Nobel laureate forced out of studies after making joke about women

[Kathinka]

Jesus Christ, when did people become such little bitches that so grossly overreact to anything that isn't absolutely PC. Get a grip. How are real issues supposed to be taken seriously when such a major stink gets raised over menial shit like this.

I would expect most people to be intelligent enough to separate real issues from small issues. It isn't really that difficult.

I would like to think so too. But every time I'm half convinced some assbackwards fuckheaded drama queens get their nickers in a twist over a scientist wearing a shirt they don't like and treat it as the second coming of Hitler, or some similar retarded event.

I was one of those people that didn't agree with the shirt. I didn't view the shirt as sexist or anything along those lines I just don't agree with dressing casually to such an important event. I didn't make a big deal out of it like some other people did. I said my piece and was then done with it. Also, while I understand it feels good to insult those people some of those very people are on this forum and they could flag your post for insulting them. Just a helpful FYI.

I appreciate the tip, but I take my chances. I firmly believe anyone should be allowed to dress however the hell they please as long as they cover the naughty bits, and people trying to do others harm because they don't like their clothing severely rub me the wrong way.
Also the irony of staunchy feminists saying that he was asking for it because of the way he was dressing is not lost on me. But that's a different topic entirely. Back to the self entitled bunch that only wants to stir up drama for dramas sake over a harmless joke!

 

[Terminal Blue]

I suspect some people aren't getting how immensely unprofessional that comment is.

University posts are extremely sensitive because they're essentially treated as public service positions, even when they are (partially) privately funded. Public service professionals are expected to.. you know, serve the public. All of the public. Without discrimination. If your conduct does not give the impression that you are doing that, then that constitutes a serious lapse of professionalism.

His institution could have stood by him, and some might say should have done. In the past, academic institutions have supported their staff in far worse situations. At the same time, it is their reputation on the line and thus their call to make. Academic institutions live and die partly on the quality of their reputations, and (while this might be a bit off topic I think it's necessary context) right now in the UK they are dying. People are losing their jobs over far less than this, assuming they even have jobs to begin with and not just an endless cycle of sub-minimum-wage fractional work.

Frankly, Tim Hunt's generation.. and I've met many people of that generation, have gotten used to a degree of job security which noone in academia is ever going to have again. His insistence that he's been terribly hard done by here is a bit strange in the context that the "young scientists" he's supposedly helping into the profession don't have a icecube's chance in hell of ever having the opportunities he had, and if they did I suspect they would be a bit more careful about how they used them.

Looking back on what I just wrote, I realize it's fucking cynical. I want to say we should all expect more and that it's important to have solidarity and that turning on each other is just feeding the neoliberal agenda which is slowly poisoning the university system, but I can't, because I'm actually quite sick of listening to established researchers whining about what they feel they deserve.

 

[Emanuele Ciriachi]

Fuck this shit, we really must be the most whiney, sensitive, thin-skinned, easily offended society in the history of the world.

This really reminds me of this article:
I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me [http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid]

All over the western world we've become so intimidated into watching every word and thought in case it might offend somebody?s precious self-esteem. It's as if the free world has forgotten to inhale.

I for one am absolutely disgusted by all of this.

 

[lord canti]

He said something incredibly unprofessional in front of the group of people he was insulting. He deserved to be reprimanded about this regardless of what credentials he has, but he didn't deserve to be fired.

 

[Superbeast]

I am really disappointed that a number of people who criticise others for "listening and believing" are completely ignoring some important facts in this situation:

Sir Tim Hunt, who is a Royal Society fellow, reportedly told a conference in South Korea women in labs "cry" when you criticise them and "fall in love" with their male counterparts.

He told the BBC he "did mean" the remarks but was "really sorry"....adding it was "a very stupid thing to do in the presence of all those journalists".

"I did mean the part about having trouble with girls," he said. "It is true that people - I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it's very disruptive to the science because it's terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field.

"I found that these emotional entanglements made life very difficult.

"I'm really, really sorry I caused any offence, that's awful. I certainly didn't mean that. I just meant to be honest, actually."

"It's terribly important that you can criticise people's ideas without criticising them and if they burst into tears, it means that you tend to hold back from getting at the absolute truth.

"Science is about nothing but getting at the truth and anything that gets in the way of that diminishes, in my experience, the science."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33077107

It should be noted that it was not even a quick quip as some present it either:

Connie St Louis, a lecturer in science journalism at City University, was in the 100-strong audience in South Korea..."The Korean female scientists who hosted us looked aghast and he just ploughed on for about five to seven minutes."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33077107

His defence that it was a joke simply cannot stand either, given that he stands by his comments.

The British biochemist, who was knighted in 2006, said the remarks were "intended as a light-hearted, ironic comment" but had been "interpreted deadly seriously by my audience".

He went on to say he stood by some of the remarks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33077107

The fact he is being supported by the likes of Brian Cox and Boris Johnson is a shame - particularly since the latter is not really making things any better:

But Mr Johnson said the response was an "overreaction" and it was not wrong to point out "gender differences"...said it was scientific fact that women cried more than men...did not deserve to be "pilloried" for pointing out "a natural phenomenon", he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33137497

That is not the context of the comments, Mr. Johnson.

It is unfortunate that he had to lose his job over this, but as a Noble Laureate you are essentially a scientific ambassador to the wider world (never mind your duties as a representative of your university as a professor; nor that whilst speaking in a professional capacity you are expected to be professional) and comments such as his can be argued to harm the perception of science and deter bright minds who would otherwise be interested in following scientific careers.

 

[Bat Vader]

Fuck this shit, we really must be the most whiney, sensitive, thin-skinned, easily offended society in the history of the world.

This really reminds me of this article:
I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me [http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid]

All over the western world we've become so intimidated into watching every word and thought in case it might offend somebody?s precious self-esteem. It's as if the free world has forgotten to inhale.

I for one am absolutely disgusted by all of this.

I agree. People need to stop whinging and need to start fighting. If someone is offended by what someone else is saying they should just haul off and slug the person as hard as they can. It's like the Westboro baptist people. Those idiots deserve to have their jaws broken.

 

[Emanuele Ciriachi]

I agree. People need to stop whinging and need to start fighting. If someone is offended by what someone else is saying they should just haul off and slug the person as hard as they can. It's like the Westboro baptist people. Those idiots deserve to have their jaws broken.

On the other hand, that reaction could get you in trouble really quickly.
As a general rule, manning up and accepting that some people's world vision offends us and that's absolutely fine would be preferreable.

 

[iLikeHippos]

It's a pretty standard affair, this. Staff-member does public bad. Public criticizes the staff-member. Organization of said staff-member cuts the member off.
And that's the end of that. You'll see this from any respectable business, organization or school, to name a few. If I were the Headmaster in control of this decision, to call for his resignation, I would had done the same; as would had 99% of people in the same position done.

It really sucks for him and his wife, (who got reprimanded as well...?) but this is the professional life. Never do the public mad, or your head comes to the chopping block, no questions asked.

 

[Kathinka]

I agree. People need to stop whinging and need to start fighting. If someone is offended by what someone else is saying they should just haul off and slug the person as hard as they can. It's like the Westboro baptist people. Those idiots deserve to have their jaws broken.

On the other hand, that reaction could get you in trouble really quickly.
As a general rule, manning up and accepting that some people's world vision offends us and that's absolutely fine would be preferreable.

This. So much this.

Somehow, the whole Social Justice Jihad has changed perception to a state where "your rights end where my rights being to" "your rights end where I am offended!". And that just shouldn't be the case. I don't want to live in a world where I have to walk on eggshells out of fear that I will be punished, either by a deranged mob or by actual institutions, that I hurt someones feelings with a harmless joke.

 

[Fallow]

Ha, perhaps that is what we're seeing.

It was bad enough when corporations became legal entities. Now we're seeing feelings become a legal entity that can be harmed in abstract ways.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I'm not sure what the problem is. If I applied to a job and started spouting off nonsense like that, and it could potentially affect the image of the company I was working for, I'd expect to be fired also. Why exactly do the rules change for a scientist and not a teacher, or a lawyer, or a salesperson?

Double standards aren't cool. Either both genders can't do it or freedom of speech is FREEDOM of speech. Jesus christ people.

How exactly is this a 'freedom of speech' issue? Is it a 'freedom of speech' complaint if someone runs their mouth and someone tells them they don't want to employ them anymore?

He lost his job, it's not like they're throwing him in jail. It was a joke in bad taste, and the reaction might be over or above what would normally be expected. But if you piss off your employer, you piss off your employer. Which is why most of us learn the lesson pretty darn quickly that running your mouth can get you in trouble. That's neither 'freedom of speech' concern, that's just common sense.

Guess what, I lost a job for saying less to a customer when I was slumming it in a restaurant during uni. Is that a freedom of expression issue?

 

[Terminal Blue]

I don't want to live in a world where I have to walk on eggshells out of fear that I will be punished, either by a deranged mob or by actual institutions, that I hurt someones feelings with a harmless joke.

Well, you do.

In the real world, people have responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is not to embarrass the people who are decent enough to pay you a salary. You don't have a "right" to a salary or to limitless job security just because you work in academia. You have to earn it like the rest of us.

I have a friend, an early career researcher and university lecturer and quite typical of my friends in academia, except she's also one of the best academics I know and I can see her work having real impact. If she told a "joke" like that in front of her students (or if I, as a GTA, did in front of mine for that matter) it wouldn't even make it to tumblr, we'd simply vanish and replaced with someone else. My friend is not 72, she's 30, and that would probably be the end of her career because you genuinely can't afford a missing reference as an early career researcher. What I'm saying here is that this is something we all learn now because it's life and death, you don't embarrass your institution if you want to keep your job.

In the past, maybe you could slide through, get tenure and then sit there fucking your students and wanking off your ego for the rest of your life while your institution was powerless to curb you, and maybe in a way that was good for free speech, but those days are gone.. And actually, I don't think I'm as sad as I should be about that, because why the fuck should someone get paid a salary to fly to Korea and tell women how they can't stop crying when the rest of us are begging for metaphorical scraps and can't afford a train ticket to get to conferences?

Goddamn it, I sound really right-wing don't I? But seriously, answer me that question.. why should someone be paid an extremely comfortable salary on the basis of having "paid their dues" and then expect to be able to fly around the world making an ass of themselves when the next generation of researchers can't even find jobs?

 

[Norithics]

Y'all act like Tumblr got him fired or somethin'.
He was fired by his superiors. If they didn't think it was worth firing him over, he'd still be working there. If I said something that ridiculous at my job, I'd be fired too! That's how that works. Welcome to the real world, as they say.

Furthermore, the article's slant is hilarious. It says they "didn't even get his side of the story," but his side was the very first side that got to be heard- he was the one who said it! Then he reinforced it. Then he started getting scared and tried to put up a front of it being a joke. Yeah, sorry, don't buy it.

But then, it's not as if an out of touch academic ever got backlash for misjudging Gamers, right?
Oh.
Oh right.

 

[Kathinka]

I don't want to live in a world where I have to walk on eggshells out of fear that I will be punished, either by a deranged mob or by actual institutions, that I hurt someones feelings with a harmless joke.

Well, you do.

In the real world, people have responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is not to embarrass the people who are decent enough to pay you a salary. You don't have a "right" to a salary or to limitless job security just because you work in academia. You have to earn it like the rest of us.

I have a friend, an early career researcher and university lecturer and quite typical of my friends in academia, also one of the best academics I know and whose work could have real impact. If she told a "joke" like that in front of her students (or if I, as a GTA, did in front of mine for that matter) it wouldn't even make it to tumblr, we'd simply vanish and replaced with someone else. My friend is not 72, she's 30, and that would probably be the end of her career because you genuinely can't afford a missing reference as an early career researcher. What I'm saying here is that this is something we all learn now because it's life and death, you don't embarrass your institution if you want to keep your job.

In the past, maybe you could slide through, get tenure and then sit there fucking your students and wanking off your ego for the rest of your life while your institution was powerless to curb you, and maybe in a way that was good for free speech, but those days are gone. Actually, I don't think I'm as sad as I should be about that, because why the fuck should someone get paid a salary to fly to Korea and tell women how they can't stop crying when the rest of us are begging for scraps and can't afford a train ticket to get to conferences?

Goddamn it, I sound really right-wing don't I? But seriously, answer me that question.. why should someone be paid an extremely comfortable salary on the basis of having "paid their dues" and then expect to be able to fly around the world making an ass of themselves when the next generation of researchers can't even find jobs?

I get what you are saying, and I'm not arguing that anyone should be able to do that. But one should be allowed to make some jokes that don't harm anyone without people losing their shit because TRIGGERED.

 

[Ariseishirou]

Goddamn it, I sound really right-wing don't I? But seriously, answer me that question.. why should someone be paid an extremely comfortable salary on the basis of having "paid their dues" and then expect to be able to fly around the world making an ass of themselves when the next generation of researchers can't even find jobs?

As someone else who works in STEM, you sir deserve a standing ovation.

I am really disappointed that a number of people who criticise others for "listening and believing" are completely ignoring some important facts in this situation:

Sir Tim Hunt, who is a Royal Society fellow, reportedly told a conference in South Korea women in labs "cry" when you criticise them and "fall in love" with their male counterparts.

He told the BBC he "did mean" the remarks but was "really sorry"....adding it was "a very stupid thing to do in the presence of all those journalists".

"I did mean the part about having trouble with girls," he said. "It is true that people - I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it's very disruptive to the science because it's terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field.

"I found that these emotional entanglements made life very difficult.

"I'm really, really sorry I caused any offence, that's awful. I certainly didn't mean that. I just meant to be honest, actually."

"It's terribly important that you can criticise people's ideas without criticising them and if they burst into tears, it means that you tend to hold back from getting at the absolute truth.

"Science is about nothing but getting at the truth and anything that gets in the way of that diminishes, in my experience, the science."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33077107

It should be noted that it was not even a quick quip as some present it either:

Connie St Louis, a lecturer in science journalism at City University, was in the 100-strong audience in South Korea..."The Korean female scientists who hosted us looked aghast and he just ploughed on for about five to seven minutes."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33077107

His defence that it was a joke simply cannot stand either, given that he stands by his comments.

The British biochemist, who was knighted in 2006, said the remarks were "intended as a light-hearted, ironic comment" but had been "interpreted deadly seriously by my audience".

He went on to say he stood by some of the remarks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33077107

The fact he is being supported by the likes of Brian Cox and Boris Johnson is a shame - particularly since the latter is not really making things any better:

But Mr Johnson said the response was an "overreaction" and it was not wrong to point out "gender differences"...said it was scientific fact that women cried more than men...did not deserve to be "pilloried" for pointing out "a natural phenomenon", he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33137497

That is not the context of the comments, Mr. Johnson.

It is unfortunate that he had to lose his job over this, but as a Noble Laureate you are essentially a scientific ambassador to the wider world (never mind your duties as a representative of your university as a professor; nor that whilst speaking in a professional capacity you are expected to be professional) and comments such as his can be argued to harm the perception of science and deter bright minds who would otherwise be interested in following scientific careers.

Also, thank you for this. Unfortunately, nobody outraged by his firing is going to read this. They've already confirmed their bias ("durn those Tumblr feminist SJWs, ruining science!"), said their piece, and will move on with their worldview unchallenged.

 

[Ariseishirou]

I don't want to live in a world where I have to walk on eggshells out of fear that I will be punished, either by a deranged mob or by actual institutions, that I hurt someones feelings with a harmless joke.

Well, you do.

In the real world, people have responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is not to embarrass the people who are decent enough to pay you a salary. You don't have a "right" to a salary or to limitless job security just because you work in academia. You have to earn it like the rest of us.

I have a friend, an early career researcher and university lecturer and quite typical of my friends in academia, also one of the best academics I know and whose work could have real impact. If she told a "joke" like that in front of her students (or if I, as a GTA, did in front of mine for that matter) it wouldn't even make it to tumblr, we'd simply vanish and replaced with someone else. My friend is not 72, she's 30, and that would probably be the end of her career because you genuinely can't afford a missing reference as an early career researcher. What I'm saying here is that this is something we all learn now because it's life and death, you don't embarrass your institution if you want to keep your job.

In the past, maybe you could slide through, get tenure and then sit there fucking your students and wanking off your ego for the rest of your life while your institution was powerless to curb you, and maybe in a way that was good for free speech, but those days are gone. Actually, I don't think I'm as sad as I should be about that, because why the fuck should someone get paid a salary to fly to Korea and tell women how they can't stop crying when the rest of us are begging for scraps and can't afford a train ticket to get to conferences?

Goddamn it, I sound really right-wing don't I? But seriously, answer me that question.. why should someone be paid an extremely comfortable salary on the basis of having "paid their dues" and then expect to be able to fly around the world making an ass of themselves when the next generation of researchers can't even find jobs?

I get what you are saying, and I'm not arguing that anyone should be able to do that. But one should be allowed to make some jokes that don't harm anyone without people losing their shit because TRIGGERED.

1. They weren't jokes. He meant them, and even doubled down on them later. The "joke" line didn't come out until much later when the backlash started. Read his actual statements, as linked by Superbeast above.

2. Speaking as a woman in a scientific profession, these (not at all) "jokes" do _tremendous_ harm when they perpetuate ideas about women and their place in the laboratory that dissuade, discourage, and stifle their careers. Read the comments he made linked above where he doubled-down on saying women cry too much, and that this is damaging to the scientific process. He truly believes this. He refers to it as a "fact." Now tell me how this is "funny" and how this view does no one any harm when your boss at the lab holds it: that you are an inherently over-emotional crybaby, and that your presence in the lab impedes the scientific process. Hilarious! Right? You would definitely not want that guy fired, his view is mostly definitely never going to harm your career, eh?

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

People criticizing totalitarian governments are also "expected" to go to jail. It doesn't mean it's not wrong that it's happening.

How is that even relevant? Or is this just hyperbole? He lost his job, he's not blindfolded and tied to a stake awaiting a 7 gun salute. As I stated ... I've personally lost a job for saying something less to a customer. You don't see me screaming about 'totalitarianism' because I pissed off my employer and they chose not to employ me anymore.

And just because employers do immoral acts for the sake of their profits and reputation does not make said acts less immoral. After all - government also has to care about it's prestige and reputation, but when it starts employing it's power to punish people for damaging said reputation, we somehow find it wrong and straight out tyrannical.

'Immoral' ... an employer fired him for running his mouth. That's neither 'immoral', nor 'inethical', nor a social cataclysm. Trust me, the sky is not falling if someone gets fired for running their mouth and pissing off the wrong people. I pissed off some clients in one of my jobs, boss axed me. Sky did not fall, and no police paddy wagons came to pick me up.

(Edit) Also, back up a moment. Companies are immoral for wanting to be efficient and marketable in their image so as to be profitable? As a person who has run businesses, we employers and business owners proper are not all guilty of some 'immorality'. If anything, how can you criticise someone firing another person for running their mouth, if you then decide that all business owners and managers of business are immoral because they seek people who will best promote their image?

By all means, I'll just give you my mission statement and company policies and you can dictate to me how to run my business ... in the hopes that I'm not the one seen as tyrannical. Does that seem as hypocritical to you as it does to me? I would hope so ...

And yes, it's a freedom of speech concern. Because freedom of speech is a moral and juridical principle, that believed to be fundamental in determining the morality of a democratic society.

I assure you, his right to free expression is maintained. He can run his mouth off AS MUCH AS HE WANTS. Unless he breaks into someone's private property to do it or begins to threaten violence towards someone, or delving into people's trashcans to get dirt on them, his rights are maintained. Because he hasn't done anything legally wrong. Unless you wish to point me to where he's being charged with a crime?

When we justify any actions that don't fit said principle by mentioning a different moral context like reputation and profits - we simply admit that freedom of speech is irrelevant in our society, for it is run by different morals and principles. And Tim Hunt was not merely criticized by his fellows - he was punished by his higher-ups for what he said, and in no way that fits any concept for free speech.

How? Everybody eventually gets punished by higher ups because of what they say or do. Everybody. If I call a customer a ****, I'll get fired. Rightly so. If I call my co-workers cunts and repeatedly verbally harass, I'll be fired for it. And rightly so...

 

[Angelblaze]

Gotta love the irony for the first couple pages of this thread.


People bashing a vague source, for bashing a man over the head for 'a joke', and claiming that that 'vague source' was over aggressive, jumped to conclusions and was hasty in its decision making.

Of course, not realizing that it wasn't a joke, people just assumed that it was a 'joke' like the headlines said, became over aggressive, jumped to conclusions and was hasty in its posting.

Good work people, nice journalism here.
--

In addition, very nice job again for people who don't know the difference between 'Freedom of Speech' and 'facing the socially enforced consequences of your actions'. Applause, applause.

 

[Ariseishirou]

What in Tim Hunt's supposedly sexist statement is that he was talking about how often scientific work and cooperation becomes all about people and their relations and feelings, while it should be about science.

Oh, that's horseshit. It would be easy to make a statement about how often relationships and feelings get in the way of the scientific process that any scientist in the world would agree with: virtually every controversy, every contested priority claim, etc., has been accompanied by battles of egos, in-fighting, power plays, rivalries, researchers using personal connections to get published/promoted, grudges, hurt feelings, etc., long before women were allowed in the laboratory at many institutions.

But that's not what he's saying. You're spin doctoring his statements. He's a Nobel Laureate, he doesn't need some random internet commenter white knighting for him by lying about his claims. He's pinning this emotionality and science-ruining relationship focus on women, specifically, when it couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[Fallow]

I don't want to live in a world where I have to walk on eggshells out of fear that I will be punished, either by a deranged mob or by actual institutions, that I hurt someones feelings with a harmless joke.

Well, you do.

In the real world, people have responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is not to embarrass the people who are decent enough to pay you a salary. You don't have a "right" to a salary or to limitless job security just because you work in academia. You have to earn it like the rest of us.

I have a friend, an early career researcher and university lecturer and quite typical of my friends in academia, except she's also one of the best academics I know and I can see her work having real impact. If she told a "joke" like that in front of her students (or if I, as a GTA, did in front of mine for that matter) it wouldn't even make it to tumblr, we'd simply vanish and replaced with someone else. My friend is not 72, she's 30, and that would probably be the end of her career because you genuinely can't afford a missing reference as an early career researcher. What I'm saying here is that this is something we all learn now because it's life and death, you don't embarrass your institution if you want to keep your job.

In the past, maybe you could slide through, get tenure and then sit there fucking your students and wanking off your ego for the rest of your life while your institution was powerless to curb you, and maybe in a way that was good for free speech, but those days are gone.. And actually, I don't think I'm as sad as I should be about that, because why the fuck should someone get paid a salary to fly to Korea and tell women how they can't stop crying when the rest of us are begging for metaphorical scraps and can't afford a train ticket to get to conferences?

Goddamn it, I sound really right-wing don't I? But seriously, answer me that question.. why should someone be paid an extremely comfortable salary on the basis of having "paid their dues" and then expect to be able to fly around the world making an ass of themselves when the next generation of researchers can't even find jobs?

Ahh, now it makes sense. You're jelly.
What is even more adorable is that you're calling a Nobel Laureate, an academic paragon, knighted for his accomplishments in service to humanity, an "ego-wanking student fucker".

I would love to hear the tale when your loved ones get really really sick, and you can sit by their bed and explain to them how the advancement and development of modern medicine wasn't as important as being jealous and outraged. Watching someone close to you die of cancer without the ability to do anything kinda sucks, and your intolerance consigns a lot more people to that fate.

Now simmer down because your entitlement is embarassing everyone that actually works to advance in academia.