"Science: It's a Girl Thing" Says Controversial Ad

[ADDLibrarian]

When the ad could also be an advertisement for cosmetics (seriously, slap on the Maybeline logo at the end)it fails as PSA. Worthy cause to try, but please go back to the drawing board.

 

[Drops a Sweet Katana]

Wait, there was science in that video?

Apparently liquid nitrogen in a conical flask is now science. Seriously though, someone, somewhere needs to be punched.

 

[AngloDoom]

What did I just...?

I wouldn't consider that advert average, just totally nonsensical. A scientist looks at a montage of women being womanly with intermittentclips of technology being...techy. Wut?

 

[EeveeElectro]

Oh yes... the best way to get women into science is to exclude men. ¬_¬

This is stupid. I thought being a geek, I'd get away from all this stupid fucking stereotypes of women.
Just makes me think I have to be model-like to be accepted in geekdom now as well.
I'm nothing like those women... I don't care for make-up, fancy dresses or being a giggly air-head.

The only positive thing I can think of with this is that's it's trying to say women can be smart, sexy and still act like typical women, which I've found can be true. They shouldn't be portraying us like this though, it just seems like another bunch of women going "OMFG, LOOK AT ME! I'm a woman in a male dominated society! Look at my non-male body!"

They're not gonna get acceptance if they keep making a song and dance about their gender.

 

[Funcakes]

This: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2125#comic

is the only advertisement science needs.

 

[flying_whimsy]

I find it noteworthy that it is not that inherently different from most advertising targeted at women (I suspect the idea for the ad simply came from study of such advertising). Unfortunately, it fails at its intended purpose, and I can't help but wonder if maybe there is something wrong with the advertising upon which it is based or whether the problem lies in communicating a positive message with the same methodology that typically perpetuates the kind of negative self-image the ad itself is trying to combat.

 

[greybing]

I often imagine the board room meetings when I see adverts and ponder how the fuck did that get the go through.This advert is yet another example of out of touch people doing dumb creative shit for money.I get that science is dominated by men but I fail to see the usefulness of this add.

 

[Jake the Snake]

That may be one of the most poorly executed advertisements I've ever seen, just...what the fucking fuck was that?

 

[Crazy Zaul]

Well that was pants on head retarded.

 

[blackrave]

"Trying to counteract the cultural bias that tends to persuade young women away from the hard sciences is a noble endeavor"

What bias? Around here proportion in hard science studies is similar to general proportion of males-females (6M:10F)
So why these ads are even being made?
There is one gender problem though, talent towards hard science amongst females is extremely rare
Yes they try to compensate it by studying extra hard, but in the end we get specialist who is extremely knowing, but have no idea how to use this knowledge in a creative way
And there is also problem of limited imagination, but it is problem of both genders

 

[greybing]

absolutely!....sorry ,that was accidental post.

 

[greybing]

........sorry,i haven't figured out how to delete posts.

 

[webkilla]

someone's gotta be feeling stupid for making that video

I can think of plenty of ways to show that science is accessible to women - by focusing on the woman, not the science

heck, I've studied movie theory and visual communication

Here's a fun alternative:

1) Show that there are women in science
- show them working, show them doing stuff, show past examples of women of science who participated in or achieved scientific breakthroughs

2) Show that universities aren't just for guys
- show women having fun studying, chatting with friends over a pile of books and notes

3) Show women with scientific educations working in the private and public sector
- basically show that women who get big degrees can get jobs and respect doing science

 

[Cheeseman Muncher]

I have no idea how they thought this would be a good idea.

Blatant overuse of stereotypes aside, you don't get people into science this way. You need to show them why it's cool. Chuck together a montage of women scientists at work interspersed with some snazzy science-y images and you've already improved on this a hundred fold.

 

[Esotera]

As a guy, if laboratories were actually as fun as the one portrayed in that video, I'd already be searching for places to do a PhD. The video wasn't particularly good but it wasn't as bad as I thought it'd be.

 

[Kargathia]

On the plus side, this ad made me slightly more interested in makeup. It's a great advertisement for lipstick and shoes.

I have to wonder who thought this was OK? Like, a team made this ad. It terrifies me that a number of people sat down, read whatever concept information was available, and thought "Yup, this is a good way to go about making science appealing for women. Lipstick and strutting all around!"

Also: Check the comments, there's a pretty hilarious Eugenics argument goin' on.

Marketing logic: everything can be improved with enough sex appeal thrown in.

Really, to anyone even mildly involved with PR departments it comes as no surprise that they habitually have their head up their arses, and are by now convinced the world looks suspiciously much like their small intestines.

 

[1337mokro]

You can't, you can't know that because as you say women never started in a neutral position. So the neutral position is unknown. Instead of having the media tell women to be what the current culture perceive as feminine you are telling them not to be that kind of feminine, but instead to be your kind of feminine. I honestly have never in my life heard a woman who didn't want to do a science course give the reason "Because I am a woman and women belong in the kitchen or because the reactor isn't painted pink".

How about we first focus on perception of those professions and courses rather than start counter brainwashing people until we hit the tipping point where you are brainwashing them into doing things the way you perceive as being right.

This is exactly the problem. You're framing it perfectly for me, but you're inside it, so you can't see what I'm saying (apparently).

The "perception of those professions" is shaped very differently for men and women based on how society treats them from a very young age. The perception is crafted by exactly the "brainwashing" we're talking about, so you can't treat them like separate issues.

There is nothing about the sciences that turns away girls on a genetic or biological level, so that leaves the problem on a social level. And yeah, "personal preference" is largely shaped by social influences, so saying it's just that "some girls don't like science" is a non-answer.

This isn't about telling women to be one kind of feminine versus another kind. It's about acknowledging that the very idea of "women acting feminine" is almost entirely defined by a male-dominated cultural model that persists behind the scenes even today. It is a term that has no meaning, except that which we give it.

Women are, barring abnormalities, programmed genetically to identify with females of their species. And there are a select few behaviors to which women are instinctually programmed to gravitate -- the so-called "nurturing instinct" perhaps among them. But outside that, the specific behaviors we term masculine/feminine are based on the social status-quo.

The social programming that directs women away from science does so gently. It's not going to be as obvious as, "Ew! Science doesn't have pink things, gross!" Instead, it's going to work like any other social programming -- it's going to feel natural, because it's what she's used to. Society has told her girls like shopping, makeup, clothes, and mothering.

What you're calling "counter-brainwashing" is ridiculous. I'm talking about making a conscious effort to stop the current brainwashing. And it will require a conscious, positive effort to do it, because the brainwashing process is such an ingrained part of our culture. Things that we do without evening thinking (like associating pink with girls, which wasn't even a "thing" until the 1940's), we have to stop and think about them, because they have unintended consequences.

You want to make this some kind of "brainwashing in reverse" thing, when it's not. Our goal shouldn't be to "trick girls into liking science." Our goal should be making sure we're not accidentally tricking them into not liking it. That requires that we understand the mechanism that got us into this mess, and it requires that we behave in a way that is more conscious of it. And, to get the ball rolling, it means it can't hurt to work the other way just a little.

There are hallways that, while maybe we haven't closed them off to women, we've made them appear uninviting. We could simply open up the hallways and trust that maybe at some point they'll realize they're open now, but that's too passive to work in our cultural climate. But we also don't want to try to lure them down those hallways (that's the reverse brainwashing stuff). What we need to do is open up those hallways and then make sure girls know they're open, inviting, and worthwhile, whereas before they were made to seem otherwise.

Apparently your deeper into it than I am because you can't see the IMMENSE switch you made between your previous posts. You literally went from "We have to show them Science is a better choice" to "We have to make sure they aren't scared away from science by current media influence". You wanted to counter current media influences by making science more appealing and current day norms less appealing with the exact same methods as used by the media today. Now it's almost done a complete 180 (I'd say it's more of a 147) and you have gone to stopping the influence, rather than counteracting it with your own influence.

That is a DRASTIC leap. However once again. How will you do this? What is your plan for doing this? Adds saying science is cool and awesome? Adds saying that just because your a woman doesn't mean your not good at science? I think the grades in high school will reflect that well enough.

Show me a plan that will achieve the counteracting of current social standards set for women without misguiding them into a choice they never wanted nor by actively punishing those that feel perfectly fine being who they are and counteract this new social standard.

I wish I could write more, but gots to work in the morning for the bossman, so I kept it brief.

 

[grigjd3]

Think they might have done better by simply showing real women in science? Maybe it's just me, but I find having good examples people finding success in what they do makes the prospect seem much more approachable. Of course, what do I know about careers in science? I've just got a meager PhD in Physics.

 

[rbstewart7263]

hilarious!

 

[Dastardly]

... Now it's almost done a complete 180 (I'd say it's more of a 147) and you have gone to stopping the influence, rather than counteracting it with your own influence.

That is a DRASTIC leap.

Sorry, but no. If that's how you've been reading and framing my position on the matter, it's fine for you to make a late adjustment, but let's not put that on me.

However once again. How will you do this? What is your plan for doing this? Adds saying science is cool and awesome? Adds saying that just because your a woman doesn't mean your not good at science? I think the grades in high school will reflect that well enough.

Show me a plan that will achieve the counteracting of current social standards set for women without misguiding them into a choice they never wanted nor by actively punishing those that feel perfectly fine being who they are and counteract this new social standard.

1. It's less about "advertising science," and more about making sure that our presentation of science isn't as male-centric. Why do most science-oriented toys have boys on the box? Why are most science-fiction shows about male protagonists (or unbelievably hot females obviously intended to draw male viewers)? That's where this stuff takes root.

People don't get into science because of science class. They get into it because of other things, perhaps only tangentially related to science, that pique their curiosity or interest. Shows and toys featuring spaceships and lasers make boys curious about spaceships and lasers, rather than this working the other way around (ie, We sell this to boys because it's "what boys like").

2. Advertising doesn't have to be directly manipulative. Most of what they do is raise awareness of a product. I don't watch a Kia commercial and decide I need another car. But the commercials make me aware of it, and the price information makes it clear that they're in my price range, so when I am making car decisions, I'll think about Kia as an option.

Now, why do Kia commercials get that reaction from me, but Lexus commercials don't? Because it's clear from the commercials that Lexus is waaaay outside my price range. And big ol' truck commercials don't register for me because they are directed toward folks with different needs and interests (For instance, why always a deep-voiced Southern gentleman narrating?)

The idea is that commercials make me aware of products by putting them in my context... or outside of it, thus letting me know it's "Not for me." But those commercials aren't making my choice for me.

We can apply this to science. Make girls and boys aware of science, but in ways that don't appeal more to one gender than the other. Become aware of the bias in the current vision of science in the minds of young people, as expressed through TV, cartoons, movies, toys, and eventually school.

Now, at first, our efforts are going to need to center on actively breaking the stereotype. We need to make people aware of this stereotype, so they see that the current wall is not naturally occurring. By that, some people who were held back by that wall will no longer be (and those who didn't care at all will continue not caring). We're not "luring" people, we're sending up a signal and letting them know it's there, and it might just be for them if they give it another look.