Crime Particles For Justice: Sexism, Gender & Physics

[MVelsor]

Their usually isn't a microscope in the kitchen, which is a disadvantage.

#FreeViva

 

[Hadron90]

01. Sir Isaac Newton
02. Albert Einstein
03. James Clerk Maxwell
04. Michael Faraday
05. Erwin Schrödinger
06. Werner Heisenberg
07. Paul Dirac
08. Ernest Rutherford
09. JJ Thomson
10. Max Planck

1. Galileo
2. Newton
3. Maxwell
4. Einstein
5. Dirac
6. Boltzmann
7. Kepler
8. Schrodinger
9. Lorentz
10. Jacob Barnett

 

[Hadron90]

There's no intellectual superiority that accords to gender. None. Brilliant scientists regardless of gender.

What evidence do you have for that? Obviously there will be some women great at physics, because there are billions of them, but what makes you think the statistical distributions for physics aptitude should be the same between genders? There are certainly statistical differences between our brains, is there any reason I should expect that to not matter?

 

[MVelsor]

@esdoornblad Why are you so hostile to the females?

 

[Billy no mates]

Cern is short for Cernunnos

Short for Cerne Abbas

actually .

 

[bobStash]

Cern is short for Cernunnos

Cern = chicks enjoy running nanneries

 

[RerouteToRemain]

 

[Crom Cruach]

Is under-performing women a phenomenon relevant to just physics?

In my 12 years working in the government technology sector, specifically programming for Web services, I've worked with some incredibly talented women.

Most of which were and are Indian or Chinese, exactly two were Eastern European.

Exactly zero were and are white or black American women, who instead have and do occupy the roles of support services and HR.

I take it that means you are blaming culture rather than gender.

I think most feminists would agree with you.

 

[esdoornblad]

@esdoornblad Why are you so hostile to the females?

In my experience females prefer that.

This is an interesting question that is clearly very taboo. In my field of physics, there are no female theorists at the highest level, despite there being some very competent female physicists and some very awful male physicists. My broader experience with respect to gender and IQ mirrors the observation that the male and female Gaussian distribution of IQs have the same mean, but the male distribution has a larger variance (more dumbells and more Nobels). So in terms of innate capacity to be a top physicist, the relative lack of females in the IQ > 140 range limits the number of top theorists.

And with respect to innate interests, we all know that men are just more interested in math and computers, and tinkering with engines and circuits. That difference is also backed up by decades of research that is not controversial among experts.

 

[MVelsor]

In my experience females prefer that.

This is an interesting question that is clearly very taboo. In my field of physics, there are no female theorists at the highest level, despite there being some very competent female physicists and some very awful male physicists. My broader experience with respect to gender and IQ mirrors the observation that the male and female Gaussian distribution of IQs have the same mean, but the male distribution has a larger variance (more dumbells and more Nobels). So in terms of innate capacity to be a top physicist, the relative lack of females in the IQ > 140 range limits the number of top theorists.

And with respect to innate interests, we all know that men are just more interested in math and computers, and tinkering with engines and circuit. That difference is also backed up by decades of research that is not controversial among experts.

Do you think Strumia went too far with it?

 

[Son of Jamin]

That is par for the course. The headmaster for a Swedish University College criticized the subject physics because the textbooks focus on determining what is true or false, they are about objectiveness.

In order to attract more female students, the traditional scientific subjects must be replaced by more emotions, subjectiveness and a relational angle of approach instead.

Basically, to attract more females, change the subject to less facts and feelings...

 

[esdoornblad]

Do you think Strumia went too far with it?

With respect to his own career, he obviously went to far. But I think his claims are reasonable. In my experience, there is an obvious "fast track" women can get in physics because of their gender, and that this outweighs any negative effects of "gender discrimination". Of course men can also get fast-tracked in many areas because of (say) who they know. So I see both men and women promoted and achieving positions of power and prestige that they would not deserve in a true meritocracy.

 

[MVelsor]

That is par for the course. The headmaster for a Swedish University College criticized the subject physics because the textbooks focus on determining what is true or false, they are about objectiveness.

In order to attract more female students, the traditional scientific subjects must be replaced by more emotions, subjectiveness and a relational angle of approach instead.

Basically, to attract more females, change the subject to less facts and feelings...

We need MOAR women & minorites in STEM.

That would be great, but what we need are the most talented, qualified and passionate people for the jobs as it isn't spectacularly well-compensated relative to mental workload, what we should (continue to) strive for is equal opportunity across the board and what we can do is (further) attempt to cultivate interest among underrepresented groups.

OTOH the far more radical ideas about introducing (in)equality quota systems, handing out awards just because and interrogating numbers and equations for their role in "promoting white racial interests" is dogshit stupid. "Decolonizing Eurocentric science" isn't an option either. <Lmaoo>

 

[MVelsor]

Not even kidding either, there were a couple of (non-hoax) published papers although the domain for one of them seems to have been moved.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377417

http://ed-osprey.gsu.edu/ojs/index.html

Cliffs:

√ Quantitative data is no less socially constructed than any other form of research material.

√ Racist perspectives are beneath the façade of supposed quantitative objectivity.

√ Numbers are not neutral, should be interrogated for their role in promoting white racial interests.

√ Systems of merit that reward hard work in mathematics classes are a tool of whiteness that oppress minorities.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

I swear the next paper will be whether or not top quarks have consent to be bonded to bottom quarks

 

[MVelsor]

I swear the next paper will be whether or not top quarks have consent to be bonded to bottom quarks

As the @salamander once told me: Anatomical penises may exist, but as pre-operative transgendered women also have anatomical penises, the penis vis-à-vis maleness is an incoherent construct. We argue that the conceptual penis is better understood not as an anatomical organ but as a social construct isomorphic to performative toxic masculinity.

The conceptual penis presents significant problems for gender identity and reproductive identity within social and family dynamics, is exclusionary to disenfranchised communities based upon gender or reproductive identity, is an enduring source of abuse for women and other gender-marginalized groups and individuals, is the universal performative source of rape, and is the conceptual driver behind much of climate change.

 

[Lord Coke]

As the @salamander once told me: Anatomical penises may exist, but as pre-operative transgendered women also have anatomical penises, the penis vis-à-vis maleness is an incoherent construct. We argue that the conceptual penis is better understood not as an anatomical organ but as a social construct isomorphic to performative toxic masculinity.

The conceptual penis presents significant problems for gender identity and reproductive identity within social and family dynamics, is exclusionary to disenfranchised communities based upon gender or reproductive identity, is an enduring source of abuse for women and other gender-marginalized groups and individuals, is the universal performative source of rape, and is the conceptual driver behind much of climate change.

,more of a titan fan myself.

 

[MVelsor]

,more of a titan fan myself.

Apollo 16 (Volume Up)



Apollo 17 (Visible Shockwaves)



Project Apollo Archive

10,000+ unprocessed photos organized by mission and sorted by the rolls of film they were on. Some of the Earth shots are incredible.

 

[MVelsor]

Top Contender For GOAT Photograph.

 

[nac386]

We need MOAR women & minorites in STEM.

That would be great, but what we need are the most talented, qualified and passionate people for the jobs as it isn't spectacularly well-compensated relative to mental workload

I've never got the impression that diversity is sought in traditionally uniform occupations simply for the sake of diversity. I have always been under the impression that the goal is to find the most talented, qualified, and passionate people for the jobs, and that you cannot achieve that goal if significant portions of the population feel that they are not right for the field based on a lack of historical representation.

We need more talent in STEM. That talent will only be easier to come by if everybody, including women, know from a young age that they also belong there. "Physics was built by men" is a shallow statement, because it may seem to imply that only men have the capability to be successful in the field, while the reality is also that women have traditionally been forced into different societal roles. Soundbites and catchphrases never tell the whole story, and do more damage than good more often than not.