Sexy Female Scientist Video Draws Fire

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.

Comments

Whats the problem

[rossdee]

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

Re:Whats the problem

[Samantha Wright]

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

Re:Whats the problem

[EdIII]

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.

Re:Whats the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Finally!

[oakgrove]

A story where everybody reads the article!

Original YouTube posting now made private?

[Wootery]

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?

I don't know about American labs...

[Monkey-Man2000]

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

First of all

[mapkinase]

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?

You know you want to

[Anonymous Coward]

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

This is nothing!

[rbh42]

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

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.