Sea Lions, Goats,& Other Stuff.

selfrescuingprincesssociety:

Hannah Wormington (September 5, 1914 – May 31, 1994)

Hannah Wormington was an archaeologist known for her writings and fieldwork on southwestern and Paleo-Indians archaeology over a long career that lasted almost sixty years.

Marie Wormington was born in Denver, Colorado. As a young child she was able to spend most of her time with her mother and her maternal grandmother who had come to the United States from France. Being fluent in both English and French proved to be a useful asset the summer she went to France to start her archaeology career.

Wormington was the first woman to focus on anthropology for a Radcliff Ph. D., which she obtained in 1954. This was during the era in American archaeology when that there was a definite bias against women being included in some departments and in some parts of the country. While taking classes at Harvard for her Ph.D. she had a professor who requested that she sit outside the classroom to take notes.

Before obtaining her Ph.D., Wormington already had an accomplished career in anthropology, which began in 1935 after she graduated with her B.A. in Anthropology from the University of Denver. Her initial areas of interest were medicine and zoology, but changed to archaeology after taking a few classes taught by E. B. Renaud, whose focus was on the French Paleolithic. He supported the idea of Paleolithic stone tool technologies in the New World that were identical to other parts of the world. Renaud suggested traveling to France to do some research.

Wormington jump started her own career through the connections she made by contacting Dorothy Garrod as soon as she was in London. Garrod became a mentor to Wormington, and she put her in touch with some notable archaeologists working in Paris at the time, including Harper Pat Kelley and Henri Martin. While working alongside Kelley, Wormington was allowed to borrow artifacts found in Europe for data collection at the Denver Museum. Martin insisted that Wormington be a part of the Paleolithic excavations taking place at Dordogne, and Wormington spent her 21st birthday doing just that.

After returning home to her native Denver, she was hired on at the Colorado Museum of Natural History (known today as the Denver Museum of Natural History) in the anthropology department until it closed in 1968, thus her appointment as a curator spanned 33 years. Because of her background as one of the foremost authorities on the subject of Paleo Indian studies, the museum was able to establish a formidable reputation. While working at the museum and before obtaining her MA and Ph.D. Wormington wrote Ancient Man in North Americaas well as Prehistoric Indians of the South West.

In the same year she left the Denver museum (1968), Wormington was the first female archaeologist to be elected president of the Society for American Archaeology. She had previously held the title of vice president twice (1950–51, 1955–56).

She was awarded a Guggenheim fellowship in 1970, and in 1977 she was awarded an honorary doctor of letters from Colorado state university. In 1983, the Society of American Archaeology awarded her the Distinguished Service Award, being the first female archaeologist to receive the award.

Just two years later she was awarded the Colorado Archaeology Society C.T. Hurst award for her significant role in Colorado Archaeology. In 1988 she was once again awarded honorary doctor of letters degree from Colorado College, the same year she was appointed the curator emeritus of the Denver Museum of Natural History.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Marie_Wormington

BAD ASS DENVER LADY!

(via scientific-women)

thatssoscience:

What It Means When Women in Tech Are Told They’re ‘Too Abrasive’ (Hint: It’s Got Something To Do With Sexism) 
In a recent study by linguist and startup CEO Kieran Snyder, she examined the kind of feedback men and women receive at tech companies. Snyder asked men and women in the tech industry to send her their performance reviews. She received 248 reviews from 105 men and 75 women. 
This is what she found: men and women receive different kinds of feedback. Women’s personalities were criticized much more frequently in performance reviews than men’s. Men were criticized for job performance, while women were criticized for not just their work output but for being ”abrasive" or having "the wrong tone". The results are so shocking, they seem skewed. 

Men received comments like “There were a few cases where it would have been extremely helpful if you had gone deeper into the details to help move an area forward.”
While women received comments like “Your peers sometimes feel that you don’t leave them enough room. Sometimes you need to step back to let others shine.”

Words like bossy, abrasive, strident, and aggressive are used to describe women’s behaviors when they lead; words like emotional and irrational describe their behaviors when they object. All of these words show up at least twice in the women’s review text I reviewed, some much more often. Abrasive alone is used 17 times to describe 13 different women. Among these words, only aggressive shows up in men’s reviews at all. It shows up three times, twice with an exhortation to be more of it.

This data validates women’s experience in STEM fields. They are stuck between a rock and hard place. Sheryl Sandberg tells them to Lean In, to speak up, and to be aggressive. While their peers and managers tell them to lean back, let others shine, and to be a little quieter. 
This is just one example of how the culture in STEM fields turns women away. While other factors keep the pipeline leaky, company culture plays a huge role. Women should be encourage to speak up, to be leaders. They should not turned down when they act like one.  It seems some tech companies have a long way to go to eliminate gender bias. 
And please ladies, don’t be discouraged by this study. Women in tech and other STEM fields are some of the most intelligent, driven, and successful people I know. Even when they face daunting obstacles. If anything this study gives validation and motivation to the need to change the way women in STEM are treated. Remember: It isn’t just you. Other people go through this too. And it doesn’t have to be this way.
To learn more check out my episode on gender bias in STEM fields. 
You keep doin’ you, STEM ladies. We need you. 

thatssoscience:

What It Means When Women in Tech Are Told They’re ‘Too Abrasive’ (Hint: It’s Got Something To Do With Sexism) 

In a recent study by linguist and startup CEO Kieran Snyder, she examined the kind of feedback men and women receive at tech companies. Snyder asked men and women in the tech industry to send her their performance reviews. She received 248 reviews from 105 men and 75 women.

This is what she found: men and women receive different kinds of feedback. Women’s personalities were criticized much more frequently in performance reviews than men’s. Men were criticized for job performance, while women were criticized for not just their work output but for being ”abrasive" or having "the wrong tone". The results are so shocking, they seem skewed. 

Men received comments like “There were a few cases where it would have been extremely helpful if you had gone deeper into the details to help move an area forward.”

While women received comments like “Your peers sometimes feel that you don’t leave them enough room. Sometimes you need to step back to let others shine.”

Words like bossy, abrasive, strident, and aggressive are used to describe women’s behaviors when they lead; words like emotional and irrational describe their behaviors when they object. All of these words show up at least twice in the women’s review text I reviewed, some much more often. Abrasive alone is used 17 times to describe 13 different women. Among these words, only aggressive shows up in men’s reviews at all. It shows up three times, twice with an exhortation to be more of it.

This data validates women’s experience in STEM fields. They are stuck between a rock and hard place. Sheryl Sandberg tells them to Lean In, to speak up, and to be aggressive. While their peers and managers tell them to lean back, let others shine, and to be a little quieter. 

This is just one example of how the culture in STEM fields turns women away. While other factors keep the pipeline leaky, company culture plays a huge role. Women should be encourage to speak up, to be leaders. They should not turned down when they act like one.  It seems some tech companies have a long way to go to eliminate gender bias. 

And please ladies, don’t be discouraged by this study. Women in tech and other STEM fields are some of the most intelligent, driven, and successful people I know. Even when they face daunting obstacles. If anything this study gives validation and motivation to the need to change the way women in STEM are treated. Remember: It isn’t just you. Other people go through this too. And it doesn’t have to be this way.

To learn more check out my episode on gender bias in STEM fields. 

You keep doin’ you, STEM ladies. We need you. 

(via scientific-women)

rosefire:

gaywitch-practisingabortion:

situationalstudent:

purplespacecats:

professorbutterscotch:

kiskolee:

THIS.

I have never thought about it in this context
that’s actually really, really creepy.

I… fuck.

Yeah, basically.

I once pointed this out to my mother and she just stared at me, in stunned silence for ages. 

There will always be a girl who is less sober, less secure, with less friends walking in a darker part of town. I want her safe just as much as I want me safe.

rosefire:

gaywitch-practisingabortion:

situationalstudent:

purplespacecats:

professorbutterscotch:

kiskolee:

THIS.

I have never thought about it in this context

that’s actually really, really creepy.

I… fuck.

Yeah, basically.

I once pointed this out to my mother and she just stared at me, in stunned silence for ages. 

There will always be a girl who is less sober, less secure, with less friends walking in a darker part of town. I want her safe just as much as I want me safe.

(Source: bigfatphallusy, via camilleonbbj)

YOUTUBE MUSEUM

there should be one. A virtual one. It would be super cool and educational. I just really want it to exsist because youtube has an interesting story. How does one make this happen? I just listened to Hank Green’s earbiscuit and he said that youtube-y stuff would be in a museum someday and then my brain exploded. It could be created in a physical space but then be transferred to an online space like one of those super cool virtual museum tours you can do of the louvre except there would be no actual physical museuem because the physical exhibits could be created all over the world and then coherently combined online. It could be the coolest collaborative project ever. 

carriehopefletcher:

So happy you guys have been enjoying @petesjams and I being Flynn and Rapunzel! :D

Teachers want us to work, and I say, “Fine, I’ll work. But you’ve gotta let me do the kind of work that I wanna do.” And for me, it’s my drum kit, man. This is my passion. This is the essence of who I am now. But before I had this, I was lost, too. You see what I’m saying? You need to find your reason for living. You’ve got to find your big, gigantic drum kit.

(Source: jakeparalta)