(note to mods: sorry for the clickbaity title. You won't believe how I actually deliver on the goods...)

Wow, so check this out guys:

Someone on another sub linked to a feminist research paper, trying to get some opinions.

Abstract Scientific conferences are biased against women when selecting speakers, but recent studies showed a positive trend where the ratio of invited female speakers had increased. We have recorded speaking times at 12 different conferences during 2016-2017 to analyze which factors influenced a speaker’s time keeping. Men and women went over time 47% and 41% of the talks, respectively. In a regression analysis, it was found that the most important factors that influences how long a presenter spoke was 1) their allocated time, 2) their career stage and 3) the level of time keeping enforcement. It was also found that gender and the size of the conference contributed significantly towards the speaker’s timing. Male speakers exceeded their allocated time more frequently than female speakers, especially at large conferences (73% vs 49%). Since conferences are an important arena for science dissemination this might have a negative impact on female scientist’s careers.

Pretty bad, right?

I wanted to read more of the paper so I opened up the pdf. I see a list of authors--I ignore it--and almost skip over the authors' departments but the top one caught my eye. Department of Chemistry and Molecular Biology? What the hell? Why is an organic chemistry major writing a paper on gender issues?

What about the other 5 authors?

Erin M. Tranfield - Electron Microscopy

Vera van Noort - Department of Microbial and Molecular Systems

Karen Siu Ting - Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences; Biotechnology

Johanna L. Hoog - Innovative Medicines and Early Development

None of them is a gender studies major and--more shocking--every one of them is a natural science major. And unless I'm mistaken, those are all women's names up there. Who was that first one? Petra. Yup. All six authors of the paper are women and also natural sciences majors. Something isn't right with this, so I keep reading:

The last few years have seen an increased attention to the lack of women representation in faculty positions in the natural science departments of universities and institutes around the world

This is a research paper about women in the natural sciences not getting enough jobs at universities, by a group of six women studying natural sciences at universities.

The question is: Is this a legitimate revelation of social injustice by those closest to the problem, or an opportunistic power grab by six ambitious and unscrupulous women?

Are they trying to balance the gender inequality, or are they trying to assassinate an innocent man's career so they can take his seat for themselves?

Does that man get a say in the matter when the department decides it needs to cut a male member of staff in order to hire a female? There is no way he can protect himself from such a low attack.

No matter how good he is at what he does, nor how nice and likable he is, nor how hard of worker he is, that man is going to be out of a job--taken from him by a group of vultures cawing, "IT's NOT FAIR! I WANT THAT JOB!"