/
    Skip to main content
    Advertisement

    Why sack ageing sexists? Send them to rehab instead

    Gaby Hinsliff
    Gaby Hinsliff
    Tim Hunt isn’t too old to learn that his views of women are out of step with the modern world
    Lab technicians
    ‘There are so many Hunts … otherwise agreeable men (and indeed sometimes women) of a certain age and background who beneath the surface hold surprisingly weird ideas.’ Photograph: Lorne Campbell/Guzelian
    “You’re a sexist!” “No, you’re a sexist!” The argument was loud enough to carry up a flight of stairs, and reluctantly I went to see what was going on. Emotions were running too high to ascertain exactly what had started it – something to do with football, possibly – but one thing was clear: playground insults have changed since my day. The gaggle of eight-year-old boys in our kitchen had absolutely no idea what a sexist actually is, but they’d certainly grasped that nobody wants to be called one.
    As, somewhat more belatedly, has Sir Tim Hunt. The Nobel-winning biochemist has been widely lampooned for suggesting that women are a nuisance in the lab because “you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them they cry”, which is apparently bad for science. He was duly put in the stocks of the Today programme, and sharply criticised by fellow scientists. And – one imagines – endured some sticky moments at the breakfast table, given his wife is an eminent professor of immunology. (Yes, they met and fell in love in a lab; miraculously, science has survived this.)
    Even if Hunt was joking when he suggested labs should be single-sex – keeping all those minxy lady biochemists in their provocatively buttoned-up white coats safely out of sight – it was self-evidently the wrong joke to make to an audience of female scientists and science writers. Not the behaviour expected of an honorary professor at University College London, which is proud of being the first university in Britain to admit women on equal terms to men. So why, then, does it feel slightly disconcerting that within a day of his remarks being reported, Hunt was out of a job?
    I don’t buy the hysterical, foam-flecked rubbish about him being bullied out by feminazis. Although UCL’s brusque statement on Hunt’s departure suggests his resignation may well have been the outcome it wanted, that hardly adds up to men everywhere being silenced by the thought police. Nor is it conclusive proof that, as the comedian Jerry Seinfeld recently complained, political correctness is killing jokes (more specifically, his jokes, including a gag involving the words “gay French king”).
    Advertisement
    Scientists, of all people, shouldn’t be surprised to be robustly challenged for extrapolating wildly from a few ropey old anecdotes. And anyone in teaching should recognise the dangers of even joking about female students potentially not being up to it, especially in the week that research (irony of ironies, from UCL) showed teachers are less likely to judge girls good at maths even when they score as well as boys. As for 61-year-old comedians who find the laughs drying up – well, maybe it’s time to try updating the material, instead of moaning that kids today don’t know what’s funny.
    So no, I don’t think Hunt is a great man wronged: highly intelligent people are not immune to saying stupid things. But what bothers me is that intelligent people are also hopefully capable of recognising when they’re wrong, changing their minds accordingly, and discussing it openly in a way that helps others recognise where they might be wrong too. And absolutely none of that is achieved by forcing a symbolic resignation.
    There are so many Hunts, that’s the problem. Educated, rational and otherwise agreeable men (and indeed sometimes women) of a certain age and background who beneath the surface hold surprisingly weird ideas about women, or gay people, or black people, or anyone else they didn’t come across much while growing up.
    As judges, they’re the sort who tend to portray 14-year-old victims of abusive relationships as little temptresses; as police officers, the sort who don’t take domestic violence as seriously as they should. They’re the politicians forever being forced to apologise for saying something that privately they don’t really regret; and as employers they’re the stuff of working women’s nightmares, with their unshakeable belief that all females under 40 are just waiting to get pregnant and give it all up for the baby.
    But what they’re not necessarily is hate-filled misogynists, or hopelessly beyond rehabilitation: just people who don’t seem to have noticed that the world has moved on a bit. So what, exactly, should we do with them?
    Ageing sexists whose personal prejudices interfere with their ability to do the job obviously have to be tackled. Getting to grips with the basic principles of equality should be as non-negotiable as – and frankly not much more complicated than – mastering the new office IT system, or keeping up with developments in your professional field. But the first step should be retraining, not issuing a P45; and above all, it needs to be clear that failure to get the hang of this stuff makes you sound not just sexist but frankly past it; ridiculous not just to women but to younger men, too.
    For the gap Tim Hunt has fallen down is arguably as much generational as gendered. The 72-year-old professor was educated at Magdalen School followed by Clare College Cambridge, neither of which admitted girls at the time. You can see why encountering these exotic creatures at work might have come as a shock to his generation.
    But their sons, raised in different times, are more likely to have learned to share an office with women without the sky falling in. And their grandsons are being raised in a complex world that sometimes looks more segregated than ever – all pink Lego for girls and blue for boys – but feels infinitely more fluid: my son has grown up with girls on his football and cricket teams, girls in science club, girls in Beavers and Cubs (which they join because it’s apparently more exciting than Brownies). Little boys are as scornful about little girls as ever, but they’re a lot more used to them; more comfortable with the idea that they sometimes do stuff differently and sometimes don’t, and you just have to work around it.
    Seinfeld was right to argue that “sexist” isn’t a word to be used lightly, and certainly not used to shut down legitimate debate. It carries too heavy a weight for that. But as the idea of men and women being roughly equal becomes ever more mainstream, and its dwindling band of opponents ever more shrill and eccentric – well, maybe we shouldn’t be so surprised if future generations start using “sexist” interchangeably with “loser”. For that’s what, with any luck, it will have come to mean.
    • This article was amended on Thursday 11 June 2015 to correct Jerry Seinfeld’s name.
    Advertisement
    Ad covers the page
    Report this ad
    Thanks for the feedback! Undo
    What was wrong with this ad?
    Thanks for the feedback! Back
    We’ll review this ad to improve the experience in the future.
    Thanks for the feedback! Undo
    We’ll use your feedback to review ads on this site.
    Closing ad: %1$d

    comments (746)

    Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
    This discussion is closed for comments.
    We’re doing some maintenance right now. You can still read comments, but please come back later to add your own.
    Commenting has been disabled for this account (why?)
    1 2 3 4 12 next
    Loading comments… Trouble loading?
    • 1 2
      "........hold surprisingly weird ideas about women, or gay people, or black people, or anyone else they didn’t come across much while growing up."
      Or men for instance? We heard nowt about the Goldsmiths academic ( high up in the Gender Studies dept) who blogged her support for Bahar "#KillAllmen" Mustafa.
      Ms Mustafa also used the term "white trash" on her offical NUS twitter account - apparently she's a Diversity Officer. Mustafa claimed she cannot be sexist or racist to white men.Any concern for the male students at Goldsmith's?
      Or are some silly sods more equal than others? If you want a free pass forget Nobel prizes - a position in Gender Studies is where it's at.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      Why refer to a ageing sexist as ageing ? The problem is that he's sexist, his age has nothing to do with it. Ageist.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      Well, I knew it had to happen eventually. A Guardian feminist article that I don't disagree with in its entirety and that doesn't make me want to slam my computer to the floor in frustration.
      I must admit that the idea of "re-educating sexists" seems a little Orwellian, though in the context of the article, I certainly see the point. It is also a little patronising in tone, and I would like to point out that equality in the fields of Scouting and sports is entirely a one-way street (there are still girls-only organisations, but no equivalent boys-only organisations). And I do think that the sudden revelation to me that Professor Hunt's wife was also a scientist whom he met in the lab suggests that it was merely an ill-advised joke in our politically-correct times (though I see no justification for the "cry when you criticise them" part of it, which possibly lets down the whole thing).
      But despite that, the general thrust of the article is not totally misguided. No blanket assertions that men are all inherently rapists, or implicitly supportive of rape. No calls for special treatment for women. No particular calls to silence opposing opinion, or constantly widen the definition of sexism. I have always found Hinsliff one of the less offensive Guardian feminists (with people such as Valenti, there is no competition), and this seems to confirm this. However, I am still waiting for the day when I nod my head in agreement at every word.
      Reply |
    • This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
    • 3 4
      I note that the latest article in which Tim Hunt defends himself has no comments thread attached to it.
      In that article it is made clear he was threatened with the sack unless he resigned before his plane had even landed and before he was given the natural justice of giving his side of the story (which I think goes against employment law) that's why he was out of his job within a day of his remarks being reported Gaby!....his wife was spoken to first before him (!) and told he 'had' to resign. Since then many female scientists have since come out to defend him and his record of helping young women develop their skills and argue against his sacking.
      Mmmmmmm....not quite the person or situation painted in the article above or in comments on this thread but we've already made our decision on what a threat to our society he is haven't we.
      Will you write another article now Gaby demonstrating the truth that this man actually contributed to the scientific development of many young female students and thus promoted 'girls' in the laboratory as is validated by his many female supporters or is that too difficult and against your ingrained prejudices?
      He made a mistake for which he has apologised unreservedly and should be reinstated in his post.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      Perry Link writing on Eileen Chang's analysis of Communist social control in "Naked Earth":
      "Eventually the farmers, like everyone else, figure out that their personal interests depend on correct verbal performance. There are certain things you are supposed to say and certain ways you are supposed to say them. “Tell the truth!” is a command that you recite your lies correctly. An unimpeachable exterior becomes everyone’s goal ... In Naked Earth, one young woman suffers a torrid criticism session, ends it with a self-denunciation, and then steals away to weep in solitude. Someone discovers her and accuses her of “only pretending to accept criticism.” Thinking quickly, she explains that, no, hers are tears of gratitude: “Everybody was so concerned about me, so enthusiastic in helping me to make Progress."
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      Just send them to Room 101. That's what you mean, isn't it?
      Ah, the perils of self-deprecatory humour.
      Reply |
    • 3 4
      Women that are racist, on a daily basis, do not loose their job. Women that are sexists on a daily basis do not loose tjeir job or are obliged to resign.
      The level of hypocrisy is beyond the pale.
      Who raise most children? Women does. Therefore, we women are responsible for the way society turns out to be.
      Who are the counselors and teachers in the primary and secondary schools? Mostly women...then, instead of blaming the issues on men and on Tim Hunt, we, women, need to change the way we raise our children and teach them...
      Reply |
    • 7 8
      "I don’t buy the hysterical, foam-flecked rubbish about him being bullied out by feminazis."
      Who was it then?
      His 'humour' was misjudged and an absolute gift for the professionally offended--but as clear as this is it is just as clear he has been removed for fear of upsetting a very powerful feminist lobby. I was once told, by a woman, in front of a very large group of colleagues that I had a surprising amount of empathy 'for a man'-----I let it wash over me and marked her down mentally as a twat. I have no doubt we could all come up with similar stories and nearly all of us let it go unless there is spiteful intent.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      yes the world has moved on and oldies like this should be moved on, whether into rehab, detention centres, Guantanamos...
      Thankfully the younger generation do not have such sexist bents. Thankfully Gaby Hinsliff's son is already cleansed and will never descend so far. Sexism is the province of "61 year old" comedians, or "otherwise agreeable men ...of a certain age", or "Ageing sexists whose personal prejudices...", or "the 72 year old professor who" was only educated with boys unlike Gaby's son (does he have a sister?).
      What's more, these unrehabilitated types are "As judges, the sort who...", "As Police officers, the sort who.." as "politicians the sort who...and so on.
      Seems that prejudice is alive and well and thriving. Sexism just a generational thing? Just look at the comments on Jonathan Freedland's piece on Vegas, or the piece on Magaluf...
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      Was that swipe near the end of the article at losers strictly necessary? Kicking people when they're down is uncool.
      Reply |
      • 0 1
        It is designed to silence debate....anyone who questions her ideas is a 'loser'. It is the idea of linkage. Language is quite powerful you'll find. For example, the right wing have been so successful in linking any social programs with Communism that now even our left wing parties are right of the middle. It's a trick as old as the ages used by people with an agenda.
        Reply |
    • 3 4
      Tim Hunt did indeed say a foolish thing. He should have realised that even if he was just a little bit right, his feminist critics would never admit it, and would barbequeue him relentlessly. That said, I think it would be good of The Guardian to pay him a reward for starting the media frenzy that its journalists have kept going, and going for days (and still isn't over.) It might provide some small compensation for his having had to resign from UCL.
      Reply |
      • 0 1
        The more right he was, the MORE he'd get barbecued. Don't tell anyone of us who lives in the real world that workplace romances are not common.
        Wonder what would have happened if Hunt had been gay, and had said the young men he works with could be distracting.
        And the ONLY people in my office who have ever cried when reprimanded/contradicted are female, (even my SO, who says it frustrates her like hell when it happens).
        As some accuse Muslims of doing, if we let the militants ride roughshod and don't fight back or condemn we are culpable too.
        Reply |
    • 3 4
      How about we value academic freedom and do nothing about academics expressing their views? Especially at public universities where there is also a freedom of speech issue.
      Yes, being rude or harassing your underlings or colleagues should be stopped but this is not what we are talking about here. He articulated his general experiences in a speech. If it is okay to fire him for it or sending him to reeducation, then it is okay to fire any female scientist who explains that in her experience many male scientists are sexist, which could cause create offense. (And would be an inaccurate generalization as well, I think.)
      Besides, Hunt's comments seem mostly inoffensive. The only possible false generalization he made was that women cry more than men. That may well be untrue, or it might not since crying is more socially acceptable for women. But if he was wrong then someone can present the data to show that he is wrong. And even then he technically might get off because he was only speaking about his own experiences.
      The part about falling in love in mixed-gender workplaces do happen to some extent, of course, and it seems pretty uncontroversial that it would happen less with segregated workplaces because heterosexuality is more common than homosexuality. Not everyone would find this to be a big distraction but Hunt apparently does (or he was joking) and it seems a matter of taste more than fact so who is to say he was wrong. I do not share his taste but I would not criticize him for expressing it.
      Of course people who really were offended and hurt by Hunt's comments have the right to express their views, just like Hunt had the right to express his. I absolutely support the right of both sides to express their views without retaliation.
      But I wonder how many were strongly offended. And I also think it odd that his views are so strongly criticized in a country that practices gender-segregated education to such a large degree up to the kids are 18 years old. Because it was segregation he was suggesting (with whatever degree of seriousness he intended) not sending women back to the kitchen.
      Reply |
    • 7 8
      A student diversity officer caught in the centre of a racism row is to keep her job after a petition calling her for to be removed from her position failed


      The petition calling for Ms Mustafa's removal from her post alleged she had "used hate speech based on race and gender".
      It read: "For example, the consistent use of hashtags such as #killallwhitemen and #misandry, and publicly calling someone 'white trash' under the official GSU Welfare and Diversity Officer Twitter account."
      Ms Mustafa has said her use of the term "white trash" on an official account had been "not professional".
      But she also said the use on her personal account of hashtags such as #killallwhitemen were "in-jokes and ways that many people in the queer feminist community express ourselves".
      Someone please explain why this woman isn't forced to resign? Where is The Guardian article suggesting she needs to be sent to re-education camp?
      These examples are not rare or isolated incidents, they are just this week's example of deep double standards.
      Reply |
    • This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
    • 1 2
      Tim Hunt will be able to do such a lot of useful work sitting in encounter groups.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      Jesus, rehab by Guardianista.
      Cruella and unusual punishment, surely. He'll be pleading for a bullet in the head before the end of half an hour.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      He should be forced to do Biochemistry in the community for a while - that'll teach him to be out-of-touch.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      'Sexist' is. like 'democracy', a word which is little more than a term of vague reproof.
      Reply |
    • 4 5
      Even if Hunt was joking when he suggested labs should be single-sex [] it was self-evidently the wrong joke to make to an audience of female scientists and science writers.
      That explains why people find it funny. It has a Partridgesque character.
      Reply |
      • 4 5
        There are no "ifs" about it, Hunt was joking. The right joke to make to an audience of female scientists. If it was made to any other audience it would not have been humorous.
        Reply |
    • 5 6
      Why sack ageing sexists? Send them to rehab instead
      You sound like a "liberal" commissar.
      Hardline commissars want people who hold or express - literally - politically incorrect views to be removed from their positions of employment.
      "liberal" commissars want them sent for re-education. And they are all the more smug about their supposed liberal approach.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      He should not have been sacked. A Nobel winning scientists has much to offer and his employer should have offered him any training he wanted and let him get on with his job. The uproar his comments caused would not have been missed by someone of his intelligence, so surely widespread condemnation would have been enough! He should be reinstated.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      So the offending remark was "women are a nuisance in the laboratory because you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and they cry when you criticise them". If he had said the opposite, "women are an asset in the laboratory because they lack passion" would he have been applauded.
      If there are those that say he didn't need to make comments about women at all, he was speaking at a conference of female scientists. Which leads me to my other point. Why is a conference of female scientists convened? The whole point about science is that it matters not who is the scientist. Hunt should have refused the invitation to attend on the grounds of it being a sexist event.
      Reply |
      • 4 5
        Hunt should have refused the invitation to attend on the grounds of it being a sexist event.
        Indeed, he should. But sexism only works one way, apparently.
        Reply |
      • 4 5
        I imagine there was a conference of female scientists because women are now making inroads into STEM careers and, in a sphere, dominated by men, deserve an opportunity to have their growing participation more discretely welcomed.
        I don't see how a male speaker is limited to making crass generalizations about genders. There were lots of other things he could have talked about.
        Reply |
      • 3 4
        1. Then how about a "Male nurses conference". How about a conference for male linguists. Poetry and literature are not STEM careers so why do we have women's poetry/literature festivals. How about a men's poetry festival.
        2. Hunt would have been giving talks for decades on a thousand topics. I am certain that he did not stand up and say "women are a nuisance in the lab because I fell in love with one of them........." and then sit down. These conferences are deadly boring and most attendees welcome a little humorous distraction.
        3. Was his wife, also a distinguished scientist, in attendance? Did she laugh or did she storm out and give him lashings of hot tongue afterwards. Maybe he had run the comments past her beforehand and got a "how sweet darling that'll get a good reception" response.
        Reply |
    • 1 2
      Having worked for several American corps I can honesty state that being sent on an "Awareness course" merely teaches people not to say out loud what you they are thinking.
      You need to catch them young.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      Send them to rehab instead
      Reeducation has the same effect and is faster.
      Reply |
    1 2 3 4 12 next
    SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
    SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
    desktop
    0%
    10%
    20%
    30%
    40%
    50%
    60%
    70%
    80%
    90%
    100%