Skip to main content

View Diary: Women in Science: Margaret Ursula Mee 1909-1988 (11 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I should have stated from the start that ... (9+ / 0-)

    I did not intend to cover current female scientists.  For one thing I could never do that as there are numerous excellent representatives, some of whom I know and a few with whom I have collaborated.

    My main intent is to show that even in earlier periods there were women who were in fact very good scientists, some of whom produced fundamental work, but who were often not recognized. A few, like the Alexandrian mathematician and physicist Hypatia, paid with their lives, but many were either ignored, like Jane Colden, sidelined, like Beatrix Potter, not paid, like Libbie Hyman, or paid very little, like Annie Jump Cannon.  A few, despite prejudices, became successful (Madam Curie, who won two Nobel Prizes, comes to mind).  

    Women in the sciences are no better or worse than men.  Sometimes (as in several of Leaky's ape girls) they may stand out in a particular field.  I have never understood the prejudice against women in the sciences as I have had several productive associations with female researchers.  This is the primary reason I started this series after someone (I don't remember who) in the KOS suggested it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site