“Where did the women go?” – Comments

I’ve followed with interest the discussion on Amanda‘s astropixie blog following her post “Where did the women go?”. She wrote the post after attending a Women in Astronomy workshop in Sydney and summarises the problem (–> women underrepresented in astronomy) and her thoughts. She also gives a list of action point for individuals and for institutes, which are useful to remind ourselves of.

I wanted to post some comments of my own, and after Blogger ate my carefully thought out words, I thought I’d write something here instead. In brief, I find myself siding more and more with the comments made by Rita Tojeiro on Amanda’s post. I find the many discussions of “women in astronomy” issues polarising and not very constructive. While it’s important to raise awareness about unconscious bias, which I do believe exists,  creating an “us vs. them” atmosphere only makes the problem worse.

Personally I want to stand out from all my peers, including those of the XY conviction. As Rita says, we don’t give awards to the best black astronomer, or the best muslim astronomer. Imagine! I don’t want to be a great female astronomer, or a great female science blogger for that matter.

We need to talk openly about the reasons that many scientists, male or female, don’t stick with a career in science, with everyone involved.”Women in science” meetings, to which often men aren’t (made to feel) welcome, tend to revolve around work-life balance issues, such as childcare and dual careers. These issues affect men too. Stronger even: in many cases, the men are the women scientists’ partners! They are the work-life balance, the problematic second body.

I won’t go on too much, as I’ve said it all before, and it’s all been repeated in Amanda’s comments section. I’d like to stress that I do think there are unconscious bias effects at work, and some of the reasons why people leave science affect women more than men. I don’t debate those things. But I think the way we discuss them, the way we try to address them, is not always the best.

And hey, it’s not all bad being a woman in astronomy. Here’s why:

  • No queues in the ladies’ loos at conferences. Where else can you get 2000 people together and only have lines at the men’s bathrooms? Makes me smile every time.
  • It’s far easier to make an impression: you are the albino chimp at the zoo! Who do you the important people will remember in a week – the 50 regular chimps or the one weird albino?

I don’t mean to belittle the issue – but you have to let yourself laugh about it too. Got any others?

 

Astronomy Snippets: Good news for UNAWE; Sackett resigns

Too many interesting things going on, not enough time to keep track and write. Here are a few items of note.

  • The Leiden-based international Universe Awareness project (UNAWE), which brings the awesomeness of astronomy to children in developing countries, has received a giant nod of support for its European activities from the European Union. The EU has awarded 1.9 million euros to EUNAWE to continue in its mission to help introduce underprivileged kids around Europe to science and engineering. That’s pretty amazing news. Until recently, UNAWE was led by my fellow dotAstronomy organiser and buddy Carolina Ödman Govender. Last year Carolina switched jobs and hemispheres, but I know that she spent loads of time and effort nabbing this grant and she deserves a warm congratulations. Published just days before Carolina’s wedding, the timing of the announcement could hardly have been better.[NB. UNAWE now has a new international project manager in Leiden, Pedro Russo, who co-ordinated the International Year of Astronomy and is the editor in chief of the Communicating Astronomy with the Public journal - i.e. the project is in excellent hands!]

    [NB2. The good news for UNAWE is also good news for my new home team Heidelberg, who are involved with UNAWE's work and will also benefit from the EU's support.]

  • On a very different note, I was disappointed to learn that Penny Sackett, the astronomy professor who in 2008 became Chief Scientist in Australia, has resigned from the post mid-way through  her term. I don’t know Prof. Sackett personally or professionally (beyond seeing some conference talks by her when I was a PhD student) and I’m far away from Australia in every sense, so I can’t comment on any circumstances. I was impressed with Australia for appointing a great astronomer to such a senior position, and it’s a shame this hasn’t worked out. There are some fairly opaque statements about her resignation, and a bit of media speculation – maybe more details will emerge in weeks to come.

In which I get Celebrated in The Guardian

Amidst the perennial discussion of how to get more women into scientific careers and keep them there, it hadn’t occurred to me that female science bloggers may also be in a minority.

A few days ago, Jenny Rohn posted a graph on her blog, showing the male to female ratio of several science blog networks: the well-established Discover and relative newcomers The Guardian, Wired and PLoS. She didn’t actually make any statement about gender balance or proportionality of representation – that was me – but an interesting discussion followed in the comments. Self-proclaimed “armchair activist” Martin Robbins started a hashtag, kickstarted the hive overmind, and collated a list of women science bloggers over at his new perch in The Guardian.

So that’s how my name ended up in my favourite newspaper. Hurrah.

It’s a really nice initiative to get more attention to us women who write about science. Female role models have been cited as an important factor in getting and keeping more women in science careers, and in that respect increasing the visibility of working female scientists is a great idea.

And yet, and yet. I don’t think singling women out is particularly constructive way to approach a gender balance issue – a gender balance issue that, in this case, we don’t even know for sure exists.

[Read more...]

The Big Bang Debate

ResearchBlogging.orgA few days ago, I posted this poll about the show The Big Bang Theory, asking the question if it was bad for science (and women). I closed the poll last night, the votes are in, you people have spoken.  Here’s the final results from 58 votes – and thanks for voting, polls are fun!

Most of you don’t seem to take sitcoms all that seriously, and that’s probably a sensible attitude. Also, quite a few of you think I should get a life. That’s probably also a fair statement. Beyond that, there’s about twice the number of BBT-lovers as there are BBT-haters, with a smattering of on-the-fencers. Well, you already know where I stand, but before I return back to the life that I do in fact have, let me elaborate.

[Read more...]

The Big Bang Theory: Badass or Badness?

After hearing much chatter about it online I finally got round to watching all three seasons of the CBS sitcom The Big Bang Theory. And I love it.  Then I discovered, however, that some of my bestest scientist friends really dislike it. They think it sets back both the quest for realistic role models in science and the positive portrayal of women. It seems like the cute little sitcom, immensely popular both in the US and in Europe, is dividing opinions (and here, and  here) among scientists.  It’s been a while since I played around with polls, so here’s one for you. What do you think?

[polldaddy poll=3311142]