"The man" resigns.

February 21, 2006 2:03 PM

No stranger to controversy, Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers steps down from Harvard. Somewhere, the world's smallest violin is playing...
posted by phaedon (57 comments total)

About time.
posted by jokeefe at 2:09 PM on February 21, 2006

These links are mostly about the women-in-science controversy, which may be what he's best-known for, but this is really mostly about the resignation of a popular dean and the faculty perception that Summers' leadership style is too autocratic.
posted by transona5 at 2:13 PM on February 21, 2006

I don't care. You shouldn't either.
posted by MarshallPoe at 2:15 PM on February 21, 2006

What transona5 said, and that Slate article is interesting in light of that.

In any event, good riddance.
posted by occhiblu at 2:16 PM on February 21, 2006

mea culpa. my cornel west links got lost in my maze of open windows. =(
posted by phaedon at 2:17 PM on February 21, 2006

More information on Dean Kirby's resignation from The Crimson.
posted by occhiblu at 2:19 PM on February 21, 2006

This past weekend the Harvard Crimson conducted a poll of undergraduate students. By a 3-to-1 margin they didn't want summers to resign.
posted by ericb at 2:19 PM on February 21, 2006

Gods, I hate posts that are made up of links, but those links aren't clearly delineated. Split it on words, fine. But then don't split some on one word, some on two and some one three. It's fucking annoying.

Of course, this is nowhere near as bad as ones where the individual letters of a word are links, and occasionally split on one, two, or three letters.

But it still is stupid.
posted by Kickstart70 at 2:21 PM on February 21, 2006

There was also the School of Public Health controversy.
posted by occhiblu at 2:25 PM on February 21, 2006

This past weekend the Harvard Crimson conducted a poll of undergraduate students.

We all know that undergrads don't count.
posted by smackfu at 2:26 PM on February 21, 2006

He's going to become a martyr for hate radio jocks who like to rail against made-up problems like "political correctness" and "liberal campuses." Whether he likes it or not.
posted by Mayor Curley at 2:26 PM on February 21, 2006

made-up problems

Go read the speech in question and tell me he didn't get railroaded. Dude stood up and said men and women are different and it deserves more study. That's it.
posted by frogan at 2:38 PM on February 21, 2006

Dude stood up and said men and women are different and it deserves more study. That's it.

Well, not really. The press made a lot of hay with that speech, but his relationship with the faculty was troubled before that happened.
posted by sriracha at 2:48 PM on February 21, 2006

Dude stood up and said men and women are different and it deserves more study. That's it.

He also ran the university in such a way that a good proportion of the faculty and his fellow administrators did not want to work with him and felt that Harvard was "was becoming a dictatorship." Which is why he resigned.
posted by transona5 at 2:50 PM on February 21, 2006

Damn, sriracha beat me to it.

One of the the main criticisms of Summers during the whole fallout over that speech is that a university president isn't supposed to alienate people unnecessarily (unlike faculty — unrepentant sexist Harvey Mansfield won't and shouldn't find his Harvard position threatened over his political views), and that his willingness to do so might indicate that he's a bad CEO in other ways.
posted by transona5 at 2:56 PM on February 21, 2006

The press made a lot of hay with that speech, but his relationship with the faculty was troubled before that happened.

Exactly. That speech gave the faculty a perfect opportunity to rip into Summers, but the disagreements had been simmering for quite a while. The common charge is that he was too "autocratic," but even that kind of glosses the problem. The thing is that Harvard is run sort of like a federation of colleges rather than a unified university -- some of the schools were even outright purchased (like the law school) and never integrated very well with the others.

One of the results is a kind of "keep what you kill" approach to lots of things, especially fundraising, that results in a lot of disparities across the colleges. The more powerful schools, like FAS (e.g. the no-confidence vote was entirely among FAS profs, I think), the B school, and the law school, like this just fine thankyouverymuch, but it's arguably not the best way to run things.

I'm not saying it's all about the money, and I'm not saying that Summers is any gem, especially in light of his women-in-science comments, but I sympathize with the desire to shake things up and see if some other approaches might lead to smoother operation across the entire university.
posted by rkent at 2:59 PM on February 21, 2006

"Dude stood up and said men and women are different and it deserves more study. That's it."

Actually, he made dismissive and uninformed comments on a subject he knew little about in front of experts in the field, comments many took to be a snidely casual defense of the fact that woman hires dropped precipitously on his watch, something he had been called out on a number of times. But, you know, whatever helps you sleep at night.
posted by kyrademon at 3:01 PM on February 21, 2006

First link is to pay-only content. The rest are a confusing minefield.

Wikipedia article on Summers, if you want to just cut to the chase.
posted by mkultra at 3:03 PM on February 21, 2006

The Steve Sailer link lead me on an interesting journey through what appears to be the mind of a cryptobigot. Check out his articles on VDARE.com if you like.
posted by BrotherCaine at 3:12 PM on February 21, 2006

How did the alumni feel? They are the cash cows and if he was alienating potential alumni donors then he had to go. Alienating professors isn't much better as they are the heart of the university and if you drive them away or hamper recruiting you hurt the school.
posted by caddis at 3:25 PM on February 21, 2006

Letter from the Harvard Corporation. (PDF)

Letter from President Summers.

Harvard Magazine (alumni publication) coverage.

Harvard Alumni Association coverage.
posted by ericb at 3:36 PM on February 21, 2006

That violin bit is an incredibly stupid, shallow, and petulant editorial for an FPP. It's exactly the sort of crap you often hear from punk kids who like taking sides on issues they don't understand just for the thrill of hurling a couple of cheap stones. I'm all for civility, but really. Go fuck yourself.
posted by cribcage at 3:43 PM on February 21, 2006

The thing is that Harvard is run sort of like a federation of colleges rather than a unified university...One of the results is a kind of "keep what you kill" approach to lots of things, especially fundraising, that results in a lot of disparities across the colleges.

Yes -- the "each tub on its own bottom" approach (which became entrenched in the latter part of the 20th. century) to the management/administration of the College and the University's various graduate schools has lead to significant disparity. One need only compare the annual fundraising and operating budgets of schools like the Divinity School and the Graduate School of Design with those of the Business and Law Schools.
posted by ericb at 3:46 PM on February 21, 2006

>The Steve Sailer link lead me on an interesting journey through what appears to be the mind of a cryptobigot.

That Steve Sailer link was a bit creepy. "Women win 13% of Nobel Peace Prizes! Whaddya mean they haven't achieved equality!?!?" Uh, OK....
posted by occhiblu at 3:54 PM on February 21, 2006

Had to be done.
posted by rollbiz at 3:55 PM on February 21, 2006

Elitist resigns from elitist university. Film at 11.

Meh.

Also, sign me up on whatever petition to stop the every word/every letter link style.

Except in extraordinary cases, two or three links should be able to express your thoughts in your FPP. Greater than that deserves a [more inside]. IMO of course.
posted by Ynoxas at 3:58 PM on February 21, 2006

w00t HDS! Represent!

*ahem* Sorry.
posted by Hildegarde at 4:00 PM on February 21, 2006

Actually, he made dismissive and uninformed comments...

Thank you for proving the point.
posted by frogan at 4:03 PM on February 21, 2006

cribcage:


posted by phaedon at 4:19 PM on February 21, 2006

Trouble has also been brewing for some time regarding Summers affiliation with his protégé, Economics Professor Andrei Shleifer who was one of those found guilty of conspiring to defraud the USAID for quietly investing in Russia's first mutual fund while advising the Russian government.

Harvard's attempts to settle the affair for $24 million were rebuffed by the U.S. government. The University continues to face the potential liability of fines in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

This incident and subsequent handling by Summers has been a cause of grave concern to adminstrators, alumni and faculty alike.

BTW -- local Boston media is reporting tonight that according to many sources the Harvard Corporation had indeed voted today to fire Summers, but allowed him to resign when he learned of their decision.
posted by ericb at 4:27 PM on February 21, 2006

continues to face faced
posted by ericb at 4:32 PM on February 21, 2006

‘Tawdry Shleifer Affair’ Stokes Faculty Anger Toward Summers.
posted by ericb at 4:35 PM on February 21, 2006

How Harvard lost Russia.
posted by ericb at 4:37 PM on February 21, 2006

Frogan - his statements were, in fact, dismissive and uninformed, e.g. the "toy truck" anecdote. But again, if you instead wish to see me as part of some vast bizarre conspiracy to attack Larry Summers, feel free.
posted by kyrademon at 5:32 PM on February 21, 2006

Just last week I learned that Summers used to be a math major, but left math after taking a class he didn't like, from my advisor! (Summers declared this at a dinner party -- this wasn't just my advisor claiming it. Though who would admit culpability in such a matter?)

My advisor doesn't deserve as much approbation as Harvard's Andy Gleason, who drove McGeorge Bundy out of math where he would have been less likely to architect the Vietnam War.
posted by Aknaton at 5:33 PM on February 21, 2006

And, as usual for the obsessed-with-the-concept-of-political-correctness crowd, frogan, you completely missed my point, which is that Summers actually had a miserable record of *action* on the subject, in that he hired far fewer women than his predecessors, thereby taking the debate well beyond the realm of whether or not his *words* were "politically correct", whatever the hell that means.
posted by kyrademon at 5:38 PM on February 21, 2006

I'm all for civility, but really. Go fuck yourself.

Heh.
posted by papakwanz at 6:58 PM on February 21, 2006

Summers makes a speech saying that men and women have different tendencies* when it comes to the career choices they make - a few feminist harpies left the room in a hissy fit because it didn't gell with their social engineering theories they learnt at Women's Studies.

Guy makes a post just saying it like it is on MeFi. Resulting pile-on ensues.
posted by FieldingGoodney at 10:43 PM on February 21, 2006

Forgot to denote:

*tendencies - think Venn Diagrams, not black & white - hard for social engineers to do this - to admit the nature part of the nurture/nature debate.
posted by FieldingGoodney at 10:45 PM on February 21, 2006

Let's try this one more time ...

1) He hired fewer women than his predecessors

2) So his saying that men and women have different *innate* tendencies was largely seen as being a defense of his own actions

3) And it was a statement he made with no data or studies or evidence to back it up

4) In front of a roomfull of academics

5) Using an anecdote about a toy truck as his only data point.

Are we all clear why some people thought that made him an asshole now? Nothing to do with political correctness or whether or not men and women actually make different choices, everything to do with his abominiable hiring practices and uninformed excuses for it? OK? Good.
posted by kyrademon at 11:17 PM on February 21, 2006

1) He hired fewer women than his predecessors

Boo-fucking-hoo. Maybe he hired the best people, regardless of gender? Or do you want him tied to a 50/50 quota? I'm hoping he discriminates not by gender, but by talent - whether that means he hires a 98 women and 2 men, or vice versa, or 50 men and 50 women - as long as he can hire the best without being labelled a sexist.

2) So his saying that men and women have different *innate* tendencies was largely seen as being a defense of his own actions

Ummm, yeah - and? He made an observation - deal with it. You make it sound like a crime to hire the best people even if it means that a disproportionate amount of the people you hire happen to be men. You're confusing equality with equal outcomes, not equal opportunity.

3) And it was a statement he made with no data or studies or evidence to back it up

There are plenty of scientific studies to back this guy up - I agree that he should have backed his words up with some studies (but maybe he didn't expect to incur such a wrath?)

4) In front of a roomfull of academics

Academics who chose to put their ideals before objective fact.

Funny how a lot of Mefi-ites become scientists when it comes to religion, but when it comes to feminism, suddenly you all turn into feminist fundies, ignoring scientific fact

5) Using an anecdote about a toy truck as his only data point.

Yeah, I agree with you there - not good considering the amount of evidence out there - but maybe he just didn't see it as such a major part of his speech - just an observation he made.

Nothing to do with political correctness or whether or not men and women actually make different choices, everything to do with his abominiable hiring practices and uninformed excuses for it?

How is it you can admit the differences in tendency of choice between men and women, yet expect Summers to hire an equal number of men and women (this is what I'm assuming from your words)? Can you substantiate your claim that his hiring practices were "abominiable"?
posted by FieldingGoodney at 11:42 PM on February 21, 2006

"Guy makes a post just saying it like it is on MeFi. Resulting pile-on ensues."

*scratches head* I dunno it seems like you have pretty god damn low standards for a pile-on. And I'm worried the mere act of pointing this out is gonna make you build a fort out of couch cushions and secede from the UN.
posted by fleacircus at 4:43 AM on February 22, 2006

FieldingGoodney: I don't want to derail the thread into a disucssion of Summers' older comments, but here's some actual information for you to work with. I'm a graduate student at Harvard now, so this is kind how the folks I know are looking at it here.

1. What Summers did was push departments to hire younger professors; he did this by intruding himself into the hiring processes of various departments. When you try to hire younger professors, you in effect discriminate against women because they have children in their late 20s and early 30s--which puts them a few years "behind."
There were plenty of highly qualified women being hired before Summers, without the use of a quota, but simply by being realistic about the intersection between work and life. Summers was not realistic or fair about this.

2. Your point here--"boo-fucking-hoo" really takes your first point for granted. But Summers wasn't necessarily hiring the best of the best. In fact, you could look at his policies as restricting the size of the eligible pool unnecessarily, and thereby missing out on a lot of good candidates. And you can't just gloss over the larger debate; Summers' statement was part of a very lengthy, ongoing back-and-forth about these issues inside the university, and that's how it ought to be construed.

3, 4, and 5. I wonder if you've actually read his speech in a critical way. It is laughable. It is delivered as though no one had ever looked into the subject before, and so Larry Summers could make some insightful points using, as evidence, not only the toy truck, but also random facts that are only loosely related. His reasoning went like this: autism has a biological cause; people working in religious communities tend to sort out along traditional gender lines in the kind of work they choose (big surprise); my daughter has a "mommy truck" and "daddy truck"; so, hey, maybe the reason there are fewer women is because they are on the average dumber. And he said this to a roomful not of "academics," but, let's be clear, of experts in this issue who had convened precisely to discuss it in a sophisticated way. Let's have no more of this 'touchy egghead academics' attitude--this isn't middle school.

I don't know about all the other things that he has supposedly done to offend and alienate, but if you take this as an example of his behavior, then it's easy for me to believe that he has made a lot of people angry. His job is to be a manager and a spokesperson. This is not how you do it. And, to the extent that a president of a university has an intellectual role, he's hasn't done a very good job of filling it. From my perspective, this has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with his people skills.
posted by josh at 6:04 AM on February 22, 2006

(Of course, I'm biased: Summers once considered -- although not too seriously, it's true -- moving my department, English, across the river to Allston to make way for new science facilities. To which I can only say, wtf.)
posted by josh at 6:21 AM on February 22, 2006

Somewhere, the world's smallest violin is playing...
And David Horowitz sheds a single tear ...

Rollbiz put a picture of elitist Harvard's most infamous "gentleman's C" elitist graduate in the thread. "Jest a good ole boy from Taxes" right?
posted by nofundy at 6:23 AM on February 22, 2006

G. W. B. went to Yale, not Harvard.
posted by josh at 6:53 AM on February 22, 2006

President Bush received a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School in 1975.
posted by matteo at 7:03 AM on February 22, 2006

Good post with a lot of information in the links. Thanks. (I'm not sure why it earned so much disapprobation.)
posted by OmieWise at 7:48 AM on February 22, 2006

Thank you, josh. You explained the context and ramifications of the incident much more clearly than I was doing.
posted by kyrademon at 12:45 PM on February 22, 2006

One of Summers's big projects at the start of his tenure was to reform hiring at the law school, right? Does anyone know how that's gone?
posted by grobstein at 4:14 PM on February 22, 2006

When you try to hire younger professors, you in effect discriminate against women because they have children in their late 20s and early 30s--which puts them a few years "behind."

.....if true, he's discriminating against older people, not exclusively younger women. You make the logical leap that he's choosing not to hire young women because they are in their child-rearing years. Basically you're choosing to ignore the idea that young women may not actually be pursuing these careers in the same numbers as men. You call "sex discrimination" whenever there's an imbalance of the sexes in any sector - to you it's all down to one man's discrimination against women and not the personal choices people make and the influence of biology that helps shape those choices.

But, perhaps, just like other professions, it's wise to hire younger people to put them a decade or so early onto the career track and set them up for a lifelong career.

my daughter has a "mommy truck" and "daddy truck"; so, hey, maybe the reason there are fewer women is because they are on the average dumber.

Saying men are more likely to take up sciences doesn't mean women are "on average dumber" - not digging science doesn't make you dumb.

(Of course, I'm biased: Summers once considered -- although not too seriously, it's true -- moving my department, English, across the river to Allston to make way for new science facilities. To which I can only say, wtf.)

Fair enough - you admit your prejudice.
posted by FieldingGoodney at 7:16 PM on February 22, 2006

Hey, Fielding: we all noticed your failure to address the substantive points of josh's argument. Sorry.
posted by mr_roboto at 3:42 AM on February 23, 2006

Hey, Fielding: we all noticed your failure to address the substantive points of josh's argument. Sorry.

Must be the royal "we"....don't know who you're speaking on behalf of, but I most certainly did address josh's (admitedly biased) points. And you're free to flat-out deny that I have - fair enough - this is Mefi, after all. :-)
posted by FieldingGoodney at 8:05 AM on February 23, 2006

Summers waged final, futile battle

"Harvard University president Lawrence H. Summers scrambled to find friends to defend him publicly, but ultimately he awakened to the reality: He couldn’t stay. It was a realization that made him profoundly angry, still believing the day he announced his resignation that Harvard was ‘'choosing comfort over excellence,' according to a person familiar with Summers’s efforts to save his job.

posted by ericb at 8:24 AM on February 23, 2006

No, you really didn't. See josh's last three paragraphs.
posted by cribcage at 8:29 AM on February 23, 2006

WaPo editorial.
posted by mania at 8:36 AM on February 23, 2006

Hey, Fielding: Add me as one that noticed your failure to address the substantive points of josh's argument.

What Summer's said was, essentially, true -- women don't enter the workforce he was drawing from in the same numbers as men. That he limited his candidates pool to professorial types in their 20s to 30s means he was eliminating qualified older candidates, and any candidate that wanted to enter this profession later for whatever reason (starting a family comes to mind, but so does getting non-academic work experience). So, he picked a group that is heavier in men than women, then wanted to speculate on ABILITY as the source?

His method of describing this phenomenon to a group of people who study such things left a lot to be desired. Talking to your staff as if they are idiots is never going to get you points. Trying to dumb it down was incredibly unprofessional.

Summer needed to go the moment he became a point of controversy -- it makes him a liability in the fund-raising effort that is part of the job, and thus nothing else he could do would weigh as much as the loss of alumni dollars.
posted by dwivian at 10:58 AM on February 23, 2006