Patter, Spatter, Rattle

Heavy clouds hang in the sky without hint of thunder or lightning. Rain scatters comfortingly on the roof and outside the air is cool and fresh. This would be a perfect Winter's day if it were not Summer.

I Am Amused

There's this thing called the Weblog Awards, see, and one of the categories is for Best Science Blog. Bizarrely, people are allowed to vote once each day and two of the nominees, Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy and PZ Myers of Pharyngula have been having a light-hearted competition for votes, offering bribes, threats and various other enticements to get people's support. Personally, I have been voting for Phil because PZ has three times the readership. Not because I am studying astronomy. No, not at all.

In Which I Give the Impression of Not Being in Basic Agreement

    Over at Scienceblogs there has been a minor kerfuffle arising from some remarks made by razib (Gene Expression) about one attractive hostess at a wine bar overheard recommending science fiction books to another. Responses from Shelley Batts (Retrospectacle) and Tara C. Smith (Aetiology), among others, followed critical of the stereotyping of attractive women that makes this a surprise.

    But the reason I am making this post is to use a comment posted by Jane as a springboard to make some comments of my own. Jane said:

""Why do people continue to award intelligence points to the attractive man, but take them away from an equally attractive woman...?"

Yes, I'd love to know why too. I really would. It is, apparently and even in 2006, still a pervasive assumption that attractive women are dumb. And if an attractive woman knows a whole set of things or even one thing outside of the set of knowledge she is supposed to have, she is typically treated like some sort of freak."

    All I want to add is that there is no reason to let people in the past off the hook for their ideas either. Although their social environment may explain the ideas they held it does not excuse them - they were just as smart as people of the present and just as capable of forming their own views. I imagine (and queasily hope) the same will later be said of 2006.