Well, the UF Dean was
not too happy about the description by the UF Law Review, but now is going to apologize for her objections:
The dean of the University of Florida's Levin College of Law, who
like other lawyers is trained to weigh words with care, has created a
stir with her objection to being called "young and vivacious."
An expert in feminist legal theory, Laura Rosenbury wrote a 4,000-word article for the New England Law Review
that ended by recounting a banquet last fall when the male president of
UF's Florida Law Review introduced Rosenbury with that description. In
the article published this summer, Rosenbury said when she discussed her
concern — whether a male dean of the college would be described as
"vivacious" — the law review adviser responded, "But you look so much
younger."
Now Rosenbury is being criticized by others connected to the Levin
College of Law for such public criticism of her colleagues, who though
not specifically named can be identified by their positions.
“The
UF Levin College of Law and the University of Florida should be
embarrassed that the Dean of their law school publicly calls out and
identifies one of her own students and faculty members with the
borderline slanderous accusation of sexism, against two of the most
well-respected, tolerant and unprejudiced people at the school,” Michael
Balducci, an alumnus and former Florida Law Review executive editor,
wrote in a Facebook post.
Rosenbury said she has heard similar pushback from others.
***
Rosenbury said the last part of the article was to say she still
encountered implicit gender bias as a dean, and while overt bias Frug
had faced during her life has lessened with time, bias based on one’s
identity still exists. In hindsight, she said she could have made the
point in a way that avoided any embarrassment to the student.
“I
think it’s good that people are talking about implicit bias in the legal
profession,” she said. “I hope, though, that we can find more
productive ways of talking about it.”
She’s been traveling the past week, but she plans to apologize to the student and faculty adviser once she’s back at UF.
“I
will certainly apologize if they think I was calling them sexist,” she
said. “Certainly that was not my intent, and I want to apologize for
that.”
As a graduate of the University of Florida College of Law, I don't think Dean Rosenbury should be the one apologizing. Unfortunately, UF College of Law has a shameful history of sexism and racism going back to when it was an all white male institution. Just research the injustice done to Mr. Virgil Hawkins or listen to a story from a respected alumna who suffered the indignity of being "shuffled" out of the law school library. Maybe Michael Balducci is ignorant of UF's past or maybe he would just rather turn a blind eye to it. But it is unconscionable that anyone should be allowed to make such a demeaning remark to any woman, let alone the first woman dean at an institution with such a checkered past.
ReplyDeleteUF statement was classic micro aggression.
ReplyDeleteIt concerns me that I have seen this issue portrayed as one rooted in feminism and discrimination. This is not an issue about sexism, as far as I see it. As an alumnus in touch with several parties involved in this, I believe all parties have made it clear that they see Rosenbury's concerns as valid, and discussions about sexual discrimination are welcome and important to have. Their issue is her improper venue for airing those grievances with a student, especially after privately handling the situation almost a year earlier. I tend to agree with them. I see no benefit in shaming your students publicly for language that was already the subject of a healthy, private discussion that achieved the desired results. What good came from an administrator further dragging her student's name through the mud after the student acknowledged/owned up to his mistakes?
ReplyDeleteI'm interested in hearing why accusing (falsely) someone of sexism is only "borderline slanderous." Because we can be sexist and it's really not that bad?
ReplyDeleteAnd, I don't know why she's walking back the substance of her comments. The comments by the student and the faculty member that she's "vivacious" were sexist. Should she have perhaps disguised the story a bit more? Probably yes, but it's refreshing that she's pointing out these issues exist.
Oh please. It's better than being introduced as old and lazy. Next intro should be "middle-aged and easily offended." Sad to think that this is what any law school dean thinks is worthy of a 4,000 word law review article.
ReplyDeleteUF Law, or any other UF school, is a product of Florida's echo chamber.
ReplyDeleteRosenbury is doing the right thing.
Yes, "Unfortunately, UF College of Law has a shameful history of sexism and racism going back to when it was an all white male institution. Just research the injustice done to Mr. Virgil Hawkins or listen to a story from a respected alumna who suffered the indignity of being "shuffled" out of the law school library."
"Oh please" says the privileged and entitled white man. Her article was not about the demeaning comments, the article was about her evolution as a post modern feminist legal scholar and the influence of Frug in her work. The comments were meant to illustrate that we have a long, long way to go.
ReplyDeleteAnd what does it say about at those at UF who know her scholarship but continue to speak of her in those terms?Vivacious means "attractively lively and animated." Would your view change if her colleague described her as "young and sexy?"
If someone introduced me as "youthful and handsome," I wouldn't complain.
ReplyDeleteOh please. John F. Kennedy was called vivacious. So was Robin Williams. To be attractive and lively is neither uniquely feminine nor offensive. Unless you're an angry woman like 6:54 or someone who continues to see 60 year-old racism in a complimentary comment introducing a privileged law dean who recently authored law review articles entitled, "Sex In and Out of Intimacy," 59 Emory L.J. 809 (2010) and "Friends with Benefits?," 106 Mich. L. Rev. 189 (2007).
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand she writes articles titled with provocative sexual connotations and on the other she wants those who read these works to avoid any hint of sexuality, even when it was not intended. There comes a point at which intelligent people should be able to distinguish between a compliment and and insult. Else they devolve into the carricature they seek to avoid.
I was called young and svelte as USA, and never complained.
ReplyDeletes/Fake Alex Acosta
ReplyDeleteMore victim blaming from 10:01.
So the best examples you have of "vivacious" being gender-neutral is a reference to JFK (murdered 50 years ago) and a comedian? Can you point to any male law school dean or male managing partner at a Top 500 who has been called vivacious in the last 20 years? Just own that the comment was sexist and let's move on.
Because Ms. Rosenbury thinks it's fair to ask, "would you call a male dean 'young and vivacious?'" then it seems fair to take her hypothetical to its logical conclusion.
ReplyDeleteTo wit...
The female editor of the UF law review calls a 46-year-old male dean "young and vivacious" during a public speech praising the man. He takes offense at the terms. Later, he expresses his displeasure to the student, privately. The law review faculty advisor, an older woman, tries to smooth things over and tells the dean "but you look so much younger." That doesn't help.
The dean proceeds to make some changes in the law review office, and then a year later, recounts his experience in a law review article.
How do you suppose that male dean would be treated, and characterized, after such a story went public?
I expect there would be an absolute tidal wave of criticism against the man, some of it telling him to "get over yourself" and plenty of it suggesting he's not much of a man at all, let alone executive material, if he'd allow such a trifling and unintentional slight bother him so damn much.
So was just reading CNN Money from 3 weeks ago and, 1:30, there it is. A more recent example of a highly successful businessMAN -- the head of a major business empire -- described as having a "vivacious and engaging demeanor." I doubt the author was inferring a feminine quality -- she was referring to Usain Bolt, who has amassed a business empire after a successful career as the world's fastest man.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ksl.com/?sid=41088032&nid=157&title=usain-bolt-how-the-worlds-fastest-man-built-a-business-empire
The word is not sexist. Your preconceived notion is. Own it and move on.
The real question is why have we dropped, "world's fastest human?" Now, Bolt is just the world's fastest man. Is there a faster woman? We can't use human anymore? This is the burning question.
ReplyDeleteI can't believe so many people chose to ignore the horrific history of sexism in: 1) the law (where women were deemed to be property); 2) the legal profession (where women were once not allowed to practice law); 3) legal education (where women were not allowed to attend school); 4) legal scholarship (where women were not hired as tenure-track professors); and more to the point, 5) UF College of Law (where the all male student body were openly hostile to women). And then they just ignorantly conclude "Well, if I were a male dean and some young female student called me young and vivacious, I wouldn't be so insulted." Do you not get how offensive and ridiculous that sounds?
ReplyDeleteSo, the fact that UF law school has a history of sexism makes it okay for the dean of the college to behave unprofessionally. Got it.
ReplyDeleteThis is something I call "fair-weather feminism."
That's just it 11:21, she did not act unprofessionally. But she is now made to apologize in large part by minimizing the offensive nature of the comments made against her. I do not have a catch-phrase name for that, so let's just call it insulting, sexist and wrong.
ReplyDeleteDo you seriously believe there is nothing unprofessional the dean of a major law school publicly criticizing a current student and a current faculty member at the law school, in a manner that allows their peers to identify them instantly?
ReplyDeleteWhat answers do you suppose we'd receive, if we surveyed, say, 100 or so law-school deans, and asked them, "under what circumstances would you consider it appropriate to publicly criticize a current student or a current faculty member?"
I expect that many would respond that such an action would only be appropriate in the most egregious circumstances, perhaps if the individual in question were unquestionably guilty of committing a felony or engaging in academic cheating.
Furthermore, I expect that many of them would indicate "I'd never publicly criticize anyone associated with the law school, it's not good for the law school."
If you disagree with anything I've just typed, then I'm giving up, because you seem to have the same blindness to the concept "abuse of power" that you believe I have regarding sexism.
Unlike blog commentary, scholarly articles go through a very rigorous editing and review process. Read in the context of her scholarly work, the dean's words were not unprofessional. Also, I know that if I had publicly insulted or humiliated my dean when I was at UF, my least worry would be whether the incident would end up in a scholarly publication. Most likely, I would have ended up looking for another law school. BTW - How many of your 100 deans were publicly humiliated?
ReplyDeleteI think humiliated is a stretch here.
ReplyDeleteToo sensitive. I agree with 9:07 pm, 10:01 am, and 9:03 pm.
ReplyDelete