Carole Hooven retweeted
When protestors disrupt classes other students are taking, they are stealing from those students. Students pay tuition to take classes for credit. Other activities that are similarly normal functions of the institution are disrupted, and harm students, researchers, and others. It is possible to work through disagreements without stealing from uninvolved innocent people.
Any Harvard graduate student who participated in this planned class disruption should be disciplined to the fullest extent possible under Harvard’s policies.
The professor tried to move the class and couldn’t. His students were disrupted while trying to complete an in-class eptable.
2
4
24
1,616
Great review of @ProfAliceS excellent book, Sex, Lies and Statistics: Why We Need Evidence-Based Policies on Sex and Gender.
“Failures to collect vital data, Sullivan argues, are both a consequence of, and a contributing factor to, important social and political trends. Her ender, but there are wider lessons for anyone who values good data, democracy, or truth.
Without collecting data on both biological sex and gender identity it is impossible to test the claim that the latter, not the former, determines sporting performance, and this matters for future policy on who should compete in which category. It is impossible to understand the interactions of sex and gender identity in social phenomena like offending rates or earnings.
It is also impossible to predict the effects of policy changes, on transgender people or anyone else. The absence of data benefits nobody, except perhaps those with a vested interest in misleading the public to pursue their own agenda.
Whatever your views on specific issues, anyone who values the role of statistics in public policy should take seriously Sullivan’s account, and her suggested lessons for a better way forward: ‘Tell it like it is; … Embrace criticism; … Abandon tribalism; … Tolerance is a virtue; …Everyone counts.’”
academic.oup.com/jrssig/article…
“Failures to collect vital data, Sullivan argues, are both a consequence of, and a contributing factor to, important social and political trends. Her ender, but there are wider lessons for anyone who values good data, democracy, or truth.
Without collecting data on both biological sex and gender identity it is impossible to test the claim that the latter, not the former, determines sporting performance, and this matters for future policy on who should compete in which category. It is impossible to understand the interactions of sex and gender identity in social phenomena like offending rates or earnings.
It is also impossible to predict the effects of policy changes, on transgender people or anyone else. The absence of data benefits nobody, except perhaps those with a vested interest in misleading the public to pursue their own agenda.
Whatever your views on specific issues, anyone who values the role of statistics in public policy should take seriously Sullivan’s account, and her suggested lessons for a better way forward: ‘Tell it like it is; … Embrace criticism; … Abandon tribalism; … Tolerance is a virtue; …Everyone counts.’”
academic.oup.com/jrssig/article…
2
17
65
2,667
Carole Hooven retweeted
My TED Talk is live! 🧠 I’m so excited to finally share this with you.
What if letting go is the key to gaining control?
The neuroscience of control, creativity, and flow—with a little help from Spock and Keith Richards.
Full talk below👇 #TEDTalk #Neuroscience
What if letting go is the key to gaining control?
The neuroscience of control, creativity, and flow—with a little help from Spock and Keith Richards.
Full talk below👇 #TEDTalk #Neuroscience
8
8
59
15,310
Carole Hooven retweeted
I understand the world is on fire, but... here's a video of a sex/gender panel discussion I participated in recently with @hoovlet and @byrne_a at the University of Arizona. This site also contains written responses we gave to some audience questions.
freedomcenter.arizona.edu/freedom-center…
freedomcenter.arizona.edu/freedom-center…
3
18
77
5,067
Carole Hooven retweeted
👏👏👏🔥🔥🔥
On Wednesday, a group of 50 scientists — from 33 institutions, including three at MIT, and nine countries — sent a letter to MIT administrators that said Sabatini’s departure from the university “carried a level of unfairness that did not meet basic standards all ord their faculty.”
On Wednesday, a group of 50 scientists — from 33 institutions, including three at MIT, and nine countries — sent a letter to MIT administrators that said Sabatini’s departure from the university “carried a level of unfairness that did not meet basic standards all ord their faculty.”
34
155
1,395
202,687
Carole Hooven retweeted
Hard for me to see someone who was a colleague at MIT relishing in my destruction. Particularly since they barely knew me and never bothered--as perhaps scientists should--to check if there was another version of events.
🚨 BOMBSHELL COURT EVIDENCE EXPOSES EXPLOSIVE PRIVATE MESSAGES REVEALING COORDINATION BETWEEN KRISTIN KNOUSE AND MIT PROFESSOR SANGEETA BHATIA IN THE DAVID M. SABATINI ORDEAL.
🔱 NEW REVELATION — Court evidence exposes how Knouse and Bhatia privately celebrated Sabatini’s potential destruction of his professional career, and anticipated the revocation of his @MIT tenure.
An 80-message exchange between Kristin Knouse and MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia, dated August 20–21, 2021, reveals their private reactions immediately following Whitehead Institute and HHMI's severance of ties with Professor @DMSabatini.
The communications contain statements that deserve serious public examination.
🔴 1. “YOU DID IT” — “AND HE’S OUT.”
On August 20, 2021, Bhatia congratulated Knouse:
🔴 “YOU DID IT. You crossed the finish line. It's out in the open. And you're not out in the open. And you're on the faculty. And he's out.”
Knouse responded:
🔴 “You connecting me to Nancy [Hopkins]was the turning point. I will never forget that walk in Lexington.”
🔴 2. “THIS WAS THE OUTCOME I DREAMED OF.”
The following morning, as news coverage spread, Knouse discussed the possibility of Sabatini losing his MIT tenure:
🔴 “Hard to imagine MIT will be left with any choice other than to revoke tenure.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “You're right about tenure”
She subsequently wrote:
🔴 “This was the outcome I dreamed of but NEVER certain I would get it.”
Knouse also described her assessment of Whitehead's handling of the matter:
🔴 “And as skeptical as I was of Whitehead's end game, in the end I think the overall process was perfectly executed.”
Bhatia expressed her approval of Whitehead Institute Director Ruth Lehmann:
🔴 “I'm proud of Ruth [Lehmann]”
These exchanges occurred months before MIT's April 2022 tenure-revocation recommendation.
🔴 3. THE PROFESSIONAL CONSEQUENCES — BEYOND WHITEHEAD.
The participants also discussed Sabatini's corporate affiliations and prospects for future employment.
Knouse wrote:
🔴 “I know of one company already speaking with lawyers to remove him on grounds of morality clause.”
She subsequently stated:
🔴 “Hard to imagine how he can be gainfully employed anywhere after the past 24 hours ...”
These were not merely discussions about an institutional investigation. They extended to the potential consequences for Sabatini's career, tenure, corporate affiliations, and future livelihood.
🔴 4. THE DIVERSITY SURVEY AND PROTECTION FROM PUBLIC IDENTIFICATION.
In another particularly consequential exchange, Bhatia wrote:
🔴 “Also the dei survey and subsequent investigation really protects you, which I love. There is not even a scent of whistleblower in all the press.”
This statement takes on particular significance alongside the previously disclosed communications in which Knouse and Nora Kory discussed using Whitehead's diversity survey to conceal an investigation already under consideration (📑 see the original court evidence in the first comment below).
🔴 5. “WE DRANK CHAMPAGNE” — CELEBRATING AS THE NEWS SPREAD.
Perhaps the most striking exchange appears on KK011419.
On August 21, 2021, Knouse declared:
🔴 “I KNOW! Young people took down a relatively young king. Progress, progress, progress.”
Knouse also wrote:
🔴 “Two other women who came forward and I drank champagne while watching the Tweets and articles roll in last night. It felt like campaign headquarters after an election victory. Really special.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “That's awesome.”
These exchanges reinforce the serious concerns about coordination and conflicts of interest raised by our previous disclosures. Their significance must be assessed alongside the full documentary record and the subsequent jury verdict.
The scientific community deserves full accountability for any misconduct established by the evidence, including the roles of individuals who participated in or improperly influenced the institutional processes that subjected Professor Sabatini to a devastating ordeal and profoundly damaged his career.
📑 REVIEW THE ORIGINAL COURT EVIDENCE BELOW.
🔱 ScienceGuardians™ Legal and Investigative Team
MORE COURT EVIDENCE. MORE REVELATIONS. STAY TUNED. ⚠️
@SciGuardians 🔱
235
726
6,906
370,877
Reasonable people can disagree about sex-based rights. But it is not reasonable to deny the reality of sex or distort the language that describes it (male and female, and man and woman for sexually mature members of our species). It prevents productive communication across disagreement, and results in this kind of ridiculousness. 👇🏽 And I fail to see how it helps trans people.
Highlight reel of Australia’s sex discrimination commissioner, the custodian of women’s rights, saying utter nonsense. It could on for hours but we’ve all got lives to lead so here’s 3 minutes.
15
70
420
15,091
Carole Hooven retweeted
Asian-Americans in Harvard’s Incoming Class More Than Double, to 43.2 Percent
Newly released data on the Harvard College class of 2030 say the class is 43.2 percent Asian-American, a record high and more than double the level when Students for Fair Admissions first sued Harvard ination in admissions.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that Harvard was unlawfully using race as a factor in admissions. Since then, the numbers of Hispanic and black students in the incoming Harvard classes have dipped, while the numbers of Asian-Americans have soared.
Newly released data on the Harvard College class of 2030 say the class is 43.2 percent Asian-American, a record high and more than double the level when Students for Fair Admissions first sued Harvard ination in admissions.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that Harvard was unlawfully using race as a factor in admissions. Since then, the numbers of Hispanic and black students in the incoming Harvard classes have dipped, while the numbers of Asian-Americans have soared.
205
319
2,338
869,682
Carole Hooven retweeted
Fascinating meditation from Andrew Sullivan on what it's being on and off his testosterone therapy.
I think it's very hard for women to think about what the background "sex noise" is like for men except through these moments of generous writing.
andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/my-musk-prob…
I think it's very hard for women to think about what the background "sex noise" is like for men except through these moments of generous writing.
andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/my-musk-prob…
43
35
936
391,440
RT @sapinker: I joined the APA as a postdoc, and resigned a few years ago. This article explains why: The Inmates Run the Asylum at the Psy…
0
148
0
88
Carole Hooven retweeted
.@byrne_a on how tenure can lock in conformism
Read more here: refreedom.substack.com/p/what-tenure-…
Read more here: refreedom.substack.com/p/what-tenure-…
2
5
34
6,444
Carole Hooven retweeted
Important, heartfelt and magisterial as ever from JKR. In particular, her class analysis of gender ideology is of characteristic unerring accuracy.
I wrote a new piece about women’s rights and whether or not I want trans people dead. (Spoiler: I don’t)👇
jkrowling.com/opinions/an-up…
20
289
2,270
54,667
Carole Hooven retweeted
A movement against injustice, driven by the language of DEI, transformed colleges and universities from protectors of free thoughts into moral police of ideologies.
𝙎𝙥𝙚𝙚𝙘𝙝𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙨 takes a deep dive into the erosion of free speech at colleges & universities from campus protnds by asking questions mainstream media does not want to discuss.
"𝙄𝙩 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙗𝙚 𝙖 𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙙𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙚𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙘𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙯𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣."
Stay alert. Sign up for FAIR’s exclusive screening of 𝙎𝙥𝙚𝙚𝙘𝙝𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙨 NOW!
🗓 October 28, 2026
🕛 7:00 p.m. ET / 4:00 p.m. PT
🎟️wl.donorperfect.net/weblink/WebLin…
@Rhetors_of_York @kathleen @BretWeinstein @hoovlet @speechlessfilm
𝙎𝙥𝙚𝙚𝙘𝙝𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙨 takes a deep dive into the erosion of free speech at colleges & universities from campus protnds by asking questions mainstream media does not want to discuss.
"𝙄𝙩 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙗𝙚 𝙖 𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙙𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙚𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙘𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙯𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣."
Stay alert. Sign up for FAIR’s exclusive screening of 𝙎𝙥𝙚𝙚𝙘𝙝𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙨 NOW!
🗓 October 28, 2026
🕛 7:00 p.m. ET / 4:00 p.m. PT
🎟️wl.donorperfect.net/weblink/WebLin…
@Rhetors_of_York @kathleen @BretWeinstein @hoovlet @speechlessfilm
0
5
9
1,029
Carole Hooven retweeted
Biologist Carole Hooven got chased out of Harvard for some interviews around this book, so I figured it was worth reading.
It's the most normal book ever, if it was about dopamine, it would have been on the best seller list.
It's the most normal book ever, if it was about dopamine, it would have been on the best seller list.
5
8
91
6,361
"The passivity of orientation scenarios, the therapy slop-packed consent guidance, and its broader determination to sanitize student life reflect the same conceit: Students are helpless actors in need of supervision." Amelia Barnum '28 @thecrimson
thecrimson.com/article/2026/1…
thecrimson.com/article/2026/1…
0
4
21
1,916
Carole Hooven retweeted
Steven Galloway went from CanLit royalty to pariah on allegations a retired judge later found unsubstantiated. Now his accusers are in court.
@jonkay on one of the founding epics of Canadian cancel culture.
@jonkay on one of the founding epics of Canadian cancel culture.
7
25
101
29,508
Carole Hooven retweeted
After you are abandoned by a trusted institution and publicly shamed, the headlines and mobs eventually fade. What you are left with is isolation.
People who claimed to be your friends abandon you. Very few will say anything positive about you. People generally pretend you are worse take credit for your work and try to write you out of history. Vultures swoop in from every direction.
This is what happens when fourth-rate administrators make decisions affecting people’s livelihoods without concern for what they are doing to their lives. These are scientists who were among the best in the world at what they did. They passed up careers in pharma, finance, tech and administration that could have paid them vastly more for their skills.
When I was younger, people in my programs who gave up on science early went on to make fortunes on Wall Street, in biotech, and in Silicon Valley. Those who stayed pursued their passion for the love of it at the cost of millions of dollars.
When an administrator steps in and dismantles that life’s work, far more than a job is erased. Laboratories take years to build, and scientific problems take years to develop and eventually solve. Experiments, research materials, collaborations, and accumulated expertise cannot simply be restarted somewhere else. The field keeps moving while your work is stopped. The time lost is also the time lost that could have been spent making money - that part a court will never be able to figure out because juries are ordinary people not dedicated scientists.
Then comes the gaslighting. People assume it must have been your fault because an institution like MIT or Duke is supposedly so trustworthy and meritorious that it would never do this to someone who was not guilty. Institutional prestige is a substitute for examining the evidence.
I recently attended a meeting on academic freedome at MIT where Dorian Abbot’s name kept coming up as their fallen hero. They cited a cancelled lecture of his at MIT as their rallying cray. It was treated as an institutional catastrophe. It was insane. David was an afterthought among people supposedly concerned about the climate at MIT and self-appointed to change the culture there.
They simply believed MIT’s PR messaging that they have always been focused on merit despite some small missteps like the canceling of a controversial lecture. I had to point out repeatedly that MIT is not the MIT they attended 30–50 years ago. The priorities reflected in its newer hires and leadership have moved far from the scientific excellence they associate with it.
People who claimed to be your friends abandon you. Very few will say anything positive about you. People generally pretend you are worse take credit for your work and try to write you out of history. Vultures swoop in from every direction.
This is what happens when fourth-rate administrators make decisions affecting people’s livelihoods without concern for what they are doing to their lives. These are scientists who were among the best in the world at what they did. They passed up careers in pharma, finance, tech and administration that could have paid them vastly more for their skills.
When I was younger, people in my programs who gave up on science early went on to make fortunes on Wall Street, in biotech, and in Silicon Valley. Those who stayed pursued their passion for the love of it at the cost of millions of dollars.
When an administrator steps in and dismantles that life’s work, far more than a job is erased. Laboratories take years to build, and scientific problems take years to develop and eventually solve. Experiments, research materials, collaborations, and accumulated expertise cannot simply be restarted somewhere else. The field keeps moving while your work is stopped. The time lost is also the time lost that could have been spent making money - that part a court will never be able to figure out because juries are ordinary people not dedicated scientists.
Then comes the gaslighting. People assume it must have been your fault because an institution like MIT or Duke is supposedly so trustworthy and meritorious that it would never do this to someone who was not guilty. Institutional prestige is a substitute for examining the evidence.
I recently attended a meeting on academic freedome at MIT where Dorian Abbot’s name kept coming up as their fallen hero. They cited a cancelled lecture of his at MIT as their rallying cray. It was treated as an institutional catastrophe. It was insane. David was an afterthought among people supposedly concerned about the climate at MIT and self-appointed to change the culture there.
They simply believed MIT’s PR messaging that they have always been focused on merit despite some small missteps like the canceling of a controversial lecture. I had to point out repeatedly that MIT is not the MIT they attended 30–50 years ago. The priorities reflected in its newer hires and leadership have moved far from the scientific excellence they associate with it.
21
112
972
154,612
Carole Hooven retweeted
Sex differences in the Big Five personality traits and 15 personality facets across the lifespan (Danish sample; N = 38,798)
Women score higher than men in all five traits and most facets.
stevestewartwilliams.com/p/exploring-th…
Women score higher than men in all five traits and most facets.
stevestewartwilliams.com/p/exploring-th…
37
60
435
31,156
Carole Hooven retweeted
A civil jury ruled in favor of ex-MIT scientist David Sabatini, who was accused by a younger colleague of inappropriate sexual conduct in his Cambridge research lab, and awarded him $6 million in damages. trib.al/s3v9VIX
217
708
7,698
2,050,974