Do you really not see how one perpetuates the other? First female scientists - who already have to overcome societal beliefs that they are less capable then men - are singled out on a public form as being less prepared then male scientists - notably in the absence of evidence for this assumption. This is followed by respondents that find this offensive, who are subsequently dismissed - which leads to secondary argument that ultimately culminates in a silencing effect.
And finally, we're back to - hey, what's wrong with pointing out that woman are less marketable than men Š maybe it will help themŠ Of course the assumption that woman are less marketable then men has never been substantiated or discussed - yet it's now evolved in the discussion as somehow factualŠ and even supported by "evidence" related to lack of mentoring and access to preferable opportunities by females. Therefore, does one not essentially lead to the other. If we believe women are less prepared do we not ultimately exclude them? The way I see it, the real problem is inappropriate, sexist assumptions that differentiate men from woman, followed by a lack of discussion and silencing that shuts down any attempts to argue against biased beliefs which ultimately feed a cycle that really needs to be discussed and brought under the microscopeŠ Two centsŠ On 13-02-19 3:17 PM, "Max Taub" <ta...@southwestern.edu> wrote: >I feel for Clara Jones who is being blasted for sexism and I don't know >what else, for what was presumably intended as a helpful word to younger >aspiring scientists. > >Her point, as I saw it, was that too many young scientists develop only >the general, generic skills of the discipline, while what is marketable >is often very particular research skills. She suggests that this is more >the case with young female than with young male scientists. > >Nothing in that suggests negative attitudes about the capabilities of >young female scientists. It might suggest female scientists are (on >average) less well mentored, or that they are (on average) shunted into >less novel and exciting projects by grad school advisors. Or a host of >other possibilities. > >I see no reason to tear into someone for posting such perceptions, > > >Now you can blast me instead of her, > >Max Taub > > > >-- >Daniel Taub >Professor of Biology >Southwestern University >1001 East University Ave >Georgetown TX 78626 USA > >Phone: 512 863-1583 >Fax: 512 863-1696 >ta...@southwestern.edu
