Shirtstorm (split from Rosetta Mission thread)

[Death from the Sea]

this landing is a really cool historical event and yet, people can't stop their butthurt long enough to realize that.

http://phys.org/news/2014-11-space-scie ... exist.html

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

this landing is a really cool historical event and yet, people can't stop their butthurt long enough to realize that.

http://phys.org/news/2014-11-space-scie ... exist.html

Well, yes, the dude landed a probe on a comet, but that shirt was still pretty fucking sexist. At least he apologized for it ... after being flame-roasted by the global press.

[mr friendly guy]

Can someone actually explain why that shirt is sexist, without resorting to special pleading when people inevitably point out the same logic can be applied to men. The shirt is clearly very casual, but he has worn numerous other casual shirts before but that certainly is between him and his employer.

[Lagmonster]

Can someone actually explain why that shirt is sexist, without resorting to special pleading when people inevitably point out the same logic can be applied to men. The shirt is clearly very casual, but he has worn numerous other casual shirts before but that certainly is between him and his employer.

I would call it "wildly inappropriate", for the likelihood that it makes women feel excluded or uncomfortable in the workplace. My guess is that this guy's used to getting away with some serious self-expression within his immediate circle of friends and colleagues, but was totally unprepared for having his behaviour and choices evaluated by a global audience. I know guys like that. They usually aren't assholes, they're just so used to the acceptance of their small clique that they can't imagine anyone outside coming in and objecting.

[Terralthra]

Can someone actually explain why that shirt is sexist, without resorting to special pleading when people inevitably point out the same logic can be applied to men. The shirt is clearly very casual, but he has worn numerous other casual shirts before but that certainly is between him and his employer.

I would call it "wildly inappropriate", for the likelihood that it makes women feel excluded or uncomfortable in the workplace. My guess is that this guy's used to getting away with some serious self-expression within his immediate circle of friends and colleagues, but was totally unprepared for having his behaviour and choices evaluated by a global audience. I know guys like that. They usually aren't assholes, they're just so used to the acceptance of their small clique that they can't imagine anyone outside coming in and objecting.

Indeed. The shirt is wildly inappropriate for a professional environment, doubly so when appearing on worldwide television, and the fact that the guy clearly had no idea that was the case is...exactly the problem.

[Elheru Aran]

Can someone actually explain why that shirt is sexist, without resorting to special pleading when people inevitably point out the same logic can be applied to men. The shirt is clearly very casual, but he has worn numerous other casual shirts before but that certainly is between him and his employer.

They usually aren't assholes, they're just so used to the acceptance of their small clique that they can't imagine anyone outside coming in and objecting.

That line from Lag right there pretty much sums up the problem with the shirt. Most likely one day the guy walked into work with that shirt on, his coworkers look up from their computers and are like 'oh hey fun shirt, cool man' and after that he gets the idea of 'oh hey this shirt is okay, I can wear this anytime', not really expecting to be on global television wearing... that damn shirt.

If he actually worked with a number of women, I imagine someone would have said something sooner about the shirt...

[Lagmonster]

If he actually worked with a number of women, I imagine someone would have said something sooner about the shirt...

That's not likely. Top level science and engineering aren't like many other professions. If the CEO of Burger King routinely sexually harasses his employees, he can be fired and replaced without the operation failing. If a top-level person on a ten-year, multi-billion dollar commitment of time and resources is doing the same thing, it's possible that he is damn near untouchable, and the people who work for him know it. At a certain point, people become investments that are too valuable to lose, which is probably why top performing artists can damn near kill people and get off.

To illustrate the point, among my father's generation of scientists, there was a thing that some of the middle-aged, upper-management men above him used to say if confronted: "It'll all come out in the memoirs". Which means, if you have a good position you can do whatever scandalous thing you want and it'll get swept under the rug until you're long retired and the damage by exposure is minimal.

[mr friendly guy]

Can someone actually explain why that shirt is sexist, without resorting to special pleading when people inevitably point out the same logic can be applied to men. The shirt is clearly very casual, but he has worn numerous other casual shirts before but that certainly is between him and his employer.

I would call it "wildly inappropriate", for the likelihood that it makes women feel excluded or uncomfortable in the workplace. My guess is that this guy's used to getting away with some serious self-expression within his immediate circle of friends and colleagues, but was totally unprepared for having his behaviour and choices evaluated by a global audience. I know guys like that. They usually aren't assholes, they're just so used to the acceptance of their small clique that they can't imagine anyone outside coming in and objecting.

I would call the shirt very casual, and certainly this would not be tolerated in my place of work. However the dress code is between him and his employer. If such casual dress is ok by the ESA then I can't see the problem with that.

Secondly why does it make women feel excluded. The women on his shirt are wearing clothes women wear in bars and clubs, heck women on beaches wear even less. Why does it make them feel excluded for showing women wearing clothes which they normally wear anyway.

[Elheru Aran]

If he actually worked with a number of women, I imagine someone would have said something sooner about the shirt...

That's not likely. Top level science and engineering aren't like many other professions. If the CEO of Burger King routinely sexually harasses his employees, he can be fired and replaced without the operation failing. If a top-level person on a ten-year, multi-billion dollar commitment of time and resources is doing the same thing, it's possible that he is damn near untouchable, and the people who work for him know it. At a certain point, people become investments that are too valuable to lose, which is probably why top performing artists can damn near kill people and get off.

To illustrate the point, among my father's generation of scientists, there was a thing that some of the middle-aged, upper-management men above him used to say if confronted: "It'll all come out in the memoirs". Which means, if you have a good position you can do whatever scandalous thing you want and it'll get swept under the rug until you're long retired and the damage by exposure is minimal.

Regrettably true to a degree. But hopefully things have moved beyond that these days?

[Jub]

Secondly why does it make women feel excluded. The women on his shirt are wearing clothes women wear in bars and clubs, heck women on beaches wear even less. Why does it make them feel excluded for showing women wearing clothes which they normally wear anyway.

This is a question I have as well, especially when it comes to female cosplayers and models, just because other women may prefer to dress more conservatively why is it an issue that others like to make the most of the fact that they look good? For that matter, why is it wrong for men to make it known that they like women that other people also find attractive? Men have tastes and the current skinny with big boobs and a butt look it what does it for most men, so why should we be ashamed to like it?

This guy wore a shirt and unless more comes out that's no reason to jump on him. If it turns out he's been perving on female staff or doing something directly to make them uncomfortable that's an issue, but it's also one that those women directly involved should deal with, not random women on the internet.

[Lagmonster]

I would call the shirt very casual, and certainly this would not be tolerated in my place of work. However the dress code is between him and his employer. If such casual dress is ok by the ESA then I can't see the problem with that.

When all else fails, just pick up the Golden rule. If you can think of a behaviour that a group might feel comfortable with between themselves, but that would make you feel intimidated or uncomfortable, you'd probably want the other group to curtail that behaviour at least so long as you have to work together and interact with each other. Even if you personally and all your friends have no problem with something, it's better to build stronger teams than to erect barriers to keep them apart.

And it isn't that hard, or damaging to one's ego, to try. I know that choosing not to act on the liberties that I have isn't the same as surrendering them.

[mr friendly guy]

You misunderstand my question. I know that some women are uncomfortable with it because they stated they are.

I am not sure why
a) they should be in a more objective sense - I mean if someone wore a Nazi shirt I can objectively say why we should dislike it.
b) Even if it makes women uncomfortable, how is it in itself sexist? I know some women are uncomfortable with my fascination for reptiles and spiders while they um, unfairly find them disgusting. Doesn't follow liking spiders is sexism.

I mean in Kenya women were protesting about men who tried to shame them because they wore short skirts. The men interviewed said they feel uncomfortable with women wearing such clothes for <insert bullshit reason>. Should women therefore have to listen to the men's opinion so that society interacts better and be more considerate to the men? I would argue not.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

You misunderstand my question. I know that some women are uncomfortable with it because they stated they are.

I am not sure why
a) they should be in a more objective sense - I mean if someone wore a Nazi shirt I can objectively say why we should dislike it.
b) Even if it makes women uncomfortable, how is it in itself sexist? I know some women are uncomfortable with my fascination for reptiles and spiders while they um, unfairly find them disgusting. Doesn't follow liking spiders is sexism.

The problem was that it is a shirt that portrays voluptuous women wearing tight vinyl in suggestive poses ... i.e. it explicitly depicts women as sex objects. It'd be like a straight woman coming to a scientific event wearing a shirt covered in pictures of Calvin Klein underwear models with their 'packages' prominently on display. In both cases, the shirt would be sending a clear message about what the wearer thinks about people of the gender they're attracted to ... i.e. as objects for their sexual desire first, and whatever else (intelligence, feelings, etc) distinctly second-place.

I mean in Kenya women were protesting about men who tried to shame them because they wore short skirts. The men interviewed said they feel uncomfortable with women wearing such clothes for <insert bullshit reason>. Should women therefore have to listen to the men's opinion so that society interacts better and be more considerate to the men? I would argue not.

This is something else entirely. The women are asserting control over their own sexuality by wearing short skirts. They're not demeaning the sexuality of the men (who are bothered by the fact that the women are attempting to assert control over something that they, the men, "traditionally" exerted full control over.) It would be a different story if the men were complaining because, say, the women were grabbing their asses and cat-calling them in the street; because in that case, the women would've been treating the men as sex objects and, thus, in a possibly derogatory and demeaning fashion.

[LaCroix]

The problem was that it is a shirt that portrays voluptuous women wearing tight vinyl in suggestive poses ... i.e. it explicitly depicts women as sex objects. It'd be like a straight woman coming to a scientific event wearing a shirt covered in pictures of Calvin Klein underwear models with their 'packages' prominently on display. In both cases, the shirt would be sending a clear message about what the wearer thinks about people of the gender they're attracted to ... i.e. as objects for their sexual desire first, and whatever else (intelligence, feelings, etc) distinctly second-place.

Just a quick question - the fact that this shirt was made by a female designer friend of him doesn't factor into it, at all?

[mr friendly guy]

The problem was that it is a shirt that portrays voluptuous women wearing tight vinyl in suggestive poses ... i.e. it explicitly depicts women as sex objects.

It'd be like a straight woman coming to a scientific event wearing a shirt covered in pictures of Calvin Klein underwear models with their 'packages' prominently on display. In both cases, the shirt would be sending a clear message about what the wearer thinks about people of the gender they're attracted to ... i.e. as objects for their sexual desire first, and whatever else (intelligence, feelings, etc) distinctly second-place.

How the hell did you get that conclusion? Liking women for looking a certain way does not preclude someone from respecting another characteristics be it intelligence, personality etc. This isn't an all or nothing case.

Would you consider art displayed in the art gallery with women who frankly have less clothes on than that displayed on this shirt as objectifying as well? If a woman hangs a picture of Mr Universe or <insert body building contest> male contestant, is she objectifying men?

This is something else entirely. The women are asserting control over their own sexuality by wearing short skirts. They're not demeaning the sexuality of the men (who are bothered by the fact that the women are attempting to assert control over something that they, the men, "traditionally" exerted full control over.) It would be a different story if the men were complaining because, say, the women were grabbing their asses and cat-calling them in the street; because in that case, the women would've been treating the men as sex objects and, thus, in a possibly derogatory and demeaning fashion.

Just want to clarify before I go on, from your perspective (unlike Lagmonster's) its less important about making someone "comfortable" and more of this objectifying business.

[Lagmonster]

I am not sure why they should be in a more objective sense - I mean if someone wore a Nazi shirt I can objectively say why we should dislike it.

I'd say that it's possible that there is no objectivity involved in the objection, really. His shirt is basically art, and I spent my university career pulling hilarious carcass-based pranks on the people who tried to connect art with truth.

Seriously, though, I'm going to skip around you a bit and say that one may be thinking that you can't conclude his feelings or beliefs from one outfit. Sure. But you can, however, infer sexual prejudice as a possibility - and that is especially bad when in a working environment because it makes people uneasy and unsure of you. Like if you have your aforementioned picture of a swastika on your shirt. It could be that you're a Raelian, or a historical re-enactor, or that you've never been to a school or a museum, but you just can't be so self-centered in a group that you ignore the potential message other people might be getting. And if it turns out that you're ignorant of the message you're sending, you really ought to learn what you're saying before you decide to keep saying it.

Even if it makes women uncomfortable, how is it in itself sexist? I know some women are uncomfortable with my fascination for reptiles and spiders while they um, unfairly find them disgusting. Doesn't follow liking spiders is sexism.

Well, I said "wildly inappropriate" and not "sexist", basically on purpose. I'm a middle-aged ivory tower sort of fellow, so I like words to continue to mean the same thing even in the midst of social revolutions. And to me the word 'sexist' means 'displaying or demonstrating prejudice towards women'. I have trouble making such an accusation bluntly, but it is certainly one of the potential messages he's sending, which is reason enough to act.

[mr friendly guy]

Well, I said "wildly inappropriate" and not "sexist", basically on purpose. I'm a middle-aged ivory tower sort of fellow, so I like words to continue to mean the same thing even in the midst of social revolutions. And to me the word 'sexist' means 'displaying or demonstrating prejudice towards women'. I have trouble making such an accusation bluntly, but it is certainly one of the potential messages he's sending, which is reason enough to act.

Yeah I agree about the inappropriate part with the caveat that its dependent on what his employer allows. Basically if the ESA couldn't be half arsed to stop him until after the shit storm I feel that it can't have been that important to them, and his work environment is just different from mine. I know places like Google supposed to encourage quite a lot of laxity in this regard.

What I do find troubling is the way the sexism accusations have flown out against him so easily, and I have trouble inferring that from one shirt. In fact I would argue that if you look for monsters under the bed, you're going to (somehow) find monsters under the bed. In other words, if you look for sexism everywhere you're going to stretch things to make it sexist. The problem is not only do you give a label to someone inappropriately, you demean cases of real sexism because people are going to associate people complaining about real sexism with cases like this.

[Zeropoint]

And of course, it's we men who get to decide what counts as "real sexism". You certainly can't let flighty, emotional women make decisions of such import.

[Jub]

And of course, it's we men who get to decide what counts as "real sexism". You certainly can't let flighty, emotional women make decisions of such import.

It's a shirt, unless they guy did something other than wear a moderately socially awkward shirt, a subset of women can crow all they want I won't expect anybody to care. The shirt doesn't objectify women in a way that I think we as a society should be ashamed of. If I like thin women with big breasts, blond hair, and junk in the trunk why shouldn't I express that? On the same token I have no issue with people doing the same with men, trans, and non-gendered people as well. If some women wants to wear a shirt covered in half naked men I say let her and if you feel uncomfortable you're likely a prude.

[mr friendly guy]

And of course, it's we men who get to decide what counts as "real sexism". You certainly can't let flighty, emotional women make decisions of such import.

Clearly not. Because some women have already decided its not sexist, for example Anna Kasparin from the liberal news channel TYT and also the female designer who made the shirt for Matt Taylor. So I see your point. We can't allow "flighty, emotional women" to make that decision, because shock, horror, they might actually decide its not sexist.

So zeropoint buddy, are you going to accept the decision of those women who decided its not sexist. Because it seems to me, by refusing to acknowledge their decision you're kind of, I don't being um, sexist. Now I am just going to run off and break out my old Alanis CD and listen to the song "Ironic."

[Terralthra]

Or you could listen to the other women, who do think it's sexist by way of objectification? I mean, it's all well and good to point to women who agree with you and define your answer by them. I say if some people find it objectifying and sexist, and some don't, and you're in a professional context, maybe you should err on the side of caution.

[Zeropoint]

Phil Plait said it better than I can: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronom ... shirt.html

[Jub]

Or you could listen to the other women, who do think it's sexist by way of objectification? I mean, it's all well and good to point to women who agree with you and define your answer by them. I say if some people find it objectifying and sexist, and some don't, and you're in a professional context, maybe you should err on the side of caution.

Or you could follow the rules of your work place and dress as they allow you to and not let the media dictate what you can and can't wear. When the media tells a women what she can or can't wear that's sexist, but when they do it to a man he should cave because of feelings? Some women need to ovary up and realize that not everything needs to offend them.

[mr friendly guy]

Phil Plait said it better than I can: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronom ... shirt.html

How about you summarise the parts of his argument you agree with. Or else I could post to a youtube video and say <insert youtuber> says it better than I can. If I was particularly sadistic I could post it to a one hour long video each time, but I think we both know that type of tactic won't fly here.

Or you could listen to the other women, who do think it's sexist by way of objectification? I mean, it's all well and good to point to women who agree with you and define your answer by them. I say if some people find it objectifying and sexist, and some don't, and you're in a professional context, maybe you should err on the side of caution.

Firstly my point was a counter to zeropoint's argument about listening to women. It clearly does counter it because some women including the person who made the shirt do not object. Your argument is clearly different, its an "err on the side of caution argument" like Lagmonsters and not in the same vein as his.

Secondly how about people actually explain their argument in clear, consistent terms, so there is no ambiguity, and so no one can suddenly shift goalposts when its no longer convenient. Like why is it objectification? Explain in such that several neutral observer applying the argument consistently will always come to the same conclusion as you. Why are the women who find it objectifying is correct, but those who do not are incorrect? Because your argument boils down to personal feeling. I have no problems saying something is bad if it objectifies women. The onus is on your side to justify why it objectifies before we start banning stuff or saying you shouldn't wear something because it objectifies women, as opposed you shouldn't wear it because my personal taste disagrees with it. Just for the record, you won't see me wearing something like that, but then my tastes are clearly different from Matt Taylors.

Edit - and if anyone can't see why its beneficial to state in clear, consistent and unambiguous terms why its objectifying let me spell it out.
1. So next time people don't inadvertently do something sexist without meaning to
2. So we can catch people who do something sexist because now we recognise it
3. So people who are accused of sexism can defend themselves by using these clear rationale on what makes something objectifying, instead of relying on, "I should err on the side of caution because there are women who object".

[Simon_Jester]

I think the argument is that:

1) Describing a very gender-neutral mission to land a probe on a comet as "she's sexy, but I never said she was easy" is sexist, since it's basically using people as metaphors for objects, in a way that reinforces the women-as-sex-objects mindset. The idea that women are 'challenges' measured by the desirability and difficulty of getting them into bed.

2) This is compounded by the fact that the guy's turned himself into a walking billboard covered with bikini babes, which is outside the norms even for the very loose dress code of academia.

Now, in isolation we might take that as "his washing machine's broken and he's down to his last shirts because he's too busy to get the laundry done while landing a probe on a comet" or something. But combine it with (1) and you get a very strong implication that this guy has a problem with his attitude toward women, which he is trawling out on display before the whole world now that the Rosetta mission has put him in the public eye.