A few days ago, the European Commission launched a new project aimed at getting teenage girls interested in science as part of its Women in Research and Innovation initiative. It’s called “Science: It’s a Girl Thing!”, it has a snazzy website with lots of pretty girls and make up and colours and fun. They also released a teaser video that essentially manages to alienate everyone working in science: men, women, young, old. I wasn’t at all impressed when I saw it a few days ago, posted online by a colleague who was invited to the launch event in Brussels, and I don’t think I’ve seen such a universally negative response to any such campaign, ever. Here it is:
I’m amazed at the way the Commission managed to screw this up. I’ve attended an EC-sponsored “women in research” event in the past and it was clearly well-motivated, researched, and featured some excellent speakers. What happened here?
The tag line first of all is just weird. Science, “a girl thing”, really? And going by the video, by “girl” they mean a 17-year old in stilettos and a short skirt blowing kisses at the camera? I’ll repeat what I wrote recently:
When in doubt, replace “woman” with “old guy”, “non-white person” or “disabled person” and if that feels wrong, just don’t go there
Let’s try that for a minute. “Science: It’s a Black Thing!”. “Science: It’s a Jewish Thing!”. “Science: It’s a Thing for People in Wheelchairs!”. Yeah, doesn’t sound right, does it?
The video is extremely slick so I assume it was produced by a marketing or PR firm, at considerable expense. It features a nerdy guy in a lab coat who can’t help himself but ogle lots of smiley girls in tiny outfits. And there are lots of close ups of make up – lipstick, nail polish, powders etc. What does this even mean? You don’t have to be a barefaced sourpuss to work in science? (Oh right, thanks!) Or are they saying that instead of boring stuff like astrophysics and curing cancer you could be developing the awesome next generation of eyeshadow compacts? I understand I’m not the target audience for this video, but I do think we should show our smart young boys and girls a little more respect than this.
Why did they even bother with a “trailer”, and what audience did they expect to reach that a video-less campaign could not? The only things that really go viral on YouTube are dogs with stupid faces, dancing babies and Scarlett Johansson’s bum. The video was pulled from the site, presumably after they realised that everyone was slating it online, which I don’t understand either. Was this backlash really a surprise to them? Did they not show it to any scientists, male or female, before the launch? Why did they not stand behind it, and have a conversation about it? Much as I hate the video myself, controversies are not always a bad thing if they get a public debate going.
It’s all a little baffling. The project’s website actually contains some good stuff: profiles of European female scientists, a description of real-world challenges, and the events may well be really good too. The accompanying press release has lots of numbers and graphs about the under-representation of women in scientific careers. The Commission invests a huge amount of money into scientific research. They are in a perfect position to make a real difference. How did they fail so badly with this?
Curt Rice, who is Vice President for Research & Development at the University of Tromsø in Norway and who says sensible things about science and gender and open access, tweeted that he was on the expert group for the project, who are now preparing a statement. I look forward to learning a bit more about the background of this thing. The twitter hashtag to follow is #sciencegirlthing, and I expect this will rumble on for a while longer….
For dotAstronomy, Amanda Bauer has already proposed to make an alternative video showing some real women in science as another one of her creative/musical hacks. I hope it happens!
[Update, 26/06: Here's the statement from members of the expert advisory panel. It doesn't really add anything interesting, I guess they aren't actually allowed to comment on what happened behind the scenes. But I do agree that (i) fundamentally the discussion is important and should continue, and (ii) the Commission essentially has the right intentions.]
I’m finding myself at the fringe of Twitter wisdom… again! I totally agree with you that the title is a fail (I often use your trick too!), and I obviously don’t personally identify with anyone in that video.
*But*, as a woman and as a scientist I also didn’t feel patronized, or offended, or anything other than slightly amused. This video is not aimed at me, it’s probably aimed at the non-negligible group of young woman that sit at the back of classes or events and that I, as a real-woman-scientist-role-model right there in front of them, have never been able to captivate. Maybe they just don’t care about science – fine. Maybe I’m just not a good science ambassador – fine. But maybe they simply respond to a different type of language, and maybe they are put off by some sort of preconception that pretty girls in make-up have no place in science.
And maybe it’s OK to tell them that they do?..
Aha, a dissenter, excellent
Yes, well I think this exactly the kind of discussion that’s interesting to have, which is why I was disappointed that they pulled the video rather than talk about it. You do have a point.
And you know, sometimes I feel we scientists can be a little judgmental of the more frivolous things in life like beauty and fashion, and of people who care about those things. I think it’s great that in a science career it’s generally accepted that ideas and knowledge and personality (…not to mention h-index…) are more important than what’s on the surface – but we don’t want to send a message that you won’t get taken seriously if you look pretty as well.
I actually started writing about that in this post as well but didn’t have time to expand on it. Thanks for raising the point though.
It’s not who it’s aimed at that matters, it’s who it hits in the face…
And I now realise I wrote “I _obviously_ don’t personally identify with anyone in that video”. It probably is obvious for anyone who knows me, but most people who read this won’t. So why should it be obvious to them? Because I’m a female scientist and on average I’m less likely to look on trend and made up? I’m now surprised, and a little angry at myself for having written it… but probably it shows a little of what you said.
I agree with the general feeling that perhaps it’s not the right video as the flagship message of the whole campaign, but I’m very surprised at the unconditional level of backslash. There is a debate to have here, and it’s not happening.
Finally got around to waching the video (Thx to continuous tweets on the topic).
It *does* look a mix between a Campari and Barbie advert (and is quite daft)…
I do tend to agree with RT (If I got her right.) Presumably the video was directed at girls who think that science is “uncool” and would rather hang around in a mall. Kind of trying to get them to be vaguely interest in the concept of “science for future reference. And, ok, the ladies are in stilettos, but the lab guy is uncharacteristically good-looking isn’t he now?
Going back to business I believe a more serious approach to get anyone into science (incl. wheelchair-bound black Jews) might be warranted. On the other hand, as I wrote above, this ad probably wasn’t targeted at the kind of girl who own a small telescopes an loves dinosaurs…
Who does it hit in the face? And.. why?
Why is it that any video now showing pretty girls doing something is instantly patronising? Does this video really tell young women that if they don’t look on trend they can’t do science? If that’s the case, doesn’t every other science video out there, featuring average-looking real women, tell young women that they can’t do science if they look hot? Why does every video need to be taken so literally and as if it is meant to represent everyone? It’s exhausting.
I’m not saying that this is definitely going to work. But all criticism seems to be coming from scientists that feel patronised, not from previous experience with this sort of campaign. I personally have trouble engaging groups of young women that often are on trend and clearly take extra pride on their appearance (some notable successes excluded). No-one is going to suggest that these girls have a natural aversion to science, and that they wouldn’t be welcomed into the science world… but hey, try and make a video exclusively with hot-looking girls taking an interest in science and all hell breaks loose. It’s nonsense.
Interestingly one of my colleagues recently commented after an outreach event with a group of teenage girls that the younger ones were all interested while by the time they got to 14 or so a lot seemed to lose interest. I don’t know if there are stats to back this up. I would also guess this effect exists for boys too. Is there any way we can avoid losing these kids to science? Is a lot of outreach narrowcasting rather than broadcasting?
I’ve spent way too long thinking about a silly 53 second video**! But wanted to add in response to Rita’s comment “Why is it that any video now showing pretty girls doing something is instantly patronising?” something I wish I’d articulated in the video response I made off-the-cuff on the day with Brady Haran. And that point is: the young women in this video weren’t *doing* anything, other than pout and simper and pose. There was sub-second clip of a confident, fierce-looking young woman scribbling some equations on a board (great!), and that was it. No doing of science – no doing of *anything*, and no actions to identify them as being scientists or having an interest in science.
Add to that the shots of the lone male scientist (identifiable because he’s actually doing science, i.e. looking in a microscope) responding to the physical posturing and appearance of the much younger women and I do feel like the filmmakers are trading in lazy, stereotypical, and fundamentally negative imagery.
I don’t need the trailer to accurately reflect what scientific life is about. But I do expect the filmmakers to show more respect to the young women they are trying to hook and hopefully inspire by presenting them as active figures rather than passive ones. In my opinion the fuss about the makeup, the pink, the fashion is secondary to these more fundamental points.
**time I could/should have spent doing science!
Addendum: Obviously I didn’t mean that gorgeous-looking women (& hunks) can’t do science…
Hi, Great coverage of this kerfuffle here. I’m one of the “experts” and was part of the statement that was released today, cf. http://curt-rice.com, that you referred to in the update to your post.
You’re right that we’re restricted in what we can say. But I think you can read more into it than you are. In diplomat-speak, we’re trying to say that there are good reasons to care about this general issue and we also make it clear that we didn’t think much of the video. And the last part of it reveals the kinds of issues we thought were important. It also makes some things clear about how the EC uses expert groups … or not … sigh …
But, still, I can see that it comes off as a little bland. We’re counting on others to spice it up!
I agree with Meghan’s point about the lack of any serious science action in the video – there’s some, but there’s room for much more – and better. That’s a fundamental point that has been lost in the whole debacle. It also makes it a poorer video, but not an offensive one. On their defense, the girls pout and simper and pose, but my main impression after seeing the video (and not seeing the Twitter reaction) is that they laugh. The male scientist is taking notice, but again – before seeing the Twitter reaction – my interpretation was that he takes notice of these girls walking into the science world , not of their appearance. You could certainly argue I’m naive though
And to make it clear – I don’t think this video is brilliant. I think it *may* make a reasonable job at peaking some girls’ interests and encourage them to find out more about science. Be it through looking at the website, perk up when science programs are on TV, or simply not automatically switch off when a scientist comes to talk to them at a class or public event. I don’t think it’s so offensive (or at all!) that it shouldn’t be given the chance to do that.
But this is obviously a subjective notion, and I’m prepared to accept that if the majority of scientists feel so incredibly put off by it then it perhaps missed the mark. I just want to make it clear that I’m not one of those scientists.