I first read on Facebook about the kerfluffle about Jill Biden using her professional title. She is an EdD, doctor of education.. Phyllis Zagano has a good article in NCR on the subject. The person who originally brought it up was the writer of an op ed in the Wall Street Journal, Joseph Epstein.
Zagano, in an open letter to Jill Biden, didn't mince words: "...I am sorry you were the subject of such a patently stupid op-ed in The Wall Street Journal the other day. Mr. Joseph Epstein's essay "Is There a Doctor in the White House? Not if You Need an M.D." ranks among the most misogynistic screeds I have ever seen."
"...Most people have never heard of Epstein, and one can hope most people never hear of him again. But the comments keep bubbling in newspapers, on Facebook and in the Twitterverse. Women scholars are outraged, and rightly so. A few men ensconced in male bastions of power are demonstrating their membership in the "Not Getting It Club" by deriding the women who recently added "Dr." to their Twitter handles".
"Then, to make matters worse, The Wall Street Journal's op-ed editor, Paul A. Gigot, defended the Epstein piece, its publication and the attitude behind it. Not only does Gigot see nothing wrong, he thinks strategists for the president-elect are behind the outcry, on social media and elsewhere. Aside from the fact that Gigot seems to find a wily Democrat under every rock, I doubt he is capable of understanding what misogyny means. "
And from this article on MSN, Mr. Epstein didn't help himself by digging a deeper hole. “Madame First Lady — Mrs. Biden — Jill — kiddo: a bit of advice on what may seem like a small but I think is a not unimportant matter,” he wrote. “Any chance you might drop the ‘Dr.’ before your name? ‘Dr. Jill Biden’ sounds and feels fraudulent, not to say a touch comic.” Um, about calling an incoming first lady, whom you haven't met, "Kiddo", just don't.
Part of the controversy stems from the belief that only medical doctors should use the term "doctor". And some of the wise ones on Facebook opined that "...Jill Biden's professional degree isn't a PhD anyway, it's "only" an EdD." Which they thought was handed out like popcorn. I'll let them argue with the ones who did earn an EdD, I'm sure they beg to differ. Other countries apply the title of doctor differently. In the UK, in the past, surgeons were not called doctor, but professors were. So not an exclusively medical title, even in the US.
I would like to discuss a little the meaning of titles, and how they are often used to display respect, and how not using them can subtly convey disrespect.
In the Jim Crow era, there were Black parents who would name a son, "Mister", or perhaps a military title, such as "Major". It should be obvious why they did that.
In particular, if the person using someone's first name expects to be called by their title, this implies a difference in rank, making the first-named one lower in status.
In former days people were more formal in their addresses to other people, calling them Mr., or Mrs., or Miss (Ms. is more recent). I am fine with formal if it is reciprocal. I have known priests who did not wish to be called "Father John" but wanted to use their surname, "Father Smith". Which I don't have any problem with, as long as they call me Mrs. or Ms. Surname. Especially if they are half my age.
At the end of her article, Phyllis Zagano quotes Jill Biden's tweet on the subject, "Together, we will build a world where the accomplishments of our daughters will be celebrated, rather than diminished."
Zagano said, "Thank you for tweeting that, Dr. Biden, I hope for that world. I really do."
Your thoughts?
When I was an undergraduate at Saint John’s in the sixties my sociology professor had a doctorate. He had been an army of occupation official in Italy where he had married an Italian duchess. He explained to us that in Europe Ph.D.’s were very socially esteemed but physicians were not since they were appropriately regarded as mere technicians.
ReplyDeleteIn graduate school one of my fellow students was a former minister who was married to the daughter of a Pfizer Vice President who had the ultimate European status symbol. He was a doctor- doctor, i.e. he had two doctorates. People do a second dissertation to earn the double degree. Earning his first doctorate was very important to my friend. I told him it was not a big deal for me. Ever since the guidance counsel whispered in my ear that I was brilliant as he distribute ETS test scores to us, I had assumed that someday I would be on the other side of the desk with my Ph.D.
A joke among mental health professionals runs something like “What is the difference between a psychiatrist and a Ph.D. psychologist? A psychiatrist cannot do research.” When I went to a professional meeting of mostly physicians, they printed my name tag with a M.D. I took it home to the psychiatrist who was our chief clinical officer, and wined “Dr,B. they demoted me.”
In university psychology departments when I was there decades ago, licensed clinical psychologists usually used their title, but social and experimental psychologist used their first or last names, e.g. I referred to the social psychologists as Russ, Jud, etc. and the experiment psychologists whom I did not know well by their last names, e.g. Goldstein, Marx which I would preference with Dr. on the rare occasions when I addressed them.
When I was a postdoctoral resident as Saint Elizabeths Hospital in D.C., I had an occasion to write a letter to a colleague in the D.C. government who did not have a Ph.D. I drafted Dear Abe: and signed the letter Jack. I had meant what it would have meant in academia, namely that I accepted him as a colleague after meeting him even though I had a doctorate and he did not. Abe was African American, and the Black secretary typed his name as Mr. and gave my Ph.D. title. I signed the letter without even asking why she had changed it; said to myself that the government must be more formal. After being there for a few more months I realized she had saved me from demeaning the guy rather than honoring him.
When teaching in academia and when working in the public mental health system, I always had everyone call me Jack. My values on this issue were formed by William James classical article The Ph.D. Octopus. It is a must read. I think of it as Willian James Pauline Letter to Academics.
https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/octopus.html
“Human nature is once for all so childish that every reality becomes a sham somewhere, and in the minds of Presidents and Trustees the Ph.D. degree is in point of fact already looked upon as a mere advertising resource, a manner of throwing dust in the Public's eyes.”
“America is thus a nation rapidly drifting towards a state of things in which no man of science or letters will be accounted respectable unless some kind of badge or diploma is stamped upon him, and in which bare personality will be a mark of outcast estate. It seems to me high time to rouse ourselves to consciousness, and to cast a critical eye upon this decidedly grotesque tendency. Other nations suffer terribly from the Mandarin disease. Are we doomed to suffer like the rest?”
When the history of 20th century America is written I think we will get favorable marks for making progress on racism and sexism, but we will be roundly criticized for professionalism, the assumption that professionals are better than the rest of humanity. It is just as bad as clericalism.
From a discipleship perspective, I think it can be salutary to use titles and honorifics in addressing people which acknowledge their competence and accomplishments - especially when they exceed whatever I've accomplished. Epstein's article (which is behind the WSJ paywall, I believe) seems to do just the opposite of that.
ReplyDeleteAs the father of a teacher, I'm incensed on behalf of those who have done original research to advance the profession, and then have joined accredited faculty to pass along the profession to another generation. Rather than disparage their accomplishments, we should thank them for their service. Or so it seems to me.
The feminist angle to the reaction is interesting. I suppose women PhDs get demeaned as much as women in any other walk of life.