A few thoughts below about this anonymous person threatening two female academics in my area. Roopsha for complaining about discrimination at Perdue where she was denied tenure (for speaking up?) and Talia for vocally supporting her.
I think this person is awful and feel for both Roopsha and Talia for receiving such threats. Opinion aside, they are pointing to potential problems in the tenure system and potential harms that can come from complaining about sexism and discrimination.
This could be valuable information. From an information theoretic perspective, information identifying the reasons for systems not to operate as we want them is valuable in learning how to improve the systems. With that said, what are the shortages this person identified?
First, they are describing a potentially problematic structure communities that can cause major harm in speaking up. Namely, small communities with lots of friendships (conflicts of interest) and how in such structure criticising powerful entities could result in ostracism.
Roopsha herself in giving tips on choosing a good dept. "[...]Can you identify your advocates [...] advocates are bold, savvy, well-respected [...] will speak up for you." So from both, I take: powerful advocates can help, powerful opponents can harm. Sooo...
What happens when the powerful well-respected discriminate? There comes my (least favourite yet unfortunately heavily experienced) part advising how to react and what will be tolerated: small criticism can result in change, heavy criticism will cause you harm. Truth to it?
So are we inevitably screwed if we are in a place where we are a minority, powerful entities act in discriminatory ways and they are (or are closely connected to) those who review our performance? If so, does this point to systematic problems that need to be addressed?
If we won't experience harm from speaking up against powerful discriminatory behaviour, how could this be guaranteed (not merely claimed) both to us as minorities and to potential aggressors. How can we create a culture where radical necessary changes are possible?
Don't I just love the "fighting the system is hopeless for those like you". With no due respect, those like us, have made it impossible for those like you to use their real name without fearing repetitional harm. We've done well. But I'll entertain you rude fellow.
Fighting a discriminatory system where the powerful well-connected feel invincible (not you who cannot use your real name), can benefit from powerful allies beyond those being discriminated. So when people do speak up. Listen, engage, be an ally, advocate for change.
Finally, let's try to address for conflict of interests and look for systematic ways to ensure that academia is not a popularity contest. Those evaluating our work should be independent from those we interact with daily and have friendships or complaints about.
This is particularly important in small communities that are heavily interconnected. One shouldn't need advocates to succeed, especially when the potential advocate population is skewed (and occasionally skrewed). We should be evaluated based solely on our performance.
I think we should try to learn from people who oppose speaking up and point to where they think the system supports this. It will give us the largest leaps in examining what they say and learning how to change things if there is any truth to it.
That said, it gives me great joy that this person decided to stay anonymous. They feel like an isolated node in our community in expressing such opinion. They do not feel powerful nor supported. Sexism becoming isolated makes me happy.