Karen McFarlane: 0:32

Hey.

Brittany S. Hale: 0:32

Brittany.

Karen McFarlane: 0:33

Hi Karen, how are you? I'm good we're back for another episode of the.

Brittany S. Hale: 0:39

E-Word. It's my favorite time of the week.

Karen McFarlane: 0:45

Well, we have something, I guess what's the word? I was thinking of juicy, but I just don't think it's a juice. I don't think it's juicy, I just think it's just absurd.

Brittany S. Hale: 1:03

Another topic that popped up.

Karen McFarlane: 1:04

Yeah, let's not.

Brittany S. Hale: 1:05

Let's not use juicy, because the person we're speaking about is quite thirsty, quite well, the person we're talking about is professor.

Karen McFarlane: 1:13

I hate to put that name in front of her name, professor Amy Wax from the University of Pennsylvania. She's a law professor. She made some remarks over the course and a group of students actually complained about her because some of these remarks were quite flagrantly racist, misogynistic, all the words we could think of. This is what happened, and she has finally, finally, been sanctioned and suspended because of her remarks both in the classroom and some outside of the classroom. Two questions for you.

Brittany S. Hale: 2:01

First was she a tenured professor.

Karen McFarlane: 2:04

Yes.

Brittany S. Hale: 2:12

Okay, and so for those listening or holds barred, right, um, that you, you are of a space in your career where you are able to work as a professor. Your contract is not up year after year after year, um, and the disciplinary proceedings for a tenured professor, it's really kind of a, would you say, it's kind of like a trust system, right? We trust that you've done your job well enough such that you can escape scrutiny.

Karen McFarlane: 2:51

Right. It also gives you, I think, just freedom, in a way, freedom of speech without retribution. In many ways Right, because academics are supposed to challenge, I guess, the status quo and they need some space to do that in order to enlighten students and think differently. When that power is, you know, used irresponsibly, it can have some detrimental effects when you are a tenured professor, because you can't just be fired just like that and to that end she right like she was suspended and she's getting half for a year and getting half pay for a year and I think she's also not allowed to collect any additional summer pay.

Karen McFarlane: 3:34

But some of these remarks that she made are just really horrible and in any other environment I think would probably get you fired, okay.

Brittany S. Hale: 3:46

So this leads to my second question, which is I know you alluded to some of these statements, but can you give us a little bit more detail? What has this professor said? Yeah, so okay.

Karen McFarlane: 4:05

So one of the statements she has said is I don't think I've ever seen a Black student graduate in the top quarter of the class and rarely, rarely, in the top half of the class. Now you might think that if that's a statement of fact, maybe that's a statement of fact, although she went on to publicize grades by race externally, which is against school policy. But she has also said Mexican men are across everyone, everyone. Can you know Exactly, exactly, receive this? Yay, it's just well, you know what. She's, including all other groups right, in an earlier interview in 2019, hold on, let me find it really quick because I just lost it. But she said we are okay.

Karen McFarlane: 5:35

She was speaking in an interview after the National Conservatism Conference in Washington DC and she was promoting this idea of quote, cultural distance, nationalism or the belief that, quote we are better off if our country is dominated numerically, demographically, politically at least, in fact, if not formally, by people from the first world, from the West, than by people from countries that had failed to advance. Let us be candid Europe and the first world, to which the United States belongs, remain mostly white for now, and the third world, although mixed, contains a lot of non-white people Embracing cultural distance. Cultural distance, nationalism, means, in effect, taking the position that our country will be better off with more whites and fewer non-whites.

Brittany S. Hale: 6:34

Interesting. Okay, so many questions here.

Karen McFarlane: 6:43

Lots of. I just want to and I also just want to reiterate for the people she's a law school professor, so it feels like there's additional undertones when you have that kind of position.

Brittany S. Hale: 6:56

Correct, because the position of a law school professor, especially a lot of, I would say, capital that comes with that position, right. So our internal biases will allow us to make certain shortcuts. We hear pen Great, we hear law professor, we think highly qualified, right, and so we hopscotch over certain checkpoints that would allow for us to question what she's saying, the ideas that she's espousing. This idea of cultural distancing, you know, is analogous to social distancing, right? That's what immediately came to my head and makes us think about safety to my head and makes us think about safety. Words mean things and a law professor knows that better than anyone.

Brittany S. Hale: 8:26

So this idea of cultural distancing, instead of this melting pot that the United States is known for in the sense of freedom and being welcoming and being this, this cultural melting pot, we see that maybe it's, you know, maybe a cultural bag salad, but all of the all of the accoutrement that makes the salad more interesting, let that, let that settle at the bottom and let's have, you know, my particular preference or her particular preference at the top.

Brittany S. Hale: 8:59

And so it's not cultural distancing so much as it is a cultural stratification designed to reinforce white nationalism, racism. And for those who say that, you know many of us think of racism as kind of this one-to-one interpersonal preference, prejudice, dislike, hatred, but we're really talking about racism. We're talking about these systemic plays, right? And we see this happening because for her to publish grades by race. Now my question is well, is she grading them blindly and then saying, oh okay, this person. Or is she saying, well, karen is the black girl. So I'm going to look at her exam through a particular lens. Right, she's already shown us that she does not believe that somebody who is anything other than her particular preference, that somebody who is anything other than her particular preference, right, white, heterosexual, or, you know, european, of European origin as the person who is superior.

Karen McFarlane: 10:36

So these are all of these insidious ways that we can create systems to reinforce inequity Right. And what is even more insidious is that she's teaching young people Correct News that, especially at a time when they're formulating their own perspectives Right, and in a profession that in some ways depending on which way you go codifies these beliefs, has the power to codify these beliefs into the American legal system Right. So it actually has this dom, potentially has this domino effect that in many ways goes unseen if unchecked. Correct.

Brittany S. Hale: 11:20

Because how many students right? So I would also like to know how many students complained. And this is a moment where I am actually feeling this. I'm having like a very visceral physical reaction to this, because I went to law school and in a class of 200, there were 12 students who identified as Black American students. Students, and in our sections, in our constitutional law courses that everyone is required to take in your first year, you go through the court cases that discuss affirmative action and that is your opportunity to have everyone kind of look at you and presuppose that you are not there for anything other than checking a box, filling a quota.

Karen McFarlane: 12:20

Well, one student that had that was a double Ivy League leader, that she only achieved that because of affirmative action.

Brittany S. Hale: 12:30

This is that moment, right. This is that fear that so many students of color in law school face, because you already know. You already know to anticipate the prejudice Right, and you already know that you have to defend your place. Though you've been admitted like anyone else, though you're sitting in the same classroom, there's a supposition, there's already a bias in favor of the belief that you are undeserving, regardless of the fact of your merit-based performance and all of the other things. Most people who get into law school are exceptional people, period, and so to create an environment that is hostile to them, or to and to reinforce this again, even though I don't think she was teaching constitutional law, it reinforces any particular biases and, like you said, these are young people, so are you. Is she truly creating an environment where all types of thought is being challenged? Because my question to her is okay, well, what does advancement look like? What about the other countries that are part of the first world, that are not in Europe? Then, what do you? You know, how do we? What do we do with?

Karen McFarlane: 14:05

that she sort of has an answer for that too. So oh great you kind of brought up. You know well, she talked about how these third world countries are basically mostly non-white people are basically aren't smart enough, essentially, to advance their culture.

Karen McFarlane: 14:22

She has a specific call out for Asian-Americans, so I, given her history, we're going to make an assumption that she falls into this whole, you know, model minority myth Right. And so she basically said in a podcast in 2021 with Brown University economist Glenn Lurie. She said Asian immigration to the United States is quote problematic due to the danger of the dominance of the Asian elite in this country. Basically, she's going on to say as long as most Asians support Democrats and help to advance their positions, I think the United States is better off with fewer Asians and less Asian immigration.

Brittany S. Hale: 15:05

So this is all artifice to support her political leanings, and I guess so. The question then is what role does that have in the classroom, right? How can we prepare students to understand and recognize the biases that they may be presented with so you can filter again Biases? Have it's a screening test, right? Much like you have to?

Brittany S. Hale: 15:35

So, for those of you who are on social media, and from a marketing perspective, I would assume, when a celebrity is endorsing a particular product using their social media, they have to acknowledge that it's an ad knowledge so that you as a consumer can understand that this person's been compensated to talk about this product in a favorable way and they allow for you to determine that. Similarly, how can we create a space where her political leanings students can understand that and contextualize it and go forward and say, okay, is what this professor saying reflecting actual facts, or is this person? Is this person really kind of presenting me with an argument in favor of one white nationalism to white nationalist conservatism and probably fascist right, like how, how can we do that? And then my question to Penn is is that what you want to be known for?

Karen McFarlane: 16:59

Right? Well, that's a big question, but I'll go. So I'm going to answer one question you asked earlier.

Brittany S. Hale: 17:07

I've asked you a bunch.

Karen McFarlane: 17:08

Thank you so much for tolerating I don't have all the answers to them, but you know, just just cause I have an answer to one of them. I don't know how many answers to them, but just because I have an answer to one of them, I don't know how many students officially complained in the very beginning. What Penn did was they hired, basically, a dean from Northwestern Law School to run the investigation. Okay, 26 alumni. They interviewed 26 alumni as part of the complaint, but guess what? Amy Wax refused to participate.

Karen McFarlane: 17:46

So, which I find super interesting, because if you, if you stand on your beliefs right, then you participate in this and you can say that it was part of you know correct pursuits and challenging. You know students to think differently, or whatever the language you want to use. Right, but she refused to participate. So we actually don't know what her mindset was. We can just make you know inferences around it, but one of the things that I like what you said is that you know you want students to be able to understand where the professor stands Right, so that they can, you know, make judgments for themselves based on the content they're being delivered. However, I think the next step on that is like, what is their power in that situation? Right?

Karen McFarlane: 18:33

So, you understand that your professor leans in a particular direction and it's not your direction. Is this professor? Inviting debate, which is what they're supposed to do, is, in my view, not necessarily take sides, particularly in law, right, Particularly in law, and you can correct me on that right. But you know, not take sides, but invite people to understand what both sides are and then come to their own determination, right. But if you have someone who is acting in this manner and making such controversial and just defamatory statements, is it a safe place for you to stand up and say, hey, I think that's racist and I don't like it? And what is the retribution, if anything, you may get when you do something like that? So I'm also mortified for the students who felt differently, no matter how they identify, obviously, particularly for the people of color, when she's made for the black people, sorry, when she's making those statements about them. Or the Mexican people in her class, potentially those horrible statements about them.

Karen McFarlane: 19:51

How do you?

Brittany S. Hale: 19:53

as a young Mexican man at an Ivy League institution. Contextualize Right.

Karen McFarlane: 20:01

And you've, you know you're there, because hopefully you know you're there because, like you said, it's very hard to get into law school. It's a special set of students that can actually do that. So you've made it this far and you've probably, you know, traversed a lot of barriers to get there. And then you step into this classroom and you hear, you're just, it just hits you, you're gutted, you're gutted.

Brittany S. Hale: 20:26

And why do you do that? So let's talk about a law school classroom, right, most classrooms are. You conduct a process called the Socratic method, which is it is not didactic in the way that a lot of undergraduate classes are, right. The professor comes in, they present you with information, you write down the information. It's up to you to ingest it and perhaps regurgitate it when there's a final midterm, et cetera. In law school first, they're rarely anything other than the final, so you may not have an understanding of the way that you've dealt with the material until the end of the class. Surprise. But with the Socratic method, the professor comes in, you are typically reading and you're tasked with briefing court opinions right, what's happened before? And the professor will usually ask a series of questions what happened in this case? What were the facts, what's the issue, what are the two parties litigating and, ultimately, what did the court decide? Extract critical thought, engaging people with differing opinions with the ultimate goal of creating a safe space for elevated discussion.

Brittany S. Hale: 22:05

There is a critique now that many people will say people are oversensitive, right, and you can't have a discussion anymore. Back in the day you could say something without offending someone, and so on and so forth and I think there is a space to again have critical discussion. I don't think that higher education is a space where everyone has to agree, correct. And I also don't think that higher education is the space for professors in powerful positions or for really anyone to espouse hateful speech. Right, because we, she knows better than anyone to espouse hateful speech. Right, because we, she knows better than anyone, right? The First Amendment does not protect all speech, does not protect hate speech, does not protect incitement. So my question is let's use the Socratic method. What happens if there is a Mexican-American male in the classroom? When she said you know, mexican-american men are known to offend, they are, you know, they have higher rates of assaulting. She's assaulting people or assaulting women, did she say?

Karen McFarlane: 23:35

Keep going, I'll tell you.

Brittany S. Hale: 23:36

Yeah. So my question is is she said that with a lot of things that she's done so. Sad, but what if another student taking assaulting women, say, another student, woman or man right now refuses to engage with that student for fear of their own physical safety? Or they attack this Mexican-American student because they believe that he is prone to violence? Right, that statement that she made in a position of authority is incitement. That is not protected speech.

Karen McFarlane: 24:20

I agree with you.

Brittany S. Hale: 24:21

I just I don't. And I'm glad they conducted the investigation, I'm glad that it seems that they were thorough. And then my the fact that she refused to participate to your point. What's the problem? Do you not want to be held accountable for the statements that you're making? Is that the problem, do you?

Karen McFarlane: 24:43

not want to take responsibility. You should be. You're part of the group that you are elevating. And so you should stand proud with that group and defend or maybe you don't feel like you need to defend, but you're in this inquiry defend your beliefs, but instead you chose not to participate, for whatever reason.

Brittany S. Hale: 25:04

Or to add context, she said well, listen, there was this study conducted by the US Justice Department, and what came out of that study is X versus personal animus.

Karen McFarlane: 25:20

This reminds me. It's not law school, it was actually, um, in middle school. Um, it wasn't my son, but it was, uh, a student it was like. And she was in a class and the teacher was talking about some literature and decided to use the N word because it was illustrative of the work that they were talking about, and she chose to use that word over and over again in the classroom. In that classroom was just one Black student, female student, and this was her choice. Okay, this was her choice to do so.

Karen McFarlane: 26:18

It was very upsetting for that student and she left the classroom distraught that her teacher would use this word, regardless of the literature, right, and again, use it over and over and over again, right, and other students actually came to her and asked her if she was OK, which actually validated how she was feeling and that she was not alone, even though those students were not, were white students actually, they knew it was wrong.

Karen McFarlane: 26:48

They knew it was wrong.

Karen McFarlane: 26:49

She told her mom the reason why, I know, is her mom called me for advice or whatever and I was like you need to share that experience that that wasn't the right move to make because, for whatever reason, she made this choice.

Karen McFarlane: 27:07

Ultimately, it came out that she didn't think anything was wrong with it because it was in the literature, right, and although, and when pointed, when it was pointed out that there's other ways, right, same point, correct. Well, you know, creating this animus between you and the student and other students and making her feel uncomfortable, she actually doubled down on her original rationale and then eventually, I think she had to make a switch and apologize to some degree, but I don't think I don't. I don't know that. I'm going to be honest with you. I don't know if she meant that apology or not, or whatever the case may be, but there's a sensitivity that you do need to have. I mean, I also recall and this is not as deep as that, but you know, I went to school a long, long time ago, right, and history class was particularly difficult for me because I was always maybe one Black person in the room or whatever.

Karen McFarlane: 28:13

And talking about slavery and things of that nature in such a cavalier, nonchalant way, without regard for how I might feel about that, right, was the norm back then. But as we move towards, you know, modern days, then that starts to change. I also remember with my own son. He was in fourth grade and they were doing a project on the underground railroad and he wasn't really participating. I came to find out in the way that the teacher wanted, and he told me he was working on an assignment, and he told me that he wasn't comfortable asking her any questions because when he did, she shut him down. And so I actually wrote her a very detailed note and said to her hey, I mean it's very long, but basically was like hey, I understand that you're not engaging him in the way he needs to be engaged, understand that you're not engaging him in the way he needs to be engaged. Keep in mind that you're talking about a very difficult time in our history that is particularly sensitive to a Black person, and the content that you are covering right now basically says that when boys turn 10, they are put in the fields, and my son is 10. So I don't know how you're teaching this class, but I need you to emphasize the bravery and the resilience that comes with our history.

Karen McFarlane: 29:55

And I kind of went into a lot Correct that comes with our history. And I kind of went into a lot Correct, and she came back and she said I never thought of it that way, which was interesting and fascinating, right, like she never thought about flipping the narrative Correct At all, it was just one of victimization and hostility and of course all those things were there. But then how does we never she never wanted to talk about or never thought about talking about sorry, you know how they, how our people, transgressed all of that? And so I'm just giving these personal examples because I think it really harkens back to the sensitivity that educators need to have when talking about sensitive subjects. It is not saying that you shouldn't talk about sensitive subjects. It is just saying that you need to do so with empathy, right, and understanding of the individuals that you are talking about, correct, and create safe spaces for discourse and disagreement, right, but knowing that no one is being singled out or attacked in those moments.

Brittany S. Hale: 31:02

And this is why it is so critical for educational institutions to apportion a part of the budget to upskilling and teaching their educators. In the example you just gave, it seems that that was not her intent. The impact was such that she created an unsafe environment for your son. She didn't intend to do it, but that's what happened. Had she had the requisite instruction, had she been challenged herself to re-engage with the material that she's probably taught countless times, countless times, and spin it on its head. Right, be innovative, be and also know your audience. Think about this Using the other E word right, empathy. How would you feel if you were one of your students hearing this? Are there other stories that have been told? And for listeners who are thinking, oh well, well, that's just how things were back then, you know, my response to that is we would never have any progress if the way things were being done was just the status quo. There have always been abolitionists. There have always Challenging what was normal. Right, the disruptors, if you will. Right.

Karen McFarlane: 32:46

There's never been accountability for why that was needed Exactly. It is still glorified today. Like you watch any period piece and I love a period piece, don't get me wrong, right. You watch any period piece and I love a period piece, don't get me wrong, right. But when you you watch these, these, these movies or these episodics and they talk about you know, you know the 18th, 16th or 17th century and all the violence that occurred, it is glorified in the name of progress, right, and that progress hurt a lot of different groups, even before we get into some of the things that America is known for, right, that came from a long line of history of violence and ravaging and all of those things. And so when you fail to acknowledge why you need all of these things, why we need to have these conversations, why it has been detrimental for centuries, then it's hard to fix or understand why anything needs to be fixed, right.

Brittany S. Hale: 33:54

And goes back to the question of what does advancement mean? What does that look like? Why are we glorifying, glorifying colonialism over diplomacy, all right, and not seeing that as an opportunity? Could we have gone about this another way? Yeah, what is trade? And we're starting to see that now. Right, we are having to rethink the way that we're engaging with markets. And that's the. You know, these pastoral retellings of the good old days, right, these rolling green hills and these stately mansions and all of that. And no, asked, well, who built that? Who's cutting the lawn?

Brittany S. Hale: 34:39

yeah, you know I can barely right um and and, additionally, confronting that with the truth. Right, these people were not um cash rich. Right, their assets required and relied on the ownership of other human beings. Without that, you had very little.

Karen McFarlane: 35:07

Thank you. I was having this debate with a friend of mine actually yesterday. We were talking a little bit about reparations, right, which is a hot topic, and we were like, okay, let's not talk about, if it happened, distribution. That's a whole rabbit hole, sure. But you know, it was like nailing down the accountability piece, like America just acknowledging that this publicly, this happened and that you know this publicly, this happened, and that you know America was built on the backs of free labor, mostly from African-Americans, africans, et cetera, right. And I was saying to her, can you? Because then we kind of went into a little bit of the money part, I was like, can you imagine, and I wish some, I'm not an economist, but I wish I were in this situation.

Brittany S. Hale: 35:57

But here's my idea not an economist, but I wish I were in this situation. But here's my idea, right? If you are listening, drop some resources for us.

Karen McFarlane: 36:02

Drop some resources. Do this calculation, which is, if you took some of these big companies, like if you took Google from its inception and took away all the salaries free labor right From its inception where would it be today versus where it is? Well, where would it be versus where it is today by paying salaries, right? Like if you just looked at some of these companies across the board, even the ones from way back then I know a couple of studies have been done around that how have they benefited and who has been hurt by that? Then you'll understand the value of free labor. You can just look in your own life and if you get something for free, you don't have to pay for it. You have more money in your pocket. This is exponentially different. People get caught up in the how much and who's it going to go to.

Karen McFarlane: 36:49

But that acknowledgement is really important that because of these horrific systems, it allowed certain people to advance. Amy Wax, right. Because you're talking about third world countries having to advance. Well, why is that? You raped and pillaged these other countries in order to advance your own and are still doing so. You know and refuse to give back. And I think about fast fashion, right.

Brittany S. Hale: 37:24

We see fast fashion companies now where you can buy I don't know a coat. It's fall now right For 20 bucks and you say this is a great deal. And you don't see the invisible labor that's exploited. You don't see the environmental costs that come with fast fashion, right? You don't see the beaches where it, you know, comes up and compromises people's access to things like clean water and all of these things. And so it's not that difficult to understand because we live with it every day. I think the key coming out of this is re-examining power, re-amining what we would, just what we have been taught. You know the spaces in which we're taught and the responsibility of those institutions that they have to us, to students, to the parents who are paying for it For a ridiculous amount of money. Correct, you're not paying for your child to be harassed.

Karen McFarlane: 38:47

Exactly, exactly. I mean that point right there is just insane. You know the thousands upon thousands of dollars in tuition that each child is paying to some degree, right Like, and you go into a hostile environment. No, you know, and that's why you also see this trend of students, or you know young people rejecting college for a lot of different reasons, but this doesn't help the whole entire situation. I mean, it's University of Penn, for example, so it has a longstanding reputation and brand, and so you know, more than likely we'll power through. But these smaller institutions need to be very wary of who's on staff and what their response is and how they're going to approach academic freedom for professors and students right.

Karen McFarlane: 39:40

It's a huge responsibility to educate the next generation and you have to be really careful, particularly in this environment, because more than an investigation will happen. Somebody will understand their true power and exercise it, and it just takes one right when they realize what they can do. It's true, so they're on notice.

Brittany S. Hale: 40:07

And we will be watching.

Karen McFarlane: 40:09

We will definitely be watching. So kudos to University of Penn for taking action. We may not like the end result because she will be back, probably teaching again, but hopefully she's on notice for what she can and cannot do and students understand that they can raise up and raise a complaint and something will happen eventually, eventually, because it's so beautiful, it was great to also have your perspective today as a former law school student.

Brittany S. Hale: 40:47

I know I was like, oh, let me just open up these boxes that I've compartmentalized in my brain and bring it back. I'm glad it came back. And I just want to reiterate like you said, as a very special person that can go to law school, and so you're too kind.

Karen McFarlane: 41:04

You're too kind. All right, brittany, we'll wait for the next. We'll talk again. Yes, all right. Why is it taking so long to stop?