Jadavpur professor Abhijit Gupta, has now deleted the 'empathetic' post he had put up on Facebook in which he said "he understood the reason behind the post" and that "institutions had failed the victims" after being named in a crowd-sourced list of academics who have been accused of sexual harassment by students, put up by lawyer, Raya Sarkar.
The post may have been deleted after a journalist hit out against it, explaining that "people were falling for his (Abhijit Gupta's) sophistry" and that it was "nowhere close to being an appropriate response".
Journalist Abhimanyu Kumar, who according to his Facebook profile has worked with prominent media houses such as The Hindu, The Sunday Guardian and Youth Ki Awaaz, thrashed the professor for 'ignoring the actual charges against him'.
"The Charge, dear professor, - since your post is confused about it - is that you are a REPEAT SEXUAL OFFENDER. It is a list of repeat sexual offenders. Your 'name has not appeared' on the list like talking animals or irascible angels appear in a narrative by Rushdie. Your name is there because you are being accused of sexually harassing young students," emphasised Abhimanyu.
The journalist also slammed Abhijit Gupta for trying to play "victim to a corrupt system" and that he was not "collateral damage".
"Again, the ethics of naming and shaming is not for alleged sexual predators to decide. you have the burden of proof on you, fix your defence. your name appearing there is no way a testimony to poor institutional mechanism. I mean how incredibly conceited you have to be? This is only a testimony of how you all have scammed the system that women can't go and complain and expect justice," he said.
Abhimanyu Kumar's criticism was reposted by Raya Sarkar, the lawyer/activist behind the crowd-sourced list of academics who have been accused of sexual harassment by students.
The journalist had shown his support for Raya Sarkar by removing content provided by academics named in her list on a blog he works with.
Raya Sarkar's initiative comes after the #MeToo campaign where thousands of people spoke out on social media about being sexually harassed by powerful men, after actress' sexual harassment allegations against Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein.
READ FULL TEXT OF ABHIMANYU KUMAR'S REBUTTAL TO JU's ABHIJIT GUPTA:
"A lot of people are falling for this sophistry. let us see if it is really an appropriate response.
To deconstruct this rather sophisticated response, we need to see what is not being said and what are the allusions.
First up, it is not a 'Facebook List'. Call a thing by its real name. It is a crowdsourced list of victims/survivors prepared by a trained lawyer who is also an activist. Do not disparage it by a calling it a 'Facebook list'.
The Charge, dear professor, - since your post is confused about it - is that you are a REPEAT SEXUAL OFFENDER. It is a list of repeat sexual offenders. Your 'name has not appeared' on the list like talking animals or irascible angels appear in a narrative by Rushdie. Your name is there because you are being accused of sexually harassing young students.
You should not be concerned 'about methodology of data-collection.' your pomposity does not allow you to see that you are not the judge and jury in this. this is not a term-paper. you don't have to worry about that.
Again, the ethics of naming and shaming is not for alleged sexual predators to decide. you have the burden of proof on you, fix your defense. your name appearing there is no way a testimony to poor institutional mechanism. I mean how incredibly conceited you have to be? This is only a testimony of how you all have scammed the system that women can't go and complain and expect justice.
Now, as you say, in 'your own case'. In your case, dear professor, read what is written in the beginning. the charge is very much there. now try and disprove it. you are not a politician, btw. you have no constituency. certainly not the students. they don't vote and elect you. they pay your educational institute which appoints you. you are 'accountable' to them and to your students. you need to come clean. ideally, you should take a leave and undergo the due proceedings of an enquiry committee. How can your students hold you accountable in your class?
You are not 'collateral damage'. Tell that to your wife and kids. Even the phrase is problematic. the insinuation is that a shock and awe campaign is being launched by powerful forces. and poor professors are running for cover. but you have the power, not students who have accused you.
How can you review your own conduct? There should be an enquiry committee as i said.
And if you are so willing to take questions from own students, why not from others?