PSA: If you are a man writing about open science, and decide it is timely and beneficial for you to include a mandatory section on "diversity", at least credit the women from whom you appropriated the ideas for this section.
-
-
So tempting to respond saying "thank you for articulating that so clearly"pic.twitter.com/SA59qYu2am
-
The source for this, of course, being the wonderful Sarah Cooper.pic.twitter.com/B1pcnviBqW
-
I forgot to say ideas taken from
@chbergma too! And@daniellecrobins and I am sure many more. It's a weird weird thing to see diversity spun to be IN AND OF ITSELF an exclusive zone, but hey! We're "used to" it in general.
-
I'm kind of annoyed too. This is a topic that a lot of people - mostly women, LGBTIQ folks, PoC, etc - have advocated for over a sustained period of time, and often been treated like we're anti-science because of it, or, idk being called "f*****g r****ds" for speaking up
-
As soon as we make some inroads... look who suddenly appears to take credit for other people's work and receive praise from the community

-
It's demoralising. I started making edits for LSR 2nd ed today & then saw *that* pop up. Seeing how everyone responded to it, with an "oh yes, wow, absolutely" attitude they've never shown when we say literally the same thing... I lost all motivation to keep going & just stopped
-
I confess I jumped on too hastily. I liked the general point (and specifics) but myopically missed the lack of explicit connections to y’all. In my head I didn’t view the post in isolation...pic.twitter.com/1X4PH5jQcR
-
They're good points. It's a well written post, and I agree with most of it. It's just that people listen when he says it and call us names when we do. It makes me really sad.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
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.


