This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/09/tim-hunt-sexism-controversy-ucl-attempts-to-draw-a-line-under-saga

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Tim Hunt sexism controversy: UCL attempts to draw a line under saga Tim Hunt sexism dispute: UCL ruling council backs decision to let him go
(about 4 hours later)
University College London will attempt to draw a line under the Tim Hunt sexism controversy when its ruling council meets this afternoon, amid concerns that the saga has left a dent in the institution’s reputation. The ruling council of University College London has unanimously backed the university’s decision to accept the resignation of Sir Tim Hunt in a sexism row that has caused bitter divisions across the scientific community. In a statement on Thursday evening intended to draw a line under the month-long saga, the council said university management and Hunt were in agreement that reversing the decision would be “inappropriate”.
Prof Hunt’s comments about his “trouble with girls”, made during a toast at a lunch for female scientists last month, initially prompted widespread criticism and the Nobel laureate resigned from an honorary post at UCL. Prof Hunt’s comments about his “trouble with girls”, made during a toast at a lunch for female scientists last month, initially prompted widespread criticism and the scientist resigned from an honorary post at UCL. Subsequently, Hunt claimed the university left him no option but to step down, and powerful supporters from the scientific community, including Brian Cox and Richard Dawkins, called for his reinstatement.
Related: Cry, cry, cry (for Tim Hunt and backwards Nobel laureates) But the council concluded on Thursday that, after reviewing all the circumstances during a meeting lasting several hours, it “unanimously supports the decision taken by UCL’s executive to accept the resignation”. In the statement, the council also “recognises the distress caused” to Hunt and his wife, Prof Mary Collins – an eminent immunologist at UCL – as a result of the media storm.
Since then, however, Hunt has claimed the university had left him no option but to resign, and powerful supporters from the scientific community, including Brian Cox and Richard Dawkins, have called for his re-instatement. The short statement ends by announcing a review of the university’s communications strategy, saying the affair had shown there were “lessons to be learned” – hinting at concerns expressed ahead of the meeting that UCL’s reputation had been dented.
Last week, the UCL provost, Michael Arthur, said the university would not back down, saying in a statement that reinstating Hunt would send out “entirely the wrong signal”. The remarks “contradict the basic values of UCL – even if meant to be taken lightly”, he added. One council member told the Guardian the story threatened to overshadow the genuine challenges facing universitiesconcerning gender bias. Women occupy just 33% of the senior academic posts at UCL and this percentage is far lower at some other institutions – despite women making up about half of undergraduates in many departments.
Although some of the 20 council members are understood to regret Hunt’s resignation, none are calling for the decision to accept it to be reversed and the council is expected to release a joint statement this evening aimed at drawing the affair to a close.
Hunt attended a conciliatory meeting with Arthur on Monday, at which both parties discussed how they could move on from the controversy, which has dragged on for an entire month. The university said the two men may issue a joint statement following the council meeting, but that there was “no question” of this including an apology to the scientist.
Ahead of today’s meeting, one council member told the Guardian that the story threatened to overshadow the genuine challenges around gender bias facing universities.
“It’s the story that just kept on running, to the huge detriment of UCL,” the source said. “This touches a particularly raw nerve for UCL. We are particularly concerned to increase the numbers of women at the highest professorial level. We’re already under enormous pressure, and quite rightly so, because the pace of change is so glacial.”“It’s the story that just kept on running, to the huge detriment of UCL,” the source said. “This touches a particularly raw nerve for UCL. We are particularly concerned to increase the numbers of women at the highest professorial level. We’re already under enormous pressure, and quite rightly so, because the pace of change is so glacial.”
They added that while there was a spectrum of views within the council about Hunt’s comments, members were united in thinking the affair had been handled badly by UCL - “no-one thinks it’s been handled well - there’s a lot of dismay about that”. The member added that while there was a spectrum of views within the council about the comments, members were united in thinking the affair had been handled badly by UCL. “No one thinks it’s been handled well – there’s a lot of dismay about that.” One mis-step was that apparently no one had established the precise content of Hunt’s speech or its context before coming to a judgment on the matter.
Criticisms included that no-one appeared to have established the precise content of Hunt’s speech or its context before coming to a judgement on the matter. Hunt had spoken at a lunchtime toast at a conference for science journalists in South Korea and was reported on Twitter by those present as having said: “Three things happen when [women] are in the lab ... you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them, they cry.”
Hunt made the remarks in a lunch-time toast at a conference for science journalists in South Korea and was reported on twitter by those present as saying: “Three things happen when [women] are in the lab ... You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticise them, they cry.” He was later reported to have gone on to say “Now, seriously”, and to have praised the contributions of women in science, suggesting that his comments were intended as a joke, and leading some to argue that stripping Hunt of honorary positions and committee memberships had been an overreaction. Others said that those worst affected by the controversy were scientists – particularly younger women – who had expressed views that were critical of Hunt or his remarks.
He was later reported to have gone on to say “Now, seriously”, and to have praised the contributions of women in science, suggesting his comments were intended as a joke, leading some to argue that stripping Hunt of honorary positions and committee memberships had been an over-reaction. Related: Cry, cry, cry (for Tim Hunt and backwards Nobel laureates)
Others said that those worst affected by the controversy were scientists - particularly younger women - who had expressed views that were critical of Hunt or his remarks. One female scientist who commented in the media after the story broke told the Guardian she had received “such a torrent of abuse” on social media and blogs that she could no longer face speaking publicly on the matter. Other female scientists who spoke out had apparently also received death threats. “We’ve all been silenced. It’s quite shocking really,” she said. “It’s just not worth the aggro of waking up to calls for me to be sacked on Twitter and hundreds of messages. It was so frustrating to see the perpetrator becoming the victim.”
One female scientist who commented in the media after the story broke told the Guardian she had received “such a torrent of abuse” on social media and blogs that she could no longer face speaking publicly on the matter. Other female scientists who spoke out had received death threats, she said. “We’ve all been silenced. It’s quite shocking really,” she said. “It’s just not worth the aggro of waking up to calls for me to be sacked on Twitter and hundreds of messages. It was so frustrating to see the perpetrator becoming the victim.” Prof Lewis Wolpert, an eminent cell biologist at UCL, said the affair had been damaging to the university. “A lot of people are really quite irritated by UCL,” he said. “It certainly hasn’t helped them. They’ve made a great deal of fuss about something that was just a bit of bad behaviour.”
Prof Lewis Wolpert, an eminent cell biologist at UCL, said that the affair had been damaging to the university. “A lot of people are really quite irritated by UCL,” he said. “It certainly hasn’t helped them. They’ve made a great deal of fuss about something that was just a bit of bad behaviour.”
Prof Martin Vessey, of Oxford University and an honorary fellow at UCL, agreed: “The Sir Tim affair has certainly damaged UCL’s reputation. Bearing in mind that I have worked closely with female colleagues at all levels throughout my medical career and have always been fully in support of their professional advancement, then surely there must be quite a few others who feel the same as I do.”Prof Martin Vessey, of Oxford University and an honorary fellow at UCL, agreed: “The Sir Tim affair has certainly damaged UCL’s reputation. Bearing in mind that I have worked closely with female colleagues at all levels throughout my medical career and have always been fully in support of their professional advancement, then surely there must be quite a few others who feel the same as I do.”