I don't think it's a fundamental lack in the sense they can never be kind. I think they have learned not to be in certain contexts. This isn't the example I have like this, I can list off at least another 10 no problem. At least one per year in academia.https://twitter.com/o_guest/status/1137246214293000193 …
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @MarcusMunafo and
In fact the reason I find it heartbreaking/disgusting is that they can be kind, as evidenced by seeing them do just that, but they chose not to be to certain people.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Yeah - that kind of thing both saddens and angers me, and you're right that it happens a lot. I guess I'm just more optimistic that things can change, but then I say that from a position of huge privilege on pretty much every dimension...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MarcusMunafo @o_guest and
(except perhaps my weird surname and tendency to tan quickly...)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MarcusMunafo @zerdeve and
I think things can change, but I don't think it's easy. It seems to be to be a typical case of "you can say you offer training/help to those who need it but if none of them think they need it, it's impossible to train/help anybody".
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @MarcusMunafo and
It's painful to watch those who are the most responsible/poster people for bad behaviour be the same as those who seem to (superficially) decry it. Like the classic case of the male ally to feminism being an abuser.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest @MarcusMunafo and
We're dealing with highly intelligent people (academics) who purposefully or just adaptively and without conscious realisation will find ways to continue as they are – being unkind in this case, or being outright abusive in others, it's a spectrum.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
But also a system that enables it - we promote people on the basis of their scientific credentials, not their management / leadership credentials, and the two often reflect skills / dispositions that are in direct opposition (e.g., individual vs team focus).
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MarcusMunafo @zerdeve and
In a world of hawks and doves, if you start to advantage doves even by a tiny bit... hawks will just kill a dove and wear its feathers. I see it happen even with the people who seem to be the least into playing games. The Ponzi scheme of science either ejects you or recruits you.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
This just shows how this has to be an ongoing process - any change to the incentives will mean that behaviour gradually shapes around those incentives. So we can't fix things and walk away - we need to always be monitoring, tweaking, evaluating, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
For sure, it just doesn't appeal to me to help fix something I never broke for zero appreciation in return.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.