One of the most things about male feminists is what and-wringing, cringing pussies they can be sometimes.
Here is a list, with photos, of 15 sexy scientists. It has a little excuse for some obvious bias in the choices:
…
The worst possible way to handle this is to search the internet for photos of women scientists and make superficial decisions about who the male eye would find sexy. There's a process of judgment that went on behind the scenes, where many women scientists had to have been rejected because they were insufficiently 'hot', and then many of the women dragged into the spotlight had their "scientist" qualifications completely ignored for their literally biological qualifications. It's a reiteration of the same inappropriate judgmental attitude that pretty much every woman scientist suffers through.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/i_have_been_objectified.php
Good grief. He’s complaining that not enough shrift is given to scientific qualifications for a list called “15 sexy scientists”. Read that title slowly again Myers.
Then there’s the usual yammering about “turning these women into objects” on the comment thread of the post he is referring to (and a lot of good rebuttals too). I can’t help but think that a lot of what these people don’t like about lists like this, is what amounts to a basic railing about the basic fact that looks are more important to women then they are to men. That’s like, get over it and stop being so offended by reality.
Posted on: Monday, July 19, 2010 12:11 PM