This post will contain no amusing images, I will not refer to myself in the third person, and I will not make mention of footwear or anyone's attractiveness. This is because I want it to be extraordinarily clear that I find no humor in what I am about to discuss. Earlier today one of my fellow ScienceBloggers shared with me this post referencing a particular incident I was involved with in which I used a picture of a particular children's toy to describe the interpretation of a particular data set. The author of the post does not think terribly highly of me or my writing and my general reaction to the post was, "eh." My original post generated a decent amount of controversy and while, the controversy was never my intent when I wrote the post, I am generally glad that it drew attention to the role of the blogosphere in the discussion of scientific findings. In the last few posts I have written since coming to my new home, students have lamented the lack of interaction they have with scientists more senior than them. Well, this forum certainly offers them the opportunity to have a discussion on a much more level playing field than the typical academic environment does.
What drew my interest upon reading the post was a comment left by KH from over at the Propter Doc blog. I am familiar with KH's writing and have kept reasonably abreast of her blog since KH was Post Doc ergo Propter Doc. I think many of the personal stories KH relates are probably universal and I have nothing negative to say about her. However, I fear that feeling is not mutual. KH writes the following about my blog (and, I guess, me):
I liked it at first but now the writing is just a steriotype and a pretty poor one at that. Thing that bothers me more is that this cartoon personality makes female scientists sound like shoe fettish ignorant bimbos.
I am not so naive as to believe that I am universally loved. In fact, I know just the opposite to be true and understand that my particular work will not resonate with everyone. My husband happens to be a huge Lyle Lovett fan, where as I seem to have Aretha on constant repeat this week. Each of us finds different things entertaining or thought-provoking and that is reflective of human diversity. However, I was particularly struck by the assertion that I have the voice of a "shoe [fetish] ignorant bimbo" by a fellow female academic. That, dear readers, is what I would like to address.
What I find unfortunate is that this is the kind of mean-spirited thing women in academia (and women in general) do to each other and I find it, frankly, unacceptable. Rather than simply stating that she dislikes my particular writing style, is not particularly interested in shoes, or thinks that I have proven myself to be too ignorant to discuss scientific findings with any degree of authority, KH refers to me with a slur that denigrates women in general when she does not agree with something (or a series of somethings?) I have done. This behavior saddens me, but I will continue to always advocate for the universal, unabashed inclusion of everyone in science regardless of their gender, ethnic, religious, or sexual identity. Unfortunately, when one female academic criticizes another for how she chooses to express her femininity, it sets a terrible precedent. This is exactly the kind of thing that can never be acceptable in science. Ever. Ever. Not from men and, most importantly, not from other women. Not in the open and not behind closed doors and not if you intend to create a culture of inclusion.
This is the point of being Dr. Isis -- to remind people that being able to express one's femininity and birth babies and have a family, should we choose, and still play science should be the norm. We cannot accept that, by not conforming to the patriarchy, we will not be successful. A woman who is aggressive, or who proclaims to anyone who will listen that she has the potential to achieve great things, is not a bitch. A woman who chooses to wear high-heeled shoes is not a slut, a bimbo, or a tramp. We need not be ashamed of the things that make us women (though, granted, we all embrace and express our femininity differently and that should always be acceptable). Neither our bodies, the social/gender roles we may choose to embrace, or our decision to or not to parent children, should ever have the capacity to limit our academic success. The first time it is deemed acceptable to suggest that someone is hurting science because of who they are, and not because of the quality of the science they produce, is the time I hang up my labcoat, turn out the lights in the lab, and hand the keys back to the status quo.
Do I love shoes? Yes. Am I a little over the top? Maybe. Does that make me ignorant? I argue that KH's comment is not only ignorant, but reflects a mindset that is frankly dangerous. Still, I will continue to advocate for an environment within science that judges the quality of one's work and not the quality of one's identity. And for that reason, I will continue to support bloggers like KH who bravely venture into the blogosphere to share, especially with more junior female scientists, their personal accounts and the struggles they face.
I may not always agree with them, but I will always support them.
Education & Careers
Medicine & Health
Comments
...
Very well said.
...tom...
Posted by: ...tom... | November 9, 2008 5:53 PM
Dr. Isis, I emailed you not all that long ago to tell you that you are my hero. The reason behind that sentiment was the fact that you have made it okay to be a woman scientist with a brilliant mind who is also a great mom and wife, who can still be feminine and sexy and maintain a sense of humor. Without apologizing for any of those things.
I personally have a hard time understanding how another woman could fail to appreciate those things, even when they disagree with what's being said.
And, quite frankly, I love your snark. I believe it was a blog post that began with "Dear Ass Monkeys" that got me hooked on Dr. Isis in the first place.
Posted by: JLK | November 9, 2008 5:55 PM
Isis,
Don't forget what a service this stand is making for future girl scientists. The school librarian has recently been having my class in a couple times a month for "Research Lessons", and one we intend to repeat is paraphrasing articles from science magazines.
While I hadn't considered or expected it, (and I should have) many of the eighth grade girls expressed more interest when the scientists involved were women. It came to a level seventh hour where it was clear they had been talking outside of class, and girls _hoped_ to find articles with women scientists, and mentioned in their writeups whether that was the case, or if they couldn't determine the gender of those involved.
So, I am glad you will continue to demonstrate that young ladies can love their makeup and shoes and simultaneously become fantastic scientists with healthy family lives.
-Mr.
(BTW, I love the snark. Sassy science women are hot.)
Posted by: Mr. | November 9, 2008 6:24 PM
The first time I read your blog (and I have to admit I have read very few posts) I thought what KH said. I, too, am female, and I have to admit I come across as hating women. I think babies and romance novels are stupid as all shit, as are being emotional and being jealous if your male looks at other women.
But here's the thing; I don't actually hate women- I hate female culture. And I think this is what most people mean when they say that they hate this or that group.
There are male and female cultures. There are black cultures. There are Hispanic cultures. I don't like most black people not because of their skin color, but because I don't like hip-hop and dancing. I don't like most women because I don't like shopping and romantic comedies. I do have female and black friends, however, because they don't belong to those cultures; they belong to my culture, which involves sci-fi, anime, and board games.
Simply put, adding female culture to your blog alienates people who don't belong to/appreciate that culture. Obviously it's a matter of taste.
Should that reflect on you as a person/scientist? Honestly? I think female culture also looks down on math and science, much the way that black culture does. The kind of girls I went to high school with that would post pictures of shoes on their blogs definitely looked down on me, that's for sure.
So if you add female culture to a post, for me, it makes me take you less seriously, simply because of that association. Sorry. Deal. For the most part, the judgment is accurate (people use top-down processing for a reason; it's effective). If you add geek culture to a post, I'm 10x more likely to take you seriously- partially because geeks have a reputation for being smart, and partially because I am one.
Posted by: Renee | November 9, 2008 6:25 PM
Well, culture doesn't have to come all in a block. You can pick your favourite parts.
Posted by: Anon | November 9, 2008 7:30 PM
What Renee said. And I'm a geek who doesn't blog geek, I write about proper "female" stuff (cooking), so in some ways I ought to be more on your side. I'm for your right to make yourself feel hot by
modern foot bindingwearing silly shoes if you choose.But the thing is, claiming a strong liking for shoes is not socially neutral. You'd have to be very naive to not know that. At very least it's a personal sexual claim that doesn't sit too well with scientific discourse. Why are you writing about your sexuality here? Do you have something interesting to say about it?
I find the whole association of women with shoes and makeup and shopping to be socially demeaning, and worth battling. Math is hard, let's go shopping? Women must be eye candy to be acceptable? If I saw your character in a movie, I would dislike her. OK, it's a small step on from when I grew up. Apparently it's now OK for women to do science, and back in my day it wasn't. But it's only OK if they spend the extra time and money and effort to make themselves look hot too? Is that the message? It's certainly what I get from today's TV & movies. Male scientists: anything goes. Female scientists: hot only.
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook | November 9, 2008 7:34 PM
I find the whole association of women with shoes and makeup and shopping to be socially demeaning, and worth battling. Math is hard, let's go shopping? Women must be eye candy to be acceptable? If I saw your character in a movie, I would dislike her. OK, it's a small step on from when I grew up. Apparently it's now OK for women to do science, and back in my day it wasn't. But it's only OK if they spend the extra time and money and effort to make themselves look hot too? Is that the message? It's certainly what I get from today's TV & movies. Male scientists: anything goes. Female scientists: hot only.
Oh, Cookin Cath, surely that is not what you read in my post. Go read it again.
Posted by: Dr. Isis | November 9, 2008 7:38 PM
Renee,
This is the kind of attitude that pisses me the fuck off. You sound as if you're saying that there’s absolutely no overlap in interests. If you like shopping and romantic comedies you can’t like anime, sci-fi, or board-games. And if you do, it must mean that you’re not serious about whichever interest is superior. Well, fuck that shit. I like some things from both categories and that doesn’t make me a stupid bimbo/cunt/bitch/etc.
Just because Dr. Isis post about shoes, which don’t interest you, doesn’t mean that what she has to say about other topics is to be taken less seriously than you would if it was coming from a D&D player or a Gundam fan. I can completely understand if you’d have said that Dr. Isis’s posting on shoes makes you lose interest. That’s a perfectly reasonable position, but to say that she can’t be taken as seriously because of that is pretty damn juvenile.
tl;dr: Disrespecting people because you don’t share interests is dumb. If you’re not interested in shoes scroll the fuck down.
Posted by: LostMarbles | November 9, 2008 7:41 PM
I would contend that framing things in terms of one's gender shapes a different discourse than framing things in terms of one's sexuality. Dr. Isis does use a strongly gendered style of writing which seems to affirm her desire to present an example of someone who is both a woman and a scientist. She is assured in her femininity in more than one aspect, but I would not describe the writings here to be a discourse of sexuality.
Also shaping culture to be a hegemonic reality where one aspects dominate all others can be very trying. Most cultures tend to exist in the plural forms. There are some cultures that identify themselves as "black" but there is not one universal black culture.
Posted by: Academic | November 9, 2008 7:48 PM
Dr. Isis,
I love reading about your shoes. I, however, can't manage to walk in high heels and would never be able to wear any of them. I just needed to get that out.
I have a difficult time with this issue myself. I think that the conflict present here is an example of how feminine culture is devalued by science. You can be a female scientist, but only if you act like a man. Frankly, I don't want to have a mental sex-change operation, and people should get over it.
On the other hand, it is very hard as a woman in science/engineering to fit into a cultural norm of femininity. My behavior is generally far too masculine for most people's taste, and I find myself not able to be myself outside of the scientific realm. It is easier for me to wear feminine clothes and at least give the impression of being a "culturally acceptable female" than it is to change my attitudes and behavior to fit others expectations.
I appreciate that you are saying this behavior is unacceptable. I wish that we could come to a time and place where people can be accepted for who they are instead of how well they fit into or defy particular stereotypes. I love the fact that, even if I don't always agree with you, you exude confidence about both your science and your femininity, which is why I keep reading.
Posted by: Cherish | November 9, 2008 7:57 PM
When I was younger, I did look down on "feminine culture", in part because the people I hung out with mocked it. Now that I'm older, I've realized that the stereotypically feminine and the geeky don't have to be mutually exclusive, and I can embrace the bits and pieces of each that I like. But I've met lots of people - both men and women, geeky and non-geeky - who believe that stereotypically feminine = dumb and frivolous and that smart, nerdy women must be unfeminine. But on the flip side, some male geeks that mock "female culture" also bemoan the lack of make-up and other feminine trappings of the geeky women they know who are like "one of the guys", and fawn over the geeky women who are very feminine.
I personally like "ungirly" things like science and science fiction and I don't wear much makeup or snazzy shoes, but I also like romantic comedies and cooking. I don't want to be thought of as frivolous for liking bits of feminine culture, but I also don't want to feel like I'm required to be stereotypically feminine to be thought of as socially acceptable. I like the fact that Dr. Isis is just herself, shoes and science and all, even if I don't have a shoe-buying hobby. Women scientists should be judged by their brains, not their clothes.
Posted by: Peggy | November 9, 2008 8:05 PM
Isis, on everything you've said here, agreed. However, I'm going to play devil's advocate just a little ('cause it's what I do).
When you say that someone must get a particular pair of shoes or a fitted blazer or something else, I know that you're expressing enthusiasm. You're also repeating a cultural norm about feminine identity.
Someone who cares much more for cultural norms than I do, someone for whom cultural norms have been impossible standards or a source of anxiety, isn't likely to hear, "You can have both science and traditional femininity if you choose." They're much more likely to hear, "Yes, yes, you're a scientist. You must also be traditionally feminine, or what is it worth?"
I'd suggest that you're not seeing mean-spiritedness but anxiety and resentment toward a norm that some people can't achieve. It doesn't make the expression the least bit better (just more ironic), but the problem may not be quite the one you see.
Posted by: Stephanie Z | November 9, 2008 8:19 PM
A quick note to Academic: this is exactly about sexuality, not gender. It's explicitly about Dr Isis writing about hotness and sexy shoes. Conflating those things with being a woman would be very sexist, now, wouldn't it?
Dr I: I hope you noticed the notes of ambivalence and attempts to distance from the personal in my reply, too. I fully accept that gender & sex issues are deeply complicated, in any individual case. How we choose to express ourselves as women is so politically loaded that there is no neutral.
But I don't think you can deny that the current media are all over that message my comment ended with. As a newcomer to your blog, I don't yet know where you sit. I am trying to explain the discomfort to you, not accuse you of anything.
But I don't automatically support women just for being women. Did you vote for your fellow vagina-American Sarah Palin? :) Though I would support her against misogyny, so there's support and support...
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook | November 9, 2008 8:26 PM
I'm a new fan of your blog and want to express my joy in reading your posts. We do a disservice to all women when we make judgments based on superficial criteria. While my approach to personal presentation is VERY different from yours (don't wear makeup, would probably cripple myself if I wore high heals), I can appreciate and smile with you as you express your joy in those things. And I can appreciate the service it does for women to see someone who can enjoy these things and still show real intelligence. We have had an all too clear example in our national scene of someone who gave high heals, flirty winks and expensive cloths a bad name. But it was because they came along with ignorance not intelligence. I find intelligent discourse, whatever the presentation, appealing. Ignorance, not so much. Keep up the good work.
Posted by: Patricia08 | November 9, 2008 8:29 PM
I maintain an interesting distinction between sexuality and gender. Sexuality refers to relating to others, whereas gender tends to be something more individually constructed. Reading Dr. Isis's descriptions of her shoes and her appearance suggests these descriptions come from herself as a point of reference. She has made the judgment as to whether the shoes are sexy or hot. Some people leave comments that agree with her description that the shoes are very attractive. If Dr. Isis posted towards needing to wear the shoes to appear sexy to someone else, then it becomes a discussion about sexuality.
I also use a construction of gender that is related to the grammatical semantic of masculinity and femininity. Masculine does not equal male; doing so uses a sex-based discourse where remarks like "sexist" are relevant. Also, I do not think that a sex-based discussion necessarily becomes a discussion about sexuality. Talking about something like a "female culture" suggests that we are having a sex-based discussion that may or may not carry with it expectations of how to relate to other people.
Gender, sexuality, and sex cannot be used interchangeably as these terms carry significant constructions. Dialogue becomes challenging when people do not define their terms.
Posted by: Academic | November 9, 2008 8:38 PM
But I don't automatically support women just for being women. Did you vote for your fellow vagina-American Sarah Palin? :) Though I would support her against misogyny, so there's support and support...
See, CCC?!?!! That is exactly the point! I don't have to agree with every woman I encounter. However, I do have to support a culture which does not exclude her for her vagina. We can dislike Sarah Palin because, well, she's crazy. On the other hand, calling her Caribou Barbie is not acceptable. You will find, if you look back in my archives, a post I wrote about Sarah Palin saying exactly this.
Stephanie Z, I adore you, you wackaloon. You've been with me for a looooong time and I know that you don't believe that I look down on people who choose to abhor Naughty Monkey shoes or fitted blazers. I speak to a particular segment of the female academic population, though, that identifies with that cultural "norm" (but let's not argue about what is normal in academia). If that doesn't resonate with you, though, the solution is to not read it, not to call names. I have plenty of readers who disagree with my shoe choices and, yet, keep it clean.
Finally, welcome to the blog Patricia08. I am thrilled to have you here.
Posted by: Dr. Isis | November 9, 2008 8:38 PM
Mostly I'd like to point out the irony of Prompter Doc criticizing you for being too femmy. This is the same person who generally sided with the guys online, and refused to see the sexism that she herself was subjected to as a post-doc.
That being said, I'm not into shoes and I'm exhausted enough by female pop culture that I don't really get into those segments of your blog. On the other hand there is a place for everything, including female scientists who want to be 'standard fem' and not feel they have to apologize for it. So I say, do what feels right. Ultimately trancending sexism means we get to be our own people and not always viewed through the same damn prism.
Posted by: FemChem | November 9, 2008 8:39 PM
p.s. your RSS feed is broken? or absent?
Posted by: FemChem | November 9, 2008 8:43 PM
I know, FemChem. I know. I am told the RSS feed can take a few days for the ScienceBorg to get in place. Hopefully it will show up soon. Hopefully. In the meantime, I hope you'll check back.
Posted by: Dr. Isis | November 9, 2008 8:46 PM
If you don't like the blog or style or writing, then don't read it, you have the power of choice.
I for one don't know squat about (or really care for) shopping/clothes/shoes and I'm a geek, and I'm proud as ever to be a geek. I'm also awkward as hell, AND female. I was the kid that picked on/ostracized all the time in elementary and middle school for being a geek/nerd/etc by (as Renee put it) " The kind of girls I went to high school with that would post pictures of shoes on their blogs definitely looked down on me, that's for sure."
Sure, it sucked, I kept my chin up and there were days where I would cry over not fitting in. But thats the past, and I don't automatically assume that women who wear high heels or expensive clothing are sluts/bimbos/etc. Everyone is different and everyone is HUMAN and subject to imperfections. I don't tolerate individuals who are quick to judge and quick to shut others down (high heeled, sneeker'ed or flip-flopped, I don't discriminate).
But during the few months I've been following Dr. Isis' blog I have not at once doubted Dr. Isis intelligence because she embraces her femininity. Guess what haters? I'm a geek who looks up to Dr. Isis!
Dr. Isis has her shit together and is an empowered woman who can handle science AND femininity. That my friends is why Dr. Isis is HOT in my book. I can only hope I can attain the level of self-confidence and empowerment (and general hotness) through science and my own style of femininity.
...
Who knew the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words" had any weight. People need to lighten up and not sweat the little things. Life is too short to attack and defame people.
Posted by: Eugenie | November 9, 2008 8:47 PM
I thought I said that. Or maybe you're just recognizing that I said it. Or...communication is hard.
Posted by: Stephanie Z | November 9, 2008 8:53 PM
So are math and science (Dr. Isis says as someone pulls the string in her back).
Posted by: Dr. Isis | November 9, 2008 8:56 PM
Dr. Isis has chosen her online persona, and uses it to convey what she feels is important. Not everyone need agree with the tone or the intermingling of science, shoes, and recipes... so what.
Isis, I personally think the only thing missing from your blog is an occasional nod toward flat shoes (since I, too, can't wear heels). I assume someone who repeatedly announces that she's hot is having fun with her readers, and take it in the spirit in which it's given. Science is fun, but sometimes you need to be bit silly as well.
Posted by: Karen | November 9, 2008 9:06 PM
As a fellow hot female scientist who has experienced many times the feeling that people aren't taking me seriously because I dye my hair too often, or because I wear clothes that are too fashionable, or care too much for my beloved Marc Jacobs purse, or because I smile too much when I talk to people, or because I am "too pretty to be smart," (yup, quoted verbatim):
This is why we have this forum for making an example of ourselves. Of all the versions of women who are in science, those who do and do not like shoes. Those who make snarky comments and those who do not. Those who have babies and those who do not. Those who love and delight in math and those who find it like digging through a rock with our bare hands (and those of us somewhere in between). Those of us who recognize our own prejudice in (initially) unconsciously liking Sarah Palin better because of her hot shoes (-->me) and those who realize that instinct, slap ourselves upside the head and give ourselves a good shake (---> also me) for it.
I have made this push towards 'normality' my new mantra: we need to become normal and thought of as normal, ALL OF US. We need to no longer think of scientific women as some rare breed, with certain characteristics. We're all normal science women, and we need to make sure people start recognizing that.
Posted by: Arlenna | November 9, 2008 9:27 PM
Eugenie: hear hear!
Renee, I have to say your comment made me mad. I'm a geek, too. I love Sci-Fi and Fantasy, and Mr. SiT knows that one of the requirements of dating me is to watch the entire Firefly series and buy me shirts like . My favorite shoes will forever be my purple Converse high tops. The thought of small children makes me squirm a little, and not in a good way.
But I love pretty shoes, too. I like to dress up every once in a while and show off my incredible legs. You don't have to throw yourself wholeheartedly into a group and dislike all those who aren't in it. I've been looked down on, too. My own advisor calls me a geek. But that's no reason to dislike or look down on people in return.
And whether I am wearing jeans or a miniskirt, my science is the same. What you wear and how you talk about being feminine should have no bearing on the way others perceive you as a scientist. And I think that Dr. Isis does a very good job of showing that.
Posted by: scicurious | November 9, 2008 9:59 PM
Dangit, why did that link turn out so badly...
Posted by: scicurious | November 9, 2008 10:01 PM
I will add to my comment the super-secret info that I used to be a guild master in World of Warcraft, in fact I did that for two and a half years while I was a post-doc--so while I am a hotness compatriotess, I too am a MAJOR GEEK underneath it all. To add to my geek cred, my guild has defeated Illidan although not gotten very far in Sunwell (yes, I know, months behind).
So it is possible, and NORMAL, for a woman to love video games, shoes, science, Marc Jacobs, boobs, haircuts and facials all at the same time, and still be smart enough to succeed in academia.
Posted by: Arlenna | November 9, 2008 10:06 PM
@ Karen - hear hear: flat shoes too :-) I've never been comfortable in heels (only ever owned one pair) but I do like shoes. And coats. Both with jeans. And science. And the shoes & coats have (as far as I can tell) no effect on my peers' attitudes to my science, or on my ability to gain promotion.
And I second scicurious just above :-)
Posted by: alison | November 9, 2008 10:25 PM
Goddess Isis, one of the reasons why you have become such an inspiration is because of your ability to prove that women are not only able to balance a work life and a home life, but that they don't have to sacrifice their femininity in order to do so. Just because we like to dress nicer than the majority of our colleagues (which, given the standard dress code in science, is not hard to do) and wear makeup, does not mean that we are less intelligent, and I have never understood why it is is an either--or world. I wear dresses and heels, but I also play tackle football and spend every Sunday watching as much football as possible around my lab schedule. And I get offended when people tell me that I should dress down because I'll come across as unintelligent when I put effort into looking nice. In the swampy summer I usually wear dresses because I have a long walk and it's too hot for pants, and my PI stopped me at one point and asked if I was dressing up "for my proteins." In order to be taken seriously around here, I have to dress like a schlub like everyone else, and it frustrates me.
So thank you for proving that intelligence, attractiveness, and femininity can coexist, somewhere, even if it isn't possible where I am right now.
Posted by: Disgruntled Julie | November 9, 2008 10:42 PM
Nicely said Arlenna.
The (few!) women around me dress like men or are poor grad students sporting the jeans/tshirt look - I am the girly chick. I like being girly, I don't feel confident walking out of the house without my bare minerals swirled, tapped, and buffed onto my face along with the jewelry I feel naked without. I paint my toe nails red to grace my daily sandal-wearing habit (they are dainty, Isis... not Crocs, I promise!) If some schmuck chooses to think I am a Bimbo PhD because I care about what I look like, then I should start walking around with my top tier papers dangling from my neck, at the appropriate cleavage length (as DrugMonkey previously demonstrated on another famous Isis graphic).
I love that Isis is unabashedly female, and this isn't the typical sciency blog. If I want to read scientific papers, I know where to find them. If I want to bond with other female scientists, Isis is at the top of my list. It's like going to the ladies' room to chat amongst ourselves except that in academia (at least my floor), I'm the only lady (or as they say here... ma'am) and I think many other women feel isolated in their physical worlds too. Thanks Isis for being yourself - ankle-breaking shoes and all.
Love the new digs - I was also around since the beginning as the anti-lamb pierogie-eating anon. Please keep doing the recipes.
Posted by: JC | November 9, 2008 10:42 PM
The token male neanderthal wanders past, noting "Yes, you have to wade through a certain amount of crap; those who come after you may have shallower wading as a result."
Posted by: abb3w | November 9, 2008 10:50 PM
While I have no sympathy for shoe-obsessions or other fashion/appearance-related extravagances and fixations, and nearly as much for the notion that such are in some meaningful way integral or normative of the experience of being female, I have no reason to believe KH speaks with any authority about what it means, or should, to be a women in academia. The "bimbo" slur is especially ridiculous. It is an unfortunate truth, however, that much of the work of maintaining oppressive gender roles and the marginalization of women is done by the pressure women put on each other (the weight thing comes to mind...). This sororicidal (?) behavior should be soundly rejected.
Posted by: Azkyroth | November 9, 2008 11:16 PM
I just wanted to say that when I read the post by KH I was a little bit upset because it talked aboout respecting science, like we needed to fawn over how it is done and never question/change how we approach it. Science communication ought to be open to the same debate as politics, in my never to be humble opinion. If only the experts could vote, that would kind of defeat the purpose of democracy. If only scientists in a certain field can talk about certain topics, it kind of makes it really hard for real ordinary people to get to excited about it- or to challenge it, even if they have the skills to do so.
It reminded me of how we often approach religion- with kid gloves and reverence. I guess there is nothing wrong with that, but when flat out wrong stuff is said or done, should we use that tone and go through proper channels? I don't think it worked for children who have been molested by religious authority figures, both catholic and protestant, and it only seems these things come to light by loud and clear and combatitive media- which is what blogging often can be.
As for Isis and shoes......... oh for pete's sakes. Do people have to be so militantly :Oh, I don't like girly shit, so I CAN'T support Iris???? Do they? Don't read her then and get on with your life after saying your piece. Often I laugh hilariously when I read this blog. Crying laughing. Because even though I am not super girly I can imagine friends and co-workers just like Isis in their respective fields. I hate how we freak out as women at each other- Hilary is too Butch- Palin is too Girly - Madonna is too Skinny and Angelina is just too damn perfect and we can't wait for her life to become a trainwreck- teehehehehe....... I don't get it. Women bashing women for their appearance (or the appearance of their appearance) is ridiculous. Women disagreeing about real issues - and not always nicely- is okay.
Probably not as clear as I would like this to be- but go Isis, in your high heals, babies in tow, while you are cooking a gourmet meal and solving something sciencey- and everyone else get out of your way or you might end up with a hole in your foot...........
Posted by: anonymous at 9:30 | November 9, 2008 11:31 PM
I read this post earlier in the morning and had conflicted feelings about it because I LOVE reading you Isis, but you know that I"ve disagreed with you before and I sometimes am uncomfortable with your choice of pictures / illustrations. That said I totally get what you're doing and why.
Renee, (1) you should go read this post about how some of us women can be conflicted about our femininity and why Isis persona is needed.
(2) I am going to completely ignore my usual policy of not name calling and respectful discourse and tell you that you are full of shit and are a racist woman hater. You statement that you don't like most black people because of your dislike of hip hop culture is racist. I was not aware that black people could only like hip hop and dancing, nothing else. You are judging someone based on the color of their skin and you are judging women based on their gender. I don't give a shit if you're a woman, you can still be a woman hater. You're attitude is the same ignorant attitude I face when people assume I had an arranged marriage because I am south asian and the 1 south asian they knew did. You are automatically assuming that because I love shoes and nice clothes I can not love all things "geeky". BULLSHIT. Nor are those affections mutually exclusive. I am sorry for having to say this but Fuck you.
I am also going to call bullshit on this idea of a feminine culture. Perhaps there is one, but I am so sick and tired of people thinking that we has a sex have to agree on everything. Assuming a feminine culture is as derogatory as assuming that all men that enjoy sports are a bunch of dumb jocks.
Posted by: ScientistMother | November 10, 2008 1:16 AM
Edited to note: I fubbared the link, that is what happens when you're commenting after spending >1 hour trying to get a monkey to bed. To clarify - I am tired of thinking that we as a sex / group must operate as a single minded group, agree on everything, that is so stupid.
Posted by: ScientistMother | November 10, 2008 1:26 AM
ScientistMother, I don't know why I am still awake, but I am and I am glad that I am because I really value the comments that you leave on my blog. You really are one of my favorite female bloggers as I hope is reflected in your inclusion on the list of women Dr. Isis adores.
I don't think you should feel conflicted about my post at all. I am happy that you enjoy reading my blog, but I do not expect you (or even want you) to agree with me 100% of the time (but don't tell ...tom... or any of the other men that). I may joke about unabashed worship around here, but you should always feel able to call "bullshit" on the D and L goddess when you think I've got it coming. If you don't this dialogue is entirely one-sided and that is completely uninteresting to me.
And I gotta agree with you on the feminine culture bit. I may have florid shoe and Sephora fetish, but I also TiVo Dr. Who and grew up playing with Star Wars and He-Man action figures and not Barbies. And, I will confess that I played a little Risk in college. I don't see anything about that to be unfeminine in the same way I don't see science or math to be unfeminine. The point of it all is that it must be ok for a woman to be the person she is.
Posted by: Dr, Isis | November 10, 2008 1:34 AM
There are male and female cultures. There are black cultures. There are Hispanic cultures. I don't like most black people not because of their skin color, but because I don't like hip-hop and dancing. I don't like most women because I don't like shopping and romantic comedies. I do have female and black friends, however, because they don't belong to those cultures; they belong to my culture, which involves sci-fi, anime, and board games.
Renee, please tell me you're being overly simplistic to make a point. You don't really write off a person who likes dancing or shopping, do you? People are way too complex for that attitude.
Posted by: Rose | November 10, 2008 2:08 AM
Aww doc, you made me blush! Thanks for the link loo as well. I hope you're up at this ungodly hour getting some great science or shopping done. I unfortunately am up because of that darn Renee. Sex with the mister couldn't get my frustrations out, so I have gone a written a rather long fuck you to her
Posted by: ScientistMother | November 10, 2008 2:54 AM
I'm really having issues with commenting tonighting...here's the post: http://scientistmother.blogspot.com/2008/11/kiss-my-shoe-loving-science-loving-hip.html
Posted by: ScientistMother | November 10, 2008 2:56 AM
Thanks for this post, Isis. I follow your blog for your take on science, kids, shoes, cooking, and otherwise having a life outside of work. I'm Latina, married, with 2 young kids. I'm also a kick ass field biologist. Guess what? After I'm done with field work, I take off my boots and put on my purple sparkly sequin flip flops. I get a kick out of taking off my boots, putting on such blatantly unsuitable-for-hiking shoes, and watching my (almost always white male) colleagues' reactions. Keep blogging them like you see them. Si, se puede.
Posted by: Peanut | November 10, 2008 4:31 AM
Since "SciFi and Faantasy" was mentioned as plausible for a woman in academia, and my Physics professor wife and I are also science fiction authors who have a 13-year-old web site which gets over 15,000,000 hits per year, there is some circle overlapping the subject of this thread and women scientists in the great Venn diagram:
FEMINIST:
science fiction and fantasy of, by, or for women
When Science Fiction was young, there were so few women authors being published that many of them adopted male -- or at least neutral -- pseudonyms. Catherine Lucille Moore, for examnple, wrote as "C. L. Moore"
[see web page for hotlink to Women with Male or Neutral Pseudonyms].
Those days, thankfully, are long gone. Many of today's greatest writers of science fiction and fantasy are women -- Octavia Butler, C. J. Cherryh, Tanith Lee, Ursula K. Le Guin, Elizabeth Lynn, Andre Norton, Joanna Russ, Pamela Sargent, Josephine Saxton, Kate Wilhelm....
The genre has been revitalized, and boasts a significant Feminist subgenre.
Susan Wood and Jessica Amanda Salmonson compiled the following list of
AMAZON HEROIC FANTASY:
1. Marion Zimmer Bradley's "The Shattered Chain" [Daw: 1975]
2. Vera Chapman's "The King's Damosel" [1976; Avon: 1978]
3. Suzy McKee Charnas's "Motherlines" [Berkeley: 1978]
4. C. J. Cherryh's "Gate of Ivrel" [Daw: 1976]
5. C. J. Cherryh's "Well of Shiuan" [Daw: 1978]
6. Jo Clayton's the "Diadem" series [Daw]
7. Ansen Dibell's "Pursuit of the Screamer" [Daw: 1978]
8. Diane Duane's "The Door Into Fire" [Dell: 1979]
9. John Russell Fearn's "Conquest of the Amazon" [1949; Futura: 1976]
10. Janrae Frank's "The Ruined Tower" chapbook illustrated by Mary Bohdanowicz [Atalanta Press: 1979]
11. Sally Gearheart's "The Wanderground" [Persephone: 1978]
12. Robert E. Howard's "The Sword Woman" [Zebra: 1979]
13. Tanith Lee's "The Birthgrave" [Daw: 1975]
14. Tanith Lee's "Night's Master" [Daw: 1978]
15. Richard Lupoff's "Sword of the Demon" [Harper & Row: 1977]
16. Elizabeth Lynn's "The Northern Girl" [Berkeley: 1979]
17. Elizabeth Lynn's "The Dancers of Arun" [Berkeley: 1980?]
18. C. L. Moore's "Black God'd Shadow", the collected Jirel of Joiry stories from the 1930s, illustrated in this edition by Alicia Austin [Donald A. Grant: 1977]
19. T. J. Morgan's "Dark Tide" chapbook illustrated by Theresa Troise-Heidel [Atalanta Press: 1979]
20. Andre Norton's the "Witch World" series
21. Doris Piserchia's "Star Rider" [Bantam: 1974]
22. Doris Piserchia's "Earthchild" [Daw: 1977]
23. Doris Piserchia's "Spaceling" [Daw: 1979]
24. Joanna Russ' "Alyx" [Gregg Press: 1977]
25. Joanna Russ' "Kittitiny, a Tale of Magic" [Daughters: 1978]
26. Pamela Sargent's [ed] "The New Women of Wonder", especially the stories by Emswiller, Reed, and Russ [Vintage: 1978]
27. John Varley's "Titan" [Berkeley: 1979]
28. and its two sequels Joan Vinge's "Snow Queen" [Dell: 1979]
29. Stanley G. Weinbaum's "The Red Peri" [Fantasy Press: 1952]
30. Monique Wittig's "Les Guerillieres" [1969; Avon: 1973]
Susan Wood and Jessica Amanda Salmonson compiled the following list of non-fiction resources on the theme of "AMAZONS" and science fiction:
1. Elise Boulding: "The Underside of History: A View of Women through TIME" [Westview Press, 1976]
2. Helen Diner: "Mothers and Amazons" [New York: Doubleday 1930; Anchor, 1973]
3. Jane Cannary Hickok: "Calamity Jane's Letters to her Daughter" [Shameless Hussy Press, 1976]
4. Nancy Myron & Charlotte Bunch: "Women Remembered" [Diana Press, 1974]
5. Julia O'Faolain & Lauro Martines [eds]: "Not In God's Image: Women in History from the Greeks to the Victorians" [New York: Harper & Row, 1973]
6. Sarah Pomeray: "Goddesses, Whores, Wives and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity" [Los Angeles: Shocken, 1975]
7. Rayna R. Reiter: "Towards an Anthropology of Women" [Monthly Review Press, 1975]
8. Michelle Zimbalist Rosaldo & Louise Lamphere: "Women, Culture, and Society" [Stanford University Press, 1974]
9. Joanna Russ: "What Can a Heroine Do" and "The Image of Women in Science Fiction", in Susan Koppelman [ed]: "Images of Women in Fiction: Feminist Perspectives" [Ohio University Press, 1972
10. Joanna Russ: "Amor Vincit Feminam: The Battle of the Sexes in Science Fiction" [Indiana University Press: Science Fiction Studies, 1978]
11. Jessica Amanda Salmonson: "The Golden Age of Sexism" Atalanta Press: Windhaven #6, 1979]
12. Charles Seltman: "Women in Antiquity" [London: Thames and Hudson, 1956]
13. Donald Sobol: "The Amazons of Greek Mythology" [A. S. Barnes, 1972]
14. Merlin Stone: "When God Was a Woman" [New York: Dial Press, 1978]
Women with Male or Neutral Pseudonyms.
Maxim Jakubowski & Malcolm Edwards ["The SF Book of Lists", New York: Berkley Books, 1983, pp.228-229] give a list of 31 women Science Fiction authors who use male psuedonyms or neutral initials. Selected and adapted from that listing, Here are some of those "Women in Disguise":
1. "Paul Ash" = Pauline Ashwell
2. "C. M. Carmichael" = Christine M. Carmichael, Ph.D.
3. "Jayge Carr" = Margery Krueger
4. "Jack Danvers" = Camille Caselyr
5. "C. J. Cherryh" = Caroline Janice Cherry
6. "D. C. Fontana" = Dorothy C. Fontana
7. major screenwriter (Star Trek) "J. O. Jeppson" = Janet O. Jeppson = Janet Jeppson Asimov
8. "A. M. Lightner" = Alice Hopf
9. "C. L. Moore" = Catherine Lucille Moore
10. "Andre Norton" = "Andrew North" = Alice Mary Norton
11. "Kit Reed" = Lillian Craig Reed
12. "James Tiptree, Jr." = Alice Sheldon
13. "S. J. Van Scyoc" = Sydney Joyce Van Scyoc
14. "M. K. Wren" = Martha Kaye Renfroe
And see also:
Nan Bowman Albinski:
* Women's Utopias in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Fiction [Routledge, 1988]
Two important web sites about Feminist Science Fiction are:
[see web page for hotlink]
Feminist Science Fiction
Guide to Feminist Science Fiction Resources
Other interesting feminist science fiction titles:
1. Marge Piercy's "He, She, and It" [Fawcett, 1991]
2. Feminist Cyberpunk Sharon Yntema's "More than 100 Woman Science Fiction Writers: An Annotated Bibliography" [The Crossing Press, 1988] ISBN 0-89594-449-9, $12.95, trade paperback
Posted by: Jonathan Vos Post | November 10, 2008 5:39 AM
Wow! Reading this post reminds me of the younger me… the one who tended to see the negative side of people and to respond in an extreme way. I also know that negative responses never help.
I am a Chinese woman in academia and have two young high-school girls. I didn’t grow up here; and I see how the society here has unknowingly put some “silly” pressure on my daughters. I think we, older and supposedly wiser women, do need to be very careful about how we present ourselves to young women, because the “perceived” negatives (?) tend to attract people’s attention more!
Cooking, shoes, cleaning, and many other things are not just for women… just ask my husband!
We need to be thoughtful and kind to each other (women or not). We need to accept each other's views.
Posted by: jrhs | November 10, 2008 9:01 AM
Cacahuate, si se puede, hermana.
ScientistMother, that's funny because I too tried sex with the mister in an attempt to relax and get to sleep. Mr. Isis was pleased and is not enouraging me to scrap on the internet on a regular basis.
Posted by: Dr. Isis | November 10, 2008 9:13 AM
well, I for one am someone who just started reading your blog on your transition to sciblogs, so I don't really know you except for your intro post here.
I also haven't read all the comments but I noticed one person said something along the lines of "female culture is looked down upon by science" to which I would add that femininity is looked down upon by just about everyone, even a lot of women who express their gender identity in a feminine manner. Which is sad.
And which is also why I was so excited to read your intro post. Here was a female scientist who not only expressed herself in "typically" feminine ways but gloried in that representation.
It doesn't matter how I express my gender identity (or my sexuality, since there seems to be confusion on what high heels might be saying, heh). It just matters to me that, as a fellow woman, you feel safe and free to express who you are and I feel safe to do the same. WIthout judgement or shame or stereotyping.
And I look forward to reading more of your posts.
Posted by: catswym | November 10, 2008 9:23 AM
Femininity and masculinity are about 90% of what's wrong with this culture's gender norms. (Gender = the political performance of sex-role linked traits.) Speaking as a female, non-cisgender person, I cannot in good conscience support the enthusiastic embrace of femininity; it as it stands now, like masculinity, is a broken thing and needs to be discarded. To me, the current gender binary is just another example of the false dualisms that persist (probably because of Greek influences on Christianity) throughout our culture.
I am not a gender essentialist, and I'm not a biological determinist either. If there were a third, non-feminine, non-masculine gender, I'd be it.
That said, I do understand why Isis' position is a radical one; science in general has tended to be an extremely masculine discourse space, so any departure from the norm is thus good and important.
In the context of the wider culture, however, I think such public embraces of femininity are overall directly harmful to other women, in precisely the same ways that public embraces of masculinity are harmful to other men. Until and unless there are more than two options, you're merely reinforcing the frame and raising the bar for the rest of us. (I for one don't want to play, and resent the hell out of being typed as "masculine" -- I'm not -- because there's nowhere else to go.)
Posted by: Interrobang | November 10, 2008 10:39 AM
@Renee - how's this? I don't like people who dislike people for reasons that make no sense.
What you seem to not understand is that most people aren't caricatures and members of only one "culture" as you call it. I find it hard to imagine that you can do good science when something as complex as human beings are broken down into simple one-faceted elements.
Love,
Hip Hop Loving, Classical Music Loving, Dancing Loving, *nix Loving, Mac Loving, Nerdy Boy Loving, Ender Loving, Python (the language) Loving, Shoe Loving, Food Loving, Project Runway Loving, Slashdot Loving, Yellow-Assed PhizzleDizzle
Posted by: PhizzleDizzle | November 10, 2008 10:39 AM
Wow
I am saddened and confused.
I am old enough to have met in person, the working, single(widowed), mother who got introduced to her new 21 yr old boss, was told to train him, and took home the pay cheque 2/3 smaller than his.
All of us working women are standing on the shoulders of those ladies, who fought for equal pay, freedom from harassment and access to the glass ceiling. You young women are taking for granted the rights and opportunities you have today and forgeting that they were unimaginable 50 years ago.
So - for God's sakes - smarten up. Act with dignity, support the sisterhood, respect personal differences and don't feed the beast who is waiting for us to fall on our collective asses.
Isis likes shoes. Her posts are amusing. If you wish to disagree with her, go for it.
But do it as one smart capable women to another. Name calling was inappropriate in kindergarten and it still is.
I want my daughters to have choice ... to be able to follow their passions where they lead, without being told their choices are incompatable with their gender. I also don't want them to forget that their grandmothers did not have those choices, and they have a responsibility to ensure that ALL women's choices are respected.
So hot shoes ... hot cars ... trashy novels... science blogs... creative recipes... decor tips... fishing ...are all valid choices. We did not come this far just to exchange one set of restrictions for another.
Posted by: R E G | November 10, 2008 11:49 AM
I don't subscribe to the "sisterhood" idea that I must support every single female colleague every single time, because we are all women and all in this together. In the past I've worked with female scientists who are disrespectful and/or patronising to their colleagues, rude, arrogant and devoid of all normal social graces. As long as my reasons for not supporting these women are valid, I see no problem with the fact that I joined in bitching sessions about them or reported specific instances of gross disrespect to a supervisor.
Posted by: Cath@VWXYNot? | November 10, 2008 1:08 PM
(Hit post too soon)
For example, I think that my reasons for calling Renee "ignorant" are valid.
Posted by: Cath@VWXYNot? | November 10, 2008 1:12 PM
One of my (other) favorite blogs, Sociological Images, had a nice fifty-cent word for the devaluing of femininity - androcentrism. It's the idea that we value masculinity over femininity so much that both men and women benefit by performing masculinity.
I thought this explained a lot about female culture in science. I've got no desire for girly things myself (I threw away all my business casual clothes when I got into grad school and now I wear only jeans, science-themed t-shirts and raggedy sneakers) but those who want to be feminine should be able to do so without having their science disrespected.
And here are some swim fins for Dr. Isis.
Posted by: Miriam | November 10, 2008 2:07 PM
Most of what I have to say has already been said, and probably more articulately than I could string together, so simply count me down as another standing behind (albeit in flats) Dr. Isis's right to post about shoes.
I don't understand why Dr. Isis's style of blogging serves as a referendum on the freedom of women in science. No one criticizes PhysioProf that by swearing he is perpetuating the stereotype of male scientists being jerks.
I've never heard Isis make the claim that her path is the only path. And frankly, I like Isis's enthusiasm of things unrelated to tenure. If there is one perception/stereotype of a scientist that scares me more than anything, it's not the idea that one should be a white male, but that one should give up everything in the pursuit of science. Dr. Isis offers the model that one can be a kick ass scientist, while still managing other obligations (children) and other loves (shoes, running).
If you don't like Isis's voice, you don't have to listen to it. The blogosphere does not lack for reasonable and diverse perspectives on women in science.
Posted by: Kat | November 10, 2008 2:31 PM
"I don't want to be thought of as frivolous for liking bits of feminine culture, but I also don't want to feel like I'm required to be stereotypically feminine to be thought of as socially acceptable."
+1
"We can dislike Sarah Palin because, well, she's crazy."
This made me lol, but I wonder about it...
"On the other hand, calling her Caribou Barbie is not acceptable."
Why not? Personally, I'd much rather be thought of as "Barbie" than as plain "crazy". Ultimately, none of it could be properly termed constructive criticism.
On the real topic- Dr. Isis sometimes annoys me in how she enthusiastically embraces some mainstream gender values I find somewhat oppressive. Nonetheless, I can still see that Dr. Isis is not, herself, trying to be oppressive. Dr. Isis is not a perfect role model for every female scientist. Just because Dr. Isis may not represent me personally, does not she does not do an awesome job representing some of us. Moreover, it doesn't mean I can't respect the type of scientist she is representing. It's not a zero-sum game where we can only respect a limited number of people or attitudes.
Posted by: Becca | November 10, 2008 3:01 PM
My heavens. Why do we do this to each other?? I read Dr. Isis' post and felt like commenting a simple "here, here"... then I read the comment thread. Please, let's stop the hair-pulling ladies!
@Cath the Canberra Cook "Math is hard, let's go shopping?" Yes, math is hard. Let's get it done, put on our lipstick and hot shoes and go shopping after. Why the hell does it have to be one or the other?? (and yes, those who don't like lipstick and shopping, fine, go entertain yourself as you like, but don't put down those who like "typical" girly things either)
Back in February I blogged about an article written in Wired where the author marvelled at the concept of the "she-geek", the girly-girl geek, and it made me pause... wait, um, isn't that me? like, all the time? Where does this come from? Why do I have to be an odd-ball to be both? :S
I mean, I get it, PropterDoc, maybe not everyone appreciates Dr. Isis' particular writing style, but there is nothing wrong with liking shoes and loving science. Critiquing the mix of shoe/fashion love with hot science Dr. Isis delights us with here as making us look like "shoe fettish ignorant bimbos" feels like a strike against who I am: both a total girly-girl who loves a great shoe, and an intelligent scientist, who just got the PhD to prove it.
Posted by: physics*chick | November 10, 2008 3:02 PM
As background: the closest I have come to murderous rage was about 15 years ago, when my daughter made a very insightful comment about a scientific subject (well, insightful for an 8yo.) I told her she had the makings of a great engineer, and she replied "I can't be an engineer, Daddy, I'm a girl."
She had the good sense then to not tell me which of her teachers had planted that bit of filth. I have since calmed down, but having discovered who the [expletive] was I have a note to send her a copy of $DAUGHTER's dissertation when it is published. Revenge is a dish best served cold.
I hope she drops by, but that's her look out. All of this is by preface to three simple words:
You go, Girl.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | November 10, 2008 4:17 PM
Oh, and about shoes:
My tastes run to the somewhat more functional, but that's just taste. We all create our own self-expressions, and if shoes are part of Isis' total-hotness-aspect (Goddesses are allowed aspects, recall) then I can only admire.
A long-ago girlfriend took me to a Passover Seder. A tiny great-grandmother (with tattooed number on her arm) retired from supervising four generations of her descendents in the kitchen and beheld this goyishe young man rather lost in all of the ritual (and wine!) and laughter and tears and catching-up and ...
"Have another glass," she told me, "it's that kind of a holiday."
Hotness. Shoes. Faculty-Mother-Figure. Wife. Mother. Life is short, don't skip any courses and for certain don't miss dessert.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | November 10, 2008 4:31 PM
KH's comment reminds me the response I get from women in my various social circles who are not engineers or have a PhD. On more than one occasion, I've been told, "You're to smart for me - I can't talk to you." And they're dead serious.
One woman tried to tell me about reading her husband's Popular Mechanics as an attempt at conversation. It was nice of her, but I'm just as comfortable talking about shoes and baking and Domino magazine as I am talking about my field of engineering.
It's frustrating when non-academic women think I am incapable of talking about girl stuff because I'm an engineering professor. And then academic women like KH think wanting to talk about shoes or fashion makes me an ignorant bimbo.
Posted by: Female Engineering Professor | November 10, 2008 4:32 PM
Hey, took me long enough to get to accept myself as maybe someone valuable (actually, it took a PhD, a postdoc, and a job in science), and see that being a scientist is not incompatible with loving science fiction (I had had early hints about that one, considering the number of SF authors that are scientists), doing tabletop roleplay and larp, enjoying sewing and clothes (and shoes, although I am very unhappy when I see all the nice models you have around, and that they are so hard to come around in this corner of the globe), and having a kid. And I want my daughter to grow up seing that her mom can do anything from sewing a dress to installing a new kitchen and be a scientist at the same time. She might want to do neither of those things in the end, but showing her it is possible is, well, the best I can give her.
So go, Dr. Isis !
Posted by: Mag | November 10, 2008 6:03 PM
I am late to the party, but I offer my comments here.
Posted by: Candid Engineer | November 10, 2008 6:34 PM
Dr. Isis,
I really appreciate this post. I'm a way-baby scientist still, but I've already found myself shoved into the "bitch" category of women. And I'm actually very nice! Not the sweetest person in the world, maybe, but I bake cookies for the lab and send thank you notes and help people with their experiments and take younger students under my wing. The only things that qualifies me as a "bitch" is that I am aggressive about taking any opportunity presented me and am not shy about the fact that I am a pretty promising scientist. Things that are "ambition" and "drive" in my male classmates.
I've learned to fight perceptions like this for myself, but it's heartening to find reminders that there are allies out there, particularly goddess allies.
Posted by: Abbie | November 12, 2008 8:30 PM
Dropped by the first day of this article then returned after reading Zuska's post.
@ Renee and Cath - you don't like the feminine culture? Women like Isis are working to widen the feminie culture to include intelligence as well as attractiveness. Girls (actually all kids )need to see that they can be who they are and not let that limit their adult lives.
New reader, not much of a poster:)
Posted by: Casz | November 14, 2008 12:53 PM
I never said she can't be taken seriously, but that she won't. I was just providing an explanation. This is how people work, because it is a good heuristic. Knowing what culture someone belongs to provides some pretty good information about them.
I don't think my interests are superior, I just was stating a preference for those who share them, and stating that other people also prefer their own culture. It's a pretty non-controversial statement, don't you think? Calm down.
As for the other geeky females who are mad at me and seem to think I don't wear high heels and dress up: lol. I love dressing up. In fact, I probably own more high heels than all of you put together, as I supplement my graduate student stipend with prostitution. They just aren't very classy high heels.
Posted by: Renee | November 15, 2008 9:39 PM
Renee is back with more batshit crazy things to say.
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | November 15, 2008 9:44 PM
You know you missed me.
Posted by: Renee | November 16, 2008 12:36 PM
You clearly misinterpreted what I was saying.
Obviously there is not a 1-on-1 correlation with race/gender/ethnicity/sexual orientation/etc. with culture. But there is a strong association. If you notice, many of these groups self-segregate. I noticed that when I was in college, a lot of the black people stuck with black people, and white people stuck with white people, and Asian people stuck with Asian people.
Were they racist? Was I racist for not hanging out with them? You seem to think that I am. But, in your anger, you failed to understand, really, what I'm saying.
Often the groups of Asian kids were from the same region. They spoke the same language. The black kids in these groups played the same music and had a different language as well, although it was more easily understandable than Korean.
My point is that people- including me- are not in perfectly mixed groups of all races, religions, and gender/sexual identities, not because we hate these people because of their characteristics, but because we speak different languages and enjoy different types of media. I would feel completely uncomfortable in these groups of Chinese speaking kids, or gangster rap kids, simply because we are from different cultures.
I never dislike being with someone because of their actual characteristics. I dislike being with people I have nothing in common with. And sometimes that's correlated with their external characteristics.
And yes, I find it pretty funny that I'm apparently both a racist and in an interracial relationship. At some point or another I've been with an entire rainbow of races and sexual and gender identities (although I have never been with an East Asian female. Oh well). Unlike you. No, this does not make me better than you. But it is rather ironic, that the people that are so worried about race appear to be the most racist people of all. When will you learn that race itself doesn't matter, but it's the culture we're confusing with race that does? Did you marry another South Indian because you're racist, or because you shared a certain culture?
Posted by: Renee | November 16, 2008 1:16 PM
Why is it odd that someone could be a racist (whether you are or not I will not say) and be in an interracial relationship? After all, there are plenty of heterosexual married sexist men.
Posted by: sea creature | November 16, 2008 7:40 PM
I am contributing some science to this discussion over on my blog:
http://topyourfragileself.blogspot.com/2008/11/some-social-science-for-ya.html
Posted by: JLK | November 16, 2008 8:23 PM
Let me first say that I am not a scientist. It was always my favorite subject, though. At one point in college (I was majoring in BioChemistry at the time) one of my profs made the off-hand comment that she hadn't had children because she'd been so busy getting tenure. That cinched it for me. I changed my major. Sometimes I regret it, sometimes not. But, it's sad that it's a choice I felt compelled to make.
Also, I don't give a rat's patootie about shoes, but I already like your voice, Dr. Isis. You seem authentic and that's what's important. I agree completely with what you've written. I'll be back when you return to your more humorous posts.
Posted by: Wendy | November 19, 2008 10:04 AM
In response to Cath the Canberra cook (Nov. 9)
she writes at the very end:
"Male scientists: anything goes. Female scientists: hot only."
Couldn't disagree more (with these two sentences and most of Cath' reply!) How about:
"Male scientists: anything goes. Female scientists: anything goes. That includes (for both): being hot and sexy!"
What is the problem with you folks out there. Being diverse is a good thing - and if that includes some wanting to dress in a sexy way (either male of female) so what?! Get real!
Posted by: dave | November 20, 2008 9:35 AM
I have never had a clue about (or much interest in) makeup and clothes, and would probably break both ankles within 5 minutes of wearing high heels. And I was always an unpopular social misfit in elementary school, high school, and even university (despite the female:male ration of 1:6).
So, Dr Isis, I enjoy many of your posts, but get bored with the ones about clothes and shoes (so I don't read them). And I am reasonably certain that it is not your intent to make other women feel inadequate. But for those of us who were told that it was OK that we were not popular and fashionable, because at least we were smart, it can be threatening to see that there are women who are conventionally attractive and socially competent in addition to being smart.
Posted by: Theo Bromine | November 21, 2008 4:33 PM
Can't we all just get along?
Hi, I'm new here.
A quick word to those who dislike shoes:
those of us who like them may have reasons other than joining the patriarchy or whatever it is we feminist sell-outs are accused of doing... shoes (and all fashion items) are wearable art. Art, like science, is very important to society as a whole and to us as people.
Art is also a personal matter - we have different tastes, and there are many styles to suit us all, and different meanings from each culture. Art critics may find the same work both profane and deeply reverential, but that doesn't mean that the artist or the gallery intends any one specific interpretation. In the same way, crocs are considered both the "most comfortable" and "ugliest" shoes by various groups, but unless you talk to the person wearing them you won't know whether they are doing it for comfort or countercultural spite.
I present this viewpoint in the hopes of bringing another definition of "shoes" that may shed light on some of the underlying conflict.
And, of course... a relevant link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCF3ywukQYA
Posted by: Tanya | December 22, 2008 2:05 PM
But you do often sound like an ignorant bimbo. And because you make such a strong point of identifying as a female scientist, your voice becomes associated with female scientists in general.
I fail to see how these plain truths can be classified as:
"...the kind of mean-spirited thing women in academia (and women in general) do to each other..." or what grounds you have for deeming it "unacceptable".
Posted by: RNA Chemist | June 1, 2009 7:10 PM