Jamie Reidy hurts his pea brain trying to think of genius women throughout history.
I recently discovered College OTR’s ranking of the Top Ten Ugliest Colleges. And perusing the list got me to the thinking.
Nine of these ten colleges are what I would call “smart schools.” Only St. John’s, a commuter school in NYC, isn’t ranked among the most difficult acceptance-wise.
(Full disclosure: my mom went to St. John’s after she aced the math portion of her SATs. Apparently, she wasn’t only a curve buster grade-wise, but in attractiveness, too! I say that in a completely non-creepy way, and with the hope she remembers this blog when Christmas shopping.)
Applying a logical conclusion to these unscientific rankings, I can only deduce that smart people are ugly.
Think about it. Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, Doc Brown. I doubt any of those guys got any ass in college.
For comparative purposes, I wondered if well known genius women are unattractive, as well. Sadly, aside from Marie Curie and the girl who played “Winnie Cooper” on TV, I struggled to name names off the top of my stupid head.
So, I googled “famous smart women in history.”
And nearly spit water all over my laptop screen, thanks to “Top Notch Mama”, a student looking for wisdom.
Here is the third-most popular link to the aforementioned search criteria.
im writtin an essay but i need an example of a smart woman dat contribute to society wit her knowledge
OK, so Gertrude Stein she’s not. But it gets even better. Do your self-esteem a favor and scroll down through the entire list of answers.
“Opera.” I realize this isn’t a spelling bee, but it would be nice to get the spelling correct when answering a question about intelligent women.
“Conellisa Rice.” At least this responder knew she didn’t know the spelling.
Here’s the thing about those two answers: Ray Ray and Mrs. Nighs were active participants on the internet. They could have googled the names and simply cut-and-pasted the correct spellings. Call me Mr. Sighs, I guess.
But Countess provided my favorite answer to “Who r some famous intelligent women?”
“Theodore Roosevelt.”
I bet those three responders went to hot colleges.
* * * * * *
That’s where I originally ended my pithy blog.
But a question has been gnawing at me all day: What in the name of Lawrence Summers gives?
Why can I rattle off guys like Oppenheimer (atomic bomb), Watson & Krick (DNA), and Moore (computer chip), but I hardly know any female superstars in engineering or science?
Maybe that is my fault. Perhaps that’s the fault of historians. Or, maybe my co-editor Joanna Schroeder is right: men steal all the good ideas from women. (That’s certainly the case in the “Scooby Doo” cartoons; Fred totally rips off Velma’s theories.)
What do you think is the reason behind the glaring difference in notoriety between men and women in these fields?
Jane Goodall! Surprised no one mentioned her. She is a pioneer in primatology, and a superstar in the anthropological world.
I am now thoroughly embarrassed.
While there are difficulties for women entering fields, especially historically, but still today, I think the major reason why no one knows about the contributions of women to science (or just academia in general) is because no one cares. Really. The people who are remembered by history are the people that historians believe are important. And traditionally, no one really considered what women had to say to be important. It has been difficult for women to be taken seriously by their male colleagues, any woman who obtained her PhD between 70s and 90s (your professors) will admit this. Who is… Read more »
However, to fight discrimination, it is important to focus on the
ways in which it is manifest.
I am an MRA, and the last thing I want to talk about is how discrimination impacts women. However, it is staring me in the face today, so here goes: Question: Why is Biology the Cinderella of scientific endeavours? The perception is that truly great scientists chose fields such as Physics, Mathematics, or Cosmology. However, how can the relative difficulty of different disciplines be measured? Even if it could be, would the answer really matter? Would it be a better idea to talk about the impact that each discipline has on the human condition? By this standard, there can be… Read more »
Attractive men are unlikely to come across a woman that will provide for them. The same can’t necessarily be said for women.
Maybe there’s a lot of potential great female minds that weren’t able to develop because boys were always doing their homework for them?
Great points re: women weren’t allowed access to the sciences until the recent half of the 20th century. That explains a lot.
But, AntZ, you just proved my point.
I had to google Franklin and Hodgkin because I’d never heard of them. Even worse, I’d somehow heard the name of “Bernal,” DCH’s mentor. And crazy to learn that Watson and Crick used Franklin’s data. Thanks for the tip!
Women have been leaders and pioneers in Biology for years. Unfortunately, when people think “genius” they often ignore science, or think of science as meaning “physics”. In fact, virtually all of the most impactful innovations of the 20th century were biology related. Why the myopia on Physics? I don’t know. The Watson/Crick “conflict” with Franklin is a cooked book that does not square with reality. There was certainly a lack of collegiality problem, but Franklin’s results were available to anyone on request. Franklin herself never thought of it as wrong, but rather, as rude. Which it was. More troubling is… Read more »
I was about to comment on Franklin. Everyone remembers Watson and Crick, but not Rosalind Franklin. No one teaches about her. I didn’t learn about her until my college biology course, definitely didn’t hear about her in high school bio.
Politics is about cunning, not smart. You are looking in the wrong place.
There have been many genius women in science, technology, and innovation. Marie Curie would not rank anywhere near the top of that list. I am not going to get into why, because it does not matter.
Think Rosalind Franklin and Dorothy C. Hodgkin.
@Lori: As far as today in concerened, imho, it isn’t society enforcing this (alleged) stigma on women, society does everything it can to let women know that it is OK to have both. Think about it, from movies, to TV Shows , to advertising. All are sending the message that women can have it all. Unfort, the reality is that for the most part, you can’t have it all. Men can easily have a family and a career: I would love you to tell that to most divorced men, how is that family doing. Yup, the kids don’t live with… Read more »
Throughout most of human history women were not allowed access to education. Women were not accepted in universities until late in the 19th century. As it often happens, real acceptance in society of women pursuing higher education probably took quite a while after that. Furthermore, even women who pursued higher education would end up under family and society pressure forgetting everything about it and staying in the home taking care of children and family. Even today, while men can easily have a family and a career, women struggle with guilt and stigma when dividing their time between the two or… Read more »
Several loosely related points: After reading the collegeotr link, I think its a number of related factors for people at ‘smart schools’ that brings their perceived attractiveness down. Nobody looks good after staying up for 50 straight hours to write 3 papers, do a few problem sets, and study for the big test. People who get into ‘smart schools’ are the people most likely to do just that, and probably did many times before they got in as well. In addition, someone who chooses academics to socializing will have less practice at socializing, which can lead to social awkwardness –… Read more »
I think it’s interesting what you say about math and science with women. I was really hardcore into math and science as a kid. I took a summer college course just so that I could do calculus a year early in high school. And yet, now I’m a social sciences field. I mean yes, there are some strict science sub-disciplines in archaeology, but I’m not in them. I’ve often wondered why it is that I didn’t go into the physical sciences. And I really don’t have an answer for you…or at least not one that is related to my gender.… Read more »
It’s the Patriarchal conspiracy at work! Shuck off your bras, ladies and invent something! Naw…I’m only joking. 😉 I think it’s more to do with the way society is set up in general. How many of these superfreakinggeniuses are from poor families? How many are non-white? How many were uneducated? – that’s the big one. Most of the people who are recognized as being wicked smart in our history were part of some sort of institutional education system…and the people who were part of that were mostly rich white guys. And then you gotta ask who is writing about them…other… Read more »
Which wow…I’m not saying that uneducated people aren’t super geniuses. I’m saying the ones who get recognized are often part of the education system.
Heather, stop saying that poor people are stupid.
Just kidding.
No, you’re definitely right Heather about the class issue.
lol yeah that’s all I need…someone thinking I’m saying poor people aren’t smart.
I don’t know, man. You really aim high. What I’ve read/heard/believed is that generally speaking, the reverse is true: attractive people are more intelligent. Why wouldn’t it be true that the finest members of our species also possess the finest minds? Tom Matlack and Oprah are two examples that spring immediately to mind of smart, successful, attractive people. They might shucks and folks you and say they’re not so smart, but if they weren’t actually incredibly smart about what matters, they wouldn’t be where they are today.
I’m not talking about just “smart.” I’m referring to superfreakinggenius, especially in science, engineering, etc.
And you might wanna raise your bar attractiveness-wise!
Perhaps you should consult with zombie Marie Curie to start: http://xkcd.com/896/
Justin, that was some grade-A ass kissing 😉
I can’t believe I’m not on that list!
You aren’t as wickedly successful as a capitalist, though you are definitely better looking than Oprah.
If I was gonna steal an idea, I hope I’d only pick a good one.
They steal all, but only take credit for the good ones.
Say, for instance, that Jamie stole my invention of a plug-in electric back massager for the bathtub that comes complete with an extra long cord. After beta testing (or alpha testing?) Jamie might not be trying to claim that one.
By the way, I said men steal women’s ideas in a mostly-completely joking tone of voice with only a hint of bitchiness, so let’s be clear that I’m totally unprepared to back this claim up with evidence. As I just made it up.
“Or, maybe my co-editor Joanna Schroeder is right: men steal all the good ideas from women. ”
But not the bad ideas?
This entire blog entry was my idea, and Jamie totally stole it. Men.
Just kidding.
I think it’s obvious that this is 100% Jamie.