Slashdot Mirror
Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Criticizes Role of Women In Labs
An anonymous reader writes: Tim Hunt is an English biochemist most notable for winning the 2001 Nobel prize in physiology or medicine. Today he's become notable for something else entirely — at the World Conference of Science Journalists, Hunt suggested science labs should be segregated by gender. He said, "Let me tell you about my trouble with girls three things happen when they are in the lab You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticize them, they cry." As you might expect, this set off a firestorm of criticism. Many asked Hunt to treat women in labs with the same respect he is afforded, and others held it up as an explicit example of the sexism that pervades the scientific community. Hunt later issued an apology, saying, "I'm very sorry that what I thought were light hearted ironic remarks were taken so seriously, and I'm very sorry if people took offence. I certainly did not mean to demean women, but rather be honest about my own shortcomings."
Today is Friday! Thanks, Dice!
The good news is if he runs into tough times, a Russian businessman will buy his Nobel at an auction and then give it back to him.
Since this DOES happen, what's the fix? Pretending that there's no shenanigans going doesn't make it any better.
Those were light hearted remarks.
Ever think that she might have been the women he fell in love with at the lab?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
What you have said sounds profound but isn't at all.
Am I offended? Nope. I'm too jaded, thick skinned and argumentative to be that easily offended. Do I think it's an idiotic thing to say? Yep.
But if I was offended by idiotic things people say on the internet, I'd be in a permanent state of offendedness and that's not very fun.
Also just because politically correct[*] has turned into a disease, doesn't mean that people being idiots is not a disease.
[*] Politically correct started off as the name describes. Things you couldn't say without inviting political fallout, whether party politics or jockeying politics in some other organisation. Things like "women belong in the kitchen" etc. Of course, people being idiots, people mutated it into all sorts of stupid things.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
"I was just being honest about my own shortcomings -- by talking about what 'you' do when there are women in the lab. 'You', of course, being a straight male, because duh, who else would I be bothering to talk to about science?"
When he is content with his mate his desire to fall in love in the lab should go away.
Not everyone is monogamous or monoamorus (is that the opposite ofpolyamorous?).
I'm not disagreeing with you that the problem is entirely his, just pointing out that your solution may not work.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
For context, he was invited to talk at a convention on women in science and journalism. In South Korea, where many of the delegates wouldn't be speaking English as their first language. At best, it was a very poorly judged joke. It's actually pretty insulting to men as well, as if we can't be around women without falling in love with them.
Saying it is a joke after the fact isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for saying something retarded like this. It's not political correctness, it's calling out obvious bullshit.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Why is it idiotic? It's just dark humor at the worst.
So it being really bad dark humour (if it is) isn't idiotic? I'd say making ill advised jokes is idiotic.
Check this joke out that I heard
You may have noticed that when a group makes a joke about itself it is generally taken very differently from an outside group making a joke about the group. You may wish to consider why.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
In a world where the Internet gives every crackpot a soapbox from which to preach to his fellow crackpots, it's not longer possible to distinguish ironic self-deprecation from a serious but deranged complaint about other people.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
What idiot can be so humour-impaired as to not realize that Hunt was just kidding? And it was a pretty tame, light-hearted joke at it.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Hyperbole much?
No one said he should be stoned to death.
Saying that women should not even be allowed to work with men is not the same as "mentioning both genders" or "speaking about gender differences".
So, you have no point other than asking a question that isn't a question. Got it.
FYI, I read the whole article, and what he said, in FULL context wasn't offensive at all. It was admission of his own weaknesses towards women and how that doesn't fit Science Labs.
To be honest, is to be commended. Yet, he is being bullied by people only reading the headline from someone "offended" at his admission. He didn't say anything about women NOT being in a science lab, only that science would be better off without the male/female interactions. And he might not be wrong.
I am not offended by people being offended at such. I simply shake my head at the outrage held by some, who ignore even more outrageous comments by people they tend to "like".
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Specializing in science basically means more and more about less and less. The limiting case of a specialist is someone who knows everything about nothing. He is a great bio-chemist, no doubt. But thinking he is great in anything other than that narrow sub-speciality within sub-speciality of bio-chemistry, is illogical.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Just because it was a joke doesn't mean it's okay. There are lots of jokes about, say, black people or Jews that people find offensive and aren't suitable for retelling at a conference about issues facing black people or Jews. They are offensive because they work to set those people back, by re-enforcing stereotypes and laughing at them.
Maybe the media has overreacted, but as this Slashdot debate shows there is still a clear need to talk about it because a lot of people seem to think it is okay, and a lot of people disagree, and there is conflict that needs to be resolved.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
"I'm sorry you were offended. I'm not sorry for what I said."?
Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
Saying it is a joke after the fact isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for saying something retarded like this.
It sure works for Politicians all the time. I didn't see any left wing people complaining about Gruber's comments about "American People are Stupid", which is actually more offensive .
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
It's actually pretty insulting to men as well, as if we can't be around women without falling in love with them.
Since when is the truth insulting? Not every man will fall in love with every woman. Not every man will fall in love with any woman. But when you put a number of men in daily proximity and contact with a number of women, some men are going to fall in love with some women and there are going to be issues. ("Fall in love with...", of course, actually covers a huge range of responses including "...wants to get into the pants of ...")
It's unfortunate.
People say all sorts of stupid, ill judged things when one's brain isn't as fully connected as one might wish it to be. I know I have. I'm glad none of them have been broadcast to the world.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
For example, there's been attempts at reclaiming the word, which is why you hear it in rap lyrics sometimes.
[...]
Meanwhile, there's also been a push to reclaim these kinds of words, which is why you sometimes hear it used in friendly conversation and song lyrics.
How the hell do you reclaim that particular word, and what kind of use would the reclaimed word be put to? My helicopter might go "wop wop wop," there might be a "chink in my armor," and when my wife throws a cup of ice water at me, I might end up with a "wet back" but I sure as hell cannot conceive of a non-insulting everyday use of "nigger." Also, your suggestion that, say, hip hop artists are using that particular word in an attempt to mainstream it (again, to what purpose?) is just absurd and smacks of grasping at any straw imaginable to justify your position that it's ok for some people to use it, but not okay for others.
The word in question belongs in the dustbin of history. People who get bent out of shape when they hear it should probably put pressure on their own communities, because other than a few backwoods idiots running around in sheets, the only thing keeping that word alive is popular culture which originates from the very people who should be most offended by its use.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
If you can't find Blazing Saddles funny, it's you who is broken.
Recognizing that there are differences between men and women is not sexism; lack of equality of opportunity is. Pretending we're all the same is moral cowardice at best; equal opportunity to succeed differences and all is a laudable goal; enforced equal outcomes is simply evil.
They are offensive because they work to set those people back
Ah, the soft racism of lowered expectations. "X people can't overcome life's normal obstacles, so we all need to treat them special, since, you know, they need our help".
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
See, this is what happens when a guy gives his honest opinion. So he shuts up, and the girls start whining about why he won't talk about his feelings! You cannot have it both ways, ladies!
Acknowledging the consequences of gender is not sexist.
Yes, but calling for segregation is. So is stating that women are not capable of handling criticism (unless you've got some objective evidence). He said both of those things.
Blazing Saddles is hilarious. I don't see what that has to do with this though, or what thinking that men and women are the same does. Obviously I don't think that, as I have stated many times, so why bring it up? Are you saying he was right?
Also, I wasn't talking about lowering expectations. I was talking about hostility towards people or not hiring them because of stupid fears like these.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Either it is offensive, or it isn't, you can't have it both ways.
Since being offended is subjective you can have it both ways.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
If I say "I'm an idiot", it's not offensive to me. If someone calls me an idiot, I'll probably be upset. Context and the identity of the speaker matter.
When black people say nigger they are often using it to reclaim the word and neutralise it, or because it has become part of the culture in a non racist sense. It's usually not self hatred.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I agree that the word nigger has a "non racist use", but the idea that this particular use can only be used by black people is racist.
A white person may want to say nigger to help reclaim the word as something that can be said in a non-racist way, but if that person is not allowed to do this because of the color of his/her skin, that is racist.
I'm not saying you can't get pissed at a white person for saying nigger. It's a free country. All I am saying is that if the *only* reason you have (e.g. not socioeconomic class, culture, or style of dress, or you know the person is racist, etc) for deciding whether saying a word is acceptable or not is based on the skin color of the person saying it, the that's racism.
You seem awfully fixated on stereotypes which aren't actually important in any meaningful way. History review?
Baby books, new baby announcements and cards, gift lists and newspaper articles from the early 1900s indicate that pink was just as likely to be associated with
boy babies as with girl babies. For example, the June 1918 issue of the Infant's Department, a trade magazine for baby clothes manufacturers, said: "There has been a great diversity of opinion on this subject, but the generally accepted rule is pink for the boy and blue for the girl. The reason is that pink being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy; while blue, which is more delicate and dainty is prettier for the girl."
Aaaand, from NPR:
Before Gatsby, a 1918 trade catalog for children's clothing recommended blue for girls. The reasoning at the time was that it's a "much more delicate and dainty tone," Finamore says. Pink was recommended for boys "because it's a stronger and more passionate color, and because it's actually derived from red."
To our 21st century ears, all this men in pink stuff may sound a bit blushy. "It's so deeply entrenched in us and our culture," says Finamore. "We think of pink as such a girlish color, but it's really a post-World War II phenomenon."
Well, suggesting that "science" would be better off without those pesky women around is kind of sexist, in an overtly sexist sort of way.
Let's look at his statement:
If he had started the statement with, "Let me tell you about my trouble with Jews." Or, since he used the slightly degrading diminutive, "girls" to refer to adult women scientists, it's actually more like "Let me tell you about my trouble with the hebes."
Yeah, buddy. That there is what you call a sexist statement.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If you think that's an honest call for segregation, than I shudder to think what happens when you're at a stand-up comedy show. Then again, Jerry Seinfeld made that point recently.
How about the example where the Nobel prize winning scientist made a poor joke that they can't take criticism, and it blew up into a huge feminist issue with him being labelled a misogynist?
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
The word in question belongs in the dustbin of history
While it may be offensive (at present), no word should ever be completely discarded in the "dustbin of history". By the way how big is your dustbin? The derogatory use of the word "nigger" has been in general use for only about half a century. That's quite tame for a word that is several hundred years old and based on a latin word for the colour black spelt "niger". I'm willing to bet the use of the world will dramatically change before you or I pass on and I fully expect my children to one day assign quite different meaning to it.
I hope you have a gay afternoon.