Comments on: Detailed uncoverage

By: Old Grouch

Old Grouch — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 01:15:51 +0000

Random Linkage – February 21, 2009 …

Charles Hill reads about Berlusconi… “Women on the left, and guys who hoped to score with women on the left, were duly outraged…” and says it’s time for a Weekly Standard Swimsuit Issue….

By: fillyjonk

fillyjonk — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:40:00 +0000

Oh, I’ve heard all the stereotypical expectations of what female scientists are “supposed” to look like, and even the stereotypical anti-stereotype “hot” female scientist. I’ve heard and seen them so much that I’m no longer even offended by them.

I don’t know. Politics would seem a funny “filter” for attractiveness, but then I’ve found that people generally don’t do the reasonable things I expect them to do.

By: The Other McCain

The Other McCain — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:24:53 +0000

Rule 5 Sunday…

In obedience to Rule 5 of “How to Get a Million Hits on Your Blog,” it’s time to bring the hotness. With a big old hat-tip to Pirate’s Cove Sunday pinup series, here is the infamous inaugural link list of shameless babe bloggers: …

By: CGHill

CGHill — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 03:03:56 +0000

Yeah, but you’re a scientist.

I have some ideas along those lines, but I’ll hold off for a couple of days until I see what level of dudgeon prevails among readers.

By: sya

sya — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 03:00:15 +0000

My first reaction to such generalizations is to ask, “Can you prove it?” I know how I’d figure out whether it was true or false–which would involve some random sampling, surveys, and quantifiable facial and body measurements. I have a hunch that there would be no significant difference between the two groups. (Yeah, I know this is totally besides the point of your post. I’m just being weird.)