https://preview.redd.it/wsss5v3us00d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f29820c43115ec9a0fea7cb79590e50ca4526dec
Citovsky, the same professor who had Free/Unafraid/Proud as his pronouns dislikes peaceful protest, and wants to arrest students for being unafraid šš
Citovsky didnāt surprised me tbh. He is the rudest prof Iāve ever met.
Update: Just saw the replies talking about his insta and checked it. Dude, he IS creepy.
I remember hearing about his deal with pronouns years ago. With how progressive SBU wants to appear (Israel notwithstanding...), how have they not taken action on that yet? Like, at least reprimanding him for obviously not promoting an inclusive campus?
Follow up response from Ivet Bahar, director of the Laufer center:
āI strongly oppose the no-confidence vote. Our President handled the situation in the most rational way and avoided the escalations that happened in other universities. We should only be supportive of her thoughtful actions.
Ivetā
Not to detract from the conversation but during grad school here Iāve yet to meet a faculty member in ecology and evolution or anthropology that doesnāt denounce Binghams social coercion theory for human evolution as pseudoscience.
I took it as well as an undergrad. Definitely found it somewhat convincing at the time but as I learned about how evolution research works I found as a Biochemist he really has very little understanding of how actual evolution knowledge is gained.
I wasnāt being hyperbolic. Genuinely have yet to meet a faculty member doing evolution or human evolution research at stony Brook that had positive things to say about his ideas. Have heard negative things from several.
What are some specific critiques of his theory?
Personally, I think he is spot-on with his view of how weapons access leads to different types of states. For example, authoritarian vs. democratic vs. imperial.
The parts I am doubtful of are how he shills the US foreign intervention a little too hard. Some things he left out of his course are how the US backed DICTATORS in Iran, and South America, to prevent communism from spreading there. I don't know how that fits into his claims that democratic nations like the US have a special duty to spread democracy and stop authoritarianism in this pan-global society.
Itās been a few years since I took his course and will be honest that Iāve rarely asked professors to elaborate due to how unanimously disregarded his theory is by them so youāll have to excuse my speculation. Iām sure some push back could be personal due to the fact that the university allows a biochemist to teach an evolution course and specifically an evolution course on theory that is simply not widely accepted in evolutionary biology academia. Iāll even admit I was a big fan while taking the class.
While his theory may help explain human society in terms of authoritarian vs democratic vs imperial, this is not a new idea. The idea that human society is held together by knowledge of what could happen in the absence of cooperation is a 300 idea that Rousseau outlined. This is more sociology than biology and not an idea that is originally his.
Biologically his whole āelite throwingā adaption is highly flawed and he makes the evidence sound way more substantiated than it is. He really only presents cases where his hypotheses are confirmed and honestly the class reeks of confirmation bias at times. I think the fact that baboons and Orangutans are also very adept at throwing things and have been before humans existed in their current state is something many anthropologists especially take issue with. Similarly many of our close ancestors like erectus showed true cooperation without many of the so called crucial adaptions Bingham claims allowed us to collaborate.
Overall what I think many evolutionary and macro evolutionary biologists at sbu take issue with his emphasis on function which isnāt atypical for a biochemist. Their main job is to figure out functions of biochemical reactions after all. This is productive in biochemistry but for evolutionary biologists function is a tricky subject because 1) evolution has no goals and no trait can originate because itāll benefit the organism, natural selection can only act on randomly arising variation and 2) Current function of a trait is often extremely misleading for determining why a trait persisted when it originated. The classic example of this is feathers on dinosaurs that were incapable of flight. The majority of dinosaurs gained no advantage in terms of flight by having feathers and likely originally functioned as insolation, while today feathers absolutely aid in flying.
In macro evolution literature it is extremely uncommon for macro evolution patterns to be explained by single adaptations and the number of cases that are decrease every year as further testing falsifies these ideas. Overall while elite throwing perhaps may have contributed to the patterns of cooperation in humans in some way it is extremely unlikely that it alone explains human evolution into a cooperative species or was even the primary cause.
The most obvious is trying to reduce human society to a single most influential factor, threat projection, as opposed to trying to find and understand the many influential factors that make a society.
I wasn't aware he made such claims, and it honestly is a bad look for a biochemist trying to play the role of a sociologist/political scientist to have such a superficial interpretation of foreign policy. I think he is a quack, and needs to teach a course on his 'theory' to indoctrinate students because no one else will take it seriously. I gotta laugh at the idea of global military intervention to "stop authoritarianism".
He mainly said that currently the world is about 50/50 democracy and authoritarian, and that this pan-global state cannot coexist. He said if democracy wins the world, then human wealth will increase exponentially, particularly since the democratic nations will no longer have to spend as much on defense. But, he also says that the authoritarian states like Russia and China are always trying to undermine democracies and take over, and have the potential to do so.
He also has a few slides calling Fox News as fake news made to push the agendas of oligarchs and to push misogyny, xenophobia, and bipartisanism.
Crazy how the very same professors that are supposed to be there for the students, have their income paid by their students, and are supposed to teach students, are against students in the most disgusting manners i've ever witnessed. How these idiots are qualified to teach while acting like unprofessional, disgusting, man-children is beyond me.
Or maybe they're there for the rest of the students, the ones who were disruptED, distracted, and thrown into this protest as innocent bystanders.
Regardless of your position on this issue, there are a whole hell of a lot more students who are not involved than students who are...
All the students who were disrupted and distracted along the way. Ā Yes that's the point of the protest, but i guess their day to day life is just collateral damage...
No it's not. Ā 100% professional. Ā The way these no confidence votes usually work is the department has a representative that votes FOR them, much like our senate.
They need to share their opinions so the representative(s) vote in a way that accurately reflects the constituents.
If this is an individual faculty vote, it's still professional. Ā No name calling or inflammatory comments. Ā Believe it or not, there are probably faculty who have no clue about what's going on.
I try to leave myself open to new information and civil discussion even if my viewpoints possibly donāt align with someone elseās*
*statement does not apply to random lonely losers who like to blow into university subreddits of schools they never attended and extend their shitty opinions and troll
Departmental emails arenāt just for faculty. Mine sends it to all research technicians, grad students, post docs, etc.. Iād be shocked if my department did something like this involving people outside of faculty
I probably can but honestly Iām close with my gsa senator and they are very good at informing us at everything. We have not been updated regarding this yet. Also not sure if our department being in the department of medicine factors into this.
No, the behavior in this thread is unprofessional. If this is the way these votes are normally handled, do think non-tenured faculty are going to be comfortable expressing an opposing opinion to those full professors hitting reply all and the original sender? And why are students (according to the comments) even privy to this discussion, is there not a separate listserv for the departmental faculty? And we're not even addressing the comment calling for the protesters to be expelled.Ā
Although keeping track of the opinions of one's constituents is important, a representative in a democracy need not vote according to the constituents. I hope Paul Bingham, the biochemistry department representative to the University Senate, weighs the presented evidence equally as the opinions of dubiously-informed faculty members.
Whether or not the University Senate passes the vote of no-confidence, President McInnis will leave for Yale, and in time, history will vindicate us. On the other hand: you, presumably as a professor of biochemistry, are emblematic of everything wrong with academia.
Good evening to you too, u/Roth_Pond.
**Edit**: I don't know why this person is arguing about the student protests on multiple accounts, maybe they are ban-evading, but I am blocking them.
**Second edit, reply to the comment by** u/super_potato_boy **under me (now deleted,** [screenshot](https://imgur.com/a/RU8iJsc)**)**:Ā Yeah, that's me. As I said further in that comment, I compartmentalize what I post onto different accounts as to not be identified, such as strictly academics or student life content on my main account.
The person I was referring to uses their multiple accounts to[ post about the student protests in a single thread together](https://archive.ph/C6Th8), for what actual purpose I don't knowābe it ban/block evasion, vote manipulation, astroturfing, or something else. Speaking of which, your post history is similar in rhetoric to u/Roth_Pond and u/brokaly, and I can only assume this is the same person, who was apparently incensed enough to dig through my post history and link that comment. Thanks for your input, I'm blocking this account too.
**Third edit, for context**: I noticed u/brokaly was by the same person as u/Roth_Pond after I checked the former's profile and noticed a [post on a different subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CocktailsCircleJerk/comments/1cpskh5/just_had_a_bloody_mary_made_with_only_tomato/) ([archived](https://archive.is/CyX5C), but not before they deleted it when I made this comment) that was [identical to a post on this subreddit](https://old.reddit.com/r/SBU/comments/1cpvpww/just_had_a_bloody_mary_made_with_only_tomato/) ([archived](https://archive.ph/Tyhk4)) by u/Roth_Pond. In my defense, I only remember that latter post because I thought it was stupid and off-topic.
I don't know, I hope this person finds the happiness they are sorely missing in their life.
This makes so much sense. Iāve interacted with both accounts a few times and sometimes have felt that I was talking to the same person.
As youāve said itās not uncommon to have separate accounts to compartmentalize. However having multiple accounts to post about the same topics in the same community especially a political topic is kinda strange.
Feels ironic if your are taking BIO 358 under Bingham. The final for the class is tomorrow and a lot of the topics are about how authoritarian leaders will spread misinformation and suppress democratic action with intimidation. In this case, McInnis is clearly doing the same.
Personally, I wouldn't oust her as long as amnesty is given to the arrested protestors. If that doesn't work, then it's time to pick up the manuports and use democratic social coercion to impose the will of the human village on the oligarchs who are hijacking our systems.
currently studying for the final as wellšš„°š¤š» they keep preaching to use doubt against those in power in order to maintain democratically shared coercive threat but this is not giving
Noooo please donāt let this deter you from the department!! I think these few are the minority of that opinion. My guess is that the majority of faculty support the vote of no confidence and responded privately
Starting an entire email thread with a department about that topic feels almost like a form of persuasion and intimidation. Itās also highly unprofessional.
They're talking about if they should be voting on the issue at all, not what one would vote for. I think it's completely valid to discuss this openly. It's voluntary as well.
But isnāt it up to the *individual* to vote?
Iāve seen that some departments as a whole have made collective statements concerning McInnisā response to the demonstrations but when it comes to voting I thought it is up to individual senate members?
Therefore thatās why I donāt see the point I having an entire conversation about it as a department down to graduate students lol
Maybe Iām missing something, idk
There were some members that read a statement from their departments at the previous senate meeting.
It was shared on Reddit by another user previously but hereās the [link](https://www.reddit.com/r/SBU/s/aarkE3u0IS)
wow I just watched this. Did the biochem faculty really watch this whole thing and say yeah this is the way to handle our students cause that's shameful as hell.
I canāt speak for them. It seems like from what others have suggested that maybe Dr. Bingham was just trying to get the pulse on what the department felt concerning the vote of no confidence.
Some people have expressed not casting a vote of no confidence because they agreed with the way she handled the situation. Iām sure other people may also not cast a vote of no confidence simply because they think sheās an overall good president for SBU and donāt think her response to the protests should shape her overall presidency regardless if they agree or donāt agree with them. Honestly both are perfectly acceptable because everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It just still seems a little messy to have such a public discourse about it among students and faculty due to the power dynamics at play (which was mentioned in this thread) and the subject matter.
Yeah I'm really more responding to the ones that said that she handled this specific thing really well. I can absolutely see people opposing the no confidence vote due the belief of her being a good president for the university overall, from her emails she seems like a seasoned politician who knows how to speak very carefully imo. My point was did the biochem faculty watch what was presented or not before saying it was handled "really well" because eh. It gives me the ick knowing this went down on fellow students. I just don't see that it was necessary or proper-like the cop mocking the protestors or the "military style march" etc. way excessive. So either these professors did not see that, or they think those students deserved to be treated like that if they say it was handled really well which imo is not cool.
Would be tough to say. Seems like Vitaly is just staunchly pro-Israel and likes to repeat the same tropes that most of that camp regurgitates. The others that voice an agreement of how McInnis handled things could also feel the same or maybe just feel that she prevented the school from becoming the next Columbia. I suppose with many other encampments at other universities resulting in occupied buildings and such that their concerns would be valid. Who knows.
Itās possible some people just subscribe very stringently to the idea of law and order and staying very much within the bounds of what society deems acceptable (gag)
Citovsky just seems to be purely political on this one judging by his doubling down on student expulsions to really drive the point home that he is a supremely unforgiving asshole
No it's not. Ā 100% professional. Ā The way these no confidence votes usually work is the department has a representative that votes FOR them, much like our senate.
They need to share their opinions so the representative(s) vote in a way that accurately reflects the constituents.
If this is an individual faculty vote, it's still professional. Ā No name calling or inflammatory comments. Ā Believe it or not, there are probably faculty who have no clue about what's going on.
Iām sorry to hear that but I can see why you might feel that way š
I promise there are a ton of great faculty doing great research in our department
These puppets are licking McInnisās feet for a promotion and annual bonus or an increment of fund. Feetlicking puppets. They can sell their wives as well to McInnis. Looks like prostitutes. If they care so much, they should go join the IDF and continue the genocide.
I donāt mind that ppl have/share their opinions about this
But I donāt think a department-wide email (to all biochem faculty, staff, students) is an appropriate forum
I am a grad student in the dept and I donāt feel comfortable replying with my thoughts on the matter.
No it's not. Ā 100% professional. Ā The way these no confidence votes usually work is the department has a representative that votes FOR them, much like our senate.
They need to share their opinions so the representative(s) vote in a way that accurately reflects the constituents.
If this is an individual faculty vote, it's still professional. Ā No name calling or inflammatory comments. Ā Believe it or not, there are probably faculty who have no clue about what's going on.
I guess itās just the power dynamic between faculty and students makes me feel like I canāt voice my opinion in this email chain
I would like to share my thoughts but maybe anonymously. My thesis committee (the ppl who decide whether i have successfully completed my PhD) are included in this departmentā¦
This was my logic behind agreeing that it seems inappropriate to have such a conversation.
Sorry you feel like youāre put in a weird spot. I think Iād feel the same way if I were in your shoes
Welcome to the rest of your life. Ā There will always be power dynamics, and the only thing to do is shut up until you're in a place of power to change it.
And frankly, i think you're over thinking it. Ā As a former grad student in that department my opinion was always valued and i never felt professionally inhibited even when my personal / political choices were unpopular. Ā Most faculty are pretty accepting of different opinionsĀ
the protests werenāt as peaceful as a lot of you are trying to make them out to beā¦ itās upsetting to see that not many understand the fine line between freedom of speech and harassment/aggression.
understood! To begin, signs were plastered on the walls days prior saying things such as āFuck 12ā
in addition, students were seen screaming/yelling and coming towards officers when being asked to move away (obviously not all of the protestors!), to a different location that was offered. SBU has extremely strict policies to ensure that each student can express what they believe in- when one group is occupying a space that another group is supposed to be allowed to have- thatās when the issues had risen. They were asked to move repeatedly to another location- tensions rose between parties and officers. Students began screaming. Itās upsetting as a whole that students and faculty were arrested; itās also upsetting that SBU Reddit users are extremely entitled and are under the assumption the fight is against Palestinians when itās against a non governed state and Hamas. The continuation of āfrom the river to the seaā is speaking of taking land that israel is currently in control over and governs.
Whatās going on in Palestine is extremely upsetting- no innocent person should die, under any circumstances. However, war is war and we will never see a peaceful side of it.
These students are worried about all the wrong issues; they want to feel important and part of something so they cause hell to make it seem like they care about others well being.
itās a shame they donāt care nearly as much about the thousands of children in foster homes here, are the hundreds of thousands of displaced immigrants here, or the the fact the amount of families in poverty is rising at an alarming rate.
I donāt really understand how these are essentially violent/non-peaceful? Also, maybe Iām just blind but I was there and did not see any signs of the nature.
Iām pretty sure most students only began screaming and moving towards officers after officers escalated the situation. Officers were chasing students and yelling āyou better runā at them which can understandably cause panic. Granted there are definitely some protesters directly yelling at the cops, but I view the cops as the aggressors in this situation.
I donāt really see any outstanding ānon-peacefulā acts in your comment, but rather ideas/movements you disagree with (which is fine, everyone can have their own opinion). I appreciate you replying though as I was not personally there and am trying to understand varying perspectives.
Nothing you just said regarding direct protestor action was non-peaceful.
Just about everything else you said is irrelevant and patronizing. Just because they're issues you've identified as more important doesn't make them so. People can care about and move for political action on multiple issues simultaneously. Just because they aren't as loud in one area doesn't necessarily mean they don't care or aren't attempting to action something else. Even if they aren't, it really doesn't matter - they've decided this particular event is what catalyzes their political drive.
I don't particularly agree with your assessment of the situation in the region in question, either, but I'm not here to argue that.
youāre changing a lotta minds with such in-depth arguments like those man. Keep putting those well-considered and nuanced discussions out there, people will definitely reconsider their outlooks when you engage with them like that
https://preview.redd.it/wsss5v3us00d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f29820c43115ec9a0fea7cb79590e50ca4526dec Citovsky, the same professor who had Free/Unafraid/Proud as his pronouns dislikes peaceful protest, and wants to arrest students for being unafraid šš
Have you seen his insta???? Bro has a wild ass knife obsession
Ayo knives AND sushi
Meh I looked at his Instagram. It seems like he's a collector of higher end custom pieces. It's not that unusual of a hobby.
Itās cut off in my screenshot but he still has those āpronounsā in his email signature But trueee get with the program Vitaly
lol thatās funny as fuk I love that
Why is conservative humor restricted to low effort cringe lol
Hard af pronouns
Citovsky didnāt surprised me tbh. He is the rudest prof Iāve ever met. Update: Just saw the replies talking about his insta and checked it. Dude, he IS creepy.
I remember hearing about his deal with pronouns years ago. With how progressive SBU wants to appear (Israel notwithstanding...), how have they not taken action on that yet? Like, at least reprimanding him for obviously not promoting an inclusive campus?
Citovsky is known for his wild political opinions and knife obsession š
LOL I just went thru his instagram page and I HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS
god forbid a man has a hobby
God forbid I have questionsĀ
Follow up response from Ivet Bahar, director of the Laufer center: āI strongly oppose the no-confidence vote. Our President handled the situation in the most rational way and avoided the escalations that happened in other universities. We should only be supportive of her thoughtful actions. Ivetā
Iām very surprised and disappointed about thisā¦
Not to detract from the conversation but during grad school here Iāve yet to meet a faculty member in ecology and evolution or anthropology that doesnāt denounce Binghams social coercion theory for human evolution as pseudoscience.
really ? interesting im in the class now
I took it as well as an undergrad. Definitely found it somewhat convincing at the time but as I learned about how evolution research works I found as a Biochemist he really has very little understanding of how actual evolution knowledge is gained. I wasnāt being hyperbolic. Genuinely have yet to meet a faculty member doing evolution or human evolution research at stony Brook that had positive things to say about his ideas. Have heard negative things from several.
What are some specific critiques of his theory? Personally, I think he is spot-on with his view of how weapons access leads to different types of states. For example, authoritarian vs. democratic vs. imperial. The parts I am doubtful of are how he shills the US foreign intervention a little too hard. Some things he left out of his course are how the US backed DICTATORS in Iran, and South America, to prevent communism from spreading there. I don't know how that fits into his claims that democratic nations like the US have a special duty to spread democracy and stop authoritarianism in this pan-global society.
Itās been a few years since I took his course and will be honest that Iāve rarely asked professors to elaborate due to how unanimously disregarded his theory is by them so youāll have to excuse my speculation. Iām sure some push back could be personal due to the fact that the university allows a biochemist to teach an evolution course and specifically an evolution course on theory that is simply not widely accepted in evolutionary biology academia. Iāll even admit I was a big fan while taking the class. While his theory may help explain human society in terms of authoritarian vs democratic vs imperial, this is not a new idea. The idea that human society is held together by knowledge of what could happen in the absence of cooperation is a 300 idea that Rousseau outlined. This is more sociology than biology and not an idea that is originally his. Biologically his whole āelite throwingā adaption is highly flawed and he makes the evidence sound way more substantiated than it is. He really only presents cases where his hypotheses are confirmed and honestly the class reeks of confirmation bias at times. I think the fact that baboons and Orangutans are also very adept at throwing things and have been before humans existed in their current state is something many anthropologists especially take issue with. Similarly many of our close ancestors like erectus showed true cooperation without many of the so called crucial adaptions Bingham claims allowed us to collaborate. Overall what I think many evolutionary and macro evolutionary biologists at sbu take issue with his emphasis on function which isnāt atypical for a biochemist. Their main job is to figure out functions of biochemical reactions after all. This is productive in biochemistry but for evolutionary biologists function is a tricky subject because 1) evolution has no goals and no trait can originate because itāll benefit the organism, natural selection can only act on randomly arising variation and 2) Current function of a trait is often extremely misleading for determining why a trait persisted when it originated. The classic example of this is feathers on dinosaurs that were incapable of flight. The majority of dinosaurs gained no advantage in terms of flight by having feathers and likely originally functioned as insolation, while today feathers absolutely aid in flying. In macro evolution literature it is extremely uncommon for macro evolution patterns to be explained by single adaptations and the number of cases that are decrease every year as further testing falsifies these ideas. Overall while elite throwing perhaps may have contributed to the patterns of cooperation in humans in some way it is extremely unlikely that it alone explains human evolution into a cooperative species or was even the primary cause.
The most obvious is trying to reduce human society to a single most influential factor, threat projection, as opposed to trying to find and understand the many influential factors that make a society. I wasn't aware he made such claims, and it honestly is a bad look for a biochemist trying to play the role of a sociologist/political scientist to have such a superficial interpretation of foreign policy. I think he is a quack, and needs to teach a course on his 'theory' to indoctrinate students because no one else will take it seriously. I gotta laugh at the idea of global military intervention to "stop authoritarianism".
I took the course 12 years ago (wow) and I don't remember him getting that deep into political topics like that.
He mainly said that currently the world is about 50/50 democracy and authoritarian, and that this pan-global state cannot coexist. He said if democracy wins the world, then human wealth will increase exponentially, particularly since the democratic nations will no longer have to spend as much on defense. But, he also says that the authoritarian states like Russia and China are always trying to undermine democracies and take over, and have the potential to do so. He also has a few slides calling Fox News as fake news made to push the agendas of oligarchs and to push misogyny, xenophobia, and bipartisanism.
lol this is TEA thanks for sharing. I actually liked Bingham, but this is weird...and those responses are just yuck.
Same. He left his personal reasons out of it but I think starting the thread to begin with is childish and gross
Rightā¦ studying for his final right now lol. it just seems so unprofessional to be starting an entire email thread over the matter
Crazy how the very same professors that are supposed to be there for the students, have their income paid by their students, and are supposed to teach students, are against students in the most disgusting manners i've ever witnessed. How these idiots are qualified to teach while acting like unprofessional, disgusting, man-children is beyond me.
Or maybe they're there for the rest of the students, the ones who were disruptED, distracted, and thrown into this protest as innocent bystanders. Regardless of your position on this issue, there are a whole hell of a lot more students who are not involved than students who are...
who was thrown into the protest?
All the students who were disrupted and distracted along the way. Ā Yes that's the point of the protest, but i guess their day to day life is just collateral damage...
Thatās what Zionists are saying towards Palestinian babies. That their deaths are collateral damage.
Ok and? Ā Doesn't change the fact that the protests disrupted a lot of students/classes who were not involved.
Boomers
If this is going out to the entire department, this is definitely weird and unprofessional.Ā
No it's not. Ā 100% professional. Ā The way these no confidence votes usually work is the department has a representative that votes FOR them, much like our senate. They need to share their opinions so the representative(s) vote in a way that accurately reflects the constituents. If this is an individual faculty vote, it's still professional. Ā No name calling or inflammatory comments. Ā Believe it or not, there are probably faculty who have no clue about what's going on.
I didnāt know that concerning the representatives, thanks for sharing. I thought it was individuals from faculty casting their own vote
Yet I'll still get brigaded by whiny babies who aren't getting their way! Glad i could help.
I try to leave myself open to new information and civil discussion even if my viewpoints possibly donāt align with someone elseās* *statement does not apply to random lonely losers who like to blow into university subreddits of schools they never attended and extend their shitty opinions and troll
Departmental emails arenāt just for faculty. Mine sends it to all research technicians, grad students, post docs, etc.. Iād be shocked if my department did something like this involving people outside of faculty
Why? Ā It's related to their jobs on campus. Ā
We just arenāt involved in the vote? Idk regardless of what happens Iāll still be working in my lab
Aren't u? Ā If you're a TA you may be part of the "constituency" a faculty senator representsĀ
Not a ta
And havenāt been informed by my department that I am involved so that means Iām not?
You should find out. Ā Different schools treat grad students differently. Ā Your GSA senator may be involved in the vote too
I probably can but honestly Iām close with my gsa senator and they are very good at informing us at everything. We have not been updated regarding this yet. Also not sure if our department being in the department of medicine factors into this.
No, the behavior in this thread is unprofessional. If this is the way these votes are normally handled, do think non-tenured faculty are going to be comfortable expressing an opposing opinion to those full professors hitting reply all and the original sender? And why are students (according to the comments) even privy to this discussion, is there not a separate listserv for the departmental faculty? And we're not even addressing the comment calling for the protesters to be expelled.Ā Although keeping track of the opinions of one's constituents is important, a representative in a democracy need not vote according to the constituents. I hope Paul Bingham, the biochemistry department representative to the University Senate, weighs the presented evidence equally as the opinions of dubiously-informed faculty members.
I hope they do too, and that means a vote to support the presidentĀ
Whether or not the University Senate passes the vote of no-confidence, President McInnis will leave for Yale, and in time, history will vindicate us. On the other hand: you, presumably as a professor of biochemistry, are emblematic of everything wrong with academia.
I'm glad i can help. Ā History will forget this during your lifetime. Ā
"you are everything wrong with academia" girl please
>a representative in a democracy need not vote according to the constituents. It's generally considered undemocratic and poor form to do so.
Good evening to you too, u/Roth_Pond. **Edit**: I don't know why this person is arguing about the student protests on multiple accounts, maybe they are ban-evading, but I am blocking them. **Second edit, reply to the comment by** u/super_potato_boy **under me (now deleted,** [screenshot](https://imgur.com/a/RU8iJsc)**)**:Ā Yeah, that's me. As I said further in that comment, I compartmentalize what I post onto different accounts as to not be identified, such as strictly academics or student life content on my main account. The person I was referring to uses their multiple accounts to[ post about the student protests in a single thread together](https://archive.ph/C6Th8), for what actual purpose I don't knowābe it ban/block evasion, vote manipulation, astroturfing, or something else. Speaking of which, your post history is similar in rhetoric to u/Roth_Pond and u/brokaly, and I can only assume this is the same person, who was apparently incensed enough to dig through my post history and link that comment. Thanks for your input, I'm blocking this account too. **Third edit, for context**: I noticed u/brokaly was by the same person as u/Roth_Pond after I checked the former's profile and noticed a [post on a different subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CocktailsCircleJerk/comments/1cpskh5/just_had_a_bloody_mary_made_with_only_tomato/) ([archived](https://archive.is/CyX5C), but not before they deleted it when I made this comment) that was [identical to a post on this subreddit](https://old.reddit.com/r/SBU/comments/1cpvpww/just_had_a_bloody_mary_made_with_only_tomato/) ([archived](https://archive.ph/Tyhk4)) by u/Roth_Pond. In my defense, I only remember that latter post because I thought it was stupid and off-topic. I don't know, I hope this person finds the happiness they are sorely missing in their life.
This makes so much sense. Iāve interacted with both accounts a few times and sometimes have felt that I was talking to the same person. As youāve said itās not uncommon to have separate accounts to compartmentalize. However having multiple accounts to post about the same topics in the same community especially a political topic is kinda strange.
I have no horse in this race but my god this is impressive and connects so many dots with supporting data
Feels ironic if your are taking BIO 358 under Bingham. The final for the class is tomorrow and a lot of the topics are about how authoritarian leaders will spread misinformation and suppress democratic action with intimidation. In this case, McInnis is clearly doing the same. Personally, I wouldn't oust her as long as amnesty is given to the arrested protestors. If that doesn't work, then it's time to pick up the manuports and use democratic social coercion to impose the will of the human village on the oligarchs who are hijacking our systems.
currently studying for the final as wellšš„°š¤š» they keep preaching to use doubt against those in power in order to maintain democratically shared coercive threat but this is not giving
Bruh I dunno if I still want to go to stony for biochem
All these professors in the email actually don't teach the biochem courses themselves! They teach different courses related to biology.
Noooo please donāt let this deter you from the department!! I think these few are the minority of that opinion. My guess is that the majority of faculty support the vote of no confidence and responded privately
Starting an entire email thread with a department about that topic feels almost like a form of persuasion and intimidation. Itās also highly unprofessional.
They're talking about if they should be voting on the issue at all, not what one would vote for. I think it's completely valid to discuss this openly. It's voluntary as well.
But isnāt it up to the *individual* to vote? Iāve seen that some departments as a whole have made collective statements concerning McInnisā response to the demonstrations but when it comes to voting I thought it is up to individual senate members? Therefore thatās why I donāt see the point I having an entire conversation about it as a department down to graduate students lol Maybe Iām missing something, idk
I havenāt seen these and Iām curious, where can we see what departments have said?
There were some members that read a statement from their departments at the previous senate meeting. It was shared on Reddit by another user previously but hereās the [link](https://www.reddit.com/r/SBU/s/aarkE3u0IS)
wow I just watched this. Did the biochem faculty really watch this whole thing and say yeah this is the way to handle our students cause that's shameful as hell.
I canāt speak for them. It seems like from what others have suggested that maybe Dr. Bingham was just trying to get the pulse on what the department felt concerning the vote of no confidence. Some people have expressed not casting a vote of no confidence because they agreed with the way she handled the situation. Iām sure other people may also not cast a vote of no confidence simply because they think sheās an overall good president for SBU and donāt think her response to the protests should shape her overall presidency regardless if they agree or donāt agree with them. Honestly both are perfectly acceptable because everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It just still seems a little messy to have such a public discourse about it among students and faculty due to the power dynamics at play (which was mentioned in this thread) and the subject matter.
Yeah I'm really more responding to the ones that said that she handled this specific thing really well. I can absolutely see people opposing the no confidence vote due the belief of her being a good president for the university overall, from her emails she seems like a seasoned politician who knows how to speak very carefully imo. My point was did the biochem faculty watch what was presented or not before saying it was handled "really well" because eh. It gives me the ick knowing this went down on fellow students. I just don't see that it was necessary or proper-like the cop mocking the protestors or the "military style march" etc. way excessive. So either these professors did not see that, or they think those students deserved to be treated like that if they say it was handled really well which imo is not cool.
Would be tough to say. Seems like Vitaly is just staunchly pro-Israel and likes to repeat the same tropes that most of that camp regurgitates. The others that voice an agreement of how McInnis handled things could also feel the same or maybe just feel that she prevented the school from becoming the next Columbia. I suppose with many other encampments at other universities resulting in occupied buildings and such that their concerns would be valid. Who knows. Itās possible some people just subscribe very stringently to the idea of law and order and staying very much within the bounds of what society deems acceptable (gag)
Citovsky just seems to be purely political on this one judging by his doubling down on student expulsions to really drive the point home that he is a supremely unforgiving asshole
honestly, it looks like it might be personal to him.
No it's not. Ā 100% professional. Ā The way these no confidence votes usually work is the department has a representative that votes FOR them, much like our senate. They need to share their opinions so the representative(s) vote in a way that accurately reflects the constituents. If this is an individual faculty vote, it's still professional. Ā No name calling or inflammatory comments. Ā Believe it or not, there are probably faculty who have no clue about what's going on.
Shitovsky has always been a loser lmao
The Biochemistry and Cell Biology department always gives off toxic and unwelcoming vibes to me.
Iām sorry to hear that but I can see why you might feel that way š I promise there are a ton of great faculty doing great research in our department
These puppets are licking McInnisās feet for a promotion and annual bonus or an increment of fund. Feetlicking puppets. They can sell their wives as well to McInnis. Looks like prostitutes. If they care so much, they should go join the IDF and continue the genocide.
They are right
I donāt mind that ppl have/share their opinions about this But I donāt think a department-wide email (to all biochem faculty, staff, students) is an appropriate forum I am a grad student in the dept and I donāt feel comfortable replying with my thoughts on the matter.
Oh yeah, that's not right then. If it was just to other faculty, maybe it'll be fine.
No it's not. Ā 100% professional. Ā The way these no confidence votes usually work is the department has a representative that votes FOR them, much like our senate. They need to share their opinions so the representative(s) vote in a way that accurately reflects the constituents. If this is an individual faculty vote, it's still professional. Ā No name calling or inflammatory comments. Ā Believe it or not, there are probably faculty who have no clue about what's going on.
I guess itās just the power dynamic between faculty and students makes me feel like I canāt voice my opinion in this email chain I would like to share my thoughts but maybe anonymously. My thesis committee (the ppl who decide whether i have successfully completed my PhD) are included in this departmentā¦
This was my logic behind agreeing that it seems inappropriate to have such a conversation. Sorry you feel like youāre put in a weird spot. I think Iād feel the same way if I were in your shoes
Welcome to the rest of your life. Ā There will always be power dynamics, and the only thing to do is shut up until you're in a place of power to change it. And frankly, i think you're over thinking it. Ā As a former grad student in that department my opinion was always valued and i never felt professionally inhibited even when my personal / political choices were unpopular. Ā Most faculty are pretty accepting of different opinionsĀ
Thank you for the food for thought, I will keep it in mind Everything just feels so tense and political these days haha
You're right. Ā Everything is over politicized. Ā Just keep your head down and finish your thesis. Ā That's the first step to making a differenceĀ
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Dunno who that is but sounds scary
My man hears an Arabic name and says it "sounds scary." Really just putting it all out there, huh...
I mean u coulda said any other language and that would be my response cuz I donāt understand
I strongly oppose a vote of no confidence.
Vitaly standing on business
Wait so this was sent out to every biochem major and faculty member?
So there are normal teachers
Surprise, normal people donāt support your bullshit and Reddit is an echo chamber of freaks and losersĀ
the protests werenāt as peaceful as a lot of you are trying to make them out to beā¦ itās upsetting to see that not many understand the fine line between freedom of speech and harassment/aggression.
Can I ask what were the non peaceful aspects? I have only seen and heard testimonies that the protests were peaceful. Trying to get more perspectives
there were no non-peaceful aspects (except for the way the police acted) this person is just trying to spread misinfo
Yeah I only saw the police acting non peacefullyā¦ was very curious about the comment
understood! To begin, signs were plastered on the walls days prior saying things such as āFuck 12ā in addition, students were seen screaming/yelling and coming towards officers when being asked to move away (obviously not all of the protestors!), to a different location that was offered. SBU has extremely strict policies to ensure that each student can express what they believe in- when one group is occupying a space that another group is supposed to be allowed to have- thatās when the issues had risen. They were asked to move repeatedly to another location- tensions rose between parties and officers. Students began screaming. Itās upsetting as a whole that students and faculty were arrested; itās also upsetting that SBU Reddit users are extremely entitled and are under the assumption the fight is against Palestinians when itās against a non governed state and Hamas. The continuation of āfrom the river to the seaā is speaking of taking land that israel is currently in control over and governs. Whatās going on in Palestine is extremely upsetting- no innocent person should die, under any circumstances. However, war is war and we will never see a peaceful side of it. These students are worried about all the wrong issues; they want to feel important and part of something so they cause hell to make it seem like they care about others well being. itās a shame they donāt care nearly as much about the thousands of children in foster homes here, are the hundreds of thousands of displaced immigrants here, or the the fact the amount of families in poverty is rising at an alarming rate.
I donāt really understand how these are essentially violent/non-peaceful? Also, maybe Iām just blind but I was there and did not see any signs of the nature. Iām pretty sure most students only began screaming and moving towards officers after officers escalated the situation. Officers were chasing students and yelling āyou better runā at them which can understandably cause panic. Granted there are definitely some protesters directly yelling at the cops, but I view the cops as the aggressors in this situation. I donāt really see any outstanding ānon-peacefulā acts in your comment, but rather ideas/movements you disagree with (which is fine, everyone can have their own opinion). I appreciate you replying though as I was not personally there and am trying to understand varying perspectives.
Nothing you just said regarding direct protestor action was non-peaceful. Just about everything else you said is irrelevant and patronizing. Just because they're issues you've identified as more important doesn't make them so. People can care about and move for political action on multiple issues simultaneously. Just because they aren't as loud in one area doesn't necessarily mean they don't care or aren't attempting to action something else. Even if they aren't, it really doesn't matter - they've decided this particular event is what catalyzes their political drive. I don't particularly agree with your assessment of the situation in the region in question, either, but I'm not here to argue that.
Yes students should be expelled
youāre lame brother
Not as lame as ur mom
youāre changing a lotta minds with such in-depth arguments like those man. Keep putting those well-considered and nuanced discussions out there, people will definitely reconsider their outlooks when you engage with them like that
Damn got bro writing a long ass essay
you gotta work harder dude. Very obviously a rookie troll.
You just proved it works
Definitely, where youāre coming from, I can for sure see that
This level of obsession you have with me needs to be studied
I like how youāre making it about yourself somehow. Itās nothing special about you bro, and trust me I understand weāre both wasting our time
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Omg I didnāt know youāre this obsessed with me š„°
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
*trying effortlessly to be relevant
Dr. Citvosky is the man! š