Some administrators and professors and I were talking about all the recent events going on, and I feel I may have participated a bit much in the dialogue and now feel I may have gotten on some people's bad side. If I email one or more of these profs. / admins, I risk drawing attention to a non-issue - there's no proof that any of them were even bothered by the dialogue, yet I feel uneasy about the current events being discussed so openly inside of a school building.

What do you recommend that I do? Be proactive and send an email and apologize in the event that I may have misspoken about something -- or keep my mouth shut and don't draw any more attention to that conversation?

  • 7
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because I don't think there's anything specific to academia about it. If you've said something truly offensive or outrageous, then apologizing would be worthwhile. If you've simply expressed common opinions a little too vigorously, you can probably forget about it and move on without further comment. Either way, I don't think there's anything unique about an academic environment that requires special handling. – Anonymous Mathematician Jan 31 '17 at 5:25
  • 1
    @anonymousmathematician I think there is something interesting about this question. I have seen my colleagues revise their opinions on people rather quickly based on their political views. A heartfelt apology might go a long way, although I agree that the original post by OP is too vague to judge anything at all. – Sana Jan 31 '17 at 6:11
  • 3
    Do you work at Trump University? – Ambicion Jan 31 '17 at 8:14
  • 3
    "Group think" mentality in academia is common -presenting ideas that oppose the norm in academe are not held in high regard, or even within the framework of a friendly acknowledgement. If folks in academe believe you are part of Trump support, you could be marginalized. Folks in academe, in my experience, are more petty than those in the private sector. Because of tenure, academicians are more likely to take action against people they feel represent inferior viewpoints. That said, write an "apology" of sorts. – M11293 Jan 31 '17 at 12:04
  • Impossible to say anything useful without knowing how far you went, and your observations of just how uncomfortable some people looked. // You might try Workplace SE -- but with more info supplied in the question. – aparente001 Feb 20 '17 at 15:24

They say three topics are banned from polite after-dinner conversation: religion, politics and sport. There are good reasons for that.

It can be said that the same holds for workplace. Academia is, in this sense, a slightly different animal in that at times it is a place where people vigorously express their opinion, and proudly so. This does not prevent occasional ganging-ups of opinion groups against people which are not seen to conform to the currently prevalent sentiment or simple are considered an out group.

Unless you must fear that the latter is the case (and with highly professional people, such as senior academic staff, I would start from the assumption that the threshold is relatively high for that), consider what's done is done. Let it go.

Remember Churchill's dictum: a fanatic is someone who won't change his opinion and can't change the topic.

| improve this answer | |
  • 3
    Afaik, it''s sex, not sport ;-) I've always disagreed with that saying, though. – Massimo Ortolano Jan 31 '17 at 6:51
  • 2
    I should say it is subsumed under sport :-) As for disagreeing with the saying, different cultures are likely to have different taboo topics (I definitely know some countries in Europe which will have a different set thereof). Avoiding the Apocalyptic Three however are a good rule of thumb for the Anglo-Saxon culture. – Captain Emacs Jan 31 '17 at 7:02

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.