The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
35 Women Scientists Declare They Are Too Morally Weakened by Feminism and Anti-Whiteism to Carry on in This Crisis
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Oh, great, swell: 35 women scientists announce they are too morally weak to carry on during this humanity-wide crisis; they blame Sexism and Racism for their patheticness in this crisis.

My impression is that, actually, most women life scientists are admirably stepping up during this emergency, and only a few are too debilitated by feminism and anti-white racism to carry on.

 
Hide 112 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist & racist inequalities in science

    So….if the pandemic has really done these horrible things, wouldn’t it make sense to fight it? Or would that be too much like work? I’ll bet you can talk Nancy Pelosi to add a little bonus for “emotional labor” into her $3 Trillion Pork Package.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist & racist inequalities in science
     
    In other words, one sex and several races aren't doing their fair share to help solve the problem.
  2. The last place I worked the only way you could get a raise was to give them your resignation and if they really wanted to keep you working there they would offer you more money to un-resign. If all these ladies stay resigned what does that tell you?

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    They aren't resigning, they are just whining.

    The last thing they are going to do is quit and get off the public teat. No effing way.

    Most of these gals are in the, increasingly girlish--and increasingly useless and PC--field of "public health"or worse "global health". Basically the people responsible for churning out the "quarantines don't work" and "most of all we must protect against the spread of bias" nonsense in service of big government and big capital.

    And they are whining now, because when this pandemic hit they expected that they would get all the attention they think they are due as "experts" But in this crisis politicians and the media were looking for people who at least offered predictions or guidance--whether wrongheaded or not--or real data, rather than these gals very tired PC "public health" bromides. And a lot of men in their field and in others have been more dynamic--in speaking up with their opinions, in collecting data, in doing analyses, in making predictions, in writing papers and in getting grants. It turns out men are more aggressive and dynamic. (Hmm, why would that be. What good does attention and status and more dollars do for men?)

    And ... hey are you listening to me?!?

    But again ... there are no resignations here. Their whining is designed to get them attention and promotions into ever more comfy sinecures without actually having to hustle harder during the crisis and do the work.
  3. It’s worth recalling that the USA’s initial response to World War II was also unprepossessing. After the debacle at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, hysteria swept the West Coast. The 1979 movie 1941 was a rare flop for director Steven Spielberg, but it conveys the slightly addled temperature of the times, which led, comically, to the Feb. 24, 1942, “Battle of Los Angeles” in which Americans unleashed a huge amount of antiaircraft fire on nonexistent Japanese warplanes; and, shamefully, to the internment of Japanese-Americans.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    The anime waifu will dominate the world! :D *maniacal laugh*
  4. Those who can, do.
    Those who cannot, blame the patriarchy for it.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    I did like the stock photo of a fake black STEM gal used to illustrate the tweet. The essay/letter itself is exactly as hackneyed as one would expect. It's all whining about female career advancement with zero consideration of actually, you know, saving lives.

    Even within our own institutions, unqualified men’s voices are being amplified over expert women because they have been identified through informal male networks, or have blustered their way in to social media and TV interviews and are therefore perceived as “high profile”.

    Not including women’s voices in the public discussion of the Covid-19 pandemic is a distortion of reality. It not only perpetuates the invisibility of women in science and leadership positions, undermining our ability to be taken seriously as experts and failing to provide role models for younger women, but also impacts our careers as we strive to prove the impact of our work to funding agencies, colleagues, and hiring or promotion committees.

    We have also noticed that women are more likely to be doing work that is focused on “getting shit done”– the operational work and supporting decision-makers, for example – rather than writing scientific papers or grants.

    All the while we are disproportionately supporting students and filling service or pastoral roles in our institutions; a continuation of a troubling trend of women doing the “invisible work in academia” even in the absence of a pandemic. At the same time, we see that the opportunistic but not necessarily qualified researchers who are applying for newly available Covid-19 funding are overwhelmingly male; this is not only skewed in favour of men and often fails to acknowledge junior women involved, but also represents a misallocation of funds.
     
  5. I wonder what the racial breakdown of these broads are?

  6. Why don’t they just go ahead and tell their bosses they got pregnant and want to raise their babies themselves, far away from the test-tubes and COVID-one-niner? Good on them for escaping the 2-income trap though. Thank you Chief Warren, for that inspiration during the sweat lodge!

  7. This site and Bill Burr are the two things I;m going to miss most about the “old normal”

    • Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy
    I discovered the comedy of Bill Burr awhile ago, but only fairly recently did I discover, after re-watching Breaking Bad that, holy crap, he was in that show. He played a fixer for Saul Goodman:
  8. Anonymous[150] • Disclaimer says:

    Put it this way:

    The person who finds a cure/treatment for Covid will receive acclamation the likes of which haven’t been seen since the time of the Illiad.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    They had one, and the Democrats and lyingpress lied about it, and denied it to patients (some doctors prescribed it anyway, with consistently good results).
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Anon, I am not the first to say this, but if the cure is discovered by a male scientist, it will be three weeks before the first of many lab assistants #METOO him. "He had a creepy way of looking at me." "He said how can you walk in those heels?" "He stood way to close to me at my work station." Don't bet against this.
  9. But highly visible articles in The New York Times and other media outlets about the scientists involved in the response are biased towards men, even though …
    … but women are quoted less often – sometimes not at all – in articles

    So it’s the fault of the sexists and racists at right-wing media outlets like *checks notes* the New York Times?

  10. I remember a women writing about carrying her “invisible backpack” stuffed with white privilege. Now we find that some women are burdened with carrying the weight of feminism and anti-whiteism. They have devolved into beasts of burden. They used to be such loyal, steady mounts.

    • Agree: jim jones
    • LOL: theMann
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    Joe, “women” is not the preferred nomenclature.

    Gyno-American.
  11. Here in the UK White people do all the dangerous work while the sacred minorities live a life of ease:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/30/nhs-bosses-say-bame-staff-should-be-risk-assessed-to-cut-covid-19

  12. Thirty-five women scientists breathe a sigh of relief after hitting upon a woke excuse for throwing in the towel.

    • Agree: fish, Abe, fatmanscoop
    • Replies: @Anon
    A lot of this is women wanting to quit and raise kids, who realize that after having their parents pay for their very expensive schooling/or taking on massive loans, they have to provide some justification for the switch. By the time you've got an advanced degree, you've paid a lot for your education. Female scientists don't score as high as their male colleagues on the tests you need to enter grad schools for science, meaning they were less likely to be offered fellowships and whatnot. This means women wanting to continue in science were more likely to have taken out loans to continue their education, and they accumulated a lot of debt.

    Much of this is 'don't want to disappoint the parents.' A lot of these female scientists don't want to hear their fathers say, "Well, it was a waste of time to pay for your college education if you're just going to become a baby factory."

    Female scientists tend to come from really pushy parents who are very competitive. They want their daughters to be winning Nobel prizes, bag a rich husband, and have kids and raise them without breaking a sweat. That's a very tall order for anybody.

  13. The headline:

    The pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist and racist inequalities in science pushing many of us to say ‘I’m done’, write 35 female scientists

    exaggerates the article’s statement:

    “After this is over, I’m done” is a refrain we have heard many times in the past few months, almost exclusively from women.

    They are not actually saying that they will not carry on.

    Megan Murray, possibly the most senior signatory, is a Professor in the Department of Epidemiology at Harvard. Her research has several areas specific to tuberculosis, plus these areas that are suddenly topical:

    2. Modeling the transmission dynamics of emerging infectious disease. We are developing transmission models to study the dynamics of various emerging infectious diseases within populations and are linking these models to cost effectiveness analyses to evaluate the impact of intervention strategies. Our work has focused on MDR tuberculosis, West Nile virus, SARS, and sexually transmitted diseases.

    6. Pedagogy in interdisciplinary research and emerging infectious disease. Through a new Roadmap grant initiative, we are developing materials and curricula to train interdisciplinary teams in research in emerging infectious diseases.

    7. Exhaled particles and their relationship to infectivity of infectious agents. We are currently conducting pilot studies to try to understand how bioaerosols are produced and how they affect the transmissibility of influenza.

    One of the writers’ grievances is that the media and policy-makers are looking only to white men for advice. There might be some truth in this, although it is hard to be sure of the explanation without comparing and contrasting the work of each scientist. Among epidemiologists, Google News reports the following numbers of hits for these searches:

    33,600 hits for “Neil Ferguson” Imperial
    18,600 hits for “Michael Osterholm” Minnesota
    663 hits for “Megan Murray” Harvard

    • Replies: @SFG
    Shouldn't you be trying PubMed (the National Library of Medicine's database of biomedical articles) or something like that?
    , @Obamahotep
    It is a shame they arent just getting out of the way now. They will simply hold back real progress and also waste more months and years that they could be dating, getting married, having babies, etc. Lose/lose like most feminist crap.
    , @Redneck farmer
    Well, if she sounded like the first two, Megan Murray would just be a hysterical broad.
  14. Anonymous[874] • Disclaimer says:

    I expect being a technical/industrial Ivy League scholar will be less prestigious in women’s eyes now that nobody can attend college anymore (Because Science, Reason). The Bizarro-ACLU’s latest endeavor is so February 2020:
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/education/see-you-court-aclu-sues-betsy-devos-over-new-campus-n1206981

    Of course, with everybody’s 18-to-25-aged daughter stuck at home working on becoming the next Marie Curie we might instead get a bumper crop of world-beater lady scientists. Nothing’s holding them back, other than complete lack of in-person relationships with whatever men are established in the various fields (but on the whole, is that a setback, or AN ADVANTAGE, right?)

  15. Since a “Scientist” is some one whose reason can overcome their prejudices, an a Woman is some one incapable of using any amount of reason or fact to overcome their prejudices ( two trial examples, OJ, McMartin pre-school), is it not more accurate to say:

    There a few Scientists who happen to be biologically female, but no such thing as a Woman Scientist?

    BTW, how many Scientists have faced: ostracism, prison, riot, death, threats to their families, and so forth? But, pwecious wittle feeeeelings………….

    • Replies: @njguy73

    BTW, how many Scientists have faced: ostracism, prison, riot, death, threats to their families, and so forth? But, pwecious wittle feeeeelings………….

     

    Galileo, Pasteur, Lister, and most shameful of all, Semmelweiss.

    Yes, I am going to keep bringing up those names.
  16. Its the end result of affirmative action where you promote less qualified for skin color and reproductive organs. Naturally they have the sexist -racist excuse for what amounts to personal issues. Say what you want we women are masters of ” the dog ate our homework, and we then cried all night you callous pig.”

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
  17. I googled “Megan Murray professor of global health” and there are 7 news articles from the last moth that quote her. But I guess she counted up how many hits some male colleague’s quotes got and she had less.

    • Replies: @Black-hole creator

    I googled “Megan Murray professor of global health” and there are 7 news articles from the last moth that quote her.
     
    Yeah, popularization of science is important, and clear communication with public has never been more important than it is now. But since when is the scientific prowess measured in "clicks" from MSM articles ? All those talking heads are usually not great scientists. Case in point - Faucci.
  18. …most women life scientists are admirably stepping up during this emergency

    It’s panicking women and men acting like women who turned this fairly minor event into an “emergency.”

    • Disagree: Corvinus
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    It’s panicking women and men acting like women who turned this fairly minor event into an “emergency.”
     
    I’m not too dismayed by the average IQ and lower women behaving exactly like women. It’s all the putative “men” I see pissing themselves in terror of a flu that has me more convinced than ever that the laws of natural selection have been in abeyance for many decades now.
    , @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    'It’s panicking women and men acting like women who turned this fairly minor event into an “emergency.” '

    • You're Damn Straight: Je Suis Omar Mateen

  19. They threw in everything but the kitchen sink … it read a bit like the Paris agreement after all 195 nations got their bits included.

    The best part was when they, in effect, complained that hubby wasn’t doing half the vacuuming.

  20. Pierre Antoinette was a genius – knew giving wife credit for his work = great PR.

    WTF do they do for sci! More efficient w/o them.

    • Replies: @Lot
    Anon, I think you have confused the two most famous women named “Marie” to immigrate to France.

    Let them eat radium!

    Also, please be aware Anne de Montmorency is both a man and did not invent any cherries.
  21. Anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    MATRIARCHY’S A BITCH

    And a lot of the time it’s a whiny bitch.

  22. I thought, oh cool, maybe research labs are replacing Wall Street’s notorious “boom-boom rooms,” with hastily unzipped PPEs left haphazardly flung over the nano-oscilloscope during moments of quantum sexual exploitation. But no, it’s just more of the usual “No one is listening to meeeee!”

    And with 35 co-authors — including the wonderfully named Rosalind Eggo — they could not come up with one specific example, just whiny generalities?

  23. timeshighereducation.com

    Timeshi Ghereduc Ation?

    Sounds suspiciously foreign.

    • LOL: Buffalo Joe
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    This sort of thing is more the rule than the exception. The women have complied with all formal requirements for their position, done everything they have been told to do (theoretically given progressively harder tasks so that they can grow professionally, and in practice given tasks their colleagues can be sure they will complete successfully), but in fact never understood the basics of their specialty. Sort of like Faucci that way.

    Ask them to do something productive, and you get no action but plenty of words about how mistreated they are.

    The women can do this and win because a fairly large fraction of the men and the administrators are the same way.

    So, while this is nothing new, it is a worthwhile graphic demonstration of a basic flaw in the West's current methods of selecting professionals.
  24. Fare well, Miss Carousel, and don’t let the lab door hit you on the way out !

  25. anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:

    My first reaction was ‘great, just what we need, a group of people who become prima donnas just when they’re needed the most’. But upon further reflection I think it’s fake, complete with a photo of a black female in a white lab coat. They can’t carry on, “I’m done”? Does that mean they quit? It takes time and effort to attain advanced science degrees. People don’t usually just quit being scientists and switch over to being Yoga instructors. Using key buzzwords such as “patriarchy” is a signal to stop listening. The few comments that follow the article aren’t very complimentary. If these people could just stop lying and disrupting work environments for just a few minutes it’d be a good thing.

  26. Well, whaddya know? Women are the weaker vessel.

  27. Anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    Trump surrounds himself with corporate women. His white house is estrogen fueled which explains a lot.

    This jackass finally comes out of his coma yesterday and pushes back mildly on Fauci… but then won’t shut up about the super express rush vaccines they have planned. People will get sick and die due to the batsh!t vaccine shape objects they will roll out.

    THERE ARE NO CORONA VIRUS FAMILY VACCINES OF ANY KIND THAT WORK

    Bannon has finally woken up on this reality. Others too. It would require a quantum leap in med tech.

    So ABC always be closing sales guy Trump goes ahead anyway.

    TRUMP HAS F***ED UP THIS CRISIS RESPONSE from the start. Economic data this week is nightmarish. We have been dragged down into the democrat hellpit because of this guy’s idiotic False Flag Jujitsu.

    Trump should be incinerating dem gov policies from the bully pulpit. Without reopening schools we are screwed. No leadership from this weakling…

    • Disagree: Joseph Doaks
    • Troll: Manfred Arcane
  28. The letter itself doesn’t say these womeen are quitting. What its actual point is I’m not quite sure. Letters written by committee rarely get to one.

    • Replies: @Alden
    The point is to just bitch , whine, complain and remind the world that they exist. They just want attention and to be in the news.
  29. men crack into gaping chasms

    This blog post should have incorporated a pun on that into the title.

  30. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:

    discouragement….lel

    woman walks into any large company in the nation with an advanced degree in stem from a top 50 research u, executives and hr would be leaping out of their chairs to throw money at them.

  31. anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s funny. In all the occupations I’ve had, in higher pressure situations, where performance and completing tasks successfully under a timeline was critical, the women I worked around mostly treated men’s “bullshit” as incidental. That is, it didn’t define their jobs, or have much to do with their intentions in the workforce. It was just part of the terrain of dealing with people in general, and they didn’t sweat it. Anything bothering them, they’d just handle it then and there, and move on. No ruminating over it day after day.

    One young gal in particular I knew, who was surrounded by STEM-type guys, always threw in with her opinion, and would back it up with stats she’d work through herself. I recall there was some problem a few of us were mulling over, and she interjected by whipping out a legal pad, and eagerly cranking through the math of it, which I wanted no part of, btw, and came up with a decisive answer, based on her numbers, the math was all good, and all us guys were standing around her going, “hmmm. looks good to us!” I remember walking away thinking, “it’s nice having her around.” She wasn’t “showing off.” She just enjoyed tackling those kinds of problems, because she was good at it.

    She could be annoying. She could be a bit of a pain in the ass, both because of her gender. But I’m certain she would say the same about the guys she was surrounded by daily, but it’s part of dealing with mixing genders. Stupid selfish shit goes on whenever humans are together. Everyone has their quirks. The trick is to ignore it, or work it out and move on. If you start believing you’re being victimized, maybe it’s just that you’re in over your head, and desperate to avoid that obnoxious fact.

    In competitive, high pressure environments, people just fuck with each other. I’ve never seen otherwise. If you want to make it about race, it’ll be about race. If you want it to be about gender, you’ll get it.

    If you’re in over your head, one shitty excuse is as good as another. If you’re proficient, all that shit doesn’t matter, because you’re providing value outside of those constructs.

    It’s a massive paradigm shift if you have your shit together, and consistently do more than is reasonably expected of you. You win by default, most of the time. Gender doesn’t mean shit if you deliver the goods.

    I’ve never seen otherwise.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    And, if you don't have your stuff together, our entire legal industry (and the cultural programming of the great and the good) stands ready to believe that it was a bigoted conspiracy to keep you down.
    , @ic1000
    > If you’re in over your head, one shitty excuse is as good as another. If you’re proficient, all that shit doesn’t matter, because you’re providing value outside of those constructs.

    That's the way it seemed to me, working in labs. Academic biomedicine has lots of good points. In many ways, those were the most meaningful and productive years of my career. And lots of my peers, male and female, felt the same. But as far as advancement, it was cutthroat then and it is cutthroat now. There wasn't (and isn't) remotely enough money and space to create the number of senior positions that would be needed to fulfill the career dreams of all but a few junior scientists.

    By its nature, this system creates large numbers of frustrated, disgruntled, talented, hard-working females and males who think, "I'm as qualified as the person who ended up with the golden ticket!"

    Yep.

    In that regard, the female scientists who wrote that letter of complaint are not terribly insightful.
  32. I am trying to think of just one significant thing a woman has ever invented, but I’m coming up with nada. Marie Curie doesn’t count.

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    At least black scientists can claim the SuperSoaker
    , @MarkinLA
    Hedy Lamarr and frequency jumping

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr
  33. @Buffalo Joe
    I remember a women writing about carrying her "invisible backpack" stuffed with white privilege. Now we find that some women are burdened with carrying the weight of feminism and anti-whiteism. They have devolved into beasts of burden. They used to be such loyal, steady mounts.

    Joe, “women” is not the preferred nomenclature.

    Gyno-American.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief

    Joe, “women” is not the preferred nomenclature.

    Gyno-American.
     
    Yes but American is heteronymous. You can't say that anymore. It's true.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Ben, Mea culpa. I am awake but not woke. stay safe.
  34. Like I say, women have a Culture of Complaint, while men have a Culture of Insult.

    Also, women opt to “shelter in place” while men prefer to “march towards the sound of the guns .”

    QED.

  35. A real positive, no?

  36. Translation: I don’t want to be a scientist anymore. Now I have an excuse for leaving.

  37. Does this mean they’re staying home and raising a family? Maybe homeschooling the kids they already have? The horror!

    Probably not. When women publicly say “I’m done!”, it’s just another bullying tactic. Maybe they should protest by crying, or taking off their clothes, or wishing death on White men in NYT editorials. You know, all the usual methods of getting attention and setting examples of equality.

  38. This is why we need more H-1bs. To bring us the more enlightened attitudes of western Asia and the Subcontinent.

    By the way, you can see how small our countries really are by dragging them around the world at this site: https://thetruesize.com

    The West is tiny. Canada is only three Indias. Russia is two Americas, and Africa is two Russias.

    What are they thinking? We just don’t have the room!

    https://www.youtube.com/watchv=s4daqigtqiq

  39. From the article:

    Neither epidemiology nor medicine are male-dominated fields, but women are quoted less often – sometimes not at all – in articles. What’s more, the lack of inclusion of leaders of colour is striking and disenfranchising for minority women scientists of colour, particularly as communities of colour are being hit hardest by this epidemic.

    But what about the sexism and racism in the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

  40. I read the manifesto. It is pretty bizarre, it is not even clear what are they complaining about, that the tech moguls are all male ? What is the proposed solution: establish all female enclaves ? Or just mandate at least 50% quotas for women for positions of power ? I like the ideas of enclaves better.

    Half of the signees are from Harvard so this reads like a hidden power struggle there. Maybe another Summers is on the chopping block.

  41. The Buffalo News pierces the boundaries of credulity by featuring a daily local Covid-19 death. Today’s is an inventor who died at 95. Yesterday it was a gentleman who died at 85. Last week we had 99, 95, 94 and 88 year old victims. But, in a slight break in the narrative, yesterday’s victim died from…”respiratory illness, complicated by Covid-19 and underlying medical conditions.” So in other words a little of this, a little of that and you get a toxic stew. I hearby nominate for a Pulitzer Prize Covid-19 headline of the year, the Buffalo News for this head shaker: “She would have lived to 105, but Covid-19 claims life of 99 year old.” Top that.

  42. Problem is, with some career women, when you say “Ok, show me what you’ve got.” They think you mean expose their “naughty bits” or flash you. Not expound on their project.

  43. Anonymous[387] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    timeshighereducation.com
     
    Timeshi Ghereduc Ation?

    Sounds suspiciously foreign.

    This sort of thing is more the rule than the exception. The women have complied with all formal requirements for their position, done everything they have been told to do (theoretically given progressively harder tasks so that they can grow professionally, and in practice given tasks their colleagues can be sure they will complete successfully), but in fact never understood the basics of their specialty. Sort of like Faucci that way.

    Ask them to do something productive, and you get no action but plenty of words about how mistreated they are.

    The women can do this and win because a fairly large fraction of the men and the administrators are the same way.

    So, while this is nothing new, it is a worthwhile graphic demonstration of a basic flaw in the West’s current methods of selecting professionals.

  44. @BenKenobi
    Joe, “women” is not the preferred nomenclature.

    Gyno-American.

    Joe, “women” is not the preferred nomenclature.

    Gyno-American.

    Yes but American is heteronymous. You can’t say that anymore. It’s true.

  45. There is no “pandemic,” she means the lockdown and the effects of the lockdown; the reverse quarantine. Which has lasted a couple of months. So if we did this for a year, women would be caveman slaves in dinosaur skins?

  46. @anonymous
    It's funny. In all the occupations I've had, in higher pressure situations, where performance and completing tasks successfully under a timeline was critical, the women I worked around mostly treated men's "bullshit" as incidental. That is, it didn't define their jobs, or have much to do with their intentions in the workforce. It was just part of the terrain of dealing with people in general, and they didn't sweat it. Anything bothering them, they'd just handle it then and there, and move on. No ruminating over it day after day.

    One young gal in particular I knew, who was surrounded by STEM-type guys, always threw in with her opinion, and would back it up with stats she'd work through herself. I recall there was some problem a few of us were mulling over, and she interjected by whipping out a legal pad, and eagerly cranking through the math of it, which I wanted no part of, btw, and came up with a decisive answer, based on her numbers, the math was all good, and all us guys were standing around her going, "hmmm. looks good to us!" I remember walking away thinking, "it's nice having her around." She wasn't "showing off." She just enjoyed tackling those kinds of problems, because she was good at it.

    She could be annoying. She could be a bit of a pain in the ass, both because of her gender. But I'm certain she would say the same about the guys she was surrounded by daily, but it's part of dealing with mixing genders. Stupid selfish shit goes on whenever humans are together. Everyone has their quirks. The trick is to ignore it, or work it out and move on. If you start believing you're being victimized, maybe it's just that you're in over your head, and desperate to avoid that obnoxious fact.

    In competitive, high pressure environments, people just fuck with each other. I've never seen otherwise. If you want to make it about race, it'll be about race. If you want it to be about gender, you'll get it.

    If you're in over your head, one shitty excuse is as good as another. If you're proficient, all that shit doesn't matter, because you're providing value outside of those constructs.

    It's a massive paradigm shift if you have your shit together, and consistently do more than is reasonably expected of you. You win by default, most of the time. Gender doesn't mean shit if you deliver the goods.

    I've never seen otherwise.

    And, if you don’t have your stuff together, our entire legal industry (and the cultural programming of the great and the good) stands ready to believe that it was a bigoted conspiracy to keep you down.

  47. The US has a glut of PhD scientists and a scarcity of creative scientific thinkers. Do we have even one scientist is his research prime of the caliber of Richard Feynman or Linus Pauling or Hans Bethe or Paul Dirac? Nope.

    • Replies: @dr kill
    Correct; have you ever thought about creativity? Been to grad school or med school? regular old university? I'm sure high school is FUBAR now , too.

    These education fucks are determined to beat the last bit of independent thinking out of their students. Independent thinkers cause extra work, and we all know how the AFT and NEA feel about work. Ask yourself, how many teachers you respected during your days of indoctrination. Bloody hell, you mostly won't even be admitted to school if they suspect you of wrongthink.

    Teach your children well, and you won't have this problem.

    Education is too critical to leave to professional educators.
  48. @Anonymous
    Put it this way:

    The person who finds a cure/treatment for Covid will receive acclamation the likes of which haven't been seen since the time of the Illiad.

    They had one, and the Democrats and lyingpress lied about it, and denied it to patients (some doctors prescribed it anyway, with consistently good results).

  49. @Inverness

    Pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist & racist inequalities in science
     
    So....if the pandemic has really done these horrible things, wouldn't it make sense to fight it? Or would that be too much like work? I'll bet you can talk Nancy Pelosi to add a little bonus for "emotional labor" into her $3 Trillion Pork Package.

    Pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist & racist inequalities in science

    In other words, one sex and several races aren’t doing their fair share to help solve the problem.

  50. Anon[347] • Disclaimer says:
    @black sea
    Thirty-five women scientists breathe a sigh of relief after hitting upon a woke excuse for throwing in the towel.

    A lot of this is women wanting to quit and raise kids, who realize that after having their parents pay for their very expensive schooling/or taking on massive loans, they have to provide some justification for the switch. By the time you’ve got an advanced degree, you’ve paid a lot for your education. Female scientists don’t score as high as their male colleagues on the tests you need to enter grad schools for science, meaning they were less likely to be offered fellowships and whatnot. This means women wanting to continue in science were more likely to have taken out loans to continue their education, and they accumulated a lot of debt.

    Much of this is ‘don’t want to disappoint the parents.’ A lot of these female scientists don’t want to hear their fathers say, “Well, it was a waste of time to pay for your college education if you’re just going to become a baby factory.”

    Female scientists tend to come from really pushy parents who are very competitive. They want their daughters to be winning Nobel prizes, bag a rich husband, and have kids and raise them without breaking a sweat. That’s a very tall order for anybody.

    • Replies: @Black-hole creator
    "Female scientists don’t score as high as their male colleagues on the tests you need to enter grad schools for science, meaning they were less likely to be offered fellowships and whatnot. This means women wanting to continue in science were more likely to have taken out loans to continue their education, and they accumulated a lot of debt."

    This statement could not be further from the truth. For the past ~20 years, women have enjoyed unprecedented support, including and above all financial support, in pretty much any STEM field. Their livelihood and financial well-being is pretty much never in any danger as long as they choose to work in STEM.
    , @ic1000
    > Female scientists tend to come from really pushy parents who are very competitive. They want their daughters to be winning Nobel prizes, bag a rich husband, and have kids and raise them without breaking a sweat. That’s a very tall order for anybody.

    This was not my experience. As far as I could tell, there were no obvious chasms separating the prior experiences, performance, outcomes, etc. of male and female grad students/postdocs. And no great advantage to being a man or a woman.* You did good (or bad) experiments, presented and wrote them up well (or poorly), were easygoing (or difficult). At that time (late '90s), there was an advantage to being black, in the ways you'd expect. But there weren't many blacks around, because those able to score acceptably on the GRE could also score well enough on the MCAT. One undergrad asked me (rhetorically), "Why would I choose the lower-prestige, lower-pay career?"

    As far as family formation, that was hard for anybody. Since there were only modest allowances for motherhood, it was hardest for the women. Women today get more generous exceptions, which of course don't go far enough. And can never be sufficient, in a pyramid-structured system where losers outnumber winners, by design (see my earlier comment).

    Biology had (and has) the reputation of being more female-friendly than the harder sciences. Chemistry, physics, engineering.

    Surprisingly, none of the 35 signatories appear to object to the anti-non-Woke, anti-white-male bias that animates hiring of biology professors at UC-Berkeley. They may not know that viewpoint discrimination used to be frowned upon at public universities.

    They just aren't very a perceptive self-selected group of scientists, I guess.

    .
    * But then I would say that, wouldn't I?
    , @Kratoklastes

    By the time you’ve got an advanced degree, you’ve paid a lot for your education
     
    Only if you're not good enough to get a scholarship.

    As I've said time and time again: if you are in a graduate program and you don't have a full merit scholarhsip, it's a hint that you shouldn't be there. (By 'you' I mean a generic you, not you personally. I refuse to use 'one' because it's faggy as fuck).

    By the time I decided not to be an academic (4 years into my PhD scholarship), I had accumulated precisely zero dollars in student debt. I had merit scholarships (fee waiver plus stipend) from second year undergraduate onwards; as a PhD student with a (tax-free) priority scholarship who did some JuniorMinion-ing on the side, I made more after tax than most junior lecturers.

    Anyone who whines about "student debt" is telling the world that they weren't very good. Fuck them - if they study a hobby and/or are outside the top few percent of their discipline, they have no right to expect super-normal returns.

  51. From the article:

    Neither epidemiology nor medicine are male-dominated fields . . . .

    Nice grammar! And it’s a “higher education” blog!

  52. @James N. Kennett
    The headline:

    The pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist and racist inequalities in science pushing many of us to say ‘I’m done’, write 35 female scientists

     

    exaggerates the article's statement:

    “After this is over, I’m done” is a refrain we have heard many times in the past few months, almost exclusively from women.

     

    They are not actually saying that they will not carry on.

    Megan Murray, possibly the most senior signatory, is a Professor in the Department of Epidemiology at Harvard. Her research has several areas specific to tuberculosis, plus these areas that are suddenly topical:


    2. Modeling the transmission dynamics of emerging infectious disease. We are developing transmission models to study the dynamics of various emerging infectious diseases within populations and are linking these models to cost effectiveness analyses to evaluate the impact of intervention strategies. Our work has focused on MDR tuberculosis, West Nile virus, SARS, and sexually transmitted diseases.

    6. Pedagogy in interdisciplinary research and emerging infectious disease. Through a new Roadmap grant initiative, we are developing materials and curricula to train interdisciplinary teams in research in emerging infectious diseases.

    7. Exhaled particles and their relationship to infectivity of infectious agents. We are currently conducting pilot studies to try to understand how bioaerosols are produced and how they affect the transmissibility of influenza.

     

    One of the writers' grievances is that the media and policy-makers are looking only to white men for advice. There might be some truth in this, although it is hard to be sure of the explanation without comparing and contrasting the work of each scientist. Among epidemiologists, Google News reports the following numbers of hits for these searches:

    33,600 hits for "Neil Ferguson" Imperial
    18,600 hits for "Michael Osterholm" Minnesota
    663 hits for "Megan Murray" Harvard

    Shouldn’t you be trying PubMed (the National Library of Medicine’s database of biomedical articles) or something like that?

    • Replies: @James N. Kennett
    Oops, I wasn't very clear. The Google News hits estimate the public profile of each person - how much they have been in the news. To determine their status as a scientist, yes, their publications should be examined.

    In any case, very few professional epidemiologists will have become public figures, consulted by the media and the authorities. Most, including the white men, have remained obscure. I suppose the complaint is that the few who have achieved superstar status are nearly all white men.

  53. Who knew COVID-19 was a male virus? Or that viruses had gender?

    Guess I missed that amidst all the statistical noise. No wonder these gals hate men.

  54. @anonymous
    It's funny. In all the occupations I've had, in higher pressure situations, where performance and completing tasks successfully under a timeline was critical, the women I worked around mostly treated men's "bullshit" as incidental. That is, it didn't define their jobs, or have much to do with their intentions in the workforce. It was just part of the terrain of dealing with people in general, and they didn't sweat it. Anything bothering them, they'd just handle it then and there, and move on. No ruminating over it day after day.

    One young gal in particular I knew, who was surrounded by STEM-type guys, always threw in with her opinion, and would back it up with stats she'd work through herself. I recall there was some problem a few of us were mulling over, and she interjected by whipping out a legal pad, and eagerly cranking through the math of it, which I wanted no part of, btw, and came up with a decisive answer, based on her numbers, the math was all good, and all us guys were standing around her going, "hmmm. looks good to us!" I remember walking away thinking, "it's nice having her around." She wasn't "showing off." She just enjoyed tackling those kinds of problems, because she was good at it.

    She could be annoying. She could be a bit of a pain in the ass, both because of her gender. But I'm certain she would say the same about the guys she was surrounded by daily, but it's part of dealing with mixing genders. Stupid selfish shit goes on whenever humans are together. Everyone has their quirks. The trick is to ignore it, or work it out and move on. If you start believing you're being victimized, maybe it's just that you're in over your head, and desperate to avoid that obnoxious fact.

    In competitive, high pressure environments, people just fuck with each other. I've never seen otherwise. If you want to make it about race, it'll be about race. If you want it to be about gender, you'll get it.

    If you're in over your head, one shitty excuse is as good as another. If you're proficient, all that shit doesn't matter, because you're providing value outside of those constructs.

    It's a massive paradigm shift if you have your shit together, and consistently do more than is reasonably expected of you. You win by default, most of the time. Gender doesn't mean shit if you deliver the goods.

    I've never seen otherwise.

    > If you’re in over your head, one shitty excuse is as good as another. If you’re proficient, all that shit doesn’t matter, because you’re providing value outside of those constructs.

    That’s the way it seemed to me, working in labs. Academic biomedicine has lots of good points. In many ways, those were the most meaningful and productive years of my career. And lots of my peers, male and female, felt the same. But as far as advancement, it was cutthroat then and it is cutthroat now. There wasn’t (and isn’t) remotely enough money and space to create the number of senior positions that would be needed to fulfill the career dreams of all but a few junior scientists.

    By its nature, this system creates large numbers of frustrated, disgruntled, talented, hard-working females and males who think, “I’m as qualified as the person who ended up with the golden ticket!”

    Yep.

    In that regard, the female scientists who wrote that letter of complaint are not terribly insightful.

    • Replies: @SFG
    TBH, though, there are plenty of men with the same frustrated ambitions. Plenty of reasons--couldn't play lab politics well enough, couldn't shell out for a fancy enough school, didn't realize they had to do X, Y, or Z--the same things that limit anyone's career. Unless they're minority members, though, they don't have an excuse the media will give any coverage to.
  55. @Jim Don Bob
    I am trying to think of just one significant thing a woman has ever invented, but I'm coming up with nada. Marie Curie doesn't count.

    At least black scientists can claim the SuperSoaker

  56. Meanwhile, a team led by “a Japanese engineer”, Emma Haruka Iwao, has determined the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter to 10,000,000,000,000π digits.

    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/03/15/national/science-health/google-team-led-japanese-engineer-breaks-record-calculating-pi-31-4-trillionth-digit/.xr7gyp9olts

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/emma_haruka_iwao

    https://www.walikali.com/emma-haruka-iwao/

    She was educated at Tsukuba, site of the 1985 World’s Fair, which I attended. To think she wasn’t even born yet…

    Some women are real scientists. Not these hens.

    • Replies: @Kyle
    The problem of this ratio having too many decimal places to write down has already been solved. It was solved 2000 years ago. By dead white men.
  57. @SFG
    Shouldn't you be trying PubMed (the National Library of Medicine's database of biomedical articles) or something like that?

    Oops, I wasn’t very clear. The Google News hits estimate the public profile of each person – how much they have been in the news. To determine their status as a scientist, yes, their publications should be examined.

    In any case, very few professional epidemiologists will have become public figures, consulted by the media and the authorities. Most, including the white men, have remained obscure. I suppose the complaint is that the few who have achieved superstar status are nearly all white men.

  58. @James N. Kennett
    The headline:

    The pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist and racist inequalities in science pushing many of us to say ‘I’m done’, write 35 female scientists

     

    exaggerates the article's statement:

    “After this is over, I’m done” is a refrain we have heard many times in the past few months, almost exclusively from women.

     

    They are not actually saying that they will not carry on.

    Megan Murray, possibly the most senior signatory, is a Professor in the Department of Epidemiology at Harvard. Her research has several areas specific to tuberculosis, plus these areas that are suddenly topical:


    2. Modeling the transmission dynamics of emerging infectious disease. We are developing transmission models to study the dynamics of various emerging infectious diseases within populations and are linking these models to cost effectiveness analyses to evaluate the impact of intervention strategies. Our work has focused on MDR tuberculosis, West Nile virus, SARS, and sexually transmitted diseases.

    6. Pedagogy in interdisciplinary research and emerging infectious disease. Through a new Roadmap grant initiative, we are developing materials and curricula to train interdisciplinary teams in research in emerging infectious diseases.

    7. Exhaled particles and their relationship to infectivity of infectious agents. We are currently conducting pilot studies to try to understand how bioaerosols are produced and how they affect the transmissibility of influenza.

     

    One of the writers' grievances is that the media and policy-makers are looking only to white men for advice. There might be some truth in this, although it is hard to be sure of the explanation without comparing and contrasting the work of each scientist. Among epidemiologists, Google News reports the following numbers of hits for these searches:

    33,600 hits for "Neil Ferguson" Imperial
    18,600 hits for "Michael Osterholm" Minnesota
    663 hits for "Megan Murray" Harvard

    It is a shame they arent just getting out of the way now. They will simply hold back real progress and also waste more months and years that they could be dating, getting married, having babies, etc. Lose/lose like most feminist crap.

  59. @Glaivester
    Those who can, do.
    Those who cannot, blame the patriarchy for it.

    I did like the stock photo of a fake black STEM gal used to illustrate the tweet. The essay/letter itself is exactly as hackneyed as one would expect. It’s all whining about female career advancement with zero consideration of actually, you know, saving lives.

    Even within our own institutions, unqualified men’s voices are being amplified over expert women because they have been identified through informal male networks, or have blustered their way in to social media and TV interviews and are therefore perceived as “high profile”.

    Not including women’s voices in the public discussion of the Covid-19 pandemic is a distortion of reality. It not only perpetuates the invisibility of women in science and leadership positions, undermining our ability to be taken seriously as experts and failing to provide role models for younger women, but also impacts our careers as we strive to prove the impact of our work to funding agencies, colleagues, and hiring or promotion committees.

    We have also noticed that women are more likely to be doing work that is focused on “getting shit done”– the operational work and supporting decision-makers, for example – rather than writing scientific papers or grants.

    All the while we are disproportionately supporting students and filling service or pastoral roles in our institutions; a continuation of a troubling trend of women doing the “invisible work in academia” even in the absence of a pandemic. At the same time, we see that the opportunistic but not necessarily qualified researchers who are applying for newly available Covid-19 funding are overwhelmingly male; this is not only skewed in favour of men and often fails to acknowledge junior women involved, but also represents a misallocation of funds.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    I did like the stock photo of a fake black STEM gal used to illustrate the tweet.
     
    Just for fun, I did a Google image search on the stock photo. It seems that this young attractive black science girl is working at 907 different places. She really is impressive.



    https://www.google.com/search?sa=N&tbs=simg:CAQSuQIJC2oglwjkPzQarQILEKjU2AQaAghCDAsQsIynCBpiCmAIAxIo0hCVHIwc3xuQHO8fihzwH48cjhzdP9A-3D_1PPp473j-RN5k7mjuaNxowe0HCudynqHpnto1sIMCxNiggx48VtPTeqnNPQOTKdIgNflf0TiRTcm_1xMrXGlUhbIAQMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgRUcNjMDAsQne3BCRqaAQokChFtZWRpY2FsIGFzc2lzdGFudNqliPYDCwoJL20vMDZ5cmZjChoKCHJlc2VhcmNo2qWI9gMKCggvbS8wNmNzMQodCgpsYWJvcmF0b3J52qWI9gMLCgkvbS8wMTdjbHcKGQoGY2xpbmlj2qWI9gMLCgkvbS8wM2ZrNWMKHAoKbWljcm9zY29wZdqliPYDCgoIL20vMDR5OV8M&sxsrf=ALeKk027Pq3fslpL8Y3HtHWfF6Yj54nosQ:1589578396096&q=does+clinical+technologist+do&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjm7JD96LbpAhUNvp4KHVCnCeMQwg4oAHoECAkQKA&biw=1317&bih=598
    , @Alden
    Pastoral roles? What’s that?
    , @ThreeCranes
    I don’t know anything about this issue, haven’t read any of the source material, but I can tell you this: your quote was written by a black woman.

    She switches subjects, person, tense and verbs midstream in her run-on sentences, a defining characteristic of black-person writing.
  60. Hypno, From the quote…”informal male networks.” Like when you’re standing at a urinal and casually ask your co worker one urinal over, “How’s your project going? ” These type of women have made it very clear that they don’t want to interface with men. Heaven forbid you should stand too close at a lab table or say something as sexist as…”You know, I think my wife would look great with her hair styled like yours.” And, no way in hell are you asking them to join the guys for a beer after work. They created this problem.

    • Agree: Dtbb
  61. Gaining credibility as a public expert is not just a matter of having the right paper qualifications. Rather, you need to both: (a) know the science cold; and (b) be able to communicate those complicated science issues in a way that is both interesting and understandable to non-experts.

    To see how it’s done check out the always fascinating and enlightening Dr. Rhonda Patrick. Her latest podcast with Joe Rogan is all about Covid.

    From an HBD perspective, she has some interesting points. For example, the Europe/U.S. strain of the virus is apparently a separate mutation from the original Wujan version. Interestingly, 20% of Asians have a genetic resistance/immunity to the European strain. (Around 20:00 mark) . Also, great discussion of the vital role of Vitamin D deficiency, including how it is a massive problem for blacks in the U.S. and Europe. (Around 30:00 mark). The whole thing is a great listen.

    • Replies: @Anon
    I found Rhonda Patrick's recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.

    It is a perfect example of an attempt at pseudo-scientific authority, which women do not need being offered up as an example of their professional behavior.

    While she offers some interesting virus-behavior factoids in the filler space, which she picked up while recently perusing research, overall it is clear that Rhonda is attempting to speak from a place of academic authority on a matter that she is not trained to speak on.

    She quickly devolves into offering repetitive and decontextualized soundbites in regard to supplements that science is not yet completely clear on.

    Rhonda is a promotion artist who tries to first-promote research to the public as a means of self-promotion. She isn't a serious academic personality by any measure. If she were, she would be more careful in both having a complete grasp of anything she chooses to lecture on as well as to be radically more conservative in promoting specific supplements as solutions to problems. She would offer mitigating data (which certainly exists) and speak as if she were reading a research article instead of speaking as a cheap promoter.
  62. @BenKenobi
    Joe, “women” is not the preferred nomenclature.

    Gyno-American.

    Ben, Mea culpa. I am awake but not woke. stay safe.

  63. @covidae
    I googled "Megan Murray professor of global health" and there are 7 news articles from the last moth that quote her. But I guess she counted up how many hits some male colleague's quotes got and she had less.

    I googled “Megan Murray professor of global health” and there are 7 news articles from the last moth that quote her.

    Yeah, popularization of science is important, and clear communication with public has never been more important than it is now. But since when is the scientific prowess measured in “clicks” from MSM articles ? All those talking heads are usually not great scientists. Case in point – Faucci.

    • Replies: @Alden
    Fauci’s the idiot who sent out all those mid 1980s press releases that AIDS was a heterosexual disease spread to children, faithful married couples and virgins by magic pixie dust, nothing to do with promiscuous sodomy and worse. He also had a fit when the city of San Francisco finally closed down the AIDS incubator bathhouses.
  64. Anon[437] • Disclaimer says:

    A complaint article in regard to the supposed plight of female scientists, which relies on unsupported explanations for its claims, does not assist their asserted situation. It is almost as if the article is attempting to hurt female scientists by virtue of its silly structure.

    No conservative institution has ever asked females to balance home and career at the same time, or has otherwise claimed it to be possible. We’ve been advising against it from the beginning.

    The contingent that propagandized these women into he workforce has made such a claim. Perhaps they should have assisted those whom they profess to help, and instead have been clear that the only widespread realistic solution is an A or B choice.

  65. Anon[129] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hypnotoad666
    Gaining credibility as a public expert is not just a matter of having the right paper qualifications. Rather, you need to both: (a) know the science cold; and (b) be able to communicate those complicated science issues in a way that is both interesting and understandable to non-experts.

    To see how it's done check out the always fascinating and enlightening Dr. Rhonda Patrick. Her latest podcast with Joe Rogan is all about Covid.

    From an HBD perspective, she has some interesting points. For example, the Europe/U.S. strain of the virus is apparently a separate mutation from the original Wujan version. Interestingly, 20% of Asians have a genetic resistance/immunity to the European strain. (Around 20:00 mark) . Also, great discussion of the vital role of Vitamin D deficiency, including how it is a massive problem for blacks in the U.S. and Europe. (Around 30:00 mark). The whole thing is a great listen.

    https://youtu.be/4_ZJ8YDOX6g

    I found Rhonda Patrick’s recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.

    It is a perfect example of an attempt at pseudo-scientific authority, which women do not need being offered up as an example of their professional behavior.

    While she offers some interesting virus-behavior factoids in the filler space, which she picked up while recently perusing research, overall it is clear that Rhonda is attempting to speak from a place of academic authority on a matter that she is not trained to speak on.

    She quickly devolves into offering repetitive and decontextualized soundbites in regard to supplements that science is not yet completely clear on.

    Rhonda is a promotion artist who tries to first-promote research to the public as a means of self-promotion. She isn’t a serious academic personality by any measure. If she were, she would be more careful in both having a complete grasp of anything she chooses to lecture on as well as to be radically more conservative in promoting specific supplements as solutions to problems. She would offer mitigating data (which certainly exists) and speak as if she were reading a research article instead of speaking as a cheap promoter.

    • Replies: @Lurker

    I found Rhonda Patrick’s recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.

     

    However she does appear to have some impressive credentials.

    https://i2.wp.com/bjjcaveman.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Rhonda-Patrick-and-Fahey-1.png?w=600

    , @Dieter Kief

    I found Rhonda Patrick’s recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.
     
    She is repetitive and lacks wit - and breath. Unpleasant and not cost-effective (not enough thoughts per minute). I quitted soon.
  66. Their beef seems to be, we’re quietly doing important work behind the scenes while someone else gets the spotlight. Come on, ladies, that would describe a large swath of the American workforce. Many workers like it that way.

  67. SFG says:
    @ic1000
    > If you’re in over your head, one shitty excuse is as good as another. If you’re proficient, all that shit doesn’t matter, because you’re providing value outside of those constructs.

    That's the way it seemed to me, working in labs. Academic biomedicine has lots of good points. In many ways, those were the most meaningful and productive years of my career. And lots of my peers, male and female, felt the same. But as far as advancement, it was cutthroat then and it is cutthroat now. There wasn't (and isn't) remotely enough money and space to create the number of senior positions that would be needed to fulfill the career dreams of all but a few junior scientists.

    By its nature, this system creates large numbers of frustrated, disgruntled, talented, hard-working females and males who think, "I'm as qualified as the person who ended up with the golden ticket!"

    Yep.

    In that regard, the female scientists who wrote that letter of complaint are not terribly insightful.

    TBH, though, there are plenty of men with the same frustrated ambitions. Plenty of reasons–couldn’t play lab politics well enough, couldn’t shell out for a fancy enough school, didn’t realize they had to do X, Y, or Z–the same things that limit anyone’s career. Unless they’re minority members, though, they don’t have an excuse the media will give any coverage to.

    • Agree: ic1000
  68. I remember having a young female intern confess to me that she didn’t want to get a job or promotion just because she was a woman, and I just sat there thinking, “What is it with young feminists to turn their backs on millenia of feminine guile that worked well too often?”

  69. @Hypnotoad666
    I did like the stock photo of a fake black STEM gal used to illustrate the tweet. The essay/letter itself is exactly as hackneyed as one would expect. It's all whining about female career advancement with zero consideration of actually, you know, saving lives.

    Even within our own institutions, unqualified men’s voices are being amplified over expert women because they have been identified through informal male networks, or have blustered their way in to social media and TV interviews and are therefore perceived as “high profile”.

    Not including women’s voices in the public discussion of the Covid-19 pandemic is a distortion of reality. It not only perpetuates the invisibility of women in science and leadership positions, undermining our ability to be taken seriously as experts and failing to provide role models for younger women, but also impacts our careers as we strive to prove the impact of our work to funding agencies, colleagues, and hiring or promotion committees.

    We have also noticed that women are more likely to be doing work that is focused on “getting shit done”– the operational work and supporting decision-makers, for example – rather than writing scientific papers or grants.

    All the while we are disproportionately supporting students and filling service or pastoral roles in our institutions; a continuation of a troubling trend of women doing the “invisible work in academia” even in the absence of a pandemic. At the same time, we see that the opportunistic but not necessarily qualified researchers who are applying for newly available Covid-19 funding are overwhelmingly male; this is not only skewed in favour of men and often fails to acknowledge junior women involved, but also represents a misallocation of funds.
     
    • LOL: ic1000
  70. @Anon
    A lot of this is women wanting to quit and raise kids, who realize that after having their parents pay for their very expensive schooling/or taking on massive loans, they have to provide some justification for the switch. By the time you've got an advanced degree, you've paid a lot for your education. Female scientists don't score as high as their male colleagues on the tests you need to enter grad schools for science, meaning they were less likely to be offered fellowships and whatnot. This means women wanting to continue in science were more likely to have taken out loans to continue their education, and they accumulated a lot of debt.

    Much of this is 'don't want to disappoint the parents.' A lot of these female scientists don't want to hear their fathers say, "Well, it was a waste of time to pay for your college education if you're just going to become a baby factory."

    Female scientists tend to come from really pushy parents who are very competitive. They want their daughters to be winning Nobel prizes, bag a rich husband, and have kids and raise them without breaking a sweat. That's a very tall order for anybody.

    “Female scientists don’t score as high as their male colleagues on the tests you need to enter grad schools for science, meaning they were less likely to be offered fellowships and whatnot. This means women wanting to continue in science were more likely to have taken out loans to continue their education, and they accumulated a lot of debt.”

    This statement could not be further from the truth. For the past ~20 years, women have enjoyed unprecedented support, including and above all financial support, in pretty much any STEM field. Their livelihood and financial well-being is pretty much never in any danger as long as they choose to work in STEM.

  71. @David 'The Diversity Mastermind' Lammey
    Pierre Antoinette was a genius - knew giving wife credit for his work = great PR.

    WTF do they do for sci! More efficient w/o them.

    Anon, I think you have confused the two most famous women named “Marie” to immigrate to France.

    Let them eat radium!

    Also, please be aware Anne de Montmorency is both a man and did not invent any cherries.

  72. @Anon
    A lot of this is women wanting to quit and raise kids, who realize that after having their parents pay for their very expensive schooling/or taking on massive loans, they have to provide some justification for the switch. By the time you've got an advanced degree, you've paid a lot for your education. Female scientists don't score as high as their male colleagues on the tests you need to enter grad schools for science, meaning they were less likely to be offered fellowships and whatnot. This means women wanting to continue in science were more likely to have taken out loans to continue their education, and they accumulated a lot of debt.

    Much of this is 'don't want to disappoint the parents.' A lot of these female scientists don't want to hear their fathers say, "Well, it was a waste of time to pay for your college education if you're just going to become a baby factory."

    Female scientists tend to come from really pushy parents who are very competitive. They want their daughters to be winning Nobel prizes, bag a rich husband, and have kids and raise them without breaking a sweat. That's a very tall order for anybody.

    > Female scientists tend to come from really pushy parents who are very competitive. They want their daughters to be winning Nobel prizes, bag a rich husband, and have kids and raise them without breaking a sweat. That’s a very tall order for anybody.

    This was not my experience. As far as I could tell, there were no obvious chasms separating the prior experiences, performance, outcomes, etc. of male and female grad students/postdocs. And no great advantage to being a man or a woman.* You did good (or bad) experiments, presented and wrote them up well (or poorly), were easygoing (or difficult). At that time (late ’90s), there was an advantage to being black, in the ways you’d expect. But there weren’t many blacks around, because those able to score acceptably on the GRE could also score well enough on the MCAT. One undergrad asked me (rhetorically), “Why would I choose the lower-prestige, lower-pay career?”

    As far as family formation, that was hard for anybody. Since there were only modest allowances for motherhood, it was hardest for the women. Women today get more generous exceptions, which of course don’t go far enough. And can never be sufficient, in a pyramid-structured system where losers outnumber winners, by design (see my earlier comment).

    Biology had (and has) the reputation of being more female-friendly than the harder sciences. Chemistry, physics, engineering.

    Surprisingly, none of the 35 signatories appear to object to the anti-non-Woke, anti-white-male bias that animates hiring of biology professors at UC-Berkeley. They may not know that viewpoint discrimination used to be frowned upon at public universities.

    They just aren’t very a perceptive self-selected group of scientists, I guess.

    .
    * But then I would say that, wouldn’t I?

  73. My impression is that, actually, most women life scientists are admirably stepping up during this emergency, and only a few are too debilitated by feminism and anti-white racism to carry on.

    Or, it could be that these 35 had their jobs only b/c politically correct hiring, and when the need for real talent presented itself, their lack of it meant they had to stand aside. What we’re hearing is a collective baby whine “I’m good enough. I’m good enough.”

    There is a recurring theme in all these COVID related complaints; the complainers think their whining supersedes our collective right to competence at a time when competence is desperately needed.

  74. @Henry's Cat
    The letter itself doesn't say these womeen are quitting. What its actual point is I'm not quite sure. Letters written by committee rarely get to one.

    The point is to just bitch , whine, complain and remind the world that they exist. They just want attention and to be in the news.

  75. @Anonymous
    Put it this way:

    The person who finds a cure/treatment for Covid will receive acclamation the likes of which haven't been seen since the time of the Illiad.

    Anon, I am not the first to say this, but if the cure is discovered by a male scientist, it will be three weeks before the first of many lab assistants #METOO him. “He had a creepy way of looking at me.” “He said how can you walk in those heels?” “He stood way to close to me at my work station.” Don’t bet against this.

  76. @Black-hole creator

    I googled “Megan Murray professor of global health” and there are 7 news articles from the last moth that quote her.
     
    Yeah, popularization of science is important, and clear communication with public has never been more important than it is now. But since when is the scientific prowess measured in "clicks" from MSM articles ? All those talking heads are usually not great scientists. Case in point - Faucci.

    Fauci’s the idiot who sent out all those mid 1980s press releases that AIDS was a heterosexual disease spread to children, faithful married couples and virgins by magic pixie dust, nothing to do with promiscuous sodomy and worse. He also had a fit when the city of San Francisco finally closed down the AIDS incubator bathhouses.

  77. @Hypnotoad666
    I did like the stock photo of a fake black STEM gal used to illustrate the tweet. The essay/letter itself is exactly as hackneyed as one would expect. It's all whining about female career advancement with zero consideration of actually, you know, saving lives.

    Even within our own institutions, unqualified men’s voices are being amplified over expert women because they have been identified through informal male networks, or have blustered their way in to social media and TV interviews and are therefore perceived as “high profile”.

    Not including women’s voices in the public discussion of the Covid-19 pandemic is a distortion of reality. It not only perpetuates the invisibility of women in science and leadership positions, undermining our ability to be taken seriously as experts and failing to provide role models for younger women, but also impacts our careers as we strive to prove the impact of our work to funding agencies, colleagues, and hiring or promotion committees.

    We have also noticed that women are more likely to be doing work that is focused on “getting shit done”– the operational work and supporting decision-makers, for example – rather than writing scientific papers or grants.

    All the while we are disproportionately supporting students and filling service or pastoral roles in our institutions; a continuation of a troubling trend of women doing the “invisible work in academia” even in the absence of a pandemic. At the same time, we see that the opportunistic but not necessarily qualified researchers who are applying for newly available Covid-19 funding are overwhelmingly male; this is not only skewed in favour of men and often fails to acknowledge junior women involved, but also represents a misallocation of funds.
     

    Pastoral roles? What’s that?

  78. anon[282] • Disclaimer says:

    I’ve known several women with law degrees who were wandering lost in the work force. Two were women with law degrees working as cashiers. Another was a woman with a law degree working as a telemarketer. Another has a law degree and has been bouncing from one mid-management job to the next in small companies looking for “meaningful” work.
    I feel sorry for them. They pursued careers because they are smart, and I can understand any smart person not wanting to spend the rest of their life being a housewife. But because they are women, they are better off being a housewife. There isn’t a great solution for smart women.

  79. @Federalist

    ...most women life scientists are admirably stepping up during this emergency...
     
    It's panicking women and men acting like women who turned this fairly minor event into an "emergency."

    It’s panicking women and men acting like women who turned this fairly minor event into an “emergency.”

    I’m not too dismayed by the average IQ and lower women behaving exactly like women. It’s all the putative “men” I see pissing themselves in terror of a flu that has me more convinced than ever that the laws of natural selection have been in abeyance for many decades now.

  80. @Reg Cæsar
    Meanwhile, a team led by "a Japanese engineer", Emma Haruka Iwao, has determined the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter to 10,000,000,000,000π digits.




    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/03/15/national/science-health/google-team-led-japanese-engineer-breaks-record-calculating-pi-31-4-trillionth-digit/.xr7gyp9olts

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/emma_haruka_iwao

    https://www.walikali.com/emma-haruka-iwao/

    She was educated at Tsukuba, site of the 1985 World's Fair, which I attended. To think she wasn't even born yet...

    Some women are real scientists. Not these hens.

    The problem of this ratio having too many decimal places to write down has already been solved. It was solved 2000 years ago. By dead white men.

  81. @Hypnotoad666
    I did like the stock photo of a fake black STEM gal used to illustrate the tweet. The essay/letter itself is exactly as hackneyed as one would expect. It's all whining about female career advancement with zero consideration of actually, you know, saving lives.

    Even within our own institutions, unqualified men’s voices are being amplified over expert women because they have been identified through informal male networks, or have blustered their way in to social media and TV interviews and are therefore perceived as “high profile”.

    Not including women’s voices in the public discussion of the Covid-19 pandemic is a distortion of reality. It not only perpetuates the invisibility of women in science and leadership positions, undermining our ability to be taken seriously as experts and failing to provide role models for younger women, but also impacts our careers as we strive to prove the impact of our work to funding agencies, colleagues, and hiring or promotion committees.

    We have also noticed that women are more likely to be doing work that is focused on “getting shit done”– the operational work and supporting decision-makers, for example – rather than writing scientific papers or grants.

    All the while we are disproportionately supporting students and filling service or pastoral roles in our institutions; a continuation of a troubling trend of women doing the “invisible work in academia” even in the absence of a pandemic. At the same time, we see that the opportunistic but not necessarily qualified researchers who are applying for newly available Covid-19 funding are overwhelmingly male; this is not only skewed in favour of men and often fails to acknowledge junior women involved, but also represents a misallocation of funds.
     

    I don’t know anything about this issue, haven’t read any of the source material, but I can tell you this: your quote was written by a black woman.

    She switches subjects, person, tense and verbs midstream in her run-on sentences, a defining characteristic of black-person writing.

  82. Well some good news. The article actually has a comments section, and three of four respondents seem to think the author is full of it.

    “Women are not underprivileged in the very PC world of academia. The opposite is true and has been for a long time. If you are too weak and cowardly to do the job for which you are well paid, then move aside in favor of someone else. We are in a time of crisis. Do the job or resign.”

    “Alessandro Strumia lost his job for disagreeing with you. That is a sign of female privilege.”

    “I’m always sad to hear from people who feel that they are hard-done-by…. but at the far side of 60 with a career that spans software & web development, teaching in FE and now the delight of having slithered into academic life I’ve never found that the fact I happen to be female has ever been a barrier to doing what I want.

    However, I may be an odd-ball. My role-models are people who have done things that I aspire to do myself, not people who are physically like me, however successful.”

    And finally the one supportive comment. I can’t help but suspect it is a sock puppet from the author.

    “I’m so grateful for your article! It exactly describes much of my experience. Women being assigned admin and data gathering tasks, being left out of calls between men discussing work ideas. Ive twice recently suggested research ideas and got the reaction – ‘that’s a good idea, why doesn’t Paul lead that’ even though i am at the same job level as Paul. I can think of more ideas but it’s sooo annoying and tiring. Thank you so much for making me feel not alone.”

  83. @Morton's toes
    The last place I worked the only way you could get a raise was to give them your resignation and if they really wanted to keep you working there they would offer you more money to un-resign. If all these ladies stay resigned what does that tell you?

    They aren’t resigning, they are just whining.

    The last thing they are going to do is quit and get off the public teat. No effing way.

    Most of these gals are in the, increasingly girlish–and increasingly useless and PC–field of “public health”or worse “global health”. Basically the people responsible for churning out the “quarantines don’t work” and “most of all we must protect against the spread of bias” nonsense in service of big government and big capital.

    And they are whining now, because when this pandemic hit they expected that they would get all the attention they think they are due as “experts” But in this crisis politicians and the media were looking for people who at least offered predictions or guidance–whether wrongheaded or not–or real data, rather than these gals very tired PC “public health” bromides. And a lot of men in their field and in others have been more dynamic–in speaking up with their opinions, in collecting data, in doing analyses, in making predictions, in writing papers and in getting grants. It turns out men are more aggressive and dynamic. (Hmm, why would that be. What good does attention and status and more dollars do for men?)

    And … hey are you listening to me?!?

    But again … there are no resignations here. Their whining is designed to get them attention and promotions into ever more comfy sinecures without actually having to hustle harder during the crisis and do the work.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob, Escher
  84. @James N. Kennett
    The headline:

    The pandemic has worsened longstanding sexist and racist inequalities in science pushing many of us to say ‘I’m done’, write 35 female scientists

     

    exaggerates the article's statement:

    “After this is over, I’m done” is a refrain we have heard many times in the past few months, almost exclusively from women.

     

    They are not actually saying that they will not carry on.

    Megan Murray, possibly the most senior signatory, is a Professor in the Department of Epidemiology at Harvard. Her research has several areas specific to tuberculosis, plus these areas that are suddenly topical:


    2. Modeling the transmission dynamics of emerging infectious disease. We are developing transmission models to study the dynamics of various emerging infectious diseases within populations and are linking these models to cost effectiveness analyses to evaluate the impact of intervention strategies. Our work has focused on MDR tuberculosis, West Nile virus, SARS, and sexually transmitted diseases.

    6. Pedagogy in interdisciplinary research and emerging infectious disease. Through a new Roadmap grant initiative, we are developing materials and curricula to train interdisciplinary teams in research in emerging infectious diseases.

    7. Exhaled particles and their relationship to infectivity of infectious agents. We are currently conducting pilot studies to try to understand how bioaerosols are produced and how they affect the transmissibility of influenza.

     

    One of the writers' grievances is that the media and policy-makers are looking only to white men for advice. There might be some truth in this, although it is hard to be sure of the explanation without comparing and contrasting the work of each scientist. Among epidemiologists, Google News reports the following numbers of hits for these searches:

    33,600 hits for "Neil Ferguson" Imperial
    18,600 hits for "Michael Osterholm" Minnesota
    663 hits for "Megan Murray" Harvard

    Well, if she sounded like the first two, Megan Murray would just be a hysterical broad.

  85. @Bardon Kaldian

    It’s worth recalling that the USA’s initial response to World War II was also unprepossessing. After the debacle at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, hysteria swept the West Coast. The 1979 movie 1941 was a rare flop for director Steven Spielberg, but it conveys the slightly addled temperature of the times, which led, comically, to the Feb. 24, 1942, “Battle of Los Angeles” in which Americans unleashed a huge amount of antiaircraft fire on nonexistent Japanese warplanes; and, shamefully, to the internment of Japanese-Americans.
     
    https://akb48oshimen.weebly.com/uploads/1/4/9/5/14952856/2792923_orig.gif?1

    The anime waifu will dominate the world! 😀 *maniacal laugh*

  86. @anon
    This site and Bill Burr are the two things I;m going to miss most about the "old normal"

    I discovered the comedy of Bill Burr awhile ago, but only fairly recently did I discover, after re-watching Breaking Bad that, holy crap, he was in that show. He played a fixer for Saul Goodman:

  87. @Jim Don Bob
    I am trying to think of just one significant thing a woman has ever invented, but I'm coming up with nada. Marie Curie doesn't count.

    Hedy Lamarr and frequency jumping

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter
    Of course, she didn't do the hard work to make it a reality.

    After all, the ancient Greeks invented the steam engine and the atomic theory of matter.
    , @Joe Stalin
    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr made this 1933 movie!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gfxcfn1qyw
  88. It must be hard being Steve Sailer. Do you get really angry sometimes and tear out the pages in your adult coling book, Break crayons.?? No … just when Bruce county comments..LOL

  89. @Federalist

    ...most women life scientists are admirably stepping up during this emergency...
     
    It's panicking women and men acting like women who turned this fairly minor event into an "emergency."

    ‘It’s panicking women and men acting like women who turned this fairly minor event into an “emergency.” ‘

    • You’re Damn Straight: Je Suis Omar Mateen

  90. I am beginning to think that women should wear masks even after this ‘pandemic’ is over.

    All the better to shut them up!

  91. @MarkinLA
    Hedy Lamarr and frequency jumping

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr

    Of course, she didn’t do the hard work to make it a reality.

    After all, the ancient Greeks invented the steam engine and the atomic theory of matter.

  92. @Anon
    I found Rhonda Patrick's recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.

    It is a perfect example of an attempt at pseudo-scientific authority, which women do not need being offered up as an example of their professional behavior.

    While she offers some interesting virus-behavior factoids in the filler space, which she picked up while recently perusing research, overall it is clear that Rhonda is attempting to speak from a place of academic authority on a matter that she is not trained to speak on.

    She quickly devolves into offering repetitive and decontextualized soundbites in regard to supplements that science is not yet completely clear on.

    Rhonda is a promotion artist who tries to first-promote research to the public as a means of self-promotion. She isn't a serious academic personality by any measure. If she were, she would be more careful in both having a complete grasp of anything she chooses to lecture on as well as to be radically more conservative in promoting specific supplements as solutions to problems. She would offer mitigating data (which certainly exists) and speak as if she were reading a research article instead of speaking as a cheap promoter.

    I found Rhonda Patrick’s recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.

    However she does appear to have some impressive credentials.

    • LOL: Inverness
  93. 35 Women Scientists Declare They Are Too Morally Weakened by Feminism and Anti-Whiteism to Carry on in This Crisis

    • LOL: James N. Kennett
  94. @Anon
    I found Rhonda Patrick's recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.

    It is a perfect example of an attempt at pseudo-scientific authority, which women do not need being offered up as an example of their professional behavior.

    While she offers some interesting virus-behavior factoids in the filler space, which she picked up while recently perusing research, overall it is clear that Rhonda is attempting to speak from a place of academic authority on a matter that she is not trained to speak on.

    She quickly devolves into offering repetitive and decontextualized soundbites in regard to supplements that science is not yet completely clear on.

    Rhonda is a promotion artist who tries to first-promote research to the public as a means of self-promotion. She isn't a serious academic personality by any measure. If she were, she would be more careful in both having a complete grasp of anything she chooses to lecture on as well as to be radically more conservative in promoting specific supplements as solutions to problems. She would offer mitigating data (which certainly exists) and speak as if she were reading a research article instead of speaking as a cheap promoter.

    I found Rhonda Patrick’s recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.

    She is repetitive and lacks wit – and breath. Unpleasant and not cost-effective (not enough thoughts per minute). I quitted soon.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    Oh, you Chermanz mit der not understanding das booben-joken.

    We can of admire the rack-Ausstattung of Ms Patrick, mit of acknowledging that she hätte machen sollen more effort mit her hair (the photograph makes her rack look of künstlich, but doesn't do justice to her of quite fetching face under normale Umstände).

    (Hat tip: r/polandball ... that shit never fails to of make me to laughing.)
  95. RACISM!

    The images show the telegenic lady Wakandan scientist looking at GroupOn hair deals on her iPad – while her Hitlerjugend colleague Gunther Otto von Wolfenstein (the unacceptably Aryan white-coated dude in the background) wastes time looking at greeblies down a microscope.

    That sort of racist twaddle is unacceptable at a time of worldwide existential “Last Man On Earth” pandemic crisis (Crisis? I hardly knew her. Boom.)

    In reality, if there was a genuine pandemic crisis, Gunther would be watching History Channel Hitler-porn and saying “If this is the big one I’ma wait and get me a free Konigsegg” (and trying to touch Shaniqua’s hair).

    KEK.

  96. @Anon
    A lot of this is women wanting to quit and raise kids, who realize that after having their parents pay for their very expensive schooling/or taking on massive loans, they have to provide some justification for the switch. By the time you've got an advanced degree, you've paid a lot for your education. Female scientists don't score as high as their male colleagues on the tests you need to enter grad schools for science, meaning they were less likely to be offered fellowships and whatnot. This means women wanting to continue in science were more likely to have taken out loans to continue their education, and they accumulated a lot of debt.

    Much of this is 'don't want to disappoint the parents.' A lot of these female scientists don't want to hear their fathers say, "Well, it was a waste of time to pay for your college education if you're just going to become a baby factory."

    Female scientists tend to come from really pushy parents who are very competitive. They want their daughters to be winning Nobel prizes, bag a rich husband, and have kids and raise them without breaking a sweat. That's a very tall order for anybody.

    By the time you’ve got an advanced degree, you’ve paid a lot for your education

    Only if you’re not good enough to get a scholarship.

    As I’ve said time and time again: if you are in a graduate program and you don’t have a full merit scholarhsip, it’s a hint that you shouldn’t be there. (By ‘you‘ I mean a generic you, not you personally. I refuse to use ‘one‘ because it’s faggy as fuck).

    By the time I decided not to be an academic (4 years into my PhD scholarship), I had accumulated precisely zero dollars in student debt. I had merit scholarships (fee waiver plus stipend) from second year undergraduate onwards; as a PhD student with a (tax-free) priority scholarship who did some JuniorMinion-ing on the side, I made more after tax than most junior lecturers.

    Anyone who whines about “student debt” is telling the world that they weren’t very good. Fuck them – if they study a hobby and/or are outside the top few percent of their discipline, they have no right to expect super-normal returns.

    • Agree: Black-hole creator
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Anyone who whines about “student debt” is telling the world that they weren’t very good.
     
    A college education should be for the very small proportion of the population capable of benefiting from it. Maybe 5-10% (I suspect 5% is closer to the mark). And post-graduate studies should be for the even smaller proportion capable of deriving some benefiting from it.
  97. @Dieter Kief

    I found Rhonda Patrick’s recent Joe Rogan appearance to be unlistenable.
     
    She is repetitive and lacks wit - and breath. Unpleasant and not cost-effective (not enough thoughts per minute). I quitted soon.

    Oh, you Chermanz mit der not understanding das boobenjoken.

    We can of admire the rack-Ausstattung of Ms Patrick, mit of acknowledging that she hätte machen sollen more effort mit her hair (the photograph makes her rack look of künstlich, but doesn’t do justice to her of quite fetching face under normale Umstände).

    (Hat tip: r/polandball … that shit never fails to of make me to laughing.)

  98. At the same time, we see that the opportunistic but not necessarily qualified researchers who are applying for newly available Covid-19 funding are overwhelmingly male; this is not only skewed in favour of men and often fails to acknowledge junior women involved, but also represents a misallocation of funds.

    This complaint is hard to take seriously. Unqualified staff are writing research proposals! It assumes that the poor proposals will be accepted.

    You get to be Professor by being good at writing research proposals that are accepted and bring money into your Department. The usual complaint of women and minorities is that the grant providers attach too much importance to the status and track record of the applicant.

    When a female Professor is complaining that opportunistic but not necessarily qualified men are submitting research proposals, it is a sure sign that she has lost the plot.

  99. @theMann
    Since a “Scientist” is some one whose reason can overcome their prejudices, an a Woman is some one incapable of using any amount of reason or fact to overcome their prejudices ( two trial examples, OJ, McMartin pre-school), is it not more accurate to say:

    There a few Scientists who happen to be biologically female, but no such thing as a Woman Scientist?

    BTW, how many Scientists have faced: ostracism, prison, riot, death, threats to their families, and so forth? But, pwecious wittle feeeeelings.............

    BTW, how many Scientists have faced: ostracism, prison, riot, death, threats to their families, and so forth? But, pwecious wittle feeeeelings………….

    Galileo, Pasteur, Lister, and most shameful of all, Semmelweiss.

    Yes, I am going to keep bringing up those names.

  100. @MarkinLA
    Hedy Lamarr and frequency jumping

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr

    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr made this 1933 movie!

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    I've read her autobiography (or "autobiography"). Strange person.....
    , @dfordoom

    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr made this 1933 movie!
     
    Exstase is a terrible movie though. It's true that if you sit through it you do get to see Hedy Lamarr's bare bottom. But with all due respect to Miss Lamarr's posterior (and it's a perfectly nice posterior) the movie is so bad it isn't worth it.
    , @Anonymous
    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr

    It's Hedly!
  101. In other words, when a real crisis loomed and the men in the room told the affirmative action hires “Look, I don’t expect you to make any real contribution, but you can at the very least not make a nuisance of yourself and not get in our way as we go about solving this thing”, they packed up and decamped in a huff. Which is good.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Maybe the old suing for discrimination when you don't get your way con is wearing thin and they are in the process of setting up their case. They haven't left yet but they now have something in the paper about how they are being discriminated against. Just a few more "incidents" and watch them file suit asking for 100 years worth of pay. The government will settle for 50 years worth.
  102. @JimB
    The US has a glut of PhD scientists and a scarcity of creative scientific thinkers. Do we have even one scientist is his research prime of the caliber of Richard Feynman or Linus Pauling or Hans Bethe or Paul Dirac? Nope.

    Correct; have you ever thought about creativity? Been to grad school or med school? regular old university? I’m sure high school is FUBAR now , too.

    These education fucks are determined to beat the last bit of independent thinking out of their students. Independent thinkers cause extra work, and we all know how the AFT and NEA feel about work. Ask yourself, how many teachers you respected during your days of indoctrination. Bloody hell, you mostly won’t even be admitted to school if they suspect you of wrongthink.

    Teach your children well, and you won’t have this problem.

    Education is too critical to leave to professional educators.

  103. Thank you, liberal women, for finally getting the heck out of the way, so that we non-liberal women can clean up the mess, & get s#it done without your “boo-hoo” or bellyaching.

  104. @Joe Stalin
    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr made this 1933 movie!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gfxcfn1qyw

    I’ve read her autobiography (or “autobiography”). Strange person…..

  105. @Joe Stalin
    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr made this 1933 movie!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gfxcfn1qyw

    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr made this 1933 movie!

    Exstase is a terrible movie though. It’s true that if you sit through it you do get to see Hedy Lamarr’s bare bottom. But with all due respect to Miss Lamarr’s posterior (and it’s a perfectly nice posterior) the movie is so bad it isn’t worth it.

  106. @Kratoklastes

    By the time you’ve got an advanced degree, you’ve paid a lot for your education
     
    Only if you're not good enough to get a scholarship.

    As I've said time and time again: if you are in a graduate program and you don't have a full merit scholarhsip, it's a hint that you shouldn't be there. (By 'you' I mean a generic you, not you personally. I refuse to use 'one' because it's faggy as fuck).

    By the time I decided not to be an academic (4 years into my PhD scholarship), I had accumulated precisely zero dollars in student debt. I had merit scholarships (fee waiver plus stipend) from second year undergraduate onwards; as a PhD student with a (tax-free) priority scholarship who did some JuniorMinion-ing on the side, I made more after tax than most junior lecturers.

    Anyone who whines about "student debt" is telling the world that they weren't very good. Fuck them - if they study a hobby and/or are outside the top few percent of their discipline, they have no right to expect super-normal returns.

    Anyone who whines about “student debt” is telling the world that they weren’t very good.

    A college education should be for the very small proportion of the population capable of benefiting from it. Maybe 5-10% (I suspect 5% is closer to the mark). And post-graduate studies should be for the even smaller proportion capable of deriving some benefiting from it.

    • Agree: Inverness
    • Replies: @Inverness
    The trouble is, we're financing the pretend "educations" of countless millions. Whether we want to or not.
  107. @ThreeCranes
    In other words, when a real crisis loomed and the men in the room told the affirmative action hires “Look, I don’t expect you to make any real contribution, but you can at the very least not make a nuisance of yourself and not get in our way as we go about solving this thing”, they packed up and decamped in a huff. Which is good.

    Maybe the old suing for discrimination when you don’t get your way con is wearing thin and they are in the process of setting up their case. They haven’t left yet but they now have something in the paper about how they are being discriminated against. Just a few more “incidents” and watch them file suit asking for 100 years worth of pay. The government will settle for 50 years worth.

    • Agree: Inverness
  108. Anonymous[387] • Disclaimer says:
    @Joe Stalin
    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr made this 1933 movie!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gfxcfn1qyw

    Fortunately for men everywhere, Hedy Lamarr

    It’s Hedly!

  109. @dfordoom

    Anyone who whines about “student debt” is telling the world that they weren’t very good.
     
    A college education should be for the very small proportion of the population capable of benefiting from it. Maybe 5-10% (I suspect 5% is closer to the mark). And post-graduate studies should be for the even smaller proportion capable of deriving some benefiting from it.

    The trouble is, we’re financing the pretend “educations” of countless millions. Whether we want to or not.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    The trouble is, we’re financing the pretend “educations” of countless millions. Whether we want to or not.
     
    Yes I agree completely.

    We need to start shutting down the Mickey Mouse departments in universities. Anything with the word "studies" needs to go. Pseudosciences like climate science need to go. Courses in applied voodoo like economics and political science need to go. Any course with the word science in it probably isn't science. At least half the law schools need to go. And as for college courses in journalism, they definitely need to go. Humanities courses are necessary but the numbers need to be slashed.

    And we need to go back to training people such as nurses on the job.

    The objective should be to reduce the number of university students by three-quarters.

    Also, being good at playing football should not get someone into a university.
  110. @Inverness
    The trouble is, we're financing the pretend "educations" of countless millions. Whether we want to or not.

    The trouble is, we’re financing the pretend “educations” of countless millions. Whether we want to or not.

    Yes I agree completely.

    We need to start shutting down the Mickey Mouse departments in universities. Anything with the word “studies” needs to go. Pseudosciences like climate science need to go. Courses in applied voodoo like economics and political science need to go. Any course with the word science in it probably isn’t science. At least half the law schools need to go. And as for college courses in journalism, they definitely need to go. Humanities courses are necessary but the numbers need to be slashed.

    And we need to go back to training people such as nurses on the job.

    The objective should be to reduce the number of university students by three-quarters.

    Also, being good at playing football should not get someone into a university.

    • Replies: @anon
    And everyone should get a pony! A free pony! No, wait, a unicorn! A unicorn to ride up the rainbow!

    lol

  111. @dfordoom

    The trouble is, we’re financing the pretend “educations” of countless millions. Whether we want to or not.
     
    Yes I agree completely.

    We need to start shutting down the Mickey Mouse departments in universities. Anything with the word "studies" needs to go. Pseudosciences like climate science need to go. Courses in applied voodoo like economics and political science need to go. Any course with the word science in it probably isn't science. At least half the law schools need to go. And as for college courses in journalism, they definitely need to go. Humanities courses are necessary but the numbers need to be slashed.

    And we need to go back to training people such as nurses on the job.

    The objective should be to reduce the number of university students by three-quarters.

    Also, being good at playing football should not get someone into a university.

    And everyone should get a pony! A free pony! No, wait, a unicorn! A unicorn to ride up the rainbow!

    lol

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...