E=mc2 is a "sexed equation". Newton's Principia (a "rape manual")

NYU Dept. Physics ^ | Published in Nature, 9 July 1998, vol. 394, pp. 141-143.] | Richard Dawkins

[Helms]

The feminist 'philosopher' Luce Irigaray is another who gets whole-chapter treatment from Sokal and Bricmont.

In a passage reminiscent of a notorious feminist description of Newton's Principia (a "rape manual"), Irigaray argues that E=mc2 is a "sexed equation".

Why? Because "it privileges the speed of light over other speeds that are vitally necessary to us" (my emphasis of what I am rapidly coming to learn is an 'in' word). Just as typical of this school of thought is Irigaray's thesis on fluid mechanics.

Fluids you see, have been unfairly neglected. "Masculine physics" privileges rigid, solid things.

Her American expositor Katherine Hayles made the mistake of re-expressing Irigaray's thoughts in (comparatively) clear language. For once, we get a reasonably unobstructed look at the emperor and, yes, he has no clothes:

The privileging of solid over fluid mechanics, and indeed the inability of science to deal with turbulent flow at all,

she attributes to the association of fluidity with femininity. Whereas men have sex organs that protrude and become rigid, women have openings that leak menstrual blood and vaginal fluids... From this perspective it is no wonder that science has not been able to arrive at a successful model for turbulence.

The problem of turbulent flow cannot be solved because the conceptions of fluids (and of women) have been formulated so as necessarily to leave unarticulated remainders.

You do not have to be a physicist to smell out the daffy absurdity of this kind of argument (the tone of it has become all too familiar), but it helps to have Sokal and Bricmont on hand to tell us the real reason why turbulent flow is a hard problem: the Navier-Stokes equations are difficult to solve.

[TheBigB]

Uuuhhhh....yeah.

Can you make heads or tails of this one, Prof?

[js1138]

Math is hard. Let's go shopping.

[The G Man]

At first I thought this thread was about the BBC's accusation that Einstein "sexed up" his relativity dossier.

[socal_parrot]

Her action has led to my equal and opposite reaction.

[Alouette]

How many women do you know who have degrees in math?

I know at least one.

[longshadow]

The privileging of solid over fluid mechanics, and indeed the inability of science to deal with turbulent flow at all, she attributes to the association of fluidity with femininity. Whereas men have sex organs that protrude and become rigid, women have openings that leak menstrual blood and vaginal fluids... From this perspective it is no wonder that science has not been able to arrive at a successful model for turbulence.

Gyno-physics ping!

[Diogenesis]

Nobody can be this dumb.
A feminist is an engineer who knows what a convective derivative is with different types of fluid flow.

[dead]

I'll sooner make sense of relativity than of this article.

[billorites]

[Always Right]

Women are turbulent. It is no wonder men don't understand them...Q.E.D.

[Viking2002]

Huh? The laws of physics are 'sexist'? Huh? What?

[Always Right]

Huh? The laws of physics are 'sexist'? Huh? What?

No, Newton just sexed them up...

[Right Wing Professor]

Nothing to make of it. It's lunacy mixed with idiocy, with a little menstrual fluid added for flavor.

(Heh heh; I can hear the ewwwww from here)

It's also typical of the state of 'scholarship' in the humanities these days.

[Diogenesis]

Of course physics rules are sexist. Especially the left-handed (sinister) rules.

[Diogenesis]

Bad news for you. This was from the Dept of Physics.

Probably between their seeking grants to study this nonsense.

[TheBigB]

Ewwwwwww. ;)

Thanks!

[Ronin]

Camille Paglia would b**ch slap this silly ditz.

(Not that there is anything wrong with that, you see...)

[VadeRetro]

Satire? Some kind of a joke, right?

[Diogenesis]

THAT would be very masculine. Better to flood her with a
fire hose. That would be feminine.