pheloniusfriar: (Default)
These short biographical essays were written as part of a 4th year Women's and Gender Studies seminar class I took in the winter/spring of 2017 called “Representations of Women’s Scientific Contributions” with Dr. Cindy Stelmackowich at Carleton University. Each of the essays required deep research into difficult to find historical and contemporary info-fragments and sometimes oblique references in order to find a coherent and accurate narrative. They also needed to be short (always a challenge for me, heh). Obviously, research into living scientists was a bit easier with the advent of the web (and Dr. Conlan is known by some in non-scientific circles from having been featured in magazines like Canadian Geographic and for her children’s books on her research, so there are popular sources as well).

Born in Ottawa, Ontario in 1950, Kathleen (Kathy) Conlan is an active Research Scientist at the Canadian Museum of Nature focused on antarctic and arctic marine benthic (bottom dwelling organism) ecology and amphipod systematics that, in addition to its pure research value, is a means of studying long term climate change, the effects of pollutants, and the impact of fisheries on marine life (Canadian Museum of Nature, 2015). She also studies the effects of ice scours (the scraping of the sea floor by moving icebergs and ice packs) on benthic life (Conlan & Kvitek, 2005), and the ecology of underwater canyons (Conlan, 2016). Her work is so influential that she has become synonymous with her field of research in the scientific community, for example “studies of sea-bed disturbance, especially the effects on crustacean communities of chemical toxins, are Kathy Conlan’s work” (Riffenburgh, 2007).

Conlan also engages in continual public outreach, education, and the popularization of her work through talks, direct engagement with students, museum exhibits, and public demonstrations, e.g. (Vancouver Aquarium, 2017), (Canadian Museum of Nature, 2010), (Racette, 2007), (Hill, 2003), and (Nguyen, 2015). She has also written a children’s book about her work called “Under The Ice” that has won at least 8 awards (Kids Can Press, 2017), including the prestigious Science in Society prize for a children’s book handed out by the Canadian Science Writers’ Association, since it was published in hardcover in 2002 (Conlan, 2002). In 2015, she was named one of Canada’s greatest explorers by Canadian Geographic (Canadian Geographic, 2015). In addition to her research, her infectious enthusiasm for her work and respect for the people who live in the arctic (Hill, 2003), has made her a welcome visitor and educator of young and old alike. Conlan states of her motivations for outreach and knowledge sharing, “the founding idea was that if youth knew about the Arctic and Antarctica they would protect and stand up for it against any exploitation that might occur in the future [...]. In essence, we were creating a bunch of ambassadors.” (science.ca, 2015).

While she grew up in Ottawa, it was a trip to the west coast when she was 16 that ignited the interest that led to her career, “I was really taken with the ocean and marine life at that point, and that trip really solidified my interest in going into biology” (science.ca, 2015). She got her B.Sc. (Honours) at Queen’s University in 1972, her M.Sc. in marine ecology at the University of Victoria in 1977, and her Ph.D. in systematics and evolution from Carleton University in 1988 (Canadian Museum of Nature, 2015) (CCAR, 2015). She has been Chief Officer (2008-present) and Secretary (2004-8), Life Sciences Scientific Standing Group for SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research); Member, Canadian Committee for Antarctic Research (1998-present); Adjunct Professor, Department of Biology, Carleton University (2004-present); and Section Head, Life Sciences Program, Canadian Museum of Nature (2006-present) (Canadian Museum of Nature, 2015). While it is impossible to draw conclusions, it is notable that she was one of four women out of 14 members (28.6% women) of the Canadian Committee on Antarctic Research (CCAR) for 2014-15 (CCAR, 2015). The number does agree with with studies done at the time that shows that 22% of STEM professionals are women (Shendruk, 2015).

Conlan is all the more interesting in that this particular field of study is not necessarily attractive or even accessible to many due to cultural bias and socialization – in short, the “ick factor” of studying sea “bugs” (Hildebrand, 2005). Hildebrand writes that while on an unsuccessful mega-fauna (i.e. whale) spotting tourist trip aboard an arctic research vessel (with Conlan on board), a lack of whales to be spotted caused them to turn to whatever activity they could find on the ship. Their writing shows that Conlan’s passion is obvious as she studies the amphipods she has brought up from the sea floor as she exclaims, “look at this [...] here’s a female with a brood pouch of fifteen”, or “this one’s a male [...]. You can see he's holding a female under his thorax. They'll mate when the female molts. It's very exciting to watch!”. In stark contrast, Hildebrand felt that “there is nothing spiritual in these lives, nothing exultant; they are simply grist for larger animals” (Hildebrand, 2005). Such attitudes only serve to emphasize the importance of the work, both in research and outreach, that Conlan and scientists like her are doing – it is work that is crucial to understanding global ecosystems and our impact on them, yet is unglamourous in the eyes of the average person, with the exception of the breathtaking photographs of her diving under Antarctic ice.

And the very useful references are here... )
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
These short biographical essays were written as part of a 4th year Women's and Gender Studies seminar class I took in the winter/spring of 2017 called “Representations of Women’s Scientific Contributions” with Dr. Cindy Stelmackowich at Carleton University. The work that we did in that class, and as volunteers over the following summer, led to the well-received exhibit “HERbarium” at the Carleton University Art Gallery (which will run until December 3, 2017). The exhibit looks at the groundbreaking work of global reach and implication by five Canadian women scientists. In the case of three of those women, their work remained virtually unknown outside of their specific scientific fields and utterly unknown to the broader public. The work done for “HERbarium” will be informing a much, much larger exhibit at the Canadian Museum of Nature in 2018 that is being curated by Dr. Stelmackowich. This essay was about one of the women whose work was included in the exhibit – the other two essays (to follow) examined the work of other women (not in the exhibit). Each of the essays required deep research into difficult to find historical fragments and sometimes oblique references in order to find a coherent and accurate narrative. They also needed to be short (always a challenge for me, heh).

As a further note, the abstract/proposal I submitted to Gender Summit 11 on the work we did on “HERbarium” and its value as historical and feminist research was accepted, and I will be presenting a poster (along with one of the other students that worked on the “HERbarium” exhibit) at the conference Nov. 6 through Nov. 8 in Montréal, Québec. At the conference “600 advocates of gender equality from science, innovation and development will participate. The overarching theme this year is
Embracing pluralism and thriving through diversity – shaping science and innovation. The Gender Summits are a series of interconnected, action-based events held across the globe since 2011. They follow the theme of Quality Research and Innovation through Equality. Their aim is to make gender equality in research and innovation the norm and to embed gender equality as a primary dimension of quality”. I am very excited to be participating in the first one held in North America!

Catharine Parr Traill (née Strickland) was born in London, England on January 9, 1802, the fifth daughter of Thomas Strickland (Morgan, 1903), manager of the Greenland Docks on the Thames, and Elizabeth Homer who went on to have another daughter and two sons together. Soon after her birth, her father retired from the docks and they moved a number of times to keep up with his various business interests, all the while receiving instruction from him “in such subjects as geography, history, and mathematics, all of which he oversaw; [while] his wife took charge of their development in the traditional feminine skills” (Peterman, 2003), which included dairy work and vegetable farming that would be valuable skills later in her life (Hobbs & Goddard, 2001). While living on a farm in Suffolk, “it was here that Catharine’s most vivid memories of childhood were formed. She recalled in particular fishing with her father [...] while being read to and reading from his copy of Izaak Walton’s The compleat angler. ‘The dear old Fisherman,’ as she told author William Kirby in 1895, had helped when she was a child ‘to form my love of Nature and of Natures God’” (Peterman, 2003). However, Thomas’ business interests increasingly kept him away from home and the Strickland children were left to find their own ways of occupying their time. In Catharine’s case, it was to work on the writing of stories to share with her siblings and family friends, and the collection of plants as her father had taught her to do.

Thomas died in 1818 and left the family in relative poverty when his business ventures failed, and Catharine turned to publishing her stories, starting at the age of 15, as a means of contributing to the family’s upkeep (Peterman, 2003). “She was the first of the sisters to commence writing, and it was the favour with which her stories and sketches were received by the public that led her elder sisters to enter the same field” (Morgan, 1903). Most of her early works were tales of Christian and Victorian morality intended for a young audience, e.g. (Strickland, 1822), (Strickland, 1823), (Strickland, 1825), and (Strickland, 1828); however, she did increasingly publish a books on her experiences as a naturalist, but still for a younger audience, e.g. (Strickland, 1930), (Strickland, 1831a), and (Strickland, 1831b).

In 1832, she married the Scottish widower Lieutenant Thomas Traill against the wishes of her family and they soon emigrated to Canada to escape financial hardship. In 1836, Catharine published her most famous work, “The Backwoods of Canada. Being Letters from the Wife of an Emigrant Officer, Illustrative of the Domestic Economy of British America” (Traill, 1836), written “using the kind of realistic detail that has become a tradition in Canadian literature” (Canada Post Corporation, 2003). While it details the hardships she faced attempting to settle in Canada, “it consistently measures Canadian experience through the lens of respectability, social class, and good taste, and in terms of interests congenial to women of similar background” and “to make clear the kinds of adjustment, effort, and resolve that were necessary if one was to adapt to Canada’s primitive and demanding circumstances” (Peterman, 2003). It was explicitly meant to be part of the colonial effort along with her subsequent books “all of which had a marked influence in promoting emigration to Canada”, including “‘The Canadian Crusoes’, ‘The Female Emigrant’s Guide’, ‘Rambles in the Canadian Forest’, ‘Studies in Plant Life in Canada’, ‘Pearls and Pebbles’, and ‘Cot and Cradle Stories’ (Morgan, 1903).

Her husband Thomas suffered ongoing financial hardships both in Canada and back in England, and continued to move Catharine and her seven children (two of their nine children had died in the 1840s) from place to place in Ontario looking for success. But the 1850s presented “an increasingly difficult struggle marked not only by deaths, illnesses, lack of firewood, and crop failures, but also by the incapacitating bouts of depression suffered by Thomas”, who ultimately died in 1859 leaving the family in destitution (Peterman, 2003). Catharine rarely complained in any of her writings or to her friends, but continued to write as a means of supporting herself and her family.

By 1861, Catharine had completed the manuscript for “a groundbreaking work on hundreds of local plants” but “despite commendations by professors, no Toronto firm was willing to risk publishing a long, specialized book” (Globe, 2015). To make the book more attractive to publishers, she enlisted the help of her niece Agnes FitzGibbon (née Moodie, daughter of her sister Susanna) to produce a set of illustrations to go in the book. Agnes, a trained artist, agreed in part because she had recently lost her own husband and was hoping it might provide a means of support for herself and her six children, found a potential publisher, taught herself lithography, and serially produced each of the ten plates on a single borrowed lithographer’s stone at a Toronto printer. The publisher, John Lovell of Montreal, agreed to publish the book, provided Catharine and Agnes found 500 subscribers to the book at $5 apiece “which at that time was enough to buy a substantial piece of furniture” (Globe, 2015). By June 1867, 400 subscribers had been recruited and the publication began of “Canadian Wild Flowers”. Agnes, her daughters, and several artists from a local Toronto art school, hand painted each of the 5000 illustrations for the book (10 colour plates in each times 500 copies of the book) and Catharine was given $50 for her part in writing the book (again, a substantial amount then). “Canadian Wild Flowers set the standard for sumptuous nineteenth-century Canadian books. An early example of large-format home-produced colour illustration, it was one of the first serious botanical works published in the country” (Globe, 2015). In 1894, biologist James Fletcher, who established the National Herbarium of Canada on the Central Experimental Farm, justly praised Traill’s plant descriptions, despite her classification as an amateur botanist, as “one of the greatest botanical triumphs which [anyone] could achieve” (Peterman, 2003).

Catharine died in 1899 at the age of 97 and was writing until the end, and “at her death she was said to be the oldest living authoress in the British Dominion” (Morgan, 1903). Despite all the hardships she experienced, she was fondly remembered: “John Reade, speaking of Mrs. Traill [...] says: ‘No one knew her who did not love her. Those who knew nothing of her literary fame, loved her for her Christian love and charity. All children loved her. It was not uncommon for grey-haired men and women to say: “I have known and loved her all my life.” Her one boast (if boast it could be called), was: “I have never lost a friend.”’” (Morgan, 1903).

And the very useful references are here... )

The following is a photo of the Catherine Parr Traill section of the “HERbarium” exhibit. The print at the top right is of an herbarium specimen, a Cinnamon Fern from the massive Vascular Plant Collection of the Canadian Museum of Nature, which was collected by Catherine in 1897 (when she was 94 years old) and showed that she was actively pursuing botanical research (it is properly preserved and labelled with its scientific name and collection place, etc.) until she died in 1899. Click on the photo to open the full sized image in another tab.

This...

Sep. 24th, 2017 05:08 am
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
Twitter user @astrokatey (Katey Alatalo) just posted this in 22 parts, which I will present in bullet form here. I have heard these sorts of stories from fellow students (as a student) and from professional scientists (as a radio inteviewer). Science (and STEM in general) is supposed to be a meritocracy, and it does best when it is, but it is also a human endeavour and wrought with all the failings and successes of all human activities. As soon as privileged thinking enters the picture, the quality of the science goes down because those with privilege know they don't have to try as hard to get the same recognition of their work or careers. It just so happens that most of those with privilege are white and male (and often in the latter part of their careers). It is hard to make space for others not exactly like ourselves, but that is (imho) one of the defining aspects of civilization and civil society.
  • This article (NYT "Push for Gender Equality in Tech? Some Men Say It’s Gone Too Far") has made me super angry. Do you want to know what it is like trying to be a woman in a scientific space? Let me tell you.
  • Your teachers will start telling you when you are young that you are “not ready” for advanced math.
  • I was just lucky my mother stood up for me with that teacher. Otherwise I would not have been in calculus in high school.
  • In college, you will be in classes where your male classmates will tell you how easy the homework was. You’ll doubt yourself a lot.
  • Only to find out they were scoring Cs while you were getting As. Be ready for them to also say things like “women aren’t naturally scientists”.
  • Those same men will look at you like a possible person to date, when you just want to do your work. You learn to close yourself off.
  • Then, if you’re lucky, the president of Harvard will give a speech about women being biologically inferior in science.
  • And you’ll get to listen to your peers repeating that all around you. You get into top grad schools, are told it’s because you’re a woman.
  • You go. Then your advisor makes you uncomfortable by staring at your chest [she linked to this article: "How Sexual Harassment Halts Science"].
  • You make it clear they made you uncomfortable. So they isolate you, insult you, and try to drive out of science.
  • When it is too much, you report it to the chair. Who tells you that you are overreacting, or lying. And threatens to throw you out.
  • You put your head down and try hard as you can not to “rock the boat” after the chair did you the “favor” of letting you switch advisors.
  • The stress of merely surviving saps you of the creative energy you needed to write and advance academically.
  • AND that ex-advisor is using his platform to denigrate you and your science.
  • MIRACULOUSLY you make it out. You graduate, you get your Ph.D. and you get a postdoc.
  • You work your BUTT off to catch up to peers. Build the networks your advisor usually helps you build and manage to get good science done.
  • YOU DID IT! You got a fellowship!! You talk about your struggles. Many don’t believe you.
  • Every day, articles like the one in the New York Times come out to remind you your voice matters less than a spoiled white boy’s.
  • And those classmates and those harassers come back to your mind. And you wonder…
  • Was the cost of having the audacity to want to be an astronomer while also being a woman worth it?
  • Most women in science I know share some of my narrative. Do most men? No. They were assumed from kids to be sciencey.
  • When the day comes that vast majority of science women DO NOT have a tale like mine, then, New York Times, we can talk “biology”.

It is the two lines "the stress of merely surviving saps you of the creative energy you needed to write and advance academically" and "you work your butt off to catch up to peers and build the networks your advisor usually helps you build and manage to get good science done" that, to me, highlight why action needs to be taken to address sexism (and racism, and classism, and ableism, and...) in the sciences. Societies have huge problems with discrimination and building those walls doesn't protect it, it makes it weaker and has a huge opportunity cost (imagine if all of those people that are interested and good at things were the ones given the opportunities instead of those who are meh about the whole thing but do it because it's easy because they are privileged... that is lost opportunity for all of us). This is also why professional organizations need to up their game when it comes to taking active measures to reverse the historic inequities that exist in their respective fields: the way the system work is that no matter how well someone does in their formative years, if they are part of a marginalized group they were not permitted to do as much as their privileged peers (I am, at the moment, quite frustrated with the Canadian Association of Physicists... they are doing a poor job at addressing the institutionalized discrimination in the field of physics in Canada). Again, we are all poorer for it. If we can't get this to work in the sciences (remember? supposed meritocracy?), then what chance do we have of sorting this out in society as a whole?

pheloniusfriar: (Default)
"Cassini, in some ways, represents the best of humanity. It's really a testament to our endless curiosity, our collective passion to continue exploring the world and the solar system we live in."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/farewell-cassini-saturn-search-for-life-1.4285365
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
Goodbye Cassini. With a final kiss goodbye from Titan, you will soon leave nothing but memories (and data, lots of wonderful data).
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
Our new head of state in Canada is a female astronaut... how frickin' cool is that!?!!!

Former astronaut Julie Payette to be Canada's next governor general

She is also a computer engineer with a commercial pilot licence, and is also an accomplished athlete, pianist, and choral singer.
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
I just read the phrase "non-avian dinosaurs" in an article, and it made it surprisingly happy. That we have so recently discovered that the dinosaurs were not (all) wiped out and live among us is such wonderful and magical knowledge.
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
Ooooo... a Cassini probe Google Doodle today! :-D

https://g.co/doodle/at3twq
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
You know times have gotten bad when government decisions can drag scientists out of their labs and onto the streets. I participated in the "Death of Evidence" march in Ottawa in 2012 and the scientists that participated were fairly consistent in saying that they'd rather be doing their research than marching publicly through the nation's capital. I just got this email from the President of the Canadian Association of Physicists (CAP) calling for global solidarity with scientists in the United States now. For a professional society like CAP to state that it "strongly endorses these marches" is exceptional language for exceptional times (and a stance that I both agree with and support, fyi). At the same time, there are those in Canada (and elsewhere) that stand ready to poach the best talent as it attempts to flee both the USA and the UK. Here is the whole email:

April 22, 2017 designated March for Science Day

The 2017 U.S. budget proposal submitted to Congress by the White House on 16 March 2017 contained some very bleak news, including a whopping 31% reduction to the Environmental Protection Agency, with smaller but nonetheless damaging cuts to the Department of Education, the National Institutes of Health, NASA, and the Department of Energy's Office of Science. The National Science Foundation did not even garner mention in the budget proposal.

A march in support of science entitled the Scientists' March on Washington, that had been organized prior to the budget announcement, has blossomed into a much wider March for Science to be held on Earth Day, April 22, 2017. There will be over four hundred marches held in locations across the globe, including seventeen cities in Canada. The number is likely to grow as that date approaches.

The CAP strongly endorses these marches. I urge you to consult the March's URL https://www.marchforscience.com/ to find out details of the event nearest you, and to get out and show your support for science!

I will be participating in the march in Montreal; if you are in the area and plan to attend, let's participate together; send me an email at the address below to let me know. CAP Past President Adam Sarty will be participating in the march in Halifax, while CAP Vice-President Stephen Pistorius will be participating in the march in Phoenix, Arizona, alongside our APS colleagues as he is representing the CAP at meetings of the American Physical Society in Phoenix at the time.

We hope to see you this coming April 22, marching for science.

Richard MacKenzie, P.Phys.
CAP President
Richard.MacKenzie@umontreal.ca
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
Three quick (ya, I know, I'm not into posting short messages) updates:

Most pressing is that yesterday me and a good friend finally launched a Kickstarter campaign. Check it out, and if you think it's a good idea and have the means, please consider supporting it: "The 2016 Reboot of a Legendary Interactive Drama and the Inception of a New Media Genre"!

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/673299016/midnight-stranger

Also, I'm one step closer to being published as a physicist in a peer-reviewed journal (Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research)... the accepted pre-press manuscript has been made available. I'm not sure what issue it will be finally published in (it needs to go through the final editing and production phases), but you can bet I'll post when it happens :). Anyway, here's the link for that (it'll be there forever, so if you only have 5 minute, go poke your nose at the Kickstarter instead):

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168900216001285

Finally, the new format for my radio show is finally starting to become workable for me. In case this is news, the show is an hour of feminism, science, and music (after 5 years I got good at the music part and don't want to give it up now). Yesterday I did my first interview: a Master's student in Women's and Gender Studies who is going to do their thesis on Batgirl from the comics (Barbara Gordon, and Oracle, and the controversies surrounding her on again/off again status as a person with disabilities and the tropes that surround it). I'll be trying to alternate between interviewing on science and feminism/social issues topics. The particular show is here (available "on demand" 24/7 for the next year or so):

http://cod.ckcufm.com/programs/371/25764.html

The general show link is here, again it's available to listen to "on demand": The Passionate Friar...
pheloniusfriar: (Default)
I am sorting through some old boxes of mementos, keepsakes, portfolio stuff, and odds and ends ... wow, talk about a trip down memory lane. I have kept bits and pieces from everything I've done since I was a least a teen going into high school. I am writing this because of one little piece of paper I found (because I could fill volumes of books just documenting everything else in those boxes) — or rather, a business card. This particular card is for one Dr. R.G. Barradas, Professor of Chemistry, Carleton University. What is special about this card is, as I remember it, I had gone to some sort of open house at Carleton when I was in early high school. I got to look at all manner of stuff and try out all manner of equipment and little experiments (including time on a timeshare "minicomputer" through a teletype terminal playing the original Adventure game). One of the places I visited was the chemistry laboratories where they had lasers and all kinds of other really, really cool stuff (especially as a teenager in the late 70s, but it'd be cool even now). In one particular lab, and I don't know how this happened, I felt invited to drop in... and did. Yes, I would skip high school and take my bike to Carleton University (from Bell's Corner's, quite the haul) and hang out in a chemistry lab. In particular, and thus the card, in the lab of Dr. R.G. Barradas. I remember green lasers and lots of equipment and vials of some uranium compound. He would let me help out with little jobs around the lab and I got some "hands on" experience there with him. I was there when he made a discovery that the particular compound he was testing fluoresced when subjected to a particular kind of laser light. He had predicted it, but it had never been observed before. It was thrilling to be there. To this day, I credit Dr. Barradas with a more mature love of science (a more practical appreciation, rather than any romantic notions I might have had from only reading books... a condition, I should emphasize, did not diminish the magic in the slightest, it only made it more tangible and keen), and I have often thought about him. Sadly, I had forgotten his name until I found this card of his that I had kept. I did an online search for him and, while it's not like he never existed, there is nothing but a historic footprint and no indication of what happened to him. Is he still alive (unlikely as I remembered him being fairly old even at the time, but then I was just a kid, so old is relative, heh)? I could neither find any trace of his passing. What I did see was he published from the 1960s through to 1995 and that's where the trail goes cold. If he retired then, even if he retired young, that was 20 years ago now, so if he's still alive he would be at least in in 70s (or more likely 80s). I don't necessarily want to track him down, but I think I will make an inquiry of the chemistry department at Carleton as to whether they know what happened to him... at least one current professor is listed as a joint author on one of Dr. Barradas' papers, so someone should know something. As I stated, the generosity he showed with his time for the young (inexperienced but enthusiastic) time-sink that I was was profoundly influential on the course my life has taken and many of my attitudes about how to approach things.

Edit: When I dug down to the bottom of the box I found stuff from when I was in elementary school. What a bizarre life I have led.

Profile

pheloniusfriar: (Default)
pheloniusfriar

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678 910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 23rd, 2025 04:52 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios