When I was in the penultimate year of high school, at that point where you need to think about universities, all six of the girls in my physics class got a flyer advertising \u201cgirl days\u201d at technical universities, during which we could visit and look around without any boys present. <\/p>\n
I instantly decided I did not want to attend either the \u201cgirl days\u201d in particular, or their universities as a whole. I was offended that someone thought I needed to be treated differently.<\/p>\n
I don\u2019t know if this early offense was the cause of it, or just another manifestation of the same thing, but I always get antsy when I see \u201cwomen in science\u201d features. Ultimately I just don\u2019t want there to even be a reason to have to produce these things. However, in the past few years I have heard stories of women who were not taken seriously at work, who were bullied out of a job, or simply forgotten. So I can see that it\u2019s necessary to do things. I just question what the point is of always showing examples of women in particular careers in the hopes of – what exactly? <\/p>\n
So-and-so has a career AND a family – isn\u2019t she amazing? And here\u2019s another feature about how unfair the salary imbalance is. And, I know, let\u2019s hold a panel discussion with four women who barely have time for this because they\u2019re also the token women on every other panel, every committee, and every editorial board. They can talk about how they\u2019re \u201cdoing it all\u201d, where \u201call\u201d is mainly sitting on panels talking about this sort of thing. <\/p>\n
And I\u2019m made to feel like I should read all the features and join in the discussion and spend another good portion of my time supporting other women in science, but just like when I was seventeen I don\u2019t WANT to go to \u201cgirl days\u201d or talk about women in science. I just want to do my actual work. <\/p>\n
That being said, there are two recent initiatives to improve female representation in the science and tech world, and unlike the well-meant flyers and features and endless discussions, I think these two things might actually change something. For the first time since my first encounter with gender issues in science, way back in high school, I did not cringe at \u201cwomen in science\u201d initiatives. I actually like these ideas, and that\u2019s pretty high praise coming from me!<\/p>\n
1. The panel pledge<\/strong> It\u2019s a brilliant mechanism that uses the voice of men who notice a lack of women, and who are in a position to change that. They can put the pressure on organisers to invite women at a stage where the programme is still being made, which is much more effective than people complaining afterward that they were left out. It\u2019s also a friendly way to remind organisers that they may have overlooked someone. <\/p>\n Since hearing about this, I\u2019ve also made a point of thinking about who I recommend for panels or include in lists of scientists. So far I haven\u2019t caught myself leaving out any women, but if I accidentally do, I\u2019ll be aware of it, and will think a bit further before finalizing my list. I\u2019m also trying not to recommend the usual suspects. There are more women in science than the two or three that always step up. <\/p>\n 2. The Finkbeiner test<\/strong> “To pass the Finkbeiner test, the story cannot mention<\/p>\n “<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n I like this one because it addresses exactly the things I dislike so much about open house days for girls only or feature articles about women in science. There is no reason to write about women in science any differently than about men in science. It\u2019s exactly that tone, that \u201clook how much she can do! She\u2019s so special!\u201d-attitude that irks me about those features, and that made me avoid particular universities when as a high school student I had to make important choices about my own future in science. <\/p>\n Together, these two ideas say: Treat scientists all the same, regardless of their gender, but be aware that there is more than one gender when looking for representative groups of experts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When I was in the penultimate year of high school, at that point where you need to think about universities, all six of the girls in my physics class got a flyer advertising \u201cgirl days\u201d at technical universities, during which … Continue reading
\nProposed by Rebecca Rosen in an Atlantic piece<\/a>, this amazingly simple idea is already changing the composition of conference panels. Men who have taken this pledge have promised that when they\u2019re invited to speak at a conference or on a panel, they will only accept if there is at least one female speaker. <\/p>\n
\nAnn Finkbeiner proposed to write about a female scientist<\/a> and not once mention the fact that she is a woman. This idea was expanded by Christie Aschwanden to the \u201cFinkbeiner test<\/a>\u201d, which you can use to analyse any piece of writing about a woman in science. <\/p>\n\n