A few months ago, The Scientist asked several prominent science bloggers who their favorites were, and I was incredibly flattered to find out PZ had me on his list (incredibly flattered, especially considering who else was on The Scientists list and PZs blog-roll).
That list stirred up a bit of controversy because no women science bloggers were asked, and few women science bloggers were listed. I have to admit, while I too was a little annoyed at this, I also thought it was kinda funny that some people who were protesting this point didnt know I was a female ;)
For people who dont read my blog or are new to my blog, ERV=SA Smith.
Steven Alexander Smith?
Stephanie Alexis Smith?
Stephanie Alexander Smith?
Because of my... *ahem* 'aggressiveness'... and my atheism, I get pegged as a dude online sometimes, so Im used to it, but I never thought about how my initials and writing style would be taken in my publication and grant submissions.
Some people have told me that women do not produce scientific results that are of the same high quality as those produced by men (nor do they write life science blogs as well as men, apparently) and that male reviewers can readily recognize when a woman is the lead (or sole) author of an article because "women do science differently from men."If this article is representative of the scientific community, Im going to stick to 'SA Smith'. 'Behavioral Ecology' switched to a double-blind review process, and female publications popped up from being under-represented to right where they should be. I dunno, I like being a chick that can kick viro-ass, and there are a lot of women at the top of the field of virology, like our visitor last week. Why cant I be S. Abigail Smith? Eh but even someone as 'big' in retrovirology as Dr. Dudley brought up biases against women in science in one of our conversations.
I guess Ill stay in cognito with SA Smith, then present at a conference so everyone can whisper to one another "OMG SA SMITH IS A CHICK! SHE WRITES SCIENCE LIKE A DOOD!" hehehehehehe!