From The Ethics Alarms Double Standard Files: So Apparently A Black Professor Can Be As Racist As She Wants Without Consequences, Correct?

Don't racist professors teach students racism? Just curious...

Don’t racist professors teach students racism? Just curious…

Unqualified GOP Presidential hopeful Ben Carson made one of his most reasonable statements when he defended the right of NASCAR fans to fly Confederate flags during races. Well of course he did, since this is the United States and we have a First Amendment. Except to the most ignorant members of the censorious left, this is literally a no-brainer: even brainless Americans should know better than to argue that flying any flag on private property should be prevented by law.

Ah, but special dispensation is due to racist African American progressive bullies. Thus is is that University of Pennsylvania religious studies professor Anthea Butler, wrote “If only there was a ‘coon of the year’ award …” when responding to a Daily Beast editor’s  tweet containing a link to a Sports Illustrated article on the issue.

Nice. This is per se denigrating Carson based on race, an ad hominem attack and beyond ugly and irresponsible. Sure, Butler has the same right to say what she wants as anyone, except when it reflects on her employer and suggests, as this tweet does, that she cannot be trusted to teach. Is any African American student who dares to question her political correctness orthodoxy risking being called a “coon” by this woman? I’d say so. She is validating racist rhetoric and modelling intimidation for her students and more importantly, the University of Pennsylvania’s students. Is it competent and responsible to employ such a woman? No. Is this within the acceptable range of “academic freedom”? Denigration on the basis of color? I want to hear a university spokesperson admit that, and then to stand up for the first white student who calls the professor a “coon.”

Campus Reform, the conservative college watchdog, tried to get some clarification but neither Butler nor spokespersons for the university responded to repeated requests for comment, and the Department of Religious Studies declined to weigh in, saying they can only answer questions from students regarding her class. Professor Butler did, however, delete the “coon” tweet from her account shortly after Campus Reform attempted to contact her. Prof. Justin McDaniel, who chairs of the religious studies program at UPenn, ducked the issue, saying…

“Professor Butler is on sabbatical and not regularly on campus as she is writing a book on African-American religious history. She will be back on campus teaching regularly in the spring. She is a valued colleague and faculty member, but I have no comment on the tweet, because I have not seen it nor know the context of the comment.”

Uh, what would be the proper context for a tweet calling an African American a “coon”?

He is an unprincipled coward, the college is irresponsible and untrustworthy, and Butler is the kind of arrogant, vile and divisive racist that no one should have to pay tuition to be corrupted by. Do students, academics and journalists care about fairness and civility toward all, or just those whose politics they approve? Let’s see if Butler suffers any adverse professional consequences for this.

Or is the majority position of progressives and academics that racist abuse is acceptable, as long as the attacker is black, and has the correct politics?

I’m afraid that the answer is becoming increasingly obvious.


Facts: Washington Examiner, Campus Reform

23 thoughts on “From The Ethics Alarms Double Standard Files: So Apparently A Black Professor Can Be As Racist As She Wants Without Consequences, Correct?

  1. I’d have more respect for the university and department if they outright said: “Professors have the freedom to communicate in whatever form they consider appropriate to educate our students, we may disagree on what they say, but the value of tenure is to allow the discussion of unpopular ideas.” That would at the very least be principled, but principled is something universities have not been in a long time.

  2. Ken White from Popehat posted this article today.

    The story isn’t relevant to this, but there’s a quote at the end by someone who thinks being a minority means they can’t be racist.

    “I, an ethnic minority woman, cannot be racist or sexist towards white men, because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender. Therefore, women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system.”

    My response to this is: the qualifications to be racist are not what you have described. Those are the results of racism, maybe.

    Racism is the belief that races of humans possess specific characteristics as to make one superior, inferior or otherwise distinct, and prejudice or hatred based on that notion.

    Does this person hate white people? I don’t know. It is not relevant. But her reason why she cannot be racist is wrong, one hundred percent wrong.

    I remember seeing a Tumblr post by a person who said they weren’t a ‘misandrist’ just because they hated and wanted to kill all men. They wanted to kill all men because that would drastically reduce the crime rate and rapes, etc. Again, this is not the proper definition of that term. Misandry might mostly be a phantom of paranoids and MRA groups, but nevertheless, this person just gave them plenty of coal for their boilers.

    At some point, the social flow against racism moved the landscape in a weird direction. For the most part, we all grasped that racism was bad. But when racism became absolutely unacceptable (which is it), the argument then went, “Racism is bad. I’m not bad. Therefore, I’m not racist.” People will wrap themselves into a cocoon to not admit they’re racist, even seeing people with contrary opinions as the “real racists.”

    This could also be a loss of direction for the movement. “Racism is bad. Whites have predominately benefited from racism. Therefore, whites are bad.” This isn’t a conscious decision, I’m sure, but it shows how the edge blunts when its used by people who aren’t careful thinkers, who let other ideas get under their feet.

    Nobody is good at the introspection that is required to examine your own prejudices. Is having a racist thought “being” racist? Maybe it should be OK to have racist thoughts, but not to act on them. But the actions racism would lead you to do would mostly be bad no matter what the reason was for it. Again, I always prefer to punish actions, not thoughts.

    People who make excuses or logical reasons as to how it is impossible for a minority to be racist are not helping push towards unity and against oppression. They are making excuses and failing to reconcile their real feelings about their fellow humans. In the end, that will be worse than just being racist, because it seems very likely that they already are; they are just in the clutches of denial.

    • All this poor reasoning and flawed thinking is carefully taught at universities. It takes many professors and many years of lack of introspection, shallow reasoning, incorrect definitions, and created cultures to produce a black studies graduate. After they graduate their only job possibilities are in the field of promoting a dangerously flawed view of society. You could say it’s almost as if “studies” students spend time in a warped territory (plantation) where they get indoctrinated into the mindset that allows them to see the “other” as not fully human yet fully evil. And some people don’t believe history repeats itself.

  3. Where’s Charles on this? Isn’t this a continuation of the mysterious ‘black people can call each other “nigger” but white people can’t’ theory?

  4. Or is the majority position of progressives and academics that racist abuse is acceptable, as long as the attacker is black, and has the correct politics?

    No, the majority position of progressives and academics is that racist abuse is a logical impossibility as long as the attacker is black and has the correct politics, as such persons by definition cannot be racist in thought, word or deed, and so it isn’t actually racist abuse and there is really nothing to be concerned about.

  5. I am curious, when she is not calling our peaceful neighbors demeaning, despicable names, has *Professor Anthea Butler ever addressed America’s expanding and shameful *National Epidemic of Child Abuse and Neglect,* aka *Poverty*, that for decades has deprived untold numbers of depressed children from experiencing and enjoying a safe, fairly happy American kid childhood.

    Is Professor Anthea Butler aware that child victims of America’s expanding and shameful *National Epidemic of Child Abuse and Neglect,* aka *Poverty*, often develop into angry, frustrated, unpredictable, emotionally depressed teens and adults lacking empathy and compassion for their peaceful neighbors, because their lives suck so why shouldn’t their neighbor’s lives suck too!

    Does Professor Anthea Butler recognize there is a substantial population of young immature teen girls and women creating life before acquiring the skills, PATIENCE and means to properly raise, nurture and supervise a developing young child who matures into a fairly happy teen and adult enjoying safe streets to play on or travel.

    Is Professor Anthea Butler one of many highly educated Americans who hold blameless young immature teen moms for failing and emotionally harming their children…while the police, criminal justice and correctional systems are charged with protecting peaceful people from depressed, angry, frustrated, unpredictable teens and adults who were victims of EARLY childhood abuse and/or neglect at the hands of immature, impatient teen girls, young women and/or irresponsible men?

    What is Professor Anthea Butler opinion of the May 2015 NYTimes article *Rise in Suicide by Black Children Surprises Researchers*

    Has Professor Anthea Butler ever asked herself, “Who is responsible for physically and/or emotionally traumatizing children to the point young kids believe their lives are not worth living?”

    Speaking At The Eulogy For The Honorable Reverend Clementa Pinckney, President Barack Obama asked:

    *”Perhaps it causes us to examine what we’re doing to cause some of our children to hate?”* (Applause.)

    I am still waiting for Mr. Obama to provide the American people with an answer to his question.

    Does Professor Anthea Butler share Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke’s sound advice offered to all Americans, *”Fix the ghetto!”*?


    • I wonder if we could make it easier to take children out of the ghetto environment by relaxing laws that would justify removal of children from parents’ custody.

      We could offer a one million dollar tax credit to people willing to adopt such children, with the condition that the adopters must already make at least one million dollars in income, or have twenty million dollars in total assets. In other words, one has to already be rich to take advantage of that tax credit.

      The upside is that children will be raised in an optimal environment where they will have every advantage of life.

      I wonder what the downside would be. .

      • You may not have to offer the incentive. If you just disallowed foreign adoptions, there might be enough demand here. Everyone I know who has adopted a child has adopted them from a foreign country (often with expensive medical problems) because it is considered shameful to put a baby up for adoption here. DHS systems bounce kids between foster homes for years rather than let them be adopted and it is considered noble to abort the child rather than let them suffer the fate of being adopted by a family that wants them. It is likely that there would be quite a demand for healthy American children.

      • Hi, Michael.

        I am hoping when camera technology proves its mettle in protecting police officers, as well as identifying officers who require further training or officers who have no business serving the public in a LE capacity, we will use that same technology to protect children by monitoring the common area of homes in which caregivers have established a track record for failing to properly raise, nurture and/or supervise their children.

        Especially in communities with higher crime rates where kids are more often exposed to some/many depressed or “living wild” neighbors with a mindset for lawlessness.

        Recently I watched a video that saddened me as well as enlightened me when I learned child welfare investigators test the hair of child abuse victims for “ambient” exposure to drugs.

        Holy smokes, the numbers were critical. At the least cameras would expose signs of intoxication in homes identified as requiring extra care to prevent children from being emotionally and or physically harmed.

        This video depicts horrific examples of men who were victims of childhood abuse and neglect, conditioning a young teen to embrace the criminal, anti-social *’Street Culture’ Baltimore Mom of The Year* failed to protect her teen son from…not to mention representing the fear peaceful people living and WORKING in the community experience knowing depressed, angry, unpredictable teens and young adults need to vent their angers and frustrations for being introduced to a life of pain and struggle by irresponsible, “living wild” single moms and/or dads.

        Search youtube; /watch?v=C3ChOLiJa8k

        If we do not take affirmative action to protect children, “the ghetto” will continue to thrive, fueled by poor parenting, resulting with depressed kids maturing into depressed teens and adults who often vent their angers and frustrations on their peaceful neighbors, instead of the person(s) responsible for introducing them to a life of hardship, pain and struggle.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.