Comments on: “Science Cheerleaders”: feminist FAIL http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/ History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present Sat, 20 Sep 2014 01:22:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2 By: Comrade PhysioProf http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-746173 Sun, 28 Nov 2010 17:47:45 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-746173 What’s the point of wasting time discussing all this 18th Century crapola? Don’t you people realize that’s all just meaningless past history? We are modern Americans, and we freely chose to do the things we do. The activities of a buncha fucken weirdos from hundreds of years ago is no more relevant to understanding us 21st Century Americans than those of green people on Mars.

]]>
By: Feminist Avatar http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-746172 Sun, 28 Nov 2010 17:31:37 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-746172 In 18thC UK portraiture, black servants (as they were termed as slavery was unfashionable and later illegal) wore clothing- but the clothing- usually that of retainers- very definitely marks their status as ‘servants’, ‘less than’ and ‘other’. See the painting: Johann Zoffany’s ‘The Third Duke of Richmond out Shooting with his Servant(c. 1765)’ where his black servant is in retinue for example. There is also a really amazing (and distressing) aristocratic family portrait- the name of which escapes me- which has a small black child dressed in retinue on one side, and on the other side of the painting is a small monkey dressed in identical clothing.

Or occassionally, black people are dressed in ‘ethnic’ clothing (which is usually ‘oriental’ in style, sometimes with turbans)- such as Zoffany’s ‘The Family of Sir William Young’; or Joshua Reynold’s ‘Frederick, Count of Schaumburg Lippe: 1764-67′; ‘John Manners, Marquess of Granby: 1763-65′, and finally his ‘Lady Elizabeth Keppel: 1761′.

]]>
By: Historiann http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-746135 Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:35:01 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-746135 Shaz–yes, I was writing about visual depictions of Africans and African Americans. Other than the stock engravings used in runaway ads, it’s really, really difficult to find a pre-1800 image black men, women, or children wearing clothing.

I thought about including Indians in the above text, but they’re portrayed much more variously, especially once trading cloth/blankets/shirts are adopted by most Indian people. Even early European drawings and engravings (the John White watercolors, ca. 1585) show Indians as wearing deerskin aprons. They may have described the Indians verbally as “naked,” but even these Indians are wearing more clothing than Africans are typically shown wearing.

]]>
By: Feminist Avatar http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-746103 Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:48:09 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-746103 This reminded me of this article: http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2010/11/how_a_15-minute

Which showed that women’s poor performances in physics class were caused by low-self esteem vis a vis science (ie they bought the BS that women weren’t as good at science as men)- and that women basically encouraged to rethink this, performed as well as men for the rest of the year.

]]>
By: shaz http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-745992 Sun, 28 Nov 2010 08:39:03 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-745992 It’s totally not the point and of interest only to the colonial historian crowd: but aren’t the Native Amerians often portrayed as unclothed? And I keep seeing discussion of slaves in “negro clothes” — which just proves your point about the clothes making the man, but is different from not clothed. Though maybe you mean visual representation, and I”m talking about textual descriptions.

Ok, carry on with the main point of the discussion now, all.

]]>
By: Isis the Scientist http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-745846 Sun, 28 Nov 2010 02:37:30 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-745846 I think the Science Cheerleaders may be more subtle than some of us are getting. Has anyone here heard of Radical Cheerleading?

]]>
By: mandor http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-745783 Sat, 27 Nov 2010 22:32:47 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-745783 Inspiration for girls interested in urban planning: work hard and someday Esquire magazine will say this about you!

At a ribbon cutting in Union Square, New York City’s Department of Transportation commissioner, Janette Sadik-Khan, walks the politician walk, four steps and your arm is grabbed, five more and you are spun into a circle of pearls and L’Air du Temps. The commissioner has Anna Wintour hair, a tight face, and a tan, thin body that does not look fifty but mid-thirties, sexy. She wears wraps over sleeveless dresses and when they fall away during rousing handshakes there is a toned yoga shoulder exposed, brownish and unabashed.

She smiles a lot, half like a lady and half like a man.

]]>
By: Historiann http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-745721 Sat, 27 Nov 2010 20:25:52 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-745721 Aurora–my point exactly. As if it’s not difficult enough being a woman in science–now they have to get personal trainers and schedule brazillian waxes and time for highlights at a salon!

Most of the kids they’re trying to get interested in science in programs like the one Zuska describes seem to have better values and a better grip. They just want a normal life and a measure of independence and creativity at work. They’re not thinking about the performance of womanhood.

Perpetua, your comment makes me think about the ageism implicit in all of this reassurance that the beautiful can be smart too: even the beautiful will hit menopause someday. Time, the avenger, will take its toll. As I’ve said here before, just as we’re all only temporarily able-bodied, so some of us are only temporarily beautiful according to dominant cultural standards.

]]>
By: Perpetua http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-745709 Sat, 27 Nov 2010 20:07:30 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-745709 I love how “smart” and “beautiful” are the two characteristics that make a woman “well-rounded.” !!!! How about “smart” and “practical” or “smart” and “creative” or any number of multiple traits that go into making someone well-rounded for reals. Nope. Beautiful has to be there!

@H: yeah, sucks to be the rest of us (who are also, not coincidentally, the majority – the unbeautiful).

]]>
By: Aurora http://www.historiann.com/2010/11/27/science-cheerleaders-feminist-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-745708 Sat, 27 Nov 2010 20:03:59 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/?p=13369#comment-745708 I have nothing against these lovely women who are as beautiful as they are talented. But let us imagine for a moment a future where a woman can become a good scientist only if she can also sing and dance and look fabulous. The rest will be deemed mediocre because of their geekiness. It is bad enough that most of us have to be more talented than the man we work with for the same position and perks. Now we have to look better be be more athletic too? I vote for making geeky seem cool and that’s what I and dozens of scientists I know do everyday.

]]>