Claim: IPCC Climate Conferences have a Problem with Sexism

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

People who believe they are on a mission to save the world frequently behave as if their great mission excuses their personal failings.


A sexist remark at a recent meeting prompted some soul-searching among the world’s top climate scientists. How can they prevent women’s expertise from being excluded?


At the recent meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the science body of the United Nations, there was an unusual announcement halfway through the week: a reminder to the scientists present that this was a meeting of experts, and that everyone’s expertise must be respected.

In one instance, Friederike Otto, an associate professor at Oxford University specializing in extreme weather events, was being introduced to a group of men. She’d said her name and where she was from—she was wearing her lead author badge—when one of her interlocutors asked who her supervisor was, implying that she must still be a graduate student. In fact, she’s deputy director of Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.

As a young female scientist, Otto says she’s familiar with these kinds of insinuations, but this particular incident left her speechless. “I was just particularly annoyed by it, because it was at the IPCC meeting, at a lead author meeting, where clearly the setting is we’re all equal,” she says. “I should have asked him who his supervisor is.” In a subsequent email exchange between the two, Otto says, the male scientist was reluctant to acknowledge any wrongdoing.

Read more:

In 2015, former head of the IPCC Rajenda Pachauri was forced to resign over allegations of serious sexual harassment.

Pachauri’s alleged misbehaviour obviously went well beyond the odd sexist comment. But the decision by people close to Pachauri not to speak up over the extended period of Pachauri’s alleged abuses should be a serious concern. Maybe people close to Pachauri didn’t value their female colleagues enough to put their own careers at risk, by publicly demanding Pachauri cease his alleged deviant behaviour.

I agree with the author that sexism exacerbates the risk of disregarding the contribution of colleagues who are the target of that sexism. But the alleged rampant sexism problem has deeper implications for the scientific integrity of the IPCC and other climate groups.

Sexism is effectively a nasty form of bullying. The kind of people who think it is funny to bully women for being female likely also have no qualms about bullying their colleagues over scientific issues – especially colleagues who hold unpopular scientific views. But then we knew that already from Climategate.

198 thoughts on “Claim: IPCC Climate Conferences have a Problem with Sexism

  1. prompted some soul-searching among the world’s top climate scientists…..

    typical climate science….start out with the impossible

    • Talking of the impossible, what ever happened to Patchuri’s prosecution? Seems to have gone amazingly quiet in the last couple of years. Seems he was charged and then the corrupt Indian legal system just decided to let matters lie.

      I suppose in a country where gang raping 12 years is only just getting police attention, you can’t expect much progress on simple work place sexual harassment.

  2. So….is the problem at these conferences males heating up or females heating up?
    (With the occasional femailman heating up.)

      • Here’s some femail goldminor:)). That preening young associate professor seems to think an older man should know what an expert she is even though she’s under 30. He was presuming she is young and without a lot of experience or research under her belt – and he would be right. And besides, who dare question anyone on the climate science bandwagon, or mention lead authors somefimes don’t have their PhD’s yet?

  3. … she says. “I should have asked him who his supervisor is.”

    And then move on, like maybe a petty faux pas is beneath the offence threshold of a deputy director of Oxford University.

    • We don’t know that it was an innocent mistake. Perhaps the person asking the question intended it to be a sexist insult.

      • We don’t know that it wasn’t either.
        I’ve met a lot of so called feminists who go around looking for an excuse to be outraged.
        In liberal circles, the most outraged person wins.

        • Liberal feminists always defend women….unless those women happen to be Conservatives !! ( or anywhere right of the extreme left ! )

      • oh please for God’s sake……in another 20 years she will be wishing she still looked young
        …perhaps the person asking the question did not intend it to be sexist at all

        give me a f’in break….stop encouraging more snowflakes

        • That reminds me of the apocryphal tale of the young man who made the mistake of opening a door for an ardent feminist.

          “Don’t treat me like I’m helpless, because of my sex,” she snapped. “I’m perfectly capable of opening my own doors.”

          “Oh, I’m sorry, ma’am,” replied the young man. “I didn’t open the door for you because of your sex, I opened it for you because of your age.”

          • Perhaps a more potent reply might be:
            “I opened the door out of respect for my elders.”
            That melts the ice much better.
            Just in case she’s a cougar

          • That’s funny, but thanks for reminding NOT to open doors for young women. They can bloody well open it for themselves after I let the door close to their toes. Only for the elderly that may need it.

        • On snowflakery:

          Thank you Latitude.

          The snowflakes are finding more and more reasons to take real or false offence at the slightest of slights.

          I suggest that people who are this uber-sensitive are far too fragile for their own good, and should stay safely indoors and never communicate with anyone.

          This especially applies to sugar-frosted snowflakes, the ultra-uber-fragile among us, who need to be completely protected – especially from themselves.

          Maybe it is because of our education system, which is dominated by leftist ideologues who have little real-life experience. These imbeciles cling to Harpo-Marxist fantasies that killed several hundred million people during the 20th Century and destroyed the freedoms of billions more.

          Can you imagine members of the Great Generation, who suffered through the Great Depression, fought in World War 2 and Won the Peace believing Al Gore’s global warming hysteria?

          Can you imagine the current crop of ultra-delicate “snowflakes”, who take great offence at the slightest slight (real or imaginary), interacting with veterans and civilians who survived the horrors of WW2?

          My first degree is in Mining Engineering, a profession that is not known for uber-sensitivity.

          In my career I have managed two armed invasions where my people were held at gunpoint, and everybody got to go home unharmed. I have been through numerous police, army, border, and “other” armed checkpoints. About the only thing that offends me now is when someone points a gun at me – and that I still find offensive.

          I recently took a highly public stand to shut down a dangerous critical sour gas project that could have killed up to 50,000 people or more – a potential Hiroshima-scale disaster. I did find the criminal conduct of the thugs who ran this project to be offensive – so maybe I am becoming a bit over-sensitive in my old age.

          One of my buddys is a quadriplegic, in a wheelchair now for about 30 years from a car accident, and the challenges he faces daily to just survive are daunting. His bones are brittle and he suffers frequent fractures – also painful muscle seizures for which he takes powerful meds. When he is not in pain, and even when he is, he cracks “crip” jokes about his afflictions. He makes everyone else look PC.

          I think that the only proper response to these politically correct snowflakes is to dismiss them with scorn. I do not support rudeness or abuse, but those uber-snowflakes who seek to find offence where none exists are not worthy of respect or consideration – at best, they should be ignored as irrelevant cringing imbeciles.

          Best personal regards, Allan

          • “I do not support rudeness or abuse,”

            So pleased to hear it.

            “but those uber-snowflakes who seek to find offence where none exists are not worthy of respect or consideration – at best, they should be ignored as irrelevant cringing imbeciles.”

            Oh dear, maybe you have a different definition of rude to me.

          • Simple Simon:

            I am so utterly devastated if I upset your delicate psyche. My apology follows, in Latin and in English:

            Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa…

            Instead of getting out the willow branch and flogging my back, I’m going to have a congratulatory glass of Scotch.
            “A drop of water to release the serpents…” … Aaaaahh!

            Your humble servant Sir! 🙂

            Confíteor Deo omnipoténti
            et vobis, fratres,
            quia peccávi nimis
            cogitatióne, verbo,
            ópere et omissióne:
            mea culpa, mea culpa,
            mea máxima culpa.
            Ideo precor beátam Maríam semper vírginem,
            omnes angelos et sanctos,
            et vos, fratres,
            oráre pro me ad Dóminum Deum nostrum.

            I confess to almighty God
            and to you, my brothers and sisters,
            that I have greatly sinned,
            in my thoughts and in my words,
            in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,
            through my fault, through my fault,
            through my most grievous fault;
            therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
            all the Angels and Saints,
            and you, my brothers and sisters,
            to pray for me to the Lord our God.

          • To be clear Simon:

            This feigned-hurt reaction of the snowflakes, who claim to be deeply wounded by the slightest of slights, is a form of micro-aggression. It is a dishonest attempt to label the other person as a bully, and is a tactic used by people of low integrity to shift the topic of debate to their advantage.

            Regards, Allan

        • A woman held a door open for me yesterday. It is just common courtesy.
          Maybe not so common now.
          If we all cared for each other, it would be a good thing.

          • I always hold the door for someone behind me or at a close approach. Doesn’t matter who they are, it’s just nice to be nice.

      • ERIC :
        GOOD……Glad to see them “falling-out” !
        THAT has to be a good sign that there are tensions within their clique.
        “We” should NOT be offering “Them” any sort of outside advice on how to
        better behave and respect one another and amicably resolve any
        such “bun-fight” !
        I would gladly encourage any such dispute and antagonism and would
        happily support the supply of ammunition to ANY IPCC internal conflict !!
        It might be nasty….but it might be quicker and easier for the rest of “us”
        if “They” self-destruct !!

      • Yes, Eric. It is possible she is just very young in appearance, which might also prompt the same comment/thought. Still, having experienced both ends of the spectrum I know it would be pretty irritating.

          • Of course, another possibility is that she came over as so stupid and scientifically uneducated that no reasonable person would assume she didn’t have a supervisor. Where global warming alarmists are concerned, and in the absence of further facts, I lean towards this view. This is probably not a genuine sexism story.

      • The problem is with Professor Otto and her excessive sensitivity to innocent statements which are intentionally construed by her to be sexist (or any other type of …ist).

      • Only if that questioner is a liar. It appears that at some point hence, she presented him with her damage and he “was reluctant” to play her little game…good for him! These numbskulls need to hear “up yours” more often, IMO.

      • If he continued and made a sexist insult, then surely this educated Associate Professor and Deputy Director could put him in his place.

    • There was a suggestion in Climategate to call Soon and Baliunas “Astrologers”, then lie it was a mistake if challenged. I think we need to take claims of deniable bullying seriously.

      Climategate Email 1061300885.txt

      Are they any good in their own fields? Perhaps we could start referring to them as “astrologers” (excusable as … “oops, just a typo”). … We need some data on Soon and Baliunas. One of my concerns is that they only publish in low-impact journals, and completely bypass the normal give-and-take of presentations at open scientific meetings (for example, I think I have probably heard 100 presentations overall from the people on this mailing list).

      • Perhaps we could start referring to them as “astrologers” (excusable as … “oops, just a typo”)…

        That’s Alinsky #5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

    • Since the ‘Metoo’ movement went from
      Justice movement to Revenge movement, ‘Man the Oppressor’ must be eternally punished and emasculated. Except when we need you, which is constantly, to: fix the flat tire, fix the car, fix the plumbing, fix the appliances, fix the lawnmower, dig the fence posts, till the garden, build roads, build the bridges, build our house and buildings, build the dams, drive the heavy machinery, fix the heavy machinery carry heavy stuff, fight in the wars….

      • And also to be less masculine and bring out your feminine side… you know, and do everything women do too:))). Except when we need you to be tough and protective.. then you need to switch gears gears real quick…

    • Michael Jankowski :
      YES…….and lots of “us” obviously agree with your comment !
      HOWEVER…..Judith Curry is an articulate and confident person and if
      SHE does not retaliate then THAT is her choice.
      My Parents always told me:
      ” Don’t descend to their level in an argument ,they will simply drag you
      down to their level and then BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE !”
      SO….I think that Judith Curry sets a brilliant example for others to emulate.
      ALWAYS take the path less trodden…the higher plane.
      RESPECT is earned , not conferred or ( as in Mann’s case ) assumed !
      Those watching and listening to the pair of them MAKE THEIR OWN
      DECISIONS and I doubt that Mann was the victor !

      • Trevor, although I agree, Trump is a perfect example of someone who fights back dirty. His style is starting to grow on me. Although I struggle to listen for more than 10 minutes, he has a certain flair for trolling the left.

        • The poor ole fanatics on the Left go nuts over *anything* Trump says now. I think they sense they are losing and they can’t stop it, and this really drives them off the deep end.

          When the radical Left talks about “American values” they are really talking about radical Leftist “values”. The radical Left does not speak for the American people, they speak for a minority on the far Left. Their control of U.S. media gives them more impact than their numbers deserve.

          • George W Bush took the position that responding in kind to insults was beneath the office of the POTUS. Look what that got him. His lack of response was taken as confirmation of the insults and negative talk about him.

          • Seems either way the critics can claim your actions vindicate their vindictive. Might as well do as Trump and give some verbal blows back in kind.

          • G.W. Bush and many of the Republican elites in Washington DC want to be loved by the Leftwing News Media, so they let the Left lie about them without fighting back and correcting the record.

            We see the power of the Leftwing Media when they are out to get someone, Trump being the best example, and other Republicans are not prepared to stand up to such a firestorm of attacks, so they allow Leftwing lies to stand because they are afraid of the consequences of them fighting back.

            Trump does not need to be loved by the Leftwing Media and he fights back and gives better than he gets, which just infuriates the Leftwing Media and they double-down on their character assasinations.

            But to no effect so far. It may even be backfiring on them. Trump’s support among Republicans is as high as ever, and the hateful, lying Leftwing Media are alienating more people every day with their attempts to smear Trump.

            The Leftwing Media truly are deranged, and their attacks on Trump are showing just how delusional they really are. They live in Trump Bizzarro World and think they are living in the real world.

        • Derg :
          And I think it is JUST FINE for POTUS TRUMP to fight
          however he sees fit !
          He has intelligence , experience , wealth , status and confidence
          PLUS the power of his office !
          “They” are doing ” their” damnest to bring him to heel or to
          bring him down but his PRIDE won’t let them !
          I think that HE NEEDS and is WORTHY of “our” support and
          HIM , loud and clear, THAT HE HAS LOTS OF SUPPORTERS !
          What he has achieved so far is considerable and what he may
          achieve IN A SECOND TERM will be EVEN MORE SO !
          With any luck , OTHER LEADERS ARE GOING TO FOLLOW
          HIS EXAMPLE and “pull out of the Paris Accord ” ,
          cease funding “STUPID SCIENCE” ( CAGW ) and DEFUND
          the Universities that produce ACTIVISTS instead of
          what they are supposed to be producing and what “our” society

          • “He has intelligence (huh, covfefe that?), experience (not as a politician he doesn’t and it’s showing. Eaten alive by Putin the other day), wealth (even that seems to come and go), status (only with the rich who he supports and the hillbillies who are gonna work out soon they got nothing from him) and confidence (I’ll give you that one, although he looked lacking in it the other day with Putin.)
            PLUS the power of his office (hopefully not for long)!

          • Trump runs circles around his opponents, domestic and foreign.

            Six more years of Trump will put the USA and the world on the right track.

      • Oh that is a neat way of calling someone old!

        Even worse:
        Who is his/her undertaker? The horror, an underlined missing female-expectation.

        Oh, she IS transgendered? That was accidental of me. I was just thinking the sexism in using ‘her’ in here.

    • Just read Penny’s bio. I love the euphemism used there that she underwent “gender affirmation surgery”. It makes the genital mutilation of Peter so he could become Penny sound very benign.

      • Snide comments about transgender people seem distinctly tangential in a blog about climate chane

        • The “snidery”, I guess, was against that nauseatingly PC euphemism “gender affirmation surgery”.

          Do you mean you had a sex-change operation? Then bloody say so!

          • Yes, dysphoria in general and gender dysphoria in particular will always exist. Those afflicted should be treated fairly. We don’t need to elevate their rights above all others, however, and metaphorically, we shouldn’t immediately promote them to pilot the ship.

          • Even “sex-change operation” is a misnomer, since your biological sex cannot actually be changed. Your reproductive equipment under the hood will still be there after you trade your penis for a cervix, or vice versa. Your chromosome pairing will still be the same XY or XX you started with. Your endocrine glands won’t spontaneously change the hormone cocktail they secrete.

            Certain species of fish and amphibians are able to naturally switch sex under the right circumstances. Certain species of arthropods are naturally hermaphroditic. We are neither.

            (We’ll skip over transvestitism, which is technically a birth defect.)

      • hmm to me it sounded as if she was born she
        is now- but mightnt have been always? lesbian(the two kids)
        and stuffed if I can work out wtf got reassigned as male I guess? from the pic supplied
        frankly I dont give a sh*t and the world didnt need to know either.
        another wanna be “special” snowflake ffs!

    • It’s almost universal among would-be tyrants that they’re immensely self-important and have a chronic inability to laugh at themselves.

  4. There are numerous examples of the ‘right minded (left leaning)’ higher-purpose persons exhibiting egregious behaviour without apology, because they feel entitled to do so, getting a pass on the grounds of their self-perceived moral superiority.

  5. As a young female scientist …

    … among older male scientists, maybe ?

    … where “Who’s your supervisor” could have the implication that “your youthful looks belie the usual image of a seasoned researcher”, … which could be taken as a compliment.

    I would need more context to make the sexist call or not.

    Hyper-sensitive, knee jerk reactions to innocent comments can happen, when people are poised to be defensive.

    • Robert, but we’re in the business of fighting for truth against liberal left lies. If it means being slightly less than comprehensive in our fact checking, so what? Ends surely justify means here.

    • If it was intended as a compliment it was even more sexist – it wouldn’t be a compliment addressed to a man!* That is the definition of whether a remark is sexist, there doesn’t have to be an intention to offend.
      *But these days it gets more complicated…..

      • “That is the definition of whether a remark is sexist, there doesn’t have to be an intention to offend.” Feminism is equality for women and so automatically excludes men. That’s sexist and offensive. There’s a perfectly acceptable, non-sexist word for equality: egalitarian.

        • Sexism works both ways, I read an article recently by a father who looks after his young child and suffers women either trying to help him or criticising him. It is actually a normal part of life and most of the time is harmless but irritating.
          It is out of place in a workplace (especially among academics and scientists who are supposed to be intelligent) since it makes it hard for women who have earned the right to be respected in their field. You either have to let it pass and put up with being treated as an inferior or make a fuss and get labelled as a humourless feminist.
          I qualified as a veterinary surgeon in the 70s when it was still a male dominated profession, I understand the problems.

          • Hey, you are right! I get comments from ladies that are sexist by nature when my younger girl has her tantrums in the shop. Never though about it, I was just tolerating them as well meaning experienced mamás.

        • Pompous Git : ( obviously one with a self-effacing sense of humour ! )
          EGALITARIAN………..Yes !
          EGALITARIANISM……No ! ( the ….ISM makes it quite offensive !! )
          Perhaps even room for some CHIVALROUS BEHAVIOUR !!??

      • Your’re right, it would NOT be a compliment to a YOUNG man coming from an OLDER man.
        Are we, then, to deny all sexuality in our visceral responses to the biological realities surrounding us ?

        An older man sees a younger woman. Maybe he has a slight attraction to her youthful femininity. He sees her at a conference of mostly older MEN. His possible slight attraction leads to a reflexive judgment that this YOUNG, somewhat attractive woman might be a student of some sort, because she does not fit the most common character of people at such events. He utters a question based on all this. He is a MAN. She is a WOMAN. Yes, it’s sexist. There are sexual differences. This is reality.

        All she has to do is say, “I don’t have a supervisor. I am a participating expert”, enjoy his surprise, and move on. Score 1 for the young, female scientist, who states the facts and doesn’t whine about sexism in a very sexually charged world.

          • Absolutely. And calling someone undergraduate in a situation like that is not a compliment. You’re seriously deluded if you think so.

          • ” attractiveness should not come into it.” say’s Susan, hmmmmm, me thinks attractiveness will exist independent of anything including political correctness. In truth attractiveness is desirable and should be nurtured, very sad state when humanity regards attractiveness &/or sexuality as a bad thing.

    • If it was intended as a compliment it was a very cack-handed one and out of place in context.

      The implied “I can’t believe anyone as good-looking / young as you could be …” is a social approach otherwise known a “making a pass”. Fine (?) over drinks or in the coffee break; not in meetings or seminars.

    • “Most men are pigs”……..”OBJECTION YOUR HONOR!!!!”

      …..”Improper Character Evidence, Creation of a Material Fact, Lay Witness Opinion, Hearsay, Creation of a Material Facts”


      • “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.”
        Winston Churchill

        • Pompous Git : ..besides which …PIGS are delicious in so many ways !
          Pork cutlets , pork roasted on the spit , bacon , ham , pigs trotters ,
          sausages , crackling……….but feminists tend to get stuck in one’s craw !
          —-NOT Winston Churchill

  6. “supervisor” is a Code word for, “who’s is paying your grants”, “how much” and “do they warrant you staying at the “Le Bristol Paris” when on travel. Otherwise they could not give a f*k if you are male or female. The old “tribal elders” are having a hard time dealing with a young whippersnapper, not sexism. Been happening for eons, move on.

  7. “Maybe people close to Pachauri didn’t value their female colleagues enough to put their own careers at risk, by publicly demanding Pachauri cease his alleged deviant behaviour.”
    You could say the same for the current president of the United States.

    • Or Bill Clinton…he was getting BJ’s in the WhiteHouse with interns….on your tax dollar nonetheless. Cost per BJ?….more than you make in a year.

      • You have got to be kidding? He grabs woman when he feels like it and brags about it. What planet are you on?

        • Simon, the planet is called, ‘you have to include the entire quote’. “They let you grab them by the p—y”, is the quote. So your claim of “when he feels like it” is not accurate and suggests behavior which has never occurred!
          Don’t be such a sheeple.

        • A planet where we ought to not take quotes grossly out of context in order to prop up our prejudices. You should stop by for a visit some time.

        • As always, Simon see’s what he is told to see and nothing will change his mind until he’s told to.

          Re-read the quote, that’s not what he said.

    • OF course there is no evidence that Trump has done anything to be ashamed of, but that never stopped you.

        • “There are numerous woman have said there is. Do you not believe them?”

          Only one woman has charged that Trump sexually assaulted her. She claimed she and Trump were on an airplane together and that Trump fondled her breasts. Trump has a witness that says Trump never went near the woman.

          The woman does not have a current lawsuit filed against Trump. If she had a case, any number of liberal lawyers would be more than happy to represent her. So, no I don’t believe her.

          None of the other women claim sexual assault.

          The Clinton Criminal Enterprise was involved in stirring all this up. Which means I am highly skeptical of any and all of these accusations, most of which don’t amount to much anyway.

          They had to scrap the bottom of the barrel to come up with the frivilous accusations they made. One woman, a beauty contestant in one of Trump’s contests, complained Trump told her she needed to lose weight. Now *that’s* serious!

          One woman said Trump triggered her by asking her for her telephone number (which she gave him). Real serious allegations, don’t you see.

          This was the best the Clinton Criminal Enterprise could come up with to try to smear Trump. I guess they figured that a large number of complaints would compensate for lack of substance.

          Trump is innocent until proven guilty. As far as I’m concerned, Trump is innocent.

          • One woman said he physically groped her in a lift. Called a family member straight after to tell her story.
            So you believe the woman who accuse Clinton (as I do) but you don’t believe the woman who accuse Trump? Hypocrite.

          • “Trump has a witness that says Trump never went near the woman.”
            Trump also never said he had an affair now there is a tape. Trump lies daily.

        • Numerous women in Salem once accused their neighbors of witchcraft. They were believed.

          Nullius en verba

        • A small handful of far left activists, some of home can’t demonstrate that they were ever in Trump’s presence.

          • So you believe the woman who accuse Clinton (as I do) but you don’t believe the woman who accuse Trump? Hypocrite.

          • So…. You find r*pe and physical s*xual assault the equivalent of a consensual relationship. Fool.

  8. The IPCC is a cesspool for so many reasons. A disgusting group in a disgusting organization….the U.N.

  9. It’s pretty easy once you come to the realization that all of them are brainless dupes, regardless of gender. Presto! Equality!

  10. This opens up a whole new avenue of attack. People have been fighting the Climate Wars for decades now, with limited (at best) success. A new approach is needed.
    Take the Go-To strategy of the radical Left and apply it right back onto them.
    Every time a Global Warming alarmist or Climate Change hysteric shows up, charge them as racist, sexist, Nazi, literally Hitler, and all the rest. Make the whole CAGW or Climate Change movement out as Racist and Bigoted. The radical Left will not be able to respond. They will be confused, flummoxed, and silenced. Ultimately they will be shattered as one of their most important causes gets short-circuited.

    For anybody who is a bit uneasy at the thought of using such tactics, I say:
    “Let the enemy choose the tactics of the battle.”
    They have it coming.

    • Best to do this under a ‘nym, so that you can get two or more factions of SJWs to go after each other. I just love it when they start devouring their own young.

    • “Climate Change hysteric”

      I like it. It just has a certain ring to it. A ring of truth.

      • “’Climate Change hysteric’ I like it.”

        Oh dear…

        L. hysteric-us, ad. Gr. ὑστερικ-ός belonging to the womb, suffering in the womb, hysterical

          • “hysterisis: a. Gr. ὑστέρησις a coming short, deficiency, f. ὑστερέειν to be behind, come late, etc., f. ὕστερ-ος late.”

            Sorry Crispin… It’s the OED and no, I had no input.

    • I have been telling you that environmentalism is racism for years. Their real concern in the excessive number of brown babies.

  11. In order to make sure they don’t fall into the sexism quagmire they need to put it in the bylaws to invite Judith Curry to ALL conferences and events!

  12. Oh for goodness sake. Isn’t this woman educated enough and intelligent enough to fight her own pathetic battles without broadcasting it as a slight to every woman on the planet?

    Go and watch some mucky movies luv. Not all women are subjugated, some do it for money, and some do it for money and fun.

    This old tart might be doing her job for both, but undoubtedly, she’s doing it for money as well which makes her, or any guy, no better than a hooker.

    And everyone has a supervisor. Even if it’s shareholders.

    The bi*ch needs to get over herself.

    • Tell us what you really think Scot, don’t hold back. I feel somehow dirty now, getting paid to go to work, even as an engineer, lol.

  13. So asking who her supervisor is was a sexist remark. I guess the end game is for men to never talk to women, period. Whoops! I said period. Clearly sexist. Having achieved that, they can spend all their time at lesbian bars, and they will finally be happy(?)

  14. Does no one see that it could well have been an age-ist remark….she seems to characterize herself as “a young female scientist” — thus likely to be a grad/post-grad.

  15. > . In fact, she’s deputy director of Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.

    Her supervisor is the director of Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.

  16. You have it back to front: “The kind of people who have no qualms about bullying their colleagues over scientific issues are also likely to think it is funny to bully women for being female

  17. multi layered hand wringing and political correctness , I love it.
    after Pauchauri, I would have thought this was small beans really

  18. Snowflake in The IPCC? If you disagree with her Its sexual harassment and you are thrown out?. Perfect. What more can they politicize in the IPCC?

  19. Awe the sweet smell of liberals eating other liberals. Now if we can only get law firms to solicit law suits against other law firms we’ll have reached Nirvana.

  20. Here they have extrapolated an entire pervasive culture of sexism from a single incident, but such is the nature of “climate science”. Imagine what they could do with a outlier tree ring study.

  21. I hate to say it but man up. Scientists are supposed to disagree and feel free to do so. The political correctness police enforce consensus thinking. Remember they believe that climate change denial is by definition sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic and evil. That is how they enforce silencing ideas.
    The poor girl should have put him in his place and moved on. If you want to be a leading scientist you have to expect some slings and arrows

  22. Isn’t sexism (or homo-sexism) a problem pretty much everywhere these days? It’s a great power card to play in my opinion. /s

  23. Usual feminist, i.e. sexist, drivel.

    We are told nothing about the circumstances just that a man “asked who her supervisor was.” No information on context, we don’t even know if the question was asked in English or if that was the questioner’s native language. As others have pointed out, almost everybody has a supervisor, and in her case it is the director of the Environmental Change institute.

    The “implying that she must still be a graduate student” seems to be her interpretation of the question. Only the questioner know what he meant and the fact that “the male scientist was reluctant to acknowledge any wrongdoing” suggest that he did not intend to be insulting.

    If the questioner had thought she was a graduate student, that would be based on age, not sex, and she is described as a “young female scientist.” I don’t know her age, but she does look rather young in comparison to the rest of the team.

    • BillP, whom are you accusing of producing “sexist drivel”? Eric Worrall? Surely we should be praising anyone who in any way casts doubt on the AGW conspiracy.

      We are fighting for Truth: such weapons are justified. (see my comments further up the thread).

      • Initially the feminist drivel is from Friederike Otto, who made the allegation. I find it interesting that there is no mention of her challenging the man at the time but there is mention of her harassing him with e-mail later, it seems she was trying to get a written apology that she could use for some purpose. I wonder if she has form for this kind of behaviour.

        If you are looking for a stick to beat the IPCC with, I suggest questioning their uncritical support for this dubious allegation of sexism. That is discrediting the entire organisation not just one person at a conference, who may have little to do with the IPCC.

        It is also easy to draw parallels between uncritical acceptance of allegations of sexism and uncritical acceptance of claims that man made CO2 will cause catastrophic climate change.

  24. I am afraid you will find women who behave the same to men. But you cannot call that sexism as only men can be sexist. Apparently.

    You find it in financial services. You find it in medicine.

    The common theme is not gender, nor is it politics (both right wingers and left wingers do it).

    The common theme is narcissism/psychopathy, allied to power complexes.

    An extreme need for power, allied to inadequacy rendering natural authority absent.

    The UK Conservative Party has had it and so has the UK Labour Party.

  25. The Mafia are also sexist apparently. It is odd that the snowflakes haven’t picked this up yet.

  26. Every girl on this planet is genetically programmed to deflect stuff like this, with a raised eyebrow or wry smile. They are The Moderators & Peacemakers. Hence why Easter Island went so badly wrong after Dutch sailors abducted many of the womenfolk.

    I’d venture that what we actually have here is another James Hansen ‘Pants On Fire’ moment.
    Esp: Throwing up chaff to distract from the fact that whatever (science) being presented is/was utter & complete garbage, the presenter knew it in their heart-of-hearts and, being ‘only human’, would give themselves away.

    Unless, and a very real possibility, everyone was One Mile High on one mind-bending chemical or another. Sugar and/or booze.
    Breakfast= coffee & croissant?
    Mid morning snack= more coffee and biscuits/cake
    Lunch= Pasta salad + soda-pop?

    See all that glucose & sugar =dehydration headache, caffeine= bigger headache
    Also= tiredness and irritability.
    Possibly hung-over from the previous evening’s reception party?
    Add in that this meeting (where?) was a a long way from home= jet lag (plus more dehydration= even bigger hangover) with wholly different weather (or climate haha), everybody is talking a ‘funny’ language and she’s travelling alone(?) etc etc etc.

    But, NOBODY is going to admit to any of that.
    Not just the IPCC, we all ‘have a problem’

    A long standing oft retold ‘joke’ amongst The British concerning foreign holidays:
    They say “Oh God, I need a holiday to get over the one I’ve just been on”
    This one has Got The Lot

    Take pity on the poor girl, or, do we acknowledge her ‘male equality’ and lecture her on the naivete of throwing herself into such a situation, as one might be told by reading any number of travel guides.
    But this is politics – it’d be safer playing with matches in a dynamite factory

    (Any closer to seeing why Western birth-rates have fallen off the proverbial cliff?)

  27. …when one of her interlocutors asked who her supervisor was, implying that she must still be a graduate student. In fact, she’s deputy director of Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.

    As a young female scientist, Otto says she’s…

    Er…nothing to do with sex, but everything to do with age….

    It used to be the case that senior staff were very experienced, and therefore in their older years.

    Nowadays people are not promoted on skill in their profession, which takes a long time to be developed, but rather on how woke they are, how supportive of multi-culturism, how closely they align with left-wing political values, and how little there is to be suspicious about in their track record. This supports the promotion of younger staff.

    For example, anyone who held a senior position under the Bush administration is obviously tarred with the Republican brush. You need someone who ‘arrived’ during Obama’s time – which obviously limits the field in age terms….

  28. How did she get to become a deputy direct of research at Oxford University , but could not be recognised at an international meeting of fellow scientists in her own field. Presumably she had previously given papers. At most scientific conferences that I attended , female scientists, being in the minority , were instantly imprinted on the minds of most of the (male) attendees.
    I am reminded of Pauli’s put down ” so young, so unknown”.

  29. Or people could, heaven forbid, just have slightly thicker skins, come back with a retort of their own, and move on with their lives.

  30. The willingness of climate change zealots to be racist, in that they want developing nations to remain un-developed, should make it obvious that sexism would be a small step for them to take.

  31. The basic attitude of most academics (by no means all!) is selfishness. Certain types of chauvinism enter in, particularly sexism on the part of both sexes. One wants the views of one’s own peers (men if a man, women if a woman, Communists if a Communist, and so on) to prevail and persuade. If one lets an outsider speak, that person may persuade; then views from the Outside have a power they lacked before. All of this is well known and easily understandable.

    Within each large group (all climate scientists, for example) there are divisions: of sex, nationality, viewpoint, and so on. The largest group will try to enforce its view (if there is one) on the other groups. IPCC is obviously not immune to this. I don’t know how prevalent sexism is in the group, nor how much or in what ways it affects what the group produces. What I do know is that IPCC’s viewpoint discrimination, exercised and enforced to exclude consideration of outsider views, is a serious issue.

  32. ‘Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.’ Obviously, no one is in charge…

  33. I think the question about her supervisor is not actually a “sexist” one or a sexsist remark.

    In a high level komisariat cabal, a young new komisariat wanabe guard must face the protocol test by an old guard.

    The test of credentials of trust and loyalty.
    Generally the validity of such credentials is establish due to one’s long enough
    “pristine” record activity or by the credentials of one’s handler.

    This one young new cabal member was simply ask to provide her credentials as expected by telling about her handler.
    From this angle, no any sexist remark, more like a normal komisariat protocol on establishment of credentials about the loyalty towards this given high level

    If this so, she has failed very badly, when due to a lack of understanding has shown to be just a freelance lose canon, but not only…
    also by publicly backfiring at the old guard, the new one has shown a very hot unstable and trustless temperament…….very very worrying for the old
    guard of this IPCC komisariat.

    Like a zombie or swarm triggered locust penetrating the safety shields 🙂

    She has being positive tested for either brainless or mindless-swarming syndrome.


    • “In a high level komisariat cabal, a young new komisariat wanabe guard must face the protocol test by an old guard.”

      In Chicago politics, the first question a new face is asked is, “Who sent you?”

  34. It is difficult to underestimate just how messed up long term extremism can make a true believer.
    The anecdote high lighted here is old, has been retold ad nauseum, and tells more about the petty neurotic childishness of the self declared “victim”.
    How about focusing on the real sexism, the attacks on women who dare think outside the consensus, by gangs of men who set out to personally and professionally destroy them?

    • “self declared “victim”
      That is the game.
      Who shall be victim of the moment.
      I see a “Monty Python Argument skit ” here.
      Best Victim campaign.
      “I am the real victim”
      “No I am..”
      Proceed to argue from idiot authorities.

      • Rational skeptical people look for the humor in life. Humor helps keep perspective between the annoying and the truly bad.
        Extremists have a self-performed humorectomy.
        So for climate extremists, little is funny, and much is offensive.
        And the lack of perspwctive means an innocent faux pas ss described in this,post is more important than the actual threats and real injuries done to women like Judith Curry, Jennifer Marohasy, and Susan Crockford, to name a few.

  35. In a serious vein, more and more I see cases of something more than sexism, perhaps a high incidence of sexual aberrations of people in high places in policy and decision making. It seems few people would argue that elected politicians in governments which we are familiar are overendowed with sexual drive, to use a familiar term. In Australia we have seen much fuss about same sex marriage. That has brought a number of people out of the woodwork. The incidence of non-normal sex behaviour is increasing, or maybe the reporting of it is.
    What bothers me a lot is the increasing incidence of it among people in high places. Earlier on this thread I noted Penny Whetton, who was both an IPCC senior author, represented Australia in Paris climatefest,and was the recipient of a sex change operation. The question arises about whether people undergoing such dramatic change can fully exert their minds on the social tasks about which they have struggled for seniority. A further question might be whether people who have spent a good part of a lifetime with severe sexual deformities of mind or body or both, have become overly aggressive in defending themselves from normal people and carry this extra agression into the greasy ladder systems of promotion and seniority. Or, can you get to the top of some fields and still be normal? Can you not get there if you are boringly normal?
    In another area, our national broadcasters, ABC & SBS, seem to have this inverse viewpoint that means a speech impediment is an advantage for applicants for news reader jobs. Like, the world is cruel, it hurts people, but your ABC gives them jobs to heal them.
    Do others have similar observations?
    It gives me the shivering quite when Australians like me are represented abroad by politicians and unelected, appointed senior persons who have obvious challenges to be sexually normal.

    • What gets me is that many of those who want to “preserve nature” are perfectly fine with those who want to take a knife to what “nature” made them.

  36. Nothing new there, the IPCC is a political organisation, politicians like to be macho men, no fear, strong men, aggressive, strong people … very aggressive people…
    Hey, that sounds familiar…. You are not talking about inhabitants of my fatherland, some place called Monte Negro, … where the heck is that place anyway ?
    Do I sound like a man who is about to start WW III?
    Ok, I occasionally have strong views (It’s sun that done it, stu..d) , my graphs may look a bit aggressive with all those strong red colours, but staring WW III ! ?
    p.s. the name of that tiny place is Crna Gora (two words!), the US and other mass media should learn to write it as ‘Monte Negro’ (pronounced as two words) and not as a single word Montenegro. (s/c)

    • vuk

      Do not mean to upset you, but what is the Monte Negro language?
      Meaning, how do you call your country, in your own language!

      • Ah, that is a tricky one, a dialect of a Serbo-Croat language is spoken there. In Roman times it was province called Diokleia, then Zeta (principality) until sometime in the 1400s, since then it has been called Crna Gora (literally translated Black Mountain)

        • Ok, Crna Gora is how you call your country in your own language,
          where, supposing if I am not wrong, Crna means Black, in literal translation
          , contrary to Dark as per possible interpretation of Negro!

          • Negro = Black in the Latin language, Monte Negro was the name given by the Venetian traders, Turkish invaders called it Kara Dag which is Turkic for “Black Mountain” see wiki; gora is also one of of two names for a forest in the local dialect.

          • Vuk

            Please do not bit around the bush….

            Negro = Black, neither in Latin or Italian does necessary mean Black in a proper literal translation, more likely it means Dark in the proper consideration of language and interpretation.

            The Roman Emperor Nero, was not a Negro.

            But my point made was more in the lines of, that if I supposedly am not wrong when considering the word “Crna”, does it clearly and literally translate to “Black”….!

          • six adjective gender inflections for the translation of ‘black’
            singular: crn (m), crna (f) crno (n)
            plural : crni (m) crne (f) crna (n)

          • Thanks vukcevic.

            That what I was looking for, the proper meaning of the word “Crna”, as
            in connection to “Negro” in accordance with “Monte Negro”.



          • You are welcome.
            That’s not all, each of the above 6 has another 7 case inflections, hence 42 different possibilities, but fortunately (for most adjectives and nouns) about half or more are written and pronounced in the same way.
            With a language like that, it’s no surprise that the POTUS thinks we are aggressive lot.

  37. Off topic. But I have been getting phishing about winning an Amazon gift card when I open a WUWT article. I close down the page and come back and am able to read the article. Anyone else experiencing this?

  38. Just answer the question matter-of-factly and move on. Not all behavior in the world needs to be explained by sexism, just like not all weather/climate needs to be explained by CO2.

  39. Since we do not know the details of the dispute between Otto and the other guy we can only guess what happened.

    One possibility would be that the researcher who asked her about her her manager did it because he was a sexist.

    To me that does not seem very likely. Why would he do it infront of so many people for so little gain? Abd still keep his position after it got public.

    Looking on what this lady is doing offers other alternatives. She is doing attribution science. E. g. she determines the exact percentage of a disaster like Irma or Harvey, which can be attributed to mankind. Link unfortunately only in German.

    This is exactly the kind of work which can drive somebody with a last bit of realism crazy. So maybe she was just bul***iting in that meeting and the guy said „Enough of that!“ without any sexist background. Or do you want to say bul***it is exclusively male?

    Reading her crazy claims in the article I bet on the second alternative.

  40. Perhaps Otto just needed to remind the insensitive gentleman of her invaluable contributions to her field of science.

  41. The UN, and all its subsidiary organizations, is dominated by third world and Muslim countries who haven’t received the memo that women deserve and can be trusted with positions of power.

  42. I feel partially vindicated in my theory that the chief Climateers are white males serving white male neomarxbrother billionaire global gov multiumvirates. After climategate, young women inexplicably began to swell the rolls (and roles, I guess) belatedly. I note in most protest photos, the participants are largely white female activists. Maybe the new fem climateer footsoldiers arose from the activist ranks. Judith Curry stands as an outlier, but look what the clime syndicate did to her.

    With all this “Diversity” consciousness, this malarkey is also white progressive, neocolonial in its creation and constitution. They love to talk about 200 countries supporting climatosis, but the truth is, they have offered to buy the Third World out and these “supporters” are ever more stridently demanding their cash that doesn’t seem forthcoming at all.

  43. The whole UN Climate Fiasco has been bullying from the start. Just read the UNFCC charter. It assumes that any kind of human activity causes vague damages for many identity groups, particularly in poorer, less developed countries. Then it applies top->down political solutions financed by government funds.

Comments are closed.