Yesterday, Christin sent a link to me about Elise Andrew who runs the Facebook page I Feaking Love Science. While the three of us are not thrilled about the title of her page, because we want to run a website that is family-friendly. However, that people are shocked a woman could create and run a page related to science eventually attracting more than 4 million viewers is appalling and must be addressed. And that many of the posts included comments about her looks made it worse. So a woman still can't be beautiful and smart? It shows how far women must still go to prove our selves.

Yes, I will agree there are differences in men and women. Such as, my husband opens jars much easier than I, and I can remember where various objects are far better than he.

Women fought throughout the last century, and now into the 21st century, for equality in pay and respect. To come across the article about Ms. Andrew is nothing short of disheartening.

Please feel free to verify the links before commenting, but please do comment. We'd like a lively discussion of women's and men's experiences related to the topic of equality.

Ms. Andrew's Facebook page link is here:

Andrew's Page

And Kevin Morris' column was posted in the Daily Dot on March 21, 2013. 

According to a post in Ask.Men.Com the top 10 male oriented professions are in

  1.  Construction
  2.  Politics
  3.  Math
  4.  Sports Media
  5.  Emergency Services
  6.  Law Enforcement
  7.  Chef
  8.  Tech
  9.  Comedy
10.  Accounting and Finance

Are you a woman in one of these professions? If so, has being a woman impacted your career in any fashion?

To read the whole article please click this link.

Top Ten


Three things: first, a couple of disclaimers. I blocked "Ask Men" from my Twitter feed last year, shortly after they followed me, because I believe that "men" don't promote the kind of things I see on their site. Males do, but not men.

Second, I think Elise Andrews picked a ridiculous name for her page. It's just sad.

Finally, and I ask this with all sincerity: what, exactly, is the issue with people being surprised that a science lover is female? I'm never able to get as exercised over this kind of issue as the women I see around me, and I really do wonder if I'm missing something.


I'd like to take a moment to address your concerns regarding the Q&A post. First, I agree with your concerns about Ms. Andrew's Facebook page name and even noted that in the post. Many people will consider it unprofessional. However, her choice of page names is not the primary concern of this blog. Women have continually fought for civil rights, equality in the workplace and equality for the division of household duties in their own homes.

This post was meant to address the fact that Ms. Andrew received an inordinate amount of comments regarding her gender and her profession when her gender shouldn't matter if she excels in her job. I was impressed with the content on her page. It is apparent that she does excel in science and she is inspiring other women to enter the field. I saw a post from a father who views the page with his daughter, because she has shown an interest in science and he wants to inspire her to continue.

Second, I apologize if using the Ask.Men.Com website goes against your personal views. I was unaware that you have a past history with the group and would not have included them in the post if I'd known. My main point in including the information was to support the post about Ms. Andrew being in a male dominated profession. I hoped to generate a debate from readers who are also in male dominated professions and how that has impacted their careeers.

Finally, the gender bias that creates the glass ceiling and the glass escalator still exists for women. If this site is to promote the empowerment of women, then I believe we must take a stand against these issues.


I just can't get worked up about this particular issue. I've seen her photo, with the perfect hair and makeup (nothing wrong with that, BTW - she's physically attractive), and I just find it disingenuous that she would then take offense at being complimented on her looks - even if the reason her looks are now known is that readers were surprised to discover that she's female. Seems to me she could have trumpeted it from the beginning, and perhaps inspired other girls to follow her path.

Hopefully, sans her degrading, disrespectful usage of language.

I don't see men getting so wigged-out offended when a woman is surprised that they cook, or have a traditionally female-dominated profession. I have a nephew who's a nurse, and he loves surprising people with that. I think the real issues are often neglected because of this kind of stuff.

Here's an example: Victoria's Secret is now marketing to tweens. I just blogged on it.

This is the kind of issue I take seriously, because it does real harm. All that the foul-mouthed science nut will get from the revelation that she is, indeed, a female is that she's grown more famous.


I took it as an insult to the intelligence of women, that there should be such surprise when it was discovered that Ms. Andrew's facebook page was created by a woman. It was as though we are not capable of creating an outstanding and inspiring page in a field dominated by men, because we are women.

I like Victoria's Secret and some fashion magazines for the clothing tips. But I get angry that they do not feature real women. I was model thin as a girl and young woman. But now as I mature, I'm not as thin. My issue, not an original one to me, is that these magazines subliminally send the message that this is the way women are supposed to look. And if we don't look this way, we aren't good enough. The Dove commercials featuring confident women of all body shapes sends a much better message.


I don't think VS, and porn in general, sends a subliminal message at all: I think the message is loud and clear. When you think about it, that message is part and parcel of why people were surprised to discover that the referenced scientist is female.

That's why I don't understand why women get so upset about issues like the topic here, yet don't protest where the attitudes come from. The best (so to speak) that VS produces is soft-core pornography, which they're now putting in front of 10-year-olds - and of course, there will be dippy mothers who purchase it, and compliant fathers who say nothing.

The difference between dressing a little girl in lace thongs that say "Call me" and kiddie porn is...?


It doesn't create a debate, but I agree with you that VS should not promote lingerie for children.

However, you haven't addressed the fact that women still face discrimination in the work place. I have been fortunate not to be passed over for promotions. However, many men are promoted over more qualified women.


That's for two reasons. First, I don't agree that it's the issue it once was. If a woman wants to make a fuss over being treated in *any* way that she doesn't like, she has plenty of options - and a bevy of agencies and attorneys who will exercise those options to pieces. If anything, there are studies showing that it is now men who are falling behind in the workplace - and in academia, it's the boys who are being neglected. In other words, there are issues far more pressing, which is why I put the example of VS up.

And second, specific to the Andrews thing: if she were my employee, I wouldn't be hoisting her toward that "glass ceiling" (which most workers slam into at some point, gender notwithstanding). To be quite blunt, if I researched her and found the crudeness of her behavior, I wouldn't hire her to begin with.

Of course, she could then get the alphabet soup of governmental agencies after me, and scream about how she (bleeping) hates discerning employers. ;)

I'm weary of females who feel entitled to behave however they choose, and who then stomp their feet over being disrespected, passed over, harassed - if she truly wanted to be respected as a scientist, then the first thing she may need to learn is that respect goes both ways. The public image that she presents is gross, at best, and an affront to people - male and female - who still cling to what little decorum is left in the world.

The second thing she may want to consider is that keeping her gender a secret was not a necessity in this culture. Then again, it certainly was a terrific marketing tool, once she let it be known. Is it possible that she could be that disingenuous? Personally, I believe that anyone who presents herself as she does is fully able to manipulate events to her benefit.

A option which, of course, is her right - but I regret the image she has set for herself, and the ripple effects of it, and I find it embarrassing to my gender that she now demands respect. I don't care if she's a scientist. And if it were a male we were discussing, I wouldn't care about his vocation, either. I'm so put off by her disrespectful language, I won't bother reading her.

I guess that makes me "discriminating".


Leave a Reply.