<p>Once again in honor of Women's History Month and to offset the damage done by Lawrence Summers, I am focusing on a great woman scientist, the renown primatologist <a href="http://www.wic.org/bio/jgoodall.htm">Jane Goodall</a>. Jane Goodall faced many obstacles to her being accepted by the scientific academic community. As Jane initiated her scientific career, she did not have formal scientific training, and went about her data gathering in an unconventional manner.  Some of Jane's strategies included naming the individual chimpanzees that she studied, rather than numbering them, and recording information about chimpanzees' vivid personalities. It was Jane who shook our understanding of what it is to be human by observing chimps using tools to gather food. At this time it was assumed only humans used tools. </p><p>One may ask how a women without (at least initially) formal scientific training could become a world-famous primatologist. It was the brilliance of <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/boleak.html">Louis Leakey</a> to recognize the limitations of formal scientific methodologies. He intentionally looked for someone with intelligence, but no formal science background. Jane had been serving as his personal secretary, and the rest is history. Jane did pursue and receive her PhD, but not before making startling discoveries. She continues to be a tireless advocate for conservation education through her institutes, the <a href="http://www.janegoodall.org/jane/default.asp">Jane Goodall Institutes</a>. Imagine if this different-thinking woman would have been silenced by a Lawrence Summers of her time!</p>
Author Archive
Barbara McClintock
Posted in Women's Voices on March 5, 2005 by Blog Admin<p><span style="FONT-SIZE: 9.5pt; COLOR: #333333; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><font color="#ffffff">In honor of Women's History Month and as a sort of antidote to recent media support of Lawrence Summers' suggestion that women are innately less suitable to enter scientific and mathematical fields, I would like to remind everyone of </font><a href="http://www.nas.edu/history/members/mcclintock.html"><font color="#ffffff">Barbara McClintock's</font></a><font color="#ffffff"> contributions to science. Evelyn Fox Keller has </font><a href="http://www.whfreeman.com/generalreaders/book.asp?disc=TRAD&id_product=1002001829&@id_course=1058000241"><font color="#ffffff">a fabulous book concerning Barbara</font></a><font color="#ffffff">, called </font></span><strong><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #333333; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><font color="#ffffff">A Feeling for the Organism </font></span></strong><b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #333333; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><strong><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><font color="#ffffff">The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. </font></span></strong></span></b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #333333; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><font color="#ffffff">Barbara McClintock represents an instance of how women's cognition is necessary to accurately express the complexities of scientific phenomenon, that traditional reductionistic approaches cannot adequately express. Barbara McClintock was a </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytology"><font color="#ffffff">cytologist</font></a><font color="#ffffff"> who studied higher-level (more complex) organisms than her male counterparts. Although she was a renowned researcher well before 1929, she could not get a tenure track position at a University until 1936, and it was an entry-level position. </font></span><span style="FONT-SIZE: 9.5pt; COLOR: #333333; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></span></p><p><font color="#ffffff"></font></p><p><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #333333; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><font color="#ffffff">Barbara had a unique ability to recognize complex structural relationships in genetic materials by observation that allowed her to discover sophisticated genetic interrelationships, like "mobile genetic elements", for which she was granted a </font><a href="http://nobelprize.org/medicine/laureates/1983/"><font color="#ffffff">Nobel prize in 1983</font></a><font color="#ffffff">. Barbara discovered this phenomenon in the 1940's and yet it took several decades to receive acknowledgment.  It appears that women's interconnected way of thinking actually contributed to Barbara McClintock's brilliance, rather than detracted from it. What do you think of that Lawrence?!</font></span></p>
ABC News suggests that Lawrence Summers is justified
Posted in Sexist pigs on March 2, 2005 by Blog Admin<p align="left">On the <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=537795&page=1">ABC Evening News yesterday (March 1, 2005)</a> Peter Jennings indicated that Lawrence Summers is justified in suggesting that biological differences are a significant reason why women are underrepresented in engineering, mathematics, and science. </p><p align="left">Historically, science has pointed to various physical differences in women to "explain" their inferiority, especially in the realm of intelligence. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/24/science/24women.html?ex=1109912400&en=19c7ed4c1aeb7d00&ei=5070&oref=login">According to the NY Times, "A century ago, the French scientist Gustav Le Bon pointed to the smaller brains of women - closer in size to gorillas', he said - and said that explained the "fickleness, inconstancy, absence of thought and logic, and incapacity to reason" in women.</a>"</p><p align="left">There are clear biological differences between men and women, which applies to our brains as well. I think it begs the question that one brain structure should be superior to the other. Scientific paradigms tend to favor male (atomistic/positivistic) thinking and discriminate against female (contextual and interconnected) thinking styles.  Shouldn't quality problem solving involve multiple thinking strategies and paradigms? <a href="http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2465/is_2_31/ai_71634867">"The Gendered Atom"</a> does a nice job of explaining how science has been biased against women, and does not adequately represent the complex interconnected reality of science.</p><p align="left">Despite the brain research that currently exists, I think it is inexcusable to suggest that women are not cut-out to be scientists or anything else for that matter. It's time to retire Summers!</p>
Bush Abroad
Posted in Media Watch on February 23, 2005 by Blog Admin<p><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">As George W. Bush is traveling in Europe, I am reminded of an international trip that his Daddy made to the Republic of Panama, after </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Just_Cause"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#0099ff">"Operation Just Cause</font></a><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff"><font color="#0033ff"><font color="#0099ff">"</font>.</font> I'd like to draw a few parallels and contrasts. Listening to </font><a href="http://www.ndrinfo.de/ndrinfo_pages_nimex/0,3228,SPM5170_URLaHR0cDovL3d3dy50YWdlc3NjaGF1LmRlL2V4cG9ydC9OSU1FWC8wLDE2NDYsT0lENDA4ODE4Ml9NT0QxLDAwLnhtbA==,00.html"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#0099ff">NDR4 </font></a><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">(North German Public Information Radio) I heard the report of the demonstrations against George W. during his visit in Brussels (and Germany as well). Unfortunately, few mainstream American media sources reported on this issue. During the summer of 1990 I was teaching in the Republic of Panama. During this time, Daddy Bush made a PR stop to show the world the gratitude of the Panamanian people for <em>Operation Just Cause</em>.  To ensure a positive performance by the attendees of Daddy's speech, it was invitation only. (Does this remind you of someone's Presidential campaigning technique?) Despite being invitation only (only wealthy people were invited), the speech did not take place, because the Mayor of Panama City could not finish her introduction due to the tear gas that was thrown. Too bad! I watched the speech live on a military channel, which simply went off the air, after it was apparent that things were not going well. What type of democratic society cannot sustain critical discussion of it policies? What kind of censored country are we living in?!</font></p>
Iraqi Elections
Posted in Media Watch on February 18, 2005 by Blog Admin<p>So a mere $300 Billion to fund massive destruction, <a href="http://www.iraqbodycount.net/">tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis dead</a>, <a href="http://icasualties.org/oif/">around 1500 US military</a> and hundreds of the coalition-of-the-willing dead, and what has the US involvement wrought in Iraq?  Bringing about another religious state in the region? At least the Iraqi people told Bush what they thought of his influence by voting for the US backed party of Iyad Allawi by a mere 14%, and supporting the Shiite, United Iraqi Alliance, by 48%.</p><p>There is a silver lining to this horrific quagmire. According to Naomi Klein in her column "<a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050228&s=klein">Getting the Purple Finger</a>", the platform of the United Iraqi Alliance calls for a time table for US withdrawal, calls for the state to provide all able Iraqis with jobs, and to use oil wealth for economic development projects. Sorry, Cheny you better pack up <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7115-2004Jul22.html">Halliburton and find another counry to plunder</a>. Hopefully, soon you won't have the US tax-payers' money to line your pockets with. </p>
Summers is criticized by other university presidents
Posted in Sexist pigs on February 15, 2005 by Blog Admin<p>In their recent editorial, "<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/02/12/women_and_science_the_real_issue/">Women and science: the real issue</a>" John Hennessey, computer scientist and president of Stanford University,  Susan Hockfield neuroscientist and president of MIT, and Shirley Tilghman molecular geneticist and president of Princeton University criticized <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/01/19/summerss_tortured_logic/">Lawrence Summers sexist remarks</a> at a conference titled, "Diversifying the Science and Engineering Workforce: Women, Underrepresented Minorities and their S. and E. careers".</p><p>Given the long-history of discriminatory treatment of women scientists, male-oriented research paradigms as chronicled brilliantly in "<a href="http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2465/is_2_31/ai_71634867">The Gendered Atom</a>", I guess it's easier to blame the victim and be done with it. </p>
"Freedom" and Meatpacking Industry
Posted in Media Watch on February 13, 2005 by Blog Admin<p><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">I made reference to the irony of Bush's wish to spread "freedom" throughout the world in my </font><a href="http://turing.plymouth.edu/~estiller/blog/archives/20050124.html"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">Jan. 24th posting</font></a><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">. Additonal information has surfaced which was brought to my attention by the recent edition of The Nation magazine. Human Right's Watch has issued a report entitled,  <em><a href="http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/25/usdom10052.htm">Blood Sweat, and Fear, Workers' Rights in US Meat and Poultry Plants</a></em>. </font></p><p><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">Is this the "freedom" that Bush wishes to export to other countries? Does Bush have a different definition of the word, freedom than we do? Perhaps we should look up "freedom" in our Bushionary:</font></p><p><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">Freedom : (Noun) the condition of large corporations being free; the powerof these corporations to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints. The power to under-pay and exploit workers at will.</font></p><p><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333" color="#ffffff">Well, I guess that explains it. But, do we really want to export this "freedom" to other countries?</font></p>
You're a Mean One Mr. Grinch!
Posted in Media Watch on February 11, 2005 by Blog Admin<p><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333">I find the Bush budget to be particularly outrageous, given his (hidden) budget priorities. It seems that all the money is going to the defense industry, and coming out of the pockets of the poor and the environment. He is cutting back on health-care for the poor, pell grants, EPA funding etc.</font></p><p><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333">Guess where Bush got his money? Ok Ok, from his daddy!  But, where did George Sr. get <em>his</em> money?  From <em>his</em> daddy and oil. Historically, the Bush family got their money as from the defence indistry (see </font><a href="http://www.oshoresbooks.com/library/books/americandynasty.htm"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333"><em>American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush</em> </font></a><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333">by Kevin Phillips for details<em>)</em>. According to </font><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040301&s=drew"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333">The Nation:</font></a><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333"> <font size="2">" Phillips argues that the Walker and Bush families, along with other wealthy investment bankers, profited mightily from the rearmament efforts after the end of the First World War and were prominent members of the "military-industrial complex,". </font>Currently, George Sr. sits on none-other than the </font><a href="http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=1875084"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333">Carlyle Group's Board</font></a><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #333333"> of Directors. Do we see a little conflict of interest? </font></p> <br /><a href="http://turing.plymouth.edu/~estiller/blog/archives/9-Youre-a-Mean-One-Mr.-Grinch!.html#extended">Continue reading "You're a Mean One Mr. Grinch!"</a>