Be Not Afraid…

A couple days ago Henry Gee tweeted what he believes to be my real life identity. To address the elephant in the room, if such things are important to you, he was correct in his identification of me.  But, really, what Henry did required only high school level sleuthing.  Any amateur with a Cracker Jack decoder ring could have figured it out, largely because my pseud has eroded as you all have become a more important part of my life. When you’ve reached out and needed me, I’ve never hesitated to help you as my real self when that has been helpful to you.  Even when we haven’t agreed. I’ve met with many of you in real life and we’ve laughed and cried together. I’ve read fellowship and grant applications and manuscripts. It’s makes me chuckle and brings me happiness to see myself (as my real named self) acknowledged in book chapters and in publications and know that there was something I could do for some of you to help you succeed. I started doing Pub-Style Science with Michael Tomasson because he had a neat vision for how science communication should look and an openness and enthusiasm for hearing a diversity of voices.  We don’t see that in science communication and I saw what he wanted to do as an opportunity to do something good. I never wore a mask to hide. I knew that when many of you heard my voice, or saw the lower half of my face, you’d know who I was. I wore it as a symbol of our relationship here. When we meet as professionals, that’s how I promised to engage with you. The things that you may have shared with “Dr. Isis” remain with Dr. Isis.

Henry  referred to me as an “inconsequential” scientist. In the long term, he could be right. But, that comment has made me think a lot about the person I am and the person I want to be. I have been humbled by the support I have received in response to these shenanigans.  While I may be inconsequential, maybe never winning a Nobel, I’ve been generally pleased with my work. But, who do I want to be here? I have been happy to share with you the up and down realities of my life. I’ve been happy to help when you’ve called for me, and I have been happy  to help people find the resources they need. I realize more and more that this is what I should be doing here. There’s no point in getting through doors if you can’t help others find them and walk through them with you. I have been helped substantially along the way and am thankful for it. I also think that I should speak out when I think something is not just. Otherwise, what’s the point? I am neither brave nor revolutionary. I sit in a place of privilege compared to where I came from and I see no point in having it if I don’t use it for what I think feels meaningful and right.

So, to address the question that so many of you have lovingly asked in the last 24 hours, “Am I ‘ok’?” I am fine. My pseudonym has never been a secret to the people I work with and they all know what a swearing, scotch drinking, pain in the ass I am. I will admit that it has given me pause to have online people contacting me through my professional email, especially in light of some of the crazy, sexually explicit, and violent email I get. But, I always knew that level of wackaloonery reaching my real life was a possibility. My silence over the last day came only from that – from pondering the realization that the probability of that sort of nonsense reaching my real life was increased by his actions..but I won’t be afraid. I have always been motivated by the goal of increasing the participation of women and minority scientists in science and I can’t be surprised that this ruffled some feathers. It feels like the right thing to do.

So, while I am “ok”, were his actions “ok?” Of course not, and they give me pause. I have undoubtedly been vocal over the last four years of the fact that I believe Nature, the flagship of our profession, does not have a strong track record of treating women fairly. I believe that Henry Gee, a representative of the journal, is responsible for some of that culture.  That’s not “vitriolic” and it’s not “bullying”. That is me saying, as a woman, that there is something wrong with how this journal and its editors engage 50% of the population (or 20% of scientists) and I believe in my right to say “this is not ‘ok’.”  Henry Gee responded by skywriting my real name because he believed that would hurt me personally – my career, my safety, my family. Whatever. Regardless of the actual outcome, the direct personal nature of the attack is highlighted by its support from some that I “had it coming..

Krueger tweetHenry Gee’s actions were meant to intimidate me into silence. He took this approach likely with the thought that it was the most powerful way he could hurt me. Nothing more. Although I am ok, there are some recent victims of outing behavior that are not. That’s frightening. To think that the editor of a journal would respond to criticism of his professional conduct regarding the fair treatment of women by attempting to personally injure and damage..

Michael Eisen raises a valid point – what about the other identities that are trusted to the editors of that journal?

eisen tweet

And, what about people that might submit to Nature? He’s clearly willing to use his knowledge of people’s identities to injure them personally. If you’ve ever criticized him, or the journal, in the past, can you really be confident in fair peer review?

I speak only for myself and I have no personal feelings about Henry. My only concern has been in his conduct as an editor of a journal that very publicly represents my profession. When Henry Gee said, in reference to my self-professed boycott of Nature (until they get their act together regarding the treatment of women), “Nature boycotted by [an] inconsequential sports physio… Nature quakes in its boots”, he spoke as a high level representative of that publication, making a statement as to how that publication regards me.

That someone would engage a personal vendetta and conflate it with how I should expect to be treated by an allegedly peer-reviewed publication gives me more pause than having my name displayed publicly. And, it should serve as a gentle reminder of the possible outcome women face when they speak up about misogyny and sexism in their field. Retaliation can be a real bitch.

About these ads

161 responses to “Be Not Afraid…

  1. There’s a tool in every shed, Dr. Isis. As a woman working in STEM, I appreciate your candor and your courage.

  2. The only thing Gee has achieved with his nasty antics is proving unambiguously that he is an unhinged vindictive freak with none of the qualities of discretion and discernment that are required of a journal editor and who should not be anywhere near the professional gatekeeper role he currently occupies.

  3. Potnia Theron

    Ultimately (besides being dead) we are all judged by what we do and what we leave for the next generation. Your legacy is safe. Does anyone remember earlier editors? But we all remember those mentors who made a difference to us.

  4. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Gee clearly is on a power trip, fueled by drugs of impact factors and journal metrics. When the community wakes up and stops giving its work to commercial publishers who go on to fleece our libraries of precious resource better spent on the next generation, he will be out of a job.

  5. You’ll always be Dr. Isis to me.

  6. That guy can’t walk a step in your awesome shoes Doc. Keep Walking.

  7. Thanks for being brave, for standing tall and for putting it all out there and on the line. You are a role model and an inspiration.

  8. Bravo, Dr. I. I am glad you are OK and I hope that continue to be well both professionally and personally, online and offline. You have been an inspiration and friend to many of us, have stood up for those who are with less power in our society, and educated those of us lucky to be born with more privilege. Who you are or what your job title is makes absolutely no difference to any of that.

  9. “Outed” by Nature! I think that makes you consequential.

  10. Meh. I gave up reading that crap Henry Gee writes long ago. I don’t think his credentials are anything sooooo special that I give one wit about what he thinks of your real life creds. Naming you was undoubtedly a douchey thing to do. I’ve met you, I like you, I think you have many valuable things to say, and the courage that so many lack to actually say them. I don’t know your real name and I don’t care. I applaud you dr. Isis … Us ballsy girls need to stick together.

  11. What a bully. He should be stripped of all powers over scientists. Of course, he should have been stripped of them after publishing that gawdawful Womanspace article and doubling down on it. It is horrible that science is still in a state where he can bully and harm women and get away with it.

    I wonder if he got the idea from reading that article on the Trans scientist who killed hirself or the article in the NYTimes about how women journalists are treated compared to men. He must be a sociopath. It sucks that he holds any power over anybody. I would hope that Nature takes this seriously, but given their track record, I think it highly unlikely that they will. And that is terrible.

  12. For what it’s worth, your posts (all the way back to 2008) helped shaped my path out of undergrad, into grad school, and during my PhD (I’m almost done! kinda…. maybe? One day….). Your posts helped encourage one more female scientist to take up the reins, so thank you for writing all those years. Thank you and hang in there!

  13. I’ve had jerks publish my identifying information online before in an effort to “out” me and therefore quiet my voice online. If I’m entirely honest, it’s a large part of why I left academia. As a small-potatoes core-class-teaching adjunct, there were some very real implications to having tons of spurious “rate my professor” ratings come up from people claiming to have been students of mine at institutions where they knew I had worked…at times when I wasn’t actually teaching for said institutions. However, leaving academia has a) left me financially BETTER off (as anyone who has taught as a non-tenured higher educator will not be surprised to hear) and b) resulted in my falling back in love with my field of study, now that I’m not attempting to drill a rudimentary knowledge it into unwilling heads. So that didn’t end up going the way the jerks wanted it to. My field isn’t like science though; y’all are some brilliant motherfuckers making new discoveries and we on the other hand are drunks and lechers and bon vivants who find new ways of telling the world stories. If I make an enemy of a fellow writer they’ll just say that my writing sucks, and be too disorganized, drunk, distracted by lechery and busy living their own crazy life to do much more than that. You, though…well. If you make an enemy of another scientist? Y’all are a book-smart, tenacious, methodical, organized bunch and I worry that it could cause you real personal grief. Hopefully MRU can look at a Twitter-based pissing match and then look at your body of work and make the right decisions accordingly, other REASONABLE scientists in your field can look at your body of work and professional conduct and make the right interpersonal and collaboration-related decisions accordingly, and people like the Henry Gees of the world will choke on the very next bag of dicks they go to gobble. HOPEFULLY. Or if not, maybe this will change some things for you, but some of them will change for the better, but either way you’ll still be you. And yours is one of my very favorite online voices; I’ve learned a lot through reading what you right and researching the terms and concepts you write about, I’ve laughed and cried with you, and I think you kick ass. xo

    P.S. I sent you a friend request from the real me to the real you on the facespace, because why not.

  14. Thats horrible behaviour by Gee.
    Thanks for doing what you do Dr Isis, its nice to have example of female scientists especially when although around, they are a bit rare in your own field.

  15. Dr. Isis, It’s a tough thing to remain level-headed when responding to such vindictive behavior, especially coming from people who frankly should know better. In this post you show real grace under fire and if I’m ever in such a sticky situation, I hope I can remain as high-minded and level headed as you.

  16. If Gee thought people would have a better opinion of him for being a vindictive bully then he’s rather hard of thinking.

  17. If you’re “inconsequential,” howcum your comments have taken such a “huge” psychological toll?

  18. “If Gee thought people would have a better opinion of him for being a vindictive bully then he’s rather hard of thinking.”

    There’s always available seats in the MRA movement.

    Gee, jerk move.

  19. I’ve been reading your blog since 2009, and I have admired you every step of the way. Today especially. Thank you for being Isis, you’ve made this scotch-swilling, swearing, high-heeled-wearing, pain-in-the-ass female scientist feel a lot more secure about herself, and your online presence has helped me feel a little less alone in this crazy journey that is academia.

  20. I started reading your blog my first year of graduate school and have followed you around the interwebs since then (in a non creepy way I promise!). You have been that forthright, kick ass female scientist that we all need as a role model – all while wearing truly fabulous shoes. Regardless of all the negativity coming your way right now, know that you have made a difference in my graduate career and I’m sure many others. Thank you for being Dr. Isis even with all that entails.

  21. Christ, what an asshole.

  22. Your voice as Dr. Isis has inspired me as a scientist and helped me through some rough patches. Your candor and criticism are part of what makes your online writing so fantastic and encouraging and useful. Hopefully if anybody cares enough about connecting your real name to your fake name, it’s only to send you really nice scotch and Naughty Monkeys.

  23. I am truly sorry that this happened.

    It has been interesting to watch this unfold… there are so many issues here.

    You and others have been so outspoken on Twitter, and, unfortunately when you are outspoken, you piss the odd person off. By being outspoken and pseudo, you must have known that this could happen. If you were really that concerned about it you would have been anon instead. So obviously this can’t be that much of an upset to you. I think that what is more upsetting is the principle of the matter – outing people because you disagree with their viewpoints. Clearly, Nature needs to get their shit together. Between the DB Lukas letter and now this Gee dude (not to mention a few shitty publications), they are losing credibility fast. Basically Gee needs to go. I’m not saying this as part of the feminist mafia either. You can’t have vindictive people like that on staff who react in such a careless (personal) manner – especially over a public forum like Twitter! Is he crazy? He is a representative of his organization, and, like it or not, his tweets have an impact on Nature mag’s brand. He has to go… and, he can’t blame the “toxic feminists” for this. His actions did this – nothing else. He has called into question his ability to maintain professionalism (even when he has a strong opinion on something).

    What I can’t figure out is why he picked this week to do this? If you guys have a history, why did he deal with this now? Isis is not responsible for Koube’s dumbass letter, nor is she responsible for the public outcry… so why is Gee outing Isis (specifically) now?

  24. As a lurker who has followed you for the past few years, I want to say how much I appreciate your blog and your candor. Being a female scientist is a difficult and lonely path, and you have shown me that I am not alone. I am sorry that you have been bullied.

  25. “inconsequential scientist”? There’s an oxymoron, and an editor of a science journal should know that above all.

  26. I am also a lurker and I have very much enjoyed your candor, not just about your job, but about your family – whose identity cannot be separated from yours. Although I would guess the original decision wrt to the pseudonym was career based, I think it has additionally granted you some freedom in sharing more private thoughts and events. Now your brother, your husband, and your children have been outed, because some one – who you very occasionally called the antichrist – felt his small part in your blog was more important than their privacy. If he had read the blog beyond what comes up when he googles for himself, he would realize that his exercise in vindication stretches beyond you on onto the absolutely innocent bystanders. I am in no way justifying what was done to you which was reprehensible, and I have always thought one good reason to blog pseudonymous was to protect those around you. In any case, While I am absolutely sure that outed you will not hesitate to share your politics with the same style and flair, I understand if the outed you does not feel so comfortable dissing your in laws Xmas celebration with the same flair. If so I will miss it.

  27. This is terrible. I know you were never all mission-impossible-top-secret about your identity but your veiled persona allowed many of us to find our own badass scientist (even if we left the lab behind). I read your blog every morning. Honestly, I couldn’t care about your name or location but I always look forward to hearing what you have to say. And now I worry about 1) your safety 2) that you will stop writing.

    I have a lengthy letter to write to Nature’s editing board.

  28. This sucks. Isis, I’ve been reading your blog since 2006. Adding my name to the list of young female scientists who consider you a role model and indirect interwebz mentor. Your brilliant writing and brutal honesty made me feel like I had a good idea of what I was getting myself into when I decided to go to grad school and pursue a career as a scientist for realsies. I’m so sorry that some douche has now tried to use your very identity as a weapon against you; it makes me furious. Glad you’re okay, and thanks for everything.

  29. Wow. Thank you for every single blog post, up through this one, and the ones yet to come.

  30. I can’t think of a single thing to say that adequately conveys my current feels — the rage, the sympathy, the frustration, the absolute what-the-fuckery, the worry. Suffice to say, Dr. Isis, you’ve been an inspiration to me as a woman, a scientist and baby blogger. You’ve honestly given me a kick in the butt to be more fierce and powerful and stop apologizing for that. I hope that the public support vastly outweighs the crap I’m sure you’re getting from the MRA Troll Brigade. And I hope there is some kind of formal letter to Nature being drafting right now because I will sign the hell out of that.

  31. Wow. I didn’t know about “inconsequential”.

    I have been outed as a blogger and have feared the professional consequences. I have also had my academic and medical history disseminated unlawfully without my permission to an unknown number of people, and I’ve feared the professional consequences. Other related shit went down, too. I choked on everything I felt then, including the conviction that I must revenge myself upon all these dudes people who thought I wasn’t special enough for even professional respect by finally being good enough for their approval. Because I did believe that they were superior to me, and that they would be until I became a magical Ivy League degree-wielding unicorn with zillions of dollars and hobbies and profound intellectual insights and a perfect physique. Or whatever.

    You are consequential for many obvious reasons, both personal and professional, and none of which have anything to do with me. But you are also consequential because somehow I read what you have to say and I don’t give up on myself. I make my goals less about assholes and more about self-improvement and realization.

    No, I don’t know you off-blog, either. But it doesn’t fucking matter. I don’t need to be all up in your business to recognize you as a wonderful friend, role model and person. Thank you.

    (Even if it turns out you are just one more sports cardiophysiologist on a GlamorMag Blacklist. Those are a dime-a-dozen, you know.)

  32. Pingback: Cyber-bullying in science | A Queer Quiche

  33. Pingback: On anonymity in science and on Twitter

  34. Long time reader, occasional commenter. Completely unbelievable that he would do this, but I can’t say that I am surprised how completely small minded and petty he is. If you’re so inconsequential, why even bother? He’s afraid and is trying to silence you.

    Just wanted to say that you are an awesome mentor and kick ass scientist who has really helped me be able to work through my own academic path. Wishing you all the best as you work through it all.

  35. what everyone else has said. Hear hear hear it for Isis!!!!!!! (sound of standing ovation). All of us only add little consequences to the big thing that is Science (aka ‘knowledge of the world around us’). Therefore the term ‘inconsequential’ has absolutely no meaning in this context (agree with the person who called it an oxymoron). d.

  36. Oh, yeah, I forgot:

    What I can’t figure out is why he picked this week to do this?

    My guess is that he saw that she’d embarked on a new job search. Making this entire episode 82 flavors of despicable with high-school topping and nuts.

  37. … if that is the case, let us all hope it backfires and that ‘this situation’ actually helps Isis in her job search, not hinders. At the very least, the people who hire her will be happy and supportive of her online persona.

  38. I just skimmed his twitter feed. This sick fuck is a senior editor at Nature?! I have hard time believing that!

    I have published in some Nature:Sausages journals in the past, but I will never publish in them again. Fuck you, Nature.

    Isis, stay safe.

  39. Pingback: We must not tolerate this. | Supernova Condensate

  40. Pingback: Anonymity and peer review | Michael McCarthy's Research

  41. Have been reading for years. Figured you were in Mad-Town. Glad to have you here. Gee……what a tool.

  42. Viva Dra. Isis!

  43. I’ve been reading your blog fora long time, since before scienceblogs! I’ve always admired your no-holds-barred-kick-butt attitude (and always wished that I could borrow some). Reading about how you deal with being a mother and a scientist has always inspired me. I’m sorry that you’re going through this right now.

  44. To the blog author. to answer your question:

    “What I can’t figure out is why he picked this week to do this?”

    Being your devote follower, I thought the answer is here:

    In my opinion dr. Gee did that because DrIsis accused him of being a misogynist involved in the recent nature reader’s letter about women in science. As a woman scientist I was shocked to read that letter, but it shocked me also to read DrIsis accusing dr. Gee of being a misogynist behind that poor editorial choice. I respect dr. Gee’s work, but if you are aware of any misogynist behaviour from his side, please let it be public and we will support you.

  45. @Nadja
    Google “Womanspace.” There are other instances of Gee’s misogyny floating around the internet, but most involve reports of people who were there and, sadly, don’t come with video. You can read about his doubling down on misogynistic editorial choices in his own words back in 2011. Unless, of course, you don’t believe that there’s anything sexist about publishing a short story in a leading science journal in which women are better able to shop because they have access to some special “woman space.”

    If I had to guess, I would also guess it was Harold Gee behind it, because I don’t know of any other Nature editor who has defended making a misogynistic editorial choice in the past. It’s quite possible that there are others (or else Gee would have been out on his ear two years ago and Nature would have apologized), but they’re not so OVERT about it.

    I just can’t fathom a top professional journal allowing him to continue, and for so long. Shame on Nature.

  46. This is appalling, just appalling.

    Your writing (all way the back to a toilet sitting teddy bear on Blogspot) has taught me many things, the most important of which is that I have no idea about the experiences that women and minority scientists face every day. So thank you for that. And I’m glad that this action won’t stop you from sharing your voice.

    Also, how many other stories of those experiences will we not hear now because someone is too afraid to share them? Afraid, justifiably so, that pissing off the wrong person will get them outed if they need to share things under a pesudonym.

  47. @nicoleandmaggie wow I was not aware of that. Thanks for pointing that out, I hope more readers will notice this too.

  48. “Inconsequential scientist”

    Oh snap. That is a T-shirt right there. Time to re-activate the old Cafe Press account, methinks.

    btw, It’s better to be an inconsequential scientist than an inconsequential arsehole. I think it was Lise Meitner who said that.

  49. correction: Henry Gee, not Harold. Sorry. (He’s not an important person in my field. Thank God.)

  50. Got an almost immediate response to my letter – seems like they are taking this seriously. We will see what comes of it.

  51. Pingback: The protection afforded by pseudonyms depends on the community | DrugMonkey

  52. I don’t need to know who you are beyond “Dr. Isis”. I’m not in your field so wouldn’t have figured it out and can’t imagine why I would need to know. I am grateful for your blog and comments throughout the years, look forward to more, and hope there are some major changes at Nature.

  53. Heh. Someone on Michael Eisen’s blog posted a link to this Jerry Coyne article I hadn’t seen before.

    Surely better to be an inconsequential scientist than an incompetent scientist?

  54. I’m about to send my youngest daughter to college. Her goal is to be a kick-ass research scientist. She doesn’t know it yet, but you’re the person she wants to be someday. Thanks for everything you say.

  55. Raucous Indignation

    It is this kind of bullshit that convinced me it would be better to be a Simple Country Doctor than to pursue a life in academics. Today, on you behalf, I am, as always, Raucously Indignant.

  56. I am raising my fist in solidarity! This is some serious bullshit, but I am glad you are okay.

  57. Wow. Just wow. Anonymity is what gives these blogs teeth. I for one will not let Gee mess with that.

    You will always be Dr. Isis, to me. Thanks for sticking around and being brave!!

  58. There are worse things for a scientist than being inconsequential. Being inconsequential only means that you are not (that) important in helping the Scientific Enterprise make progress.

    What is worse is actively holding the Science Enterprise back.

    That is what people like Henry Gee do when they don’t support and help other scientists to do the best work that they can do. That is what exploiting other scientists does. That is what glamor mags do when they put hype over substance.

    That is what for-profit journals do when they hype fads to generate profits over good science, and parasitically suck money out of the scientific process as profits, that instead could be used for salaries, equipment, and reagents.

    Of course journals like Nature have to support the idea of top-down science and stroke the egos of PIs and marginalize all the underlings. When you are at the top of the social power hierarchy, protecting your position at the top is more important than making the hierarchy more productive, or in moving the best people up. You move the people up who support your position in the hierarchy.

    Real science can’t be top-down. It has to be bottom up, from data.

    Actions speak louder than words. Gee actions tell us exactly what he is, and what he represents as an editor of Nature and what policies Nature will follow in deed, if not in word.

  59. Along with so much else, Gee got his readership’s interests wrong. We’re interested in content, not smut. Reading whatever Dr. Isis has to say is much so more important and interesting to me than … reading about some private woman being blackmailed (because, let’s call a spade a f*cking shovel, that’s what this is: blackmail, and I am outraged on your behalf).

    Anyway, I’ll keep coming here, and wishing the best for you.

  60. You are very, very, far from inconsequential. I will also be writing to Nature’s editing board to point out the utter crassness of insulting someone who is such an inspiration to many, many female scientists (in the absence of actual flesh and blood role models in our institutions).

  61. Thank you for “being not afraid” — it’s not a talent everyone has. Are we allowed to use your real name now? Or do you still want to try to keep the identities separate on line?

    I will say that I am one of those who tries to figure out who anonymous bloggers are, though I’d never out them. But, I misidentified you, and thought I was pretty sure. So, I’m kind of glad to hear your real name.

    I hadn’t followed any of the discussion of Gee, but am frankly horrified at the threads and follow-up on the Dr. Isis outing. I’m feeling a bit ashamed to have published in the Nature group, and sad to see, as I look at the editorial list, that so many of the great (yes, mostly women) who I knew there don’t seem to be there any more. I’d be very worried about my anonymity (as a reviewer, or someone submitting a manuscript) being maintained by Gee (though he doesn’t edit my field).

  62. Nice post.

    All he did was prove why some of us like anonymity–because some people in power will bully of belittle the smaller voices, and we do what we can to protect ourselves but still be heard.

  63. Kathleen Lowrey

    Why was I not surprised when I looked up Henry Gee to find out he’s an evolutionary biologist. They seem to run 3:1 reactionaries to apoliticals/progressives (combined).

    The good news: this kerfuffle brought me to Dr. Isis, about whom I had not previously known and I can hardly be the only sympathetic new reader won today :)

  64. I can’t stand bullies. I hadn’t heard about him or you, Dr. Isis, before this (one of my friends posted a link on her FB page to this post), but I think I like you already. You have wonderful grace under pressure, and I hope if I ever face such people, I can respond as articulately and dignified as you did. Write on and stay awesome!

  65. Dr. Isis, I’m shocked beyond words that someone would do this, both in general and specifically to you. Even though I have no clue who you are in real life, you have been my mentor for many years and I feel outraged and hurt on your behalf. You have no idea how important your blog is for me personally and the science community as a whole, and I wish you the best of luck for the future. Thanks for being an inspiration.

  66. I’ve read and reread this post and still don’t get any further than thinking fucking hell. I hope this will backfire on Gee but that this will turn into something positive for you, Isis. Keep strong.

  67. Dr. Isis, you are far from inconsequential. The insights you share on your blog regarding our shared profession have challenged me and spurred better scientist. Stay brave!

  68. @Kathleen Lowrey
    There definitely is an irony there with an evolutionary biologist looking down on a scientist who does actual science. At least from my vantage point as a social scientist, physiology has never been the punchline of a joke. Of course, that’s just one of the many ironies about this whole thing. (Others being… what, exactly, is Henry Gee’s affiliation and research that makes him a scientist if the Nature editorship is stripped away? Why did he use his own pseudonymous handle to edit his Wikipedia entry, something that is not allowed on Wikipedia? Then there’s that article for the Guardian that exposes his misunderstanding of statistics and his dogmatic misunderstanding of science. Even ignoring his overt misogyny and unprofessional behavior, how he is still employed is a big mystery.)

  69. What a wanker. What is this middle school?
    Sure, he’s in a position of authority, but I can’t imaging a guy like that has a lot of real friends. You matter far more to PEOPLE than that asshat.

  70. Two reasons that I think you are far from inconsequential:

    1) your guidance has helped me, a female grad student, have a better understanding of the challenges I will face as a woman in academia. Your insight has really been invaluable, and your blog is by far my favorite in its arena.

    2) I was actually at a talk of yours today! It was very cool for me to get to see my pseudonymous blog idol speaking about her science. And for the record, your talk was great and actually had me engaged in the area, which is far from what I study.

    Keep on keeping on!!

  71. also, the fact that someone from Nature said that sort of bullsh*t makes me highly question its prestige and value.

  72. That is horrifying and viscerally disgusting. I am so grateful that women like you have the huevos not to tolerate this treatment. Maybe ONE DAY women will be permitted opinions without the side order of threats and intimidation.

  73. Pingback: Macrotweet 5: Pseudonymat des blogueurs scientifiques | Matières Vivantes

  74. Kathleen Lowrey

    nicoleandmaggie — when I did a bit more digging, I was actually rather sympathetic to Henry Gee’s take on science in The Guardian (vs. the version promoted by Dawkins). It’s all the more discouraging when one of the putative “friendlies” behaves like this: the depth & breadth of the misogyny is so dispiriting. So many thanks to bloggers like you Dr. Isis — you draw the fire but also (hopefully) are drawing out the poison, draining it… erm. Let me stop before I throw any metaphors into the mix :)

  75. Pingback: That Time We All Talked About Peer Review Together | tangledfields

  76. Pingback: Why Did This Top Science Journal Editor Expose A Blogger’s Pen Name?

  77. As a long time lurker, I just wanted to throw in my two cents (and support): you call it like you see it and point out many issues we’re all dealing with. And provide mentorship to many of us in the process. You’ve made academia a better place, so thank you.

  78. You know I was on your side when I first read this before I ran it by my professor and someone who is a mentor in my life. He said you were a vindictive bully and not only trolled him but many of his colleagues for years. He said however, that Dr. Gee was wrong in outing you and that anonymity should be respected. Makes me wonder just what kind of legacy you actually had and what kind of person you are? Most people in our community are supporting you because you had no right to be outed, but almost all are in agreement that you are a somewhat horrible person. And it’s also telling that, now that I know your identity, I find myself actually more educated and qualified than you, but I wouldn’t speak on half the topics you did. Makes me wonder if anonymity didn’t make you feel more important than you actually were. Would love if you would post this comment and actually reply.

  79. Pingback: Why Did This Top Science Journal Editor Expose A Blogger’s Pen Name? | Taylor

  80. Professor Chaos

    The wonderful thing about the pseud world: it’s about the validity of what you say, not your ‘professional credentials’. But you already know this. Those of us who can think for ourselves will continue to think about what you say and decide for ourselves if we agree or disagree with you. As for those who need your credentials to assess your arguments….well, I’ve personally always found them tiresome. Keep up the good fight.

  81. I’m an optimist. While the circumstances of your “outing” are rather vile and not of your own making, I prefer to think that you will have more opportunity for positive change without the mask of anonymity. You obviously can handle the criticism and, frankly, it is the job of all of us who can do so to make waves for change.
    RE “inconsequential scientist” – that really validates assumptions about the place of Nature or Science in the broader community and the choices they make on who/what/why to publish. Name only, I guess, nothing to do with ideas/arguments/research.

  82. You know, I have no idea whether you’re any good in your field, or what level of a-hole you are (we’re all at SOME level, after all), but I find the accusatory approach hilarious no matter what. Only an unhinged lunatic would walk up to your house and tell you what a bad person you are. But it’s apparently its fine to show up on someb ody’s own blog and do the same. Anyway- anybody who cancreate and raise two human beings in their spare time is a serious bamf and deserves some respect

  83. Harold, I am interested, how long have you been reading this blog? Because I have for a long time (I started while it was still on science blogs). Never once have I seen Dr. Isis act as a bully. Yes, she is vocal, and critical, and intelligent, and she calls out some bad science and some bad behavior. Is someone calling you out on your shit and asking you to back up your claims a bully? Hell, that’s what they train us to do – a university even decided to pay me to do exactly that! If you are not being critical, someone dropped the ball in your training. And you find yourself more qualified than Dr. Isis to discuss some of these topics? Really? Then go ahead, start a blog, and let’s see how many people want to hear what you have to say. Back up your claims. Because I want to hear what she has to say, and I couldn’t give a rats ass if she was a second year grand student or three years away from retirement.

  84. I’m late to the game as usual (never follow Twitter, read blogs irregularly), but Damn, is Henry Gee ever a jerk! [Parenthetically, I see that the tweet under discussion now "doesn't exist," as if anything can ever disappear on this series of tubes ...]. I don’t always agree with everything you’ve posted — who is that agreeable? — but have enjoyed your blog for quite a while. Glad you’re “OK.” Surprised, but pleased, to find out you’re right here in Mad City; unpleased at how I found out. And I NEED one of the proposed “inconsequential scientist” T-shirts!

  85. @Kathleen Lowrey
    Which Guardian article are you talking about because if its the one I’m thinking of its completely nonsensical and just raving gibberish.

  86. All the best to you Dr. I – you are an inspiration whether named or not.

  87. Sending you lots of love from my little corner of the intertubes, hermana. Gran leccion sobre como responder a un idiota.

  88. I have followed you since forever and love your candor and your passion – about science, family and yes, shoes. You are an inspiration to me. Keep being yourself!

  89. I grew up in a family where everyone was heard; it was quite a shock to my naive young self that I could say something, have it be ignored, or treated like an upstart, and then have someone else say the same thing, and be praised. I literally did not know what “that” was, but your blog helped clarify it for me. I sincerely hope your involuntary outing results in more job connections for you. Nonetheless, dick move Gee.

  90. So who is “consequential”? I mean, what has Henry Gee done that’s so great? Where is his Nobel prize?

    In my experience, the “super stars” of the research world are the people who excel at fundraising and self promotion, not necessarily always the smartest people in a given field. And what does it take for research to be “significant” enough in publish in Nature? This kind of judgement is totally subject to the whims of fashion, popularit and spin. I agree with the person above who said that the glamor journals like Nature hold research back. We would be better served it if were easier to publish “boring” results — confirmations (as well as data contracting) previous results, dead ends that we could warn other researchers away from, etc. This idea of “conequense” hurts sciencinjecting poplitics and fashion and popularity into it.

  91. Kathleen Lowrey

    But this (from a different pop sci article by him):

    “But if humans’ prominent breasts and big penises are made obvious by hairlessness, they are made more so by bipedalism, which displays everything for all to see. In which case, standing upright could be a by-product of sexual selection, in which mates choose one another on the basis of features that might represent outward signs of inward genetic health.”

    oh god. That Henry Gee both (1) swims among those vast shoals of evolutionary biologists who simply spin just-so story after just-so story and call it “sexual selection” and (2) pulled this misogynist caper… not surprising.

    That’s he (3) is a senior editor at _Nature_: depressing. Very depressing.

  92. @Kathleen Lowrey
    You do realize that a lot of the premises behind that article are factually incorrect.

  93. Kathleen Lowrey

    enlighten my poor benighted self!

  94. but almost all are in agreement that you are a somewhat horrible person.

    You need some help with reading comprehension, Harold.

    He said you were a vindictive bully and not only trolled him but many of his colleagues for years.

    And did you consider that perhaps your professor and mentor is a raging asshole or whiny ass baby and deserved every bit of the “trolling” he or she allegedly received? Because this sounds like one of a mere handful of folks who I am familiar with. Why don’t you ask this person for specifics on exactly what it was that he or she did to draw Isis’ alleged vindictive bullying?

    I find myself actually more educated and qualified than you,
    oh? do share.

    Makes me wonder if anonymity didn’t make you feel more important than you actually were.

    Fascinating. You really can’t grasp the attainment of influence via means other than your IRL professional reputation, can you? It’s not all the same, genius. One can have importance in any number of arenas of life that are not influenced by ones accomplishments in another. The one does not enhance or degrade the other, save for those weebags who are basically uninfluential save for their reputation and position. This is what drives Gee so insane by the way. People are unimpressed by his blatherings on science and religion and other people are unimpressed by his opinions on privilege. He is unconvincing and uninfluential in and of himself. He simply cannot square this with the kow-towing and ass-kissing he gets as a gatekeeper Senior Editor to a highly prestigious scientific Journal. So he goes off on extremely ill-considered rages when he is faced with this reality. In some senses, one might note that it is a guy like him, over-impressed with his own credentials just as you appear to be, that is feeling more important than he actually is.

  95. but almost all are in agreement that you are a somewhat horrible person

    This is the same argument Henry Gee made: “Everyone I talked to agrees with me, so therefore my conclusions about Isis must be empirical.” But I’m sure a person of your vaunted genius understands why this is wrong.

    I find myself actually more educated and qualified than you

    By what code? By whose standard?

    Makes me wonder if anonymity didn’t make you feel more important than you actually were.

    By what code? By whose standard?

    LOLZ. Exactly.

    Isis, I am too old and preppy to wear graphic tees, but if you make an “Inconsequential Scientist” button on CafePress, I will buy it and wear it in solidarity whenever I get the chance.

  96. “Isis, I am too old and preppy to wear graphic tees, but if you make an “Inconsequential Scientist” button on CafePress, I will buy it and wear it in solidarity whenever I get the chance.”

    Better, put it on a surgical mask (can you do that on CafePress?) and we’ll all show up to conferences the world over wearing them Anonymous-style.

    But, you know, a button would be fine too.

  97. Can we modify the T-shirts? I can wear a “Failed Scientist” – or “Failed, Inconsequential Scientist.”

  98. Pingback: Repost: You Will Respect My Authoritah! | DrugMonkey

  99. I don’t agree with all you have to say, Isis. You go ‘balls out’ in speaking your mind in a way that is over the top for the polite white folks. But that’s the thing isn’t it? You aren’t a polite white person.
    We ask people from all backgrounds to speak our language our way or be religated as a second class citizen. CPP’s blog rants in the same way on occassion. Sometimes they are a bit like sandpapering my legs, but I want that.
    As a faculty member, i know I live in my bubble where my trainees laugh at my jokes, colleagues nod and collaborators slap me on the back. None of these these should be used as surrogates for actual information or professional feedback about how well I am doing. They feed egos. There are a few people we can count on in our world at our level who will listen and be honest.
    People like Gee get their asses chaffed when you refuse to speak to them with the respect “they deserve”. Clearly, Gee didn’t get Isis’ respect from the get go and that was just one of her many sins. That being said, I do respect what you are doing and why you are doing it, Isis.

  100. Harold: “You know I was on your side when I first read this before I ran it by my professor and someone who is a mentor in my life. He said you were a vindictive bully and not only trolled him but many of his colleagues for years. Most people in our community are supporting you because you had no right to be outed, but almost all are in agreement that you are a somewhat horrible person.”

    Really? I don’t think Isis is a horrible person (I reserve that title for Malcolm Gladwell…). By the way, what do *you* think? Not your professor, but you? I would be really interested in hearing what counts as trolling for years, by the way. I’m guessing that it’s a lot of thin skins.

  101. Better, put it on a surgical mask
    :)

    But it might get ruined during the behavioral experiments where the mice pee on me from above, dsks.

  102. Harold: I agree with those who have answered your queries so far – there have been several of them.

    I add this: what is wrong with sometimes being horrible? Nothing. Horrible is OK, it is part of the human spectrum. Sometimes it is comforting not to have to be nice to everyone all the time. It is not necessary to be nice to do science adequately (consequentially, consequently, not sure of the opposite of ‘inconsequential). I am sure many, many of my students and sometimes my kids thought i was a horrible person (or maybe they talked to someone with more qualifications who told them to think I was a horrible person), but I make no apologies because by questioning what they were doing or saying or writing – by confronting them with vigour and not being nice – I made them go back and examine their ideas and I hope I helped them to THINK, which is what science is all about.

    Isis has demonstrated she knows how to THINK. Her qualifications and degree of horribleness are totally irrelevant to that, and to the ‘outing’ under discussion.

    ps Not ‘everyone’ thinks Isis is horrible by the way. I do not think she is. Therefore, since one negation disproves a theory, your theory does not hold water.

    d.

  103. @mytchondria: Really, Isis is not white now … because she speaks her mind? You appear to be conflating ethnicity and race — surely it’s obvious to you that some Latinas are white! And just to save you a step, the fact that someone is Latina has nothing to do with whether she is “hot-tempered,” outspoken, or not. Moreover, I’m quite certain that English is Isis’ language, and that she can be perfectly polite — like the “polite white person” she is — when she wants to be. Can we leave these stupid stereotypes behind? Amazing the things people say when they’re not paying attention!

  104. Yo, if you were a reader of her blog you would have a good idea of whether Isis self-identifies as brown or white. Even her ankles.

    I don’t know about the hot tempered thing, you’d have to ask.

  105. Speaking as another white Latina academic, totally on board with mytochondria’s description of “polite white folks” policing of behavior and academic norms. Mytochondria said nothing about Dr. Isis being hot-tempered, but she is outspoken. Know why, Anon@6:35? Because there’s only so much BS you can put up, without having to give up who you are, who your family is, where you come from, and what you want to do.

    I’m tired of the BS myself. Figuring out whether/when/how to say something wears me down. Being Latin@ is an ethnicity yes, but specifically it’s a mix of cultural norms, customs, common experiences, and sometimes language and skin colors that are different from those polite white folks. They’re the ones who do some or all of the following to me: 1) tell me not to “get all ethnic on them” when I pronounce things with their correct (to me) Spanish pronunciation (my own last name; jalapeño (ha-la-pen-yo NOT ja-la-pee-no); other words or names; 2) become paranoid that I’m talking about them when I speak Spanish to the field technicians to be friendly, clear, and efficient in describing the work to be done; 3) tell me that I’m not really Latina/Mexican-descent/Hispanic because I’m white; 4) get upset/confused when I tell them that my family ranges in color from pale (me) to very dark (brother, cousins, grandfather), 5) make racist comments about darker skinned people and/or people who speak with another language accent, 6) expect me to say nothing when they do #5 and get pissed when I say something,

    Those “polite white folks” expect everyone to be/think/act just like them. Guess what? We’re not. Isis doesn’t pretend to be, and she calls them on it. It pisses them off. Good.

  106. Pingback: A post of random things § Unqualified Offerings

  107. Know what else I’m tired of?

    People “like you” as in 1) I didn’t mean people/Mexicans/Latinas “like you” or 2) People “like you” don’t usually make it this far or 3) People “like you” don’t belong here/shouldn’t be getting that opportunity.

    Thank you Isis, for being you.

  108. Just wanted to say had I known you were just around the block from me (literally) prior to my exodus, I would have asked you to go for coffee (code word for scotch). Alas, knowing too late, I will just have to be content with looking to your blog for sensibility, snark and all things Isis that I have come to love.

  109. @Peanut: Given that I am a white Latina academic in a male-dominated field, I don’t need anyone to explain to me what that means, thank you very much. But since I am white, and usually pretty polite, I’m not sure how I’m expected to react to the phrase “polite white folks.” You remind me of the ignorant people who expect me to choose between being white and being Latina, as if there were some sort of innate conflict in who I am.

    I see no evidence that Gee targeted Isis because she is Latina. Nor can we attribute the manner in which Isis expresses herself on her blog solely to her ethnicity and/or race. She seems perfectly capable of being polite when she wants to be, and I object to this image of her as some poor creature who was just being herself because she couldn’t do anything else and was attacked for it. She *chooses* to write in an incendiary manner. That attracts the crackpots…. O.c., it goes without saying that she did not deserve this. Nevertheless, it is a calculated risk on her part.

    I’m not sure how you reconcile talking about “polite white folks” when you yourself are white. I guess you must be a rude SOB all the time, huh?

  110. Anon – If it makes me a rude SOB to tell off a colleague who recommends I don’t go to a certain laundromat or pool after extended field work because of “the dirty Mexicans there”, so be it.

    You can chose to say nothing. I don’t.

    Helpful hint – don’t say crap, don’t get crap back from me. 90-98% of the time, this never comes up. When it does, I’m gonna give it back.

    YMMV, Anon, but this white Chicana refuses to “hold my tongue” when various white people say racist things to my face, because they think I am one of them.

  111. @Peanut: Who the hell said anything about not defending yourself or not correcting others for sexist/racist remarks? But you see no contradiction in talking about the racism of others while attributing specific racist behavior — that doesn’t come up 90-98% of the time, according to you — to the entire white race, of which you claim to be a part? But … let me guess, you’re not one of “those” whites, are you?

  112. @Anon – I’m told to not be myself, to not be “too ethnic” and to let racist and sexist comments slide. It’s not polite nor lady-like to tell what happens and who did it? Whatever. Only people who are white have told me this. I never generalized to the entire white race; you did. I’m not the one telling my brown cousins, nephews, and nieces that they can’t play in the sandbox.

    I’m only telling my story and that I appreciate Isis telling hers. You may not. Fine. Not sure why that makes me rude, ignorant, or one of “those” whites. That’s your chip on the shoulder, not mine.

    Henry targeting Isis went way back, at least to Science Online 2010, when he blasted her and Zuska in the civility session. Look it up. She called him out on his behavior; he’s held a grudge. She never said it was because she was Latina. He thinks she’s an inconsequential scientist and therefore unworthy.

  113. (Another) Former Academic

    Dear Dr. Isis. Long time lurker here. I just want to add my voice to the chorus of support.
    As we say in New Zealand, Kia Kaha.

  114. If Gee thought Dr. Isis was “inconsequential” anything, then why the fuck did he bother making all this fuss?

  115. ‘Inconsequential” obviously means “female.”

  116. Nothing to say that hasn’t already been said but that is truly appalling and despicable behavior. I have been a long-time reader of your blog Dr. I and as usual you have handled this with tact and grace. Since you’re too big of a person to say it, I will — fuck that fucking guy. I hope he gets fired. Fuck.

  117. Am I going to ask if you are OK? No, I won’t insult you with that. You are not a delicate flower.

    The thickness of drama in this whole affair is a farce. Yeah, what Henry did was pretty nasty but you were being pretty trolly to Henry as well (remember when you called him a goat fucker?). The hyperbole of it all is pretty lame to anyone not neck deep in the twitter-drama that defines current science blogging.

    You can argue ‘well my criticisms and personal insults against Henry were justified and deserved’, but then he could come back and say the outing was justified and deserved (remember when you called him a goat fucker?) and where does that leave us? Still stuck in a spat worthy of children and not so-called adults that have decades of experience in critical thinking.

    Henry made a rash (and poor decision) but you deserve some blame as well in instigating the current spat. I know you are self aware enough to admit that. Because of that, I believe you owe Henry an apology as well – this isn’t a judgement that you were as wrong as he was it’s just an admission that you were culpable in creating the situation.

    If you choose not to a great thing about twitter time is that in 2 weeks no one is going to care. Love your blog.

  118. @Pseudo– Do you think Isis was implying that Henry Gee literally fucks goats? That’s usually just a figure of speech.

    You *really* think that Henry Gee being called a goatfucker justifies his actions? Seriously? Someone who has done so much to harm women in science, and so much to pollute the environment for women in science, and he deserves an apology from the person whose life he has made more dangerous because she called him the equivalent of an asshole? (Note, he has an asshole, but he is not literally an asshole. That’s another figure of speech. When someone acts like a jerk, we call him an asshole.)

    You have GOT to be kidding. She called him a goat fucker is the big horrible thing that justifies his actions? That’s it?

  119. “instigating” Pseudo?

    I see this word all the time, directed at those who call out those in power for abusing their position. Troublemaker. Uncollegial. Feisty. Uppity.

    Standing up and saying the Henry Gee behaves like a bullying, misogynist asshole (or goatfucker, or douchebag) is not instigating jack shit. It is stating a broadly received and valid opinion based on multiple reliable sources, including his own comments.

  120. Pingback: On power and powerlessness in anonymity. | Sarah Hillenbrand

  121. @Peanut
    Huh, I seem to have missed the part of that response in which they part ways with Henry Gee. In another two years or less he’s going to do something *even worse* if they keep letting him. At some point that publishing group is going to have to realize he’s too much of a liability. But how many more women in science is he going to hurt before that happens?

  122. Nature’s Press Release: “We also wish to make clear that both the language and behaviour are contrary to Nature’s principles and codes of editorial practice, and indeed contrary to the practices of all our editors.”

    Well. No. It’s not contrary to the practices of *all* of your editors, because “both the language and behaviour” were, indeed, used by one of your editors.

  123. Pingback: Let’s Quarantine the Nature Publishing Group | The Broken Spoke

  124. Pingback: How do we respond to the Nature Publishing Group? | The Broken Spoke

  125. I think we need to have some perspective here. What Gee did was nasty, vindictive and juvenile. But calls for him to be ousted from Nature are overblown. For all we know he has had an excellent track record at the journal where he has worked for more than 20 years, so they are probably going to be rightly justified in needing more than this to actually fire him. So yes, let’s censure Gee as much as we can as a community but I can’t see how something like this should be enough of an excuse to simply boot him from Nature.

  126. @dhl
    No, he should have been ousted two years ago with his behavior surrounding the womanspace story. Also that guardian article questions his scientific credentials, though his general making science a more hostile place for women is enough for me. His repeated unprofessionalism should be enough for his employer. Being editor at nature is not a right.

  127. @nicoleandmaggie
    Could you point me to the Guardian article? Thanks. My only point is that Nature is going to judge him based on his total contributions over 20 years. If he has generally done a good job of being an editor, vetting manuscripts and contributing to the journal’s growth over such a long period then I am not sure one or two incidents like this will be considered enough to oust him, especially if he agrees that he has done something wrong. I am just thinking from the perspective of Nature here.

  128. @DHL
    There are multiple incidents where he’s compared people to Nazi’s, repeatedly called people a dick, made fun of people’s penis sizes, and has compared critics to religious extremists.

  129. @dhl. Look up in the comments, or the comments of any other post on this topic, or just google henry gee. It comes up on the first page of hits, usually.

    Nature obviously has a misogyny problem, otherwise they wouldn’t have published that letter last week. Even if they think sexism is ok, eventually Gee is going to do something that crosses even their line, because each incident has been escalating and leaving more of a paper trail. This is the first time they seem to have slapped him on the wrist instead of patting him on the back, but I doubt that is going to be enough.

  130. @DHL

    Nature, in its comment on this situation, acknowledged that Gee broke their own code of conduct for editors. And yet they have chosen to to nothing other than make that statement. A statement wherein they say they won’t comment any further because it’s so “complex.”

    I think your insight into Nature’s position is actually correct in one way. It’s clear that Nature values Gee’s presence, contributions, etc. more than they disagree with his misogynistic comments/history and bullying behavior. That just tells us that they don’t think his misogynistic comments/history and bullying behavior are all that bad. And that’s what’s so fucked about it.

  131. Pingback: An open letter to Nature editor Philip Campbell | Tenure, She Wrote

  132. Kathleen Lowrey

    Nat — yup.

  133. Pingback: This Week’s Wildlife and Conservation News Roundup « strange behaviors

  134. my two cents, lurking

    Everything happens for a reason. I hope and pray that you and your family stay safe. This, too, shall pass, and it seems to me ypu’ve lived through far worse and come out okay. I suspect this element of your existence spurs a lot of jealousy in weak minded, less/un-successful people who look at this chick from the ghetto who suffered trauma and violence, and they wonder what their excuse is for not doing as well. I don’t agree with everything you say or how you say it, but I get angry when children are made targets purposefully or accidentally because of who their parent(s) are.

  135. Pingback: Civility, respect, and the project of sharing a world. | Adventures in Ethics and Science

  136. Pingback: Somewhere else, part 111 | Freakonometrics

  137. Pingback: I’ve Got Your Missing Links Right Here (25 January 2014) – Phenomena: Not Exactly Rocket Science

  138. Pingback: Morsels For The Mind – 24/01/2014 › Six Incredible Things Before Breakfast

  139. “I’ve been generally pleased with my work.”

    Good. That’s the key thing. Your judgement is more important than Gee’s. By the way, HG is also an inconsequential scientist, as are we all.

    I love your blog, and I respect the positive effect you’ve had on your readers.

  140. my two cents, lurking

    If you haven’t already done so, it would be a good idea to retain a lawyer for any of the number of issues that this situation has or may create. I remeber your posts from several years back about the threats that unhinged animal rights activists had sent you through email. Be safe and trust in God.

  141. Pingback: Links 1/26/14 | Mike the Mad Biologist

  142. Isis, I’m a few days behind in my blog reading and just saw this post. You have been a mentor to me for years, through the end of grad school, a post-doc, and now my first years as an Assistant Prof. As a woman scientist with a baby and a tot in the pre-K set, I can relate to so much of what you write about. Henry Gee’s a major arse, and your response is great.
    Props to you, from another inconsequential scientist!

  143. Pingback: I’ll have what Linkspam’s having (28 January 2014) | Geek Feminism Blog

  144. Pingback: We All Use Pseudonyms. Some of Us Are Just More Honest About It Than Others | Mike the Mad Biologist

  145. Pingback: Did Charles Darwin go to a R1 institution? - The Winnower :: The Winnower

  146. Pingback: Recommended Reading | January 2014 | Cindy E Hauser

  147. From a fellow inconsequential scientist: My respects…

  148. How are you sleeping at night, Dr. Isis? Do you hear that?

  149. Pingback: Seriously, Nature? | Beyond the Abstract

  150. Dr Isis, I’m not a woman, and I still don’t know who you are in ‘real’ life. I think my CrackerJack decoder ring is back at my parents, but beyond that, I respect your privacy – and your wish for privacy. I do work in your field (exercise physiology) and I would love to meet you, if just over the interwebs. But maybe at a conference. I’d buy you a scotch.

  151. Pingback: Addiction is a disease and why I don’t #boycottNature | InBabyAttachMode

  152. Incredible! This blog looks just like my old one!
    It’s on a totally different subject but it has pretty much the same layout
    and design. Superb choice of colors!

  153. Pingback: Norms, Rules, and Protecting Scholarly Associations | Will Opines

  154. This Henry Gee character deserves to be fired. Why is Nature employing such a jerk?

  155. Pingback: The End Of Anonymity, by Sandra Bullock | Harmonia Philosophica

  156. Pingback: courage and a back up plan | Learning Document

  157. Pingback: Toxic or Just Tough? | Kathryn B. H. Clancy, PhD

  158. Pingback: Recognising Sexism: Boobs to ‘Broteomics’ | STEM Women

What do you have to say about that?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s