Jump to content

Recommended Posts

In case there are those who are unaware of the latest gossip in the scientific community, then check out some of these responses to Tim Hunt (A nobel prize winner and Sir). I think they are brilliant.

 

http://mashable.com/2015/06/11/female-scientists-responses-tim-hunt-distractinglysexy/

 

They are in response to the three problems he has with girls working in science that he announced to journalists and fellow scientists while giving a talk at a conference. These three problems are why he believes women should not be allowed to work with men. He says it's too distracting...

 

1) He falls in love with them,

2) They fall in love with him,

3) They cry when criticized

 

A quick google search will bring you all up to speed, and if I used twitter I would be all over #distractedlysexy, where I think the issue is being handled brilliantly. It highlights what a fool he is. Science is rarely sexy.

 

What do you all think? Funny?

 

Do we dare delve into the broader subject where this sort of sexist opinion is still prevalent in a lot of disciplines? I mean, really, why is it that the girls have to go? Couldn't he have instead said that men shouldn't be allowed to work with women because they get too distracted. ;-)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the answers these women posted! And yes, Tim Hunt himself is the issue. Good he resigned. Typical for patriarchal societies to put the blame on women when in fact it is a men's issue. It does not look good for the science world and gender equity... Several steps backward for science? So much for evolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hesitate to post in this thread at the risk of being bombarded by the white knights but my view is that I had to laugh when I saw this on social media - specifically the pictures posted in response. The OP, mistakenly, grouped all into the same category. I am sure he would be feeling that way if he meant some of those that replied with pics. My speculation, and just take it as that, is he is commenting on the distract-ive force of sexuality in the workplace. Especially with lab+research work where there is usually fewer people and demands a heightened level of mental focus to advance. It is really just human nature, nothing sexist or certainly that should cause for resignation for verbalizing the reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh you're mostly right pleasureme,

 

It wasn't that his 'problems' are sexist. They are after all, just problems he has. That most people have.. humans fall in love, women cry, men cry. The bad part came when he said that because of HIS problems, a whole gender shouldn't be able to work in the field.

 

"The OP, mistakenly, grouped all into the same category"...

 

What did I group all into the same category? I am confused by this...

 

I too found the social media responses hilarious. That was my point. I was laughing all day yesterday seeing my lab counterparts partake in this feed. I see now that my starting post really should have read "I think they are hilariously brilliant", and opposed to simply brilliant.

 

I find it funny. Truly hilarious. Seriously. Writing on such a topic is hard. I can see how the tone of my original post was lost. It's supposed to be lighthearted. When I asked if you found it funny, it really should have said funny too.

 

I think making fun of the situation is much more productive than getting all up in arms over it.

 

Additional Comments:

Oh I found another compilation of good ones.

 

http://gizmodo.com/these-lady-scientists-are-so-distractingly-sexy-im-in-l-1710920322

 

LMAO

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2yotsm9.jpg

 

 

I think making fun of the situation is much more productive than getting all up in arms over it.

 

Screeching histrionics is such a turn off. I like science girls; mocking is so much more fun!

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm sure Tim Hunt has learned a few things.

 

The first is that these days, what you say in front of what you think is a limited audience can go around the world very fast, and the world might disagree with you about whether it's funny or not.

 

The second is that if you piss off a whole load of smart women you're probably going to lose.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim Hunt says women in science cry when criticized.

 

Backlash ensues and Tim Hunt resigns, like a cry-baby, within 48 hours of said backlash.

 

Oh the irony.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is important to remember that scientific ability or intelligence is no measure of character.

Plenty of brilliant people are outright jerks.

Plenty of not so bright people are wonderful and kind hearted.

Watson, one of the discoverers of DNA was a totally disgusting person, but got a Nobel Prize and is highly thought of by many.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science uproar related.

 

It's a pity Matt Taylor tearfully apologized. It's his right to wear a shirt with beautiful women on it,

 

main-qimg-864fd9bbb66fde5eab048689080b3457?convert_to_webp=true

 

just as it's a woman's right to wear a shirt with beautiful men on it,

 

blue-wranglers.1301156067.1301568010.2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the guy is an idiot! I work with a lot of women, many of them in management positions, and I love the vision they bring, the way they interact, the way they react, the way they make and take decisions, they way they foster a team approach ... that guy doesn't know dick ... sorry for the pun! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a pity Matt Taylor tearfully apologized. It's his right to wear a shirt with beautiful women on it,

Dude was an idiot and deserved the massive rebuke he rightly received, since his stupid shirt reduced and trivialized women, and was a rebuke to every woman who worked on Rosetta.

 

He at least earned a few points back for recognizing his error and apologizing in a way that showed he really understood the gravity of the mistake.

 

I'd be equally contemptuous of any woman who wore a shirt covered in pictures of penises. Except... you'd never see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be equally contemptuous of any woman who wore a shirt covered in pictures of penises. Except... you'd never see that.

 

Ah, but he did not wear a shirt covered with female genitalia. The women on his shirt were actually modestly covered compared to the string bikinis I've seen on the beach (eliciting both "Yabba Dabba Do's" and "Oh My God, eyebleach please!")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude was an idiot and deserved the massive rebuke he rightly received, since his stupid shirt reduced and trivialized women, and was a rebuke to every woman who worked on Rosetta.

 

Good grief man you wouldn't know a thing about the project let alone what any of the women thought, or what they did on the mission.

First, the shirt was a gift from his girlfriend, second, nobody on the team was offended by the shirt, third, many female team members were offended because nobody in the media talked to them about their scientific or engineering contributions. All the media wanted to do was talk about the frikknshirt.

On science forums he got lots of support from women as well as men.

Boards like this where nobody knows the guy, the people he works with, or anything about the group dynamics, you can't criticise him because we know too little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good grief man you wouldn't know a thing about the project let alone what any of the women thought, or what they did on the mission.

That's an odd thing to say, as you don't have any idea what I might or might not know about Rosetta and the people who work on that project.

 

First, the shirt was a gift from his girlfriend

That's true.

 

second, nobody on the team was offended by the shirt,

Hold your horses. Citation, please. Where do you get your information that NOBODY on the team was offended by the shirt?

 

third, many female team members were offended because nobody in the media talked to them about their scientific or engineering contributions. All the media wanted to do was talk about the frikknshirt.

That's true. But that doesn't mean the shirt itself wasn't a problem. They were annoyed because journalists proceeded to show interest in the women on the team only in their capacity as "a woman", and that eclipsed all interest in their actual work as scientists and engineers on the project.

 

On science forums he got lots of support from women as well as men.

And condemnation too. There were immediate comments from women pointing out that the casual and witless sexism Matt Taylor exhibited was EXACTLY the kind of thing that had made their own careers in science and engineering more difficult.

 

Boards like this where nobody knows the guy, the people he works with, or anything about the group dynamics, you can't criticise him because we know too little.

Matt Taylor himself disagrees with you. That's why he apologized.

 

For a parallel that you might find more perceptible: it's much like Taylor had decided to wear a shirt covered in garish, cartoony caricatures of Jewish stereotypes counting piles of money, and then expressed surprise at all the outrage. If you wear that to the office, and especially when you represent your project in a very public capacity, don't be surprised when someone stops and instead of asking about the project says, "Dude. What the FUCK is up with that shirt?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's an odd thing to say, as you don't have any idea what I might or might not know about Rosetta and the people who work on that project.

 

 

That's true.

 

 

Hold your horses. Citation, please. Where do you get your information that NOBODY on the team was offended by the shirt?

 

 

That's true. But that doesn't mean the shirt itself wasn't a problem. They were annoyed because journalists proceeded to show interest in the women on the team only in their capacity as "a woman", and that eclipsed all interest in their actual work as scientists and engineers on the project.

 

 

And condemnation too. There were immediate comments from women pointing out that the casual and witless sexism Matt Taylor exhibited was EXACTLY the kind of thing that had made their own careers in science and engineering more difficult.

 

 

Matt Taylor himself disagrees with you. That's why he apologized.

 

For a parallel that you might find more perceptible: it's much like Taylor had decided to wear a shirt covered in garish, cartoony caricatures of Jewish stereotypes counting piles of money, and then expressed surprise at all the outrage. If you wear that to the office, and especially when you represent your project in a very public capacity, don't be surprised when someone stops and instead of asking about the project says, "Dude. What the FUCK is up with that shirt?"

 

Sounds like a version of Godwin's law. It might be an appropriate comparison only when TV shows, magazines, billboards, virtually every media out there 24/7 portrayed images of "Jewish caricatures counting piles of cash" like they do with women and sexuality. We see those highly sexualized images everyday to the point some people don't recognize that what they see everyday can be selectively demonized should you misstep. It's an angry world! That's probably why he apologized?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It might be an appropriate comparison only when TV shows, magazines, billboards, virtually every media out there 24/7 portrayed images of "Jewish caricatures counting piles of cash" like they do with women and sexuality.

No. My comparison is apt in that it parallels the nature of the offense in the eyes of others. Your qualification about how pervasive the images are addresses "why did Matt do something so wrong and stupid?", but it doesn't at all diminish the fact that it was exactly that wrong and stupid in the first place.

 

We see those highly sexualized images everyday to the point some people don't recognize that what they see everyday can be selectively demonized should you misstep. It's an angry world! That's probably why he apologized?

I do agree that the casual reduction of women to an exclusively sexual role is so pervasive in the culture that people sometimes don't recognize it for the belittling insult that it can be.

 

There's nothing innately wrong with sexual imagery of women, or of men. Even the imposition of fantasy sexual roles upon members of the opposite sex can be healthy in the right context -- hey, it's the stock in trade of we who are posting here, either as sellers or buyers.

 

It's when women are reduced exclusively to a sexual fantasy role, especially in a place where they've earned acknowledgement as something else, that there's a deep cultural issue. This type of reduction happens to women far, far, far more than it does to men. And it's what happens when you wear pictures trumpeting women as semi-naked objects who embody male sexual fantasies, to any professional workplace whose business isn't porn.

 

I have trouble deciphering your last couple of sentences. It's possible you're suggesting that Taylor only apologized because the world got angry about something it shouldn't have. I give Taylor more credit than that, and think it's much more likely that he realized what he'd done was wrong, rude to his colleagues, and deeply offensive to all the women in that setting who had worked so hard to swim against the cultural current and be something else. And he apologized for THAT.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. My comparison is apt in that it parallels the nature of the offense in the eyes of others. Your qualification about how pervasive the images are addresses "why did Matt do something so wrong and stupid?", but it doesn't at all diminish the fact that it was exactly that wrong and stupid in the first place.

 

 

I do agree that the casual reduction of women to an exclusively sexual role is so pervasive in the culture that people sometimes don't recognize it for the belittling insult that it can be.

 

There's nothing innately wrong with sexual imagery of women, or of men. Even the imposition of fantasy sexual roles upon members of the opposite sex can be healthy in the right context -- hey, it's the stock in trade of we who are posting here, either as sellers or buyers.

 

It's when women are reduced exclusively to a sexual fantasy role, especially in a place where they've earned acknowledgement as something else, that there's a deep cultural issue. This type of reduction happens to women far, far, far more than it does to men. And it's what happens when you wear pictures trumpeting women as semi-naked objects who embody male sexual fantasies, to any professional workplace whose business isn't porn.

 

I have trouble deciphering your last couple of sentences. It's possible you're suggesting that Taylor only apologized because the world got angry about something it shouldn't have. I give Taylor more credit than that, and think it's much more likely that he realized what he'd done was wrong, rude to his colleagues, and deeply offensive to all the women in that setting who had worked so hard to swim against the cultural current and be something else. And he apologized for THAT.

 

Thanks again for your POV but it still brings up further questions for me.

 

Where do we draw the line on offensive shirts? Who gets to draw that line? The "eyes of others", to use your words? That's a pretty wide swath of potential offendees. Your comparison still seems a bit extreme.

 

Given what we do here, it seems quite hypocritical to chastise a guy for wearing a shirt with sexualized fantasies but it's OK and healthy to "impose that fantasy"? Did you mean to say that? Imposition means an unfair or unwelcome demand or burden. Many women who sell that fantasy do so to make a living. Some may freely choose to partake but if they didn't need to pay the rent, they may not. Are we guilty of similar reduction of women? Of course, many of the same women who objected to the shirt would likely object to sexual commodification and the "imposition of fantasy sexual roles on members of the opposite sex", to once again use your words.

 

Finally, it was the media and the social commentary that focused solely on the shirt that reduced the women. The guy may have been a decent person in his interactions with both men and women on the job and just thought the shirt his girlfriend gave him was cool and wasn't trying to demean all women. Did anyone even bother to ask?

 

I said it's an angry world in the sense that we love to demonize anyone who missteps. It makes it easier for the group to use extreme forms of punishment on the "outsider". Who knows, he may have apologized if someone at his job told him the shirt offended them. Of course, he only apologized "after" the storm hit as far as we know. Some people may call that being practical. I can't read his mind but neither can you.

 

As always, you really make me think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where do we draw the line on offensive shirts? Who gets to draw that line?

The audience, and the context. Here it's not hard because we're talking about the workplace, and sexualized imagery just doesn't belong there. The shirt was no more appropriate than a manager's office wall being covered with images of seminaked women in posters and swimsuit calendars.

 

There's no complete and itemized list of the rules to share here, though. Like all social things, it's a dance and the music is always changing. Knowing what's appropriate requires awareness of social expectations. It's the nature of social interaction that we are, at least to some degree, beholden to others.

 

Your comparison still seems a bit extreme.

Why? I personally think it's bang-on. Is it possible that it seems lopsided to you because you just don't perceive workplace sexism as being a big deal? 'Cause others perceive it as a very. big. deal.

 

Given what we do here, it seems quite hypocritical to chastise a guy for wearing a shirt with sexualized fantasies but it's OK and healthy to "impose that fantasy"?

No, there's no hypocrisy. Again, context; my previous post touches on this. Sexualized imagery in the workplace is bad. Sexualized imagery in other places is okay. Matt Taylor didn't screw up because he finds women sexy, or because he owns a shirt covered in nearly-naked cartoon women posing with guns. He screwed up because he wore that shirt to the office -- and on that day, an extremely public office when he clearly should have known better.

 

Did you mean to say that? Imposition means an unfair or unwelcome demand or burden.

I mean "impose" in the sense of "place upon, out of self-interest, without much regard for whether it's accurate regarding the subject." A particular woman in a particular context may be perfectly willing to engage in that fantasy, and that's when it's cool. Other times people just try hard to make the subject inhabit the fantasy, regardless. And so...

 

Are we guilty of similar reduction of women?

No, because consensual roleplay is okay, and the transactions we're discussing are consensual. The fantasy being played out represents a pretty shallow and limited idea about who other, complex human beings really are... but it's a fun place to visit in small doses.

 

Finally, it was the media and the social commentary that focused solely on the shirt that reduced the women. [Maybe Taylor] wasn't trying to demean all women. Did anyone even bother to ask?

No. Matt Taylor's intentions are irrelevant. "I'm sorry, it never occurred to me that you'd be offended by these pictures all over my shirt of Jews counting money." DUDE. You should have known. That Taylor didn't have the insight to recognize the inappropriate and sexist message his shirt was sending in that context, doesn't mean he's not responsible for the impacts of his actions on others.

 

As always, you really make me think!

Hey, cool. Take from my typings whatever works for you.

 

Reddit has exhausted my patience and my former, limited optimism regarding a lot of these discussions, though. So if I don't return to this subject it's not because I don't value back-and-forth... just that I've been here too many times before. :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third, many female team members were offended because nobody in the media talked to them about their scientific or engineering contributions. All the media wanted to do was talk about the frikknshirt.

 

This.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am glad a male's attire is being so intensely debated. It's so rare and refreshing.

 

Female's attire is so often mentioned in media and news that hardly anyone notices, but it's one of those things that drive me crazy...

 

For example

 

"..... The Tecumseh, Ont., woman, who was dressed in a conservative black top and pants and whose hair appeared lighter than when she made her notorious videos, declined to comment ...... "

 

completely ruined an otherwise interesting article about making sex videos in public spaces,

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/woman-gets-probation-250-fine-for-streaming-live-sex-show-from-windsor-public-library

 

Wouldn't we all find it strange if every time a male went to court (or did anything for that matter) we got a description of their attire?

 

I would welcome it. We could judge their innocence and guilt based on their clothing :tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate you taking the time to clarify your points, MP.

 

I will concede your point about the workplace and inappropriate attire. It is also true, I don't see many examples of workplace sexism that's offensive so don't quickly assume the worst.

 

I still think many people who would complain about Matt Taylors shirt would also complain about someone purchasing sex, regardless of context. Is the transaction consensual when you have a rich guy and a woman who is struggling to get by? I mentioned it in my earlier post since you brought it up, although it distracts from the main thrust of the topic perhaps.

 

I do personally think intentions are relevant and I could give examples as could you, but let's just leave that one for another time.

 

I didn't understand your reference to Reddit until I googled it. Hard to believe but I did not know what that was. I'm heading back to my cave now. LOL

 

I also understand if you don't want to debate this anymore... bok, bokbokbok. That's a chicken on the odd chance you didn't get my humour. :)

 

To oldblueeyez, the leave comment button isn't working but I wanted to say you make a good point about women putting more pressure on a woman to dress well than men do. My wife comments about our TV weather ladies attire from time to time. I'm thinking "what, I didn't even notice her outfit. I was too busy looking at her breasts". Just kidding.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×