AS166: Discussion With Lauren; Postmortem

Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors — the audio is the record.

0:00:30 Thomas: Hello and welcome to episode 166 of Atheistically Speaking with your host Thomas Smith. All right, well, we're going to continue the discussion with Lauren about the Tim Hunt thing and then I'm gonna make some comments afterward. Let's just get right to the remainder of the discussion, shall we?

0:01:00 Thomas: You can send the same resume, one with a man's name and one with the girl's name. No, I'm just kidding. One with a woman's name. See, I made a joke. It was okay. I didn't reflect my real feelings. You're laughing. See? See, we're all happy. Everybody says, yeah, you

0:01:17 Lauren: Well, wait, wait. You aren't representing, though, you aren't a spokesperson for a scientific organization Saying that. You

0:01:29 Thomas: So you can't make jokes of your spokesperson. No, no jokes. Spokesperson, rather.

0:01:33 Lauren: Can make jokes but you have to consider the circumstances. Well,

0:01:40 Thomas: All right. So anyway, just to finish that thought. Yeah, I mean, he's pointed out things like that, Sean Carroll, and maybe you should check him out because he does sound like a good advocate for women in science. And I certainly think that it's a big problem, our biases, as regards women in science. And I think I understand. I just still think now. Now, let's say, OK, let's say we agree that he made a joke. It reflected it reflected his biases. It was unfair to women in science. Now there's the part where what do you think the proper response to that is? Do you think he, it sounds like you said earlier, that's also, you know, the punishment was adequate.

0:02:28 Thomas: It wasn't too much. The fact that he lost his post and his, do you not see where the just massive online shaming becomes a bit gratuitous for that? Or do you think that's all appropriate?

0:02:42 Lauren: I think that he chose to react by resigning. Well,

0:02:46 Thomas: No, he was, he told him he pretty much had to resign. Otherwise they were going to fire him. So he resigned to maintain dignity. But that's what they, that's what these organizations do. They just say, you're going to need to resign. And then that's what they, well,

0:02:58 Lauren: In, One of the articles I read that isn't what it said. Well, it was like him saying that he's like, yeah, I really thought that I just had no choice. But the organization released a note saying, hey, no, we were gonna, we're trying to reach out to him to talk to him and we didn't hear back from him, saying, you know, we got his resignation. I think it was in The Guardian. I think that's where I read that article.

0:03:21 Thomas: Okay. I'll have to look that up. Cause I have very specifically the opposite memory. So we'll have to, I'll, I'll check up on that later. And okay. Well then what, what do you see as what the consequences then? So you're saying he resigned because of what? Because, well

0:03:40 Lauren: Because he didn't like being corrected. That's really what I think. It was, I think, it was his ego.

0:03:47 Thomas: This is getting pretty speculative. I will be honest that I don't know. So now you're speculating that he, you

0:03:51 Lauren: Oh, so, okay, look at, okay. Think about this. We have plenty of people on, like, I thought that in the episode where y'all discussed it, I really thought that you guys were giving Twitter outrage too much credit. Yes, there are so many things that people get outraged about on Twitter that are not done. So you Take these small samples of things where supposedly it's Twitter, the uproar on Twitter or the upror on Facebook that causes a change, without looking at the huge amount of things where they're completely useless.

0:04:08 Thomas: Think so? So that are not done.

0:04:33 Thomas: Can you give an example of that?

0:04:36 Lauren: I would say, that's a good question right there. There's so much. I mean, there's just so much, because I hate to say it, I'm kind of addicted to Twitter.

0:04:51 Lauren: So, I mean... Well, one, look at the GOP presidential nominees. Look at Trump, Donald Trump. All of the outrage against him, People posting constantly about all the horrible things he's said about women. And the man is more popular than ever. So, I mean, that's an example. And I know that there are others. There are TV shows that would have been, if you went by Twitter and Twitter outrage over things that happened, Game of Thrones, right? I don't watch it, but I watched the outrage about things that happen. And they don't get changed. There are so many things that do not, that Twitter has no effect on.

0:05:23 Thomas: Yeah, I think that that's an interesting point. So it's interesting to try to isolate the variable of, you know, the Twitter rage. You're saying that there's plenty of Twitter rage, but when it results in something we were unfairly, I guess you'd be saying Tom and Cecil and I were unfairily attributing it to the Twitter storm when it could. OK, well, my go Ahead. Go ahead.

0:05:51 Lauren: Yes. And that's, go ahead. And that's why I, I guess, and you're right, I should not give, I shouldn't say, well, it's Tim Hunt's ego. But basically I'm saying that, well you know, some outrage on Twitter, it doesn't work for everything. Why did it work here?

0:05:54 Thomas: Um.

0:06:10 Thomas: So I think it's, I will say it's more than just Twitter, I think I would call it kind of the blogosphere and kind of the, uh, that that sort of thing, but my answer would be that different, um, organizations respond more to, um, social justice than others. So Trump's popularity, we can outrage and we can rage and I do, but all we can and we can rage all we want about him, but his popularity comes from, uh, well, for one, he's completely financially, obviously independent.

I mean, he has no, he doesn't answer to anyone for that. He, and by the way, he got kicked off NBC for The Apprentice for this very reason. So certain organizations do respond to that stuff, but his popularity is based on not him being hired by an organization, but his image that he's already cultivated. I think, I was thinking Ann Coulter, but he's already cultivated, um, and the sort of, um, I hate to say it, but I think it is, uh, grassroots, just conservative support of people who think like him, uh, and respond to his just bogus comments about, you know, immigration and stuff. There's, we have enough people in the, in the country that really respond to that, that a Twitter storm, and they don't listen to Twitter, but like I said, NBC did drop him on The Apprentice.

0:06:59 Lauren: But?

0:07:26 Lauren: Oh.

0:07:26 Thomas: His own, you know, his show, just,

0:07:28 Lauren: But you know, that one of the reasons that they, that they put out, and I, and I think that there's some merit to their claim because he was running for office, they had, they were going to drop him anyway, right?

0:07:41 Thomas: Oh, so just based on the fact that he's running for office, they're dropping them, you're saying.

0:07:45 Lauren: Because it would be considered giving him a a platform to, A political candidate, I think, and I haven't looked into this lately, but I've seen, recall it from other, somebody else, there's someone else who was running for office years ago. I think it was, was it Elliot Spitzer when he had his show on Current? It may have been him, but there was someone who was run for office. And once he decided that he was going to run for office, he had a TV show and he had to cut off the TV show because the network would have had to give equal time to.

0:07:50 Thomas: Oh, okay. Okay.

0:08:21 Lauren: Other people.

0:08:22 Thomas: That's a good answer. I'll put that on the list of things I'm going to look into, because I thought I had seen it as a response to just the bogus crap he was talking about. But that is definitely a sensible explanation. But I would also say that, in particular, we're seeing a big difference between how, how universities and those types of organizations who do lean left and do keep an ear toward social justice issues, they really respond to these kind of shit storms, for lack of a better word, whereas Trump's base support is not going to. And that's kind of how I see it, because Because they're going crazy so far in advance that I think, again, maybe it will come down to going back and researching the reasoning behind his resignation. But the way I read it, they had told him so fast that he needed to. And it was as a result of when just the first journalist or two wrote their account of the speech. Like it wasn't even, isn't that interesting? Like it's just, it wasn'T even like the recording.

It was someone wrote what they recollected that he said, Tim Hunt, that is, and that caused such a storm that he was forced to resign. I think, I don't know. I think that your theory is interesting. I do think there are times where Twitter storms don't affect much or they don't, maybe they don't they affect things, but they don't

0:09:01 Lauren: That makes sense. I

0:09:52 Thomas: T change things because things are already in a balance. But this is a little bit of a different story.

0:09:59 Lauren: Definitely see, I think you're right about Donald Trump probably not being the best example. Maybe, yeah, and I guess because I follow a lot of activism on Twitter and I see that not really doing anything. I mean, so, but like you say, I guess that would be something different. It isn't focused on a particular person. Well, I'll tell you one thing though. There's definitely been a campaign to get Richard Dawkins to leave Twitter and he hasn't respond it by leaving Twitter you know

0:10:11 Thomas: Yeah.

0:10:23 Thomas: Well, again, you're talking about an individual person you're trying to get to respond. I find that the people who really respond or the organizations that respond to these Twitter storms are those that are very interested in keeping their public image in line with liberalism and social justice. Those are the the ones that really do, you know, wear a mixer.

0:10:24 Lauren: Right I see so so maybe there is a that so you're saying there's like a subset of organizations that respond and that but here's the thing with that maybe the people who started the the The Twitter storm over Tim Hunt, who's to say that they even knew that that was a possibility?

0:11:05 Thomas: Oh, I think that you're right about that. I think that it, and that was one of the points I wanted to make. And I think I did make with Thomas Cecil is I'm, I'm okay with, with bad consequences for, for bad, you Know, even at, even a distasteful joke, even if it was a joke, let's say.

And, and I, I, and, and it's, it's a, it, it was, I think it was the question of like how, whether or not, you know, how much it reveals his true sexist intentions or whatever. Let's say it was a joke that did reveal his true sexist intentions. I'm very in favor of some consequence. I think that Twitter, unfortunately, and social media, it just makes this hyper laser beam focus out of everybody's little bit of outrage, and it has profound consequences.

And that's why I referenced that book by the author whose name I'm going to not remember again, because I didn't remember then, and I'm not remembering now. Oh, John Ronson. And he's written about how it just that focus that that because back in the day, what would happen if you were in a town, maybe the newspaper would write about it or something. And yeah, some people would say that was a bad thing to say, whatever it was, you know, and maybe there would be some consequences going forward from that. Maybe a few people would see you and think, hey, you're the guy who said that thing.

But now Now it's like such a minuscule thing, like, like a journalist, a certain journalist accounting of something that was said in a speech can create such a magnificent effect that it, I don't know, that worries me. But it's something that I don'T think we have any control over. So I think it's Something we're stuck with. But the

0:12:01 Lauren: Right, right.

0:12:44 Thomas: Only reason I bring that up is because, you know, you did start this out by saying you thought that was, that was all warranted and everything. Thing.

0:12:43 Lauren: And I, right, I mean, well, I, but again, because my view of what happened, and I could be wrong, I thought it was that they really did not fire him or they did not tell him, hey, you know, quit or else. Else I I

0:13:08 Thomas: Well, would that change? Let's just talk about then hypothetically, would that change your feeling? Like let's say hypothetically maybe that maybe it did go down the way you said. I don't know. Like I said, I want to look it up. But if it went down the way I said would that change what you're thinking at all or no?

0:13:22 Lauren: Have to say that it wouldn't because

0:13:24 Thomas: Okay, well then it doesn't matter. Well

0:13:26 Lauren: They responded to the because here here's my thing on that I'm on Twitter enough to know and that you know you'll have some people that know nothing about what they're talking about say things if if the organization decided to fire him wrongfully based on all these tweets and outrage from people that probably just retweeted stuff because, oh, this is cool, then that is on them. And I still don't think that it, I mean, that was their choice. They chose to be influenced, but

0:14:05 Thomas: Okay, granted everything is everyone's choice. I get it. I mean it's all everyone's.

0:14:09 Lauren: They chose to Be Influenced. I don't Think that it's really, I mean people, people get outraged. They get outraised. They They go and they say stuff. Yes, now we have Twitter, so you can do a major attack of some sort, but it's still up to the organization to decide how seriously to take it.

0:14:29 Thomas: Well, ok, I guess what I would be saying then is in general, and again, granted, you know, everything is everyone's choice, we're not, you and I aren't going to make any difference on on what's actually going to happen in the real world. I I I merely think that it's interesting to, I don't think it makes sense to say when something that happens that goes along with what you want to have happen, you say well, that's their their choice, they did it, but if something goes along that doesn't happen, like say a company that's supporting Trump or something, you want to say, hey, stop supporting Trump. You know, I don't think that's a bit of a non-answer. Go ahead.

0:15:01 Lauren: But actually, that's not the way I think, though. I'll tell you something. So in my town, after, I mean, I think you mentioned, I shouldn't recall you mentioning McKinney, Texas, over the summer. They had a pool party where a young, yes, he assaulted a young woman named DeJaria Becton.

0:15:04 Thomas: Oh, really? Okay, go ahead.

0:15:20 Thomas: Oh, the cop? Yeah,

0:15:30 Lauren: In my Town where I live, there was a volunteer firefighter who made a comment supporting the officer on his Facebook page, and he was fired. And I disagreed with him being fired, right?

0:15:30 Thomas: Yeah, yeah. No, I remember.

0:15:46 Thomas: Okay, well, I'm really glad you feel that way because that's how I feel as well.

0:15:49 Lauren: Exactly. So that's the thing, to me, it is not that I like somebody or that I liked what they say, it is I try to be fair and I try to be consistent, but

0:16:05 Thomas: Okay. Well, then all I wanted to say before is that I think that yes, any organization like the one that was employing Tim Hunt in whatever capacity they were, I mean, they, yeah, they have the choice to do whatever. I understand that they can react however they want. I'm just saying in this particular instance, if I were them, I would hope, or, or if, if, uh, yeah. If I were they or them or however the grammar works out, um, I would, I, would, uh I would have gone about it differently. I don't, I don't think forcing a resignation. It's just such a quick, it's such a permanent reaction to something that you didn't even have all the facts in at the time. And go ahead.

0:16:49 Thomas: Well, I'm going to say, I'm gonna say, yeah, we'd have a hard time passing each other in the hall. Like we'd do like, oh, you go that way. I go that. And again, we'll, let's, we've agreed, I could be wrong, but we'll go with my version of events of the resignation, because you said it wouldn't change your mind anyway, so if you don't, we'll go ahead and grant that with it, with the caveat that I could, I could be wrong, since you brought it up, I mean, I'll

0:16:47 Lauren: That, go Ahead, but That, yeah, you That's True. Now I

0:17:18 Thomas: Look at that, but uh, but under that version of events, for conversation's sake, where they forced him to resign, um, I, I don't know, I don't like that response, I think that it, it, I don't know, what were you gonna say? Well, at least give it a minute to, to, uh, let him say what he's gonna say, or, or say, hey, we, uh, we think, or whatever happened to this, why can't they say yeah, we think the, uh, the joke he made was distasteful, um, we're gonna talk to him about it, and going forward, uh, he'll continue his employment, but he won't make jokes like that, like whatever happened in that, there's a, there's such a quick, quick reaction. Nope. Got to fire him right away. It's like instant. There's no chance for anyone to say like, well, sorry, I made that joke. I'm going to stick with it, and, uh, and change my mind. The first reaction is firing. It seems to be in these things.

0:17:33 Lauren: Forgot, well, I Think that I thought that they, fight that the firing, in quotes, happened after his apology, that wasn't really an apology, okay.

0:18:24 Thomas: Resignation. Yeah.

0:18:33 Thomas: Okay. Now you're going to make us have to look more stuff up. I, I, uh... I should have, I didn't, I didn't count on this conversation coming down to the particulars so much of the Tim Hunt thing. So So I apologize for not having that handy. Now we're both remembering the time. It's been several months. So, okay.

0:18:38 Lauren: Um, Yes. Yeah. And I have to say, I actually, though, I, I discussed it with a friend of mine yesterday and today, and I, I sent her article, and I didn't read it myself, no.

0:19:02 Thomas: But is this going to be another thing where I say, well, would it change your mind if it happened the other way? And you say, no. Yeah, see, there you go. So I don't know why you're bringing up these things as though they matter when in reality they don't. Okay. Okay, so your mind's made up, even if they shit canned him right, when uh, the first story, right when the first quote came from a journalist who didn't have a recording but just wrote it down from memory, so right when that first thing happened, if, if, uh, I'm

0:19:09 Lauren: That's true. My mind is set, they don't. My mind is paid up they they had a right, if they thought that it was a public relations disaster for them, they had the right to, if

0:19:38 Thomas: Not disputing that they had the right, I never will dispute that they have the right to do that, there, if you're employed under whatever contract you're deployed under, you know, maybe there's some particular contract track where they wouldn't have the right, but I'm assuming they have the right. I'm saying, is it a wise decision?

0:19:54 Lauren: They, they determined it, was their board of directors, and everybody, so, um, according to them, it was wise decision. I

0:20:02 Thomas: Okay, according to this logic, we cannot discuss the rationale of anyone's decision ever, and this would be a very boring show.

0:20:08 Lauren: Told you.

0:20:09 Thomas: Yeah, I get it that they made the decision. I understand all this. They made the decision, they thought it was right. Is that a decision you would make? Do you agree with the decision? I think you're dodging that a little bit.

0:20:22 Lauren: That's what I do, I'm not, you know, you know, that's kind of what, is it, it, it comes with who I am.

0:20:33 Thomas: Well, I'll say for the record, I really respect the point that if he's calling women in science girls all the time, if that's a very condescending bad habit, I want to go back and examine the language he used for that. But I will say that I think that all I'm advocating for is a little bit less of a knee jerk response to the stuff like this. I mean, give it a minute.

0:20:36 Lauren: But Okay. Well, I'm gonna say this.

0:20:59 Thomas: Yeah, go ahead.

0:21:00 Lauren: I like, why do you, on what basis do you decide that was a knee jerk response? I mean, okay, it seems like the decision was made kind of quickly, right, but that does not mean that it was knee jerk, who's

0:21:12 Thomas: The basis for that for me is that there there wasn't even a recording or anything out at the time when it happened I mean it just was okay

0:21:21 Lauren: To say that they didn't talk to someone who was, we don't know all the actions that they took before making that decision. We don't know enough information, but we do know that this is an esteemed organization.

0:21:35 Lauren: We do know their reputation is important to them. We know that they have a board or some type of ruling party that would make these decisions. Decisions, I am willing to speculate that it wasn't a knee-jerk reaction, that they had people, they were talking to, you know, PR people, they were taking to lawyers, they were talking into potential donors, and all that, and listening to their opinions before they made their opinion, before they make their decision.

0:22:11 Thomas: Then you're just passing the buck one thing further I I respect that you might be right that that okay maybe uh then maybe they put some thought into it that's fine but if they're talking to donors if they'RE talking to pr people and the pr people are saying yeah yeah get rid of it this is terrible and the donors are saying yeah there's no way this is they're okay they're being impulsive they're being knee-jerk you know somebody is

0:22:32 Lauren: Do I? Well, they're doing what they think is in their best interest. They aren't concerned about Tim Hunt. They're concerned about them.

0:22:34 Thomas: We've established this okay well then why why can't why doesn't this work for this tim hunt made the joke in his best interest he thought it was a joke to me I can just give you the same answer about everything you're giving me tim hunt made The Comet and say how

0:22:48 Lauren: No, because I'm talking about a body, a group, an organization that made a decision with input from more than one person.

0:22:55 Thomas: Why does that matter what do you think okay

0:22:59 Lauren: Tim Hunt is himself.

0:23:00 Thomas: Tim hunt had it what how do you know he didn't have input speech writers that helped him make this decision I think think you're just dodging I don't really think this is all right I I guess I I think sure but I don't know that that just having a few more people handy to make the decision I don't know that that really more you know categorically changes what we're talking about I I think that you're you're giving an answer if they had the right they made this in blah blah et cetera that's all understood I get that they have the right they can make their decision but so does Tim Hunt I mean, he had the right to make that speech. He can make that decision. The answer is he said something.

0:23:09 Lauren: Dodgy. It's the way an organization works. And He He faces the consequences of it. They're facing the consequences. I mean, there's been some backlash against them, right. Everybody faces the consequences of their decision, so I told

0:23:43 Thomas: Yeah, you're right. No, there has. Yeah. So what we're talking about, if you're going to tell, I think we'll have to end this conversation. If you're, if the line that you're gonna take is people are gonna make choices, there will be consequences. There's not an interesting conversation to be had there. I think that's boring. I'm trying to get at whether or not what you actually think. I'm trying to get you to commit to like a decision one way or the other. So we'll just have to call it, I guess, if the takeaway is going to be, you know, atoms move in a certain way and they bounce off each other and that's why everything happens. Yeah, I know. That's all understood.

0:24:03 Lauren: You Okay, so you want me to, I, I'm, you know, it's just my nature that, um, gosh, like, the the is, do I think that they were right under the current circumstances that they were right to respond to a Twitter storm, right? In my opinion, do I think they were right to do that?

0:24:49 Thomas: Sure. Yeah, put yourself in their shoes with what limited information they had. What do you think? What would you do?

0:25:00 Lauren: I don't know.

0:25:03 Thomas: All right. Well, okay.

0:25:05 Lauren: Because I would want to know what they know. I would I would have to know, I would have to be, talk to the donors and everything. I would Have to know what they saw as the potential worst case scenario if they let him stay.

0:25:26 Thomas: OK, so there's some level of facts there that if you think donors are going to freak out, if you think, you know, such and such is going to happen, if he stays, you got to cut him loose despite the, you know. Potentially limited information that everyone is working off of.

0:25:45 Lauren: Yes. And also, if I don't have a contract with him that says that, like, if there are no potential consequences that way, then I know I can, hey,

0:25:47 Thomas: OK, yeah, I understand. I think that that definitely is part of it. I mean, the contract is what the contract ist. Because if there's some clause in there that says, you know, first off, it's at will, or maybe they had to, I don't know if they had to pay him to cut him. I'm not sure. I didn't look at that. But yeah, that's fine. Do you worry then if you ever say something that someone writes down later as their impression of what you said? Do you ever worry that that could come back at you.

0:26:30 Lauren: Hey, I don't even use my name, okay? Obviously I'm concerned that something that I say is going to come back to bite me.

0:26:34 Thomas: So that's your solution. Don't. All right. Well, if it's me, I don't want to live it here. Maybe we can wrap up. I'll just make my last statement. You can make whatever final statement you want to make. I understand. It's very possible this guy's got some, you know, latent sexism bias he's working with. And the joke was probably an inappropriate joke. I'm cool with some level level of consequence. I'm not cool with getting rid of jokes altogether or ever giving, getting rid of all benefit of the doubt for anyone making a joke. Cause I like jokes. I like making jokes. I like that people make jokes. They're fun. Um, I'm okay with being the butt of a joke if you, if you anyone out there, I'M OPEN if you want to, anyway. Um but I, I, all I'm asking for,

0:27:20 Lauren: Well, your voice is kind of pre-adolescent. I didn't want to tell you that, but...

0:27:25 Thomas: I do get, uh, people do say I sound a lot like Norm Macdonald. So, okay.

0:27:29 Lauren: Yes, yes, you do.

0:27:31 Thomas: All right. Well, Well, there you go. Laugh it up, everybody.

0:27:36 Thomas: Yeah, and all I'm hoping for in this world and all I would advocate for with what little difference I can make, which I understand is virtually none, I just want a little bit more prudence with reaction to big giant shitstorms. That's it. Just give it a minute. Gather the facts. Make sure there's some sort of actual recording or real account. That's all I am asking for. Or take it away, Lauren. Oh, go ahead.

0:28:02 Lauren: But do you honestly think that with the way people are, that having every recording, gathering the facts, is going to make everyone reach a consensus on what it means anyway. I think yeah, so I mean, why not go with your gut? Okay.

0:28:16 Thomas: No, no. Yeah. Go with your gut. Oh geez. Well, I think that it, maybe it, it would change one or two voting members of whatever this board was. I don't know. Maybe it would have swung, you know, swung it 50, 50 the other way. If you give it a minute, could it, could It possibly make it worse to give it A week to put out a statement?

0:28:25 Lauren: Oh,

0:28:40 Thomas: Like we're looking into this because

0:28:40 Lauren: Wait, why why why would they have to give it a week? But

0:28:45 Thomas: They don't have the full picture. It's just been one person's blog. So someone could just go write a blog about nothing and completely make it up. And under your regime, it's okay. Someone wrote a blog. We need to look into whatever was said. We're going to have to fire you because someone wrote a block. It's like, give it a minute. That's all I'm saying. Give it a few weeks.

0:28:48 Lauren: Again, But I'm saying that you don't have have to a week, okay? That's all I'm saying. I'm a week, no, they can find out everything that they need to know within 10 minutes. Honestly, find somebody who has a recording and watch it, okay?

0:29:17 Thomas: All right. Find out everything you need to know. I'll revise Buy is what I'm saying too. Find out the irrelevant information. All right. Well, I feel like we're at an impasse. Is there anything else you'd like to say?

0:29:33 Lauren: Gosh, I had had something I was gonna say after you said about getting to make our closing comments. Oh, yes, I do not have a sense of humor. I do NOT like jokes. I Uh, I, I don't listen to you and I, we discussed once, Louis C.K. I've listened to him, but he kind of, I don't find him very funny.

0:29:46 Thomas: Oh, okay.

0:29:59 Lauren: Let's see, I think the last comedian I really admired was Richard Pryor. He's hilarious. And Whoopi Goldberg back in the day, some of her stand-up.

0:30:07 Thomas: Richard Pryor. You know how un-PC Richard Pryor was? You know, how hard of a time he would have these days? Yeah, you are a bag of contradictions.

0:30:11 Lauren: I know. Nah. I am not.

0:30:21 Thomas: Okay, you are a small ziplock bag of... Oh, man.

0:30:22 Lauren: I disagree. I agree.

0:30:29 Thomas: All right, well, thanks for coming on and and giving me some feedback. I appreciate it. I definitely taken away everything I can from it. And if you, know, feel free to keep listening and, you know, tell me what you think. I, I'm very open to it. Yeah.

0:30:45 Lauren: Thank you for having me. Seriously. I mean that.

0:30:46 Thomas: No problem. Well, I, I... appreciate that. Thank you for coming on. Wish you the best. And who knows? Maybe next time there's a giant shitstorm, we'll... Don't like jokes. Not very... Yeah, you just...

0:31:01 Lauren: Yeah, I don't have a sense of humor.

0:31:03 Thomas: Wow. You just openly say no sense of humor. I've heard you laugh several times during this podcast. Maybe I'm better than Richard Pryor. Maybe that's what it is.

0:31:06 Lauren: No sense of humor. For jokes.

0:31:15 Thomas: You're laughing right now and you're saying you have no sense of humor? What is happening here?

0:31:22 Thomas: What's happening? What are you laughing at then, oh, man, well, see, that's a bit, you just made a joke, I can't, okay, this is too much contradictory information happening, I don't believe that you have no sense of humor, I don't believe you don't like jokes, I think you just don't like some jokes or most jokes, uh,

0:31:26 Lauren: You. No, I'm kidding.

0:31:42 Lauren: Right. Jokes made by Tim Hunt.

0:31:45 Thomas: There you go, that is fair, that is completely fair, all right, thanks for joining me, Lauren, and uh, I'll talk to you again sometime, next time there's a shitstorm, all right, bye.

0:31:48 Lauren: Okay. All All right. Feel free. Bye.

0:31:58 Thomas: Thank you.

0:32:11 Thomas: So, that was very interesting. Lauren, if you're listening, forgive me, but I think I mentioned this to you, and I said it in an earlier episode, that I would be doing some analysis afterward. I'm going to be talking about you because you're no longer, we're no longer recording together, but I've had some time to think about this and to research some stuff and to look into stuff, and I really, I don't know what to make of this anymore. I really don't. I'm sorry that everyone, that this kind of got hung up in the details of what the actual Tim Hunt thing was. I didn't really expect it. Actually, it wasn't my plan that our discussion was going to go into those details, but then it did, and I didn't want to stop it or whatever. So apologies for that, but I want to answer some questions of fact.

0:33:01 Thomas: So, in terms of the timeline, Tim Hunt made his speech on June 9th, and then he did actually make the interview that was called the non-apology on the phone, kind of on his way home, and then he was asked to resign immediately afterward. So, it's unclear if it was in response to that interview, because it would have been really quick, but uh, the also the thing I want to point out, with you know, Lauren and I kind of disagreed or had different memories of the resignation, but I want to just point out the facts on that real quick. First off, it was an honorary position that had no pay. I think I referenced if they had to give him some sort of severance.

0:33:48 Thomas: I didn't, or I wondered if they had to, but it was not a paid position. So that question is moot. And some people, not related to Lauren's discussion, some people said, oh, it's an honorary position, stop making something out of nothing. I think it's important. I just want to say my opinion is, it may not be that this one position is like the end-all for Tim Hunt. But it's, it, it's still, I think it still matters, the decisions that people make and the just knee-jerk reactions people have are sort of an indicator as a whole of where we are in response to Twitter mobs and to these kind of things. And he also was forced to resign from other positions as well.

0:34:34 Thomas: So it's not just the one honorary position. But anyway, Lauren's memory was that he, or she said that he resigned of his own free will and that UCL is where he was employed or where he had the honorary position. She remembered that UCR tried to contact him, but never contacted him, and he just never got to talk to him about it. He just resigned. My memory was, that they forced him to resign. And the reason we both had these distinct different memories was there are two different sources that say these two stories. And wouldn't you know it, I, I remember the one that kind of went with what I was saying, and she remembers the one that goes with what she's saying. So that's, I think that's a certain amount of bias for both of us, actually, but I'm going to make an attempt to justify my version of events, and you can judge for yourselves.

0:35:25 Thomas: And Lauren, you can just for yourself too. So, here's the official statement, UCL can confirm that Sir Tim Hunt has today resigned from his position as honorary professor with the UCL Faculty of Life Sciences following comments he made about women in science at the World Conference of Science Journalists on the 9th of June. UCL was the first university in England to admit women students on equal terms to men, and the university believes that this outcome is compatible with our commitment to gender equality. Quality. Then the rest is sort of not relevant. And then there's an updated statement. So that was on the 10th. On the 15th update, Sir Tim Hunt's personal decision to offer his resignation from his honorary position at UCL was a sad and unfortunate outcome of the comments he made in a speech last week.

0:36:18 Thomas: Media and online commentary played no part in UCL's decision to accept his resignation. Sir Tim Hunt held an honorary position at UCL. He was not and has never been employed by UCL at any stage of his career and did not receive a salary. UCL sought on more than one occasion to make contact with Sir Tim to discuss the situation, but his resignation was received before direct contact was established. UCR accepted his resignation of his honorary position in good faith, and in doing so sent a clear signal that equality and diversity are truly valued at UCL. So there's that version. Now here's the version that Tim Hunt told. He said, at no point did they ask me for an explanation for what I said or to put it in context.

0:37:09 Thomas: They just said I had to go. There's been an enormous rush to judgment in dealing with me. And then his wife said, Tim was still on the plane from Seoul when a senior manager at UCL phoned me and said Tim had to resign his honorary position. They had not even spoken to Tim at that point. He just said Tim has to resign or we fire him. It was very upsetting. We are both extremely angry. So, I would just ask that even if you guys are anti-Tim Hunt, which story makes more sense? I mean, look at all the evidence. So, we have a guy who in his mind, and again, I'm going to approach this even if your on the anti-tim Hunt side, still the UCL statement in my opinion is just total BS.

0:38:01 Thomas: To be diplomatic and to not look like you were just giving in to a mob and firing a guy, like that's what it looks like to me, because which makes more sense. So Tim Hunt is on a plane from a place. He just made a speech that in his mind he was just making jokes, and it was fine in his mind, even if you disagree with him, in his mind he just made some comments, whatever. But then he decides to just resign without talking to anyone at UCL. Just decides like, oh man, I made these comments and it looks like some people are mad, I'm going to resign. Does that make more sense? Or does it make more since what he and his wife said, which is they told me I had to resign or they were going to fire me, so I resigned. They didn't even reach me for comment.

0:38:46 Thomas: Does that make more sense? And then that UCL would say something different, which makes more sense. So somebody's lying. And in my mind, the organization that's trying to like maintain an image and trying to be diplomatic in their statement. And they say, here's the thing that also looks like they're lying. On their June 10th, they make the statement, Tim Hunt has resigned. And then it says, UCL was the first university in England to admit women. The university believes this outcome is compatible with our commitment to gender equality. So they're expressing that it's their desire that he resigned. Like that was compatible with what they wanted. Yet they're saying he just did it himself. He totally did it himself. We don't know why. Like, which makes more sense?

0:39:34 Thomas: So I don't fault Lauren for remembering it that way because that's how UCL presented it. And so that's fine. That's fine and all that. I just really, I mean, in my mind, the one version of events sounds like something that would actually happen. The other version of event sounds like nonsense to me. So let me know if you disagree on that. Next point of fact I want to address, Lauren talked about him calling women girls, and I didn't remember the specific wording, but I agreed that girls would be offensive, calling women and science girls. Let me read, this is the EU Observers account, and even if you are anti-Tim Hunt, again, I think this jibes with the other account. He said, He said, it's strange that such a chauvinist monster like me has been asked to speak to women scientists.

0:40:21 Thomas: Women scientists, by the way. Let me tell you about my trouble with girls, he says. Now he switches to girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab. You fall in love with them. They fall in Love with you. When you criticize them, they cry. Perhaps we should make separate labs for boys and girls, question mark. Now, seriously, I'm impressed by the economic development of Korea. And women scientists played, without a doubt, an important role in it. Science needs women and you should do science despite all the obstacles and despite monsters like me. So when he was joking, he said girls and he said boys and girls, separate labs for boys and girls. Again, this is someone's transcript. There's no recording, but I'm going to play a slight recording we have. But this is Someone Else's transcript that That I find to be pretty reliable, or based on everything I've read, it's probably not 100% accurate.

0:41:14 Thomas: It's probably a little bit more polished by memory, but it also agrees with a lot of other sources. So, if you want to dispute the source, you want dispute what was actually said, whatever, that's a separate conversation. I'm going to go with this as though it was what was actually said because of all the reading I've done, and going with that assumption. And that's what's been important in this discussion with Lauren. It's like we'd argue about something, and then she'd say, well, that would make no difference. I'd ask her, would that make a difference? No, that'd make no different. It's, like, her mind was already made up a million years ago, and now it's just filling everything else in. And I don't really, I'll be honest, Lauren, like I don't, I think you reacted to what, by your account, what some women scientists said, and I think their reaction was overblown.

0:42:03 Thomas: I think there's stuff in what Tim Hunt has said to react negatively about. I do. I'll tell you what it is specifically. At first, I was going to say, I think it's that if he really does believe men and women should be in segregated labs, then that would be a real stupid thing. I don't think he's an idiot for saying that, and that's something that would do totally sexist. Here's the thing. I can't find anywhere where he said that. And people, I keep finding, I keep googling a quote saying Tim Hunt backs up his comments, he sticks to his guns that he thinks men and women should be segregated, but there's no quote that actually says that. The only quote comes from the actually, the actual speech where he said that, but then he said, now seriously, I don't think he really believes that. Please, if someone can find me where Tim Hunt has said he actually believes men and men and should be inseparable, and it's an actual quote, let me know.

0:42:59 Thomas: Because all I'm finding is the part before the now seriously. That's all I am finding. And Now, here's what I think he said that is objectionable. I think Tim Hunt does believe, when he said, that women have a tendency to cry when you criticize them and that stands in the way of science. Now, when he says it, when I heard him say it, there was an actual quote, he said well, anyone who cries, you know, he didn't phrase it in terms of men and women, but I think it's clear from the context and what he said that he's thinking of women when he says that. And that's sexist. I don't believe that in this day and age, we can go around saying, here's the problem with women in labs, they cry when you criticize them.

0:43:45 Thomas: I, I suppose if you wanted to just say anytime someone's feelings get in the way of being able to give them true criticism, that's a bad sign, and that happens with men and women. In So, that particular thing I think is quite objectionable, but I don't really think that's what all the fuss has been about. I think that is part of it, and I think what we should do in response to Tim Hunt saying that is, look man, that's not really a cool thing to say that you think women are holding up science because they cry when you criticize them. That's just not a cool thing to say. I don't think the facts bear that out, and that's sexist. But the part where we have to go on an uproar and exaggerate other things he said and then take this joke where he said now seriously and he praised women in science, we don't need to go crazy and revisionist history on it.

0:44:41 Thomas: That's what I don't get. It's cool to say, okay, here's one thing he said that's no good. What's the proper punishment? What's the proper social punishment for him saying that one thing? Well, it's an opinion that I'm pretty sure a lot of people hold. I'm pretty sure if you polled your average person and said, hey, do women tend to get emotional under criticism more than men? What do you think the percentage would be? It would be high. Now, it might be wrong. I don't know. We'd have to look at some actual science, which I don't have. It might be wrong, and I think it is sexist to suggest that that's holding up signs that women are responsible for preventing good science from being done. Don't get me wrong. I think that is a sexist statement. But I also think that the majority of people would agree with that sentiment.

0:45:29 Thomas: So what is the proper social punishment for someone saying something that most people agree with in this context? Now, it's fine if you want to say colleges should be progressive, they should be on the forefront of of stuff. He can't just say what a lot of people are thinking in a biased way, in an old-fashioned kind of way. And it's cool if you want to say that, but does he need to be immediately forced to resign from all his posts for saying something? Like I said with Lauren, what happened to the time if indeed this time ever existed? What happened to when we could just say, hey, that wasn't cool that you said that and go from there? Why is it always the instant, no, you got to get rid of him, He can't be like, there's no such thing as expressing something and then getting the chance to say, oh, I, I might've been wrong about that.

0:46:20 Thomas: You can't get that chance. You're fired before you get that long, long before you gets the chance to, to read what people are saying, responding to you, think about it, change your mind. And granted, maybe you won't change your head. But long before that time, you just get fired or whatever happened to when people can just just say, look, this guy, not every view he holds is a view we hold. Like, is it just assumed that anyone who holds any sort of honorary position, 100% of every view that they have has to be in line with the college or whatever, where they hold that position? Whatever happened to like, well, we just don't agree with that. We don't disagree with that particular thing and end it there, especially when it's such a minor thing. It's a very minor comment that he's using his personal experience to say.

0:47:06 Thomas: He's saying in his experience, women have cried when he's criticized them or something. Maybe that's true for him. I don't know. But we're going to fire him for saying something based on his experience. It just doesn't seem like it solves much. Does that solve anything? Does that progress anything? This is getting a little long, but the last thing I want to say is regarding the female scientist that I think Lauren was quoting. The first person who really made comments about this was Connie St. Louis. Here's what she said here on BBC.

0:47:34 Clip: He stood up, declared that the women had probably prepared the lunch because that was their role, and then went into this, I'm a chauvinist, and then into these three things that girls are a problem about, and so very clearly nobody was laughing, there was a room full of a hundred people, nobody was, was laughing, everybody was stony-faced, the

0:47:39 Thomas: Didn't happen.

0:47:53 Thomas: This wasn't cherry-picked, by the way. This is just literally, I went and saw and looked at the video on the BBC of her and just watched the first 26 seconds. That's all that was, and already she said like three things that were completely false. He didn't thank the women scientists for making, the women for making lunch because that's what they should do or whatever she said. He didn't do that. That was misreported at first and then later corrected, and even the people who issued that uh, did correct it and say, oh, that, that actually didn't happen. But this person, Connie St. Louis was there. So why is she reporting this? It's not like she's getting this secondhand. She was there and she's reporting that he thanked the women for making lunch. When later it was found out he didn't do that.

0:48:39 Thomas: It was actually the two women guests that came before him that thanked the woman for making launch. And then she says, everyone was stony faced. There was silence. It Was just, everyone Was aghast. So let's let's hear this little clip here.

0:48:54 Clip: Congratulations, everybody, because I hope, I hope I really hope there is nothing holding you back, especially not monsters like me.

0:49:08 Thomas: So apparently that's the sound of everyone in the room being stony-faced and not laughing. That's what she said. She literally said everyone in the room was stony faced and not like now. Here's the thing. I don't know what this woman's deal is. I don't know much about her or whatever, but she's clearly not a reliable witness at this point. I'm honestly not really going to give much credence to what she's saying because she's just made made two very concretely false claims. And I'm thinking maybe, I don't know, maybe she misheard something, maybe whatever. Something set her on a direction of this guy's a total misogynist. Or maybe, maybe it was legitimate. Maybe she did hear something that made her think this guy is a misoginist. And then she kind of colored everything in afterward or something, which can happen.

0:49:57 Thomas: Everyone does that. I do that. Every human does that, they color in their memories afterward. But still, the fact that there's two major points that she's totally wrong on, it makes it so I can't, I can't really trust everything she says. So again, is Tim Hunt perfect? And did he, I'll do the thing where I ask myself a question. Is he perfect? Did he, uh, say everything right? And was the joke totally cool? No, I don't think it quite was.

I think he, I think he clearly has a little bit of sexism in him. I think he's got a little little bit. Is it at all what the, is it, has it been, what the outrage, has it been warranted, there's all this this extreme outrage, the lot, the misrepresenting what he said, the forcing him to resign, all that stuff? No, that's not justified, I don't think so.

I'm just a crazy person who holds the belief that we ought to take two seconds to gather our thoughts, maybe two days, maybe instead of one day, and see what happens and not react to Twitter mobs in this this way, but it will never happen and it just won't. So, but that's my opinion. I'm sticking to it. Let me know what you guys think on this. Uh, I am, it's very interesting. So please give me feedback. atheisticallyspeaking.com. You can make comments. You can go to facebook.com slash atheistically speaking or a Patreon is a good place. I see them everywhere. You can email atheisticallyspeaking at gmail if you want to be a little more private.

Alright, here's the part where I thank my patrons, I don't know, I think I thanked Aaron Gleason, but maybe not, I dunno. Sorry I'm a little dyslexic today, I keep saying things backwards. Aaron Gleeason, thank you so much, new patron, and also thank you my top patrons, Zimu Zinu, Adrian Borschoff, Michael, Jonathan Moyet, Jay Alden, Walt Bangs 90 Bits, of course, thank you Bangs so much.

0:51:41 Thomas: Sean Zipperer, Peter Skelton, Brian Gareford, Dale, Matt Garrett, Samantha, thank you guys, thank you for being my patrons, I appreciate it. Um, and you can message me, hit me up anytime, patrons, uh, and I will respond if you send me a message or an email or whatever. Um, and uh, let me know your opinions on this, like I said, and I'll see you next week.