Friday, April 27, 2007

An MIT dean with high school education (or less)

Dr Marilee Jones, PhD joined the MIT Admission Office in 1979 to lead the recruitment efforts for women. That was exactly what was expected from certain powerful cliques so she became the Dean of Admissions in 1998.

Last year, she co-authored a booklet called "Less Stress, More Success". She emphasized that "you must always be completely honest who you are."

Dr. Marilee Jones, PhD is the recipient of MIT’s highest award for administrators, the "MIT Excellence Award for Leading Change", as well as the "Gordon Y. Billard Award" and the "Dean for Undergraduate Education Infinite Mile Award for Leadership". I could continue. She has simply been a star.

Except that last week it turned out that among her three degrees from schools in upstate New York, she hasn't received a single one. See

She is not a Dr. She is not a PhD. She hasn't finished a college. She hasn't seen the two colleges out of three at all and she has only attended the third one as a part-time student for a year. Indeed, with much less stress, she achieved much more success: she earned about 3 million USD more than if she didn't cheat. And she has been teaching students how to achieve the same thing with minimal effort. It's not surprising they liked her.

An obvious question is whether anyone has noticed during these 28 years. Is it really that difficult for those thousands of people who have interacted with her to distinguish a PhD from a former torch singer at upstate New York clubs with high school education? Maybe it's not difficult but it is certainly hard to point out that the woman has been a complete fraud because of an outrageous totalitarian ideology called feminism.

Its power is so overwhelming that even if you're the most obvious scholarly zero as you can get, you can not only live with these lies for 28 years but also collect the highest awards on the market, as long as you help to spread certain fashionable lies.

If she were a Harvard dean and not an MIT dean, she wouldn't be fired. Instead, she would simply say that she only hasn't received the degrees because of white male sexist pigs who prevented her from getting them. She would be given the three degrees and as a hero of the feminist struggle against the last remnants of common sense and moral integrity, she would be promoted to the president of the university.

I assure you that comparable although not as striking situations can be found everywhere in the Academia. Thousands of activist women and radical members of other "oppressed" groups - groups that actually control this whole disgusting theater - pretend that they are much more than they are and the whip of political correctness guarantees that they can do so. Feminism and other types of victimism are forms of organized crime.

And that's the memo.


  1. How would have people known that she didn't have a PhD? Her job at the Admission Office didn't require any special competence, and she was probably really good at it.

    The book "Disciplined Minds" by Jeff Schmidt contains stories of both men and women faking degrees and being successful before being unmasked, and argues that it is not very hard to do so.

    I just don't see where feminism enters the story.

  2. Dear Jonathan,

    show me a male dean or a similar-level male university administrator without college who could have faked it for 10+ years (not necessarily 28). I think that saying that it has nothing to do with the "random" fact she was pushing for feminist policies is completely ludicrous.

    I agree that in different fields of human activity, it is both sexes that have been faking their past. In the commercial world, male cases dominate because men domuinate the powerful jobs, too.

    We would fundamentally disagree whether she could have been good at it. The question is what the word "good" means. For me, it is enough to learn - and I've learned that - that she was pushing for special recruitment of women to see that she was corrupt and incompatible with an honest performance in that job, especially if we now know her background.

    I don't believe you're seriously defending it. This is about the whole system of judging individuals and their work, and if someone can judge her work positively even with the data we know today, he or she is just miles away from something that I would find acceptable.

    But think whatever you like, of course.


  3. I agree with Jonathan, where does feminism come into the picture? You are leveling some pretty random accusations, I might even qualify it more as a rant. I do agree that falsifying degrees is a stupid thing to do.

  4. Is it OK to say that until you will show me a similar example in the Academia where a man, e.g. a conservative man, could have lived with that for 28 years, your accusations that I have written anything inaccurate are unsubstantiated and silly attacks against myself?

    Every sane person knows very well how it would work in a different context. If the Dean of Admissions were a conservative man, the first day when he would be named, leftist activists would try to find something against him. If he faked a single diploma, even partially, it would be found the following day, and the second week, he would be fired.

    When it happens with a woman who has no college at all and who's been promoting more women in the Academia in general, nothing happens for 28 years, and if someone like myself just states the obvious fact she has earned millions of dollars beyond what she would have if she had not cheated and all these things happened because it is virtually impossible to question female administrators' qualification, it is myself, not the criminal, who is being attacked.

    I think it's completely disgusting.

    It is totally obvious that no one had the right courage to say that the woman was directing the approach of applicants and the selection process in a wrong direction and that she was unqualified both intellectually as well as morally to influence it. No one had the courage because this kind of fraud is fashionable in similar contexts.

    Even if someone knew, no one would care about these things because she represents a fashionable ideology. It's much bigger a crime if e.g. Prof Richard Lindzen of MIT explains that the catastrophic global warming theory is silly. When a woman cheats for 28 years, it is simply not a problem.

  5. WTF was she thinking! here is an awesome take on the situation from a college student

  6. It's not not just admissions personnel or PhD fraudsters.

    It's possible to get an actual PhD in Economics from MIT and still be a complete moron. Example: Julianne Malveaux. Now president of Bennett College, she was previously a member of the Duke Group of 88 who took out an ad vilifying the lacross team. Her reaction to their innocence: "Those kids don’t deserve an apology... Not from the professors, not from anyone else... I believe that something did happen there. We know that something happened... Something happened to this woman and she deserves a lot of our compassion... I think these guys are bad apples. They may not—you may not be able to prove rape; you may not be able to prove anything. But something did happen there, and it was something that was wrong."

    She's an absolute retard.

    I'd love to know anything about her PhD thesis. I can't find anything about it, even a title, on her Web site.

    Every ethnic and women's studies department ought to be shut. This would allow all their faculty to be terminated in spite of tenure. They contribute nothing. They just spew hatred and diddle themselves.