Forty Two wrote:
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?
And that in his ideal world there would be gender-segregated labs - yes, the views under discussion.
Forty Two wrote:
Link? I looked and read the author's articles. Not there. Can you support your assertion?
I'm noticing a common trend here where people defending him have to magically forget all the relevant information on this issue in order to pretend that everything's okay...
His initial apology is discussed
here where he says:
"Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Wednesday, Hunt apologised for any offence, saying he meant the remarks to be humorous – but added he “did mean the part about having trouble with girls”.
He 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.
“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.”
In a statement, Hunt said: “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.”
In other words, he was sorry for the offence, not the comments, which he was kind of serious about.
Forty Two wrote:
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.[/quote]
That sounds like an extremist statement from you. Must be those evil SJWS!!!
Forty Two wrote:
Ah, excellent argument. There's no sexism problem here, as demonstrated by the use of sexist slurs.
Where's the link?[/quote]
Just above.
mistermack wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:
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.
Just to be clear, you understand that you aren't helping your position here? The fact that some clearly sexist dude on the internet is saying Tim Hunt isn't sexist doesn't exactly scream respectability.
DaveDodo007 wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:
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.
You've obviously meant to respond to someone else's comments as none of that applies to mine. Although if you're concerned about authoritarian positions, you really should cut back on your attacks on free speech and freedom of expression. Seriously I will never be able to see eye to eye with your demands to restrict them in such extreme ways.
DaveDodo007 wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:
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.
I know what the functions are, I work in science and frequently talk with Emeritus professors. They are just a bunch of old people that the university respects enough to allow them to wander through the labs occasionally and sometimes pay to fly around the place promoting their universities. I suppose they're more similar to "booth babes" than PR people.
DaveDodo007 wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:
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.
All sources state that he resigned,
even he himself says so: "The beleaguered British biologist Sir Tim Hunt has revealed that he was forced to resign from his post at University College London (UCL) without being given a chance to explain his controversial remarks about women in science.".
Maybe check your facts first.
DaveDodo007 wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:
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.
He was given due process for the position he held. What are you talking about? I just don't agree with your authoritarian stance that employers have to jump through loopholes that you're inventing on the spot because you're not happy with them having the power to fire people who do a bad job.
DaveDodo007 wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:
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.
What the fuck are you talking about? Universities are the opposite of bastions for free speech - they are institutions where only very specific discussions are allowed, from only those who are qualified, to talk only in ways that are methodologically agreed upon prior to the discussion. They regularly turn people away from conferences for spouting bullshit ideas, work together to bring down journals that aren't respectable or qualified to publish those articles, etc.
Have you ever stepped foot inside a university?
As for evidence of the "ad campagin", you're the one who fucking said they advertised it. I simply said they had to make a public statement using your preferred terminology. Do you have any evidence for your assertion that it was an advertising campaign?
DaveDodo007 wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:
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.
Huh? No, I'm saying that your claims are assertions without evidence. You can't respond to the accusation that you're making assertions without evidence by asking for that assertion to be evidenced. That makes no sense.
Are you drunk right now?
Forty Two wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote: 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.
I love how you make so many claims which are pulled directly from your ass without supporting them. Beautiful work there.
Anyway, it's amazing that this thread has reached the point where the people defending Tim Hunt has dropped the pretense that they were fighting for "free speech" or against "mob rule", and just blatantly engaging in sexism. It is good to know that the only people who would bother to defend Hunt are sexist assholes.
“The real question is not whether machines think but whether men do. The mystery which surrounds a thinking machine already surrounds a thinking man.” - B. F. Skinner.
