Commentary

Feminist Allegedly Tries To Get Professor Fired for Not Supporting Her Racist Views

Combined Shape

In certain circles, Amy Siskind and David Pakman are somewhat famous.

Siskind is a former Wall Street-executive-turned-activist, best known for her website The Weekly List, in which she chronicles everything that’s gone wrong during every week of Trump’s presidency. Pakman is a former adjunct professor at Boston College who also hosts a podcast in which he similarly catalogues the many perfidies of the Trump administration.

Both are a lot more famous than they were before the month of December began, and not just within those certain circles. And surprisingly, it’s also not for their concordance. Anything but, in fact.

Their story begins on Dec. 19, when Siskind announced on Twitter that she refused to consider any “white male candidates” in the 2020 Democrat primaries.

Trending:
US Chamber of Commerce Defies Biden, Calls for Termination of Weekly Unemployment Perk

“I will not support white male candidates in the Dem primary,” she wrote.

“Unless you slept thru midterms, women were our most successful candidate. Biggest Dem vote getters in history: Obama ‘08, Hillary ‘16. White male is not where our party is at, and is our LEAST safe option in 2020.”

This is a pretty good argument unless — and sometimes it helps to do this — you think about it.

Do you think that Amy Siskind is in the wrong here?

Hillary lost and Obama was a cultural phenomenon — a phenomenon that seems unlikely to duplicate itself in a 2020 field where the very white Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and (sigh) Robert “Beto” O’Rourke were the only candidates to crack 5 percent in a recent CNN poll. Of the candidates meeting Siskind’s parameters, Cory Booker is at 5 percent and gaining no momentum, and Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren have seen their support cut by more than half.

Of course, Siskind has an issue with Beto, as well:

I don’t get Betomania either, but he’s at 9 percent and Stacy Abrams hasn’t even made the polls.

Related:
Report: Biden Supposedly Cost Taxpayers Billions to House Unaccompanied Minors

Beyond strict pragmatism, there was also an ideological problem with this, which Pakman decided to point out (or mansplain) to her: This is kind of racist/sexist in its own right.

Siskind’s riposte was also fairly progressive, essentially questioning Pakman’s manhood:

So now the argument’s shifted to white men lifting women and minorities up by disqualifying themselves because they’re comfortable with their white manhood, not because this is a good strategy for the Democrats. I mention the shift because I think the two are mutually exclusive; that they have to do the work of “lifting women, people of color, or people of all sexual orientations” assumes they need lifting to win, not that they represent the best hope for the Democrats.

Pakman, however, seemed to agree with Siskind — he just didn’t see how what she had to say made the progressive movement stronger.

And then things moved off of Twitter in a very big way, at least according to Pakman:

When you can’t beat ’em, try to get him fired. As it turns out, Pakman hasn’t taught at Boston College in at least a year, according to The College Fix, which could explain why this is arguably the worst possible way to end a Twitter war. We also have to point out that this is just an allegation, but Siskind’s response seemed to indicate something had happened.

Asked by The College Fix what her exact complaint was — Pakman simply disagreed with her, after all, and didn’t use sexist language or anything like that — Siskind was vague.

“Mr. Pakman can publicly apologize and explain his misstatements. I understand he has been corrected,” she said. “People are watching how he conducts himself.”

Actually, I’m more interested in watching how Siskind conducts herself. But that’s just me.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →






We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Tags:
, , ,
C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia. Specializing in political commentary and world affairs, he's written for Conservative Tribune and The Western Journal for four years.
C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia. Specializing in political commentary and world affairs, he's written for Conservative Tribune and The Western Journal for four years. Aside from politics, he enjoys spending time with his wife, literature (especially British comic novels and modern Japanese lit), indie rock, coffee, Formula One and football (of both American and world varieties).
Birthplace
Morristown, New Jersey
Education
Catholic University of America
Languages Spoken
English, Spanish
Topics of Expertise
American Politics, World Politics, Culture




Conversation