tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10721624.post3894136878738124194..comments2023-10-30T12:26:15.822+01:00Comments on Research as a Second Language: InstitutionsThomashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04858865501469168339noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10721624.post-53628351217901823772016-10-29T11:45:52.211+02:002016-10-29T11:45:52.211+02:00Wow! Thank you for this. Interesting article. I th...Wow! Thank you for this. <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/arecibo-observatory-hit-with-discrimination-lawsuit-1.20778" rel="nofollow">Interesting article.</a> I think it's a somewhat too clear example of the danger I've been alluding to. Once "injustice" against (young?) women becomes an overriding concern, and their protection and promotion therefore becomes an end in itself, this sort of thing is likely to happen. If the EEOC's assessment is correct, it would seem that Schmelz's "tireless advoca[cy] for the right[s] of female astronomers" has clouded her judgment.<br /><br />I note with some interest that Schmelz is being defended by Meg Urry by appealing to that advocacy, and by her former boss at Arecibo for her "utmost professionalism”. Richardson, meanwhile, is described by colleagues as "courteous and kind" and very insistent when it comes to being "scientifically proper". My take away is that Richardson is a dedicated scientist and Schmelz probably more of a political operator. Science needs both kinds of animal, of course. (Someone has to get the funding and run the observatories.) But these days, I fear, the one is crowding out the other. The scientific mindset, with all its allegedly "masculine" obsessiveness and cantankerousness, is under threat.Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04858865501469168339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10721624.post-89971735711130717702016-10-29T11:18:16.594+02:002016-10-29T11:18:16.594+02:00It's curious how the fact that Joan Schmelz, t...It's curious how the fact that Joan Schmelz, the former chair of the Committee on the Status of Women in Astronomy and a candidate for the next AAS Vice-President, was recently a sued for discrimination (see Nature News, 13th October) has received so little attention.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10721624.post-25243141305616808302016-10-27T20:13:41.201+02:002016-10-27T20:13:41.201+02:00I agree completely, Jonathan. Today, it's poss...I agree completely, Jonathan. Today, it's possible to fire a man for harassment though he never proposes a sexual relationship, never offers or withholds professional support, never thinks or says that women don't belong in his field, and never does anything to obstruct anybody's career. All he has do is make her feel a little unsure about whether he's really impressed with her mind or perhaps just likes looking into her eyes.Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04858865501469168339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10721624.post-40650913528508772242016-10-27T18:57:38.909+02:002016-10-27T18:57:38.909+02:00The idea of hostile environment was meant to descr...The idea of hostile environment was meant to describe situations like that of a woman police officer in a previously all-male department who is subjected to constant gender-based harassment. There are pornographic images placed in her locker. She is called names. Dirty jokes are told whenever she is around. There are constant remarks about her body or appearance. This is discrimination because no "reasonable person" would find this tolerable, and the aim is to drive this woman out of the department. <br /><br />How this got translated into a situation where a single remark or isolated incident is enough to equate to a hostile environment is quite a story. <br /><br />Of course, quid pro quo harassment is different from "hostile environment" harassment. <br /><br />Another problem is that violent assault--much more serious than discrimination--is under the aegis of discrimination law. Violent crime should be punished like violent crime, not like "inappropriate"behavior of a harassing nature. The result of this confusion is a trivialization of both discrimination and violence: both are bad, but it hardly seems you would want the same mechanism to deal with both of them. Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09371893596402673898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10721624.post-40733038670799218252016-10-27T17:09:02.849+02:002016-10-27T17:09:02.849+02:00The Calvinist doctrine of "total depravity&qu...The Calvinist doctrine of "total depravity" emphasized the idea that humans are incapable of avoiding sin. Modern academics are properly secular and dismissive of theological ideas, but are as human as our ancestors and thus attracted to similar ideas about human nature.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com