Girls cry says Nobel Prize winning British scientist

[Hal 9000]

Ok, So Hal? And if he doesn't respond, I'm not wasting my time on his post. And the reason I won't waste my time is because he doesn't address anything relevant.

The answer is...No! There aren't any cases that I know of where a female has been held to task for her sexism. That's the point! You want to deal with sexism, fair enough, make it a 2 way street. Until you can address female to male sexism as well, you'll be rid of it. But, you're not and have never been against "sexism", you're against male to female sexism - in short, you're against men.

[WestCoastRunner]

Until you can address female to male sexism as well, you'll be rid of it. But, you're not and have never been against "sexism", you're against male to female sexism - in short, you're against men.

What a ludicrous statement. I'm asking you to identify sexism towards men in the scientific community. Can you?

[Hal 9000]

What a ludicrous statement. I'm asking you to identify sexism towards men in the scientific community. Can you?

That's kinda the point! Women can say or do anything they want and it'll never be sexism. In fact, some will argue that women "can't" be sexist. It's all around us - yet, it'll never make the news - let alone force an apology.

You've seen the video posted showing Sharon Osbourne and her little feminist group laughing about the dude who had his dick cut off. Do you think that's sexist?

[WestCoastRunner]

That's kinda the point! Women can say or do anything they want and it'll never be sexism. In fact, some will argue that women "can't" be sexist. It's all around us - yet, it'll never make the news - let alone force an apology.

You've seen the video posted showing Sharon Osbourne and her little feminist group laughing about the dude who had his dick cut off. Do you think that's sexist?

I have no idea what you are talking about because a) I don't watch 'the voice' and I have no idea about this 'feminist group' I have no idea about the story behind this dude's dick being cut off

Can you provide substance to this?

[WestCoastRunner]

That's kinda the point! Women can say or do anything they want and it'll never be sexism. In fact, some will argue that women "can't" be sexist. It's all around us - yet, it'll never make the news - let alone force an apology.

You've seen the video posted showing Sharon Osbourne and her little feminist group laughing about the dude who had his dick cut off. Do you think that's sexist?

And you haven't provided examples of sexist situations against men in science.

[Hal 9000]

And you haven't provided examples of sexist situations against men in science.

I don't give a shit about the science world, i'm asking if a woman has ever been forced into an apology or out of a job for sexist remarks toward a man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muuFygvXPAM

Ok, watch the video and tell me what you think - it's not a trick, I seriously want your opinion.

Edited June 14, 2015 by Hal 9000

[WestCoastRunner]

I don't give a shit about the science world, i'm asking if a woman has ever been forced into an apology or out of a job for sexist remarks toward a man.

I don't know. Do you?

[Michael Hardner]

Hal I posted some questions above.

[Hal 9000]

Hal I posted some questions above.

And, I'll get to that. I'm just waiting for WCR to watch the above video and give her thoughts.

I'm going to Jurassic World later though.

[WestCoastRunner]

I don't give a shit about the science world, i'm asking if a woman has ever been forced into an apology or out of a job for sexist remarks toward a man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muuFygvXPAM

Ok, watch the video and tell me what you think - it's not a trick, I seriously want your opinion.

Ok, so I watched about 3 minutes of this video and I thought it was simply a ratings game. You seriously can't hold any sort of serious commentary to this segment of 'The Talk' or 'The View' or whatever it's called.

It's simply disguisting for women to celebrate men's penis' to be cut off.

Edited June 14, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

[kimmy]

I don't give a shit about the science world, i'm asking if a woman has ever been forced into an apology or out of a job for sexist remarks toward a man.

Can you provide an example where a woman *should* have been fired? The Sharon Osborne video you provided is an example of sexist comments, that should have required an apology and maybe a firing, but apparently they got enough negative feedback that they did later have to apologize.

Are there some other incidents that should have turned into a big controversy but didn't?

Ok, watch the video and tell me what you think - it's not a trick, I seriously want your opinion.

That's quite awful. Sarah Gilbert-- the one at the table who has the least interest in penis-- pointed out the obvious double-standard and that it really wasn't funny, but instead of taking the opportunity to dial it back Osborne just continued on and on... I can't imagine somebody being so tone-deaf as to not get that what she was saying was completely disgusting. I'm not even sure why they were discussing the topic in the first place unless it was to play it for lulz.

I don't recall a controversy over this, but then I can't actually recall being aware that "The Talk" even existed.

-k

[Michael Hardner]

... apparently they got enough negative feedback that they did later have to apologize.

Ok, but we're no longer in the real world with this example, we're in the MSM/entertainment world where saying outrageous things, apologizing and getting the attendant ratings are just grist for the mill.

[cybercoma]

I can't imagine somebody being so tone-deaf as to not get that what she was saying was completely disgusting. I'm not even sure why they were discussing the topic in the first place unless it was to play it for lulz.

-k

We're talking about a woman whose family dynasty is built upon shocking people as a marketing strategy. She was trying to be "edgy" most likely.

[cybercoma]

I'm sure there's got to be some instance of a female upper manager saying her male employees should be segregated or are a detriment to her workplace.

[jacee]

I'll bet Ozzy's wearing a cup to bed these days. :/

One problem I've had with the women's movement is the assumption that all women are innocent and all men are brutes.

Some women are frigging nuts, nasty, vicious, psychologically abusive, scheming, devious ... damaged and deranged ... and extremely malicious and vindictive when crossed.

They are very good at luring men in.

Men are real ssuckers for the 'poor me' act, wanting to feel that they are 'the white knight' saving the damsel in distress.

Note to men: RUN!!!

.

Edited June 14, 2015 by jacee

[kimmy]

Listening to people who you disagree with can be a valuable learning experience too. Do you ever wonder why Charles Manson, David Duke or Caitlyn Jenner think the way they do? Do you ever wonder why blacks are at odds with police, why blacks are killing blacks at an alarming rate? I do, and would love to listen to their world views - does it mean that I'd agree with them? No, but I'm sure i'd learn something new.

The second you heard that something negative was said about a females, you shut down, don't care to know context and simply wish the offender into a cornfield. That's the way many of your ilk operate - not me.

Yes, it's always great to hear other peoples' ideas. But I'm curious as to why people give credence to the idea that Sir Tim has special insight into the dynamics of working alongside women that the millions of other men who work alongside women don't have.

What makes a scientific research lab so vastly different from other collaborative environments in technical or business or creative fields where communication and exchange of ideas is also vital to success? You seem to be of the belief that his opinion has extra value because he's in a unique situation, but I'm of the belief that his situation isn't really very unique at all.

BTW - It's also noteworthy that geniuses like this dude aren't the most socially savvy people in the world.

Well, that's a generalization, but it does go back to my earlier comment that the problem isn't with men and women working together, it's with individuals who aren't mature enough to work well in social situations. Hardly unique to male-female dynamics, btw. I earlier referenced William Shockley, "the man who invented the transistor", and his voyage into racist genetics and eugenics. Another tidbit about him is that his Bell Labs co-researchers, John Bardeen and Walter Brattain, both quit and left to work on other projects. The three of them became unable to work together, in a clash of egos-- Shockley believed that he deserved all the credit for the success of the project. The idea that getting women out of the lab would make sure that interpersonal interaction doesn't disrupt the science doesn't hold water; people have all kinds of conflicts with people of the same gender as well. I work in a mostly male environment; I've had interpersonal problems with very few of my co-workers, but I've had lots of male co-workers who had issues working with each other. I think the issue here is that interacting with other humans is tricky and you need to either deal with it or work by yourself.

-k

[Hal 9000]

Yes, it's always great to hear other peoples' ideas. But I'm curious as to why people give credence to the idea that Sir Tim has special insight into the dynamics of working alongside women that the millions of other men who work alongside women don't have.

What makes a scientific research lab so vastly different from other collaborative environments in technical or business or creative fields where communication and exchange of ideas is also vital to success? You seem to be of the belief that his opinion has extra value because he's in a unique situation, but I'm of the belief that his situation isn't really very unique at all.

Well, that's a generalization, but it does go back to my earlier comment that the problem isn't with men and women working together, it's with individuals who aren't mature enough to work well in social situations. Hardly unique to male-female dynamics, btw. I earlier referenced William Shockley, "the man who invented the transistor", and his voyage into racist genetics and eugenics. Another tidbit about him is that his Bell Labs co-researchers, John Bardeen and Walter Brattain, both quit and left to work on other projects. The three of them became unable to work together, in a clash of egos-- Shockley believed that he deserved all the credit for the success of the project. The idea that getting women out of the lab would make sure that interpersonal interaction doesn't disrupt the science doesn't hold water; people have all kinds of conflicts with people of the same gender as well. I work in a mostly male environment; I've had interpersonal problems with very few of my co-workers, but I've had lots of male co-workers who had issues working with each other. I think the issue here is that interacting with other humans is tricky and you need to either deal with it or work by yourself.

-k

I think what he is getting at is the dynamics of the work environment when 2 people start to bring extra emotions into their work. Most places don't matter, but some do. And, it's his opinion that in the world of science where every decision must be based on factual evidence, this can become a problem.

We all know (or should know) that couples in the workplace sometimes causes problems in the decision making process, and most times it's little more than an uncomfortable situation and people for the most part can get over it. When one of those people is the boss, it can lead to decisions based solely on personal reasons rather than business reasons. We can extend that thought process to any sort of nepotism as well.

[kimmy]

I think what he is getting at is the dynamics of the work environment when 2 people start to bring extra emotions into their work. Most places don't matter, but some do. And, it's his opinion that in the world of science where every decision must be based on factual evidence, this can become a problem.

And I'd think it would be much easier to navigate in science, where you have objective facts and data to guide you, than in fields where judgments are based on subjective criteria, intuition, and opinion. That was one of the interesting things we saw in the Sony leaked emails: multi-million dollar decisions being made based on little more than the gut feelings and personal biases of some big executives.

Which is more likely: a research team goes chasing the wrong theory because a guy was afraid to tell a girl he had a crush on that her theory sucked? A movie studio spends hundreds of millions of dollars producing a movie that flops because some executives had a mistaken faith in the box office appeal of a movie star or a franchise? A tech company makes a significant investment in a technology product that flops because they misjudged where consumer demand was heading? An advertising campaign flops because some executives had a brain-fart and misjudged the appeal of their premise?

I don't think you can name very many cases where scientific research went off the rails because of emotional entanglements in the lab; it's very easy to produce examples of bad decisions that are made in the absence of hard data to go on. I think scientists have it easy in this respect, which is the opposite of what Sir Hunt is suggesting.

We all know (or should know) that couples in the workplace sometimes causes problems in the decision making process, and most times it's little more than an uncomfortable situation and people for the most part can get over it. When one of those people is the boss, it can lead to decisions based solely on personal reasons rather than business reasons. We can extend that thought process to any sort of nepotism as well.

Women in the office are hardly the only source of problems in decision making. It would be impossible to list all the factors that could lead to bad decisions being made in the work place, but if it was decided to eliminate everything that could result in complications from an office, all you'd have left is an empty room.

"Will Smith is our friend, and his movies have made us a lot of money in the past, so just give him as much money as he needs and After Earth will be a big hit for this studio. Trust me."

-k

[Hal 9000]

And I'd think it would be much easier to navigate in science, where you have objective facts and data to guide you, than in fields where judgments are based on subjective criteria, intuition, and opinion. That was one of the interesting things we saw in the Sony leaked emails: multi-million dollar decisions being made based on little more than the gut feelings and personal biases of some big executives.

Which is more likely: a research team goes chasing the wrong theory because a guy was afraid to tell a girl he had a crush on that her theory sucked? A movie studio spends hundreds of millions of dollars producing a movie that flops because some executives had a mistaken faith in the box office appeal of a movie star or a franchise? A tech company makes a significant investment in a technology product that flops because they misjudged where consumer demand was heading? An advertising campaign flops because some executives had a brain-fart and misjudged the appeal of their premise?

I don't think you can name very many cases where scientific research went off the rails because of emotional entanglements in the lab; it's very easy to produce examples of bad decisions that are made in the absence of hard data to go on. I think scientists have it easy in this respect, which is the opposite of what Sir Hunt is suggesting.

Women in the office are hardly the only source of problems in decision making. It would be impossible to list all the factors that could lead to bad decisions being made in the work place, but if it was decided to eliminate everything that could result in complications from an office, all you'd have left is an empty room.

"Will Smith is our friend, and his movies have made us a lot of money in the past, so just give him as much money as he needs and After Earth will be a big hit for this studio. Trust me."

-k

I don't know what would be more likely, but in his opinion chasing a wrong lead because you don't want to tell your mate they're wrong does seem to happen.

I think that there are times when couples can be a benefit. I would think that in jobs where creativity or production is the goal, couples can be beneficial - or at least not a detriment, however, Ive seen teachers who work together and it's good for them - bad for everyone else. My father owned a business (service industry) and loved having couples; they tried to do a good job, helped each other and were basically bound to the company. In my job (about 90% men), the guys work harder when there is a woman on the crew, but also complain to me that they're given the harder tasks - and question why the women don't do as risky of work but get paid the same.

And, Ill add, it's not just about women in a certain workplace. You can throw a man into a primarily women's job and cause the same issues. Eg. teaching, nursing, banking etc.

[Michael Hardner]

Wait, what ? Banking is woman's work now ? What ?

[Hal 9000]

Wait, what ? Banking is woman's work now ? What ?

I didn't say women's work - I said primarily women. Have you been to a bank lately?

P.S - OK, I'll take the infraction/suspension and outright call you a troll, A forum facilitator is trolling me - great!

[Michael Hardner]

No I was honestly surprised-the banks where I am are mixed men/women

[Canada_First]

No I was honestly surprised-the banks where I am are mixed men/women

All women tellers, except one where I am some days, others it's all women. Mixed bank management and mortgage people.though.

[cybercoma]

I don't think you can name very many cases where scientific research went off the rails because of emotional entanglements in the lab; it's very easy to produce examples of bad decisions that are made in the absence of hard data to go on. I think scientists have it easy in this respect, which is the opposite of what Sir Hunt is suggesting.

-k

To be fair, you wouldn't hear about the science because it would never be published. A lot of those other things are very public events, particularly with Hollywood.

[cybercoma]

No I was honestly surprised-the banks where I am are mixed men/women

Low-paid customer service and nearly obsolete teller positions are and have been predominantly female. Management and high finance, in other words the jobs that pay better, are male dominated.