So Few Pulsars, So Few Females

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  23 Apr 2004:
Vol. 304, Issue 5670, pp. 489
DOI: 10.1126/science.304.5670.489

eLetters is an online forum for ongoing peer review. Submission of eLetters are open to all. eLetters are not edited, proofread, or indexed.  Please read our Terms of Service before submitting your own eLetter.

Compose eLetter

Plain text

  • Plain text
    No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

  • Quality versus Quantity

    I enjoyed Jocelyn Bell Burnell's Editorial "So Few Pulsars, So Few Females" in the April 23 issue (304, 489, 2004), her descriptions of the excitement of pulsar discoveries, and laboratory hierarchies in the early 1970s. It is discouraging that 30 years later, in the 21st century, the scientific aristocracy is still denying the value of women scientists and their discoveries (1), as evidenced by the fact that there are...

    Show More
    Competing Interests: None declared.

Stay Connected to Science

Navigate This Article