Last week I gave a presentation at the annual conference of the Asociación Española de Comunicación Científica (Spanish Association of Science Communication) in Madrid, Spain - the organizers explicitly asked me to discuss current challenges and cite contemporary examples facing women in research and science communication when it comes to encountering sexism in the workplace and online. I still can’t decide if I ought to be frustrated by how easy it is to come up with recent incidences like this one here, or be encouraged by how quickly the topics begin trending online as they are swiftly picked up by the science communication communities who refuse to let such instances be swept under a rug.
In my talk last week, I mentioned the #ShirtStorm controversy from last fall, and how Phil Plait said it best when he wrote that the incident was the sort of thing that contributes to the greater issues at hand – ‘death by a thousand cuts’ for women seeking equality in the workplace.
I talked about how Fiona Ingleby’s transcript was rejected from PLOS ONE, the reviewer’s comments citing “It would probably… be beneficial to find one or two male biologists to work with (or at least obtain internal peer review from, but better yet as active co-authors)” in order to lend more credibility to her science.
And then we embraced #GirlsWithToys – social media hitching onto Caltech astrophysicist Shrinivas Kulkarni’s casual comment that “many scientists are… what I call ‘boys with toys,” failing to understand how the statement excludes female colleagues.
Just today this article from the Atlantic popped up on my newsfeed: Don’t Let Them See Your Tampons, which goes into the marketing of menstrual products, and how we as a society are so willing to try and make periods invisible. I’m guilty of this in that I was even embarrassed to ask what women do when they get their period while in the field - and guiltier still because we haven’t made an episode about the topic, as I’m anxious about inevitable backlash from those who will fail to see the importance of discussing it publicly, even though, clearly, people want an answer. And I question why I feel embarrassed, why I don’t want to talk about the reality of my own physiology, why we feel the need to keep these topics isolated to small and private female audiences in order to feel most comfortable discussing the topic, if at all.
When I talk to women who have been in academia and research science for decades they tell me sexism still exists but it’s not as blatant as it used to be, and therefore more difficult to recognize by many today. Before, a female colleague would be asked to serve tea at meetings, even though she was a peer of the group - that happened to Dr. Neena B. Schwartz of Northwestern University early on in her career. Today, the digs aren’t as obvious. After a talk I gave a few months ago someone was commending me for being so eager to say yes to opportunity and collaboration - a senior scientist grabbed my left hand, pointed to my ring finger and he jokingly said, “well, she doesn’t say yes to everything!” Some people laughed - I cringed.
Maybe it’s just a joke, it’s just a shirt, it’s just a look, it’s a compliment, they didn’t mean it, stop being so sensitive. Give it time. Maybe if we just continue to grin and bear it, to tolerate the ogling looks and comments about marriage, the condescending remarks that our gender prevents us from being as good as our male peers, maybe once we achieve all that is expected and more we can create change from the top down, and maybe it’ll stop and go away. But I doubt it. I think that change happens by sharing these stories, encouraging dialogue, and most importantly, celebrating victories. Until we stop telling people to tolerate workplace harassment because they think it’s the only option in advancing their careers, I’ll keep traveling, and talking, and advocating. I look forward to seeing you there.
turnnoffyourmind
baratheonpilled
gracieabrams
snowghoul
blakekathryn
germansingergirl
2087
areudirty
gummygunk
