So, we're hosting this meeting again and it's up to me to get invited speakers. Last year, we worked together to figure out who to invite and I sent the emails and stuff. This year, I'm getting input from others, but in the end it's pretty much up to me. The big boss had some suggestions, but he doesn't really know all that many people in the field. My direct boss is much better acquainted with the field, but there are big gaps in his knowledge. I have different gaps. This is how it works when you're involved in interdisciplinary research.
Anyway. I'm disappointed in myself/us, because at this point we only have one woman lined up out of seven speaking slots so far. We asked one who said no. Some of the other usual suspects spoke last year and we don't want to overuse them (we are passing on some men for the same reason). In some cases there is a man we needed to invite for complicated political reasons, which means we passed on a woman who works on a similar topic. I think we'll be inviting on the order of six additional people, and hopefully we find some women in that round of invites. Of course it would be fantastic to get some people from other underrepresented groups too, but I don't even know where to begin with that.
So that's how it comes to pass that even a meeting with a woman in charge can be dominated by men.
Showing posts with label women-in-science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women-in-science. Show all posts
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
Just ask
I just read Kate Clancy's excellent post summarizing the panel to which she contributed at Science Online 2011. The post is awesome, and the comments are great too. I found the discussion of self-promotion by women compared to men particularly interesting. I started the book Women Don't Ask a while back, and although I still haven't finished it, it had a big impact on how I think about getting what I want. For instance, I negotiated for a slightly higher salary than I was offered (although a man probably would have gotten even more), and I feel less guilty than I used to about asking for things at work.
Still, like many of Kate's commentors, I am amazed at things a man will have the nerve to request. One man actually asked to be invited to speak at the meeting we had last year, and so we did! It would never occur to me to do something like that.
My favorite comment there (so far) was this one by Stephanie Meredith:
Still, like many of Kate's commentors, I am amazed at things a man will have the nerve to request. One man actually asked to be invited to speak at the meeting we had last year, and so we did! It would never occur to me to do something like that.
My favorite comment there (so far) was this one by Stephanie Meredith:
For realz.
And now I realize that when a woman hears the message, "You have to self-promote. Don't be afraid to self-promote," she may interpret that in a completely different way from the man who's sitting beside her getting the same pep-talk. Now I realize that I need to ask my male colleagues for specific advice in this area. Now I realize that when a man encourages me to self-promote, I should be asking "How? What would you recommend in this situation? Are there any other things you think I should do?"
Saturday, January 31, 2009
A better world
I missed the February Scientiae deadline, but I'm going to write on the topic anyway. Pat wants to know about our dreams for a better, more equitable society. I have the same visions that many others have -- freedom to have the type of family you want with good, affordable childcare and access to any kind of job with no discrimination. But all of these seem to be symptoms of a larger, more underlying problem of bias and marginalization in our society. We're socialized to fit gender roles that have positives as well as all those negatives. So yeah, to make things better for women, we need to support daycare on site and all that, but to really chip away at the problem, I think we need to change things for men.
I want men to never think twice about doing "women's work". I want domestic jobs, from household chores that are done by its members to paid work like childcare or nursing, to be things men do too. Without anyone thinking anything of it. Without men getting extra credit for making dinner or ironing. And jobs like daycare teacher would be paid more because men would want to do it too.
I think women will have fair shake once they can stop doing two jobs at once. It needs to be totally normal and expected for men to do all the jobs that women do. I don't mean just in your relationship because you have a super supportive partner. I want it to do beyond supportive partners. Even that phrase is suspect; it's like saying "my partner helps me do the things I should be responsible for at home". No. People should be equally responsible.
I think a better, more equitable society is one where it's okay for boys to wear pink (we fight to get girls out of pink, right?), for boys to play with barbies (we fight for girls to play with trucks, right?), for a husband to clean the toilet without thinking he's doing to help out his wife, for hairdressers, lawyers, and professors to be equally valued, whether they are men or women. If there is no men's work and women's work, then there can't be any discrimination related to work. Even science.
scientiae-carnival
Whenever I write about gender stuff, I get a little nervous. I haven't had any training in gender studies but I know many of you have and I worry my ideas are silly. And now new, although they are new to me. But after watching how things work, they're the ideas I have. I guess the blog is pseudonymous for a reason.
I want men to never think twice about doing "women's work". I want domestic jobs, from household chores that are done by its members to paid work like childcare or nursing, to be things men do too. Without anyone thinking anything of it. Without men getting extra credit for making dinner or ironing. And jobs like daycare teacher would be paid more because men would want to do it too.
I think women will have fair shake once they can stop doing two jobs at once. It needs to be totally normal and expected for men to do all the jobs that women do. I don't mean just in your relationship because you have a super supportive partner. I want it to do beyond supportive partners. Even that phrase is suspect; it's like saying "my partner helps me do the things I should be responsible for at home". No. People should be equally responsible.
I think a better, more equitable society is one where it's okay for boys to wear pink (we fight to get girls out of pink, right?), for boys to play with barbies (we fight for girls to play with trucks, right?), for a husband to clean the toilet without thinking he's doing to help out his wife, for hairdressers, lawyers, and professors to be equally valued, whether they are men or women. If there is no men's work and women's work, then there can't be any discrimination related to work. Even science.
scientiae-carnival
Whenever I write about gender stuff, I get a little nervous. I haven't had any training in gender studies but I know many of you have and I worry my ideas are silly. And now new, although they are new to me. But after watching how things work, they're the ideas I have. I guess the blog is pseudonymous for a reason.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Playing the field
I just remarked over at River Tam's place that no one would ever call me mannish. No one would ever think I'd be good at field work, either. I'm petite, just 5'1" (155 cm) with a really slight frame. Field work in my discipline relies on one crucial activity* that is most efficient when the worker has height, mass, and strength on her side. I have none of those qualities, unless you're comparing me to a child.
I hate field work, mostly because I'm just not built for it, or at least not for the key tasks. I almost always need a helper in the field. A few years ago I was engaged in a project that required frequent field efforts that I could not do alone so one of the technicians came with me. He could have done this job on his own but since it was for my PhD, it was my fieldwork and I had to be there, turning a one-person job into a two-person job. It frustrates me that I can't be more self-reliant. I also dislike the one-and-only-chance nature of field work; the conditions today will not be the same as tomorrow or next week, so if you fuck it up, you can never really redo it.
But. Field work takes more than just the brute force tasks. It takes a lot of organization, good judgment, and for some things we do, the ability to stay crouched on the ground for hours on end. I can do those things. So even though I can't do that one crucial task, I can do many of the things that go along with it that are also essential. It's hard to remind myself that I'm useful, even good, in the field without the ability to do the big strong stuff, but I am.
One of the benefits of being in a female-dominated lab is that no one connects my poor aptitude for field work with being a woman. Blame it on being small -- yes, but on being a woman -- no. Research Advisor is a machine in the field, while one of the male PIs is worthless. On the other hand, our one male technician is excellent in the field. Some of the female techs can hold their own, too. It's just not a gender thing.
I'm still last picked for field work that's not for my PhD, but that's partly because everyone knows I hate it and partly because no one is paying me to help with other lab projects (in contrast to the technicians who are paid for that). And who am I kidding, it's still partly because I'm a wimp, but whatever. I'm happy I'm not on the trip to do crappy field work this week, like many of my lab mates are.
*If you're positively dying to know what it is, send me an email.
I hate field work, mostly because I'm just not built for it, or at least not for the key tasks. I almost always need a helper in the field. A few years ago I was engaged in a project that required frequent field efforts that I could not do alone so one of the technicians came with me. He could have done this job on his own but since it was for my PhD, it was my fieldwork and I had to be there, turning a one-person job into a two-person job. It frustrates me that I can't be more self-reliant. I also dislike the one-and-only-chance nature of field work; the conditions today will not be the same as tomorrow or next week, so if you fuck it up, you can never really redo it.
But. Field work takes more than just the brute force tasks. It takes a lot of organization, good judgment, and for some things we do, the ability to stay crouched on the ground for hours on end. I can do those things. So even though I can't do that one crucial task, I can do many of the things that go along with it that are also essential. It's hard to remind myself that I'm useful, even good, in the field without the ability to do the big strong stuff, but I am.
One of the benefits of being in a female-dominated lab is that no one connects my poor aptitude for field work with being a woman. Blame it on being small -- yes, but on being a woman -- no. Research Advisor is a machine in the field, while one of the male PIs is worthless. On the other hand, our one male technician is excellent in the field. Some of the female techs can hold their own, too. It's just not a gender thing.
I'm still last picked for field work that's not for my PhD, but that's partly because everyone knows I hate it and partly because no one is paying me to help with other lab projects (in contrast to the technicians who are paid for that). And who am I kidding, it's still partly because I'm a wimp, but whatever. I'm happy I'm not on the trip to do crappy field work this week, like many of my lab mates are.
*If you're positively dying to know what it is, send me an email.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Is this how it is with women in charge?
First of all, I am very pleased to announce that S4 had a baby boy today. He is her third child and the 14th grandchild in my family. Everyone is happy and healthy. Yay!
Now I'd like to share two observations about life in a female-dominated lab. I've said before that the lab I'm in is something like 70% women. Since I've always been part of very woman heavy labs, I don't have personal experience with which to compare them to male dominated labs. Lately I've been trying to imagine what the little differences might be.
Our lab has several rather sensitive personalities. They aren't cry babies or difficult people, they are people who are always concerned with how their words and behaviors might be perceived by others and who carefully interpret the words and actions of others so as to fully understand their complete meaning and intent. I recently had a chance to work with a wider group of scientists from my institution as part of a new collaborative effort. We were literally working all together at a table for a whole day. As we worked, one of the technicians in my lab asked, "what is this thing?" I answered, "it's an X and it does function Y." She said, "I know it does Y but I didn't know Xs looked like this." I said, "oh, okay." No big deal. The entire exchange took less than a minute. Then the tech added, "Sorry to be short with you" and I replied, "You weren't and I hope I didn't sound condescending". The men at the table were mildly aghast. I think they thought we were walking on eggshells with each other but really it was just a normal interaction, at least among people who are used to sensitive types.
Is this representative of how women interact professionally as a result of socialization or is it because of the particular personalities that have shaped our lab culture?
Next observation. I have said before that I hate pooping (although I think butts are hilarious). It is the worst part of my day. If I have to Go while at work, I try to be as discreet as possible, even timing my bathroom visit when there are no other women in there. There is a man who works in my vicinity who goes to the bathroom every day with reading material tucked under his arm, clearly headed off to take a shit. Ewww. There have been other men at my work who regularly announce their #2 events. I have never heard a woman in our lab group do that.
Again, is this an example of how gender socialization drives lab culture or is it just individual quirks (i.e. that I am grossed out by the idea of anyone at all making #2 and it just happens that none of the women ever announce it in my presence)?
Now I'd like to share two observations about life in a female-dominated lab. I've said before that the lab I'm in is something like 70% women. Since I've always been part of very woman heavy labs, I don't have personal experience with which to compare them to male dominated labs. Lately I've been trying to imagine what the little differences might be.
Our lab has several rather sensitive personalities. They aren't cry babies or difficult people, they are people who are always concerned with how their words and behaviors might be perceived by others and who carefully interpret the words and actions of others so as to fully understand their complete meaning and intent. I recently had a chance to work with a wider group of scientists from my institution as part of a new collaborative effort. We were literally working all together at a table for a whole day. As we worked, one of the technicians in my lab asked, "what is this thing?" I answered, "it's an X and it does function Y." She said, "I know it does Y but I didn't know Xs looked like this." I said, "oh, okay." No big deal. The entire exchange took less than a minute. Then the tech added, "Sorry to be short with you" and I replied, "You weren't and I hope I didn't sound condescending". The men at the table were mildly aghast. I think they thought we were walking on eggshells with each other but really it was just a normal interaction, at least among people who are used to sensitive types.
Is this representative of how women interact professionally as a result of socialization or is it because of the particular personalities that have shaped our lab culture?
Next observation. I have said before that I hate pooping (although I think butts are hilarious). It is the worst part of my day. If I have to Go while at work, I try to be as discreet as possible, even timing my bathroom visit when there are no other women in there. There is a man who works in my vicinity who goes to the bathroom every day with reading material tucked under his arm, clearly headed off to take a shit. Ewww. There have been other men at my work who regularly announce their #2 events. I have never heard a woman in our lab group do that.
Again, is this an example of how gender socialization drives lab culture or is it just individual quirks (i.e. that I am grossed out by the idea of anyone at all making #2 and it just happens that none of the women ever announce it in my presence)?
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Turning tables
I'm really excited about the symposium idea I developed with a friend at Big Meeting. We've had nothing but positive feedback on it, so we're going to move forward and propose the idea for next year's meeting. I'm super jazzed about the idea as well as a little thrilled at the prospect of putting together the session -- having a legit reason to interact with famous scientists, getting additional exposure, etc. Of course, the proposal has to pass review, so our chances aren't outstanding, but just making an attempt will be good for us.
This friend needs a pseudonym. I'll call her...Cauliflower. She is a pretty close colleague despite working several states away. We had the same fellowship that required us to attend yearly workshops so we've been seeing each other annually for that in addition to seeing each other at other conferences. Our advisors collaborate, and now Cauliflower is collaborating with my advisor on a dissertation improvement project that had her staying with me while she worked in our lab for a month. She has graduated now, but she will return again during the winter to finish the project. We do extremely complementary work, so I can see us having a very long-lived collaboration.
Anyway, I had an interesting revelation today. It's possible that every speaker we invite to participate in our symposium could be a woman, without us even trying. We've been brainstorming names for several days, so today I started to make a list to organize our ideas. Almost every candidate is female. Since I don't want to be a hypocrite, I will try for better gender balance in our session. Plus, there are a few men who would make excellent contributions. But still, that's pretty cool, huh?
This friend needs a pseudonym. I'll call her...Cauliflower. She is a pretty close colleague despite working several states away. We had the same fellowship that required us to attend yearly workshops so we've been seeing each other annually for that in addition to seeing each other at other conferences. Our advisors collaborate, and now Cauliflower is collaborating with my advisor on a dissertation improvement project that had her staying with me while she worked in our lab for a month. She has graduated now, but she will return again during the winter to finish the project. We do extremely complementary work, so I can see us having a very long-lived collaboration.
Anyway, I had an interesting revelation today. It's possible that every speaker we invite to participate in our symposium could be a woman, without us even trying. We've been brainstorming names for several days, so today I started to make a list to organize our ideas. Almost every candidate is female. Since I don't want to be a hypocrite, I will try for better gender balance in our session. Plus, there are a few men who would make excellent contributions. But still, that's pretty cool, huh?
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Back
I'm back! Actually, I've been back for a few days but I haven't gotten around to posting because I had so many posts to read. You people are just far too interesting.
So, the meeting was fine. It was an annual workshop that I've attended before, so I didn't get as much out of it this time. The participants were all students, at all levels, in a range of disciplines. Personally, I think the workshop program needs major overhauling in order to meet the very difficult task of providing something valuable to all members of such a wide audience. They ask us to come for an entire week in June, the time when people are finally freed from the classroom to focus on research or need to be working outdoors in the field, so I think we should be able expect to really benefit from the program that takes us away at such a crucial time. The worst part for me was listening to several of the same talks, positively steeped in opinion, that I heard last year. The best part was interacting with the many undergrads who were eager to learn all about grad school, what it's like to do research, and the science everyone is doing. The even better part was that more than 50% of the people there were women, some from very male-dominated fields.
My talk was okay, but not as seamless and interesting as I would have liked. As I was working on it, I realized that I don't have a super good grasp of how the work fits with some of the recent literature. One lab group has published several very nice papers in the last 6 months or so that put forth a new concept substantiated with several lines of observational evidence. I need to study those papers to figure out how my research adds to that body of work rather than simply confirming it. So, that's why my talk last week was so unsatisfying. However, I think I know what I need to do next (before my presentation at the big August meeting).
Since I've been back, I learned that Research Advisor finally started to do a Lab Thing that has been holding me up. She didn't finish it, but we decided I could move on with part of it in the meantime. I'm glad because waiting for her had me suck on two different projects and I was starting to resent it. But before I do any work in that lab space, I have to clean it because someone did Something Bad in it and now I don't trust the integrity of samples processed in it. Poo. On the personal side, yesterday we met a bunch of friends at a festival where I saw 1. a man wearing a black cowboy hat, cowboy boots, and tiny briefs that had "evil" written in glitter across the ass, and nothing else. and 2. a man wearing tiny denim briefs and nothing else. There was also a marching band band that was awesome and seriously, the most openly-affectionate same-sex couples I've ever seen. That was really cool. Today I had grand plans for doing all sorts of housework, work reading, etc., but ALL I've done is read blog posts. Maybe I'll get my ass into gear and at least go to the grocery store.
So, the meeting was fine. It was an annual workshop that I've attended before, so I didn't get as much out of it this time. The participants were all students, at all levels, in a range of disciplines. Personally, I think the workshop program needs major overhauling in order to meet the very difficult task of providing something valuable to all members of such a wide audience. They ask us to come for an entire week in June, the time when people are finally freed from the classroom to focus on research or need to be working outdoors in the field, so I think we should be able expect to really benefit from the program that takes us away at such a crucial time. The worst part for me was listening to several of the same talks, positively steeped in opinion, that I heard last year. The best part was interacting with the many undergrads who were eager to learn all about grad school, what it's like to do research, and the science everyone is doing. The even better part was that more than 50% of the people there were women, some from very male-dominated fields.
My talk was okay, but not as seamless and interesting as I would have liked. As I was working on it, I realized that I don't have a super good grasp of how the work fits with some of the recent literature. One lab group has published several very nice papers in the last 6 months or so that put forth a new concept substantiated with several lines of observational evidence. I need to study those papers to figure out how my research adds to that body of work rather than simply confirming it. So, that's why my talk last week was so unsatisfying. However, I think I know what I need to do next (before my presentation at the big August meeting).
Since I've been back, I learned that Research Advisor finally started to do a Lab Thing that has been holding me up. She didn't finish it, but we decided I could move on with part of it in the meantime. I'm glad because waiting for her had me suck on two different projects and I was starting to resent it. But before I do any work in that lab space, I have to clean it because someone did Something Bad in it and now I don't trust the integrity of samples processed in it. Poo. On the personal side, yesterday we met a bunch of friends at a festival where I saw 1. a man wearing a black cowboy hat, cowboy boots, and tiny briefs that had "evil" written in glitter across the ass, and nothing else. and 2. a man wearing tiny denim briefs and nothing else. There was also a marching band band that was awesome and seriously, the most openly-affectionate same-sex couples I've ever seen. That was really cool. Today I had grand plans for doing all sorts of housework, work reading, etc., but ALL I've done is read blog posts. Maybe I'll get my ass into gear and at least go to the grocery store.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
It's that simple
Ecogeoman simply cannot understand why any man would discriminate against women at work.: "Why would I want to go to work in a sausage fest every day?!"
I suppose the ends are more important than the means?
I suppose the ends are more important than the means?
Sunday, May 11, 2008
May Scientiae is awesome
I have had the May Scientiae Carnival at A Cat Nap bookmarked since Flicka Mawa published it last week, but I just got around to reading it today. If you haven't seen it yet, go check it out now! Flicka did an incredible job of putting together a whole bunch of amazing posts on "career paths, perspective, and a changing self-image".
The scientists who wrote posts for the carnival have taken a wide variety of paths to get where they are now. I'm struck, though, by how many have faced uncertainty along the way or had very different goals at the outset. I perceive many of these bloggers to be extremely successful, ambitious, and goal-orientated. And they are, but they don't all have the clear long-term vision that I thought they had. It makes me feel better about my own insecurities and uncertainties to know that not everyone has it all figured out from the get-go.
The scientists who wrote posts for the carnival have taken a wide variety of paths to get where they are now. I'm struck, though, by how many have faced uncertainty along the way or had very different goals at the outset. I perceive many of these bloggers to be extremely successful, ambitious, and goal-orientated. And they are, but they don't all have the clear long-term vision that I thought they had. It makes me feel better about my own insecurities and uncertainties to know that not everyone has it all figured out from the get-go.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
History of Science
Today the department seminar was given by a historian about one of the pillars, nay, founders of (one of) my field(s). I've never listened to a history seminar before. I'm pretty sure this is the first one of its kind in my department since I've been there.
It was mildly interesting to learn about this Founding Father of my -ology and I've no doubt that the information will be useful to me someday at some level. But this kind of history is just not my cup of tea, so while a talk about something so different was refreshing, I hope seminars like this don't become too frequent. Also, the speaker handed out hard copies of his PowerPoint presentation so we could take notes. It disgusted me a little to see all that paper just destined for the trash being passed around the room.
I did find one thing really interesting in the talk: there were many women in the photos documenting field research from the 1890's - 1930's. Apparently, these women were Founding Father's students. I wonder what they did after they earned their degrees, since it doesn't seem like they went on to establish notable research careers (or maybe they did but didn't get credit for it). The speaker hypothesized that the women chose to major in -ology and to participate in Founding Father's field trips because it was one of the few opportunities for them to get outdoors and get dirty. Interesting thought.
It was mildly interesting to learn about this Founding Father of my -ology and I've no doubt that the information will be useful to me someday at some level. But this kind of history is just not my cup of tea, so while a talk about something so different was refreshing, I hope seminars like this don't become too frequent. Also, the speaker handed out hard copies of his PowerPoint presentation so we could take notes. It disgusted me a little to see all that paper just destined for the trash being passed around the room.
I did find one thing really interesting in the talk: there were many women in the photos documenting field research from the 1890's - 1930's. Apparently, these women were Founding Father's students. I wonder what they did after they earned their degrees, since it doesn't seem like they went on to establish notable research careers (or maybe they did but didn't get credit for it). The speaker hypothesized that the women chose to major in -ology and to participate in Founding Father's field trips because it was one of the few opportunities for them to get outdoors and get dirty. Interesting thought.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Once, I was a fool
Well, I still can be a fool sometimes. But this story is about a time when I was biased against a woman doing science, which I thought would be appropriate for Peggy's Scientiae Canival theme. I can’t believe I ever felt this way. I won’t do it again.
When I was in college, I worked in the lab of a brand new assistant professor. I went to a smallish school with no PhD program and a limited number of master’s student in the department, so undergrads had great access to research opportunities. Because this professor was new, she was still setting up her lab when I joined it. And because the department was small, she was doing most of it by herself. I recall one day I was there during the installation of a fancy piece of equipment that I now know is pretty standard fare for labs in our subfield. There were problems with the installation that required much troubleshooting during the first weeks she had the instrument. As this bright, capable women was buried up to the elbows in tubing and electronics, performing major surgery on the new instrument, I thought, Can she really fix this? She needs to get a man to deal with this. She’s going to break it! Of course, she didn’t break it. She fixed it. And when I moved on to the next lab, I met several very smart and technically savvy women who did similar work and expected me to be able to use and troubleshoot just such an instrument. Which I did, thank you very much.
I shudder now to admit those thoughts even crossed my mind! I would never think such a thing now. There’s no job a woman can’t do with the right tools. But knowing that someone like me could have had those thoughts once upon a time makes me realize that lots of people still have them. I think that’s why I’m drawn to women-in-science issues even though I rarely feel bias myself. Hopefully, women doing great work and speaking out about these issues will shown the remaining fools just how foolish they are.
scientiae-carnival
When I was in college, I worked in the lab of a brand new assistant professor. I went to a smallish school with no PhD program and a limited number of master’s student in the department, so undergrads had great access to research opportunities. Because this professor was new, she was still setting up her lab when I joined it. And because the department was small, she was doing most of it by herself. I recall one day I was there during the installation of a fancy piece of equipment that I now know is pretty standard fare for labs in our subfield. There were problems with the installation that required much troubleshooting during the first weeks she had the instrument. As this bright, capable women was buried up to the elbows in tubing and electronics, performing major surgery on the new instrument, I thought, Can she really fix this? She needs to get a man to deal with this. She’s going to break it! Of course, she didn’t break it. She fixed it. And when I moved on to the next lab, I met several very smart and technically savvy women who did similar work and expected me to be able to use and troubleshoot just such an instrument. Which I did, thank you very much.
I shudder now to admit those thoughts even crossed my mind! I would never think such a thing now. There’s no job a woman can’t do with the right tools. But knowing that someone like me could have had those thoughts once upon a time makes me realize that lots of people still have them. I think that’s why I’m drawn to women-in-science issues even though I rarely feel bias myself. Hopefully, women doing great work and speaking out about these issues will shown the remaining fools just how foolish they are.
scientiae-carnival
Thursday, January 24, 2008
That's encouraging
Today I learned that five out of six candidates for a faculty position in my department are women. Cool.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
I have it so good
I've been thinking a little about why I am interested in women-in-science issues. I have never once personally experienced gender discrimination at work. Two of my three advisers have been women, the third is an extremely enlightened man. Yet, I identify with the plight of the screwed-over woman scientist.
I think it's because my culture is steeped in sexism and I hate it. This post on Propter Doc's blog clarified it for me. I think I just expect the negative stereotypes present throughout the rest of my life will carry over to my work. But they haven't (so far). I know they have for many, many other women. I feel very sensitized to that.
I'm very thankful that so far my work experience has been free of that crap. It's almost like it's one place where it doesn't matter that I'm a woman; the expectations are the same for me as for a man doing the same job (with the exception of field work, but that's just practical). I want more women to share my experience, except that I want all the cultural stereotypes to disappear too. I'm sick of the image that women are bad at things like investing or home repair and men shouldn't plan a holiday meal or buy their kids' clothes. An example: my friend would love to have a boat someday, but I pretty sure she considers it something a man buys and maintains, not something she would be responsible for. I think when I suggested she start saving for her own boat, it was the first time it occurred to her that she could get one for herself. It shouldn't be this way.
Anyway, I'm glad I get to work with a group of wonderful, mostly female, people. Am I the only lucky one? Or am I totally sheltered?
I think it's because my culture is steeped in sexism and I hate it. This post on Propter Doc's blog clarified it for me. I think I just expect the negative stereotypes present throughout the rest of my life will carry over to my work. But they haven't (so far). I know they have for many, many other women. I feel very sensitized to that.
I'm very thankful that so far my work experience has been free of that crap. It's almost like it's one place where it doesn't matter that I'm a woman; the expectations are the same for me as for a man doing the same job (with the exception of field work, but that's just practical). I want more women to share my experience, except that I want all the cultural stereotypes to disappear too. I'm sick of the image that women are bad at things like investing or home repair and men shouldn't plan a holiday meal or buy their kids' clothes. An example: my friend would love to have a boat someday, but I pretty sure she considers it something a man buys and maintains, not something she would be responsible for. I think when I suggested she start saving for her own boat, it was the first time it occurred to her that she could get one for herself. It shouldn't be this way.
Anyway, I'm glad I get to work with a group of wonderful, mostly female, people. Am I the only lucky one? Or am I totally sheltered?
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Not so historically male?
I spent most of the last two days reading papers mostly from the 1930's -1950's. I noted several interesting things I wanted to share.
- Back then, they measured distance in inches, but mass in grams.
- Sometimes, they used a human body to measure height. For example, to demonstrate that corn plants grew taller in one part of a field than another, there was a photo of the field with a man standing at one end and another man standing at the other end. The caption noted that the plants were taller than one of the men but shorter than the other. They never actually measured the height of the plants in any units. To be fair, it was an extremely obvious gradient in plant height.
- There were women doing research back then! With their names on papers! Several different women appear in this body of early literature. Of course, many are merely thanked in the acknowledgements for what I'd bet was authorship worthy work. Still, I guess my field is not quite as historically male as I thought.
On another topic, my carpool buddy had to stay home today so I was free to work late. I stayed for an extra two hours and now I'm exhausted. Before I started carpooling I frequently worked long days -- I forgot how bad I used to feel at the end of them and how little I got done in the last hour or two. It's so hard to make myself stay in my seat for that long, even with little breaks to walk around. Plus, I was doing really frustrating literature searches. Maybe if I had been doing something more engaging, I wouldn't have noticed the time passing.
Monday, January 7, 2008
Family/work balance is always lurking
Today, Research Advisor was telling me about her service on a committee for one of the professional societies to which we belong. The committee is charged with selecting future locations for the society's annual national meeting. We were discussing the attributes of several cities, like accessibility, costs, hotel room availability, etc. One important factor is availability of particular dates. This meeting is usually in the beginning of November, but can be as early as mid-October or late as mid-November. Advisor said that many on the committee favor the last week in October. I frowned and she said, "yeah I know. right at Halloween. When my kids were little I always hated being away at Halloween, so I wouldn't go to this meeting in those years." I asked if the other members of the committee are men.
They are.
They are.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Lets not be mean girls
Last night I watched the movie "Mean Girls" and I really liked it. It was funny but had a good message that didn't dilute the fun into lameness. The movie is about a girl who has been home schooled until age 16, at which point she starts at a wealthy suburban high school. She makes friends with the "art freaks" but infiltrates the group of popular girls. Drama ensues. The screenplay was written by Tina Fey based on the nonfiction, non-narrative book Queen Bees and Wannabes by Rosalind Wiseman.
I watched some of the special features after, including an interview with Wiseman. For years, she ran workshops for parents to help them cope with the social development of their teenagers, and then elaborated upon that experience in her book. She also started something called “The Empower Program” to help both girls and boys prevent and deal with violence in their world. In the interview, Wiseman claims that girls learn social rules from early socialization, but don't fully understand them as adolescents. They are responsible for enforcing those rules among themselves by creating cliques and gossiping. But sometimes girls don't know the rules until they break them and face social consequences for an action they didn’t know was prohibited.
Wiseman explores many perplexing behaviors, like why girls put up with crap from friends and why they pretend they're fat or stupid when they know they aren't. She notes that members of a clique treat each other badly despite putting up a polished, united front to outsiders. Wiseman argues that adolescence shouldn't be a rite of passage that parents expect their kids to endure, but rather is a period when kids learn important things that shape their adult life and so the experience should be as healthy as possible. She wants teenagers to be able to take good risks, like being a mathlete, instead of bad risks, like promiscuous sex.
I think all of this is great and socially healthy teenagers likely develop into better balanced adults, helping the girls become empowered women. But, I couldn’t help but notice the parallels to adult life, especially for women in science (because that’s where my experience lies). For example, the imposter complexes we all seem to have -- why do we say we can’t do top notch science when we know deep down we can? Or, how about when a PI is super friendly to outsiders, but is a jerk to the members of the lab? Or what about the risks involved with not trying a novel, innovative technique in favor of the status quo favored by established scientists, which also poses the risk of slow progress?
Anyway, I hope that the challenges women in science face don’t come from the women themselves. I hope that we aren’t inhibiting ourselves by holding on to some of our teenage whims and insecurities. And I hope that we aren’t establishing rules for women scientists that no one knows until she breaks them, like what constitutes a respectable position, or how much maternity leave it too much, or how much time away from kids is allowable. Because lets not kid ourselves, we do judge each other, if only to establish guidelines for ourselves. I hope that we are mature enough to make our social nature work for us as a group instead of holding us back more.
I watched some of the special features after, including an interview with Wiseman. For years, she ran workshops for parents to help them cope with the social development of their teenagers, and then elaborated upon that experience in her book. She also started something called “The Empower Program” to help both girls and boys prevent and deal with violence in their world. In the interview, Wiseman claims that girls learn social rules from early socialization, but don't fully understand them as adolescents. They are responsible for enforcing those rules among themselves by creating cliques and gossiping. But sometimes girls don't know the rules until they break them and face social consequences for an action they didn’t know was prohibited.
Wiseman explores many perplexing behaviors, like why girls put up with crap from friends and why they pretend they're fat or stupid when they know they aren't. She notes that members of a clique treat each other badly despite putting up a polished, united front to outsiders. Wiseman argues that adolescence shouldn't be a rite of passage that parents expect their kids to endure, but rather is a period when kids learn important things that shape their adult life and so the experience should be as healthy as possible. She wants teenagers to be able to take good risks, like being a mathlete, instead of bad risks, like promiscuous sex.
I think all of this is great and socially healthy teenagers likely develop into better balanced adults, helping the girls become empowered women. But, I couldn’t help but notice the parallels to adult life, especially for women in science (because that’s where my experience lies). For example, the imposter complexes we all seem to have -- why do we say we can’t do top notch science when we know deep down we can? Or, how about when a PI is super friendly to outsiders, but is a jerk to the members of the lab? Or what about the risks involved with not trying a novel, innovative technique in favor of the status quo favored by established scientists, which also poses the risk of slow progress?
Anyway, I hope that the challenges women in science face don’t come from the women themselves. I hope that we aren’t inhibiting ourselves by holding on to some of our teenage whims and insecurities. And I hope that we aren’t establishing rules for women scientists that no one knows until she breaks them, like what constitutes a respectable position, or how much maternity leave it too much, or how much time away from kids is allowable. Because lets not kid ourselves, we do judge each other, if only to establish guidelines for ourselves. I hope that we are mature enough to make our social nature work for us as a group instead of holding us back more.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Random Bullets of Meeting: the feminists' edition
- There were fewer children at this meeting than at the super casual conference I sometimes attend, but more than at the super stuffy one. I tried to give lots of smiles when I saw people with kids so they would feel like at least some of us think this is a welcome occurrence. There was a conference babysitting service at $7 per hour. If there were ever children in the sessions, I was never disturbed by them.
- I overheard a man with a child in a stroller explaining to another man that people didn't seem to mind his kid at this meeting. He also said that at the last meeting to which he brought the kid (the one with the stuffy old men in blazers), he received many disapproving looks.
- I overheard a woman saying that female convention center staff had been extremely rude to her when she asked where she could pump. She ended up asking a different staff worker, a man, who very courteously led her to the first aid room where she pumped in privacy.
- I went to an all women mixer where I met a few nice people in fields utterly unrelated to mine, but also got to have a lengthy conversation with a few women who are in my field who I had never talked to before. That was great.
- The session my talk was in was organized by two women. Nine of the 11 invited speakers were men. There were also contributed papers (like mine), some of which were given by women. While historically male dominated, my field has many, many more women than most sciences, especially those of the non-biomedical or straight-ecology sort. There are even some women who are senior level, very appropriate candidates for invited talks. I think 2 out of 11 invited talks by women is pretty lousy. Especially for a session organized by women.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)