You are quite correct on all points. The inaccuracy of the exhibit comes from not pointing out that few technical professions in the 19th century had members that were women or people of color, that birth control was a significant factor in women taking control of their lives (and reducing the risk of overpopulation), that radioisotopes are also used in the treatment of cancer, and that nylon (and similar plastics) are used in artificial joints. In other words, the exhibit had NO examples of positive aspects of science. (if you think nylon stockings are positive, you clearly have never worn them;-)
A realistic discussion of science in American life should include the good as well as the bad.
If anybody else has suffered through the *highly* politicized "Science in American Life" exhibit at the Museum of History in DC, you know what I mean. It featured--
1) a intricate diorama of two (white, male) 19th century scientists arguing about who got the credit for inventing saccharine,
2) control panel for a nuclear reactor, and some of the flash-ash images from Hiroshima,
3) blamed the invention of birth control pills for the decline of the American family,
4) the ONLY use for nylon they could come up with was... nylon stockings.
Lots more in that vein. Not a single positive image of science or scientists in the whole thing. American Chemical Society paid 2 million to put that exhibit up, and were so furious with what had been done with their money they insisted their name be removed from it. Plenty of false information in *that* museum exhibit!
I'd say stupid more than insulting. I'm female (and quite at home with equipment much more complex than a printer) and I figured out a long time ago I could get cheaper socks, shoes, etc. if I didn't buy the "pink" ones. I hate pink. (Marketers hate *me*.)
I saw some idiotic "women friendly" hammers at a hardware store once. Yes, you guessed it. Pink handles. woo. That makes *all* the difference.
Slashdot Mirror
You are quite correct on all points. The inaccuracy of the exhibit comes from not pointing out that few technical professions in the 19th century had members that were women or people of color, that birth control was a significant factor in women taking control of their lives (and reducing the risk of overpopulation), that radioisotopes are also used in the treatment of cancer, and that nylon (and similar plastics) are used in artificial joints. In other words, the exhibit had NO examples of positive aspects of science. (if you think nylon stockings are positive, you clearly have never worn them ;-)
A realistic discussion of science in American life should include the good as well as the bad.
If anybody else has suffered through the *highly* politicized "Science in American Life" exhibit at the Museum of History in DC, you know what I mean. It featured-- ... nylon stockings.
1) a intricate diorama of two (white, male) 19th century scientists arguing about who got the credit for inventing saccharine,
2) control panel for a nuclear reactor, and some of the flash-ash images from Hiroshima,
3) blamed the invention of birth control pills for the decline of the American family,
4) the ONLY use for nylon they could come up with was
Lots more in that vein. Not a single positive image of science or scientists in the whole thing. American Chemical Society paid 2 million to put that exhibit up, and were so furious with what had been done with their money they insisted their name be removed from it. Plenty of false information in *that* museum exhibit!
I'd say stupid more than insulting. I'm female (and quite at home with equipment much more complex than a printer) and I figured out a long time ago I could get cheaper socks, shoes, etc. if I didn't buy the "pink" ones. I hate pink. (Marketers hate *me*.) I saw some idiotic "women friendly" hammers at a hardware store once. Yes, you guessed it. Pink handles. woo. That makes *all* the difference.