Exciting things to come!

I haven't written a blog post in almost a month which is very unlike me, so I thought I would update you on what is happening in my bubble.

I've got some really exciting events coming up, thanks to Fran at Social Sheffield. - We're going to TedX Sheffield where there are going to be some amazing speakers (I've already been researching and googling them), then the week after I'm attending an event here in Sheffield called 'Celebrating Modern Feminism' hosted by Laura Bates, who is the founder of the Everyday Sexism Project. Fingers crossed that because we have press passes, we may get to do a quick interview with her. (It's a feminists dream!).

Also coming up is the Stemettes Hackathon this weekend, which I am volunteering at. I got a press pass for the event, but the Stemettes kindly Dm'ed me on Twitter and asked me if I want to volunteer as well, which is lovely of them. I'm excited to throw myself into the world of code, it'll be fun to learn something new!

Uni wise, revision has begun.

I REPEAT. REVISION HAS BEGUN. 

It's that time already. I feel as if I've been back for five minutes but it's only 2 months until exams and this year I'm determined to ace them. I can do it! :-)

ScienceGrrl: Science is for Everyone

On the 8th October, I went along to the Arts Tower at the University of Sheffield to attend the first inaugural lecture titled 'Science is for Everyone' by ScienceGrrl's Sheffield branch. 

The lecture began with Jen Lewis (founder of ScienceGrrl Sheffield) asking people to picture a typical scientist and engineer, something I have written about before here. Jen then showed a picture of Ada Lovelace and asked the audience if anyone knew who she was. It's safe to say that not many people did (or they were being extremely shy!). The lecture itself was arranged to coincide with Ada Lovelace day on 14th October, which is a celebration of the achievements of women in science. Ada is often associated with being the worlds first computer programmer after sketching out programs and plans for something called the 'Analytical Engine', which was essentially an early version of the modern computer.

Ada Lovelace Day - 14th October

Next up was the main speaker of the evening, Professor Elena Rodriguez-Falcon, a Mechanical Engineer and Enterprise Educator at the University of Sheffield. She told us her story and how she became involved in the field of engineering. Elena is originally from Mexico, where she studied. There she met a new friend who had a disabled brother. Elena was astounded at the way his family had made a hand-brace for him. This was engineering. She was determined to help disabled people complete day to day activities and she discovered she could do this through engineering. 'Everything is enabled by science and engineering' and so these pathways make just as much difference to people's lives as medicine can. 

Professor Rodriguez-Falcon has spent her career dedicated to helping those with a disability through her knowledge of engineering. Someone with a 'disability' may not just be someone who was born with a physical/mental disability, as she explained that we all become disabled in one way or another as we age. She showed that the number of elderly people with a physical disability will be 50% of the population by 2020. As our strength and dexterity deteriorate as we get older, it becomes harder to do day to day chores and clever engineering solutions are the way to overcome this. Elena's talk was incredibly inspiring and it was extremely helpful of her to give an insight into what you can do with engineering and how helpful it can actually be to people. When you say the word 'engineering' people often think of cars or aeroplanes and vehicles, but actually it is so much more than that and the career possibilities you can get from engineering are endless. 

We then heard from some PhD students from the University, all ScienceGrrls and hence involved in STEM subjects. They were kind enough to talk us through their research and all four of them were involved in entirely different fields:

• Firstly we heard about the subject of Bone Regeneration and the engineering behind aiding the recovery of broken bones through inserting a material between the gaps in the broken bone to speed up recovery. 

• The second short talk was on Additive Manufacturing, or 3D printing as we all know it. The technology behind 3D printing is extremely cool, not only because you can make a 3D replica of your own face (really!), but really thin slices of material in any shape needed can be produced by the printer. This is very useful for the Medical, Automotive and Consumer Industries. 

• We then heard from Priya, a member of Sheffield's NeuroGirls, who was researching Vasomotion and the dilation and constriction of arteries in the body. She told us that vasomotion is extremely useful in medicine as it can help predict whether a patient is developing a disease, before the disease is actually apparent. 

• Lastly, we heard from another ScienceGrrl, Steph, who began as a chemist who was interested in environmental chemistry and is now an environmental engineer studying groundwater and the microbiology to clean up groundwater after petrol leaks. I found her talk most interesting as I think I could relate to it most, however all of the girls were absolutely amazing and so passionate about their fields and projects. 

At the end of the lecture, there was time for questions:

The first question asked Professor Rodriguez how she decided what kind of engineering she wanted to study. Elena replied that she didn't actually know what career she wanted, so she chose mechanical engineering as it is a very broad field and she decided it would be best for her as she could specialise later if she wanted to. Some of the other ScienceGrrls also said this and some said they 'fell' in to engineering; it wasn't their initital career plan but they discovered that they really enjoyed finding practical solutions to problems faced in the world. 

Following questions discussed the gender imbalance in engineering subjects at University and in Industry. Elena was quick to reassure people that she had never experienced discrimination even whilst working at a company where she was the only woman amongst 200 men. She said that the actual problem is not the vast number of boys in STEM, but the number of girls not taking STEM subjects. 

'That's not to say we're not awesome.

 We are brilliant!' 

- Professor Elena Rodriguez-Falcon on the lack of women in engineering

I had the most enjoyable evening at the lecture and I hope it inspired all of the younger people in there to study STEM at University. It was really good to see people of different ages and there were more boys there than I expected there to be, which was amazing to see. I really hope ScienceGrrl Sheffield hold more events like this at the Uni. I'd like to thank them all for giving up their time to share their knowledge and passion with us. You're an inspiration. 

Difficult Decisions

When I first applied for University, I wanted to do a year in Industry as I thought this would help improve my employability prospects and make me stand out. I'm now in my second year and have been preparing to send applications to companies etc. However, no matter hard I try, I can't quite find it in me to send them. It has been overwhelming (and not in a good way).

In the last few days, something has dawned on me. I'm not cut out for this and it's just not for me. This has knocked me sideways as I've always been the kind of student who has 'succeeded' at everything and given things a try even if I didn't really want to because I knew it would be good for me in the long run. Now this has come along and a multitude of factors is making me dread my year in Industry. Recently my mental health hasn't been tip-top so I'm really worried about spending a year alone in a random place with no one to go home to cry to (really). Also, I've realised that I actually kind of don't want to do this. It's an entire year of my life that I will be spending doing research and development or some other activity. A year is a long time and seeing as I'm unsure whether I want to do it right now, what happens if I have to spend an entire year there and I hate it? 

I'm still really confused as to whether I should move 'down' on to the straight MChem course and so I've written some lists of pros and cons:

Pros of staying on the Industry course

• Return to Uni in fourth year with more lab experience
• Be more employable
• A year free of exams 
• It looks good on my CV

Cons of staying on the Industry course

• I don't really want to do it
• My mental health isn't that great at the moment
• The stress of actually applying
• Having to complete uni modules whilst working 9-5 at a company

Looking at these lists it's almost clear to me what decision to make, however being told I can 'move down' to the straight MChem course is something that I don't like to hear. People treat it like I would be taking a step backwards and be less of a successful scientist and I don't know if I can take that idea, as I've always been the kind of student who has been good. I've always been the best, and I don't quite know how to cope with not being the best and not succeeding at something. I can't quite grasp the idea that maybe this course is not for me, because I've never experienced that before and I suppose I'd feel a bit like a failure.


Any advice is appreciated, as I'm sure you'll guess, I'm a little clueless.

New Adventures

I have exciting news. From now on I will still try to blog regularly, however I have new ventures that I am about to embark upon.

I recently met the Creative Director of an organisation called Social Sheffield. After being spotted on twitter, I was asked to meet up with them to discuss how they could support my aims and passions. Social Sheffield have their own site, where they advertise events and activities going on in the Sheffield area. They also support restaurants, bars etc and have Food, Culture and Music twitter accounts covering all kinds of entertainment and events. Recently, they have been wanting to set up an Education section, where educational activities can be posted in the hope that the people of Sheffield will be more drawn in to going to these kind of events. Anyway, I met up with Social Sheffield and I will now be tweeting from their Education account as well as my own personal account. They have offered to let me be their Education Editor and hopefully in due course I will be able to write articles for their online magazine which is currently under maintenance. 

It's all very exciting and has happened so quickly. I can only hope that I'm good at it and who knows where this could lead? :-)

My Social Sheffield Twitter

The Social Sheffield Twitter

What's it like to be in the Lab?

With so many people starting University soon I thought I would share what a typical day at Uni is like for me. Recently quite a few people have asked me 'What do you actually do, Gina?' So here, I'll talk you through what happens in a first year lab.

With no thanks to popular culture, people often think that as chemists we make a lot of meth. That's only partially true*. Being in the lab is nothing like cooking with Walt, although the technicians are just as fixated on health and safety as him. That's the first thing you learn, before you're even allowed anywhere near the lab is health and safety. *Cue 10 year old Powerpoint with images of horrific scarring*. Being in the lab is dangerous and potentially lethal, which kind of makes it fun, but let's face it, no one wants to be stripped and put under the emergency shower in the corner of the room. 

Preparation for labs can be quite dull with quizzes and questions to answer and research to do, however they're really valuable and I can't imagine going into the lab not knowing what to do, especially because my first year lab teacher was incredibly intimidating when he wanted to be. 

In first year, our lab sessions began at 10.00am and finished at 4.00pm, which seems like a really long time to be stood in the same room, however as soon as you begin a science degree you learn that nothing in science is ever 'quick'. Experiments are time-consuming and sometimes there is nothing to do but wait around for the rotary evaporator to finish, but in general those six hours were spent rushed off our feet. Usually, there is something that can be done. I've discovered that organic labs are possibly the worst simply because there is so much to do in such a short space of time, however the write-ups are fairly easy and vice-versa with physical chemistry labs. 

Setting up glassware and finding missing glassware occupies the first ten minutes of labs, you learn that people never put things back in the right place. In my first year we got a lab manual which had instructions, we simply had to follow these instructions and were expected to think about the chemistry behind the experiment and why we were doing it. Labs always link to something you're learning or will learn so having the practical application of what you're taught in lectures helps you learn and improve your skills. We have PhD students who help us with the experiments and give us advice. A lot of time is spent talking to them in the hope that they pass their wisdom onto you; they're like majestic chemistry unicorns, always there to save the day. 

Undergraduate labs are so different to being at school, you get to play around with loads of cool new equipment and machines, things you'd previously never heard of and are worth thousands of pounds. Learning to use a rotary evaporator is one of those skills that once you've mastered you feel like a proper chemist. IF YOU CAN USE A ROTARY EVAPORATOR, YOU CAN DO ANYTHING. Well, you feel that way. It's just fun to learn how to use equipment you'd previously only seen on TV. Also, there's always a sense of panic in the room when you're using a dangerous chemical for the first time. It's thrilling yet terrifying to know that you are handling something that has the power to kill you and when you use it successfully without killing anyone you feel a great sense of achievement. I was absolutely terrified the first time I used chlorine gas in the lab, but I've learnt that handling potential dangerous gases and compounds is all part of being a competent chemist. Plus I love going home to my flatmates and telling them that I worked with a chemical warfare agent. 

Here's my tips/advice if you're starting a Uni course that involves labs:

1. Always wear safety glasses or you will get shouted at.
2. Don't worry about getting your lab coat dirty, you look more experienced if it's covered in substances. Although you probably should wash it at some point.
3. Make use of PhD students/Older students/Technicians, they know lots of valuable stuff, and sometimes they might tell you the answer ;)
4. Your feet WILL ache after standing up for so long. After a lab go home, put your pyjamas on, make a cup of tea and mentally recover from what's just happened to you. 

Also useful is my Surviving the First year of Uni post I wrote a while ago. 

*I'm joking, obviously.

Preconceptions of a Scientist

Whenever people ask me what I study at University and I tell them I'm a chemistry student, I usually get responses along the lines of:

 'Wow, you must be really intelligent!' or 'Ooh, aren't you a clever girl?', (which is possibly the most patronising comment ever).

My own personal favourite is 'Oh, but you're so pretty!', simply because it's unrelated to my field and I still can't figure out whether it's a compliment or an insult.

I've recently discussed what people perceive scientists to 'look like', however my experience has told me that these preconceptions of scientists are much more complex than simply appearance. I've even had medicine students ask me what I study and when I tell them they respond with something like 'Eww really? Chemistry's so hard. You must be so clever.' I wanted to remind them that they study medicine, the most competitive University course there is. People have this idea that all scientists are genius' (what is the plural of genius?!) and we sit at desks all day scribbling down complex equations. This may be true of some scientists, who are extremely intelligent and probably make the rest of us look a little dim, however we're not all Einstein and I think this is where the preconceived idea comes from. Einstein is the most well known scientist on Earth and probably the first person people think of when they imagine a scientist. Therefore I think people's thought process is something along the lines of:

Einstein = Scientist, therefore if you are a scientist you must be on the same level as Einstein! Which I know on a personal level isn't true. I am most definitely not a genius. Sure, I have a brain like everyone else, but I am a scientist because I love science and I enjoy it and that is the reason I am good at it. Not because I have an IQ of 1 billion. (Disclaimer: I'm pretty sure you can't have an IQ of 1 billion.)

I think a lot of careers have stereotypes but those of people in STEM subjects are actually quite damaging and I think is one of the reasons there is a lack of women in these fields. Take the 'Big Bang Theory'. It's a funny show and I love it, but when I look at characters like Amy Farrah Fowler, I wonder if I would have chosen a career in science if I had grown up with her character. Probably not. Fortunately I'm lucky enough to know that most female scientists aren't like her at all. Mayim Bialik who plays Amy, is a real representation of a women in science! She's amazing and funny and beautiful with a passion for the subject; she's a true inspiration. However Amy is frumpy, socially awkward and perceived as 'boring'. Maybe I'm taking this too seriously but she really doesn't represent the majority and personally, I don't know anyone like her which makes me wonder where this stereotype comes from.

Yes as scientists,we are a little geeky but we like to have fun as much as anyone else. We love the Universe and the origin of it, we love the Earth, we love the organisms that inhabit the Earth, we love invisible forces the act on you and the atoms and molecules that make up everything. We love the chemicals whizzing around your brain as you're reading this. In general, we love life and the origins of life. How can you possibly say that's boring?

What does a scientist look like?

Whilst reading the latest issue of Chemistry World, a monthly magazine I receive for being a member of the Royal society of Chemistry, I came across an article about Martyn Poliakoff, a professor of Chemistry at the University of Nottingham. He is the foreign secretary of the RSC, meaning he has an influential role in the international business of the Royal Society. Despite this, he is most famous for his insightful and entertaining Youtube videos on the channel 'Periodic Videos'. Poliakoff and his team at Nottingham worked to produce informative videos on every element in the periodic table and have now moved on to even cooler chemistry concepts and experiments such as heating up Creme Eggs (an absolute must-see) and the classic experiment; the Iodine clock.

Heating a creme egg. 

 Professor Poliakoff himself is the epitome of  your 'stereotypical scientist', his wild grey hair and glasses make him the received idea of a scientist we've all come to know. But, as Poliakoff states 'Part of my mission is to show that not all scientists look like me'. Whilst Poliakoff acknowledges his own appearance, he makes viewers aware that there are people out there in the field of science who do not look like him at all. His team at the University of Nottingham comprises of men and women of different backgrounds and ages. It is good that he acknowledges the stereotype and recognises that there needs to be more diversity. His work in Ethiopia has been invaluable in getting more African scientists into the international community and he has said 'My long term vision is that Ethiopian scientists should go to an international conference and nobody should think it surprising'. He is truly an ambassador for diversity.

When you picture a scientist you probably think of an old man with crazy Einstein-like hair and glasses, wearing a white lab coat, not unlike Professor Poliakoff. Whereas if you look at real people who have careers in STEM fields, they come in all shapes and sizes, different ethnic backgrounds and of course, different sexes. I believe that challenging the stereotypical image of a scientist is the one of the most effective ways to introduce more diversity into the fields. If you have this view of what someone in a chosen career path 'should' look like then you are alienating everyone who doesn't look that way. Therefore, girls and ethnic minorities may be less inclined to take up science if they are unable to see how they 'fit in' and if there is no one who they can relate to. The image of a scientist we have all grown up with is an ageing white man, yet first and foremost, a scientist is a person, someone with passion and curiosity. That's it. These preconceptions of what a scientist is, damages the opportunity to diversify the scientific industry. I am glad that there are people like Martyn Poliakoff in the world who want to confront this out of date vision.

I'm a scientist! No grey hair to be seen!

Obviously, I am passionate about getting more girls into STEM subjects and I just wanted to let any girl reading this know that you can be a scientist/engineer/mathematician, regardless of your appearance. Science doesn't care about how you look, it cares about your mind and how you think and your passion for the subject. People shouldn't be scared of following their dreams because they can't relate to the image of what they should be. There are so many fabulous female scientists and organisations, such as the Stemettes, who promote diversity and gender equality in the field, so why are we still stuck on this grey haired character who is so obsolete in today's society? The days of balding men in suits sat round a table discussing gravity is long gone. It's time to make way for a new 'face of science', one that represents all cultures and backgrounds.

Planetariums, Stars and Spacecraft..

In today's society, we spend a significant proportion of our lives staring at television and computer screens trying to keep up with the world. By doing this we often forget to look at our own planet, especially the sky. If you're new to physics and all this space-y stuff (as I am), then a planetarium is a great way to explore the skies and learn about the feats of mankind in exploring the planets, whilst remaining warm.

I was lucky enough to visit two planetariums whilst on a recent trip to Newcastle and both were equally fabulous. First, I visited the Centre for Life which I have mentioned in a previous blog post, where I watched a short film titled 'Back to the Moon for Good'. The film faded in to millions of stars and you felt like you were floating in outer space, miles away from civilisation. Amazing graphics took you on a journey through the cosmos and told you the story of the first moon landing and why no one has been back since.

Google Lunar XPRIZE

Debts and austerity mean days of exploring planets are the last thing on governments minds as obviously getting to the moon isn't the most cost-effective enterprise. However, the Google Lunar XPrize, initiates the  race to the moon once again. 33 teams from all over the world must build a spacecraft which can successfully land on the moon, travel 500 metres across the surface and send images back to Earth. The best part? The teams expenses must be no more than 10% government funded, meaning getting to the moon on a budget! Who knows, one of these teams may revolutionise rocket building as we know it and design a cheaper way of sending spacecraft into orbit, meaning more missions could take place. Exciting stuff. The deadline of the competition is December 31st 2015 which really isn't that far away. It's brilliant that people from all over the world can have a go at sending something they have designed themselves into the skies. Many teams rely on volunteers to aid the success of their project, and it gives a chance for people not originally from the field of physics to get involved. The film showed that one team member was a neuroscientist who compared the building of a rocket to the human brain and all the processes that go on are delicately intertwined. I cannot convey how much it made me want to be a physicist (and this is coming from a chemist). The winning team will receive the grand prize of  $20 million and I imagine will go down in history. Since watching the film, I've been reading a lot about the respective teams and all of them have chosen different ways of approaching the challenge and comprise of different scientists and engineers from different fields; it's truly inspiring.

Whilst also in the North-East, I visited the Great North museum, previously the Hancock, which also blew me away with it's planetarium. You have to pay for the planetarium at this venue, but it's not expensive at all. I paid £1.95 for a film titled 'Dawn of the Space Age' which was around 40 minutes long. Not bad at all, and totally worth it! In 'Dawn of the Space Age' you relive space exploration, starting from the first time an artificial satellite was launched, through the space race where the Soviet Union and the USA battled to see who could get into space first. The Soviets won with the launch of Sputnik 1 in October 1957, and the battle continued to outdo each other, resulting in the USA's Apollo 11 landing in 1969, whereby the first humans set foot on the moon. As someone who has only recently developed an interest in space and doesn't really know much about space travel, it was enlightening and entertaining to be taken through the growth and advancements of spacecraft through the ages. Being the feminist that I am, I only have one issue with the film and that was that much emphasis was placed on the first man on the moon, but not on the first woman in space. Valentina Tereshkova was the first woman in space and was on board the Soviet's 'Vostok 6' which launched 16th June 1963. The Great North has many other planetarium shows available to watch and I thoroughly recommend visiting any planetarium. Learning about space is fascinating and opens up so many questions that you want to find the answers to. It's great if you're an inquisitive individual.

My love for Science museums

During my time in Newcastle, the most outstanding place I have visited has been the Centre for Life. Situated in Times Square, Newcastle upon Tyne the centre attracts around 250,000 visitors a year and is the 'largest provider of school science workshops in Europe'.

Curiosity Zone

The centre provides all sorts of activities including the 'Curiosity Zone' where science activities are provided to children, along with instructions' (sometimes) but the actual aim of the activity is not given. The curiosity zone aims to replicate research and development and compares research to a 'formal sort of play'. I fully agree, as all scientific research involves some playing around with concepts or reactants; the path is never straightforward and and the target almost never met first time around. I really loved the idea of leaving children to make what they wanted of the equipment provided and explore it for themselves without an adult telling them what they should be doing. Each child approached activities in a different way and had different ideas of what they 'should' do or what the equipment was used for. It's a great way to inspire budding scientists and give children an opportunity to 'think like a scientist'.

Some of the activities on offer in the Curiosity zone included 'The Reactable', a table where you can create sound using programmed shapes. The sound can then be adjusted by placing other shapes next to those already laid on the table, as the pucks interact with each other. Hence by using the process of placing shapes carefully and adjusting and fine-tuning the sounds you want, you can create a digital musical masterpiece. The Reactable aims to encourage creativity and curiosity and all in all is fun to play around with. 

 A video of me dancing to our own musical masterpiece. I have some seriously groovy dance moves going on that I sincerely apologise for. 

When I first got there I was already extremely excited, but my excitement got taken to a whole new level when I saw that one of the exhibitions on show was 'BODY WORLDS vital', which is an exhibition by Dr. Gunther von Hagens, using real human bodies. Dr von Hagens invented the technique of plastination in 1977 whilst working as an anatomist in Germany and the exhibition is approved by the Human Tissue Authority. To see real human bodies and the amazing things they are capable of is truly fascinating. Real people may donate their bodies to plastinated after they pass away and although this may seem a little grim, the result is a display of amazing exhibits informing the audience of how the human body works and how to live a healthy lifestyle. Samples of healthy lungs compared to those with emphysema and lung cancer can be seen and it's shocking to see how much damage you are capable of doing to your body. Although a lot of people are initially unsure about the exhibition, it is there to spread a good message about the importance of life. Of course photographs are not allowed to be taken inside the exhibition, after all these are people's bodies and must be respected, so I took a picture of the poster instead.

I also visited the centres Planetarium, however I'll leave this for the next blog post as I've been fortunate enough to visit two planetariums in two days, so I'll leave the awesome space stuff for later. :-)

 Centre for Life

North-East Adventures

Kielder Water

So I'm currently sat in my boyfriend's bedroom in Wallsend after the most incredible week of sightseeing and new experiences, and I still have another five days here. I went camping for the first time, which was fab and the toilet block had Dyson Airblades which I'm a huge fan of and I imagine it's rare for a campsite to have such luxurious hand-drying facilities. If anyone wishes to visit said campsite with fabulous toilets I'll leave the link below. We camped just outside of Bellingham (which I learnt is NOT pronounced Belling-ham) at Boe Rigg campsite. The area is amazing, there's so many beautiful sites to see, including Kielder Water and Forest Park. Being the science fanatic I am, I of course wanted to visit the observatory but unfortunately all events were fully booked. I will visit one day when the skies are clear. :-)

If you're a fan of conservation and wildlife, there are many species that can only be seen in this part of the country, including red squirrels.  Kielder is home to 50% of the native red squirrel population and much information can be found about the conservation work being done to protect this beautiful species. Also to be seen are Ospreys, some of the most fascinating birds of prey.

Discovery Museum

Yesterday I visited the Discovery Museum in Newcastle, the first science museum in Britain to be built outside of London. The place is vast with so much to 'discover', literally; I could have spent all day in there. There is an exhibit which takes you through the history of the Newcastle, from the Romans building Pons Aelius to the modern day. Of course, my personal favourite was the science maze. The maze takes you through the basics and fundamental concepts of science including: forces, how sound travels, electricity, and light and vision just to name a few. There are activities to try throughout the maze such as a ball game involving magnets and seeing how much electricity you can generate simply by completing a circuit using your hands and how the voltage increases when your hands are moist. It's a brilliant way for young people to gain  an interest in science; there were so many little children bewildered by making their own circuits and standing in front a kaleidoscope mirror. It's lovely to know that this brilliant exhibition might inspire one of these young children to take up science. The gift shop is also filled with sciencey goodness, I especially wanted the crystal growing kit. :-)

I still have to visit the Centre for Life and the Great North Museum amongst other things, so I'll write a little review of those next week.

Boe Rigg campsite

Kielder Water and Forest Park

and for any astronomy enthusiasts: Kielder Observatory

Discovery Museum

Being a girl.

As a girl, from the very first moment that you begin to walk and talk you are bombarded with images of what you are supposed to be. Toys, clothes, everything is pink. Possibly the sickliest colour known to man dominates our life and choices, even as a child. If you've ever been to 'Toys R Us', you will completely understand what I am about to say. From the moment you step into the shop, you immediately know which are the 'girls' toys and which are the boys. The shop is split into two distinct colours; one aisle bright pink, the next blue. As you wander down the 'girls' aisle it's easy to understand why girls as young as five worry about their weight [1] as stick-thin dolls line the shelves in provocative clothing.

Although these toys are not labelled as being for  'girls' or 'boys' it's easy to understand where the stance of the companies that make these toys lie. The simple message is 'Girls, if it's not pink you shouldn't be playing with it.' and for a child, that is an incredibly confusing concept. Why should your choice of toy depend on the colour of it? And since when did being a girl mean you were attracted to all things shiny and sparkly? They're girls, not magpies. To look into this I went on the 'Toys R Us' website to look at the marketing used to ploy young children and make them make choices that aren't really their own.

I thought looking at the 'dress-up costumes' might give me an idea of the gender stereotypes placed on children, and they did. This image shows a 'boys' pirate costume placed directly above a 'girls' wedding dress. I believe that these gender stereotypes effect both boys and girls, however in this case I think it's much more damaging to girls. I couldn't find one 'girls' dress-up costume of a builder or a scientist or a police officer, but there were plenty of wedding and princess dresses. Not only does it limit the roles girls think they can play, but I know first hand that if you're the kind of girl that isn't into this stuff, it makes you feel like an outcast. I went to a fancy-dress party when I was about seven where all the girls went as Disney princesses/Angels/Mermaids and I went as Lara Croft. I loved it but everyone else just thought I was a weird kid dressed all in black and wielding toy guns, including the parents who found it quite amusing and made comments about my choice of costume. This amongst other things was damaging to myself esteem.

This was the next thing I found which sparked interest. Why does the 'boy' get to wear the army costume whilst the girls wear tiaras and play with a Disney Princess kitchen. Really. A DISNEY PRINCESS KITCHEN. My seven year old self would much have preferred the army costume, but again the message is that danger and adventure are for boys and girls can um, stay in the kitchen like the good little princesses they are. There were so many other toys I found that restricted boys and girls to gender stereotypes and conveyed the message that pink is girly and not for boys. Since when can you make toys masculine or feminine? They're pieces of plastic designed to be played with, but they are capable of sending out such damaging messages. 

This video was made by 'PinkStinks', a campaign with the objective to raise awareness of the stereotyping that goes on in the designing and manufacturing of children's toys. They believe both boys and girls are at risk of the stereotyping and this may limit their future career and life decisions. Their intention is to reverse the 'pinkification' of toys and girlhood and promote positive body-image and self-esteem for young girls.  Although this video is a couple of years old now, I think it's still very much relevant today. From my own personal experience, I don't believe that marketing the shiny pink plastics toys to girls and gearing them away from science and engineering has gotten any better. In fact, I believe it's worsened as we're continually becoming more obsessed with the way women look and the roles they play in society, which impacts young girls greatly. The more focus we put on how girls look, the more we drive the same young girls away from anything that could be seen as masculine. The challenge of removing these gender stereotypes is key to increase girls confidence, get more girls into fields of work where women are vastly under represented and instil a confidence in girls whereby they have dreams and aspirations, but not just to be a princess.

There's more than one way to be a girl

[1] APPG on body image.

Science and the education system.

For a while now, people have been talking about why there aren't many girls taking the sciences at A-level, especially physics. I sometimes think that I regret not taking physics at A-level as it's a subject I really enjoy now and it would have helped me hugely during my first year of University. However, the more I think about it, I realise that I didn't choose physics because physics A-level looks extremely boring. I'm not saying that physics is boring; I find it fascinating, especially learning about the origin of the planets and why we're here but at the time of choosing my A-levels, I couldn't think of a more mind-numbing course. I think this opinion can be extended to the majority of the sciences at A-level, as to pass the exams you don't even need to understand key concepts, simply memorise them, throw in some key words and BAM, you've got full marks. Well done you.

Chemistry is obviously my favourite subject, but even I didn't find the syllabus or the way of "learning" during A-level chemistry inspiring at all. Instead of focusing on why certain complexes produce gelatinous precipitates and the chemistry behind this, you simply had to remember to write down the word 'gelatinous' in the exam and you would be fine. I knew this wasn't learning. Okay, there's always going to be key concepts and words that you need to remember because they're important, but the idea behind science qualifications like this isn't understanding, it's memorisation and that's not what science is about. How are young people and especially girls supposed to pick these A-levels when there are no real-life applications behind them? Simply saying 'This is this, accept it. Oh and remember to write this word in your answer.' is not representative of the problem-solving and creative thinking that many scientists use on a day to day basis. This is why I didn't choose physics at A-level. I really didn't enjoy it as a subject at school because I couldn't relate to it. The only part of physics I enjoyed at school was learning about nuclear fission and radioactive decay as we were given actual examples of this. I think when it comes to science, the way you learn is by hands-on experience, not sitting and memorising. Thankfully, I had a brilliant teacher who actually studied chemistry at Uni (a rarity these days) and hence was really enthusiastic about the subject and always throwing in anecdotes and random facts related to what we were learning. I don't hesitate to say that if it wasn't for him, my love for chemistry probably wouldn't have developed as much as it did.

The way A-levels are taught kind of sets you up for failure when you reach University. All of a sudden you have vast amounts of information thrown at you and you quickly realise that memorising it all will be impossible and that's where I suddenly realised that I didn't know how to learn. Thankfully, there are a lot more practical sessions at Uni and these are what most helped me learn the concepts we were introduced to in lectures. My scores in my lab sessions have been consistently high throughout both semesters, simply because I enjoy them and I get to 'do stuff' whether it be carrying out a recrystallisation or playing around with chlorine gas (I use the word 'playing' loosely. Please don't play with chlorine gas.). All in all, the way A-levels and even GCSEs are taught makes science seem like very boring fields, when actually they are amazing and I can't imagine doing anything other than a science degree.

My favourite females

As you've probably guessed by now, I'm all for getting more girls into STEM subjects and science outreach is something I'm really passionate about. It's obvious that throughout history, women in science and technology have been overlooked and their ideas and achievements not seen as important as those of their male counterparts. Whilst referring to women who happen to be scientists as 'female scientists' doesn't exactly help with striving for equality between the sexes in STEM fields (afterall we don't refer to men as male scientists), there have been some pretty damn good women in science and I thought I would share my favourites.

This is a list of women from STEM fields who inspire me. I've purposely left Marie Curie out of this list because in case you didn't know, she's not the only women who has played a role in pushing science into the 21st century. Also, some of these women are living today and that's just fab; these women are role models for girls like me and inspire me to continue in my field and make a career out of it in the hope that one day, I'll achieve great things too. So here it is, AWESOME WOMEN ALERT.

1. Hedy Lamarr
In my opinion, one of the most beautiful women ever, Hedy Lamarr also happened to be extremely intelligent. She and George Antheil invented an incredibly sophisticated piece of electronic engineering which they called the 'Secret Communication System' whereby frequency hopping was used to prevent infiltration of signals from radio-controlled missiles. Simultaneously, the radio frequencies of  missiles would change, preventing enemies from detecting the signals.

Hedy Lamarr

Most people would say that she 'doesn't look like a scientist', however she proved that it's possible to have beauty and brains. As a woman, you can have it all, you don't have to choose between being intelligent and being attractive.

The woman who was one of the most popular Hollywood actresses of her day also had a room in her house reserved for drafting ideas and the shelves filled with engineering books. I find the fact that she was extremely creative both inspiring and fascinating because as well as being an actress, she also applied her creativity to engineering and problem solving and helped pave the way for modern day technologies mobile phones.

2. Dorothy Hodgkin
Dorothy Hodgkin won the Nobel prize for Chemistry in 1964 and quite rightly so. X-ray crystallography is a common method used by chemists today and Hodgkin advanced this and discovered the 3D structures of some of the  most important biomolecules. I learnt about Dorothy Hodgkin in one of my lectures about medicine and chemistry. She found the structure of penicillin, a chemical so often used in treatment and therefore made a significant contribution to both chemistry and medicine as often in science structure determines function. She also discovered the 3D structure of insulin and also taught students, notably Margaret Roberts (later Margaret Thatcher).

Dorothy Hodgkin

3. Rosalind Franklin

Rosalind Franklin

When people think about discovery of the structure of DNA, most people associate James Watson and Francis Crick with this amazing feat, after all they were awarded with the Nobel prize in 1962. However what allowed them to recognise the 'double helix' as DNA's structure was the x-ray images of DNA produced by Franklin. She practised x-ray crystallography techniques many times and had received a doctorate in physical chemistry. Unfortunately she died before the Nobel prize was awarded to Watson, Crick and Wilkins (another scientist involved)

.







4. Helen Sharman 
I love Helen Sharman. It might be because I'm following in her footsteps by doing the same degree at the same University, but nevertheless, she is truly inspirational. She also deserves to be on this list because she was the first British person in space. What's cooler that being an astronaut?

Helen Sharman

5. Natalie Portman
Okay, so when you think of Natalie Portman, you don't automatically think 'scientist' but this woman has serious brains. As well as being my ultimate woman crush and all round Hollywood beauty, she's been published in scientific journals, as well as a writing a paper titled "A Simple Method to Demonstrate the Enzymatic Production of Hydrogen from Sugar." Basically, I want to be Natalie Portman.