Earlier this month, Science had a big victory. The Rosetta Project landed their spacecraft, Philae, on a comet. This was a billion Euro and entire careers in the making. This was a huge step in space exploration. The accomplishment is unprecedented and data gleaned from this project are entirely unique. Good job, Science.
Meanwhile down on earth, a #ShirtStorm broke loose. Rosetta Scientist Dr. Matt Taylor gave a television interview about the project. His choice of attire—a naked-lady shirt—was ill conceived. Moreover, he described the project as the “sexiest mission,” feminizing and then validating the probe as “sexy” but not “easy.”
Thank goodness women don’t have a science problem!! Oh, wait…
Quickly, Atlantic writer Rose Eveleth posted this tweet:
And Astrophysicist Katie Mack said this:
Bloggers, columnists, and social media micro-pundits shook their heads and called Matt Taylor on the misogynistic implications of his public presentation. Dr. Taylor, in turn, granted a heartfelt apology.
Well, Dr. Taylor, I accept. That thing you did was sexist. You realize that now. You engaged in humility and public repair work. Let’s hug it out and get back to hoping that Philae shifts its position into the path of enough sunlight to regain power.
I am a strong proponent of conversation over accusation, and try to avoid extrapolating the actions of one person to the actions of an entire group. Science didn’t wear a naked-lady shirt, Matt Taylor did, and he apologized. All of the other Rosetta scientists were appropriately (if not stylishly) dressed. But Dudes (and yes, I mean Dudes in the “Bro” sense of the word), you’re making it difficult this time. The vitriolic response AGAINST TAYLOR’S DETRACTORS on both social and mainstream media shines an unflattering fluorescent light upon the cultural depths of misogyny.
Tim Stanley at the Telegraph dubbed November 14th , the day of Taylor’s apology, The Day Political Correctness Went Mad. Glenn Reynolds at USA Today discredited Taylor’s critics as “crazy.” And James Meikle of the Guardian, while not explicitly taking sides, recounts the incident under a title that places “offensive” in quotes. And then there was Twitter:
Some quick themes (each represented above): sexism is bidirectional, and men are at least as gender-oppressed as women; there are real problems for women from which #shirtStorm distracts (as though the banality of everyday culture is somehow separate from, rather than constitutive of, the material conditions of violence and inequality); feminists are stupid/whiney/infantile.
My question, as always, is what are you defending? This reaction is so clearly compensatory, stemming from a fear of a changing world, and the implications about how particular kinds of people hold disproportionate power and resources. We feminists would like to get back to the science, if only our opinions didn’t lead to literal threats on our lives.
Follow Jenny Davis on Twitter @Jenny_L_Davis
*Cyborgology maintains a policy of editorial comment moderation. We are purposeful in keeping the conversation productive and intellectually relevant. We don’t approve trolling, personal attacks, or off-topic rants. In the case of this post, however, I am approving all comments. Here, they act as data that illustrate the theoretical argument I pose above*
Comments 11
Comradde PhysioProffe — November 16, 2014
I was a little taken aback by his emotional display, as if being called out on his misogynist behavior in public was one of the worst, most damagaing things, that ever happened to him.
Ribbit — November 16, 2014
This is so not misogyny. And you are so not a real scholar . . . you are actually defending the outrage-ocracy. Sociology used to be a real social science. Exactly what is that you do?
Anon in Socks — November 17, 2014
"We feminists would like to get back to the science..."
That's just a BS way to drop the "internet death threats come from your side" accusation. The drama's still going on with both sides arguing over just how "misogynistic" wearing that shirt was (the current middle-ground seems to be "it was inappropriate for television but not sexist").
"Feminists" aren't any more interested in the science than the people who complained about Comic Sans on another mission. But the article is clearly biased and I will be avoiding this site in future, Jenny.
@PhysioProffe: Misogyny Drama has caused both supporters and opponents to lose their jobs, whatever industry they're in. The Rosetta probe was already having problems, so the extra stress on top wasn't needed.
Comradde PhysioProffe — November 17, 2014
Yeah, I think my initial reaction merits revision. Equally plausible interpretation is that he genuinely recognized and felt bad about the harm that he caused.
po — November 17, 2014
What harm did he cause? I can't get over this, at the height of science and physics people are calling this man a misogynist. He had several women working on this project with him and I havent heard one person speak to their involvement. Possitive views, I mean. This guy obviously lives and breathes science, I don't see him caring at all what he wears. He was given the shirt by his friend (a woman I might add) for his birthday before this event and was wearing it to honor her. You realize everyone that is lashing out at this guy is actually insulting the woman who made the shirt for him. He didn't care what he was wearing, why should anyone else? I hate that this has overshadowed a monumental leap in the future of human exsistance to basically ostracize a man for wearing a shirt. We shouldn't call women in revealing outfits sluts and we should not call men in anime shirts misogynists. That is the meaning of equality. It means not jumping the gun because we can.
Quib — November 18, 2014
Over reaction to criticism is a technique for controlling the narrative, that has worked really well for all kinds of backlash and reactionary movements.
It's really aggravating to watch it play out over and over again.
He got a few comments about how his shirt is inappropriate for the event and his position. Which get's spun as an "attack".
It's blatant hyperbole that deflects everything on to the tone of the criticism.
Alan — November 18, 2014
Not enough women in science? Where have I heard that before?
I am a voluntary teacher of 13-18 year olds of both sexes. I have worked in the aviation industry as well as other technical industries.
None of my pupils, of either sex, would consider science or engineering as a career. They want to be footballers or beauticians, or whatever is the latest fad on TV (e.g. vets).
Science and engineering mean hard work. They mean spending serious amounts of time learning things, then passing proper exams to prove that you have learned these things. My pupils get multiple guess open book joke exams they can re-sit as many times as they want. They think that is too hard.
My pupils' only real interest is other peoples' relationships.
Most of them can barely count. One can't read at all, and none of them are not readers. Most have never read an entire book all the way through. That would be too hard.
If it is any consolation, it is not only the girls who are strangers to the real world, so are the boys. I do not believe that any of them will ever be scientists or engineers. If they are really lucky one or two might become a Kwik Fit Fitter. That is as close to science as they will ever get.
None of my pupils have "special needs". They are just ordinary kids who go to ordinary schools. They are socio-politically conditioned. That process is controlled by people who think that civilisation depends on art galleries,literature poetry and slogans.
I do not believe that this is the fault of the patriarchy. It is the fault of the education system.
I believe it is entirely intentional.
Don't believe me? Have a look at this:
http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
That is why there aren't enough women in science or civil, mechanical or electrical engineering, or aeronautical engineering. Or electronics. Or mechatronics. etc etc.
Alan — November 18, 2014
OOps typo
should read
Most of them can barely count. One can’t read at all. None of them are confident readers.
Sorry