I really enjoyed reading Wylie's article. I am an environmental biology major was incredibly curious when reading Wylie discuss Widnall's idea of the "pattern of 'leakage' of women from the training pipeline" with the women mentioned being in the sciences and engineering. (pg 42) It describes that "while white male students benefit from the self-reinforcing confidence that they belong which they acquire in part through self-identification with [largely] white male faculty for others---women, minority and foreign students---....the environment is not so reinforcing". This lowering of confidence creates a lowering in career aspirations--> and that is the leakage effect. Is it mostly in the sciences that this happens or does this occur in most work places? Does this put women in a bad light in that they are too weak to maintain their goals because of others' attitudes towards them?
On another note: Wylie talks about gender systems on page 34. She discusses Wilson's conclusion that "even if sex/gender systems are not an exclusively biological legacy---even if they are contingent and plastic enough that they could be changed 'through an exercise of will'--they are by now so entrenched in the fabric of our society that it would be enormously costly...to change them.........one option that must be weighed by any society contemplating such change is that the greater good may be better served by following the status quo to persist, even if this means sacrificing the interests of those who are disadvantaged by existing conditions." I thought this quotation brought up a lot of topics and points about which there could be lots of debate. I am just curious as to how you all reacted to this passage and if you believe it to be the truth.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't think the leakage effect should be blamed so much on bad laboratory working environment and/or weak wills of women. I was in thesis seminar earlier today and we were actually discussing this particular topic - there is a stigma about scientists in general as crazy, antisocial, obsessive people. And yes, historically they have mostly been old white men. This perspective naturally predisposes many women against entering the scientific field. (Which is something I question about Wylie's article - rather than rail from the sidelines against male domination of science and how it might bias information, which is then inherently faulty science and therefore useless, women should continue to enter the field to upturn the "mad oldwhitemale scientist" stereotype.) However this means that the women who have chosen a scientific path are most likely strong-willed for acknowledging and facing the challenge to begin with. As I wrote in my question/comment thing, women are also faced with that familiar old responsibility to having/raising children and maintaining the domestic sphere. I know several friends who have turned from pursuing careers in science to do just that.
ReplyDeleteSo basically...that leads to the conclusion that the issue of women in science, like the issue of women everywhere else, is complicated.