Andreas submitted:

This might also be a case for Escher Girls: http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/13/7213819/your-bowling-shirt-is-holding-back-progress

….at least I had to think of this blog the moment I saw the picture….

(Photo from The Guardian)

You’re not the only one.  A lot of people have sent me links or pictures about this since it happened.

For those confused: this is one of the scientists involved in the project of landing the Philae spacecraft on a comet.  He was interviewed in the hours leading to the event, and for whatever reason, chose to wear that shirt for the interviews.

It’s created a backlash from women in the sciences as an example of how a negative environment for women can be created that discourages women and girls from joining the sciences, or feeling welcome in them. 

From the above article:

This is the sort of casual misogyny that stops women from entering certain scientific fields. They see a guy like that on TV and they don’t feel welcome. They see a poster of greased up women in a colleague’s office and they know they aren’t respected. They hear comments about “bitches” while out at a bar with fellow science students, and they decide to change majors. And those are the women who actually make it that far. Those are the few who persevered even when they were discouraged from pursuing degrees in physics, chemistry, and math throughout high school. These are the women who forged on despite the fact that they were told by elementary school classmates and the media at large that girls who like science are nerdy and unattractive. This is the climate women who dream of working at NASA or the ESA come up against, every single day. This shirt is representative of all of that, whether Taylor meant it to be or not.

Also, the woman whose tweet is quoted in the article (Rose Eveleth) is getting death threats and other angry responses. -__-

Since running this blog, I get a lot of messages from women telling me what a turn off some of the art in video games & comics depicting women are, and how it marks certain spaces as being for straight men, and they feel unwelcome in it, like they could be guests, but never an equal participant.  Many won’t even take a chance on a book with this kind of art no the cover or advertising for the same reason, it says “this is not for you”, and if there’s a lot of these depictions in a community, it suggests (even inadvertently) that the community is not for them.

So, I completely understand how women in the sciences would feel the same way about that shirt, especially when it’s merely one example of the ways the environment makes them feel uncomfortable (as eluded to above.)  This is less about that one specific shirt, than what it stands for in the larger picture of what they’ve experienced in the field, and the effects that kind of environment might have in dissuading women from entering or staying in the field.  It’s not that the shirt is BAD, or the guy is bad, or that the one shirt is the issue, it’s the appropriateness, the lack of professionalism to wear such a shirt to an interview, and how it’s not an isolated example as many women in sciences have pointed out.

It also doesn’t help when a woman talks about it, they get attacked and threatened, and told that they need to get laid, either (which also happens to women who talk about similar sorts of issues in other environments, including gaming & comics, as has been talked about in the news a lot recently.  Even running this blog, I get some of that. :\  I recently had somebody send me a song they wrote about raping me in fairly explicit detail.)

Edit: He has now apologized and admitted he “made a big mistake.”

The woman who received all the harassment for tweeting about the shirt is glad he apologized and is hoping she and he can both move on with their lives.

god i want hook to be the tin man so bad

i want zelena to take his heart and try to use it to control him, gives him all these orders

that he belligerently follows to the exact letter like

she tells him to bring back information about snow and charming and he returns with the disney movie (“i’m not certain what this is, but i’m given to understand that it will explain everything you need to know about the royals”)

or to kill belle and he breaks a bell and gives it to her (“i went to a lot of trouble for that, you could at least act grateful – finding a bell that was made in some place called france was not as simple as you might suspect”)

and just in general totally fucks up her program and makes her seriously regret expecting a goddamn pirate be obedient in any way

My weakness is tattooed parent!destiel. Carrying baby Marie into the house for the first time, colourful tattoo sleeves in stark contrast with the white blanket she’s swaddled in. Going to the grocery store and cooing at her like saps, completely ignoring the way people stare at them; at these two heavily inked guys, nuzzling their infant’s nose and blowing raspberries on her cheeks.

Laying still as she traces Papa’s big black wings and the special lily flower on Daddy’s side. They tell her a different story for each piece of ink. And when she asks about the tattoo that both her parents have, the one that says: “may the wind under your wings bear you where the sun sails and the moon walks,” they explain that it’s from their favourite book The Hobbit and that it’s for her; that they each had it done before bringing her home. 

Because that is their wish for her.

Have you ever wondered how fast you are spinning around Earth’s rotational axis?  Probably not, but now you can find out anyway!  This graph shows the tangential speed of a point on Earth’s surface for a given latitude due to Earth’s rotational motion – it does not include speed due to our revolution around the sun! Tangential (linear) speed is the magnitude of the velocity vector, which points tangent to Earth’s surface in the same plane as the circle of latitude.

I’ve plotted the dependent variable (speed) on the x-axis; though this is unconventional, it allows the map in the background to be placed in the traditional north-pointing-up orientation.  So if you don’t know the latitude of your location, you can pick it out on the map and then trace a horizontal line to where it intersects with the curve. To the scientists and non-US readers, sorry that the speed axis is in mph; I converted from km/h because most of the people who read this are from the US.

Those who remember their trigonometry will notice that this graph is nothing more than a slight variation on the cosine function – because I have switched the axes, it could be thought of as cosine reflected over y=x, or arccos if it had no range restrictions and could plot below the x-axis.

Though this is an approximation, in an effort to be as accurate as possible, I used the length of a sidereal day (23 hrs, 56 min, 4 sec), which is a full 360° rotation of Earth. Because Earth is an oblate spheroid rather than a sphere, I varied the radius as a function of latitude when calculating the tangential speed. The polar radius is 3950 miles and the equatorial radius is 3963 miles; I approximated the radius at other latitudes via a linear interpolation. This has no visible effect on the curve, though. Using the average radius of the earth (3959 miles) as a constant changes the global tangential speeds by <1 mph. Topography of the Earth is equally unimportant for this level of accuracy because the difference between a mountain peak and the bottom of the ocean is trivial compared to the radius of the Earth. If, hypothetically, Mt. Everest’s peak (5.5 miles above datum) and the deepest part of the Mariana Trench (6.8 miles below datum) were both located along the equator, the difference in tangential speed caused by the 12.3 mile elevation difference would only be about 3 mph, or less than a third of a percent of the equator’s 1040 mph tangential speed.

There are three things about this picture that make me unreasonably excited (beyond just the fact that it exists LOOK AT HIM WHAT DOES THIS MEAN). I’d like to present them you all and see what you all think.


There’s a wet spot as though he was just kneeling down (and as far as we can see it’s just the one knee) and I know this is what everyone is saying (especially since there is a ring on Emma’s finger even if it’s a different finger), but I couldn’t not mention it because WHAT.


He isn’t wearing any of his rings or necklaces or other pirate jewelry, and princes don’t usually wear earrings, so keeping this on is probably a deliberate choice. The fact that he’s wearing the earring even while dressed up all princely is great, because it’s a little visual reminder that even now whatever the hell ‘now’ is he’s still a pirate. He can be this princely heroic looking guy and still be a pirate.

There’s also the fact that his coat is basically the exact same cut, just not all leather and a different color. The essentials of who he is are still the same, and the shift from “pirate” to “prince” is really just a matter of how you look at him.


This one is a lot more speculative and I’d like to ask what other people think, but here we see Colin holding two black gloves in his hand, so I assume he’s wearing both of them - this means either fake hand or HE GETS HIS HAND BACK.

I know in past fake hand scenes he has at least sometimes worn an actual fake hand (so he could take it off), but I don’t know if that was always the case. If he sometimes just wears a glove and holds his left hand stiffly then that could just mean fake hand here. But even then, notice that the cuffs are pretty tight around his wrists and the coat doesn’t hang over his hands a little the way his usually does. There’s no room to include the ‘mechanism’ that would hold a fake hand in place (which Hook would have).

I’m not saying I’m certain about this at all, but the possibility is boggling my mind a little.


Esquirebob does it again. This is fucking awesome.

  • Okay, if you people are going to be reblogging that list of Doctor Who cast birthdays, I might as well post the entire year.
  • January
  • 2 Deborah Watling
  • 8 William Hartnell
  • 15 Richard Frankin
  • 20 Tom Baker
  • 30 Daphne Ashbrook
  • February
  • 1 Elisabeth Sladen
  • 1 Lisa Bowerman
  • 4 Peter Butterworth
  • 10 Peter Purves
  • 16 Christopher Eccleston
  • March
  • 1 Roger Delgado
  • 10 Yee Jee Tso
  • 11 John Barrowman
  • 11 Alex Kingston
  • 20 Freema Agyeman
  • 21 Peter Pratt
  • Timothy Dalton
  • 22 Mary Tamm
  • 25 Patrick Troughton
  • April
  • 6 Mark Strickson
  • 9 Lisa Greenwood
  • 13 Peter Davison
  • 14 Peter Capaldi
  • 18 Eric Roberts
  • David Tennant
  • Camille Coduri
  • 20 Louise Jameson
  • 27 Jenna Coleman
  • May
  • 2 Paul Darrow
  • 5 Richard E. Grant
  • 7 Valentine Dyall
  • 12 Catherine Tate
  • 26 Peter Cushing
  • June
  • 1 Jonathan Pryce
  • 4 Philip Olivier
  • 8 Colin Baker
  • 9 David Troughton
  • 16 Carole Ann Ford
  • 17 Arthur Darvill
  • 25 Sheridan Smith
  • 28 Lalla Ward
  • 29 Maureen O'Brien
  • July
  • 1 Jean Marsh
  • 7 Jon Pertwee
  • 10 Jackie Lane
  • John Simm
  • 15 Miles Richardson
  • 22 Bonnie Langford
  • Adrienne Hill
  • August
  • 10 Kate O'Mara
  • 20 Anthony Ainley
  • Sylvester McCoy
  • Sophie Aldred
  • September
  • 9 Janet Fielding
  • 22 Frazer Hines
  • Billie Piper
  • October
  • 11 Nicola Bryant
  • 14 Katy Manning
  • 17 Mark Gatiss
  • 19 Caroline John
  • 20 Anneke Wills
  • 22 Derek Jacobi
  • 28 Ian Marter
  • Matt Smith
  • 29 Michael Jayston
  • November
  • 3 Richard Hurndall
  • 14 Paul McGann
  • 18 Trevor Baxter
  • 19 William Russell
  • 23 Michael Gough
  • 28 Karen Gillan
  • 29 Michael Craze
  • December
  • 6 Noel Clarke
  • 7 Wendy Padbury
  • 12 Sarah Sutton
  • 16 Nicholas Courtney
  • 17 Jacqueline Hill
  • 19 Matthew Waterhouse
  • 24 John Levene
  • 27 Christopher Benjamin
  • 29 Bernard Cribbins

Intervenendo ieri alle Camere, Matteo Renzi ha parlato dell’inchiesta sull’Eni.

Come si ricorderà, l’Eni è accusata di aver pagato uno sconquasso di tangenti in Nigeria, e il Corriere della Sera è stato il primo quotidiano italiano a far trapelare la notizia.

Renzi con una certa enfasi, ha spiegato che non saranno inchieste “citofonate sui giornali” a minare l’industria italiana mettendo a repentaglio “migliaia di posti di lavoro”.

Cioè, traduco:

1) Chi indaga sulle industrie – eventualmente – truffaldine, mette a repentaglio l’Italia.

2) I giornali che danno la notizia, pure. E comunque hanno certamente ricevuto quelle notizie da giudici infedeli.

Uno che volesse cambiare verso, davvero, a questo derelitto Paese, avrebbe potuto dire:

“L’inchiesta Eni è un fatto grave. Spero e credo che i vertici sapranno dimostrare la loro innocenza, ma in caso contrario siamo disposti a fare pulizia perché l’Italia ambisce a presentarsi sui mercati internazionali con le mani pulite e la testa alta. Questo è il nostro impegno di novità e trasparenza”.

Invece, ha detto, a giornalisti e giudici: fatevi i cazzi vostri.

Perché è la sua cultura. Che non solo è quella di Berlusconi: è la nostra.

Renzi. Razzi.


Continua a leggere