Abby Kelley Foster (January 15, 1811 – January 14, 1887) was an "ultra" abolitionist and feminist who withstood all manner of abuse in order to continue speaking out against injustice, and out-agitated many of the men and women we herald as leaders of the era.
"All the great family of mankind are bound up in one bundle. When we aim a blow at our neighbor’s rights our own are by the same blow destroyed. Can we look upon the wrongs of millions—can we see their flow of tears and grief and blood, and not feel our hearts drawn out in sympathy?"
Abby Kelley was born to Quaker farmers, but even from an early age she was aware of the inequality in how she was treated when compared to the boys she grew up with. As a young adult, she expanded her radial beliefs when she heard prominent anti-slavery advocate William Lloyd Garrison speak. She quit her position as a teach and immediately joined the Female Anti-Slavery Society, where she quickly earned herself the respect of many of her companions. She was elected to serve on a committee whose duty was to circulate petitions to gather support before they were to be sent to the federal government. In short order, she'd gained the support, and signatures, of half the women in town.
But she wasn't content to simply gather signatures. She was called to speak, even though there were strong social prohibitions against women speaking in public. Undaunted, she braved a torrent of abuse in order to make herself heard. She was routinely castigated in the press for her behavior, was at least once forcibly removed from a meeting of Orthodox Quakers because she refused to stop speaking, was regularly pelted with eggs and rotten produce (and worse), and was often forced to give her speeches in the outdoors because she was barred from speaking at organized events.
No matter. Instead of shutting her up, all that she endured simply worked to make her even more revolutionary in her beliefs. She began advocating for true equality between the races and between the genders. She influenced feminist foremothers like Susan B. Anthony, and then called them out when they refused to support the 15th amendment. Her work in Seneca Falls during the early abolitionist meetings set the foundation for the women's rights conventions that came afterward.
Her radicalism was applied to all aspects of her life. She was a strong proponent of "come-outerism" -- the idea that abolitionists could not stay in churches that did not condemn slavery. She encouraged anti-slavery activists to call out their churches and confront any clergy who did not forcefully stand on the side of abolition, and in every town where she spoke, she made it a point to publicly question their church leaders.
She married another radical abolitionist, Stephen Foster, and when they weren't busy traveling the country together speaking on the abolitionist and feminist speaking circuit, they worked on the farm they purchased, which they named "Liberty Farm." It was here where they raised their daughter Paulina, although Abby only took a few years off from organizing and speaking engagements. Contrary to the domestic ideal being pushed on middle class white women of the era, she was adamant that women could be mothers and wives and still have an active life outside the home.
Frederick Douglass wrote of Abby, "Her youth and simple Quaker beauty, combined with her wonderful earnestness, her large knowledge and great logical power bore down all opposition wherever she spoke, though she was pelted with foul eggs and no less foul words from the noisy mobs which attended us."
MarÃa de Zayas y Sotomayor (1590 – 1661) was a pioneering feminist writer during Spain's Golden Age of literature. She was the first Spanish woman to earn an international reputation as a writer, which lasted nearly 200 years, and used her stories to address feminist issues in Spanish society in the 17th century.
She was born in Madrid in 1590, probably a few days before her baptism which was recorded on September 12. It was the height of the Spanish Inquisition, a period of approximately 350 years of enforced Catholic orthodoxy where those deemed to be heretics were tortured and murdered, and others who fell afoul of the proscribed behavior risked fines or imprisonment. Women were expected to be subservient to their fathers and husbands, and aside from being a nun or a prostitute, their roles were limited to that of wives and mothers. Not surprisingly, this oppressive culture gave their fathers and husbands an inordinate amount of power over them.
As the daughter of an infantry captain, de Zayas was privileged in that she had enough wealth to afford to live somewhat on her own terms, and that provided her access to education and the freedom to write. She used her writing as a means to address the patriarchal system and how it bound women in often dangerous positions. In 1637, de Zayas published her first collection of novellas which told the stories of violence women experienced and illuminating their vulnerability in a society where this kind of brutality is acceptable. It was an instant hit and quickly spread across Spain and throughout Europe. Her second collection was published in 1647 and continued her mission to illustrate the challenges facing strong women.
It has been argued that de Zayas' female characters exist in within an interesting paradox. While they are all strong women, they are powerless to change the system. She was not telling the stories of the average woman, but instead of women with financial and intellectual means who were still unable to break down the societal forces against them and who then turned to using whatever small power they had to change their own circumstances. Certainly she must have realized it would be impossible for any one individual to change the entire social structure, especially with the power of the state and the church supporting it, but within the system each woman could fight for a measure of independence, and each man could address his own tendencies toward violence.
Her two collections remained immensely popular for nearly 200 years, and only fell into obscurity in the late-19th century when women's roles in society began to shift again. More emphasis was on the purity of womanhood, and critics' attitudes toward her work turned sour. Although you or I might think a review calling her work "the filthiest and most immodest that I have ever read" intriguing, readers of the 19th century did not.
It wasn't until the 1970s that her work again began to attract attention as the second wave feminist movement encouraged more interest in women authors of the Golden Age of Spanish literature. Since then there have been several excellent analyses of her work, as well as important study of its changing reception over the past 370 years. I have not read more than a few pages of a recent English translation, but I am certainly intrigued. In many ways her story reminds me of the experiences of Emilia Bessano Lanier, another female writer of that era. I only recently finished a new fictionalized biography of her life, and am beginning my own research into her work, which also addresses the experiences of women. (A review of that book is coming soon!) It would be interesting to compare the lives and works of each woman, and find the ways they may have influenced other women who came after them.
Here in the US it's Labor Day Weekend. For some that means BBQs and shopping. But it's also a time to reflect on those who've come before us and worked so hard for many of the things we take for granted these days - reasonable working hours, weekends, child labor laws, safer working conditions, etc. It's also a day to stop and evaluate where we stand now in regards to these same issues.
Over the last few years of working on this blog, I've featured more than a few women who have played instrumental roles in the Labor Movement. These are just a handful of the many women who were involved. You can rest assured I will continue to celebrate more as I have the time to research their lives and write about them. I also plan to include more women in the modern Labor Movement.
On this important day of reflection and celebration, here are some of the women I've written about over the last couple of years.
Louise Blanchard Bethune (July 21, 1856 – December 18, 1913)
If you haven't heard of Louise Bethune before, don't be too ashamed. While she was a remarkable woman during her time, her story has been all but lost to history. Fortunately, folks like Kelly Hayes McAlonie are working to change that.
Here are a few basics facts about her life and her work that everyone should know:
Here we are at another weekend! I'm so excited because I've found loads of great stuff to share with you. We've got two very different stories about women in sports, showing how different prevailing attitudes can have dramatically different effects. There's a beautiful piece about the amazing Jane Goodall. And Linda Holmes of NPR goes in-depth in trying to understand the fascination with the Cinderella story and how each new re-telling tells us more about ourselves than it does about the actual princess. Then there's a piece about how a science academic writing a romance about a science academic taught her more about herself and her colleagues than she had expected. And finally, a wonderful conversation between two of my favorite modern feminists!
So let's dive right in!
Photo: Kate Warren
Regardless of how you feel about the sport of boxing, you have to admit it takes a special kind of bravery to get into the ring for one round, much less to try and make a career out of it. And women boxers have to have the most bravery of all -- not just to face their opponents, but to face the uphill battle of winning over coaches, promoters and the public. Kate Jenkins' piece for The Atlantic, The Real Knockouts of Women’s Boxing, digs deep into the life of one boxer trying to make it, and the battle that switches between foes of blatant sexism and cool indifference.
That’s exactly what today’s women fighters are doing: staying light on their feet, waiting for the perfect opening. They’re struggling to maintain their balance and their sanity. Nelson has found hers in God, and she keeps training, keeps delivering pancakes, with the faith that her dedication will give way to an answer. If she could eat title belts, Nelson wouldn’t have a care in the world. But undefeated or not, there’s no clear strategy for turning her athletic success into financial success just yet.
Meanwhile, Douglas struggles to keep her anger from controlling her. She once thought boxing could help her overcome a past filled with abuse and foster homes, but after she debuted as a pro, a bad experience with a promoter left her jaded. “They told me, ‘You need to change the way you dress, you need to put on makeup, do this, do that,’” she says. “They were trying to change everything about me, and I wasn’t having it.” The promoter also dragged her out to nightclubs, where they’d hang around with wealthy men who frequently propositioned Douglas, implying that they’d take sex in exchange for financial support. “It really used to bother me. I used to cry. Now I’m like, ‘How ’bout I break your jaw?’”
Courtney Force greeting her fans. Photo: NHRA
Tony Fabrizio's great piece in ESPNW, How the Success of Women Drivers in NHRA Engages, Inspires Fans, shows that if nowhere else in racing, at least in the NHRA there are excellent opportunities for women racers, which is fueling the overall success of the brand, as well as attracting whole new segments of the population to the races.
Anecdotally, though, anyone can clearly see a difference in the NHRA pits and grandstands.
"The women are out there," [Gary] Darcy said. "The young girls are out there. And when you see somebody like a Courtney Force, a Leah Pritchett, both boys and girls are paying attention, but certainly you see the young girls and the moms that are there trying to get a glimpse. Because it does become very inspirational, and they see somebody doing what they could maybe do one day.
"That's the great thing about our sport. Those barriers don't exist."
Jane Goodall on Lake Tanganyika. Photo: Michael Christopher Brown/Magnum
Paul Tullis' article Jane Goodall Is Still Wild at Heart is as amazing as you would want it to be. Last summer he traveled with her to visit her old research facilities in Gombe, making note of her interactions with tourists and officials alike, and perfectly capturing this remarkable woman's talent for patience and determination.
But if her interactions with government officials from the United States, France, Tanzania and Burundi, as well as executives from Silicon Valley, are any indication, the skill sets are not so different: patience, purpose, perception. It took her only a few months of observing chimps before Goodall noticed that some of their behaviors were remarkably similar to those of humans. Now, perhaps, it has come full circle: Her understanding of people has been informed by her time spent with chimps, giving her an intuitive power of persuasion that even she does not seem to consciously grasp.
Photo: Disney
You think you know the Cinderella story, but do you really? I love Linda Holmes, and this piece she wrote for NPR, A Girl, A Shoe, A Prince: The Endlessly Evolving Cinderella, is just plain brilliant. In it, she discusses the background of the Cinderella story and its variations from around the globe, and why it still has such a powerful hold over our imaginations.
The actual Cinderella tale, while a nebulous thing that can be hard to pin down with precision, is more than that. There's very little that's common to every variant of the story, but in general, you have a mistreated young woman, forced to do menial work, either cast out or unloved by her family. She has an opportunity to marry well and escape her situation, but she gets that chance only after being mistaken for a higher-status person, so she has to get the man who may marry her to recognize her in her low-status form, which often happens either via a shoe that fits or some kind of food that she prepares.
For me is was very valuable. It gave me a broader view about professional compromises and personal choices. Moreover, a novel-length format provides something unique: it gives the readers (and the writer) an opportunity to experience the situations emotionally. One can then get a richer impression of what is going on and what kinds of pressures a woman-scientist feels, and what drives those around her. It is such understanding, rather than any practical advice, that may help women in science.
Oh yes! You absolutely have to watch this conversation between Tavi Gevinson, founder and editor in chief of Rookie Magazine, and Anna Holmes, founder of Jezebel.
Like I mentioned last week, one of my favorite things about this blog is the fascinating women I get to 'meet' on a regular basis. Today's amazing woman is Dorothy Detzer -- peace activist and lobbyist, and all-round kick ass woman. What resonates with me most about her story is that she didn't start off on the path that she eventually ended up on, but instead went following her instincts, and found her personal mission almost by accident.
Dorothy Detzer was born on December 1, 1893, in Fort Wayne, Indiana. Her parents, a drugstore owner and a librarian, raised Dorothy and her brothers during the Progressive Era, and that upbringing had a tremendous influences on Dorothy's life.
Eliza Ann Grier (1864 - 1902) was the first African American woman licensed to practice medicine in the state of Georgia.
Very little is known about her early life. She was born during the Civil War. Her parents were slaves in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, which made her a slave as well. After emancipation, her family moved to Atlanta, where she grew up and attended school. She originally intended to become a teacher, and attended Fisk University. It took her seven years to graduate because she took every other year off to work picking cotton and working other jobs to pay for her education.
Just before graduating from Fisk, she changed her focus to becoming a physician. She felt that it would be the best way she could serve her community for her to become a doctor instead of a teacher.
When I saw colored women doing all the work in cases of accouchement ... or, childbirth and all the fee going to some white doctor who merely looked on, I asked myself why should I not get the fee myself.
She wrote to the Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania in December of 1890 inquiring about the cost of tuition and whether there was any work she could do. She was accepted into the school, but still had to work every other year to afford the costs. In 1897 she received her medical degree, and became one of the few African American women physicians in the US. Later that year, she made history as the first African American woman to apply for and receive a medical license in Georgia.
[S]ome of the best white doctors in the city have welcomed me and say that they will give me an even chance in the profession. That is all I ask.
She worked to improve the conditions in the African American community. She struggled to establish and maintain a private practice, and supplemented her income by teaching at the Hospital and Training School for Nurses in Charleston, South Carolina.
In 1901, she attended the Tuskegee Negro Conference. Tragically, she contracted influenza in 1901, and was unable to continue seeing patients during her illness, which caused her financial strain and jeopardized her future. She reached out to help from many prominent African American and feminist leaders, but none were able to help her enough. Sadly, she died in 1902.
If you like the work I do here at Self-Rescuing Princess Society, please check out my Patreon.
Mary McLeod Bethune: suffrage and civil rights work Mary McLeod Bethune's work with her school was remarkable in itself, and had she only focused on that, she would still be heralded for her contributions to society. But she did not. She could not. Her experiences trying to improve the lives of young African American women showed her that there was much work to be done -- both for their race and for their gender.
Happy Birthday - Septima Poinsette Clark Septima Poinsette was born on May 3, 1898, in Charleston, South Carolina. Her father had been born a slave, and worked as a caterer after the Civil War. Her mother was born free in Charleston, but was taken to Haiti during the Civil War. After the war, she worked as a launderer, but did not work for whites, and refused to let her daughters work in white houses...
SRPS Shout-Out - Althea Gibson "Shaking hands with the Queen of England was a long way from being forced to sit in the colored section of the bus going into downtown Wilmington, North Carolina." "I want the public to remember me as they knew me: athletic, smart, and healthy.... Remember me strong and tough and quick, fleet of foot and tenacious."
Henrietta Muir Edwards was a life-long women's rights activist and reformer. She spent her long life advocating for the rights of women and children in Canada.
She was born in Montreal, where she grew up in an upper-middle-class family, with all the duties to honor and culture that brought with it. Her family placed a high value on education and religious activity and Henrietta belonged to many organizations, especially those with a religious nature.
When she was older she traveled to Europe to study painting and other artistic pursuits. She was also exposed the burgeoning feminist movement, and began to question her involvement in and perpetuation of traditions that excluded women from their ranks, as well as her interest in a career in the arts where women were not welcome.
In 1876, Henrietta married Dr. Oliver C. Edwards. Although they had three children and moved quite often, Henrietta maintained her high level of activity in the world of women's issues. She continued to advocate for equal grounds for divorce, equal custody of children, raising the age of consent for girls to eighteen, reform of the prison system (especially as it pertained to women), adoption of mother’s allowances, equal pay for male and female workers, and female suffrage, among other issues.
Her husband's work took them to live among several of the indigenous tribes in western Canada. She adjusted to each new environment with good humor and flexibility, but like many other white women in positions of power in the late 19th century, she was not a true ally to the aboriginal women she lived with. She and her husband collected artifacts with the hope of preserving the relics of the peoples she and many others believed were dying out. Often her dealings with aboriginal women were sympathetic, but maternalistic. She and her husband were strong advocates for the health of native peoples, and it was their hope that many of the people they met would eventually assimilate into white culture.
She worked with Lady Aberdeen, wife of the Governor General, to establish the National Council of Women in 1893. Henrietta served for 35 years as the chair for Laws Governing Women and Children. Also with Lady Aberdeen, she helped establish the Victorian Order of Nurses in 1897 and was appointed chair of the Provincial Council of Alberta.
She quickly gained a reputation as an expert in regards to laws relating to women and children, and she was called in to review public policy.
During the latter period of the First World War, when supplies and morale were at low, the Government of Canada selected individuals to assist in an advisory capacity about how to invoke stricter conservation measures. Mrs. Edwards was part of the selected committee, and it was the first time in Canadian history that a woman had been called for a review of public policy with the Government. (source: Wikipedia)
Henrietta wrote two books about her work to help women and the legal problems they faced. She worked with Louise McKinney, Irene Parlby and Emily Murphy to win married women the rights to their dowery and married property.
In 1927, in the fight for the Persons Case, along with the other members of "The Famous Five," Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung, Louise McKinney, and Irene Parlby, she petitioned the national court to recognize women as equals to men in the eyes of the British North America Act.
It was not until October 18, 1929, after taking their cause to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London, that a reversal of the Supreme Court decision granted Canadian women the right to be appointed to the Senate. By joining the "Famous Five," Henrietta Muir Edwards brought to the cause of "women not officially recognized" her determination, extensive knowledge of the Canadian legal system and the prestige of having fought so many battles aimed at re-defining the position of women in Canadian society. (source: Library and Archives Canada)
In October 2009, the Senate voted to name Edwards and the rest of the Five Canada's first "honorary senators."
"All the hardships taught me something, and they taught me how to cope. So, I was prepared to fight back. If it had all been good, I wouldn’t have known how to fight."
Ellen Dorrit Hoffleit was born on March 12, 1907, in Florence, Alabama, but the family soon moved to Newcastle, Pennsylvania.
Her interest in astronomy started quite early, when she watched the Perseid meteor shower with her family.
"My mother and brother and I used to sit in the backyard, especially during the Perseid meteor showers, and look for meteors," she said. "What impressed me was the sheer beauty of the event."
The family moved to Cambridge, Mass., so that her brother could attend Harvard College. She graduated from Radcliffe College but never seriously considered astronomy until she got a job in 1929 working for noted astronomer Harlow Shapley at the Harvard College Observatory.
Hoffleit described herself as no better than an average undergraduate, but she showed a zeal for examining Harvard's vast collection of photographic plates of the skies. In her spare time, she wrote a paper on meteors and dropped it on Shapley's desk. Shapley was so impressed that he encouraged her to pursue a Ph.D.
"I have never been as happy as that day," she said. (source: Hartford Courant)
During World War II, she went to work at the Aberdeen Proving Ground ballistics laboratory in Maryland. Not unlike many women working for the war effort, she was forced to take a position below her status while she watched men who had less experience take higher level jobs. Frustrated that women weren't getting the training they needed and the promotions they deserved because of a fear that they would "run off and get married," she complained to a visiting inspector general, who helped improve the situation and get them the professional ratings they were entitled to.
She returned to the Harvard Observatory but didn't stay long. When Harlow Shapley retired, he was replaced with someone who did not appreciate her research, and even went so far as to have one-third of the photographic plates destroyed. It broke her heart to leave, but she could not stay under those conditions.
Dorrit went job hunting, and, when the dust had finally settled, she was ensconced in two positions that she would occupy officially for the next twenty years (and unofficially long beyond that). It was in those two contexts that most of us came to know her. Hoffleit became, half-and-half, both director of the Maria Mitchell Observatory from 1957 to 1978 and a research astronomer at Yale (1956 to official 1975 retirement) under its long-term director Dirk Brouwer, where her primary task was to be preparation of astrometric catalogs.
(source: Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society)
In 1956, she took a position at Yale, and in 1957 began spending the summers on Nantucket, teaching programs at the Maria Mitchell Observatory, named after the first female American astronomer Maria Mitchell. Over the years she taught there, she worked with young students, mostly women who became known as the "Girls."
While at Yale, Hoffleit taught the most basic course on Astronomy to Undergraduates. Her passion for the subject was inspiring to these young men and women who were probably only in the class to fulfill a GE requirement. She retired from teaching in1975, but continued to work until her death in 2007, at the age of 100.
Most notably, she was the author and editor of several editions of the Bright Star Catalogue, an extensive compilation that lists all the stars visible with the naked eye from Earth. She also co-authored The General Catalogue of Trigonometric Stellar Parallaxes, which contains precise distance measurements to nearly 9000 stars, information critical to understanding the history and workings of our solar region.
In 1988, she was awarded the George Van Biesbroeck Prize by the American Astronomical Society for her lifelong contributions to astronomy. In 1993, she was the second astronomer to receive AAS-Annenberg Prize for science education. The first recipient was Carl Sagan.
Among her many other awards and recognitions, she served as a past president of the American Association of Variable Star Observers; a Hoffleit Assistantship was established at the Mitchell Observatory; and asteroid 3416 Dorrit was named after her.
Happy Birthday, Dorrit!
If you like the work I do here on SRPS, please support me!
Beatrice Muriel Hill Tinsley was born January 27, 1941, in Chester, England. Her father was a minister, and her mother was a cellist and writer. After World War II, her family moved to New Zealand, where she and her sisters attended the all girls district schools. Beatrice showed an early affinity for learning, and did quite well in her studies. She was one of those children who would read the encyclopedia for fun, and dreamed about becoming a scholar some day.
When she was only 14, she announced that she would be an astrophysicist. Her teacher at the time, Joyce Jarold remembered it clearly:
"Beatrice asked me if she could borrow some physics books, 7th form reference books. I was skeptical at first although I knew she was bright. When you teach, you're mostly trying to din something in. Very occasionally you realise that you are dealing with a great mind that is infinitely superior to your own. Beatrice came into that category."
At the age of 16, she received a Junior University Scholarship, and left school to attend Canterbury University College, where she continued to excel -- earning her Bachelors of Science in 1961, and a Masters in Physics in 1963.
She gained an MSc with first class honours in 1961, winning every prize open to her. She did not write for student publications or play sport, although delighting in weekend excursions to Steeds Hut, but she was an outstanding violinist (a member of the National Youth Orchestra) and particularly enjoyed the meetings and discussions of the Socratic Society, or Soc Soc. (source: NZine)
While working on her Masters, she also taught Physics at a local girls high school, as well as offering private instruction for college students. It was at this time she married fellow post-graduate student, Brian Tinsley. When Brian was given a position teaching at the Southwest Center for Advanced Studies (SCAS), in Dallas, Texas, they moved to a small apartment, and Beatrice sought an academic position for herself.
Sadly, the standard practice for universities at the time was to refuse positions for spouses of current faculty. This meant that wherever her husband was able to find a job, she would not. This frustrated her deeply. But, in July of 1964, she was accepted to the University of Texas, Austin, to study for her Ph.D. in Astronomy.
Though some judged Tinsley as a mere Dallas housewife with no experience in astronomy, her top-notch academic record convinced the head of the astronomy department at the University of Texas, Austin, to take a chance on admitting her, even with the added burden of her commuting the 200 miles from Dallas to Austin.
Initially Tinsley planned to take part in the longstanding cosmological pursuit of deciding whether the universe was open or closed. But as she examined all the servables in this line of work—the diameters of clusters of galaxies, galaxy magnitudes, galaxy sizes—one question kept diverting her: how were the galaxies changing over time? How were they evolving? That information was crucial to finding an answer to the universe’s fate. At that point she chose the problem that became her dissertation: actually simulating the evolution of a galaxy. Setting up a numerical model, she would track its changes in color and brightness over billions of years as the stars within it are born, fiercely radiate, and then inevitably die. It was an ambitious task, as numerical simulations were grueling in this primordial era of computing.
(source: Natural History Magazine)
In typical over-achiever fashion, she finished her Ph.D. studies in a remarkable two years. This, while also caring for their first child. Unfortunately, after receiving her degree, she was unable to find a suitable position, again because of the rule against hiring the spouses of faculty. Instead, she had to cobble together her own funding for research from grants and scholarships, and was given a "fictitious" position as a visiting scientist. As a consequence, she did very little actual cosmology study during this time.
In 1971, she landed part-time work for the National Science Foundation, and was able to attend the American Astronomical Society meeting at Amherst. In 1972, she took a leave of absence from her "fictitious" position at the University of Texas, and took her now two children with her to visit the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena to work at Mount Palomar's Hale Observatory. Here, she was inspired by her fellow astrophysicists and dreamed of someday being able to do observation work, once her children were older.
In 1973, she accepted a temporary lectureship at the University of Maryland, which was nearby where Brian was also teach, in Washington, D.C. While her position was not "profitable financially" is was a "great boost professionally." She finally felt like she was "an accepted member of the community of cosmologists and astrophysicists," as had been her life-long dream. "The work is a pleasure to me!"
In 1974, she was awarded the Annie J. Canon award, and was given an all-expenses-paid trip to Institute of Theoretical Astronomy, Cambridge, England. While the travel and experience was invigorating and intellectually stimulating, it was only temporary, and every time she returned to the University of Texas, she was demoralized further. As she wrote in a letter home, her time there:
"...has reduced me to a state of mental anguish. Hard to explain! I am a good scientist, and among my peers treated like a full and respectable person and feel of worth. UTD has kept me at the nearest possible level to nothing and there is no one who knows enough about astronomy to care in the least for my work, Austin has helped, but it is second rate job (underpaid, half-time) at a department much worse than I'm worth. This isn't supposed to be boasting. To be rejected and undervalued intellectually is a gut problem to me and I've lived with it most of the time we've been here, apart from extended visits to Caltech and Maryland and shorter trips and meetings and so on." (source: RootsWeb)
It was during this time that she received Assistant Professorship offers from both Yale and the University of Chicago, as well as a three year teaching position at Cambridge. Still trying to find a position closer to home, she applied to head the Astronomy Department at the University of Texas, Dallas, which she herself had designed and worked so hard for over the previous years since moving to Dallas. Based on the previous treatment she had received, it is probably no real shock to learn that her application was not taken seriously. In fact, she received no reply at all. It wasn't until she attended a faculty party where she cornered the man who was to have reviewed and responded to her application that she learned exactly how little respect they had for her. When pressed, the man said, "I have a letter from you, don't I, that I must answer some time." Beatrice happily replied, "You needn't bother now. I'm choosing between Chicago and Yale!"
In light of her incredible groundbreaking achievements, she effectively had her career shut down due to her gender. It was at this point Beatrice made a decision that I hope will become one that no woman in science ever need make again. She chose between her husband and staying in Texas and continuing her scientific career.
She chose science. She divorced her husband. The least socially acceptable choices she could make. The courage it took to make them can not have been easy. (source: Catherine Q)
In 1975, she and Brian divorced, with Brian retaining full custody of the children. This enabled Beatrice to take the position at Yale, and pursue her dreams of true scholarship. She traveled from observatory to observatory, gaining respect from her peers and broadening her personal goals. When Yale created a committee to improve the status of women at the university, Beatrice joined immediately.
In 1978, she was made a full professor at Yale. Tragically, that same year, she discovered a lump on her leg that turned out to be melanoma. She continued to lecture and write while she was treated, but there was little hope for a full recovery. The type of cancer she had carried at best a 50/50 chance of survival.
In the final stages, she was cared for at the Yale Infirmary, where she continued to write. When she lost the function of her right hand, she taught herself to write with her left. Her drive and determination never slowed. Her final scientific paper, submitted just ten days before her death, in 1981, at the age of 40, was published by the Astrophysical Journal posthumously, without revision. In her short, and often thwarted, career, she accomplished a great deal, and left a legacy of research that is still being felt today.
Before Beatrice began her research, little was known about life cycles of galaxies and the stars within them. She pioneered the study of interacting galaxies and the idea that galaxies change over short timescales compared with age of the Universe, which inspired astronomers to study distant galaxies for clues to galaxy evolution. In particular Beatrice studied how different groups of stars age and what observable effects those changes have on a galaxy. Her work was significant in determining the size of the Universe and its rate of expansion. It was also assumed that galaxies of the same type - spiral, elliptical or lenticular - would be a similar size, shape and luminosity.
By comparing the size and luminosity of distant galaxies to nearby galaxies whose distance was already known, it was thought that an accurate distance could be obtained. But her thesis, "Evolution of Galaxies and its Significance for Cosmology" showed that determining distances based on morphology alone was unreliable. Factors such as the abundances of chemical elements, the mass of the galaxy and the rate of starbirth were all important parameters in determining the distance and age of the galaxy and, by inference, the size and age of the universe. Tinsley's work formed the basis for contemporary studies of galactic evolution. She also contributed to research to find out whether the universe is an open or closed system. (source: She Is An Astronomer)
In her honor, the American Astronomical Society established the Beatrice M. Tinsley Prize in 1986, to recognize "an outstanding research contribution to astronomy or astrophysics, of an exceptionally creative or innovative character, " and the University of Texas at Austin created the Beatrice M. Tinsley Visiting Professorship in Astronomy. And, fittingly, asteroid 3087 Beatrice Tinsley is named after her as well. The Beatrice Tinsley Institute for New Zealand Astronomy and Astrophysics is a world class research facility, named for her in her home country.
Let me be like Bach, creating fugues,
Till suddenly the pen will move no more.
Let all my themes within - of ancient light,
Of origins and change and human worth-
Let all their melodies still intertwine,
Evolve and merge with ever growing unity,
Ever without fading,
Ever without a final chord… Till suddenly my mind can hear no more.
If you like the work I do here at Self-Rescuing Princess Society, please check out my Patreon.
On January 23, 1997, Madeleine Albright took office as the 64th U.S. Secretary of State, becoming the first female to hold that position, and the highest-ranking woman in the history of the U.S. government.
I have said this many times, that there seems to be enough room in the world for mediocre men, but not for mediocre women, and we really have to work very, very hard.
Not only is she smart, tough, and all-around awesome, she's a total geek!
I've never been to New Zealand before. But one of my role models, Xena, the warrior princess, comes from there.
About a year ago, one of the truly awesome women I follow on G+ posted a link to her ebook, Finding Gaia, and on a whim I bought it. I downloaded it to my Kindle, and then pretty much relegated it to my virtually teetering ebook stack, which rivals the teetering stack of actual books on my bedside table, only easier to ignore. But even though it wasn't blocking my ability to see the surface of my nightstand, it was always there in my brain, nagging me to read it. I mean, with this kind of warning, who wouldn't want to dive right in?
I started reading the book last summer. While it was enjoyable, it was slow going at first. Not because it was boring, but because it was summer, and my already slow reading pace was even slower. I don't read as much in the summer (due to a combination of vacation activities and a distinct reduction in hot soaking bedtime baths), as I do during the rest of the year. Whole weeks would go by before I was able to visit with the folks in Truitt mansion. Sadly, "during the rest of the year" means school-time, which comes with all kinds of reading of its own. So,while I continued reading, I could only spare a half hour or so a couple of times a week. Even with frequent breaks in reading, the story was compelling and was always lingering at the back of my mind. I found myself wondering what Trish and Anna would think about different things I came across during a day. For the first time in a long while, the characters of the book were like invisible people who escaped the story and were running amok in the world.
Which isn't half wrong. Trish has her own blog and G+ page: EcoSnark
Anyway... what's this book about? Good question. When describing it to friends, I wind up saying something like, "it's a feminist environmentalist love story mystery drama, with lots of laughs." And, well, that pretty much sums it up.
The book starts out a bit quietly, building as we meet kind, gentlemanly Jason, tough-as-nails, in-your-face with a razor sharp sense of humor, eco-feminist Trish, and quiet, plugged-in, very modern Don, and learn about their quest to find a mysterious woman they refer to as Gaia.
Wealthy, handsome Jason Truitt appears to have it all: he runs an international conglomerate of environmental businesses and research facilities, he lives in a luxurious mansion…and he can’t die. But his uncanny health and failure to age keep him distanced from normal human life. For over a century he’s been searching for the one other person on earth he suspects is afflicted with the same condition. Like him, she has lived under many different names to keep her immortality secret, so in honour of her supernatural ability to induce plant growth by thought alone, he thinks of her as Gaia.
Finding Gaia, however, is only the beginning, for where he has used his talents toward prosperity, hers have brought loss, isolation, abduction, and unspeakable torture. She will need all that he can give to reclaim her own inner strength and rediscover who, what, and when she is.
We get to see Trish reacting to having a very different type of woman in her personal space, and learning how to be accepting and supportive, in her own way. And we get to see Jason working to create a better world, out there, as well as in his own home. But the sweetest part of the story is watching Anna adjusting to living in a safe environment, with new people, new technology, and new challenges. Sure, she's got a severe case of culture- and time-shock, but it's so much more than that. She's been hunted and hurt, she's had to hide her secret from everyone she has ever loved, and lived in constant fear and dread. Now, for the first time in several centuries, she finds herself in a place where she can rest, relax a bit, and begin to explore her own power.
Which isn't to say this part of the book is boring. Quite the contrary. Confused, shrinking violet Anna begins to branch out, so to speak, first taking on the task of tending the garden, and getting to know the people she's living with. Very quickly we see her stretching herself, learning how to use her power to create a better world, and exploring her relationships with the other housemates, especially Jason. The somewhat formal courtship of Jason and Anna is anachronistic for the present setting, which makes it all the sweeter. There are lots of slow waltzes and longing looks, shy smiles and tentative hands touching. And shared secrets -- not all of them innocuous or pleasant.
It seems that in their 500 years of existence, both Jason and Anna have had to face the terrible side of their special powers. Jason was a former soldier, using his ability to overpower the enemy. After the war, he worked as an assassin -- a distant period in his very long life that still has the power to shame him.
Even in the luxurious haven Jason has worked so hard to create for himself and Anna, there's a nagging fear that something terrible is waiting just outside. And, as we learn, we were right to worry. Without getting too spoiler-ish, I'll just say that what- or whomever is hunting Anna doesn't stop hunting her just because she went into hiding in the Truitt mansion. But I will also say that Anna is stronger than she first appears. By the end, we see her finally coming to terms with her immense power. And she really is awe-some.
As an indication of how the end of this book had me on pins and needles, I will admit that I spent far too many nights sitting in a no-longer-hot bath, clicking "next page" over and over and over, ignoring the hundreds of pages I should have been reading for class. I had been so disciplined early in the semester, but fell off completely after [spoiler redacted] happened. I just had to know what was going to happen and how it would all turn out!
And then, at the end, there's a final scene that hints at a sequel. With more interesting characters and untold adventures and happenings! It's all I can do to not PM Kimberly Chapman every day, asking her when I'll know what happens in the next book!
If you like the work I do here at Self-Rescuing Princess Society, please check out my Patreon.
There are an increasing number of opportunities for girls interesting in pursuing a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) career. Over the last year or so, I have read about dozens of fascinating summer camps, extracurricular programs, weekend schools, and the like. One of the most intriguing has been the Women's Health Science Program.
The Women’s Health Science Program for High School Girls and Beyond (WHSP) was created by the Institute for Women’s Health Research to prepare and empower a diverse population of high school girls to successfully become the next generation of women leaders in science and medicine.
Girls enrolled in the Women's Health Science Program.
Photo source: WHSP Facebook page
Founded in 2006 by Teresa K. Woodruff, Ph.D. and Megan E. Farout, MEd, the Women's Health Science Program is an innovative program which brings together high school and college students interested in the field science and medicine and places them within a community-based program, with the goals of increasing science mentorships and improving advocacy, improving authentic science and health learning opportunities, and exposing promising students to the available academic programs leading to careers in science and medicine. It was designed to introduce college-level instructors, programs and resources to high school students.
Currently the program offers several different academies, ranging from the general study of physical science to the specific study of oncofertility, each of which with an emphasis on women's health concerns to make it relevant to the girls' lives.
In each program, the girls get plenty of laboratory time, learning how to use equipment and procedures, simulating working with samples and performing dissections. They also get plenty of clinical experience, learning how to work with patients, doing research, observing surgeries, and discussing current health issues facing young women.
"We think girls need more opportunity to see what the possibility is for them in their lives and sometimes girls think of themselves in other careers, but not as scientists," said Woodruff. "We have them interfacing with scientists, clinicians, nurses, physical assistants and really ask them to involve themselves in the discovery process of science that then translates into human health."
(Quote source: ABC12)
The more I read about it the more I'm convinced it really is a remarkable program. I hope if you're in the Chicogo area, you'll check it out.
When I was a kid, I spent a lot of time in the library. While I enjoyed reading all kinds of books, I especially liked reading biographies. And one of my favorite subjects was Amelia Earhart.
...now and then women should do for themselves what men have already done - occasionally what men have not done--thereby establishing themselves as persons, and perhaps encouraging other women toward greater independence of thought and action. Some such consideration was a contributing reason for my wanting to do what I so much wanted to do.
I was fascinated at her bravery, her determination, her verve. At the time, I didn't like to spend the night away from home, so her ability to fly solo off into the nearly-unknown made me a bit weak in the knees. And the thought of her crashing onto a remote island (or worse, into the ocean), was almost too much for me to bear thinking about.
One of my favorite phobias is that girls, especially those whose tastes aren't routine, often don't get a fair break... It has come down through the generations, an inheritance of age-old customs which produced the corollary that women are bred to timidity.
As I grew older, and learned even more about her life, I was even more impressed. And inspired. She was a true trailblazer. I like to imagine what kind of spirit was required to break so many records and turn social convention on its head like she did, repeatedly. She knew she was making a path for other women to follow in. How did that affect her? She was born before World War I. Before the Wright brothers had completed their first flight. Before women could vote. What an exciting time that must have been!
My ambition is to have this wonderful gift produce practical results for the future of commercial flying and for the women who may want to fly tomorrow's planes.
I can't help but wonder what would she have gone on to do with her life, had she been successful on her last voyage. Would she have truly retired into private life? Would she have continued to be an advocate for women in flight? Would she have come up with a brilliant new passion to follow?
We'll never know for sure, of course. But it's comforting to me to know that these many years later, she is still an evocative figure.
