WSJ Tells Dr. Jill Biden to drop the Dr...because it's in Education.

U

User.45

Guest

Madame First Lady—Mrs. Biden—Jill—kiddo: a bit of advice on what may seem like a small but I think is a not unimportant matter. Any chance you might drop the “Dr.” before your name? “Dr. Jill Biden ” sounds and feels fraudulent, not to say a touch comic. Your degree is, I believe, an Ed.D., a doctor of education, earned at the University of Delaware through a dissertation with the unpromising title “Student Retention at the Community College Level: Meeting Students’ Needs.” A wise man once said that no one should call himself “Dr.” unless he has delivered a child. Think about it, Dr. Jill, and forthwith drop the doc.

As someone with an MD and a PhD, this is the cringiest shit I've read in a while. A few months ago my institution sent out a newsletter about respect in sciences, and specifically that people with a doctorate degree should be introduced as doctor, even if it's a PhD or a PharmD (duh). Just to shed some light on the sexism of all of this bullshit is, unlike my wife - or in fact Jill Biden - I've definitely never delivered a child. In fact, OB/GYN was the only subject I made a challenge out doing nothing more than the absolute bare minimum to pass. I personally don't believe in titles, outside the hospital, I prefer to be called by my first name, and even in the hospital, I only expect patients to call me doctor, because that's my role there. However, there's so much cringe in a "honorary doctor" perceiving to be in the position of authority to tell someone not to be called a doctor is just so classic:

1. He feels entitled AND qualified to be able to tell who deserves to use the title doctor, and who doesn't, but he himself doesn't hold the actual title or even an advanced degree (I'm especially annoyed by people bringing up their bachelors or in this case almost bachelors from UChicago).
2. Uses old sexist tropes (a person is not a doctor unless HE had delivered a child).
3. Goes on a tangent why a doctorate in education is lesser, because there was no blood shed, and passed greek or latin. Dude.

argh.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lizkat

Melting Down
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,538
Reaction score
11,815
Location
Catskill Mountains
Apparently his former employers at Northwestern felt compelled to express an opinion about this guy, possibly because they figure the WSJ is not going to apologize or pull the op-ed.


NU, while supporting academic freedom and freedom of expression, wrote in a Saturday statement it does not agree with Epstein’s opinions laid out in the op-ed. The University emphasized that a doctoral designation is “well-deserved” by any individual who has earned a Ph.D., M.D. or — in Biden’s case — an Ed.D.

“Northwestern is firmly committed to equity, diversity and inclusion, and strongly disagrees with Mr. Epstein’s misogynistic views,” the University wrote.

NU’s English Department said the op-ed cast an “unmerited aspersion” on Biden’s doctoral credentials and expertise. Rejecting the opinion, the department wrote it also condemns the diminishing of any individual’s well-earned degrees “in any field, from any university.”

Epstein was never a tenured professor at NU, the University wrote, and has not been a lecturer since 2002. He currently holds emeritus status with the English Department.
 

Scepticalscribe

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
6,306
Reaction score
9,029



As someone with an MD and a PhD, this is the cringiest shit I've read in a while. A few months ago my institution sent out a newsletter about respect in sciences, and specifically that people with a doctorate degree should be introduced as doctor, even if it's a PhD or a PharmD (duh). Just to shed some light on the sexism of all of this bullshit is, unlike my wife - or in fact Jill Biden - I've definitely never delivered a child. In fact, OB/GYN was the only subject I made a challenge out doing nothing more than the absolute bare minimum to pass. I personally don't believe in titles, outside the hospital, I prefer to be called by my first name, and even in the hospital, I only expect patients to call me doctor, because that's my role there. However, there's so much cringe in a "honorary doctor" perceiving to be in the position of authority to tell someone not to be called a doctor is just so classic:

1. He feels entitled AND qualified to be able to tell who deserves to use the title doctor, and who doesn't, but he himself doesn't hold the actual title or even an advanced degree (I'm especially annoyed by people bringing up their bachelors or in this case almost bachelors from UChicago).
2. Uses old sexist tropes (a person is not a doctor unless HE had delivered a child).
3. Goes on a tangent while a doctorate in education is lesser, because there was no blood shed, and passed greek or latin. Dude.

argh.

Some guys are just so ludicrously and pathetically threatened by educated, accomplished, qualified women......it would be funny if the consequences weren't so (potentially) awful.
 

lizkat

Melting Down
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,538
Reaction score
11,815
Location
Catskill Mountains
And already infamous for anti-gay statements years ago... but he still gets work consistently into his 80s. But no, institutional sexism and racism are just a figment of our imaginations.....

Epstein's op-ed blurb includes reference to one of his books, and he knew his op-ed would blow up... and gain him publicity.

Now the WSJ has put up an editorial by Paul Gigot (on the editorial board and managing the opinion pages) defending the Epstein piece mostly on the grounds that since the Biden crew and friends apparently had a few choice words on offer yesterday in conversations about the piece with the Journal's editorial side, the entire outpouring of comment to the Epstein op-ed therefore amounts to a manufactured political assault on Epstein or the WSJ, yada yada culture war, identity politics, indulging in cancel culture etc. -- GOP talking points time

Patently untrue since early on the commenters were from all over the map, plenty good ol' boys were defending the piece anyway and even with some tweets around from folks like the VP-elect's husband and the Buttigiegs, commenters could not have known that any behind-scenes conversations with spox for the actual principals were occurring.


Why go to such lengths to highlight a single op-ed on a relatively minor issue? My guess is that the Biden team concluded it was a chance to use the big gun of identity politics to send a message to critics as it prepares to take power. There’s nothing like playing the race or gender card to stifle criticism. It’s the left’s version of Donald Tump's "enemy of the people” tweets.

Gigot closed with

If you disagree with Mr. Epstein, fair enough. Write a letter or shout your objections on Twitter. But these pages aren’t going to stop publishing provocative essays merely because they offend the new administration or the political censors in the media and academe. And since it’s a time to heal, we’ll give the Biden crowd a mulligan for their attacks on us.

Welp. Business as usual on the opinion pages of the WSJ. Double down when on the wrong side of history.
 

Joe

Elite Member
Posts
1,469
Reaction score
2,573
Location
Gilead
30285A78-120A-47A8-B203-D236707F28F2.jpeg
 
U

User.45

Guest
Epstein's op-ed blurb includes reference to one of his books, and he knew his op-ed would blow up... and gain him publicity.

Now the WSJ has put up an editorial by Paul Gigot (on the editorial board and managing the opinion pages) defending the Epstein piece mostly on the grounds that since the Biden crew and friends apparently had a few choice words on offer yesterday in conversations about the piece with the Journal's editorial side, the entire outpouring of comment to the Epstein op-ed therefore amounts to a manufactured political assault on Epstein or the WSJ, yada yada culture war, identity politics, indulging in cancel culture etc. -- GOP talking points time

Patently untrue since early on the commenters were from all over the map, plenty good ol' boys were defending the piece anyway and even with some tweets around from folks like the VP-elect's husband and the Buttigiegs, commenters could not have known that any behind-scenes conversations with spox for the actual principals were occurring.




Gigot closed with



Welp. Business as usual on the opinion pages of the WSJ. Double down when on the wrong side of history.
Cringe x cringe = Kiddos at WSJ.
 

thekev

Elite Member
Posts
1,074
Reaction score
1,613

I prefer to make it about her being a bad person, similar to her husband. How does posing nude even shock anyone? Especially in Melania's case, I can't imagine a lot of people would even care to see that. She has undergone so much plastic surgery that she appears incapable of a meaningful range of expressions at this point.
 

Alli

Perfection
Staff Member
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
4,780
Reaction score
9,664
Location
Alabackwards
I spent some time yesterday reading comments on this subject and was disappointed. Some of the commenters chose this as an opportunity to just bash Joe (of course). But they went after him as an adulterer. What? And that naturally meant that Jill was just as bad. And oh! the money they stole. What?

What is wrong with these people?!
 

Joe

Elite Member
Posts
1,469
Reaction score
2,573
Location
Gilead
I prefer to make it about her being a bad person, similar to her husband. How does posing nude even shock anyone? Especially in Melania's case, I can't imagine a lot of people would even care to see that. She has undergone so much plastic surgery that she appears incapable of a meaningful range of expressions at this point.

Melania posing nude does not bother me at all. It's the hypocrisy coming from the right. Melania is such a classy first lady to them, but these same people call Michelle Obama trashy. lol smh
 
U

User.45

Guest
I spent some time yesterday reading comments on this subject and was disappointed. Some of the commenters chose this as an opportunity to just bash Joe (of course). But they went after him as an adulterer. What? And that naturally meant that Jill was just as bad. And oh! the money they stole. What?

What is wrong with these people?!
Double standards. Again, at the end of the day we are talking about an article written by a kiddo holding no doctorate degree who mentored no doctorate student, who glorifies the days of learner abuse and belittles the value of doctorates in education. This article reeks of Dunning-Kruger effect...after all, without people researching education we would still conflate learner abuse with scientific rigor. I think the irony is clear.
 

lizkat

Melting Down
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,538
Reaction score
11,815
Location
Catskill Mountains
I spent some time yesterday reading comments on this subject and was disappointed. Some of the commenters chose this as an opportunity to just bash Joe (of course). But they went after him as an adulterer. What? And that naturally meant that Jill was just as bad. And oh! the money they stole. What?

What is wrong with these people?!

What gets me is WSJ's Gigot trying to flip it so it was not their op-ed contributor but Biden's crew operating as a political strike froce who decided to attack the WSJ by playing "a gender card". These guys on the editorial side of the WSJ are not only dinosaurs, they're morons. (and I might add, pre-Calvinist prudes, now having experienced the fact that to escape a place in the human moderation queue, one's post should not deploy the phrase "for the merry hell of it" but subsitute "heck" for "hell"). Meanwhile the tackiest of good ol' boy remarks somehow get by.

Pleased to see that once that trainwreck of a defense by Gigot came out, even more "that's Dr Biden to you Sir" t-shirts got sold so NOVA community college education fund bonanza is well over $20k and counting.

I prefer to make it about her being a bad person, similar to her husband. How does posing nude even shock anyone? Especially in Melania's case, I can't imagine a lot of people would even care to see that. She has undergone so much plastic surgery that she appears incapable of a meaningful range of expressions at this point.

I have always thought of the current First Lady as a bird in a gilded cage. She made conscious choices to enter the cage and so whatever inconveniences or even public humiliations lay ahead for her in that cage are at least rooted in some of her own decisions. But the "choice" to follow her spouse to the WH? That decision was likely governed by not only her prior choices --going way back to dropping out of university, by the way, no matter her necessity or other rationale there-- but also by concern for her son's future, and an awareness that acting on a desire to avoid the goldfish bowl could have a highly negative impact on his (and her) financial prospects.

As far as Melania Trump's actual relevance to the brouhaha over Epstein's op-ed attacking the incoming First lady, there is none. Not that that ever stopped anyone from hooking up anything to anything else in what passes for public discourse these days. But it's possible and now a fact that an op-ed writer in the WSJ can gratuitously insult any incoming First Lady and reap both opprobrium and attaboys off the effort... just in case that was never clear while either a Trump or an Obama was First Lady. Not quite as clear whether the WSJ can defend any such op-ed, but in the case of Biden, dinosaur genius Gigot took a shot at pretending the WSJ was just a drive-by victim of a political assault instead of the perpetrator of one. No sale here on that.
 

Yoused

up
Vaccinated
Posts
3,232
Reaction score
5,100
Location
knee deep in the road apples of the 4 horsemen
Has it been pointed out that her degree is an Ed.D: an expert in that one thing that Republicans do not understand (they wanted Betsy deVos to raze the whole bidness). And, of course, Bill Cosby has an EdD, so that makes Jill no better than a sex offender.
 

thekev

Elite Member
Posts
1,074
Reaction score
1,613
As far as Melania Trump's actual relevance to the brouhaha over Epstein's op-ed attacking the incoming First lady, there is none. Not that that ever stopped anyone from hooking up anything to anything else in what passes for public discourse these days. But it's possible and now a fact that an op-ed writer in the WSJ can gratuitously insult any incoming First Lady and reap both opprobrium and attaboys off the effort... just in case that was never clear while either a Trump or an Obama was First Lady. Not quite as clear whether the WSJ can defend any such op-ed, but in the case of Biden, dinosaur genius Gigot took a shot at pretending the WSJ was just a drive-by victim of a political assault instead of the perpetrator of one. No sale here on that.

It's easier just to call the author a jackass. On a side note, for a second there, I actually thought you were going to suggest Melania was about to take up a career in prostitution. I'm glad I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that.

I don't know where they get their ideas of "classy". Nothing about Melania is particularly respectable. She makes shithead comments just like her husband, so I tend to view her as just another shithead, similar to her husband. I was mostly indifferent to her prior to taking note of some of her past comments.
Melania posing nude does not bother me at all. It's the hypocrisy coming from the right. Melania is such a classy first lady to them, but these same people call Michelle Obama trashy. lol smh

Those people are imbeciles. Usually the nitpicks over Michelle Obama concentrated on a perceived scowl or something, which I find pretty ridiculous. I don't like it when people want to control the involuntary expressions of others. As I pointed out, Melania lacks any issues in this area, as surgery has effectively mapped her range of expressions to one matching those of Steven Segal.
 

lizkat

Melting Down
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,538
Reaction score
11,815
Location
Catskill Mountains
Has it been pointed out that her degree is an Ed.D: an expert in that one thing that Republicans do not understand (they wanted Betsy deVos to raze the whole bidness). And, of course, Bill Cosby has an EdD, so that makes Jill no better than a sex offender.

Speaking of Cosby,Trump put up and deleted a tweet about him today. Genius...

Note that he put Cosby's honorific in quotes.


oh ok yeah forgot about that.jpg
 
Top Bottom