Is Tim Hunt Really A Seething Chauvinist Who Thinks Female Scientists Should Be Forced To Work In The Broom Closet Across The Hall?
Here's what Tim Hunt said:
"Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab. You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them, they cry."
He did say this:
"I'm in favor of single-sex labs."
But looking at all of this, it could be seen as a man lamenting his own difficulties with women -- or even if he is in favor of single-sex labs, couldn't somebody discuss or debate this with him instead of immediately packing him off to the guillotine?
We're a little quick to use social media as a means to assess -- or rather "assess" -- a person and then make some some speedy determination about how they should be punished.
Robin McKie writes for the Guardian about Nobel winner Tim Hunt's speeding "prosecution" via social media and the subsequent firing from an honorary position from University College of London. (Other organizations followed in dismissing him.)
Sitting on a sofa with his wife, Hunt tries to explain why he made the remarks that got him into trouble while Collins groans in despair as he outlines his behaviour. Hunt had been invited to the world conference of science journalists in Seoul and had been asked to speak at a meeting about women in science. His brief remarks contained 39 words that have subsequently come to haunt him."Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab. You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them, they cry," he told delegates.
"I stood up and went mad," he admits. "I was very nervous and a bit confused but, yes, I made those remarks - which were inexcusable - but I made them in a totally jocular, ironic way. There was some polite applause and that was it, I thought. I thought everything was OK. No one accused me of being a sexist pig."
Collins clutches her head as Hunt talks. "It was an unbelievably stupid thing to say," she says. "You can see why it could be taken as offensive if you didn't know Tim. But really it was just part of his upbringing. He went to a single-sex school in the 1960s. Nevertheless he is not sexist. I am a feminist, and I would not have put up with him if he were sexist."
Hunt may have meant to be humorous, but his words were not taken as a joke by his audience. One or two began tweeting what he had said and within a few hours he had become the focus of a particularly vicious social media campaign. He was described on Twitter as "a clueless, sexist jerk"; "a misogynist dude scientist"; while one tweet demanded that the Royal Society "kick him out".
The next morning, as he headed for Seoul airport, Hunt got an inkling of the storm that was gathering when BBC Radio 4's Today programme texted requesting an interview. He recorded a clumsily worded phone message. "It wasn't an interview. It was 1am British time and I was just asked to record a message. It was a mistake to do that as well. It just sounded wrong."
After Today was broadcast, and while Hunt was still flying back, Collins was called by University College London. She is a professor and a former dean there, while Hunt was an honorary researcher.
"I was told by a senior that Tim had to resign immediately or be sacked - though I was told it would be treated as a low-key affair. Tim duly emailed his resignation when he got home. The university promptly announced his resignation on its website and started tweeting that they had got rid of him. Essentially, they had hung both of us out to dry. They certainly did not treat it as a low-key affair. I got no warning about the announcement and no offer of help, even though I have worked there for nearly 20 years. It has done me lasting damage. What they did was unacceptable."
Should he really be out of a job? From Science Media Centre:
I had questions, mainly revolving around whether or not Tim Hunt is a chauvinist. Does he actually discriminate against his female colleagues? Does he seriously propose segregated labs and has he ever tried to implement this? Does he refuse to employ young women in his lab because they might cry when he appraises their work? And critically, will removing Tim Hunt from his positions at UCL, the Royal Society and the ERC also remove a barrier to the progress of women in science and advance that cause. I asked around but none of those giving interviews or tweeting seemed be able to answer me. Worryingly for me, the question of whether this scientist deserved this global vilification seemed irrelevant.I then called scientists who know him and something interesting happened. They said they had not witnessed any gender bias in him. Some specified the exact opposite. That Tim is a fantastic supporter of young scientists, including women. The organiser of a national competition for young scientists told me that he had never been anything but fantastic, especially with the young women, and is really dedicated and generous with his time. Another eminent woman wrote: "among scientists who know him, Tim Hunt is regarded as a good man and an excellent scientist. He is renowned for his willingness to engage, especially with students, and has done a great deal to promote the careers of young people, including women."
I then decided to call Tim himself. I asked him why he called himself a chauvinist and if he believes he is one. He insisted again that it was intended to be a silly joke and that he prides himself on treating everyone he works with respect and kindness, and believes he has achieved that over his career.
So does it actually matter whether Tim Hunt is a real sexist or just made sexist remarks? Dorothy Bishop, who issued one of the most humane and intelligent comments about the affair, thinks it doesn't: "I feel that personal liking for the man should not blind us to the damage he has done, especially to the Royal Society's push for greater diversity. In one short speech he has set back the cause of women in science."
Fair point. At a time where women are still underrepresented in areas of science and ridiculously hard to find at the top, news of crusty old dinosaurs reinforcing tired old stereotypes is enough to make anyone despair, let alone those women and institutions who have been fighting to put this image of science behind us. But there is huge difference between slamming his comments as out of date, and calling for his head on a plate. Surely we cannot celebrate the fact that an excellent scientist known for doing much to promote scientific careers for young men and women will no longer occupy three important positions? Has this advanced the cause of women in science? I fear not. The very real issues which women in science face at each stage of their careers are not being addressed by tokenistic gestures and a rush to judge.
A female scientist posts at Daily Kos:
The issues that Sir Hunt brought up are real issues. At our Women in Science meetings we discussed similar issues of gender-related tensions in the lab. Female graduate students sometimes feel their relationship with their male adviser is very different from the relationship said adviser has with his male students. Falling in love in the lab is not unheard of, to put it mildly. That women tend to be more sensitive and brought to tears more easily is also nothing to be ashamed of. Bringing these issues up as one person's experience, in a light-hearted way, is not something that I see as an attack. And yet, somehow it turned into just that.And this is what bugs me (sorry for the pun, I am an entomologist) as a woman scientist. That female scientists, perhaps without seeing the whole remark in context, immediately see an attack instead of a joke, or an opportunity to bring these issues up and discuss them with the seriousness they deserve.
Instead, they lash out a counter attack with the #DistractinglySexy tag. It makes me feel as if they are so insecure in their abilities as scientists, that they're afraid one man's comments will show the world "what they're really like". Now some might take my words out of context and say that I think women are lesser scientists than man. And that's what, I think, was done to the Nobel laureate.
I don't know Sir Tim Hunt personally, but he is married to a scientist and has worked and published with women scientists. Which makes me doubt he feels women scientists do not deserve respect.
It would be interesting to hear from women scientist who had worked with him. Maybe he is a dirty old man who thinks women should get out of the lab. I just don't see it in his remarks.
(as someone else pointed out)
Tim Hunt: women in the lab whine, cry.
Women: *whine*, *cry*.
Look even uber-SJW PZMyers refuses to be alone with women in his lab.
jerry at June 13, 2015 10:22 PM
Even if he is a sexist douche, if he contributes great research he should continue to do so. As for his adminstrative role, he should be reprimanded and his record looked at but firing him is insane
Nicolek at June 13, 2015 11:20 PM
I believe that a new scientific principle has been discovered: the Summers-Hunt effect.
Wfjag at June 14, 2015 1:13 AM
I am absolutely disgusted by what I have started calling the moral equivalent of stoning someone to death because you don't like what a person has said. When will this stop? This is starting to happen every day and it is so destructive to the accused,their families, and their reputations completely ruined. This dude is a Nobel Laureate for fuck's sake. What have those who have made their business to destroy his life achieved?
We need to start calling women out for their overt sexual advances toward men. For years I sat by and watched as woman after woman (especially Kathleen Raven, but also Kelly Hills...and SO many others) would openly flirt with Bora, follow him around, send him endless emails and DMs on Twitter. It was pitiful.
However, you can't say bo-peep about women if you are a man, or you risk having your career (and your life) destroyed. This is a grave injustice and we must do something about it. In my day, feminists were strong as rocks, and leaders, but today, everybody is a victim. Makes me want to puke.
Ccziv at June 14, 2015 1:33 AM
Nicolek Says:
"Even if he is a sexist douche, if he contributes great research he should continue to do so. As for his adminstrative role, he should be reprimanded and his record looked at but firing him is insane."
I just want to put a few things out there for those who aren't necessarily as familiar with how academia works.
As a Nobel laureate Tim Hunt almost certainly doesn't step one foot into a lab to run any experiments himself.
In addition, he probably only teaches classes when he chooses to (that is usually one of the perks of having a Nobel).
Instead his job will predominantly be administrative where he directs centers, oversees the activities of post-docs and graduate students, writes grant proposals, and travels to give invited lectures.
Those post-docs and graduate students would be the people in the trenches "contributing great research" as you put it.
I personally have no issues with Dr. Hunt rolling up his sleeves and getting back into the lab to perform his own experiments and then publish the results.
The issue is that given his views, he probably shouldn't be managing other people because he is unlikely to treat people fairly or equally.
One of the key features in being an effective manager is that the people who work under your supervision should be able to expect that you will treat everyone equally and fairly. Everyone should anticipate being provided with a fair shot of proving themselves.
Like it or not, his impartiality in this key area is now under reasonable suspicion, this may make him unsuitable to manage a lab or a center.
Artemis at June 14, 2015 1:52 AM
@Artemis:
Perhaps unintentionally, you well illustrate the Summers-Hunt Effect.
The exceptionally distinguished academic careers of Dr. Larry Summers and Dr. Tim Hunt, were destroyed by histrionic outrage over remarks twisted out of context by persons who seem to relish a victim status.
You conclude that Dr. Hunt is under "reasonable suspicion." However, those who know and have worked with him - female and male - state that they are aware of no evidence of gender bias by him. Rather, his remark (which was in a presentation on women pursuing careers in biology) was apparently an attempt at humor - an admittedly lame attempt by a scientist, who would have starved had he tried a career at Stand Up.
Because of the gross misrepresentation of him, he is under unreasonable suspicion, and an impeccable career badly damaged because of one short remark that offended some anonymous listener's opinion on feminist orthodoxy, which was posted on-line and went viral.
Wfjag at June 14, 2015 3:23 AM
"reasonable suspicion"
Reasonable - under what standard - his professional actions? Nothing found. Personal conduct. Nothing found. He was deemed unneeded based on his social status (old white guy).
Suspicion - he was fired immediately so nope. No review. No discussion about "It's true although poorly stated."
"They cry." - well he got fired for making a joke/observation that is discussed in women's groups so hell yeah. They cried. He got fired.
I believe his firing made his point.
Bob in Texas at June 14, 2015 4:21 AM
Great point, CZiv, re: Bora. The story of the horrible injustice done to him:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2015/02/17/a_man_is_out_of.html
"A Man Is Out Of A Job (And Much More) Over This Innocuous Crap"
Amy Alkon at June 14, 2015 6:59 AM
as a woman you are at least allowed to speak in his defence - as a man you can't as you are automatically sexist.
UCL has shown their scientific as well as their political incompetence and the people who should take their hat over the affair are the bigots that call the man sexist. The equality delusion in british academia has gone too far. If you fail to see the difference between male and female you definitively failed in your scientific observation skills. The should not even be given equal opportunities and not been seen as equal. For men who see woman as equal only want to get them down to their level for their own benefit. Feminists who want to be like men have already got there with their pronounced selfishness, and they have clearly lost any authority as they demand it. Why would a woman ever want to sink so low to want to be like a man? Have they no pride in being a woman?
marvin at June 14, 2015 7:16 AM
Wfjag Says:
"The exceptionally distinguished academic careers of Dr. Larry Summers and Dr. Tim Hunt, were destroyed by histrionic outrage over remarks twisted out of context by persons who seem to relish a victim status."
I want to point out something that is very easy for people to confuse for those who have no experience dealing with people within academic circles.
Those who get into managerial/administrative positions do not necessarily get there by virtue of their ability to manage people.
They can just as easily get into those prestigious positions because they have demonstrated excellence as a researcher.
The skills that make one an excellent researcher do not necessarily translate into making one an excellent manager.
This is why in private industry you often have technical tracks and managerial tracks for those in the sciences.
Some scientists have excellent managerial skills, but those are not actively selected for within academic circles in terms of hiring new professors.
As a result, while Dr. Hunt may be an excellent researcher, his ability to effectively manage personnel may not be quite up to snuff.
Artemis at June 14, 2015 8:31 AM
Bob in Texas Says:
""They cry." - well he got fired for making a joke/observation that is discussed in women's groups so hell yeah. They cried. He got fired."
I just want to point something out in case you missed it.
You are observing that there is a group of people who have gotten all bent out of shape over some off color comments he made.
That is fair.
However, I think you are missing some key points here and may be on the same histrionic train as the women you are complaining about.
In particular, you note that "He Got fired."... and yet you seem to have failed to notice this rather important part:
"subsequent firing from an honorary position"
The key thing to note here is ***HONORARY POSITION***
This fellow is not out on his ass struggling to find a new job.
Nobel laureates collect honorary positions in much the same way that celebrities collect honorary degrees.
Dr. Hunt is still gainfully employed.
Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why I always defend tenure and people here get their panties in a wad.
When you are a tenured professor you can't be dismissed from your tenure track position because a bunch of overly sensitive people pitch a fit.
The point still remains that Dr. Hunt may not be a good manager based upon his personal views.
Artemis at June 14, 2015 8:40 AM
"...that's not funny." She demanded.
For well or ill, we live in a time when it is better not to engage with banter in any way, ESPECIALLY not in public venues.
Corp, schools, and govt.s certainly see their appearances a paramount, so what might get you written up internally, will get you fired externally, and for cause... because it makes the corp entity look bad.
Like space-girl-hawaiian-shirt dude, it doesn't actually matter what his intent was, in any way.
the only thing that matters is how it will be perceived.
scientists and engineers understand rules based logic, and this is the rule. Don't talk to women in anything but a neutral way, and realize that people will take offense on someone else's behalf.
In the long run, you will feel like walking on eggshells all the time, and you will avoid women so that you don't have to worry about the wrong ear hearing.
Those of us in the corporate world, have to take the training every year, so we already know this... academics will learn...
SwissArmyD at June 14, 2015 9:43 AM
The point still remains that Dr. Hunt may not be a good manager based upon his personal views.
I'm not the only one to mention this, so either your reading is selective or you are ignoring the fact that
MANY
PEOPLE
WHO
HAVE
WORKED
WITH
HIM
(INCLUDING
WOMEN)
HAVE
SAID
THAT
HE
IS
NOT,
I
REPEAT
NOT,
THE
LEAST
BIT
SEXIST.
Did you happen to catch that this time Artemis?
lujlp at June 14, 2015 12:17 PM
This nonsense will continue until true egalitarians step forward and insist, demand that the same standards of social-media umbrage be applied to woman.
When a few high-profile female CEOs, scientists, etc., are hounded out of office for an off-hand remark, or publically humiliated and forced to grovel for forgiveness for a bad fashion choice, then and only then will society-at-large care.
If it hurts women, it must be a problem. Otherwise, not so much.
DrPinWV at June 14, 2015 1:15 PM
What an 'old white guy' can say at a Women in Science meeting:
"I think women should go into science."
"I think they would be successful."
"Thank you for having me speak today."
Bob in Texas at June 14, 2015 4:12 PM
As a Nobel laureate in an honorary research position, Hunt was a prestige hire, like having a distinguished athlete in a visible position in the Athletic Department. When he no longer brings prestige to the university and ht program, he is out.
He's basically a Kardashian, meant to look good, not to actually produce anything. And if he discovers something great while there, more good for the university. If not, he's still part of the reason the university can boast of "32 Nobel Prize winners and 3 Fields Medalists" among its alumni and current and former staff.
What's more, after Matt Taylor, he knew the sensitivity of social media towards any implication of sexism in science. And it's not like this was an off-the-cuff remark. It was a prepared speech in front of a women's science group which he travelled several thousand miles to deliver.
Artemis/Orion, your condescension has gotten old - and you have given us no evidence of the high intellect you imagine that you have; that somehow gives you the right to talk down to the rest of the forum as if it were populated with uneducated bumpkins.
Careful, there, luj, criticism of Artemis/Orion's selective interpretation of others' posts will net you an accusation of putting words in his mouth or reading his posts selectively.
Failure to acknowledge his prolix ramblings as intellectually superior to anything else posted here will get you a condescending dressing down - and hundreds of extraneous words.
Ooh, you're in for it now.
Conan the Grammarian at June 14, 2015 4:24 PM
I can't say I know a whole lotta scientists, but the few I do know should never, ever in this present PC-oriented time, be allowed to ad lib in front of anyone with pen, paper, or a recording device. Their brains do not have a social filter. This should be understood about these genius souls who should not be put in a corner with a dunce hat on. Bush has said stupid stuff. Biden has surely said crazy stuff. We let so much slide from public figures, yet a scientist gets no pass?
gooseegg at June 14, 2015 4:35 PM
Deborah Blum, who was there, calls Hunt's defenses "damage control."
https://storify.com/deborahblum/tim-hunt-and-his-jokes-about-women-scientists
But so a guy has some attitudes one disagrees with or even deplores. Should the guy be fired? Even if there's no evidence he's discriminating against women and is just talking about some of the trouble he's had or has?
Amy Alkon at June 14, 2015 4:51 PM
I was an intern for United Press International back in 1983, and part of the beat I covered was the Senate, and in particularly, some hearing or hearings by the one-man clown rodeo also known as Joe Biden.
If Biden were not a Democrat and if Biden were a researcher in today's climate, he would have been out of a job before he even had one.
Amy Alkon at June 14, 2015 4:53 PM
Unfortunately the adults (and the majority) have been superseded by a vocal few that act emotionally thus avoiding any "facts" that disagree w/their viewpoint.
Since adults feel that opposing views should be heard in a respectful manner the minority have gained an upper hand. Until donors, sponsors, and the public respond in a forceful manner we are in for a rough ride.
"Stupid is as stupid does." may be a movie line but it sure covers a lot of ground.
Bob in Texas at June 14, 2015 7:24 PM
lujlp Says:
"Did you happen to catch that this time Artemis?"
Did you happen to catch this component of what I wrote lujlp?
"The point still remains that Dr. Hunt ***MAY*** not be a good manager based upon his personal views."
My only point is that based upon his expressed views that he apparently does not feel qualified to manage female researchers (this is what it implies when he claims to believe that laboratories should be gender segregated).
He is the one expressing that he ***MAY*** not be able to be fair to the women in his labs.
He is the one expressing that he ***MAY*** harbor some prejudices when it comes to the women who might be under his supervision.
There shouldn't be anything shocking about a suggestion that someone might not be a great manager if they tell you that they don't feel the same way about men and women in the work place.
Don't be so fucking obtuse.
Just to put the shoes on the other foot.
If you had a female boss who stated that she didn't think that men and women should work together because men have emotional problems... wouldn't you at the very least consider the possibility that she ***MIGHT*** not be a good manager, and that she ***MIGHT*** have treated you unfairly at some point?
Artemis at June 14, 2015 11:50 PM
Conan the Grammarian,
You are very funny.
It seems like we are apparently in agreement when it comes to this issue... and yet you still feel the need to pick a fight because of some grudge you hold from other times you have been wrong.
Do you know who behaves that way?... carrying childish grudges from thread to thread for no reason?
Children.
Mature adults have the capacity to see when they are in agreement and can acknowledge it.
You don't seem to have the integrity to even say that you agree with me on this issue.
You would rather pick a fight than to do the mature thing and say something like:
"While I generally disagree with Artemis, on this issue they are correct about Dr. Hunt being fired only from a prestige position and that he still has his tenured job."
It is time for you to grow up Conan. You are too damn old to behave like you never made it out of junior high.
Artemis at June 14, 2015 11:57 PM
"As a woman scientist..."
Here's how you start fixing this: if you don't want people to key in on your gender, then stop putting your gender first when you think or talk about what you are. In the lab, you shouldn't be a "woman scientist". You should be a scientist.
Cousin Dave at June 15, 2015 7:09 AM
You just rub me the wrong way. You irk me. You're a giant irk.
As for my "grudge," I merely pointed out your unwarranted condescension to others on this forum: "I just want to put a few things out there for those who aren't necessarily as familiar [as the all-knowing Artemis] with how academia works."
You don't even realize you're doing it, do you?
So, I've decided not simply to ignore the man behind the curtain, I've decided to throw rocks at him. Because he irks me.
You. And anyone who deals with you.
How would you know what capacity mature adults have? Did you meet one recently? Is your therapy kicking in? Did you get a new ward attendant?
Mature adults don't condescend to the world and pretend they have more experience and knowledge than anyone else, lecturing others on what their jobs are, as we've seen you do.
When mature adults have more knowledge on a subject than those around them, they know it and they let others know where they're coming from (from what source their expertise is derived). You hold onto your personal information like an toddler resisting potty training and insist we accept without question your superior expertise on any subject.
If you're the expert on "how academia works," let us know from whence this expertise comes - or realize that we're not going to simply accept your condescending rants that you know "how academia works."
The only reason you know I've made it out of junior high is that I've told you (and everyone here) a little about myself. You, on the other hand, have anal-retentively held onto any and all personal information, refusing to tell us anything about yourself (except through your posts - where you've shown us you have no experience dealing with a non-structured world and none in non-regimented interaction with intelligent adults).
You're method of arguing - with unnecessary verbosity and a rigid insistence on having your prolix posts interpreted in only one way (your way) - is why Crid speculated that you are institutionalized somewhere. You're a very brittle personality and you don't deal with fluid situations well.
Conan the Grammarian at June 15, 2015 8:29 AM
I'm with you Cousin Dave. One of the things I really admired about my friend James was he was an engineer who just happened to be gay. Being gay was just a part of him. It didn't define and encompass his whole being. Unfortunately there are many in the LGBT community who act like their sexual orientation is a job. They get up and go to gay. They put in 8-10 hrs of gay. Then they go home, go to bed, and get ready for a new gay day.
Ben at June 15, 2015 11:27 AM
For those of you who are not familiar who Deborah Blum is I would recommend watching this for a full discloser of where her Science Journalist's friends are coming from. Was Sir Tim Hunt set up?
Science Journalism: The double XX question
https://youtu.be/UVwiyRFLX-E
Sam Juno at June 15, 2015 10:17 PM
Leave a comment