Here's a version without the bad crop, comedy homicide, pointless circle around the punchline, and puritanical censoring
63 1 Replythanks
6 0 Reply
In his essay "To Tell a Chemist" (1965), Asimov proposed a simple shibboleth for distinguishing chemists from non-chemists: ask the person to read the word "unionized". Chemists, he noted, will read un-ionized (electrically neutral), while non-chemists will read union-ized (belonging to a trade union).
16 0 ReplyGood luck finding the chemistry teacher, though.
9 0 ReplyAs a leftist chemistry teacher, I read it as "having attained union", rather than "not ionized", so YMMV with this heuristic
ETA: (also, yeah, I have excellent job security until all public schools are abolished in the US)
6 0 Reply
My initial thought was "would chemists theoretically be less into labor protections than plumbers"?
I guess that puts me in a third bucket.
10 0 ReplyAm a chemist in your group. I read it the plumber way too. Took me several seconds to get it.
4 0 Reply
Ah, because of the ions.
Took me eons.
14 0 ReplyOnionized
15 0 ReplyIf you don't think about it very hard, solidarity is basically macro ionization
20 0 ReplyWhat about ChemE then? They're both. Sort of. Okay maybe they're not chemists, but... chemistry-adjacent.
4 0 Reply