This is a bad op ed and it's unmasked by this quote in particular
“Some of my friends and professors in science were saying, ‘Oh the people in sociology are trying to study us and judge us and tell us how to do better and be better people,’ and we were laughing at that seeing how silly that was because we’re the rational ones,”
The self righteous "rationality" of scientists and engineers can actually be a huge hinderance to them being kind and good and thoughtful people.
This whole argument of "well we better hope the guy who is gonna cure cancer isn't a republican" is so daft and status quo focused - the reason we're having this reckoning is because of the system exclusion of racial minorities and anyone but men in STEM fields.
What about all of the people who have been historically disadvantaged and systemically excluded who could have cured cancer? We don't need to pander to the racists in hopes of their contribution, we need to do better for all the people who never had a chance to contribute in the first place
The goal is to cure cancer. In the meantime, those efforts shouldn't be limited to people who (largely) fit the existing power structures and historical privilege.
"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."
The fact is our institutions of science and education have not been and are not pure meritocracies (and if they were, they are meritocracies in a society that gives more tools to achieve merit to specific groups of people)
The status quo is not truly based on merit, and is not the most efficient cause because it systemically excludes massive amounts of people.
This op ed implies that someone who doesn't believe in racial injustice is more meritous and worth considering and making space for rather than the Black woman who wasn't hired because of her [hair/vernacular/skin color/gender/couldn't get an internship or lab placement because of those same factors]
I had dismissed this as over reaction, until I read a biology PhD dissertation on medicinal plants, which contained a section on diversity and inclusion. Somehow this paper was published with the irrelevant racial aspect. How does this get through peer review, much less the advisor or PhD committee?
Is it now standard for academic papers to include such political statements?
6 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 28.8 ms ] thread“Some of my friends and professors in science were saying, ‘Oh the people in sociology are trying to study us and judge us and tell us how to do better and be better people,’ and we were laughing at that seeing how silly that was because we’re the rational ones,”
The self righteous "rationality" of scientists and engineers can actually be a huge hinderance to them being kind and good and thoughtful people.
This whole argument of "well we better hope the guy who is gonna cure cancer isn't a republican" is so daft and status quo focused - the reason we're having this reckoning is because of the system exclusion of racial minorities and anyone but men in STEM fields.
What about all of the people who have been historically disadvantaged and systemically excluded who could have cured cancer? We don't need to pander to the racists in hopes of their contribution, we need to do better for all the people who never had a chance to contribute in the first place
"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."
The fact is our institutions of science and education have not been and are not pure meritocracies (and if they were, they are meritocracies in a society that gives more tools to achieve merit to specific groups of people)
The status quo is not truly based on merit, and is not the most efficient cause because it systemically excludes massive amounts of people.
This op ed implies that someone who doesn't believe in racial injustice is more meritous and worth considering and making space for rather than the Black woman who wasn't hired because of her [hair/vernacular/skin color/gender/couldn't get an internship or lab placement because of those same factors]
Just don't be an asshole, it's not that hard
Is it now standard for academic papers to include such political statements?