5 ms·

When it's the lead scientist of a 10 year project to land something on a comet 100 million miles away and he decides to wear a shirt a friend made for him, yeah

by hoopd 11y ago

When it's the lead scientist of a 10 year project to land something on a comet 100 million miles away and he decides to wear a shirt a friend made for him, yeah his feelings are important. But that's not the point, the point is the group saying others must be held responsible for their public actions refuse to take responsibility for their own. It was a tactless showing of power based on a skewed sense of social justice and it overshadowed a momentous occasion. It's ironic as anything that the excuse for the abuse he took is literally "he shouldn't have worn that if he didn't want that to happen."

wpietri 11y ago
What horrible actions are people refusing to take responsibility for? As far as I can tell the sequence is: * He wore the shirt on international broadcast * People around the world objected * He admitted the error and apologized * People accepted his apology Also, it's not clear to me that he was the lead scientist, and he only joined Rosetta in 2013. The rest of what you have looks to me like sweeping assertions. Quite a lot of people, me included, think it was a proportional reaction driven by a reasonable sense of social justice, and it was his casual sexism that spoiled a momentous occasion. Your last line is just sad. I assume that's just willful ignorance and a lack of empathy, but in case you really can't tell the difference: rape victims get harmed for going about their lives, so bringing up what they wear is shifting blame to the victim. But here the shirt is the thing causing harm, so it's reasonable to call it out.
- hoopd 11y ago
  Here you show your difficulty perceiving men as victims. He didn't just apologize, he broke down crying. He was being tried in a court of public opinion where he was not allowed to explain or defend himself. Look at what happens to men who refuse to prostrate themselves to the social justice mob: they lose their jobs (even if they founded the company: Brendan Eich, even if the have a Nobel Prize: Tim Hunt.) Threatening somebody's career for an honest mistake and then celebrating their tears is, in a word, scary. It's bullying and I'm touched that others have come together to show him support (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/matt-taylor-rosetta-project-scientist#/story https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/matt-taylor-rosetta-proje...) The reason I bring up victim-blaming is that even when it's pointed out to you, you don't see it. Benefit of the doubt suggests it's because you don't believe that what happened to him was wrong. An aside: nobody asks what the effect this charade has on young boys looking at a career in science. It tells them that an undergrad in physics (which is 10x the work of most degrees), and a PhD in magnetohydrodynamics (which would be literally impossibble for most people), and 10 years hard work as a scientist still won't be enough to earn them the benefit of the doubt. > Also, it's not clear to me that he was the lead scientist, and he only joined Rosetta in 2013. True, apparently Taylor joined Rosetta in 2013. He joined the ESA as a project scientist on different mission in 2005 before getting the Rosetta job. Notice that here (http://sci.esa.int/rosetta/43058-mission-team/ http://sci.esa.int/rosetta/43058-mission-team/) his name is second from the top. He's a superstar. All of this is so far blown out of proportion that the fundamental argument isn't being challenged, is "casual sexism" really what's keeping women from careers in science? I'm not convinced. Since you're calling people out for being anonymous in this conversation just remember you get to have your name attached to your arguments without risking your social life and career.
  - wpietri 11y ago
    I can perceive men as victims. But here he is not a victim. He thoughtlessly did something bad in front of the whole world. People told him that he did something bad. Lots of people, many of them angry. This upset him and he apologized. Forgiven and forgotten, end of story. Except, apparently, for bitter anti-feminists who can't help bringing this up every time Rosetta is in the news. I too have said and done dumb, hurtful things, been called out, and tearfully apologized. That's not victimhood. It's being a vaguely responsible human. > the benefit of the doubt What doubt did he fail to benefit from? The accusation is that he wore an inappropriate shirt on an international stage while representing an important scientific effort. I am not seeing a lot of room to doubt that was true. The general assumption I saw was that it was something he did thoughtlessly, with no understanding of the impact. So to the extent that his motivation was unknown, I'd say he got plenty of benefit of the doubt. > I'm not convinced. You say that like I might worry, but I don't. Quite a lot of views change in a progressive direction not because any given individual learns anything, but because those defending old errors die off. Note the rate of change here is pretty close to the rate of death: http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/bb8ic2qate-wa_cbgc2ifg.png http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Prod... We've been moving toward gradually less sexism for the last couple hundred years. I figure it's going to be at least a century more. If you have sincere questions (as opposed to argumentation in question form) I'm glad to answer. But otherwise, feel free to remain unconvinced. Your participation in bettering the world would be useful, but history suggests it's far from necessary. > Since you're calling people out for being anonymous in this conversation just remember you get to have your name attached to your arguments without risking your social life and career. Sure, but this is mainly true because I'm an older white guy. Just based on that status, I can get away with almost anything and still be employable. I agree that things have changed such that for the first time older white guys can no longer be guaranteed total impunity for being openly and vocally bigoted while occupying high leadership roles. I agree that this sucks mildly for people like me. Now I have to do the slightly difficult work of actually caring how my words might impact other people, and the actually hard work of learning how to apologize well when I fuck that up. But as far as I'm concerned, that is good news. Certainly for everybody who isn't an old white guy, as they can throw off some of their burden of fear of unpleasant consequences for saying things that might upset older white guys. I think it's good even for we old white guys. Privilege stunts people. I'm glad to live in an age where decreasing power imbalances mean a decrease in distorted communication.

by hoopd 11y ago

wpietri 11y ago

What horrible actions are people refusing to take responsibility for? As far as I can tell the sequence is: * He wore the shirt on international broadcast * People around the world objected * He admitted the error and apologized * People accepted his apology Also, it's not clear to me that he was the lead scientist, and he only joined Rosetta in 2013. The rest of what you have looks to me like sweeping assertions. Quite a lot of people, me included, think it was a proportional reaction driven by a reasonable sense of social justice, and it was his casual sexism that spoiled a momentous occasion. Your last line is just sad. I assume that's just willful ignorance and a lack of empathy, but in case you really can't tell the difference: rape victims get harmed for going about their lives, so bringing up what they wear is shifting blame to the victim. But here the shirt is the thing causing harm, so it's reasonable to call it out.

hoopd 11y ago
Here you show your difficulty perceiving men as victims. He didn't just apologize, he broke down crying. He was being tried in a court of public opinion where he was not allowed to explain or defend himself. Look at what happens to men who refuse to prostrate themselves to the social justice mob: they lose their jobs (even if they founded the company: Brendan Eich, even if the have a Nobel Prize: Tim Hunt.) Threatening somebody's career for an honest mistake and then celebrating their tears is, in a word, scary. It's bullying and I'm touched that others have come together to show him support (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/matt-taylor-rosetta-project-scientist#/story https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/matt-taylor-rosetta-proje...) The reason I bring up victim-blaming is that even when it's pointed out to you, you don't see it. Benefit of the doubt suggests it's because you don't believe that what happened to him was wrong. An aside: nobody asks what the effect this charade has on young boys looking at a career in science. It tells them that an undergrad in physics (which is 10x the work of most degrees), and a PhD in magnetohydrodynamics (which would be literally impossibble for most people), and 10 years hard work as a scientist still won't be enough to earn them the benefit of the doubt. > Also, it's not clear to me that he was the lead scientist, and he only joined Rosetta in 2013. True, apparently Taylor joined Rosetta in 2013. He joined the ESA as a project scientist on different mission in 2005 before getting the Rosetta job. Notice that here (http://sci.esa.int/rosetta/43058-mission-team/ http://sci.esa.int/rosetta/43058-mission-team/) his name is second from the top. He's a superstar. All of this is so far blown out of proportion that the fundamental argument isn't being challenged, is "casual sexism" really what's keeping women from careers in science? I'm not convinced. Since you're calling people out for being anonymous in this conversation just remember you get to have your name attached to your arguments without risking your social life and career.
- wpietri 11y ago
  I can perceive men as victims. But here he is not a victim. He thoughtlessly did something bad in front of the whole world. People told him that he did something bad. Lots of people, many of them angry. This upset him and he apologized. Forgiven and forgotten, end of story. Except, apparently, for bitter anti-feminists who can't help bringing this up every time Rosetta is in the news. I too have said and done dumb, hurtful things, been called out, and tearfully apologized. That's not victimhood. It's being a vaguely responsible human. > the benefit of the doubt What doubt did he fail to benefit from? The accusation is that he wore an inappropriate shirt on an international stage while representing an important scientific effort. I am not seeing a lot of room to doubt that was true. The general assumption I saw was that it was something he did thoughtlessly, with no understanding of the impact. So to the extent that his motivation was unknown, I'd say he got plenty of benefit of the doubt. > I'm not convinced. You say that like I might worry, but I don't. Quite a lot of views change in a progressive direction not because any given individual learns anything, but because those defending old errors die off. Note the rate of change here is pretty close to the rate of death: http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/bb8ic2qate-wa_cbgc2ifg.png http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Prod... We've been moving toward gradually less sexism for the last couple hundred years. I figure it's going to be at least a century more. If you have sincere questions (as opposed to argumentation in question form) I'm glad to answer. But otherwise, feel free to remain unconvinced. Your participation in bettering the world would be useful, but history suggests it's far from necessary. > Since you're calling people out for being anonymous in this conversation just remember you get to have your name attached to your arguments without risking your social life and career. Sure, but this is mainly true because I'm an older white guy. Just based on that status, I can get away with almost anything and still be employable. I agree that things have changed such that for the first time older white guys can no longer be guaranteed total impunity for being openly and vocally bigoted while occupying high leadership roles. I agree that this sucks mildly for people like me. Now I have to do the slightly difficult work of actually caring how my words might impact other people, and the actually hard work of learning how to apologize well when I fuck that up. But as far as I'm concerned, that is good news. Certainly for everybody who isn't an old white guy, as they can throw off some of their burden of fear of unpleasant consequences for saying things that might upset older white guys. I think it's good even for we old white guys. Privilege stunts people. I'm glad to live in an age where decreasing power imbalances mean a decrease in distorted communication.