Sexism in Science?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I'm sorry, a 'moral objection' to a spelling error, and a deflecting response to a correction???

Who gives a bleep???

Wolfgang56's story sounds pretty much identical to mine [in terms of interacting with you].

A blow up over nothing, you calling everyone dishonest and accusing them of "misrepresenting the facts"
and then condescending insults while trying to claim the moral high ground.

You are a hypocrite.

If you send a PM to someone else that person is not obliged to keep quite about it simply because
you want them to.
The agreement to privacy is something both parties need to agree before hand.
Otherwise you can send me a post and I am suddenly obliged not to talk about it without having any
choice in it. It doesn't work like that.

Now if someone agrees to talk privately and to keep the contents of that discussion private that's a whole
other story. But if you just receive a message out of the blue, then the sender cannot require the recipient to
keep it private.

Perhaps if the system asked you if you were prepared to receive the message on the condition that you
kept it private and not deliver it if you refused. But that's not how it works.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Googlefudge cannot read my mind and has wrongly jumped to conclusions about what I think.

Perhaps. Annoying isn't it. Maybe you might consider that before trying to read my mind.
Also, talking to me while talking about me in third person... failing to admit you were wrong...
missing the point... yeah, this will be the last post.

so perfect judgment should not be expected.

I'm not talking about perfect judgement. I'm talking about not abysmally c**p judgement.

The fact that you cannot be perfect doesn't mean you cannot be better.
In this case, a lot better.

Contrary to what my trolls may like others to believe,
I do receive PMs from readers (often but not always women) expressing their approval,
even their admiration, of my intelligence and 'bravery' in speaking out in the forums.

Well if true, that's great [for you] but those PM's are not in evidence and given the lies you
told about me I am not going to take your word for it.

Regardless, my problem with you is not the fact that you take unpopular positions or shine a light
on the truth, or whatever. I actually quite like that.

My problem, again, is that you treat every attack/criticism as if it was part of a vast misogynist conspiracy.
If you don't think you do that, or don't want to look like you do that, then you are failing to convey what
you actually think/mean/intend.

If I am failing to understand your motives or feelings [whatever] then you are failing to convey them
to me.

I don't write to court popularity. I don't write to cultivate 'potential friends or allies'.
I don't write anything that I don't really believe because it's expedient to gain support

I never suggested that you write things you don't believe to gain support.

I suggested you stopped being a condescending ass to stop pissing of people who would otherwise support you.

Like me.

You fail. Apparently you do so by choice.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Just to be clear:
Your (Duchess) English is usually excellent

And I am not straining - although my right shoulder is still sore post-op.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Usually Googlefudge's honesty gets him into trouble!
He is a very opinionated individual with a forthright style
that often offends but I cannot recollect him lying. Perhaps
you (Duchess) can give an example of his "usual dishonesty".
.. ... I'll use it next time I cross swords with him!