Sunday, October 20, 2013



Scientist called a "whore" because she wouldn't work for free

The story below is touted as telling us something about discrimination.  As far as I can see, it is in fact a story about just one nasty person (male or female we do not know) with such a weak ego that they could not take "no" for an answer.  Ofek is an Israeli name so maybe Ofek's Yiddisher Momma spoilt him/her.  It is of course common for bloggers (male or female, black or white) to write for free so that expectation tells us nothing about discrimination

This is a cautionary tale for all of the people out here who seem to think sexism in the sciences is still ok. Actually, for anyone who thinks sexism at work… online… anywhere is ok.

It’s also a lesson in how our brave new media world is slowly eating itself by expecting everyone to work for free*.

It all started when DN Lee, who runs the Urban Scientist blog on the prestigious Scientific American network, got asked to do some blogging for Biology-Online.

It would be a monthly article, he said, and she would have to wait two weeks before she was allowed to repost the blog on her own site.

“Regarding payment,” editor “Ofek” replied in response to her question. “Truthfully, we don’t pay guest bloggers”.  “Thank you very much for your reply,” DN Lee said. “But I will have to decline your offer. Have a great day”.

It should have stopped there. Why should a respected blogger and scientist provide content to a website for free?

But instead, Ofek decided to send this reply:  “Because we don’t pay for blog entries? Are you an urban scientist or an urban whore?”

Just let that sink in for a moment.

WHORE? REALLY??

Calling a professional woman who wants to be paid for her work a whore is so far out of the ballpark it’s a new sport entirely.

DN Lee responded by posting a blog and video that said this: “I do need you to recognise that how you behave matters, not just to me but to a lot of people because it sets the tone. For far too long the presumption has been that if you are a woman, a person of colour, or of low socio-economic status, that they think they can get you, your energy and talent for free.”

So what did Scientific American do? They took down her blog. That’s right. Scientific American seemed to think DN Lee was the one that should be punished.

There is SO much outrageous behaviour involved in this I don’t even know where to start.

We all know that women are paid less than men, and are more uncomfortable asking for pay rises. Often this is framed as an issue that just requires women to toughen up and be more like a man.

But what events like this show is that it’s actually not just about us, but that there are broader social issues at play that make it perfectly understandable that women have less confidence than men in asking for what they deserve (I’m not saying this is a good thing).

As the ‘rivers of gold’ (classified ads) that used to fund jobs like mine have dried up, media companies have increasingly turned to writers to do what they do for free – and I suspect that it’s women who will end up disproportionately taking on the bulk of this free work as well. This is not OK.

At least the Scientific American fiasco how provides a handy and well-documented case study of how NOT to handle sexism. After first saying that they took the blog down because it wasn’t about science – an embarrassing response given the Urban Scientist blog is clearly about more than just straight science – they have eventually put it back up and changed their story to say that they were actually worried about defamation, not science, when they took it down).

It’s true that we all need to start ‘leaning in’ and asking for what we want like DN Lee, but we also need some serious changes to the way women are treated and seen in the workplace.**

Hopefully now we can at least all cross “calling women whores” off the list of “things considered acceptable at work”. Baby steps, sisters, baby steps.

Post-Script: Biology Online, at least, handled this issue better than Sci Am, and have fired the editor who was involved.

SOURCE





English 'too nervous' to celebrate St George's Day

Because they have been told it is racist -- JR



The English are more likely to be able to correctly name the date of the US Independence Day and St Patrick’s Day than they are their own national saint’s day, a new poll has found.

The survey found only 40 per cent were able to identify St George’s Day as falling on April 23, compared with 71 who could give July 4 as the American national holiday and 42 per cent who knew that March 17 was the Irish one.

British Future, a think tank specialising in identity and integration which carried out the study, says the results suggest many English people are too “nervous” to celebrate St George’s Day.

It cites concerns among many that national symbols like the St George’s Cross flag may be interpreted as racist by others, and that celebration of the national saint’s day could upset ethnic minority groups.

It also accused politicians failing to “engage” with the concept of Englishness, to help to promote more pride in it.

The poll found that people in England are twice as likely to say they are more English than British than the other way round. Forty per cent said they were more English than British, while only 17 per cent feel more British than English. Just over a third (37 per cent) felt equally English and British.

The survey also found that two-thirds of those polled in England considered the Irish saint’s day as more widely-celebrated in Britain that St George’s Day. Only seven per cent believed April 23 received more attention than March 17.

St Patrick’s Day is marked by parades in several English cities, such as London, Liverpool and Birmingham, which attract crowds in their tens of thousands. By contrast, events marking St George’s Day have traditionally been lower key.

The research did suggest, however, that there was an appetite among the English to do more to celebrate their national identity. Three quarters (76%) wanted St George’s Day celebrated more or at least as much as St Patrick’s Day. Just under two thirds (61%) felt the flag of St George should be flown more widely across England.

Four in ten (41 per cent) citied the lack of a Bank Holiday when asked why St George’s Day is not celebrated more. Less than one in three (29%) thought it was because people did not care.

Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said: “Why shouldn’t we be able to celebrate Englishness? We’re all happy to come together as a nation when there’s football or cricket on, so why keep the flags in the drawer for the rest of the year?
“It’s a bit baffling that people in England will happily enjoy a pint of Guinness on St Patrick’s Day but then get nervous about celebrating St George’s Day too. We need to get over it and celebrate Englishness more.

“There’s clearly an appetite for bringing Englishness out of the stadium and into our everyday lives – but politicians have been very wary of engaging with it. It’s time they joined this national conversation. People think a Bank Holiday and flying more St George’s flags would help and it’s hard to see why anyone would disagree.”

British Future released the findings ahead of a “Festival of Englishness” it is holding in London this Saturday, with the Institute for Public Policy Research.

The event has been organised to discuss Englishness in areas such as politics, comedy and sport. Among those involved is Vanessa Whitburn, the former editor of The Archers, who will discuss English culture.

SOURCE





Bad parents are to blame for society’s ills, says Ofsted chief: Sir Michael Wilshaw attacks 'hollowed out and fragmented families'

As boss of school standards, Wilshaw knows the contribution of Britain's Left-run schools to declining British civility but he is undoubtedly right in pointing out that defective parenting has much to answer for as well.  Unsaid is that much of the problem parenting is among blacks

Parents who fail to teach their children right from wrong are at the root of Britain’s biggest problems, Ofsted’s chief inspector has said.

Sir Michael Wilshaw attacked ‘hollowed out and fragmented families’ where parents suffer a ‘poverty of accountability’.

He said child abuse and neglect were not the fault of councils alone. Such issues were the product of social breakdown.

Sir Michael warned that the problems exposed in child abuse scandals were being deepened by an apparent national obsession with ‘pussyfooting around’ and ‘making excuses’ for bad parents.

He said many children were ‘alienated’ from their natural father and that this lay at the root of the wider problems.

‘Some people will tell you that social breakdown is the result of material poverty – it’s more than this,’ he said.  ‘These children lack more than money: They lack parents who take responsibility for seeing them raised well. It is this poverty of accountability which costs them.

‘These children suffer because they are not given clear rules or boundaries, have few secure or safe attachments at home, and little understanding of the difference between right and wrong behaviour.

‘If we believe that the family is the great educator – and I certainly do believe that – and the community the great support system, then we as a society should worry deeply about the hollowing out and fragmentation of both.’

He spoke as Ofsted’s first report on England’s 152 children’s services departments found 20 areas where children are poorly protected.

He said Birmingham was one of the worst places to grow up in the developed world.

His comments come after a review of the death of two-year-old Keanu Williams was published

Sir Michael said: ‘It is an absolute disgrace and government needs to look at this with real urgency.  'Why is it that nearly a third of children in the city live in households on low incomes?  ‘Why is it that infant mortality is almost twice the national average, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

‘These are shocking statistics and a national disgrace. They are a testament to failure of corporate governance on a grand scale.

'What is shocking is that this is the city council with responsibility for more children than any other, our second city, the largest unitary local authority in the country.

'This is a city that should be nipping at London’s heels for power, status and influence.’

'Sir Michael said children’s services had been undermined because one in three of the country’s departmental directors have either quit or been sacked in the past year – 50 out of the total of 152.

‘Incompetent and ineffective leadership must be addressed quickly,’ he added. ‘But where those in leadership positions have capacity and potential, this must be recognised and nurtured.’

The report found 86 of the 152 councils had children’s services that were ‘less than good’. The 20 judged inadequate were Barnsley, Bexley, Birmingham, Blackpool, Calderdale, Cambridgeshire, Cheshire East, Cumbria, Devon, Doncaster, Herefordshire, Isle of Wight, Kingston on Thames, Medway, Norfolk, Northamptonshire, Rochdale, Sandwell, Slough and Somerset.

A spokesman for Birmingham council said: ‘This is a long-standing problem which we acknowledge. ‘While we can only agree with the seriousness of what Sir Michael has said – indeed we have said it ourselves – we now need improvement rather than further diagnosis.’

SOURCE





More Disgusting Anti-Semitism From The Scum On ‘The View’
  
Maybe they should change the name of the show to the “The Anti-Jew.”

While running on the treadmill at the gym, this morning, I made the mistake of watching ABC’s “The View,” and I could not believe what I was hearing. On second thought, though, I shouldn’t have been surprised, as the various co-host hags of the show defended skank Miley Cyrus’ anti-Semitic comments (last week, Ms. Virus she said she wouldn’t let a “70-year-old Jewish man” tell her how to run her sleazy career) and engaged in their own anti-Jewish comments because the show has a history of Jew-hatred, which I’ve covered on this site (more on that later).

On today’s episode of the annoying anti-male yenta hag-fest, Jenny McCarthy made the comment , “I would always trust any Jew ‘cuz they know how to make money.” (This whore, McCarthy, made money by spreading eagle on video and in magazines for Playboy. She also bragged about giving oral sex at truck stops to pay for her spring break vacation. I don’t think this aspect of “making money” came from Jews.) When show producer Barbara Walters, a Va-JINO (my word for a female Jew In Name Only) told her that the comment is anti-Semitic, McCarthy didn’t apologize. Instead, she made more anti-Semitic comments.

Guest co-host, Singer Gavin DeGraw, defended Cyrus, saying that her comments about Jews were Cyrus’ way of “being rebellious.” He explained that that’s “rock ‘n’ roll.” Really? Since when did rock become an SS officers reunion . . . and why weren’t Gene Simmons (real name: Chaim Witz), Paul Stanley (born Stanley Harvey Eisen), David Lee Roth, and Bob Dylan (real surname: Zimmerman) tipped off about this apparently major feature of “rock rebellion”?

In response to DeGraw’s defense of Cyrus’ dissing of the Jews, Jenny McCarthy responded, “Well, you won’t be hosting the Shabbat telethon anytime soon” and then started laughing. Shabbat is the Hebrew word for the Jewish Sabbath, and here’s a tip, Jenny: we don’t have telethons on the Jewish Sabbath, dummy.

And, then, of course, Whoopi Goldberg, who defended Mel Gibson and said he’s not anti-Semitic, defended Cyrus by saying that she only made the mistake of “being a few decades late.” Goldberg said that about four decades ago, Jews controlled the music industry.
Really? Did Berry Gordy have a secret Bar Mitzvah? Did he have a bris even his own penis doesn’t know about? Just askin’.

And, of course, not to be outdone in idiocy, Sherri “I still think the world is flat” Shepherd, defended Cyrus by giving some cockamamie figure, claiming that six out of eleven top executives of record companies are Jews. Well, I can play that absurd logic game, too, by saying that two out of two Black co-hosts of “The View” are fat, ugly, dumb, anti-Semitic racists who look like lesbians, and therefore, that must apply to all Blacks.

Newsflash for Sherri Shepherd: the word “Sony”–which is in the name of three of the 12 major record labels over the past two decades, Sony, Sony BMG, and Sony Music Entertainment–is not Japanese for Epstein or Horowitz. BMG–which owns in part or in full two of the 12 major record labels–BMG and Sony BMG–stands for Bertelsmann Music Group. It’s a German company. Just because the Germans extinguished six million Jewish lives doesn’t make ‘em Jews, themselves. Today, Sony, which absorbed BMG, is the second major record label among the three biggies in the record biz. It’s not owned by Jews.

Last week, I watched these hags and guest co-host Jesse Ventura yell and scream about the name of the Washington Redskins NFL team and how offensive it is to American Indians, er . . . “Native Americans.” In the past, I’ve watched them whine about Don Imus’ comments about the hair and sexual habits of Black female  basketball players at Rutgers, demanding Imus’ head. And I watched them, including Goldberg, walk off the set of the show, when Bill O’Reilly said Muslims hijacked the planes on 9/11.

As I’ve noted before, “The View” has a history of anti-Semitism, including:

* “View” co-hosts said that Chassidic Jewish women are “ugly,” “weird,” and “bizarre,” and laughed about it (including current FOX News morning co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck);

* “View” co-hosts defended the Muslim terrorist bombing of Jews while they celebrated the Passover Seder, saying “we have to understand their [Muslims'] culture is different than ours;”

* “View” co-host Whoopi Goldberg defended Mel Gibson’s anti-Semitic comments;

* “View” co-host Whoopi Goldberg defended Helen Thomas’ anti-Semitic comments; and

* a “View” co-host Star Jones was hired after she defended and praised killer Lemrick Nelson, who murdered Chassidic Jew Yankel Rosenbaum in an anti-Semitic hate crime inspired by an Al Sharpton rally.

These are just a few examples I remember off the top of my head, but there are plenty more.

Frankly, as I’ve noted before, the name “Whoopi Goldberg”–the stage name of unfunny comedienne and talentless affirmative action beneficiary, Caryn Elaine Johnson–is anti-Semitic. I mean, how would Black people like it if I took the stage name, “LaDebbie Shaniqua Tyronetta Ax Me a Question No You Di’in’t Jackson?”

As I’ve previously pointed out, that would be racist, so why does “Goldberg”/Johnson get a pass? Oh, yeah, she’s Black. So, she gets away with it and her many racist, anti-Semitic comments.

But, Jews, are fair game for bigoted attacks on this show because Barbara Walters looks the other way, in a way she never would if the hosts made these comments about Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims or other preferred minorities.

SOURCE

*************************

Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here

***************************


No comments: