466
degree in bamf
(mander.xyz)
Then everyone clapped
Yeah for real, there's been another very old tweet that this seems to be based on. Might be real but reads very copied from the previous one.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Tell me you don’t talk to female academics, lol.
Why did she have to specify the "white male" part?
to trigger insecure white males
Judging from this thread, mission accomplished.
I find it unnecessary. Race/gender/skin color or whatever shouldn't matter.
Yet somehow it is true that the vast majority of smug people who are confidently wrong are white males. Maybe someday we can have equality in the ratio of being smug while confidently wrong.
The irony of this comment
You know how it goes, not all white males… but almost always it is a white male.
This guy probably wouldn't have even considered insulting a speaker that way if she wasn't a woman. In a scientific setting it's one thing disagreeing with an argument, and attacking the person proposing the argument.
Not true, African American males are just as sexist as white American males.
Yes, but until recently they weren't even accepted into colleges, were they? Almost like oppression is intersectional or something.
EDIT: refer to my response to Mango. Y'all way stupider/bigoted than I gave you credit for in the first place.
Because that's the group most likely to commit misogyny in the workplace? Especially in male dominated fields.
What about cis white females that identify as centrists?
What about them? Do you have a study to share? Or just making up straw men?
Did you just assume the straw person's gender?
load more comments
(2 replies)
NASA Earth meeting
Are there also meetings on other planets?
Duh, it's NASA, they can fly to the Moon or Mars
They should do a video call instead of flying there for meetings all the time. Much more efficient and cheaper.
I'd be willing to bet this isn't real.
I've been to lots of scientific talks and the idea of someone trying to call put the person talking is kind of ridulous and never happens. You would have to an asshole of the highest calibre to do that. And the fact he mentions a specific paper/person and that just happened to be tbe person speaking and the idea that the speakers name wasn't listed is just so incredibly unlikely I can't ever imagine that happening.
This just seems like the kind of thing people fantasing happening, so they can smugly correct them.
To be fair, she didn't say she was giving a talk, guess it could have been a side conversation. It would seem more likely in a little side conversation.
However, at least when it happened to me, the other person remembered the paper but not the author, so it seems weird to refer to the paper by author. Also it feels weird even if he did remember to throw in the "et al". It's extra weird for her to declare that she is "McCarty et al", since she is saying she is "and others". It feels like a detail thrown in to make the exchange sound more "sciencey", when it doesn't make sense.
Since I had it happen to me, I'm sure it's happened to other paper writers, but this exchange doesn't sound like a realistic way for it to go down. So it's at least massaged for dramatic effect.
I mean, she's McCarty...
But I feel like this reploat has been around for a decade by now, and it's always bothered me.
Just sounds like a George Costanaza thing where she thought of this comeback but never in the moment
the hair thing could be drama for the tweet but everything else is not the first time nor the last time that happened, there are others stories like that
I don't doubt the situation happened, it is common.
But her reaction rarely is, but it's always the rebuke you think of "in the elevator" afterwards.
That's the less believable part, that she thought of it and used it in the moment. Quick on your feet thinking is like the opposite skillset of doing hard scientific research
"but that's me" isn't that clever of a comeback that its unrealistic.
exactly, if someone said that to me i could totally answer with a "but, i'm (my name)?" with a very confused look and in a less cool way, it's not that clever
What's there to be quick about? Someone criticizes you comparing to your work, you tell them you're the author...
Don't you understand? It's not about him. To have a line as perfect as 'jerk store' and to never use it. I, I couldn't live with myself.
Human drivers of fire??
That's not how "et al" works
Someone call the police!
I am the police.
Colloquially, it is.
Being casually sexist in an anecdote about alleged sexism, ok.
I actually experienced this exact same scenario, where someone accused me of being an idiot on a topic and referenced me to educate myself on a paper that I myself wrote. Dude was a white male, but I am too.
Hilarious because when he threw that at me I told him to look at the author and he doubled down that I was wrong, and I didn't understand the nuance of the paper I wrote.
Short of it is people can be condescending douches even without sexism.
Particularly in academia, which is a broad field that seems to draw in some seriously smug arseholes.
How is she being sexist exactly?
What's this got to do with his skin colour?
Or... is she just racist?
She's just pointing out that because of his race, the man she was taking to was in a place of social privilege and he should be more mindful of this when talking to under-represented groups in his field, such as women and POC.
Reminding him that his race grants him a level of authority, encourages him not to approach every conversation with the assumption that he is the smartest in the room.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Ooofff
Big L right there
This once again shows how important it is to acknowledge ones own biases and to account for them.
How did she manage to be racist and sexist at the same time? Interesting.
Yeah, she could've just said "a post doc". Imagine if it was "a black woman" instead of "white male" and people would be going ballistic
load more comments
(1 replies)
Wow. If true, sick slam.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
466 points (100.0% liked)
Confidently Incorrect
4007 readers
1 users here now
When people are way too smug about their wrong answer.
Posting guidelines.
All posts in this community have come from elsewhere, it is not original content, the poster in this community is not OP. The person who posts in this community isn’t necessarily endorsing whatever the post is talking about and they are not looking to argue with you about the content in the post.
You are welcome to discuss and debate any topic but arguments are not welcome here. I consider debate/discussions to be civil; people with different opinions participating in respectful conversations. It becomes an argument as soon as someone becomes aggressive, nasty, insulting or just plain unpleasant. Report argumentative comments, then ignore them.
There is currently no rule about how recent a post needs to be because the community is about the comeback part, not the topic.
Rules:
• Be civil and remember the human.
• No trolling, insults or name calling. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone.
• No bigotry of any kind, including homophobia, transphobia, sexism and racism.
• You are welcome to discuss and debate any topic but arguments are not welcome here. I consider debate/discussions to be civil; people with different opinions participating in respectful conversations. It becomes an argument as soon as someone becomes aggressive, nasty, insulting or just plain unpleasant. Report argumentative comments, then ignore them.
• Try not to get too political. A lot of these posts will involve politics, but this isn’t the place for political arguments.
• Participate in good faith - don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguements sake.
• Mark NSFW posts if they contain nudity.
• Satire is allowed but please start the post title with [satire] so other users can filter it out if they’d like.
Please report comments that break site or community rules to the mods. If you break the rules you’ll receive one warning before being banned from this community.
This community follows the rules of the lemmy.world instance and the lemmy.org code of conduct. I’ve summarised them here:
- Be civil, remember the human.
- No insulting or harassing other members. That includes name calling.
- Respect differences of opinion. Civil discussion/debate is fine, arguing is not. Criticise ideas, not people.
- Keep unrequested/unstructured critique to a minimum.
- Remember we have all chosen to be here voluntarily. Respect the spent time and effort people have spent creating posts in order to share something they find amusing with you.
- Swearing in general is fine, swearing to insult another commenter isn’t.
- No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia or any other type of bigotry.
- No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS