I am currently a postdoctoral researcher in astronomy at the Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics in Sweden. In the last two years, I have been harassed and discriminated against on multiple occasions by other astronomers in the international community for my choice to work with exoplanet pioneer Geoff Marcy. Geoff Marcy was accused of sexual harassment in 2015 and subjected to a public shaming, after which he apologized and retired from the University of California, Berkeley. The allegations were never investigated by a court of law, only internally at Berkeley. The scandal happened just a couple of months after Geoff Marcy initiated the $100 million dollar
This whole situation strikes me as a malignant form of the heckler's veto. Also I am reminded of the Scarlet Letter and The Crucible.
The part that seems most tractable to address are published institutional policies that exact collateral damage, e.g. the one that banned you, "Participants must not promote the work of those who have violated Professional Codes of Ethics..." https://sites.psu.edu/setisymposium2023/code-of-conduct/
If such a policy were to be applied in a uniform and consistent manner, it would invalidate many attendees and presentations.
Jun 19, 2023·edited Jun 19, 2023Liked by Beatriz Villarroel
SETI seems to think that, like stargazers need a lightless place, the best way to find extraterrestial intelligence is to turn off their own.
Seriously, this case makes me appreciate working in a field that has a low presence on Twitter. At this point, it should be clear to anyone that doing PR on major social networks is not extending your reach but handing veto power to strangers.
The art must be separated from the artist. If the offender can continue to contribute positively to society, then it could only be socially detrimental to prevent him from doing so. The offender should suffer the appropriate repercussions according to the law, but ordinary citizens should not act as additional judges, juries, and executioners by imposing further punishment (by harassing, ostracizing, canceling, etc.).
I became aware of the problem only peripherally, but reading this full account reveals the alarming nature of a Mafia with PhDs. I have a PhD and everyone with one should take a stand against this new form of affaire Dreyfus. We are in the Age of the Bully, and fascists in academia are hiding behind their institutions and titles, forgetting that the academy is meant to be the seat of integrity, not just knowledge. If they don't mind killing careers in a racketeering conspiracy of censorship, what trust can we place on their actual work and results? It isn't a good look for them.
I would love to know the names of these cowards, once you publish what they've written you, their institutions will disavow them. "May everything used against me be turned against my enemy."
Science has suffered, but the Karma will be visited entirely on these individuals. Good always triumphs, and wounds serve only to strengthen your voice in the end. I will follow you with great interest.
A weakness in this essay, for me, is the part about legal due process. Universities have their own due processes, such as they are, and much wrong behavior isn't appropriate to adjudicate in a criminal or civil court. Institutional processes, again - such as they are, have much merit compared to the court of public opinion.
The NSF recently awarded a CAREER grant to an assistant professor of chemistry at UC Berkeley. The outreach component of the project involves convicts in the San Quentin prison. It's worth thinking about a comparison: why does the US NSF fund such a project, but some other organizations disallow promotion of the research of anyone who has violated a code of conduct? https://www.dailycal.org/2023/01/23/assistant-professor-of-chemistry-receives-nsf-career-award
I support you as a person. But you must realize that certain behaviors requires, before that one is re-admitted in the scientific community at least a public , sincere, deep and humble excuses to women and then to all colleagues , of such behaviors. Until then, a ban for all people involved is correct, in my opinion .
Hat's off to Beatriz for sharing her story! Let's hope the sunshine will kill these germs.
This whole situation strikes me as a malignant form of the heckler's veto. Also I am reminded of the Scarlet Letter and The Crucible.
The part that seems most tractable to address are published institutional policies that exact collateral damage, e.g. the one that banned you, "Participants must not promote the work of those who have violated Professional Codes of Ethics..." https://sites.psu.edu/setisymposium2023/code-of-conduct/
If such a policy were to be applied in a uniform and consistent manner, it would invalidate many attendees and presentations.
Dr. Villarroel, I suggest you may benefit from joining the https://heterodoxacademy.org/
SETI seems to think that, like stargazers need a lightless place, the best way to find extraterrestial intelligence is to turn off their own.
Seriously, this case makes me appreciate working in a field that has a low presence on Twitter. At this point, it should be clear to anyone that doing PR on major social networks is not extending your reach but handing veto power to strangers.
The art must be separated from the artist. If the offender can continue to contribute positively to society, then it could only be socially detrimental to prevent him from doing so. The offender should suffer the appropriate repercussions according to the law, but ordinary citizens should not act as additional judges, juries, and executioners by imposing further punishment (by harassing, ostracizing, canceling, etc.).
I became aware of the problem only peripherally, but reading this full account reveals the alarming nature of a Mafia with PhDs. I have a PhD and everyone with one should take a stand against this new form of affaire Dreyfus. We are in the Age of the Bully, and fascists in academia are hiding behind their institutions and titles, forgetting that the academy is meant to be the seat of integrity, not just knowledge. If they don't mind killing careers in a racketeering conspiracy of censorship, what trust can we place on their actual work and results? It isn't a good look for them.
I would love to know the names of these cowards, once you publish what they've written you, their institutions will disavow them. "May everything used against me be turned against my enemy."
Science has suffered, but the Karma will be visited entirely on these individuals. Good always triumphs, and wounds serve only to strengthen your voice in the end. I will follow you with great interest.
Blessings.
F
Wow. I shared the link to the story on Twitter.
How does one tell a first author it's not her paper?!
Yep.
Hello Beatriz,
This is horrible and I'm sorry you are having all this trouble. Geoff should be released .. and we should all move on.
Take care, Jane L Piepes .. Artist Musician Teacher
First of five articles in support: https://open.substack.com/pub/michaelvigne/p/s11-e1-in-the-eye-of-the-swarm?r=2bzb33&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
A weakness in this essay, for me, is the part about legal due process. Universities have their own due processes, such as they are, and much wrong behavior isn't appropriate to adjudicate in a criminal or civil court. Institutional processes, again - such as they are, have much merit compared to the court of public opinion.
The NSF recently awarded a CAREER grant to an assistant professor of chemistry at UC Berkeley. The outreach component of the project involves convicts in the San Quentin prison. It's worth thinking about a comparison: why does the US NSF fund such a project, but some other organizations disallow promotion of the research of anyone who has violated a code of conduct? https://www.dailycal.org/2023/01/23/assistant-professor-of-chemistry-receives-nsf-career-award
Thank you, Beatriz.
I admire your principled courage.
I support you as a person. But you must realize that certain behaviors requires, before that one is re-admitted in the scientific community at least a public , sincere, deep and humble excuses to women and then to all colleagues , of such behaviors. Until then, a ban for all people involved is correct, in my opinion .
EVERY ACTIVIST ONLINE:
“Is the last scientist that disagreed with my politics out? Good.
WE NEED TO PUT THE SCIENCE BEFORE THE POLITICS…”
Do the bullying come mostly from other astronomers or some unrelated Twitter mob?
This essay is linked in the 2023 Open Inquiry Awards of the Heterodox Academy.
https://heterodoxacademy.org/2023-open-inquiry-award-winners/