Nobel laureate forced out of studies after making joke about women

[manic_depressive13]

So his point is supposedly proven because women cried at his comments, but this somehow doesn't apply to all the men crying about how unfair this is. The funny thing is he probably would have gotten away with it if he wasn't to fucking stupid to give a proper apology. He dug his own grave yet the tears keep flowing. Such injustice is too much for the righteous hearts of men.

 

[Czann]

This is the world we live in.

A non-official Stasi/Gestapo hybrid thought police using political correctness gone mad to force their stupid ideology down the majority's throat.

It's 1984 but not instituted by a government but by Tumblr and their ilk.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

So his point is supposedly proven because women cried at his comments, but this somehow doesn't apply to all the men crying about how unfair this is. The funny thing is he probably would have gotten away with it if he wasn't to fucking stupid to give a proper apology. He dug his own grave yet the tears keep flowing. Such injustice is too much for the righteous hearts of men.

Yeah, it figures doesn't it, that it's only crying if it's women who complained. And then I kind of doubt that everyone who had a say in his firing were women. It's very telling about people really when they try and say "Hah it confirms the (sexist/racist/whatever) stereotype!"

 

[Jack Action]

It's 1984 but not instituted by a government but by Tumblr and their ilk.

It's just too bad that none of that is really true, just the talking-points of people who miss being able to express their backwards thinking.

"No, there's no thought police, people just aren't allowed to express backwards opinions anymore."

...uh... Do I really need to point out the problem with that?

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

It's 1984 but not instituted by a government but by Tumblr and their ilk.

It's just too bad that none of that is really true, just the talking-points of people who miss being able to express their backwards thinking.

"No, there's no thought police, people just aren't allowed to express backwards opinions anymore."

...uh... Do I really need to point out the problem with that?

Well what in the world makes you believe they can't? They miss being able to without consequence. And social consequences aren't thought police. It's called people not liking you.

 

[Jack Action]

Well what in the world makes you believe they can't? They miss being able to without consequence. And social consequences aren't thought police. It's called people not liking you.

You mean besides Dynast outright saying "they can't"?

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm aware.

I'm not making an argument that every single person that ever says or does a stupid thing is as pure as the driven snow. I'm making the argument that this increasing verve for turning social media into a kangaroo court is absolutely terrifying, and more than a little morally bankrupt.

I find comparing it to a kangaroo court a bit over-the-top in and of itself.

And if this were about some random guy, I might give a shit. But considering this is a guy with actual impact on policy stating something that he claimed was "honest" that would actually impact policy, evidently not for the first time, as part of an endemic issue that is likely only sheltered because of his position in the first place?

Screw it. I'm going to dance a victory dance. Maybe I won't have to read about a stupid, sexist thing some scientist said every week while people tell me the real reason there's a dearth of women in STEM is that they just don't like it. But probably not, because despite the claims of a kangaroo court and a lynch mob, most of these guys still seem to be employed. And, often enough, in positions of authority.

The problem is, examples tend to fall off sharply after a few major examples of awful people. This is nowhere near what I would imagine a "kangaroo court" to be. I also wouldn't expect such a vehement defense in the court of public opinion or the press were that the case.

I actually think it would be pretty much the same with a woman, except it would be the anti-sjw crowd calling for their head on a plate/firing.

I don't know, there was that woman recently who basically told female scientists to use their tits to their advantage. I don't think she was fired. Then again, she was encouraging women to let men stare at their cleavage, so maybe that's okay?

There is, of course, the other difference.

I doubt it would count as a "joke" anymore.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

Well what in the world makes you believe they can't? They miss being able to without consequence. And social consequences aren't thought police. It's called people not liking you.

You mean besides Dynast outright saying "they can't"?

That's a very interesting view on what constitutes outright saying. Please show me those words in his post.

It's funny really how hard you're trying to go for the most unreasonable interpretation that doesn't even match reality. Like seriously we all know they can do it, what are you gonna prove misinterpreting it? XD

 

[Jack Action]

That's a very interesting view on what constitutes outright saying. Please show me those words in his post.

It's funny really how hard you're trying to go for the most unreasonable interpretation that doesn't even match reality. Like seriously we all know they can do it, what are you gonna prove misinterpreting it? XD

...riiiiight. I'm totally misinterpreting what "miss being able to express their backwards opinions" means. On the flipside, I'm not getting into the "being ostracized by everybody is a perfectly normal consequence if you say the wrong things" argument. Partially because it's already been done to death, partially because, take it away captcha:

Don't waste time.

 

[Jack Action]

No, you should probably stick to the obvious differences between policing, and the condemnation by your peers. It's a danger of argument from analogy, that you get lost in it.

You might also want to consider that what you want is, what? To have an external authority to reach in and overrule private an institutional employment choices? To shut up Twitter? Sounds to me like you just don't like how the chips are falling, and instead of defending ideas, people would rather play the victim.

Sure. Whatever floats your boat, chief. Just remember that no matter how much you tell yourself you're one of the good people to whom... how did you put it... "backwards thinking" would never occur, one day you'll find yourself on the wrong end of this.

 

[Jack Action]

Not worth it, mod please remove.

Spoiler alert: I can still read that. And you know what? I'm not the one with the gall to declare certain opinions backwards and to bask in the knowledge that they can't be expressed, so spare me the self-righteousness.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

It's a joke.

Which he later clarified by saying he thought it was absolutely true.

.
They fired him from his work because of a perceived sexist comment. He's a Nobel laureate - a scientist with decades worth of knowledge - and they boot him because somebody's feelings got hurt.

Don't feel bad, most people like him are only meaningfully productive in a narrow band around their 20's and 30's. Mostly what he'd have been doing now is making female students and co-workers uncomfortable, and cashing checks while jockeying with the bureaucracy.

The man is 72 and was awarded a nobel prize for his work in 2001.

"...and when you criticize them, they cry."

And he quickly found out he was right.

In all seriousness, my opinion is the same as the scientist who wore that shirt last year: it was unprofessional, but the lynch mob against him is unwarranted.

So he's free to speak, but no one else is free to speak against him? Your mob is only people speaking you know, exercising the same rights he did.

If he is outnumbered and outgunned, and maybe even in the wrong, he should have been smart enough to see that coming. Your sympathy is at best placed with a fool, at worst with an ass.

Everyone should see everything coming. Fuck compassion.

A bit of nastiness, totally unwarranted and pitiable condescension, and you run away? OK. I guess you don't care about your views really, just holding them over people.

It's 1984 but not instituted by a government but by Tumblr and their ilk.

It's just too bad that none of that is really true, just the talking-points of people who miss being able to express their backwards thinking.

"No, there's no thought police, people just aren't allowed to express backwards opinions anymore."

...uh... Do I really need to point out the problem with that?

No, you should probably stick to the obvious differences between policing, and the condemnation by your peers. It's a danger of argument from analogy, that you get lost in it.

You might also want to consider that what you want is, what? To have an external authority to reach in and overrule private an institutional employment choices? To shut up Twitter? Sounds to me like you just don't like how the chips are falling, and instead of defending ideas, people would rather play the victim.

The twitter mob are not Tim Hunt's peers. Far from it.

Are you saying that people who are unhappy with the power the twitter mob hold these days are "playing the victim"? And do you not see the irony here?

"an external authority to reach in and overrule private an institutional employment choices?"

Sounds a bit like... The twitter mob.

A bit of nastiness, totally unwarranted and pitiable condescension, and you run away? OK. I guess you don't care about your views really, just holding them over people.

The internet doesn't forget. Are you really playing the victim at this point? Also: "Stand by what you say!" followed by a quick edit. Funny.

 

[VincentX3]

"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 criticise them, they cry."

So I guess he was right?
Talk about not getting a simple joke. :'l

 

[Jack Action]

Lets deal with one wrong statement at a time.

He was awarded the Nobel in 2001 for his work from the very early 80's. Want to start over from there or is your mind so made up that reality has no impact on the end result?

I hope you realize you just told Panda he's wrong, detached from reality, and then proceeded to repeat exactly what he said (namely that the prof got a Nobel in 2001).

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

It's a joke.

Which he later clarified by saying he thought it was absolutely true.

.
They fired him from his work because of a perceived sexist comment. He's a Nobel laureate - a scientist with decades worth of knowledge - and they boot him because somebody's feelings got hurt.

Don't feel bad, most people like him are only meaningfully productive in a narrow band around their 20's and 30's. Mostly what he'd have been doing now is making female students and co-workers uncomfortable, and cashing checks while jockeying with the bureaucracy.

The man is 72 and was awarded a nobel prize for his work in 2001.

Lets deal with one wrong statement at a time.

He was awarded the Nobel in 2001 for his work from the very early 80's. Want to start over from there or is your mind so made up that reality has no impact on the end result?

Why do I get the feeling that you're going to make me contemplate suicide?

I concede the point. Scientists older than 40 are not worth their salt, and we should be flippant about their professional value as of that milestone.

Anything else you have a problem with?

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Once again the idea of political correctness is killing comedy. Jokes are supposed to be controversial, supposed to be politically incorrect. Thats part of the point of humor. To throw humanities tragedies back at humanity blown way out of proportion and distorted and called humor. Comedy is the opposing side of tragedy.
Hence the whole two mask thing that you see in every drama class, one laughing the other crying.
Why do you think George Carlin was funny?
Now people make insensitive jokes, but they shouldn't fear losing their jobs over them. If the person in question hasn't actually done anything but tell a poor taste joke, there shouldn't be a lynch mob forming but hey, its all the rage right now to hound anyone who says anything out of line. That folks is a form of forced censorship, and that folks is totally wrong.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

No, you should probably stick to the obvious differences between policing, and the condemnation by your peers. It's a danger of argument from analogy, that you get lost in it.

You might also want to consider that what you want is, what? To have an external authority to reach in and overrule private an institutional employment choices? To shut up Twitter? Sounds to me like you just don't like how the chips are falling, and instead of defending ideas, people would rather play the victim.

Sure. Whatever floats your boat, chief. Just remember that no matter how much you tell yourself you're one of the good people to whom... how did you put it... "backwards thinking" would never occur, one day you'll find yourself on the wrong end of this.

Because clearly if only we didn't so it those other people wouldn't either. Surely their conscience will stop them if we follow your plan. Maybe I'll get a magic charm as a back up defense

 

[Jack Action]

Because clearly if only we didn't so it those other people wouldn't either. Surely their conscience will stop them if we follow your plan. Maybe I'll get a magic charm as a back up defense

So, what, this is a preventative measure? We're justified in doing this because they're wrong and we can't allow them to do it for the wrong reasons?

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

No, you should probably stick to the obvious differences between policing, and the condemnation by your peers. It's a danger of argument from analogy, that you get lost in it.

You might also want to consider that what you want is, what? To have an external authority to reach in and overrule private an institutional employment choices? To shut up Twitter? Sounds to me like you just don't like how the chips are falling, and instead of defending ideas, people would rather play the victim.

Sure. Whatever floats your boat, chief. Just remember that no matter how much you tell yourself you're one of the good people to whom... how did you put it... "backwards thinking" would never occur, one day you'll find yourself on the wrong end of this.

Because clearly if only we didn't so it those other people wouldn't either. Surely their conscience will stop them if we follow your plan. Maybe I'll get a magic charm as a back up defense

Care to elaborate on who "we" and "those other people" are? Also, what's the "plan"? Not being insufferably judgmental and devoid of compassion? Crazy plan you're hatching their, Jack. Stop being so human, it'll get in the way of all the wonderful progress that's happening.

 

[VincentX3]

"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 criticise them, they cry."

So I guess he was right?
Talk about not getting a simple joke. :'l

Nice Catch-22, Joseph Heller would be genuinely appalled no doubt.

"People always complain when you hit them." *hits people* "See? Whining like bitches!" I guess it makes for a good show though, if you're already totally on board with the general sentiment.

I would just say that people tend to complain, you know, say you make a new movie with a female cast. You might piss off a bunch of boys who want their Ghostbusters? I don't know, I'm just guessing here.

Not sure what you're trying to get at here, other than yes, people love to complain, because their lives aren't fulfilling without complaining of course.

Still it's way to over the top to lose your job for, women or not. :l
Especially since he had a pretty long carrier too.