Harvard prez: “On behalf of the Harvard community, I apologize to Dr. Terry Karl for the University’s failure to assure that Domínguez met the conditions of his 1983 sanction. Harvard failed her.”
about 👏 goddamn 👏 time!!! 👏
provost.harvard.edu/files/provost/…
about 👏 goddamn 👏 time!!! 👏
provost.harvard.edu/files/provost/…
I am incredibly relieved that the report is finally out. We had to fight for a LONG time to get this review, and it didn't get off to a great start when they spent more time talking to Harvard faculty than to *the women who were sexually harassed*...
https://twitter.com/sophie_e_hill/status/1207039926258327557?s=20
I continue to find it incredibly frustrating that the Harvard administration couldn't just butt out and let this be an *external review*. The degree of micromanagement by the deputy provost was insane...
https://twitter.com/sophie_e_hill/status/1203484197198999552?s=20
Like, seriously.
https://twitter.com/sophie_e_hill/status/1203484221630820353?s=20
But still, it was a big win for us to have this report be made public. (Many argued that a private report could get to the truth better. We said that this thing has gotta be public and given to every damn person that comes within 100 feet of the Harvard Gov department.)
I have to go read this thing properly now but on skimming I'm glad to see the committee naming names. "Institutional failure" is a good description of what happened but it shouldn't absolve any individual of blame.
P.S. Any comment, @LHSummers?
P.S. Any comment, @LHSummers?
One really striking detail from the #Domínguezreport: Harvard sanctioned Domínguez in 1983 and barred him from holding any administrative positions in the department for 3 years. But just 2 years later, he was given administrative positions in both the Gov dept and FAS!
This really cuts against the narrative that the grad students were given - which was that the 1983 sanctions were gradually "forgotten" over a period of many years.
Two years is not a long time in academia!! The sanctions weren't forgotten, they were deliberately overridden.
Two years is not a long time in academia!! The sanctions weren't forgotten, they were deliberately overridden.
So let's talk about one of the more controversial parts of the #Dominguezreview. Here the committee says that Harvard's handling of the 1983 case was "appropriate and admirable in many ways".
I find it sort of baffling that the External Review committee seems so keen to defend and praise Henry Rosovsky (then Dean of Faculty, who initially sanctioned Dominguez in 1983)... this guy is undeniably one of the most cartoonishly evil figures in the whole story.
Terry Karl asked Dean Rosovsky for further measures to ensure she wasn't forced to constantly interact with her harasser. Rosovsky declined, saying "It was specifically not our intention to lock Domínguez away".
Karl left Harvard shortly after.
chronicle.com/article/she-le…
Karl left Harvard shortly after.
chronicle.com/article/she-le…
The following year, 1984, a group of LatAm scholars wrote to Dean Rosovsky saying that they could not recommend that their students apply to Harvard until there was "absolute assurance that they will not face undue risk of harassment".
Rosovsky's response was... jfc i don't even have the words. Just read it.
Some excerpts:
"the victim has received and continues to receive compensation that any reasonable person must view as generous"
[Reminder: Terry Karl received absolutely zero compensation and was essentially forced out of Harvard.]
"the victim has received and continues to receive compensation that any reasonable person must view as generous"
[Reminder: Terry Karl received absolutely zero compensation and was essentially forced out of Harvard.]
“your letter displays a degree of moral arrogance that is unusual even by the unfortunate standards prevailing in the academic profession”
“if the letter reflects your academic work, your students might still consider our university even though the Latin American program is — for the moment — in difficulty”
“One further thought: rather than spending your time lecturing other institutions, why not dedicate yourself with equal fervor to the avoidance of those very problems at your universities? Good works are more effective at home.”
I really can't emphasize this enough. Dean Henry Rosovsky was – by the standards of today and the standards of ANY TIME – a whiny piece of shit.
(N.B.: Rosovsky was also one of Jeffrey Epstein's biggest champions at Harvard...)
(N.B.: Rosovsky was also one of Jeffrey Epstein's biggest champions at Harvard...)
This photo of Henry Rosovsky and Jeffrey Epstein is purportedly from 2012, which would mean that Rosovsky continued to associate with Epstein well after he was convicted in 2008 of "procuring a person under 18 for prostitution".
While the External Review committee would love to paint a picture of total relativism, as if the 1980s was an entirely different universe, I think there's a simpler conclusion.
People who were misogynistic pieces of shit in the 1980s still are today.
And people with a single ounce of courage and basic human empathy today also had it in the 1980s.
And people with a single ounce of courage and basic human empathy today also had it in the 1980s.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
