In the FCL Lab, we are all interested in learning about how people learn science.\u00a0 Often, we approach this process by looking at how they currently interact with scientific exhibits and other people in those exhibits.\u00a0 What they say, what they do, and how they then reflect on the experience gives us social scientists information about how the information is being processed.\u00a0 I am interested in this work because the processing of information by an individual is very telling. \u00a0But often, we aren\u2019t aware of the impacts that our home culture, gender, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status play in how we perceive the world, let alone science.\u00a0 So for my first FCL blog, I want to bring this question to the forefront: How has gender played a role in how we see science?<\/p>\n
In today\u2019s postmodern, feminist, gender-blending world, the idea of gender can be sometimes seen as a negative four-letter word.\u00a0 I am sure that there have been situations where you looked at someone and wanted to ask, \u201cIs that a man or woman,\u201d but know it is not PC<\/i> to do so.\u00a0 As social scientists, we don\u2019t often ask questions in relation to gender unless we feel they are important to the study.\u00a0 But listening to a This American Life<\/i> podcast made me rethink whether we should research the role gender plays in learning science.\u00a0 Here is a link to the podcast. http:\/\/www.thisamericanlife.org\/radio-archives\/episode\/220\/testosterone<\/a><\/p>\n In Act Two of the podcast, you meet Griffin Hansbury, who was born a woman but has since transitioned into man.\u00a0 He speaks about how increasing testosterone has changed his life \u2013 not only in the way he sees the world and himself in the world, but even in his interests.\u00a0 At one point, he mentions that after taking testosterone he finds that he is more interested in science.\u00a0 The interviewer remarks that with that comment, he has set our society back 100 years.\u00a0 But is there some truth in what Griffin said?\u00a0 If we look at the science field, it is dominated by males (many of whom are white – but that is another blog post). \u00a0Is it because the way science is done now speaks to a male, testosterone-fueled mind? Would it be different if science was propelled by female, estrogen-fueled minds?<\/p>\n In Star Trek\u2019s Next Generation episode, Angel One<\/i>, the crew encounters a society woman-dominated culture.\u00a0 On this planet, women not only hold the positions of power, but are also the ones that do the science.\u00a0 Men on this planet are considered \u201cemotional\u201d and incapable of doing anything in leadership or science.\u00a0 As a work of science fiction, this episode not only points out the inaccuracies with this form of thinking, but also serves as a social commentary on our society.\u00a0 Could it be that somehow this still holds true in our modern day, despite supposed advancements in gender equality?\u00a0 If we move further into the World of Geek and equate how women are viewed in science with how they are viewed in gaming, maybe the video Nothing To Prove<\/a><\/i> can give us an inkling of what is happening today.<\/p>\n You be the judge.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In the FCL Lab, we are all interested in learning about how people learn science.\u00a0 Often, we approach this process by looking at how they currently interact with scientific exhibits and other people in those exhibits.\u00a0 What they say, what they do, and how they then reflect on the experience gives us social scientists information… Continue reading