Sciencemadness Discussion Board


chemoleo - 17-12-2003 at 11:27

Haha, I thought that would get your attention :P:P

Was wondering whether there are any female members on this forum. Not for dating purposes (there surely are better places for this), but out of curiosity to see whether there are chemically inclined females here.
I would be surprised if there were!!

Otherwise why do you think this is such a male-dominated hobby? Because it's not girly, or what?

There are plenty of gals that are interested in chemistry (yes, the scientific type of chemistry :D), but I don't think any of them would ever consiider doing experiments at home....Kinda sad really isn't it ;)

On this one there isn't even any social pressure, as you could happily keep your chemical endeavours hidden from your fellow female friends....

What do the boys and girls reckon?

same old story...!

PinkFire - 17-12-2003 at 14:20

I'm inclined to blame sexism. As a child and teen who was educated by the California public school system, I wasn't encouraged to really understand mathematics or sciences. Whenever I was "stuck" and needed assistance understanding something math or science oriented, I was more often than not told by teachers and parents, "Oh, don't worry about it, go practice your violin/cook something/write something." So I did. I think it takes special parents to encourage their daughters to study what is "traditionally" considered a male-dominated area. Hell, even the UC system accepted "geology" to fulfill a physical science requirement.

It wasn't until I became interested in soapmaking and perfumery that I took an interest in chemistry, and since that existed outside academics, I was able to approach chemistry and math with a more relaxed attitude.

Now that I've been tutored in stoichiometry and principles of equilibrium, I'm addicted! Those moments of "wow, I get it now!" are quite motivational. Now, despite having a master's degree in a completely unrelated field, I'm going back to college to get a degree in chemistry. My main interest is perfumery, but I plan to delve into many areas of chemistry while I'm at it.

vulture - 17-12-2003 at 14:53

I don't want to make any sexist remarks, as I am myself a defender of equal chances policy, but I always get the impression that girls are less "hardwired" for chemistry than boys.

It's hard to explain, but it's just the same as a girl will notice you're wearing a new tie and a boy won't.

That said, if they go for it, they're usually better at it then boys, because they usually show more dedication.

BromicAcid - 17-12-2003 at 18:37

I forget what thread it was in but someone told one of the newer members to get a job to fund their chemistry habit. They said, "you should get a job and become a janitor" or something of that nature, their response was along the lines of, "Well I'm a girl" I just forget where it was, struck me as odd at the time.

Mumbles - 17-12-2003 at 19:01

I have three female friends(not too bad looking either) that are getting interested in chemistry. It is odd because they each take a different approach.

One want some revenge and is trying to get me to teach her some things to do. I wont teach her about high energy compounds. In many ways a bit of ethyl mercaptan can be worse than say a car bomb(if they're not in it). I don't think this is the best way to go about learning as you don't soak in the full spectrum of chemistry goodness.

The second wants to know about "cool" chemicals. The good smelling ones, or the demo kind of reactions. Lots of pretty colors, and things like that.

The third(and my best friend btw) just wants to learn as much as she can. She wants to be able to go through Chemistry and already know everything. This is how I was. Since there's really no limit to what you can learn in chemistry it keeps me quite well satisfied. I could sit down and talk to her about chemistry and sciences all night and she would be hanging on my every word. I must say, it is a great feeling having someone just about as interested as you are in a topic to talk to.

KABOOOM(pyrojustforfun) - 18-12-2003 at 20:17

BromicAcid:that thread is "NaOH". she's Saerynide
IIRC that job idea was Hermes's


Hermes_Trismegistus - 19-12-2003 at 20:14


thread was relating to how a person might fund a chemistry habit...Hermes mentioned job at "Janatorial SUPPLY WAREHOUSE" for "funding" maybe job in STOCKROOM!

maybe get DEEP discount, yes(yoda voice)

maybe accidentally put boxes in garbage bin not quite empty yes?
maybe midnight dumpster diving yes???
wink wink, nudge nudge,yes yes:D

I am a fish - 21-12-2003 at 09:45

I've set up a poll on the matter of gender.

girls love chemistry!!!!!!! (well i do anyway)

fitlaurz - 8-1-2004 at 04:13

I got accepted to do a 3 year modelling contract with Models Direct in England. I've won beauty competions and my auntie wants me do do a page 3!!!!!!
but i decided agaisnt doing the contract and now im doing a Pharmaceutical chemistry degree and i love it-still might do the page 3 though!
i've got loads of gorgeous girly mates who are doing maths and science degrees and its the best-we still do a bit of modelling, just recently me and 5 of my house mates went modelling for en vogue. so really weve got the best of both worlds glamour and education!

Saerynide - 9-1-2004 at 03:34

I hate how girls are always not trying out "guy" subjects like IT because they've been brainwashed by society's traditions of what girls should like. They pretty much tell themselves not to get interested in certain topics cause "theyre not supposed to like things of that sort".

Last time was telling a friend about me trying to get a CCNA cert and I asked if she wanted to join me. She just gave me a funny look as if I was retarded or soemthing. Then she said "I dont want to be interested in guy subjects." Like wtf, shes making herself fit a sterotype and contributing to the disrespect for more daring females... :mad:

blip - 9-1-2004 at 14:25

I got four girls at my school interested in chemistry, but I still have to ask them what's up with their studies to find out (they don't initiate that topic). Maybe it's that stereotyping? Also, there's a girl at my school all into computing, but it really seems her goal is just to get into a good college with good scholarships and all. I've seen only two or three females online into assembly language (any), so that sucks too. Primarily, though, it'd be the best to have a girlfriend with the same interests and knowledge as me, rather than actually working towards being a complete ditz to act cute.

Who Cares?

Hermes_Trismegistus - 9-1-2004 at 15:00

I mean really, If there were too many women in lab, I just don't think I could contain myself:P

seriously though, I think the numbers are a little skewed on this site, the number of women in my organic chem lab course far outweigh the number of men.

its physics that really has a paucity of women, but unless a guy is cruising the glassware section looking for a little action, who cares what variety your colleagues come in....?

Some sciences (like the health sciences) are becoming dominated by women (like M.D.'s), not like it matters anyway!



Hermes_Trismegistus - 9-1-2004 at 15:14

Originally posted by fitlaurz
I got accepted to do a 3 year modelling contract with Models Direct in England. I've won beauty competions and my auntie wants me do do a page 3!!!!!!
but i decided agaisnt doing the contract and now im doing a Pharmaceutical chemistry degree and i love it-still might do the page 3 though!
i've got loads of gorgeous girly mates who are doing maths and science degrees and its the best-we still do a bit of modelling, just recently me and 5 of my house mates went modelling for en vogue. so really weve got the best of both worlds glamour and education!

Does anyone remember the chippies in the clearasil ads they used to show on t.v.?
I never knew, that there really were people like that.


KABOOOM(pyrojustforfun) - 11-1-2004 at 21:01

randomly I've been chosen in a general chem lab class in which there are only 2 males (includes me:D) but anyways in my university number of fem chem students are @least three times higher than that of males. (hmmmmmmm....... time to show off;):P)

I thought this site was a discussion board and NOT a slagging off match!!!!!

fitlaurz - 30-1-2004 at 07:18

I answered chemoleo's Question and get abuse from Hermes Trismegistus.

Hermes whats with the hatred for girls anyway? does your Mother abuse you ? if so i pity you and im sure theres some sort of counciling you could try!
One could say that your level of 'bitchyness' is rather girly?
So show us all the woman you are and post a bitchy girly reply to this when you're not doing your hair and make up!


chemoleo - 30-1-2004 at 07:40

Let's keep this civil people, shall we?
Going from clearasil ads to abuse by mothers is a big leap, is it not? :D

silly CHiPy! trix are for kids!

Hermes_Trismegistus - 30-1-2004 at 08:09

Oh yeah! I remember posting those!

They still make me grin!

No I don't like little girls, they irritate the crap out of me.

I do enjoy the company of adult women though. Truth be told. I should get used to ditzy little girls whos two biggest priorities are hair and makeup, my daughter's reasonably centered now but you never know what effect school will have.

Also a group of people gathered together for the purpose of governing.

Maybe you meant COUNSELING... good advice from a trusted friend or competent advisor..

I guess you've never seen California Highway Patrol or those Clearasil pimple ads with the frivolous little girls whose lives are "just like....totally TOTALLY" because of a pimple HUH?

Don't get those telly programs and adverts across the pond?


Hermes_Trismegistus - 30-1-2004 at 08:13

Sincerely hope you don't get twisted out of shape over any humor on my part there fitlaurz.

All in good sport now... wot wot!

Organikum - 30-1-2004 at 12:20

I think Hermes clearasil reply was funny.

Hey, learn to laugh about yourself!
Tip: A look in the mirror helps!

btw. - I am a neutrum.:D

chemoleo - 9-2-2004 at 16:20

Saerynide, am I correct in that you are a female yourself? In that case, great stuff, you are actually doing experiments! Me is impressed :D - there are so few of you!
Keep up the good work :)

EtherBunny - 9-2-2004 at 20:06

I am female as well. And I'm not embarrassed to wear pants with chemical stains on them.

Saerynide - 10-2-2004 at 00:58

Thanks Chemleo :D

Maybe substances with pretty colors could actually make pants look cooler :) Come to think of it, I might just try something like that one day :D

Friedrich Wöhler - 10-2-2004 at 02:40

Oh god - I read and write in a chemical forum as a releasing ESCAPE from a climate of hardest contra-sexual insanity, destroying all that human reason. But even here I must read
"[...]whats with the hatred for girls anyway? does your Mother abuse you ?[...]"
All sexual things are "abusing" today. Its highly time now to stop such contra-human "morality".
For me that sentence on top could also name "Where comes your endless love to girl so higly? Did your mother "abuse" you?"
I must note here, I find that American sexual "morality" SICK SICK SICK and CRIMINAL.
Arresting an 11-yearly boy for erotic "doctor games" with his half sister caused even in sexual-blocked Germany a wave of indignation and solidarity. There is a joke all arround allready about best method getting asylum:
Say "I'm an American citizen. And I'm a child."

Oh, how sky-like can it be to think about chemistry only more...!

IgnorantlyIntelligent - 19-2-2004 at 16:52

I think women can be better than men when it comes to science and math. They dont get distracted by things as easily and have generaly a more seriouse attitude(from what I have seen) Like Vulture said, they notice things more that would normaly get missed. My girl friend knows nothing about chemistry but she's pretty smart and has helped me with some stuff. Girls pick things up fast.

Dont know if this belongs here but I just want to add it because of the anti-sexist ppl here.
I'm not sexist BUT absolutely by no means should any woman EVER be in the military! This pisses me off beond beliefe. They take up a ton more room and supplies than men. I know this from my cousin who has been in the Marines for a few years and been to other countries for this new war for oil/terrorism. He said they are picky, anoying, always needing tampons, and dont like getting dirty. Thats just the anoying parts, obviously they cant shoot, run, climb, or fight as well as men. That is all due to strength differences, and sorry women but you aint JI-Jane bitch! When I go into the Marines, if Im in a fire fight and some bitch accidently shoots a friend in the back when she gets the piss scared outa her from a near miss from an artilary shell I'm guna hand her over to the enemy for a good old fashond ass raping.
LOL oh yea, he also told me some dumb hispanic bitch in another battallion accidently discharged her M16 in the food area. No one was injured though.

[Edited on 20-2-2004 by IgnorantlyIntelligent]

PHILOU Zrealone - 18-5-2004 at 15:58

Out of university, I can say that girls are in equal amounts vs boys in chemistry, doctor/surgery, biology, geology, pharmacy,...,
More girls in litterature, nurse, psychosociology, social assistance.
Less girls in physic, math and engineering and commercial engineering.

But it is on the change like for medical field...until 15 years ago it was mostly male it is like 60/40 female/male.

About chemistry at home...yes, social pressure is already there when you are a boy (out of 200 chemists I was the only one to have a lab at home); for a girl it is even worst.

Girls are fascinated by chemistry...and chemistry can be beautiful, estethic, entertaining...but fire, explosion, and runaway feels more exciting for boys...out of 20 girls I asked to, none realy apreciate fire...I can last hours t watch a woden fire burn in the cheminey (it is beautifull, changing and...romantic.)

It seems that girls think more to the risks than boys do...and it is of course due to the societal endoctrinement, social pressure, group normalisation....the insidious conditionning we got every day from our birth to our emancipation...but when you see what a sect can do to adults in six monthes...imagine what can be done in 30 years on the fragile and manipulable, soft resisting child we were...:cool::cool::cool:

"boys don't cry"
"Hooo watch Tomy has build a nice truck like his father drives..."
"Girls shouldn't behave like this"
"Girls take care of themselves"
"Go on Charlie seduce a lot of girls"
"Don't watch at boys"
Everyday, every hour, each seconds ...there are zillion of practical examples, tiny implicite or big explicite things tha is sexist, archaic, biaised, machist....

Hard to make this change...only time will do ....

PHILOU Zrealone - 18-5-2004 at 16:10

Anyway, girls, continue to show to the face of the world you aren't affraid of change, fire and that all this is a myth nourished by other myths.



PHILOU Zrealone - 18-5-2004 at 16:16

Destroy The BiG MYTH

For unknown reason it was screwed up in previous post :(

Even the text program is sexist ;););)

Organikum - 18-5-2004 at 17:42

Destroy the BigMac ?

Ah! French! Fight cultural imperialism I understand, welldone!

Mr. Freud had a good laugh btw..........


thalium - 12-11-2004 at 10:32

I'm a girl too. The only problem is that my mother doesn't accept that I'm interested in chem and physics (more in chem.. MUCH MORE in chem). She'd like me to play the piano:mad: and study literature and arts and classic music:mad::mad::mad:. this may be what happens to many girls: the influnece of their mothers (maybe torture too...who knows...). I didn't let myself be influenced by my mom:D

Saerynide - 12-11-2004 at 19:04

Omigod, my mom used to make me play piano too. I have lonnnnngggg quit though. *shudder* I have no musical talent :D What is it with moms and having their daughters learn music?

thalium - 13-11-2004 at 00:30

I didn't even TRY to learn...I'd learn to play the giutar tough...rocker thing (when I'll have some time for it). I don't know why...maybe just to amuse the guests when they invite people:P

TomThumb - 13-11-2004 at 08:38

off subject, spare me to torment and explain what "IIRC" means :/

--> If I Remember Correctly.
--> If I Recall Correctly. ^^

[Edited on 13-11-2004 by chemoleo]

[Edited on 15-11-2004 by Ramiel]


MadHatter - 14-11-2004 at 04:31

I remember that course well. There was only 3 males in the entire class ! We were the
engineering types taking that course as part of a well-rounded degree program. Actually,
there was quite a bit of statistics involved and I managed to get a B for that class. The other 2
males were bitching about this requirement while I felt I had hit the mother lode for women !
They were mostly nursing students who also bitched about other required courses -
namely Calculus I. I was more than happy to offer my assistance to these lovely young
ladies !

P.S. That's 1 of the few textbooks I kept. Later on, my niece found it useful in her
report on Margaret Meade - a well known sociologist.

[Edited on 14-11-2004 by MadHatter]

Social change

chloric1 - 14-11-2004 at 06:34

Its the beginning of the 21st century and certain generations tend to want to cling to 19th century ideals. My daughter will be born this February and my wife has no problem with me teaching her math and science. It is the time for change otherwise we will no be able to reach the status of a "civilized" society.

Jome - 17-11-2004 at 16:25

I hope so. In my opinion the "I have to be like everyone else" thing in most girls is very sad, most interesting personalities certainly result where it does not.


Twospoons - 17-11-2004 at 17:06

I love it when my daughter comes to me and asks if we can do a 'science experiment'. At which point I wrack my brains for something easy, immediate, and impressive (making pH indicators out of flowers went down extremely well).

At her 7th birthday I got to be 'Professor Snape' :P and amuse all the party goers with a hands on 'potions' class.

Professionally I'm an electronic engineer, and it saddens me that so few women take up a career in engineering.

Geomancer - 17-11-2004 at 18:10

I was talking to my sister the other day (trying to discuss a probability problem), and she rather rapidly declared that she found the whole concept of averages to be almost useless. Draw what conclusions you may.

Not that it's easy to say exactly what a numerical probability does mean. Not easy at all.

BTW, here's the problem: You are given two boxes, one containing twice the amount of money (or whatever) as the other. That's all you know. You open one box, and, after examining it's contents, you are given the choice of either keeping it, or switching to the other box. Which do you choose? Your object is to maximize your earnings. (My sister, interestingly, was interested in minimizing dissapointment.)

You reason as follows. The opened box contains X dollars. Since you had an equal chance of picking either box, half the time the other box will contain 2X, and half the time it will contain 0.5X. On average, then, switching to the other box will get you 1.25X.

Does this make sense?

chemoleo - 17-11-2004 at 18:30

No it doesn't. :P
As it's random, one could say, oh, let's always take the first one. Therefore the average is (2x + 1x)/2 = 1.5 x, as the choice on 1x or 2x is random.
This is your average earning. Regardless which boxes you pick (i.e. random, or selectively the first or second).
Nice one :)
anyway...there are some related threads in Whimsy, so your little confusing problems may be better suited there.
I can see why your sister doesnt like averages, if you treat the poor lass with that!

HNO3 - 30-11-2004 at 18:49

Can you pick up hte other one? If you can, feel which one is heavier, and take it:P:P:P:P;):D:P:P:P:P:cool::cool::cool:

I am a fish - 1-12-2004 at 06:31

A similar problem is as follows:

There are three identical boxes, one of which contains a prize. You are asked to select a box. Before opening it however, one of the other boxes is opened and revealed to be empty. You are then given the option of changing your choice of box. What should you do to maximise your chance of winning?

The "obvious" answer is that switching boxes won't affect your chances of winning, as the game is entirely random. However this is wrong. The probability that the prize is in one of the two boxes that you didn't initially choose is 2/3. Once one of the boxes is opened, this probability remains the same and so there is still a 2/3 chance that the prize is in the remaining unselected box. Therefore, switching boxes doubles your chance of winning.

[Edited on 1-12-2004 by I am a fish]

[Edited on 1-12-2004 by I am a fish]

Polverone - 1-12-2004 at 11:53

Originally posted by I am a fish
A similar problem is as follows:

There are three identical boxes, one of which contains a prize. You are asked to select a box. Before opening it however, one of the other boxes is opened and revealed to empty. You are then given the option of changing your choice of box. What should you do to maximise your chance of winning?

The "obvious" answer is that switching boxes won't affect your chances of winning, as the game is entirely random. However this is wrong. The probability that the prize is in one of the two boxes that you didn't initially choose is 2/3. Once one of the boxes is opened, this probability remains the same and so there is still a 2/3 chance that the prize is in the remaining unselected box. Therefore, switching boxes doubles your chance of winning.

It sounds like the obvious answer is still correct. After one box is revealed empty, there is an equal chance of finding the prize in either remaining box. The misleading part is "the prize is in one of the two boxes that you didn't initially choose". Initial choice is irrelevant; only final choice determines whether or not you have a box with a prize. Once one box is revealed empty, there is a probability of 1 of the prize being in the unopened boxes, 1/2 for each.

[Edited on 12-1-2004 by Polverone]

I am a fish - 1-12-2004 at 14:29

Originally posted by Polverone
Initial choice is irrelevant; only final choice determines whether or not you have a box with a prize.

You're falsely assuming that the process of opening one of the empty boxes is entirely random. If the player initially chooses incorrectly (as she has a 2/3 chance of doing), then she effectively dictates which of the boxes must be opened (as neither the winning box nor the chosen box can be opened). Therefore, information is passed onto the player, from which she can can make a better than random guess (by switching her choice).

[Edited on 2-12-2004 by I am a fish]

Polverone - 1-12-2004 at 17:10

I wasn't assuming that the initial box-opening is random, but that it was rigged to always be empty by re-distribution of the box contents rather than selection of an existing empty box. I didn't pay enough attention to the physical reality of the situation; in an electronic gambling game (for example), it would be common to implement this so that you just show an empty box and then let each remaing box have a 1/3 probability of containing the prize. Of course in electronic gambling games it's also standard fare to rig things so that there is no real probability involved, just a guaranteed prize after X thousand plays, so I really should keep physical and electronic worlds better separated in my thinking :(

[Edited on 12-2-2004 by Polverone]

Twospoons - 2-12-2004 at 13:45

The initial choice is totally irrelevant, as one empty box will always be removed. This leaves two boxes, one prize, and a choice out of two boxes. "Option to change your initial choice" is just messing with words - what you really have is "Pick one of these two remaining boxes, one of which contains a prize". So your chance of winning is exactly 1/2, whether or not your second pick is different to your first.

If you don't believe it get three boxes, one prize, and try it 100 times.

I am a fish - 5-12-2004 at 05:33

You're confusing the mean probability with the individual probabilities. If you make a random choice between the original box and the other box, the probability of winning will be 1/2. However, the individual probabilities are 1/3 for the originally chosen box, and 2/3 for the other box.

HRH_Prince_Charles - 5-12-2004 at 07:13

The initially chosen box has a 1/3 probability of containing the ball. The probability that the ball is one one of the 2 remaining boxes is 2/3.

When one of the remaining boxes is shown to be empty and removed, knowledge of the system has changed: the ball is equally likely to be in either of the 2 remaining boxes; the probability of it being in either is 1/2.

Probability is based on knowledge of the possible states of the system: as the knowledge changes, so does the proabability.

Geomancer - 5-12-2004 at 14:28

Chemoleo's shown that the reasoning in the problem I mentioned is wrong (which is intuitively clear). He hasn't shown WHY it's wrong, though. Any takers?

Polverone: Your point regarding electronic gaming is well taken. The discussion below assumes that the prize begins in one box and stays there.

HRH, Twospoons: you're not alone in falling for the 50:50 story. The issue was raised in Parade magazine, and several mathematicians wrote in claiming something similar. It's still wrong.

Intuitively, since it is always possible to remove a nonchosen empty box, the probability of you having chosen the nonempty box cannot be changed by the new information given (we ALREADY KNEW one of the nonchosen boxes was empty, so no new information about the chosen box is available).

Indeed, your 50:50 arguement should work regardless of the numer of boxes. Imagine a large number, say N, of boxes, one prize, and one initial choice. The person running the game then removes N-2 of the nonchosen empty boxes. Obviously, if N is, say, Avagadro's number, the chances of your initial choice being right is absurdly small, so you can safely assume that the prize is in one of the boxes you did not choose. But that means that the prize is in the one nonchosen box left after the others are removed, so switching is almost always going to get you the prize.

Formally, probability problems arising from a finite and uniform distribution can always be solved by listing all the possibilities and counting. There are three possibilities for the initial layout of the boxes/prize:
p n n
n p n
n n p
(p being the prize, n being an empty box)
These are all equally likely. Assume that you initially choose the first box (the other cases are similar). The three cases go to:
(the chosen box is capitalized)
Since the initial cases are equally likely, so are these. One non-empty, nochosen box is removed, and the three cases lead to these descendents:
Once again, since the previous states are equally likely, so are these. But then it is clear that in 2 out of three possible and equally likely cases, switching to the other box will win the prize.

HRH_Prince_Charles - 6-12-2004 at 05:41

Geomancer: I am very sorry to say that you are correct.

Twospoons - 6-12-2004 at 16:31

Your mistake is in assuming the order of the boxes is important.

the last two are indentical states, as it doesn't matter which of the other two boxes actually contains the prize since the other is going to be deleted! Leaving just

50:50 chance

Look at it another way : why would it matter if you make a choice before one of the empty boxes is removed? Your final choice is still one of two!

[Edited on 7-12-2004 by Twospoons]

HRH_Prince_Charles - 6-12-2004 at 16:38


Geomancer's solution is correct, there are 3 possible outcomes; it just so happens that 2 of those outcomes are identical, giving 2 chances of the same outcome: that is why the probability is twice as high.

Geomancer's head is probably swelling as we speak.

Twospoons - 6-12-2004 at 16:43

You're right. I was just gazing out the window moments after the last post and I see where the bias comes from.

Point conceded.

Good argument though :D.


Sergei_Eisenstein - 16-12-2004 at 11:01

Comrade Sergei has always been under the impression that most chemgirls are - to be as honest as possible - plain ugly. This was not just an impression, it was a fact. But not long ago, he found this most delicate and interesting chemgirl. Damn, she looks soooooo innocent... Every time he sees her, she begs him to corrupt her. Ooooh yes she does! He was thinking about inviting her to the lab to sniff his newest chemicals together. However, he doesn't know yet how much of a geek she is... :(

vulture - 17-12-2004 at 08:54


Comrade Sergei has always been under the impression that most chemgirls are - to be as honest as possible - plain ugly.

I can attest to that for my female chemistry comrades. Two of them would be perfectly able to scare a German Tiger tank into submission.

The solution is to open your eyes for girls from other faculties. I recently had a talk with a girl that studies economics and she did had some general interest in chemistry stuff too. Well, on the other hand, chemical industry is a key component of Belgiums industry, so....

cyclonite4 - 18-12-2004 at 05:32

Originally posted by vulture
I can attest to that for my female chemistry comrades. Two of them would be perfectly able to scare a German Tiger tank into submission.

LMAO :P. Im not so suprised to notice that there are only 3 female chemstudents on my year, all that would of course agree with "sergei's hypothesis". Infact, i've also noticed in general (but not always) that girls with less of a mathemetic/science orientation, tend to be the more attractive, they all seem better at english/the arts.

Polverone - 18-12-2004 at 13:03

Hmmm, maybe this was just because I was at a small liberal arts school where women were already considerably more numerous than men, but there were a fair number of good-looking female chemistry majors at my undergraduate school. The science that really seemed to attract them in droves was biology, though. I was a computer science (one of those pretend sciences that needs to attach "science" to its name, like social science :P) major, and female majors were a small minority. On the anti-stereotype side, one was quite hot and none of them was unattractive. On the stereotype-fulfillment side, one of them dropped out and tried to sue the school after she failed to pass a hard class in her junior year, and the hottie really didn't know what she was doing and graduated I-don't-know-how.

Also on the stereotype-violating side, two out of four professors in the department were female, and were both pretty good looking as well. One was tall and blonde with a twin sister who works at Cray (she had some amusing tales of visiting tech conferences with her sister and being drooled all over), and one was the daughter of a wealthy Saudi expat who grew up in England. This woman had done some groundbreaking work in natural language parsing for Arabic. Both of them were very bright and competent.

cyclonite4 - 18-12-2004 at 22:32

Yeah, i also noticed that when it comes to science, most of the girls go for biology, infact, there are hardly any guys in biology (not even me). As for computer "science" there is one girl who looks alright (also the ONLY girl there) but she is accurately marked as a slut, and i would never go near her.

My girlfriend (goes to a different school) follows the stereotypes :(, she is good at home economics (has nothing to do with economics :D, more like cooking and sewing) and the arts/music. And of course she is fairly attractive :D, if only she was into science too.

[Edited on 19-12-2004 by cyclonite4]

ordenblitz - 22-1-2006 at 12:52

MSDS for Women

image16.gif - 39kB

DeAdFX - 22-1-2006 at 14:35

I do not believe there are any girls intrested in chemistry at my school. Other fields of science I believe there are.

The_Davster - 22-1-2006 at 15:00

I know of a few girls into chem, one wants to do experiments at home but is not being allowed by her parents and the other is into inorganic chem, 'nothing bio related' in her words. Her parents are both chemists as well.
The latter is really attractive, and guess who is going out with her;).
The honours chem group at my Uni is 90% guys, 10% girls, grad students 80% guys, 20% girls, and general chem is about 65/35.
Numbers are aproximate based on what I have seen at department social functions, and for grad students they have pictures of them all on the internet.
I do know a lot of girls in bio related stuff though, I wonder exactly why girls are less dispositioned toward chem?

[Edited on 22-1-2006 by rogue chemist]

neutrino - 22-1-2006 at 17:06

That MSDS was great. I haven't laughed like that in too long. :D

Magpie - 22-1-2006 at 19:05

I thought I had tracked down a local source of pure NaNO2 at a meat market where the owner was making his own sausage. When he brought out a pink powder I knew he didn't have what I wanted.

But he was trying to help me and we began talking. I said I needed it for a calibration as I was a chemist. He then began telling me about his 11 year-old daughter. He said she was nuts about chemistry, was reading high school chemistry texts, and wanted him to start buying her chemicals. I told him that his daughter was a rare person and that 11 years old was about the age I also began begging for a chemistry set. :D

The_Davster - 22-1-2006 at 19:40

tsk tsk Magpie, you did not link her to this site:P.

But wow, 11 year old girl really into chem, that is rare, she is precious.:) I wonder how she got interested?

Nerro - 23-1-2006 at 03:39

Where I study (Leiden, Netherlands) There are plenty of girls in chemistry-related topics but only three out of 30 in actual chemistry. Any theories as to why it goes like that? Do girls make their pick earlier in life? Or is chemistry just to theoretical to be of interest?

Btw, I agree with Vulture that once they dó get started on chemistry they do really good generally, I suppose because they are more determined to do good. It's kind of cute to see a girl come hopping out of the exam room because she just passed an easy test :P They just cheer things up.

DrP - 23-1-2006 at 04:19

My GF was top of her year during her Chem degree - got about 90% and a 1st. Is now doing a PhD in Chem. :)

woelen - 23-1-2006 at 10:50

But now the added question, how many girls do experiments and syntheses at home like many of us do ???

Esplosivo - 23-1-2006 at 11:01

Few or none I would say. My girlfriend has studied chem, she got very good grades (as good as I did, but hey we both got an 'A' and there isn't any further grade in which I could have done better, although at school during tests I did get great results, top of the class :P). I said did because now my girlfriend and I are in Med school, which also indicates good grades where I live, where only the 'best' are allowed to join ('best' is variable, people who do well in exams might be as stupid as a cucumber).

She does enjoy joining me when I'm doing some chemistry, which pleases me a lot. I usually do much of the work alone though, being the solitary type of guy. I've known only a couple of girls who actually went as far as titrating solutions and did some general salt analysis at home. My girlfriend is one of them - I sort of pushed her in, giving her small chemical samples and helping her where she didn't comprehend. I'm lucky.

Magpie - 23-1-2006 at 16:18

My wife says she has no idea of what I am doing in my lab or what I am talking about. :P

But we must not forget Madame Curie who was an outstanding chemist and a dedicated researcher. I saw a old movie on her a while ago. She and her husband laboriously took huge vats of solution down to one evaporating dish to isolate radium.

woelen - 23-1-2006 at 23:51

For me it is the same. My wife accepts things as long as they do not become too expensive, too dangerous or too smelly ;). She likes, however, the things I put on the web :).

Our youngest daughter (now 7.5 years old) has quite some interest in chemistry, and sometimes I do some nice experiments with her or let her play herself with some chems (e.g. NaHCO3, vinegar, sugar, salt, very dilute K4Fe(CN)6 and FeCl3 for blue colors). However, she never is allowed to do any chemistry on her own and she knows very well, that she may not go into my lab without me.

mick - 3-3-2006 at 15:46

Where I work as a technician there a girls and women all over the place. I work in the med chem labs (synthetic organic chemistry) but it is called medicinal chemistry research which is part of what was called the biomolecular research group and is now part of "inflammation and infection". Most of the women come from a biological or pharmaceutial background and move into chemistry even though chemistry is not mentioned.
Just read the autobiography of Rosalind Franklin, the dark lady of DNA. It just about sums up why there are not many women in chemistry.


[Edited on 3-3-2006 by mick]