Sir Tim Hunt - women should stay out of labs because they distract men

[MurielWoods]

and they cry too easily and make men fall in love with them

I shit you not

I published as an undergraduate (2) in the Journal.

mummytime 22.38 Tues That's spot on.

Muriel: "Essentially what he was saying was this:

Science Labs are a male dominated space, although women are 'permitted' to be there also. The problem with this however is that women are often quite attractive and have breasts and vaginas and legs which are proving to be an enormous distraction to the men and preventing them from doing their important work.

There is also the added risk that if you criticise a woman or publish her work in your own name taking all the credit for yourself then she may feel a bit emotional."

This. Thanks for putting in words what disturbed me so much about the premise from which he was coming. Whether the twitter storm is justified or not, I am glad for a high profile scalp.

I am shocked at morebeta's description of academia. It sounds worse than in the City. No accountability or transparency. Corruption at the highest levels.

1. Tim Hunt has, for decades, mentored and supported women in science. He has done more for women than 99.9% of those who called for his resignation.

2. Tim Hunt "was always immensely supportive of the ERC’s work around gender equality" (Dame Athene Donald)

3. Tim Hunt made an experience-based assertion, based on over half a century of experience, that men and women working together in labs can be emotionally distracting for both sexes.

4. Tim Hunt commented that a problem he has had, working in labs in the past, is that women tend to cry more when confronted with criticism. Nevertheless he fully supports women in science. “No one seems to mention his main speech in Korea in which, according to the ERC President, he was ‘very supportive towards women in science and he said that he hoped there was nothing that barred women from science’” (Dame Athene Donald). He simply believes, based on his own considerable experience, that single sex labs are more conducive to good scientific research.

5. We may disagree with what Tim says, but we should defend to the death his right to say it.

Please read the other side of the story here and, if you agree, sign the petition to help reinstate Sir Tim Hunt:

www.ipetitions.com/petition/bring-back-tim-hunt#scrollTo-upvote-1653069

(Posted by an ordinary chap and advocate of human rights for both sexes).

I have signed the petition as I think it is very unfair that he has been made to resign without due process, whatever people think about his comments.

But he didn't say 'the problem with mixed sex labs, is that men and women find it difficult to work together'. He said the problem with girls. That women and girls were the ones causing problems.

And he does have every right to say what he wants, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be called out.

Perhaps if he had actually apologised, rather the half hearted #sorrynotsorry 'I'm sorry it offended you' nonsense he spouted, people would be more sympathetic.

And how nice of him to support women in STEM areas, not like that should just be a standard thing expected of all lecturers and people in senior positions. He was being extra-special nice to us girls, and now we've bullied the poor man out of his job by calling him out on his totally sexist statement?

Right.

There is a right to free speech - there is not a right to protection from the consequences of your free speech. Tim Hunt has not been imprisoned for his views - his employer has just decided that they don't want to be associated with him because of them.

Karisade

Here too?

Invested much?

What does this mean: "has been made to resign without due process"?

He was asked to resign and it was his choice. He could have stayed and suffer due process instead.

I have signed.

Was UCL actually his 'employer' anyway? I thought it was an unpaid honorary position. (he's 72, will be on a very large state pension presumably, it's not like he's been thrown into penury or anything)

I've already stated that I don't think UCL have handled this well. If they were responding to some twitter nastiness, more fool them (the only twitter I've seen is the mostly goodhumoured #distractinglysexy). But neither should they be particularly swayed by internet-circulated petitions.

Signed here too.

I don't mind what Tim Hunt said. Didn't and wouldn't take it very seriously. The title of the thread isn't what he said, either.

Besides, why complain about mentioning that it can be difficult when people fall in love or show emotions?

Reason #65,301 why the feminist club wouldn't want me.

Perhaps we should be quite glad the poor old chump has revealed the serious underlying issues, as commented on (in particular MoreBetas post, not sure if he'd consider himself part of a 'feminist club' either) or in this Forbes article.

What he said was not acceptable-but this thread is rife with ageism, gender-stereotyping (both about men and women) and, frankly, all sorts of rubbish.

Unfortunately for him, his remarks touched a very raw nerve for the thousands and thousands of women who have suffered discrimination in the STEM fields and highlighted the issue of sexism in labs which is a massive problem.

He wasn't saying anything new (colleagues flirt and have affairs all the time, it's not just restricted to the science lab). But he appeared to be laying the blame at the door of the 'girls' and reinforcing the belief that labs are first and foremost male 'spaces'

Generally speaking I am not in favour of a 'trial by twitter' (although there are some notable exceptions) and I would have preferred to have seen UCL follow due process (when I first started this thread I wasn't aware that they hadn't).

I think that if he had been prepared to issue a proper and sincere apology and to have acknowledged the very real issue that many women face in the STEM fields, then his career could have survived.

Instead he issued a stubborn 'apology' "I'm sorry for causing offence but stand by what I said" and then started winging (oh the irony!) to the press when his career went arse over tit.

I would have preferred to have seen UCL follow due process

Again, he wasn't sacked. He resigned. Upon their request, but he could have stood by and asked to be sacked through grueling due process, which could have uncovered uncomfortable issues, despite the public support by people who know him.

"A friend of mine who was lectured by him just told me that he was seemed strange & 'quirky', and not great at picking up on social cues..."

I did my PhD in a neighbouring lab, involving some collaboration with Tim's. Absolutely agree with the above - quirky, obsessive about science, not great at picking up social cues, immersed in what was going on in his lab at the time ...

Immensely supportive (as a scientist) to the female scientist I then was.

For the record, much, much, much more supportive than my (female) supervisor ever was - the battles faced by some eminent women scientists at that time, rather than encouraging them to nurture women to follow in their footsteps, seemed in some cases to drive them to show female students no mercy, in the 'I survived it, you must too' mould.

Had I been in Tim's lab, i would almost certainly have stayed in science, as he embodied the curiousity, the driving 'need to know' that first took me into science. With a female supervisor, I left it as soon as I finished my PhD.

He said something very stupid and crass.

Like everyone does. sometime in their lives.

As someone said upthread, he's done a lot for women in science, and his achievements should outweigh some very stupid comments. I don't agree with his being sacked (being "asked" to resign is the same thing, it doesn't really leave you with a choice and no doubt constructive dismissal procedures are in train already).

I'm fed up with social media storms - they remind me of witch hunts and lynch mobs. Has anyone heard about the ludicrous and potentially very serious situation in Cyprus? All British tourists of course, not the locals who no doubt have some common sense.

I'd like to see a bit less judgment and a bit more "there but for the grace of god"

NOBODY is perfect.

And again, he could have sincerely apologized. But he didn't. So whether what he said was just a stupid, thoughtless comment, it's irrelevant now. He wasn't apologetic or even contrite.

"Brilliant Scientist is bullied online, resigns."

Perhaps all his work should be disavowed - shame if it helped towards a cure for cancer.

The Distractinglysexy hashtag is hardly bullying.

It's not as if he was threatened to be beaten or raped or called names, as has happened to women who have actually been bullied online for defending equal rights.

Cdtaylor - fortunately science is measured objectively. Of course his work won't be 'disavowed'.

I think it's more 'Brilliant scientist says something very stupid in a very public speech, refuses to apologise and is subsequently asked to resign from his honorary post'.

Nooka has clearest explanation of the whole sorry debacle in the fewest words.