et. al
I wouldn't mess with her, she contains multitudes!
That guy publishes a LOT.
What does “human drivers of fire” mean?
Well I'm here so I guess I'll answer.
There are many human drivers of fire, the first and foremost being, well you know, lighting a fire. And boy, do humans light a lot of fires.
Take for example, here is a map of active fires around the globe, right now:
First order human drivers of fire are things we actively or accidentally do to light a fire. Ignition is a fundamental for fire to happen, and humans cause WAY more ignition events than nature does. Things like a cook fire, burning brush or downed debris for management purposes, infrastructure like power lines or fueling stations, car accidents, lit cigarettes being thrown out etc.. etc.. The timing and frequency of these events directly influence the frequency of fires.
Second order drivers are things like vegetation management, home placing and construction, and other biophysical drivers. For example, introduction of invasive species like bromus tectorum, which burns very readily, represents more fine fuels in the environment. Yadayadayada more fires. Other things around vegetation management would fall into this category, such as the suppression of fire, or the psychical thinning of fuels in forests, or prescribed burns.
Well I'm here so I guess I'll answer.
Are... are you McCarty et al., TropicalDingdong?
edit: [email protected]
Thanks!
...such as the suppression of fire, or the psychical thinning of fuels in forests, or prescribed burns.
I'm definitely picturing Jedi clearing debris from the forest floors using the Force, now.
Take for example, here is a map of active fires around the globe, right now:
By "fires" do they mean fores fires? Controlled fires to burn crops, or burn land to clear it for crops? House fires? Bonfires? Campfires? Fires in fireplaces?
Ignition is a fundamental for fire to happen, and humans cause WAY more ignition events than nature does.
A car causes hundreds of ignition effects per minute. But, I'm guessing you mean a certain kind of ignition?
The timing and frequency of these events directly influence the frequency of fires.
The timing and frequency of things like lighting a fire directly influence the frequency of fires? Do you mean the frequency of out-of-control fires? Because otherwise that seems like a pretty obvious conclusion.
Thank you so much for sharing something that you are passionate about. It was awesome to hear about, and I hope you continue to share the knowledge you have with others like myself. 😁
I use geospatial science and data to document, analyze, and predict complexities of wildland and human-caused fire, from individual to global scales. I have a particular interest in fire emissions and modeling, regional food security, land-cover/land-use change, and the Arctic. As a mom, I am concerned with helping children and future generations have better lives.
Probably just the totality of human influences on wildfires. This can include a wide range of activities and factors including climate change, forest preservation or cutting, changes in wild or domestic mammal herbivory, accidental ignition events, controlled burns, irrigation or diversion of streams, damming rivers, invasive species introductions, etc.
Those who are deemed "Lit" in academic language.
It’s my new band name, that’s for sure.
Something about climate change maybe?
She is McCarty for sure but I doubt that she is et al too ...
Maybe et al was their last name.
Taking credit for the work of people who are barely even credited in the first place is… a way of responding. If only she had disappeared behind the curtain for a moment, re-emerging with everyone there with big hair and guitars and eye shadow and screamed “we are McCarty and the Et Als!!!”
Oh well; next time.
She drew attention to her being the/an author of the paper rather than just being a naming coincidence (or family relation, etc).
Adding the et al was likely for that effect, rather than an attempt to take credit for other authors' work, imo
"Et al" is a pretty funny honorific though
She's so prolific, one mere mortal body is insufficient for her bamfness.
I always roll my eyes whenever I see a "you can't do that because you're a woman" character in a show, and then I'm always reminded that these people actually exist
these people actually exist
The way it's been explained to me is that so much of the negative interactions in life come from a tiny, tiny number of offenders who manage to be shitty to dozens and dozens of people. So anyone who has to interact with many different people will inevitably encounter that shitty interaction, while most of us normies would never actually behave in that way.
Of the literally thousands of times I've interacted with a server or cashier, I've never yelled at one. But talk to any server or cashier, and they'll all have stories of the customer who yelled at them. In other words, it can be simultaneously true that:
- Almost all servers and cashiers get yelled at by customers.
- Very, very, few customers actually yell at servers or cashiers.
In other words, our lived experiences are very different, depending on which side of that interaction we might possibly be on.
When I talk to women in male dominated fields, basically every single one of them has shitty stories about sexist mistreatment. It's basically inevitable, because they are a woman who interacts with literally hundreds or thousands in their field. And even if I interact with hundreds or thousands of women in that same field, just because I don't mistreat any of them doesn't mean that my experienced sample is representative.
I think you're right that only a tiny minority are directly responsible for the negative interactions, but as someone within academic science, there's also a much larger chunk of people who don't challenge the assholes or the systemic fuckery when they see it.
Minorities who face oppression are much more likely to be ignored if they report inappropriate or offensive behaviour; I directly know people who have been made to feel like they are the problem for highlighting a problem. This is especially common if it's an established and respected academic who makes the iffy comments, because there's a tendency to them like a senile grandparent at Christmas. If they're a professor emeritus, there's a sense of them not really being relevant anymore, even if they're still respected, but it can feel tremendously isolating to see no-one step in to challenge the comments, either at an individual or institutional level.
It's understandable to not want to rock the boat, but abstaining is easier for some than others.
I seen first hand examples of something happening like women being interrupted by men and they go on about how everything is sexist and they were mistreated. But in that exact same meeting multiple guys talked over multiple other guys. It just happens, not everything is sexist but a lot of people claim sexism when it isn't.
We poke fun at your infatuation for these infantile cartoons. You reply, "misogyny!!"
The only reason your cries are taken seriously here is that so many of these people are on the same dumb wavelength.
And then everyone applauded..
But seriously if I witnessed this, I might actually applaud because that is a pretty badass bit of trivia to get to whip out.
I think I would rather this happen to me than just about anything professionally, the withdrawal from that high might actually kill me
Hilarious. I actually witnessed this online when someone tried to “well actually” another user and it turned out that user was the author of the paper they cited.
I see it happen a lot online with people "looking for help with", but really just looking to vent about, open source software.
And I encounter it a lot at work with policies, reference docs, and little PowerShell scripts I've written.
"Hello I am tech support. Sysadmin, please help with strange situation A"
Sure thing, you'll need to do X.
"But that doesn't match our documentation, it says to do Y and that's not working"
My man, look at the changelog on the first page. I wrote it and made most of the updates for the first year we had it. This is an exception, and adding it to the doc would have bloated it outrageously for how infrequently this comes up. Especially to explain the why. I'd also need to try to cover all the other rare exceptions, which would turn the doc into an absolutely useless shitshow. Anyway, I should have a PowerShell script to handle it, give me a bit to find it.
"Ahckstually, Numpty #3 says our team has a PowerShell script to handle it already, no worries! Thanks!"
Motherfu- My brother in christ who do you think wrote that? You know I used to be on your team, and I just said- My name is in the first line of the scri- I mean cool, glad I could help you get it sorted.
Similar story, talking with a vendor. Again, I'm the one not in quotes.
I need you to connect me with a technical resource on your side for assistance with attempting an alternate solution Y for the issue we are facing, which Important Muckety Muck #7 in my company said you were able to do for them. I understand that I previously suggested that we could do X on our side as a solution for our problem. As we've moved forward in other places on this project, we have found that X will not work for us as a solution for reasons A, B, and C.
(He's breathing loudly through his mouth, hanging agape between words like some great panting missing-link-between-man-and-ape who has somehow found his way into a sales position. Somewhere in the dark recesses of his mind, the sounds of the wind through jungle trees, the calls of ancient and exotic birds and animals, the quiet noises of strange insects alien to this modern time and place, all combine into a beautiful primal music lost to the modern world. It flits through his subconcious, never quite fully able to be grasped.)
"I am the technical resource. According to my notes, X was identified as a solution to your problem."
(This was not some poor third world guy stuck in a call center having to follow a basic help desk script. Same first language, a few states away, he'd been involved with this project the whole way)
AS STATED IN MY PREVIOUS EMAIL
BOFH vibes haha
Isn't there an infamous Usenet post where someone did that to the creator of Perl?
ITT people baww at the mere mention of race and gender, and proceed to behave as if the problem is other people being too sensitive about race and gender.
This funny story really brought a lot of great accounts out of the woodwork to block!
You're not kidding. The comments are so much worse than I was expecting.
I had to scroll down to see what you mean. Shocking that people really still don’t understand how privilege works.
Any kind of interruption seems rude AF, and that’s without even considering the sexism and insinuation that she’s incompetent.
What’s the norm for the audience in situations like this? Raising your hand? Holding any questions/comments until the end?
Even then you don't go "you don't understand x!". You make an actual point about something in the presentation, usually with enough self-doubt to state it as a question.
If the whole presentation is trash in your opinion, just leave.
You start by asking questions. If you're wrong you'll find out, if you're right you'll expose something.
Depends on the size of the meeting and the length of the meeting.
For an hour-long lecture/seminar with less than 20 people, probably raising your question directly is fine.
For a 25 mins talk at a conference with 200 people, you will probably need to save your question to the end.
But it is always safer to ask beforehand.
Some people develop extreme skills while never learning how to interact with others.
Funny, but what does the skin color have to do with the situation?
When a given demographic is a dominant presence in a given area (not necessarily work, it can be anything), there is a tendency for they demographic to start making assumptions about other demographics.
In most places, men are the dominant presence, and in most of the "western" world, they will also be white.
In this case, the individual who a white male was doing what's called colloquially, "mansplaining". He was correcting a woman when not only was the woman right, but was the very source he was using to correct her.
This is a consistent and very unpleasant fact of the world that white men will treat anyone of any other demographic as less than equals.
In this specific case, I suspect that the person making that post was pointing to the prejudice and stupidity of the person indirectly insulting her being a systemic issue arising from both gender and sexual entrenchment along with the privilege that allows the dominance of the white male demographic despite their being no quantifiable factor for that group to be dominant other than that privilege.
She, in other words, was pointing out a systemic issue by using an anecdote. Which can be a bit difficult to accept as evidence. Or would be if there wasn't a good century or so of giant piles of anecdotes from real people pointing to that systemic issue not only existing, but being something that holds everyone back.
Truth? Yes, women and people of color are going to assume they're right and whoever they're talking to is wrong just like any humans will. But white dudes have been pulling that crap for multiple generations, and anyone that isn't both white and male get sick of the bad behavior.
This is a consistent and very unpleasant fact of the world that white men will treat anyone of any other demographic as less than equals.
Pls stop generalizing this bad behavior upon all white men. It only serves to further the divide, and is completely unfair and uncalled for against those in the demographic who don't subscribe to those beliefs or patterns of behavior.
I'm not sure if that was your intent, that's just how it comes across and it makes it hard not to completely write off your argument/viewpoints for being unable to respect your neighbor.
When a given demographic is a dominant presence in a given area (not necessarily work, it can be anything), there is a tendency for they demographic to start making assumptions about other demographics.
Isn't she the one making assumptions, though? Specifically, the "prejudice and stupidity of the person indirectly insulting her" part? I mean, is that really the only possible explanation?
It's a reminder than people that have always been in a privileged position often don't realize they do.
What privilege applies here?
It's an American obsession.
You're right, racism doesn't exist outside of America
To emphasize the privilege this guy has.
Exactly.
In the US it's all about skin colour
Or even the gender?
Edit: so... based on the downvotes this gets, its not OK for a male to interrupt but if it had been a female or other gender, then it would have been ok?
Male and Female aren't genders, they're Sex, Words used to describe biological makeup of a living creature, for example XX Chromosomes are Female, XY Chromosomes are Male, but there are also instances where XXY Chromosomes can happen, and things get a little tricky.
Gender is what we use to tell children how to behave based on their genetalia and cause dysphoria in them when they don't want to do something but will get ostracized for doing what people with the other genetalia do.
It is just mentioned. Just a description of what happened. What's wrong about saying it was a white male when it was a white male? Why jump to the opinion that mentioning the gender or complexion has any other purpose than being descriptive?
Also the gender?
You can’t be racist against white, duh
Edit: nobody realized this was sarcasm
That et al is the best scientist, they’re in all the papers.
That man's name? Albert Einstein
I was hoping for Davy Crockett, oh well...
He kil't him a bar when he was only three.
at the table, after his question was asked, and her eyes squinted in delight, it was at that moment he knew he had fucked up, he just didn't know how yet
...later that evening, that's when this poor wounded white male post doc subscribed to the Ben Shapiro podcast.
As a white dude, I would be horribly embarrassed to do something like that. I hope the guy in the story learned a lesson from it.
Image failing to load here :/
What does skin color and gender have to do with this?
hegemony
Is McCarty, not et al. (unless bipolar?)
I find it interesting how writing "a male" instead of man is a good way of pointing out "sexist mansplaining" and writing "a female" is dehumanizing (which i actually agree on). I will not deny that there are many sexists out there who are mansplaining or see women as less knowledgable. Without knowing the person ("offending") however, i think we would be wise to use occam's razor which would lead us to the conclusion that this is a prime case of the dunning kruger effect (which would also apply if sexism is involved).
Mycomment however has to be seen as mansplaining because i sadly have a dick between my legs. Sorry for that.
im this case she uses male as an adjective, which would be fine for female too ("a female post doc")
I think the comedy rule of punching up explains this.
Why is 'race' relevant here? What the fuck is wrong with Americans and how did they become so astonishingly self flagellating.
That said... this sounds like one of those fantasy scenarios where "then everyone clapped".
Just on the insecure posture of this tweet, I'm prepared to bet cold hard cash that he asked her for clarity or something with a informational challenge "but does x not come from y?" Or whatever and she manufactured his reasoning and the rest to feel good. She doesn't seem to know what et al means either.
They're mentioning the race and gender basically to say "a privileged person". Having privileges obviously influences your character. And race+gender correlate with privileges.
So, while there's no direct causation, and us white males who aren't chumps don't need to be offended, it's often good enough of an explanation why a particular white male might be a chump.
I agree that the usage of "white" is irrelevant here. That being said, are you in academics? It is not an unusual situation for people to not be aware of the "face behind the maths" so to speak. Granted, this is not entirely unique to women in science but it is exhaustingly common for women to be questioned more than their peers.
I think questioning this is fine as many people lie but I wouldn't take this to mean this type of situation didn't happen/couldn't happen.
I recognise that, I think it's important to make very clear distinctions with no sweeping statements when prescribing value to demographic groups.
Why is ‘race’ relevant here?
Because it's extremely relevant in American culture. Every culture really, we're just somewhat ahead on not lying to ourselves about it.
What the fuck is wrong with Americans and how did they become so astonishingly self flagellating.
Nothing and we're not, you're an irate ignoramus with a chip on your shoulder having an imaginary dick measuring contest because you're super duper sensitive about race.
Just on the insecure posture of this tweet, I’m prepared to bet cold hard cash that he asked her for clarity or something with a informational challenge “but does x not come from y?” Or whatever and she manufactured his reasoning and the rest to feel good. She doesn’t seem to know what et al means either.
He was literally telling her to go read her own work. The "et al" part is very fucking clearly taking the piss, do they not have humor over there in Stuckupistan? Or are your panties always in too much of a twist about basic ass descriptors to have any kind of humor about literally anything?
E: guy's post history is chock full of dogshit-tier takes with a thin veneer of leftism and a big heap of good ol' fashioned xenophobia.
"Because of the sheer scale of the issue and long history of institutionalized racism with lingering consequences, we, Americans, developed more vigilance on the issue, and I think this experience and this point of view should be considered across the globe. I do not appreciate the way you speak of it, and I'd rather have you respect, even if not immediately understand, this position."
-Your comment, with personal attacks taken out.
I ask you to consider the way users express themselves around Lemmy, and keep this place nice and tidy. Personal attacks and flaming are better left to Reddit. What makes the Lemmyverse so amazing is the cooperation of kind strangers, and in the spirit of it, it would be amazing for you not to provoke flaming and aggression.
I'm no admin and no mod, but a kind patriot of the Lemmy space, and I sincerely hope you could listen up to this and be kinder next time, even to the people who aren't perfectly keeping to the good conduct themselves.
While I perfectly agree with your position on that the "privilege" talk has become a weapon in and of itself, and that a lot of bullshit stories come out of it, I'd love it if you could change the tone of conversation.
Americans are different, and they may have cultural reasons to behaving this way. That's not to say they're right - but seeding anger this way is not gonna magically change their minds.
Wow, so she managed to clone herself and use the clones to write a paper?
Multiple clones. Otherwise the paper would be McCarty & McCarty.
Why's she flexing about a paper that a white male couldn't understand?
Also science is full of arrogant people, both males and females.
Clearly the race and genre are both only being used in this sentence for bullying purposes. What could very well be just "a random guy" was specifically changed to "a white male" to really attack the race and genre mentioned. If it was another race or genre it would be called racist. The "white males" won't accept this blatant racism many more years without standing up against it, trust me. But then they will be called racist. They are not racist only while they accept being bullied and accept racism towards them. This hate speech against white males is being completely normalized in america daily. And being used in comments, sentences and now even books in such a "normalized" way that it disgusts me. Just because whites are not a minority, doesn't mean we can bully and be racist to them. And in this exact sentence, it triggers me so much that the "while male" adjective was used with the clear intent of bullying and image degradation of the mentioned race and genre.
When will we, as humans of all colors, stand up against racism against whites (and especially males) that is strangely being more and more accepted as a normal thing daily?
Edit: ofc I am being hugely downvoted. Society can't understand that bullying against whites actually exists. She just didn't need AT ALL to use the race and gender in her post. Minorities and inequalities between genres exist and should (and are) be solved. Women and all other races deserve all the same as white males do. But white males don't need to be bullied in exchange or used in jokes like this like if they are the modern punching bag of standup comedy.
White dude here. It's super easy to read something like this without feeling disenfranchised or bullied. Sure we can do better to avoid it, but that should not at all be the main takeaway from this testimonial. Why aren't you angry at the common propensity for women in places of academic and professional authority being looked down upon and disrespected like this? This is super common.
One can and should be angry about both. I wouldn’t go so far as to call the person who posted this a racist, but it’s still not a good practice. Taking an example of a stupid thing someone did and directing the criticism at their race isn’t OK for good reason. (Yes, saying “a white male did ____” is directing the criticism at the group, not the individual.) It encourages people to form judgments about white males as opposed to assholes who belittle others, which is who she’s really having trouble with.
The same thing being done to minorities and women is a much bigger problem, but using the same attack in the opposite direction isn’t exactly a good solution.
Why aren't you angry at the common propensity for women in places of academic and professional authority being looked down upon and disrespected like this?
Well, I am angry at that. Women and all races deserve equal rights and possibilities. We should keep fighting for that. But white males don't need to be transformed into comedy punching bags in exchange for women/other races equality. Can we respect everyone INCLUDING white males?
https://slate.com/technology/2014/05/not-all-men-how-discussing-womens-issues-gets-derailed.html
The race mention is signalling the privilege displayed in the behaviour. We know that all kinds of people can be a bigot, but this ain't it fam. This stuff hurts both you and me. Men do need help, but that is not this conversation.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627321004177
Hurt people hurt people.
If you don't see that many white men have been so privileged for so long that they act entitled to be shitty towards others (including to other white men) than you must be seriously delusional
When will we, as humans of all colors, stand up against racism against whites (and especially males) that is strangely being more and more accepted as a normal thing daily?
You get 0 'progressive points' for standing up for white males. One of the last socially acceptable punching bags. Look at the proliferation of the 'dumb dad' on sitcoms, totally acceptable.
Won't someone think of the poor disenfranchised white males.
only white men can read an anecdote about a woman being tired of having her own field mansplained to her, and turn it into "...and that's why this is bigoted against me, actually". Holy fucking shit dude.
