Sexism in Science
“It is complicated because they did not think of her as a thinker, but they did not think of her as a woman either. Because a woman must not think and a thinker must not be a woman!” This commentary by Paris University Physics Professor, Francoise Balibar, describes the society in which the most famous female scientist, Marie Curie, lived. Obviously, Marie Curie was in fact a woman, but almost as apparent as her gender was her brilliant mind.
Marie Curie is quite deserving of the recognition she received for her scientific advancements, but to consider her an oddity would perpetuate the same fallacious thinking that existed throughout her lifetime. Likely, there are equally as many brilliant female scientists as there are male scientists. Quite possibly, other women would have made important scientific advancements had there not been a prevailing sexism in science.
Besides her brilliance and determination, Marie Curie had another advantage: she was married. She wasn’t just married to any man; she was married to a renowned physicist, Pierre Curie. Pierre recognized the brilliance and persistence possessed by his wife. The 1903 Nobel Prize for Physics was originally proposed for Pierre Curie and Henri Becquerel only. It was Pierre who stood up for Marie to have her recognized for her vital work in the isolation of radium. The work was done regardless of who received credit, but because of her husband, Marie Curie was recognized for her abilities. This recognition allowed her to receive a second Nobel Prize on her own after Pierre’s tragic death.
Hopefully, sexism no longer persists among the science community, if it does, the fact that scientific journals are filled with the work of great female scientists along with their male colleagues at least supports that sexism in science is waning. If it persists in the least, for the sake of scientific advancement, the world needs men like Pierre Curie who will fight sexism and give proper recognition to those who deserve it. Even more so the world needs women like Marie Curie who will overcome the odds and make their work known. The combined force of brilliant men and women makes the future of science full of possibilities.
I think that it's a bit unrealistic to expect/hope for a 50/50 split of men/women in science. The simple fact is that men can't carry and feed babies; women can and in my opinion there are intrinsic biological drivers that will always get in the way of the career pursuits for some women. They're a product of evolution and I don't know why this should be surprising to biologists. Of course, this doesn't mean that women shouldn't be considered just as seriously as men for graduate school/job positions or that the ability to bare children should be used to disqualify them, it just means that if we don't see quite as many women as men seeking these opportunities it's not necessarily a cause for alarm.
ReplyDeleteOf the 21 professors in John's department at UW-Madison 14 are men and 7 are women, with many of the women falling on the younger end of the spectrum. And when a few of the old dudes retire it's quite possible that this could shift even more. The numbers of men vs. women who are accepted to John's PhD program are pretty comparable, and typically falling heavier on the side of the women than the men if they're not even.
I know that the disparity is larger in some sciences, but in general I think that this whole science sexism thing is a bit of a non-issue that academia makes all of us think/talk about way more than necessary.
Just when I thought there wasn't anybody reading this blog, I get a great comment. Thanks Sheena. I really appreciate your prospective.I think your response was better written than my paper.
ReplyDelete