Merged Arday life and death

[ahhell]

kind of tough to keep the racists out of it tho, isn’t it?

plus if you own media and want to push narratives to create social division, this kind of stuff is a prime candidate. especially in this media landscape, anytime you see a minor local issue turning into national headlines on a left vs right divide, you should probably be on guard as to why that is. and this one is pretty obvious. that’s my opinion

I don't necessarily disagree with your larger point, but I think there are plenty of reasons this story in particular went big aside from racism or divisive narratives. As I said earlier, the scale and audacity of the lies and the public pantsing of the high and mighty provides more than enough chum for the sharks on this one. Add to that that his hiring was clearly motivated by Cambridge's desire to announce they'd hired the youngest black prof in their history and they went around telling everyone who would listen. So, yes there are racist laughing in glee about this, there are likely many more non-racists doing the same.

For the most part the narrative has not been, hey guys, there's some racists enjoying this. It has largely been, the only reason folks care is racism. And I fully admit there is certainly some "What racism?" out there too.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

I don't necessarily disagree with your larger point, but I think there are plenty of reasons this story in particular went big aside from racism or divisive narratives. As I said earlier, the scale and audacity of the lies and the public pantsing of the high and mighty provides more than enough chum for the sharks on this one. Add to that that his hiring was clearly motivated by Cambridge's desire to announce they'd hired the youngest black prof in their history and they went around telling everyone who would listen. So, yes there are racist laughing in glee about this, there are likely many more non-racists doing the same.

For the most part the narrative has not been, hey guys, there's some racists enjoying this. It has largely been, the only reason folks care is racism. And I fully admit there is certainly some "What racism?" out there too.

That's them doing the "affirming the consequent" fallacy. It goes like this:
P1: Students wear backpacks.
P2: My 50 year old sister in law wears a backpack.
therefore:
C: my 50 year old sister in law is a student.

According to studies it also rapidly becomes increasingly scarily common among people below 85 IQ. (One standard deviation down.) Down to 90-ish, yeah, no problem. Then it goes down. Misunderstanding "X => Y" as "X <=> Y" is the most common. Less common, unless you go down enough is the inability to understand hypotheticals. As in, if you say "X => Y" it means to them "X AND Y". E.g., if you say, "if John Does is guilty, then he should be punished", they'll take it as you saying that John Doe IS guilty, AND he SHOULD be punished.

Which, I guess, explains a lot of the posts on the Internet

 

[Safe-Keeper]

especially in this media landscape, anytime you see a minor local issue turning into national headlines on a left vs right divide, you should probably be on guard as to why that is.

Exactly this.

 

[dirtywick]

I don't necessarily disagree with your larger point, but I think there are plenty of reasons this story in particular went big aside from racism or divisive narratives. As I said earlier, the scale and audacity of the lies and the public pantsing of the high and mighty provides more than enough chum for the sharks on this one. Add to that that his hiring was clearly motivated by Cambridge's desire to announce they'd hired the youngest black prof in their history and they went around telling everyone who would listen. So, yes there are racist laughing in glee about this, there are likely many more non-racists doing the same.

For the most part the narrative has not been, hey guys, there's some racists enjoying this. It has largely been, the only reason folks care is racism. And I fully admit there is certainly some "What racism?" out there too.

i agree there’s other areas of interest for people to latch onto.

 

[theprestige]

It's easier to call people racist than admit that Cambridge spectacularly ◊◊◊◊ the bed in order to get in a DEI hire, and that Arday was enthusiastically complicit in the scam - right up to the moment his benefactors cut him loose rather than take his side.

The bitter irony is that anyone at Cambridge who was in a position to prevent DEI fetishism from taking root like this was probably too afraid of being called racist to speak up and advocate for better quality control back when doing so might have protected the school's reputation and Arday's life.

And now that an unqualified clown has been found out and taken his own life rather than face the consequences, all the defenders of DEI have to offer is charges of racism.

---

"The Emperor has no clothes!"

"So you can see the color of his skin? Pretend he has clothes on or you're a racist."

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yup. Its like watching a real-life game of 'Twster', seeing certain posters bending themselves into something akin to a human pretzel as they strive to justify believing anything that fits their preferred conclusion.

It's wild. Like, I totally get people being angered at the racist commentary coming out of the woodworks, sure. I even understand (not necessarily agree) with people determined to defend the virtue of EDI/DEI/DIE and hand-wave Arday away as an exception. It's the complete suspension of really basic skepticism that I find troublingly fascinating.

 

[Emily's Cat]

TBH, what I find more unbelievable, and even slanderous, is his claim that a doctor would recommend to just pull the plug on someone locked in, instead of even trying to use morse code, much less at least try some therapy. AND would even do that in the presence of someone who's fully aware and hearing everything. And shouldn't he at least be consulted as a fully aware grown-ass adult who is able to communicate, or at least can be taught to?

I mean, it's like talking around grandpa about putting him down.

If we extend our grace to the utmost and assume embellishment rather than outright fabrication... then perhaps we have Arday being hit by a car (assuming that's even the right event in their many tragedied life), who ended up unconscious for some period of time, who has a nightmare about an overheard conversation between doctors and parents asking whether they're going to make a full recovery. Then that unconsciousness becomes a "coma", the couple of days become "months", and the uncertain recovery becomes "pull the plug".

If we take that view then we could plausibly end up with socially awkward and shy to converse around some people being "severe non-verbal autistic", and perhaps there is some dyslexia that they got coaching and treatment for so they "learned to read at 18". A twisted ankle or knee in the midst of 30 marathon-lengths becomes a "hairline fracture" and the slight swelling becomes "twice normal size". Perhaps a bout of fainting or panic attacks becomes "epilepsy" and a "stroke". Perhaps temporary confusion and disorientation after a legitimate health event becomes "forgot everything in the thesis".

Still not characteristics you want in a respected and publicized educator. But fish stories are arguably better than complete invention.

I do kind of wonder if this was a new thing for Arday, or if they'd always been prone to hyperbole.

 

[theprestige]

kind of tough to keep the racists out of it tho, isn’t it?

plus if you own media and want to push narratives to create social division, this kind of stuff is a prime candidate. especially in this media landscape, anytime you see a minor local issue turning into national headlines on a left vs right divide, you should probably be on guard as to why that is. and this one is pretty obvious. that’s my opinion

Exactly this.

The fact is that an unqualified clown got hired, promoted, and celebrated to the public, purely because of the color of his skin. Just like you were warned would happen if you insisted on crying "racism" every time someone asked about qualifications in minority hiring.

Arday died because Cambridge indulged racist hiring practices, and because he'd been subjected to years of gaslighting that race-based hiring was his friend.

Alternatively, Arday died because the media didn't know their place, as envisioned by race-based hiring policies, which was to shut up about qualifications and leave the incompetent tokens alone.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Thank you. My eldest son has had two seizures over 20:years ago, and none since. I never saw any stigma at all. And why should there be? Epilepsy is not caused by lifestyle choices.

At most I've had curiosity, but it doesn't really come up very often. I'm well managed, and haven't had an event in 15 years or so. My immediate coworkers and staff know, mostly because I need to enlist a battle-buddy in the event of a fire alarm. And I had to back out of a holiday work event that was covered in bazillions of flashing christmas lights, strobes, and a very loud live band. I'm grateful that I don't seem to be photosensitive, but I am sensitive to loud higher-pitched noises.

Generally nobody seems to care. Well, HR kind of cares, because apparently I count as having a "disability" for their records. Total win for them, because I doubt they're going to be planning any sky dives or appalachian hikes as a team building event, where I might actually want an accommodation!

 

[Emily's Cat]

Well, there should not be a stigma, of course, but there are plenty of illnesses and disabilities that people are afflicted with through no fault of their own which nonetheless can be, and have been, stigmatized.

I'm sure. The only ones I can really think of tend to be ones that result in socially inappropriate behavior (dementia patients stripping, tourettes, really oddball OCD, etc.) or ones that unfortunately result in physical deformities that trigger our inner cavepeople.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Global Childhood Development syndrome, autism, selective mutism, dyslexia and epilepsy are not at all mutually exclusive or 'fabulist'. In addition, it is possible to have had all of this and yet be highly intelligent enough to obtain a degree and a doctorate. The thesis picked apart by Cofnas out of idle spite against one successful individual contained what John Moores Liverpool Uni accepted was an honest oversight. That lady, IS accredited in his bibliography so hardly something a cheat would do.

Whilst two of his papers have been picked apart by Thiel- and Elon Musk-backed far right political activists, that is only two out of his 33 papers.

In addition, as for the 'fabulist' mugging and asking the judge for mercy towards his attackers; just so you know, in the UK, victims of crime are invited to provide an impact statement. Whilst this is directed at the convicted defendant, all court matters are addressed to the Judge. So again, not at all 'fabulist' , except in the minds of the envious.

Ahh the joys of AI. Take it for what it is and isn't.

So yeah, google's AI says it's technically possible for a single person to have GCD, autism, selective mutism, dyslexia, and epilepsy all at once (( suspect that's where you got that particular list anyway, AI is good for that). But even AI says that being nonverbal to age 11 and illiterate until 18 makes it extremely implausible that a person with such significant cognitive developmental issues would make a complete turnaround from age 18 and get a doctorate, a prestigious professorship, and publish complex peer-reviewed papers.

AI even knew who we are talking about.

 

[smartcooky]

kind of tough to keep the racists out of it tho, isn’t it?

plus if you own media and want to push narratives to create social division, this kind of stuff is a prime candidate. especially in this media landscape, anytime you see a minor local issue turning into national headlines on a left vs right divide, you should probably be on guard as to why that is. and this one is pretty obvious. that’s my opinion

First of all, DEI is not all about race. Sex, sexual orientation, age and disability are also part of its remit. If you think that people who oppose DEI are racists, then you must also think they are misogynists, ageists, ableists and homophobes.

I am neither a misogynist, nor an ableist, and I'm not a racist or an ageist or a homophobe either. I oppose the concept of DEI because I believe in merit-based hiring and appointment - the best person for the job always, regardless of race, ethnicity, sex or sexual orientation. In my 30+ years as an employer for full-time, part time and temp employees, I have employed dozens of people mostly women, several Māori, at least two lesbians that I can remember, a gay man and a person who I suspect may have been non-binary but it was never discussed. Their ages ranged from teens to a women who was in her 60's, and who still works for the business now that my daughter owns it. I always selected what I considered to be the best candidate, and I took the input of my business manager, my businenss mentor and my existing employees during the hiring process.

I beleive thet DEI lowers the level of exellence in academia (as we have seen in the Arday case) and will eventually lead to a less than fully competent or fully capable work force for any given business or organization chosing to use its principles in hiring and appointments. If you hire a candidate BECAUSE of their race, sex, skin colour etc, you have likely turned down a better or better qualified candidate. If a woman, a Māori, a gay person, a transperson, regardless of their age, is the best person for the job, thats the person who should get the job. Hiring in employment needs to be completely blind to anything other that the ability to do the job.

 

[dirtywick]

First of all, DEI is not all about race. Sex, sexual orientation age and disability are also part of its remit. If you think that people who oppose DEI are racists, then you must also think they are misogynists, ageists, ableists and homophobes.

i think some people who do are, definitely misogynists and homophobes amongst them too. not so sure about ageists and ableists, not really sure there's much interest in that stuff.

anyway, what they do is they turn out in force online for stories like these to snake their extremist beliefs into mainstream discussions to make them more palatable. pretty rare that anyone is comfortable enough with a group to proudly announce their racist or sexist beliefs, usually they hide that stuff because they know it turns a lot of people off. so they insidiously hide their intent.

part of the problem is the media too. there's media outlets pushing these kinds of narratives to create division and controversy over minor issues either for their own benefit or the benefit of their ownership, often for political purposes.

so you're already pretty far off base for what i must and must not think and even why i'm saying what i'm saying.

I am neither a misogynist, nor an ableist, and I'm not a racist or an ageist or a homophobe either. I oppose the concept of DEI because I am pro-merit based hiring and appointment. The best person for the job always, regardless of race, ethnicity, sex or sexual orientation. In my 30+ years as an employer for full-time, part time and temp employees, I have employed dozens of people mostly women, several Māori, at least two lesbians that I can remember, a gay man and an person who I suspect may have been non-binary but it was never discussed. Their ages ranged from teens to a women who was in her 60's, and who still works for the business now that my daughter owns it. I always selected what I considered to be the best candidate, and I took the input of my business manager, my businenss mentor and my existing employees during the hiring process.

I beleive thet DEI lowers the level of exellence in academia (as we have seen in the Arday case) and will eventually lead to a less than fully competent or fully capable work force for any given business or organization chosing to use its principles in hiring and appointments. If you hire a candidate BECAUSE of thir race, sex, skin colour, you have likely turned down a better or better qualified candidate. If a woman, a Māori, a gay person, a transperson, regardless of their age, is the best person for the job, thats the person whot should get the job. Hiring in employment needs to be completely blind to anything other that the ability to do the job.

ok, that's an interesting story, thanks for sharing. must have been interesting to have employed a gay guy.

 

[smartcooky]

ok, that's an interesting story, thanks for sharing. must have been interesting to have employed a gay guy.

It was.

Darryl is very funny, has a wicked sense of humour. He is really good with customers, and especially patient with, shall we say, those who are not the brightest. He is a quick study with learning to operate equipment, and it turned he is quite a whizz in IT. He knows more about film cameras and photography than anyone else I know.

 

[Emily's Cat]

anyway, what they do is they turn out in force online for stories like these to snake their extremist beliefs into mainstream discussions to make them more palatable. pretty rare that anyone is comfortable enough with a group to proudly announce their racist or sexist beliefs, usually they hide that stuff because they know it turns a lot of people off. so they insidiously hide their intent.

Just want to throw out for consideration that a whole lot of people have a habit of assuming secret hidden racism communicated by code in an awful lot of people an awful lot of the time.

I really, genuinely don't think racism is nearly as prevalent in reality as you seem to. Some exists, certainly. But it's just not as much as you think.

 

[Emily's Cat]

must have been interesting to have employed a gay guy.

Why? Have you not worked with any gay people before? It's not like they're whipping parts out and hooking up in the bathroom or anything. They just check out different backsides than you.

Or the same backsides, if we're talking about lesbians, I guess.

 

[Steve]

i think some people who do are, definitely misogynists and homophobes amongst them too. not so sure about ageists and ableists, not really sure there's much interest in that stuff.

anyway, what they do is they turn out in force online for stories like these to snake their extremist beliefs into mainstream discussions to make them more palatable. pretty rare that anyone is comfortable enough with a group to proudly announce their racist or sexist beliefs, usually they hide that stuff because they know it turns a lot of people off. so they insidiously hide their intent.

part of the problem is the media too. there's media outlets pushing these kinds of narratives to create division and controversy over minor issues either for their own benefit or the benefit of their ownership, often for political purposes.

so you're already pretty far off base for what i must and must not think and even why i'm saying what i'm saying.



ok, that's an interesting story, thanks for sharing. must have been interesting to have employed a gay guy.

I was never in a position to hire anyone, but I counted a number of "gay guys" among my work colleagues. Also among my non-work friends and acquaintances, I never found gay people I knew to be any more, or less, interesting due to their sexual orientation and I can't imagine why an employer would think they were.

 

[Steve]

It was.

Darryl is very funny, has a wicked sense of humour. He is really good with customers, and especially patient with, shall we say, those who are not the brightest. He is a quick study with learning to operate equipment, and it turned he is quite a whizz in IT. He knows more about film cameras and photography than anyone else I know.

None of which had anything to do with being gay.

 

[dirtywick]

I was never in a position to hire anyone, but I counted a number of "gay guys" among my work colleagues. Also among my non-work friends and acquaintances, I never found gay people I knew to be any more, or less, interesting due to their sexual orientation and I can't imagine why an employer would think they were.

not really sure, i've never employed anyone either. and i mostly keep things pretty light at work and just do my job and go home, so not too sure who's gay and not gay of the people at the plant.

 

[Emily's Cat]

not really sure, i've never employed anyone either. and i mostly keep things pretty light at work and just do my job and go home, so not too sure who's gay and not gay of the people at the plant.

Do you even care? There's a good chance that at least some of them are, so it's probably not as interesting as you assume Just some folks like folks with bodies organized the same way as their own. Makes no difference to the work they do.