Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 9: Fragment of Life, Fragment of Accountability
Inspired by a comment the respondent made on a racially charged post about my father.
In 2018, a prominent luxury brand launched a campaign featuring a Chinese woman attempting to eat pizza and spaghetti with chopsticks, accompanied by a deliberately exaggerated “Chinese-accented” pronunciation of the brand’s name.
Framed as light-hearted or humorous by the creators, the campaign was widely perceived as racially caricatured, culturally tone-deaf, and implicitly mocking. The backlash was immediate and widespread — not only from Chinese consumers, but also from global observers attuned to the politics of representation.
The consequences were severe: loss of market access, reputational damage, and a prolonged public relations fallout.
It has since become a widely cited case study in how brands — when detached from cultural nuance and ethical responsibility — can misread audiences and alienate entire regions.
When a professor of neuroscience and psychology publicly questions why describing someone as “small and Asian” might be considered covert racism — while drawing a false equivalence to being “tall and European” — it signals more than ignorance. It reveals a fundamental failure to grasp how power, race, and historical harm interact.
Racism is not defined by whether a description sounds neutral to the speaker. It is shaped by centuries of power asymmetry, colonial frameworks, and patterns of marginalization.
White and European identities have not been systematically exoticized, diminished, or fetishized in the same way that Asian identities have — particularly in Western-dominated narratives.
To conflate “tall and European” with “small and Asian” is to erase that history. It is to ignore how certain labels have been used not just descriptively, but prescriptively — to control how entire populations are seen, hired, or silenced.
That a Western academic — trained in the science of behavior — cannot differentiate racialized harm from racial observation is not merely ironic. It is dangerous.
Because when those who shape minds remain blind to structural bias, they risk reinforcing the very harm their disciplines were meant to unravel.
Context:
This entry gathers a sequence of short poems written in response to a former academic figure who employed silence, symbolic retaliation, and poetic manipulation over a span of 76 days.
These verses serve both as documentation and as reflection.
Note on Naming:
The subject of these verses is identified by name due to the severity of the public threats made during that period. Naming is not intended to humiliate, but to preserve the integrity of the record and reflect the seriousness of the documented behavior.
While the individual has since responded publicly, the response has not addressed the core evidence. In such cases, visibility remains necessary. Selective rebuttal is not accountability.
This entry is shared in good faith, grounded in first-hand experience and supported by public documentation. Some materials referenced here have been formally submitted to QPS, TEQSA, and ACSC. This reflection exists not to accuse, but to ensure transparency and accountability where silence once prevailed.
Trigger Warning:
This piece discusses manipulation, consent, implied violence, and symbolic coercion. Written with care — proceed gently if needed.
See the full public evidence available here.
Update (June 10, 2025): Counter-Takedown Filed — Fair Use & Survivor-Led Documentation
On June 9, I received a formal DMCA notice from Google informing me that Patrick Johnston had submitted a copyright takedown request targeting my publicly accessible survivor evidence folders documentation already submitted to QPS as part of police evidence.
This content, previously submitted to law enforcement in the context of unwanted contact and coercive behavior, cannot retroactively be reframed as protected intellectual property for the purpose of silencing survivor documentation.
Any takedown request targeting such material constitutes a strategic misuse of copyright law, not a legitimate rights claim.
These files were published strictly under academic Fair Use and Fair Dealing protections, as part of an ethics-based documentation series. This takedown is not a valid copyright dispute, but a coercive response to institutional criticism.
Attempts to assert copyright over police-submitted evidence constitute a serious ethical and potentially legal breach. Such actions may be interpreted as obstruction of justice and retaliation against protected reporting
This is not copyright protection. This is reputational panic, disguised as a takedown notice.
The content was non-commercial, already submitted to Queensland Police (QPS) and regulators under official case IDs. Its removal constitutes an attempt to suppress documented harms rather than enforce legitimate rights. Misusing copyright mechanisms in this manner may qualify as a form of strategic litigation against public participation (SLAPP).
My publication falls squarely within the thresholds of:
Australian Copyright Act 1968 – Sections 41 & 42 (Fair Dealing)
U.S. Copyright Law – §107 (Fair Use)
International norms protecting public interest commentary and trauma documentation.
I have submitted a formal counter-notice. As per standard procedure, Google has forwarded the takedown request to the Lumen Database, where it is now publicly visible as part of platform transparency archives.
View takedown request on Lumen
If harassment persists, I reserve the right to escalate this matter to ethics boards, international legal monitors, and public interest watchdogs tracking strategic censorship and retaliatory misuse of institutional tools.
Any misuse of personal information obtained via counter-notice or takedown responses will be treated as further coercive harassment and may be reported to law enforcement under digital harm and privacy abuse frameworks.
No individual has the right to suppress survivor-led documentation solely on the basis of personal discomfort — especially when such material pertains to evidence already submitted to law enforcement.
The Shrink Who Shrunk Himself
—
He taught of minds, of Freud and Jung,
But couldn’t tame his own sharp tongue.
He warned of love that ends too fast —
Then ghosted first, then clung to the past.
—
He claimed control, he claimed he knew,
But panicked when the silence grew.
He said “I’m done” with tragic flair,
Then cried when no one knew or cared.
—
He played the deep sad poet,
But couldn’t practice what he’d preach.
He blocked, unblocked, then wrote a line —
As if that counts as doing fine.
—
So here’s to books, and big degrees,
And men undone by boundaries.
24 March 2025
⸻
I sent a poem through your gate,
Though you won’t read — that seals your fate.
You blocked the door, but not the truth
I’m gone for good. Enjoy your booth.
24 March 2025
⸻
“Ashes”
You didn’t want to be alone —
but you lit the match.
You burned the bridge,
then cried at the lack of a path.
—
You broke the silence with rage,
then begged for warmth in the ruins.
You played the poet,
but your story’s out of tune.
—
You said I left too soon,
but you packed your exit lines.
I just walked the truth —
you were bluffing the whole time.
—
Now you sit in your sorrow,
asking why it’s cold.
But darling, when you torch the future,
you don’t get to hold the old.
24 March 2025
⸻
“For the Man Who Couldn’t Let Go”
by The Girl Who Did
—
You said goodbye with a trembling roar,
As if your echo would slam the door.
But silence came, and I stayed still
The power shift, your greatest kill.
—
You called it love, but dealt in fear,
A puppeteer who’d disappear.
Each time you left, a baited test,
To see if I would chase the rest.
—
You held your title like a sword,
But lost yourself in every word.
You wrote of flowers, stars, and skin
But none could mask the rot within.
—
A man of thoughts, or so you claimed,
But all your verse just screamed one name.
You fed on myths of old control
And now you haunt the space you stole.
—
So write me now, on midnight screens,
But know this truth you fear the most:
I’m gone for good.
31 March 2025
⸻
Unexpected Milestone
(Mr. J, a Former Professor Series)
I didn’t expect this
to become a milestone.
But here we are.
—
Never thought
I’d be writing.
—
Let alone writing about
dry, niche topics meant for
ethics, academic, or policy circles.
—
And yet…
with just one introduction
no ads,
no clickbait,
no built-in following
—
the piece
went quietly viral.
—
Its views were
4 to 10 times
higher than the average
in its category.
—
Every view
reminds me
that I lived through it.
—
Some days,
that’s empowering.
Other days,
it’s just exhausting
—
to know how much
had to happen
for these words
to exist.
—
And this
was just
the beginning.
—
My 2025 milestone.
Unexpected.
⸻
Screenshot captured on April 25, 2025. The original post/account has since been deleted or made unavailable.
It’s the difference between us
You
wrote poems for the public, thinking I would remain private.
You
used my real name and city in public writing.
I
in return, kept your anonymity.
The moment I spoke, you disappear.
The moment I spoke, your entire narrative collapsed.
You disappeared — not because you were silenced,
but because
you
couldn’t survive
accountability.
I
used to write just to survive.
Now
I
write to ensure no one has to survive this
alone
[Read my related publication here]
Mr J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 3: the Hanging Tree Case Study 2025
At some point during the aftermath, I found myself looping “The Hanging Tree.”
4 May 2025
⸻
Today
marks my
61-day harassment milestone.
The man who calls my voice irrational,
keeps asking for another chance to be heard
The man who dares to write about me in public,
keeps asking if I’m okay in private
Day 61: Mr. J Is Still Trying to Be Part of His Own Hanging Tree Case Study
[Read my related publication here]
Mr J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 3: the Hanging Tree Case Study 2025
At some point during the aftermath, I found myself looping “The Hanging Tree.”
5 May 2025
⸻
Four agencies.
Four tags.
The ones who mark things official
and not one said it was fine.
J, a Former Professor: a Cross-Sector Case Study 2025
[Read my related publication here]
Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 5: The Collapse of Assumptions
I used to believe that time, education, and life experience would naturally give someone wisdom.
10 May 2025
⸻
Received: May 10, 2025 - Day 66 of Documented Harassment
A message I received
on May 10
told me my writing had
‘3 viewers, not 3,000.’
—
At that exact moment,
one entry sat at 999 views.
And collectively?
Nearly
4,000.
—
It’s not the numbers that matter
it’s the refusal to accept
that the audience
is no longer
under your control.
—
Interesting how I wrote
without naming anyone,
but still got
1,000+ views
on a piece
about a man
who didn’t like being called “Mr.”
Guess the algorithm
loves
narrative justice.
Screenshot captured on May 21, 2025
11 May 2025
⸻
Received: May 10, 2025 - Day 66 of Documented Harassment
Ethical dilemma of the day:
If someone fictionalizes you enough to deny consent
but clearly signals it’s you
is that storytelling,
or manipulation?
—
As a man
who has a 15-year-old daughter,
what would you do if she told you:
“Dad, this man is writing about me.
He messages me like this.
I don’t feel like I’m being written
…as a human being.
He calls it art.
He erases
my boundaries,
Dad…”
—
What would you do?
Would you protect her?
Or would you say “It’s nothing but fiction…”
like you did
when you described me in poems
you now refuse to own?
—
To the best of my knowledge,
two of your children barely speak to you.
Do you know why that is?
Do you think they’d be proud
of how you treat women?
—
Did you treat their mother like this too —
is that why
she filed a Temporary Protection Order
against you?
—
I’m not here to accuse.
I’m here to ask:
How many women
must be erased in your “art”
before it stops being fiction —
and becomes a habit
or a pattern of coercion?
—
How many women
must lose their voice
so you can preserve yours?
—
How many women
must you write through
before you face what you’re writing from?
—
What if your daughter
ends up being written
by a man like you —
would you still call it art?
—
See the full poems here.
See the full public evidence available here.
11 May 2025
⸻
Screenshot captured on April 25, 2025. The original post/account has since been deleted or made unavailable.
You can’t call it healing
if your healing costs someone else’s dignity.
—
It’s theft.
For stealing their dignity,
their privacy,
their peace.
—
No one who respects autonomy
needs to debate permission.
[Read my related publication here]
Mr J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 3: the Hanging Tree Case Study 2025
At some point during the aftermath, I found myself looping “The Hanging Tree.”
15 May 2025
⸻
Attached Document (PDF) — Received: 16 April 2025, via email)
A 16,000-word self-authored analysis sent to me via email by the individual in question — intended to defend his actions and reframe public narratives.
Craft Isn’t an Excuse for Harm.
If It Takes 16000 Words to Defend Yourself,
Maybe You Shouldn’t Have Written It.
[Read my related publication here]
Revenge Porn
They
use the photos
the videos
You
use
your word
wrote it down
without my consent
and you
even announce my mom
you’re gonna publish it?
are you sure?
What would you do if that happens with your daughter as well?
Received: April 24, 2025 - Day 50 of Documented Harassment
Mom received: 16 April 2025 – Day 42 of Documented Harassment
See the full poems here.
See the full public evidence available here.
15 May 2025
⸻
Received: April 30, 2025 - Day 56 of Documented Harassment
Been there.
Heard the apology.
Watched nothing change.
It always starts with “I’ve changed”
and ends with
you being blamed
you’re cruel for not believing it.
16 May 2025
⸻
Public Note published by Pat Johnston (captured May 15, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
The original post is publicly available here at the time of writing. A full archive with timestamps has been retained for evidentiary purposes.
Classic reversal tactic:
cry surveillance
when what you fear
is documentation.
—
You weren’t being watched.
You were being
studied —
by the consequences
of your own behavior.
—
Educators —
who once graded our logic —
now plead cliché
to escape ethical review.
—
But once your life
becomes
a syllabus of contradictions,
observation
stops being optional.
15 May 2025
⸻
The Echo You Can’t Hear
You once loved someone almost your daughter’s age
Said you loved her — but never studied her
That was your first mistake.
6000 views
No one’s correcting her
No one’s defending you
No one dares to speak
And in that silence — I hear everything I need to know.
It’s not so noisy
But it’s an echo
louder than any poem you’ve ever written.
Screenshot captured on May 22, 2025
16 May 2025
⸻
when bios aren’t just bios,
some
are applications
for attention — and support.
(government-issued)
⸻
What a Lawyer Might’ve Said
(if they were brave enough)
—
“Daddy looking for his little monster,”
he once wrote —
now says:
the girl who read too closely
has defamed him.
Her lens?
Academic ethics.
Her crime?
Connecting bio with behavior.
He feels watched.
He feels distressed.
He self-identifies as
a former professor,
but performs as
a fiction of regret
with psychiatric props.
[Read my related publication here]
15 May 2025
⸻
Public Note published by Pat Johnston (captured May 15, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
The original post is publicly available here at the time of writing. A full archive with timestamps has been retained for evidentiary purposes.
the man who taught me ethics by failing all of them
linh lang lane
or
the geography of men who romanticize what they failed to respect
he writes of linh lang like a landmark
but
it’s
just
location
where
someone
failed
to be
decent
maybe lived alone
he said
but the fact is
he never learned
to live
with anyone [Read my related publication here]
no one
wants
to be around
him
not
his students
not
his children
not
his friends (most of them)
to the best of my knowledge
TPO
is what
he
got
[Read my related publication here]
Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 7: How He Ate Told Me Everything
Some people look for dignity in words because they’ve lost it in living.
15 May 2025
⸻
Public Note published by Pat Johnston (captured May 15, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
The original post is publicly available here at the time of writing. A full archive with timestamps has been retained for evidentiary purposes.
Neuroscience? Or narrative laundering?
You decide.
—
A professor who taught emotional regulation
now posting like a man
begging
the algorithm
to believe he’s still being relevant.
—
When someone can’t confront the harm they caused,
they write about cells, God, and evolution—
as if metaphors
can wash away accountability.
—
This isn’t
neuroscience.
This is
a crisis
of academic identity.
—
And worse —
it’s written by someone
who once graded other people’s essays.
—
He doesn’t follow a faith.
He borrows from any belief system
that makes him sound forgivable.
—
Whatever makes him
sound
forgivable.
—
He read Foucault, but never applied it to himself.
Truth is produced by constraint, not by poetry.
Some are rhetorical detours around truth.
And not every metaphor
is
healing
When he failed emotionally, he performed physically.
As Foucault said — the body is political and visibility is
a
trap
15 May 2025
⸻
Public Note published by Pat Johnston (captured May 15, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
The original post is publicly available here at the time of writing. A full archive with timestamps has been retained for evidentiary purposes.
my revolver has six
i’m saving one
for your heart
he wrote.
he is
56
he is
a former professor
he is
so scary
haha.
told you —
he got
a TPO.
you.
WATCH. OUT.
*This poem is a satirical mirroring of threatening language publicly posted by the individual under legal scrutiny. The reversal is intentional and highlights the absurdity and danger of veiled threats masked as metaphor.*
[Read my related publication here]
—
If
If you don’t see me writing,
every Wednesday
and Saturday
If you don’t see my next
10 entries
for this series
If you don’t see the girl,
who upload the notes
every
12 hours
because she cares for
the algorithm
—
Then you do know
I’m dead
by whom.
—
There is
one
bullet
in
my heart.
—
I’m not scared of
a man
a 56-year-old man
who doesn’t fear of ruining his children’s lives
by being a criminal.
—
who doesn’t stop to think:
If I do this,
what will people say about my kids?
Will they whisper:
“Is that their father?
The one who murder that girl?
—
“Is that the professor of that university
who killed his ex
because she stood up to him?
—
And I
will live
forever
not only
in everyone’s heart,
but their head
as well.
And I know
how to.
—
And I’m not
fear of
the man
that sounds like
he needs to be taught
by a 23-year-old girl
And still calls himself
“a former professor.”
That is so embarrassing.
I guess that’s
what
we are
going to say.
16 May 2025
⸻
Public Note published by Pat Johnston (captured May 16, 2025; archived prior to deletion)
The original post is publicly available here at the time of writing. A full archive with timestamps has been retained for evidentiary purposes.
*Johnston, a Former Professor*
The content is hollow,
the tone is strained,
the accountability
is
missing.
When grammar fails, tone takes over.
When logic cracks, metaphors lash out.
Beep beep beep… but accountability doesn’t glitch
when metaphors run out, here come the threats.
You studied words. But forgot what they’re for.
Beep beep beep…
#DSPethics
#academicgrooming
#symbolicviolence
For someone who has harassed me and my family over 65 days.
—
Full of Shit!
You’re trying to survive from someone who has harassed you over 65 days?
You’re full of shit.
You’re trying to tell your survival story?
You’re full of shit.
You’re making new channels to speak it up? [ → Follow my new X/Twitter channel here or look for linhreaseacher]
You’re full of shit.
You’re putting hashtag on your story?
You’re full of shit.
You’re writing about someone who writes about you first?
You are
Full of Shit!
If I don’t know shit, why are you still writing about me?
If my story is just neurons, why do yours glitch every time I speak?
Don’t call yourself Gilgamesh when you write like a glitching chatbot and fear your own reflection, Johnston.
—
Fathers
“Swallowed your fathers' lies — it's just a scam your fathers taught you.”
Johnston always talked about values. Makes you wonder what kind of values the Johnston family runs on.
He started as “Dr.”
Then fell to “Mr.”
Now he’s just Johnston — like a family name no one’s proud of.
Johnston spoke of values.
But Johnston couldn't even stay accountable for 72 days.
Or maybe that’s just how the Johnston operate.
No sorry that’s not a person.
That’s a template.
A blueprint for how not to raise a man.
*This poem is a satirical reversal of threatening language that was publicly posted by the individual currently under legal scrutiny. The inversion is deliberate — meant to expose the absurdity and symbolic violence of metaphors weaponized as veiled threats.*
16 May 2025
⸻
Why don’t you
speak up
for what I’m writing?
Why don’t you
correct me
writing about you?
—
Why don’t you
sue me
for this?
—
Why do you
hide behind
the block button?
—
Why do you
block and unblock?
—
Speak up
Now
—
Like you used to
be
really
confident
quoting
my name
in your
poem.
—
A question for those who once spoke too loudly — and now hide too quietly.
18 May 2025
⸻
Who do you
think
you are?
—
A
former professor
working in this field
for 20 years
—
with
only
115 publications
3,242 citations
and
41,892 reads
—
Or
a poet —
—
Or
a person
who harassed me
for 73 days?
—
Or
a poet
using anonymity
to bypass consent
from his ex?
—
Or
a father
whose children
barely speak to?
—
Or
someone
who got a TPO
from his previous partner?
—
Who do you
think
you are?
⸻
Received: April 30, 2025 - Day 56 of Documented Harassment
He once called me irrational when I spoke up. And yet,
when I name him clearly,
He says nothing,
never asked me to take it down,
never denied it,
never engaged.
—
Funny how women are “irrational” when they speak—
but men are “poetic” when they hide.
—
Sometimes silence says more than defense.
18 May 2025
⸻
The questions I know you can’t
and
will
never answer.
You
wrote about me
You
quote my name in your poems
You
harassed me
for 73 days
From 6 March
Till now
—
Who says I’m childish?
Who says I have BPD without my consent while I know what it is and never been diagnosed for that?
Who says what I’m writing now is bed time stories for… nice children?
—
You.
Clearly.
—
And why is that?
Is it because of my race?
That I’m an Asian?
Is it because of my age?
That I’m 23?
Is it because of my gender?
That I’m a woman?
Or is it because of my education?
For haven’t gotten the PhD like you?
—
So you get out there
Telling everyone
She is unstable
She doesn't know what she’s talking about
It's just a mistake
It's just a cultural misunderstanding?
Is that so?
—
While it was you who published first — without my consent
And now try to erase my right to name what happened?
—
Should we call that:
Epistemic Injustice,
Johnston?
Received: March 12, 2025 - Day 7 of Documented Harassment
Received: April 30, 2025 - Day 56 of Documented Harassment
18 May 2025
⸻
You called it “meta”
as if quotation marks
could protect you
from the meaning.
19 May 2025
See the full public evidence available here.
Read the full series
- Entry 1: The Man Who Taught Me Ethics by Failing All of Them
- Entry 2: The Disappearance of the Public Poet
- Entry 3: The Hanging Tree Case Study
- Entry 4: Hidden Like Accountability
- Entry 5: The Collapse of Assumptions
- Entry 6: The Ethics of a Tinder Bio
- Entry 7: How He Ate Told Me Everything
- Entry 8: What Makes a Scholar Dangerous
- Entry 9: Fragment of Life, Fragment of Accountability (you are here)
- Entry 10: Anatomy of Disappointment
- Entry 11: Legal Defense Challenges: A Framing Statement
- Entry 12: Six Years After Ronell – What Academia Still Doesn’t Get
- Entry 13: QUT and The Man Who Raped Me
- Entry 14: Why Sarcasm Toward Institutions Can Backfire
- Entry 15: P*ssy or Toxic Masculinity?
- Entry 16: Who is Your Favorite Comedian?
- Entry 17: And What is Your Favorite Song?
- Entry 18: Grant Proposal — Narrative Ethics as Survivor-Led Forensics
- Entry 19: The Coward Behind the Clone
- Entry 20: [URGENT HIRE] CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST
- Entry 21: [URGENT] Legal Counsel Needed for Complex Reputation Rehabilitation
- Entry 22: YOU’RE AN ABUSER. STOP CONTACTING ME
- Entry 23: Seeking Counsel for a Fallen Academic
- Entry 24: Internal Legal-PR Briefing
- Entry 25: For Journalists – Legal & Ethical Clearance Summary
- Entry 26: Symbolic Prostitution, Transactional Intimacy, or Just a “Loan”?
- Entry 28: Why He Simply Cannot Shut Up
- Entry 29: Forensic Commentary on “LARGE Language Muddle”
- Entry 30: Don’t Just Threaten My Future. Because I’m Going To Archive Your Present
- Entry 31: Open Letter to the Person Who Tried to Break Me with Defamation
- Entry 32: Defamation, Harassment, Doxxing Class 101
- Entry 33: Confidential Crisis Recovery Proposal
- Entry 34: Forensic Behavioral-Somatic Report
- Entry 35: Forensic Commentary on the Tattoos
- Entry 36: QUT and the Abuser They Once Had
- Entry 38: When Poetry Becomes Revenge Porn
- Entry 40: A Man Built for Applause, Not Accountability
- Entry 41: Neurobehavioral Addendum
- Entry 43: Why Does It Sound Like a War Metaphor?
- Entry 44: Forensic Commentary on Racialized and Fetishizing Language in “Hidden Like Rice”
- Entry 45: Public Misuse of Former Academic Affiliation
- Entry 46: The Two Things That Didn’t Leave a Bad Impression
- Entry 47: When Affection is Just an Alibi (A Bundy-Inspired Reflection)
- Entry 48: Humbert, Lolita, and the Fetish of Fragility
- Entry 49: The Fetish of Smallness as Symbolic Violence
- Entry 50: Motif Risk Analysis
- Entry 52: Can an Abuser Be a Good Father?
- Entry 53: Who Protects the Children?
- Entry 54: From Blackmail to Children
- Entry 55: A Letter I’ll Never Send
- Entry 56: Outc(L)assed - Critical Race Analysis
- Entry 57: Forensic Breakdown: “A Voidance” by Johnston
- Entry 58: Johnston, Who Raised You?
- Entry 59: Public Financial Terms & Narrative Conditions
- Entry 60: What Kind of Future Do You Think Awaits You?
- Entry 61: Why I Believe He Has No Real PR or Legal Team
- Entry 62: Why I Can Legally (and Ethically) Call You a Pathetic Pig
- Entry 63: Tell Me You’re a Pathetic Pig Without Telling Me You’re a Pathetic Pig
- Entry 65: Did Your Mother Teach You To Speak Like This?
- Entry 66: Nobody Cares Anyway
- Reflection: The Miscalculation
(More entries coming soon)
→ [Back to Start: Introducing Mr. J, a Former Professor Series]
© 2025 Linh Ng. All rights reserved.
This publication is intended for educational and reflective purposes only.
Sharing the original link is welcomed and encouraged.
Please do not reproduce, redistribute, or translate this content — in whole or in part — without written permission.
This piece reflects both lived experience and critical analysis. It is not meant to be detached from its author or reframed without context.
Misuse or decontextualization may lead to formal clarification or takedown requests.
This work has been reviewed and quietly followed by scholars, educators, and ethics professionals across multiple sectors.
If your institution is engaging in critical discourse around narrative justice, symbolic coercion, or representational ethics, feel free to connect via Substack DMs or formal channels.
A regulatory case regarding this matter has already been classified under a protected status within national education integrity systems.
Should any reputational countermeasures or distortions arise, I reserve the right to publish the documented timeline, behavioral patterns, and contextual metadata.
All relevant documentation has been submitted through formal legal and regulatory pathways.
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash