Sexism in high places

Professor Tan Sri Dato' Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
My View - The Sun Daily
June 24 , 2015

THE issue of sexist remarks being uttered in hallowed space is of concern. The most recent in Parliament led to a protest complaining of “inaction” against the practice resulting in several repeat occurrences involving certain individuals.

But it is not just our parliamentarians. Recently, no less than a Nobel laureate was implicated while making comments at the World Conference of Science Journalists in Seoul. Tim Hunt, an English biochemist, was quoted as saying that scientists should work in gender-segregated labs and that the trouble with “girls” is that they cause men to fall in love with them.

“Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticise them, they cry.”

Hunt, 72, who won the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine in 2001, was addressing a convention of senior female scientists and science journalists on June 9 when he made the remarks.

He later apologised. Hunt claimed that his remarks were meant to be humorous but added he “did mean the part about having trouble with girls”. Shortly after, he resigned from his position as honorary professor at the Faculty of Life Sciences, University College London.

If only the Malaysian parliamentarian(s) took the honourable way out like the Nobel laureate, the unpleasant experiences conjectured from sexist remarks could eventually be brought to a halt. More time could be allocated to meaningful debates given that there are no lack of issues. At the very least the house could be cleansed of crass and crude unparliamentary language.

Even in Hunt’s case, questions were raised about how someone of repute and intelligence (read: IQ) can falter on what seems to be very flimsy ground? Could it be their lack of EQ (emotional intelligence)? Or is it the chauvinistic egoistical stature that they are suddenly catapulted to? Hunt admitted that he had a reputation for being a chauvinist. In some of his writing he is frank about it, noting for example: “Bar girls are all bitches.” Then again: “I am not going to be a gentleman to such worthless bitches…”

Unfortunately, he is not alone. It happened to another Nobel prize winner in physiology or medicine, James Watson – an American molecular biologist and geneticist, who was the co-discoverer of the DNA double helix.

In his book Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA (1968) he demeaned Rosalind Franklin – the female scientist whose work enabled Watson and co-worker Francis Crick to sort out the DNA helical structure. Both went on to jointly win the Nobel prize, and create history. Since the book was written after Franklin’s death, in which case libel laws do not apply, Watson was left “unharmed”. It was not until 2007, that he had to resign from his position at the Cold Spring Habor Laboratory in the United States after making controversial remarks that blacks were intellectually inferior to whites, claiming a link between intelligence and geographical ancestry.

Incidentally, the then Harvard University president Lawrence Summers, who was undersecretary for international affairs of the US Department of the Treasury, and who later become secretary of the treasury in the Clinton administration, stepped down in 2006. It had something to do with his remarks and statements about women lacking an intrinsic aptitude for maths and science. This in part translated to a no-confidence vote of 218-to-185 by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, ending his brief and tumultuous presidency of some five years.

What is apparent, however, is that making unwarranted sexist remarks is not to be taken lightly with “resignations” – voluntary or forced – being the natural course of action regardless of the speaker’s stature. “Inaction” is not an option.

If the chauvinist and sexist parliamentarians fancy themselves to be in the same league as some of the brightest scientific minds, then they should be smart enough to take a hint and follow the footsteps of their illustrious “colleagues” – that is, tender their resignations to preserve the sanctity of the august house. They will then have our respect.