| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
Mildronate
Hazard to Others
Posts: 428
Registered: 12-9-2009
Member Is Offline
Mood: Ruido sintetico
|
|
That picture is from some postsoviet country.
|
|
|
The WiZard is In
International Hazard
Posts: 1617
Registered: 3-4-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Could be. La picture get 300+ Googling hits from round
the world.
|
|
|
hissingnoise
International Hazard
Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: Pulverulescent!
|
|
Mmmm! Thaaat . . . Nipple . . .
I mustn't've been fully weaned, I guess!
Bittie? Bittie?
|
|
|
The WiZard is In
International Hazard
Posts: 1617
Registered: 3-4-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Could be. La picture yields 300+ Googling hits from round
the world.
|
|
|
Al Dehyde
Harmless
Posts: 3
Registered: 26-2-2011
Location: Outback Aus
Member Is Offline
Mood: Steam Distilled
|
|
how many females here?
That's a beauty! im 30, been out of school a few years now and im struggling to find anyone who has an interest in chemistry at all, so if any males
or females in Melbourne wanna genuinely learn and explore all things chemistry then im up for it! Send me a P.M and we'll see, its always nicer to
have someone share the joys and pick up on mistakes ( or as the case for that photo -call the ambulance) you never know what will come of things when
two heads are at work, i have been really looking into biodiesel etc, enjoyed it so much that i started to research anything and everything and
looking to turn my hobbies into a profession  
|
|
|
azo
Hazard to Others
Posts: 163
Registered: 12-2-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
i wish someone would nucleophilic back door my mrs that has an interest in chemistry, but i supose there is even less females in australia with an
interest in chemistry.
regards azo
|
|
|
Mildronate
Hazard to Others
Posts: 428
Registered: 12-9-2009
Member Is Offline
Mood: Ruido sintetico
|
|
ITs soviet glasware and ring stand
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I am a female... admirer
I'm not saying let's go kill all the stupid people...I'm just saying lets remove all the warning labels and let the problem sort itself out.
|
|
|
The WiZard is In
International Hazard
Posts: 1617
Registered: 3-4-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Ring stand?! I never noticed it!
Reminds me 40+ years back, a dentist writes a letter
to Playboy noting that in the previous months issue one
of the female carbon based units had a chipped tooth.
I never noticed that either.
|
|
|
peach
Bon Vivant
Posts: 1428
Registered: 14-11-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I'm afraid the PC bubble has caused us to believe some quite large anomalies. Most girls I've met have very little genuine interest in science. I
spoke to a girl about this at university and she said she was there because her parents expected her to be. Another I spoke to answered "Meh..." when
I asked if she liked science. None of the girls I met at university on science courses did anything to do with science outside of the lectures and
labs.
I suspect a significant percentage of girls doing the sciences now are doing it as a result of the girl power age making them think doing a subject
that was predominately studied by men is asserting some form of power, as some new form of burning their bras, and will ensure they end up being paid
the same amount as men. It is good that more girls feel able to move into science and engineering if they want to, but it is not good if they're not
genuinely passionate about it at heart.
Another interesting part to the puzzle is that universities and companies have to preferentially take girls into these subjects so as to avoid having
bias charges made against them. Girls are also given special grants just for being on science and engineering courses. Things not given to the men. An
odd form of fairness.
A harmful thing has happened over the last few decades in terms of the women's liberation. That is that not only have women been told that 'to be a
woman you must muck in with the boys (pssst... even if you don't want to!)' but that roles typically dominated by women have become shunned.
"She's a stay at home mum (pssst... what a looser)". Last time I checked, men couldn't have babies. And we do need those.
In effect, women's liberation has scored a bullseye shot in it's own foot by wrecking the things women are usually better than men at, and making
women feel like they have to be men to be a woman. Rather than them doing what they want to do, they are (as usual) being told what to think and do.
By other women.
Girls find it special that I can use a sewing machine. My underlying reason for learning to use one was because 5p of thread is cheaper than the £50
for a fitted shirt. I have very little interest in the art of sewing and clothes beyond their utility. I can understand why women are surprised I can
use one (as most men can't be bothered working out how to iron their own shirt), but I would be offended if they thought I was good at it or gave me
sewing machines they wouldn't give to another woman; in reality, a grandma could thrash me on one and I'm not all that interested, so I don't deserve
any special treatment.
I apply the same thinking to girls and science.
[Edited on 5-7-2011 by peach]
|
|
|
sternman318
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 21-4-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
....
There are no pictures peach 
|
|
|
peach
Bon Vivant
Posts: 1428
Registered: 14-11-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Of what?
|
|
|
jamit
Hazard to Others
Posts: 375
Registered: 18-6-2010
Location: Midwest USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
peach, you're absolutely right on! Woman liberation and the way our culture in america gives special privileges to woman in filling quotas in science
departments and engineering and other disciplines of science is just wrong! If a woman is good as what she does, fine, she deserve to be there but to
give special preferences just because she's a woman, just proves that they are not "generally speaking" fit to be there. Our differences are more
than just "biological" but "psychological and even spiritual". Most of the world, except the western world recognizes this because they are honest
about the oblivious (but in the west, its all about political correctness) and their countries are run by men, including science department.
I hope none of you "mostly men" at sciencemadness are wimps when it comes to feminism and all. Women have just as much "smarts" as men, but they are
not "wired" like men, generally speaking, which proves why so few women are part of this forum.
If you're a woman on this forum, please don't take this as a criticism of you... I'm just pointing out the oblivious... few women on this forum and
many other similar forums... you're just one of the special ladies here.
|
|
|
Magpie
lab constructor
Posts: 5939
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Chemistry: the subtle science.
|
|
Marie Curie was also a special lady...a very special lady; and so was Lisa Meitner. I'm sure there are many others.
I think that culture may play a more important role here than "wiring." I would be interested to hear the opinions of former Soviet Union and former
East European (Soviet Bloc) countries on women chemists. During the Soviet period I don't think that culture played much of a role.
The single most important condition for a successful synthesis is good mixing - Nicodem
|
|
|
The WiZard is In
International Hazard
Posts: 1617
Registered: 3-4-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Magpie  | Marie Curie was also a special lady...a very special lady; and so was Lisa Meitner. I'm sure there are many others.
I think that culture may play a more important role here than "wiring." I would be interested to hear the opinions of former Soviet Union and former
East European (Soviet Bloc) countries on women chemists. During the Soviet period I don't think that culture played much of a role.
|
Lisa Meitner screwed big time by the Noble Prize Committee!
Soviet block - comes upon my mind that female Romanian
who "Despite never finishing an elementary education (her records
show that she left school with only a good mark in needlework),
graduated from the University of Bucharest with a PhD in polymer
chemistry and top in a class of 100 women with the honor of
summa cum laude. Her thesis has 162 pages, 32 tables, 40 figures
and 440 references and describes the invention of a very valuable
artificial material." She then went on to publish an astonishing
number of papers in chemistry.
djh
----
Wall Street Journal
Opinion
April 12, 2011
There Is No Male-Female Wage Gap
A study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30 found that
women earned 8% more than men.
By Carrie Lukas
Tuesday is Equal Pay Day—so dubbed by the National Committee for Pay Equity,
which represents feminist groups including the National Organization for Women,
Feminist Majority, the National Council of Women's Organizations and others. The
day falls on April 12 because, according to feminist logic, women have to work that
far into a calendar year before they earn what men already earned the year before.
In years past, feminist leaders marked the occasion by rallying outside the U.S.
Capitol to decry the pernicious wage gap and call for government action to address
systematic discrimination against women. This year will be relatively quiet. Perhaps
feminists feel awkward protesting a liberal-dominated government—or perhaps they
know that the recent economic downturn has exposed as ridiculous their claims that
our economy is ruled by a sexist patriarchy.
The unemployment rate is consistently higher among men than among women. The
Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that 9.3% of men over the age of 16 are currently
out of work. The figure for women is 8.3%. Unemployment fell for both sexes over the
past year, but labor force participation (the percentage of working age people
employed) also dropped. The participation rate fell more among men (to 70.4% today
from 71.4% in March 2010) than women (to 58.3% from 58.8%). That means much of
the improvement in unemployment numbers comes from discouraged workers—
particularly male ones—giving up their job searches entirely.
Men have been hit harder by this recession because they tend to work in fields like
construction, manufacturing and trucking, which are disproportionately affected by
bad economic conditions. Women cluster in more insulated occupations, such as
teaching, health care and service industries.
Yet if you can accept that the job choices of men and women lead to different
unemployment rates, then you shouldn't be surprised by other differences—like
differences in average pay.
Feminist hand-wringing about the wage gap relies on the assumption that the
differences in average earnings stem from discrimination. Thus the mantra that
women make only 77% of what men earn for equal work. But even a cursory review of
the data proves this assumption false.
The Department of Labor's Time Use survey shows that full-time working women
spend an average of 8.01 hours per day on the job, compared to 8.75 hours for full-
time working men. One would expect that someone who works 9% more would also
earn more. This one fact alone accounts for more than a third of the wage gap.
Choice of occupation also plays an important role in earnings. While feminists
suggest that women are coerced into lower-paying job sectors, most women know
that something else is often at work. Women gravitate toward jobs with fewer risks,
more comfortable conditions, regular hours, more personal fulfillment and greater
flexibility. Simply put, many women—not all, but enough to have a big impact on the
statistics—are willing to trade higher pay for other desirable job characteristics.
Men, by contrast, often take on jobs that involve physical labor, outdoor work,
overnight shifts and dangerous conditions (which is also why men suffer the
overwhelming majority of injuries and deaths at the workplace). They put up with
these unpleasant factors so that they can earn more.
Recent studies have shown that the wage gap shrinks—or even reverses—when
relevant factors are taken into account and comparisons are made between men and
women in similar circumstances. In a 2010 study of single, childless urban workers
between the ages of 22 and 30, the research firm Reach Advisors found that women
earned an average of 8% more than their male counterparts. Given that women are
outpacing men in educational attainment, and that our economy is increasingly
geared toward knowledge-based jobs, it makes sense that women's earnings are
going up compared to men's.
Should we celebrate the closing of the wage gap? Certainly it's good news that
women are increasingly productive workers, but women whose husbands and sons
are out of work or under-employed are likely to have a different perspective. After all,
many American women wish they could work less, and that they weren't the primary
earners for their families.
Few Americans see the economy as a battle between the sexes. They want
opportunity to abound so that men and women can find satisfying work situations
that meet their unique needs. That—not a day dedicated to manufactured feminist
grievances—would be something to celebrate.
Ms. Lukas is executive director of the Independent Women's Forum.
|
|
|
sternman318
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 21-4-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I feel like most of your lengthy posts have pictures of some sort. it was a joke- I was trying to make it seem that I cared nothing of what you said,
just wanted pictures
|
|
|
jamit
Hazard to Others
Posts: 375
Registered: 18-6-2010
Location: Midwest USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Magpie |
I think that culture may play a more important role here than "wiring."
I would agree with you Magpie that culture does play a role to varying degree but it's mostly because men are "wired" differently than women that
account for men's dominant interest in science. Even though our culture tries to encourage and even "unfairly" and selectively place women in every
department of science, generally speaking, its still dominated by men in the general public. Many of my engineering friends tell me just how unfair
such a ridiculous policy is in this country. Women who are less qualified in their aptitude and test scores get in while guys with similar aptitude
and test scores don't.
Yes, both nature and nurture plays an important role in shaping a person's interest in science. However "nature" is the foundation and "nurture" can
either encourage and build that foundation but it cannot eliminate it.
Even in a western culture like ours, dominated by "political correctness" and feminism we still cannot produced on a consistent basis a significant
female interest in the area of science... not that there aren't exceptions. You can't quote Madam Curie and a few others and think that this proves
your point. It doesn't!
As this forum has shown and other similar forums as well, most are dominated by men, although there are women present. Why is that? Do we discourage
women in this forum. Absolutely not!
I don't care about gender when I read a post. However since this post is on the subject of the number of females on this forum... the number being
rather small, doesn't this prove my point that men have a greater inclination by "nature" in certain areas of "interest" due to the way they are
"wired" (though nurture/culture does influence to some degree) toward's the sciences.
Thanks guys for letting me express my thoughts. I just know too many friends who are "science majors" who should have received a faculty position in
major universities but because of this STUPID feminist quotas, they were rejected from being considered from such a position all in the name of
"equality". I call this, not equality, but favoritism and injustice! If females are just as "naturally" interested in science as men, you wouldn't
have to give them any "preferential" advantages to make it "equal".
Enough said. |
|
|
|
Magpie
lab constructor
Posts: 5939
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Chemistry: the subtle science.
|
|
Jamit, I can't really disagree with you. But I would still like to hear from our post-soviet bloc members on this.
In my own experience, ie, some 40 years in industry working as a chemical engineer, I did work with several female engineers. Some were competent but
I don't remember any as outstanding.
But place yourself in today's US junior high or high school, where women with intelligence and ambition are deciding what they want as a career. It's
hard enough for a male to show exceptional skill in science/math without being teased as a "nerd." For a female it must be the same as social
suicide.
The single most important condition for a successful synthesis is good mixing - Nicodem
|
|
|
jamit
Hazard to Others
Posts: 375
Registered: 18-6-2010
Location: Midwest USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Magpie... As always you are gracious and wise!
|
|
|
woelen
Super Administrator
Posts: 8027
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: interested
|
|
All this political correctness about the role of men and women is going way too far. Right new there are even creches where children may not be called
'girl' or 'boy' anymore. ALL differences (except the obvious biological ones) about the genders MUST be removed. But I know from personal experience
that there _are_ differences, even with young children. I myself have 2 daughters and a son and I know many little girls and many little boys and
whether you like it or not, there simply are differences. Boys are more 'physical'. They have rougher games, are playing more physically (e.g. running
hard through the house, climbing all kinds of objects). Of course, girls also do such things, but on average there certainly is a difference.
Where I live, there now also is a counterreaction. The people, taking care of all the kids in creches and schools like to have kids playing peacefully
and not too physically. But this is harmful for some boys. These boys just have to run, they have to climb and have to get rid of their energy. In
some places these differences are accepted and boys and girls again are treated (somewhat) differently. Not by forcing them in some role or direction,
but simply by allowing and even encouraging them to play in such a way, which fits the child most.
Of course, when people grow older, the differences between the genders remain. I think that we should accept that. I know women who feel
uncomfortable, because they have two kids and are at home with these kids 80% of their working time. Other women make them feel like they are loosers
because they do not have such a fantastic job or career and just are at home with their kids. There is a lot of social pressure on women to have an
outdoor career, but at the same time the same women must be perfect mothers for their kids and perfect lovers for their husbands. This gives a lot of
stress. So, the old slavery of women being there only to take care of kids, preparing food and cleaning the house and enjoying the men is replaced by
a new kind of slavery due to social pressure. Of course, the last sentence is somewhat exaggerating, but I'm quite sure there is some truth in it.
During my career I have met quite a few women in science and engineering. On university during my PhD research period I shared an office room with a
woman who did research in the field of control engineering. She was a perfect office mate, who really was enthusiastic about her research but at the
same time she also was a nice social person, a pleasure to talk with. She did the research, because she liked it, not because she was pressed to do
so.
Lateron in my career I had to work together with a young woman, who also really liked the work she did (software engineering). But she was a real
nerd. Her appearance was not nerd-like, she looked quite pretty, but her behaviour was really nerdy. I had a hard time communicating with her and
getting information from her and other team members had similar issues with her. She was not social at all.
So, two women in science/technology and two totally different experiences. Women are just like men 
|
|
|
peach
Bon Vivant
Posts: 1428
Registered: 14-11-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I frequently end up in a local primary school helping out, where I get to watch the behaviour of a few hundred children, and have done since I wasn't
much older than them. Your own observations, woelen, are quite correct.
Yesterday I was sat in a class with reception kids. The girl on the mat in front of me was stating, to thin air, who her friends where. Four or five
boys were busy wrestling each other across the carpet. This is standard stuff and is so generic I can confidently say that's normal.
This point;
| Quote: | | But this is harmful for some boys. |
Is dead on.
A lot of primary teachers are women. And where ever there is a single parent, it is likely going to be a woman.
It is hard to watch young boys, even as a guy, hitting each other, coming out covered in cuts and bruises or doing things that look like they're going
to break their neck. But they're not genuinely fighting or going to do all that much damage to themselves and the others, they're just being boys and
getting used to a rougher physical life. There is a fine balance, as playing rapidly turns into crying (as it does in adult men, with guns). The
crying can last all of 1 minute in boys, before they're then sharing action figures with each other.
Another very important factor is them burning off spare energy. If they don't run around, fight with each other and do stupid stuff, they end up like
little nuclear bombs of anger waiting to go off and the problems smear out over weeks, years and their entire life.
I think in the older days this was allowed much more outside school than it is now. Now, the boys have 'problems' if they want to behave like that, in
school or out, and are instead plopped in front of GTA for 6 hours when they get in, after having dinner at McDonalds, again. Enter the Ritalin era.
This is the only problem I have with same sex marriages that, like single parent families, there will be more of a single sided approach to bringing
them up. But that is a complicated issue, more so than that statement can get into. Lacking a dad myself, I never had anyone to share my interests
with and had to do it all myself. This was both a positive and negative thing.
One picture it is. Me with an owl, in a school.
<img src="http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/2005/dscf4156o.jpg" width="600" />
[Edited on 8-7-2011 by peach]
<!-- bfesser_edit_tag -->[<a href="u2u.php?action=send&username=bfesser">bfesser</a>: reduced
image size(s)]
[Edited on 7/16/13 by bfesser]
|
|
|
Neil
National Hazard
Posts: 556
Registered: 19-3-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
First
Second, there are LOTS of girls in science, you just need to look at it as a whole. Bio-engineering? Biology? environmental science? Guys are the
minority there. I am under the impression that there are still more males then females overall, but that balance does seem to be shifting.
Socially there is ample evidence suggesting that peer pressure leads to many females who display mathematical skills dumbing it down to be more
excepted. Add this negative impetus to the difficulty in following through with a massively mathematical science like chemistry, electrical or
chemical engineering etc, and the numbers start to make sense.
Guys get to find a niche being the nerd or the geek (anyone riding white and nerdy?) but girls in the same role are supposed to be sexy nerd eye candy
*hehe yes I have big breasts and am holding a test tube*
Just google "nerd girl" then google "nerd guy"
There are lots of girls who are in science and who know their science cold. Educational institutes such as science centers normally have a very biased
gender ratio with very few males and a very large number of females and not as a result of biased hiring. I've known about ten girls who were 100%
science for every guy who was 100% science in said scenario.
As to schooling, many men avoid trying to teach primary/kindergarten or work with small children. There is such a massive negative stereotype that any
guy who is adult and wants to work with children must secretly want to bugger them, thus many males avoid working with youngsters.
Despite the exceptionally large number of females I know who are in science, none of them do any home experimenting. At the same time despite the
excessively large number of males I know, I'm the only one who is actively pursuing home research at any given time.
Maybe there is a reverse stereotype at play? Guys who are hyper “WHOA SCIENCE” clearly want to make bombs and drugs which means that their
interests and their public actions are somewhat impinged. A forum of like minded people offers a outlet, how many active posters here? Not many given
the number of English speakers who are involved in chemistry all over the world. The same posters on this forum are also responsible for a broad
spread of posts on a number of other forums on a number of topics - once again that's a awfully small number of people.
If this forum is a tiny minority of males, then it makes sense that likewise there is a small number of females – whose numbers are further
constrained by social pressures.
OF course this is aside from the already mentioned likelihood that revealing an extra X chromosome leads to mass overtures of nerd infatuation, http://fatuglyorslutty.com/ .
I'd really like to know - WHY ARE THERE SO FEW HOME EXPERIMENTERS OF ETHER SEX?!
|
|
|
Arthur Dent
National Hazard
Posts: 553
Registered: 22-10-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: entropic
|
|
I knew it... i knew it!!!
You ARE Harry Potter, aren't you? Hah!
If not, you still are a top notch wizard, sir!
Robert
[Edited on 8-7-2011 by Arthur Dent]
--- Art is making something out of nothing and selling it. - Frank Zappa ---
|
|
|
The WiZard is In
International Hazard
Posts: 1617
Registered: 3-4-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Pyrophoric
djh
----
Pyrotechnics, which is captivating
to some people, is a dark chaos
which one cannot penetrate without
the torch of chemistry and math-
ematical calculations.
Claude-Fortuné Ruggieri
Principles of Pyrotechnics
3rd Edition 1821
Translated by Stuart S Carlton
MP Associates 1994
|
|
|
simba
Hazard to Others
Posts: 175
Registered: 20-5-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The chemistry engineering & pharmacy courses in my college is composed mostly of woman.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
