Dice//
Banned
Agreed there.
I see this more of a hiccup in getting more women in the field (if that?), not as a step back. THe actual problem probably has many other factors to contend with the one fella's bad fashion choice.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
'Shirtstorm' Leads To Apology From European Space Scientist
- Thread starter richiek
- Start date
- Status
Agreed there.
I see this more of a hiccup in getting more women in the field (if that?), not as a step back. THe actual problem probably has many other factors to contend with the one fella's bad fashion choice.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
Why do so many people think this is the one big thing people care about when it comes to this? Has anyone implied that? Has anyone made a "straw that broke the camel's back" comment about this shirt?
Glad to know we're on the same page!
Gentleman Jack
Member
Thank god you're here to reduce what a hundred different people have said into a single sentiment because goodness knows treating individual opinions differently is just so damn hard.
charlequin
Banned
See, this is what frustrates me about this discussion, because this is seems like such an exaggeration of what's happened. Are you upset that a few people tweeted that they were upset about something they saw on television? That women who work in aerospace wrote blog posts talking about how this event was representative of broader institutional sexism? This is the absurd overreaction that is much, much more important to criticize than the original mistake? Sure, the Verge article had a dumb clickbait title. That's fine to object to, but the idea that a reasonable criticism stated briefly and in the moment is innately wrong because a media outlet wrote a dumb clickbait article about it later is obviously silly.
I mean, again, I want to note what is happening here: a person who did something unprofessional, and who, after having this pointed out, agreed that it was a mistake and apologized for it, is being "defended" by people who are insisting that it was wrong for anyone to criticize him in any way to begin with.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Was this really necessary, though? Not elevating the debate with an ad hominem like that.
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552
Dice//
Banned
Was this really necessary, though? Not elevating the debate with an ad hominem like that.
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552
We all have opinions, some much stronger than others. I guess it depends how much weight or accreditation you give those *very* strong and vocal opinions as being that of a representative of their particular stance or as representative of the whole. Certainly no one here feels that way.
It's like when people hate on feminists for the much more radical few but then condemn the whole thing entirely because of these very vocal few.
Yeah I think that's the part of the story I truly find most fascinating.
*woke up*
*put on goofball shirt of tacky sexy women*
"Hey! I look great today! Lets do a press conference!"
entremet
Member
Was this really necessary, though? Not elevating the debate with an ad hominem like that.
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552
Ugh.
Leaving aside everything else ridiculous about this comment, why is it her responsibility to elevate the debate?
Green Mamba
Member
Do you really think he did it seriously thinking it would look good? It's pretty clearly intended to be a joke. A subversion of what you would think a scientist would wear at a press conference about a comet landing. I mean, it pretty clearly missed its mark for most people, but I guess the guy just has an off-kilter sense of humor.
Beerman462
Member
Did he know he was going to be interviewed?
Does it? I mean the dude is crying about it as he apologizes. That doesn't seem like the kind of thing that happens unless you're feeling particularly stressed about the situation (because you're getting hundreds of tweets thrown at you per hour with death threats mixed in).
It's not that it's wrong to criticize or object to these things - but that the tools used to do so are really inappropriate. It's not something that should create a mass public shit storm.
I guess we're still in an age where collectively we're just a bit simpleminded about these public communication tools - and don't wholly understand the reprecussions of small incidental decisions like deciding to use twitter to bitch about public figures.
It feels like there should be a function on twitter where you can privately tweet to people or groups of people (I wouldn't know; I don't use it).
freenudemacusers
Member
radios shipping overview
Member
I think it's worse. We deserve a second apology for his crimes against fashion.
If he meant it to be a joke, he's about as tone-deaf as he would be if he wore it on TV without any particular intentions.
NASA's Mission Control had a polished look in the 60s:
But these days it looks like they've adopted the Best Buy look:
entremet
Member
I think it's worse. We deserve a second apology for his crimes against fashion.
If he meant it to be a joke, he's about as tone-deaf as he would be if he wore it on TV without any particular intentions.
NASA's Mission Control had a polished look in the 60s:
But these days it looks like they've adopted the Best Buy look:
Everyone looked great in 60s.
Don't you watch Mad Men? ;P
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Ultimately, none of us have any responsibility to engage in civil discourse (with the emphasis on "civil"), but it can be argued that this kind of hostile tone, especially on the internet, can lead to a piling on mentality that usually doesn't turn out so well.
However, just as people have been saying that he bears some responsibility as a public representative of his group to act professional and not wear a controversial shirt on TV, acting mean to prove a point on the internet doesn't help her public image, either. Especially when trying to convince that segment of society who is predispositioned to believe that internet feminists are mostly of the hater variety.
I really hope you're wrong, because the theory that he was momentarily incredibly socially unaware is way more charitable than the theory that he woke up and deliberately decided to troll the entire world in a manner calculated to create the most fraught controversy possible.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Always surprising to see how this forum is usually open minded and liberal but when it comes to clothes it's super conservative.
Every time I make a thread about something even remotely unique or different everyone starts absolutely tripping over themselves to come insult it. Do you guys all just wear plain black, white, and gray?
Every time I make a thread about something even remotely unique or different everyone starts absolutely tripping over themselves to come insult it. Do you guys all just wear plain black, white, and gray?
Was this really necessary, though? Not elevating the debate with an ad hominem like that.
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552
Poor thing, the "cool comet landing ruined" for her... That sounds TOTALLY sincere and not fucking bizarre at all.
From what I've read of this thread, this is highly relevant because a lot of people have a very shallow understanding of why this shirt is viewed as problematic. If you don't understand, hopefully this will help you:
That is the problem with that shirt: It sends the same sort of exclusionary message to women as the geeky décor does.
It doesnt require any special sociological training to read the barely veiled message being communicated to these talented and ambitious women: You dont belong here. We tend to think of this sort of outright sex discrimination as being a thing of the past in Western, industrialized nations. The Sexual Paradox author Susan Pinker, for instance, writes of barriers to women as having been stripped away. Her book is peopled with women who, when asked if theyve ever experienced ill-treatment because of their sex, scratch their heads and search the memory banks in vain for some anecdote that will show how they have had to struggle against the odds stacked against women. As well see in a later chapter, blatant, intentional discrimination against women is far from being something merely to be read about in history books. But here were going to look at the subtle, off-putting, you dont belong messages that churn about in the privacy of ones own mind.
[ ]
What psychological processes lie behind this turning away from masculine interests? One possibility is that, as we learned in an earlier chapter, when stereotypes of women become salient, women tend to incorporate those stereotypical traits into their current self-perception. They may then find it harder to imagine themselves as, say, a mechanical engineer. The belief that one will be able to fit in, to belong, may be more important than we realize - and may help to explain why some traditionally male occupations have been more readily entered by women than others. After all, the stereotype of a vet is not the same as that of an orthopedic surgeon, or a computer scientist, and these are different again from the stereotype of a builder or a lawyer. These different stereotypes may be more or less easily reconciled with a female identity. What, for example, springs to mind when you think of a computer scientist? A man, of course, but not just any man. Youre probably thinking of the sort of man who would not be an asset at a tea party. The sort of man who leaves a trail of soft-drink cans, junk-food wrappers, and tech magazines behind him as he makes his way to the sofa to watch Star Trek for the hundredth time. The sort of man whose pale complexion hints alarmingly of vitamin D deficiency. The sort of man, in short, who is a geek.
Sapna Cheryan, a psychologist at Washington University, was interested in whether the geek image of computer science plays a role in putting off women. When she and her colleagues surveyed undergraduates about their interest in being a computer science major, they found, perhaps unsurprisingly given that computer science is male-dominated, that women were significantly less interested. Less obvious, however, was why they were less interested. Women felt that they were less similar to the typical computer science major. This influenced their sense that they belonged in computer science - again lower in women - and it was this lack of fit that drove their lack of interest in a computer science major.
However, and interest in Star Trek and an antisocial lifestyle may not, in fact, be unassailable correlates of talent in computer programming. Indeed, in its early days, computer programming was a job done principally by women and was regarded as an activity to which feminine talents were particularly well-suited. Programming requires patience, persistence, and a capacity for detail and those are traits that many girls have wrote one author of a career guide to computer programming in 1967. Women made many significant contributions to computer science development and, as one expert puts it, [t]odays achievements in software are built on the shoulders of the first pioneering women programmers. Cheryan suggests that t was not until the 1980s that individual heroes in computer science, such as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs came to the scene, and the term geek became associated with being technically minded. Movies such as Revenge of the Nerds and Real Genius, released during those years, crystallized the image of the computer geek in the cultural consciousness.
If it is the geeky stereotype that is so off-putting to women, then a little repackaging of the field might be an effective way of drawing more women in. Cheryan and her colleagues tested this very idea. They recruited undergraduates to participate in a study by the Career Development Center regarding interest in technical jobs and internships. The students filled out a questionnaire about their interest in computer science in a small classroom within the William Gates building (which, as you will have guessed, houses the computer science department). The room, however, was set up in one of two ways for the unsuspecting participant. In one condition, the décor was what we might call geek chic: a Star Trek poster, geeky comics, video game boxes, junk food, electronic equipment, and technical books and magazines. The second arrangement was substantially less geeky: the poster was an art one, water bottles replaced the junk food, the magazines were general interest, and the computer books were aimed at a more general level. In the geeky room, men considered themselves significantly more interested in computer science than did women. But when the geek factor was removed from the surroundings, women showed equal interest to men. It seemed that a greater sense of belonging brought about this positive change. Simply by altering the décor, Cher-yan and colleagues were also able to increase womens interest in, for example, joining a hypothetical Web-design company. The researchers note the power of environments to signal to people whether or not they should enter a domain, and suggest that changing the computer environment can therefore inspire those who previously had little or not interest . . . to express a newfound interest in it."
[ ]
What psychological processes lie behind this turning away from masculine interests? One possibility is that, as we learned in an earlier chapter, when stereotypes of women become salient, women tend to incorporate those stereotypical traits into their current self-perception. They may then find it harder to imagine themselves as, say, a mechanical engineer. The belief that one will be able to fit in, to belong, may be more important than we realize - and may help to explain why some traditionally male occupations have been more readily entered by women than others. After all, the stereotype of a vet is not the same as that of an orthopedic surgeon, or a computer scientist, and these are different again from the stereotype of a builder or a lawyer. These different stereotypes may be more or less easily reconciled with a female identity. What, for example, springs to mind when you think of a computer scientist? A man, of course, but not just any man. Youre probably thinking of the sort of man who would not be an asset at a tea party. The sort of man who leaves a trail of soft-drink cans, junk-food wrappers, and tech magazines behind him as he makes his way to the sofa to watch Star Trek for the hundredth time. The sort of man whose pale complexion hints alarmingly of vitamin D deficiency. The sort of man, in short, who is a geek.
Sapna Cheryan, a psychologist at Washington University, was interested in whether the geek image of computer science plays a role in putting off women. When she and her colleagues surveyed undergraduates about their interest in being a computer science major, they found, perhaps unsurprisingly given that computer science is male-dominated, that women were significantly less interested. Less obvious, however, was why they were less interested. Women felt that they were less similar to the typical computer science major. This influenced their sense that they belonged in computer science - again lower in women - and it was this lack of fit that drove their lack of interest in a computer science major.
However, and interest in Star Trek and an antisocial lifestyle may not, in fact, be unassailable correlates of talent in computer programming. Indeed, in its early days, computer programming was a job done principally by women and was regarded as an activity to which feminine talents were particularly well-suited. Programming requires patience, persistence, and a capacity for detail and those are traits that many girls have wrote one author of a career guide to computer programming in 1967. Women made many significant contributions to computer science development and, as one expert puts it, [t]odays achievements in software are built on the shoulders of the first pioneering women programmers. Cheryan suggests that t was not until the 1980s that individual heroes in computer science, such as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs came to the scene, and the term geek became associated with being technically minded. Movies such as Revenge of the Nerds and Real Genius, released during those years, crystallized the image of the computer geek in the cultural consciousness.
If it is the geeky stereotype that is so off-putting to women, then a little repackaging of the field might be an effective way of drawing more women in. Cheryan and her colleagues tested this very idea. They recruited undergraduates to participate in a study by the Career Development Center regarding interest in technical jobs and internships. The students filled out a questionnaire about their interest in computer science in a small classroom within the William Gates building (which, as you will have guessed, houses the computer science department). The room, however, was set up in one of two ways for the unsuspecting participant. In one condition, the décor was what we might call geek chic: a Star Trek poster, geeky comics, video game boxes, junk food, electronic equipment, and technical books and magazines. The second arrangement was substantially less geeky: the poster was an art one, water bottles replaced the junk food, the magazines were general interest, and the computer books were aimed at a more general level. In the geeky room, men considered themselves significantly more interested in computer science than did women. But when the geek factor was removed from the surroundings, women showed equal interest to men. It seemed that a greater sense of belonging brought about this positive change. Simply by altering the décor, Cher-yan and colleagues were also able to increase womens interest in, for example, joining a hypothetical Web-design company. The researchers note the power of environments to signal to people whether or not they should enter a domain, and suggest that changing the computer environment can therefore inspire those who previously had little or not interest . . . to express a newfound interest in it."
That is the problem with that shirt: It sends the same sort of exclusionary message to women as the geeky décor does.
Green Mamba
Member
I think there's a possibility in the middle--that it was an intended joke but he vastly underestimated the reaction to it.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
When you have to deal with these sorts of sexist things all the time your whole life, it can get pretty draining.
Man, I don't even understand where you begin to get this viewpoint out of this. You're overlooking the other super conservative things going on here.
Fuck I hate twitter. People get whipped up into such ridiculous frenzies.
I always like your scientamifical contributions
No one talks to one another anymore. This more than anything to me is the grand complication. Rather than speaking to him personally and expressing something people silent flock to their twitter application and ascribe meaning to thrifty tacky as fuck shirts, the likes of which where I'm from there's a myriad of flavours for him and her available be it patriarchal or not.
The thing is I can understand how females might find themselves feeling disjointed from the rest in this field. I can understand how individually they might find hardship and strife. How some comments and ideals might wear them thin day in and out.
But it's a fucking shirt that he's wearing because NO ONE, not even the female who gave it to him stopped him from wearing prior to the inevitable backlash because the internet and stuff.
I try to champion equal rights for all and feel as if from time to time I watch my own person or that of other individuals might find themselves infringes upon and it hurts, truly.
This means absolutely nothing to me. Especially in the face of teenage heart throb #97936, on a platter for my damn niece.
The thing is I can understand how females might find themselves feeling disjointed from the rest in this field. I can understand how individually they might find hardship and strife. How some comments and ideals might wear them thin day in and out.
But it's a fucking shirt that he's wearing because NO ONE, not even the female who gave it to him stopped him from wearing prior to the inevitable backlash because the internet and stuff.
I try to champion equal rights for all and feel as if from time to time I watch my own person or that of other individuals might find themselves infringes upon and it hurts, truly.
This means absolutely nothing to me. Especially in the face of teenage heart throb #97936, on a platter for my damn niece.
plasmawave
Banned
Was this really necessary, though? Not elevating the debate with an ad hominem like that.
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552
Sometimes i find myself really hating social media, a lot.
Probably didn't anticipate there being a huge shit storm over a silly shirt. What with the asteroid landing and all.
You realize there are lots of different contexts here right?
Exactly. It's like those scientists at CERN using Comic Sans to present their findings on the Higgs-Boson particle. And of course, The Verge turned that into a thing too.
The guy just wanted to wear one of his tacky shirts for a fun thing to do on the day they LAND ON A COMET, and then this "outrage" happens and completely upstages it.
Dice//
Banned
To be fair do people actually find the picture anything more than 'amusing' perhaps and just another 15 minutes of fame for someone who got famous off a sex tape? No one takes her seriously, she's got a book coming out of selfies she's taken for goodness sakes. I don't think many sane-minded folk would call her a role model.
IIRC the comet got more tweets than Kim's photoshopped butt did if that counts for anything.
GalacticAE
Member
thats a sick shirt
plasmawave
Banned
You mean the shirt was a gift from his female friend and the Kim K photo was actually a male photographer's idea? Whaaaaaaaaaaaaa
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I take him to be a very unique individual with a bizzare and personal sense of style.
Which is why I find the comments about him perpetuating a "typical geek male subculture" a little off base. Geeks typically have sleeve tattoos and garish clothing...?
I think this guy is very atypical of his peer group.
Paracelsus
Member
It is indeed his fault, but in this particular case for paying attention to her. Some times you really need to listen, he should've done like Carmack: when you tell someone wants to make the show about themselves, quickly move on.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
I've grudgingly accepted that these threads will bring out sexist assholes who try and veil their views. However I take exception at people who say the shirt itself is inherently sexist without a doubt. It's definitely overboard for my tastes and lacks tact but it's far more subjective than some would portray it.
I would gladly buy either of these shirts below if they were still available since they are a bit more toned down and less overt with the imagery. Is there something wrong with that?
I was going to discuss the women on the shirt being, you know, not real women, while Kim is, so she has agency while the women on the shirt are very much literally objects. The display on the shit is created and curated, and that effects the message being sent out.
So nice try using the flawed "but a woman made it" defense.
Why would either of these things be at all relevant?
Also,what gives you the idea that people don't think the magazine cover is exploitative? It's a magazine cover with a scantily clad woman on it, obviously it's exploitative. That's literally their business model. We can't make a thread every time a magazine supports the patriarchy, we'd need a whole separate board.
Sapphire Dreams
Member
I am sorry but why would anyone care what the guys wears ? It's none of our freaking business !
It's not not like he was walking naked or with his underwear or something.
It's not not like he was walking naked or with his underwear or something.
I feel like this has been quoted every few pages and still people haven't read it.
He posted it 50 mins ago...
I've grudgingly accepted that these threads will bring out sexist assholes who try and veil their views. However I take exception at people who say the shirt itself is inherently sexist without a doubt. It's definitely overboard for my tastes and lacks tact but it's far more subjective than some would portray it.
I would gladly buy either of these shirts below if they were still available since they are a bit more toned down and less overt with the imagery. Is there something wrong with that?
Those aren't too bad, but still a weird choice for a scientific, professional setting. Especially a setting in which the media is watching.
Are you saying portrayals of fictional characters are more offensive and problematic than those of real women in similar situations?
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
Was this really necessary, though? Not elevating the debate with an ad hominem like that.
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552
no, she's being an idiot.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked