AIBU - sexist science homework

[Litchick]

Lst night's science homework was to write a short passage about a famous scientist, what they discovered and its applications today.

Fine except that each question said 'he'.

Eg what was his name? What did he discover?

DD and I chose Marie Curie and changed everything to she.

AIBU to make the point on the prep sheet or just touchy?
Does it matter? It felt to me like it does. Grrrr

And I am beginning to despise the way discourse can infiltrate a discussion between intellegent, reasonable people and make those sworn to identify and upholld it sound like complete morons.

Having a hormonal day, LadyMMT?

MT, nobody's calling for this to be the top item on Newsnight. We are just responding to the OP who thought it was poor. I'm not sure why you find this so preposterous.

There have been quite a few news reports lately on very low take up of scientific subjects amongst girls.

Discourse? Do you mean discourse? Discourse is what we are all here for surely? Have you been on the sauce tonight

Just had weird brain flash of MT having had one too many sherries, and sitting typing at laptop in period dress - corseted, full skirt, gloves hat and maybe pince nez.

MT do i have that right?

If you want a non-gender specific form (and clearly we do), singular they is perfectly elegant and has a long and respectable history of usage.

YANBU - I do consciously when - eg like today writing to a company saying that I would escalate it to their Finance Director, say that I will deal direclty with him/her, not 'him' - find it incredible in this day and age that 'he' should be used... I agree that stylistically it can be cumbersome, but that's just too bad - it is inaccurate to use 'he' generically when it is just as likely to refer a 'she'.

totally. Tghough now envisage said corseted lady with bog brush morning hair, squinting through half moon specs balanced on tip of nose

No, I meant 'feminist discourse'

LovelyTinOfSpam,

You say you are a physicist and yet think h3o is heavy water? Brilliant advert for female science! Even if it was a long time ago, surely remembering that hydrogen has one proton and one electron is not that hard (it is v important in all physics as well as chemistry). How on earth would 3 of those bond to an oxygen molecule with only 8 protons and 8 electrons (2 in first shell, 6 in second, i.e missing 2 giving it a valency of 2 and, only ever, 2). It is 23 years since I graduated in physics, and have never practiced science as a career, yet am interested enough in science to remember/be able to work out that.

If you want to produce the next generation of brilliant female scientists, focus on the question FFS, not on deconstructing it for gender bias overtones. Instil a love of science, not a hatred of men. To date, most great scientists have been men, regardless of the reason for it. Marie Curie ahead of Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Leibnitz, Maxwell?! What did she actually do which was so earth shattering (and, by te way, she did it as a team with her husband, Pierre, who sadly predeceased her so is often forgotten).

No, I agree Lenin. But it was challenged wasn't it? Better to plant a seed and let it grow than batter it senseless.

But your also right re chips. I must be hormonal.

am now going back to bed to nurse hangover

Haven't seen any man-hating sentiments on this thread, Larry. Did I miss something?

As for battering this to death, it is only because of the minority who keep saying "actually 'he' is quite correct" or "it really doesn't matter" that we feel the need to persist.

MT - I'm still not quite sure why feminist discourse should be a bad thing in the context of this particular discussion. But I won't push it if you've got a hangover to deal with

Sorry - I see that I've just repeated everything that Lenin said, but with rather less elegance.

Speaking as part of 'the minority who keep saying "actually 'he' is quite correct" or "it really doesn't matter"', my purpose in being here is to keep reiterating that there could be more than one way of looking at this. So many people were ready straight away to close the argument down with "Yes, it's sexist. No question."

I don't feel there is anything wrong with "battering" (if you put it that way) the idea that there are actually two possible interpretations here (at least) and not one.

Apologies if I had misunderstood the purpose of a discussion forum.

larrygrylls you are correct that H3O is not heavy water, Heavy water is is when deuterium (the nucleus of deuterium contains a proton and a neutron) replaces some or all of the hydrogen.

However it much as the principle you outline may be very important in physics but I think a chat with a chemist about H3O might enlighten you, failing that Wikipedia has a little on the matter
H30

And "he" is a grammatically correct generic in English. It is a homonym of the masculine singular pronoun. Do you people not know what a homonym is?? Now, it's fair enough to have a discussion about whether using it could be ambiguous, and whether the usage could lead to people thinking there was some kind of (intentional or not) sexist undertone.

So UQD do you think that the fact that the masculine singular and generic singular pronouns are homonyms is just coincidence then?
I do know what what a homonym is, but I am wondering if you know what disingenuous means?

Jumping in a bit late here, but as someone who was nearly put off a career in science at school, I think it is important to make it clear to everyone that there are plenty of famous female scientists and that they are just as important as the men!

I think we do need to go a bit further to try to break down the gender stereotypes. We have generations of bias in the other direction to overcome, so it is going to take some work.

I have had many discussions about whether women are, as a group, less good at science based subjects and have found it extremely hard to get most people to take me seriously. I am, aparently the exception to the rule and the men all seemed sure that expectations delivered through literature and the media have little or no part in the current situation and whatever was done, women would still be, in most cases, unsuited to careers in (in this particular argument) software development.

I've experienced assumptions through my whole working life - like I must be the secretary or couldn't help someone with a technical issue on the phone but I expected them, and at times had some excellent defenders (like the male co-worker who, when the customer was offered a drink and told me what he wanted even though I hadn't asked, firmly corrected him as to my position in the company!) I did see plenty of people being put off by the attitudes we met though.

That's my long-winded way of saying no, YANBU and changing the 'he' is a tactful way, IMO, of making your point

And I sad AGES ago that I really really don't see why the response to seeing a sheet using "he" isn't - "Oh yes, it's a bit daft to use language that implies that all scientists are male, isn't it? It'd be a good idea to phrase it differently next time. I'm sure the teacher will agree."

Not sure why it's become such a big issue - I suspect that UnquietDad has a deadline and was looking for some displacement activity!

UQD, I don't have a problem with the use of "he" in a lot of circumstances (particularly last night when I was reading a very lengthy paper written by an American which had "he and she" littered throughout it making it very, very difficult to read and quite unintelligible) but I do think that in the context of this one-line question it is not difficult or onerous to accommodate both sexes and that there is actually a very good reason to. Do you disagree?

Agree with seeker

It is interesting though, that when black people are airbrushed out of company advertisements, a large hue and cry ensues in the media. However, when women are airbrushed out of the language there is a significant minority who seem to think it does not really matter.

Yes but it's OK, slug, because it's correct don't you know?

Unquietdad, lol at your "Apologies if I had misunderstood the purpose of a discussion forum." It's not that anyone wants to shut down the argument - quite the opposite. If you want your point to be accepted you've got to present a good argument for it - we're not going to say "oh yes, unquietdad has made an interesting point. I think he's got it wrong but I won't say anything because it's good to have a variety of views on the board". If you keep reiterating your point and people think it is flawed, they will keep challenging it. That is the purpose of a discussion forum.

Lady GP: It's not coincidence, but it's not automatically sexist. Grammar is surely more complex than that. This is like saying we shouldn't use the word "boycott" because it contains the word only for the male youth and might mislead people - a bit bizarre. After all that, too, is only a coincidence.

zephirine - yes but you took the attitude that "oh, well, we've only got to keep on because 'the other side' keeps on", which is something anyone could say in any argument! And I feel I have presented the argument, actually.

And it's not a case of "I think X and people think Y" - my point is that we have to allow for both X and Y.

I ^don't think it doesn;t matter. I think it matters, and also that its sexist. I also think that its like getting hot under the collar with someone who thinks the world is flat. This battle has been won.