Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
Thread gallery
55
SexRealistic · 16/11/2025 12:00

Boiledbeetle · 16/11/2025 09:57

As its breakfast time (yes I know it's 10 am but I've only just got up)...

Third pig: What was that Debbie? You’re not actually a professor?

Seond lipstick 💄 pig: she was hardly showing she was sharp as tacks with that fibro/ medicine Melarkey.

OP posts:
DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 12:03

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 11:30

I guess the academic institutions probably weren't paying much attention to ETs? Boyd seems to have been in a bit of a sweet spot where she was high enough profile to get the odd gushing press article and be seen as a safe pair of hands here, but not high enough for people to actively follow her or notice much about what she did. She's also old enough for it not to be odd that she doesn't use much social media in her work.

She's also old enough for it not to be odd that she doesn't use much social media in her work.

Unless she actually was an academic, as Professor implies. Universities were very early adopters. The JANET academic internet went live in the mid 1980s and was used by anyone carrying out research. If she was a professor she'd have had an online presence of some sort for between 30 and 40 years.

BetaTwoAgony · 16/11/2025 12:07

It must just be so weird going around being called Professor, seeing your name on a website prefaced by Dr, sitting in a seat with a sign with Professor in front of you....

All while knowing you are not those things.

For decades.

KittyWilkinson · 16/11/2025 12:10

Retired academic here, and Dean is correct, I was online from late eighties. Lots of references online to me going back decades. So her age is no reason for a lack of profile.

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 12:11

DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 12:03

She's also old enough for it not to be odd that she doesn't use much social media in her work.

Unless she actually was an academic, as Professor implies. Universities were very early adopters. The JANET academic internet went live in the mid 1980s and was used by anyone carrying out research. If she was a professor she'd have had an online presence of some sort for between 30 and 40 years.

Well sure, but presumably the university who gave her the visiting professorship all those years ago didn't think they were appointing her as an academic. And I can believe there's nobody whose job it is to actively monitor what people who were once a visiting professor are calling themselves a couple of decades later.

Cailleach1 · 16/11/2025 12:11

DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 10:51

It's the usual Irish language version of William.

Indeed, a compete name in itself. Both different versions of the German Wilhelm (Normans bringing it into popularity with their arrival in Britain and Ireland).

Just like the Irish Micheál is not just a variation in spelling of Michael. It is the Irish version of Michael. Pronounced ‘Mee Hawl’. Similar to Michel (french) and Mikhail (Russian) version.

weegielass · 16/11/2025 12:13

What I'm struggling with is whether anything can actually be done about the fake professor thing? Not only in terms of stripping her of it, but also the fact that due dilgence was not done by the tribunal to ascertain she was who she said she was. Also can anything be done about the ET judge threat to remove MD oath?

DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 12:14

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 12:11

Well sure, but presumably the university who gave her the visiting professorship all those years ago didn't think they were appointing her as an academic. And I can believe there's nobody whose job it is to actively monitor what people who were once a visiting professor are calling themselves a couple of decades later.

Raising speculation as to why she was appointed visiting professor, what if anything did it pay her, who was she associated with. Way back in 1990, when NI was a very different place.

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 12:15

KittyWilkinson · 16/11/2025 12:10

Retired academic here, and Dean is correct, I was online from late eighties. Lots of references online to me going back decades. So her age is no reason for a lack of profile.

Not for an actual academic, no, but my point was that the uni will clearly know full well she isn't one and have made her a visiting professor on a different basis. The discussion there is about the academic institutions having her on their radar- my point is I don't think they will, and that her lack of online profile isn't at all sus for someone of that age who isn't an academic.

SexRealistic · 16/11/2025 12:19

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 16/11/2025 10:57

If she was an academic professor with a publication record then deletions wouldn't be possible. She'd be in Google Scholar and the big research publishers' databases. If she isn't an academic professor then she might not have that.

And apart from that she may not have much online profile. It was an extreme allegation and I would have wanted to check it out very thoroughly before raising it in court. Unless NC had already been given evidence of deletions (e.g from archive sites) I'd want her to do a thorough trawl before making that kind of allegation.

Edited

Just to be clear she’s schroedingers professor.

Naomi was kind and said you have a low digit footprint, it’s unusual for a professor.

However since the woman left school at 16 and did no further education there was a low profile because the thing never existed.

Naomi didn’t accuse, she queried.

OP posts:
DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 12:19

Did the University of Ulster produce a paper yearbook listing employees and associates, activities and achievements? If so it should be in the stacks of sundry libraries, and might explain what was going on.

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 12:21

DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 12:14

Raising speculation as to why she was appointed visiting professor, what if anything did it pay her, who was she associated with. Way back in 1990, when NI was a very different place.

Very much so!

SionnachRuadh · 16/11/2025 12:22

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 12:15

Not for an actual academic, no, but my point was that the uni will clearly know full well she isn't one and have made her a visiting professor on a different basis. The discussion there is about the academic institutions having her on their radar- my point is I don't think they will, and that her lack of online profile isn't at all sus for someone of that age who isn't an academic.

I think that's especially true for the UU, who regularly appoint people from industry to be visiting professors. Unless that person does something to put themselves on the UU's radar, I wouldn't expect there to be anyone checking up on former visiting professors to see if they're styling themselves professor years later.

It's a similar thing for reappointments. There will usually be some due diligence done, but that will be in terms of seeing if the appointee has been involved in a scandal or has dodgy tweets or such like. I doubt if anyone would think to check academic qualifications, especially if it's a role where there's no formal qualification required in the first place.

It's very easy for some things to slip through the cracks of bureaucracy.

Largesso · 16/11/2025 12:23

I totally agree that this is the fairest read:

‘Indeed. I think the best possible case for DB's credibility is that she in fact knows nothing about academia, did have a brief visiting professorship (that could be checked by a FOI to the institution), and doesn't understand how professor titles work.’

And because she doesn’t understand she’s done anything wrong she is outraged at it being called into question.

I wonder if anyone will be setting her right over the weekend and what she might do with that knowledge.

The less fair is that she has accrued an enormous sense of herself over the years, faked the title here and there, enjoyed how it feels wearing it and feels she deserves the title even though she made it up in the first instance.

The less fair version chimes with the aberrant use of Dr some have found in, I think, companies house. You are never offered that title as a visitor, of course, so she has to have selected that on the form’s pull down menu and, perhaps because no one called her on it, never corrected it and then thought why not go for Professor although it is clear from the digging above that she didn’t enter that from the honorific pull down options but in the box for ‘name’, first accidentally putting it in the middle name box and then in the fist name box before Deborah.

I’m beginning to think she might not even have had a visiting professorship formally speaking but had been, perhaps, invited in to give a talk or offer mentorship and someone referred to her that way.

it is interesting in that publication on mentorship someone found that she is named Prof Debbie. So perhaps a casual use by students adopting Americanisms became what she imagined a right to use.

BettyBooper · 16/11/2025 12:23

DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 12:14

Raising speculation as to why she was appointed visiting professor, what if anything did it pay her, who was she associated with. Way back in 1990, when NI was a very different place.

You raise a good point.

The Prof has been ET panel member since 1990 (is that correct?)
She didn't start to use 'Prof' until c 2004 (earliest evidence is 2004 and 2002 and before she wasn't).
So she started using Prof when she was already a panel member.

So they must have changed her title at some point.
Did they check or did they just go on what she said?

TriesNotToBeCynical · 16/11/2025 12:29

DeanElderberry · 16/11/2025 10:40

Thanks. I'd seen that, and then a few people referred to him as Micheal which sounds and reverberates differently.

For those of us outside of an Irish context that may be just a problem with spelling.

DrBlackbird · 16/11/2025 12:31

thirdfiddle · 16/11/2025 01:09

"Cunningham told the court it was difficult to find much information online about Professor Boyd including her academic specialism."

Is this a polite lawyerly way of saying we know you're not a real professor, now are you going to get out of the way or make us spell it out?

Out of curiosity, I tried looking up professor Deborah Boyd and found nothing related to this Deborah. Anyone else?

Edited to say I’m catching up with the thread and see further info has come to light.

SternlyMatthews · 16/11/2025 12:33

SionnachRuadh · 16/11/2025 12:22

I think that's especially true for the UU, who regularly appoint people from industry to be visiting professors. Unless that person does something to put themselves on the UU's radar, I wouldn't expect there to be anyone checking up on former visiting professors to see if they're styling themselves professor years later.

It's a similar thing for reappointments. There will usually be some due diligence done, but that will be in terms of seeing if the appointee has been involved in a scandal or has dodgy tweets or such like. I doubt if anyone would think to check academic qualifications, especially if it's a role where there's no formal qualification required in the first place.

It's very easy for some things to slip through the cracks of bureaucracy.

I knew someone who went to UU (might have been Queens) in the 1960's, whose endless store of anecdotes included the observation that there was a high bar for dismissal of a lecturer: 'gross moral turpitude', & for a professor : 'gross and persistent moral turpitude'.

SionnachRuadh · 16/11/2025 12:34

BettyBooper · 16/11/2025 12:23

You raise a good point.

The Prof has been ET panel member since 1990 (is that correct?)
She didn't start to use 'Prof' until c 2004 (earliest evidence is 2004 and 2002 and before she wasn't).
So she started using Prof when she was already a panel member.

So they must have changed her title at some point.
Did they check or did they just go on what she said?

It's entirely possible that she started using Prof, was listed for a case, used the title in correspondence or conversation when being booked, and whatever junior civil servant was dealing with her said "aye seems legit" and changed the title on the records.

This would be going back to when the Tribunals were in Waring Street, not Killymeal House, and most of the records would have been on paper back then. It was an outfit with a small staff and there were several hundred lay panel members.

And once something is written down in the public sector, it stays written down and nobody challenges it unless a problem arises.

BettyBooper · 16/11/2025 12:34

DrBlackbird · 16/11/2025 12:31

Out of curiosity, I tried looking up professor Deborah Boyd and found nothing related to this Deborah. Anyone else?

Edited to say I’m catching up with the thread and see further info has come to light.

Edited

She's listed as Prof DB in official government documents relating to her giving evidence to Parliament in 2004.

SexRealistic · 16/11/2025 12:35

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 11:41

It just seems so stupid of DB because it's not like she needed to be a proper professor for this role. Having O-levels only and still being successful enough in business for a university to want to associate with her on that basis sounds impressive all by itself. I could certainly see how that would sound good in an application process. Diversity of background, recognition of multiple routes to expertise, that kind of thing.

I haven’t seen evidence that she applied to the role with it ar Tribunal. But she definitely adopted it along the way - along with Dr one year.

Maybe tried it on for size but liked Prof more.

OP posts:
KittyWilkinson · 16/11/2025 12:35

weegielass · 16/11/2025 12:13

What I'm struggling with is whether anything can actually be done about the fake professor thing? Not only in terms of stripping her of it, but also the fact that due dilgence was not done by the tribunal to ascertain she was who she said she was. Also can anything be done about the ET judge threat to remove MD oath?

Professor is not a protected job title afaik.
So it's iffy, but not illegal to use it, like saying you are a lawyer. Lawyer is a generic word and not regulated, so anyone can say that.
Solicitors and barristers and paralegals are regulated.

If she was claiming, for example, that she was a school teacher, then that's a regulated profession, and she would be on more dodgy ground.

I suppose an approach could be made to one of the named institutions to ask them to clarify her status.
UK regulated professions and their regulators - GOV.UK

I don't know if her use of Professor within a tribunal setting could be deemed misconduct or malfeasance in a public office, it's a high bar to prove that.

Especially if her defence was that no one ever asked her for evidence of her Professorship, or told her that using it wasn't on.

But the cat is out of the bag with her now and the rest of us know she's likely to be a phoney.

As for the Judge, it's possible to raise questions about her behaviour, often it's used as a way to take matters to appeal.

UK regulated professions and their regulators

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/professions-regulated-by-law-in-the-uk-and-their-regulators/uk-regulated-professions-and-their-regulators

BettyBooper · 16/11/2025 12:36

SionnachRuadh · 16/11/2025 12:34

It's entirely possible that she started using Prof, was listed for a case, used the title in correspondence or conversation when being booked, and whatever junior civil servant was dealing with her said "aye seems legit" and changed the title on the records.

This would be going back to when the Tribunals were in Waring Street, not Killymeal House, and most of the records would have been on paper back then. It was an outfit with a small staff and there were several hundred lay panel members.

And once something is written down in the public sector, it stays written down and nobody challenges it unless a problem arises.

Yep. I think that's a likely scenario.

Lunde · 16/11/2025 12:36

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 16/11/2025 11:30

I guess the academic institutions probably weren't paying much attention to ETs? Boyd seems to have been in a bit of a sweet spot where she was high enough profile to get the odd gushing press article and be seen as a safe pair of hands here, but not high enough for people to actively follow her or notice much about what she did. She's also old enough for it not to be odd that she doesn't use much social media in her work.

I think it's significant that nobody really questioned it - it sounds as though she wasn't around academic circles enough for it to be noticed and non-academics never thought to question her "Professor" title.

I is really, really odd though - academics have been loading publications and conference papers online and into search engines for decades. It is pretty unusual that even a visiting professor hasn't got their name on anything - collaborated with research, put their name to a research grant application, co-authored an article or even presented a paper at a conference.

I knew visiting professors who planned holidays around presenting (the same) conference papers at different international locations.

ICouldHaveCheckedFirst · 16/11/2025 12:39

BetaTwoAgony · 16/11/2025 11:24

The mad thing being that she's worked and networked in the same small geographical area and moved in the exact same circles with the same people for decades.

The academic institutions themselves must have had her on their radar a bit and could have challenged her.

Her own family might possibly have said, 'how are you a Dr and a Professor when you have never attended a course or sent off an assignment or taught a lecture or been to uni or got a degree or published any articles or carried out any research?' or something.

There is no way this happened in a vacuum at all.

Most people outside academia would be hard pushed to explain how you come to be appointed a professor, and what it entails. So they might just be impressed, and would be unlikely to question her further.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread