tinpra

By EILEEN POLLACK
Published: October 3, 2013

Last summer, researchers at Yale published a study proving that physicists, chemists and biologists are likely to view a young male scientist more favorably than a woman with the same qualifications. Presented with identical summaries of the accomplishments of two imaginary applicants, professors at six major research institutions were significantly more willing to offer the man a job. If they did hire the woman, they set her salary, on average, nearly $4,000 lower than the man’s. Surprisingly, female scientists were as biased as their male counterparts.

The new study goes a long way toward providing hard evidence of a continuing bias against women in the sciences. Only one-fifth of physics Ph.D.’s in this country are awarded to women, and only about half of those women are American; of all the physics professors in the United States, only 14 percent are women. The numbers of black and Hispanic scientists are even lower; in a typical year, 13 African-Americans and 20 Latinos of either sex receive Ph.D.’s in physics. The reasons for those shortages are hardly mysterious — many minority students attend secondary schools that leave them too far behind to catch up in science, and the effects of prejudice at every stage of their education are well documented. But what could still be keeping women out of the STEM fields (“STEM” being the current shorthand for “science, technology, engineering and mathematics”), which offer so much in the way of job prospects, prestige, intellectual stimulation and income?

As one of the first two women to earn a bachelor of science degree in physics from Yale — I graduated in 1978 — this question concerns me deeply. I attended a rural public school whose few accelerated courses in physics and calculus I wasn’t allowed to take because, as my principal put it, “girls never go on in science and math.” Angry and bored, I began reading about space and time and teaching myself calculus from a book. When I arrived at Yale, I was woefully unprepared. The boys in my introductory physics class, who had taken far more rigorous math and science classes in high school, yawned as our professor sped through the material, while I grew panicked at how little I understood. The only woman in the room, I debated whether to raise my hand and expose myself to ridicule, thereby losing track of the lecture and falling further behind.

In the end, I graduated summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, with honors in the major, having excelled in the department’s three-term sequence in quantum mechanics and a graduate course in gravitational physics, all while teaching myself to program Yale’s mainframe computer. But I didn’t go into physics as a career. At the end of four years, I was exhausted by all the lonely hours I spent catching up to my classmates, hiding my insecurities, struggling to do my problem sets while the boys worked in teams to finish theirs. I was tired of dressing one way to be taken seriously as a scientist while dressing another to feel feminine. And while some of the men I wanted to date weren’t put off by my major, many of them were.

Mostly, though, I didn’t go on in physics because not a single professor — not even the adviser who supervised my senior thesis — encouraged me to go to graduate school. Certain this meant I wasn’t talented enough to succeed in physics, I left the rough draft of my senior thesis outside my adviser’s door and slunk away in shame. Pained by the dream I had failed to achieve, I locked my textbooks, lab reports and problem sets in my father’s army footlocker and turned my back on physics and math forever.

( Read the rest at nytimes.com )

This is an excellent, excellent longread (10 pages, per NYT). Thoroughly engrossing and highly transferrable. The reasons cited by the author an others apply in many areas, as she gets to, and not just to women. After reading this, I quite nostalgically, and feeling-sorry-for-myself-ly, wondered if I should have stuck with Geology. After getting over my pity party I remembered that no one put me down, per se, and my primary Geo professor (the head of the department!) pushed me toward taking a BS over a BA if I really wanted to pursue a career in geology. What got me was the math side of geology. The rocks I loved. The math I hated. I am very much a creative person and thinker, but I'm analytical and logical too. Is it possible that if someone had bolstered me on my math side until I got it that I might be a successfully struggling geology PhD candidate today? Who knows. But let's not have our daughters, little sisters, and neighborellas asking these questions 10-20 years down the road.

The justices of the US Supreme Court have questioned the meaning of marriage and the government's role in defining it, as they weigh whether the state of California may ban same-sex nuptials.

Following Tuesday's arguments, the court could uphold the 2008 ban, narrowly overturn it, or invalidate all state same-sex marriage bans in the US.

The ban's defenders argued the issue should be decided by individual states.

Recent opinion polls have shown a rapid rise in support for same-sex marriage.

( Read the rest at the BBC Online )

----------------

Feel free, of course, to post any comments, thoughts, etc. here, but I made a much earlier post this morning (I start work at 7, ya'll, I beat the sun up every day) that already has a couple of comments.

The Crumbling of the Fourth Wall: Why fandom shouldn't hide anymore
by Aja Romano

"The fourth wall is like the Berlin wall at this point. It's only a matter of time." —iaddedarainbow

In the world of theater, the term "fourth wall" refers to the invisible wall that divides the characters from the audience. In the untamed, sprawling, creative world of fandom, the fourth wall refers to the invisible line of cover that shields fans from the outside world. The fourth wall is what we think of as our security: a battlement of protection keeping our wild, pioneering settlement safe—right up until it fails to protect us.

Even after four decades of steady production, the idea of fanfiction, fan-art, slash, and fans otherwise doing whatever they/we want with other people’s characters still shocks and scandalizes many. The fourth wall is what insulates us, protecting us from their often harsh judgment, and sometimes even from real-life repercussions. A mix of Fight Club-like codes of silence (the first rule of fandom: do not talk about fandom) and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell-level feigned ignorance, this imaginary wall is what creates an impregnable barrier between fandom and everybody else.

Except that it doesn’t. Not even a little bit.

Because of the current stigma that all fanfiction is either porn, plagiarism, or otherwise creepy and gross, many fans don’t enjoy the privilege of owning their own fan activities. We fear that being "outed" as a fanfic writer or fanartist may result in being fired, getting kicked out of our community or religious groups, having our Internet access taken away, or seeing our friendships end. This isn't melodrama; each of these things has happened to people I know. Being outed as a writer of fanfiction can have serious consequences. I say this having experienced many of the items on that list firsthand myself.

Read the rest at the Daily Dot

---

Aja is part of fandom and, from what I can tell, and is the Daily Dot's fandom writer. You want news on LJ, fests, and the craziness of fandom-meets-nonfandom, she's the one you're going to be reading.

Anywho, what do you guys think of the op-ed and her opinion? Should we, as a body, "come out" and break the "fourth wall"? Are you (as individuals) hiding behind said wall for the reasons that she gives? Are you hiding at all? The handful of comments are worth reading as well.

by Nathan Bransford

It's difficult to overstate how big of a deal it is to bookselling culture that the Department of Justice is reportedly planning to sue five publishers and Apple for colluding over e-book prices*.

In order to understand why this is a big deal, here's a brief recap of what led us here (this summary is described in greater detail in my post Why Some E-Books Cost More Than the Hardcover).

Wholesale vs. Agency

At the time Amazon kicked off the modern e-book market with the introduction of the Kindle, e-books were sold according to the traditional wholesale model. Essentially, publishers set a cover price and they got half, the bookseller got half. If a book was listed at $25, publishers got $12.50 on an e-book sale, the bookseller got $12.50.

Problem was from publishers' perspective, Amazon was selling some e-books at $9.99 and taking a loss on those sales, all the while locking readers into their proprietary format. Not only did this devalue what consumers felt a book "should" cost, publishers were worried that competitors wouldn't be able to enter the e-book space because they wouldn't be able to compete with Amazon's prices. No competitors would mean a virtual monopoly for Amazon, and publishers were presumably concerned about Amazon's ability to then dictate terms.

Along comes Apple and the iPad. Steve Jobs talked the publishers into the agency model - publishers set their own prices and they get 70% of the proceeds.

( Read the rest of this really fascinating post on Nathan Bransford's blog )

FYI, Nathan's blog is great for writers/authors and readers. Great community and, as a former agent, now writer, he has amazing insight into the publishing world. I can't recommend him highly enough.

By Roland Martin, CNN Contributor

(CNN) -- Who knew that 70 years after African-American pilots had to work hard to overcome the prejudices of whites in the U.S. armed services, and the nation having its first black commander-in-chief, the men known as the Tuskegee Airmen would still be doing battle with an entrenched institution of white power brokers, all based on the color of their skin.

Many of you may have seen the flashy commercials advertising "Red Tails," the major motion picture that chronicles the amazing and true story of true American heroes: black pilots who went overseas in World War II to fight for the freedom and democracy that they could not enjoy at home.

The film opens January 20 in theaters nationwide, and for its producer, George Lucas, it has been a 23-year odyssey.

You would think that someone considered one of the most powerful players in Hollywood, a man who has made billions with blockbusters such as the "Indiana Jones" and "Star Wars" franchises, would have been able to get "Red Tails" approved without any hesitation. Yet many African-Americans have long known that in Tinseltown, the color of your skin -- or that of the people in the story you want to tell -- often falls victim to racial pigeonholing.

Oh, sure, Hollywood is seen as a liberal bastion where folks talk about equality and supporting civil rights, but when it comes to telling stories that have mostly black casts, Hollywood might as well return to the '50s and '60s and erect signs that say "Whites Only." ( Read the Rest on CNN.com )

---

Tyler Perry Pens Letter About the State of Black Films, Says They’re Almost Extinct
by Britni Danielle

Last week George Lucas made waves when he took to The Daily Show to explain why it took 23 years to make the upcoming film Red Tails about the Tuskegee Airmen. According to Lucas, only one thing stood in the way of the historical action flick reaching movie screens: money.

Lucas spoke candidly about the difficulty of getting a film with an all-black cast to garner the backing of major studios and even larger budgets. Apparently studios don’t think films with black casts are commercially viable here or abroad, and therefore don’t invest big bucks in making them.

Today, Tyler Perry took to his website to talk about his own difficulty making films despite posting respectable box office numbers.Perry ratcheted up the rhetoric a bit more and argued that films with black casts are “on the verge of becoming extinct.”

Why? Well, read Perry’s letter to find out. (Read the original article and Tyler Perry's open letter on ClutchMagOnline.com )

---

Thank you, klcthebookworm for pointing me to the first article. I came to the second via the Neo Griot. Both of these are op-ed pieces.

From Mohamed Fadel Fahmy

Cairo (CNN) -- An Egyptian administrative court issued an order Tuesday banning virginity tests for female detainees, months after several women alleged they were subjected to such examinations following a March protest in Cairo's Tahrir Square.

The ruling comes in the case of Samira Ibrahim, a 25-year-old marketing manager who took the country's military led-government to court in August, alleging she was among those subjected to the test after her arrest during the March 9 protest. She said she faced death threats after bringing the case.

"Justice has been served today," Ibrahim told CNN. "These tests are a crime and also do not comply with the constitution, which states equality between men and woman. I will not give up my rights as a woman or a human being." ( Read the rest at CNN.com)

WATERLOO, Sierra Leone — The paramedic’s eyes were bloodshot, his features drawn. Pregnant women jammed into the darkened concrete bunker, just as they had yesterday and would tomorrow. The increase in patients had been fivefold, or tenfold. The exhausted paramedic had lost count in a blur of uninterrupted examinations and deliveries.

The word was out: it was no longer necessary to give birth at home and risk losing a baby or dying in childbirth. Hadiatou Kamara, 18, waited in the crowd. She had already lost a baby boy and girl. “They both died,” she said quietly.

Now, for her third pregnancy, she was at this rural health clinic outside Freetown, the capital. The Sierra Leone government has eliminated fees for pregnant women and children, and Ms. Kamara, like thousands of women in a country where surgery has been performed by the light of cellphones and flashlights, could afford trained medical staff to oversee her pregnancy for the first time.

At the Waterloo Community Health Center here, the women were spilling out the door, as they have consistently since the fees were lifted last year. ( Read the rest at the NYTimes.com )

Good news out of Africa, seemingly, for once!

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

CAIRO — The headline screamed from a venerable liberal newspaper: Coptic Christians had abducted a young Muslim and tattooed her with a cross. “Copts kidnap Raghada!”

“They tied me up with ropes, beat me with shoes, shaved my hair,” Raghada Salem Abdel Fattah, 19, declared, “and forced me to read Christian psalms!”

Like many similar stories proliferating here since the revolution, Ms. Abdel Fattah’s kidnapping could not be confirmed. But for members of Egypt’s Coptic Christian minority, the sensational headline — from a respected publisher, no less — served to validate their fear that the Egyptian revolution had made their country less tolerant and more dangerous for religious minorities. The Arab Spring initially appeared to open a welcoming door to the dwindling number of Christian Arabs who, after years of feeling marginalized, eagerly joined the call for democracy and rule of law. But now many Christians here say they fear that the fall of the police state has allowed long-simmering tensions to explode, potentially threatening the character of Egypt, and the region.

“Will Christians have equal rights and full citizenship or not?” asked Sarkis Naoum, a Christian commentator in Beirut, Lebanon. A surge of sectarian violence in Cairo — 24 dead, more than 200 wounded and three churches in flames since President Hosni Mubarak’s downfall — has turned Christian-Muslim tensions into one of the gravest threats to the revolution’s stability. But it is also a pivotal test of Egypt’s tolerance, pluralism and the rule of law. The revolution has empowered the majority but also opened new questions about the protection of minority rights like freedom of religion or expression as Islamist groups step forward to lay out their agendas and test their political might.

( Read the rest at the New York Times online )

This isn't so much a story as a running stream of updates on CNN. It may change to a full blown report. IDK. Still...it's huge! Check it out for yourself.

New York (CNN) -- A taxi driver is in stable condition Wednesday after allegedly being stabbed by a passenger who apparently asked if he was Muslim before attacking him, a taxi driver union official told CNN.

Police have identified the suspect as Michael Enright, a 21-year-old white male. New York Police Det. Mark Nell said Enright has been charged with four counts, including attempted murder and hate crimes charges, and he's expected to be arraigned Wednesday afternoon.

Bhairavi Desai, executive director of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, said the cabbie who was attacked is Ahmed H. Sharif, 43, a practicing Muslim.

When he first got into the taxi Tuesday night, Desai said, Enright engaged in cordial conversation with Sharif.

He "started out friendly, asking Mr. Sharif about where he was from, how long he had been in America, if he was Muslim and if he was observing fast during Ramadan," said Desai, who has spoken with the cab driver.

Then, after a few minutes of silence, Desai said Enright started violently cursing at Sharif and shouted "Assalamu Alaikum, consider this a checkpoint," before slashing him in the throat, arms, and hand.

( Read the rest on CNN.com )

Ab-solutely horrible! On the one hand I'm not surprised, and on the other I'm surprised something like this hasn't happend sooner. But, omigosh! How wrong. It reminds me of the days just after 9/11 when the Muslim girls at my school and Sikh guys were afraid to go around campus alone, even though my school had a very, very diverse population. I personally don't agree with the building location for the Islamic center in NYC--just seems like a bad idea considering the significance of the area, but the new building (whether or not it goes up) and the 9/11 attacks are in no way, shape, or form reasons to attack random folks on the streets, in their cars, or at their jobs.