Sometimes one deludes oneself into thinking that progress has been made on some important social issue, and then out of the blue, there’s a reminder of just how far things still have to go. Check out this post – supposedly a report on the contents of a physics seminar given by a woman – on the blog “A Quantum Diaries Survivor”, and get a reminder of what women in physics are up against. Near the beginning of the post he spends one of the longest paragraphs of the piece talking about how her hair was done, how fit and attractive he thinks she looks, wondering whether she works out…(!) It’s so completely awful to do this sort of thing and he does it so spectacularly completely that I actually thought it was meant to be a parody of some sort! From his comments in response to people pointing out the inappropriateness of it, it turns out that he really does not get it at all. Not a bit.
It is really sad. It is so embarrassing too, when anyone female shows up in a physics context and guys just start behaving like they’ve never seen a woman before. That silliness alone is simply embarrassing, but this is quite a bit worse I would say, since it is damaging to the cause of women in the field.
I really shouldn’t go on, and I will risk sounding preachy and self-righteous (and I’ll just get yelled at and nobody will learn anything) but it’s important, so I will try some words:
Of course there are contexts in which we can discuss things about each other that take note of (even celebrate) our differences in gender, race, and so forth. I’ll be so bold as to say that with appropriate care, we can even legitimately talk about whether we find someone attractive or not, wonder about aspects of their personal lives, etc. (No, by this I don’t mean it is ok to be a sexist jerk in private.) Nobody is suggesting that we be all gray and genderless automata. These things are part of the spice of life – grist for the mill of human interaction, and we are human. But we are humans with brains that can help us separate out different aspects of our interactions. The point is that these things should not pollute the atmosphere of the workplace – or the extended workplace (he was reporting on a physics talk at CERN to a wider physics audience). In other words, they should not be done at the expense of those around us – context is everything. Most definitely, to my mind, this is really not one of those contexts. One should always be careful in a work context, of course, and in the broader context of a public forum about work and reflections on work matters, one should be very careful to separate out the physics discussion from the other stuff. Even then it is very hard to get right and probably the best policy is to err on the side of caution, I would say. Sure, it’s a minefield – people’s feelings can be involved. That sort of thing is never simple, and nor should it be.
Also, it is irrelevant whether or not the person being commented on is an established respected scientist (in this case they are – it’s Lisa Randall). The key point is that doing this sort of thing in this context does not send a good message to younger women in the field who are trying to be taken seriously as thinkers rather than eye-candy for the majority males in the field (or worse), nor to younger women thinking about coming into the field. It also does not set a good example to other men in the field who have yet to learn about how such comments can make a woman feel about herself and how seriously she is being taken.
This all puts me in mind of that fine Science Friday interview of Ira Flatow’s (of the same person) a while back. If you look at that old post of mine, be sure to scroll down to the comments starting around #58 or so where the man himself (or someone claiming to be him) comes into the discussion and makes it all even more depressing.
Of course, as usual all of these considerations will be lost in the stampede of people rushing to form intelligent counter-arguments which are a variation on “American political correctness out of control” and so forth.
Doubly sad. Triply if one notices that the interesting physics he does get around to reporting on has yet to be discussed in any of the 12 comments so far. I wonder how many comments it will take before the physics is mentioned (not counting the trackback that this post might leave there)?
-cvj
Some Related Asymptotia Posts (not exhaustive):
Clifford — Fair enough; the matter is indeed subtle. I am young and may find that the status of women is less than what my optimistic mind supposes it to be. In my four short years of study, I never encountered a professor who doubted my capacity to understand physics (as far as I could tell), or expressed any inappropriate interest in me. On the other hand, I’ve seen a man give a tour of a research facility and hardly make eye contact with the four females in the group of eight. I tend to think of such people as relics, still in existence, but most of the field has moved on.
In any case, I wish you well. While I disagree on this particular battle, the war is worth fighting.
Oh, and maybe I’ll be able to call Jennifer Ouellette a colleague in a couple of years
Hi Clifford,
thank you very much for your answer – I was about to comment in more detail, but right now, I’m just to shaken by the latest post by Lubos Motl, partially targeted at my wife. Of course, it is Motl, and he may not qualify as a “colleague” anymore – but his malicious distortion of quotations and his defamatory attitude does far more harm than any remark about physical appearance. Believe me, if I would meet Motl right now, you would have to prevent me from breaking his fingers.
Anyway – are there any useful suggestions around how to handle such a case?
Best regards, Stefan
Hi stefan,
Good luck. I don’t know if there are any useful suggestions. Don’t break anything – that never helps really.
General policy reminder to all – Lubos has no right of reply on this blog, and so to be fair I also delete anything inflammatory said about him too. So stefan’s understandable expression of frustration is where it stops, with regards Lubos, please. In any case, lack of relevance would also be an issue.
Despite the attempts of some to tilt the conversation that way, let’s keep trying to keep the discussion here out of the gutters and sewers.
Thanks.
-cvj
alpinekat said:
Oh no, No ! No, they have not. There are examples in the new generation being created all the time, and encouraged (subtly, and not necessarily intentionally) to mimic their elders in these matters – We have come a long way on the one hand, but in other ways, we are only ever a tiny step away from the old ways, and have not come very far at all, in my opinion. This is precisely the reason to take note of these things, and to have this sort of conversation.
Best,
-cvj
Stefan -
Your comment reminded me of a comment I had meant to make, when someone (way up there) wrote that we should remember what we were taught as children [i.e. sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.]
What rot that turned out to be, didn’t it?
Hi Clifford,
sorry about that, usually I am quite a restrained person, but this was just too much – reading that diatribe again, hours later, still makes me upset …
Coming back to the topic of this post – now, I guess I got your point that remarks about physical appearance are a no-go in a blog post about the presentation of a colleague – let her or him be black or white or whatever. I’m sure you have had quite some first-hand, bad experience with this issue, and for this reason are much more sensitive to it than I am. Moreover, I don’t buy at all Tommaso’s argument that his writings are not public – there is hardly anything more public than a blog post.
But please accept that I don’t completely share your point of view.
For example, concerning the issue of public versus private, I think the relevant category may be official versus private – and in this respect, this post on a “private blog” is not official, as has been mentioned before.
Then, I would say, the most important thing is that it is obvious for everyone that the writer has a deep respect for the person he or she is writing about, and regards his or her work seriously, as alpinekat puts it. Now, this is a delicate point, since it definitely requires good writing skills and tactfulness to meet these requirements if you consider writing about anything else than the presentation as such. But if fulfilled, I still see not a principle reason not to insert such a paragraph in a post, given that the context is non-official, and the person described really plays in a different league (I hope Tommaso doesn’t mind that statement). If Tommaso’s paragraph meets these criteria may be open to debate – as I mentioned before, I would not have written that myself, and similar to alpinekat, I could imagine a formulation that would, hopefully, leave less margin for potentially harmful misinterpretations.
But I completely agree that this issue is extremely sensitive and should be handled with extreme care!
On the other hand, as for the case of women in physics in general, I guess the most important goal we should try to aspire to is that, as Lisa Randall puts it in the Discovery piece mentioned by Bee, a woman can “just [...] be a scientist like the others”.
In this respect, I am quite confident that a certain normality has been reached already – maybe this is naive, but I hope it is not – you see, for example there are now cases of physicist couples where quite obviously, the woman is the more brilliant one of the two
But then, schemes to protect women in physics bear the danger of overdoing, and just reaching the opposite of what they initially are intended for, by singling out again woman as not “scientists like the others”. I remember that Sabine once told me about her mixed feelings when she obtained a scholarship intended to foster women in the sciences, exactly for the reason that she wanted to be accepted for her science in the first place.
I understand that this was not the point of your post, and that you are quite certainly aware of this problem, but it comes to my mind as a further aspect of the problem.
Since this was mentioned, the guy who did not dare to make eye contact with the four women visitors – well, there are quite shy male physicists, perhaps more than among a random sample of males, and I could imagine that such a guy is even more intimidated and unsettled by long discussions bout how to be careful with respect to women – I concede that from alpinekat’s description alone, it is not clear to me whether the reason for this guy’s behaviour was not plain old-style chauvinism.
I am well aware of the old professors talking patronisingly about their female students as “their girls”, or even worse – but I am optimistic that these are dinosaurs, on the brink of extinction. However, from several discussions with my wife, I am also aware that we male physicist are at risk to get caught in a much more subtle trap – that we may perceive perfectly normal women physicists as either arrogant and aggressive, or as feminine and a bit naive, depending on how much they adopt to a style typical of male physicist. Interestingly, I read these days about roughly the same problem facing young women managers in industry – it may be typical for a setting traditionally dominated by males, and with few female role models.
So, this issue is to stay with us for some time – but I am confident that with time, things will improve, and normality will set in. We should just stay aware of the many pitfalls we may fall into.
Thanks, Stefan
Stefan:- Very thoughtful, and I largely agree with you overall, in fact. We may have some differences in emphasis here and there… and I’d also say that we should not be so complacent about the dinosaur theory. I also disagree about thinking of various measures as there to “protect” women… Such things – when run properly – are more enablers than protectors, and not, to my mind, inappropriate – in the right context.
Overall, I do not think that there are hard and fast rules of behaviour…. only guidelines of which to be mindful. Sadly, one can most clearly tell when something does not feel right only after the fact/event/act, rather than accurately prescribing beforehand what will work and what won’t. So guidelines are worthwhile, to help with navigation. There will always be room for good examples that break all the guidelines but nevertheless work….but those are exceptions… and as things improve, there will hopefully be more of them and we can worry about this all less… but we are a long way from that situation, in my mind, and hence the care.
Best,
-cvj
It IS his own blog, and he does profess to love physics. and he claims to “respect” the woman he has objectified. For that reason I came away from his blog posting thinking less of the Tommaso and his professionalism, even though he did go into some interesting detail about Lisa’s talk.
What he wrote is the equivalent of saying, “I heard a great lecture today by a physicist I respect and boy, did she have great hooters!” Crude, unrefined, and unnecessary. I don’t really care if it’s his private blog or not, what he said is publicly available and gives us insight into his thinking. Falling back on the old “Oh, all Italian men are like this” doesn’t make his disrespect any more right than claiming that it’s okay to mutilate women because of cultural concerns. It’s still disrespectful at the very least.
Perhaps all of us, no matter where we come from, could learn to be MORE respectful of other human beings, rather than falling back on trite “cultural” excuses for flagrant behavior.
I want to add a remark to what my husband mentioned above about the scholarship that I was on, which was to specifically support women in science and engineering. I wouldn’t have applied for that scholarship to begin with, for the reason he mentioned, I just want to be a scientist like all the others.
At the institute where I was, those who finished an MD usually got a PhD position as researcher/teaching assistant. I should add literally everybody got such a job. I am not usually over-convinced of myself, but I think most would agree that there were many PhD students which were not as qualified as I was. However, when I finished my MD, I was told I wouldn’t get a position there, because I am a women and could apply for the scholarship, so the Institute wouldn’t have to pay me.
Yes, I got that scholarship. It was about the same amount as the job had been, but with the usual drawbacks (no health insurance/retirement plan/unemployment insurance). The next three years I’ve been repeatedly told (in many though not all cases half jokingly, but nevertheless) that I am only there because I’m a women and got payed through that scholarship.
I am all for supporting women in science, but what I have been trying to communicate is that one needs to be very careful how to do that, or it will backlash. I want women to be treated equal, not more equal than men.
Bee said:
I couldn’t agree more… Hence what I’ve said above.
By the way the fact that there are people who will assume that your holding a fellowship had more to do with your gender than your ability says more about them than it does about the fellowship. Such fellowships have done a lot to help women get a start in a field. They are not ideal measures, but are not evil either. Let’s not rush to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Cheers,
-cvj
the fact that there are people who will assume that your holding a fellowship had more to do with your gender than your ability says more about them than it does about the fellowship.
Sure. But the scholarship didn’t change a thing about that. It’s certainly a good idea to have these (well, I generally think scholarships for qualified young people are a good idea because they provide a certain level of independence) but it doesn’t really address the cause of the problem. And in some cases it can actually go against the intention to provide a welcoming environment for women in a men-dominated area.
True, but they are only *part* of a wide range of things being done to address the problems. No single programme is going to be the perfect solution to all aspects of a huge and multi-faceted problem. The whole picture has to be looked at when evaluating the worth of a single programme.
Cheers,
-cvj
About programs policies addressing parity, we have an interesting paradox here in Spain: the laws ask for a minimum quota of 40% in highly regarded jobs where women are underrepresented, but they do not ask for a maximum quota of 60% in lowly regarded jobs where women are overrepresented. My impression is that the second part would contribute even better to a perception of equality (or to equality in perception).
“nobody on planet Earth knows better than me how hard it is for women in scienceâ€
This is not a productive way to argue. It is especially wrong-headed when thrown at another woman scientist who you know nothing about!!!!!