Quote 30 Sep 4,332 notes

After reading about gender-bias and conversation dominance in the classroom, I asked for a peer to observe a physics class I was teaching and keep track of the discussion time I was giving to various students along with their race and gender. In this exercise, I knew I was being observed and I was trying to be extra careful to equally represent all students―but I STILL gave a disproportionate amount of discussion time to the white male students in my classroom (controlling for the overall distribution of genders and races in the class). I was shocked. It felt like I was giving a disproportionate amount of time to my white female and non-white students.

Even when I was explicitly trying, I still failed to have the discussion participants fairly represent the population of the students in my classroom.

This is a well-studied phenomena and it’s called listener bias. We are socialized to think women talk more than they actually do. Listener bias results in most people thinking that women are ‘hogging the floor’ even when men are dominating.

— 

Stop interrupting me: gender, conversation dominance and listener bias, by Jessica Kirkpatrick from Women In Astronomy

Implicit bias is a thing, just like privilege. Calling it out isn’t meant to shame anyone, but to alert us to step it up and improve ourselves so everyone can have a voice. Be conscious of what you and others are saying, and know when not to speak.

(via scientific-women)

(Source: itsawomansworld2)

Text 30 Sep 93,037 notes

becausebirds:

professor-pigeon:

I googled ‘swimming pigeon’ once and I still haven’t recovered from this picture

image

(source)

pigepuddle

Video 30 Sep 166 notes
via .
Photo 30 Sep 28,711 notes rocktopussy:

becausebirds:

Kiwi on a treadmill.

well you can tell by the way i use my walk i’m a flightless bird
i can only walk

rocktopussy:

becausebirds:

Kiwi on a treadmill.

well you can tell by the way i use my walk i’m a flightless bird

i can only walk

Text 29 Sep 1,055 notes

Anonymous said: Thanks for the dead bird eurghhhh not cool

thefrogman:

I think you are mistaken. Here is the previous photo of that bird. 

The photo in question. 

And the caption of that photo: 

"Portrait no.2 Patiently waiting for a tummy scratch."

alive and silly birb.

Video 29 Sep 20,342 notes

thefrogman:

Photographedby Leila Jeffreys [website]

[h/t: jedavu]

birbs b cray

Photo 28 Sep 21,078 notes
Link 28 Sep 79,680 notes http://muchanimal-veryfeminism-wow.tumblr.com/post/98669618046/floozys-the-most-fucked-up-thing-is-that-emma»

floozys:

the most fucked up thing is that

emma watson

image

made

image

one of the most

image

men inclusive

image

feminist speeches

image

i’ve heard in the longest time, and the result? the result from these men who claim that they would be all for feminism if it weren’t for all “the man…

Video 28 Sep 1,937 notes

becausebirds:

frompawstowings:

Kiiiih~ (Asio clamator / Pseudoscops clamator )

pew pew

Screeeee~

Video 26 Sep 44,900 notes

(Source: joshfjelstad)

Video 26 Sep 7,286 notes

image

(x)

(Source: drakefeathers)

Photo 26 Sep 263 notes avianawareness:

(via Piccsy :: picc)
Link 26 Sep 8,231 notes Frat brothers rape 300% more. One in 5 women is sexually assaulted on campus. Should we ban frats?»

ebol4:

maybe I’m just ignorant, but fraternities have always just seemed like a breeding ground for subhuman scumlords to me

(Source: amodernmanifesto)

via trash.
Photo 25 Sep 166 notes thatssoscience:

NIH Announces $10.1 Million Worth of Grants to Combat Gender Bias in the Lab
This week, the NIH announced grants worth around $10.1 million to combat gender bias in research. Traditionally medical research focused on male subjects. Even when working with animals such as mice and rats, researches still favored male specimens. When women make up more than half the population, why is Male still seen as the default? Scientists want the most clean-cut results possible.  Women are frequently seen as variables to be controlled for. Not only were young, white male, undergraduates readily available, males don’t have the pesky hormonal fluctuations that women do. Yet the belief that the estrous cycle needs to be controlled for or monitored is false.  
Dr. Janine Austin Clayton, associate director for women’s health research at N.I.H.  called for this bias to be addressed early this year in a commentary in the journal Nature. She said this bias has caused a huge gap in scientific knowledge, “we literally know less about every aspect of female biology compared to male biology”. Unfortunately, this bias for male subjects has lead to damage outside of the lab. 
Women reportedly suffer more severe side-effects of new drugs, the effects on women weren’t discovered until after the drug hit the market. Recent studies of the sleep aid Ambien showed that women metabolize the drug differently than men. The drug stayed in their bodies longer and had greater potential for next-day impairment. The drug had previously been tested mostly in males.   After being on the market for a decade, the FDA finally recommended that women should reduce their dose by half.
Even the gender of researchers can have an unnoticed effect on studies. Rumors that the gender of researchers affects the lab animals existed for years. A study published early this year gave credence to such whispers. Researchers from the Mcgill University in Quebec found that mice and rats reacted differently to pain based on who was in the room with them. They showed elevated blood levels of the stress hormone corticosterone when men were in the room or even when the scent of a male was present in the room. The presence of women seemed to counteract this effect. It was suggest that in future studies the gender of the researchers should be published. 
The bias affects the way we understand diseases too. Did you know that women experience heart attacks differently than men?  Symptoms for women include, chest pain or discomfort, shortness of breath, nausea, and jaw pain. Tons of other diseases are more prevalent in women, depression, thyroid, migraines, etc. and lacked proper research for decades due to the ingrained gender bias.
Sex is a biological variable, but one that shouldn’t be ignored. With women making up more than half the population on this planet, its essential drugs get tested in everyone (and I mean everyone, not just those that fit into a binary of male/female). It’s essential that we know how diseases affect people differently depending on sex. These recent grants from the NIH are a huge step in the right direction.  But it makes you wonder, how has this skewed results for decades of research?

thatssoscience:

NIH Announces $10.1 Million Worth of Grants to Combat Gender Bias in the Lab

This week, the NIH announced grants worth around $10.1 million to combat gender bias in research. Traditionally medical research focused on male subjects. Even when working with animals such as mice and rats, researches still favored male specimens. When women make up more than half the population, why is Male still seen as the default? Scientists want the most clean-cut results possible.  Women are frequently seen as variables to be controlled for. Not only were young, white male, undergraduates readily available, males don’t have the pesky hormonal fluctuations that women do. Yet the belief that the estrous cycle needs to be controlled for or monitored is false.  

Dr. Janine Austin Clayton, associate director for women’s health research at N.I.H.  called for this bias to be addressed early this year in a commentary in the journal Nature. She said this bias has caused a huge gap in scientific knowledge, “we literally know less about every aspect of female biology compared to male biology”. Unfortunately, this bias for male subjects has lead to damage outside of the lab. 

Women reportedly suffer more severe side-effects of new drugs, the effects on women weren’t discovered until after the drug hit the market. Recent studies of the sleep aid Ambien showed that women metabolize the drug differently than men. The drug stayed in their bodies longer and had greater potential for next-day impairment. The drug had previously been tested mostly in males.   After being on the market for a decade, the FDA finally recommended that women should reduce their dose by half.

Even the gender of researchers can have an unnoticed effect on studies. Rumors that the gender of researchers affects the lab animals existed for years. A study published early this year gave credence to such whispers. Researchers from the Mcgill University in Quebec found that mice and rats reacted differently to pain based on who was in the room with them. They showed elevated blood levels of the stress hormone corticosterone when men were in the room or even when the scent of a male was present in the room. The presence of women seemed to counteract this effect. It was suggest that in future studies the gender of the researchers should be published. 

The bias affects the way we understand diseases too. Did you know that women experience heart attacks differently than men?  Symptoms for women include, chest pain or discomfort, shortness of breath, nausea, and jaw pain. Tons of other diseases are more prevalent in women, depression, thyroid, migraines, etc. and lacked proper research for decades due to the ingrained gender bias.

Sex is a biological variable, but one that shouldn’t be ignored. With women making up more than half the population on this planet, its essential drugs get tested in everyone (and I mean everyone, not just those that fit into a binary of male/female). It’s essential that we know how diseases affect people differently depending on sex. These recent grants from the NIH are a huge step in the right direction.  But it makes you wonder, how has this skewed results for decades of research?

Photo 25 Sep 3,980 notes thefrogman:

Coyote Hug by Perry McKenna [flickr]

thefrogman:

Coyote Hug by Perry McKenna [flickr]


Design crafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.