Robert21 wrote: Rob27172 wrote:
Even Tim Hunt admitted his comments were sexist !!! Just because he never meant to cause offence doesnt mean it was ok. It means he really isn't as smart or thoughtful as he should have been.
But did Hunt's throw-away joke at an obscure conference justify destroying his career? Or does the fact that this sort of thing commonly happens happens these days highlight the fact that the laudable desire to challenge discrimination had created just another tyranny?
In addition, there seem to be plenty of people around these days whose whole focus in life appears to be looking for things to be offended by,
especially if this helps them to further their agendas. Even Trevor Philips, one-time chair of the UK's Equality and Human Rights Commission, recognises that pandering to such individuals has gone too far, not least because doing so has helped to fuel the 'populist' backlash which put Trump into power.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/19/trevor-phillips-i-dont-care-about-offending-people-has-political-correctness-gone-mad-channel-4
Couldn't agree more with the bold. Life would be so damn dull if we never said anything the slightest bit risque, polemical, daring, etc. etc. in case some one might be offended. In such a world, Darwin would have been in chokey as the likes of Bishop Usher got all hot under the collar. Change rests with the unreasonable man, after all.
I'd much rather the world was full of free thinkers willing to challenge ideas and say the wrong thing so long as their intentions aren't malevolent, versus a world where we have the thought police, whose intentions appear to be to shut anyone up that doesn't agree with a narrow world view predicated on an assumption of victimhood. It's a dead bore and very dangerous to boot. Any one interested in this stuff should check out what's happening to Prof. Jordan Peterson in Canada. As for Tim Hunt - well, since most of the people who know his name probably know him for this rather than his achievements, I'd have thought his reputation has suffered, which seems absurd given what he actually said was pretty darn mild and clearly not intended to cause offence. Folks need to develop a bit thicker skin and focus on bigger issue rather than trivial tokenism. Why not get hot under the collar about things causing actual harm, like modern day slavery, FGM, harrassment in the workplace etc. etc.
Which is not to say that bullying is acceptable - there's a world of difference between an off the cuff, slightly off colour joke and systematic bullying and harrassment. A culture in which a number of people feel uncomfortable and excluded -whatever their gender - clearly needs at least investigating if the aim of an organisation, such as British Cycling, is to get the best out of people. The culture should be able to adapt to different needs: some people will need reassurance, some people will need a kick up the backside. Personally I can tolerate a lot of what others might call sexism if the intention to cause harm isn't there, and there is a demonstrable willingness to act when the behaviour is called out. That said, the reviews I've read don't exactly inspire confidence that there was a genuine willingness to change when you have the BC Board allegedly over-turning the findings of it's own independent compliance officer and covering up adverse findings.