close
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20120114115943/http://membracid.wordpress.com:80/category/ranting-feminist/

Does Google+ hate women?

Ok, that title is way over the top to get your attention.* BUT.banned from google
I do want to talk about what the “no pseudonyms” policy adopted at G+ means for women, LGBT folk, and civil servants.

There are many, many resources that can explain to Google why adopting this policy is a stupid idea (aside from the obvious business advantage of not alienating early adopters and potential G+ evangelists). One of the best can be found at the Geek Feminism Wiki:

The cost to these people {of denying pseudonym use} can be vast, including:

  • harassment, both online and offline
  • discrimination in employment, provision of services, etc.
  • actual physical danger of bullying, hate crime, etc.
  • arrest, imprisonment, or execution in some jurisdictions
  • economic harm such as job loss, loss of professional reputation, etc.
  • social costs of not being able to interact with friends and colleagues

That page goes on to list, in detail, the various ways that these groups can be harmed.   We know that women experience 25 TIMES the amount of harassment online that men do.  We know that 50% of LGBT teens are bullied online, and many of them consider–or commit–suicide.  We know that women are stalked and killed by ex-lovers. We know that LGBT folk are the victims of hate crimes.

Basically, we know that some people are assholes online, and like to target others and make their lives hell. They will do this using their real names; they do this with fake identities.   It’s about BEHAVIOR, not about names.  If your website is full of assholes, it’s your fault for not holding people–whatever name they go by–accountable for their behavior.  Online behavior doesn’t have to be polite or full of everyone agreeing with each other. Conversations just need to not be bigoted, hateful, or destructive.

If you agree that allowing pseudonyms online is important, please visit this petition and sign. It goes directly to Google.

My personal take:

I was banned from Google+ after happily using it for about a week, because I used my pseudonym as my name.  I’m not the only one–a bunch of other bloggers, all of whom have reasons to want to not reaveal their real names, or who, like Lady Gaga, have an alternative name that they are known by.  I have both professional and personal reasons to want to use my pseudonym Bug Girl online.

I can get my profile re-activated by giving Google my real name, and allowing it to be publicly linked with my profile.  But I’m not going to choose to out myself just because some giant world-ruling corporation demands it.   I have been Bug Girl online since at least 1997; as a blogger since 2005.  I initially adopted a pseudonym because I had been the target of some white supremacist groups in the 90s, as well as experiencing stalking.

Later I discovered that I had become a high-enough level civil servant that I was actually PROHIBITED, by law, from having opinions online.  I controlled enough of the state budget that my activities online, if connected to my real name, could be seen as lobbying.  It looks like my current job in Connecticut is going to be bound by the same rules.

I also only feel free to talk about my disability (I have epilepsy) and my status as a rape survivor under this pseudonym. I don’t want my students, my employer, or my mom to find out these secrets about me from Google.

How concerned am I about keeping my IRL name separate from Bug Girl? I am going to be giving a talk at the Entomological Society of America National meeting under the pseudonym of Bug Girl.  When an academic passes up a chance to pad her vita, you know she’s serious about plausible deniability.

Google is targeting people based on how “real” sounding their names are. Had I chosen a name that sounded more plausible, I would probably still be able to use Google+.  I know at least 5 people who put in fake names that are still happily using the service.  It’s a rule that can’t be applied consistently, and it blocks me from participating in a lot of wonderful online conversations.  Google+ is a really great platform, and I liked it a lot before I was evicted.

Google’s adopted a policy that puts people at risk and silences their voices in this new online forum.  Not because we have misbehaved, but because our privacy is important and we won’t give it up.  Google is a company that profits by serving you advertising on YouTube videos where  my friends are threatened with rape and death.  It is beyond hypocrisy for them to say they are concerned about online civility.

I have so many, many wonderful friends online as Bug Girl. I think I could go to just about any town in the world and find someone fun to have a conversation with that knows me as Bug.  I am constantly humbled by how kind and generous people online can be, and the realness of virtual communities.   Please sign the petition and help me share that with others.

(Oh, and make sure to click the Google+ button below! :)   )

Additional links:

*EDITED 7/24 TO ADD: People are getting hung up on the title of this post. It was a deliberately provocative title, but apparently a little too provocative. I have slightly altered it.  I drew a complete blank that afternoon when floundering for a title that would convey that Google had, once again, implemented a policy that would harm women and LGBT folks.

A letter to Richard Dawkins from Victims of Sexual Assault.

I have mentioned before that I am a rape survivor.  And that is why I was horrified to see Richard Dawkins display an amazing amount of ignorance and victim-blaming over the last week.  I asked Stephanie Svan to help me put into words what I was feeling, and the result is below.  If you wish to have your name added to this letter, visit Almost Diamonds for the original post.

I have added a photo of me from that time period.  [edited to add--have removed photo of me at age 18, since some people have copied it and been innapropriate.]

This is the face of “shutting up” and trusting, Professor Dawkins. This is a photo of a girl starting down the road of science. Within 2 weeks of arriving at college, she learned that women in science have a lot more to deal with than just nasty chemistry lab partners.  I almost flunked out my first year of school–and yet amazingly, it was not until years later that I realized that my assault was probably the reason.

Why? Because I was so deeply enmeshed in a culture that wanted me to shut up and be nice to men–which you are promoting and supporting with your comments– that I didn’t know what to do when a boy invited himself into my apartment.   And why I kept trying to be polite and asking “Please don’t do that.”  And why I thought for many years that what happened was my fault.

This is why I am so very unhappy and feeling betrayed by you.   Stephanie says this in a much more moderated way; I just wanted you to hear from me directly, in addition as a signatory to this letter.

Comments here will be moderated as I see fit.  Do not even think of trying to mansplain this to me.

The Letter:

Dear Dick:

At your request, we write to you to tell you what it is that you do not understand about elevators, invitations, and sexual assault. Who are we, and why are we in any position to tell you anything? We are atheists and skeptics, but more relevantly, we are victims of sexual assault.

There are two important things to note about Rebecca Watson’s experience. The first is that she had spent much of her evening telling the people around her, “Please don’t hit on me,” and finished by saying she was done talking and wanted sleep. This was ignored by the man now widely referred to as Elevator Guy. (Yes, it’s been established that he was in a position to hear her. Yes, it’s been established that he followed her out of the space in which she’d been saying this and got on the elevator with her.)

She had said, by unequivocal implication, “No.” He ignored this and did what he wanted to. This is important.

The second important thing to know is that her response was to say publicly, one more time, “Please don’t do that. It makes me uncomfortable.” That’s it. That was her entire response to Elevator Guy beyond telling him she wouldn’t go to his room.

For that response, Rebecca came under considerable fire. This is also important.

The entire drama-filled discussion came about because Rebecca asserted her right and the right of other women to say, “No,” and be heard. It happened because she asserted that men, as well as women, have a role to play in maintaining that right.

Then you spoke. Then you, widely regarded as one of atheism’s leaders, one of the Four Horsemen, decided you needed to say something about this.

You didn’t have to do that. If you felt, as your comments seem to indicate, that too much attention was being paid to this event, you could have simply declined to add yours.

However, that wasn’t what you did. Instead, you said that Rebecca, who was voicing our concerns, was thereby telling other women with other concerns that they were whining. Or perhaps that the rest of us who supported Rebecca when she was criticized for expressing her preferences were accusing these women of whining.

Even if you had stopped there, this would merit an apology. Not only has Rebecca spoken out loudly against female genital mutilation (drawing the ire of those who told her she wasn’t paying enough attention to the boys) and other religion-driven wrongs against women and girls, but her demand that women’s self-determination be respected is exactly what needs to spread in order to prevent the ills you mention. If this is an issue you care about, instead of a distraction from Rebecca’s point, you should be thanking her for her work instead of emphasizing the “chick” in the name of her organization, diminishing her stature.

Then, in response to complaints about that, you told us all that what happened to Rebecca–having her clearly and repeatedly expressed preferences about being hit on ignored–was “zero bad.” It should be clear by now why that requires a correction from you. It also calls for another apology, whether or not you knew the facts above when you wrote your comment. If you didn’t know, you weren’t in any state to lend your position and reputation to any characterization of what happened, much less the mischaracterization you used.

That is where you injured us, the victims. You have made one more space blatantly unsafe to us. We don’t mean safe as in free from any kind of sexual interest. We’re not asking for that, and we don’t want it. We mean that you, a leader in our community, made free with a woman’s experience and rewrote it to suit your own ends.

You decided you knew better than she did what had happened, and you were comfortable explaining it to everyone else. That is part of how communities are ruined and ultimately shaped to support sexual harassment, sexual assault, and rape. That is how offenders operate and how they are excused. That is how the world that hurt us was built. And you have added to that.

That is why you owe us an apology as much as you owe Rebecca. When may we expect it?

Sincerely,


Stephanie Zvan, survivor of teen sexual assault
Bug Girl, survivor of a date rape in 1980
Abigail Marceluk Parker
Chris Tucker
Elyse Anders, rape survivor
Dana Hunter, raped at age 18
Megan Wells, survivor of teen sexual assault
Tracy Walker, raped at 15
Danarra Ban
Paul Mannering
Andrea Gatley, sexually assaulted at age 14. In an elevator in a hotel.
Carol Levesque
Anneliese Bowman
Debbie Hadley, lucky to have fought off two sexual assault attempts by men who didn’t believe no means no
Cori Frazer, survivor of childhood sexual abuse
Leilah Thiel, sexually assaulted at age 16
Helen Krummenacker, victim of repeated schoolground gropings
Edie Howe, assaulted at 7, 9, early teens, by both husbands, by strangers three times
BeardofPants, survivor child sexual abuse, age 7
Julia Heathcote, survivor of sexual assault by her PhD advisor
Rebecca Dominguez, survivor of sexual assault and date rape
Monado, survivor of groping (age 13), rape threats for refusing one of those innocent invitations to go for a ride (age 16), partner rape (age 35)
Doubting Thomas, gang raped at 18
Anarchic Teapot
Amanda W. Peet, date-raped at age 25
Zandperl
Alice, raped at 16, assaulted at 19
Melanie Mallon
Susan Silberstein, survivor of husband and stranger rape
Stephanie Zierenberg, victim of acquaintance rape at 24
Janice Clanfield
Kelly Sexton
Lynn Wilhelm, date raped in the 80s
Robin Buckallew, victim of childhood sexual assault, age 7
Catherine Ann, date-raped at age 30
Shoshana Kane, biologist, atheist, skeptic, rape survivor
Solvei Blue, survivor of sexual assault at age 19
Dr Fiona Wallace MB BS(London), MA, assaulted age 14 when babysitting – by the child’s father
Nicole P., repeatedly raped by ex-fiance
Dorothy M., victim of kidnapping, assault and rape, daughter of a victim of child molestation, mother of a victim of date-rape
Sandy H., survivor of childhood sexual assault
Anne Marie Newman, victim of acquaintance rape, sexual assault by a “friend,” and sexual harassment at work
Alianna B., stalked and sexually harassed for 3 1/2 years
Calebandrew, rape at the age of 15
Catherine Schneider, sexually abused by father from birth to age 14; raped by teen boyfriend age 15-17; gang raped by acquaintances age 22
Skepticalbunny, date rape survivor in 1982
Emily Dale, raped at age 16
Professor Anonymous_Female_Voice_Specialist, BS, MA, first sexually assaulted at age 3 or 4 and several times thereafter, at various ages
Nichole Filbert, sexually assaulted and raped in the process of leaving abuser
Nikoel Stevens
Carolyn, raped on 30th birthday
NameHidden
Maggie Champaigne
Sarah Killcoyne, sexual assault survivor
Emily F, rape survivor
Dianne K, molested at age 9, groped on the bus at 14
Kate W., molested at age 14, groped by multiple strange men, assaulted at age 25
WMDKitty, survivor of domestic assault
Jan Bunten
Bethany Baker, sexually assaulted at age 14
Wilma Janssen, assaulted multiple times, first time at 17
Chris Rhetts
Lee Ruby, survivor of childhood sexual abuse
ChristineCCR, raped, stalked, and sexually harassed
Jennifer Forester, raped by multiple partners
Lynne, raped and multiply assaulted
Cafegirl1995, raped at 13, assaulted at 14
Gwen Olson RN, sexually assaulted by a coworker
Lia C., molested at age 10, groped and ejaculated upon while riding the train at age 19, and date-raped at age 26
Katherine Ann B., survivor of multiple partner sexual assaults, two assaults by strangers, and kidnapping and assault by ex-partner
P. Adams, date raped at age 18
ephymeris, raped and molested repeatedly as a child, raped as a teen
CathyC, survivor of childhood sexual abuse and multiple sexual assaults
Sue Williams, date raped at 20, assaulted multiple times
Jennifer Haden, molested as a child and recently drugged and assaulted
Alexandra B, drug-raped at 18, other various sexual assaults
FranW, raped at age 25 by partner’s contrivance
Jafafa, sexual abuse victim ages 11-14
Mrs. Carol King, first sexual assault at age 7 with more following
StarsEnd42, sexually assaulted on very first date ever, sexually asaulted again at a conference
PixelFish, sexually harassed, verbally and physically, by fellow students and coworkers
Cripdyke, incestuous rape at age 10, domestic sexual assault ages 21-22
Rune C. Olwen, survivor of a Catholic abuse family and repeatedly attacked since;
one of the women who invented women self-defence
Whiteman, sexually abused by father from the ages of 12-15
Rebecca G., survivor of childhood molestation from 5-7, date rape at 16 and at 17, and sexual assault by a colleague in grad school
Nepenthe, repeated partner rape at age 20
Claire D, survivor of repeated and regular rape and gang rape between the ages of 12-15 and date rape at ages 16 and 18
Kate A., survived rape at 19 & multiple assaults
Jenny W, raped at age 14
Ellid, assaulted twice by her own husband in her own home
Sarah, survivor of molestation at 3 & 5, rape at 5, and threats of sexual assault from classmates from 8-17
Aimee McDowd, survived rape at 8, 12-13 repeated molestation and rape again at 15, escaped attempted abduction at 16
Can’tSayWho, raped by friend of 10 years
Kristin, survivor of sexual assault, age 4 and 20
Cynthia Wood, groped by a teacher at 12, raped by a boyfriend at 15
Kay, raped by a partner, groped countless times
Brigitte Hentschel, raped twice, once by a casual acquaintance, once by an ex-boyfriend; sexually harassed and groped countless times
Margaret L, sexually assaulted at 13, raped by a coworker at 22
Elizabeth C., molested as a child
Sarah Rean, molested from infancy, raped at age 18, and assaulted
Michelle, sexually abused by grandfather 4-12
Juliet, sexually assaulted at age 17
Rae, stalked by someone everyone insisted was harmless until he stabbed a stranger
Dr. Dory Green, sexually assaulted at 21 by a casual acquaintance in an encolsed space after politely turning down his advances
Jessa, drugged and raped at age 12
Tamsin, sexually harassed in elementary school with the help of a teacher
Alumiere Sg, sexually abused age 13 – 17, raped as an adult
Veronica
Melissa Faulkner, sexually abused by stepfather for almost a year, age 12
mouthyb, BA, MFA, PhD (in progress), molested at age 9, raped multiple times
Allison, molested ages 13-14, raped at age 22
Sarah J., molested at age 7, assaulted in 2009
Rob, raped at ages 11-13 by a school official
Kathi, raped at age 12
Faith L., sexually assaulted at 11 and 12, raped at 16, assaulted at 18
Gayle Peterson
Jane P., sexually abused at age 6, raped at 8 and 13
Marley, raped at age 16
Heidi H., raped age age 16
Anonymouse, sexually assaulted at age 17 and groped by a college professor age 18
Demetria, survivor of sexual assault July 10, 2009
Joey Nichole Thomas, survivor of child sexual abuse between the ages of 5 & 6

Things do get better, sometimes

I was very excited to see this news this morning:

“Christianne Corbett, a senior researcher at the American Association of University Women (AAUW), will be the keynote speaker at Entomology 2011, the 59th Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America (ESA). Her speech will take place during the opening Plenary Session on Sunday, November 13, 2011.

An important subtheme of Entomology 2011 is “Entomology and Social Responsibility,” an area where ESA President Delfosse feels there is an important nexus of science and society, and one issue of particular visibility is the dominance of white males in elected leadership positions in ESA. Ms. Corbett’s presentation, “Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics,” will address these issues.”

You might remember Corbett’s name from the big AAUW release of data in 2010 with the same name.   To give someone  time in the Plenary Session–the biggest session of the meeting–is HUGE.

To understand just how HUGE (yes, I’m going to keep using random capitols because it is HUGE, deal with it), you have to know something about the history of women in the ESA.

When I started in Entomology, the ESA membership was 3% female.  THREE. PERCENT.
It made going to ESA meetings really freaky. And, creepy. I had more than one faculty member seem to be interested in me…and it turned out that they wanted to buy me drinks for something other than my research prowess.  It was not unusual for the Annual Meeting Program advertising to have women in bikinis modeling backpack sprayers.

BERJAYA

Here is a little something from grad school I found recently during my packing.  Someone fished this letter out of my departmental mailbox, marked it up, and put it back.

That wasn’t that uncommon; I also had someone take my photo off the departmental board and write “boy are you ugly” on the back.

BERJAYA

Those are just two examples I happen to have on hand that visibly show the many little indignities of being a bug broad during that time period.  I have a fair idea who did these things; and I suspect they thought they were being funny.  What I really “heard” though was You Are Not One Of Us.

You don’t belong on the bulletin board with all the faces of people who are really part of this department.

That award you got? They had to give it to a woman, you didn’t really earn it.

It got better; I met a lot of great women at the National Meetings over time, and they encouraged me.  I especially am indebted to Dorothy Feir.  She was a ground breaker all the way: First female faculty member in the St. Louis University Biology department; First woman elected to the Governing Board of the Entomological Society of America; First female president of the ESA society.  As a research scientist, she was the first to demonstrate the presence of bacteria in Missouri ticks that cause Lyme disease.

But it was her taking the time to talk to a lowly grad student that I remember.

Over 20 years ago some brave pioneers formed a Women in Entomology Breakfast group at the ESA annual meeting. It was to help women in entomology network among other women, and mentor students so they didn’t feel isolated.  Suspicions and rumors about what was really being plotted over breakfast were hilarious. The good old boys were terrified of a bunch of women eating pancakes.

So, to travel from having someone write “SLUT” across my first peer-reviewed publication and mailing it to me to seeing a major researcher on women and science be a Plenary speaker–that is, as I have said, HUGE.

Past attitudes within the ESA were that they had a “woman problem.”  Something was wrong with women. They didn’t like entomology. So, if we could just fix women, then the problem would be solved!  It looks like the ESA has graduated to recognition that it could be a problem with the system and the structures of power.

It is really exciting to see tangible evidence of change. I am excited that I’m going to be there this Fall for the Annual Meeting, and that I went ahead and renewed my ESA membership.

Things do get better, sometimes.

And, so, ESA, you’re going to work on the “diversity problem” next, right?

Christian Identity: The scary religion you don’t know about

Sadly, Michigan is home to an awful lot of racist bastards with guns.  The Hutaree group arrested in May 2010 for stockpiling guns and explosives is a pretty good example.  Once again,  Americans were shooting and plotting terrorism–and they were doing it in the name of Christianity.

To those of us who have been targeted by Christian Identity folks, this isn’t all that surprising.  Christian Identity is a particularly virulent (and violent) form of creationism and apocalyptic thinking.  It disguises racism, antisemitism, and brutality under happy, Christian sounding churches and groups. Can you spot the hate group in this line up?

  • America’s Promise Ministries
  • By Yahweh’s Design
  • Church of Jesus Christ Christian
  • Church of True Israel
  • Ecclesiastical Council for the Restoration of Covenant Israel (ECRCI)
  • Fellowship of God’s Covenant People
  • Gospel Ministries
  • House of Yahweh
  • Kingdom Identity Ministries
  • Present Truth Ministries
  • Scriptures for America Ministries
  • Tabernacle of the Phineas Priesthood
  • United Identity Church of Christ
  • United Church of YHWH
  • Yahweh’s Truth

Read the rest of this entry »

Dear Nintendo:

I want to have a little talk with you about the Wii.  Specifically, the Wii Fit.BERJAYA
It’s a cool little thing, don’t get me wrong. Not only am I able to have a quick workout and do some fun hula hooping, but there are lots of games that are highly entertaining at parties.

HOWEVER.

We need to discuss the way in which your device ruthlessly hounds me about weight gain from day to day. I’m subjected to an interrogation about minor fluctuations in my weight. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition in a video game.

Frankly, your choices on this screen are crap. And if I give an honest answer to your machine’s third degree, which is that I DON’T FUCKING KNOW why I gained 2 pounds in one day, I get a lecture from your stupid animatronic Wii Fit board.

I do not wish to be lectured about physiology by a bouncing white blob. In particular because said bouncing white blob does not seem to understand basic human biology.

It’s highly unlikely I ate 7000 calories in just one day, which is what it would take to actually gain 2 pounds of tissue.  You seem to be missing an obvious reason why a large segment of the population might experience significant weight fluctuations over time, despite doing everything “correctly” in terms of the reasons you list on this screen.

Maybe this is because there are no women on your development team. I don’t know, but I kind of suspect that’s the case.

BERJAYA

I find it difficult to believe a female designer would have let a game ship with such an obvious camel toe on the woman yoga instructor.

But I digress.

Anyway, in the interests of improving the usability of the game, I’ve taken the liberty of fixing this particular screen. No need to thank me.

Pest Control: an old metaphor for racism

I happened to stumble across this really horrifying story last week:

Last week the Web site UsedWinnipeg.com ran an advertisement headlined “Native Extraction Service” with a photograph of three young Native boys. The service offered to round up and remove First Nations youth like wild animals, and “relocate them to their habitat.”

The text of the ad read: “Have you ever had the experience of getting home to find those pesky little buggers hanging outside your home, in the back alley or on the corner??? Well fear no more, with my service I will simply do a harmless relocation. With one phone call I will arrive and net the pest, load them in the containment unit (pickup truck) and then relocate them to their habit.”

To complete the clusterfuck trifecta, the image in the ad was stolen from Longhouse Media. In fact, it was from an award winning documentary about native Swinomish youth!

Despicable.

Beyond the obvious hateful racism, there is something else going on, and it’s a pattern: Talking about people of color as pests or insects.

“Nits make Lice.” Remember that one? When Col. John Chivington ordered the use of howitzer artillery guns to fire upon unarmed Cheyenne women, children, and elders in 1864?

This othering is a racist technique that’s centuries old.BERJAYA By treating your “enemies” as less than human, they become non-people.

And if you treat them as pests, well.
You know what you do with pests, right?
You EXTERMINATE them.

What do pests and native/other people have in common in this world view? They don’t respect boundaries. They go where they are not wanted.  Bugs and mice come in your house.  First people come….into your neighborhood.

Let’s just ignore the fact that the boundaries are completely artificial, and it was their habitat in the first place before they were colonized.

I’ve linked here to an image of racist US propaganda from WWII. Same thing, different context.  This is why white supremacists talk about “mud people.” Non-whites aren’t humans. So killing them is easier. And killing them is a duty, not a sin.

Goebbels used this metaphor to rationalize death camps:

“Since the flea is not a pleasant animal we are not obliged to keep it, protect it and let is prosper so that it may prick and torture us, but our duty is rather to exterminate it. Likewise with the Jew.”

William Porter, Chief of the US Chemical Warfare Service in 1944, said “The fundamental biological principles of poisoning Japanese, insects, rats, bacteria and cancer are essentially the same.”

This metaphor between humans, insects, and war is pernicious and common. It dehumanizes its target. It makes them less than human.

Please. Don’t let it go unchallenged.

Additional reading:

Do scientists work too hard?

BERJAYAA recent article in Academe Online had some startling numbers that I had long suspected, but wasn’t able to back up with data until now.

Over half of scientists surveyed–regardless of gender–reported they work 50 hours a week or more.  This work-intensive lifestyle is one of the most frequent topics students (grad and undergrad) ask about when they see how haggard all their professors look.

I think this statement from the article is quite true:

Universities have developed over the past two hundred years to fit men’s lives, both as faculty members and as students. From the nineteenth to the mid-twentieth century, university professors were predominantly men—with stay-at-home wives who organized and cared for the household.

One of the reasons I jumped off the tenure track was that it was not a healthy choice for me, a person with a disability. I don’t, frankly, think it’s a healthy choice for very many people, aside from a few superstars who thrive on stress. An academic life can be wonderful…but too often it’s a toxic environment.

Too much work/too little time is a problem with academia, and also a problem for Americans in general, since Americans have little or no vacation time, compared to other developed countries.  The Academe Online article caught my eye because it  actually was about the role of housework in adding to the burdens of female scientists:

“female scientists do nearly twice as much housework as their male counterparts. Partnered women scientists at places like Stanford University do 54 percent of the cooking, cleaning, and laundry in their households; partnered men scientists do just 28 percent. This translates to more than ten hours a week for women— in addition to the nearly sixty hours a week they are already working as scientists—and to just five hours for men.”

This pretty much validates what I’ve been hearing from friends for many years. While some women have wonderful husbands that help with parenting and housework, most of them still do the heavy lifting around the house.

When you combine this information with the recent National Academies publicationGender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty“, you realize just how important home/house work can be.

In every science field they measured, the proportion of female applicants for tenure-track jobs was significantly less than the number of women completing PhDs in that field. Women received 45 percent of the Ph.D.s in biology awarded from 1999 to 2003, but they accounted for only 26 percent of applicants to tenure-track positions.  Same story in Chemistry –36% of PhDs earned,  18% of applicants for tenure-track positions.

In every field, women were underrepresented among candidates for tenure relative to the number of female assistant professors.  In chemistry, for example, women made up 22% of assistant professors, but only 15% of the faculty being considered for tenure.

I hear–often–from grad students “I don’t want to work in academia because I want to have a life/family/kids.”  I hear it from both men and women.

What does it mean for Academia that some of our best and brightest see it as a machine that grinds up lives and spits out bitter, tenured dead wood?

Back from the ESA meeting!

I’m back from the ESA conference, and will be parceling out reports on the cool research I saw over the next couple of weeks.  I also will have a special guest post tomorrow about a Resource/Cookbook I know we will all need for our Holiday Entertaining!!

A highlight from the meeting:

Immediately preceding the ESA meeting, there was a cheerleader conference in the same building the Entomologists used.

It was in fact the Greater Midwest Cheer Expo, and I am not linking that site, because there hasn’t been a website that made such horrible use of clip art and blinking GIFs since….um…1992. When it would have been state of the art.

And not just any cheerleaders were competing…JUNIOR cheerleaders.  BERJAYA
As in, kids from age 5 to 10.  I  cannot express to you just how horrible it was to see small children dressed in midriff-baring, lowcut cheer uniforms, stroking their stuff and pelvic thrusting as they tried to be Beyonce on a videophone.  Each of them had enough make-up on to cover at least 3 Tammy-Faye Bakers.

One of the folks at the meeting coined the term “prostitots”, which was appallingly accurate.  I could not find an online photo, and I was afraid to take any photos, but the uniforms were about this revealing.

On an adult woman–ROWR. On a kid–EWWWW.

There was a short period during which the two meetings overlapped. Entomologists in Suits. Kids in Thongs covered in glitter.

The end result: SPARKLY ENTOMOLOGISTS.

That part, at least, was awesome.

Word of the day: Egregious

egregious:BERJAYA

  1. Exceptional, conspicuous, outstanding, most usually in a negative fashion.
  2. Outrageously bad.

Example: this headline from Science Daily: Fruit Fly Sperm Makes Females Do Housework After Sex

Seriously. How freakin’ embedded in your culture do you have to be to project your heteronormist, traditional gender role shit onto FLIES, people?

Do fruit flies have a monogamous sex life? No.
Do fruitflies live in houses? No.
Do fruitflies live in nuclear families? No.
Do fruitflies iron, bake, or do any sort of traditional Western gender-role stuff? No.
Is it necessary to have all science news stories relate to humans? No.
Is it necessary to have all science news stories relate to sex? No. Maybe. Yes. What was the question?

PhD comics has an EXCELLENT description of the science news cycle. If you haven’t seen this, go print it out and stick it on your door/cube/whatever.

Anyway.

The paper they were actually describing is this one:

Isaac, R., Li, C., Leedale, A., & Shirras, A. (2009). Drosophila male sex peptide inhibits siesta sleep and promotes locomotor activity in the post-mated female Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277 (1678), 65-70 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.1236

Oddly, no mention of dustpans and ironing there….

The paper is actually pretty fascinating–it provides a connection between a peptide in a male fruit fly’s sperm and a change in behavior in female flies after mating.  Mated females skip their afternoon naps (fruit flies take a siesta, as mentioned in the title of the paper) and spend that time looking for food, or places to lay eggs.

This is, regrettably, described as “domestic type activities” by one of the paper’s authors in the news story, although the actual research paper stays on point and doesn’t branch off into this sort of silly anthropomorpic speculation.

I was not aware that finding food was housework. Thank goodness I have science reporters to help enforce gender norms!BERJAYA

For bonus points, guess the Order of Insect covered in this news release before you click through:

Why Nice Guys Get the Girls

EDITED 11.30.09 TO ADD: Ha! the title of the article has now been changed to “Female fruit flies do chores after sex”. Screen shot of the original article now linked.

News flash: beetles are not the same as women

Amazing. Under this headline:

“Science still cannot explain why women sleep around”

“A study published today in Science details a series of careful experiments Swedish researchers conducted on mating seed beetles (pictured). They want to find out what the benefits were to females who mated with multiple males….”

Now, as a normal person, you are probably thinking: “WTF does a paper in Science about beetles have to do with promiscuity in women?”  The answer would be NOT A GODDAMN THING.
This is one of the most blatant, shameless examples of “sexing up science” I’ve seen in a long time.

Here is the actual paper they are referring to:

Bilde, T., Foged, A., Schilling, N., & Arnqvist, G. (2009). Postmating Sexual Selection Favors Males That Sire Offspring with Low Fitness Science, 324 (5935), 1705-1706 DOI: 10.1126/science.1171675

It is a paper about seed beetles, people. Seed. Beetles.

In the press release covering this paper, there is no mention that this research means anything for mammals, much less humans. So… where did this get connected up to explaining why women “sleep around?”

In the messed up little head of the writer, that is where. Because human women liking sex is clearly deviant, and in need of explanation.

And that is how you get crazy sentences like this one:

“Why would these insects have sex with so many different men, only to choose the crappiest sperm?

As I said initially, Amazing.  Aside from the Green Porno of Isabella Rossellini, I am not aware of any human-insect hookups. (And, frankly, do not want to be aware of any, so please don’t email me.)

There are a whole host of other errors in this i09 article, and I’ll just pick this one:  It does not use the term fitness correctly.

In evolution, the one who dies with the most babies wins. Even if the animal is small, unhealthy, and wimpy.  The males with the most offspring are, by definition, the most fit.

OY.

BTW, I was asked recently to recommend some things to read critiquing evolutionary psychology, and this seems like a good spot to stick some links.

Related posts on Bad Evolutionary Psychology:

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,032 other followers