squishykat

In an effort to be in a more cheerful mood, I am writing my Christmas cards! Anyone here who wants one too, hmu (before Saturday as that is post office day!) :)

A delayed reaction post, pretty much identical to the one 2 years ago:

Sherlock! Wheeeeee! :D

I was just reading through my friends page and came across the latest offering from Bad Astronomy, 'Scientists are...' (http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/12/04/search_engine_bias_scientists_are.html). In this article Phil Plait is worrying about the bad rep scientists seem to have via Google search autocomplete.

Scientists being idiots, liberal and liars as the top three options listed. The perception of scientists and scientists perceptions of other peoples perceptions of scientists is a topic close to my heart as a scientist and a science communicator so I had some opinions on this article!

Granted, the options shown are not generally the most flattering but I wondered how other professions fared with the same test.

Teachers are overpaid and underpaid
Lawyers are liars, evil and crooks (no surprises there I guess...)
Authors are rockstars , dead and crazy, but also listed alphabetically
Chefs are arrogant and alcoholic
Actors are overpaid and stupid
Politicians are corrupt and liars
Footballers are awesome and overpaid
Sales people are scum and annoying
Mechanics are crooks and thieves
Police are useless and evil

I could go on, but you get the picture. Scientists are not alone in having their profession disparaged. Maybe it's because I interact with a lot of scientists that I see it more, but I do see a lot more complaining by scientists than other professions about how 'the public' sees them. In fact, after having carried out a study on 10 year old children and reading many other studies, I feel I can say with reasonable confidence say that most people think of scientists as people who work in science.

All professions have their stereotypes and the people in those professions are as diverse, character-wise, as any other arbitrary group.

I have mixed feelings on the promotion of science and scientists. On the one hand I think it is important for professions to be visible, so children can decide if they like them and so 'the public' can see how they affect them socially. On the other hand I don't think this persecution complex on the part of scientists is something that is at all helpful to be holding on to. Neither is the promotion of science as the perfect objective lens through which the world must be viewed. Science is important, but so is history and politics and law and all these other subjects. We are not one dimensional beings, nor is 'the public' a cohesive whole. Trying to treat people like that smacks of condescension which doesn't help anybody's cause at all.

This post is not meant as a complaint about Plait specifically, but his article is another in a long line of similar ones I have seen and pushed me to post my own thoughts on the matter. If anyone's still reading, you might like some more posts I have planned on children's perceptions of scientists. I have got my dissertation back and am now free to post it where I like so there will be some of the better extracts from it coming soon (when I am not too lazy). There will also be pictures drawn by the children, which are frankly the best part.

If anyone wants to join in with more professions do so in the comments!

Augh! What are you supposed to do when you're halfway through reading a story on AO3 and it suddenly becomes user restricted? I have been left at a cliffhanger and am feeling a bit desperate... :( :( :(

I'm genuinely quite shook up over not being able to finish it. Also I can't find it anywhere else either. Feeling very sad right now. :(

ETA It turns out what you do is watch some kitten videos for a while, then join AO3. Problem solved!

Last push for the masters is today! 4000 words to finish it, then the dissertation will be printed and bound and handed in tomorrow. Then the year will be done! Come on Kat you can do it!

edit: dissertation is done!

43,651 words, 214 pages, 47 pictures, 10 focus groups, 4 tables, 2 graphs and 1 interview. My summer's work.

It's saddening going through old rec lists and discovering you've been too far out of a fandom for the last couple of years and the authors you loved have disappeared entirely from the net. Four or five have gone from one rec list, though admittedly that was quite a mega list.

So on Wednesday night we forgot to lock the door and had a break-in. My laptop and ipod got stolen. I'm on a new laptop now, as they don't think they can get the other one back. I have lost all my work that I've done this year, a good chunk of audiobooks and podcasts, photos, movies, and all of my bookmarks. With a bit of effort, some things can be recovered and re-downloaded but others can't.

You can be sure I'll be more careful about backing up and locking the door from now on!

I couldn't let this page from my assigned reading pass without comment here...

From Understanding Popular Science by Peter Brok.

'However, if we do recognize the public creating its own popular science and we do accept it on its own terms, then we have a vision of popular science markedly different from that of science literacy surveys and PUS. This is clearly the case with a particular form of rewriting Star Trek known as 'slash fiction' - a form of pornography written by female fans in which the main characters of the series (Kirk/Spock, or K/S) are reimagined as lovers. For Penley, however, NASA/TREK is the kind of popular science we should aspire to.'

The context of this is that PUS (Public Understanding of Science) is a model of science communication that works by scientists trying to 'improve the public's knowledge deficiency' by telling them facts. This chapter acknowledges this is a poor model and that the public (surprise surprise!) have opinions and agency and aren't just empty vessels waiting to be filled with science.

On reading this passage my first act was to chuckle, and then want to find someone who has written NASA/Trek fiction. I feel sure that there must be some somewhere on the web.