Never Read The Comments

You may have heard of the recent furore surrounding Professor Tim Hunt's comments regarding "girls" in science. If you haven't seen (congratulations on avoiding it), he stated: "Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab. You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them, they cry." He said this at a conference. About women in science. It didn't go down well.

Since making the comments, Hunt has resigned from his position at UCL and the European Research Council. In response to the comments, female scientists have begun a social media campaign '#DistractinglySexy', posting pictures of themselves at work, falling in love, making men fall in love with them, or celebrating getting through a day in the lab without crying. Plenty of coverage of these two events has been posted elsewhere, but what I want to focus on is the response of individuals outside science to the whole event.

Largely, most individuals (particularly women, particularly scientists) have been startled by Tim Hunt's views. For women in science, I feel the prevailing cry is that of "Seriously?". I've worked as a research assistant over the past four years, and not once have I fallen in love in the lab, had someone else fall in love with me, or cried in response to criticism. It may surprise many people to realise that women aren't all delicate little flowers, who fawn over men and can't handle something as devilishly tricky as science. In fact, we're as competent as men in our jobs, and not needlessly distracted by our emotions.

Despite this, there are significant problems facing women in science. Stereotypes suggest that science is a masculine profession. CVs with men's names attached are rated higher than identical CVs with women's names at the top. Women have fewer role models. Fewer women serve on interviewing committees, simply because there aren't as many around. You can look at the evidence for yourself here. With all these problems, women in science simply don't need to hear the nonsense spouted by Tim Hunt, and someone with his standing should really think before he opens his mouth.

Now, Tim Hunt has since spoken to the Guardian, stating that he's been hung out to dry by UCL. He also said that his comments were a joke, but he did mean them. Not much of an apology, suggesting he's not too aware of how such comments affect women who work in his industry. I don't believe that he's misogynistic or particularly against women, but these comments highlight that he perhaps has a limited view of women in science. The comments aren't defensible in any case - BUT, here's what gets me, so many people in the comments simply think that the problems faced by women in science aren't a big deal. We're all overreacting and ha, can't you see the irony in these "man-hating feminists" crying over these innocent and completely harmless comments?!

I don't think that any of this is harmless, and the comments posted by so many keyboard warriors highlight our terrible attitude towards women at worst, and our lack of understanding of the barriers facing women in science at best. For example, one very well written and balanced comment called for Hunt to use his retirement to work with the Royal Society to understand the precise problems facing female scientists. All very well, and a useful suggestion. The first response to that comment was:

 "No. He should do something useful."

I'm female, and I'm aspiring to work in science. I think understanding the potential barriers that could stop my career progression would be very useful!

Another comment asked how the comments were sexist. Well, suggesting that women cry at the merest hint of criticism and just swoon over their male colleagues is pretty ridiculous for one...

A final example stated how this sequence of events showed how science was no longer a meritocracy, and that 'the feminist way has come to prevail'. Given how many women were overlooked for science positions in the past, I'm not sure how much the meritocracy applied. And I'm fairly certain if the 'feminist way' prevailed, there wouldn't be so many problems for women in science.

Alright, maybe the comments got blown out of proportion, and the man lost his job. But, if you're speaking in public, you should be aware of what you're saying and how it can be interpreted. If you do say something so stupid, then perhaps you should issue a proper apology. What the commenters need to understand, however, is that there are still issues for women wanting to break into science, and attitudes similar to Hunt's really don't help. The ignorance exuded by these comments highlights how little these problems are appreciated by the majority, and it's prompting me to bang my head repeatedly at my desk. Never. Read. The. Comments.

Babies

If you've spent the morning living in a cave, then lucky you! You will have missed the 'news' that Kate Middleton is in labour, giving birth to the next 'Royal Baby'. For readers in the UK, this means the media will spend an entire day, fawning over and speculating about the characteristics of the baby, while pointing a camera at the door of a private hospital or a chalkboard outside Buckingham Palace. No, I'm not kidding or exaggerating. For many people, this event seems to be something wonderful, magical, as if a woman had never given birth to a child before. For me (and a fair few others), it's a non-story, and bordering on offensive.

You might wonder why I call such an event offensive. Here are some statistics and thoughts.

In the UK, 3.5 million children are currently living in poverty. 

Over 1 million people in the UK have had to use food banks to feed their families.

90,000 children are homeless

By contrast, the new royal baby can expect to live in a family worth millions, and will likely never want for anything. Of course, there are plenty of families richer than the families of those children living in poverty, and people rarely complain about those. However, these families are generally not fawned over by the media at every opportunity. These families are not supported by taxpayer's cash. These families (or at least hopefully a significant proportion of them) will have earned their wealth in some way, shape, or form, and will not have gained significant wealth simply through the act of being born. In a country where so many people live in poverty, and when over 2,000 children are born every day, is it morally correct to lavish praise on one particular family having a child?

As you may have gathered by now, I'm not in favour of the monarchy. I think it is an out-dated institution which negatively shapes our ideological beliefs. Today's celebration of one child being born highlights this. Arguments for the monarchy tend to verge towards the economic. People will say that the monarchy brings in tourism. Having read some data from Visit Britain, this is unlikely to be the case. While some tourists state that visiting London has links to royalty, they come for the buildings not the people. Funnily enough, if the monarchy was abolished, these buildings would likely become more accessible (would we then see an increase in tourism? It's something to consider). Staying on the tourism theme, think about your last trip to London. Why did you go? Was it to see Elizabeth? Or was it to see the numerous museums, galleries, and historic sites? Think about your last holiday abroad? Did you narrow down your choices by whether the country had an active monarchy or not? Speaking for myself, last year I went to Paris, and visited the Palace of Versailles. It was packed full of tourists, and I for one enjoyed the day without ever once thinking 'Hmm, I wish this place had a King or Queen still'.

The monarchy costs a huge amount of money every year. Although there are claims of 'it's only 56p per year!' this is 56p none of us have had the choice of paying. Why should we pay money to a family that has over £14,000,000 in assets? When many families have to choose between heating their homes and eating, why should we accept a family whose annual utility bills are £1.9 million (why should we pay this bill?!)? However little it costs us per person, we should not be sending more money to a family who already has wealth and status while there are others starving on our doorsteps.

Furthermore, the royal baby is being born in an expensive private wing, while our NHS is crumbling. I see no reason why this child can't be born in a regular hospital, like many of the others being born today. The doctors, nurses, midwives, and all the other hospital staff will do the best job they can, irrespective of whether someone has paid £7,000 per night to be in the hospital. To suggest Kate is somehow above the usual, excellent care provided in a normal hospital is ridiculous.

Aside from the monetary arguments, the monarchy has too much of an ideological grip over us. Our national anthem (although not official) is about a single person - the Queen. Indeed, the British people are only mentioned as subjects long to be ruled over (or those rebellious Scots!). I don't remember asking for anyone to rule over me! I certainly don't consider myself a subject. The fact that the royal family are held up as somehow more important than anyone else is obscene. A recent article in the Guardian around the time of Richard III's reburial summed it up beautifully:

"It’s comical, but tragic too, as a reminder of the indignity the British accept in their accustomed role as subjects, not citizens. ... The one benefit of a supremely privileged family is to prove, once and for all, that talent and brains are randomly assigned. Forget a super-race, this royal selective breeding with the very best education and top university tutors has produced the least intellectually curious, least artistic, dullest bunch of polo-playing, hunting, shooting, fishing dullards you could hope not to meet. But then their adherents praise their very “ordinariness” as a quality."


In my view, the people who contribute most to British society aren't those born to one wealthy family with luck on their side. Instead, they are the doctors, nurses, cleaners, scientists, engineers, and carers, along with every other ordinary individual working towards making their life just a little bit better in some way. The real tragedy is that these people aren't celebrated as much as the monarchy. We are perceived as somehow inferior. Why? We were all created and born in more or less the same way as the monarchy. Although, my surname is Gallagher - apparently the name of the most senior families in Ireland in the 14th century. My birth wasn't hailed in the media, despite such potential high status. The birth of British Nobel Laureates (of which there are many) hasn't been heralded by news report. The birth of all those ordinary people who work to make the world a better place isn't covered by rolling news, and nor should the birth of Kate's child today. Every one of the babies born on the 2nd of May 2015 has the chance to contribute something amazing to society. Maybe one will become our prime minister. Maybe another will find a cure for cancer, or Alzheimer's Disease. One might work tirelessly as a nurse, or a midwife, helping other women bring inspirational people into the world. Why aren't these children celebrated just as much?

Everyone alive on the planet today has descended from families throughout history, and back through species until you reach the first single-celled organism. That's quite amazing. Why then, is one baby being held up to such adoration? It's senseless. Today, I'm sure everyone wishes Kate well. However, I also wish well the 2,000+ other women who are giving birth today. I also wish well anyone adopting a child today. I wish well the 3.5 million children in poverty, the 1 million visiting the food banks. Although the coverage will only be on the royal baby, these people aren't any less important, and our society will only progress when we recognise that everyone should be born equal and have just as many chances to succeed as anyone else.

Please visit these links. 

https://republic.org.uk/

http://www.cpag.org.uk/

On a lighter note, have this Monty Python video, summing everything up nicely.