I was hoping to see some substantive discussion of the statistics which Audrey Mayer posted, since they raise a number of questions related to various hypotheses. Some of these could be verified by further data.
For example, it would be pretty conclusive to compare the CVs and especially the publication lists of faculty members to see whether in fact females have better credentials than males of the same rank. It would also help to know the career tracks of females to see whether there is divergence from that of males. I used to work for the government of Canada which had a definite policy of recruiting women to senior positions. Because of this many female scientists were offered well-paid managerial/administrative posts, so the end result of a bias towards women was a reduction in the number of senior female scientists. Given the strong position of Finland on gender equality, is there much recruitment of women in ecology to non-academic posts? There is no question that networks play an important role in all areas of society, including ecology. Men also experience discrimination when trying to break into certain circles, including faculties, funding, etc. That would put all newcomers to the trade, whether women, members of disadvantaged racial groups, immigrants and many others at a disadvantage. It would help to have more detailed information on what is happening to women in science that could serve as a backdrop for remedial action. This is a big task, but it needs to be undertaken. Bill Silvert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Audrey Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 9:45 PM Subject: gender bias: maternity not the whole problem > Looking at pooled numbers from three ecology departments at the > University of Helsinki: > Male:female professors (44 total) = 82%:18% > Male:female docents/fellows (15 total) = 67%:33% > Male:female lecturers (47 total) = 51%:49%
