Gaslighting
Speaking of emails, I received an email and letter on 22/03/12 from someone in the wider college, who was also responsible for exams, which I found very disturbing and confusing, based as it was, on lies, character assassination and threats that a formal complaint could be brought against me which could result in me being thrown out of college. Who was going to bring this formal against me? That was left vague. I suppose he wants me to think it'll be Susan James. But that couldn't be the case because we didn't have an issue to solve and we hadn't sat down together to attempt to resolve it between us before taking it to that formal stage. He should know that. So he's unprofessional in suggesting this was even possible because this is a prerequisite before submitting a formal complaint. I know it and she knows it. The email was also strangely signed because there are ink dots around the signature that usually arise from a stamp. It was supposedly signed by someone from the wider college who I had contacted the year before asking for advice on how to deal with a problematic situation at uni. He suggested (in 2011) I file a formal complaint to address the problems I was experiencing. That wasn't what I expected him to recommend, I was looking for a more informal and amicable way of resolving issues. I had also mentioned to him in 2011 that I'm a lesbian suffering from homophobia, bullying and harassment at uni, even in the exam room by the invigilators. He suggested I go to the uni Disability Office! I didn't, still don't and never have had any mental health/illness problems or physical conditions or disabilities (which is obvious given that I'm an athlete on the ITF circuit for able bodied players and wrote 'tennis player' under 'occupation' on uni forms!). The only issue that needed addressing was bullying, harassment, stalking, and homophobia, all of which universities are obliged to take very seriously, record accurately and rectify. Not only did this not happen, but anyone who knows their LGBT+ history would have a fit over linking being gay and reporting homophobia with having a mental illness 😠!
Women students and LGBT+students note that you need to be very conversant with 'what if....' situations e.g. questions such as - what are my options, who do I go to, what is the process that will deal with the situation the best? etc. Be aware of all the options people don't tell you about or suggest. I did what it said in the handbook and wider college literature so that should have resolved things and others should have acknowledged and respected this. So why didn't they? And why didn't they (ie some staff from both the department and wider college) follow the advice and rules set out by the department and wider college?
March 22nd 2012, when I received the appalling and totally inappropriate email/letter was right on the last day of term, therefore it was on the 1st day of revision for my 3rd year exams which took place every May. It seriously distressed and distracted me, just as I was beginning my 5 week only revision period and reworking my extended essay for that year (level 6 module). Who writes this to a student who is preparing to take exams in only a few weeks time! Especially since nothing needs to be urgently raised with me as a student during this period because I was merely sitting at home revising, didn't need to come in to college, wasn't going to write to anyone (unless it was to fix an exam problem with an exam relevant person) and I was not going to come into contact with any lecturer there until the following academic year (October). It is also against complaints policy to turn the tables on someone who has raised harassment and bullying problems with the college and make out they are doing something wrong. It's also homophobic to make insinuations about my relationship with a female lecturer (Susan James) within a year of telling him I'm gay. It never came to his attention (or anyone else's who is involved in stalking me because how else can they report that we were walking together along a street, talking) that I walked regularly with A.C. Grayling (autumn term 2011) between lectures. All was quiet, there was no crush on autographs! Nor was it brought to anyone's attention when I walked around the streets with Gemes - that was fine too and that was a long walk after sitting in on his MA lectures on Nietzsche! Oh, hang on, that's OK, they are men.
The wider college admin person who sent this email was obtuse about who asked him to write this 22nd March 2012 letter in "relations" (not my typo) to Susan James because he wrote that the matter merely came to his attention rather than naming who informed him. Where have we heard that elsewhere 🤔 oh yes, the head of department sticking his nose 👃 in where it's not wanted in 2014 about postgraduate study and Susan James (see 3 posts back on PhD proposals).
In this 2012 letter from the wider college, the person writing it doesn’t even seem to know whether I talked to Susan James two or three times (while walking along the street together for all of two minutes until we reached our respective modes of transport) and is completely unaware she was lecturing to me on a compulsory module (History of Philosophy level 5 including Spinoza/Descartes)! And since Susan James knows that she was standing there teaching me on my compulsory module that academic year (indeed, that week!) he couldn't have gained that false impression from her!
Neither could he have gained the false idea from Susan James that she objected to my emails at any point because I apologised to her end of summer term 2011 in case I 'd upset her that year. It had been a traumatic year! She replied 'You have nothing to be sorry about'. So it was just them objecting to my emails to her. Well, I'm sure they did want to panic me and Susan James over the emails because in them I record what I'm experiencing at uni. How inconvenient for them that she knows and there's a written record of it!
This compulsory history module entailed me writing an essay on Spinoza which I submitted by email on time (21/02/2012) but both tutorial tutor, Binesh Hass* (Oxford University) and my Spinoza essay were never seen again. I have no idea why Alex Douglas didn't carry on doing my group's tutorials in the Spring term, since he'd been the tutor for this module the previous term (on Ancient Philosophy, Plato). So he could take Ancient Greek Philosophy tutorials but not Early Modern ones, including Spinoza, despite being a Spinozist (and he's a Cartesian because his first book was on Descartes which was the other half of the essay and a large part of that module) and doing his PhD on Spinoza with Susan James! 🤷😲🤦🙄
You can read my Spinoza essay on my academia page at:
So I had every right to discuss this with her since she needs to know what is happening to essays she sets because she also sets the exam paper questions therefore, should know if a tutorial group has been disadvantaged on a topic and which essay title she set is affected. This was a problem because when it came to the exam, the fact that my Spinoza essay was left unmarked and the tutor for it didn't roll up at any point, I thought it unwise to choose Spinoza as an exam essay question. That's unfair to her because it skews the stats - it makes it look as though students didn't wish to do Spinoza in the exam when they did! This could give the false impression she had not taught Spinoza adequately that year when she had. Or that students don't like Spinoza. My only reason for not doing Spinoza in the 3rd year exam was the lack of a tutorial tutor and the college which didn't fix this problem. The same could be true for others in my tutorial group who missed out on the Spinoza tutorial too or anyone else who had him as a tutor.
The email and letter end with a threat to my degree and worse still, support unfounded, baseless, untrue accusations and insinuations against me based on rumours, with no evidence. In that email/letter he also has his facts wrong and seems confused.
In addition, he argued, the excuse for writing this very odd email and letter was that Susan James and I are at the same college. So what? I am at liberty to talk to any lecturer in my department. Freedom of association is a basic human right. But what's the excuse since 2013? We are not at the same college. (Well, I haven't been at any college since graduating 2013 and removed my alumni status as well as slowly cancelling my membership to all philosophy societies.) So, on that theory, why doesn't everyone just leave us alone by now all these years later?!
This email/letter effectively cut me off from communicating with her and adversely impacted on my education because it meant I felt I couldn’t talk to her to discuss philosophical points raised in her lectures without getting some anonymous harassment via some head of something at uni becoming "aware" in some very dubious manner that I had something to do with her. But nobody said I couldn't so he, or anyone else, had no right to harass me over every tiny contact.
Indeed, a few years later, Susan James sends me an email to say there has been a room change so the London Spinoza Circle will be in room x. That's all she wrote at 6pm the day before the talk but by 1pm the following day, admin at the college wrote and said that Susan James had told them to write to me that all socials after the Spinoza Circle talks are private. As if! I wrote and told Susan James about this email and it was immediately made clear at the Circle that going for drinks after the talk was open to all!
Going back to the 22/3/12 email/letter. Ironically, even though the 22/3/12 email/letter clearly states I can work with her on my course, only a few months later (with no contact with her during that period) I was not allowed to have Susan James as my dissertation supervisor. How does that work?🤔 So even the person who wrote this ridiculous email/letter knows the rule that you cannot prevent two people working together. So the head of department who (25th June 2012) disallowed me having Susan James as my supervisor was completely out of line, unethical and should have faced consequences for her appalling behaviour! She was completely out of step with the college rules and this letter (22nd March 2012) that states we can work together on the degree course! Here's the inappropriate email which was dated 25th June 2012, which she threatened to send as a letter to my private home address (again) if I didn't acknowledge it). Here's the email:
"Dear Libuse,
I am getting in touch about your BA dissertation topic.
I understand you have requested to write your dissertation on Margaret Cavendish. I’m afraid the Department is unable to supervise you in this area, because it is a topic that only Prof James has expertise in, and I have been advised that, given your history with Prof James, it is not possible for you to be supervised by her.
I therefore need to ask you to re-think what you’d like to write your dissertation on. Perhaps another topic in Political Philosophy? Or indeed any topic you like so long as we are able to supply a suitable supervisor to help and support you.
Dr Michael Garnett, as BA Tutor, would be happy to advise you about another topic if you need help in deciding ....."
"I would be very grateful if you could briefly acknowledge receipt of this email, just so I can be sure I've reached you. If I don't hear back from you soon I'll pop this message in the post to you as a letter."
What "history" is the head referring to in her email above (25/6/12)?! The 3 times I saw Susan James and confided in her about the serious non-academic problems I was facing at uni, such as stalking, the p**n site, being physically punched (which is a&b) on campus and general harassment? Surely that's a good history of trust isn't it! Or is the head victim blaming?! Or gaslighting me, distorting reality and adding to the lies and harassment? How self-contradictory for a feminist who pretends to be pro-women in her research! Or does that only apply to cis, heterosexual women? This email shows she has never met me and has no idea of who I am even down to not knowing that people call me by the shortened form of my name (Liba)! I trust this appalling attitude of hers did not influence the choice of tutorial tutor I was given for History of Philosophy and Political Philosophy level 6 for the following academic year (my final year)! Especially since the supervisor and tutorial tutors I ended up with negatively impacted on my references and access to further higher education and employment post-degree! There is no good reason why I should be pressured into such isolation! It’s this sort of adverse interfering in my life that has meant I never want to return to study there! It totally ruined my university experience, my tennis career and life in general.
And, no, I didn't contact Garnett or get any "help" thinking up my dissertation idea. I don't need "help" as can be seen by my independent research, my PhD proposals and the 5 books I've written! I have no trouble thinking up my own ideas, unlike, so it seems, many lecturers who need whole teams of assistants to help them with their research and projects. Maybe that's why I see people get their pens and paper out, sit or stand behind me and lean over my shoulder to read what I'm writing down during talks.😂 One lecturer/conference organizer even directly asked me once to give her my notes that I'd written during talks at a long conference, saying it would help her with funding! 😅 And no, this lecturer was not Susan James, quite the contrary, I saw her have a word with Susan James at a conference in Scotland straight after I'd asked Susan James if I could chat to her later. I don't know what she said but it couldn't have been pleasant because shortly afterwards Susan James left the conference early looking very upset and never returned. She left so fast I didn't manage to catch up with her to ask her if she was OK, which upset me 😢😪. Then this lecturer I'd last seen talking to Susan James started giving me sympathetic looks (after Sue left) - about what? I hadn't raised any issues or complained about anyone or anything at that conference (or any other event for that matter) so why is she acting as though I had? I wasn't receptive to her sudden, apparent sympathy. I was enjoying the conference but I became very concerned about what she might have said to make Susan James leave!
Another time (Feb 2012) a male lecturer/conference organizer, at least I assumed he was, grabbed Susan James by the arm and pulled her along (which constitutes a&b) out of the room we were having a tea break in and into an empty room nearby for what reason I don't know. I looked into the room and was disconcerted by the way he was talking to her. I had just asked if I could chat to her for a minute which was something else the email/letter of 22/3/12 allowed! I could chat to her at conferences but not at college if she wasn't teaching me that year. Are you serious? There's no such rule and besides she was teaching me during the academic year 2011-2012 although the writer of this email tried to say she wasn't. Does someone seriously think that we are going to doubt what we did ie she will forget she lectured that year on this module and that meant I had to be there, since it was a compulsory module and that I'm going to forget that she lectured on this module. And since she knows me she'll recognise me in the lecture theatre, especially since I ask questions at Q&A.
By now it must be clear that something is seriously wrong here. And it's not far -fetched to suspect that homophobia is at play. There may be other factors, such as racism since I'm half Slav. But whichever way you look at it neither Susan James nor myself should be individually targeted in this way making life impossible. Neither should we be targeted together and made to feel that talking or emailing one another is doing something wrong! The college should deal with this type of problem swiftly and effectively to our satisfaction. No student or lecturer should have to suffer such blatant discrimination and worse which could lead some to suffer mental health problems purely because they have been targeted by an institution. They do say (Times Higher Education) that PhD students have mental health issues, maybe not so surprising given my experience at BA level.
*This is an article he wrote:
Since I have a Czech heritage and my Czech grandparents fled communist Czechoslovakia not long after my Czech grandfather Jan Kaucky had returned having fought against the Nazis in the Battle of Britain, I'm concerned I was given this tutor after he'd already written this. It was totally unnecessary to give him the job, since he wasn't at my uni and there was someone who was ie. Alex who could have taken the tutorials and was better suited. In this article, he singles out the former Czechoslovakia out of all the countries in Eastern Europe under Soviet communism. Philosophers from Oxford can't try to take credit for the Velvet Revolution and subsequent freedom and democracy! The Czechs did it for themselves! The sacrifice of Jan Palach, who believed in human rights and democracy, was the turning point, not some Oxford philosophers who somehow managed to get into the country and it's an oversimplification to give the impression they were just teaching Kant! Besides, there were Czechs and Slovaks in London and the UK, who were supporting, organizing /attending demonstrations and working hard to free Czechoslovakia but this article gives no credit to them. There is no parallel to be drawn between Iran and the former Czechoslovakia. They are different countries in different circumstances. So what's his point? I don't appreciate his labelling Czechs and Slovaks as totally incompetent and in need of relying on foreign English help to save them from themselves while completely ignoring the fact that they were under Nazi then Soviet occupation. Iran, as far as I'm aware, has never been in quite the same position. Their political systems are not parallel either because Iran is a theocracy but Soviet communism was atheist. Furthermore, it's potentially misleading about Czech history and politics for people who aren't familiar with it.
Comments
Post a Comment