Has there been a post about this that I missed? Earlier this week, Tamar Lewin of the New York Times wrote an investigative story about the married head of the Cardiology unit at Yale School of Medicine who pursued an Italian researcher in another lab in his division, writing her a letter in Italian saying "I want to kiss you in Liguria and other cities":

Dr. Di Lorenzo told him that the letter was unwelcome and insulting to her, her new boyfriend and Dr. Simons's wife. But Dr. Simons told her that she was choosing the wrong man since he was in a position to "open the world of science" to her.

Yale's Sexual Misconduct committee recommended that Simons be removed from his post as Chief of Cardiology and barred from high administrative posts for 5 years. The Provost overruled them, letting Simons, who had won major grants from the federal government keep/re-assume three leadership positions in the Medical School. The Medical School faculty, up in arms about this and the general climate at the school, meet with the clueless and resistant Provost. However, once emails go out from Lewin to Yale notifying them of her story and asking for comment, Yale announces a few days later that Simons decided to "not to return" (I assume just to the Chief position). Lewin's follow-up blogpost is worth reading here.

I don't know why I'm surprised at some of the clueless comments by NYTimes readers (and to be fair most of them recognize that this is a clear case of hostile work environment), but here's a sample:

But how can any given 'advance-er' tell ahead of time that his or her advance is unwanted? . . .

I've observed that this charge of making 'unwanted advances' is made quite selectively. This is something that the late and exemplary Teddy Kennedy, for example, was not accused of very often.


Don't ask out people over whom you have institutional authority and connect that advance to their professional success. Other fish in the sea dude. And that different women didn't pursue action against a powerful, womanizing dead man doesn't make this case less clear cut.

Has anyone here considered the possibility that Dr. Simons actually did fall in love? Can anyone fall in love anymore without other people analyzing it to death or recreating it into some kind of legal or ethical issue?

No, no one has considered your Omnia Vincit Amor bullshit. Because your dick (I'm sorry, deep love) doesn't override someone's right to a professional work environment.


And this winner, the John Locke of love and the Buddha of forgiveness:

Love letter in Italian, yes he is a man in love, his natural right. And her natural right to reject. The stigma is that he is a famous researcher and big grantsmanship. So every move of his is becoming a sin upon him.

18 months out of the grant picture is a big hurt and punishment.

Enough is enough!! and Let him also have a dignity and redemption and stop the unlimited liberal attack and self righteousness