GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
9,032 Supporters
$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
18 Days Left

Support:

Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
We probably don't need another sexism thread, but we have at least a couple female scientists here and this one was so beyond the pale I had to post it.

A team of two female researchers in he UK received a peer review that consisted of nothing but "men are better at science because they're stronger and faster so you should get one to help."

An excerpt from the review, which according to a third party whom it was shared with contained no constructive criticism at all:
Quote:
It would probably also be beneficial to find one or two male biologists to work with (or at least obtain internal peer review from, but better yet as active co-authors) in order serve as a check possible check against interpretations that may sometimes be drifting too far away from empirical evidence into ideologically biased assumptions.



9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bimmy Jim
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
...and if someone suggested a team of male biologists get a female perspective on their work, would that also be sexist?
1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What does sex have to do with ideology?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Is this him?


8 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Rogers
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
badge
They're Young, They're in Love... They eat LARD
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Is she Canadian?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Hawaii
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
epilgrim wrote:
Is she Canadian?

Racist
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John O'Haver
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
badge
Pet photographer, that's me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Funny, when something absolutely needs to be done right the first time where I work, we go get the woman.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
scribidinus wrote:
Funny, when something absolutely needs to be done right the first time where I work, we go get the woman.


Yeah. I remember my ex-wife being totally 100% accurate and reliable when it came to balancing the books, getting bills paid on time, and never, ever, allowing a dirty dish to remain on the kitchen counter. It was great having her around because it freed me up to do the really important stuff.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
In all seriousness, the OP is short on facts and long on emotion. It's just: some woman said it so it must be true. There is really nothing there but a hint that there is something interesting in the link.

I'd be happy to work with you on your next attempt. You know... Me being male and all. I might read the link. If it's interesting I might rewrite the OP for you.

Don't bother to thank me. You are welcome.


You should read the link.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Hawaii
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scribidinus wrote:
Funny, when something absolutely needs to be done right the first time where I work, we go get the woman.

Sure, but not everyone can work for a cooking and cleaning service.
7 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald
United States
New Alexandria
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scribidinus wrote:
Funny, when something absolutely needs to be done right the first time where I work, we go get the woman.


THE woman? You do realize with the wage gap, if you hire three more it will be like one of them is working for free, right?

Plus, the office will never run out of coffee.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Hawaii
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CapNClassic wrote:


What am I missing? Did the female biologists release their paper for review by the public? It might be interesting to see how biased it was.

Their research is either sound or it isn't. There's no good reason to expect a "male perspective" is required to fix it. It's a stupid suggestion.
24 
 Thumb up
2.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jarredscott78 wrote:
CapNClassic wrote:


What am I missing? Did the female biologists release their paper for review by the public? It might be interesting to see how biased it was.

Their research is either sound or it isn't. There's no good reason to expect a "male perspective" is required to fix it. It's a stupid suggestion.


Also, the criticism was somewhat vague and did not actually pinpoint flaws. If this was the review then there was a problem with the rejecting it based on that. And PLOS was right in stating that ""PLOS regrets the tone, spirit and content of this particular review," it stated. "We take peer review seriously and are diligently and expeditiously looking into this matter" It should be interesting what they find

On a minor plus side there was this link on the original link which is great just for the title

http://news.sciencemag.org/paleontology/2015/04/ancient-mega...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lynette
United States
Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
Yep, I am a girl Scientist. Come for the breasts; Stay for the brains!
badge
For as long as I shall live I will testify to love; I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CapNClassic wrote:
Female biologist paper gets rejected because their weak methodology and data doesn't support their conclusion (about post doc paper-gap between male/female authors)

Reviewer suggests that getting a male perspective or a male co-author might help them see that their gender bias is influencing their conclusions.

Female biologists don't see the irony, bitch on twitter. (sure this wasn't tumbler?)

What am I missing? Did the female biologists release their paper for review by the public? It might be interesting to see how biased it was.


If you read the link... you will see that more than one "Male" coworker had already reviewed the paper before submission.

So gee... what is more likely, that the paper really sucked and several reviewers missed it OR that this one sexist male reviewer didn't like the conclusions and let his prejudice affect his reaction AND craft his reply?

Hummm... I think if I were a interested in taking bets I would lay my money on option #2!

Though since you are a sexist jackass, I certainly can see how you might miss the irony of the whole mess.

A paper pointing out the prevalence of systemic sexism within science research, gets rejected by an obvious blatant sexist who cannot even be bothered to offer constructive criticism.

shake

13 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Meerkat wrote:
CapNClassic wrote:
Female biologist paper gets rejected because their weak methodology and data doesn't support their conclusion (about post doc paper-gap between male/female authors)

Reviewer suggests that getting a male perspective or a male co-author might help them see that their gender bias is influencing their conclusions.

Female biologists don't see the irony, bitch on twitter. (sure this wasn't tumbler?)

What am I missing? Did the female biologists release their paper for review by the public? It might be interesting to see how biased it was.


If you read the link... you will see that more than one "Male" coworker had already reviewed the paper before submission.

So gee... what is more likely, that the paper really sucked and several reviewers missed it OR that this one sexist male reviewer didn't like the conclusions and let his prejudice affect his reaction AND craft his reply?

Hummm... I think if I were a interested in taking bets I would lay my money on option #2!

Though since you are a sexist jackass, I certainly can see how you might miss the irony of the whole mess.

A paper pointing out the prevalence of systemic sexism within science research, gets rejected by an obvious blatant sexist who cannot even be bothered to offer constructive criticism.

shake



I can't see the paper. It's possible the males on staff were in a lower power position than the females and validated everything their bosses said.

It's possible the paper is highly biased because that's what groups do.

Groups of men (or the same nationality) have produced many biased papers.

Women are equally capable of producing a biased paper.

It's possible the paper is fine and the reviewer is biased.

Need more data to have any kind of conclusion.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lynette
United States
Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
Yep, I am a girl Scientist. Come for the breasts; Stay for the brains!
badge
For as long as I shall live I will testify to love; I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:

Need more data to have any kind of conclusion.


"Likely" and "taking bets" are the key words in that post that indicate I was speculating rather than drawing solid conclusions.

Maybe you need a woman to read and help you understand RSP posts. Women are known to have better communication skills on average.

kiss

Spoiler (click to reveal)
Love you Mac, but I couldn't resist. When you lob me a slow pitch like that, I have to swing at it.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Hawaii
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So, Michael, where did the bad lady refuse to touch you?
17 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lynette
United States
Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
Yep, I am a girl Scientist. Come for the breasts; Stay for the brains!
badge
For as long as I shall live I will testify to love; I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CapNClassic wrote:

This one sided story stinks like some important details are missing. But, keep believing I am the sexist when it is you who believe that women get paid less and scientific papers rejected because of their genitals. I will wait for the full story.


You will never get the full story... because if you read the link the reviewer process is kept anonymous. Aka... only the Journal Editors will ever know who wrote it.

But as to your other assertions....

CapNClassic wrote:
Meerkat wrote:


If you read the link... you will see that more than one "Male" coworker had already reviewed the paper before submission.
Perhaps you were reading a different news report than me. Was the anonymous reviewer aware that male co-workers reviewed the paper? If not, I am sure you understand why your comment is stupid.


Ummm NO... obviously other "males" had seen the article, so either
A) The article was acceptable and this reviewer is way off base in his evaluation,
OR
B) Just a "male" perspective wouldn't be sufficient to address the problems, so the reviewer's suggested fix was demonstrably erroneous. (aka full of shit)

So my comment was right on point... you twit!

Quote:

Quote:
A paper pointing out the prevalence of systemic sexism within science research, gets rejected by an obvious blatant sexist who cannot even be bothered to offer constructive criticism.
He did provide constuctive criticism. He said the conclusions she was trying to draw could not be arrived at with the data she provided, and no amount of rewriting could save it. What would be more constructive than that? How do you know he is sexist?


As a Published Scientist who has been reviewed and who also has peer reviewed at least a hundred reports I am telling you that is NOT constructive criticism.

Constructive Criticism points out specific sections that are weak, asks probing questions that they would like to see addressed in more depth, points out specific sources of error they think were not addressed in the error analysis, asks questions about methodology if they are think the data isn't credible and offers suggestions for further study if they think the data is insufficient to support a specific conclusion, offers other possible conclusions if they think there are some or lists at least SOME specific reasons why they don't think the conclusion the paper makes is well supported... etc.


Quote:

You sound as bad as these other women, coming to conclusions without data to back it up.


Actually I am a woman who knows what the hell I am talking about, as opposed to you who displays a propensity to just spew whatever crap comes into your mind without even bothering to do your own mental review for quality before posting.


5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Schaeffer
United States
Unspecified
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CapNClassic wrote:
Meerkat wrote:
Quote:
A paper pointing out the prevalence of systemic sexism within science research, gets rejected by an obvious blatant sexist who cannot even be bothered to offer constructive criticism.
He did provide constuctive criticism. He said the conclusions she was trying to draw could not be arrived at with the data she provided, and no amount of rewriting could save it. What would be more constructive than that? How do you know he is sexist?


From the article:
Quote:
Ingleby and Head said they received the rejection with just the single review. “Not only did the review seem unprofessional and inappropriate, but it didn’t have any constructive or specific criticism to work on,” Ingleby wrote. (The reviewer wrote that the study is “methodologically weak” and “has fundamental flaws and weaknesses that cannot be adequately addressed by mere revision of the manuscript, however extensive,” according to a copy of the review Ingleby provided to ScienceInsider, but Ingleby says these comments are “quite vague” and therefore difficult to address.)


Quote:
You sound as bad as these other women, coming to conclusions without data to back it up.


Ah, you've read and critiqued the paper, then? I assume that's how you know they came to conclusions without adequate data to support them.

Quote:
The standard in journalism is to get both sides.
We don't have the reviewers response, just excerpts choosen by the woman claiming sexism.
We don't have the paper she was trying to get published.


Therefore, as in all cases of ambiguity, we consider the woman to be either lying or overreacting because of emotions and stuff.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
Jythier wrote:
What does sex have to do with ideology?


I think the more proper question is what does sex have to do with IDEALOGY.* I think it may be beneficial for some male posters in RSP to obtain some peer review of their spelling. It's probably "not so surprising that on average [male RSPers spells this word wrong more] than female [RSPers], just as, on average, male [RSPers} can probably run a mile a bit faster than [female RSPers]".

*No reflection on you, Jay.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
bjlillo wrote:
Were they having trouble opening jars or something?


I will CUT YOU! Or freeze you. The latter is probably worse for you.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
she2 wrote:
Jythier wrote:
What does sex have to do with ideology?


I think the more proper question is what does sex have to do with IDEALOGY.* I think it may be beneficial for some male posters in RSP to obtain some peer review of their spelling. It's probably "not so surprising that on average [male RSPers spells this word wrong more] than female [RSPers], just as, on average, male [RSPers} can probably run a mile a bit faster than [female RSPers]".

*No reflection on you, Jay.


I spells 'em like I sees 'em.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
Seriously though, getting peer reviews is generally a huge stress and self-esteem sink without adding in sexism to the mix. Critique the merits of the conclusions. I'm sure there is a way to critique the paper as drawing the wrong conclusions or not being statistically valid without bringing in female bias. So do that. Don't be lazy and a stoneage jackass.
9 
 Thumb up
0.50
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lynette
United States
Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
Yep, I am a girl Scientist. Come for the breasts; Stay for the brains!
badge
For as long as I shall live I will testify to love; I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BimmyJim wrote:
...and if someone suggested a team of male biologists get a female perspective on their work, would that also be sexist?


Done in exactly the same way this happened. Yep!

Of course the odds of that happening are really low. But yes it would be just as sexist and unprofessional.

I want to make clear, that suggesting getting perspectives from a DIVERSE audience isn't the problem here. I OFTEN sought out male opinions because men do tend to approach problems from a different angle than women, and in science having as many possible different approaches at least considered is usually a plus. Just like I sought out people with different educational backgrounds or specialties from mine.

It is the suggestion that the quality goes up automatically based on the gender of the person doing the work that is offensive. And of course INACCURATE.


5 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lee Fisher
United States
Downingtown
PA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
she2 wrote:
Jythier wrote:
What does sex have to do with ideology?


I think the more proper question is what does sex have to do with IDEALOGY.* I think it may be beneficial for some male posters in RSP to obtain some peer review of their spelling. It's probably "not so surprising that on average [male RSPers spells this word wrong more] than female [RSPers], just as, on average, male [RSPers} can probably run a mile a bit faster than [female RSPers]".

*No reflection on you, Jay.


Huh? How is Idealogy preferred? Is that the joke?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.