What is your image of a woman scientist?

@Banana Breath,

My favourite comedy since ever...yes I recommend you give a second shot.

@Fil Albuquerque,

I can think of a lot of words to describe it, but comedy would not be one of them.

The 16th of March
Caroline Lucretia Herschel (16 March 1750 – 9 January 1848) was a German astronomer and the sister of astronomer William Herschel, with whom she worked throughout her career. Her most significant contributions to astronomy were the discoveries of several comets, including the periodic comet 35P/Herschel-Rigollet, which bears her name.[1]

She was the first woman to be paid for her contribution to science, to be awarded a Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society (1828), and to be named an Honorary Member of the Royal Astronomical Society (1835, with Mary Somerville). She was also named an honorary member of the Royal Irish Academy (1838). The King of Prussia presented her with a Gold Medal for Science, on the occasion of her 96th birthday (1846).

http://www.hawksmoorsbazaar.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Caroline-Herschel-01.jpg

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

There's a lot more then comedy to it indeed but I don't get why you think comedy is not the best way to describe it ? Perhaps there is something miss in translation here ? I like humour series that can tell 3 jokes in one single go for three different target markets. Big Bang Theory does that. It also reminds of my own party of nerdish friends, so it echoes with me.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

The jokes are formulaic and you can see the punchlines coming a mile away. I think it's execrably unfunny, full of outdated stereotypes and jokes that wouldn't be out of place in Benny Hill. We stopped laughing at stuff like that back in the 1980s.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

There is no accounting for taste....it is true its a formula, but I think it has really good shinning moments. Besides what humour is not formulaic ?
Also humour is made of outdated stereotypes by definition...if they are fresh they wont get a public large enough.

1 Reply

By the way be it women or men, people married to a scientific or philosophical or mathemathical life, or pretty much any area they really are passioned with, wont have much time to care with anything else.
The new cliché in town is that people can get it all, be all...guess what, there is only so much time...one thing is to manage a group of monkeys working for you and another to get in the mud yourself. So yeah some old stereotypes have more to it then it meets the eye....making this a gender question is even more silly. I will always admire the guy that gets to work in his sleeping shoes because he was acttually spending time solving a mental challenge in his private time...

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

It's in the same league as the Chuckle Brothers.

This is what our kids watch. You might like it.

1 Reply

@Banana Breath,

Quote:

What's really sad, farmerman, is that you're unable to elevate the discussion to a higher plane, you don't even try. Is science education for women a stupid subject? Is STEM education a stupid subject?

I have neither time nor inclination to favor your "modified" OP. I recruit and hire scientists of all kinds in my work. In my field at last 60% of engineers and almost 50% of the scientists with PHD's are women and they are all smart enough to know when some asshole is trying to justify its own existence by playing this 1940"s line of male reasoning.

If you were reallypushing to have started a reasonable discussion of STEM ed or STEAM (s its now more regionally known), why not try to start with a reasonable point. If you think you are favoring me with outrageous wit, youre a few decades past prime.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

What is the 'A' for Farmerman?

1 Reply

@TomTomBinks,

TomTomBinks wrote:

The stereotype of the clueless woman. Just look at Barbie's face, she's not serious about research, she just wants to look cute in her outfit.
I'm a man. I judge women's attractiveness based on their looks. Period. wanting to "do" them is my response to their attractiveness. This can't be news to you, you must've met some men at some point in your life...
I know there are women who base their self worth on how attractive they are to men. I think they are for the most part victims of some childhood trauma that was never addressed or resolved. They engage in self-destructive behavior throughout their tragic lives, unless they finally seek help. They are unable to form healthy relationships, and while promiscuous and often in the company of men, harbor anger and resentment toward them as well; sometimes triggered by the sexual attraction they themselves have fostered. I hope you're not one of them.

Wow tomtom, nice try.

Clumsy, but I'm sure you did your best.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

"arts". Theres been a great backlash on how the arts have taken a back of the bus place > In some places the arts programs have been totally disassembled

1 Reply

@farmerman,

That's kind of silly. What fields of study aren't "STEAM" ('cause we can always add more letters).

If you keep adding letters to include things in the acronym, doesn't the acronym lose its meaning?

I don't think arts belong in the same category as science, technology, engineering and math. That isn't to say the arts aren't important. But they ain't in the same category as "STEM".

3 Replies

@maxdancona,

youve missed the point entirely. DEFUNDING of arts programs is a fact, not a debate point .
STEM was just another BS term similar to the "focus on science and math" when I was a kid in elementary school in the late 50"s.

The interactions among the arts programs (music, visual, drama,) are critical. If your state had not defunded arts, then I applaud the forward thinking that your ed programs present. Back east, not so much. We have these public schools that are over administrated, under planned, and weve gone from buzzphrase to buzzphrase. "STEM" is just another one.

We agree to disagree, If you feel youve got a point , Ill listen but When I was on the Pa ed advisory board FOR SCIENCES, I was part of a movement that got some schmeckle in the mix so that hat you thought was obvious BECAME OBVIOUS.

During 2 governors tenure (one a conservative Dem and the other a Moderate "Pa Style" GOP). much damage to the arts was done in order to grow these STEM programs (They defunded many "magnet schools with programs for the gifted" and hired numbers of ill equipped teachers to become mentors in Math and Science (When the techers themselves need mentoring to develop some subject SKILLS(rather than just BS "theory of teaching"

Ive got lots of experience in this mess in Pa and two other states as a sort of conultant.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Again there is no accounting for taste...

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

If you keep adding letters to include things in the acronym, doesn't the acronym lose its meaning

No. So many "liberal arts" type programs were being stripped (butthey didnt **** with fooball).

We are slowly coming back from a complete educational DESERT of the early to mid 200's (at the same time one can notice the rise of "Fundamentalist scinces" --what was that about?)

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

I don't think arts belong in the same category as science, technology, engineering and math

Is science fiction science or art?

In a STEAM program, the arts are experienced as a growth in culture , not only a skill.

Arts are intertwined with technology. If you dont agree. dont tell the Pa legislature, theyve been coming about nicely to the fantasy that were gaining "STEAM"

It took a lot of angry mothers and fathers to give the Pa legislature a "day in school".

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Which is why Portuguese comedy is such a successful export.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Jesus man...how childish can you be ? Let me get back accordingly:
**** ya mate, up yours, shove it with a pint !
(Brit humour witch I happen to like is nonetheless a tad on the repetitive side, freaking oldest formula in the world and it still works)

0 Replies

@farmerman,

There are two different issues here.

1) I am arguing that the term "STEM" is useful to refer to a specific set of similar skills.

The term "STEM", groups science, technology, engineering, and math together as a set of subjects that require similar cognitive skills that have become increasingly useful in our technological society. This term does not include things like art, or music, or history, or writing skills, or physical fitness.

2) I am not arguing that non-STEM subjects aren't very important parts of education. Certainly writing, and music, and civics are all very important even though they are not part of STEM education.

My point is that the reason that STEM is a useful term is that it is referring to closely related subjects and skills. STEM is never meant to mean "all of the important subjects that every educated person knows".

That would be STEAMBOATINGR.

1 Reply

What is your image of a woman scientist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know