During my master's work, when I was trying to solve the problem the advisor assigned to me, I solved another problem. I got an idea and it worked, I tried to talk to him about it, he refused. So, I went to present it in a prestigious conference and now I will send it to a journal. Now, the advisor knew and offers to revise it and put his name on it. I don't need revisions!
If I told him no then, I might not get recommendations when I apply for PhD programs.
What do you advise me to do?
My first bit of advice is to suggest that you recognize (as I think you do) that you may be being abused here. I would need to know more to be sure, but "male domination" kind of sticks out a bit here.
If the advisor has something to add to the paper (and you agree that it does) then co-authorship of a revised paper would be proper and possibly even advantageous to you, depending on the general reputation of the the advisor. But if the "revision" is just "moving the chairs around" then it is clear abuse to insist on co-authorship.
But, my second, and more important, bit of advice is that you do what you need to do to make the advisor happy enough that you get a good recommendation and get away from his influence if the request is, in your view, improper.
You suggest that you don't want to press it to higher authorities. I can't disagree with that, though I think it would be a proper course to do so. Sometimes you just need to protect yourself and your future career.
While a sole author paper is good, any paper at all is also good and can be a positive point in getting your career going. Think long term. Think strategically. Don't take any action that will come back against you. Life ain't fair in many ways. People with power often abuse it. In Tai Chi we would rather side-step an attacking opponent than counter attack. The point is to remain safe.
Caveat. In some fields, advisors are accepted generally as co-authors. I don't particularly like that standard, but it happens. People in that field understand what is going on so it is, in that world, acceptable. A contributions section in the paper can, then, be used to clarify who did the work.
I've seen similar conflicts between students and advisors here before. Sometimes the question seems along the lines of "should you sacrifice your career to spite an abusive/unethical advisor?" You can certainly choose to submit the paper by yourself, but is it best for your long-term goals? For an established professor, missing out on coauthoring one more paper is a minor loss. For you, your advisor being a coauthor is expected in many fields (I don't know about yours) and carries no disadvantage. I know you don't believe you need revisions, but positioning a paper in context is often as important as the results, and a MS student is usually not yet an expert on publishing. Getting a good recommendation letter is helpful for your future too. In summary, I think there are several advantages to working with your advisor here.
Overall, only you can decide what the best choice for you is, but my advice is to weigh the long-term advantages and disadvantages in your decision.
