This was originally intended as one of my rambling notes (you do read the notes, don’t you?) appended to “Zombie Feynman vs The Special Girl Powers”, but the ramble took on a life of its own. So, here are some thoughts about the impact of SexyGate that have been tumbling around in the old noodle for a few days. Not sure if the extra cooking time helped them at all.
I would almost like to agree with Ayatollah PZed on this one – that to make a “sexy scientist” list without appearing to be an ass monkey, one should give the scientists the choice to be included. For just such a list, check out the Science Cheerleader’s Sexy Scientists and Engineers, but restrain yourself from making any comments about how good I look in the short rugby shorts. Continue reading “Musings on SexyGate, an opportunity missed?”
If there is one lesson from SexyGate (the kerfuffle following Sheril Kirshenbaum’s inclusion on a “sexy scientist” list), it is that actions have consequences, long-range, important, and potentially ironic consequences, for which you shall be held responsible. Consequences like drawing the attention of the hedonistic proletariat to the “sexy scientist” list and giving many the excuse to consider the potentially related question: “Is science sexist?”
There were a number of thought-provoking answers. Alexandra Jellicoe’s article was advertised as both unusual and interesting, but was neither. While most commentators examined sexism in the institutions we use to do science, Jellicoe spent her non-raging-lesbian-feminist thunder on the fundamental process of science. Continue reading “Zombie Feynman vs The Special Girl Powers”