3 ms·
> Imagine if female teachers put up Chippendale’s posters in the classroom Isn’t it more like if female researchers used the cropped head-only photo of a Chipp
by pfannkuchen 3y ago
> Imagine if female teachers put up Chippendale’s posters in the classroom
Isn’t it more like if female researchers used the cropped head-only photo of a Chippendale’s guy in an image processing paper?
Shifting it to an “interfacing with an authority figure for children” role is not really fair IMO, as I think that is why most would find it distasteful.
- dahart 3y agoThe situation isn’t being shifted to interfacing with an authority figure for children. That’s what it already was! Maybe not primarily, but don’t miss the very point that research is setting an example and it percolates widely outside of college journals into textbooks, onto the internet, into videos, into work, and into homes. The movement is centered on the simple idea that we need to take the fact that we’re setting examples for young women and young men alike slightly more seriously.
- George83728 3y ago> The situation isn’t being shifted Really? Then what male researchers were hanging posters of Lena in classrooms?
- dahart 3y agoWhat do you mean? Lena is one of the single most-used images in computer vision, it’s been on literally hundreds of posters, in papers, textbooks, conferences, online. The Wikipedia article talks about it being used in college and high school classrooms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna
- cubefox 3y agoI'm pretty sure it was to 99% used in research papers.
- pfannkuchen 3y agoI’m pretty sure the reason why people are against the image being used is that <insert field here> (image processing in this case) used to be a male dominated field, and the use of an arguably contextually misogynistic image could make female researchers in the field uncomfortable and/or less included, etc. I really don’t think setting an example for children has anything to do with it.
- dahart 3y agoYour summary is accurate, I agree with it, though the question of whether Playboy is “arguably” contextually misogynistic isn’t really even up for debate, it’s a well known fact that lots of women (and men) have repeatedly pointed out for decades. The issue with Lena is more than the potential that it could make female researchers uncomfortable, it actually did, and some of them were kind enough to let people know, and ask politely to consider more carefully what that makes the field of research look like to outsiders, and whether it is truly inclusive for women if we demand the right to keep using a pinup in research and act incredulous if anyone doesn’t like it. That makes us seem immature. I don’t know what you mean by “children” or what you’re reacting to exactly, since I didn’t make any specific claims about children, but where is the line? Do you consider female high school students or college students to be children? (I’m old enough that I do.) The movement to stop using Lena is about having the entire field of computer vision set a better example all around, for young people and adults, for men and women. There is a particular emphasis on what using Lena in research looks like to high school and college women because we have a history of accidentally excluding women from tech, and high school & college are the times when kids really decide what they want to do, right?
- pfannkuchen 3y ago> I don’t know what you mean by “children” or what you’re reacting to exactly, since I didn’t make any specific claims about children I’m reacting to this: “Imagine if female teachers put up Chippendale’s posters in the classroom, or nurses put them in the hospital, and argued that anyone who complained was just being PC police and unreasonably sensitive” I don’t have a strong position on Lena elimination, I just think that comparing the situation to teachers or nurses hanging up an explicit or sex-related poster is ridiculous. I brought up children because I think the reason why teachers or nurses hanging up posters like that is obviously offensive is that those are professions which have a large and direct day to day exposure in-person to children. Image processing researchers do not share this trait, so the comparison is invalid IMO. If you said the same about, say, mechanics or factory workers, professions without direct exposure to children, I don’t think it would be as obviously offensive. > we demand the right to keep using a pinup in research It isn’t itself a pinup, it looks like a still from a regular film and the image itself isn’t explicit at all. I think calling it a “pinup in research” is an exaggeration. The fact that it is actually from Playboy is sort of an in-joke in the field, since I don’t think anyone naively looking at the image would think that (I certainly didn’t when I first saw it). > we have a history of accidentally excluding women from tech Do you honestly believe that things like Lena have a significant effect here? I think women’s perception of tech being a place for men is primarily influenced by it being, in fact, full of men. Spending time on matters like this is counterproductive because it makes people working to improve equality in the field seem petty. > Do you consider female… college students to be children? Absolutely not, and I find the idea insulting to female college students. Women having children at that age is accepted in our society, so I have no idea how they could themselves be considered children without seriously altering the functional definition of the word child.