What Nobel winner Tim Hunt's sexist outburst actually says

[Forty Two]

Equality is good, right? I'm told it's all the rage these days. Kumbaya and Michael Row the Boat Ashore, I'm witchya, soul-sista!

Equality? That's like computer/internet quality, right?

[Forty Two]

If he were simply a scientist working in a lab, perhaps being sacked would have been a little harsh. However, from what I gather, he had a very definite PR role, which would be incompatible with the comments he made.

His role would have been Emeritus Professor, which is not really the same as PR person. His knowledge and expertise would have been invaluable to the university. Even then if they had suspended him pending an investigation which was conducted in a professional manner. If his behaviour was found to be inappropriate then they could have either. Have him apologize whilst using it as a teaching moment. Or even just let him go (quietly) if they thought that keeping him on was detrimental to the university image. Remember he claims that he wasn't given a chance to defend himself. Having him railroaded out of a job because of a lot of outrage twitters with the IQ of a donut, well he didn't deserve that. I hope all the people who helped him lose his position wont use any medicine that his work helped to make. Who I'm I kidding they are all hypocrites.

And, all he said was that women fall in love with men, and men fall in love with women, and when you criticize them, they cry -- ba dum bump -- "but seriously...."

I mean -- folks like to refer to "his views" and "his sexist comments" and then make declarations about how unacceptable it was. Certainly, there are sexist comments -- like, someone seriously saying that women are less valuable or worthwhile than men and we should keep them at home and out of the workplace -- vs. what Hunt said. It's a world of difference in degree.

[Forty Two]

What amazes me, is that he bowed to pressure, and resigned these posts.

He should have stayed where he was, and refused to resign, and not made it easy for those pathetic weasels.

And, never, ever, ever apologize. Don't try to assuage their feelings. It's the mob. They aren't really hurt. They're opportunists with an agenda.

[Forty Two]

You're going to need to be a bit more specific about what "beliefs" you think he reaffirmed.

...Well I thought that'd be clear - the beliefs he mentioned in the speech that eventually caused him to resign.

That women and men fall in love with each other in labs, and that women cry when he's criticized them (seems to be referring to women having a greater tendency than men to cry). Those views?

I googled Deborah Blum and tim Hunt and read articles regarding the incident. Nowhere does he "reaffirm beliefs."

He said he was joking, and when we read the transcript, it sure as heck comes across as an attempt at humor. I mean, his joke as the three part rhythm of a joke -- "let me tell you my problem with girls" --- point one, point two and on the third point it feels like he's punching the joke - ba dum bump. Then he says "But seriously...." and proceeds to be more serious about it.

The most Blum said is that he said he was "being honest" and we don't know what he's being honest about -- that people fall in love with each other in the workplace? That women are more apt to cry? That he's a male chauvinist monster?

Except for the parts where he says he isn't joking and in his apology where he doesn't say that he's joking (until his second apology after his resignation where he claims he was being jocular and ironic).

Link? I looked and read the author's articles. Not there. Can you support your assertion?

His big mistake was in trying to apologize for it. Apologies to the social justice extremist crowd are blood in the water for sharks.

Only when the apologies are non-apologies, like in Hunt's case. Also, I find it absolutely hilarious that the notion of social justice is viewed as "extreme" to bigots. I mean, it makes sense but to most reasonable people the idea of equality is viewed as a normal and uncontroversial thing.

I didn't say all of social justice folks are extremists - I referred to those that are extremist. Like feminists. Many are fine, some are extremist. It's the extremist, vocal, activist crowd that won't accept apologies.

Equality IS a normal and conventional thing. However, social justice extremists are not concerned with equality, and they tend to be liars.

'

The Blum woman doesn't quote his words, and is clearly putting her own spin on what he ACTUALLY said.
She's a cunt.

So that's the link that Samsa omitted?

I'm not surprised.

Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.

Where's the link?

[mistermack]

She's a cunt.

Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.

Not at all. You're a cunt too.

[DaveDodo007]

So let's try to put this into the story: he made the comments at the time and the people questioned him where he reaffirmed his beliefs. He was asked after the speech by a journalist who he says he can be honest with because she seems tougher than most women and won't cry on him, where he reaffirms his belief. He then attempts his first apology where he reaffirms his belief.

And now apparently the Daily Mail has found out that he doesn't really believe those things and said something different?

That's some amazing skeptic work there Dave, and entirely convenient that it happens to confirm your prior beliefs when we ignore all other evidence to the contrary.

My position has been the same from the start of this thread, I don't care if he meant it or not. He has done more for science and more for women in science than all the outrage brigade have or will ever do. The latest information if true will just show the mendacity of his opponents, that's all.

Delusional. There's no other word for your eagerness to dismiss reality and replace it with misogynistic ramblings.

Assertion, authoritarian stance, insult, damn! You forgot the shaming comment or you would have the lefty/liberal method of debating down to a T.

If he were simply a scientist working in a lab, perhaps being sacked would have been a little harsh. However, from what I gather, he had a very definite PR role, which would be incompatible with the comments he made.

His role would have been Emeritus Professor, which is not really the same as PR person. His knowledge and expertise would have been invaluable to the university.

That's the same thing. An Emeritus professor will rarely even go into the university, meet any of the researchers or do anything with science. Their role is to basically play mascot and lend respectability to the university by having their name associated with them, and helping with the promotion of the public understanding of science. It's at best a PR position and more realistically just an honorary title.

Look up the function/duties of both positions. There is no way they are even remotely close to one another.

Even then if they had suspended him pending an investigation which was conducted in a professional manner. If his behaviour was found to be inappropriate then they could have either.

Well he chose to resign (not that there was even really a position to resign from).

He certainly did not, he says so himself "wasn't allowed to defend myself","I was hung out to dry." and I have provided links with this information in it. You are not responsible for UCL lying but you could have looked for Tim's side of the story for balance considering he was the focus of the story.

Have him apologize whilst using it as a teaching moment.

He had a couple of chances to apologise and he kept saying the same thing.

So an accusation is guilt now and he isn't allowed due process, I seeing this a lot from the left and liberals, cut it out.

Or even just let him go (quietly) if they thought that keeping him on was detrimental to the university image.

They had to advertise it to get some respectability back. They would have been laughing stocks if academics thought that they hadn't taken any action.

Do you have any evidence for this ad campaign or is it just another assertion. You haven't a clue how higher educational institutes work do you. They are supposed to be bastions of free speech and open discussion. A veritable market place of ideas. STEM fields doubly so.

Remember he claims that he wasn't given a chance to defend himself. Having him railroaded out of a job because of a lot of outrage twitters with the IQ of a donut, well he didn't deserve that. I hope all the people who helped him lose his position wont use any medicine that his work helped to make. Who I'm I kidding they are all hypocrites.

Just note that none of that is true.

Another assertion and shows you are not keeping up with this thread. The first two are claims by the man himself so if you think he is lying then provide evidence. The rest is my opinion though I think am on solid ground with my views of twitter uses.

[Forty Two]

She's a cunt.

Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.

Not at all. You're a cunt too.

Cunt is sexist. You should use the non-sexist slur "dick" instead.

[Hermit]

And, all he said was that women fall in love with men, and men fall in love with women, and when you criticize them, they cry...

Meaning what? That he welcomes women as equal coworkers in his labs? Yeah. Right. As for is so called apology, Hunt said: "It is true … 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." Sounds like he was doubling up on his "joke" that there is no place for women in his laboratory, even though he does not actually own it.

[mistermack]

She's a cunt.

Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.

Not at all. You're a cunt too.

Cunt is sexist. You should use the non-sexist slur "dick" instead.

Oh, nnnnoooo...

I think accuracy is important here.

[Forty Two]

And, all he said was that women fall in love with men, and men fall in love with women, and when you criticize them, they cry...

Meaning what? That he welcomes women as equal coworkers in his labs? Yeah. Right. As for is so called apology, Hunt said: "It is true … 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." Sounds like he was doubling up on his "joke" that there is no place for women in his laboratory, even though he does not actually own it.

Saying it's disruptive to have relationships like that in the workplace is not sexist. He didn't blame "women" for it. It's disruptive in just about any workplace. What's the big effing deal?

And saying it's "disruptive" is not the same thing as saying there is "no place for women in his laboratory."

And, making lighthearted banter about an "it's funny cuz it's true" bit is not sexism. It's just a quip. A funny thing to say before one says "now seriously..." and goes on with the discussion.

On another point, this whole notion that we have to "welcome" women into the workplace to a greater degree than we do men is really rather infantilizing of women. Nobody really "welcomes" men into the workplace per se. You are hired and you're expected to produce, and if you fuck up, you are called to the carpet on it. And, the workplace was far more "abusive" to men traditionally than it ever was to women.

We've always had etiquette when speaking to women. You can't say this in front of women -- a workplace can't have such and such talk around women. When dealing with women you have to understand they don't negotiate and don't step forward as much as men, so we have welcome them and urge them more and support them. Etc. Etc. Etc. With men, traditionally, it was -- can you do the job? Well you better as fuck do it, because if you don't, then fuck you.

[Forty Two]

She's a cunt.

Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.

Not at all. You're a cunt too.

Cunt is sexist. You should use the non-sexist slur "dick" instead.

Oh, nnnnoooo...

I think accuracy is important here.

Maybe just say "You genital!"

Then nobody could complain.

[DaveDodo007]

If he were simply a scientist working in a lab, perhaps being sacked would have been a little harsh. However, from what I gather, he had a very definite PR role, which would be incompatible with the comments he made.

His role would have been Emeritus Professor, which is not really the same as PR person. His knowledge and expertise would have been invaluable to the university. Even then if they had suspended him pending an investigation which was conducted in a professional manner. If his behaviour was found to be inappropriate then they could have either. Have him apologize whilst using it as a teaching moment. Or even just let him go (quietly) if they thought that keeping him on was detrimental to the university image. Remember he claims that he wasn't given a chance to defend himself. Having him railroaded out of a job because of a lot of outrage twitters with the IQ of a donut, well he didn't deserve that. I hope all the people who helped him lose his position wont use any medicine that his work helped to make. Who I'm I kidding they are all hypocrites.

And, all he said was that women fall in love with men, and men fall in love with women, and when you criticize them, they cry -- ba dum bump -- "but seriously...."

I mean -- folks like to refer to "his views" and "his sexist comments" and then make declarations about how unacceptable it was. Certainly, there are sexist comments -- like, someone seriously saying that women are less valuable or worthwhile than men and we should keep them at home and out of the workplace -- vs. what Hunt said. It's a world of difference in degree.

What's more his wife was a scientist and he fell in love with her in the lab, hardly the behaviour of a traditionalist. So he was (from what I have read so far) making a self-deprecation joke, though by getting all offended with his comments the outrage brigade were showing them to be accurate.

[DaveDodo007]

She's a cunt.

Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.

Not at all. You're a cunt too.

Cunt is sexist. You should use the non-sexist slur "dick" instead.

Cunt is only (considered) a sexist slur in the USA, cunt outside of the USA is mostly used against men. I only started using it against women when I found out it annoyed feminist.

[Forty Two]

It's like the Matt Taylor shirt issue all over again where most people were just calmly pointing out that maybe it wasn't an appropriate shirt to wear to such an important event, and then the outrage mongers just went insane sending death threats and attacking people because they thought there was nothing wrong with Taylor's shirt.

Nothing like standing an issue on it's head. The objections to Matt Taylor's shirt were anything but calm and reasoned.

There was nothing wrong with the shirt. Heck, if a female wore one of the outfits that was worn by the women depicted on his shirt, if anyone criticized it, they would have been resoundingly condemned for commenting on what women wear and commenting on women expressing their sexuality in their manner of dress.

The woman who gave Taylor the shirt said of it - "Everyone is entitled to have an opinion. We would all be very boring if we felt the same way about everything. I can see both sides of the coin in this debate, but as it is a style I am into, I don’t see it as offensive. But that is just my view. It is up to us to empower ourselves. We can achieve anything we want to if we have the skills and put our minds to it." -- and, of course, those that opposed the shirt were out in droves screaming bloody murder, and demanding apologies and such. The woman who gave him the shirt also said, "Everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion. I feel sometimes people can take it too far and get nasty. I feel all views can be expressed adequately if it’s done constructively. No one’s opinion is wrong or right. It’s the delivery of the opinion I feel should be considered..... I love the female form, and these pinup prints and pictures are unique and beautiful."

Her response was measured and calm. The Shirtstorm freak-out crowd were hysterical.

And, they are, of course entitled to be hysterical about it if they want. But, they are hypocrites because they're the same people who demand that nobody comment on what women wear, and that women be permitted to express their sexuality in public and in the manner of their dress.

A guy wants to wear a bowling shirt with fully clothed women on it, given to him by a female friend as a birthday present.... that's "sexist" and "ostracizing" because why? The women are of the pinup variety? Because there were women depicted at all? He should have had Chippendales images on there too, to balance it out?

First World Feminism.

[Forty Two]

She's a cunt.

Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.

Not at all. You're a cunt too.

Cunt is sexist. You should use the non-sexist slur "dick" instead.

Cunt is only (considered) a sexist slur in the USA, cunt outside of the USA is mostly used against men. I only started using it against women when I found out it annoyed feminist.

Dick isn't a sexist slur, because you can't be sexist against men, as they are the privileged ones. It's punching up, not down, so it's o.k., and not sexist.