“We care more about the crazy, insane members of Times Up Healthcare???”
This is what Roberta Kaplan apparently thought of us a few months ago when we stood up for survivors and ultimately resigned. A long 🧵explaining the news..
1/
Many of us resigned bc the organization clearly did not, despite its purported mission, prioritize survivors.
In case you’ve missed them, here are some highlights.
When the attorney general’s report on Cuomo came out, early reporting by @jodikantor@arya_sundaram delineated Roberta Kaplan and Tina Tchen’s roles in supporting Cuomo’s efforts to defend himself...
3/
...and undermine the first survivor who came forward. (Kaplan was then the chair of TIME’S UP, and Tchen is its President and CEO)
This, by @agrenell, is 🔥. “it’s right on brand for an organization of women that cozies up to patriarchy, not only failing to call for Cuomo’s resignation when Boylan and Bennett first came forward but also suggesting that he investigate himself.”
>144 survivors wrote this open letter to TU, calling for change at the organization & outlining its numerous missteps including belittling survivors and creating a workplace filled with secrecy and allegiances to people in power rather than survivors.
In the aftermath of all this, Kaplan resigned from TU. Btw Kaplan was, at the time, representing one of Cuomo’s staff members, Melissa DeRosa, who herself resigned even before Cuomo did. #ConflictOfInterest
8/
Since Kaplan’s resignation, Tchen has denied knowing the extent of Kaplan’s involvement with Cuomo’s team.
This excellent opinion essay by @melissagira highlights a key challenge for TU: “Anti-violence organizations often place gaining the favor of powerful people above efforts to mobilize the survivors who built power for these movements in the first place.”
In the meantime, despite ongoing breaking news showing the problems with TU's culture and the ways that absolute power corrupts (absolutely), the women of TU, including Tarana Burke and Shonda Rhimes, have rallied around Tchen.
12/
Along the way, other allegations have been brought to light, particularly Tchen’s handling of an engagement with the Southern Poverty Law Center. Members of the @SPLCUnion wrote a strongly worded letter detailing their concerns about this.
.@eshugerman summarized the concerns of staffers at TU, describing it as an organization “where powerful executives and board members dictated policy based on their connections with media and political power players, rather than on the needs of survivors or ideas of staff.”
14/
In the words of a former staffer, “It was patriarchy with a dress on."
Of note, @eshugerman had previously reported on the hypocrisy of TU calling for an elimination of NDAs bc they silence survivors and then, themselves, asking employees and committee members to sign similar documents.
See more excellent reporting from @eshugerman in her thread, covering the Oprah Winfrey/Russell Simmons issue, the plans for the for-profit “Time’s Forward,” and ways TU’s relationships with power affected the organization’s priorities/advocacy:
In this article by @AmandaBecker, as well as the others, you see people have been working to hold the organization accountable from within for some time. However, those voices have not been heard before. Perhaps they, like us, have been called “crazy.”
Advocates for survivors of sexual harassment and sexual assault have continued to push TU and Tchen, and as of yesterday, TU announced it would not hold its employees to the confidentiality agreements they had signed. Small win!
In the @nytimes article today, tho, we learned Kaplan had called us crazy. We again saw how dysfunctional TU is: “staff members’ focus was often scattered as they were drawn into ancillary issues, the promotion of board members’ pet projects or PR campaigns on unrelated topics.”
Megan Malloy, former strategist for TU, said, “There’s never been so much power behind addressing issues like sexual harassment…it felt like we were there to burnish the reputations of very powerful women” rather than...
21/
...“to actually do programmatic work that would materially change the lives of survivors.”
So, where do we go from here? I don’t know what the futures of TU or Tchen hold. But, my colleagues and I do have some thoughts on what it would take to do better. If anyone is interested in publishing that editorial, lmk.
#1. Perhaps instead of “ideological” lens you mean the authors have some kind of agenda? That agenda seems to be helping women have the same access to opportunities as do men.
2/
#2. People love to deny the existence of discrimination. This is especially true for those who are high up in the hierarchy because if you acknowledge widespread discrimination it may bring your own success into question.
It's not every day your piece is front and center on the @TheLancet homepage!!
I was delighted to work with @reshmajagsi on this commentary covering what institutions should do to reverse the damage the pandemic has done to women's careers. 🧵
We have four major recommendations. "First, institutions must intentionally implement best practices to recruit, select, retain, and promote women..."
This would include criterion-based evaluations and transparency regarding roles and compensation.
2/
"Second, institutions should ensure they provide paid parental leave and resources to support caregiving. Flexible options...can be helpful if they are part of a broader approach that recognizes the existence of family responsibilities for all employees."
Lately I've kept quiet on here about covid. There are amazing doctors and scientists tirelessly sharing the latest studies and policies, and my daily work is related more to bias and harassment than it is patient care. So I have been leaving that work to others.
1/
But I have been spending time with some amazing colleagues who are trying to educate the public over on Clubhouse. What I've seen in the last six months there has me concerned.
I'm not trying to be alarmist, but with infections rising across the country, I'm a bit down.
2/
Within the past week, I have heard chatter about the vaccine being "experimental," that it was developed too fast to be trusted, that "they" want to control our bodies.
(Who are "they," anyway?)
I have heard people be scared for their health and that of their children.
3/
How do we talk things that are hard to talk about? Some musings.
I imagine that if I were a man, I would be upset about the way women and non-binary folks are treated in the workplace. I imagine I would want to speak up—that’s how I’m wired. But I might not know what to say.
1/
Being the type of person I am, I would probably read books such as She Said or Good and Mad to try to understand. And then I might start speaking up.
But what if someone tells me I’m speaking up in the wrong way?
2/
No, you shouldn’t MENTOR that woman, you should SPONSOR her! It’s not MATERNITY leave, it’s PARENTAL leave! You’re not babysitting your children, you’re taking care of them! They’re YOUR kids!
I would learn, sure. But I also might start to shy away from the conversation.
3/
It’s been almost 2 years since I left my academic surgery job. In this time, I’ve become acutely aware of how much we have to PAY ($$) to build an academic career. I stopped submitting abstracts to meetings because I had no money to pay for going to them. When students…
1/
…asked to submit abstracts based on our work, it was heartbreaking to tell them that I couldn’t pay for them to go but that maybe we could try to find another way. (I made so little myself I couldn’t pay for them out of pocket).
When I got asked to give talks...
2/
...I could only do it if they were paying me. Of course, most societies don’t pay their own members to give talks, even when they’re invited opportunities. This is what I mean about paying, and many of you know this. You have to pay an annual membership fee...
3/
Earlier this week I spoke at @thoracicrad about how biases affect our evaluations of performance. Here's the gist on how we measure "intelligence" and perceive others.
(I also talked about stereotypes but will save that for another day.)
1/
First of all, let's start with what intelligence is. There is a ton of variability, but this, from Howard Gardner, resonates with me. 2/
How do we measure intelligence? There are many many many tests. What I learned about human cognitive abilities in my PhD, though, was there's no one measurable "intelligence." There are instead measures, such as the ones on this slide, of specific skillsets.