3 ms·

>student’s own testimony exonerated the professor. The problem is that's not possible. Her testimony would be the same if: (1) Their relationship was consens

by treis 6y ago

>student’s own testimony exonerated the professor. The problem is that's not possible. Her testimony would be the same if: (1) Their relationship was consensual. (2) She didn't want to have one but feared retaliation for saying no. (3) She didn't want one but thought it would help her career if she slept with him. That's the problem with these types of relationships. Until we get a truth detector we can't ever really know.

nullc 6y ago
According to the article the relationship was 12 years ago and they had "left campus six months before [the] relationship had begun". Had (2) been a factor at the time it wouldn't have been now, and (3) doesn't sound likely given that they'd already left the campus.
throwaway894345 6y ago
Look, I’m not saying it’s a good idea to date your former students, but the student in question verified that nothing inappropriate happened. They weren’t dating when she was a student barring some technicalities which would never (neither under Title IX nor the university’s own rules) constitute a fireable offense (per the article). It’s one thing to disagree with the prudence of dating one’s former student, but that doesn’t remotely validate the university’s behavior.
- treis 6y ago
  >student in question verified that nothing inappropriate happened. It's not like she's gonna say: "Of course I just banged him to help my career. Have you seen him? Dude's hideous." So again, she can't verify that nothing inappropriate happened because we can't trust that her testimony is honest.
  - throwaway894345 6y ago
    Maybe, but this is different than quid pro quo harassment or other kinds of sexual harassment which is what Title IX is concerned with. Fugrther, your scenario is implausible because she would have stood to gain very little from their relationship—her grades were locked-in at that point and her future PhD program was secure. Her employers would care very little about her masters advisor’s opinion compared to her PhD advisor. Further still, none of this justifies railroading someone out of their position. Title IX guidance is horrendous and it leaves a trail of victims in its wake. I don’t understand the desire to impugn these victims and distract from the pressing problem. I guess I strongly disagree with the idea that we should punish someone because they might have done something wrong in the utter absence of evidence. Which is to say, I’m opposed to injustice.

by treis 6y ago

nullc 6y ago

According to the article the relationship was 12 years ago and they had "left campus six months before [the] relationship had begun". Had (2) been a factor at the time it wouldn't have been now, and (3) doesn't sound likely given that they'd already left the campus.

throwaway894345 6y ago

Look, I’m not saying it’s a good idea to date your former students, but the student in question verified that nothing inappropriate happened. They weren’t dating when she was a student barring some technicalities which would never (neither under Title IX nor the university’s own rules) constitute a fireable offense (per the article). It’s one thing to disagree with the prudence of dating one’s former student, but that doesn’t remotely validate the university’s behavior.

treis 6y ago
>student in question verified that nothing inappropriate happened. It's not like she's gonna say: "Of course I just banged him to help my career. Have you seen him? Dude's hideous." So again, she can't verify that nothing inappropriate happened because we can't trust that her testimony is honest.
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  Maybe, but this is different than quid pro quo harassment or other kinds of sexual harassment which is what Title IX is concerned with. Fugrther, your scenario is implausible because she would have stood to gain very little from their relationship—her grades were locked-in at that point and her future PhD program was secure. Her employers would care very little about her masters advisor’s opinion compared to her PhD advisor. Further still, none of this justifies railroading someone out of their position. Title IX guidance is horrendous and it leaves a trail of victims in its wake. I don’t understand the desire to impugn these victims and distract from the pressing problem. I guess I strongly disagree with the idea that we should punish someone because they might have done something wrong in the utter absence of evidence. Which is to say, I’m opposed to injustice.