A Slap on the Wrist for Satoshi Kanazawa

By Sexual Correspondent Andrea (AJ) Plaid

For the maelstrom Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa caused by publishing on Psychology Today‘s blog a “study” he contended would “prove” that not only Black women are unattractive but we’re deluded for believing otherwise, his place of employment, the London School of Economics (LSE) placed him on publishing and teaching probation for a year.

From Times Higher Education:

The LSE has now published the findings of an internal investigation into the affair, ruling that Dr Kanazawa had “brought the school into disrepute” and barring him from publishing in non-peer-reviewed outlets for a year.

In addition to the 12-month ban, he will not teach any compulsory courses this academic year.

Kanazawa issued a very belated fauxpology for his “research.”

In a letter to Judith Rees, director of the LSE, Dr Kanazawa says he “deeply regrets” the “unintended consequences” of the blog and accepts it was an “error” to publish it.

“In retrospect, I should have been more careful in selecting the title and the language that I used to express my ideas,” he writes.

“In the aftermath of its publication, and from all the criticisms that I have received, I have learned that some of my arguments may have been flawed and not supported by the available evidence.”

He adds: “In my blog post, I did not give due consideration to my approach to the interpretation of the data and my use of language.”

Yes, Psychology Today fired Kanazawa after Color of Change and many other people online and offline pressured the company to do so. And students from LSE agitated for his firing. However, considering that he’s obfuscating–and failing to apologize for–the fact that he used his science skills on a piece that helps perpetuate engendered racism–and that he has pulled this fooliganery before–a year really isn’t enough.

Related posts:

Voices: The Satoshi Kanazawa Study

H/t to Taja for the update!

  • Pingback: Gravitational pull of that which needs attention « A Gaming Girl's Take on Life

  • Pingback: *Rolls Eyes* « Psychology at Play

  • Pingback: Kanazawa is Grounded for a Year by LSE | DCentric

  • Tiffany

    Someone is protecting Satoshi. I know one person who is, but whether there are others and who they are baffles me.

  • Pingback: Today's Lady News: Michele Bachmann Jokes About Ex-Gay Therapy | The Frisky

  • http://bethaniqua.blogspot.com bethanyk

    Does this read to anybody else that he just gets a reduced work-load at the same job?

  • Lyrwen

    Being banned from teaching is a reward for most academics… :/

  • Digital Coyote

    So….his elective classes are about to become a hot ticket because of the “controversy,” he can spend the year re-establishing his legitimacy and reputation by writing normal stuff in respected journals in addition to  increasing his name recognition, and he can go right back to his bullshit (under the auspice of being faculty and a researcher at a prestigious school) with 175% more doublespeak (since he’s going on about how he should choose his language rather than apologizing) as soon as the year is up? 

    Oh yeah.  He was punished.

    • Patty

      Agreed. One can still hope that he will have trouble finding co-authors for whatever papers he publishes in the coming year.

    • Patty

      Agreed. One can still hope that he will have trouble finding co-authors for whatever papers he publishes in the coming year.

    • Anonymous

      …or, is what the school hoping for is that Kanazawa is so besmirched by this controversy that no one would want to take any elective class with him (“Ewwww! You’re taking classes with a known racist?”) and that no respected peer-reviewed journal (unless Bell Curve‘s author Charles Murray runs a scientific racism journal (/snark)) would want to touch him? And, out of that frustration, Kanazawa leaves LSE? It’s sort of the Silent Banishment way of getting rid of Kanazawa, but I can also see that at work in this case. 

      • Digital Coyote

        I would like to hope that what you’re saying will happen–it’s totally possible because the school would have plausible deniability when he beat feet since they gave him a second chance–but, even with coffee, I don’t have that much faith in humanity today. 

        • Anonymous

          @e823978a2fe04f6ea8d1c740cdbb3f32:disqus : Then I’m more optimistic about people than I give myself credit for–and I don’t drink coffee. LOL
          @Heavy_Armor:disqus : I see your point. But I’ve also seen cases where a company-known HR case who their bosses’ supervisors will go to bat for get maneuvered out of zie’s job.  For years, the fooligan is allowed to behave the way zie does. And others complain about said person which the HR department documents. At some point, the egregious fool crosses a line that even their bosses can’t defend and, instead of facing a lawsuit, they set up the environment that “allows” the person to leave.  

          So, yes, LSE many have defended Kanazawa, but at some point, they may find themselves in an untenable position, thanks to Kanazawa saying/writing something that pushes them to that point. And they have enough “evidence” from his other work where they can point to them–and the unnecessary drama they caused the school (including the students wanting his ass gone and the mass controversy around the world from this Psychology Today mess)–for really firing him. But, as Digital Coyote said, they want the sheen of plausibile deniability to cover their asses. So, they curtail the very activities that allows the fooligan to work for them. Next thing you know, Kanazawa is talking about “leaving” because he “can’t work in the LSE’s academic environment.” 

          So, perhaps it’s not optimism but just how seeing businesses get rid of some the more problematic employees. Universities, being businesses, really, aren’t too different in that regard. ::shrug::

        • Anonymous

          @e823978a2fe04f6ea8d1c740cdbb3f32:disqus : Then I’m more optimistic about people than I give myself credit for–and I don’t drink coffee. LOL
          @Heavy_Armor:disqus : I see your point. But I’ve also seen cases where a company-known HR case who their bosses’ supervisors will go to bat for get maneuvered out of zie’s job.  For years, the fooligan is allowed to behave the way zie does. And others complain about said person which the HR department documents. At some point, the egregious fool crosses a line that even their bosses can’t defend and, instead of facing a lawsuit, they set up the environment that “allows” the person to leave.  

          So, yes, LSE many have defended Kanazawa, but at some point, they may find themselves in an untenable position, thanks to Kanazawa saying/writing something that pushes them to that point. And they have enough “evidence” from his other work where they can point to them–and the unnecessary drama they caused the school (including the students wanting his ass gone and the mass controversy around the world from this Psychology Today mess)–for really firing him. But, as Digital Coyote said, they want the sheen of plausibile deniability to cover their asses. So, they curtail the very activities that allows the fooligan to work for them. Next thing you know, Kanazawa is talking about “leaving” because he “can’t work in the LSE’s academic environment.” 

          So, perhaps it’s not optimism but just how seeing businesses get rid of some the more problematic employees. Universities, being businesses, really, aren’t too different in that regard. ::shrug::

      • http://heavyarmor.wordpress.com Heavy Armor

        If this kind of thing didn’t happen before with Kanazawa, I’d agree.  However, LSE has gone to bat for him over his “scholarship” on issues like this before, and nothing that LSE has done indicates any change in MO to me.

  • http://heavyarmor.wordpress.com Heavy Armor

    I said, elsewhere, during the initial firestorm of Kanazawa’s commentary, that he would not be fired, but instead submerged for a short time while the whole thing blows over.  This is not the first time that Satoshi had written this kind of drivel – and this was not the first storm he nor his bosses encountered.

    But, here we are, with another “probation,” and no justice served, again.  No responsibility taken and none given, again.