Unethical Tweet Of The Week: University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Sami Schalk

Associate Professor of Gender and Women’s Studies Sami Schalk describes herself as a “Sarcastic fat Black disabled queer femme,”—yes, she’s full of herself!—added,

“Make real substantive long term change commitments or the uprisings will continue. So many people have so little to lose in the wake of the pandemic. Folks got time & anger & not much else to do with it but disrupt the fuck out of this city,”


  • Why do universities allow people like this to teach our young?
  • What responsible parents would pay a cent  to an institution to inflict the ravings of a fanatic like this on their children?
  • Who taught those young protesters  so negligently that the statues mean nothing to them?
  • “Your people”—funny, I always thought that kind of distinction was racist—aren’t in “cages,” you fool—they’re in prison, just like “my people.” Those who are there are there because they don’t know how to live in a civilized society, and refuse to obey its laws, thus harming the rest of us. A cheap, transparent rhetorical trick like “cages” doesn’t change the truth.
  • I’m curious how long the self-contradictory narrative will survive that the protests are about systemic racism and George Floyd, when so many of its leaders and cheerleaders openly admit the goal is power? Like so much of the 2016 Post Election Ethics Train Wreck, it all comes down to just how apathetic and gullible the American public is.
  • This is the  crowd the leaders of the Democratic Party is supporting, encouraging, and enabling.  Sure, it’s cynical and dishonest, and wildly reckless, but as the saying goes, grab power by any means necessary. Voters have four months to figure out what’s going on.
  • It’s a long time.

16 thoughts on “Unethical Tweet Of The Week: University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Sami Schalk

  1. I wrote to the Chancellor pointing out that if she can’t answer the question, she has no business in education. And, further, who the hell does she mean by “our people”? Does she mean that its okay if people are in cages so long as they are not her people?
    I’ll follow up if I get a reply.
    I can’t imagine taking a class with someone so arrogant.

    • Oh, I certainly can. My sophomore year (Boston University) I signed up for Political Science 101 with none other than the fabled Howard Zinn. Even though I was pretty far left at the time, I withdrew from the class after two lectures, because he was a sneering, self-important, arrogant asshole who took great pleasure in ripping apart students who asked questions coming from what Zinn perceived was a point of view contrary to his.

      Zinn was the fore-runner. Much of academia seems to have picked up his lead.

    • Here’s the heart of the email I did in fact send to the new, young, of color, head of my college’s alumni association:

      “I’d appreciate your briefly telling me what the college has done wrong and what can be done to remedy those wrongs. When I was on campus fifty years ago, the college took absolutely no position on, for example, the Vietnam War protests, other than insisting finals be taken on schedule, Kent State notwithstanding. How is it that the college needs to take a position on police procedures?”

      Which had been prompted by her email, excerpted below:

      “This meeting was not business as usual for me, however. As the first person of color to hold this position, I’m compelled to point out that now is the time we must begin to address some of the pain caused in Hamilton’s past, and the pain our community (and our country) is going through in the present. I believe Saturday’s meeting was just the start.

      I invited alumni to keep the conversation going after the committee reports and awards. The statements made by the College regarding racism and discrimination and the current uproar relating to the murders of Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, and the dozens of other Black and Brown women and men at the hands of police are only a few examples of why I felt we needed to talk, listen, and learn from one another. I know these conversations open a wound for Kirkland women, alumni of color, and those in the LGBTQ+ community who felt isolated, violated, and unheard during their time on the Hill. Many participants in the meeting, myself included, were still processing their reactions to the College’s response. However, during the meeting, as many reflected on their own personal experiences at Hamilton, the need for these discussions became abundantly clear. I’d even say the need for continued conversation and follow up are vital if we are ever going to move toward a healthier and more inclusive community.”

      Here’s the response I received from her this morning:

      “Thank you for reaching out to me. I hope you took away more from my letter to the alumni association than I was expecting the college to take a position on police procedures and the college has done some things wrong. With this said, I do expect if they are going to make a statement against racism and discrimination, that the statement is more than a few niceties and general platitudes.

      I won’t list each moment where Hamilton’s leadership (or students at the school allowed by the leadership) has caused someone pain. There’s no way to do that briefly. What I will tell you is I’m working with an advisory council to identify some overarching issues and determine some measurable ways to address them in a realistic timeline. As we do so, we’ll be looking to the Hamilton and Kirkland alumni and the community at large to help. I hope that we can count on your participation when we do.”

      Nothing but gratuitous cant. I’m still formulating my response to make sure it’s impeccably measured.

    • Here’s the follow-up I promised.
      MY EMAIL:
      You must be very proud to have people like this on your staff. If she can’t answer this question [Why should they give a fuck about a dead white dude?] for herself, she has no business in education. And just who the hell does she mean by “our people”? In cages? Where? Does she mean it’s okay if the people in cages are not her people?

      Thank you for sharing your view. UW-Madison supports peaceful protest and activism among our students, faculty and staff.
      We oppose racism and continue to take actions to build a more diverse and inclusive university.
      The university urges members of our campus community to obey applicable laws and university policies.
      We do not endorse views or opinions on personal social media accounts. As a public institution, however, we recognize the First Amendment rights of students, faculty and staff to express themselves as private citizens and must address such matters consistent with the strict legal limitations that apply to public universities.
      John Lucas
      University Communications

      MY OBSERVATION: They must obey the law in their private comments. They do not need to consider ethics nor facts, and if they don’t, that is fine with the university.

  2. My son is going to a private, liberal arts college here in WI (about 2 hours from Mad) to the tune of $62K a year. Thank god he’s “wicked smaht” and earns enough in merit money and scholarships to allow him to go. At any rate, I’ve been paying very close attention to the emails the college has been sending out recently. So far, there has been nothing to warrant yanking my kid out. My real saving grace is that when I dropped off my Jewish, gay son for his freshman year the first thing he said to me was “there better not be a bunch of snowflakes here”.

    • I don’t think I’d send my grandchildren to my college on a bet. And the institution hosting my law school, the University of Notre Dame, spawned the perpetrator of the 1619 project. That’s depressing. I knew ND had gone heavily SJW, but come on there, Holy Cross fathers.

  3. I’m curious how long the self-contradictory narrative will survive that the protests are about systemic racism and George Floyd, when so many of its leaders and cheerleaders openly admit the goal is power? Like so much of the 2016 Post Election Ethics Train Wreck, it all comes down to just how apathetic and gullible the American public is.

    They dound out the “horse” was actually a tiger pumped with stimulants and its tail on fire, and they can only hope it mauls the other guy first.

    I wrote an essay. Link here.


    I am old enough to remember when these protests were about systemic racism, police brutality, and lack of police accountability.

    Having participated in online discussions since the mid-1990’s, I have been aware of these issues. Indeed, one of my longtime Usenet allies wrote frequently about this.

    “Whom were the Selma, AL police “protecting and serving” when they
    turned dogs loose on civil rights marchers?

    Whom were the Pittsburgh, PA police “protecting and serving” when they
    beat Malice Green to death because he wouldn’t open his hand so they
    could see what was inside?”- Christopher Charles Morton, 5/17/1997

    Chris continued to post about this sdubject matter as recently as a few days ago.

    “Remember you don’t need a gun because:
    * Justin Volpe
    * Jon Burge
    * Alvin Weems
    * Derek Chauvin
    * Jonathan Aledda
    * Scot Peterson
    * Gerald Goines

    will protect you.”- Chris, 6/23/2020

    So, you see, I have been aware of these issues for DECADES, issues which persists in part because people keep voting for those who perpetuate it.

    And it became front and center just recently with the video of George Floyd. Suddenly, social media attention turned to police brutality and systemic racism issues.

    But then it became about removing characters from cereal boxes because they look white.

    Or renaming Penny Lane in Liverpool?

    the Duluth City Counil removing the word chief.

    A cheer invented by a black football player beiong removed.

    Or toppling statues of U.S. Presidents?

    Or defacing statues of abolitionists?

    Or abolishing the Star Spangled Banner?

    The statue topplers are most likely ne’er do-wells lashing out, and virtue signaling is much easier than actually examining policies that either magnify incentives for or diminish deterrents against police brutality and misconduct.

    But people, real people, have been hurt.

    Reporting on a private party that happened years ago.

    Trying to get a professor fired for criticizing Black Lives Matter.

    People resiogning en masse.

    Multiple cancellations.

    Abolishing the police.

    Getting a man fired for using the OK symbol.

    I have also heard of the Gadsden flag and the Betsy Ross flag being called racist symbols.

    I have heard of background checks for employment as being racist.

    This campaighn clearly did morer than jump the shark.

    This campaign is jumping over multiple shivers of sharks.

    Secretly recording a selectman’s conversation, and then banning the selectman.

    This can only discredit the campaign for police accountability and equal protection and against police misconduct, brutality, and systemic racism.

    Is that the goal of jumping these multiple shivers of sharks, to so discredit anti-racism that American societty opnely em braces racism like almost all societies in the past fifty centuries?

    Or is there a more nefarious goal that discrediting equality is just collateral damage?

  4. She’s “fat, Black, disabled and queer” — supposedly therefore oppressed by our society on 4 fronts. But the reality is that she describes herself that way because those are her only qualifications for holding the comfortable sinecure that she does. In the academic world of today, they are huge advantages for her.

  5. I’m going to turn this tweet in on itself. What does removing statues, in a manner that bypasses democracy, have to do with reforming the criminal justice system? How does removing the image of a “dead white dude abolitionist” get people out of “cages”? Why should protesters care about statues when “their” people are in “cages”?

    I suggest it’s because humans aren’t good at applying their supposed values to unfamiliar situations, and other humans are distracting them for personal profit. Protesters are breaking things because, like most humans, they don’t know how to negotiate. They might not even have the concept of negotiating, since they seem to denounce anyone who attempts it. Granted, negotiations can be used as weapons by those who practice deception, but it doesn’t take a superhuman effort to learn how to recognize deceit.

  6. What responsible parents would pay a cent to an institution to inflict the ravings of a fanatic like this on their children?

    They have no choice. It is pay up, go to prison, or die for resisting the power of the state. Such schools are mainly funded by taxpayer dollars.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter 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.