Mr.

Unknown,

For I would not honor you with the title of Professor; I would like to tell you that you are
very much the source of the hostile work environment holding back any chance
whatsoever of ______ advancing in any legitimate way and not simply through sexual
intrigues and crass liberal elitism. I am writing to you to let you know it seems you enjoy
your ability to set the dial at mediocrity. For should such a place as the ________you
work for ever have even a minute chance of exceeding anyone’s expectations, you would
lose your post on the top of the measuring stick. I am not sure what supplies you with
such omnipotence. Since the first days at that place whose name I will not repeat, I
noticed how it is that you work, discouraging original theses, bullying women (no, not to
an illegal extent, but “just enough” to do the trick), snickering at anything creative or
socially just. You are rather hilarious with all that petty omnipotence. Not one person
joined you at your one-man protest against an extremely disliked individual. One would
think you think you could have had a job at a University but you can’t. You can’t not just
because you like to command that XY or Z salary, but you would not cut it. Small fish in
a small tank.

You may wonder why I would select you as the recipient of such a letter. As far as the so-
called history discipline you see yourself as professing, the only faculty in your group I
feel pity for is _____ ____ for I can’t imagine how much of his insight and intelligence
he has to swallow in order to work intimately with you in a department I doubt you
belong to but which you also wish to dominate. Historians are different than what you
think. You see, historians serve the humanities not themselves. And in order to do that,
you really must first be inclined to be human too for humanism does not mean what you
take it to mean. In order to read humanism, you must be able to appreciate implications of
ideas. Surely, even an anthropologist in camouflage must pause to consider what
distinguishes him from a humanist.

I would like to offer you one clear essential difference between you and a humanist. A
humanist, first of all, is a sort of a linguist in this regard, a humanist can comprehend
LANGUAGE! And you do not for you speak and understand only what you believe is
evidence. You are awed at ______’s lecture when he offers nothing but evidence he
himself
could not even theorize nor ever could produce of his own means. He says, "I'm using
Ethnic powerpoint," and "I can't tell the difference between a Dominican and a Haitian,"
and he says, "I won't bore you with the theory."

On such occasions, you lead with that grandiose question, "what is your evidentiary
basis?” and salivate at a table of worthless mathematical variables. A humanist does not
need such fundamentals to be comfortable in any language, in any document, and in any
theory.

A humanist would have called _______ on his exotic overtones toward Blacks in the
Caribbean (A place you also think you know about), his misuse of outdated and
ridiculously rudimentary as well as un-cited, borrowed (aka plagiarized) evidence, and
finally, a humanist becomes suspicious when a presenter says, "I'll spare you the theory."

Thus given this example of your participation at _____’s research presentation, you fail
again as a humanist for it is clear you and _______do not know how to theorize, neither
does ____ who trembles while reading theory, and yet you are all so highly valued as the
intellectual pace-setters. Well as it has been said with evidentiary basis, if the shoe fits
wear it!

I might take the time to enumerate for you other ways in which you fail to gain admission
to the humanities, but I sense it would overwhelm you.

I have considered more than once those fathers at ______ who had young daughters or
adult ones. And I have felt such mercy for those young women whose fathers set about
structuring the world according to misanthropic and misogynist biases. I hope that they
will come to see and to eventually love and forgive their fathers as they are and that I, a
woman and a lesser in their fathers' eyes, will do something to help them.

I will do my best (a level of rigor which you cannot fathom) to change the Universities to
be an inclusive place for all women. Thus it is the case that a humanist which I am
and which you are not nor ever can be, will reverse the patterns of oppressive male
dominance so that other women, younger women, even your daughter and the daughters
of the other horrible sexists you work with can see in me a hope that they can become the
humanists their fathers never were.

So I say goodbye to this Faux-Humanist , and may I never see another like him in my
life!