Forty-two hours into November, and I’ve written no words of fiction. I’m using NaNoWriMo this year to motivate novel rewrites, rather than to start a new piece of fiction, but that isn’t off to a good start. It was for an excellent reason, though.
Tonight I will start, and I’ll write/revise/rewrite all weekend.
Why, you might ask, could I possibly be cranky on a beautiful Friday afternoon just before a three-day weekend?
Well, let me tell you.
More on sexism (comments: rage-inducing) in science.
And then there’s the US House Science Committee. What the fuck? “All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and the Big Bang Theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of Hell,” said Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA), a member of the committee. Akin is also a member.
I don’t even. How can we hold our heads up in the world with this kind of bullshit going on?
First off, an unsurprising finding: the same resume with a male name is more likely to garner a job offer as an academic lab manager than if it has a female name AND the salary offered is $5000 higher.
On the bright side, the Royal Society is planning to do a bit to increase awareness of the contributions of women to science. They’re planning a Wikipedia editing campaign for October 19 to add or improve articles on female scientists. Good for them: these women deserve to be known.
(Note: In both cases, but especially the second, don’t read the comments. Discover attracts a better class of commenters than Yahoo, but there are still some aggravating things being said.)
Personally, I’m taking the day off from science. Yesterday was effectively the last day of the year for me and I made all my deadlines, but I need a break. I’d be playing Torchlight 2 if I could get it to run…
I’d like to believe that this is a new viral makeup ad.
(Note: As of Saturday afternoon, the original official video has been taken down, but someone saved it and put it back on YouTube.)
But it seems to be an entirely serious attempt by the European Commission to entice young women into the glamors of science.
You know, by making it all about appealing to men (the “real” scientist in the video: note the lab coat and microscope), and makeup, and high heels.
About which, nobody wearing those shoes would be allowed to set foot in my lab.
I didn’t spend much time on the website, but one thing jumped out: the pink heart-adorned text box that said, “Why you’ll LOVE science: You can really improve people’s lives.” Because women should be taking care of others. That’s the only possible reason that women could or would be interested in science: we’re the nurturing caretakers.
Pardon me while I barf in the corner.
There is a problem with recruiting and retention of women in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM fields). But did the marketing agency that came up with this campaign ever talk to a scientist about it? Or even a woman? Perpetuating stereotypes is never the way to increase your appeal.
(I picked this piece of pink-tinged crap up from Ferrett, who has some interesting things to say.)
Edit: And here’s a discussion of why this video will fail, with citations, from New Scientist.
Sarah Goslee is a scientist, weaver, and writer, not necessarily in that order.
She spends far too much time chattering on Twitter, or you can email her at sarah dot goslee at gmail.
