[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 35 KB, 289x450, 127959478379sH5k.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4806241 No.4806241 [Reply] [Original]

It seems like the beginning of a porn movie. A serious man with a microscope looks startled (or is he intrigued?) when three glamazons burst into his lab.

Apparently they are there to prove that girls can rock science in micro-mini skirts and five-inch stiletto heels. Look! Makeup is chemistry! Ooooh, the inside of a smart phone is sort of, like, techie!! OMG, a lipstick looks like the “I” in science!


http://science-girl-thing.eu


>Women in science

>Any year

>> No.4806258

that's why we're into it

>> No.4806260

Every day you post this thread.

Get over it, feminism is out and gender roles are back in. This is how a properly organized economy works.

>> No.4806259

>>4806241
What a ridiculous slogan. Science isn't gender specific...

>> No.4806270

Back in the real world there are sensible programs to get women into science like project Juno, which don't enforce gender stereotypes even more.

>> No.4806274

>>4806270
If you have to GET them into science, what does that tell you?

>> No.4806289

>>4806274
That society's gender roles are difficult to get rid of. Things are changing, there are good physics departments getting classes with more women than men. Hell in the 80's and 90's teens TV had no hang ups about the idea a girls work is to find a husband.

If people can do well there then they should be encouraged. It dosen't say anything about them.

>> No.4806297

>2012
>still believing in made up concepts such as gender

>> No.4806301

>>4806289
*Sigh*.

>> No.4806303

>>4806301
Wow, powerful argument.

>> No.4806316

>check /sci/
>another kid posting "girls r stoopid"
>leave /sci/

>> No.4806318

Science: It's a bimbo thing!

>> No.4806321

It was sweet of Mr.Curie to give his wife credit.

>> No.4806332
File: 56 KB, 312x312, 1314930975028.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4806332

>>4806241

>that website
>the only way to attract women to science is to fluff it all up like some teen girl's wet dream

>> No.4806336

America has plenty of good scientists, we need more housewives and poledancers.

>> No.4806427

>check the Profiles of women in science section
>expect to see a huge Wikipedia-like list of women who have contributed two science
>12 women, half of them being average students

>> No.4806432

>>4806427
>two

>> No.4806436

Hey if a girl puts out she can do all the science she wants.

>> No.4806440
File: 12 KB, 468x425, 1282254724056.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4806440

>mfw I have already collaborated with two of the women portayed on there
>mfw I can't believe that they actively support such a sharade

>> No.4806450

On very rare events I agree with her:
http://skepchick.org/2012/06/why-pinkifying-science-does-more-harm-than-good/

>> No.4806452

>>4806440

>mfw /sci/ is constantly misspelling words or using words they don't know

>> No.4806459
File: 56 KB, 504x521, canwemakeitpink.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4806459

>>4806332
How new are you?

>> No.4806472

They didn't go far enough.

Still waiting for: "Science: It's a Girl-on-Girl Thing!"

>> No.4806759

So is Europe hurting for scientists that badly?

>> No.4806764

>>4806459
I was going to post that image.

>> No.4806803

That does it. I want to become a girl.

>> No.4806812

>>4806459

I love writing in pink.

>> No.4806846

>>4806260
Thank you!

We get it ladies, you can do the same things we can, but you and I are better suited for our gender specific roles.

Nature and nurture, figure it out doug.

>> No.4806862

But girls can't into science because they refuse to into math.

I'm not saying that they can't do math, I'm saying that they won't. They just refuse to put even the slightest bit of effort into it.

>> No.4806889

I've never met a girl with any meaningful aptitude or interest in math nor science. Maybe females just aren't biologically suited for science disciplines?

>> No.4806972

>>4806889
> Maybe females just aren't biologically suited for science disciplines?

Maybe? More like CERTAINLY. Females of the species are very illogical on average.

You can't find that many women in the sciences since they don't have the mentality for logic and facts. Just like you can't many Blacks anywhere in academia since they just aren't smart enough (again, on average).

There are exceptions, but those only test the rule.

>> No.4806991

>>4806862
>>4806889
>>4806972
It's funny to see people attack women's ability to do science with anecdotal evidence and baseless statements.

>> No.4807005

According to Bruce G. Charlton who was the editor of the journal Medical Hypotheses there might even be too much of them, or possibly not the right kind.

http://medicalhypotheses.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/why-are-modern-scientists-so-dull.html

He argues that what you need to do revolutionary science is people with exceptional intelligence and creativity and moderate conscientiousness.

What the current educational system selects for is exceptional conscientiousness, high aggreableness and moderate intelligence and it selects against creativity. So you end up mostly with the kind of people who are not right for the job.

>> No.4807041

>>4807005
>The journal's lack of peer review[4] and publication of ideas that are considered clear pseudoscience,[5] particularly AIDS denialism,[6] attracted considerable criticism, including calls to remove it from PubMed, the prestigious United States National Library of Medicine online journal database.[5] Following the AIDS papers controversy, Elsevier forced a change in the journal's leadership.

He is not a big name in science. He's welcome to his opinions but he seems to be one of the people on the outside complaining that the people on the inside are idiots.

>> No.4807058

>>4807005
Uuh. This is interesting! Thanks.

>> No.4807085

>>4806889
I guess it has to do with the fact that you probably never talked to any girl in your life.

Physfag here, in my uni there is more women than men in my section (well, not in first year but anyone can be in first year so it doesn't really count). Science doesn't need to be girly, just to be neutral.
Strange fact though, they seem to see problem differently. I often see more creativity in the way men solve problem while women just apply the formula.

>> No.4807109
File: 50 KB, 500x393, woman-kitchen.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4807109

I hope that stethascope is in the kitchen.

>> No.4807115

>>4807085
In my university the men to women ratio is about 15:1. What now, Einstein?

>> No.4807145

>>4807115
well now I'm just aware that you live in a country that doesn't care about giving education to women.

>> No.4807149

>>4807145
But why would it? Just for "gender equality"? Successful empires throughout the history never cared about that, why would we start now?

>> No.4807183

>>4807149
they didn't care either about modern physics so we should drop that to?

>> No.4807195
File: 33 KB, 682x400, sexy-scientist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4807195

I'm just going to say this, because I have the safety of anonymity to protect me, and I could probably not get away with it anywhere else than on /sci/,

so fuck it.
There is a part of me that doesn't want to see women start to move into science.
Please try and understand before you attack me.

It's more that I don't want to see science move into mainstream.
I think science almost needs to be a niche thing. I don't mind women going into science if they have the same love for it that I do, if they WOULD (not necessarily do) sacrifice their social lives to dedicate their life to science.

Science doesn't need advertising, and it shouldn't have it either. If you have to be enticed into it with promises of a nice job and being shown how "science can be cool so you won't look like a nerd if you do it anymore" then you don't belong here.
The more of a loser I look like for my obsessive interest in science the more proud of my place I am, it's like a badge that says "yes, I would sacrifice all for science".

I don't want to see a bunch of ditsy girls turning science work places into drama filled flirtatoriums.

Fuck campaigns to get women in science. Let the women who are truly dedicated to science come of their own volition and I will welcome them with open arms as an equal, let them sacrifice to be here, they shouldn't need science to be "socially acceptable" before they join.

>> No.4807194

>>4807183
What makes you think the government gives a rat's ass about modern physics?

>> No.4807244

>>4807195
I kind of agree with this to a certain point, but it has nothing to do with "women being in science" as much as it has with society (at least in my country) going all-in on advertising how cool science is and how every girl in the world should get a job in science (to satisfy their statistics) because it gives a good job and blablabla. It's even gotten to the point where any mathematical/physics based education lowers the bar for women to get in, just to satisfy the statistics.

It's kind of devaluating the entire profession. Just allow anyone to do whatever the fuck they want and this will work out. Convincing people to take educations they don't actually want isn't going to solve anything except a number on a paper.

>> No.4807284

>>4807194

NASA is the first thing that comes to mind. Nuclear weapons is a close second. Actually, make that the entire US military...Air travel, engineering public infrastructure

Cant tell if retarded or just very bad troll

>> No.4807287

>>4807284
I'm talking about my government you retarded son of a whore. Go get fucked by a donkey

>> No.4807293

>>4807287

Lol, your country has probably never made any contributions to the field...

>> No.4807301

girls are the sex obsessed don't you think? we don't put lipstick in a science slogan because we don't want to fuck but to do science, mixing those things is stupid

>> No.4807319

/sci/ Im having a REALLY hard time understanding why that video is a bad thing

>> No.4807348

>>4807319
I just watched it, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Our problem is not with that video, it's with what OP was saying, we don't want science to turn into that.

>> No.4807378

No one actually wants to see females in Science.

It's just that there's an embarrassing gender gap which implies they're too stupid for it. You never see anyone making these advertisements for blue collar jobs, they're way too lowly.

>> No.4807380

>so much misogyny and philandry
It's like I'm really in some fundie muslim-controlled country.

>> No.4807400
File: 20 KB, 481x270, two thumbs up my ass.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4807400

>>4806260
>properly organized economy

it's 2012 and people still think it's possible to structure an economy without it failing miserably

>> No.4807418

>>4807145
>well now I'm just aware that you live in a country that doesn't care about giving education to women.

No, this is a feminist myth. The free egalitarian countries have MORE not less imbalanced education systems.

Turns out that when the sexes are free to choose what they are naturally inclined to like, they choose more different things.

Feminism got it completely wrong.

http://genusnytt.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/se-hjernevask-avsloja-genusmyterna/

Go watch this. Will clear up many of the feminist myths.

>> No.4807421

>>4807378
>It's just that there's an embarrassing gender gap which implies they're too stupid for it. You never see anyone making these advertisements for blue collar jobs, they're way too lowly.

No, it doesn't. It might be that they are simply uninterested in it, which they are. Women like working with people, not things.