... presented as exemplars of a scientific variety of mainstream masculinity
... and those scientists probably often are viewed as geniuses with
rare gifts and completely original thoughts.
Such views about 'geniuses' justify authority and inequality, while denying actual interpersonal ties with societies (given, for example,. unrecognized discussions with co-workers that, in some cases, would contribute to a scientific discovery)
The mural is about a scientist who contributed to discovering insulin (with a helper who is included in the painting);
but I'm highlighting the mural because of what it conveys about science, gender, men, and liberal individualism.
See the comments below for additional remarks.
I'll highlight this part of what I had said down there -
"Those figures and that chemical obviously could be presented in a variety of different ways in other paintings. (Perhaps another painter could show Banting with apparent emotions and apparent friendships, for instance). But in this case, the painter or painters happened to stick to common stereotypes, and it's those stereotypes -- rather than Banting, Best, and insulin -- that I was commenting on. Similar points could be made about representations of other scientists -- given stereotypical depictions of them. (How often do we see an Einstein actually talking with other people, for instance? Instead, we're supposed to believe that all sorts of insights came out of his totally independent brain -- alone.)
I don't have anything against Banting, Best, or insulin per se, and I haven't said anything to that effect. "
Here's another Flickr post about issues like these -
"An 'important' authority"
Here's another photo of the same mural about science -
(The weather was brighter that day; so I could get a better shot.)