Well maybe JEBO was just a good fit for her papers -- so you are saying if the Editor harasses you, you no longer should submit there?
Sorry but i don’t find that convincing. JEBO is a journal with close substitutes. If I had been harassed, I would never be able to have email exchanges with someone who harassed me and he is in a power position
And what about Ernesto R staying as Associate Editor in JEBO?
And what about GM pretending not to know Ernesto R on Twitter?
"I am not writing to defend Dan Houser. There seem to be too many accusations. I am also not writing to undermine the #metoo in Econ movement; it is clearly long overdue.
I am writing to expose the HYPOCRISY of Georgia Michailidou before she destroys the credibility of the #metoo in econ movement."
This post is about GM's credibility, her relationship with DH, and her unprofessional sexual behavior.
Just flip the roles! Imagine if GM is a man... These are important considerations.
Don't do this on here, as it's literally pointless to do it here. If you're going to do say this, you're going to want to reach out Houser, and probably then need to say this under oath.
It will be interesting to see if the OP will come forth and testify. The OP did say that she wanted to protect the #metoo movement and that she didn’t want to defend DH. But the questions she raised can be used by Houser’s lawyers. There is enough to seriously question (if not destroy) GMs credibility.
I have never met GM, and I believe I have never met DH.
However, as a woman, I am appalled by this post. Seductive behaviour is in the eyes of the beholder. Are you 100% sure that what you saw was a seductive behaviour, or was it simply being friendly? Women are judged all the time, b****y if not friendly enough, seducers if they are fun to socialise with.
The argument "because her behaviour led to a marriage, it was excessive" is strange. Most people marry people who are friendly with them, not those who want to seduce them.
So please stop judging women’s behaviour, we women have experienced way too much of that.
Let's leave the judgment to the proper investigation, rather than - as it's often done in such cases - blame the women for their (alleged) conduct, or blame the men for their (alleged) power.
Blame all…I mean, believe all women!
I have never met GM, and I believe I have never met DH.
However, as a woman, I am appalled by this post. Seductive behaviour is in the eyes of the beholder. Are you 100% sure that what you saw was a seductive behaviour, or was it simply being friendly? Women are judged all the time, b****y if not friendly enough, seducers if they are fun to socialise with.
The argument "because her behaviour led to a marriage, it was excessive" is strange. Most people marry people who are friendly with them, not those who want to seduce them.
So please stop judging women’s behaviour, we women have experienced way too much of that.
Let's leave the judgment to the proper investigation, rather than - as it's often done in such cases - blame the women for their (alleged) conduct, or blame the men for their (alleged) power.
I have never met GM, and I believe I have never met DH.
However, as a woman, I am appalled by this post. Seductive behaviour is in the eyes of the beholder. Are you 100% sure that what you saw was a seductive behaviour, or was it simply being friendly? Women are judged all the time, b****y if not friendly enough, seducers if they are fun to socialise with.
The argument "because her behaviour led to a marriage, it was excessive" is strange. Most people marry people who are friendly with them, not those who want to seduce them.
So please stop judging women’s behaviour, we women have experienced way too much of that.
Let's leave the judgment to the proper investigation, rather than - as it's often done in such cases - blame the women for their (alleged) conduct, or blame the men for their (alleged) power.
This is GM. stop we all know that you’re a th0t
Is that you Dan? GM had the courage to come forward, you could at least attack her openly and not in this anonymous forum.
This post is taken directly from sexual harassers 101. Best way to defend yourself is it to attack the "credibility" of your accusers by trying to put their behavior in a bad light. Then claim that you are under attack (a "witch hunt") by people that have nothing to gain and everything to lose by coming forward. Use vague conspiracy theory techniques, such as posing "questions" that need answering, like an answer would in any way absolve the harasser.
Please, do not insult our intelligence. There is nothing insightful or revealing about this post. It is just trying to distract from the fact that Dan Houser has harassed GM and others. That is not acceptable under any circumstances and to any person, no matter how they appear to behave to you.
I am not writing to defend Dan Houser. There seem to be too many accusations. I am also not writing to undermine the #metoo in Econ movement; it is clearly long overdue.
I am writing to expose the HYPOCRISY of Georgia Michailidou before she destroys the credibility of the #metoo in econ movement.
I have repeatedly seen how overtly flirtatious she is with senior male economists in conferences and workshops. I have also heard other people discuss this. There seems to be a belief that she does this systematically to advance her career. I will share two observations that I witnessed before stating some facts that everyone can verify.
In 2015, the same year GM accuses Dan Houser groped her, when she was still a PhD student, I saw her seduce a senior male economist in a conference. She succeeded. This is all easy to verify with some modest detective work online. Much more on that below. I also saw her try to seduce another senior male economist a few years later (yes, while she was with senior male economist #1). Her behavior was totally over the top. I was NOT the only one who witnessed that. I wish I could write more but I do not wish to provide any identifying hints. Perhaps the senior male economist himself would like to speak up? You know who you are!
Let’s look now at some FACTS about GM that are public information and which point to a repeatedly OPPORTUNISTIC behavior by her.
(i) GM has three publications in economics journals; not a great record for someone who got her PhD 5 years ago, started as a postdoc (ie no teaching/admin) and is working in experimental economics. Interestingly, two of those are in JEBO from the time Houser was an editor-in-chief. WHY WOULD GM SUBMIT AT THE JOURNAL OF HER HARASSER?! (JEBO at the time had two editors in chief so the chance that DH would handle her papers was not trivial! Given the research of the other editor in chief, DH would almost certainly handle them. (Perhaps JEBO could open the files to know if he indeed handled any of these papers?)
(ii) GM started a position as a Researcher in Sep 2017 in a frankly unknown school in France, but she abandoned it 3 months later to join NYU Abu Dhabi as a postdoc. What happened there? Why accept a job and drop it 3 months later? All this happened when she hooked up for good with the senior male professor mentioned above (the one that I saw her seduce in 2015 and who is identified in another thread in this forum as Ernesto R). This can also easily be verified with modest detective work online. SO GM SEDUCED ER IN A CONFERENCE THE SAME YEAR THAT DH SUPPOSEDLY GROPED HER (again, Im not defending DH), AND GOT TOGETHER WITH ER FOR GOOD WHEN HER JOB MARKET TANKED.
(iii) Her husband, Ernesto Reuben is an Associate Editor in JEBO! Why serve as Associate to the Editor who harassed your wife? Or did she make all this up?
(iv) Why does GM pretend not to know Ernesto R on Twitter? Is she afraid of people knowing that she is with a senior male economist who works in her department? But that doesn’t stop her from ...See full post
... as a woman, I am appalled by this post. Seductive behaviour is in the eyes of the beholder. Are you 100% sure that what you saw was a seductive behaviour, or was it simply being friendly? ...
The argument "because her behaviour led to a marriage, it was excessive" is strange. Most people marry people who are friendly with them, not those who want to seduce them.
Why does it have to be about men vs. women? Relax. I am a woman too and I want to see change. The OP includes eye-witness accounts as well as FACTS that can be indeed easily verified. Why are you appalled? If GM is discredited under testimony, who will that help?
I have never met GM, and I believe I have never met DH.
However, as a woman, I am appalled by this post. Seductive behaviour is in the eyes of the beholder. Are you 100% sure that what you saw was a seductive behaviour, or was it simply being friendly? Women are judged all the time, b****y if not friendly enough, seducers if they are fun to socialise with.
The argument "because her behaviour led to a marriage, it was excessive" is strange. Most people marry people who are friendly with them, not those who want to seduce them.
So please stop judging women’s behaviour, we women have experienced way too much of that.
Let's leave the judgment to the proper investigation, rather than - as it's often done in such cases - blame the women for their (alleged) conduct, or blame the men for their (alleged) power.
I don't think you have been in enough DEI and harrassment sessions. It's not about what is intended. It's about what the victim feels.
Now, not sure ER has enough brain cells to feel, so you might be off the hook there
I have never met GM, and I believe I have never met DH.
However, as a woman, I am appalled by this post. Seductive behaviour is in the eyes of the beholder. Are you 100% sure that what you saw was a seductive behaviour, or was it simply being friendly? Women are judged all the time, b****y if not friendly enough, seducers if they are fun to socialise with.
The argument "because her behaviour led to a marriage, it was excessive" is strange. Most people marry people who are friendly with them, not those who want to seduce them.
So please stop judging women’s behaviour, we women have experienced way too much of that.
Let's leave the judgment to the proper investigation, rather than - as it's often done in such cases - blame the women for their (alleged) conduct, or blame the men for their (alleged) power.
I mean, if she literally has a pattern of hooking up with senior faculty at conferences I think it's hard to file that under "just being friendly".
"I am not writing to defend Dan Houser. There seem to be too many accusations. I am also not writing to undermine the #metoo in Econ movement; it is clearly long overdue.
I am writing to expose the HYPOCRISY of Georgia Michailidou before she destroys the credibility of the #metoo in econ movement."
This post is about GM's credibility, her relationship with DH, and her unprofessional sexual behavior.
Just flip the roles! Imagine if GM is a man... These are important considerations.
Her professional sexual behaviour, you mean. This is tied to her job
I don't know about you, but to me this all sounds like much ado about nothing. There is zero evidence that GM benefited in any way from her relationship with ER or any other prof. And btw, ER was a young assistant prof back then. Anyone going after him for profesional gain would be seriously dumb.
Depends on your definition of "advances" and "signals". Did she invite DH to her hotel room, light candles, give him a glass of wine and invite him to lay down in bed? Or was she just being friendly? The content of the post above sounds more like the second than the first.
On a different note, i am glad i am married and presumably out of the dating market. This "culture" kills what used to be exciting about flirting and chasing (which went two-ways) before dating apps and #metoo ruined it all. where is the spark? where is the spontaneity? where is exactly the fact both are excited to test ground and about the unknowns of how it all will end?
Just to be clear: i don't think any woman i have flirted with would say i have behaved inappropriately.