Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sexy Female Scientist Video Draws Fire

Posted by timothy on from the marie-curie-or-mary-lou-jepson-or-danica-mckellar dept.

sciencehabit writes "A new video released by the The European Commission — ostensibly aimed at getting girls interested in science — is drawing widespred condemnation from around the web for its depiction of female scientists as sexy models strutting into the frame in high heels and short skirts. A male scientist watching them from behind his microscope doesn't seem to mind that none of them are wearing safe lab attire—he just pops his glasses on for a better look. The rest of the video is a mish-mash of heels, nail polish, lipstick, and sexily smoldering Erlenmeyer flasks, arbitrarily punctuated by girly giggles." The Commission denies that the video (since pulled) was a parody, but they've certainly set the bar high for anyone who wanted to make an actual parody.

24 of 404 comments (clear)

  1. Whats the problem by rossdee · · Score: 5, Funny

    Whats wrong with sexy female scientists - they have them in movies.

    1. Re:Whats the problem by Golddess · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nothing. But seems like it'd do more to attract men to the field.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    2. Re:Whats the problem by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Informative

      Whats wrong with sexy female scientists - they have them in movies.

      Or, applying the term "scientist" more liberally, on the Mythbusters - Kari Byron - though technically, she's an artist. (Women, take your pick from the other hosts, I'm sticking with Kari.)

      More seriously, I know a few women scientists and I can confirm that in many, many cases, the old adage "Beauty * Brains = Constant" is false. Personally, I think smart girls are sexy - end of story.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re:Whats the problem by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An accurate depiction of lab work wouldn't attract anybody, simply because no advert could ever be long enough to capture the true nature of a science (or in fact, any) job.

      The problem is in trying to create a video at all. Ask female scientists why they got into science and create something that triggers those buttons in girls.
      Most likely female scientists didn't become scientists because they wanted to look at pretty colors in glass tubes all day.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    4. Re:Whats the problem by Dekker3D · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd have to agree that Kari Byron both pulls off the "sexy" and "scientist" part better than these girls. And she's not even a scientist, nor trying (or at least this obviously) to be sexy.

    5. Re:Whats the problem by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's totally untrue. There's actually a small positive correlation between IQ and good looks. One hypothesis is both result from good genes. The other is that men attribute intelligence to pretty women. (See halo effect. We also imagine pretty women to be virtuous, witty and nice.)

    6. Re:Whats the problem by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Funny

      Completely agree. The video clearly depicts a beaker smouldering much moreso than any Erlenmeyer flask. How do you mess that up?!

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    7. Re:Whats the problem by Pro-feet · · Score: 4, Informative

      My wife is a sexy scientist. Really. She loves high heels and nail polish. And physics. Believe me, it's true.

    8. Re:Whats the problem by EdIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ick. I'm not sure I'd consider it sexist, but I do consider it bad.

      Ohhh, it's sexist.

      Using good looking models? Not so sexist. Using very well dressed good looking models? Well women scientists are still women. They can dress nice.

      Showing lab equipment, chemical equations, and elements interspersed with cosmetics in a flagrant advertising-douchy way as if that is the only way to keep the attention of women watching it, or to participate in science?

      Sexist. Most definitely.

    9. Re:Whats the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mainzer. But I guess you were so taken with imagining what her tits look like that you didn't notice what her name was.

      Question: why does it matter if she's gorgeous? Is she a better scientist for it? Is her work more notable as a result? She's a remarkably intelligent scientist in her own right, and that's far more important to her scientific credibility than her cup size.

      Pairing "gorgeous" with "brilliant" is sort of like saying, "He's a great programmer. And has a horse cock!" They're two characteristics that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ONE ANOTHER, and drooling over a small handful of smart/pretty women only serves to underscore the sexist, borderline-misogynist, attitudes prevalent in the field.

      If you respect a woman's scientific work, there is no reason to bring her looks into it - it's irrelevant to the study of astronomy.

    10. Re:Whats the problem by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Informative

      As the summary says, the video was pulled from the website. The video you're probably watching is not the one being discussed. I can't fathom who would be so dumb as to think that removing it from the website would be more effective than lying and saying it WAS a parody, even after saying it wasn't. Anyway, here's the real one. The summary was completely accurate.

      I'm suspicious that the whole thing is an overly complicated marketing ploy by some nail polish company, bribe some science commission to put an ad up. It could easily be a commercial for cosmetics.

  2. Finally! by oakgrove · · Score: 5, Funny

    A story where everybody reads the article!

    --
    The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  3. Umm by trifish · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can imagine somebody was trying to address a number one concern of girls: It's not a sexy enough job! And I can't be sexy doing it, either.

  4. Yes, I suppose that's true. by intellitech · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the sense that people read Playboy magazine for the articles.

    --
    vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
  5. Oh God by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This video is awful on so many levels.

    If you really want to close the gender gap, show girls the video of Ariel Waldman's talk at last year's OSCON. That..was awesome.

    --
    Finding God in a Dog
  6. Original YouTube posting now made private? by Wootery · · Score: 5, Informative

    Judging by the 'tweets', what seems to be the original has been made 'private', i.e. taken-down. (I'm assuming that was the official YouTube posting - I can't find anything more official looking.)

    As well as the mirror linked in the summary, we have a Youtube mirror, and another non-Youtube mirror.

    Why would they bother? Do they really not realise that if you release something high-profile on the web, it's out for good?

  7. I don't know about American labs... by Monkey-Man2000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't know about American labs, but this is how we roll in Europe. Especially, Biology labs...

    --
    This post was generated by a Cadre of Uber Monkeys for Monkey-Man2000 (603495).
  8. First of all by mapkinase · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why does anybody want to advertise this way?

    Does science career needs THIS type or any type of advertising?

    People who go to science and people who science need to go into science, have completely different channels of getting into science, being highborn for example (science is one of the most hereditary professions in the world).

    Science does not need extra people, science does not need advertising.

    If science had a want in people, postdocs won't be living on meager 50K a year salary, grown 35 old men with beards and wives.

    Why don't European commission advertise food serving industry, the situation seems quite deplorable there?

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  9. You know you want to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Next stop - stirring more male interest in the nursing profession by making an ad with fast cars in a hospital.

  10. Sexist? by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why did no one complain that they used a sexy male model for a scientist too?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  11. This is nothing! by rbh42 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Please take a look at how things work in Denmark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ8_81Qy9kg&feature=BFa&list=UU3B_-v8-6-_6Px0FwBcLTrw Not at all related to the subject but also funny - and from just across the lawn: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOzwpMs-5bM&feature=BFa&list=UU3B_-v8-6-_6Px0FwBcLTrw

  12. Horrible by JeremyGNJ · · Score: 4, Funny

    What a horrible bunch of stereotypes and role models for young girls. Everyone know that to be smart you have to bug ugly or fat.

  13. An Actual - Real - Female Scientist Responds by ryanisflyboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3eZQHwGQE0&feature=g-u-u

    I agree with Dr. Meghan Gray. She is spot on.

    For those not familiar with Brady (the interviewer and editor of the videos), don't take too much offense. He commonly takes an antagonistic view to help draw out a more in-depth response.

  14. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While there may be some who would be content with closing the gender gap on general principle, for most of us the goal is not warm fuzzies, it really is more and better science. One of the problems we have is that since there are so few women in the sciences, it is very hard to attract new women, even if they have the aptitude. So, the woman who had the potential to be a brilliant bio-chemist goes off and gets a degree in French literature instead and we are down a brilliant bio-chemist. Will all of the women who are attracted by these kinds of efforts make significant scientific advancements? Of course not. Most of the men in the sciences won't either. However, if we can't attract new women to the sciences, we are, in essence, shutting out half of the population from whence these advances could come. This isn't the only reason to want to close the gender gap, but hopefully it will at least convince you that the efforts are not just some pointless progressive feel-good program.