Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Have Paper On Gender Bias Rejected Because They're Both Women
ferrisoxide.com writes: A paper co-authored by researcher fellow Dr. Fiona Ingleby and evolutionary biologist Dr. Megan Head — on how gender differences affect the experiences that PhD students have when moving into post-doctoral work — was rejected by peer-reviewed PLoS Onebecause they didn't ask a man for help.
A (male) peer reviewer for the journal suggested that the scientists find male co-authors, to prevent "ideologically biased assumptions." The same reviewer also provided his own ironically biased advice, when explaining that women may have fewer articles published because men's papers "are indeed of a better quality, on average," "just as, on average, male doctoral students can probably run a mile race a bit faster." PLoS One has apologized, saying, "We have formally removed the review from the record, and have sent the manuscript out to a new editor for re-review. We have also asked the Academic Editor who handled the manuscript to step down from the Editorial Board and we have removed the referee from our reviewer database."
A (male) peer reviewer for the journal suggested that the scientists find male co-authors, to prevent "ideologically biased assumptions." The same reviewer also provided his own ironically biased advice, when explaining that women may have fewer articles published because men's papers "are indeed of a better quality, on average," "just as, on average, male doctoral students can probably run a mile race a bit faster." PLoS One has apologized, saying, "We have formally removed the review from the record, and have sent the manuscript out to a new editor for re-review. We have also asked the Academic Editor who handled the manuscript to step down from the Editorial Board and we have removed the referee from our reviewer database."
This is the same dross men have to go through when speaking towards gender, so why should it be different for ladies?
Welcome to equality. You made your bed, now lie in it.
you are modded funny, and make a joke, when men ARE privileged
as proven by the story you are commenting other
yet everyone is laughing
so the problem is real, because everyone thinks the subject is a joke
it's like a story showing racism's bad effects, and people make racist jokes underneath
unexamined prejudice is alive and well in the slashdot comments
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I'm sure if a paper with the opposite conclusion authored only by men was submitted for review, women (both reviewers and others) would be decrying that fact,
Please cite the article about this happening? Or is this just your prosecution fantasy as a middle classed white male?
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
no, wrong
women suffer from sexism far more than men in general society, and especially in STEM careers/ academia
this is actual reality
it's like says racism against whites by blacks balances racism against blacks by whites. completely ignoring history and reality of who actually suffers far, far worse effects
and of course there is misandry in this world, that's real, that exists
but it's the misogyny that is far, far more worse and embedded in social norms and power structures in jobs and schools, especially in STEM jobs and scholarly pursuits
that's reality. if you don't agree with that or understand that, you don't understand reality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
misandry exists and is real
but it is tiny compared to the systemic misogyny in the power structures and social norms in jobs and schools, especially STEM jobs and schools
so to ask for the false balance with the esoteric minor misandry, when examining the very strong and very real misogyny, is yet another example of someone, in this case you, just not fucking getting it, and being out of touch with the reality of pervasive misogyny
you are out of touch with reality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it