Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Criticizes Role of Women In Labs 412
An anonymous reader writes: Tim Hunt is an English biochemist most notable for winning the 2001 Nobel prize in physiology or medicine. Today he's become notable for something else entirely — at the World Conference of Science Journalists, Hunt suggested science labs should be segregated by gender. He said, "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 criticize them, they cry." As you might expect, this set off a firestorm of criticism. Many asked Hunt to treat women in labs with the same respect he is afforded, and others held it up as an explicit example of the sexism that pervades the scientific community. Hunt later issued an apology, saying, "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."
I knew it! (Score:5, Funny)
Today is Friday! Thanks, Dice!
Re:I knew it! (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can someone explain this comment to me?
Thanks
Re:I knew it! (Score:5, Informative)
>>>> Today is Friday! Thanks, Dice!
>> someone explain this comment to me
Web traffic generally falls on Friday, so the theory is that Dice waits to throw a troll-worthy article, often about perceived sexism/racism, up on SlashDot on a Friday morning to keep the advertisers happy.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus, Friday afternoon at the office is a really good time for really getting stuck into a pointless flame war. That, or after returning home drunk.
I like the "flamefest Fridays". They're fun.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh. I thought Hot Topic owned us. What's Dice?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do they? Seems like owning this place would be a bit of a gamble.
One of James D's pals, no doubt (Score:2, Insightful)
The good news is if he runs into tough times, a Russian businessman will buy his Nobel at an auction and then give it back to him.
And what if he's right? (Score:2, Insightful)
Since this DOES happen, what's the fix? Pretending that there's no shenanigans going doesn't make it any better.
Re:And what if he's right? (Score:5, Insightful)
Since this DOES happen, what's the fix?
The fix is for people to deal with it, like grown-ups. Office romances happen across the entire working population. If people are idiots there's fallout. So far the world has survived, and nothing needs to be done to fix this.
Also, if you want to fix it, what do you do about gay people? segregate them out so you have one gay person in an all-straight office of the opposite gender? And just isolate those awkward bisexual people on their own?
Nothing needs to be done.
Re: (Score:3)
Clearly he's the rock star scientist.
Your average geek story would go something like this...
"you fall in love with them"
"they reject you and things become awkward"
"you cry when they criticize you"
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm... I much prefer Conan the Barbarian's office rules.
- Crush your enemies
- See them driven before you
- Hear the lamentations of their women
Re:And what if he's right? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, and I would need my own lab because I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I’m fucking retarded but I don’t care, I’m beautiful. I’m having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me "Apache" and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can’t accept me you’re a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding.
Re:And what if he's right? (Score:4, Interesting)
The fix is for people to deal with it, like grown-ups. Office romances happen across the entire working population. If people are idiots there's fallout. So far the world has survived, and nothing needs to be done to fix this.
Significant enough numbers of grown-ups are sufficiently unable to act like grownups that yeah, the rest of us really do need to fix it.
More importantly, this is not new. Interpersonal struggles and conflict are as old as humanity itself, and we've discovered, as a species, that we really do benefit from having rules, laws, guidelines, and social norms to help us navigate these choppy waters.
"Just deal with it like grownups" is a cop-out philosophy of managers not wanting to do their jobs and employees not wanting to grow beyond what they already are. "Just deal with it like grownups" means nothing more than "I don't like dealing with the strife and drama that is the human condition, therefore I'll pretend that MY employees/co-workers are somehow magically above all that."
Lastly, if you think that the world has survived without people having done anything to fix this, well, you [bible.com] haven't [archives.gov] been [ancient.eu] paying [luther.de] any [cornell.edu] attention [google.com] at [justice.gov.za] all [forbes.com].
Re: (Score:3)
So, we need to set rules on human behavior based upon the limitations of the people who are unable to act like grownups?
You haven't thought this thing through, friend.
Why not just expect grownups to act like grownups and ask the ones who cannot to leave the lab?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And what if he's right? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the problem is not so much the office romance but the office breakup. Yours worked out because it didn't result in a breakup.
Re:And what if he's right? (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, that said, employers are entitled to setup policies as they see fit: I just think such policies are generally repressive and don't address the heart of the issue.
Without intending to start a general Libertarianism-is-good-no-it's-bad argument, I'll just say that I think employers that think it's okay to try to control their employees' private lives in that way are despicable. It is none of your business what I do outside of work, and if you think it is, then fuck you.
I'm not saying regulations against a direct supervisor dating a subordinate, or stuff like that, are offensive. But there is a very clear line, and that line is at preventing clear, work-related conflicts of interest that would be caused by the relationship. And even in that case it's more respectful to have a policy like "report it so we can deal with the conflict of interest through reassignment, etc." rather than "don't do it".
Oh and segregating a workplace by gender is so stupidly ridiculous that it would honestly shock me if anyone not in the cultural orbit of backwaters like Saudi Arabia proposed it seriously. So I'm going to assume this guy wasn't serious, because he'd have to be such a shithead to seriously suggest that that it's more likely he was joking.
Re: (Score:2)
My experience is that most places once they are large enough to have to have real company policies have policies on office romances, and they tend to be not "Thou shalt not make a pass!" but more that you can't date within the same management structure. It's far more about power dynamics than office politics.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Since this DOES happen, what's the fix?
We fire the guy for speaking his mind. We replace him with a female scientist.
And we pretend that this very kind of problem doesn't happen in any of the female-dominated professions.
Re: (Score:2)
Until they contaminate the samples in the test tubes.
Hialrious (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And you know, if he left out the part about "they cry" this wouldn't be newsworthy. Also, if we just said the fall-in-love bits and padded the end with the Einstein quote about science not being able to explain why people fall in love; this would be placed in a totally different light.
Re: (Score:2)
That being said, while one instance is not proof of a widespread issue, the many many instances we hear reported on nearly a daily basi
Married and having affairs (Score:2, Redundant)
So I see from Wikipedia and other sources that he is married to professor Mary Collins, immunologist. I wonder how she feels about him falling in love with women in the workplace. I know my wife doesn't take too kindly to that.
Re:Married and having affairs (Score:4, Insightful)
Ever think that she might have been the women he fell in love with at the lab?
Re: (Score:2)
Ever think that she might have been the women he fell in love with at the lab?
Yes, I wonder about that. The exact chronology there could be very illuminating.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Who cares about this guy's personal life. He's a scientist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This man is a fool (Score:2)
If you have to pick one rule to stick to at work, it's don't date your coworker.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
we could also grow up as a species and fulfill the desires without the needless stigma.
Re: (Score:2)
He responded to the question "what is the problem with women in science" with something he felt would be funny and people would laugh at. When he was informed others didn't find it funny, he apologized. What more do people want? When did it happen that science geeks were expected to have good social skills?
Re:This man is a fool (Score:4, Insightful)
It's unfortunate.
People say all sorts of stupid, ill judged things when one's brain isn't as fully connected as one might wish it to be. I know I have. I'm glad none of them have been broadcast to the world.
Then why say "you" instead of "I"? (Score:3, Insightful)
"I was just being honest about my own shortcomings -- by talking about what 'you' do when there are women in the lab. 'You', of course, being a straight male, because duh, who else would I be bothering to talk to about science?"
Re: (Score:2)
"I was just being honest about my own shortcomings -- by talking about what 'you' do when there are women in the lab. 'You', of course, being a straight male, because duh, who else would I be bothering to talk to about science?"
Well, what you have to realize is... see what I did there? It's totally normal.
Let this be a warning. (Score:5, Insightful)
In a world where the Internet gives every crackpot a soapbox from which to preach to his fellow crackpots, it's not longer possible to distinguish ironic self-deprecation from a serious but deranged complaint about other people.
Huh? Wasn't it clear that he was joking? (Score:5, Insightful)
What idiot can be so humour-impaired as to not realize that Hunt was just kidding? And it was a pretty tame, light-hearted joke at it.
Re:Huh? Wasn't it clear that he was joking? (Score:4, Interesting)
Q: How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: THAT'S NOT FUNNY
The whole speech apparently was not recorded, so all we've seen is the cherry-picked remarks. Maybe he's really a misogynist of Marc Lepine's level. More likely, though, it was British humor.
Nobel laureats are super specialists. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No, please; put it down.
So is this the "new apologizing"? (Score:4, Insightful)
"I'm sorry you were offended. I'm not sorry for what I said."?
Re: (Score:2)
"I'm sorry I'm not sorry enough for you!"
Re: (Score:2)
No, because it's not even remotely new. I inherited a stack of vintage Mad magazines going back to the earliest days of that magazine from my grandfather a while back, and I remember it poking fun at that sort of nonapology. That said, I'd be surprised if you couldn't find evidence of the same type of nonapology going back basically as far as language itself.
Nobel is an Misogynistic Organization (Score:2)
Earned his Noble stamp of approval!
Did you think that Nobel-anything would respect women?
Just because you're a scientist.... (Score:2, Informative)
I'm Not Sorry: It's Not Sexism (Score:2)
Acknowledging the consequences of gender is not sexist.
Too many stupid people confuse issues that are intrinsic to gender with sexism... The fact that humans have gender creates problems, some are specific to one gender and some apply to both: Women need bras... that's not sexist, that is being a woman.
In this case; Straight people of opposite genders have higher probability of being attracted to each other, this creates issues in the workplace - not exactly shocking is it.
Feminazis what us to be asexual or
Re:I'm Not Sorry: It's Not Sexism (Score:5, Insightful)
Acknowledging the consequences of gender is not sexist.
Yes, but calling for segregation is. So is stating that women are not capable of handling criticism (unless you've got some objective evidence). He said both of those things.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
>> stating that women are not capable of handling criticism (unless you've got some objective evidence).
you're either
a) female
b) been single all your life
c) found and dated the one woman on the planet who can handle criticism calmly.
Re: (Score:2)
>> stating that women are not capable of handling criticism (unless you've got some objective evidence).
you're either
a) female
b) been single all your life
c) found and dated the one woman on the planet who can handle criticism calmly.
I think the existence of GamerGate shows that this is not anything unique to women.
Re: (Score:3)
If you think that's an honest call for segregation, than I shudder to think what happens when you're at a stand-up comedy show. Then again, Jerry Seinfeld made that point recently [youtube.com].
How about the example where the Nobel prize winning scientist made a poor joke that they can't take criticism, and it blew up into a huge feminist issue with him being labelled a misogynis
Honesty (Score:2)
Very good. Get your prize, speak your mind.
It is isn't hatred of woman (misogyny) to hold that woman are different in important respects and are sometimes suited for different roles as general rule. Maybe that view is sexist (never heard the word defined, honestly) but then reality is sexist and we a need a another word to describe unjust unequal treatment on the basis of gender.
And even if you are of the 'gender is a social construct or personal preference point of view, though to be fair I've never met an
Ladies: the lab is no place for you (Score:2)
If a ladies are allowed in the lab, scientists will be continually distracted by having to help them with all their twisted ankles and fainting spells.
Hey, girls, you want my HONEST opinion...? (Score:3, Insightful)
See, this is what happens when a guy gives his honest opinion. So he shuts up, and the girls start whining about why he won't talk about his feelings! You cannot have it both ways, ladies!
You mean (Score:2)
Ex-Nobel prize winner. Sweden is calling him.
Eighth Century Solution (Score:2)
I wonder if the esteemed scientist Tim Hunt would be OK with women in the lab if we forced them to cover their bodies and faces in dark clothes and made sure they never looked the male scientists in the eye?
Or we could just do like the Ultra-Orthodox and make sure women just don't have face-to-face contact with any men who are not family.
Re:FFS (Score:5, Insightful)
What you have said sounds profound but isn't at all.
Am I offended? Nope. I'm too jaded, thick skinned and argumentative to be that easily offended. Do I think it's an idiotic thing to say? Yep.
But if I was offended by idiotic things people say on the internet, I'd be in a permanent state of offendedness and that's not very fun.
Also just because politically correct[*] has turned into a disease, doesn't mean that people being idiots is not a disease.
[*] Politically correct started off as the name describes. Things you couldn't say without inviting political fallout, whether party politics or jockeying politics in some other organisation. Things like "women belong in the kitchen" etc. Of course, people being idiots, people mutated it into all sorts of stupid things.
Re:FFS (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is it idiotic? It's just dark humor at the worst.
So it being really bad dark humour (if it is) isn't idiotic? I'd say making ill advised jokes is idiotic.
Check this joke out that I heard
You may have noticed that when a group makes a joke about itself it is generally taken very differently from an outside group making a joke about the group. You may wish to consider why.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it idiotic? It's just dark humor at the worst.
So it being really bad dark humour (if it is) isn't idiotic? I'd say making ill advised jokes is idiotic.
Check this joke out that I heard
You may have noticed that when a group makes a joke about itself it is generally taken very differently from an outside group making a joke about the group. You may wish to consider why.
Have you ever seen the movie "The Dark Knight"? Most people who saw it loved the character of the Joker. He actually does make most people laugh. Essentially what you're saying is that they're all idiots, and you're also not only wrong, but yourself a prude for actually thinking so. It was a brilliantly written character in a brilliantly written movie, and only a very non-idiot can make very demented actions seem funny.
Anyways go ahead and reply with another prudish SJW rant.
Re: (Score:2)
Today we always depict the word being used with a sneer and negative tone accompanied by a whip. That doesn't make it the reality of the time. For realistic picture imagine more the general indifference with which one says "waiter" which the periodic shift to positive or negative tone in positive or negative context.
Re: (Score:2)
For the sexist male, "woman" can be a slur. Saying woman is o
Re: (Score:2)
*the negative connotation wasn't in the word. Any of those using the terms as a slur actually found being black negative
Re: (Score:2)
"Then your "black friend" is stupid..."
Or, to state the obvious, he's not your friend.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it embodies hatred of those who aren't black. People alive today were neither the abused nor the abusers and the beef is not legitimate. I'd put them on equal footing with a range of attitudes ranging from the deep south in the 70's to the KKK.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Either it is offensive, or it isn't, you can't have it both ways.
Since being offended is subjective you can have it both ways.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can have it both ways, then why are certain people offended at its use, while simultaneously using it themselves? I think that is a tad hypocritical.
Re: (Score:3)
If I say "I'm an idiot", it's not offensive to me. If someone calls me an idiot, I'll probably be upset. Context and the identity of the speaker matter.
When black people say nigger they are often using it to reclaim the word and neutralise it, or because it has become part of the culture in a non racist sense. It's usually not self hatred.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree that the word nigger has a "non racist use", but the idea that this particular use can only be used by black people is racist.
A white person may want to say nigger to help reclaim the word as something that can be said in a non-racist way, but if that person is not allowed to do this because of the color of his/her skin, that is racist.
I'm not saying you can't get pissed at a white person for saying nigger. It's a free country. All I am saying is that if the *only* reason you have (e.g. not socioe
Re: (Score:2)
My wife calls me an idiot all the time. It is and isn't offensive based on the context. It isn't the person using the word, it is the context.
Case in point, Dog the Bounty Hunter used the word, and I believe he is not racist, and got castigated for it. He used it because it is the culture he deals with uses it ... a lot. But none of that matters to the monochrome viewpoints of certain groups.
Re: (Score:2)
If the word is so offensive, then why do all the Rap chanters use it in their lyrics?
Because they are intentionally trying to be offensive.
Either it is offensive, or it isn't, you can't have it both ways.
Yes you can. A word, or phrase, can be offensive in some contexts, and not in others. It can be offensive to some people, and not to others.
Re:FFS (Score:4)
For example, there's been attempts at reclaiming the word, which is why you hear it in rap lyrics sometimes.
[...]
Meanwhile, there's also been a push to reclaim these kinds of words, which is why you sometimes hear it used in friendly conversation and song lyrics.
How the hell do you reclaim that particular word, and what kind of use would the reclaimed word be put to? My helicopter might go "wop wop wop," there might be a "chink in my armor," and when my wife throws a cup of ice water at me, I might end up with a "wet back" but I sure as hell cannot conceive of a non-insulting everyday use of "nigger." Also, your suggestion that, say, hip hop artists are using that particular word in an attempt to mainstream it (again, to what purpose?) is just absurd and smacks of grasping at any straw imaginable to justify your position that it's ok for some people to use it, but not okay for others.
The word in question belongs in the dustbin of history. People who get bent out of shape when they hear it should probably put pressure on their own communities, because other than a few backwoods idiots running around in sheets, the only thing keeping that word alive is popular culture which originates from the very people who should be most offended by its use.
Re: (Score:3)
The word in question belongs in the dustbin of history
While it may be offensive (at present), no word should ever be completely discarded in the "dustbin of history". By the way how big is your dustbin? The derogatory use of the word "nigger" has been in general use for only about half a century. That's quite tame for a word that is several hundred years old and based on a latin word for the colour black spelt "niger". I'm willing to bet the use of the world will dramatically change before you or I pass on and I fully expect my children to one day assign quite
Re: (Score:2)
Words are words, neither bad nor good. Intentions are good or bad, not the words. But that doesn't help those that can't tell intentions by their use or who only see things in monochrome (Irony here if you look for it).
Re: (Score:3)
For context, he was invited to talk at a convention on women in science and journalism. In South Korea, where many of the delegates wouldn't be speaking English as their first language. At best, it was a very poorly judged joke. It's actually pretty insulting to men as well, as if we can't be around women without falling in love with them.
Saying it is a joke after the fact isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for saying something retarded like this. It's not political correctness, it's calling out obvious bull
Re: (Score:3)
Saying it is a joke after the fact isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for saying something retarded like this.
It sure works for Politicians all the time. I didn't see any left wing people complaining about Gruber's comments about "American People are Stupid", which is actually more offensive .
Re: FFS (Score:2)
That's a bit unfair - Hans only took over Nakatomi Plaza, I didn't remember him calling Americans stupid.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's actually pretty insulting to men as well, as if we can't be around women without falling in love with them.
Since when is the truth insulting? Not every man will fall in love with every woman. Not every man will fall in love with any woman. But when you put a number of men in daily proximity and contact with a number of women, some men are going to fall in love with some women and there are going to be issues. ("Fall in love with...", of course, actually covers a huge range of responses including "...wants to get into the pants of ...")
Re: (Score:2)
Then you would think he'd have sense enough not to refer to females in his lab as "girls". But to be fair, he might be one of those old guys who refers to the 50 year-old black cab driver as a "boy".
Re: (Score:2)
An individual man can be around an individual women without falling in love with them. I don't think "men" can be around "women" without falling in love with them. For that matter I don't think people can be around other people without occasionally falling in love with them.
I think this should be more offensive to the LGBT community than to women, as it assumes a heterosexual worldview.
I guess he did also suggest women can't be criticized without crying.
Re: FFS (Score:2)
It's not very prejudiced - there's a huge difference between being fluent in a language and understanding the nuances & subtleties of humour. Most Germans I know have excellent English yet really struggle with my sense of humour (to be honest, so do a lot of people).
A lot of people will mentally translate what they hear into their native tongue which can cause you to miss things. For example the Scottish drink Irn Bru had a slogan "it's got girders in it" - which (according to my uncle who worked on the
Re:FFS (Score:4, Interesting)
So, you have no point other than asking a question that isn't a question. Got it.
FYI, I read the whole article, and what he said, in FULL context wasn't offensive at all. It was admission of his own weaknesses towards women and how that doesn't fit Science Labs.
To be honest, is to be commended. Yet, he is being bullied by people only reading the headline from someone "offended" at his admission. He didn't say anything about women NOT being in a science lab, only that science would be better off without the male/female interactions. And he might not be wrong.
I am not offended by people being offended at such. I simply shake my head at the outrage held by some, who ignore even more outrageous comments by people they tend to "like".
Re: (Score:2)
Without male/female interactions, we'd soon run out of scientists.
Re: (Score:2)
As to poe vs pao, thanks for the correction.
yeah but they did it to themselves... didn't they? I mean a lot of this stuff comes out of feminist academia.
Sit there making gasoline and then accidentally burn their house down with it.
Look, if people want me to care, then you have to show you care about other people besides yourself. If you're one of those people that only recognizes something as an issue when it burns your house down... and you totally ignored that it burned everyone else's house down ages bef
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Some of us are heteroromantic, biromantic, homoromantic, panromantic, demiromantic, or even aromantic.
We realize that different cultures have different hygiene practices, but really, can't you put on a bit of deodorant in the morning?
Oh, wait. Never mind.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if they were aromatic than a lot of this nonsense wouldn't happen.
Turn off the showers! Save California!
Re: (Score:3)
When he is content with his mate his desire to fall in love in the lab should go away.
Not everyone is monogamous or monoamorus (is that the opposite ofpolyamorous?).
I'm not disagreeing with you that the problem is entirely his, just pointing out that your solution may not work.
Re: (Score:2)
He observed something that some of us have actually seen but not spoken about. Men and women are different. Who knew?
To suggest splitting them in a lab is ridiculous but that doesn't eliminate the fact that his observations/statements are reality in all work environments where both genders reside.
Should he really be stoned to death for speaking of this? Is it because he talked about women in the work place because I noticed him mentioning both genders? If he's not allowed to speak about gender differences then all hope is lost for the feminist case. After all don't they just want to be seen as another worker in the work place?
More to the point do the comments represent his views in a meaningful way or are they just the result of some random speculation he had during the talk and decided to blurt out?
If he's made this his thing then sure, talk about it, but in general my issue with articles like is is that people say some random thing, it goes viral, and suddenly that is how they're defined to the world.
How many things do you say in a day? How many of those things, if they went viral, would accurately represent your views?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hyperbole much?
No one said he should be stoned to death.
Saying that women should not even be allowed to work with men is not the same as "mentioning both genders" or "speaking about gender differences".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Just because it was a joke doesn't mean it's okay. There are lots of jokes about, say, black people or Jews that people find offensive and aren't suitable for retelling at a conference about issues facing black people or Jews. They are offensive because they work to set those people back, by re-enforcing stereotypes and laughing at them.
Maybe the media has overreacted, but as this Slashdot debate shows there is still a clear need to talk about it because a lot of people seem to think it is okay, and a lot o
Re:Trollbait (Score:4, Insightful)
If you can't find Blazing Saddles funny, it's you who is broken.
Recognizing that there are differences between men and women is not sexism; lack of equality of opportunity is. Pretending we're all the same is moral cowardice at best; equal opportunity to succeed differences and all is a laudable goal; enforced equal outcomes is simply evil.
They are offensive because they work to set those people back
Ah, the soft racism of lowered expectations. "X people can't overcome life's normal obstacles, so we all need to treat them special, since, you know, they need our help".
Re: (Score:3)
Blazing Saddles is hilarious. I don't see what that has to do with this though, or what thinking that men and women are the same does. Obviously I don't think that, as I have stated many times, so why bring it up? Are you saying he was right?
Also, I wasn't talking about lowering expectations. I was talking about hostility towards people or not hiring them because of stupid fears like these.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you're the guy who likes to repeat all the jokes from Blazing Saddles during an address at a professional fucking conference.
You don't tell a racist joke in a professional setting any more than you'd crap on the floor in church. Although maybe crapping on the floor is not such a good example, since a professional racist has been known to do exactly that.
http://theconcourse.deadspin.c... [deadspin.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Well, suggesting that "science" would be better off without those pesky women around is kind of sexist, in an overtly sexist sort of way.
Let's look at his statement:
If he had started the statement with, "Let me tell you about my trouble with Jews." Or, since he used the slightly degrading dim
Re:Trollbait (Score:5, Informative)
You seem awfully fixated on stereotypes which aren't actually important in any meaningful way. History review? [livescience.com]
Baby books, new baby announcements and cards, gift lists and newspaper articles from the early 1900s indicate that pink was just as likely to be associated with
boy babies as with girl babies. For example, the June 1918 issue of the Infant's Department, a trade magazine for baby clothes manufacturers, said: "There has been a great diversity of opinion on this subject, but the generally accepted rule is pink for the boy and blue for the girl. The reason is that pink being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy; while blue, which is more delicate and dainty is prettier for the girl."
Aaaand, from NPR [npr.org]:
Before Gatsby, a 1918 trade catalog for children's clothing recommended blue for girls. The reasoning at the time was that it's a "much more delicate and dainty tone," Finamore says. Pink was recommended for boys "because it's a stronger and more passionate color, and because it's actually derived from red."
To our 21st century ears, all this men in pink stuff may sound a bit blushy. "It's so deeply entrenched in us and our culture," says Finamore. "We think of pink as such a girlish color, but it's really a post-World War II phenomenon."
Re: (Score:2)
They just proved his point when they took truthful statements and CRIED about them.
But you've just disproved his statement by crying about the people proving it's true. So it's not true so the crying people weren't proving his statement so you weren't disproving it! Which means it was truthful and so those people proved it. But that means you disproved it.
This statement is false.
Re: (Score:2)
This is Slashdot. I can be both brilliant and stupid, while the whole fiasco is observed by thousands of Slashdotters!