- Crocobile
- Dec 2, 2006
-
|
I feel like there was no way Hillary could escape the sexism of the early & late 90s. Like Elizabeth Warren is a politician people became aware of in the 2010s so she is viewed through the sexual politics of the 2010s, but Hillary cannot possibly escape the impressions and narrative that was started in the 90s. And while she did do some Cool poo poo I think she had a lot of difficulty thinking beyond the political scenario of the 90s and had trouble taking credit for progressive poo poo she did in the 10s.
...I'm so happy the feminism thread is back! I used to lurk it when it was in EN but then it got weird and I stopped. There was a point when people were making amazing effort posts on women in history; is there anyway people could repost those? I actually copied someone's posts on Cecilia Payne, Liz Hartel and Shan Zheng. I seem to remember posts on the Countess of Carlisle and a woman in Panama who had Jesus/Mary-like idolatry painted about her?
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2017 07:12
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 19:42
|
|
- Crocobile
- Dec 2, 2006
-
|
That sounds really neat; I can look for them at some point. Feel free to post the ones you have saved, unless other people say they aren't interested. I mean, I'm interested!
Here's what I have saved! Copy pasted from the old feminism thread (I didn't write these, I don't remember who the posters were!) ...
quote:Payne, Cecilia: Since her death in 1979, the woman who discovered what the universe is made of has not so much as received a memorial plaque. Her newspaper obituaries do not mention her greatest discovery. […] Every high school student knows that Isaac Newton discovered gravity, that Charles Darwin discovered evolution, and that Albert Einstein discovered the relativity of time. But when it comes to the composition of our universe, the textbooks simply say that the most abundant atom in the universe is hydrogen. And no one ever wonders how we know.
—
Jeremy Knowles, discussing the complete lack of recognition Cecilia Payne gets, even today, for her revolutionary discovery.
-OH WAIT LEMME TELL YOU ABOUT CECILIA PAYNE.
Cecilia Payne’s mother refused to spend money on her college education, so she won a scholarship to Cambridge.
Cecilia Payne completed her studies, but Cambridge wouldn’t give her a degree because she was a woman, so she said gently caress that and moved to the United States to work at Harvard.
Cecilia Payne was the first person ever to earn a Ph.D. in astronomy from Radcliffe College, with what Otto Strauve called “the most brilliant Ph.D. thesis ever written in astronomy.”
Not only did Cecilia Payne discover what the universe is made of, she also discovered what the sun is made of (Henry Norris Russell, a fellow astronomer, is usually given credit for discovering that the sun’s composition is different from the Earth’s, but he came to his conclusions four years later than Payne—after telling her not to publish).
Cecilia Payne is the reason we know basically anything about variable stars (stars whose brightness as seen from earth fluctuates). Literally every other study on variable stars is based on her work.
Cecilia Payne was the first woman to be promoted to full professor from within Harvard, and is often credited with breaking the glass ceiling for women in the Harvard science department and in astronomy, as well as inspiring entire generations of women to take up science.
Cecilia Payne is awesome and everyone should know her
quote:Hartel, Liz: "For fun google about the first Olympics where they removed the restriction that competitors in equestrian events had to be Military in 1952. There was no rule on the books saying only men could compete in Olympic dressage. So in allowing civilian men they accidentally allowed women.
Lis Hartel wasn't just a woman. She was a partially paralyzed polio survivor who needed help to mount and dismount her horse.
And she took silver that year. Over the flower of military chivalry."
quote:Zhang, Shan: Ok let's go into backstory.
The first time a woman took gold in mixed gender Olympic skeet shooting was Shan Zhang in 1992. Note, women were only permitted to shoot in the Olympics at all starting in 1976. However, 2/3rds of the podium was male. Juan Ghia and Bruno Rossetti. Neither gender dominated the other. You could not look at that single event and declare either gender to have an advantage. At 223 total points Shan was 1 point ahead of Juan at 222.
And the Olympic committee immediately canceled mixed gender skeet shooting. Today Olympic skeet shooting is segregated by gender.
Furthermore, the courses are different. In the first round for women's skeet shooting they have three sets of 25 targets each. The men's first round has them shoot five sets of 25 each. Because point are issued per target and the men get 50 additional targets to shoot at this ensures that all the men's scores will be higher than all the women's scores. A man would have to miss 50 clay pigeons to get a score as low as a woman who hit every target offered her.
In the 2012 Olympics qualifying round Kim Rhode shot 74/75 targets for first in the women's group. Vincent Hancock shot 123/125 targets for first in the men's group. Both hit 74/75 on their first three sets.
They seem pretty well drat matched to me.
You can see this pattern persisted in other Olympic sports segregated for political rather than physical reasons.
The women's bobsled competition only allows two-person sleds while the men compete in four-person sleds which achieve higher speeds due to more mass. Women's ski jumping was only Included on the Olympics this year after a decade of campaigning and some law suits. But they'll be jumping off a smaller hill.not because they want to or need to. In less prestigious competitions men and women jump the same hills. But because the Olympic committee has expressed concerns that the long jump is to rigorous for female bodies and is putting them on a smaller hill for their own safety.
Which, coincidentally, ensures that the distances they jump will be shorter than the men's. Physics, not gender, will see to that.
The documentary Fighting Gravity covers the decade long fight of elite women ski jumpers to be allowed in the Olympics at all.
...That's what I have saved! I keep a note file of inspiring women in history, so I'm always delighted to have more stuff to add to my list.
Crocobile fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Jan 8, 2017
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2017 07:54
|
|
- Crocobile
- Dec 2, 2006
-
|
Yes please do! I read a ton about archaeology and one thing I read lately talked about how sexist assumptions work their way into interpretations of what objects were for or art was depicting. Female figures are always "fertility" figures, any skeleton buried with weapons was a man, etc. Do you know anything about that?
Yeah yeah yeah! Also I heard a theory once (I can't remember where) that those headless "fertility figures" could be self-portraits of women? Like the exaggerated breasts/belly and tapered feet are a pretty convincing likeness to when you look down at your own body, which was an interesting take. IDK if that's a real archeological take or just an Internet take though.
I'm pretty down for any posts on history/sociology/anthropology that debunk patriarchal thought. Post-election I've found a couple of my otherwise cool male friends have been spending way too much time reading r/atheism and have terrible opinions re:feminism. So far the fastest way to shut them up has throwing academic research/papers/the dictionary/etc in their face. Precious that a group that prides itself on "rational thought" spends so little time actually reading published scientific papers.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 00:16
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2017 07:12
