Mary’s Monday Metazoan: Peek-a-boo »« Physicist squelching fantasy

Dario Maestripieri needs to both learn and apologize

Sometimes this crap is pretty blatant.

Dario Maestripieri was facebooking from the Society for Neuroscience meetings. Does anybody see anything wrong with this observation?

My impression of the Conference of the Society for Neuroscience in New Orleans. There are thousands of people at the conference and an unusually high concentration of unattractive women. The super model types are completely absent. What is going on? Are unattractive women particularly attracted to neuroscience? Are beautiful women particularly uninterested in the brain? No offense to anyone…

“No offense to anyone”…oh, yeah, that makes it all better. But man, am I ever glad that I personally have super-model good looks so that all those years I was attending SfN nobody would have cause to criticize me. Fortunately for him, too, Maestripieri is drop-dead gorgeous, or his membership in the society might have to be rescinded for failure to meet the beauty standards (which I don’t recall seeing mentioned in the application, but it’s been a few years.)

I wouldn’t worry, though. Apparently Dr Maestripieri is chairing a search committee at his university, and I’m sure he’ll be doing what he can to improve the attractiveness of the pool of neuroscience faculty attending this meeting in the future. (Ladies! If you get an interview, you might want to think about some cosmetic surgery ahead of time, and be sure to use cosmetics and wear something sexy — these are important criteria for studying the brain.)

DrugMonkey, Janet Stemwedel, and Dr Isis have all posted on this incident, and the wonderful thing is that all three already have sexist dolts in their comment threads telling them that they’re over-reacting or that what Dr Maestripieri said wasn’t so bad.

Comments

  1. says

    Another dude who doesn’t seem to understand that being a “supermodel type” is a combination of genetics and obscene spending on products meant to obscure what women actually look like. Being a “supermodel type” means chasing an image that is a cartoon of a woman, and chasing it generally requires carcinogenic chemical exposure (in the case of US cosmetics, anyway) and pain to accomplish. In a different time and a different place he would be complaining about how all the women had failed to bind their feet for him, how icky big-footed women must be attracted to his discipline. He also seems to be dismissing the fetish the fashion industry has for youth- a lot of the models he is drooling over are probably 12-15 but dressed up to look older. A neuroscience conference requires people with experience, and that means women over a certain age attending the conference. It makes me wonder how few women actually work with him on a daily basis, if he is so unfamiliar with the way normal women look in real life.

    He also doesn’t seem to understand that “giving men boners” isn’t on the list of priorities for women who are just trying to live their lives and go to a professional conference.

  2. says

    I trust there will be repercussions at the University of Chicago. I assure you, were he here (one of those pointy-headed east coast liberal universities) he’d be a) off the search committee and b) eating shit.

  3. eric says

    This makes all scientists look bad. They use public grant money to go to conferences, asking grantors (and thus the public) to trust them, these are really necessary and important events focused on the science. They aren’t boondoggles, says the community, we promise. Except that for folks like him, evidently they are.

    I’m very much pro-science, but with comments like this I can see why nonscientists would want to chop science funding. With the economy the way it is, who wants their tax dollars going to Dr. Maestripieri’s Magical Hookup Tour?

  4. Janine: Hallucinating Liar says

    Just what is wrong with demanding that an intelligent and accomplished woman also should put the effort in to look like Cindy Crawford or Tyra Banks.

    Fucking Dario Maestripieri looks nothing like George Clooney. Fucker should do something about that.

  5. raven says

    Fortunately for him, too, Maestripieri is drop-dead gorgeous, or his membership in the society might have to be rescinded for failure to meet the beauty standards..

    This must be sarcasm. I’ve seen cuter toads.

    Frank Zappa song:

    What is the ugliest part of your body
    Some say your nose, some your toes

    But I think it is your mind

    The ugliest part of Dario Maestripieri is his mind.

    Fortunately, I’m sure Dario and the Society for Neuroscience are in a good position to hunt for the cure.

    Hey Dario, good luck!!! Humanity is depending on you to find a cure for your sick mind.

  6. schmeer says

    Oh I’m sure his search committee will go really well. They’ll probably bring him binders full of women.

  7. says

    the drug monkey thread says he is an evolutionary psychologist and that he has used websites like hotornot in his research. Its bingo card time.

  8. says

    Sarcasm? Moi?

    Note that I also mention my dazzling good looks, and all you have to do is look to the right to see my photo proving that I can’t possibly be sarcastic about that.

  9. raven says

    the drug monkey thread says he is an evolutionary psychologist

    In other words, a quack.

    I guess we won’t be seeing that cure in the near future. Or forever either.

    Note that I also mention my dazzling good looks,..

    LOL. Don’t kid yourself. You do better than pass and several orders of magnitude better than Dario.

  10. ruthsimplicity says

    Who cares what Dario looks like and what is this about “out of his league?” I guess as a plain woman I am in his league?

  11. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Fuckin’ amazing. It’s like a real-life demonstration of the bizarre TV sitcom and commercial convention. Some very ordinary-looking guy (or downright conventionally unattractive/20 years older/very overweight) always has a conventionally attractive, fit wife, sometimes so good-looking the pairing verges on the farcical.

    Dario thinks that’s real life.

  12. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Ruth, people are poking fun at Dario by applying his own shallow and petty standards to him. The humor comes from the fact that he thinks the looks standard works in only one direction. This does not imply an endorsement of these shallow cosmetic standards.

  13. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    For emphasis: I am discussing this taking the cosmetic/looks frame as a given for the sake of argument. I am NOT endorsing that value system.

  14. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    I hope Dario is happy with his recent contribution to SEO-enhancements to his brand. He’s soooo easy to find on Google.

  15. unclefrogy says

    comments and attitudes like that always boggle my mind for all the reasons already stated above. The other thing is how naive and inexperienced they all ways sound to me. Have they never thought about or seen cross-dressing or Female impersonator acts? That he is mistaking an image like above a carton. Or even a mirror? and he is a psychologist?
    Some “supermodels” look just as much like boys as girls to me. It is all so superficial and blurry.
    I take it the “dr.” would be just as pleased with a bunch of young boys/men in drag so long as they were wearing the right clothes in the current season’s fashion.
    gee what at hick.

    uncle frogy

  16. kevinalexander says

    Maybe the search committees that don’t have Dr Maestripieri are actually doing their jobs and picking women for their competence in neuroscience.

    In a perfect world such a committee wouldn’t even notice that they were women.

  17. Sastra says

    I guess this particular neuroscientist isn’t attracted to brains. He’s obviously in the wrong line of work.

    He goes to professional medical conferences to do — what? Ogle women? Ogle beautiful women? Ogle beautiful supermodel women? Because that’s what medical conferences are for. Heaven is for real. Nitwit.

    We unattractive women are not impressed with his brains. We can tell they’re unimpressive even without a background in neuroscience.

  18. Chuck says

    The prevalence of all of this misogyny makes me wonder if we can change anyone’s mind, or if these people just have to die off and a new generation take over before any of this gets any better.

  19. dianne says

    What can one say about Dr. Maestripieri? I suppose all male biology professors can’t be as good looking as PZ, but really…it’s hard to describe Maestripieri’s looks with any…delicacy. His brains don’t seem to be anything to write home about either. Dude, if you MUST make sexist statements like that, at least do it somewhere other than a facebook account with your full name on it and no apparent restrictions on who can view it? I know facebook plays unfair and periodically erases security preferences but really…

  20. Janine: Hallucinating Liar says

    We unattractive women are not impressed with his brains. We can tell they’re unimpressive even without a background in neuroscience.

    Sastra, you forget yourself. What real human cares what unattractive women have to say?

    Funny thing, they also tend not to care about what attractive women have to say.

  21. Beatrice, anti-imperialist anti-racist Islamophobiaphobic leftist says

    I don’t see what you’re all getting upset about.

    I vaguely remember reading something that made me scrunch my face up unattractively. But then I read No offense to anyone… and suddenly that nasty frown disappeared from my face! Any offense anyone could possibly take has been destroyed by those words.

  22. kp71 says

    I knew that name sounded familiar! He started as a Prof at the U. of Chicago when I was a grad student there. Isn’t he a bit too old to be going to meetings to look for chicks?

  23. duce7999 says

    I totally get where this guy is coming from. I understand it completely and I sometimes think something very similar to what he wrote.

    Right after that I admonish myself for my douche-baggery and check my privilege really damn hard. No offense to bags of douche.

    Dude needs to be corrected, allow that correction to change his outlook, then be thankful for the opportunity provided to be better. Very sad indeed.

  24. alektorophile says

    Being culturally Italian myself (just born on the wrong side -right side?- of the border), and familiar with Italian society and politics, I see this as a far too common problem in that particular corner of the world. One just has to read quotes from erstwhile Italian PM Berlusconi:

    On Italian secretaries (comments made at the New York Stock Exchange): “Italy is now a great country to invest in… today we have fewer communists and those who are still there deny having been one. Another reason to invest in Italy is that we have beautiful secretaries… superb girls.”

    That’s no excuse, of course, and in Maestripieri’s case, having lived and worked in the UK and the US for close to twenty years, he should simply know better.

  25. grendelsfather says

    the drug monkey thread says he is an evolutionary psychologist

    Someone once explained to me that evolutionary psychology was the branch of psychology that tries to justify why it is OK for 50-year-old professors to sleep with their 25-year-old graduate students. And I thought they were just kidding.

  26. says

    alektorophile:

    I see this as a far too common problem in that particular corner of the world.

    Be that as it may, seems to me that Dario’s problem runs a bit deeper. He seems to be of the opinion that he deserves to be surrounded by women of supermodel looks and that women basically exist to serve his eyes and assuage his libido. I’m surprised Dario isn’t choking to death on his ego.

  27. Chuck says

    I’m surprised Dario isn’t choking to death on his ego.

    I’d be surprised if Dario is even aware of his own ego.

  28. eric says

    The super model types are completely absent. What is going on? Are unattractive women particularly attracted to neuroscience?

    Congratulations! For such insightful coverage of a prestigious scientific meeting, you have been awarded a seat on ark ship B.

  29. says

    I think that Dr. “No Fat Chicks” here is the least of Italy’s problems with science.

    Six Italian geophysicists have been sentenced to six years in prison for not accurately predicting an earthquake.

    To quote George Carlin, I’m going to repeat that because I think it’s vaguely important

    Six Italian geophysicists. Have been sentenced. To six years in prison. For failing to predict. An. EARTHQUAKE.

    Basically these scientists are going to jail for not having jumped up and screamed “RUN AWAY!” after the first large radon outgassings, because radon outgassing always presages a large quake, as everyone knows.

    The Enlightenment was really a fucking waste of time.

  30. ShowMetheData says

    DrugMonkey, Janet Stemwedel, and Dr Isis have all posted … and already have sexist dolts in their comment threads telling them that they’re over-reacting

    No, that’s just re-acting rather than shutting the fuck up which is what the sexist dolts really want.

  31. Elf_Owl says

    If I (an ordinary-looking, middle-aged woman) caught myself looking around at the male attendees at an Evolution conference, and judging their appearance, what would I do? Maybe roll my eyes at my own shallowness.

    What WOULDN’T I do? Post in on FaceBook! Duh!

    (Besides, it so happens that I think the folks in my field, both male and female, are a pretty decent-looking bunch!)

  32. Becca Stareyes says

    You know, I read this while at a conference myself. And I thought, ‘is the conference experience that different for men?’ Because goodness knows my time between waking up and the first session is spent finding food and tea and making sure I don’t show up in my PJs or with bed hair. I don’t have the time (or the inclination) to apply major makeup and hair work, and I can’t exactly write off ‘stylist and make-up artists’ to a grant. High fashion generally isn’t suitable for air-conditioned meeting rooms or standing around for 2 hours in front of your poster, and it was all crammed into a tiny suitcase and hurriedly ironed anyway.

    But maybe men get things like free luggage allowances and staff, and the ability to survive on 4 hours of sleep to have enough time to freshen up. (I won’t even get into Photoshop touch-ups of photos.)

    Or maybe Maestripieri has no clue how much work it takes to make the women and girls he sees in the media look as they do, and what the normal range of human looks looks like when everyone is trying to make themselves reasonably presentable in public.

    Or he doesn’t care and judges women solely by their ability to titillate him.

  33. No Light says

    Ing – WRT Skeptifem’s

    a lot of the models he is drooling over are probably 12-15 but dressed up to look older.

    Try and get hold of the documentary Girl Model. It’s from the Storyville stable.

    It made me physically sick.

    Basically model agencies go to places like Siberia and Moldova, gather up a collection of the half-starved children of subsistence farmers, parade them around undressed, and select the ones they want.

    These kids are then sent off to Tokyo (alone), promised they’ll get $8000 regardless of whether they get work or not, and treated appallingly. Oh, and not getting the promised fortune that their families are so desperate for.

    The model scout is a former child victim of this kind of predation, although she’s American. She’s incredibly mentally unstable as a result of her experiences, is collecting pictures of child models’ feet and legs (and perhaps selling them), and appears to approach the whole thing with an air of “Nobody protected me, so why should I care about these girls?”

    It’s implied that she had sexual “relationships” with casting directors in her modelling days, and in a chilling scene with her former agent/current boss there’s a very unsettling sense that this model agency is a front for him to access young girls that she’s.sending his way.

    These. kids are told to lie about their age, their weight is strictly policed, and they’re essentially trapped in a foreign country at the mercy of their exploitative handlers. All because they want to help their families.

  34. frog says

    What a shithead.

    Doesn’t he know that supermodel-neuroscientists don’t go to conferences? They have two jobs! Where would they get the time to go to conferences? This week Fifi LaBrain is in the lab, but next week she has to be in Taiwan for a fashion show, and after that she’s flying to Berlin for a photo shoot, then New York for a guest stint on ANTM, before it’s back to the lab again.

    Sheesh, dude, only ordinary-looking people like Dario get to go to conferences.

  35. alektorophile says

    @ Caine

    He seems to be of the opinion that he deserves to be surrounded by women of supermodel looks and that women basically exist to serve his eyes and assuage his libido.

    Unfortunately that describes too many (but not all, not even most, thankfully) Italian males between the ages of 15 and 99 I know. Berlusconi is perhaps only a well-publicized example, but one hears his type of comments (and Maestripieri’s) all the time, including on Italian TV. Speaking of which, of course Berlusconi’s TV stations are at leasts partially responsible. In the last 30 years of idiotic programming and parading of skimpily-clad women they have done as much damage to Italian society as Fox has done to US political discourse.

  36. says

    Pentatomid:

    Also, completely irrelevant to this thread.

    Not entirely. Walteramos’s post is a sterling example of “Oh, bitches. Forget them, this *important* thing is happening over here.

  37. says

    Alektorophile:

    In the last 30 years of idiotic programming and parading of skimpily-clad women they have done as much damage to Italian society as Fox has done to US political discourse.

    I’m truly sorry to hear that.

  38. says

    “Female Attractiveness and Interest in Neuroscience: Evidence from a Conference”

    It’s often been noted that females are not interested in the sciences or public events. This holds true particularly for those sciences centered around the brain, long associated with reason and thus, needless to say, with males. But the increasing participation of females in science and public life appear, some would argue, to challenge this knowledge. In defense of existing theory, however, many contend that such participation is largely if not entirely limited to those females who lack evolutionarily gender-specific outlets – i.e., to sexually unmarketable females. This paper analyzes the participation of females at the 2012 Society for Neuroscience meetings. We find that female attractiveness (measured by the MFS, Maestripieri Fuckability Scale) is highly negatively correlated with female participation in this scientific event. The most sexually marketable females, in fact, seemed to actively avoid this environment. This research thus replicates earlier work on the subject and upholds the existing evolutionary psychological consensus.

  39. RFW says

    Dario Maestripieri seems not to have noticed that the vast majority of women don’t look like super models. If he paid attention while doing nothing more important than buying cat food, whether at Trader Joe’s or at Walmart, he’d have realized this. Perhaps he has scanned too many advertisements, with their photoshopped-airbrushed pretend-women?

    Keep in mind that some drag queens can don female attire and look as sexy as all get-out, to the degree that they fool onlookers.

    P-zed’s point about “super models” being very young is relevant. Women that young, whatever their looks, aren’t at neuroscience conferences for precisely the reason P-zed pointed out: they don’t yet have the scientific experience to be there.

    While a few women may come by super model looks thanks to their aberrant genes, the majority of those so afflicted owe it to artifice, not nature. I would expect that female scientists of any stripe have better things to do with their lives. I am reminded of the great mathematician, Olga Taussky Todd, who was the Los Angeles Times’ “Woman of the year” in the early nineteen sixties. Part of this distinction included instruction in the womanly arts of makeup and hair styling. Can we say “demeaning stereotyping”?

  40. says

    The prevalence of all of this misogyny makes me wonder if we can change anyone’s mind, or if these people just have to die off and a new generation take over before any of this gets any better.

    Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like boys (and girls for that matter) are generally being taught not to think like this. Sexism is still on the “acceptable” side of the line. We’re still (after a few centuries of progress) in stage one.

  41. says

    such participation is largely if not entirely limited to those females who lack evolutionarily gender-specific outlets

    *Snorts* :chokes coffee down: Well now, that’s terribly unattractive, to say the least.

  42. TheBlackCat says

    What I want to know was how the hell was he able to connect to the internet at SFN. It was barely working at all for me or anyone I know. And there were tens of thousands of people, not thousands, didn’t he here the PA’s announcing the attendance? Probably not, he was too busy oggling the attendees.

    Seriously, though, I had a great time at the conference, then to come back and see this just makes me sick.

    The conference seemed to have a good number of female attendees, both scientists and sellers, not sign of “booth babes” (not that I suppose those are all that common at scientific conferences, not that I have been to many), and a large number of security guards, many of whom were female. On the other hand, if there was an anti-harassment policy it wasn’t very heavily promoted, and the socials did not seem to be well-monitored, and were situated in otherwise vacant hotels with lots of poorly-lit and out-of-the-way areas, which is asking for trouble.

    But not being female I would be less likely to notice any problems or really understand what the serious issues are. Since I haven’t been to that many conferences, I would appreciate if any female pharyngulars who attended could report on their assessment or experiences so I have a baseline to know what to look for.

  43. Tony–Queer Duck Overlord of The Bronze– says

    Beatrice @27:
    I wonder if “no offense…” Is a close relative of “bless his/her heart”…?
    How to insult people while thinking you’ve preempted complaints. Has that ever worked?

  44. Chuck says

    Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like boys (and girls for that matter) are generally being taught not to think like this. Sexism is still on the “acceptable” side of the line. We’re still (after a few centuries of progress) in stage one.

    That is a depressing thought.

  45. isilzhaveni says

    It also devalues women’s time! The time investment for hair and make-up is substantial. To expect that women are suppose to invest that sort of time and effort every day says that a woman’s time is not valuable for any other pursuits.

  46. TheBlackCat says

    You know I just made that up, right?

    I wasn’t entirely sure until I reached the definition of the MFS scale.

  47. says

    Oh yes. I still almost choked on my coffee.

    :)

    I wasn’t entirely sure until I reached the definition of the MFS scale.

    I considered putting that in another post. Maybe I should have.

    I could totally be an evolutionary psychologist. Or an evo psych parodist. Either…one.

  48. TheBlackCat says

    I could totally be an evolutionary psychologist. Or an evo psych parodist. Either…one.

    If only that distinction was actually meaningful.

  49. says

    I wonder what his daily life is like. Is every other aspect of his life just flooded with supermodel types, thus his question about the conference?

    Of course not. He is expecting a much higher number of supermodels than can reasonably be expected at this conference despite going through life seeing women within a couple of standard deviations of average attractiveness all the time.

    Thank you, sir, for making it clear you think of women as things. Perhaps at the next conference we can just place hot real dolls throughout for your purposes so you will STFU.

  50. Rodney Nelson says

    No offense to anyone…

    When someone puts this phrase in a comment then xe knows what’s written is offensive.

  51. says

    @ing

    @skeptifem.

    Really 12-15?

    yes absolutely. America The Beautiful (the documentary) followed a 12 year old girl recruited by the fashion industry for runway shows. She was a hot commodity for awhile and then her popularity declined, at which time her mom took her to other markets (like NY and france), where she was subsequently called too fat to model. You get to see the whole mindfuck in detail in the movie, her self esteem is totally destroyed. More famous supermodels were recruited in the 12-15 age range (such as kate moss at 14). The fashion industry is also filled with predatory men so the age difference is nice for dudes like the shitlord that runs american apparel. When you chuck out people for exiting their teen years it makes sense to recruit at as young an age as possible.

  52. says

    It is also impossible to Photoshop yourself in real time, so how could even a supermodel at the conference look like a supermodel?

  53. neuroturtle says

    TheBlackCat: You could sort of get internets on the first floor, but if you were upstairs in the meeting rooms there was nothing. (If you wanted overpriced coffee you were in luck, though!)

    Ugh. I’ve collaborated with this guy. =/ Not anymore!

  54. says

    Oh, and on sexism: I was reading a progressive blog where they were discussing the Romney’s privilege and corresponding lack of respect for others. And to insult Tagg Romney, they called him a pu$$y.

    I commented that I found it really funny that we were calling people that name while discussing privilege and disrespect for others. At which point the men turned on me. It was funny and heartbreaking all at once.

  55. Ichthyic says

    @Sastra:

    We unattractive women are not impressed with his brains. We can tell they’re unimpressive even without a background in neuroscience.

    FWIW, I met you in LA; don’t ever think of yourself as unattractive.

  56. magistramarla says

    OK, now this just got personal for me.
    My daughter attended that Society for Neuroscience conference, as she does every year. She usually is a presenter at those conferences.
    She’s quite beautiful – not only to her father and I, but also to the handsome young professor that she is about to marry.

  57. NitricAcid says

    I would suggest that none of the female readers of Pharyngula are in this fellow’s league. You are intelligent; he is not.

  58. Alverant says

    Well I’m going to a sci-fi convention in a few weeks and I expect lots of pretty women in skimpy costumes.
    **OK that was sarcasm. I do expect some good costumes though. When that con had a Steampunk theme there were some really detailed costumes. I also expect to have a good time and get some free booze.

    I’m also having trouble getting to the different pages on FtB. It could just be me. A bunch of sites have been slow today.

  59. alexanderz says

    Off Topic

    Every time I hear about evo-psych it’s in a negative context. Has there actually been any real scientific discoveries in that field or is it completely riddled with people such as Maestripieri and Kanazawa?

  60. jose says

    A neuroscientist who is not very interested in the brain, but rather in the looks of the people around him… maybe his true vocation is make-up rather than science?

  61. says

    I can imagine going to a conference as a single person and finding no one there you’re attracted to and being disappointed. Fine. But to consider that important? No, that I can’t understand.

    This entire conference – and let’s leave aside that it’s in New Orleans – sounds utterly fascinating. It’s one of the most exciting fields in science. I would probably go to every single presentation if I could. (Please put the whole thing online, organizers.)

    And this person just discounts that? I don’t care what he’s published. He’s no scholar.

  62. Ichthyic says

    Has there actually been any real scientific discoveries in that field

    yes. You could, you know, actually look around the behavioral journals and see for yourself.

    or is it completely riddled with people such as Maestripieri and Kanazawa?

    no.

    you only hear of these fuckwits because they are so notably “controversial”, thus the media jumps on publicizing every idiotic word that parts their lips.

  63. magistramarla says

    Salty Current,
    The conference is held in a different city each year.
    There are presentations by leaders in the field. My daughter loves it. She studied eye-hand coordination and the brain.
    She’s now working in Science Policy, especially trying to encourage more women and minorities to get involved in STEM.
    She holds degrees in engineering, computational neuroscience and neurobiology.

  64. TheBlackCat says

    TheBlackCat: You could sort of get internets on the first floor, but if you were upstairs in the meeting rooms there was nothing. (If you wanted overpriced coffee you were in luck, though!)

    You were luckier than we were. Even on the first floor it would almost always fail at getting an ip address. I was lucky if I could get a connection for a couple minutes per day, and it wasn’t just me.

  65. imthegenieicandoanything says

    “Dario Maestripieri”????

    That’s a joke name, right? Like “Biccus Diccus” or “Bat Guano”?

    Why do assholes like this neer appear in my life? I know many “regular” guys, and a few of them are stupid (and “Republican,” BTW) assholes – though I avoid their company as much as possible. Do they, as they do with their racism, make sure non-assholes are not within earshot?

    Well, “Dario Maestripieri,” if that REALLY is your name, may I get the chance to meet you and catch you making this kind of comment.

    No kidding.

  66. reliwhat says

    At first i was like: Pz seems about right on this, he’s not aggressive or anything, his points are clear, his irony is justified. But then came the “sexist dolts in their comment threads telling them that they’re over-reacting or that what Dr Maestripieri said wasn’t so bad”. So, as soon as someone thinks you might be reacting a little too hard, he’s a sexist. I guess next time ill make a decision, about anything, i’ll make sure i ask you first, because you seem the universal center of ethic knowledge.

    But, you still made a good point about the interview thing, congrats on that.

  67. pipenta says

    Oh holy fuck PZ, I read this and I sprayed my cocktail all over my monitor. I’m wiping tears of laughter out of my eyes at the same time I’m cleaning the sticky mixture of Campari, tequila and apple cider off the screen.

    Yeah, I know what a drag it is for the humans who have to work with a jerk like this. There is that, which is valid and real and all. But man, what a buffoon! I laugh so I do not cry. Thankfully, he’s making the laughter come easy because, he’s complaining about no supermodels, but Johnny Depp he ain’t. He’s not ugly, he’s just ordinary. But don’t you know the formula?

    OML x NIE = EGW + APs + $ + (B +/- AN)

    OML = ordinary man looks
    NIE = narcissistically-inflated ego
    EGW = extraordinary genes woman
    APs = Adobe PhotoShop
    $ = $
    B = bulimia
    AN = anorexia nervosa

  68. Ichthyic says

    I guess next time ill make a decision, about anything, i’ll make sure i ask you first, because you seem the universal center of ethic knowledge.

    frankly, from what I’ve seen of your posts up till now, you could do worse.

    well, actually you have been.

  69. alektorophile says

    @78

    Oh, the irony. Complaining about racist friends while mocking ethnic Italian names. You sound like one of those people you seem to want to avoid.

  70. reliwhat says

    @ ichthyic

    OMG, you can judge a man’s worth only by reading a few of his comments!!!! What’s your super hero name????

  71. says

    You could, you know, actually look around the behavioral journals and see for yourself.

    I’m not the OP, but I’m glad to know this. From now on when *I* might have a question about science, instead of asking it on the board I was reading about the subject on in a discussion filled with scientists, I’ll head right down to my town’s tiny little library.

    I’m sure they have it all right there along with the Louis Lamour.

  72. Ichthyic says

    I’ll head right down to my town’s tiny little library.

    or you could use this thing called Google Scholar.

    or hell, yeah, fuck off and go use your tiny library. might be a better place to start?

  73. Ichthyic says

    …look, I can see where you’re coming from, but try to see it from the position of someone who actually works in behavioral ecology.

    asking someone if an entire field represented at many major universities has ever published anything of note is just… oxymoronish.

  74. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden says

    RFW @48:

    Keep in mind that some drag queens can don female attire and look as sexy as all get-out, to the degree that they fool onlookers.

    I…

    You…

    Just F* off, will you please?

  75. says

    Its damn hard to study the origin of behaviors when the biological mechanisms behind those behaviors are not well understood. This is especially true of trying to explain the origin of human behavior. Lots of failed attempts have been made so far, even with relatively simple behaviors like yawning.

    What I really dislike about talking evpsych online is that some asshats always show up to assure everyone that the ridiculous bullshit studies aren’t “real” evolutionary psychology, when the perpetrators of it are really in the field and doing research. If there were any kind of actual division between the ridiculous bullshit and good science then these hacks would get called out long before they decided to say something racist or sexist on their own time, but it doesn’t seem to happen. People are more concerned with making sure the embarrassments aren’t sullying the image of the field than making sure that they are actually weeded out. This specific trait in an organization is a huge red flag to me that their data can’t withstand scrutiny. Virtually every kind of woo I’ve come across has this problem when you look at how they all talk to each other when non-members aren’t likely to overhear.

  76. says

    look, I can see where you’re coming from, but try to see it from the position of someone who actually works in behavioral ecology.

    Damn if you aren’t a natural born science communicator.

    asking someone if an entire field represented at many major universities has ever published anything of note is just… oxymoronish.

    really now? Really.

    Anyway, enough thread derailing, so now you fuck off back to your sense of superiority.

  77. Ichthyic says

    really now? Really.

    yes, really really.

    wanna parade around some more ignorance and blame me for it?

    feel free.

  78. Lyn M: Necrodunker of death, nothing but net says

    Janine @ 26

    Funny thing, they also tend not to care about what attractive women have to say.

    I sense a trend.

  79. says

    reliwhat:

    So, as soon as someone thinks you might be reacting a little too hard, he’s a sexist. I guess next time ill make a decision, about anything, i’ll make sure i ask you first, because you seem the universal center of ethic knowledge.

    First, try out capital letters and punctuation. That will at least give you the appearance of intelligence.

    You seriously need to work on your reading comprehension, Cupcake. It’s abysmal. The comments in question? Not a matter of “reacting too hard”. A matter of sexist assholes acting as though this is no big thing, whatcha got your panties in a bunch for, anyway? Not that I expect you to comprehend any of this at all.

  80. says

    Ichthyic:

    try to see it from the position of someone who actually works in behavioral ecology.

    So, as the question was about evolutionary psychology, are you saying that behavioral ecology is the same as evo psych?

  81. alexanderz says

    @Ichthyic

    asking someone if an entire field represented at many major universities has ever published anything of note is just… oxymoronish

    Considering that all universities have art departments, I think that my question does have some validity, even if in hindsight it was rude and ignorant. Still, thank you for your patient response.

    What I was getting at was whether there is any clear genetic basis for evolutionary psychology. But you are obviously right – I would indeed have much more luck in finding the answer by searching through thousands of articles (whose merits I can’t fully assess) on Google Scholar than asking you here.

  82. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    OMG, you can judge a man’s worth only by reading a few of his comments!!!! What’s your super hero name????

    Versus your terminal insipidity and stupidity? You aren’t funny. Never quit your day job.

  83. TheBlackCat says

    asking someone if an entire field represented at many major universities has ever published anything of note is just… oxymoronish.

    Are these the same universities that have theology departments?

    …sorry, couldn’t resist.

  84. No One says

    Dario Maestripieri,

    Some advice…

    Stop being a cheapskate. Break out your credit card, google “escorts”, and wear a condom. The internet libido display on the internet… not so much.

  85. Tony–Queer Duck Overlord of The Bronze– says

    reliwhat:

    So, as soon as someone thinks you might be reacting a little too hard, he’s a sexist.

    In this circumstance, yes (also in a whole lot of other situations).
    This was a professional meeting on the subject of neuroscience. Dario’s comments imply that the value he finds in women is their appearance. The women present weren’t there to perform as supermodels. They shouldn’t be judged on their appearance, but that’s exactly what he was doing. The expectation that the women’s primary purpose for being there was to look good is sexist (when he starts applying that same idea to the men in these conventions, we’ll revisit).

    Sexism:

    The categories of male and female are stereotyped such that members of the category are assumed to possess certain characteristics by virtue of their biological categories. This results in sexism, the belief that one category, female, is inferior to the other, male.

    http://www.public.asu.edu/~squiroga/santill.HTM

    I’ve held your hand this far. Now take the baton and run the path set for you.

  86. andyo says

    What’s your super hero name????

    Captain Obvious.

    LOL, the dumbass just walked into that one.

  87. Hairhead, whose head is entirely filled with Too Much Stuff says

    OMG, you can judge a man’s worth only by reading a few of his comments!!!!

    And I don’t have to consume an entire bad egg to know that it’s rotten.

  88. Ichthyic says

    Are these the same universities that have theology departments?

    yes.

    do you think theology departments themselves have NEVER published anything of worth?

    I’ll take that bet.

  89. Ichthyic says

    So, as the question was about evolutionary psychology, are you saying that behavioral ecology is the same as evo psych?

    the questions asked are very similar, the approach taken to answer them is different.

    it’s still science, and there are plenty of people doing good work in the field, too many to even name really.

    same with sociobiology.

    very tired of having this discussion, which is why I react like this.

    you folks SHOULD know better.

  90. Ichthyic says

    What I was getting at was whether there is any clear genetic basis for evolutionary psychology

    it’s a good thing that’s the question you asked then.

    oh wait…

  91. =8)-DX says

    Well, on the “just mentioning attractiveness is not sexism per se – it’s being human!” side of things, would it be a solution to see less comments on female attractiveness from men and more comments from women about male attractiveness. If we could get a sexism 50/50 could we placate both sides?

    Either way I’m sure everyone would understand if PZ’s stunning looks and mouth-watering sex-appeal get highlighted next time he’s introduced before a talk – it’s about time he was recognised for his true qualities.

  92. mikecline says

    Dr Maestripieri shouldn’t be involved in any sort of evaluation until he proves he’s no longer judging academics through his asshole glasses. If he’s at a conference with his peers and similarly credentialed professionals and he’s this misogynistic and unprofessional, imagine how he’d be in a lab or classroom? Maybe to get him thinking about his stupidity, if he’s even fixable at this point, maybe the next journal he submits a paper to, should put an “asthetic appeal of the author” category on his next review, request a head shot and a swimsuit photo from the doofus.

  93. John Morales says

    mikecline:

    Dr Maestripieri shouldn’t be involved in any sort of evaluation until he proves he’s no longer judging academics through his asshole glasses.

    Clearly, he’s not judging their academic merit, rather only how pleased he personally is by their appearance; a personal evaluation on one criterion is not the same as a professional evaluation on a different one.

    (But yes, his apparent grasp of statistics is weak, if he is surprised that there are not multiple supermodel types in a sample of mere thousands, and given the age and vocational constraints applicable to those qualified to attend such a conference in a professional capacity)

  94. ibbica says

    ohn Morales

    (But yes, his apparent grasp of statistics is weak, if he is surprised that there are not multiple supermodel types in a sample of mere thousands…

    Tens of thousands.

    I mean, I didn’t attend this year, but there are typically around 30,000-35,000 attendees… so, actually, statistically… er… nevermind.

    Oh hey, maybe he meant something else other than ‘supermodel’ (whatever that means, anyway). “Super role model types”? “Super people who could be models”? Er… hm… nope, no saving this one, folks :/

  95. mikecline says

    John Morales,

    My “academics” meant the people not the field, but your point is taken. His poor judgement of publicly making “looks” the seem like most important part of the cnonference for him certainly calls in to question his professionally. You could then easily question how often the guy is evaluating this criteria first, to the detriment or disadvantage of other more relvant criteria. If he’s a bafoon with such a large public audience, imagine how he would treat “ugly” students or lab assitants. He would seem to in the least be likely to publicly say demeaning things about female, and possibly male students’, physical appearance. Facebook is as public as having a loud conversation with a small group of people, that everybody can or will hear.

  96. ltft says

    I wanted to pull a snippet from the Psychology Today article Boiling Billy at 102 linked.

    “The male mind is designed in such a way when it comes to sex that heterosexual men will do anything to increase their chances to have sex with an attractive woman, no matter how small these chances are, and even if what they do only increases the probability of sex from 0.01 to 0.015 %… The female mind may not be as extreme as the male mind in pursuing ALL opportunities for sex with attractive partners, but women too are active players in this arena. Heterosexual women too like to look at ads featuring half-naked male models and they flirt (consciously or unconsciously) with attractive men whenever they get the chance.”

    One of his books, which I won’t give the title to here, has an extended section on this topic including details on how often Maestripieri’s girlfriend, who Maestripieri points out is very attractive, gets hit on by random guys.

  97. says

    The male mind is designed in such a way when it comes to sex that heterosexual men will do anything to increase their chances to have sex with an attractive woman, no matter how small these chances are, and even if what they do only increases the probability of sex from 0.01 to 0.015 %

    And they say feminists hate men.

  98. alkisvonidas says

    “…William wondered why he always disliked people who said ‘no offense meant.’ Maybe it was because they found it easier to say ‘no offense meant’ than actually to refrain from giving offense.”

    ― Terry Pratchett, The Truth

  99. No Light says

    skeptifem –

    yes absolutely. America The Beautiful (the documentary) followed a 12 year old girl recruited by the fashion industry for runway shows.

    Thanks for the recommendation. As sick and upset as it made me, I wish teen-me could haun seen it. It might have made a dent in the extreme self-hatred and self-harm.

    But yeah, just like in Girl Model, my heart hurts for those exploited girls, and makes me rage at the culture that makes it fucking acceptable.

  100. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    What’s your super hero name????

    Captain Obvious.

    Literally, LOL!

    *applause*

    ——————-

    “…William wondered why he always disliked people who said ‘no offense meant.’ Maybe it was because they found it easier to say ‘no offense meant’ than actually to refrain from giving offense.”

    ― Terry Pratchett, The Truth

    Like!

  101. parent says

    Thanks so much to Drugmonkey, Prof. Stemwedel, Dr. Isis & PZ Myers for beginning and continuing the conversation about Dario Maestrieri’s FB comments.

    Some commenters to the various blogposts seem to suggest that the discussion is overblown, as if a mountain is being made of a mole hill.

    Sometimes it’s important to know about even mole hills.

    When I read about Maestrieri’s comments, I found the concluding remark, “No offense to anyone,” to be especially curious, as if the guy is either truly clueless or is actually somewhat hostile. If I had a daughter attending University of Chicago, I’d want her to know that this guy is potentially problematic and advise she give him a wide berth.

    As it turns out, my daughter is an undergraduate neuroscience student at another institution who attended & made a poster presentation at the SfN conference. We’d otherwise not have been aware of the mini-tempest associated with Maestrieri’s comments. As my spouse, who works in media, spotted the blog attention, links were forwarded to me and to her.

    Because our daughter is considering graduate study, the blog discussions have provided very important information. While I don’t expect the Maestrieri maelstrom to affect significantly her decision of WHETHER to pursue graduate education, I do hope that, if she decides to apply, these issues are considered as she determines HOW, WHERE & WITH WHOM she may seek to pursue graduate education.