• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

How the sex bias prevails

Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
1,941
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
512
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
From: How the sex bias prevails
How the sex bias prevails

SHANKAR VEDANTAM
May 15, 2010
MADELINE Heilman at New York University once conducted an experiment in which she told volunteers about a manager. Some were told, "Subordinates have often described Andrea as someone who is tough yet outgoing and personable. She is known to reward individual contributions and has worked hard to maximise employees' creativity."

Other volunteers were told, "Subordinates have often described James as someone who is tough yet outgoing and personable. He is known to reward individual contributions and has worked hard to maximise employees' creativity."

The only difference between what the groups were told was that some people thought they were hearing about a leader named Andrea while others thought they were hearing about a leader named James. Heilman asked her volunteers to estimate how likeable Andrea and James were as people. Three-quarters thought James was more likeable than Andrea.

Using a clever experimental design, Heilman also determined that four in five volunteers preferred to have James as their boss. Andrea seemed less likeable merely because she was a woman who happened to be a leader.

The existence of unconscious sexism can be scientifically proved in laboratory experiments. We know that unconscious sexism caused the laboratory volunteers in Heilman's experiment to find Andrea the manager less likeable than James the manager, because two groups of volunteers, divided at random, reached different conclusions about the likeability of the managers. Since the only thing that varied between the groups was whether they were told the manager was named Andrea or James, we can confidently say the outcome was produced by that single difference.

Bias is much harder to demonstrate scientifically in real life, which may be why large numbers of people do not believe that sexism and other forms of prejudice still exist. Many people think we live in a "post-racial" and "post-sexist" world where egalitarian notions are the norm. Indeed, if you go by what people report, we do live in a bias-free world, because most people report feeling no prejudice whatsoever.

What would be remarkably instructive in real life would be if women in various professions could experience life as men, and vice versa. If the same person got treated differently, we would be sure sexism was at work, because the only thing that changed was the sex of the individual and not his or her skills, talent, knowledge, experience, or interests.

Joan Roughgarden and Ben Barres are biologists at Stanford University. Both are researchers at one of the premier academic institutions in the country; both are tenured professors. Both are transgendered people. Stanford has been a welcoming home for these scientists; if you are going to be a transgendered person anywhere in the United States, it would be difficult to imagine a place more tolerant than Palo Alto and the San Francisco Bay Area.

Ben Barres did not transition to being a man until he was 50. For much of her early life, Barbara Barres was oblivious to questions of sexism. She would hear Gloria Steinem and other feminists talk about discrimination and wonder, "What's their problem?" She was no activist; all she wanted was to be a scientist. She was an excellent student. When a school guidance counsellor advised her to set her sights lower than MIT, Barbara ignored him, applied to MIT, and got admitted in 1972.

During a particularly difficult maths seminar at MIT, a professor handed out a quiz with five problems. He gave out the test at 9am, and students had to hand in their answers by midnight. The first four problems were easy, and Barbara knocked them off in short order. But the fifth one was a beauty; it involved writing a computer program where the solution required the program to generate a partial answer, and then loop around to the start in a recursive fashion.

"I remember when the professor handed back the exams, he made this announcement that there were five problems but no one had solved the fifth problem and therefore he only scored the class on the four problems," Ben recalled. "I got an A. I went to the professor and I said, 'I solved it.' He looked at me and he had a look of disdain in his eyes, and he said, 'You must have had your boyfriend solve it.' To me, the most amazing thing is that I was indignant. I walked away. I didn't know what to say. He was in essence accusing me of cheating. I was incensed by that. It did not occur to me for years and years that that was sexism."

By the time she was done with MIT, Barbara had more or less decided she wanted to be a neuroscientist. She decided to go to medical school at Dartmouth in New Hampshire. Gender issues at med school were like the issues at MIT on steroids; one professor referred Barbara to his wife when she wanted to talk about her professional interests. An anatomy professor showed a slide of a nude female pin-up during a lecture.

During the first year of Barbara's residency, when she was an intern, she found herself clashing with the chief resident. "When you have to learn to do a spinal tap or do a line, at some point only one person can do the procedure. What I noticed is that every time a male resident would do the picking, he would pick a guy to do the procedure. I had to often say, 'He did it last time. It is my turn this time.' "

But things changed in large and subtle ways after Barbara became Ben.

Ben once gave a presentation at the prestigious Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts. A friend relayed a comment made by someone in the audience who didn't know Ben Barres and Barbara Barres were the same person: "Ben Barres gave a great seminar today, but, then, his work is much better than his sister's."

Ben also noticed he was treated differently in the everyday world. "When I go into stores, I notice I am much more likely to be attended to. They come up to me and say, 'Yes, sir? Can I help you, sir?' I have had the thought a million times, I am taken more seriously."

When former Harvard president Larry Summers (who went on to become a senior economic adviser to President Barack Obama) set off a firestorm a few years ago after musing about whether there were fewer women professors in the top ranks of science because of innate differences between men and women, Ben wrote an anguished essay in the journal Nature. He asked whether innate differences or subtle biases - from grade school to graduate school - explained the large disparities between men and women in the highest reaches of science.

"When it comes to bias, it seems that the desire to believe in a meritocracy is so powerful that until a person has experienced sufficient career-harming bias themselves they simply do not believe it exists … By far, the main difference that I have noticed is that people who don't know I am transgendered treat me with much more respect: I can even complete a whole sentence without being interrupted by a man."

Joan Roughgarden came to Stanford in 1972, more than a quarter century before she made her male-to-female transition in 1998. When the young biologist arrived at Stanford, it felt as though tracks had been laid down; all Roughgarden had to do was stick to the tracks, and the high expectations that others had of the young biologist would do the rest.

"It was clear when I got the job at Stanford that it was like being on a conveyer belt," Roughgarden told me in an interview. "The career track is set up for young men. You are assumed to be competent unless revealed otherwise. You can speak, and people will pause and people will listen. You can enunciate in definitive terms and get away with it. You are taken as a player. You can use male diction, male tones of voice. … You can assert. You have the authority to frame issues."

At the Hopkins Marine Station in Pacific Grove, an outpost of the university about 150 kilometres from campus, Roughgarden ruffled feathers in the scientific establishment by arguing that a prominent theory that described the life cycle of marine animals was wrong. Where previous research had suggested that tide pools were involved in the transportation of certain larvae, Roughgarden reframed the issue and showed that the larger ocean played a significant role. The new theory got harsh reviews, but Roughgarden's ideas were taken seriously. In short order, Roughgarden became a tenured professor, and a widely respected scientist and author.

Like Ben Barres, Roughgarden made her transition to Joan relatively late in life. Stanford proved tolerant, but very soon Joan started to feel that people were taking her ideas less seriously. In 2006, for example, Joan suggested another famous scientific theory was wrong - Charles Darwin's theory of sexual selection. Among other things, the theory suggests that men and women are perpetually locked in a reproductive conflict. Men are supposed to be sexually promiscuous because they stand to gain from spreading their genes as widely as possible, whereas women are supposed to value monogamy because they can have relatively few biological children.

Even when women and men escape from this "battle of the sexes", it is only because a temporary truce has been declared. A monogamous husband, for example, "forgoes" his natural inclination to infidelity because his partner offers him something of exceptional value - such as beauty or youth. The theory essentially suggests that conflicting goals are basic to all male-female human relationships - and even purports to "explain" why men rape women.

Using ideas from game theory, Joan published a review article in the prestigious journal Science, where she explained why she thought the theory was wrong. Thinking about sex purely in terms of reproduction was flawed, Joan argued. Sex was also about building alliances, trading, co-operation, social regulation and play.

Joan used the example of the Eurasian oystercatcher, a wading bird, in her 2006 paper. In particular, she looked at nests involving three birds, a male and two females. In some of these families, the females fought viciously with each other, whereas in others, the females mated with each other almost as often as they mated with the male. Nests where females bonded sexually were much more likely to have offspring that survived, compared with nests where the females fought each other, since the co-operative nest could call on the resources of three birds to defend offspring against predators. Sex between the females may not have produced offspring, but it had a powerful effect on the survival rate of offspring.

Where Darwin's theory of sexual selection would argue that the competing interests of males and females are what produce a range of sexual behaviours, Joan's theory of "social selection" offered a different viewpoint: conflict between Eurasian oystercatchers, as perhaps with conflict between human mates, was not the starting point of relationships but an unfortunate outcome. Co-operation, not conflict, Joan argued, was basic to nature. "Reproductive social behaviour and sexual reproduction are co-operative. Sexual conflict derives from negotiation breakdown.''

THE scientific establishment, Joan said, was livid. But in contrast to the response to her earlier theory about tide pools and marine animals, few scientists engaged with her. At a workshop at Loyola University, a scientist "lost it" and started screaming at her for being irresponsible. "I had never had experiences of anyone trying to coerce me in this physically intimidating way," she said, as she compared the reactions to her work before and after she became a woman. "You really think this guy is really going to come over and hit you."

At a meeting of the Ecological Society of America in Minneapolis, Joan said, a prominent expert jumped up on the stage after her talk and started shouting at her. Once every month or two, she said, ''I will have some man shout at me, try to physically coerce me into stopping …When I was doing the marine ecology work, they did not try to physically intimidate me and say, 'You have not read all the literature.'

"They would not assume they were smarter. The current crop of objectors assumes they are smarter."

Joan is willing to acknowledge her theory might be wrong; that, after all, is the nature of science. But what she wants is to be proven wrong, rather than dismissed. Making bold and counter-intuitive assertions is precisely the way science progresses. Many bold ideas are wrong, but if there isn't a regular supply of them and if they are not debated seriously, there is no progress. After her transition, Joan said she no longer feels she has "the right to be wrong".

Where she used to be a member of Stanford University's senate, Joan is no longer on any university or departmental committee. Where she was once able to access internal university funds for research, she said she finds it all but impossible to do so now. Before her transition, she enjoyed an above-average salary at Stanford. But since her transition, "My own salary has drifted down to the bottom 10 per cent of full professors in the School of Humanities and Sciences, even though my research and students are among the best of my career and are having international impact, albeit often controversial."

I asked her about interpersonal dynamics before and after her transition. "You get interrupted when you are talking, you can't command attention, but above all you can't frame the issues," she said. With a touch of wistfulness, she compared herself to Ben Barres. "Ben has migrated into the centre whereas I have had to migrate into the periphery."

Shankar Vedantam is a 2009-10 Nieman fellow at Harvard University and a national science writer at The Washington Post.

This is an edited extract from The Hidden Brain, published in Australia by Scribe. RRP $35

Thoughts? I must say that as a female (science) graduate student, I do feel like I am taken seriously most of the time, and addressed on the merits/lack thereof of my ideas rather than my sex. But perhaps that is because I've never felt the level of respect that a male student would have, and therefore have lowered expectations. Or maybe it's because I haven't been screwed over career-wise because of my sex (yet)?
 

gromit

likes this
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
6,508
I'm sorry... I didn't read the whole article that you quoted, but in my experience (as a woman in the field of engineering), it seems to me that it is very equitable... until children enter the equation. As a single woman, I have the same opportunities for promotions and career advancement as any of my male peers.

But if I were to get married and have children, it would be a lot more difficult. I don't know if it's because women still feel like they need to be the perfect homemaker AND fulfill all their job responsibilities or if it's that women feel guilty leaving their children in daycare or WHAT, but in my observation that's when women's careers take the biggest hit. From an organizational standpoint, I'm not quite sure how to balance this out...
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
1,941
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
512
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I'm sorry... I didn't read the whole article that you quoted, but in my experience (as a woman in the field of engineering), it seems to me that it is very equitable... until children enter the equation. As a single woman, I have the same opportunities for promotions and career advancement as any of my male peers.

But if I were to get married and have children, it would be a lot more difficult. I don't know if it's because women still feel like they need to be the perfect homemaker AND fulfill all their job responsibilities or if it's that women feel guilty leaving their children in daycare or WHAT, but in my observation that's when women's careers take the biggest hit. From an organizational standpoint, I'm not quite sure how to balance this out...

Hm, the article wasn't so much about institutionalised sexism (i.e. opportunities for promotions and career advancement) as individualised sexism and how it colours how people perceive your ideas/your abilities.

I agree about children being a career-killer, though. I see it happen a lot.
 

gromit

likes this
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
6,508
Yeah I only read a couple parts... it was long. The part I was maybe referring to is

"It was clear when I got the job at Stanford that it was like being on a conveyer belt," Roughgarden told me in an interview. "The career track is set up for young men. You are assumed to be competent unless revealed otherwise..."

I feel that way a lot at my job actually. Like there's this career track, and if I just keep doing the things I'm "supposed" to be doing, I'll advance (which is how it has been going so far, at the same rate as male peers in the same company). Actually I find a lot of it happening before I even feel ready for it... perhaps it's personality-related or perhaps its socialization (probably both). I don't know, but I feel like people think I'm a lot more competent than I actually am. I thought I would have to fight for my career as a woman, but it seems like the biggest fight is within myself, feeling like I'm actually capable and not a huge flailing mess.

I also work at a really, really great company and my bosses and colleagues are really considerate and supportive of me and the other employees.


I'd be interested in experiences of transgendered people in the reverse direction (male to female), because part of the increased respect that Ben reports could also come from general advancement in career, or from projecting a greater sense of overall confidence, having finally taken on the outward form that he feels reflects his true gender identity...

I've never been a male student/professional either, so I really can't know.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
1,941
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
512
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I feel that way a lot at my job actually. Like there's this career track, and if I just keep doing the things I'm "supposed" to be doing, I'll advance (which is how it has been going so far, at the same rate as male peers in the same company). Actually I find a lot of it happening before I even feel ready for it... perhaps it's personality-related or perhaps its socialization (probably both). I don't know, but I feel like people think I'm a lot more competent than I actually am. I thought I would have to fight for my career as a woman, but it seems like the biggest fight is within myself, feeling like I'm actually capable and not a huge flailing mess.

I also work at a really, really great company and my bosses and colleagues are really considerate and supportive of me and the other employees.
Funnily enough, I feel similarly with regards to academia, which is why I want out when I've graduated. I have about as much interest in climbing the research/academic ladder as I have in climbing the corporate one. I also find that I have a lot less confidence in my own abilities, and expect more things to fail compared to my male peers. But I put that down to imposter syndrome.

Like you, I am currently working in a supportive and considerate environment where most of the danger comes from me overworking to make sure that I don't disappoint. So, while many of my male peers work for individual success, I find that I'm working for others' ambition. Not sure if that's a sex thing or an individual "completely unambitious" thing.

I'd be interested in experiences of transgendered people in the reverse direction (male to female), because part of the increased respect that Ben reports could also come from general advancement in career, or from projecting a greater sense of overall confidence, having finally taken on the outward form that he feels reflects his true gender identity...

I've never been a male student/professional either, so I really can't know.

There's a section in the article about an m to f transgendered academic, Joan. That's partly why I found it so interesting and a great contrast.
 

gromit

likes this
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
6,508
Moral of the story, gromit: read the whole damn thing. :rolli: I will try to remember to do it later... when I am not at work. :blush:


I'll probably have better/more coherent thoughts at that point too. Great conversation though!
 

phoenix13

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
1,293
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
Question: What population of volunteers were tested in the Heilman experiment? If they were college students, we have a problem.

The case of the transgendered woman was quite disturbing. This is pretty common in male-dominated fields, but the opposite happends in female-dominated fields. For example, a male friend of mine works with emotionally troubled middle-schoolers. All of his coworkers are women, and they interrupt him constantly, and don't listen to him the way they listen to other women.

As more and more women flood the professional work place (often in greater numbers in men), this power dynamic may start to change.
 

phoenix13

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
1,293
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
I'm sorry... I didn't read the whole article that you quoted, but in my experience (as a woman in the field of engineering), it seems to me that it is very equitable... until children enter the equation. As a single woman, I have the same opportunities for promotions and career advancement as any of my male peers.

But if I were to get married and have children, it would be a lot more difficult. I don't know if it's because women still feel like they need to be the perfect homemaker AND fulfill all their job responsibilities or if it's that women feel guilty leaving their children in daycare or WHAT, but in my observation that's when women's careers take the biggest hit. From an organizational standpoint, I'm not quite sure how to balance this out...

This is absolutely correct. Many people will hire a man over a woman because they don't want to waste their time training someone who will take a year or two off to rear her children.

...and this bullshit about the mother having to be professional and sole homemaker is... bullshit. If you're a professional married to a professional, there needs to be a reasonably even distribution of labor; otherwise the kids, or your carreer will suffer.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I have seen this in real life. Example: a friend of mine was laid off from her job when they were making cuts in all departments due to finances, and the reason given for choosing her over others was that they felt better letting her go because they knew she had a boyfriend & dad to "take care of her financially", whereas her male co-workers had families to support. And yet all the men she worked with had working wives/girlfriends, and probably working mothers. Interesting....
 

spin-1/2-nuclei

New member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
381
MBTI Type
INTJ
So, while many of my male peers work for individual success, I find that I'm working for others' ambition. Not sure if that's a sex thing or an individual "completely unambitious" thing.

I'm also a science graduate student, but I'm not this way so I don't think it's related to being female. I work for my own individual success and not for the ambition of others not even my advisor. I do respect his expectations and standards of course but I also have my own internal goals that I focus on daily - and I get all of my ambition from there. I've been treated differently than males but the further I get towards the end of my PhD the less often that happens. In the end the data speaks for itself, which is one of the reasons I enjoy science. There are definitely politics in academia but a great idea, hard-work, and solid data still means something male or female.
 

CrystalViolet

lab rat extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
2,152
MBTI Type
XNFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Hmmm....I think I'm experiencing this to a degree at the moment. Currently I'm working in a male dominant situation, and I can't count how many times my ideas are being dismissed, yet the younger and less intellingent male who started with me can repeat my ideas and get clapped on the back for being perceptive. I quite literally have to lose my temper to get any acknowledgement at all, which at the moment isn't doing me favours, rather reinforcing their intial perception of me, still you should see them scramble to attention when I do. Actually half the time they seem surprized anything intellingent comes out of my mouth at all. I don't want to raise the spectre of sexism, at this current time, because otherwise, they are damn supportive, but it's becoming apparent that I'm some what of an anomaly to them.
 

Kasper

Diabolical
Joined
May 30, 2008
Messages
11,590
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Experience that all the time. Sadly. There is a certain disrespect in the form of dismissal of ideas/opinions that is allowed to be directed towards women that, when the behaviour of people who do so are observed, they do not direct at men.

I've found in life I am evaluated by my sex first, my merit second. With few exceptions.

Age also has an impact here though. Older man > younger man > women.

The most obvious example in my work place was when a man in his 40s joined to take up a junior role in out IT department, as a department head myself I could clearly see this man be given more respect and value of opinion than I was, directors would come in and make a point of interacting with him on the same level while females would be dismissed. It carried over to his expectation of being treated with more respect, backed by management in their attitude, and that women in higher positions of authority should be undertaking secretarial type roles that are not part of their job while he should be excused from them, things such as answering the phone. Needless to say I was joyous when he left but demoralised that there is such a split in how the sexes are treated at my place of work. You can't fight that as what you say is already dismissed.
 

CrystalViolet

lab rat extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
2,152
MBTI Type
XNFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Experience that all the time. Sadly. There is a certain disrespect in the form of dismissal of ideas/opinions that is allowed to be directed towards women that, when the behaviour of people who do so are observed, they do not direct at men.

I've found in life I am evaluated by my sex first, my merit second. With few exceptions.

Age also has an impact here though. Older man > younger man > women.

The most obvious example in my work place was when a man in his 40s joined to take up a junior role in out IT department, as a department head myself I could clearly see this man be given more respect and value of opinion than I was, directors would come in and make a point of interacting with him on the same level while females would be dismissed. It carried over to his expectation of being treated with more respect, backed by management in their attitude, and that women in higher positions of authority should be undertaking secretarial type roles that are not part of their job while he should be excused from them, things such as answering the phone. Needless to say I was joyous when he left but demoralised that there is such a split in how the sexes are treated at my place of work. You can't fight that as what you say is already dismissed.
This is exactly what I'm experiencing.
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
I'm not sure. For example, I have experienced unfounded cheating accusations from a female professor on the grounds that "males usually don't put that much effort in optional workshops" (I did because I liked the subject). Women now populate colleges in much higher precentage than males, because school usually doesn't "reward" typical male characteristics. There seems to be a system of self-creating checks and balances where an individual who's been favoured during period of time t1, will likely ecounter resistance during the subsequent time-interval.
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Thanks for sharing a very interesting article, I think I'll actually pass it on to my lab to read.

I'm blessed to have a very successful woman (who is also a very nice person) as my research supervisor, and we were just talking about this the other day! I mentioned to her that I didn't feel a sense of sexism in the workplace, and she said that when she started at the university (roughly 10 years ago?) she had to work very hard to earn the respect of her peers - she heard sexist nicknames and comments about her clothes, and was directed to more trivial/social assignments - all in a nonmalicious but disrespectful way. Things seem much better now but I have a feeling it's because she has individually earned respect, more than from the improving culture (though I do think things are improving).

It's definitely true that the number of women in science at the undergraduate level has skyrocketed recently so they've surpassed men in numbers, and perhaps even at the graduate level. Looking around my lab, there are more female MSc students...but more male PhD students and way more male post-docs. And the profs at my uni are maybe 70% male (about the same as the post-docs).

I think this reflects a lower desire in women to pursue "higher" levels in their career - whether because they won't like the work, they fear sexism/children hurting their career, they want a good work/LIFE balance, they aren't ambitious, or they see a workplace dominated by men and few female role models....who knows really. Probably some of the above apply to various women choosing to end with a MSc or BSc instead of continuing to a PhD.
Thoughts? I must say that as a female (science) graduate student...
Do you mind if I ask what your research area is? Always curious about other female grad students. I'm in medical research, myself.

edit: spin, as well - though I may assume some sort of chemistry from your name?
I'm sorry... I didn't read the whole article that you quoted, but in my experience (as a woman in the field of engineering), it seems to me that it is very equitable... until children enter the equation.
I've noticed this as well, especially in research when you're expected to keep abreast of all the new developments and new techniques in your area, it can be really tough to come back, especially after several children. I've seen one prof on my floor come back recently after about 3 years of mat leave, I'm very curious to see how things go for her.

As I said my supervisor is very hardworking and successful in her career so she's an excellent role model there, but she doesn't have children and I'm confident that I want them, and probably fairly early in my career, too. So I'm a little nervous about that aspect.

Like you, I am currently working in a supportive and considerate environment where most of the danger comes from me overworking to make sure that I don't disappoint. So, while many of my male peers work for individual success, I find that I'm working for others' ambition.
That's really interesting, I feel the same way sometimes - not in terms of the overall degree, that's for myself, but on a day to day basis I'm most easily motivated by the short-term goal of avoiding disappointment. mostly from my supervisor. It's hard to think of the long-term motivation of my future success! I don't think it's a gender related thing, or at least not exclusively. I'm just more interested in my quality of life than in achieving a high level in my career. I want to still have a life outside of work. :)
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Fuck. Maybe I should change my name to James?
I must say that as a female (science) graduate student, I do feel like I am taken seriously most of the time, and addressed on the merits/lack thereof of my ideas rather than my sex. But perhaps that is because I've never felt the level of respect that a male student would have, and therefore have lowered expectations. Or maybe it's because I haven't been screwed over career-wise because of my sex (yet)?
Like Roughgarden says:

"When it comes to bias, it seems that the desire to believe in a meritocracy is so powerful that until a person has experienced sufficient career-harming bias themselves they simply do not believe it exists … By far, the main difference that I have noticed is that people who don't know I am transgendered treat me with much more respect: I can even complete a whole sentence without being interrupted by a man."
I'm self-employed, in part, so that I don't have to deal with most of this crap, but at the last client I worked for, I experienced serious discrimination after a change of management. I'm familiar with the physical intimidation the article describes. Being screamed at and "handled" and humiliated in every way imaginable. Often this happens after a woman refuses to validate a man in a position of authority by responding to sexual innuendo or advances in the expected "feminine", submissive way. It's disgusting. I've encountered plenty of other women who have been sexually harassed or bullied (same thing) at work.
People who believe equality is a reality are seriously deluding themselves.

It's really only transgendered people who can convincingly carry out this sort of experiment, and there just aren't that many around.

Women now populate colleges in much higher precentage than males, because school usually doesn't "reward" typical male characteristics. There seems to be a system of self-creating checks and balances where an individual who's been favoured during period of time t1, will likely ecounter resistance during the subsequent time-interval.
How is this balance? What you are saying is that women excel where they are assessed purely on the basis of competence (i.e. in education) yet in spite of that, they are discriminated against where it actually matters - the workplace.
 

kelric

Feline Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
2,169
MBTI Type
INtP
How is this balance? What you are saying is that women excel where they are assessed purely on the basis of competence (i.e. in education) yet in spite of that, they are discriminated against where it actually matters - the workplace.

It isn't balance. But I think there's more involved in this particular situation, and I think that FDG has a point -- people are given more "respect" when fulfilling roles that others expect of them. And in many workplaces, the culture (and management) has grown up with a culture in which men in the workplace were more prevalent (particularly in decision-making and technical roles). In many cases, those people grew up in the 50's and early 60's, when things were very different with regard to breaking "traditional gender roles". I'm *NOT* making excuses here. People do have a responsibility, in this day and age, to break out of those behaviors -- but sometimes we as people get into a "coasting" mode, and need to get called on it. I don't think it's a matter of education being a matter of "competence" and workplace being a matter of something else (I'll get into the part about academic research below).

I do believe that there's a generational component -- I truly think that this will get better (for women) in the future. I think that it *is* better than it was... it's just taking time. All we can do is keep moving in the right direction. While we're at it, we need to make sure that things move in the other direction in areas where men have been historically prejudiced against (such as child custody disputes). I know I may be a little off-topic there, but it's not an issue that only women have to deal with.

I've spent a number of years in medical research (no longer, thank goodness :)), and I think that the academic environment there does tend to favor a "male" lifestyle choice -- not necessarily "men", but the "give up my life for my job" mentality that I think tends to be more prevalent in men than women. So it doesn't bother me that more men tend to choose that -- as long as the women that *do* choose it have an equality in opportunity and respect when they're there.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
Age also has an impact here though. Older man > younger man > women.

I agree. I don't want to go into big detail here, but anyone who doesn't think the world, including the business world, is still very patriarchal is incredibly naive, deluded or blind.

Ever work with a group of women and then a man joins that group, even as a peer? Automatically he assumes a position of leadership, and the women typically accept this. Most of them will even fawn over him ... stroke the male ego.

As a woman working in IT, it's a very common experience to have a group of male colleagues over-run, even ignore you in conversation; I've been told not to worry my "pretty little head" about solving problems, to let the "men" take care of them ... I've been in meetings as the lone female developer and had people ask me to go get coffee. It's pretty shocking in a way - I am not here to take notes, boys. I have to counter this brand of discrimination with a whole arsenal of tools to establish my credibility and ground in new environments. This will typically take anywhere from 3 to 6 months in a contract where I am the "new kid on the block." In my opinion, new male programmers on a project are seldom expected to prove they "belong" like a woman does. Once I have established my "right" to be there, I do get treated much better actually, but it's annoying that as a person with very well-established credentials I still have to prove I am "smart" enough to get to work with the men on equal footing with equal rapport and equal say.

I'm self-employed, in part, so that I don't have to deal with most of this crap, but at the last client I worked for, I experienced serious discrimination after a change of management. I'm familiar with the physical intimidation the article describes. Being screamed at and "handled" and humiliated in every way imaginable. Often this happens after a woman refuses to validate a man in a position of authority by responding to sexual innuendo or advances in the expected "feminine", submissive way. It's disgusting. I've encountered plenty of other women who have been sexually harassed or bullied (same thing) at work.
People who believe equality is a reality are seriously deluding themselves.

@bold: I coordinate with programmers overseas and I never tell them I am a woman. I always let them believe I am a man. I don't get treated with the same courtesy and respect as a woman. SO, I communicate via e-mail and never reveal my gender. Just so much easier. "Oh yes, Mr. PB sir, we are happy to work with you."

@green: Yep, as soon as a man doesn't think he can fully "control" you (as your BOSS; certainly not ALL men) it can spell trouble. Ironically, one of my worst bosses was a woman though ... same kind of issue.

@purple: Yes, and I have worked in many different places and it happens everywhere. Sadly.

@blue: indeed. And this isn't to point fingers at where the problem lies - I know many men who sincerely believe in equality. Somehow, though, in the execution of so-called equality, it often falls apart. Whether this is due to our inherent gender programming or our cultures or even physiology I don't know, but true equality is a long way off and may never really be fully viable.
 
Top