Feminism Will Destroy Science: The Case of Alessandro Strumia
The Marxists and PC-NPCs are taking over physics now — I kid you not.
by David Sims
TELL THE truth, lose your job. As it was with James Damore, and, some years ago, with James Watson, so it is with Alessandro Strumia.
Strumia, a brilliant physicist, dared to tell a scientific conference that the feminist trope that “women are discriminated against in science” is the opposite of the truth — and proved his point with irrefutable facts and figures.
The deluded equality-believers and the knowing liars have massed their forces and are now in the process of ruining Strumia’s reputation and career. This shameful but effective Marxist technique of rapidly swelling, massive vilification came immediately into play. As someone famous once astutely observed, “We must study this vile technique of emptying garbage pails full of the vilest slanders and defamations from hundreds and hundreds of sources at once, suddenly and as if by magic, on the clean garments of honorable men, if we are fully to appreciate the entire menace represented by these scoundrels of the press.”
It bears repeating: A threat to the paycheck is sufficient to make most people pretend to believe every lie they ever heard. Teachers will teach lies to students, if telling them the truth will get them fired. Judges will rule in favor of evil, if doing otherwise will cost them their office.
* * *
One anonymous observer, after seeing the video above, commented on the effects of feminism on competence in aviation, a far less important field than physics — and this was the 1990s and early 2000s version of the ideology, far less virulent than the PC fanaticism that prevails today:
I am a retired electrical engineer, raised in a feminist-dominated household. I worked for the FAA.
About 1995, there was a policy announced from DC. By 2000, 50% of all technicians were to be female. We had some female technicians already. From what I saw, they were well accepted and fully competent. There were some instances of sexual harassment and policies were instituted to protect them and raise awareness of the need to not offend females. These were rational and well administered, for the most part. I recall one female technician with a sign above her desk that read, “Sexual harassment will not be tolerated, but it will be graded.” She loved the attention she got for being female, and it was a happy and highly functional workplace. The female technician and engineer numbers were steadily growing, but once this 1995 policy was introduced, the path to promotion for managers was to select women technicians over men, if at all possible. I could write a book about the results of this forcing a change onto a workforce responsible for maintaining the safety of the air traffic control system.
At first, I welcomed the policy, thinking that disparity in gender diversity was due to bigotry. Primarily, it wasn’t. There were very few capable female candidates. Secretaries and other technically incompetent women were encouraged to apply for positions that formerly required deep technical backgrounds. After a few classes at the FAA Academy, they were led to believe they were technicians, though some really were incapable of using a screwdriver. In my limited experience, I saw several such cases where they were sidelined because they were too dangerous to be allowed near the equipment. They drew full pay, but managers did not know what to do with them. Their careers were ruined by believing what they were told, so a misguided policy could be made to appear successful. They were then led to believe that their failure was due to the patriarchy.
On the other hand, the competent female technicians suffered by association. When I was assigned to work on some project with a female before the policy was initiated, I was glad for it. I like women. Having them in the workforce improves the general conditions. I never had problems with incompetence or corruption before this 1995 policy. Afterwards, I was often nervous to be working with women, despite my long favorable history of association with many feminist minds. Male technicians would tell me of their dread to be working with incompetent women technicians, which was never the case prior to the policy. The chances of being called before the Accountability Board for non-malicious comments or jokes were strong, and could have severe consequences. What was a funny joke, which made women technicians laugh, suddenly was a matter of utmost offensiveness. Where was the middle ground of telling the guy to cool it? Times change. Those with more than three neurons to rub together want to avoid trouble. Electronics technicians were smart people, mostly ex-military and knew how to get along under authority. Elimination of overt sexism had been happening. Then, the PC police started busting heads, figuratively. Now, hostility proliferates, and it all gets blamed on men, particularly old white men, like me.
(In the electronics industry, women are preferred for circuit board assembly. It was only a few years ago that that observation was considered a compliment to women’s proclivity toward meticulous and careful attention to detail. Now, I probably committed a dozen mortal PC sins by repeating what was commonly known. Women have abilities that are of high utility in the air traffic control system. I knew one very sharp female controller who became a manager, and I worked with her for years. Her computer abilities were outstanding. Her people skills made her a much respected manager. Most importantly, she would not offer an opinion, or attempt any work for which she was not convinced she was qualified. If there is any one qualification that matters the most, it is that willingness to not try to do something unless certain of one’s ability.)
* * *