one of all! Something has to be done, this for all the marbles. They will try to shut up the whole country if they can. It’s thought control. They give you some wacky theory and you better believe it or you are going to get visits and requirements to mental health evaluations.

      1. Here are the buzz words of the year “neurodiversity” and “nuerodivergent”. You must know and apply those terms to your children and to the people around you.

  2. The law is on his side, but that doesn’t mean he’s going to win.

    1. It doesn’t mean he going to lose…..

    2. The university will spend whatever it takes to ruin his life. If a Judge rules against UVA they will appeal. If they lose the appeal they will appeal to a higher court. Meanwhile the guy is stuck in limbo instead of completing his medical education and becoming a doctor. I have a nephew attending a well known liberal arts college, and the college there has prohibited a fraternity from using their on campus frat house for at least 5 years. The college keeps losing in court, but it doesn’t matter. To these tinpot college administrators/dictators there is no greater crime than refusing to bend the knee to them at your first opportunity, and there is no limit to what they will spend to destroy you.

      1. This strategy did not work well for Oberlin.

    3. Why? You can request a trial by jury in civil cases. The judge’s assessment of this case, which I’m assuming was part of an anti-SLAPP process, clearly shows the court sees this as a very legitimate claim and a classic case of retaliation. Any jury this is put in front of would unanimously side with Bhattacharya.

      1. This has nothing to do with SLAPP-related laws, which is probably a good thing, because Virginia’s anti-SLAPP law is rather weak. This is now a straight Section 1983 case under federal law. (The judge dismissed the three other counts in the complaint.)

    4. I hope he wins and breaks UVA’s bank. It’s just another public university that has been totally taken over by the left and, in true fascist form, stamps out any opposition.

      1. In which case the loser is… the taxpayers of Virginia. There really is no victory here.

        1. Courts have ruled that state school administrators violating students’ rights can be held personally liable – here is one recent case

          https://www.thefire.org/court-holds-university-of-michigan-administrators-personally-liable-for-violating-students-due-process-rights/

        2. The taxpayers deserve to pay. They need to pay attention to whom they vote for, and what is happening in their public schools, including colleges.

        3. I’m a Virginia taxpayer and I hope UVA loses badly. Maybe it will force them to redeploy their resources to …going out on a limb… start educating kids again.

  3. “I simply want to help you understand and be able to cope with unintended consequences of conversations.”

    Should have called a lawyer the moment he read that.

    1. Like being kicked out of med school by the psychopaths running it.

      1. EXACTLY — this was the Behavioral Intervention Team….

  4. Start making cash online work easily from home.everybody can join this job and make extra dollars in part time…………….USA PART TIME JOB.

  5. Everybody can earn 500 dollars Daily.you can earn more than you think by working online from home. I have been doing this job for like a few weeks and my last week payment was exactly 2537 dollars…………….EARNS DOLLARS.

  6. More than 100 million Americans have already received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine—but if the country was waiting for the federal government’s handpicked vaccine manufacturer to deliver those shots, the pandemic’s end would be nowhere in sight…………….MORE INFORMACTION.

  7. Do not question the narrative. Do not question your betters.

    1. During a career with a major oil company I learned to shut up, nod in agreement, and let it wash over me. Anything else would inevitably involve the evil dwarfs at HR and possibly lawyers. The student is clearly too young to know from experience that a position strongly held by people in the soft ‘sciences’ can not be defended with logic, so a logical attack is met with force.

      1. The scary part is wondering if your silence will be held against you when eventually this all comes crashing down. People always say “Why didn’t you say something” and they never understand just what a fine dust the system will grind you to should you do so.

        1. Silence didn’t save a soul in the Soviet Union, they needed fear in everyone especially the innocent to survive.

        2. There are always excuses, yes.

          1. It’s relatively easy to be brave with your own life. It’s much harder to brave with the lives of everyone and everything you hold dear. I suppose that’s what they count on, but I guess that’s why wars are primarily fought by young unmarried men.

            1. That’s the problem. With the leverage numerous major corporations have granted to them, the left has figured out how to make employment for many people contingent on supporting them (increasingly, silence is not an option), and for anyone with dependents, that’s not a small consideration. Add to this that you can be branded publicly and become unemployable anywhere that matters, and this is a gun to the head of anyone with a mortgage. Branding the decision to go along under these circumstances as simple rank cowardice may be emotionally satisfying, but it does nothing to grapple with the realities involved here. Most of what obsesses the left is *not* popular. And yet it succeeds anyway. Their obsessions drive practically every public conversation, even though in the real world practically no one cares about any of that shit (and the people I know who constantly spout prog memes IRL are clearly regarded as freaks even by their nominal allies). One of the primary reasons for this dominance is that the cost of confronting it (for most people, for the moment) is far higher than the benefit of leaving it alone. People just check out of the conversation, making the people left talking the radical fringe. The “engage or you’re complicit” position gestures toward confronting this problem, but it ignores the heavy downside and almost total lack of upside to engagement. You speak up somewhere and then get downvoted to oblivion by the hive before getting banned. You push back at work and get the axe. Other employers won’t touch you, you’re radioactive. The end. It’s great to talk about free speech, but everyone knows it doesn’t effectively exist anymore in the public sphere, so it effectively doesn’t exist. Without it, fighting the good fight is only really open to people with fuck you money or the few people willing to nuke their own lives regardless of the actual results they achieve.

              1. This ???? is brilliantly written

              2. Question marks were supposed to be a finger pointing up to the comment lol

              3. Well said; practical truths. Thank you.

      2. No offense, but you did it wrong and we are reaping the consequences of your inaction.

      3. Smart behavior!

      4. “I learned to shut up, nod in agreement, and let it wash over me.” is how a minority can drive preference cascades (a small, intolerant group can move the whole population).

        Also, ‘We all knew’

        Both are terrible.

    2. Yes. As a BIPOC he was indeed questioning his betters. People should know by now that what some White Dude says they speak for your race, then shut up and do what he says.

      Especially in Virginia.

      1. You know, that is really sickly funny. But I just realized that is exactly what happened.

      2. As a BIPoC, he was questioning his FEMALE, white, betters.

        Which means 2X microaggressions and a bonus aggression penalty for every sentence he doesn’t end with a rising intonation. I mean, if he’s not stopped people could literally virtually die.

        1. Oh, are they white? They’re not pulling a Fauxcahontas or Dolezal maneuver to get more victim points?

          -jcr

        2. Some of you — perhaps you — are going to have to face up to the fact that this is not coming exclusively from white females. In this case, you are wrong: Nora Kern is Asian.

          I realize you word things this way in order to feel safe — if you criticize white people, this is protected territory. The left has already cleared the field for you to move in after the fact and complain about “whypipo.” After all, aren’t they evil? Criticizing Asians or blacks exposes you to more danger, and you won’t do it.

          So: Nora Kern is an Asian female. Is that relevant? If not, then why is referring to “FEMALE, white” in your comment relevant?

          1. Your assumptions are already out of date. Asians, Jews, South Asian’s, are now labeled “White Adjacent”, which means they are basically white and it is open season on them from the left.

            Just look at who are the growing targets of racial attacks in this country and who is performing the attacking, and where the attacks occur.

            Just look at affirmative action, it isn’t white males who are being hit hardest from it, it is the “white adjacent” groups.

          2. Some of white womenist people I know are asian. Theyre better at everything.

    3. Or your worsers.

  8. That’s the difference between a public university and an asylum.

    I would question your assertion that this is a difference, but I certainly agree that it is hard to tell them apart.

    1. I know a man who said it took him four years to get through university, and 20 years to get over it!

      To the person who said, “It’s just college kids being college kids,” — those are the leaders of tomorrow. How many graduation speeches do we have to hear to remind us of it? The Leftism, which has controlled all levels of education the past 40 or so years, is showing up in D.C., board rooms, media outlets, etc. Most believe our rights come from government. Pelosi, Hillary, and Obama, have confused the Constitution with the Dec of Independence more than once, & people <>.

      Imagine if our founders & Patriots who fought to free us from “mental” King George.” They gave up their jobs, houses, university admittance for their kids, morning Starbucks, sports cars, iPhones, vacations, friends, and even family member love…to be free of tyranny. One even had the nerve to say, “Give me freedom, or give me death!” I’d post his name, but it’s very “White,” and I don’t want to be seen causing a micro-aggression on a privately owned corporation’s public board.

      1. We continue to slide toward leftist tyranny. It’s real and those fascist mfrs smell blood in the water.

    2. People “yawned.” For some reason the powers that be left that word out between my brackets in my post.

      1. Linda — anything inside of those bent angle brackets will be read as a HTML language command so don’t use them.

        Fortunately, “yawned” is not a HTML command — “blink” actually is although I am not sure if it is supported anymore.

    3. Dissenting voices are treated better at an asylum.

  9. Watch out, Robby. Your HATE may causesome twitter rando to cancel his reason subscription.

  10. It’s just college kids being college kids. It has no implications for the wider culture.

    1. Has become “just crazy congress persons being congress persons”

    2. Pretty sure you just provocatively dropped a straw man.

      We’ve all seen ridiculous and mockworthy trends on college campuses become broader societal trends and inquisitions.

      These kids internalize what they learn, and then bring it into the courtrooms when they become judges, and Senate chambers when they become politicians.

      Colleges are trendsetters and leading indicators, cultures , it’s values and tattoos, originate from them. You’ll be seeing more of this guaranteed.

      1. Life is more when after you learn to recognize sarcasm.

        1. …more fun after…

          Damn You Autocorrect!

    3. Besides, it’s just an isolated incident, nothing to worry about except for those trying to use these minor matters for larger nefarious purposes.
      More seriously, I do wish our good liberal friends would recognize that the absurd Trump is gone (even if, sadly, Trumpism survives) and they don’t need to stop defending or excusing this stuff. It’s serious, it’s growing and it won’t end with just the “right people” being punished.

      1. He (Trump) still lives in your brain, though. You should make sure to vote for him in 2024, so you can re-externalize your angst.

    4. Yeah, no potentially bad outcomes from effectively requiring med students to learn law incorrectly (and punishing them for doing so) from people clearly unequipped to discuss such matters.

    5. The professor who complained is a college kid? The body that suspended him until he did what they ordered were students?

      If those are college kids, the inmates are running the asylum.

  11. In the Soviet Union, anybody that publicly questioned the prevailing political orthodoxy of the Communist party faced the prospect of involuntary confinement in a mental institution; there, people were “treated” until they saw the error of their ways.

    1. Just started rereading “The Gulag Archipelago” this morning. Best to prepare for the future.

      1. Interesting how the KGB would go around in their black sedans with a quota to fill, and just randomly pick people off the street. No doubt just to maintain the terror and to ensure that the prols remained subservient.

        1. Lenin said violence was an end, not a means…

    2. The beatings will continue until moral improves.

      1. No, the beatings will just continue.

        1. Well that is until they just resort to mass graves.

          1. Yep, the final phase of socialism, after the poverty and famine. Genocide.

    3. In Soviet Russia, orthodoxy questions you.

      1. +1, 30-year-old proto-meme

  12. He should also sue each of the people individually for defamation.

    1. What I never understood is that you are exchanging money for a service, the professor transferring his knowledge to you in order to learn a new skill. Why is college, or any schooling you pay for, not considered the purchasing of a service? Why is it not treated as such? Did they fail to provide him what he paid for? Did they change terms of the deal AFTER the service commenced? I had this problem in college too and there was a visceral reaction from administration when I presented them with my thought that I had purchased a service from them but at it’s very least education is a transaction that requires the transfer of information and the assessment of that transfer.

      1. Progressives don’t provide knowledge as a service, like merchants peddling wares. They bequeath it as academic aristocracy upon the worthy. Any lack respect shown for the process, is clear evidence of your unworthiness.

        1. No one provides you knowledge except for yourself.

      2. Sorry. MB. They are content providers
        Presenting or offering content is the university’s job.
        Learning it is your job.
        And the university’s grades for you are the assessment you asked for.
        So, what is your complaint?

  13. Your observed discomfort of me from wherever you sat was not at all how I felt.

    Your actual actions, your actual intentions, your actual feelings don’t matter. It is only the supposed perception of the aggrieved that is factually relevant.

    And, for fuck sake, never publicly or privately challenge orthodoxy.

    1. And, for fuck sake, never publicly or privately challenge orthodoxy.

      Unless you have a discreet video backup, and enough money to grind them under your lawyers. Here’s hoping Mr. Bhattacharya gets a free education out of this.

      1. True, but he probably needs to go somewhere else. Most of the faculty and almost all the administrators will retaliate over his actions revealing their bumbling incompetence.

        Left wingers like to believe experts are some infallible group. But every peek under the covers reveals they are idiots unworthy of nay respect.

      2. He’s definitely getting an education.

      3. F that, he needs to get a life time’s salary out of this. The administration at UVA will now be gunning for him and this will follow him wherever he goes. Not to mention the only way they will learn is if he really hits them in the pocket book..not just a piddling amount but enough in damages to cover him for years and hopefully 100 million or more in punitive damages. As Robby said they need to lose big, enough that other schools will think twice about pulling something like this. I hope he does not settle.

        1. “hopefully 100 million or more in punitive damages.”
          That is a fantasy that will never happen.
          If the University offered him 1 or 2 M$ and an apology in writing, he should settle for that and get on with his life.

          1. Medical school is very difficult to get into. It required a childhood committed to academics and sacrifice, while his buddies were out riding bikes and having fun in high school and even before. His parents invested likely invested tens of thousands in extracurricular academic training when he was younger. The admissions process is grueling, expensive, demoralizing, and highly competitive. His future income as a doctor would potentially be a couple of hundred thousand per year x 30 year career = 6 million or more. This has all been trashed by UVA. They need to pay 10 million or more.

    1. UVA abandoned their integrity back when they let Teddy Kennedy get away with an honor code violation. It’s been a long, slippery slope since then.

      -jcr

  14. This is utterly ridiculous. A university is, or should be, a place of open inquiry of ideas, often provocative ideas. Of course that inquiry should take place in a respectful environment. But polite disagreement is not the same as disrespect. These administrators’ demands that this student “show more respect” to them is Cartman-levels of ridiculousness.

    1. It is a worrisome trend.

      1. Welcome back screetch.

      2. Three minutes apart, but not the same person.

        Why do you even bother? We know it’s you.

      3. Where are your lamentations on the bloody 4/2 Insurrevtion?

    2. I believe, as did the Soviet apparachicks, that it is all based on a lie, at the very least a very poorly constructed ideology; and they cannot allow that lie to be challenged at all lest the house of cards come tumbling down.

      1. What is the “it” that you think is all based on a lie?

        1. Your right, communism in action is all based on reality, one big happy workers utopia !

  15. thanks god i’m not a student today i used to get into real blow ups with so called professors. other student even commented about how loud we got. in some cases they were honest disagreements and others they were flat out wrong. I think even teachers back then had more back bone than these wousis today. don’t be so offended of course when you hold that kind of power its to easy to use

  16. Someone must have been telling lies about Kieran Bhattacharya, he knew he had done nothing wrong but, one morning, he was thrown out of school.

    1. Backatchya

  17. I am shocked that a med student would show so little respect toward faculty members.

    This is particularly amusing. Left wing students call faculty racist over nonsense with faculty and administrators racing each other to kowtow. “Respect” is an absurd fig leaf to punish students for not being sufficiently left wing.

  18. It is actually fascinating in a dystopic way to hear and watch this occur around us. No hard data is ever cited, no questions are allowed, but reality does not match the orthodoxly.

    No doubt some poor med student in the Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Eastern Block Countries, North Korea, Nazi Germany etc, etc and now in American Universities were / are trying desperately to understand empirically the religion and insanity and fail utterly.

    It is like listening to someone tell me 1+1= green, and then actually trying to figure it out.

    1. 1 + 1 = Apple for me today. Could be green tomorrow. Yesterday Apple + Green = Sky.

      1. Apple + Green = THE BEATLES

  19. Bhattacharya expressed a scientific skepticism that a microaggression could be distinguished from an unintentionally rude statement.

    Even this is being generous to Adams’ intent. The definition given just says “interactions” not “statements” and says “negative” not “rude intentionally or not”. The given definition includes any bad thing that happens when two people of differing races interact whether either one of them was in control of what happened or not and even if the minority wasn’t the ‘victim’. By Adams’ definition even well intentioned and successful acts of kindness that benefit everyone but incur unforseeable or unavoidable consequences constitute microaggressions.

    If I buy a copy of ‘A Promised Land’ for a black person and their dog eats it and dies, that fits the definition of “negative interaction with member of a marginalized group”.

    1. Why would you kill someone’s dog ? You are literally Hitler.

      1. Sounds like a cop to me

      2. Hitler was huge into animal rights, and was a vegetarian.

        He’s literally Mao!

        Fixed that for you

    2. The first publicly identified “microaggression” was a California University Professor (maybe UCLA?) correcting a black student’s grammar in an English course. It’s clear microaggression has no meaning other than a substitute for whatever a black activist is unhappy about because being specific would trigger mockery and ridicule.

      1. Maybe first to be identified as such at the time but various people have been retconning everything from, mispronouncing names, crossing the street, to locking car doors, and whistling at women as microaggressions for a long time.

    3. I’m in a marginalized group. I’m a classical liberal.

      1. We don’t cotton to your type here at Reason boy. You better crawl back inside the normal parameters.

  20. Noticed this on another article about college suspensions, it’s interesting how they phrase their contempt for political wrongthink as performance based with passive aggressive questions like ‘I wonder about his future here’

    Talk about psychopaths.

    1. ‘I wonder about his future here’

      That’s mafiosi as hell, like the neighborhood thugs coming around to collect the protection money. “Nice future you got planned kid. It’d be a real shame if something happened to it. Now then, what was it you were sayin’?”

  21. And of course the definition of microaggression is “negative interactions with members of marginalized groups” and then, conveniently, Bhattacharya is not a member of a marginalized group and Adams’ blacklisting him doesn’t constitute a negative interaction.

    At this point ‘students unfairly blacklisted and persecuted by UVA’ constitutes a well-defined marginalized group by itself.

    1. Since Bhattacharya is obviously a Person of Color, he erred in not prefacing his original statement with that fact. “As a Person of Color I find the definition contradictory and therefore a microaggression in itself.”

  22. From his name I’m guessing he broadly and conveniently fits into the “Asian” block; they may or not be considered marginalized, depending upon the needs of the moment.

    In my considerate opinion, however, no medical student at UVA is in any way shape or form “marginalized.” In a few years of hard study and residencies, they will all be in positions of authority and making serious bank.

    1. Remember when Mindy Kahling’s brother applied to medical school as both a black and an Asian, and ended up getting accepted based off his “black” test scores?

      I have a feeling all the fury over that, especially by his sister, was due to the fact that he exposed just how low colleges really set their expectations for black people. It’s not an accident AT ALL that colleges are moving away from requiring test scores for admission now.

      1. It’s worth remembering that “diversity” did not exist until the Supreme Court said it was the only acceptable justification for racial discrimination. Now entire organizations claim it is literally the most important aspect of their mission.

        1. Remember when they said they didn’t mean they wanted quotas? Then it was “What? Quotas? There’s no quotas here!” Now it’s just blatant quotas and they’re proud of it.

    2. I wonder if he is related to another Dr. Bhattacharya, who frequently debunks COVID scaremongering on Laura’s show on Fox. That would be something.

  23. “I am shocked that a med student would show so little respect toward faculty members. It worries me how he will do on wards.”

    Has this person ever worked with actual physicians? So I looked her up:

    Beverly Cowell Adams, PhD [psychology] Assistant Dean, College of Arts and Sciences. So no, she has no idea of what it is like to work “on wards.”

    1. In order words, she is “not a real Doctor.”

      1. We can go far as to say, in other words, she is a moronic self-aggrandizing dipshit.

    2. Nora Kern filed the written complaint, not Beverly Cowell Adams.

      Kern is Asian. Adams is Black. What they’re up to is toxic gynocentric misandering feminism.

  24. I stopped giving to UVA when they had the president of Iran give a speech.
    It’s only gotten worse since then.

  25. >>microaggression theory

    is stupid. if more 28 point bold headlines had made this point 10 years ago it might have caught on.

  26. Beverly Cowell Adams, PhD [psychology]

    The “psychology” speaks volumes….

  27. This is a good example of how lacking in awareness of diverse perspectives this panel displayed. Bhattacharya seems like the kind of person you might come across in a philosophy talk where people are used to challenging assumptions and definitions. He could also be neurally atypical. We all know people who like to pick apart your statements almost out of habit. It can be annoying but it’s their right. It seems UVA is trying to microcontrol the questioning and shield its speakers from challenges. That is definitely not the mission of a University.

    1. There’s also the fact that Bhattacharya was absolutely right in his assertion. That was his fatal error.

  28. Does anyone have a time mark in the soundcloud recording link of the AMWA presentation, to where Kieran Bhattacharya was asking his questions? I skipped through stopping every 2-3 minutes and was unable to find it. I want to listen to him talk but really would rather not listen to the entire 60 minutes.

    1. I found it – it’s 28:45 to maybe 34:00.

      Bhattacharya to me sounded like he had an axe to grind and was using question time to try to debate. 100% DEFINITELY NOT something one should be kicked out of college for, but does come off pretty obtuse. Like an internet comment warrior, rapid fire questions asking for evidence beyond anecdotal, “you say you’ve studied this for years surely you have something better than anecdotal evidence”. I want to listen to the hearing recording, but I don’t think I have the stomach for it today.

      1. You got the correct spot on the recording. Do listen to the entire thing and tell us whether the student is a sociopath or just skeptical and clinically analytical as I would hope that a medical student should be.
        I did listen to the exchange. Mr. B’s questions were not rude, irrelevant, taunting or insulting.
        He did press the speaker for specifics; he did offer his opinion about what sounded like a contradiction in the speaker’s definitions and questioned the intellectual underpinning of the concept of microagressions.
        The speaker was flustered that B. did not swallow her line of argument. But pointed out weakness in her defense of the concept.
        That is a good reason to give the student an A, rather than to subject him to brainwashing and then kick him out of school.

      2. This is what academics is supposed to be. It’s not about being nice, it’s about the validity of the opinion presented. Intellectual vigor is not tolerant.

      3. Punished student for curiosity, enthusiasm, and treating the matter as if it meant something. (Should I watch that video?)

        Was microaggression exemplified by anyone obviously in the room?

  29. It is so sad that the only people sticking up for our Constitution are more recent immigrants.

  30. “…His doubts were wellfounded given that microaggression theory is not a particularly rigorous concept…”

    You could save space and simply call it “bullshit”.

  31. What did the members of the panel have to say about this controversy? The person he questioned did not seem to be stressed by his questions. Debate should be a natural part of academic exchanges of ideas. This university was Thomas Jefferson’s creation. He was famous for never questioning or disagreeing, right?

    1. He didn’t want his students becoming Federalists or reactionaries. He wanted them to be good liberals.

      But probably now *this* version of liberal.

      1. not, not “now”

      2. “This” is no version of liberal.

  32. Just how large is a microaggression? Is it so micro you need a micrometer to measure it, or will a feeler gauge do the trick?

    1. Nothing but feeler gauges.

      1. The official tool for this is called the “Geiger-Feeler”, scientifically proved to be 100% effective less then 5% of the time.

    2. Snowflakes melt at the slightest rise in temperature.

    3. How large is a microaggression? It’s so large that a sheet of graphene would be too thick to be an appropriate feeler gauge, and even a bench mic doesn’t have the resolution to detect it.

    4. You need dark skin to measure it unless you have a vagina.

  33. Micro aggressions…what a stupid concept. Sooo many easily offended,weak little cunts that I guess they had to come up with something.

  34. Young Tom Jefferson wouldn’t last one semester at the school he founded.

  35. Critical thinking = bad

  36. The last line was GREAT, especially with a slight modification. That is supposed to be the difference between a university and an asylum.

  37. It is no wonder they got so defensive when questioned about ‘microaggressions’. The whole concept was created to specifically protect ‘special’ groups. The concept of aggression is as old as humanity. Aggression aims to hurt someone for whatever reason. We already have laws and definitions for many types of aggression such as assault, manslaughter and murder. We also have aggressive acts such as ridicule, insult and belittling which are not legislated against since they do no physical harm. Legislation or the lack of it applies to all human beings whether they belong to a marginalised group or not.

    We do not need a concept of ‘microaggressions’. Every aggressive behaviour is already covered by legislation or is deemed to be outside of the law. Those who propose the concept of microaggression want something done about ridicule, insult and anything which makes them feel uncomfortable. They want something that no one else has nor needs. They want to put themselves and their marginalised identity above the rest of humanity.

    They only seek special treatment because they are so insecure about their marginalised identity. If they truly believed they were marginalised then they would not need protection against aggression which causes no physical harm. No more protection than everyone else.

    Insults, ridicule and jokes only hurt those who are insecure in their identity and no amount of policing of ‘microaggressions’ will ever give them the security they crave.

    1. “no amount of policing of ‘microaggressions’ will ever give them the security they crave.”

      That’s not stopping them.

      1. The security is removal off all people who could possibly create a negative emotion in them. The logical conclusion of this has been shown countless times before by progressive regimes, and is never pleasant.

  38. Beverly Cowell Adams and Sara Rasmussen will keep this shit up until and unless they suffer personal consequences for their bullying behavior. Suing the school isn’t enough. Bhattacharya needs to go after them for violating his civil rights.

    -jcr

  39. Of course, the reason they need to punish Bhattacharya is that their vapid victimhood theater schtick is so trivial to deflate, that their only hope of maintaining their bullshit tax-dependent billets as pseudointellectuals is to scare anyone and everyone out of questioning their naked emperor.

    -jcr

  40. How the fuck is ANYONE okay with this?

  41. Most American universities are largely funded by the federal government. Pretty much anybody who wants to go to college can get a large amount of cash handed to them with relatively few strings attached. A small but sizable percentage default within a few years after leaving college. A much larger percentage pay a fraction of their loans back based on their their income. At a certain point, the remaining balance is forgiven. Since these colleges are essentially de facto branches of the federal government, I think the same First Amendment rules should apply.

  42. she filed a “professionalism concern card”

    Oh, FFS! Isn’t the lack of capitalization of that term a microaggression in itself? And I see spellcheck thinks “microaggression” is not a word. Probably a doctoral dissertation right there.

  43. How has nobody brought up the fact that UVa was founded by a slave owner?! Just setting foot on campus is a micro aggression. The entire school should be wiped from the pages of history!

  44. I’m glad his lawsuit is able to proceed but I can’t help but feel miffed.

  45. Spend your free time chatting with hot girls from our web platform casual sex in bristol

  46. In other words our virtue signaling BS can’t stand up to some valid questions so the questioner must be punished.

  47. It is very unusual for a medical school to suspend a student for any reason. The goal is to get everyone through.

    They will offer support, tutoring or other resources if a student is struggling.

    So something broke down here.

  48. Everyone should be concerned about this. This smacks of the old Soviet Union where you could be put in a mental hospital for ‘unsoviet” behavior. This whole ‘micro aggression’ garbage is total nonsense. It was designed so wannabe victims can still whine when there are no ‘macro aggressions’ to worry about.

  49. Almost certain you just provocatively dropped a misrepresentation.

    We’ve all seen absurd and mockworthy patterns on school grounds become more extensive cultural patterns and investigations.
    These children disguise what they realize, and afterward carry it into the courts when they become judges, and Senate chambers when they become legislators.
    Schools are pioneers and driving markers, societies , it’s qualities and tattoos, start from them. You’ll be seeing a greater amount of this ensured.
    Best Schools in gurgaon

  50. What this shows extremely clearly is that these are not “panel discussions” at all. There is no allowance for discussion at all – these are simply indoctrination/struggle sessions which are sometimes somewhat optional but increasingly mandatory. I would think it’s ridiculous to think this will actually convince people of the merits of the indoctrination topic but after living in recently post-Communist Poland for awhile I learned that wasn’t the aim at all. It’s simply to advise the citizenry of the terms of acceptable public statement and to rub their powerlessness in their face to shame and demoralize them.

  51. “these are simply indoctrination/struggle sessions which are sometimes somewhat optional but increasingly mandatory.”
    Indeed they are indoctrination / brainwashing sessions in which any sign of resistance is viciously punished.
    One best learns at an early age to keep one’s mouth shut and take revenge only if the chance offers and you can leave no fingerprints

  52. any student caught reading Reason will be expelled

  53. The best defense in these instances is a good offense. Try to identify a white person you oppose, preferably one who is leading the group, and accuse them of racism. Keep repeating the charge no matter what happens.

  54. A state university staffed by freaks sounds like a waste of taxpayer money.

  55. I mean, you can’t expect the free exchange of ideas and challenges to your worldview at an institution of higher learning, that’d just be silly.

  56. WOW. That’s all I can say. I don’t know what this student said to the administrators in his meetings with him, but I will say that his behavior at the conference on “microaggressions” contributed in a positive way to the UVA academic community. That the administrators and professors involved don’t recognize this and responded in a way reminiscent of the old soviet union does them no credit. On the one hand, this student should not sue to be reinstated to a clearly intellectually impoverished academic community that doesn’t want him. On the other, I hope he gets many millions from them over a destroyed career combinded with punitive damages to make sure he never has to work another day in his life. UVA and its medical school behaved reprehensibly. I say this as a board certified MD with no UVA affiliation. And after this sorry showing I hope I never have any UVA affiliation, though it is allegedly a fine school.

  57. With this advanced world, everybody is willing on assortments. Regardless of whether that is about garments or even food, they need to continue for various assortments. Therefore, when it comes to arrange cakes online Iris baking is offering to order cakes online in Chandigarh on most circumstances, you should visit one specific of the best wedding cake bread kitchens in your town from where one can get kinds of cakes like design cake, photograph cake, compartment cake, cupcake, animation baked good, etc.

  58. America’s colleges and universities have become a joke, a laughing stock to the rest of the world, filled with spoiled little narcissists, run by misanthropes disguised as learned people, when in truth, they are as ignorant and selfish.
    Just as bad is the public schools being used as an indoctrination and brainwashing into the new collective thought of socialism and wokeism.
    This disease has wormed its way into corporations like Coca Cola which now forces its employees to attend classes on being less white. Talk about rubbish….
    The entire plan is to take America down and destroy it, then build back better as they would scream at you, all the while labeling you as a racist, misogynist white supremacist.
    In this day and age, the slightest remark can be taken out of context and used against you or me.

  59. Super woke academia such as UVa….where the First Amendment goes to die.

  60. Everybody has the right to be offended….nobody has the right to never be offended.

    BTW….I can hear China laughing halfway around the world.

  61. I’m a huge Reason fan, but with all due respect, this article is incredibly one-sided… I really expect better from Reason. If we want to read position pieces, we can read the MSM.
    Where is the “other side of the story?” The student was not censored for *what he said*, he was censored for interrupting a seminar and hogging the attention and aggressively attacking the people giving the talk. Have you never been to a seminar where someone has done this? It is incredibly rude, selfish, and generally indicative of someone who doesn’t have empathy or understanding of others. I see no evidence presented by Reason that it was *what* he said that caused the problem: they have simply wishcast that because of their bias against State run institutions. Look, I’m an AnCap, I want the State to wither and die; but State institutions are still run by people, most of whom are just trying to do their best: not everything they do is wicked. At the least, I’d want to better understand exactly how disruptive he was.
    Note for example that Reason gives a word by word quote of his initial question – one that is pretty reasonable – and then just waves away his subsequent behavior. Was it so hard to also detail that? Instead we have to take the author’s word for it: “Adams and Bhattacharya then clashed for a few minutes about how to define the term. It was a polite disagreement. ”
    The author then basically lies by summarizing this: “”This student asked a series of questions that were quite antagonistic toward the panel,” wrote Kern. “He pressed on and stated one faculty member was being contradictory. His level of frustration/anger seemed to escalate until another faculty member defused the situation by calling on another student for questions. I am shocked that a med student would show so little respect toward faculty members. It worries me how he will do on wards.” As being “pointed” at the topic of microaggression. But it isn’t at all. The policy card discussed *only* his disruptive and aggressive behavior, not the content of what he said.
    Fuck me Reason, if you are no longer the voice of, well, “Reason”, then who the fuck is?

    1. “censured”, sheesh

  62. With this advanced world, everybody is willing on assortments. Regardless of whether that is about garments or even food, they need to continue for various assortments. Therefore, when it comes to arrange cakes online Iris baking is offering to order cakes online in Chandigarh on most circumstances, you should visit one specific of the best wedding cake bread kitchens in your town from where one can get kinds of cakes like design cake, photograph cake, compartment cake, cupcake, animation baked good, etc. apkfleet

  63. Kieran Bhattacharya was punished for demonstrating that the assistant dean is a fraud. That’s higher ed these days.

  64. Relax, they used Macro, not micro aggressions against Bhattacharya. Presumably, this guy is somewhat “brown” (it’s really “orange” or “flesh” increased saturation, not color, but let’s go with “brown”) and therefore is actively micro-aggressing against the narrative that the “man” keeps brown down.

  65. “That’s the difference between a public university and an asylum.” Public universities are asylums.

  66. Beverly Cowell Adams has been scrubbed from their website. But you can find the instigator of the witch, Nora Kern, here: https://med.virginia.edu/urology/dr-nora-kern/

  67. Why would a rational person want to attend a seminar on the topic in any event? It is quite possible the student attended with the intent to question the validity of the seminar’s scope.

    Regardless, those feminazi’s need to be sued big time.

  68. You mean, like this — or like this? Is that enough microaggression for ys’?

    This was pure magic or genius, the way that you can invent a theory that has everyone looking like some sort of swine, detractor, racist, sexist, honor code violator, etc. — and not even understand where aggression begins & ends.

    So we’ll shrink it, microscopically, and then go from there.

  69. A friend of mine is an airline pilot. First officers are taught to speak up, if they think the captain is doing something stupid.

    Sometimes, the elder physician is the idiot, and the young doctor fresh out of residency knows better. But, under UVA’s policy, it seems that a young doctor should allow an older doctor to make a mistake, rather than tell him that he is being stupid.

  70. “Students must have the right to question administrators about poorly formed concepts from social psychology without fearing that they will be branded as threats to public order. That’s the difference between a public university and an asylum.”

    Not an asylum – a monastery. We are looking at the formation of a state religion.

  71. And how much is Reason complicit in this travesty?

    Reason promotes the narrative of “cops oppressing people of color” (see your article on Daunte Wright this same issue). Then when those “oppressed” peoples act on this narrative and take the reasonable (to them) step of censoring those who, they claim, are oppressing them — you complain.

    Reason needs to make up its mind on which side it needs to support in the culture war. Either shill for the “oppressed” and then shut up about their censoring dissenters. Or take the side of liberty and reject the “oppression” narrative.

  72. I’d rather take the side of sides and point out that police are not sworn to follow whatever advisers that one may, however in spirit, reference in mind.

    Police should be following the law, so you need to know that much THAT they should. Additionally so, police — who actually expect to be identified by anyone they confront — will probably be looking for signs that their person-of-interest shall be able to receive and intercept their any signal. And that’s probably how police usually get a bad rap, because many people do not want an interaction at all, and those persons must receive police advances if being detained or being considered for detainment or arrest.

    Thirdly, only right decides the contest in terms of legal standing. Right were anything that you know that you know correctly, such as what of your actions were made into priorities. I’d say there were only two demonstrable types of approaches to a situation of police in known common practice, one being to meet the possibility of contest with a clue that police ultimately work for you, and the other shown by attempt to evade. Evasion is not a legal option no matter how popular it may appear to be, and thus would be punished as matter of no uncertain inevitability. Avoidance works only if they do not see you at all — and are not looking for you.

    When submitting to police, it is not a sexual nor a sadistic form of submission but only a conditional form of submission. And that surely must be the most frightening of prospects for anyone who has not even bothered to consider rehearsal for any possibility of being detained or arrested. Because at this point you neither know nor care what police do and have assumed that by capturing you — that they may not even be police at all but wearing disguises. Or that even if they were police, or not, that they but Could take you anywhere they may please and do anything to you. That’s why people need to investigate and learn about the condition of the liberty that people expect yet already enjoy around themselves and even go so far as to consider moving elsewhere if too ignorant to know how to hold corrupt police to terms of their public & visible contracts, respectably.

Please to post comments