Amid Summers' Nightmare

OK, that did it. The headline says: "Harvard Faculty Voting Tuesday on Confidence in President". Let me begin by stating that I really, *really* didn't want to write about this. I mean, my personal opinion is these people should have someone voting confidence on them - they are only ruining the university's reputation with all this fuss. However, no one's asking me, so I'll stick to my blog. The reason why I didn't want to write about Summers and his remarks is very simple: both have been overcovered just as much by mainstream media as by my fellow bloggers. I didn't think I had anything more to say (especially not after the Blogger just ate an eloquent post on the subject). We all had a good laugh at the super-PC hysterical feminists, who instead of studying the clear biological differences men and women DO have, as well as the more ambugous ones to try to prove Summers wrong, acted in a way that only conforms the misogynist stereotype. Time to move on, you would think.

In short, just a few weeks ago, I would have placed this story along with other Political Correctness Nominees, and forgot about it. However, something was a little different about this particular story. The amount of coverage it has received is clearly disproportional to its importance. It has sparked a debate even among those who don't usually pay much attention to academic politics. Nevertheless, political correctness tends to blow things out of proportion to the point of it absurd, so in that respect the story fit in quite easily. The thing is, I'm not really sure whether it's just about PC anymore, or whether it's something else, a new category waiting to be created. As time passes, and the dead horse continues to be flogged (and Summers continues to be hounded by his critics), I'm beginning to see an *aim* to the kerfuffle raised around the President of Harvard.

Methinks, these feminists are after a bigger fish. I don't think they really care about Summers' comments. Or the University. Or the diversity. Or women's progress. Or achievements in science and math. Nope, they are out there for themselves. For their own personal power. And they want Summers out of there, and they will stop at nothing until he's GONE. Otherwise, they would have been satisfied with his numerous apologies and promises of reform. What many people, inlcuding these bloodthirsty harpies (both female and male) don't see but I do, is that they are overdoing it.

By bringing so much attention to this issue, they make Summers come off more and more as a victim of a witchhunt than a villain. The faculty should take care lest they make a completely unnecessary martyr out of him. We have somewhat of an Orwellian scenario unveiling before us. The faculty accuses Summers of "stiffling open discussion". (So far, no clear examples have been provided). That accusation is quite ironic, considering that it is the faculty which successfully shut up their President for making a "controversial" remark, in-quotes I say, because there's absolutely nothing controversial or misogynist in saying that men are women, though equal, are not the same, that they have different strengths, which can complement each other to create a balanced and well-functioning society. In fact, I'm beginning to think that even the most passionate of feminists know that. However, the issue here is political. It has been imbued with layers of meaning which do not exist, just to attract attention and sympathy to Summers' "victims".

These victims have shown that they are more than capable of defending themselves. Immediately, we see the accusations of discriminations rising, that supposedly during Summers' tenure as the President, fewer women have been hired. A few weeks ago I would have simply exclaimed that they might not be hired because the applicants happen to be less knowledgeable or experienced, that quality is more important that superficial diversity. But now I see that the issue is deeper than that and I say: Good! If those are applying are as nitwitted as the ones we've heard from so far, maybe everyone's better off without them.

By now, Summers' words have been turned into a caricature of themselves, and Summers' public trial has turned into a farce. What can I say, but that this incident is filling me with shame. I think by now Summers has found himself in a rather humiliating position, having to apologize over and over again, taking back his words, making public statements full of promises no one cares about. I hate to say what it reminds me off, but readers acquainted with certain histories of certain countries can draw a very easy parallel. It's not about the imperfect human being that Summers is anymore. He has now been turned into a symbol. That's my problem with this whole situation. When human beings are turned into symbols for whatever purpose, injustice is bound to follow. I think by now Summers has done more than enough to atone for whatever grievances he may have caused knowingly or unknowingly, and that further hounding of him can only be counterproductive.

By all means, teach your lessons. But know when to stop. This vote has overstepped any boundaries separating propriety from the absurd which may have remained. In my opinion, if the Harvard faculty was so dissatisfied with their president, they should have done away with him quietly. It would have been a quiet and sensible thing to do, considering that Summers has a reputation as an accomplished economist. If we treat all our experts like this, who will we have left after the witchhunt is over? (I'm not sure I want to know). Secondly, besides being a humiliating experience for Summers himself, it is much more so for the University as a whole. You just do NOT make a laughingstock out of your own president, because eventually it will look very bad for you. And the faculty has made Harvard to some extent a laughingstock for the Harvard students themselves, for other college students, for future applicants. They've done more harm than good by raising a ruckus over a minor incident.

But perhaps... just maybe, it was a clever maneuver to distract public attention for the deeper, darker issues lurking beneath the surface?

Anyway, I have decided to create a separate category for nominees of this sort. I'll call it very simply: "The Witch Hunt Award". It is related to political correctness, but has much more destructive consequences and aims.

Ever watchful,
Irina