Isis reports on a colleague including sexist graphical abstracts with his papers.
The last one looks like this:
Haha. So funny. So science.
A woman who is a scientist – Professor and Graduate Program Director at Johns Hopkins type woman who is a scientist – tweeted a criticism and he replied with “I wonder if you have been trained in the Vatican.”
Oy.
Isis comments:
Why is this a problem? Because Professor Righetti is continuing to publish his hilarious graphical abstracts (see this month’s issue) and I suspect it is but a matter of time before we get more titties. He is also on the editorial board of several journals (Electrophoresis, J. Chromatography, J. Capillary Electrophoresis, BioTechniques, Proteomics, Journal of Proteomics, and Proteomics Clinical Applications, according to his faculty page), including the journal with his hilarious graphical abstracts. He’s essentially using his leadership to be a huge creeper. Worse, the leadership of the journal is letting it happen. It is impossible to consider submitting a paper to that journal without thinking that the associate editor (and perhaps his affiliates) see me as nothing more than a holder of coconuts. Nothing more than an object.
Love the flow chart.
Righetti probably thinks his pictures add a bit of “levity” to otherwise dull scientific papers. Anyone objecting to his illustrations are sex-phobic killjoys. IOW he’s a sexist so wrapped in his privilege he doesn’t even see why there might be legitimate objections to his pictures.
I don’t get the Vatican remark.
Like – “Are you some kind of nun or something? Hate sex? Can’t take a joke?”
I know this because I get the same kind of shit myself – though not from people as respectable as that guy is. Mine all come from drooling pseudonymous pests.
I don’t think they know much about RC teachings if they think Catholics oppose sex.
♪Every sperm is sacred♫
The irony is that there is more sex happening in the Vatican than this guy is getting. Clearly this guy has not been able to successfully navigate adolescence
I also liked the flow chart. Alas, that Professor Righetti hadn’t seen the handy chart before he made the embarrassing blunder. It would have applied so well — surprising, really.