Johns Hopkins dean apologizes to staff after DEI officer sent bigoted email telling them that anyone white, male or Christian is 'privileged' - but she gets to keep her job
The thing that lies behind these idiotic claims is that ON AVERAGE whites do better than blacks in various ways. And that upsets some people. But there are some properous and successful blacks and some street-sleeping whites. So making ANY blanket claims about whites or anybody else is simply false and can only be described as bigotry
Johns Hopkins' medical faculty dean has apologized to staff after a diversity, equity, and inclusion officer sent a woke hit list email labeling all white people, Christians, men and English-speakers as 'privileged'.
The letter, first posted on Twitter by End Wokeness, was written by Chief Diversity Officer Sherita Hill Golden [Below], and was part of the 'monthly diversity digest'.
It caused commotion and outrage online - forcing the institution to apologize.
Dr Golden was allowed to keep her job, despite cries for her to be sacked. Now, the dean and president of the medical faculty said that they 'repudiated' her language.
Theodore L. DeWeese, the Dead of the Medical Faculty, and Kevin W. Sowers, the President of Johns Hopkins Health System, wrote: 'Every month, the Johns Hopkins Medicine Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity distributes a newsletter from JHM's chief diversity officer, Dr. Sherita Golden.
'Regrettably, the January edition of this newsletter, which was distributed to all Johns Hopkins Medicine employees yesterday, included a definition of privilege that runs counter to the values of our institution, and our mission and commitment to serve everyone equally.
'Dr Golden heard the feedback from our community, sincerely apologized, and retracted the definition. We fully support and appreciate her decision to do so, and as leaders of Johns Hopkins Medicine, we too repudiate this language.'
In the initial email sent out, Dr. Golden explains that 'privilege' is the 'diversity word of the month'.
To explain who the phrase applies to, she offered a list. It reads: 'Privilege is characteristically invisible to people who have it.
'White people, able-bodied people, heterosexuals, cisgender people, males Christians, middle or owning class people, middle-aged people and English-speaking people,' all fit the bill, according to Golden.
'People in dominant groups often believe they have earned the privileges they enjoy or that everyone could have access to these privileges if only they worked to earn them.
'In fact, privileges are unearned and are granted to people in the dominant groups whether they want those privileges or not, and regardless of their stated intent.'
Among those to condemn the remarks was Elon Musk, who tweeted: 'This must end!'
Donald Trump Jr. said: 'The rot and racism in higher education goes so much further Harvard, MIT, and Penn (my alma mater) it has taken over virtually every institution and needs to end now.'
'The newsletter included a definition of the word privilege which, upon reflection, I deeply regret. The intent of the newsletter is to inform and support an inclusive community at Hopkins, but the language of this definition clearly did not meet that goal.
'In fact, because it was overly simplistic and poorly worded, it had the opposite effect.'
'I retract and disavow the definition I shared and I am sorry.'
In a statement to DailyMail.com, a Johns Hopkins Medicine spokesperson said: 'The January edition of the monthly newsletter from the Johns Hopkins Medicine Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity used language that contradicts the values of Johns Hopkins as an institution.
'Dr. Sherita Golden, Johns Hopkins Medicine's Chief Diversity Officer, has sincerely acknowledged this mistake and retracted the language used in the message.'
Other Twitter users slammed the letter too.
In response, conservative activists are trashing the institution online. 'Johns Hopkins is throwing away their legacy of being a respected and honored institution over the DEI movement that history will list as the thing that brought down this venerable institution for promoting racism, and discrimination and too many phobias to mention,' wrote one person.
'I fall in every category here-- so I must be the privilege world champion,' joked another user.
'I would love the word 'privilege' to just get sucked into a vortex, never to be seen or uttered again,' said another.
This past October, Johns Hopkins made headlines when it renamed one of its programs, the Caroline Donovan Professorship in English Literature due to the Donovan's family owning of slaves in the 19th century.
According to a 2020 announcement from the school, founder Johns Hopkins too was a slaveowner, despite being a Quaker, a group who were largely abolitionist.
'Weighing the prime legacy of any name is a subjective and imprecise process, but in taking up this work, the university seeks to reconcile history with the values it strives to protect and uphold,' Vice-chair of the university's board of trustees Sarah O'Hagan said in a statement at the time.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12962519/Johns-Hopkins-dean-apologizes-staff-DEI.html
****************************************************America’s ‘Social Justice’ Nightmares Have Only Intensified
Seattle is in King County, Washington, where Joe Biden got 75 percent of the vote in the 2020 election. King County had more than 1,000 drug overdoses involving fentanyl in 2023. These two facts are almost certainly related, but which is the cause and which the effect? Or could it be that both (a) the tendency to vote for Democrats and (b) the addiction to dangerous drugs are caused by some unknown factor? Without a careful analysis of the available data to identify that unknown background factor, is it wrong to hazard a guess that the overdosing dopeheads and Democratic voters in King County are just plain stupid?
Beyond sarcastic put-downs, it behooves those interested in public policy to take a look at what’s going on in places like Seattle, where Democrats dominate and “progressive” ideas therefore advance unhindered by any effective opposition. In the case of King County’s skyrocketing drug overdoses — which increased nearly 50 percent in just the past year — local officials have declared the problem “a public health crisis.” However, fentanyl is illegal, which means that the overdoses are also indicative of a crime problem, and progressives are against putting criminals in prison.
After the 2020 George Floyd riots — caused, not coincidentally, by the death of a fentanyl user — the progressive outcry against “mass incarceration” was part of the general anti-law-enforcement rhetoric that incited “fiery but mostly peaceful” protests. It was claimed that black people were disproportionately imprisoned because of “systemic racism,” and, it was further claimed, many of those inmates were guilty of nothing more than “non-violent drug offenses.” This rhetoric has now become the basis of national policy, e.g., Biden’s recent commutation of the sentences of 11 criminals “serving disproportionately long sentences for non-violent drug offenses.” These commutations were part of “reforms that advance equal justice, address racial disparities, strengthen public safety, and enhance the wellbeing of all Americans,” Biden declared. (READ MORE: Chauvin Did Not Murder George Floyd)
As a matter of public policy, this approach only makes sense to those who know nothing about how criminals operate or law enforcement works. Habitual felons are not specialists; that is to say, the person trafficking in illegal drugs is also likely to be engaged in other criminal behavior. Pimps and thieves are often involved in the drug trade, to say nothing of the gangbangers who shoot each other in disputes over urban “turf.” Once upon a time in America, cops and prosecutors knew how to deal with such activity, a get-tough approach that included what we may call the Al Capone principle of law enforcement.
Everybody knows that Al Capone and his gang were guilty of innumerable murders and other serious crimes, but Capone didn’t go to prison for those crimes. Instead, he went to prison for federal tax evasion. The principle expressed by this prosecution was simple — once you identify the habitual perpetrators of crime, it doesn’t really matter what charge sends them to prison. What matters is getting the bad guys off the street.
For decades, intellectuals and activists told us that the “War on Drugs” was misguided and ineffective. However, if recent experience has shown us anything, it’s that you can’t reduce the drug problem by legalizing hitherto outlawed substances or refusing to enforce existing drug laws. Just take a look at the streets of Seattle, where addicts crowd the sidewalks in open-air drug markets.
Is it a coincidence that Washington state was the first to legalize the recreational use of marijuana in 2012 and that now, more than a decade later, dopeheads are dying at record rates on the streets of Seattle? The criminals who were previously trafficking in marijuana didn’t decide to stop dealing drugs once marijuana was legalized. Drug dealers aren’t specialists, after all, and even with legalization, black-market marijuana sales continue, outside the taxed and regulated state-licensed cannabis shops. The same criminal who sells you weed will also be happy to supply you with fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine, or MDMA.
The cause-and-effect questions about the correlations between (a) voting for Democrats and (b) disastrous outcomes like the drug problem in Seattle are matters of national consequence. The progressive policy agenda that tolerates — nay, that enables — the squalid scenes on the streets of Seattle and other Democrat-run cities is far-reaching in its ambitions. Even while urban “blue zones” turn into crime-ridden hellholes, the people responsible for these disasters lecture us about their plans to “save democracy” and, indeed, to “save the planet.” (RELATED: A Trashy Speech by a Trashy President: Biden Takes on Valley Forge)
In one of the all-time great moments in the history of televised political debates, Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis recently confronted California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom with what instantly became known as the San Francisco “poop map”:
“This is a map of San Francisco. There’s a lot of plots on that. You may be asking, what is that plotting? Well, this is an app where they plot the human feces that are found on the streets of San Francisco,” DeSantis said, holding up the geographic depiction of the city smeared in shades of brown.
Democrats don’t seem to mind if the streets of their cities are littered with discarded hypodermic needles and other detritus. They have more important priorities, like making sure restaurants don’t provide plastic straws to their customers. This is not a joke. In 2018, Seattle became “the first major U.S. city to ban single-use plastic straws and utensils in food service.”
Think about that for a minute. Police in Seattle are patrolling restaurants to enforce the city’s plastic utensil ban, even while the city’s “progressive” policies require cops to ignore the junkies shooting up on the sidewalks. Peddlers of fentanyl go about their deadly business unmolested, but a restaurant owner could go to prison for giving his customer a plastic straw.
How many exclamation marks do you want me to put after a sentence like that? It is difficult to express in words how crazy Democrats have become. What can explain this madness? Thomas Sowell once outlined it as The Vision of the Anointed — the belief that what matters in public policy is not practical consequences but rather the expression of good intentions. This vision turns politics into a narcissistic competition in which support for “progressive” ideas is considered symbolic of one’s moral and intellectual superiority, without regard for the efficacy of the resulting policies. Even when progressive policies produce disaster — e.g., the squalor in cities like Seattle — the people who vote for such policies still cling to the vision that tells them they are more enlightened and caring than their opponents and critics who point out the failures of their policies.
It would be bad enough if these failures were merely local in their impact. Watching once-prosperous cities turn into crime-plagued nightmares — whether in Seattle or Portland, Chicago or Baltimore — is unpleasant, but people who want to avoid local disasters perpetrated by advocates of “social justice” can simply move away from Democrat-controlled cities. What happens, however, when urban progressives gain control of entire states? This was the point DeSantis was making in his debate with Newsom, namely, that the former San Francisco mayor has presided over California’s startling decline since becoming governor. We may stipulate that Newsom himself is not entirely responsible for this decline, which was underway long before he became governor in 2019. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that the progressive agenda is the basic cause of most problems in California, a state where a majority of voters have chosen Democrats in every presidential election since 1996. Democrats control the state legislature and every statewide office in California, where Joe Biden got 63 percent of the vote in 2020. Is anyone surprised to learn that (a) the state now has a record $68 billion budget deficit, and (b) it is now losing population as fed-up residents leave the state?
Eventually, however, as the cancer of progressivism spreads, destroying cities and states, the health of the nation is threatened — which is, after all, why Joe Biden is in the White House. Go through the 2020 election results state-by-state and a pattern becomes clear. In every “swing” state that tilted to Biden, Trump would have won were it not for the overwhelming tsunami of Democratic votes in major cities. For example, in Georgia, where the official margin of victory was less than 12,000 votes (0.23 percent of the approximately 5 million votes in the state), Biden’s margin of victory in Fulton County (Atlanta) was more than 160,000 votes. Which is to say, the Democrats in Atlanta won and the rest of Georgia lost. Something similar was true regarding Philadelphia versus the rest of Pennsylvania, Milwaukee versus the rest of Wisconsin, and so on.
Democrat-controlled cities exercised a decisive influence in putting Biden in the White House, and, therefore, the preferences of urban progressives control the policy agenda of the administration. No matter how much Biden tries to portray himself as a blue-collar “regular guy” favoring commonsense policies, his election was the result of the Democratic Party’s urban dominance, and the agenda of the Biden administration owes much less to common sense than to the kind of ideologues who think it is good policy to legalize drugs, ban plastic straws, and turn loose violent felons in the name of “social justice.”
What is really at stake in this year’s election is whether the American people will wake up and stop this insanity before it destroys our nation.
https://spectator.org/americas-social-justice-nightmares-have-only-intensified/
*********************************************The great Canadian hysteria
Another poisonous Leftist hoax
Almost 100 Christian churches in Canada have been systematically targeted in apparent revenge attacks following a hoax about mass graves containing Native American children.
In 2021, a horrific story swept the internet as an indigenous group in Saskatchewan claimed to find 751 unmarked graves under the Marieval Indian Residential School, weeks after 215 children were supposedly discovered under another school in British Columbia.
The schools were run by Christian churches - largely Catholic - and sought to eliminate their students' Indigenous culture so they could 'assimilate' into Canadian society.
However, excavations carried out last year failed to turn up any evidence of bodies, and most experts concluded that claims of mass graves were exaggerated.
At the same time the excavations failed for the past two years, at least 96 churches have been burned, vandalized and destroyed, seemingly in retaliation, with phrases smeared on the walls including: 'Where are the children.'
The root cause of the apparent hoax stems from the early 19th to 20th centuries, when tens of thousands of indigenous children were ripped from their families and placed at 'residential' boarding schools across Canada.
Many suffered horrendous abuse, were killed or disappeared, leading to searches in recent years that claimed to find shallow graves through the use of ground-penetrating radar.
The tech only found aberrations in the ground that were mistakenly believed to be shallow graves, that may also have been rocks and tree roots disturbing the soil.
Although not every 'site' has been excavated, no bodies were discovered at those that have, leading some to now feel outrage at the 'mass graves' may have been fueled more by social media hysteria than evidence.
As backlash to the initial claims reached fever pitch, furious protests erupted at many sites, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau telling indigenous people that 'the hurt and trauma you feel is Canada's responsibility to bear.'
Since then, almost 100 churches have been burned or vandalized, with Canadian law enforcement declaring just two of the 33 church fires to be accidents.
Over 60 other churches have been marked with vandalism, including rocks thrown through windows, burglaries, and graffiti reading 'dig them up' and 'return them home'.
Although the attacks have stretched for hundreds of miles, one of the worst affected cities was Calgary, which saw 11 churches vandalized in a matter of hours on the night of June 30, 2021.
As the incidents pile up, outrage has been growing among those who feel the government's reaction was far stronger to the hoax 'mass graves' than recent attacks on Christianity.
Many of the retaliatory arson attacks have occurred on First Nation territories, since many churches are found on Native American land after Catholic missionaries built them in the early 1900s and forcibly indoctrinated locals into religion.
Deep divisions remain today, with indigenous hatred for the residential schools ongoing while they are blamed for apparent retribution toward hundred-year-old churches.
The retribution towards Canada's history has also seen Catholic churches make up a majority of those targeted, possibly also due to the church's history of crimes against children.
There is little debate that the indigenous children forced to attend the residential schools suffered awful abuse and neglect, however those that have questioned the claims have faced severe backlash and claims they are 'genocide deniers.'
After one recent excavation on August 18 of 14 sites under Our Lady of Seven Sorrows Catholic Church, experts again said the mass graves claims appeared to be baseless.
'I don’t like to use the word hoax because it’s too strong but there are also too many falsehoods circulating about this issue with no evidence,' Jacques Rouillard, a professor emeritus in the Department of History at the Université de Montréal, told the New York Post.
'This has all been very dark for Canada. We need more excavations so we can know the truth,' Rouillard said. 'Too much was said and decided upon before there was any proof.'
************************************************
Australian surrogacy advocates defend family-making practice, after Pope Francis calls for blanket ban of 'deplorable' act
I must say that I find it distasteful when male homosexuals are given access to surrogate parenting. I think all children need a mother. In the case below, however, the actual mother -- the egg donor - remains in close contact so I am less disturbed by that
Stephen Page and his husband Mitch were brought to tears when a friend offered to become a surrogate mother and give birth to a child for them so they could form a family.
"It was Christmas Day, of all days, when she said she loved us both and wanted to be our surrogate," Mr Page said.
"Then a very good friend offered to be an egg donor. "Both of them were giving the gift of life to us."
That gift is now a "magical", four-year-old girl named Elizabeth who has taken to calling Mitch "Dad" and Stephen "Daddy", so they know who she is referring to.
The women who helped to bring Elizabeth into the world are also part of her life, as they remain close friends of the family.
As the Pages are based in Brisbane, Elizabeth was born through an unpaid, altruistic surrogacy arrangement, the only kind of surrogacy legal in Australia.
A nationwide ban on commercial surrogacy — which is available to prospective parents in several countries overseas — means it is illegal to pay surrogate mothers in Australia.
But all types of surrogacy are back in the spotlight following a call earlier this week by the head of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis, for a worldwide ban on all forms of surrogacy.
In his yearly speech to diplomats in Vatican City on Monday, the pope declared surrogacy to be a "deplorable" act that exploited poor women.
"I deem deplorable the practice of so-called surrogate motherhood, which represents a grave violation of the dignity of the woman and the child, based on the exploitation of situations of the mother's material needs," Pope Francis said.
"A child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract."
Pope Francis has previously described surrogacy as using a "uterus for rent" and a practice that commercialises motherhood.
The Catholic Church also opposes in-vitro fertilisation, abortion, artificial contraception and homosexual sex, although in a landmark ruling in late 2023, Pope Francis approved blessings for same-sex couples.
The Archdiocese of Brisbane did not respond to the ABC's requests for comment on the pope's latest condemnation of surrogacy.
Mr Page, who is a fertility lawyer and surrogacy advocate, said the pope's comments were hypocritical, as the numerous cases of child sexual abuse by Catholic priests meant the church did not have the high ground when it came to sexual morality.
"It's a bit rich to hear the Catholic Church, of all institutions, talking about women's and children's rights given their history," Mr Page said.
"They should put their own house in order first," he said.
However, Mr Page said there were legitimate concerns about women being exploited overseas, with the majority of Australians who pursue surrogacy to create or expand their families going abroad to find surrogate mothers.
He said, in his opinion, surrogate mothers should be allowed to receive payments in Australia, because the current system disincentivises local surrogacy, resulting in more people entering into commercial arrangements overseas.
A Monash University paper, 'Australian intended parents’ decision-making and characteristics and outcomes of surrogacy arrangements completed in Australia and overseas', noted that overseas surrogate mothers and the babies they gave birth to had worse health outcomes, including higher rates of preterm births, multiple births, and neonatal intensive care, than babies born via surrogates in Australia.
Sweeping changes to ACT surrogacy laws proposed
The ACT government proposes changes to the territory's surrogacy laws, including allowing single people to access surrogacy and removing the requirement for the intended parent to have a genetic connection to the child.
The researchers found that overseas surrogacy practices included many cases of multiple embryo transfers and anonymous egg donations, which are both illegal in Australia.
Their survey revealed the most common reasons Australians sought international surrogacy were difficulties finding a local surrogate and the complicated legal processes at home.
"Improving access to surrogacy at a domestic level would reduce the number of people engaging with international arrangements and, in turn, reduce the potential for harm," the paper found.
There were 213 Australian babies born through international surrogacy in the 2021-22 financial year.
This compares with 100 surrogacy births reported by Australian and New Zealand fertility clinics in 2021.
'A beautiful extended family'
Surrogacy lawyer Sarah Jefford said she felt blessed to become the surrogate mother for two Melbourne dads in 2018.
The podcaster said in her view she was receiving the gift of life just as much as she was giving it.
She said throughout the process she formed an intimate bond with the two dads and her surrogate daughter, who is about to turn six.
"While they gained parenthood and the ability to raise and parent her, what we gained together was this beautiful extended family," Mrs Jefford said.
"I am her Aunty Sarah and we spend time together, I've babysat for her, and we celebrate milestones like birthdays and Christmas together."
Growing Families global director Sam Everingham said there needed to be a global framework to regulate surrogacy overseas.
The Australia-based research organisation advises governments and families who are considering undertaking surrogacy.
Mr Everingham said some countries had very poor protections for surrogates, but the solution was not a blanket ban on all surrogacy.
He said Australian surrogacy was very highly regulated. "We've got many thousands of surrogates who do so in an ethical manner," he said.
****************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
<> http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See
No comments:
Post a Comment