next »

[systeme_d_]

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v477/n7366/full/477626a.html#/comments

I have several women friends in scientific fields.  My physicist friend drew my attention to this piece, and to various responses to this astonishingly sexist article.  Here is one of my favorite responses:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/compound-eye/2011/11/17/nature-publishing-groups-new-journal/

Have you come across any responses/reactions to Rybicki's article?

[grasshopper]

Have you come across any responses/reactions to Rybicki's article?

Nothing nearly as good as that magazine cover. "My Date with Henry Gee." Priceless.

[geonerd]

The response by Paul Anderson is excellent, and right on the money.

[chaosbydesign]

I can't believe Nature published that.

[galactic_hedgehog]

One of the comments:

Henry Gee said: I'm amazed we haven't had any outraged comments about this story.

Henry Gee is one of the senior editors at Nature.  I wonder if he was the idiot editor responsible for this.  If so, given his comment, why the fvck did they publish it?

[lasquires]

What is this I don't even...

[crowie]

Henry Gee is a real piece of work who has a long history of this kind of puerile "provocative" stuff.

[history_grrrl]

Wow. That is unbelievable. Or at least, I wish it were.

But I have to say, it's great to see the female scientists, including younger grad students, weighing in on this -- and equally heartening that male scientists are outraged as well. The point raised about the author's presumption that all scientists are men with wives bustling around the kitchen is especially on target. So much for post-feminism.

[alleyoxenfree]

For my money, this was a great comment:
"The editors of Nature are underestimating the passage of time since the 1950s."

But I also confess that - perhaps it's just the PSU news of late - but what really creeped me out was how titillated these two grown men seemed to be by the chore of seeking out knickers for a young girl.  Over and over, the knickers.  Hee, hee, hee.   

[lasquires]

So basically, the gendered division of labor that was predicated--100 years ago--on the idea that lady parts made made one unsuited for "brain work" is now predicated on the idea that lady parts just make one so much better at stuff like buying food and mops. Apparently, man parts just make one incompetent and useless at that sort of thing, because man brains are all tied up with stuff like iMacs and Physics and coming up with BS evo-psych theories that conveniently justify the status quo, because SCIENCE.

Somehow, I do not think this is progress.

[chromatic]

I read the article, it is an unmitigated embarrassment to the journal and the profession.

[unusedusername]

The article certainly didn't belong in Nature, but it wasn't as inane as some of the responses.  Anybody who thinks that men and women shop the same way needs to get out more.

[polly_mer]

I generally don't read Nature.  However, when I've gone to look up articles, Nature appeared to be a scientific journal, not Parade Magazine.  I would expect to read such a piece as the final comment in Mr. Humor Guy's column or in Reader's Digest.

I'm not offended or anything (some of those women definitely have their knickers in a twist over a silly anecdote), but I remain confused about who the audience for such a piece is when placed in such a journal.  All I can think is that Nature needs a publicity boost, extra clicks on their webpage, or something and resorted to silly tricks to get it.

[galactic_hedgehog]

I'm not offended or anything (some of those women definitely have their knickers in a twist over a silly anecdote), but I remain confused about who the audience for such a piece is when placed in such a journal.  All I can think is that Nature needs a publicity boost, extra clicks on their webpage, or something and resorted to silly tricks to get it.

Think I can get my banana bread recipe in Physical Review Letters?  Just think of how that'll look on my CV!

[polly_mer]

I'm not offended or anything (some of those women definitely have their knickers in a twist over a silly anecdote), but I remain confused about who the audience for such a piece is when placed in such a journal.  All I can think is that Nature needs a publicity boost, extra clicks on their webpage, or something and resorted to silly tricks to get it.

Think I can get my banana bread recipe in Physical Review Letters?  Just think of how that'll look on my CV!

Banana bread seems more like a Journal of the American Chemical Society communication to me.  But, yeah, send that in and I'm sure you can meet the two-page maximum limit.  Or skip that and send it to Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, which has a more international audience.