{"id":880,"date":"2020-07-07T15:45:21","date_gmt":"2020-07-07T15:45:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/?p=880"},"modified":"2020-07-07T15:45:50","modified_gmt":"2020-07-07T15:45:50","slug":"the-surprising-tolerance-people-have-for-child-sodomy-rape-in-professor-mitmans-case-boys-will-be-boys","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/the-surprising-tolerance-people-have-for-child-sodomy-rape-in-professor-mitmans-case-boys-will-be-boys\/","title":{"rendered":"The Surprising Tolerance People Have for Child Sodomy Rape in Professor Mitman’s Case: “Boys Will Be Boys.”"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is part of the split-up post, Should Rapists Edit Scholarly Journals?<\/a><\/p>\n

Harald Uhlig is another technical macroeconomist editing a major journal. I won’t go into his case at length here; see my Harald Uhlig Fired as Editor of the Journal of Political Economy<\/a>. It is clear, though, that there are a lot of people, even PhD economists, for whom making fun of Martin Luther King Day is a more serious offense than child sodomy rape. Really. <\/p>\n

Kurt Mitman, of course, is one of them, though by now the retweet alluded to in EJMR in June<\/a> no longer appears: <\/p>\n

\nKM just retweeted GV\u2019s tweet supporting the call to remove HU….oblivious much? Or were truly at the stage where raping a minor is a lesser offense than awkward jokes in class.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Interestingly, Mitman advertised <\/a> a seminar by Uhlig before Uhlig’s transgression came to light, who was appearing together with Mitman’s PhD advisor\/coeditor Krueger: <\/p>\n

\n.
\nVMACS Seminar Tuesday 26\/05 5pm London time:
\n.
\nDirk Krueger, Harald Uhlig and Taojun Xie
\n.
\n“Macroeconomic Dynamics and Reallocation in an Epidemic”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It’s important to see the kind of responses people have to Mitman’s past. I was going to say “dark past”, but the significance of the responses is that people don’t think child sodomy rape really matters very much. I’ve just said I’d keep him as journal editor, but I would have give him the death penalty for his offense, and I would not say he’s put it behind him in general— just that a murderer or rapist could make a fine journal editor, in the same way as he could make a fine chef, investment banker, or ditchdigger. From one EMJR thread<\/a>: <\/p>\n

\n.
\nHe made mistakes when he was young. Since then, he’s grown and he’s now a productive member of society.
\n 6 GOOD 4 NO GOOD
\n.
\nLove this guy for coming back from a personal tragedy and becoming a star. Way to go kurt. He’s a way better man than any of you trolls.
\n 10 GOOD 13 NO GOOD
\n.
\nI agree he did a very bad thing, although I think it was a thing that is actually legal in Sweden and Germany if I’m reading the data on age of consent correctly. I’m not sure if that really falls into the “so unforgivable you should just do nothing else ever again in your life” category.
\n6 GOOD 3 NO GOOD
\n.
\nSelf-promoter. Who on earth would write publicly about their flyouts? And yes, he is 7 years out, not 5 as he pretends. He has been very nice to the twitterati mafia so he is OK with them.
\n 4 GOOD 0 NO GOOD
\n.
\nIt’s very easy to make mistakes with sex when you are a young man. There but for the grace of God go I (except for the gay part).
\n3 GOOD 3 NO GOOD
\n.
\n Many self-appointed judges on this forum and in our profession. Give the guy a break and a chance to put this behind him. He is an outstanding researcher who paid his due for whatever an independent justice system decided some time ago that he needed to pay. Not any of our job to re-judge that. Chapeau to him for being able to put this behind (despite the self-appointed judges) and thrive research-wise. He should actually be made into a positive example, if anything.
\n 12 GOOD 9 NO GOOD
\n.
\nHow many of the people defending him are Mittman at different IPs?
\nBuddy, I like your research. But let’s not pretend you were too young to know better.
\n4 GOOD 3 NO GOOD
\n.
\nYou people are idiots. What he did would have been legal in many\/most European countries. Its a total non-story.
\n3 GOOD 7 NO GOOD
\n.
\nI asked senior people whether there was any conflict in his appointment to the executive board of jeea. He did jail time and therefore should no longer be punished for his acts.
\n.
\nSo as soon as HU does all the prison time associated with his crimes, he can go back to editing?
\n.
\nI don’t know the case in case, but I can very generally say what Europeans think of Americans:
\nYou are sexless aspie virgins, who prosecute sex “offences” (i.e., regular human behaviour) because you are mentally ill.
\nBy a couple of hint, the sexless virgin mob is prosecuting this guy because he had sex with under aged person?
\nWell, the age of consent in most of Europe is 14 years. In Spain until 2-3 years ago it was 13 years. And generally you do not see many people prosecuted for sex with underaged even in countries where the age of consent is higher (16 Germany and UK).\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Another EJMR thread,<\/a> post-Uhlig, says: <\/p>\n

Can anyone articulate a specific reason why KM’s history would make him unqualified to be an editor?
\nWhile I don’t agree with them, at least HU’s attackers can articulate reasons why they feel he would be unqualified, such as bias against certain kinds of submissions or their sense that his factual understanding of social science is mistaken.
\n 11 GOOD 9 NO GOOD
\n.
\nJust let the guy be. Dude has a permanent tattoo on his face. Couldn\u2019t be shamed more than he has been. The sex offender registry is cruel and unusual punishment. No need to add to it.
\n3 WEEKS AGO # QUOTE 11 GOOD 14 NO GOOD
\n.
\nHU can reject papers based on ra\/ce. That would affect his duties as an editor.
\nWhat KM did is considered consensual and noncriminal in many countries (not all countries have the age of consent as 18). He doesn’t teach undergrads (who should be adults anyway). He also cannot diddle your papers or infect them with g\/ay, if that’s what you are worried about. How does his past conduct make him unfit as an editor?
\n 6 GOOD 15 NO GOOD
\n.
\nIndeed the problem with HU is whether his conduct shows he would not be biased when handling papers by minorities or proposing findings he does not like due to his racial views. KM\u2019s past has nothing to do with biases in editorial job. No underage (based on US law, btw, in many other countries consensual sex with a 14 year old Is not a crime) person will even submit to the journal, and he will never teach underage people given he is a college professor.
\n 3 GOOD 1 NO GOOD
\n.<\/p>\n

Insane. How is he still a member of the editorial board?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Krueger: The Kaplan, Krueger, Violente clan. Having said that, Kurt is a good person but he will have to show his independence from them. He will make enemies rejecting papers\u2014look at the piling on Uhlig. I\u2019m not sure this is the best thing for Kurt.
\n 4 GOOD 2 NO GOOD
\n.
\nLol at these losers trying to justify KM’s spot. Here’s your “argument”: his discernment is so bad, he broke a highly taboo law that ended up with him in prison. You want a person with that kind of decision making handling the careers of juniors? Including your precious minorities? Maybe he uses his power to force grad students or jrs to engage in certain.. Acts.
\n 9 GOOD 4 NO GOOD
\n.
\nI have a question for those defending KM and using the argument that what he did is legal in other countries where a 14-year old can legally consent. Did you also defend Jeffrey Epstein? Why or why not?
\n 8 GOOD 2 NO GOOD
\n.
\nEditors have roles beyond their jobs as paper reviewers. They are representatives of the profession, period, and people young scholars look up to. This role goes well beyond whether he can appraise a paper. Moreover, his past raises serious questions about his judgement in general, his attack on Uhlig only emphasizing his lack of self-awareness.
\n 8 GOOD 4 NO GOOD
\n.
\nLeave KM alone. He’s a very good economist. He did something bad, paid his debt, and that should be the end of it. If he decides to become a kindergarten principal I could see the problem, but an editorial position in an academic journal has zero connection to his past crimes.
\n 7 GOOD 17 NO GOOD
\n.
\nUndergrads can be 16yo in this country.
\nKM got visiting (paid) jobs at the NY fed. HU lost his gig, and KM?
\n 4 GOOD 2 NO GOOD
\n.
\nHe is unemployable in the US. That’s why he is at Stockholm, in a program that only teaches graduates. He doesn’t teach anyone remotely close to 18, let alone 16.
\n.
\nWhat is this “in many countries you can have sex with 14 year olds” justification?
\nWhere do you live, Afghanistan?
\n 9 GOOD 1 NO GOOD
\n.
\nWhen attacking Uhlig, Violente wrote “editors of top economics journals are necessarily perceived as representing our profession, and they must lead by example. With great power come equally great duties.”
\n.
\nCountries with age of consent = 13: Japan, SK
\nCountries with age of consent = 14: Germany, Italy, Austria, most South American countries, …
\nCountries with age of consent = 15: Sweden (where KM is employed), France, Denmark, Greece, etc…
\nInternet is your friend.
\n2 GOOD 11 NO GOOD
\n.
\nIf it had been a 14yo girl, nobody would defend him.
\n.
\nWho thinks it’s moral to have intercourse with a 14 year old as a 21 year old?
\nIf that’s the law in Sweden, that’s crazy. My son is 13. He is a child.
\n.
\nAnother issue with people who force themselves on children is that sometimes their misdeeds aren’t known for a long time. How do we know there weren’t other children who were victimized? Was the move to Europe to facilitate this sick behavior due to different age of consent laws (ala Jeffrey Epstein).
\n.
\nThe difference between KM and HU is that KM attacked a child and HU attacked a race. History shows that nobody cares about child victims (e.g., Catholic Church)
\n.
\nShame on OP for contacting media sources in an attempt to drive KM out of his position. Whatever your reasons for disliking him, cancel culture does not belong in econ.
\n 6 GOOD 10 NO GOOD
\n.
\nThis is OP from a different IP. NYT just called me up and said that they are not running the story.
\n.
\nWhat should I ask him? If you support driving out either KM or HU, then you are in favor of cancel culture.
\n.<\/p>\n

You should have contacted restud board, not media. This could end up going much farther than you’d planned.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Nah, what’s the point? Google this guy and you’ll seem multiple articles about him popping up on the first page. They all know.
\n.
\nYou should read this carefully.
\nhttps:\/\/www.econjobrumors.com\/topic\/too-many-moral-and-emotional-attacks-on-hu-and-km<\/a>
\nYou know nothing about KM, as well as HU, and you simply have no right to judge them. For legal matters, let the tribunes work. For professional matters, let the employers evaluate. You are taking a role that does not belong to you for the only sake of destroying a person. You will pay for this as there is no VPN to avoid the last judgement.
\n“For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged:
\nand with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”
\nYou better think about it carefully.
\n 5 GOOD 5 NO GOOD\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A third EJMR thread<\/a>: <\/p>\n

\n.
\nA reminder of the foundations of our civilization seems necessary.
\nIf you think it is inappropriate that KM teaches or edits, you should ask the legislator to implement a law about it. You should not act with person-specific mobbing. KM has no legal constraint preventing him to be an editor. This is the law and this is also our Western culture. Sins can be fully forgiven. I see the tendency of many to condemn Uhlig or Mitman or others on moral grounds. Please, leave this duty to God. You are not in charge of it.
\nFrom a professional point of view, the baseline for society to work efficiently is that no one should ever value the off-work business of employees. So asking Uhlig to be removed for his tweets is pointless and unethical. But Uhlig can be judged for what he does during lectures.
\nTherefore,
\n1. It is correct to hire KM without questioning his personal past.
\n2. It is correct to keep Uhlig as an editor without questioning his tweets.
\n3. It is correct to investigate Uhlig’s comments in class.
\n4. It is correct to wait for more investigation before a verdict.
\nOverall: Economics profession strong despite weak mobbing Twitter and EJMR.
\nyet, it has some irony that KM reacts to the HU story as ‘Shocking and unacceptable’ (paraphrased from a deleted tweet). What is it again about stones in glass houses?
\n 7 GOOD 2 NO GOOD!
\n.
\nHonestly I care more about the hypocrisy of Econ Twitter than KM himself.
\n 17 GOOD 1 NO GOOD
\n.
\nThe mood seems to be: right-wingers with HU and left-wingers with KM. Yet again polarisation has killed civil argument
\n.
\nMy problem with the KM cancelation is that he committed a crime, was convicted in a real court, served his time in a real prison, and that should have been enough. Why does he have to be punished again for the same crime?
\n 3 GOOD 2 NO GOOD
\n.
\nThose stones won’t be thrown at him. By signaling his affiliation with the woke crowd, it helps brush aside his personal history – after all, what’s a felony compared to the great cause of ending 300 years of systemic racism? Any time someone attacks KM from now on, he can claim: Are you smearing me because I happen to be a vocal anti-racist?
\nKM is a very, very smart dude. This guy doesn’t believe in the nonsense. He knows it will help rather than hurt him. The woke badge is immensely valuable. Pick one up while you can.
\n.
\nWhat\u2019s KM\u2019s name? Why do we even bother with initials at this point?
\n.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s KM\u2019s name? Why do we even bother with initials at this point?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

We bother more than ever. We fought the mob against HU, now we have to prevent a public shaming against KM. So stick with the initials and protect his privacy.
\n.<\/p>\n

\nDon’t insult UH by comparing the two.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

What a moralistic stance. I am nobody to judge either of the two. I can compare mobbings. And they are always bad.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

EJMR are economists, of course, which is an important group to consider here, but not typical humans. Neither are people who write comments to the Palo Alto newspapers<\/a>, but here are some of their thoughts> I am glad I don’t live in Palo Alto. It would be safer to raise children in inner-city Detroit. I mean that seriously, and I wouldn’t be surprised if people who have raised children in Palo Alto agree with me, ex post, though I doubt they’d ever admit it. <\/p>\n

\nSo would you do the same hack job of reportingn if the person was a convicted drug dealer or maybe a gang member who in a drive by shot a kid. Let\u2019s define people by the worst mistake they made.
\n.
\nNo one is \u201cnormalizing\u201d anything. In our society you get punished for breaking the law, then you get to live your life again. This treats people like monsters for the rest of their lives.
\n.
\nLet me get this correct. A person researching for another international university that is studying economics at college where adults, not children, attend? Has committed no new crime? Found out he was a registered sex offender by an underground newspaper? The post called a district attorney in another state for comment citing nobody would want him rhetoric? Then reposts data from a public sex registry site as if people are unable to look for themselves? Then reports that he failed to tell his past university of his crime that wasn\u2019t a requirement unless the university made a provision despite being re-admitted? Naturally no comment or sources from the accused?
\n The first lesson in journalism is to bring no harm. This article borderlines call to action journalism in the worst possible way. Instead of attempts to locate redeeming qualities from a past this writer introduces a one sided scare tactic not reporting news but filtering tabloid journalism for a self serving campaign to bring harm to others when no new crime or allegations exist. No wonder why fake news has shifted from the far right to mainstream? This isn\u2019t a story. It\u2019s doxing journalism to bring harm to redemption, recovery, respect and retaliation.
\n.
\nAlice your sense of awareness and safety might benefit from some facts. The registry is lifetime and many people are not listed on the public website and only with law enforcement. This man is required to register for life under California law, one of 3 states who require lifetime registry. He complied.
\nThis registry was created in 1940 for gay men. Many are still registered and over 90 years old. All people placed in California will die on the registry.
\nA revised law will be set free after 10 years people who possessed illegal pornography. After 20 years people who have had sex w minors will be able to apply for removal.
\nThis man was 22 years old and had sex w a minor. You might ask your circle if anyone had sex w a minor as it is more common than you think. 18 year old with 15 year old for example was not uncommon.
\n Maybe support a public gun registry since mass shootings are almost daily.
\n.
\nI wonder if he sought treatment.
\nI wonder if he regrets his actions.
\nI wonder if he has learned from his choices.
\nI wonder if he has become a different person in the FIFTEEN YEARS since his offense.
\nAre YOU the same person you were fifteen years ago?
\nOverall, people who commit sex offenses have been shown to have a recidivism rate (5%) higher ONLY than people who have committed murder.
\nInstead of fearmongering over the person he WAS, maybe consider that \u2013 as a HUMAN with the capacity to change \u2013 it may not be who he has chosen to be going FORWARD.
\nWhat he did was wrong. He served his sentence. Good. Now we know.
\nAnd now comes his chance to be a better man, such as we would all want for ourselves.
\n.
\nOnly in Palo Alto would there be sympathy for a child molester.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This is part of the split-up post, Should Rapists Edit Scholarly Journals? Harald Uhlig is another technical macroeconomist editing a major journal. I won’t go into his case at length here; see my Harald Uhlig Fired as Editor of the Journal of Political Economy. It is clear, though, that there are a lot of people, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-880","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/880","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=880"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/880\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":883,"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/880\/revisions\/883"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=880"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=880"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rasmusen.org\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=880"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}