Science and Looks: Debunking the Stereotype

[Kalimaa23]

Greetings,

I'd like to discuss something with you people. I get the impression that a certain stereotype exists that people who study science generally are unattractive and socially ackward. Having spent four years in a Science faculty I must say that this is most undeserved. Sure, there are a number of anti-social misfits out there...but they are a minority. Quite often they do not even constitute the brightest part of the student population (so much for the genius geek stereotype).

I was wondering what your experiences with this were. Am I just lucky to be at university where the science people are more socially apt and attractive, or is the stereotype just undeserved?

 

[Mk]

I personally like a scientist better. Intelligence is a key part of attractiveness for me. I don't care how nice you look, if you are much at all retarded I am not going to go out with you.

 

[PRodQuanta]

I was wondering what your experiences with this were. Am I just lucky to be at university where the science people are more socially apt and attractive, or is the stereotype just undeserved?

In my experience... yes, you are lucky. I was good enough to qualify for a national (sort of... a couple states were involved) high school math competition. Let me tell you about the people I went up against at that competition... Boys and girls alike. Not to mention the State Science Quiz Bowl...

Lets just say that that is one stereotype that seems to hold up. However, I did win a portion of that competition, so that does null part of the stereotype (I guess it is a matter of opinion, but I don't think I'm that nerdy looking).

Paden Roder

 

[Evo]

Greetings,

I'd like to discuss something with you people. I get the impression that a certain stereotype exists that people who study science generally are unattractive and socially ackward. Having spent four years in a Science faculty I must say that this is most undeserved. Sure, there are a number of anti-social misfits out there...but they are a minority. Quite often they do not even constitute the brightest part of the student population (so much for the genius geek stereotype).

I was wondering what your experiences with this were. Am I just lucky to be at university where the science people are more socially apt and attractive, or is the stereotype just undeserved?

Judging by the members here, I'd say that the stereotype is wrong. I know a lot of hot scientists. :!) :!) :!)

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Greetings,

I'd like to discuss something with you people. I get the impression that a certain stereotype exists that people who study science generally are unattractive and socially ackward. Having spent four years in a Science faculty I must say that this is most undeserved. Sure, there are a number of anti-social misfits out there...but they are a minority. Quite often they do not even constitute the brightest part of the student population (so much for the genius geek stereotype).

I was wondering what your experiences with this were. Am I just lucky to be at university where the science people are more socially apt and attractive, or is the stereotype just undeserved?

Since I work with scientists or at the least technicians every day, I would like to confirm this as bunk, but since I only ever went to University bars, I'd also like to say that I have no idea how many social misfits their are at University.

 

[Kalimaa23]

I personally like a scientist better. Intelligence is a key part of attractiveness for me. I don't care how nice you look, if you are much at all retarded I am not going to go out with you.

True enough, I'd rather go for a girl with brains who is just "moderately" attractive then a air-head supermodel. But in my experience there are a lot of extremely good looking girls who are very intelligent, and interested in science. So whenever I read stuff describing the dorky looking female geek being the norm in sciences I get rather cross...seems an unfair branding to me.

 

[neutrino]

Well, this might help in putting some of those misconceptions to sleep...
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/02/11/some-astronomer-stuff/
;-)

 

[Kalimaa23]

As a girl, I think being able to study things like Mathematics and Physics is indicative of a certain manliness

I couldn't disagree more. What I have noticed is that women tend to approach academics in a different fashion. Whereas guys tend to get competetive, the girls I know seem to be content in just being good enough without having to show of their mastery of the subject, with all the geekiness that implies. I know most math students at my university rather well, and there are not "manly" in any way...

 

[Kalimaa23]

Well Dimitri if you find a manly gook looking mathematician or physicist who is also a gentleman, I would very much like to meet one being a girl who studies such things! I personally have never encountered such a one. Just because a man is smart does not mean that he is manly or a gentleman.

Somehow you sound rather bitter...

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Bitter! No. I am just telling you my experience. For a girl, I have seen and experienced a lot. The men that I really respect, my professors and such all happen to be a lot older. Strange I get along with them better than people my age. But they have seen a lot and know a lot about life. With men, I find they have a head on their shoulders by the time they reach 40. But I am only speaking for me and my experiences. Nothing bitter about that. Most men my age are not that mature.

Indeed, it takes a long time being a man to learn how to be one, at least for many people, and intelligence in this case is not an indication of proficiency at learning how to behave. We were all young once though, maturity is not something I see in men even over 40 either, as a generalisation, you'd best get used to all men being kids in my experience at least, under a thin veneer of respectability even lecturers and professors are kids, it's just they tend to keep it secret, I've met a few professors who were off the record, they're just like everyone else at heart, again in my experience.

I'd say maturity is about knowing when to act like a child, and when to act like an adult, after all being silly is fun right?

 

[Kalimaa23]

Well Dimitri if you find a manly mathematician or physicist who is also a gentleman, I would like to meet one being a girl who studies such things!

Found one (as far as I'm a judge on these things). He is in the first year of his Master's. The girl is a last year math MA student as well

http://wkpc1.vub.ac.be/gallery/Barbecue/Picture_064

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Sure, being silly is a lot of fun and there is a time for that! And you are right. Some men never do grow up, and regarding some professors I am amazed by how downright immature they are! Women say that all men remain boys. I just thought of forty as an age when one has enough experiences to know a bit about life in general.

You're right, but then what I said is a generalisation; most men never grow up and those that do are still thinking in the same way they did when they were 18, as you say; there is just a wealth of experience that comes with age to determine when it is wise to act in the foolish manner of your younger years, and when to behave responsibly, you can't change the way men are at heart, but we do get more of a clue as time goes by some of us are born with it, some of us have it thrust upon us, some of us never learn

 

[Astronuc]

Sure, being silly is a lot of fun and there is a time for that! And you are right. Some men never do grow up, and regarding some professors I am amazed by how downright immature they are! Women say that all men remain boys. I just thought of forty as an age when one has enough experiences to know a bit about life in general.

Perhaps one should say 'some' men and 'some' professors, rather than generalize to group of people. Most professors I know are quite serious about their work and about the field in which we work.

At 40 one should have plenty of experience 'to know a bit about life in general.' On the other hand, as Schrodinger's Dog mentioned, some learn, some don't.

There is nothing wrong with being young at heart. And then there are those who are just uptight.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I think to assert that a man of science is unmanly you have to define manly.

Being a man simply means having the qualities of a man, what those qualities are are entirley subjective, unless you want to affirm that being manly = Macho or something else entirely.

The least manly qualities IMO are often attributed to the state of being a man.

e.g

Courageous

Aggressive

Dominant

Confident

Arrogant

Selfish

Only confidence and courage measures up, the rest are just chaff in the wheat. Courage is so indefinable, a man who builds a reputation only to have it destroyed and then girds his loins and reinstates it, instead of dissapearing off to lament his mistakes ad infinitum, is a man; and a man who fights in battle and saves his colleagues then comes home and behaves like he is a hero without humility, expecting respect is no man. Difficult to weigh up what we think being a man is, just as it is difficult to sum up what we think being a woman is.

Compassionate

Having Empathy

Considerate action

emotional honesty

not forceful in their opinions

emotional sometimes seemingly ilogically

Capricous

All "fine" words all not really descriptive of what it is to be woman, and in the same way what it is to be man, I freely admit I understand women less than men. So feel free to broaden the description as it's a blatant stereotype.

 

[Mickey]

What?? Have you seen Maria Spiropulu? I have eyes for no other.

Well, maybe Émilie du Châtelet. :shy:

 

[marlon]

True enough, I'd rather go for a girl with brains who is just "moderately" attractive then a air-head supermodel.

You sure 'bout that ? No Jessica Simpson for you ? Well, then i will take her...Or Britney(who is pushing the limits of human stupidity when she makes Kevin Federline sound intelligent)...

marlon

 

[Moonbear]

In my experience... yes, you are lucky. I was good enough to qualify for a national (sort of... a couple states were involved) high school math competition. Let me tell you about the people I went up against at that competition... Boys and girls alike. Not to mention the State Science Quiz Bowl...

Lets just say that that is one stereotype that seems to hold up. However, I did win a portion of that competition, so that does null part of the stereotype (I guess it is a matter of opinion, but I don't think I'm that nerdy looking).

Paden Roder

:rofl: EVERYONE is geeky and awkward looking in high school, you just don't realize it as fully until you look back at the old yearbooks!

All one needs to do is look at the member photos here to get an idea of the appearance of scientists and science students in a range of fields, and you'd see that you'd never pick them out from a crowd as a scientist...there's nothing inherently geeky about any of them.

I found it somewhat amusing when I attended my cousin's wedding somewhat recently (she's quite a few years younger than I am). Her friends kept asking, "You're really a professor?" :rofl: I don't know who told them that in the first place, undoubtedly some relative was bragging, since I don't usually bring up my profession on purely social occassions, but I thought it was pretty funny that they seemed so surprised. I guess they were expecting some old maid to be sitting in a corner with coke-bottle glasses and snorting when she laughed and muttering to myself or something.

 

[Mickey]

Seriously, now, I don't see the joy of being physically and emotionally intimate with someone without being a little intellectually intimate as well. You need a common basis to solve problems together.

I want to be a team with my partner; individuals who together make a triangular passion for a common cause and for each other. Without that third dimension, two people attracted to one another are just behaving like animals, IMHO, unaware of long term effects on their emotional and physical safety.

 

[Astronuc]

As for: Courageous, Aggressive, Dominant, Confident, Arrogant, Selfish - I would agree that of those, only confidence and courage measures up.

As for Compassionate, Empathetic, Considerate (in action or thought), emotional honesty, not forceful in their opinions, I would hope those apply to men as well as to women.

I think "emotional sometimes seemingly illogically" and "capricous" would often apply to men as well as women. But then I don't know too many women who have these characteristics.

 

[Physics_wiz]

Well Dimitri if you find a manly mathematician or physicist who is also a gentleman, I would like to meet one being a girl who studies such things! I personally have never encountered such a one. Just because a man is smart does not mean that he is manly or a gentleman. I am sure they are out there, not in my school.

We need to meet

 

[Pythagorean]

i'm going to be a physicist rockstar (or a rockstar physicist)

 

[Kalimaa23]

Another thing that I'd like to adres : the US/EU difference in this matter. Wheneve I go to the States or talk to friends from there, I get the impression that the whole "being smart is uncool" thing is much stronger there. I've never gotten a hard time in school for being smarter then average or getting good grades. In fact, judging from the school I went to and the people I know, it's not being smart that's "uncool", it's being an achiever. Lazy people who party a lot and get good results (especially in university) seem to get the most respect around here. It's not just the students, I'm getting the same vibe from some professors. I'm not saying that this is better (I think someone who works really hard for a mediocre grade should get more respect), just different.

 

[marlon]

(I think someone who works really hard for a mediocre grade should get more respect)

Well, i disagree. In the end, it is talent that merits respect because THAT is what we all want to have, no ? Talent is what separates the mediocre from the top. I realize that talent needs to be developed (which requires hard work) but in the end, it is talent (and only that) that generates the great ideas and achievements.

marlon

 

[Kalimaa23]

Well, i disagree. In the end, it is talent that merits respect because THAT is what we all want to have, no ? Talent is what separates the mediocre from the top. I realize that talent needs to be developed (which requires hard work) but in the end, it is talent (and only that) that generates the great ideas and achievements.

marlon

The comparison is between someone who has mediocre abilities but achieves something because of hard work, and some who is talented and achieves the same result by not working that much at all. I agree that talented people who also work very hard warrant to most respect. It is indeed them who shape society. But when I see this people usually consider me an elitist arrogant bastard :grumpy:

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

As for: Courageous, Aggressive, Dominant, Confident, Arrogant, Selfish - I would agree that of those, only confidence and courage measures up.

As for Compassionate, Empathetic, Considerate (in action or thought), emotional honesty, not forceful in their opinions, I would hope those apply to men as well as to women.

I think "emotional sometimes seemingly illogically" and "capricous" would often apply to men as well as women. But then I don't know too many women who have these characteristics.

The idea was to point out how difficult it is to sum up what makes a man manly or a woman womenly, and cliche's are clearly counterproductive, I say just go with worthy of respect for both, but that is also clearly subjective. Some people would say say Bush is worthy of respect, some people would say not(just an example, please I don't really want to know what anyone really thinks)

Is a scientist manly? I think your getting confused with macho. To be manly you simply need the accompanying physical and mental traits we define as male. Rippling muscles are optional here's what I mean.

man·ly Audio pronunciation of "manly" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mnl)
adj. man·li·er, man·li·est

1. Having qualities traditionally attributed to a man.
2. Belonging to or befitting a man; masculine. See Synonyms at male.

ma·chis·mo

1. A strong or exaggerated sense of masculinity stressing attributes such as physical courage, virility, domination of women, and aggressiveness.
2. An exaggerated sense of strength or toughness: “People prefer raw-milk cheese for its subtlety and depth of flavor, not out of some kind of foodie machismo” (Corby Kummer).

I know it's very anal to define words but I think the original posts interpereters were asking are scientists macho not manly.

 

[Astronuc]

The idea was to point out how difficult it is to sum up what makes a man manly or a woman womenly, and cliche's are clearly counterproductive, I say just go with worthy of respect for both, but that is also clearly subjective.

I know what you meant, and I agree that clichés and stereotypes are counterproductive. Mutual respect is the way to go.

Some people would say Bush is worthy of respect, some people would say not(just an example, please I don't really want to know what anyone really thinks)

Don't get me started. :grumpy:

Is a scientist manly? I think your getting confused with macho. To be manly you simply need the accompanying physical and mental traits we define as male.

I would agree that the use of 'manly' is confused with 'macho'. I've never cared for such nonsense.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Don't get me started. :grumpy:

:rofl: I know but haven't we had enough bush is evil threads

I would agree that the use of 'manly' is confused with 'macho'. I've never cared for such nonsense.

Generally I've never felt the need to conform to any societal standards to any huge degree, so I must say I agree 100%

. If one is talented and passionate about something and willing to work hard at one's talents who cares what the hoi polloi have to say?

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago

I think it's more PC to call them proles or plebs, Hoi paloi has upper class snobbish conoitations.

Dimitri there is nothing wrong with respecting talent. In fact the intellectual and moral qualities of a man are the ony thigns that merit respect

The only things? What about honour, sporting achievement, heroism, tenacity, wisdom. I doubt moral thought or contemplation or intelect come into many actions but they still can be admired, need to broaden that out a little.

 

[Moonbear]

i'm going to be a physicist rockstar (or a rockstar physicist)

I'd suggest doing the rockstar part first, make gobs of money, do a few tours, live the wild and crazy life while you're young enough to enjoy it (or was that what the professional fisherman adventures were for...if you kept that up, you could have at least been a TV star on one of those Discovery Channel shows ), then when the band breaks up, become a physicist and live off your savings from your days as a rockstar. From your photo in the member photo thread, you definitely have the right look to be a rockstar (even if you aren't very good at looking bad).

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

You can't do both I don't think, Brian May (Queens lead guitarist) Gave up a masters in Astronomy to go into the music business, he still appears over here on astronomy programs, but it's too late for a career in it for him, so it's a hobby, thinking about it he's a multi multi millionaire who has a telescope the size of a house at his disposal, what does he care

 

[Moonbear]

You certainly can't do both at the same time. Both are careers that require a lot of dedication and long hours. There's no such thing as being a part-time physicist or rock star. Though, if you're truly masochistic, it's possible to get through grad school while playing in a band part-time at local clubs (I know someone who did that, but then had to choose between becoming a scientist or rock star when the band started becoming successful, and he chose scientist...but, every so often, he gets together with some other scientists with musical talent and we get a live performance during a conference banquet!).

 

[PRodQuanta]

:rofl: EVERYONE is geeky and awkward looking in high school, you just don't realize it as fully until you look back at the old yearbooks!

All one needs to do is look at the member photos here to get an idea of the appearance of scientists and science students in a range of fields, and you'd see that you'd never pick them out from a crowd as a scientist...there's nothing inherently geeky about any of them.

I found it somewhat amusing when I attended my cousin's wedding somewhat recently (she's quite a few years younger than I am). Her friends kept asking, "You're really a professor?" :rofl: I don't know who told them that in the first place, undoubtedly some relative was bragging, since I don't usually bring up my profession on purely social occassions, but I thought it was pretty funny that they seemed so surprised. I guess they were expecting some old maid to be sitting in a corner with coke-bottle glasses and snorting when she laughed and muttering to myself or something.

Point taken

Also, I do live in Iowa. That may account for the plethora of odd looking people (less Superman and the dude from That '70s Show).

Paden Roder

 

[Astronuc]

But the best scientists have been compassionate and concerned with the general welfare and the various ways in which science is used and the greatest scientists have been humble in this respect. The concept of manliness like that of gentleman is a concept difficult to define, one of those things one feels rather.

That has been my impression of scientists. I've always thought that mathematics and science are cool! When I was in primary and secondary school, I was teased for being a 'brain' or looking like Mr. Spok. On the other hand, I could ran as fast as the athletic boys in the class, and fight just as well, which fortunately I didn't have to do very often.

 

[Pythagorean]

You certainly can't do both at the same time. Both are careers that require a lot of dedication and long hours. There's no such thing as being a part-time physicist or rock star. Though, if you're truly masochistic, it's possible to get through grad school while playing in a band part-time at local clubs (I know someone who did that, but then had to choose between becoming a scientist or rock star when the band started becoming successful, and he chose scientist...but, every so often, he gets together with some other scientists with musical talent and we get a live performance during a conference banquet!).

Yeah, I used to rock hard on guitar. I play keboard too. Actually, I just (randomly) ran into a guy with a drum set and he had a guitar at his place, so he handed it to me and we kicked up some cool tunes, I STILL GOT IT!

But ever since going after physics, my attention towards music had dwindsled. At one point, I was majoring BA in Physics with a minor in music, but I dropped music when it got hard.

If anything, I'd cut an album out in my spare time and try to sell it, and never play live. It's a lot me work than it sounds like though, my god.

Yeah, so I'll probably focuse on physics, (since yeah, fishing was my adventure for my adolescence) and once it gets boring (shaw!) I'll go back to music. But I'll always be practicing here and there while I"m pursuing a physics degree.

 

[Pythagorean]

oh yeah, something to add:

the whole dorkiness thing doesn't have to be about looks. If a scientist only talks about science in his/her spare time, then he/she is a dork by society's standards because he/she is obsessive, he/she is a science dork.

If you can keep up with multiple dimensions of conversation without being articulate and anal (like you should be in science) than people will never suspect you a scientist.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I personally have never been concerned with what people think is nerdy or geeky. On the contrary, I find that genuine talent often evokes envy from people. In answer to Dimitri's question, if certain people think scientists are nerdy why bother with such people? This is what I meant by hoi polloi and did not mean it in a snobbish way.

Oh don't worry I was just kidding if anything prole and pleb are just as snobbish terms, you have a point.