Remember Winnie Cooper from The Wonder Years, Kevin Arnold’s first love and ultimate crush? Danica McKellar, the actress whom we all wished to end up with our hero, Fred Savage, grew up to be a mathematician! She graduated summa cum laude from UCLA with a degree in mathematics and even co-authored a theorem that bears her name. As an actress, she made the experience of falling in love as a kid relatable to millions. Now she aims to guide a new generation through a different part of growing up: middle school math class. She’s written three books, Math Doesn’t Suck: How to Survive Middle School Math without Losing Your Mind or Breaking a Nail, Kiss My Math: Showing Pre-Algebra Who’s Boss, and Hot X: Algebra Exposed! 
Going from child actor to math book author is rare enough, and McKellar has gotten a lot of attention, notably with a racy photo shoot in Maxim magazine (accompanied by an article about her books and the coolness of math). In an interview with Salon.com, she offers, “Most of the images that girls are getting of what is attractive are so limiting. And that's what I want to fight against.” That’s great!
I think there’s a lot of potential for good here, but is it appropriate for educators to conflate attractiveness with math ability? And what exactly is she advocating, a bait and switch? She seems to be going on the assumption that math isn’t cool enough on its own, but we can coerce students into liking it, like offering them chocolate-covered vitamins. The books have increasingly racy titles. I also have a gripe that the books argue, “If you are good at math, then you are attractive.” (Conceding there is no accounting for taste, I’ll argue that there is no shortage of counterexamples here.)
I’d like to continue this argument mathematically by offering the following two statements. (Please note that the arguments are, in general, centered on girls.)
A: You are good at math.
0 Comments on Girls, Math, and Image as of 1/1/1900
Add a Comment
I think there’s a lot of potential for good here, but is it appropriate for educators to conflate attractiveness with math ability? And what exactly is she advocating, a bait and switch? She seems to be going on the assumption that math isn’t cool enough on its own, but we can coerce students into liking it, like offering them chocolate-covered vitamins. The books have increasingly racy titles. I also have a gripe that the books argue, “If you are good at math, then you are attractive.” (Conceding there is no accounting for taste, I’ll argue that there is no shortage of counterexamples here.)
I’d like to continue this argument mathematically by offering the following two statements. (Please note that the arguments are, in general, centered on girls.)
A: You are good at math.
0 Comments on Girls, Math, and Image as of 1/1/1900