Men make the rules, men win the game, Clara. People like you that do not question the system or do not try to change it perpetuate a dysfunctional professional environment.
Silvia Secchi Assistant Professor, Energy Economics & Policy Southern Illinois University Carbondale On Apr 11, 2012, at 11:14 PM, "Clara B. Jones" <[email protected]> wrote: > Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" > that the advantages afforded to professional females (including females in > research science careers) in some countries are beneficial to them and > their families... > 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... > 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, > equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... > 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you > cite equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., > professorship [+]) status in the US... > 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions are; > however, i suspect the answers are "no"... > 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative research is > acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA where, it seems > to me, females who rely on collaboration are often/usually perceived as > "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's research projects...though this > strategy may, indeed, purchase senior status in the USA, it often does not > translate to reputation or respect (indeed, there are exceptions)... > 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i think > i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts of > positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put it, > after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be it...SORT OF... > 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA females > changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made other > commitments under the guise that they want to be senior scientists *as > defined in USA*... > 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate > students, post-docs, etc. are "grown-ups" capable of making their own > "rational" decisions...all good...then they should be prepared to assume > responsibility for their decisions...understanding *the realities of USA > science that they signed up for*... > 10. ...what is the Plan B for these girls that will fulfill their > commitments *(to USA science)* when they switch priorities... > 11. ...what is their plan for purchasing UNDIVIDED, UNINTERRUPTED, > SINGLE-FOCUSED, LONG-TERM, OFTEN UNPREDICTABLE TIME required to accomplish > the sort of senior science *as defined by USA standards*... > 12. ...some females & minorities assert that the structure of USA science > needs to change...for a variety of reasons... > 13. ...however, why should the USA modify the system producing among the > best and most successful scientists in the world... > 14. ...more important, in my opinion...is that "RATIONAL" grown-ups of > whatever sex or sexual orientation or personal status sign up for this > system & need not only to have their eyes open but need to step up by not > changing the rules unilaterally in mid- or late-stream...clara > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Andres Lopez-Sepulcre <[email protected]> > Date: Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and > professional life > To: [email protected] > > > Andres, do you have any ideas about how we can import that Finlandian model >> to the U.S.? And how to get more universities and other employers in the >> U.S. to recognize the need to provide for professional couples? Thanks, >> David >> > > Ufff... this discussion may become more political than ecological... the > problem, as I see it is more fundamental. How willing are we to pay higher > and more progressive taxes, socialize higher education (and health care), > punish job instability, remove undergraduate and graduate student fees (in > fact, undergraduates are paid in Finland!!) or increase graduate > student/post-doc salaries and benefits at the cost of reducing those of > professors...? > > > ---- Andres Lopez-Sepulcre <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> In my experience, it all depends on the country and how easy funding >>> agencies, research institutions and governments make it. I have >>> experience in several countries: Spain, USA, France and Finland. They >>> each have their good and bad points on that respect. Fore example, >>> while the USA and Canada tend to be pretty good at opening jobs for >>> couples, which helps enormously the two-body problem, I find that some >>> European countries offer better conditions to be a parent. For >>> example, in Finland and Sweden the government offers paid maternity >>> and/or paternity leaves of at least 10 months. Since this is a >>> 'stipend' independent of the scientific fellowship or contract, it >>> essentially means that if they had 3-years of funding, they now will >>> have that + 10 months (i.e. the grant or contract 'slides' forward). >>> Moreover, there are good free or cheap daycare services and even >>> sometimes, daycare or family-housing in field stations. The conditions >>> are so good that I have never seen such a high rate of graduate >>> students pregnant or with children as in those countries... and they >>> are consequentially doing better than average at keeping women in >>> science. Of course, many countries (like Spain, my home-country) fail >>> in all aspects. >>> >>> Andres Lopez-Sepulcre >>> Laboratoire d'Ecologie, UMR 7625 >>> Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris >>> [email protected] >>> >>> http://web.me.com/asepulcre >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Apr 11, 2012, at 5:54 PM, Rachel Guy wrote: >>> >>> I've been following the debate Simone Whitecloud inspired concerning >>>> babies in the field. This brought to mind something I was told when >>>> I was pursuing my B.S. in Wildlife Ecology: >>>> >>>> "You can be a scientist, a spouse or a parent. Two of these things >>>> you can be simultaneously great at doing, while the third will >>>> suffer." I'm not sure I entirely agree with this statement, but I >>>> have seen personal relationships tried by professional obligations >>>> and professional obligations tried by personal obligations. >>>> Particularly in a field that often demands long absences and >>>> irregular hours, I can see how this would particularly be true. >>>> Though, I have also seen faculty and research scientists with >>>> families that seem pretty stable and happy. Is there any substance >>>> to this paradigm, and if so, are there realistic ways in which we >>>> can change them? I'd love to hear the communities' thoughts on this >>>> as it is something that I have often reflected on as I've progressed >>>> through my career. Can we have it all? What are the key differences >>>> between the ones that are seemingly able to do it and the one's >>>> where the challenges become too great? >>>> >>>> Rachel Guy >>>> Project Coordinator, Research Assistant >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> -- >> David McNeely >> > > > > -- > clara b. jones
