I don't know where to start...

indicative of*

No, Michael Williams most definitely was not an invisible husband. It's just that his wife was probably a more famous actress than he was an actor. I'm not sure that the concept of invisible husband actually exists at all.

I've always thought of the invisible wife syndrome to not be purely in terms of celebrity - although in the case of Mrs BRian Cox she obviously mainly attributed it to his fame.

I think the invisible wife thing is indicative to women being sidelined in society in general - and here we get back to the topic that the op wanted to discuss.

I think the 'sidelining' of women in society as a whole, becomes more apparent when a woman gets married. She then, esp if she has children, is in danger of becoming this 'invisible' force behind the man. Of contributing to his success, but from 'behind the scenes' I'm thinking particularly of the phrase 'Behind every great man lies a great woman' here.

It's interesting, isn't it - there's that idea that women are often part of a great partnership (that 'behind every great man' thing), but I think it's quite rare for a woman to be very famous and her husband unknown.

Eg., Greg Wise and Branagh are (obviously) both people I've heard of. I'd not heard of Taylor Hackford (great name), but he's obviously important.

I'm completely off-subject here so feel free to ignore ... but how many famous women have husbands who take on the role that traditionally women took on, and do the 'support' side of a famous career? Oddly enough, the one that springs to mind is Leo Woolf, but then, he had a sparkling career too and just managed to be pretty supportive alongside that (AFAIK).

*she in the last line being Milinovich, obvs, not Dench.

Sorry, LRD, that was to FamilyGuy, not you. I love Judi as well.

I actually know quite a few on list Must be a shameless celeb stalker

Of course!

But, you know, it strikes me this isn't quite the same thing? Is he an 'invisible husband'? It sounds as if he is very well known in his own right, whereas she is more 'invisible'.

All I know is that he sent her red roses every year, which I thought was absolutely lovely. I remember hearing her talk about it in an interview and he came across as a totally lovely bloke who she obviously still missed hugely.

But then, I'm obviously not terribly up-to-date on what she's been doing recently!

You don't know who Judi Dench was married to? I'm quite surprised by that, as it was a very famous partnership (until his death, sadly).

Yep, fair point. I didn't even know any of them were presenters but I will look them up. I am dead chuffed about Judi Dench though, I think she is utterly fantastic.

LRD

It's always tricky with this kind of thing as some people have more interest in partners and are more resourceful. However, I can honestly say that I do not know if/who these women are with:

Judi Dench
Helen Mirren
Julie Walters
Emma Thompson (although I did know she was married to Kenneth Branagh)
Delia Smith
Alison Goldfrapp
Kate Humble

Perhaps I am particularly out of touch but I genuinely do not know if these people are even single.

Yes.

I love the idea that it might be 'fair' to 'aim' to get 12% of women presenting, and just hope that'd somehow magically correct the other larger unfairness. Because, of course, it'd be totally unfair for a disproportionate number of women to be presenters .... good lord, man, it'd be almost as if we were allowing them to be as disproportionately well-represented as the men are in the actual subject!

I don't know what I find more depressing - the fact that women only form 12% of the scientific, engineering or technology industry or NCG's posts.

Too difficult to call really.

This is an interesting article from the BBC re attempts to improve their coverage of science;

www.bbc.co.uk/ariel/20528607

It says this; 'The follow-up report adds: 'We are working hard to increase the number of female scientists we put on air, in the knowledge that women form 12% of the scientific, engineering or technology industry.' (sorry for quoting directly from an article, but I think it preserves accuracy )

If this is accurate, would it be fair to aim for 12 per cent of presenters of such subjects to be women? And as (hopefully) more women take up scientific posts in future, this percentage can increase pro rata.

Really? I'm trying to think of celebrity women whose husbands are unknown. I do believe the exist, of course, but they don't spring to mind. Most women in the public eye that I can think of, I know who they're married to. I didn't even know Cox was married.

If we're thinking of presenters/TV personalities, I can't move for people talking about who Victoria Coren is related to, the fact (shock) that Sue Perkins and Sandi Toksvig are lesbians, etc. etc. I do believe people pay a lot more attention to who women are married to, than to who men are married to.

Of course, it may be the (oh-so pleasing) fact that there are fewer women in the public eye as presenters and physicists that is to blame here.

namechangeguy

First post since the Xmas break so Happy New Year to you and all!

I have no idea about Brian Cox's academic work but what I can say (from working in planetary sciences for half my career) is that the ability to present and academic achievement are in no way related. I have worked with some of the brightest minds (male and female) but these have also been people that cannot even hold a conversation whilst making eye contact. Most just look at your shoes and are so socially inept that it's painful. I'm not saying that Brian is all charisma and no talent but just that the two don't always go hand-in-hand. IME you are genuinely fortunate if you have bags of charisma and are at the top of your game academically. You are even more so if you also have 'on screen' ability too.

I am a lot less 'gifted' academically but a people person. I've presented in schools and other events sucessfully so know I am good with people. However, I have had a go at TV presenting (science) and have no shame in admitting that I failed miserably. It was a "don't call us, we'll call you" moment, which is sad but the job requires a level of ability that I just don't posess.

Incidentally, just to level the discussion, the Rough Science series was presented by Kate Humble and consisted of an equal male/female scientist cast. In my search for more info I also found this article, which provides some counter argument.

www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/may/03/women-science-tv

But seriously, are we suggesting that men don't suffer from 'invisible husband syndrome' either? There are plenty of successful celebrity females that are married to unknown men and they suffer from exactly the same thing. However, the difference is the typical comment that the man couldn't stand a woman being more sucessful, which may be true (in some cases) but is simply another stereotype.

I can believe that kitty - a couple of DH's mates are physicists and they are lovely people, far too busy being interested in what they do to notice or care who's who!

Your boss's reply is brilliant.

LRD, particle physics, last time I was (vv peripherally) involved, was a very egalitarian society full of enthusiastic and endearingly style-free lads and lasses with remarkably similar outlook and haircuts, whatever their sex.

Next-best for gender-blindness was the staffing ration of a science magazine (though someone did once ask my boss, 'Why do all the girls on your team have short hair and all the boys have long hair?', to which she replied, 'So I can tell them apart.'

God, I just love that the thing NCG brings onto the thread, from that Brian Cox article, is the quote about 'silly giggly middle aged women.'

The article was about 'invisible wife syndrome'. Something I have a lot of sympathy with, being the wife of a very successful man.

Study

I teach Economics in a girls' school and it concerns me how few female role models there are for the girls, both among the thinkers/theorists that we studu and contemporary commentators. However, hurray for Stephanie Flanders, and I have also noticed many excellent young female journalists present news items on the Al-Jazeera channel - there seem to be good Chinese ones in particular.

It's not clear? Oh dear.

Never mind, I'm sure it's just one of those things.

I struggle with things too - particle physics is a closed book to me - so I do sympathize.

So why are you objecting to me quoting it? That is not clear - dear...

My take on her article is that most people are obsessed with Cox's celebrity, rather than his achievements, as it occurred as soon as he had presented Wonders of the Solar System. I don't see how or why this is so controversial. Rosa, too, seems upset that I have quoted her.

We saw that, dear, we're all reading the same article, believe it or not.

My objection was to you quoting it.

Sorry that wasn't clear, what with me objecting to you quoting it.

'Giggly middle-aged women' is a direct quote from Gia Milinovich's article - it's in the 4th paragraph down, for those who wish to find it. Try getting angry at her for that, rather than me.

I am middle-class but not yet middle-aged. Together we'll do fine!