watermelon-burd:

approachingsignificance:

8 Myths About Scientists
I stumbled across this in Thick Books and Thin Films by Adam Ruben. Pretty good.
Myth #1: Scientists frequently make “breakthroughs.”
Truth: Scientific discovery is agonizingly slow. The only time I’ve ever run naked through the streets yelling “Eureka!” is when I forgot to refill my prescription.
Myth #2: Scientists work in isolation.
Truth: Scientists are even prouder of setting up collaborations than they are of actual results. Most scientific talks end with a slide listing all collaborators like little badges of honor—and the less similar the collaborator’s field, the prouder the scientist. “Well, you know, I might have discovered a cure for tuberculosis,” a scientist will say, “but what I’m really excited about is this new collaboration with an Icelandic poet!”
Myth #3: Scientists possess useful skills.
Truth: Scientists possess useful laboratory skills. But you should never allow a physicist to wire your house.
Myth #4: Scientists follow the scientific method as it was taught in high school: Observation, Question, Research, Hypothesis, Experiment, Conclusion.
Truth: In reality, the way scientists work is more like: Fiddle Around, Find Something Weird, Retest It, It Doesn’t Happen a Second Time, Get Distracted Trying to Make It Happen Again, Go to Chipotle, Recall the Original Purpose of Your Research, Start Over, Apply for Funding for a Better Instrument, Publish Some Interim Fluff, Learn That Someone Has Scooped You, Take Your Lab in a New Direction, Apply for Funding for the New Direction, Collaborate With an Icelandic Poet, Eat Chipotle With an Icelandic Poet, Co-Write Scientifically Accurate Ode to Walrus, Get Interested in Something Unrelated, Apply for Funding for Something Unrelated, Notice That 20 Years Have Passed.
Myth #5: Experiments always yield data that teach or reveal something.
Truth: Let’s say you’re doing an experiment with five mice. These particular mice will turn either yellow or blue. So you walk into the lab expecting to see five yellow mice, which will point to one explanation, or five blue mice, which will point to the other. Instead you would see one yellow mouse, one green mouse, one striped mouse, one plaid mouse (dead), and one mouse that has somehow sewn himself a little blue jacket, though he doesn’t wear it all the time.
Myth #6: A personal tragedy can turn a scientist evil.
Truth: Very few scientists are legitimately evil, though the number rises if you ask graduate students to characterize their advisers. Besides, it’s hard to be truly evil when you don’t have any practical skills.
Myth #7: A scientist can be proficient in all branches of science.
Truth: Exactly what discipline did the professor from Gilligan’s Island specialize in? Chemistry? Mechanical engineering? Coconut-based transistor radio construction? Any time a problem needed solving or a device needed building, the professor knew exactly how to do it. That guy could make anything. Except a boat.
People who don’t understand science assume that scientists can master any subfield. That’s why we’re often asked for our opinions about scientific news items, and we can only reply, “Uh … sorry … I know I’m a molecular phylogeneticist, and this story was about molecular phylogenetics, but, well, I’m a different kind of molecular phylogeneticist.”
Myth #8: Scientists are not sexy beasts.
Truth: Scientists are indeed sexy beasts. Not only do our lab coats make us look dapper and charming, those same coats look even better strewn unceremoniously over a standing lamp while we make passionate love to you.

#7 always gets to me the most. “OMG LET’S GO TO THE SCIENCE CONVENTION!”“ONLY A SCIENCE MAJOR CAN COME UP WITH THESE!” (That is actually a poor paraphrase from my memory of Spiderman in his very first comic talking about his web shooters. I didn’t know you learned about web shooters in SCEINCE.)
“Do you know how important this asteroid may be to science? I may lead to major scientific breakthroughs in the field of scence!”

watermelon-burd:

approachingsignificance:

8 Myths About Scientists

I stumbled across this in Thick Books and Thin Films by Adam Ruben. Pretty good.

Myth #1: Scientists frequently make “breakthroughs.”

Truth: Scientific discovery is agonizingly slow. The only time I’ve ever run naked through the streets yelling “Eureka!” is when I forgot to refill my prescription.

Myth #2: Scientists work in isolation.

Truth: Scientists are even prouder of setting up collaborations than they are of actual results. Most scientific talks end with a slide listing all collaborators like little badges of honor—and the less similar the collaborator’s field, the prouder the scientist. “Well, you know, I might have discovered a cure for tuberculosis,” a scientist will say, “but what I’m really excited about is this new collaboration with an Icelandic poet!”

Myth #3: Scientists possess useful skills.

Truth: Scientists possess useful laboratory skills. But you should never allow a physicist to wire your house.

Myth #4: Scientists follow the scientific method as it was taught in high school: Observation, Question, Research, Hypothesis, Experiment, Conclusion.

Truth: In reality, the way scientists work is more like: Fiddle Around, Find Something Weird, Retest It, It Doesn’t Happen a Second Time, Get Distracted Trying to Make It Happen Again, Go to Chipotle, Recall the Original Purpose of Your Research, Start Over, Apply for Funding for a Better Instrument, Publish Some Interim Fluff, Learn That Someone Has Scooped You, Take Your Lab in a New Direction, Apply for Funding for the New Direction, Collaborate With an Icelandic Poet, Eat Chipotle With an Icelandic Poet, Co-Write Scientifically Accurate Ode to Walrus, Get Interested in Something Unrelated, Apply for Funding for Something Unrelated, Notice That 20 Years Have Passed.

Myth #5: Experiments always yield data that teach or reveal something.

Truth: Let’s say you’re doing an experiment with five mice. These particular mice will turn either yellow or blue. So you walk into the lab expecting to see five yellow mice, which will point to one explanation, or five blue mice, which will point to the other. Instead you would see one yellow mouse, one green mouse, one striped mouse, one plaid mouse (dead), and one mouse that has somehow sewn himself a little blue jacket, though he doesn’t wear it all the time.

Myth #6: A personal tragedy can turn a scientist evil.

Truth: Very few scientists are legitimately evil, though the number rises if you ask graduate students to characterize their advisers. Besides, it’s hard to be truly evil when you don’t have any practical skills.

Myth #7: A scientist can be proficient in all branches of science.

Truth: Exactly what discipline did the professor from Gilligan’s Island specialize in? Chemistry? Mechanical engineering? Coconut-based transistor radio construction? Any time a problem needed solving or a device needed building, the professor knew exactly how to do it. That guy could make anything. Except a boat.

People who don’t understand science assume that scientists can master any subfield. That’s why we’re often asked for our opinions about scientific news items, and we can only reply, “Uh … sorry … I know I’m a molecular phylogeneticist, and this story was about molecular phylogenetics, but, well, I’m a different kind of molecular phylogeneticist.”

Myth #8: Scientists are not sexy beasts.

Truth: Scientists are indeed sexy beasts. Not only do our lab coats make us look dapper and charming, those same coats look even better strewn unceremoniously over a standing lamp while we make passionate love to you.

#7 always gets to me the most. “OMG LET’S GO TO THE SCIENCE CONVENTION!”
“ONLY A SCIENCE MAJOR CAN COME UP WITH THESE!” (That is actually a poor paraphrase from my memory of Spiderman in his very first comic talking about his web shooters. I didn’t know you learned about web shooters in SCEINCE.)

“Do you know how important this asteroid may be to science? I may lead to major scientific breakthroughs in the field of scence!”

Actually, I really like the way they did Ace’s Doctor Who episodes?

savagedamsel:

eccecorinna:

Some of them are confusing and screwy because they’re all out to make Seven ~mysterious~ and I can only hold the plot of “Ghost Light” in my mind for about a minute before it dissolves and stops making sense again BUT.

Ace is a teenage girl with clear motivations, likes and dislikes, and backstory, and all of these drive her through her two seasons of Doctor Who. And she gets a female friend her age on just about every adventure, so there’s Bechdel test passing and sometimes femmeslash subtext. And sometimes there’s a love interest and she gets to flirt with boys too but her storyline always involves other things just as much and moreso.

Ace doesn’t think her parents are her real parents and imagines she’s been stolen away from some alien planet, which is a feeling we can relate to when we’re sixteen. She lies about her age and dumps milkshakes on people. She doesn’t easily connect to adults but at the same time she wants to earn the respect of the adults who count. She’s clever and resourceful but in this street smart way and she’s got that curious Mythbusters instinct to screw around with science and make things blow up, and she’s learning, about herself and about the universe.

And then Seven and Ace’s relationship is full of so much goddamned love I can’t. Not that there aren’t misunderstandings, or tough moments, but at the end of the day he is her teacher and they are so important to one another and aaahhhhh.

There’s that whole post on “strong female characters” vs “strong characters, female” and I’d hold Ace up as an example of the latter category and Doing It Right.

I HAVE A LOT OF ACE FEELS OKAY.

I wish to co-sign every word of this post. 

beautifulwelshvowels:

fiveroundsrapid:

…apparently I made this at a point. 

Look at all these amazing women.

beautifulwelshvowels:

fiveroundsrapid:

…apparently I made this at a point. 

Look at all these amazing women.

"Slut-bashing shows us that sexism is still alive and that as boys and girls grow up, different sexual expectations and identities are applied to them. Slut-bashing is evidence of a sexual double standard that should have been eliminated decades ago…. Slut-bashing sends the message to all girls, no matter how ‘pure’ their reputations, that men and boys are free to express themselves sexually, but women and girls are not."
Leora Tanenbaum, Slut! Growing Up Female with a Bad Reputation (1999)