Katie Bouman was trolled by sexists and this is why we can’t have nice things

Katie Bouman, the woman credited as a key to the historic black hole photo, was trolled by sexists just two days after the image was released (one day after her name went viral). This is why we can’t have nice things.

On Reddit and Twitter, trolls began to rear their ugly heads. Spreading spiteful memes and falsely claiming that Harvard graduate student Andrew Chael, a member of the international team that took the historic photo, wrote “850,000 of the 900,000 lines of code” and “did 90% of the work. Where’s his credit?”

Well it turns out they picked the wrong guy to be the face of their propaganda, because Andrew shut their claim down faster than you could say “Event Horizon Telescope.” He clearly was not having it. Setting the record straight on Twitter, he said, “So apparently some (I hope very few) people online are using the fact that I am the primary developer of the EHT-imaging software library to launch awful and sexist attacks on my colleague and friend Katie Bouman. Stop.”

He explained, “While I wrote much of the code for one of these pipelines, Katie was a huge contributor to the software. It would have never worked without her contributions and the work of many others.” Adding, “With a few others, Katie also developed the imaging framework that rigorously tested all three codes and shaped the entire paper.”

Andrew also debunked the claim that he wrote “850,000 lines of code,” explaining that “many of those ‘lines’” are taken from existing “model files.” He stressed, “There are about 68,000 lines in the current software, and I don’t care how many of those I personally authored.”

Proving further that he is not just a great scientist, but more importantly a great human being, he said, “I’m thrilled Katie is getting recognition for her work and that she’s inspiring people as an example of women’s leadership in STEM. I’m also thrilled she’s pointing out that this was a team effort including contributions from many junior scientists, including many women junior scientists.” He stressed, “Together, we all make each other’s work better; the number of commits doesn’t tell the full story of who was indispensable.”

In an interview with The Washington Post, he said, “It was clearly started by people who were upset that a woman had become the face of this story and decided, ‘I’m going to find someone who reflects my narrative instead’” He added,  “It was ironic that they chose me.” You see, Andrew is actually openly gay. I don’t know, but I honestly find it funny: To think that they went and looked for a white male as a prop to their sexist, and then it turns out, the person they used is also part of a marginalized community and an underrepresented group in science. Their plot backfires hard, and I’m enjoying it.

If you too are bitter about all the attention a woman is getting for what is likely the most important scientific feat of the year, Andrew has words for you: “While I appreciate the congratulations on a result that I worked hard on for years, if you are congratulating me because you have a sexist vendetta against Katie, please go away and reconsider your priorities in life.”