Sciency stuff not for girlies

[Gob]

A senior scientist has given what has been described as a "highly offensive" presentation about the role of women in physics, the BBC has learned.

At a workshop organised by Cern, Prof Alessandro Strumia of Pisa University said that "physics was invented and built by men, it's not by invitation".

He said male scientists were being discriminated against because of ideology rather than merit.

He was speaking at a workshop in Geneva on gender and high energy physics.

Prof Strumia has since defended his comments, saying he was only presenting the facts.

Cern, the European nuclear research centre, described Prof Strumia's presentation as "highly offensive".

Continues; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45703700

[Big RR]

He also said that he himself was overlooked for a job that he was more qualified for, which was given to a woman.

Gee, I wonder why he wasn't hired--he seems to have such great people skills and isn't given at all to over generalizing to compensate for his lack of success in his career.

Eta: and as for Oxford, despite his clumsy wording, it appears all students, male and female, get the extra time, so what is his complaint?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2 ... s-benefit/

[BoSoxGal]

Worth posting about 3x!

[Big RR]

3 times? I guess I missed if before.

[BoSoxGal]

3 times? I guess I missed if before.

Gob’s thread posted 3x, not your reply here.

[Gob]

Eta: and as for Oxford, despite his clumsy wording, it appears all students, male and female, get the extra time, so what is his complaint?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2 ... s-benefit/

It was done to benefit women, even Oxford could not get away with such blatant sexism as to keep it "women only". Though it didn't work as they still score less well than men.

[Big RR]

gob--that's what the article says, but why is there any objection to giving everyone more time? Is there some magical effect of the previous time constraints that resulted in better graduates? I can't see the objection (or any sexism) if it is applied across the board to both genders.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Regardless of the difference between men and women, which was, even in my university days 50 years ago, negligible if at all as far as I could tell - there were far fewer women than men doing chemistry - maybe a factor of 3. But what I did find astonishing about those tables was the very high percentages who achieved first class honours: for us it was maybe 5%, not the 35 or 40% you see now. Grade inflation.

[dales]

Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday signed landmark legislation that will require all publicly traded companies with headquarters in California to have at least one woman on their board of directors by the end of 2019. The minimum requisite will increase to two by the end of 2021.

[Gob]

gob--that's what the article says, but why is there any objection to giving everyone more time? Is there some magical effect of the previous time constraints that resulted in better graduates? I can't see the objection (or any sexism) if it is applied across the board to both genders.

No one is claiming any different, but what he was pointing out is that this was done for the female students.
It was not done because male students needed more time, it was done because female students couldn't handle time pressure.
Therefore the time for everyone was increased.

[Big RR]

And therefore??????

I just don't get the complaint. Is he maintaining that time pressure is something which should be factored into assessing an individual's ability to be a good scientist? And/or that someone who can answer questions more quickly are somehow more likely to be successful scientists? I just don't see it.

[BoSoxGal]

Professor Strumia comes across as somebody with his boxers in a real twist - i.e., he has a wounded ego. Maybe a former incel?

With regard to the Oxford testing times; such things are pretty arbitrary to begin with, as much of the recent research has shown in terms of the ability of standardized testing to serve as an accurate measure of ability and potential.

I hardly think, as a matter of common sense, that 15 extra minutes is coddling any student who couldn’t otherwise excel in these fields. Unless there is evidence that every single male student has handed in his test 15 minutes short of test time ending, then the men are also, clearly, benefitting from (i.e., using) the extra time.

I studied Zoology for three years, pre-med, before leaving the hard sciences after a very disturbing experience interning in a genetics laboratory one summer in college, where I was alternatively ogled and sexually harassed, then relegated to the autoclave for hours on end to do all the housekeeping for the other lab interns - all male besides me. I was offered a spot in this professor’s lab because I earned the top grade in his course the prior term; I was getting top grades in all my science classes, and endured harassment from male classmates who were my study group colleagues when I had the temerity to score higher on exams than they did. Not long after that summer ended - I never complained to the professor because girls who complain are whingers - I read the book Femicide about the former engineering student in Canada who murdered a classroom full of female engineering students because he hated women and didn’t believe they deserved the education or the subsequent jobs in STEM. I decided then that STEM was full of far too many arrogant assholes and I didn’t want to spend my life around that kind of people - so I left Zoology, and because I was only one year short (in terms of credits) from earning my BS, and the degree requirements in English and PoliSci were two more years work, I ended up with two Bachelors degrees instead of just one.

The irony, of course, is that I was later encouraged by an English professor mentor I very much admired to attend law school after graduate school - where there was also no end of arrogant, sexist assholes.

Imagine a world where intelligent women could experience education and the world of work just based on their merit, and without any difference in opportunity or experience from what is offered men. Why is that so much to ask? Why does that concept upset so many men? It’s sad to me that so many millions of men feel such an entitlement based on a trait that was randomly selected long before any hint of their intellect began to form.

[rubato]

Eta: and as for Oxford, despite his clumsy wording, it appears all students, male and female, get the extra time, so what is his complaint?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2 ... s-benefit/

It was done to benefit women, even Oxford could not get away with such blatant sexism as to keep it "women only". Though it didn't work as they still score less well than men.

You are confused about statistical comparisons of groups, where it may be true that women collectively have lower mean scores, and comparisons of individuals where many women outscore men in a direct comparison.

When you are hiring or matriculating individuals it is only the latter which is important. Madam Curie and Lise Meitner were both scientific stars who outshone most males in an era when few women were given any chance to succeed.

A small offset in the center of the bellcurves for math or science ability is nothing.

yrs,
rubato

[rubato]

The fact that the male mean is slightly higher is of no use in choosing between two individuals.

If you give extra time you might be rewarding those who work carefully and slowly and not giving an advantage to those who work quickly. I would rather work with someone who shows up in 30 minutes with the right answer expressed clearly than someone who shows up in 20 minutes with sloppier work.



yrs,
rubato

[ex-khobar Andy]

And today, for the first time in 55 years, a woman shared the Nobel Prize for Physics.

[RayThom]

[Gob]

And therefore??????

I just don't get the complaint. Is he maintaining that time pressure is something which should be factored into assessing an individual's ability to be a good scientist? And/or that someone who can answer questions more quickly are somehow more likely to be successful scientists? I just don't see it.

No, he's says "this is an example of how things are being changed to make it easier for females." If the adjustment had been made to make it more advantageous for males, the whole "this is sexist" crowd would have been down on it like a ton of shit.

[Big RR]

OK, but even if that were true, why is he complaining? Males are being treated the same. and I can see no reason why the ability to answer questions a bit more quickly would be useful for physicists, let alone a way to determine who should get the best jobs. Science requires much deliberation and consideration in experimental design, and the ability to think and reason is more important than the ability to respond more quickly on an exam.

[BoSoxGal]

Gob sees ‘change’ and ‘female’ in the same sentence and his boxers twist reflexively. He’s a very conservative guy.

[Gob]

OK, but even if that were true, why is he complaining?

I didn't say he was "complaining", he was using it as one example. However, people have latched onto this as if it were the whole of his argument.