I don't agree with the author's final statement. It's an absolute requirement for all scientists to have a great mentor, and not just during the grad student and post doc years but throughout one's career. The fact is that it's [relatively] easy to find great scientists, but much harder to find great mentors. I don't know his complete track record, but it sounds like Tim Hunt falls into the former, but not the latter category. On the other hand, Nobel laureate Liz Blackburn has always acknowledged the important role that Joe Gall played in her career development.
12
Based on anecdotal evidence provided by four close female friends, all smart and hard working and all with PhD's in chemistry and biology, I would never encourage my daughter to pursue a career in a bench science. Only one of my friends has had positive mentoring and lab experiences. The other three have contended with openly sexist PI's who farmed them out like indentured servants to other labs, did nothing to quell harassment by male lab partners, and generally fostered working environments that were particularly hostile to women. After watching their struggles I have nothing but profound sympathy for women in science.
30
Men like women. Women like men.
Science has studied this and found it to be true.
Men have sketchy understanding of women and are awkward and clumsy.
Women don't know whether to take advantage of it or run away from it.
Do you think this is any different for a science laboratory than it is for an insurance company or a police department?
Men don't always like women who like them.
Women don't always like men who like them.
That's one science has not come up with an answer for.
Science has studied this and found it to be true.
Men have sketchy understanding of women and are awkward and clumsy.
Women don't know whether to take advantage of it or run away from it.
Do you think this is any different for a science laboratory than it is for an insurance company or a police department?
Men don't always like women who like them.
Women don't always like men who like them.
That's one science has not come up with an answer for.
23
Misogyny and sexism isn't a new thing for a female in a place of work.
Females experience sexism and misogyny on a daily basis from their almost-innocent, male coworkers. A lot of the time a male coworker will say something degrading and sexist without meaning it to come across that way. An example of this is when men express that they don't feel women are cut out for a specific type of job because they are worried that the woman won't have total focus because she has a family to take care of. That is a prime example of sexism. Said coworker may not have realized what he said was sexist and offensive, but his statement declares that a woman's purpose is to serve her husband and her children instead of trying to accomplish any of her own aspirations. Meanwhile, a man is never asked how he manages to take care of his family and work at the same time.
Not only do these women have to deal with accidental sexism, they also have to deal with coworkers making sexist comments that they are aware are sexist and demeaning. An example of this is when a coworker may make sexual comments or women-belong-in-the-kitchen jokes. Majority of the time a woman is told she is too uptight, and she should take it as a compliment or with good humor. If she gets upset over this and demands respect, she is then labeled as a stereotype of a bossy and overemotional woman even though she has every right to be upset over being undermined in her profession.
It's hard out here for a girl.
Females experience sexism and misogyny on a daily basis from their almost-innocent, male coworkers. A lot of the time a male coworker will say something degrading and sexist without meaning it to come across that way. An example of this is when men express that they don't feel women are cut out for a specific type of job because they are worried that the woman won't have total focus because she has a family to take care of. That is a prime example of sexism. Said coworker may not have realized what he said was sexist and offensive, but his statement declares that a woman's purpose is to serve her husband and her children instead of trying to accomplish any of her own aspirations. Meanwhile, a man is never asked how he manages to take care of his family and work at the same time.
Not only do these women have to deal with accidental sexism, they also have to deal with coworkers making sexist comments that they are aware are sexist and demeaning. An example of this is when a coworker may make sexual comments or women-belong-in-the-kitchen jokes. Majority of the time a woman is told she is too uptight, and she should take it as a compliment or with good humor. If she gets upset over this and demands respect, she is then labeled as a stereotype of a bossy and overemotional woman even though she has every right to be upset over being undermined in her profession.
It's hard out here for a girl.
31
It isn't just science. A vast number of the best jobs are based on mentorship.
That is true for lawyers, and police officers, military officers and career civil service, and for businesses of all types where one learns the business by doing it with a mentor.
High level schools only prepare a student to be ready for a mentor. They only teach what is needed to learn more in the real world, applying general principles to actual facts and real circumstances.
That is true for lawyers, and police officers, military officers and career civil service, and for businesses of all types where one learns the business by doing it with a mentor.
High level schools only prepare a student to be ready for a mentor. They only teach what is needed to learn more in the real world, applying general principles to actual facts and real circumstances.
14
Author’s description “….an established principal investigator, who is rarely involved in hands-on experimentation, but has near-absolute authority in hiring” points out why many of these so-called elite mentors (but not all) most of the time behave like mini-dictators in their own lab-settings. More research money they bring to their institutions, more revered they become to the eyes of the administrators as well as rich alumni. And knowing very well their absolute authority on a graduate student’s ultimately earning her / his degree after a long four to five years of regular grinding, when research direction hits a wall, many of these “mini-dictators” become ruthless blaming the student, female or male! And then the consequences of the frustration of waking up from their “Nobel dreams” in the month of October!
Of course, another set of students who silently suffer in the hands of these elite mentors are the foreign graduate students coming to this country from a different cultural and behavioral background. But, that’s the story for another day!
Of course, another set of students who silently suffer in the hands of these elite mentors are the foreign graduate students coming to this country from a different cultural and behavioral background. But, that’s the story for another day!
14
Male, PI, huge group.... I hope I'm aware, open, non-discriminatory, and unbiased, but I undoubtedly carry biases "underneath" which on my better days I try to ferret out. The more we *all* hear such well-expressed analyses, the more we *all* will benefit. I thank you.
38
I run a fairly large chemistry research group (about 20 total), We do pretty hard-core chemical physics involving state-of-the-art lasers and other complex instrumentation. Over the last few years, my group has become about 75% female, a trend I am very pleased with. One of my goals as a research mentor is to encourage my female graduate students and post-docs to consider academia as a profession. So I get very frustrated when I see sexist comments such as those of Prof. Hunt; I feel like they undo years of effort that like-minded colleagues and I have invested.
45
While women can face their own set of challenges, mentors (of either gender) can do plenty of 'gender neutral' damage to your career as well, they can also be some of your greatest and most trusted friends. I've had at least 2 (male) friends switch advisers because of issues with them during their PhDs and at one who had to appeal to his university because his adviser was trying to sabotage his degree to keep him doing (unrelated) work in his lab (he won).
Don't think that this is the norm though, as others have said, most scientists are eager to train the next generation and form lasting collaborations and friendships with their students. Earning a PhD was one of the most fulfilling, enjoyable experiences in my adult life.
Don't think that this is the norm though, as others have said, most scientists are eager to train the next generation and form lasting collaborations and friendships with their students. Earning a PhD was one of the most fulfilling, enjoyable experiences in my adult life.
8
Here's my problem with men who think they should hold back on mentoring women because the women will end up focusing on children someday. Unless you have personally asked a woman, you have no idea what she wants or is biologically capable of having. And most likely, due to the legal/sensitive nature of the topic, most employers, bosses, or mentors would never dare ask a woman if they want or can have children someday. I say this, because I wonder how often I don't get opportunities in my competitive profession based on the same quiet bias when I will never be having children. And unfortunately it probably wouldn't look right walking into my law firm wearing an "I'm never having children" t-shirt.
30
An issue here is the fact that although there are roughly equal numbers of female and male students in the bioscieneces in undergraduate training, the proportion of females that reach the top tier as heads of major groups is much smaller. This may change, and indeed is changing, but the change is slow and not due to changes in the attitudes of male group leaders. The change is due to real changes in the laws and expectations outside of the lab that make it likelier that men take a greater part in family life and that women are allowed to leave their children with others, even their male partners for extended periods. This allows without retribution women to work hard and long hours in their chosen field while raising a family. Those early years after graduate school are critical to success in a scientific field. Science is generally a young person's game. If you have to take time off to raise a family, you will never recover the years lost.
6
Bias: a particular tendency, trend, inclination, feeling, or opinion, especially one that is preconceived or unreasoned (from Dictionary.com).
The core problem that I have seen is that most scientists (most of whom are male) do not recognize the existence of bias within themselves. They believe that their successful careers are due to their superior ability to reach conclusions based on DATA not feelings, opinions or inclinations. Therefore, they fail to recognize bias (both positive and negative) in their treatment of female students, post-docs and colleagues. Likewise, they fail to recognize the biases of their own science. We have all seen the post-doc told to redo experiments when the results don't fit with preconceived hypotheses, and data re-analyzed to make the scientific story "work". Both scientific progress and gender equity would take a leap forward if self awareness was valued as a core scientific skill.
The core problem that I have seen is that most scientists (most of whom are male) do not recognize the existence of bias within themselves. They believe that their successful careers are due to their superior ability to reach conclusions based on DATA not feelings, opinions or inclinations. Therefore, they fail to recognize bias (both positive and negative) in their treatment of female students, post-docs and colleagues. Likewise, they fail to recognize the biases of their own science. We have all seen the post-doc told to redo experiments when the results don't fit with preconceived hypotheses, and data re-analyzed to make the scientific story "work". Both scientific progress and gender equity would take a leap forward if self awareness was valued as a core scientific skill.
19
What needs to happen is that universities from the top on down all need to have their HR departments involved at every level with lab employment. The grad student postdoc thing is at-will employment, run as a fiefdom. Postdocs especially are essentially independent contractors with very little connection to the university except through the PI.
More generally, I think science would benefit if PIs have less power. The postdocs do most of the work but often don't get any credit.
More generally, I think science would benefit if PIs have less power. The postdocs do most of the work but often don't get any credit.
9
As a male, who grew up when few women survived the rigors of a career in engineering and science, I listened patiently to women complain. Complaints were about careers limited by families, about sexual harassment, and the strange feeling women had about men who clearly couldn't put aside their sexual attraction.
Believe it or not, I understood these problems. I've led teams that included women and welcomed them into the fold. I pushed back, sometimes hard against aggressive men; sometimes, I reminded them that they wouldn't be behaving this way if the women had a big brother staring down at them --- I wanted them to remember the conversation we had.
On the other hand, I explained to the women can't expect to advance to the top in a profession because, eventually, most women want children. It's a hard thing to say but it is true. With that said, I was always supportive, even when I had a young female subordinate who had a romantic crush on me; I took her aside and told her I found her attractive but that my position would not allow reciprocation.
Working with women is a challenge for some men. For me, growing up around them has taught me that they can be every bit as valuable at work as a man. And, they do indeed think differently than we do. That brings something fresh and useful to an assignment.
Believe it or not, I understood these problems. I've led teams that included women and welcomed them into the fold. I pushed back, sometimes hard against aggressive men; sometimes, I reminded them that they wouldn't be behaving this way if the women had a big brother staring down at them --- I wanted them to remember the conversation we had.
On the other hand, I explained to the women can't expect to advance to the top in a profession because, eventually, most women want children. It's a hard thing to say but it is true. With that said, I was always supportive, even when I had a young female subordinate who had a romantic crush on me; I took her aside and told her I found her attractive but that my position would not allow reciprocation.
Working with women is a challenge for some men. For me, growing up around them has taught me that they can be every bit as valuable at work as a man. And, they do indeed think differently than we do. That brings something fresh and useful to an assignment.
28
"On the other hand, I explained to the women can't expect to advance to the top in a profession because, eventually, most women want children. It's a hard thing to say but it is true."
Here's a great example of some patronizing, poorly thought out wisdom from a man, purporting to show the truth of things but really just showing how sexist he is. I wonder why these brilliant male scientists never stop to examine if this statement is actually true, and if so, *why* it is true. News flash-- men want children, too. Men have children, too. Men at the top of a profession have children, too. And yet, these brilliant male leaders accept at face value that a man's choice to have children won't damage his career. Why? Why do we accept that as true for men and not for women? What is the inherent unspoken assumption here? I am so tired of all of these so-called brilliant men pretending like its only women who want children. I am so tired of these supposedly egalitarian men refusing to examine their own inherent assumptions that having children will negatively affect a woman's career and not their own. Every man out there who has children (and for whom that choice did not diminish his career prospects) has a wife at home raising those children to thank. Refusal to acknowledge that women take hits to their careers so that men can have children without ruining theirs is despicable.
Here's a great example of some patronizing, poorly thought out wisdom from a man, purporting to show the truth of things but really just showing how sexist he is. I wonder why these brilliant male scientists never stop to examine if this statement is actually true, and if so, *why* it is true. News flash-- men want children, too. Men have children, too. Men at the top of a profession have children, too. And yet, these brilliant male leaders accept at face value that a man's choice to have children won't damage his career. Why? Why do we accept that as true for men and not for women? What is the inherent unspoken assumption here? I am so tired of all of these so-called brilliant men pretending like its only women who want children. I am so tired of these supposedly egalitarian men refusing to examine their own inherent assumptions that having children will negatively affect a woman's career and not their own. Every man out there who has children (and for whom that choice did not diminish his career prospects) has a wife at home raising those children to thank. Refusal to acknowledge that women take hits to their careers so that men can have children without ruining theirs is despicable.
64
Just curious-- did you also tell your male colleagues that they couldn't expect to advance to the top if they had children?
"they can be every bit as valuable at work as a man."
Do you realize that kind of qualified statement is not actually a compliment?
"they can be every bit as valuable at work as a man."
Do you realize that kind of qualified statement is not actually a compliment?
44
The men don't want children? When the women want children, how do they get them? Children only belong to the women? What does that say about fathers, in general? Here's the real problem: men get paid to work; women can afford to give up work, because there's no financial incentive not to. We talk about how important it is for children to have two parents; what good is that if only one participates in rearing them?
27
Why must women scientists pay the price, because male scientists do not know how to behave, how to communicate with women, have the emotional maturity of a 5 year old boy on the school playground?
28
If you feel that way about your fellow scientists, you probably do not belong in a lab. Berating and devaluing men isn't the ticket. It makes you look immature and cranky and obnoxious. All qualities no one appreciates.
1
I assume you are not referring to all men. If you are, you are in very serious need of a few sexual "sensitivity" classes. Your sexism is trully disgusting.
3
But that was exactly what Tim Hunt was implying in his comments (i.e., that male scientists can't control themselves around their female colleagues because they're so distracting).
10
I got my PhD in physics more than 20 years ago. I observed plenty of positive discrimination towards female recent graduates back then, and I guess this is still the case today. I don't think that this positive discrimination carries over to higher academic positions, but I find ironical that it is almost never mentioned in any "women in science" articles.
5
"Among the scientific elite, women make up an even smaller fraction — of the 24 Nobel laureates included in the study, two were women."
This appears to be the case across all academic disciplines; maybe what he really thinks is that it's an iq thing at the extreme of the distribution but veils it instead with a slightly more acceptable "trouble with girls" observation.
This appears to be the case across all academic disciplines; maybe what he really thinks is that it's an iq thing at the extreme of the distribution but veils it instead with a slightly more acceptable "trouble with girls" observation.
2
You say: "This trend is exaggerated for elite male scientists; their labs are even more biased toward men, but the gender bias is not observed in top labs with female heads."
I work in a high-profile government agency. The appointed Chair is a woman. Three of four commissioners are women. Eleven of nineteen office directors are women. Promotions have been exclusively going to women in the ranks. That's all well and good. But when it occurs at the expense of qualified persons with records of achievement, that's bad ... very bad.
I wish I worked in your lab.
I work in a high-profile government agency. The appointed Chair is a woman. Three of four commissioners are women. Eleven of nineteen office directors are women. Promotions have been exclusively going to women in the ranks. That's all well and good. But when it occurs at the expense of qualified persons with records of achievement, that's bad ... very bad.
I wish I worked in your lab.
10
its called affirmative action. A real serious problems considering the fact that the majority of STEM grad students are men.
6
The women aren't qualified and have no records of achievement? Really?
15
One serious problem is that male science professors, at least in the US, are among the social groups now most likely to have stay at home wives, who are moreover also more likely to have a great deal less formal education than they do. Ironically, this may not mean that their children necessarily do better in school, but it does mean that they are more likely to take women colleagues less seriously, let alone post-docs and students.
13
"One serious problem is that male science professors, at least in the US, are among the social groups now most likely to have stay at home wives, who are moreover also more likely to have a great deal less formal education than they do."
where does the evidence for such a sexist comment come from? These type of persons are much more likely to have a very well educated spouse than those with BS/BA/high school degrees.
where does the evidence for such a sexist comment come from? These type of persons are much more likely to have a very well educated spouse than those with BS/BA/high school degrees.
12
"Twenty-first-century science has a great deal in common with the medieval apprentice system." This is the problem girls, science did not start in medieval times. Let's not blame the guys, they're trying their best, but sometimes it's hard. I know you all can do just as good a job given the opportunity.
1
Thank you for this!! I quite agree with all of your points.
This, in particular, caught my eye: "One scientist with whom I trained told me that he did not feel that women were cut out to be truly successful in the field, as they were likely to be too distracted by their families. He used his own wife, a scientist with whom he clearly shared a family, as an example".
First of all, running down your own spouse's abilities and competence is just.... wow. I wonder if his wife knows that he speaks about her that way. Secondly, I don't suppose it occurred to him that maybe his wife is so "distracted" with their family because HE isn't doing his fair share at home?
This, in particular, caught my eye: "One scientist with whom I trained told me that he did not feel that women were cut out to be truly successful in the field, as they were likely to be too distracted by their families. He used his own wife, a scientist with whom he clearly shared a family, as an example".
First of all, running down your own spouse's abilities and competence is just.... wow. I wonder if his wife knows that he speaks about her that way. Secondly, I don't suppose it occurred to him that maybe his wife is so "distracted" with their family because HE isn't doing his fair share at home?
30
"HE isn't doing his fair share at home? "
so a man needs to work 70-80 hour weeks while women may not work at all and they expect men to also take up 50% of household chores? This sounds like irresponsible sexism run amuck.
so a man needs to work 70-80 hour weeks while women may not work at all and they expect men to also take up 50% of household chores? This sounds like irresponsible sexism run amuck.
6
The scenario in the article is not isolated to the science lab, it mirrors environments in many industries i.e., the tech industry is a good example.
Many men, American & from India, do not wish to work on projects with you or if they have no choice then it's on 'face' for the project leader and the 'real face' when no one of authority is around.
Many men, American & from India, do not wish to work on projects with you or if they have no choice then it's on 'face' for the project leader and the 'real face' when no one of authority is around.
8
Yet another feminist cry about workplace discrimination. All the while leading in college attendance, grades, salary, with all the power of the media behind them. It's a fact: women have a much easier time getting hired. In to workplace, an offense to women will crush any career, even a Nobel laureate.
It's long been a woman's world. Time for a backlash.
It's long been a woman's world. Time for a backlash.
7
Seriously? You are mistaken if you believe that women lead in salary, power, or any other metric which most people value as a measure of their success!
25
Things like college attendance and grades don't necessarily bear *any* relation to who is actually being hired or promoted in the workplace.
"It's long been a woman's world."
*Citation needed.*
"It's long been a woman's world."
*Citation needed.*
19
Gosh. Centuries of male domination, and you're ready for a "backlash" after such a brief and small taste of female parity (I doubt women do lead in salaries, as the last I heard, men do). But I do have to admit it's hard to accept change, especially when one's own power perks seem to have been diminished.
20
Right off, with 2 first author Mol Cell papers, we need to listen to her. Unfortunately, I do not believe that she has applied for faculty positions yet. My advice is get the letters out and run your own lab.
I sit here with 2 kids, one spouse, 4 students, a postdoc, a tech, an R01 and and R21. It takes a lot to find some balance. As Amichai noted, you don't have time to have time for everything. Head down this path and you pass on many things. The worst is that the last years of your youth are spent trying to build something that surely won't last. It's worth the trip, but you need to be all in, and you need to keep after it when someone insults you. You won't find a better example than J. Steitz; not in any generation.
I sit here with 2 kids, one spouse, 4 students, a postdoc, a tech, an R01 and and R21. It takes a lot to find some balance. As Amichai noted, you don't have time to have time for everything. Head down this path and you pass on many things. The worst is that the last years of your youth are spent trying to build something that surely won't last. It's worth the trip, but you need to be all in, and you need to keep after it when someone insults you. You won't find a better example than J. Steitz; not in any generation.
8
You raise the important part of the equation - mentorship is very important to succeed in the research environment, especially in academic research. Isn't it true that there is a significant improvement in the acceptance and encouragement of women in academic research? I am not suggesting it is perfect, but is Dr. Hunt's idiotic statement being put in proper context with a sense of proportion? It would be really helpful is everyone concerned would present a less emotional (angry, offensive, passive, defensive) and more objective response - what is the trend since the 1960s - more women in which fields, less women in which fields, what are the leading issues in each field for female and male scientists, what is the publishing rate like, quality vs quantity. All of these questions will actually help rather than serve as more white noise for the media industrial complex to make money off of.
Any change of this magnitude will take time and effort and revisions. Are we dragging our feet (compared to?) Are girls being prepped like boys (are they?) for academic research? Are 15 yr old girls' brains occupied with the same things as 15 yr old boys' brains? (Those who think that is sexist bcos you have visions of nail polish, makeup, shoes, being my concern - in India 15 yr old girls often do housework - sweeping floors, washing pots, pans, clothes, get water from the well or water truck, while their brothers often do not. Same is true of Mexico, etc... )
Let us focus on the useful.
Any change of this magnitude will take time and effort and revisions. Are we dragging our feet (compared to?) Are girls being prepped like boys (are they?) for academic research? Are 15 yr old girls' brains occupied with the same things as 15 yr old boys' brains? (Those who think that is sexist bcos you have visions of nail polish, makeup, shoes, being my concern - in India 15 yr old girls often do housework - sweeping floors, washing pots, pans, clothes, get water from the well or water truck, while their brothers often do not. Same is true of Mexico, etc... )
Let us focus on the useful.
3
In the end, opinion pieces like this one are counter-productive because it reinforces the belief that women are whiners and complainers and thin skinned. If you want to excel in a field go out there and kick you-know-what. Like men do. Stop with the victimization.
5
How exactly are individuals supposed to "kick you-know-what" if they're passed over for lab positions simply because of their gender? A huge part of the problem is that they're not seriously considered for positions to begin with (despite their qualifications).
13
Have you ever worked in a lab? You can't kick butt by yourself. When you are considered to be in "training" and that's pre- and post-doc, you are working for the lab head, not really for yourself, even if you have outside funding paying your salary. You can only kick butt to the extent that your lab head assigns or allows you to work on projects that might kick butt in the end. That's where mentoring first comes in.
8
Academics requires great focus without distraction and foofaraw. Women are well equipped for almost everything except dealing with Idiotic men who are clumsy, without grace and manner. Most men do not know very much about anything and certainly, very little about women (with or without a lab coat).
6
"Men who can't control themselves and the negative impact on science and discovery and women's education" could be another title for this. When I was an undergrad at an Ivy League School, I had what I came to realize is completely unacceptable harassment from professors. One, a scientist, told me I was attractive. This is late at night, we are alone, I was working in the lab. I wish I had the power to tell him what I would say to him now.
Another was a linguistic professor who was "famous" to boot. I was at office hours - again, alone, and he uses an example of a sentence "If I say, I find (my name) attractive"... and then goes on to discuss some linguistic question I had. Shame on these men.
Another was a linguistic professor who was "famous" to boot. I was at office hours - again, alone, and he uses an example of a sentence "If I say, I find (my name) attractive"... and then goes on to discuss some linguistic question I had. Shame on these men.
16
Dr. Clatterbuck Soper's very thoughtful article deals with two separate issues:
1. Her own and other women scientists', presumably all working in labs of one bio kin d or another, experiences with maternity and child care.
2. The narrower "issue" -- if there is one -- is a flippant comment by Dr. Hunt.
I am a male scientist and I never had any problem with working with women colleagues. But I see the case of Dr. Hunt as a witch hunt by those who believe in the heresy of political correctness and are trying to be "more catholic than the pope". Cool it and get real!
1. Her own and other women scientists', presumably all working in labs of one bio kin d or another, experiences with maternity and child care.
2. The narrower "issue" -- if there is one -- is a flippant comment by Dr. Hunt.
I am a male scientist and I never had any problem with working with women colleagues. But I see the case of Dr. Hunt as a witch hunt by those who believe in the heresy of political correctness and are trying to be "more catholic than the pope". Cool it and get real!
3
You could "get real" by acknowledging the negative effects that those archaic attitudes have on real women's day-to-day lives and careers.
Statements like Hunt's may not mean much to you personally, but they have a seriously discouraging and demoralizing effect on women in the STEM fields. The message is an overwhelming: "You are not welcome here". It's especially discouraging for young women who are just starting to consider careers in STEM, and may put a lot of them off altogether. That is waste of talent and potential.
Hunt also chose to make his remarks in possibly the most tasteless forum imaginable-- at a luncheon honoring the achievements of female scientists in South Korea, where gender bias against women in STEM is even more rampant than in many other countries. Those are women who've had to work *incredibly* hard to be taken seriously in their careers. (They make up only 17% of researchers in the country). For whatever reason, he decided to take *that* particular moment to belittle women.
The consequences of this action were entirely predictable, if he'd exercised even a modicum of common sense.
Statements like Hunt's may not mean much to you personally, but they have a seriously discouraging and demoralizing effect on women in the STEM fields. The message is an overwhelming: "You are not welcome here". It's especially discouraging for young women who are just starting to consider careers in STEM, and may put a lot of them off altogether. That is waste of talent and potential.
Hunt also chose to make his remarks in possibly the most tasteless forum imaginable-- at a luncheon honoring the achievements of female scientists in South Korea, where gender bias against women in STEM is even more rampant than in many other countries. Those are women who've had to work *incredibly* hard to be taken seriously in their careers. (They make up only 17% of researchers in the country). For whatever reason, he decided to take *that* particular moment to belittle women.
The consequences of this action were entirely predictable, if he'd exercised even a modicum of common sense.
9
I trained in a male-dominated lab and had few problems with gender bias.
My science came first and I learned to ignore any unwanted advances or inappropriate remarks. However, my fear is that all of these discussions about having more women in science will soon be moot if the dismal climate for scientific funding does not improve. The level of discouragement and frustration among practicing scientists- both male and female- is high, particularly in light of significant increases in funding for the sciences in China.
My science came first and I learned to ignore any unwanted advances or inappropriate remarks. However, my fear is that all of these discussions about having more women in science will soon be moot if the dismal climate for scientific funding does not improve. The level of discouragement and frustration among practicing scientists- both male and female- is high, particularly in light of significant increases in funding for the sciences in China.
9
When I took a pre-med Physics class at Stanford in the early 90's, I found that the instructor called on male & female students fairly equally. The difference was very subtle: female students who gave the wrong answer were told that it was wrong, and a another student was immediately chosen to answer; male students who gave the wrong answer, however, were led by the professor to figure out the right answer. I'm fairly sure that this was unintentional, but the professor's bias did suggest that as a female student, you were thought to be incapable of figuring out the right answer, or, on the other hand, that it was not thought worth the trouble to help you get there.
150
I am a female graduate student in the life sciences. Never once have I been made to feel uncomfortable in any professional setting because I am a woman. I understand, of course, that I am lucky, but I don't think sexism in science is more pernicious than it is in any other high profile field. I truly believe that the disparity between men and women at the faculty level will gradually lessen as the current crop of graduate students rises through the ranks.
But most importantly, I don't think what Dr. Hunt said is in any way representative of some disturbing misogynistic culture in the sciences. If anything, the fact that he was so quickly and forcefully ostracized for his comments speaks more to the way in which women are viewed in the sciences.
Let's stop obsessing about this and get back to producing scientific data.
But most importantly, I don't think what Dr. Hunt said is in any way representative of some disturbing misogynistic culture in the sciences. If anything, the fact that he was so quickly and forcefully ostracized for his comments speaks more to the way in which women are viewed in the sciences.
Let's stop obsessing about this and get back to producing scientific data.
8
The smartest people in science are all too often not smart at all about people. This creates problems even for men.
When I was ready to receive my doctorate in theoretical physics, my institution held a meeting with professors to help grad students get through the actual process of thesis publication and cap and gown and leaving the lab and etc. But the meeting turned into a villagers with pitchforks situation after one graduating student asked a speaker, "When are faculty going to be held accountable for how they treat the students in their labs?"
The whole graduating Ph.D. audience then erupted with grievances raging from sexism coming from the women students to accusations of prejudice of the scientific variety from the men. In other words, advisors making it harder for students to graduate if the student's research disproved or outdid some important research by the advisor.
So this medieval apprentice system she speaks of here -- it's not just a gender issue. Any kind of prejudice that can be entertained in the head of a high IQ person who is socially unaware and low in empathy can be found being expressed on some poor student in this medieval system.
So helping women here is going to help men too. You can trust that. I know it. I was there.
When I was ready to receive my doctorate in theoretical physics, my institution held a meeting with professors to help grad students get through the actual process of thesis publication and cap and gown and leaving the lab and etc. But the meeting turned into a villagers with pitchforks situation after one graduating student asked a speaker, "When are faculty going to be held accountable for how they treat the students in their labs?"
The whole graduating Ph.D. audience then erupted with grievances raging from sexism coming from the women students to accusations of prejudice of the scientific variety from the men. In other words, advisors making it harder for students to graduate if the student's research disproved or outdid some important research by the advisor.
So this medieval apprentice system she speaks of here -- it's not just a gender issue. Any kind of prejudice that can be entertained in the head of a high IQ person who is socially unaware and low in empathy can be found being expressed on some poor student in this medieval system.
So helping women here is going to help men too. You can trust that. I know it. I was there.
26
Had a sharp technician in Palo Alto who went on to Berkeley aspiring to get a Ph.D. She made the mistake of reporting a radioactive contamination in the tissue culture lab. Her somewhat noted male supervisor and professor became enraged and fired her.
10
I trained in the sciences, as did my husband. But while he shrugged off Dr. Hunt's comments as the benign, antiquated dodderings of an old man past his scientific prime, I saw something much more insidious. Perhaps this is because, as a woman, I have had to contend on many occasions with inappropriate behavior from male superiors, and have had to live with the professional consequences of their behavior. My husband, of course, has not had these experiences. He does not know the feeling of mild panic that sets in when your boss says something inappropriate. He does not know how difficult it is to get ahead when being alone with your boss means dealing with unwanted physical contact. He does not know the feelings of frustration and powerlessness that descend when a male superior who has already established his career risks your professional future by hitting on you, for no other reason than to spice up his life. When men who are in charge have nothing to lose, and you have everything to lose, the playing field is not level. When you have no real recourse to justice, and your only option is to put up with it or lose your path to career advancement, the deck is stacked against you. So Dr. Hunt's remarks are not meaningless or inconsequential, they are in fact a sign of the very real, pervasive challenges that exist for women in most professions, due to the inability of men to acknowledge that their "innocent" behavior has consequences -- just not for them.
354
Extremely well put-- thank you!
It's much easier for people who haven't personally experienced this kind of attitude to write it off as harmless.
It's much easier for people who haven't personally experienced this kind of attitude to write it off as harmless.
5
How is it that your husband does not know about any of these important events that have touched upon your life and career in such important ways?
This op-ed piece is great but like most of the public discussion since Dr. Hunt's sexist remarks the discussion has been dominated about sexism in the sciences in academia. Sexism exists in the private sector too. One of my friends found out that she was being paid less than her male coworker even though she had more experience and education. When she confronted the lab manager about this, he just shrugged and refused to give her a raise even match her male coworker's salary. She pushed harder and he just threw out more excuses. While the labs I worked for did a good job of hiring people that didn't think sexual harassment was okay, they could not control the behaviors of clients or contractors. Some middle-aged male clients and contractors thought our workspace was a great place for their "jokes." Clients on tour would hit on me while I was working or ask me to "grab them a beer" (like I was their waitress or wife) when I getting standards out the refrigerator. Despite the fact that it was incredibly creepy to be hit on by someone twice my age while I was trying to work, I couldn't say anything because they were clients. Even my bosses laughed along with their "jokes." These incidents didn't happen often but when they did, they ruined my day and it was something my male coworkers never had to deal with.
23
What it is like being the "Black Girl" in the lab is so much worse and tougher to fathom or imagine.
Just ask Space Shuttle Astronauts Mae Jemison, Joan Higginbotham, Stephanie Wilson and Yvonne Cagle. Or Ursula Burns, Claudia Alexander, Katherine Johnson, etc.
Just ask Space Shuttle Astronauts Mae Jemison, Joan Higginbotham, Stephanie Wilson and Yvonne Cagle. Or Ursula Burns, Claudia Alexander, Katherine Johnson, etc.
9
While this "mentorship" is probably the most important in science, it also exists in other graduate fields. When I was an undergrad majoring Art History, I took classes in Egyptian Art & Architecture from a noted Egyptologist, who absolutely believed that women had no place in the field of Egyptology. I was basically a straight A student when it came to any kind of history. I barely scraped thru with a C in his classes & I don't believe that it was because I was a poor student. However, he also believed that no married man had a place in Egyptology. When one of his graduate students, who was working on his PhD, had the audacity to marry. Dr. B, forced him out of his Egyptology program.
8
Of course Dr Hiang's advice was good, as un-pc as it seems. Surely,
male post-doc menthes shouldn't get on the "bad side" of mentors either, by whatever other ridiculous reason.
male post-doc menthes shouldn't get on the "bad side" of mentors either, by whatever other ridiculous reason.
Better, more neutral advice would have been wear clothes where he can't look down your shirt and work hard to get out of that lab and onto better things.
More gun violence in the USA today and the Times is still churning THIS one-day relative non-story on the home page...?
Can anyone say: 'abrogation of journalistic responsibility'?
Can anyone say: 'abrogation of journalistic responsibility'?
1
Fill the entire paper with news about gun violence?
4
You may not have noticed this, but newspapers often cover more than one story at a time.
6
I work in a high-level cancer research lab at a major hospital and roughly half of my coworkers are women. They're always very productive and knowledgable, as is expected of all the employees. I've never seen any evidence of harassment or discrimination here. However, my mother has headed a research lab for years and has repeatedly complained about gender discrimination in her institution. She doesn't get paid as much as her male colleagues and constantly has to fight for fair allocation of space and resources.
11
This excellent piece touched a nerve for me because my daughter currently is an undergraduate majoring in science and she is learning to navigate through the system described by Dr. Sopher. My daughter has just finished her freshman year of college and has started a paying research job in the lab of an extremely prominent male scientist at an elite university. Two people deserve credit for the fortunate circumstances my daughter finds herself in. First, my daughter herself deserves credit for displaying fearlessness in seeking a job. She reached out around the country to the best scientists in her field of interest and wasn’t deterred by the long odds against her. Second, the professor who hired her has committed an amazing act of kindness and generosity by hiring my daughter. Yes, she will do a great job for him, but he certainly didn’t need to hire her. He is taking a chance on her and he is committing time, money and lab resources to train her. That is a wonderful undertaking and I am grateful for his willingness to provide an amazing opportunity to my daughter. So, male mentors do exist and women can find them. Both parties just need to take a chance on each other.
4
As a male scientist these type of articles irk me. The author does not seem the least bit troubled that a male nobel laureate is canned due to a silly comment on gender issues. This would likely never happen to any female scientist even with a way more outrageous pop off. The author should realize things like this are precisely why high level researchers must be wary of mentoring women. Things go wrong (all genders, there is a lot of stress) and you are guilty till proven innocent with no recourse in the present environment. Also the author needs to open her eyes. In most fields there are way more support fellowships etc for women students than male students. There are also more males and more competition among males since they get less of such boosts. So it is not so surprising the best researchers pick males more: they are selecting the top with higher counts being males meaning the top is likely male (if all is otherwise equal). Most of us professors are quite liberal. I know that I am much more careful/respectful with women than I am males. I believe many or even most of my male colleagues are similar -- though I am sure counterexamples exist (and get presented as the norm). Science is not easy for either gender. Males do not have some magical back room boost that the author seems to suppose.
45
White men matter--- women, in general, don't. What a premise, Steve.
11
Hear hear. She's helping perpetuate the bias against her and her ilk.
This new generation--no sense of the bigger picture, the common good, and
the fact that an older Nobel laureate might be of more value (right now)
to society than her/his own whining self, full of potential though it may be.
The entitlement of the youngsters is starting to really wreak havoc.
This new generation--no sense of the bigger picture, the common good, and
the fact that an older Nobel laureate might be of more value (right now)
to society than her/his own whining self, full of potential though it may be.
The entitlement of the youngsters is starting to really wreak havoc.
1
This "male scientist" fails to show a good scientist's respect for facts. Hunt did not lose his livelihood, or any paying job; he was deprived of some prestigious honorary positions. That is not the normal use of the term "canned".
He goes on to claim that "This would likely never happen to any female scientist even with a way more outrageous pop off." That may be an accurate description of Steve's aggrieved mental state, but where's the data that supports his contention in the real world?
He goes on to claim that "This would likely never happen to any female scientist even with a way more outrageous pop off." That may be an accurate description of Steve's aggrieved mental state, but where's the data that supports his contention in the real world?
18
Frankly, maybe on needs to put off breeding if one wants to continue her studies. Life does involve choices. And even having it all sometimes turns out not b be all it was cracked up to be. From the other side of 65.
Mentoring is essential for all and should be THE undergrad college experience-- not part of but all of. (MOOCs for content -- mentoring for achievement.) i believe Woodrow Wilson suggested something like this when he was president of Princeton.
Mentoring is essential for all and should be THE undergrad college experience-- not part of but all of. (MOOCs for content -- mentoring for achievement.) i believe Woodrow Wilson suggested something like this when he was president of Princeton.
1
Wow. One must be far from the other side of 65 to call starting a family "breeding" and and to show such little compassion for the complexities of modern life where most families require two incomes to do well. Sadly, this comment seems to come from someone who was actually around when Woodrow Wilson was president of Princeton, and not from someone experienced in the day-to-day life of young adults trying to balance career development with starting families, and is probably the same type of attitude that spurred Tim Hunt's comments.
15
You mean, maybe *women* need to put off "breeding" in order to "continue *her* studies". You clearly are not recommending that men do the same.
Yeah, sure, that works... for men. How convenient. I can see why you're not worried.
Yeah, sure, that works... for men. How convenient. I can see why you're not worried.
9
Setting aside the odd tone of the "breeding" comment...
There are only so many years that women can put off having a child before it becomes physically impossible. There are also all kinds of medical risks (e.g., chromosomal abnormalities) that rise with maternal age.
And it's funny how no one ever seems to suggest that *men* put off having children if they care about their careers.
There are only so many years that women can put off having a child before it becomes physically impossible. There are also all kinds of medical risks (e.g., chromosomal abnormalities) that rise with maternal age.
And it's funny how no one ever seems to suggest that *men* put off having children if they care about their careers.
15
after all, most of the Health problems affecting the public really only affect women. Who wants them to study theyre own bodies? Weve been told were born w/every beady egg we`ll be laying the next 40+yrs, when in fact we develop a new egg every month. Food is lab approved, & men are the majority approving the vast landscape of retail sugared products (most are targeted at children). There are now 2 kinds of Food: food, & Real Food.
2
Tim Hunt sounds like he's quite the drama king. How did anything get done in his lab? I'd be interested in hearing from males who worked under this self-centered galoot.
17
Thanks for bringing that insight into what female scientists go through. We can see that despite America's boasts of being progressive, we are far behind other countries in many, many ways with regards to workplace imbalance, pay, racialism.... In a way, I'm glad Dr. Hunt made those remarks. He has opened a lot of eyes into the scientific world and how women are perceived and treated.
9
First, you need Western society to detach itself from its win-at-all-costs as-fast-as-you-can attitude, so that maternity leave doesn't look like a gargantuan hit to productivity for their research. Without that, no on will consider other assets that women bring to the table, alternate viewpoints and wisdom, group dynamism, a bigger pool of graduate talent. A general commitment to society as a whole, and not just science is a prerequisite to women getting the fair shake that they deserve.
7
Not to mention that many men would like to take paternity leave and spend some time with their kids as well.
2
I am Ph.D. scientist. I am male. My career was destroyed by the interactions between pharmaceutical companies and my elite academic advisor due to his use of grad students to send materials to drug companies from which he profited, the university profited, and I got nothing (not even a career). I never recovered. He is celebrated worldwide; I am nothing. And I have to read about the problems of academia with SEX DISCRIMINATION? What about the problems of single versus married professors. I would like a study on how many single post-docs versus single assistant professors versus single full professors. If you aren't married, you don't get promoted despite single people having more time to devote to research. Why is that? Discrimination. And it's not male versus female: it's single versus married. If you aren't married, you don't get to be a professor. And of course there will be rare exceptions but when the decisions are made behind closed doors, the decisions are made not based not just upon scientific prowess but "Who can we get along with?" Who will "have our backs"? in the tight little club of full tenured professors at any university who act like little kings in their medieval kingdoms. Birds of a feather flock together. When intereviewed if you are "married with kids", it becomes apparent. You ask about "schools in the area" or you casually mention "your wife (or husband)"? If you aren't married well "what's wrong with you"? And no chance.
2
All that should be said is, "Welcome to the academy." Who you worked under becomes your pedigree in all disciplines.
The pecking order is evident even in the sequence of a paper's authors.
It is a surprise that any of this comes as a surprise.
The pecking order is evident even in the sequence of a paper's authors.
It is a surprise that any of this comes as a surprise.
1
"What sets female scientists apart is the absolute requirement of high-quality mentorship."
You know, 'mentorship" can only go so far. In the end, it's talent, not "mentorship", that makes original science happen.
Who "mentored" Newton or Einstein or Gauss or Darwin or Galileo or Crick? They came by their achievements almost entirely on their own, without endless "mentorship" to tell them what they should be investigating.
The supposed absolute requirement of mentorship is little more than the need, in some individuals, of someone more talented to supply them with original ideas. Scientists of genuine talent and real perseverance will rarely fail to find their way to impressive achievements.
You know, 'mentorship" can only go so far. In the end, it's talent, not "mentorship", that makes original science happen.
Who "mentored" Newton or Einstein or Gauss or Darwin or Galileo or Crick? They came by their achievements almost entirely on their own, without endless "mentorship" to tell them what they should be investigating.
The supposed absolute requirement of mentorship is little more than the need, in some individuals, of someone more talented to supply them with original ideas. Scientists of genuine talent and real perseverance will rarely fail to find their way to impressive achievements.
2
You are delusional if you think successful scientists are made by their inherent genius. No doubt many, if not most, are quite bright, but they are also lucky and they have had the benefit of training with a mentor who not only provides them with the money to do cutting-edge research but also the connections to collaborate with other prominent researchers, name-recognition, high-impact publications (also highly influenced by who you know), and lastly a mentor who will promote you to his/her colleagues.
10
I have no doubt that having good connections can make things flow a lot more smoothly for a scientist, and that luck plays a real role in actual achievements in certain disciplines.
But it is exceedingly rare for a scientist of genuine talent and real perseverance not to find a way in the fullness of time to impressive achievement.
And it is quite common for individuals who have all the connections and mentorship one might ever ask for to flounder once they are mostly left to their own devices to find useful research paths.
Women might ask themselves why they so often need so much "mentorship" to succeed.
But it is exceedingly rare for a scientist of genuine talent and real perseverance not to find a way in the fullness of time to impressive achievement.
And it is quite common for individuals who have all the connections and mentorship one might ever ask for to flounder once they are mostly left to their own devices to find useful research paths.
Women might ask themselves why they so often need so much "mentorship" to succeed.
You do have a point. But in defense of the author, she is referring to mentorship as necessary in the context of getting more women to succeed in academic research per se. In other words to be able to get far enough to make a career of it. As you have a critical mass of women, you will start seeing a change in the environment (yet unspecified change) which will make it more hospitable to young female students (and not necessarily hostile to male students obviously) and also with a broader perspective on the enquiry into the field of research.
As regards Newton, Einstein, et al - please remember Madame Curie was a genius in her field and one of the rare double Nobel laureates. Her daughter Irene (and son-in-law) also won a Nobel Prize - was it due to mentorship or genius or both? The point is there are clearly exceptional minds in men and women, if you keep one all the time in the kitchen or barnyard (milking cows) or in the fields, you lose all of that talent. By fostering women in science, sports and other fields, we are recovering the talent we were wasting otherwise due to antiquated, unthinking, irrational old habits having to do with menstrual cycles and other "solved" problems.
Speaking of Crick - he and Watson took the X-ray diffraction images made by Rosalind Franklin. They practically cheated her out of credit for her work, and her boss actually helped them by giving them her images without her knowledge. Don't you think a good mentor would have helped that woman?
As regards Newton, Einstein, et al - please remember Madame Curie was a genius in her field and one of the rare double Nobel laureates. Her daughter Irene (and son-in-law) also won a Nobel Prize - was it due to mentorship or genius or both? The point is there are clearly exceptional minds in men and women, if you keep one all the time in the kitchen or barnyard (milking cows) or in the fields, you lose all of that talent. By fostering women in science, sports and other fields, we are recovering the talent we were wasting otherwise due to antiquated, unthinking, irrational old habits having to do with menstrual cycles and other "solved" problems.
Speaking of Crick - he and Watson took the X-ray diffraction images made by Rosalind Franklin. They practically cheated her out of credit for her work, and her boss actually helped them by giving them her images without her knowledge. Don't you think a good mentor would have helped that woman?
3
The sheer fact that Dr. Tim Hunt was forced to resign from an honorary professorship over his whimsical comment about females in the laboratory is an insult to free speech, and demonstrative of how silly and out of control the PC Police have become in our society.
6
This has nothing to do with free speech. The guarantee of free speech is there to protect speech from GOVERNMENT interference, period.
This guy simply paid the price for making outrageous public statements. His idiotic opinions lowered his market value, so he lost some perks. He didn't get fired from his paying job (an honorary professorship isn't a paid position), he just took a well-deserved reputational haircut.
This guy simply paid the price for making outrageous public statements. His idiotic opinions lowered his market value, so he lost some perks. He didn't get fired from his paying job (an honorary professorship isn't a paid position), he just took a well-deserved reputational haircut.
2
Since when does free speech = "I can humiliate my employer internationally without any fear of losing my job"?
That has never, ever been the case.
FYI, the phrase "free speech" generally refers to lack of interference by *the government*. It does not mean that anyone has the right to say anything they want, in any forum (no matter how public), with no personal or professional consequences. Individuals are responsible for exercising some common sense and good judgment.
That has never, ever been the case.
FYI, the phrase "free speech" generally refers to lack of interference by *the government*. It does not mean that anyone has the right to say anything they want, in any forum (no matter how public), with no personal or professional consequences. Individuals are responsible for exercising some common sense and good judgment.
1
Some of the fury concerning this incident may have arisen because people are willing to attack Dr. Hunt without reflecting upon where he is coming from. For example, how many of the American readers who referred to him as a "jerk", a "sexist", and "vile" have an understanding of British social interactions? In Britain, the use of the term "girls" is generally considered to be something friendly and personal, and is allowed as long as one has a friendly relationship with that person or persons or perhaps has obtained permission to use that term. It is not an insult. It is, in fact, sociable. As to his reference to falling in love, one would think this to be a good thing, but somehow the enraged responders have missed this. Perhaps they have never been in love themselves? Some responders must know that some men don't know how to respond to a woman's tears and that they just want to make things better. It is painful to them. "Please don't cry", they are thinking, and they feel responsible for making things right.
Finally, Dr. Hunt was exhibiting a classic instance of dry British humor. He was laughing at himself for his ineptitude in love and being able to deal with tears. He was doing it with a straight face, which is the hallmark of dry humor. This kind and brilliant man doesn't deserve the the violent response he has received. At least he is capable of love, which is something those who responded in a vindictive enraged manner probably are not.
Finally, Dr. Hunt was exhibiting a classic instance of dry British humor. He was laughing at himself for his ineptitude in love and being able to deal with tears. He was doing it with a straight face, which is the hallmark of dry humor. This kind and brilliant man doesn't deserve the the violent response he has received. At least he is capable of love, which is something those who responded in a vindictive enraged manner probably are not.
5
Sir you are one of the few who understand. The fact that a Nobel prize winner and indeed,an actual knight, was treated in this way is a disgrace.
2
I've lived and worked in the UK, and that's absolute nonsense. It's just as offensive in the UK to refer to a room full of professional female scientists as "girls". Read some British newspapers-- his sexist remarks were considered just as offensive within the UK as they were in the rest of the world.
Nothing about his remarks bears the slightest relation to "British humour" or "British self-deprecation". The other participants at the event gave him the chance to clarify his remarks at the time, and he made it quite clear that he was being "honest"-- NOT joking. He only claimed that his remarks were jokes considerably later, after getting in hot water.
Also, Hunt didn't make his remarks in the UK-- he made them at an event honoring female scientists in South Korea, where sexism in STEM is (if anything) even more entrenched than it is in the UK. His choice of that particular forum to belittle women and their professionalism was in incredibly poor taste.
Re: falling in love, nobody disputes that people who work closely together sometimes become romantically involved. But it is HIGHLY offensive to imply that women should be excluded from certain jobs because they're "too emotional", or because the men who work with them can't control themselves.
Nothing about his remarks bears the slightest relation to "British humour" or "British self-deprecation". The other participants at the event gave him the chance to clarify his remarks at the time, and he made it quite clear that he was being "honest"-- NOT joking. He only claimed that his remarks were jokes considerably later, after getting in hot water.
Also, Hunt didn't make his remarks in the UK-- he made them at an event honoring female scientists in South Korea, where sexism in STEM is (if anything) even more entrenched than it is in the UK. His choice of that particular forum to belittle women and their professionalism was in incredibly poor taste.
Re: falling in love, nobody disputes that people who work closely together sometimes become romantically involved. But it is HIGHLY offensive to imply that women should be excluded from certain jobs because they're "too emotional", or because the men who work with them can't control themselves.
2
Never make the assumption that what women need are more women mentors. The inability to discuss openly how sexism from senior women colleagues is a major issue. You would not BELIEVE the kinds of things I have seen senior women colleagues tell and do to junior women - differential salaries granted by female chairs (favoring men), women being told to not seek leadership positions because they have young children.... these are comments and actions of women!!
All scientists need great mentors - that is not unique to women at all.
The PNAS study is deeply flawed. I will bet you anything fewer women applied to those top labs. We need to understand that.
Finally, we should also stop tiptoeing around one of the very real issues that face women (especially) scientists. There are a great many scientists who have married or become involved with their mentors to great professional gain (at least temporarily). Examples of this are abundant - it is NOT sexist to say this - it is a fact. Examples of senior men and women who married their trainees: David Baltimore (Alice Huang), Ronald dePinho (Lynda Chin), Jennifer Doudna (Jamie Cate). If you want to include affairs, the list grows substantially. Why is this relevant - Alice Huang's advice may have offended, but she has a perspective from her own experience and seeing science over the last several decades.
All scientists need great mentors - that is not unique to women at all.
The PNAS study is deeply flawed. I will bet you anything fewer women applied to those top labs. We need to understand that.
Finally, we should also stop tiptoeing around one of the very real issues that face women (especially) scientists. There are a great many scientists who have married or become involved with their mentors to great professional gain (at least temporarily). Examples of this are abundant - it is NOT sexist to say this - it is a fact. Examples of senior men and women who married their trainees: David Baltimore (Alice Huang), Ronald dePinho (Lynda Chin), Jennifer Doudna (Jamie Cate). If you want to include affairs, the list grows substantially. Why is this relevant - Alice Huang's advice may have offended, but she has a perspective from her own experience and seeing science over the last several decades.
6
"All scientists need great mentors - that is not unique to women at all."
Amen to that.
Amen to that.
Human interactions are complex and don't always align with our deep beliefs about cause and effect. I once worked for a female in a technical field who told me that she had told one of my colleagues that his team was incompetent. She later complained to me that he had trouble with working for a female because in meetings he would address his comments to me and not to her. I always assumed he did that because I didn't tell him that his team was incompetent. We were in the same place and saw the same situation in two very different ways, with perhaps a bit of truth to both.
I did my PhD and postdoc in ultra-elite labs run by male PIs, who gave me (a female) nothing but encouragement. My male colleagues were a very different story, however. Some were fine, but it was difficult to gain any modicum of acceptance, either socially or intellectually, with the majority. (A few even seemed eager to discredit me and my work.) I do not doubt that many senior, influential scientists are as biased as the author describes. Based on my experience, however, the greatest impediment to women in science is acceptance into the scientific community by male peers.
8
How True. I had to help a friend get tenure by educating her on EEOC RIGHTS BECAUSE HER PEERS AT AN IVY LEAGUE school in BASIC SCIENCE DIDN'T want to play fair. SHE HAD 2.5x greater in grant wards than her nearest male peer. ON top of that burden, The department chair thought women shouldn't get tenure. Vigorus application of the law by her counsel righted the situation but she was shunned for years by her male peers.
2
Again I ask all comment(ers) to please state the exact STEM Field that they are in. Context does Matter.
As an undergrad student and the only female in a business class, I had a professor who routinely made fun of that fact and encouraged others (all males) in the class to make fun of me. As an employee in a firm, the President said to me he had heard I wanted to be a "businessman". As an auditor with no other females to supervise me and all males with experience I was asked why I wanted to have audit guidance by a male. YIKES, they are all a little nuts I think. (There are many other moments like this in my life, these are but a few of the true and sad stories).
10
Firstly, good of you to have overcome these idiots. Secondly, did you mentor any women in your career? Also did you mentor any men and make them better humans so another generation of women does not have to go through the nonsense you went through?
1
One paragraph in this otherwise perceptive article struck me: The one that notes that nearly half the graduate students in bioscience today are female, but only 21% of the full professors are. It seems to me that the percent of female full professors in the field today reflects the situation of perhaps 20 years ago, assuming that it takes at least that long from grad school to get to the top. So we should expect the percentage of female full professors to steadily increase until it reflects today's percentage of graduate students. Why would one expect the percent of female full professors to automatically equal the percent of female graduate students?
2
Trouble is, 20 years ago, I'll bet the ratio was about the same...
2
Hire a mentor who only has daughters !! and has the wisdom and Humanity to recognise FEMALE WISDOM which complements Male Wisdom to get complete wisdom
1
One can't "hire" a mentor in the sciences, or most other fields.
1
Treating female colleagues with respect doesn't require having your own daughter-- anyone with common sense, empathy, and the most basic human social skills should be able to manage, really.
1
Why don't we just get it over with and mandate a 50% female quota in all professions! This is precisely what has been done in US government conservation and many other agencies, and one can see that we are making big progress to save the environment ... right? Wait a minute? Actually no! So .... perhaps it does make a difference whether the most qualified applicant for the job, a person who really has a deep intellectual interest in solving problems in that field is in a critical position. A opposed to someone who just wants the status, fame, reality star celebrity of being the first x, Y, Z to be in this or that position in a given profession. H'mm but that's why the CIA and Supreme Court at least used to exclude themselves from the quota follies. But if our patronage vote buying, wanting to sabotage everything from real environmental protection to the enforcement of our immigration laws criminal political class wants to defeat a certain agency's or profession's progress - they go all out with accepting "minimum qualifications". In order that they might get a more diverse workforce so they can put up a rainbow looking group picture in some publication, kiss up to this or that ethnic or racial group in order to get appointed to a upper level mostly political manipulation (not actually accomplish or discover anything) job in the field.
2
The writing and reasoning demonstrated here both suggest that this scientist's MA was earned for something other than for his writing and his reasoning. Great legs, maybe.
4
In an ideal world, jobs would be filled based on qualifications, but it turns out that in the real world, there is intrinsic bias in science against female job applicants. When scientists were presented with identical applicants but with a random male or female name assigned to the application "Results found that the “female” applicants were rated significantly lower than the “males” in competence, hireability, and whether the scientist would be willing to mentor the student." http://bit.ly/1ciQ0fc
It would be nice if such biases did not exist, but as long as they do, they should be countered by positive discrimination.
It would be nice if such biases did not exist, but as long as they do, they should be countered by positive discrimination.
1
Hating on Hunt doesn't advance women in science. If anything the petty and vindictive streak on display is a turnoff for many early career women.
4
"Hating on Hunt"? Hardly. Men and women are simply holding Hunt accountable for his discriminatory remarks about women.
2
On the contrary-- the fact that the university took this incident seriously sends a positive message to women all over the world (i.e., that this kind of bias is no longer going to be tolerated). It's a particularly positive message to young women who are just starting to consider STEM careers.
I know *many* women in STEM, in various countries, and they've been uniformly pleased that this situation was actually dealt with and not just swept under the rug as per usual.
I know *many* women in STEM, in various countries, and they've been uniformly pleased that this situation was actually dealt with and not just swept under the rug as per usual.
I was mentored by Dr. Alice Huang many years ago thinking that she would help me navigate the treacherous path of male dominated academics. She generally advocated that an attractive female use her sexuality to make career gains. The problem with that approach was that it damaged confidence in the pursuit of scientific achievement. So choosing a mentor based on gender may not be the wisest career choice.
7
Surely Tim Hunt has been thoroughly shamed and thrashed enough for his highly naive and tactless remark--the mistake of which I hope he realizes was not just that it would get into the press. Some hearty boos on the spot would have made him realize what he did. But he was clearly saying something about himself, not making a sweeping generalization about women scientists.
5
"Some hearty boos on the spot would have made him realize what he did."
Well, Hunt was addressing a group of female scientists in South Korea, at a luncheon to which he was invited specifically to honor their professional accomplishments. "Booing" speakers (especially invited guests) is *not* a culturally acceptable custom there.
First-hand accounts (e.g., from the journalist Deborah Blum) indicated that the audience was completely bewildered at his remarks, and at the fact that he chose to share them at an event honoring professional women in STEM. The scientists in attendance later sent a letter to Hunt, expressing their strong dismay his statements.
Well, Hunt was addressing a group of female scientists in South Korea, at a luncheon to which he was invited specifically to honor their professional accomplishments. "Booing" speakers (especially invited guests) is *not* a culturally acceptable custom there.
First-hand accounts (e.g., from the journalist Deborah Blum) indicated that the audience was completely bewildered at his remarks, and at the fact that he chose to share them at an event honoring professional women in STEM. The scientists in attendance later sent a letter to Hunt, expressing their strong dismay his statements.
Few of the very best scientists and mathematicians, artists, sculptors and architects, musicians, poets and playwrights of all time had children. Few of them married. It was impossible for me to work at my full potential and to care properly for my wife and children. For better or for worse, I chose the latter. You can't have your cake and eat it. If we're fortunate, we have choices. So choose.
2
1) I'd love to see the data about the "best scientists and mathematicians, artists, sculptors and architects, musicians, poets and playwrights"!
2) This is not a column about the conflicts between a life in science and taking care of a family--it's a column about the effects of bias against females. So are you saying women should "choose" to be men?
2) This is not a column about the conflicts between a life in science and taking care of a family--it's a column about the effects of bias against females. So are you saying women should "choose" to be men?
6
Albert Einstein was married twice and had several children. Niels Bohr was married and his son also was awarded a Nobel Prize. Marie Curie shared one Nobel Prize with her Husband Pierre and her other Nobel Prize with her daughter Irene.
2
This is also true in other fields like the arts. I was told pointedly by the chairman of my department in art school that because I was female, I wasn't going to be allowed into his group of acolytes, who were all male.
9
I spent 40 years as a lab head, and later department chair, in biomedical sciences. It's a tough career, whatever ones gender, and yes, women have a tougher row to hoe owing to their career demands conflicting with biology, for those who wish to start a family. Speaking for myself, I was able to train roughly equal numbers of male and female PhD's, and managed to avoid romantic attractions with any of them. The department which I chaired for over a decade hired, and promoted, more females than males, because our recruitment efforts attracted for whatever reason more highly qualified females. The one point in this column with which I have to take issue is the statistic concerning numbers of female students vs female facutly, especially at the higher ranks. When I was in grad school, greater than 75% of my fellow students were males; today, the split is roughly 50-50. In light of this, is it at all unexpected to find current faculty ranks disproportionately male? And the same for Nobel (and other) prizes?
3
Try being the only "girl" in a DA's office in a big city. And going to trial and having judges and jurors and defense lawyers think you are a secretary......until you show them all how good you are as a trial lawyer. It takes many women to break through glass ceilings, but they all have to do it one and at time. Now to get that pesky president of the USA position to a woman, and change the world.
10
What is it about some men that they have so little self-discipline? Tim Hunt provides empirical evidence that a Nobel Prize isn't given for maturity.
11
Dwelling on what he said does not help, we need to simply continue working in our labs and let our research do the talking. (Haters gonna hate)
I am only motivated by things like this. When we make the cover of Nature that will be enough to show anyone who doesn't believe.
-MIT Science girl
I am only motivated by things like this. When we make the cover of Nature that will be enough to show anyone who doesn't believe.
-MIT Science girl
3
Thank you for writing this column. My first reaction when I read that Dr. Hunt had lost his job was that it was a convenient, expedient, and, let's face it, easy course of action for the university to take. They can feign horror at his insensitive remarks and declare their commitment to gender equality, but I can't imagine this was the first hint of his sexism. What about where the rubber meets the road? Are they hiring female PIs? Recruiting female tenure-track faculty? Are they using their considerable influence to promote the education of girls in the STEM fields, and then actively recruiting them as students? If not, then dismissing Dr. Hunt was an empty and hypocritical gesture intended more to save face than make things right.
It's one thing to say you're in favor of gender parity. It's quite another to actually do something about it. Words are cheap.
It's one thing to say you're in favor of gender parity. It's quite another to actually do something about it. Words are cheap.
170
Bravo for stating the raw truth abut human society!
The humanities and social sciences aren't much different.
And it is not just erotic stuff, it can involve any permutation of power relations gone rogue.
Thank you for a post that reveals the all too real and unfortunate dynamics that sometime get very much in the way of a more pure academic process.
And it is not just erotic stuff, it can involve any permutation of power relations gone rogue.
Thank you for a post that reveals the all too real and unfortunate dynamics that sometime get very much in the way of a more pure academic process.
5
A female Chemistry grad student lived in my dorm. She was planning to get a PhD . There was a big presentation that all of the masters students had to give to the whole department. This was in her second year. She slaved over this and spent weeks preparing.
The day came and she gave a great presentation. Her department (all male), said she did "okay". She was livid. The next presentation was from a male grad student. He threw together his presentation that very morning. It was very minimal. The male heads in the department told him his presentation was wonderful in front of everyone.
She realized no matter what she did, they were never going to allow her to graduate from their program with a PhD. She left that spring with a masters degree and took a job. She never got the PhD.
So when they talk about women leaving these PhD programs--one big question is why. The articles always cite age, family obligations etc. how many women leave because of the way they have been treated?
The day came and she gave a great presentation. Her department (all male), said she did "okay". She was livid. The next presentation was from a male grad student. He threw together his presentation that very morning. It was very minimal. The male heads in the department told him his presentation was wonderful in front of everyone.
She realized no matter what she did, they were never going to allow her to graduate from their program with a PhD. She left that spring with a masters degree and took a job. She never got the PhD.
So when they talk about women leaving these PhD programs--one big question is why. The articles always cite age, family obligations etc. how many women leave because of the way they have been treated?
40
I agree. It is a death by thousand cuts, and starts much earlier than the family stage. I think by the time women are having children, it is the last drop on a long list of inferior mentoring and other obstacles.
4
I was fortunate to have parents who encouraged me in my interests in science. I was fortunate as an undergraduate in a liberal arts college where I had excellent mentors including the woman who supervised my undergraduate thesis work (she went on to become chair of the department and later dean of sciences). As a PhD student and later post-doctoral fellow in the University of California system I was again fortunate that my mentors (both men) treated me with respect and encouragement (as they did all of their students, male or female, American-born or foreign, of any race or orientation). It took me many more years to realize that not all female scientists are so lucky.
10
I note that the print version of this op-ed contains the following: "He [Dr. Hunt] was swiftly censured for his remarks and forced to resign from an honorary professor post and several high-profile committees, which indicates how seriously institutions take the problem of gender bias." Why this has been deleted from the online version is not explained, but perhaps someone has noticed the strong backlash in Britain against Hunt's forced resignation.
To summarily force a professor to resign, whether a Nobel Prize winner or not, for some idiotic remarks casually thrown off about romantic experiences in labs and women's propensity for crying when criticized, without even the pretense of due process, is simply outrageous. And that is what a lot of people in Britain have after a little consideration realized. I note too that many of the people who have come to Hunt's defense (over his forced resignation, not his remarks) are women who have worked with him in labs and also women whom he has mentored. The portrait they offer is of a generous and supportive teacher, colleague, and mentor. (And his wife, herself a distinguished biologist, points out that he does most of the cooking and washing.) Have any women come forward to say his behavior towards them, in or outside of labs, has been in any way discriminatory? I haven't seen any such.
Had Hunt been provided even minimal due process, what exactly would the charge be?
To summarily force a professor to resign, whether a Nobel Prize winner or not, for some idiotic remarks casually thrown off about romantic experiences in labs and women's propensity for crying when criticized, without even the pretense of due process, is simply outrageous. And that is what a lot of people in Britain have after a little consideration realized. I note too that many of the people who have come to Hunt's defense (over his forced resignation, not his remarks) are women who have worked with him in labs and also women whom he has mentored. The portrait they offer is of a generous and supportive teacher, colleague, and mentor. (And his wife, herself a distinguished biologist, points out that he does most of the cooking and washing.) Have any women come forward to say his behavior towards them, in or outside of labs, has been in any way discriminatory? I haven't seen any such.
Had Hunt been provided even minimal due process, what exactly would the charge be?
8
No "due process" concerns are implicated here. Good grief. There does not exist, and he was not deprived of, any "right" to be a member of high-profile committees that the state is required to respect. This is not a criminal proceeding.
3
I am presently a young assistant professor on the tenure track. I recently had my first child and am back from my maternity leave. During the course of my maternity leave, I was actively writing grants and papers.
I am very luck to have an excellent female mentor during my PhD (who is now a national academy member). During my PhD I saw her personally struggle with comments made regarding her ethnicity and sex during conferences by other members of the scientific community. Discrimination is active and well in the scientific community. However, I also saw the way she responded to discrimination. Openly, actively, and now I see how successful she is today.
In regards to Tim Hunt's comments. It is true, men and women can fall in love in the lab. I fell in love with my husband during my PhD (although in a different lab). However, our relationship in many times has inspired both of us to continue actively in strong pursuit of science when at times many friends have left the field.
So, in conclusion, I find that love, contrary to Tim Hunt's suggestion, can actually aid in science. I also find that women, contrary to his suggestion, have to be stronger in the face in criticism than men, since oftentimes that criticism is not based on the actual science at hand.
My experience has been very different than his, and I hope other women can agree with me on this. I hope that times continue to change.
I am very luck to have an excellent female mentor during my PhD (who is now a national academy member). During my PhD I saw her personally struggle with comments made regarding her ethnicity and sex during conferences by other members of the scientific community. Discrimination is active and well in the scientific community. However, I also saw the way she responded to discrimination. Openly, actively, and now I see how successful she is today.
In regards to Tim Hunt's comments. It is true, men and women can fall in love in the lab. I fell in love with my husband during my PhD (although in a different lab). However, our relationship in many times has inspired both of us to continue actively in strong pursuit of science when at times many friends have left the field.
So, in conclusion, I find that love, contrary to Tim Hunt's suggestion, can actually aid in science. I also find that women, contrary to his suggestion, have to be stronger in the face in criticism than men, since oftentimes that criticism is not based on the actual science at hand.
My experience has been very different than his, and I hope other women can agree with me on this. I hope that times continue to change.
133
I'm thinking Dr. Hunt's "love" as unrequited love.
I just finished reading a WaPo article: Advice to young scientists: don't worry about adviser peering down your shirt. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/06/02/advice-to-y...
The gist of the piece was that a young scientist complained to a career advice columnist about her mentor looking down her blouse, asking "what to do?" The columnist (a woman) pretty much told her to ignore and even laugh about it. Huh. The comments section pretty much agreed with it. Most commenters advice was "button up your shirt, men can't control themselves, nor should they be expected to."
But we all know that women covering themselves up isn't the issue. Some commented "wear a turtleneck." So we are stuck at this: women, we'll tell you what to wear, and if you get attention, don't blame us.
When I was in advertising, my supervisor told me I'd get further ahead if I "wore more low-cut dresses."
C'mon scientists: you're smarter than that. I sure hope you're smarter than that. You're not smarter than that? You're not smarter than that.
And yet, women are told they're not good at science.
Wow.
The gist of the piece was that a young scientist complained to a career advice columnist about her mentor looking down her blouse, asking "what to do?" The columnist (a woman) pretty much told her to ignore and even laugh about it. Huh. The comments section pretty much agreed with it. Most commenters advice was "button up your shirt, men can't control themselves, nor should they be expected to."
But we all know that women covering themselves up isn't the issue. Some commented "wear a turtleneck." So we are stuck at this: women, we'll tell you what to wear, and if you get attention, don't blame us.
When I was in advertising, my supervisor told me I'd get further ahead if I "wore more low-cut dresses."
C'mon scientists: you're smarter than that. I sure hope you're smarter than that. You're not smarter than that? You're not smarter than that.
And yet, women are told they're not good at science.
Wow.
8
There is an element of truth to commenters' suggestions to "button up" her shirt. While her mentor's behavior is unacceptable, professional women should dress the part. Yes, I know that there are a lot of mixed messages out there, but the bottom line is that one doesn't see professional men in revealing clothes. Think first of yourself as a professional in the lab and dress accordingly.
There is another side to this story. I won't argue with the author about sexism being alive and well in science and the acadame, but it is even more troubling to me that sexism is alive in well in so many young women. I teach for an on-line writing course. Again and again, women over the eighteen refer to themselves as girls. A few of us fought in the Seventies and Eighties to restore power to calling ourselves women. A woman is an adult. A girl is a child - and as such, open to dismissal, patronization and marginalization. I teach my students how important naming is. Girlism also manifests itself in the babytalk voices so many young women use. It is astonishing what happens when a Valley-girl speaker drops her voice half an octave and speaks. She becomes worthy of attention.
5
Your experience in teaching an "online writing course" has no relevance to the experiences of the author of this op-ed.
I've just returned from a stint teaching science majors at a university in a former Soviet republic, my class graduating this year. Many are going on to medical school and to careers in biomedical and other sciences in laboratories in Europe and Asia. I really do tire of the whining of American women scientists...well, Americans generally, but women scientists in this particular case. You want a baby instead of advancing your career? That is a choice. You think your gender entitles you to some sort of privilege? That is a fiction. I would have no problem NOT falling in love in the lab with the author or any other like-minded whiner. Want the recognition? Do the work.
2
You, sir, are part of the problem.
1
Academia is no different than the rest of society... I lost my supervisory role when a man who was on the management track needed it in order to continue that trajectory. Meanwhile a co-supervisor refused to consider hiring a qualified woman because he "...couldn't understand her" - so I remain one of two women in a sea of male IT technology professionals - the "one percent" as it were...
8
This is spot on. Bravo.
As for Hunt's remarks, the irony of it is that in my experience it is MEN who are more emotional than women in labs. Their insecurity, need to feel they are the best, to dominate, to be the smartest person in the room can overwhelm them so that they behave and carry on like two year olds. They scream, they yell, they berate their colleagues, they misbehave and yes, they cry. In fact, a woman who behaved like a man would be ostracized and probably thought to be crazy. So even our perceptions of WHO is more emotional is clouded by gender bias. We accept men's emotions as the norm, but men are more emotional than women in my lab experience. And didn't Tim Hunt say he cried when he was fired???? He certainly has companied bitterly (just like a girl?)
As for Hunt's remarks, the irony of it is that in my experience it is MEN who are more emotional than women in labs. Their insecurity, need to feel they are the best, to dominate, to be the smartest person in the room can overwhelm them so that they behave and carry on like two year olds. They scream, they yell, they berate their colleagues, they misbehave and yes, they cry. In fact, a woman who behaved like a man would be ostracized and probably thought to be crazy. So even our perceptions of WHO is more emotional is clouded by gender bias. We accept men's emotions as the norm, but men are more emotional than women in my lab experience. And didn't Tim Hunt say he cried when he was fired???? He certainly has companied bitterly (just like a girl?)
24
I have to wonder how much knowledge our world may have missed out on if some of our greatest minds had been born with two X chromosomes. Would Stephanie Hawking have been able to overcome so many obstacles to success? How about Alberta Edison, Carla Sagan ... fill in your own.
1
Maybe they were, and we did.
3
And don't forget the lingering effects that mentor will have on your entire career. I had a fabulous advisor in graduate school, a real silver-back in our field. But once I graduated and married a man he didn't care so much for, his mentorship of me came to an astonishingly abrupt halt. No more professional promotion, no award nominations, no special invitations to conferences. How many men would do that to another younger man just because they weren't so happy about who the new wife was? Not many, I would guess, since in the sciences personal life is supposed to be separate from the professional. Not so much for women.
6
6 Women Scientists Who Were Snubbed Due to Sexism - http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130519-women-scientists-...
There are many more.
There are many more.
1
Over 50 YAG at Purdue while an undergraduate, there were 15 males for every female. Yes it is a science and engineering with a bit of agriculture also. Today the male/female ratio is nearly even. Why this has happened is anyone's guess but it is heartening to see the female participation increase.
The "trouble with girls" guy has demonstrated he can't have any sort of administrative responsibilities as he will be biased against females.
Just remember Women's Suffrage was enacted just over 100 YAG - I hope we will continue to make progress and IMHO a baby bump is a sign of optimism!
The "trouble with girls" guy has demonstrated he can't have any sort of administrative responsibilities as he will be biased against females.
Just remember Women's Suffrage was enacted just over 100 YAG - I hope we will continue to make progress and IMHO a baby bump is a sign of optimism!
4
POST DOC LEADS TO PROPER DOC
Post doc leads to propter doc,
which means, of course, a horrid waste,
a statement that one needs to knock
not only on the grounds of taste ,
which is distinctinctly disputandum,
since creation of new lives
generates not only pandem-
onium in pre-post doc wives,
but the rationale living,
as by the Bible, we are told.
That’s the reason I’m forgiving
propter docs whose stranglehold
on the post docs causes them
to be confined outside a lab,
until a terminus ad quem,
called matrimonial rehab.
[email protected]
Post doc leads to propter doc,
which means, of course, a horrid waste,
a statement that one needs to knock
not only on the grounds of taste ,
which is distinctinctly disputandum,
since creation of new lives
generates not only pandem-
onium in pre-post doc wives,
but the rationale living,
as by the Bible, we are told.
That’s the reason I’m forgiving
propter docs whose stranglehold
on the post docs causes them
to be confined outside a lab,
until a terminus ad quem,
called matrimonial rehab.
[email protected]
Witnessing this crazed feminist uproar over Hunt’s quip – that’s what it was – has given me the idea that besides the now-fashionable “trigger warning” signs, there should also be “land-mine” warnings. The trigger one would be posted outside the class room for students, and the land-mine one would be posted on top of the professor’s desk. This would warn a male professor that making the wrong remark i.e. ”they cry when you criticize them” is the equivalent of stepping on one: he will surely lose a limb or two, and quite possibly his livelihood.
What apparently is out-of-the-question is the remote possibility that Hunt was voicing an honest opinion based on his real experiences. In his long career he very likely has seen various “fall in love” lab romances, and he has also very likely, via his criticism, brought a few females to tears.
This pitchfork teapot-tempest is, of course, reminiscent of Larry Summer’s crucifixion for suggesting their might actually be innate differences in male and female brains at the highest levels of math.
Of course, the basis of this uproar isn’t that men make dumb remarks (so do women), but the contention that there aren’t enough women in STEM fields because of male bias. You may recall that last November a scientist with the European Space Agency was pilloried for wearing a Hawaiian shirt covered with women in swimsuits to news conference. How dare he when there aren’t enough women scientists! He had to apologize.
What apparently is out-of-the-question is the remote possibility that Hunt was voicing an honest opinion based on his real experiences. In his long career he very likely has seen various “fall in love” lab romances, and he has also very likely, via his criticism, brought a few females to tears.
This pitchfork teapot-tempest is, of course, reminiscent of Larry Summer’s crucifixion for suggesting their might actually be innate differences in male and female brains at the highest levels of math.
Of course, the basis of this uproar isn’t that men make dumb remarks (so do women), but the contention that there aren’t enough women in STEM fields because of male bias. You may recall that last November a scientist with the European Space Agency was pilloried for wearing a Hawaiian shirt covered with women in swimsuits to news conference. How dare he when there aren’t enough women scientists! He had to apologize.
2
Apparently Hunt's employer didn't view responses to Hunt's remarks in a speech to an international conference, that they paid for him to attend, as a "crazed feminist uproar."
I am a 70 year old woman whose career choices were nursing or teaching and this nonsense in 2015 makes me want to scream and run amok.
19
I pity all of you who think that the forced resignation of a scientist that has contributed massively to the advancement of the human race is a just outcome for making some comments at a conference. If you don't like his comments, you are more than welcome to think poorly of him personally, or to not associate with him, or indeed condemn the comments. But to take someone's career away, a career that has spanned decades and was of great worth, especially at the end of his life, is the worst sort of thought police tactic.
Political correctness and the tyranny has truly reached terrifying proportions. You don't need to agree with the man's foolish comments to condemn utterly the reign of terror being perpetrated by the illiberal left.
Political correctness and the tyranny has truly reached terrifying proportions. You don't need to agree with the man's foolish comments to condemn utterly the reign of terror being perpetrated by the illiberal left.
4
Until we come up with better child-care arrangements in this country, too many women will perceive that their life choices are Either/Or -- either a challenging career, or child care you are happy with, but never both -- and too many of them will be right. We deserve both. Our children deserve both. Our children's fathers deserve both! And our country needs us to have both, if we are to keep up.
6
women are half the population. the article is explaining that dr. hunt's job was to be a mentor. he admitted he could not do his job and quite properly resigned.
7
'...He was swiftly censured for his remarks, and forced to resign from an honorary professor post and from several high-profile committees, which indicates how seriously institutions take the problem of gender bias...'
Which was an outrage, as one stupid lame job is not an indication of 'gender bias', just bad joke telling and old age.
'...Getting on your mentor’s bad side could ruin your career...'
Getting on the bad side of any person in authority can ruin your career.
If women get a reputation as huge whiners, looking for 'gender bias' in every remark or situation, what will happen is that managers in male-dominated professions will be reluctant to hire women.
As a women in a male-dominated profession, the way to deal with any hint of sexism is to head it off at the pass. Any woman over the age of 20 can see a pass coming for miles away and any woman over the age of 20 should know how to head it off, not with 'good humor', but not with crying and drama either.
One example is as a new hire, my male boss asked me to lunch. It was not a 'working' lunch and was not a 'getting to know you lunch', as if it was, it would have been with the rest of the small department. He was a player and that came off clearly in his manner, but when I declined with a 'Thank you, but I already have lunch plans', he accepted it gracefully and, more importantly, never asked me again.
Deflecting a pass is a critical skill for all women and the vast majority of men accept it and that is that.
Which was an outrage, as one stupid lame job is not an indication of 'gender bias', just bad joke telling and old age.
'...Getting on your mentor’s bad side could ruin your career...'
Getting on the bad side of any person in authority can ruin your career.
If women get a reputation as huge whiners, looking for 'gender bias' in every remark or situation, what will happen is that managers in male-dominated professions will be reluctant to hire women.
As a women in a male-dominated profession, the way to deal with any hint of sexism is to head it off at the pass. Any woman over the age of 20 can see a pass coming for miles away and any woman over the age of 20 should know how to head it off, not with 'good humor', but not with crying and drama either.
One example is as a new hire, my male boss asked me to lunch. It was not a 'working' lunch and was not a 'getting to know you lunch', as if it was, it would have been with the rest of the small department. He was a player and that came off clearly in his manner, but when I declined with a 'Thank you, but I already have lunch plans', he accepted it gracefully and, more importantly, never asked me again.
Deflecting a pass is a critical skill for all women and the vast majority of men accept it and that is that.
4
The woman who was the victim of the shirt-peering should learn to use her own eyes to do a little peering of her own. A taste pf his own medicine. FTR, I do hate it when someone speaks to my chest instead of to my face.
I wonder if Marie Curie worried about things like this, or did she just focus on the tasks and discoveries which comprised the reason she was in the laboratory in the first place.
1
What I fail to understand in the article and in most readers comments, is what the new discovery is about this sort attitude in academia. This is - very frankly - nothing new. The fact that it manifested itself in a way that is offensive to women is a variant on the "above everyone else" attitude that permeates these careers.
Yet another reason why I cringe when someone says "what? you don't believe in science???".
I very much believe in science. I do not believe every scientist.
Yet another reason why I cringe when someone says "what? you don't believe in science???".
I very much believe in science. I do not believe every scientist.
1
I'm a woman and have faced gender bias, especially in the 80s. But I can tell you that much has gotten better over time. I am disappointed that the Times has decided to pick on this elderly laureate to continue their story of gender inequality. It is incredibly wrong. But I guess no one can say anything anymore. No one can have an opinion or feeling, typically based on their personal history over their lifetime, if it doesn't match the new marching orders of the progressives. Why?
3
I was recently told by my manager that although he believes I do not lack in technical skills, senior management in the company would rather hear the opinions of a "good ol' boy" over mine.
Yes, it really happened. This was barely a month ago. No, I'm not going to sue. Yes, I'm going to have to find another job. Yes, this sucks.
Yes, it really happened. This was barely a month ago. No, I'm not going to sue. Yes, I'm going to have to find another job. Yes, this sucks.
23
I find it very sad that the author thinks that "Dr. Huang’s counsel was regrettably sound" because "Getting on your mentor’s bad side could ruin your career". Many people, who were harassed/discriminated keep it quiet because their career could be destroyed. As less people take action, less is known about these everyday issues. Moreover, since it isn't a topic that is addressed or discussed well, this 'system' is perceived as 'normal' although it is unhealthy in many different ways.
4 years ago I filed a complaint against my PhD advisor of 4 years for sexual harassment. Did my career get ruined? Yes, at least for now. Did I get discriminated because of this? Yes, I have been treated like a problem student instead of been respected for risking my career for doing the right thing. I am not trying to say everybody should do it, but I believe we need to speak about and discuss these issues more publicly (even if we don't take drastic action about it, like I did) so that this 'system' will change in a healthier way for everyone and for future scientists.
This mindset needs to change because sticking with this mindset feeds more and more into it. The gender inequality, immense power of our advisor over our career, sexism, and prejudice against women for being the child-bearer should not be tolerated. I shouldn't be expected to be in the lab all weekend because "I'm not married and I don't have kids" (something the director of graduate studies in my program told me 4 years ago).
4 years ago I filed a complaint against my PhD advisor of 4 years for sexual harassment. Did my career get ruined? Yes, at least for now. Did I get discriminated because of this? Yes, I have been treated like a problem student instead of been respected for risking my career for doing the right thing. I am not trying to say everybody should do it, but I believe we need to speak about and discuss these issues more publicly (even if we don't take drastic action about it, like I did) so that this 'system' will change in a healthier way for everyone and for future scientists.
This mindset needs to change because sticking with this mindset feeds more and more into it. The gender inequality, immense power of our advisor over our career, sexism, and prejudice against women for being the child-bearer should not be tolerated. I shouldn't be expected to be in the lab all weekend because "I'm not married and I don't have kids" (something the director of graduate studies in my program told me 4 years ago).
5
Truly we have reached in the promised land when female scientists' problems in the lab are as trivial as having to remember like wearing a sensible shirt that does not invite prying eyes or having to borrow an extra-large lab coat when pregnant!
3
It is odd that no one has mentioned the case of the Stanford Mentor relationship that went seriously awry - featured in the NYTimes Magazine not too long ago.
Just like people have more than one dimension, socially as well as academically, they should not depend on one mentor for their future well-being. Universities and Professional organizations should work together to promote multiple connections between leaders and "understudies".
Just like people have more than one dimension, socially as well as academically, they should not depend on one mentor for their future well-being. Universities and Professional organizations should work together to promote multiple connections between leaders and "understudies".
3
While you and I would like to think that a fundamental sense of fairness should infuse the debate over women in the workplace, the truth is that the system of male dominance has served men quite comfortably down through history. So, is it really so surprising that many of them, even intelligent and highly educated men like Dr. Tim Hunt, feel no obligation to seek justice in the treatment of women?
No, apparently it is not surprising.
No, apparently it is not surprising.
11
Excellent piece describing the realities for women. The lack of mentoring feeds on itself--fewer women get their own labs because of it, so there are even fewer women who can mentor other women. The bias against women among male scientists is an outrage and limits the number of talented women scientists who can contribute to society. Time for a serious change of behaviors--voluntarily or by edict.
4
These remarks by Tim Hunt certainly sound like comments from someone who is totally out of touch with current PC thought restrictions. We've all seen that before. But much more interesting would be to hear from women scientists whom Dr Hunt has mentored--how were they treated and how were their careers furthered?
4
I received my PhD in biomedical sciences nearly 30 years ago and can attest to the struggle. No support - only brick walls. After a postdoc and many years as a research scientist in industry, I left research to pursue a new career in law. What a difference! The support and mentoring is outstanding by both men and women. Its a revelation to see what a difference support and mentoring makes to one's career. I am saddened to hear that life is not much better for today's young women researchers. But, please, keep up the struggle - for our daughters and granddaughters.
5
I am a mechanical engineer and mom, who researches risk and writes internal white papers for a living. Finding mentors in a male world is hard, but I've found an edge. I have a quasi military background and married a soldier. I can always find a verteran to take me on, because I can speak a common language that most of the world cannot. Won't work for most women but it has worked for me.
2
I am very sorry to hear that things have not changed in the 40 years since I was a graduate student and post-doc in molecular biology. I ended up with a good career in biotech (not with a top rated company) and a family but I also always had male bosses, some better than others.
Good piece overall, but one quibble: claiming 7pm to be "working late" trivializes professionals' real gripes about work culture. When I was an associate in Big Law, I was just warming up by then. It was not unusual to be at the office past 10pm, even on holidays.
And yes, I did have a family (and a baby). And no, I don't work jobs like that anymore.
And yes, I did have a family (and a baby). And no, I don't work jobs like that anymore.
1
I am going to play futurist... When I read articles like these, I feel the planet seems to be heading in this direction:
Mandatory paternal leave. Fathers will have no choice but to spend as much time raising and getting to know their children and doing domestic duties as mothers. Women won't be the only ones away from their work for extended periods.
It will become completely normal to have 'spouses' and 'affairs' at work. Couples will find ways to deal with it honestly and openly. The very institution of marriage may eventually change to accommodate it all.
Mandatory paternal leave. Fathers will have no choice but to spend as much time raising and getting to know their children and doing domestic duties as mothers. Women won't be the only ones away from their work for extended periods.
It will become completely normal to have 'spouses' and 'affairs' at work. Couples will find ways to deal with it honestly and openly. The very institution of marriage may eventually change to accommodate it all.
1
Tim Hunt's type of seemingly benign sexism exists everywhere--with both men and women.
Until we--both men and women--pursue and reward our endeavors "on the merits" none of us will find justice. This pertains not only to gender equality but also to race, religion, disability and so on. Lifting up one group a person at a time and punishing the innocent is not a solution that is fair nor just. We must demand that decisions be made on the merits, if this is not done then punish the perpetrators both individually and systemically--don't take from the innocent.
Complete transparency in all recruiting, hiring, promoting, demoting, and firing is a necessary first step.
Until we--both men and women--pursue and reward our endeavors "on the merits" none of us will find justice. This pertains not only to gender equality but also to race, religion, disability and so on. Lifting up one group a person at a time and punishing the innocent is not a solution that is fair nor just. We must demand that decisions be made on the merits, if this is not done then punish the perpetrators both individually and systemically--don't take from the innocent.
Complete transparency in all recruiting, hiring, promoting, demoting, and firing is a necessary first step.
1
Contrary to several posters, and as the Hunt situation shows, the problem remains. As a Asst Prof, (mid90s) a Full Prof asked if my photomicroscopy was 'making wallpaper for my dollhouse'. Was my microanatomy atlas a 'storybook for my dollies?' I outlasted him ('I won', thanks DH), but less blatant problems continue. My male peers go for beers to chat science with male peers but never include female colleagues - that's where collaborations get done, and new insights created. A PI group to critique each others' grant proposals included only men. Oh, plus me (I was the afterthought). My male PI peers still see female PIs as conducting "softer science" even though we use the same reagents, equipment, and exptal techniques.
The subtle biases are extraordinarily well documented in Virginia Valian's excellent book, "Why So Slow?" The male posters here who refuse to believe believe need to read this. We all have subtle biases that shape our subconscious thinking and impressions. Understanding that we have these and recognizing them when it happens, is halfway to resolving the problem.
I have a full lab and, like many of my female peers, have more female than male grad students and postdocs. I don't insist that they all become PI clones of me. Frankly, the jobs aren't there. But I do insist that, whatever the career path or gender, they continue to do good science and practice clear thinking and problem solving, because that's what we do in science so well.
The subtle biases are extraordinarily well documented in Virginia Valian's excellent book, "Why So Slow?" The male posters here who refuse to believe believe need to read this. We all have subtle biases that shape our subconscious thinking and impressions. Understanding that we have these and recognizing them when it happens, is halfway to resolving the problem.
I have a full lab and, like many of my female peers, have more female than male grad students and postdocs. I don't insist that they all become PI clones of me. Frankly, the jobs aren't there. But I do insist that, whatever the career path or gender, they continue to do good science and practice clear thinking and problem solving, because that's what we do in science so well.
18
The fact that Professor Hunt was shunned and fired for this "offhand" joke is far, far more worrying than anything in this op-ed.
5
"The columnist, Dr. Alice Huang, advised her not only to put up with it, but to do so with “good humor.” "
This was perhaps more disappointing than Tim Hunt. I think that it would be difficult to find a woman who was not blatantly sexually harassed in a lab who just put up with it. Science is a small world. Keep your mouth shut or throw away your career. Really, it is that simple.
This was perhaps more disappointing than Tim Hunt. I think that it would be difficult to find a woman who was not blatantly sexually harassed in a lab who just put up with it. Science is a small world. Keep your mouth shut or throw away your career. Really, it is that simple.
4
Thank you Dr. Soper, for illuminating the more likely scenario related to Tim Hunt's "trouble with girls"; that is, "you fall in love with them," they reject your annoying and innappropriate behavior, you get your revenge, they complain.
5
One of the issues is the long working hours needed to be successful in research, often 12 hour days 6 or 7 days a week. A woman who wants children needs to either cut back and be less successful or put off having children until she are firmly established. Though there are good examples of men taking on more of the burden or helping out 50-50, it is more often the case that the woman opts to take on more of the childcare. I waited until my 40's to have a child and created a "no weekend" work rule. My husband, though, still works weekends.
1
" woman who wants children needs to either cut back and be less successful or put off having children until she are firmly established"
No. Her husband needs to help more. After all, they're his children too, right?
I'm so tired of people talking about "women having children" as if men in science aren't making the exact same choice to have children- it just doesn't impact their careers as much because they know women are taking on a greater portion of the childcare.
No. Her husband needs to help more. After all, they're his children too, right?
I'm so tired of people talking about "women having children" as if men in science aren't making the exact same choice to have children- it just doesn't impact their careers as much because they know women are taking on a greater portion of the childcare.
Part of the problem comes from the notion of "prestigious labs" - celebrity labs which rise above all the "ordinary" labs and lend prestige to their alumni. Narrowing an employment search to "prestigious" loci gives the celebrity Principle Investigators of those labs a drunken sense of their own power, likely leading to abuse of that power (yes, I've seen it happen). A more productive approach is to credit all of those non-celebrity labs which beaver away in obscurity, testing their own individual models of the universe. These labs are far more accessible and offer more opportunity for original thinking. And the history of science shows that the no-name labs are ultimately where the paradigm-shifting science comes from! If you want to succeed as a woman (or a man) in science pick a productive, free-thinking mentor with a modest self-image in a less-well-known lab.
1
I find it interesting that no one makes a correlation with race when it comes to the overt and sometimes "just" normalized sexism that is on display in the lives of (in this case) women scientists AND too many comments here.
If we substituted some of the words and situations for parallel ones involving presumptions about race, I think even more would see the realities, whether or not many would still say, "if you just work hard enough..." solves all problems.
Even in the "hard sciences" where one might assume knowledge about biology and the myths surrounding race or "the weaker sex" is greater than in the average population, there will still be those who easily and readily buy into the perceived "problems with girls" and similar and yes, someone has to call them on it--so if losing a job is the result when someone won't learn over decades, so be it. That (in this case, white) men can be unstable, alcoholic, abusive, less competent, never show up on time, and all manner of behaviors that can mean "trouble with boys" seems to regularly get lost in these discussions.
If we substituted some of the words and situations for parallel ones involving presumptions about race, I think even more would see the realities, whether or not many would still say, "if you just work hard enough..." solves all problems.
Even in the "hard sciences" where one might assume knowledge about biology and the myths surrounding race or "the weaker sex" is greater than in the average population, there will still be those who easily and readily buy into the perceived "problems with girls" and similar and yes, someone has to call them on it--so if losing a job is the result when someone won't learn over decades, so be it. That (in this case, white) men can be unstable, alcoholic, abusive, less competent, never show up on time, and all manner of behaviors that can mean "trouble with boys" seems to regularly get lost in these discussions.
2
As a female professor in a STEM discipline, who came up (somewhat) early for promotion and has had sufficient/substantial external funding as well as a great marriage and 3 really fun and well-balanced children, I feel that I really do have it all; being an academic or research science is a career I would wholeheartedly recommend to men and women!
As far as I am aware, I have not experienced any sexism (not overt at least, who knows about anonymous peer-review). This is not to disavow the experiences of others, rather I simply want to point out that science can be an exciting and rewarding field that *usually* functions as a meritocracy and that it is possible to establish work-life balance.
As far as I am aware, I have not experienced any sexism (not overt at least, who knows about anonymous peer-review). This is not to disavow the experiences of others, rather I simply want to point out that science can be an exciting and rewarding field that *usually* functions as a meritocracy and that it is possible to establish work-life balance.
1
Having spent many years in a research field where women were given preferential treatment when it came to promotions, funding, and tenure -- in many cases, the review committees on which I sat would go out of their way to favor projects that had women in charge, at the expense of equally-qualified scientists who had the misfortune to be born with a Y chromosome -- I can sympathize with Dr. Soper's experience. Gender bias in any form has no place in science, and will always lead to inferior outcomes, just as Dr. Soper suggests.
40
Paul G, have you ever heard of "confirmation bias?" Study after study have shown that when profiles lack gender identification, men and women are judged as equally skilled, talented, competent, etc. But as soon as gender identification is added, women are seen as less skilled, talented, competent, etc than their male counterparts -- even on the same profile. You write "equally-qualified scientists who had the misfortune to be born with a Y chromosome" -- yet you imply that the outcomes are "always" "inferior." In fact, I'm surprised that you didn't write "better-qualified," instead of "equally-qualified," since I'm fairly certain that's what you meant.
3
Poor baby. This is the lament of those who are used to having 100% and now find they have to make do with 95%
3
It would be interesting to see statistics to back up your anecdotal knowledge. Confirmation bias leads one to remember the conversations that support your assumptions and to forget those that don't.
However, when there are anywhere near the same number of studies and the same amount of funding for women-led efforts as there are for those led by men, something that, as the article indicates is demonstrably not the case, I'll have more sympathy for your viewpoint.
However, when there are anywhere near the same number of studies and the same amount of funding for women-led efforts as there are for those led by men, something that, as the article indicates is demonstrably not the case, I'll have more sympathy for your viewpoint.
3
Soper's experiences in the lab in 2015, doesn't sound much different than my experiences in the lab in the 90's. It is disheartening that some of the work we continue to do in the K-12 space hasn't produced much progress. However, I continue to be hopeful that helping our girls see that they can and should continue to achieve to do what they love, especially in the sciences. I continue to be hopeful that we will do the same type of work in the K-12 space when working with boys. They are the ones that will begin to shift the sexist and harassing work environments for the future.
30
I have worked in research under two opposite conditions. During my former tenure at one university I was made to feel like a second class citizen based, I believe, primarily on my gender. I accepted a position at another university and the atmosphere here is entirely different. i am treated like an equal by both the men and women in my department and my accomplishments are readily acknowledged. I think part of the problem may be related to how an institution views its professionals.
9
The real question to ask is why Postdocs and Research associates are not paid decent salaries and benefits and have regular humane working hours. It benefits the lab heads to have 5 low paid postdocs instead of 2 decently paid ones. NSF, NIH and the University administrations should impose minimum standards and enforce how long students spend in doctoral or post doctoral positions. Average time to Ph.D has crept up to 6 years and after that the average scientist spends 6 years postdocing. This benefits only the lab heads who can use all this talent to further their careers and reputation. Graduate schools should have policies that benefit society in general not one generation at the expense of another (Leave that to social security, medicare). Women will continue to shun science as long as they have to make a choice between their careers and personal life. We all deserve a better system.
4
I am not sure that this kind of attitude is unique to sciences. When I was in graduate Economics program in the late 70s, one professor insists on calling his TAs Section Men even when 3 out of 8 were female!
Any rigorous graduate program in a top- ranked University demands almost completed commitment on the part of the students most undergraduates are not accustomed to. The fact that most of the graduate positions come with stipends controlled by one's mentor further complicate the relationship.
Any rigorous graduate program in a top- ranked University demands almost completed commitment on the part of the students most undergraduates are not accustomed to. The fact that most of the graduate positions come with stipends controlled by one's mentor further complicate the relationship.
2
I am a male neuroscientist who trained under both male and female mentors for my PhD and post docs. My first post-doctoral adviser was a woman and she was an outstanding scientist, but she was far more difficult on the women in our lab than the men. And not in a "toughening them up for a career in science as a woman" way. She was just plain mean to them. By contrast, the male director of the lab, who is a world-renowned expert in his field, seemed not to discriminate between male and female lab members and I never heard any negative comments about his treatment of female grad students or post docs. And please believe me when I say that my female student and post doc friends discussed sexist and inappropriate professors in our department all the time.
I would suggest that women pursuing a career in the biosciences contact former female students and post docs (you can usually find their names on journal articles and then find their current affiliation) from the labs you are interested in and ask them what the atmosphere is like for women in the lab and the department. Sexist and inappropriate behavior by senior scientists is rarely an unknown and women in science are almost always willing to help each other out.
I would suggest that women pursuing a career in the biosciences contact former female students and post docs (you can usually find their names on journal articles and then find their current affiliation) from the labs you are interested in and ask them what the atmosphere is like for women in the lab and the department. Sexist and inappropriate behavior by senior scientists is rarely an unknown and women in science are almost always willing to help each other out.
11
While we may get motivated sometimes when we read about deplorable conditions facing women in third-world countries, their treatment stems from the same perspectives that are highlighted in this essay. We, homo sapiens, while biologically evolving, have somehow neglected to shed the social acceptance of male dominance that clubs a woman and drags her back to the cave to "use" her for the physical and logistical convenience of the males in our species.
Look at the issues that are on the political plate: equal pay for equal work; males who have no medical education or understanding deciding the "proper" female medical protocols; focusing on gender during an election instead of on the policies and platforms.
Too bad we aren't like earthworms....able to fulfill either male or female roles, and then perhaps we could get on to more relevant issues, like saving our planet, serving basic human needs like food and shelter for all, and educating all minds instead of only those whose pocketbooks are overflowing.
Look at the issues that are on the political plate: equal pay for equal work; males who have no medical education or understanding deciding the "proper" female medical protocols; focusing on gender during an election instead of on the policies and platforms.
Too bad we aren't like earthworms....able to fulfill either male or female roles, and then perhaps we could get on to more relevant issues, like saving our planet, serving basic human needs like food and shelter for all, and educating all minds instead of only those whose pocketbooks are overflowing.
2
Here are some facts about women in science, that I know from being in the Caltech physics division for many years. Yesterday, the summer interns arrived, as they do every June, and the majority are female, as they always are, due to aggressive affirmative action in the selection process. In the weekly meeting that I attend, there are three female postdocs among ten or so total, and they are encouraged to speak and males listen properly (even the one with the quiet voice) and debated with respect (perhaps I should say I am not detecting any disrespect). The hiring process in my department has a written affirmative action process, that females must get as far as the interview shortlist, and white-male hiring must be explicitly justified. On campus this summer is an excellent program called "Project Scientist", to school-age girls into scientists (including my daughter). The newly-appointed head of the physics division is female. So ... obviously as a white male I cannot speak to the "micro-abrasions" that I read about, but it seems to me that one world-class science school is really trying.
4
...when I was a (male) postdoc in physics at Caltech, my advisor stated "We at Caltech are too smart to be sexist!"
Being the empiricist, I went around and asked all the women I knew at Caltech about their experiences. Every single one, from secretaries and graduate students up through postdocs (no female professors in physics at that time) had stories of harassment, exclusion, and condescension. One grad student in math had been told--by fellow grad students--that women are genetically incapable of doing mathematics. (The lab I was in, they did report, was much better, and though my advisor was not the empiricist I am, had a reputation of treating women fairly. He just was wrong to think his fellow faculty members were like him.)
So, Roy, I would say that the affirmative action was desperately needed.
PS--for you readers out there, you should also know that Caltech did not admit women until the 1970s.
Being the empiricist, I went around and asked all the women I knew at Caltech about their experiences. Every single one, from secretaries and graduate students up through postdocs (no female professors in physics at that time) had stories of harassment, exclusion, and condescension. One grad student in math had been told--by fellow grad students--that women are genetically incapable of doing mathematics. (The lab I was in, they did report, was much better, and though my advisor was not the empiricist I am, had a reputation of treating women fairly. He just was wrong to think his fellow faculty members were like him.)
So, Roy, I would say that the affirmative action was desperately needed.
PS--for you readers out there, you should also know that Caltech did not admit women until the 1970s.
1
Look to your own biases, Mr. (Professor?) Will. Why would you assume that your summer interns are majority female only because of "aggressive affirmative action"? Is it not at all possible they are there by merit?
1
Thank you, Roy Will. That is very encouraging. Good for Caltech physics!
The real trouble in academia is political correctness.
Aren't you all happy now that you have ousted a Noble laureate?
The only thing you have accomplished is to make any prominent male scientists reluctant to mentor younger female colleagues.
Aren't you all happy now that you have ousted a Noble laureate?
The only thing you have accomplished is to make any prominent male scientists reluctant to mentor younger female colleagues.
2
Seriously Eric? In which era were you born? Treating ALL colleagues with respect is not political correctness; it is called human decency. I am most curious to know what type of "criticism" Dr. Hunt stated that made these women cry. As a scientist myself I have witnessed far too many senior male scientists (and yes, they were all male) haranguing junior scientists- male and female. This type of behavior should never be excused, Nobel laureate or otherwise.
1
Eric, Dr. Hunt being a Noble Laureate does not inoculate him against being a jerk. He can certainly say whatever he wants, and now, faces the consequences of his statements. It is not "political correctness" that is the problem. The University policy requires equal treatment for all students, and Dr. Hunt's statements demonstrate that he is not willing to do so.
1
There are other jobs that need high quality mentorship in order to attain them or succeed at them. Women are at a distinct disadvantage because of how society views a man and a woman who spend a lot of time together: they must be a couple, they're doing IT, she's with him because she can't get ahead on her own, etc. Then there are the inevitable put downs due to gender: you're a woman and you'll have a family and waste that training we gave you. No one derides a man's interest in his family but a woman needing to do anything for her family is seen as slacking off.
As a woman in research and later on in the corporate world I saw my ideas belittled and ignored by men. Acknowledgement was given to any male who said anything similar to what I said or not. One supervisor who had a child who needed open heart surgery was completely unresponsive to my request to take a day off to accompany my mother for her surgery. When it was his child he got kudos all around and offers of help. I got nothing until I cc'd his supervisor and our department head.
The difference is that women can work as hard and as well as the men but whenever the women take time for family it's bad while a man's doing so means he's a wonderful human being.
As a woman in research and later on in the corporate world I saw my ideas belittled and ignored by men. Acknowledgement was given to any male who said anything similar to what I said or not. One supervisor who had a child who needed open heart surgery was completely unresponsive to my request to take a day off to accompany my mother for her surgery. When it was his child he got kudos all around and offers of help. I got nothing until I cc'd his supervisor and our department head.
The difference is that women can work as hard and as well as the men but whenever the women take time for family it's bad while a man's doing so means he's a wonderful human being.
27
The other huge problem for women is being recognized for their work. I read stories often of brilliant women working and making discoveries and not getting any credit for their labor.
17
the range here is wide...
from the antic: the post-doc under the gaze of her mentor (and most likely others in her lab) can just button her shirt (as could any man who does not want to encourage the eyes of others to go past the top button)...note: no judgement of motive here.
to the epic: no examples of the "full-throated" advocacy of women in science by "many men" are offered, with only the example of the "one scientist" who "did not feel that women were cut out to be successful in the field" defining "the landscape" awaiting "a girl lucky enough to land in a prestigious laboratory."
the conflating of gender and career agenda issues herein is best demonstrated by the gender neutral notion that "getting on your mentor's bad side can ruin your career"...a condition that can be brought on by any number of factors, gender included, (memory holds counseling sessions with male students in a computer lab, directed by a woman of some note, who felt neglected, passed over as the mentor toured her lab, and diminished by her clucking over their questions once her attention was captured) but also from ineptitude or its extreme opposite, threat from evidence of talent.
from the antic: the post-doc under the gaze of her mentor (and most likely others in her lab) can just button her shirt (as could any man who does not want to encourage the eyes of others to go past the top button)...note: no judgement of motive here.
to the epic: no examples of the "full-throated" advocacy of women in science by "many men" are offered, with only the example of the "one scientist" who "did not feel that women were cut out to be successful in the field" defining "the landscape" awaiting "a girl lucky enough to land in a prestigious laboratory."
the conflating of gender and career agenda issues herein is best demonstrated by the gender neutral notion that "getting on your mentor's bad side can ruin your career"...a condition that can be brought on by any number of factors, gender included, (memory holds counseling sessions with male students in a computer lab, directed by a woman of some note, who felt neglected, passed over as the mentor toured her lab, and diminished by her clucking over their questions once her attention was captured) but also from ineptitude or its extreme opposite, threat from evidence of talent.
When men take responsibility raing a family, women will no longer be a waste of your time in mentoring them.
25
Might some of the very competitive, male-dominated labs be that way because of female choice, not male choice or bias?
I worked in such a lab and hated it. I wanted a more collaborative atmosphere. They weren't being sexist on purpose. They were just being very, very competitive.
I worked in such a lab and hated it. I wanted a more collaborative atmosphere. They weren't being sexist on purpose. They were just being very, very competitive.
4
Many women scientists and researchers are very competitive, like my women colleagues and myself. Being competitive is a necessary though insufficient condition in research. We are competitive with ourselves first and foremost, always looking for a better solution to a more challenging problem.
I have worked in a few labs and have observed many more.
In my experience, male heads of labs hire and mentor men and women; female heads of labs hire women.
Physics depts have a few women and lots of men; chemistry depts have more men than women but not by a lot; bio labs have few men and lots of women.
"Getting on your mentor’s bad side could ruin your career." This is a true statement. It applies to men and women of all types, students, post-docs, everybody. To attribute it to men alone is dishonest.
Only when this lengthy period of training is complete might a young scientist hope to establish an independent laboratory of her own, but she will always be known as having trained in Dr. So-and-so’s lab.
Another dishonesty.
This statement too is 100% true with absolutely zero connection to gender. It is universally true.
Bias?
It would, in the case of this author, seem so.
In my experience, male heads of labs hire and mentor men and women; female heads of labs hire women.
Physics depts have a few women and lots of men; chemistry depts have more men than women but not by a lot; bio labs have few men and lots of women.
"Getting on your mentor’s bad side could ruin your career." This is a true statement. It applies to men and women of all types, students, post-docs, everybody. To attribute it to men alone is dishonest.
Only when this lengthy period of training is complete might a young scientist hope to establish an independent laboratory of her own, but she will always be known as having trained in Dr. So-and-so’s lab.
Another dishonesty.
This statement too is 100% true with absolutely zero connection to gender. It is universally true.
Bias?
It would, in the case of this author, seem so.
4
Neither of the "dishonest" comments mentioned above were attributed to men. If you read more carefully, you will realize that they were gender neutral statements.
I agree with other commentators that the underlying problem is a desperate need for restructuring academe.
7
Do you want to tell us how to restructure?
Here we go again...
The author is a victim because she is a female.
My suggestion to the author (and anyone else who self-identifies as a victim) is to transpose the factor that s/he feels makes them a victim into another independent factor.
For example, change gender for skin color (or nationality or eye color or body type or any of the myriad other factors that may or may not play a roll in personal interaction dynamics). Are you being held back because you are a woman or did you get the job because you have blond hair, blue eyes and your last name is Gyllenhammar? Did you lose out on the job because you have tattoos or did you get the job because you have a wonderful laugh?
It's difficult to isolate and remember things that don't happen (e.g. I didn't not get called back to a second interview because I'm a woman) and it's very easy to mistakenly correlate failure with active discrimination. The way to overcome this condition is to stop identifying as a victim.
The author is a victim because she is a female.
My suggestion to the author (and anyone else who self-identifies as a victim) is to transpose the factor that s/he feels makes them a victim into another independent factor.
For example, change gender for skin color (or nationality or eye color or body type or any of the myriad other factors that may or may not play a roll in personal interaction dynamics). Are you being held back because you are a woman or did you get the job because you have blond hair, blue eyes and your last name is Gyllenhammar? Did you lose out on the job because you have tattoos or did you get the job because you have a wonderful laugh?
It's difficult to isolate and remember things that don't happen (e.g. I didn't not get called back to a second interview because I'm a woman) and it's very easy to mistakenly correlate failure with active discrimination. The way to overcome this condition is to stop identifying as a victim.
3
Apparently in your world there are no victims. There are victimizers in positions of power. If you cannot see that you may be part of the problem in my view.
15
I suggest you re-read the article with an open mind.
Imagine someone staring at your face because you have a big blob of mustard on your cheek. Are you a victim because your male colleague is staring at your face?
Now imagine you are wearing a blouse. A blouse that exposes cleavage. Are you a victim because your male colleague is staring at your chest?
Finally, imagine a male colleague who is wearing Richard Simmons style 80's shorts. He sits down and starts talking to you but in doing so, he exposes part of his reproductive organ to you. You find yourself both uncomfortable but unable to stop glancing at it. Are you victimizing him?
People are not robots that can be programmed. Women are not victims just because they happen to be born female.
Imagine someone staring at your face because you have a big blob of mustard on your cheek. Are you a victim because your male colleague is staring at your face?
Now imagine you are wearing a blouse. A blouse that exposes cleavage. Are you a victim because your male colleague is staring at your chest?
Finally, imagine a male colleague who is wearing Richard Simmons style 80's shorts. He sits down and starts talking to you but in doing so, he exposes part of his reproductive organ to you. You find yourself both uncomfortable but unable to stop glancing at it. Are you victimizing him?
People are not robots that can be programmed. Women are not victims just because they happen to be born female.
I have been doing science every day, and most working hours, since 1962, as a molecular biologist and biophysicist (who uses math and physics as well as anatomy and electrophysiology to answer questions) and have seen innumerable superb female scientists. Indeed, as Chairman (in 1976) I hired something like six females in a row to tenure track positions as my wife scientist looked on carefully. Your discussion of mentorship is one of the rare realistic presentations of lab life and reality, although it is a bit short on the important role of the peer group of postdoc's (and sometimes grad students and junior faculty). Scientists have to relearn throughout their careers. We are the only profession in which we 'never' know what we are doing. As soon as we answer one question, we move to the next, so most of the time we are wandering in the unknown. The personal characteristics needed to motivate such intense work are unusual and when coupled with the need for absolute honesty, create great strain in any person trying to be a scientist. Being a female is certainly an extra constraint, but so are most parts of the human condition. All the constraints are important, all need to be dealt with. But in my view, the greatest enemy to the scientist is her/his acquisition of administrative skills, in which manipulation of people and facts are central. Those skills are crucial to dealing with human beings for sure, but they are dangerous or worse when applied to the real world.
99
If you have been around that long, then you also remember when female grad students got half the financial support of male students, because the men had to "support a family". You may also remember that women grad students had to have better academic records than males to get into the same programs.
My advisor (who never really became a mentor) regularly took all his male students on international fieldwork trips, but those were "too dangerous" for most of the female students. (A few eventually went, but only after more years of experience in the lab.)
There's a reason that science pipeline to the top leaks women out along the way. Yes, things have changed since the 70s and 80s, but attitudes remain.
My advisor (who never really became a mentor) regularly took all his male students on international fieldwork trips, but those were "too dangerous" for most of the female students. (A few eventually went, but only after more years of experience in the lab.)
There's a reason that science pipeline to the top leaks women out along the way. Yes, things have changed since the 70s and 80s, but attitudes remain.
4
I think this constant focus in the media on "women in tech" and "women in science" and "women in politics" is all about selling newspapers and generating online clicks, but is ultimately damaging to women as a whole. As the author mentions, what male scientist or executive would risk damaging his career by hiring anything other than a token woman? And it is a risk. A single perceived slight towards the woman, even if unintentional, combined with the amplification effect of social media, and his career is suddenly over.
The case of Mr Hunt may be where we finally see feminism start to eat itself. The ruthlessness and disproportionate nature of the response to his few comments, which were meant as British 'wit', coupled with no evidence of previous sexism, means we may now be at the interesting point where these self-proclaimed public feminists are actually hurting womens progress in the workforce.
The case of Mr Hunt may be where we finally see feminism start to eat itself. The ruthlessness and disproportionate nature of the response to his few comments, which were meant as British 'wit', coupled with no evidence of previous sexism, means we may now be at the interesting point where these self-proclaimed public feminists are actually hurting womens progress in the workforce.
19
"No evidence of previous sexism" does not excuse present sexism. Women are not jokes. I am assuming you are not a woman and therefore have never been subjected to both subtle and glaring gender discrimination in the workplace. When women are dismissed and deminished by powerful men, and have the audacity to complain, they are accused by some of making too much of "little things." Those little things (often disguised as all in good fun) add up. You are blaming women both for their own discrimination at the hands of men and of failing to be good sports about it. How convenient.
28
Well, i think you do have to concede that however it may be justified by principle, the reaction (to Hunt) was both zealous and punitive. And this makes one a little suspicious that the principle involved (whatever it is) may be a little self-serving.
Hunt certainly made patronizing and anachronistic remarks and for these he has bee deservedly upbraided. However, the empirical content of his remarks has, as far as I can tell, never been evaluated.
A neutral observer would wonder if indeed there are inter-gender dynamics that subtract from the efficacy of scientific enterprise (and if so how these may be addressed going forward).
Males and females undoubtedly differ in their preference profiles over a range of things, probably work environment included.
It is not useful to crow one way or the other that the best version of reality is androcentric or gynocentric and hence the other side should just shape up. Reality itself, as indicated by the revealed preferences of the participants in it, the identification of the most productive environments (measured by valuable output) and so on should be the decider.
If it turns out that this state of affairs has fewer females than males in STEM areas then is a futile and perverse piece of social engineering to force an alternative outcome (see communism, for example)
Of course, correctly characterizing such reality is a difficult task. The stakes are high etc. But we need to commit to it and not to an a priori ideology
Hunt certainly made patronizing and anachronistic remarks and for these he has bee deservedly upbraided. However, the empirical content of his remarks has, as far as I can tell, never been evaluated.
A neutral observer would wonder if indeed there are inter-gender dynamics that subtract from the efficacy of scientific enterprise (and if so how these may be addressed going forward).
Males and females undoubtedly differ in their preference profiles over a range of things, probably work environment included.
It is not useful to crow one way or the other that the best version of reality is androcentric or gynocentric and hence the other side should just shape up. Reality itself, as indicated by the revealed preferences of the participants in it, the identification of the most productive environments (measured by valuable output) and so on should be the decider.
If it turns out that this state of affairs has fewer females than males in STEM areas then is a futile and perverse piece of social engineering to force an alternative outcome (see communism, for example)
Of course, correctly characterizing such reality is a difficult task. The stakes are high etc. But we need to commit to it and not to an a priori ideology
Poor Dr. Hunt. His career is in shambles because his attempt to be witty was misconstrued by "self-proclaimed"" (rather than what? Outed by others?), pubic" (if only they'd keep their feelings to themselves they'd save themselves so much trouble) "feminists" (still an epithet used as an insult).
If Dr. Hunt had taken just a moment to think about his attempt at wit, he could have realized that it would have been better to rephrase. I doubt he would have joked about his problem with blacks, Jews, Asians, Catholics, left-handed people, or any other group in the lab. He clearly does have a problem with "girls" and trying to blame women for Dr. Hunt's problem is way off the mark. As Ms. Soper points out, publicizing any sexism that a female scientist may encounter in the lab could ruin her career. That's why there's no evidence of previous sexism.
If Dr. Hunt had taken just a moment to think about his attempt at wit, he could have realized that it would have been better to rephrase. I doubt he would have joked about his problem with blacks, Jews, Asians, Catholics, left-handed people, or any other group in the lab. He clearly does have a problem with "girls" and trying to blame women for Dr. Hunt's problem is way off the mark. As Ms. Soper points out, publicizing any sexism that a female scientist may encounter in the lab could ruin her career. That's why there's no evidence of previous sexism.
2
I was once in the P.R. department of a university with a tip-top science Ph.D. program. As part of my duties I had to interview science grad students -- chosen by the faculty as being the most outstanding -- about their future plans. Every single man said he planned to have his own lab someday. Every single woman was looking for other options (teaching, government, industry, science writing) because they didn't think they had a chance at getting their own lab.
These were young women who did not yet have family commitments that might have made them quit the chase to get a lab. I sometimes wonder if the "women quit because they have children" isn't really the last step in a disillusionment about the career.
These were young women who did not yet have family commitments that might have made them quit the chase to get a lab. I sometimes wonder if the "women quit because they have children" isn't really the last step in a disillusionment about the career.
86
Unfortunately, the adage of a "nice assertive young man" versus an "aggressive, pushy woman" still refer to exactly the same behavior, but coming from persons of different gender.
When you work in a lab, you work in very close quarters with many people from many different cultures. Somehow a woman must navigate among a number of men who have different expectations of how a woman should behave and her place in society. Each puts pressure on her to "make room for the men".
When you work in a lab, you work in very close quarters with many people from many different cultures. Somehow a woman must navigate among a number of men who have different expectations of how a woman should behave and her place in society. Each puts pressure on her to "make room for the men".
56
This writer has made clear to me that in still-male-dominated fields like science and math, the "medieval apprentice system" is the bottleneck for women. Elsewhere in academia, and in the corporate and nonprofit worlds, old boys still call shots but there are more paths leading to the top. That doesn't mean we don't encounter Dr. Hunts and men peering down our shirts - it does mean there might be another workplace across the street where we won't be harassed.
Discussing Hunt with my daughter last week, I realized that every time I worked under and with men (in all my jobs, from waitress to editor to social worker) someone was peering down my shirt. The worst encounters included my boss cornering me in a locked refrigerator where I escaped rape only by pounding on the door (I was fired) and another boss handing me pornography and telling me to make copies (I quit). Harassment faded finally when I started to work for myself.
Discussing Hunt with my daughter last week, I realized that every time I worked under and with men (in all my jobs, from waitress to editor to social worker) someone was peering down my shirt. The worst encounters included my boss cornering me in a locked refrigerator where I escaped rape only by pounding on the door (I was fired) and another boss handing me pornography and telling me to make copies (I quit). Harassment faded finally when I started to work for myself.
20
I agree with several comments pointing out the still largely unchallenged and virtually autocratic role of department/lab heads. Governance in academia, including clinical academic medicine, is anachronistic. I interacted with a group of academic research leaders a couple of years ago, as they were taking a leadership course. One of the major issues was their inability to delegate authority. Academia is still a collection of fiefdoms whose employees/young professionals often thrive or perish based on the whims of the chair. Academic careers still mimic genesis (XX begat XY begat YY, etc.) more than a meritocratic process.
16
It should be, and certainly is with me, an outrage that women today face ANY obstacles in advancing their careers, that men do not. It is a failure of society, a failure of Government, and a failure of Private and Public enterprise world-wide.
No woman should have to live with an employer, mentor, or anything else that reinforces a patriarchal misogynistic attitude being forced upon them. In 2015, this should be and is a National Disgrace.
Ms. Soper, I apologize on behalf of men everywhere who do not believe that is up to other men to decide where a woman works, what a woman does in regards to a family, or what she can do with her body. It is her, and therefore your, choice.
Also, I believe a Constitutional Amendment should be proposed that would declare that women, and only women, can legislate any law that affects women as a group. That includes abortion, workplace laws that affects women or anything else that affects a woman's life.
No woman should have to live with an employer, mentor, or anything else that reinforces a patriarchal misogynistic attitude being forced upon them. In 2015, this should be and is a National Disgrace.
Ms. Soper, I apologize on behalf of men everywhere who do not believe that is up to other men to decide where a woman works, what a woman does in regards to a family, or what she can do with her body. It is her, and therefore your, choice.
Also, I believe a Constitutional Amendment should be proposed that would declare that women, and only women, can legislate any law that affects women as a group. That includes abortion, workplace laws that affects women or anything else that affects a woman's life.
29
I assume your comment is sarcastic.
It's is, however, subtle enough that at least ten other people - besides yourself - believe it and have recommended it.
It's is, however, subtle enough that at least ten other people - besides yourself - believe it and have recommended it.
Thanks for apologizing for all men who ... . Apologize for yourself, and let others step up. What have you done to advance the cause of "merit" and not the claims of specific classes of would be beneficiaries.
There is too much sanctimony here and not enough personal action. If the Equal Rights Amendment could not be adopted, what are you really proposing?
There is too much sanctimony here and not enough personal action. If the Equal Rights Amendment could not be adopted, what are you really proposing?
My daughter is a graduate student in physics at a prestigious research university. She has witnessed many situations affecting her and her female colleagues where a male professor, postdoc, or graduate student has behaved badly towards the female students. Harassment, inappropriately personal emails, hugs being asked for repeatedly, etc are apparently a "normal" part of a young woman's world in the sciences. Elsewhere too, no doubt. As far as I can tell, it's always the guys who are the problem.
82
It may be 'the guys who are the problem', but if 'hugs being asked for repeatedly', that means the 'guys' were not shut down immediately.
It is mothers who raise their daughters to always seem 'nice' and those daughters go out in the world never have learned how to say 'No'. Many women will say they 'hinted' about their discomfort, but few men understand those subtle clues and, in fact, see any acquiescence as encouragement. And if a woman allows even one hug, why should they not?
How about teaching your daughter at the very first sign of sexual interest, shut the man down with a simple 'No thanks'. The vast majority of men will accept that without question. As for the few who will not, they are sociopaths, so best to look for another job.
It is mothers who raise their daughters to always seem 'nice' and those daughters go out in the world never have learned how to say 'No'. Many women will say they 'hinted' about their discomfort, but few men understand those subtle clues and, in fact, see any acquiescence as encouragement. And if a woman allows even one hug, why should they not?
How about teaching your daughter at the very first sign of sexual interest, shut the man down with a simple 'No thanks'. The vast majority of men will accept that without question. As for the few who will not, they are sociopaths, so best to look for another job.
You mean that in labs sometimes people treat other people badly or inappropriately or clumsily?
You mean that in universities people sometimes fall in love with other people or lust after them? and that they persist in pressing their suits even when their advances are rejected?
I am shocked -- shocked.
But aren't you really describing life? And if you can't learn to navigate these hazards of life then I wonder if life is for you. I would suggest the medieval solution: "Get thee to a nunnery".
But, on second thoughts, I wonder if the same problems were not rife in monasteries and convents and beguinages too.
You mean that in universities people sometimes fall in love with other people or lust after them? and that they persist in pressing their suits even when their advances are rejected?
I am shocked -- shocked.
But aren't you really describing life? And if you can't learn to navigate these hazards of life then I wonder if life is for you. I would suggest the medieval solution: "Get thee to a nunnery".
But, on second thoughts, I wonder if the same problems were not rife in monasteries and convents and beguinages too.
Question: Why do you think it's always the guys? Are women socialized not to do it? Are men as the socialized initiators thinking that nothing comes from nothing? Are women more empathic about the consequences? Are women more in control of their attraction? Do women feel less attraction to those with which they don't first share a close personal relationship?
As a mail lab head who trained with many junior scientists of both sexes, I firmly believe that equal opportunities are there for both men and women. While there may be an occasional PI with antiquated views like Tim Hunt, the vast majority just want to get good science done and train the next generation. No matter what they might look like. The fact that women mentors attract more women to their labs is not surprising--mentors of Indian heritage attract more Indian scientists, Germans tend to attract more Germans, etc. To see something sinister here is to look for problems where, on the whole, few exist. In my experience biological research runs as a meritocracy, where the most successful move up.
56
I'm a current Graduate Student, and there is some truth to what you say. Our group is pretty small, and comes close to gender parity considering sample size. The program matriculated students with a close to even division of the genders also. By anecdotally many of my women colleagues disproportionally suffer the attrition of the program, and many plan on careers outside the academy. Talking with them, their reasons are unrelated to gender bias. Still, while I perhaps no individual is being forced out, I do worry that some subtle bias may be at work helping to dissuade some of them. If this same process is at play elsewhere, which I have no reason to think is not the case, then it will be a while before the professoriate is truly representative.
18
Unfortunately, my experience is that discrimination (especially the subtle discrimination of differential expectations) can be difficult to detect unless you are the recipient of that discrimination. 15 years ago, as a female undergraduate studying physics, I experienced several incidents of subtle (and, not-so-subtle) discrimination from "antiquated" professors. But, what stung just as much as the professors' remarks or actions was the fact that my male classmates often didn't notice the slight. Here was the future of the field, the up-and-coming generation, and they were oblivious to the challenges I faced.
287
Point of View is telling. Your experience is probably not the most reliable too in determining whether there is sexism in your lab. Your point of view is skewed by your experience as a male in a male-dominated field.
In order for you to see what is behind your experience, you have to ask yourself if you have received more opportunities than your skills merited. A very difficult task because we all want to believe that we have earned everything we have received -- that is really WAS what we know, not who we know.
In order for you to see what is behind your experience, you have to ask yourself if you have received more opportunities than your skills merited. A very difficult task because we all want to believe that we have earned everything we have received -- that is really WAS what we know, not who we know.
16
Sure there's sexism, but that doesn't get to the heart of why women generally don't get to the top of heap in highly competitive fields.
It's their biological role of mother.
To get to the top tiers of any highly competitive field, a person needs to spend an inordinate amount of time and focus. The moment an individual needs to share that with family responsibilities, then it become difficult to nearly impossible to become an elite leader.
So then, feminists say, men should take on more domestic responsibilities to even the playing field. Yes, that would help, except that couples make up their own minds and most women end up spending more time with the kids than the men, usually by choice.
However it's not all perfect for the men in this model either. A Harvard study found that high performing business executives sacrificed a lot of their family time, sometimes with regrets.
As they say, there's no such thing as a free lunch.
It's their biological role of mother.
To get to the top tiers of any highly competitive field, a person needs to spend an inordinate amount of time and focus. The moment an individual needs to share that with family responsibilities, then it become difficult to nearly impossible to become an elite leader.
So then, feminists say, men should take on more domestic responsibilities to even the playing field. Yes, that would help, except that couples make up their own minds and most women end up spending more time with the kids than the men, usually by choice.
However it's not all perfect for the men in this model either. A Harvard study found that high performing business executives sacrificed a lot of their family time, sometimes with regrets.
As they say, there's no such thing as a free lunch.
8
Dear Matt, Please work on men having babies so we can stop punishing women who have both brains and uteri. Who else will have the babies? And if a women is brilliant must she give up the idea of family? This seems very unfair. Perhaps brood mares can be developed?
11
No.
It is not.
If what you say is true, then women and men in graduate school and in post doctoral positions would be perfectly equal until they have a family.
This is just another attempt to argue that women don't WANT to work like men do. We do. Deciding that we aren't effective with a family is what holds us back.
It is not.
If what you say is true, then women and men in graduate school and in post doctoral positions would be perfectly equal until they have a family.
This is just another attempt to argue that women don't WANT to work like men do. We do. Deciding that we aren't effective with a family is what holds us back.
1
Matt:
You had me until "except that couples make up their own minds and most women end up spending more time with the kids than the men, usually by choice."
I wonder how free most women who spend more time with their children than their partners do think their "choice" was.
In my experience, couples often drift into traditional gender roles, no matter how firm their original intentions may have been. To me, that's a sign of how strong the expectations surrounding those roles still are in all areas of a couple's life: employment, families of origin, other important institutions like churches, etc. Also, men too often regard everything they contribute to their household above and beyond the level that their own father contributed as "extra": something that can be taken away when the going gets rough at work, for example.
I think many women accept whatever help they get from their partners because they don't think they have a realistic expectation of obtaining more. Obviously, there are exceptions, and I do think this is changing with a new generation of men who grew up seeing first hand what their own working mothers had to contend with.
You had me until "except that couples make up their own minds and most women end up spending more time with the kids than the men, usually by choice."
I wonder how free most women who spend more time with their children than their partners do think their "choice" was.
In my experience, couples often drift into traditional gender roles, no matter how firm their original intentions may have been. To me, that's a sign of how strong the expectations surrounding those roles still are in all areas of a couple's life: employment, families of origin, other important institutions like churches, etc. Also, men too often regard everything they contribute to their household above and beyond the level that their own father contributed as "extra": something that can be taken away when the going gets rough at work, for example.
I think many women accept whatever help they get from their partners because they don't think they have a realistic expectation of obtaining more. Obviously, there are exceptions, and I do think this is changing with a new generation of men who grew up seeing first hand what their own working mothers had to contend with.
2
I believe that the Op-Ed author has highlighted a problem that exists in not just the field of science but in business and even in the fine arts- a lack of mentors willing to take on and guide prospects who are also female in any given profession. I definitely found this to be the case as a Graduate student in my program and I remember discussing this issue with several of my fellow female colleagues. We discussed the aspect of lacking mentors while watching several of our male colleagues develop an informal apprenticeship relationship with several male professors, our department being overwhelmingly male. I remember being surprised after talking to a fellow male colleague and discovering during the course of our conversation that he had been offered a TA position, which was unadvertised and therefore not open to an application process. It made me wonder what other opportunities and career pathways I was not aware of and were not open to me.
25
So the male students were cultivating the professor, no doubt pandering to him and stroking his ego, to further their careers.
This is the way of the world and both sexes can do this and it is probably even easier for women.
This is the way of the world and both sexes can do this and it is probably even easier for women.
The system is the real issue. I have worked with female scientists that were just as bad. The problem is that academic scientists have no management training, usually disdain it and think that managing people is trivial. Well anyone who has seen nasty lab politics would wonder that these are highly qualified people. Lab politics is petty, aggressive and demeaning.
In science curricula there should be some aspect of team training, learning how to communicate assertively but not aggressively etc. However many science departments are not at all open to this. Engineers on the other hand learn this in spades by the nature of their work. Doctors are not necessarily team players but learn to get along with many people by the nature of their work, lawyers ditto.
No one is saying "dilute science education with management" just that there has to be a realization that scientists - unlike Sheldon Cooper on the Big Bang theory, a type that I have met many times - do have to function with other people. They can't be absolved of this basic human responsibility - it is not a choice.
In science curricula there should be some aspect of team training, learning how to communicate assertively but not aggressively etc. However many science departments are not at all open to this. Engineers on the other hand learn this in spades by the nature of their work. Doctors are not necessarily team players but learn to get along with many people by the nature of their work, lawyers ditto.
No one is saying "dilute science education with management" just that there has to be a realization that scientists - unlike Sheldon Cooper on the Big Bang theory, a type that I have met many times - do have to function with other people. They can't be absolved of this basic human responsibility - it is not a choice.
45
This buys into stereotypes to be incredibly off the mark. Scientists are well aware that professors are essentially managers in much of what they do. They may not get a lot of formal training for this role, but as addressed even in the article scientists know this.
More importantly however, I think there is a strong case to be made that a large part if not the largest part of my graduate education in science is on how to communicate effectively. Scientific investigation is a moving target, but we will always need to communicate it. Whether this is through grant proposals, presentations, conference meetings, or publications, science only happens when we communicate it. A new finding must be advocated for and defended to be investigated or adopted into a growing consensus. This is done with experimental evidence and the scientific method to be sure, but it is still a matter of convincing others of a position.
Are scientists sometimes socially unadept? Obtuse? Sure, but no successful scientist is not an effective advocate and communicator or their investigations. The jargon and standards by which this is judged inside the community are different, but not invalid.
More importantly however, I think there is a strong case to be made that a large part if not the largest part of my graduate education in science is on how to communicate effectively. Scientific investigation is a moving target, but we will always need to communicate it. Whether this is through grant proposals, presentations, conference meetings, or publications, science only happens when we communicate it. A new finding must be advocated for and defended to be investigated or adopted into a growing consensus. This is done with experimental evidence and the scientific method to be sure, but it is still a matter of convincing others of a position.
Are scientists sometimes socially unadept? Obtuse? Sure, but no successful scientist is not an effective advocate and communicator or their investigations. The jargon and standards by which this is judged inside the community are different, but not invalid.
1
From my experience, engineers are trained to believe they are the only ones who know anything or can get anything done. It doesn't matter if the other person has a Ph.D. in their field. If they don't have a ring, they just don't know.
2
Absolutely correct. This is just another PC gestapo move by a gutless university board. How come the Times didn't report on these supporters of Hunt?
I see things differently than most commentators. I see a great scientist frog-marched out of his career for offhand and ill-advised comments made after dinner in Korea. He himself says he's not the best in social situations, he's at a loss at what to say in such scenarios, and his comments were intended as jocular. Clearly, he bombed.
Many women who worked with Hunt have since come forward to say he was a fine mentor, not in the least bit sexist, and helped their careers immeasurably. As one woman wrote in his defense in The Guardian: "Tim has continued to advise on my career in science editing whenever I have asked for help." But off-hand after dinner comments in Korea trump a decades-long track record of outstanding achievement and sound mentorship.
I am alone in finding this a bit extreme? I do not condone or excuse Hunt's remarks. But haven't we all, at some point in our lives, made ill-advised comments that offended someone? Do we deserve to see our careers end over those few moments?
The appropriate response would be for Hunt to apologize (which he did), for the institution(s) that employ him to issue a statement distancing themselves from his remarks, and for everyone to move on. Had women who worked with Hunt come forward to say how he had harassed them, or belittled them, or passed them over for men and so damaged their careers, then that would be a different story. But they haven't. Quite the opposite.
Let the punishment fit the crime.
Many women who worked with Hunt have since come forward to say he was a fine mentor, not in the least bit sexist, and helped their careers immeasurably. As one woman wrote in his defense in The Guardian: "Tim has continued to advise on my career in science editing whenever I have asked for help." But off-hand after dinner comments in Korea trump a decades-long track record of outstanding achievement and sound mentorship.
I am alone in finding this a bit extreme? I do not condone or excuse Hunt's remarks. But haven't we all, at some point in our lives, made ill-advised comments that offended someone? Do we deserve to see our careers end over those few moments?
The appropriate response would be for Hunt to apologize (which he did), for the institution(s) that employ him to issue a statement distancing themselves from his remarks, and for everyone to move on. Had women who worked with Hunt come forward to say how he had harassed them, or belittled them, or passed them over for men and so damaged their careers, then that would be a different story. But they haven't. Quite the opposite.
Let the punishment fit the crime.
153
'...I am alone in finding this a bit extreme?...'
No.
As a woman in the STEM fields, it is discouraging that many younger women have turned into Nanny Scolds, comparing 'hurtful' words to actual assault and demanding that the entire world be 'sensitive' to their precious feelings.
Women do not need to be treated as delicate flowers whose sensibilities must be protected by laws, such as the demands for laws against wolf whistles.
No.
As a woman in the STEM fields, it is discouraging that many younger women have turned into Nanny Scolds, comparing 'hurtful' words to actual assault and demanding that the entire world be 'sensitive' to their precious feelings.
Women do not need to be treated as delicate flowers whose sensibilities must be protected by laws, such as the demands for laws against wolf whistles.
3
Yes, quite the opposite. Hunt's wife, identified as a top scientist in her field, stated that her husband is not the sexist pig his comments, taken out of context, made him appear. He just doesn't deliver humor very well. Few scientists do.
3
Give me a break. He's 70-something and was pushed out of an honorary position. He wasn't "employed."
6
Apparently I am a statistical outlier among male scientists. My dissertation advisor is female, and had about half females and males in her lab while I was there. When I was a postdoc, the lab was half female. The department where I have taught and done research for the past 30 years has always been comprised of about half female faculty members. The chairmanship of our department rotates, and about half have been women. The associate dean for natural sciences at my university is a woman. Most of my graduate students have been women; not by design, but simply by chance. Currently two of my three graduate students are female. The best scientist I’ve ever known is my wife, who is in the same field I am, and continues do do most things better than I do. Two of our three daughters are pursuing careers in science, one as a science teacher, and the other as a marine environmental policy consultant. I know gender bias exists. The statistics are unequivocal. But I am very lucky to have come of age in labs and departments in which this is not an issue.
16
In my career, I was lucky enough to have strong male mentors at grad school and post-doc level. Interestingly, it was my male colleagues (fellow grad students and post-docs) who were the most sexist, questioning why I had won the prestigious internal graduate student fellowship or why I had received more job interviews than them. It never occurred to them that I might have had a higher GPA in my grad school courses or that my higher-profile science public publications from grad school and post-doc might have had something to do with my job search success. They preferred to "blame" it on my gender.
As pointed out by Dr. Soper, the scientific enterprise is stacked against women in many ways. Unfortunately, it is not so different from other fields, such as politics, law, academic medicine, where the same pressures apply.
One solution is what's happening in almost every other developed country except the US - more support for maternity leave, childcare, etc.
As pointed out by Dr. Soper, the scientific enterprise is stacked against women in many ways. Unfortunately, it is not so different from other fields, such as politics, law, academic medicine, where the same pressures apply.
One solution is what's happening in almost every other developed country except the US - more support for maternity leave, childcare, etc.
59
Maybe you received more job interviews because you have green eyes? Or because you are 6'1" and they needs a starting forward for the company basketball team? Maybe the fact that you can program in some obscure scripting language is what got you those extra interviews? Maybe it's because your last name sounds Japanese and the HR manager's mother is from Okinawa?
Maybe your colleagues were equally sexist with everyone else (because we all know that 99% of all grad students are back-stabbing egoists anyways)?
Who knows why things happen? Everything does not simply relate to the gender of the person in question.
Anyway, I do agree with your last sentence. I support a year of parental leave (combined) and day care should be "free" (like public schools).
Maybe your colleagues were equally sexist with everyone else (because we all know that 99% of all grad students are back-stabbing egoists anyways)?
Who knows why things happen? Everything does not simply relate to the gender of the person in question.
Anyway, I do agree with your last sentence. I support a year of parental leave (combined) and day care should be "free" (like public schools).
People of all walks of life learn prejudice at home. One does not have to grow up in any specific type of family to become indoctrinated with racist and sexist propaganda; it is an equal-opportunity infection.
As adults, and especially as professional adults in difficult scientific research environments, we are expected to behave as professional adults during work hours, at least. Those who come to their profession saddled with years of ignorant indoctrination who do not overcome these learned behaviors are going to make ridiculous statements like those found in this article.
Evidently working hard at school and being highly intelligent in a specific field that attracts very few people is no guarantee that one can overcome the years of indoctrination one receives growing up in ignorant and self-righteous home environments.
I am one who continually discusses the lack of foresight and progress on the part of countries who disenfranchise 50+% of their population (females) due to religious or other medieval belief systems. Evidently this attitude is not limited to such backward nations. How enlightened!
As adults, and especially as professional adults in difficult scientific research environments, we are expected to behave as professional adults during work hours, at least. Those who come to their profession saddled with years of ignorant indoctrination who do not overcome these learned behaviors are going to make ridiculous statements like those found in this article.
Evidently working hard at school and being highly intelligent in a specific field that attracts very few people is no guarantee that one can overcome the years of indoctrination one receives growing up in ignorant and self-righteous home environments.
I am one who continually discusses the lack of foresight and progress on the part of countries who disenfranchise 50+% of their population (females) due to religious or other medieval belief systems. Evidently this attitude is not limited to such backward nations. How enlightened!
11
From our perspective as dual career track scientists, we saw the problems back 4 decades ago but got through anyways. At that time, we had already decided that whomever got the best career job offer took the job and were lucky enough for my wife to get that job and I was able to carve out a career job at the same location. It allowed me early retirement and a great career for her. We don't doubt that sexism and a number of other ism's still occur in academia and have seen them in action. The system of graduate student programs and mentoring have changed in the 35+ years since my wife and I both finished our graduate degrees but not enough. We still see evidence of sexism and still actively oppose it and continue to mentor both male and female graduate students. However, the world has changed and continues to change. The best thing we have seen is those professors are now our age and retiring. They were never really aware they were projecting skepticism and negative attitudes to female graduate students. These dinosaurs are slowly but surely going extinct.
131
"One scientist with whom I trained told me that he did not feel that women were cut out to be truly successful in the field, as they were likely to be too distracted by their families. "
My mother, a scientist, called her children 'the progeny' and finally left us and my father, at her death I had not seen her for over 30 years.
She ended up not excelling at the very research she forsook her family for.
Is this the sort of behavior Ms. Soper and other female research scientists should aspire to?
I say no.
" Getting on your mentor’s bad side could ruin your career."
Giving up family, allowing men to 'look down your shirt', only reinforces the idea that you are a lackey and a second class citizen.
If one chooses to give up everything in return for a few crumbs, one deserves what one gets, and what one will NOT get either from the men one works with, or the women looking on, is the very respect one craves.
To paraphrase Matthew:
For what is a woman profited, if she shall gain the whole world, and lose her own soul?
My mother, a scientist, called her children 'the progeny' and finally left us and my father, at her death I had not seen her for over 30 years.
She ended up not excelling at the very research she forsook her family for.
Is this the sort of behavior Ms. Soper and other female research scientists should aspire to?
I say no.
" Getting on your mentor’s bad side could ruin your career."
Giving up family, allowing men to 'look down your shirt', only reinforces the idea that you are a lackey and a second class citizen.
If one chooses to give up everything in return for a few crumbs, one deserves what one gets, and what one will NOT get either from the men one works with, or the women looking on, is the very respect one craves.
To paraphrase Matthew:
For what is a woman profited, if she shall gain the whole world, and lose her own soul?
14
I am truly sorry that your own personal experience sours you on the whole idea of parents having interests outside of their family, but I assure you that your own anecdotal experience doesn't mean that women have to have only one primary interest in life, their families.
11
There have always been women who left their families--most for reasons other than scientific careers. Within the scientific areas I've worked, I've known many many more men to leave their children and wives than women doing so. Women and men who do abandon their children for any reason are vastly outnumbered by those who manage both a career and a family. I'm sorry for your loss, but don't see this as an either-or choice for women scientists.
13
You misunderstand what the aim of the article is. The aim is fair treatment for women based on merit, not gender. It's quite simple. The pregnancy&family argument should be seen as what it is, arcane. There should be enough time given to the mother, but also the father (or other mother) to participate in the rearing of the child, without having to give up their careers.
What you're saying is that a woman who chooses a career path inevitably abandons her family?
I completely disagree. I was raised by a single mother who held several diplomatic posts and still found the energy and time to be the most inspiring and loving woman in my life. Don't tell me others can't do it.
What you're saying is that a woman who chooses a career path inevitably abandons her family?
I completely disagree. I was raised by a single mother who held several diplomatic posts and still found the energy and time to be the most inspiring and loving woman in my life. Don't tell me others can't do it.
9
Human attraction, love, lust, and the ability to remain clear-headed as humans with hormones - a very long-standing and persistent part of the human genome.
There is a scene in Merchant Ivory's film of "A Room With A View" where the romantic George tries to explain to Lucy the reason she should avoid Cecil, the man she intends to marry. "He will never really understand a woman, he can't. He can't love a woman. He wants you as a posession." (I am paraphrasing, a bit.) George, of course, adores her, and values her for herself.
What is fascinating about this is that Forster (the author of the novel) Merchant, and Ivory are all gay men. How well they understood, understand, the trials associated with love and human attraction. The struggles for women's rights and for gay rights are really the same in this sense. The need is to overcome stereotyping, put away all prior prejudices that are affected by past notions, and to allow humans to pursue what they have a passion for; to separate the sexual thing and the intellectual thing; to allow evey person to strive for, and to reach his or her life goals.
We have come a long way, but we still have more to accomplish.
There is a scene in Merchant Ivory's film of "A Room With A View" where the romantic George tries to explain to Lucy the reason she should avoid Cecil, the man she intends to marry. "He will never really understand a woman, he can't. He can't love a woman. He wants you as a posession." (I am paraphrasing, a bit.) George, of course, adores her, and values her for herself.
What is fascinating about this is that Forster (the author of the novel) Merchant, and Ivory are all gay men. How well they understood, understand, the trials associated with love and human attraction. The struggles for women's rights and for gay rights are really the same in this sense. The need is to overcome stereotyping, put away all prior prejudices that are affected by past notions, and to allow humans to pursue what they have a passion for; to separate the sexual thing and the intellectual thing; to allow evey person to strive for, and to reach his or her life goals.
We have come a long way, but we still have more to accomplish.
66
His brilliant career and stunning achievements aside, Dr Tim Hunt is also an old fart whose jocular dismissive comments regarding "girls" is today an anachronism. Kudos to the NY Times for publishing Ms Soper's Op-Ed piece.
249
It's wonderful to know how little a "brilliant career and stunning achievements" matter in today's world. Gov. Scott Walker will be delighted to know that being an "old fart" is now an acceptable rationale for termination; he should be able to clear an "old growth" path through the campus at Madison in no time.
1
So you rate a few comments about what its like to work with women in science as more important that "his brilliant career and stunning achievements"? Especially given that he has zero history of sexism and many women who have worked under him have come out in support. Does that sound level headed and rational to you?
2
Interesting that you used the honorific Dr. for Tim Hunt but Ms. For Sarah Soper. That ol' implicit bias at work even in the best of folks...
5
I'd like to believe that as the Tim Hunts of the scientific community age and die out, the postdocs who are replacing them will have less sexist views. But I'd say we can and should speed up this process by having male apprentices insist upon gender parity from their mentors in the teams that they join. We can "breed" for the culture that we want to find in lab, boardroom and senate chamber but with the help of men shouldering some of the responsibility change will come a lot faster.
35
And exactly how do "male apprentices" go about insisting on much of anything
2
That's a very noble thought, but realistically, the top mentors don't have to worry about being boycotted.
1
It is unbelievable how women who try to explain why women have lagged behind in various fields, --like science in this example--invariably give the explanation of the 'lack of mentors.' Sorry, it won't work. Men don't have mentors all the time and they still manage to climb to dizzy heights of success based on their aptitude for science and hard work. Women lack this, and therefore don't do as well. That's why this tired, totally boring, all-purpose and completely off the mark of mentoring is trotted out every time. If mentoring was indeed the key, then why don't women's only colleges excel in science?
9
Most women only colleges are liberal art colleges where the emphasis is in excelling in their liberal arts, education and business programs.
Also, women only colleges typically do not have the PhD programs that turn them into major research centers where professors are hired and promoted almost strictly based upon how much money they can bring in via research grants and where lower level science courses are often taught by Post-Docs and graduate students. Rather the focus in women only colleges is on education and every professor, regardless of their research, is also expected to teach students. However when a women only college want to excel in science it can. I know because I teach at one - Cedar Crest College in Allentown PA. We do not have a PhD program but all our undergraduate students in the sciences are expected to do research and many go on to pursue their PhDs at other schools.
Also, women only colleges typically do not have the PhD programs that turn them into major research centers where professors are hired and promoted almost strictly based upon how much money they can bring in via research grants and where lower level science courses are often taught by Post-Docs and graduate students. Rather the focus in women only colleges is on education and every professor, regardless of their research, is also expected to teach students. However when a women only college want to excel in science it can. I know because I teach at one - Cedar Crest College in Allentown PA. We do not have a PhD program but all our undergraduate students in the sciences are expected to do research and many go on to pursue their PhDs at other schools.
11
I am sorry that your view of women's abilities is so limited. The sad part is the with this attitude, women are not the only ones who pay. The entire human race suffers because women who could achieve great things are limited by men who are in power.
9
men don't need mentors, they already own the system.
1
This is why professional standards and equity hiring policies are mandated at many institutions, not to create mediocrity but to push through this kind of nonsense.
45
VIVE LA DIFFERENCE In Deborah Tannen's classic, You Just Don't Understand, she points out that women communicate with the general purpose of answering the question, Do you like me yet? While with men the question is, Have I Won Yet? In essence, men and women may speak the same language, but they tend to have a gender-based version with subtle but powerful differences. Tannen demonstrates that women tend to build rapport and intimacy by sharing details and gestures of affection, while men tend to build rapport by sticking to the facts and through confrontation and competition. Given that Tannen posits that women place a high value on expressing affection, it is not surprising that men would perceive that expression differently from women, and "fall in love." Tannen says that men find argument to be a gesture of friendship, while women find that style to be off-putting and hurtful. So men's style tends to strive for winning rather than affection. One way for women and men to understand each other better is for them to learn each others' styles, in which men would more fully experience their feminine side, while women would learn to "man up." My intention in writing is to elucidate so that readers can understand what's going on in a sociolinguistic context. I imagine that some people will react negatively, in the mistaken belief that what I've written reflects "gender bias." According to what Tannen writes, it does not. So let's learn woman-speak and man-speak!
57
I don't think that male talk is off-putting in the least. I had a French friend whose idea of flirting was to make all kinds of comments, then wait for me to rise to the bait. What he got were comments that matched his. Due to genetic factors (mine) I broke it off, and have never found another male as appealing.
Perhaps women should be less thin-skinned and enjoy this verbal fencing. I assure you, it's great fun!
Perhaps women should be less thin-skinned and enjoy this verbal fencing. I assure you, it's great fun!
You wrote, "I found myself thinking that Dr. Huang's counsel to be regrettably sound."
In reading your column, I found myself thinking that perhaps there is a "regrettably sound" truth underlying Tim Hunt's insensitive words. Mentoring often involves a close personal relationship that sometimes can entail shared personal disclosures and activities together away from the work environment. Between men and women this can require attention to boundaries and managing the perceptions of co-workers (as well as the perceptions of potentially jealous spouses or partners). Perhaps a hard truth is that some men shy away from mentoring women due to their lack of confidence in managing boundaries and perceptions.
The lab scenario described in your column was not rife with sexual tension. But if you and the male post-doc had celebratory drinks well into the evening on that Friday night, you both likely would have become aware of the need to manage boundaries.
The mentoring barrier is regrettable and ultimately unacceptable. Perhaps the first step in solving the problem is to identify with total candor the social dynamics contributing to it.
In reading your column, I found myself thinking that perhaps there is a "regrettably sound" truth underlying Tim Hunt's insensitive words. Mentoring often involves a close personal relationship that sometimes can entail shared personal disclosures and activities together away from the work environment. Between men and women this can require attention to boundaries and managing the perceptions of co-workers (as well as the perceptions of potentially jealous spouses or partners). Perhaps a hard truth is that some men shy away from mentoring women due to their lack of confidence in managing boundaries and perceptions.
The lab scenario described in your column was not rife with sexual tension. But if you and the male post-doc had celebratory drinks well into the evening on that Friday night, you both likely would have become aware of the need to manage boundaries.
The mentoring barrier is regrettable and ultimately unacceptable. Perhaps the first step in solving the problem is to identify with total candor the social dynamics contributing to it.
29
"But if you and the male post-doc had celebratory drinks well into the evening on that Friday night, you both likely would have become aware of the need to manage boundaries."
Have you ever worked in a laboratory...for 12-16 hours a day, 6/7 days a week? Celebratory drinking is not a high priority, compared to 7 hours of sleep! Your fantasies have little to do with reality.
Have you ever worked in a laboratory...for 12-16 hours a day, 6/7 days a week? Celebratory drinking is not a high priority, compared to 7 hours of sleep! Your fantasies have little to do with reality.
7
Oh, please. I have mentored young people of the opposite gender without any inappropriate involvements or overstepping of boundaries on either side. A professional relationship can in fact be just that.
Or are you saying that men in the lab just can't help it, and so we should structure the system to protect them from their mistakes?
Or are you saying that men in the lab just can't help it, and so we should structure the system to protect them from their mistakes?
8
And yet, even if you stick to same-gender mentoring situations, the realities of gendered expectations make boundaries harder to navigate for women. I'm a female PhD student with a female adviser (an incredible rarity in my field). My adviser is great, but there are still strong personal boundaries. The female faculty in my field keep more personal distance from their students than the male faculty do. Male faculty and grad students play sports together, go out drinking together--sometimes even pub crawls--and go on multi-day bike trips together (not kidding at all). Female grad students are very rarely invited to participate in such activities by profs of either gender, and female profs almost never initiate such things.
I see the other side of this as a grad student teaching undergrads. Some male grad students will occasionally hold office hours off campus in a cafe, offering a less formal setting. No female grad student makes that choice. I've occasionally had students ask me to hold office hours at a cafe, but I've never felt I could consider it--because as a female grad student I would lose my authority in a heartbeat if I did, and I need to keep my authority when dealing with my students. (Even avoiding those kinds of situations, I've still had male undergrads interrupt me and talk over me WHILE I WAS TEACHING CLASS, scream at me in my office hours for daring to criticize their work, etc. I am not being needlessly cautious, nor are other women in academia).
I see the other side of this as a grad student teaching undergrads. Some male grad students will occasionally hold office hours off campus in a cafe, offering a less formal setting. No female grad student makes that choice. I've occasionally had students ask me to hold office hours at a cafe, but I've never felt I could consider it--because as a female grad student I would lose my authority in a heartbeat if I did, and I need to keep my authority when dealing with my students. (Even avoiding those kinds of situations, I've still had male undergrads interrupt me and talk over me WHILE I WAS TEACHING CLASS, scream at me in my office hours for daring to criticize their work, etc. I am not being needlessly cautious, nor are other women in academia).
6
Excellent and (from what I know) accurate piece. It's important that more academics speak out against sexist bias in training, hiring, and career development. But it's also important that the whole feudal system of academia which disadvantages many groups be brought under scrutiny. Academia is not a meritocracy (here's some evidence to back that statement up http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/1/e1400005), but it should be.
90
In order to make academia truly meritocratic and more transparent, we should start with double-blind review of scientific papers and research proposals, which, in many areas, is not currently the case.
4
Here is the problem - if someone is faced with extra costs of watching his/her behavior around "apprentices" who may try to gain advantage by using "gender" bias, then unless the apprentice is extremely talented it makes perfect sense to minimize any risks by going with the "safest" gender. After all in many cases no substantial proof is needed to damage the reputation of the publicly visible person in academia. So unless the propensity of "witch/warlock hunts" diminishes drastically we are going to see the "safety net" approach to the recruitment into apprenticeship in academia.
9
DL argues that, due to the burden to a man of having to avoid sexual entanglement, "it makes perfect sense to minimize any risks by going with the 'safest' gender" in mentoring.
However, this argument assumes that there is no such thing as a gay male apprentice who might tempt the male mentor, and no such thing as a lesbian, who might be (horrors!) immune to the male mentor's supposedly universal attractiveness.
However, this argument assumes that there is no such thing as a gay male apprentice who might tempt the male mentor, and no such thing as a lesbian, who might be (horrors!) immune to the male mentor's supposedly universal attractiveness.
120
Here is the perfect example of taking other reader's post and turning it into something else. Nowhere in my post did I specify men vs women problem as I specifically used his/her or nowhere I specified that "safe" gender meant the same gender in all cases. This is the prime example why mentors should only be picking apprentices who can be trusted without reservation. Thank you for proving my point.
Your assumption that female students are just waiting for an opportunity to take advantage of a mentor by "using gender bias" is both insulting and patently false. Women in science are much more likely to put up with a great deal of inappropriate behavior from a mentor to avoid rocking the boat than to actually stand up for themselves and risk getting on a mentor's bad side.
Of course, this was addressed in the article - what is your advice for the female student whose mentor keeps trying to look down her shirt?
Of course, this was addressed in the article - what is your advice for the female student whose mentor keeps trying to look down her shirt?
12
This is why all-female colleges which excel in the sciences, such as Mount Holyoke, are so important. As an undergraduate, I never heard that I couldn't do something because of my sex. Nuclear magnetic resonance equipment was available to chemistry undergraduates. Independent research was encouraged.
This experience provided the confidence and the resolve to achieve in the sciences, regardless of the chauvinism and sexism that I later encountered while obtaining my Ph.D. and my M.D.
This experience provided the confidence and the resolve to achieve in the sciences, regardless of the chauvinism and sexism that I later encountered while obtaining my Ph.D. and my M.D.
376
Both you and the author seem to be saying that sex-segregation or female led environments lead to better outcomes for women in science. Does Hunt, at some level have a point then?
Why the heck is this a NYT pick? We should self-segregate? Get thee to a science nunnery? I want to know how my daughter should deal with MIT, Caltech and Stanford and that level of school, not some women's college no one's heard of, no matter how 'strong in the sciences' and nurturing for women it is.
3
But they are rare and there is no efficient way to identify them when selecting, since reputation and rankings apply to the college as a whole (and are bad proxies for quality anyhow.)
I went to Wellesley (30 years ago) and got a sub-par education in both my math and computer science majors (e.g., our typical semester-long classes covered one-third to one-half the material other graduate students I met had covered in their corresponding undergrad classes.) I later found out about a math professor who quietly told someone that the classes were deliberately made less challenging because otherwise no one would enroll.
Getting women a quality STEM education as first-class citizens is a hard problem.
I went to Wellesley (30 years ago) and got a sub-par education in both my math and computer science majors (e.g., our typical semester-long classes covered one-third to one-half the material other graduate students I met had covered in their corresponding undergrad classes.) I later found out about a math professor who quietly told someone that the classes were deliberately made less challenging because otherwise no one would enroll.
Getting women a quality STEM education as first-class citizens is a hard problem.
3
I was disappointed when three of my female PhD students, each having authored several excellent research papers and achieved top honors PhD degrees, separately decided to end their careers in research science, preferring to play second fiddle to their respective male partners. Their decisons represented a significant loss to science. I had tried very hard to persuade them to look for career scientific positions, which they would have found very easily given their accomplishments. In the end, I could not help feeling that it had been a waste of my time in carefully mentoring and supervising them, and their time in the painstaking hours they had spent in the lab. It would help enormously if there were more role models of successful female scientists with successful marriages and families.
86
When talented women marry, sometimes they do postpone career advances. But this is far from universal. And if they keep up with the field in private study, they might return to professional work far sooner than expected.
The notion that a productive career, in science or any other field, must follow the traditional male model of steady uninterrupted progress is outdated. Men who hope to be present in their families will learn this, I hope. If not, divorce and "Gosh, the kids grew up before I noticed them and I just got divorced" will continue to be their fate.
The notion that a productive career, in science or any other field, must follow the traditional male model of steady uninterrupted progress is outdated. Men who hope to be present in their families will learn this, I hope. If not, divorce and "Gosh, the kids grew up before I noticed them and I just got divorced" will continue to be their fate.
185
Yes, the role models you are talking about do exist (I, for one), but a lot of women look at us and witness the level of subtle and no-so-subtle discrimination and bias we are repeatedly subjected to, and decide to opt out. One could ask: who can blame them? Simply put, the pathway of an academic career is made so unappealing to women by gender bias, that the struggle of combining family and career no longer look worthwhile.
142
Since it is women, not men, who are able to carry babies, they will continue to do so. This should not be a bar to career advancement for talented scientists (or others). Do we want to limit reproduction to women who are neither ambitious nor highly intelligent? Perhaps some men would prefer that! It would keep down those pesky women wanting a place in the academic world. What a relief for them: no more love complications and crying in the laboratory. Whew!
31
his “trouble with girls” in laboratories is that “you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticize them, they cry.”
As a man and a nerd (I work in IT/engineering) I cannot express how offensive this is. No wonder women avoid there fields. I would not want my daughter within 100 miles of Hunt.
As a man and a nerd (I work in IT/engineering) I cannot express how offensive this is. No wonder women avoid there fields. I would not want my daughter within 100 miles of Hunt.
258
Pardon me for generalizing, but men who voice these opinions are often predators, using their position to prey upon women who require their approval for advancement. Perhaps the ugliness of his statements are merely a reflection of his own ugly thoughts if not deeds.
8
It was a stupid joke by an old man.
That people 'cannot express how offensive this is' in this world, where a large percentage of women have no rights in this world, is bizarre.
As a mother working in the STEM fields with an adult daughter doing the same, I rest assured that both of us would make short work of a man like this.
That people 'cannot express how offensive this is' in this world, where a large percentage of women have no rights in this world, is bizarre.
As a mother working in the STEM fields with an adult daughter doing the same, I rest assured that both of us would make short work of a man like this.
1
I feel this whole furore is has missed an important opportunity to have a proper discussion about how academia operates. Yes, what Hunt said was crass and stupid but he should not have been hounded out of his positions. This is win-win for knee-jerk clicktivists and academia that can claim to have purged the posterboy of sexism.
Reading this op-ed, the bigger problem is not being a girl, it is the admittedly 'medieval' norms that academia still by and large works to. In this case neither gender is immune from having to keep on the right-side of the prof. and work long hours. Significant sacrifices are required no matter who you are. Note. she was sharing the lab with a boy late at night. Academia is not friendly to those with families, until you change that, you will continue to see fewer women in top positions. These issues are societal and will never be solved by solely looking at it from women's viewpoint.
Neither feminists, nor academia want to have this discussion, far more satisfying to hound a nobel prize winner out of a job and claim job done until the next unsuspecting chump decides to get up and make a joke at a conference.
Reading this op-ed, the bigger problem is not being a girl, it is the admittedly 'medieval' norms that academia still by and large works to. In this case neither gender is immune from having to keep on the right-side of the prof. and work long hours. Significant sacrifices are required no matter who you are. Note. she was sharing the lab with a boy late at night. Academia is not friendly to those with families, until you change that, you will continue to see fewer women in top positions. These issues are societal and will never be solved by solely looking at it from women's viewpoint.
Neither feminists, nor academia want to have this discussion, far more satisfying to hound a nobel prize winner out of a job and claim job done until the next unsuspecting chump decides to get up and make a joke at a conference.
72
The problem is that there is not an alternative system that has been demonstrated to work. The professionalization of science, medicine, engineering and law--among others--has demonstrated the inadequacy of formal schooling as compared to mentorship by practitioners. Virtually no medical student would be regarded as an able, independent doctor prior to her completion of internship and residency, nor would she be able to function as one. I think this is neither wrong nor unique to medicine.
A sweeping cultural change in America is required if one wants to make the work environment in competitive fields more humane. Simply decrying the long tenure of apprenticeships leads nowhere.
And, lest it be thought I agree, Hunt deserved to lose his positions over that ignorant and boneheaded statement.
A sweeping cultural change in America is required if one wants to make the work environment in competitive fields more humane. Simply decrying the long tenure of apprenticeships leads nowhere.
And, lest it be thought I agree, Hunt deserved to lose his positions over that ignorant and boneheaded statement.
5
And it's not just academia that is not family friendly. Corporate America also has problems, in spite of family friendly policies. Parental leave and personal time off for family reasons are good and necessary, but constant required overtime and unpredictable schedules do great damage to families for both male and female workers. I know we must compete globally, but tired workers are not as productive as happy workers with predictable schedules.
6
I'm a feminist and I want to have that discussion.
"Academia is not friendly to THOSE WITH FAMILIES, until you change that, you will continue to see fewer WOMEN in top positions."
Do men not have families? Maybe a good chunk of the solution is for men to step up and do their part with their families and stop assuming that it is primarily the woman's responsibility. These issues are so skewed towards men's point of view that I've no doubt "unsuspecting chumps" in the field abound, however I wouldn't equate "unsuspecting" with innocence, but rather with willful ignorance. It sounds to me like there are more men in a position to change this academic system than women, and until men see it as important (i.e. impacting men negatively and not just impacting women negatively) it won't change.
"Academia is not friendly to THOSE WITH FAMILIES, until you change that, you will continue to see fewer WOMEN in top positions."
Do men not have families? Maybe a good chunk of the solution is for men to step up and do their part with their families and stop assuming that it is primarily the woman's responsibility. These issues are so skewed towards men's point of view that I've no doubt "unsuspecting chumps" in the field abound, however I wouldn't equate "unsuspecting" with innocence, but rather with willful ignorance. It sounds to me like there are more men in a position to change this academic system than women, and until men see it as important (i.e. impacting men negatively and not just impacting women negatively) it won't change.
10
People in a network tend to be close to people like them. Whites and whites. Men and men. Straights and straights. It isn't done out of malice or intentional exclusivity, but rather a reflection of personality.
Now suppose one of those hypothetical white men is in an ambitious position of growth. Perhaps he started a company, or got a major promotion at a research lab. Either way, hey need to recruit. What better talent than those you know? So if he looks within his networks, he will likely find a high proportion of white men as suitable candidates. Again, it is not to exclude others, but simply a function of who they know.
Carry on a few years and this man becomes promoted to senior manager, and his friends become junior managers with hiring needs of their own. They too, will look to their networks, and take on people like them.
The problem with retroactive diversity is not that privilege is born at the top - it starts at the bottom, climbs to the top, and stays there.
Now suppose one of those hypothetical white men is in an ambitious position of growth. Perhaps he started a company, or got a major promotion at a research lab. Either way, hey need to recruit. What better talent than those you know? So if he looks within his networks, he will likely find a high proportion of white men as suitable candidates. Again, it is not to exclude others, but simply a function of who they know.
Carry on a few years and this man becomes promoted to senior manager, and his friends become junior managers with hiring needs of their own. They too, will look to their networks, and take on people like them.
The problem with retroactive diversity is not that privilege is born at the top - it starts at the bottom, climbs to the top, and stays there.
56
Nikko,
I'm thinking you might not have read the article Ms. Soper clearly indicates that women who head top labs do not show this tendency to populate their labs with "people like them". They show no gender bias.
The world has changed. There are lots of women in the pipeline. The shut-off valve for women has simply moved a bit higher up the line.
I'm thinking you might not have read the article Ms. Soper clearly indicates that women who head top labs do not show this tendency to populate their labs with "people like them". They show no gender bias.
The world has changed. There are lots of women in the pipeline. The shut-off valve for women has simply moved a bit higher up the line.
7
But if he started the company, how is it privilege? Aren't women and ethnic minorities entitled to start companies and hire within their networks. too?
This is an apologia for segregation, quotas and discrimination.
7
May be Prof. Hunt is being hunted down for some remarks he made inadvertently or based on his experience . No one would have noticed such statement 30 or 40 years ago but today it is a taboo to say such a thing event if there is an element of truth or not. When you work in a very active lab. supervised by a Noble Laureate , you have to face lot of pressure and devote more time to achieve results. So women working under pressure and if having a family they have to endure a lot of challenges which men by default need not face. So there might be a truth in Prof. Hunt's statement but is 30 to 40 years too late for public acceptability. I do not think he deserves the treatment he is being meted out to him by his employers and associations.
8
I completely disagree. Mr. Hunt still has his Nobel Prize for his work in the laboratory, but he deserves a major rap on the knuckles for failing to learn that sexist behavior toward women is no longer acceptable. I believe that even a Nobel Laureate can learn to function in a workplace where women work along side men. Mr. Hunt's punishment was nothing compared to the many women who are denied scientific careers by the sexist behavior of the scientists they must work with. Mr. Hunt's humiliation will be an excellent example for other top scientists.
17
"I do not think he deserves the treatment he is being meted out to him by his employers and associations."
Women don't deserve the treatment being meted out to them by their employers and associations either.
Thankfully the gender issue is being discussed - at least this time - in the NY Times. Around the world. Again. These discussions have been going on for at least 40 years of my life, when this Nobel Laureate would have been in his 30s. Too long for smart people to not get it. We'll need to "meter out" such treatment until Nobel Laureates get that gender discrimination really is not just wasteful but wrong.
Women don't deserve the treatment being meted out to them by their employers and associations either.
Thankfully the gender issue is being discussed - at least this time - in the NY Times. Around the world. Again. These discussions have been going on for at least 40 years of my life, when this Nobel Laureate would have been in his 30s. Too long for smart people to not get it. We'll need to "meter out" such treatment until Nobel Laureates get that gender discrimination really is not just wasteful but wrong.
10
"So women working under pressure and if having a family they have to endure a lot of challenges which men BY DEFAULT need not face."
That is exactly the sexism that needs to be addressed. I would also note that Dr. Hunt's remark didn't refer to families. Men assuming that women are attracted to them or men treating female colleagues as sexual objects (looking down the shirt, etc.) are challenges and unnecessary burdens that men, by default, need not face while working in the lab. And let's not forget the "and when you criticize them, they cry" remark. Has this ever happened? Probably. But I would say it's probable (and just as likely) for men under pressure, too. And I noticed that you refer to "women," but Dr. Hunt referred to "girls," which says a lot about how he thinks of his female colleagues. Finally, Dr. Hunt's statement exudes his notion of men's privileged status--the lab is not a meritocracy, but the rightful domain of men to which "girls" can either be admitted or excluded based on the men's willingness to put up with her gender, and not based, apparently, on her achievement.
None of what Dr. Hunt said is publicly acceptable now because it is not acceptable, period. If it takes the "public's" involvement to make a change, then so be it.
That is exactly the sexism that needs to be addressed. I would also note that Dr. Hunt's remark didn't refer to families. Men assuming that women are attracted to them or men treating female colleagues as sexual objects (looking down the shirt, etc.) are challenges and unnecessary burdens that men, by default, need not face while working in the lab. And let's not forget the "and when you criticize them, they cry" remark. Has this ever happened? Probably. But I would say it's probable (and just as likely) for men under pressure, too. And I noticed that you refer to "women," but Dr. Hunt referred to "girls," which says a lot about how he thinks of his female colleagues. Finally, Dr. Hunt's statement exudes his notion of men's privileged status--the lab is not a meritocracy, but the rightful domain of men to which "girls" can either be admitted or excluded based on the men's willingness to put up with her gender, and not based, apparently, on her achievement.
None of what Dr. Hunt said is publicly acceptable now because it is not acceptable, period. If it takes the "public's" involvement to make a change, then so be it.
10
Well written narrative. My wife and my daughter are scientists (mechanical Engineering) in the male dominated institutions and they are successful. The response to every relationship aspects is professional behavior and professional discussions and they are surviving beautifully.
28
This may have identified a problem for the writer, but the overall issue is still the low rate of funding for scientific research in the US. Women have advanced to the extent that a recent President and Chair of Chemistry at MIT were both women. When was a student there, a woman was rarely to be seen outside of the secretarial services. As funds grow tight, I suppose it is inevitable that bais will creep in, but my experience is that women are at the forefront of the portion of science that I deal with.
21
I worked for 23 years at a famous scientific laboratory. When I started there were 3 female scientists among 3000 male scientists. When I retired the number had jumped to about 20% of the scientists being female.
Sexist behavior was and continues to be a constant problem. There were many lawsuits regarding sexual harassment and gender bias. People were fired in some cases.
The problem is far from solved. I regard Dr. Hunt's punishment over his sexist behavior as a necessary step in making ti possible for women to work in the field of science. Many men have learned to do better but the cases of sexism in the laboratory are still rampant. Perhaps Dr. Hunt's punishment will help other scientists learn that sexism can ruin the career of a man -- not just a woman.
Sexist behavior was and continues to be a constant problem. There were many lawsuits regarding sexual harassment and gender bias. People were fired in some cases.
The problem is far from solved. I regard Dr. Hunt's punishment over his sexist behavior as a necessary step in making ti possible for women to work in the field of science. Many men have learned to do better but the cases of sexism in the laboratory are still rampant. Perhaps Dr. Hunt's punishment will help other scientists learn that sexism can ruin the career of a man -- not just a woman.
11
It used to be called a pregnant belly, which I find a bit more accurate. I guess if you wanted to sound scientific you could call it a pregnant abdomen or midsection.
Maybe it's a pop culture thing that I missed because I haven't watch television or movies for the past 10 years. Wait! I'll do an image search. Egads! Overload.
This is indeed foreign to me. Annie Leibovitz, Demi Moore and Vanity Fair- I question if this vanity is fair even to other childless women. Seems to be a big bump used as a big tool in the money making machine)
Additionally: we waste enough water on this planet producing fibers and fabrics and fashion as it is. Do we really need a maternity lab coat to be used for four months and then discarded?
Wear an apron extension under the lab coat and use some elastic extensions on the buttons,
or
go to a low paid (dare I say, Immigrant) Dressmaker. She will open up the side seams, add a triangular piece of fabric. Four months later, she can take it out. She'll be glad for the 15 bucks she'll earn as a non-scientist domestic worker.