Challenges of a science career for women: How can we make the field truly equal?

Lately I have been listening a lot to ‘the gender knot’ - a very interesting podcast that tries (and somewhat accomplishes) to disentangle the innate differences that exist between men and women, and gives some keys to try and decifer the other gender..


And, listening to the podcast I realised that .. ‘I am a feminist but ..’ (those familiar with podcasts world might be familiar with this line , part of the guilty feminist podcast of which I am also an avid listener..)
Yes, I am a feminist but.. I am writing this somewhat controversial piece about women in science, and please do read on and give me your opinion. I’d like to hear from men in the field, women who made it and women who gave it up. And if you are not a scientist, also please feel free to give me your opinion.. 


 “Women in science” is  such a controversial topic. Look around you , in your lab,  and you may believe the problem is overcome. You may think that it’s just a thing of the past. Your lab is likely full of busy (young) women. But look more closely, and instead of looking side to side, look upwards, and problem is very evident. Chances are that a great majority of the people holding higher position (lecturers, professors) are male. You can see a pyramid where the number of women gets smaller and smaller as you climb the ladder while the number of men follows an inverted pyramid scheme. 


But why?
Is it just a generational gap that needs to close? (a problem of the past and we yet have to see the results of a shift?) Or  is there more, something else, behind it? 

1. One of the problems seen by mainstream media goes back to school levels. I have lately heard that it’s all ‘fault of the cartoons representing scientists as typical middle aged man in  a lab coat’. When I was in the UK and Ireland, I was a S.T.E.M. (Science, technology, engineering and mathematic) ambassador. The idea was to inspire all kids including young girls. I particularly wanted to inspire girls, so went to all girls school when possible. But I then realised that it was not where the problem lied. Many girls wanted to do A level biology. And I said above, there are plenty of women in science subjects at university and plenty of young women in the labs. 
2. I also heard people saying that the problem is there because  women just don’t want to do science and are not as committed. Believe me when I say, this is NOT true. Women at university want to advance. Many go on to do PhDs, which is a sign that they want a career in science. 
3. Science and a scientific career, particularly in academia, requires a lot of sacrifices to be made during a time when a family may be started (i.e. around your late 20s, 30s). Sacrifices like a lot of mobility, jumping from short term post doctoral research contract to another, before your tenure track which requires a lot of energy especially in the beginning (i guess, as I am not yet there myself.. i’m in the previous ‘jumping’ phase). This means maybe long distance from your loved ones (unless they are awesome and follow you, but it may lead to financial instability thus really still not great for settling). This also means not buying house (why should you buy something if you are in the country for 2 years or so?). This all makes some kind of sense, but what about men? They also may want a family. So why can they do it?

As you can already guess, I am not entirely taken with the above explanations. 
So.. what else could be driving this shift? What if it’s more than simply having a family and we are just using it as an excuse (washing our hands of the problem)? 


I think it can have to do with working hours, working ethic and differences in stress handling between men and women (potentially related to the different functioning of our brains…). Now, don’t shoot me in the head and close the browser before you read on. 
    Science is hard and requires weird working times. For example,  I try to have an 8-5(or 6) working attitude but nonetheless I will check my emails and I will respond to students  or professors at any time that I open my emails. I cannot ‘ignore them till later or tomorrow’. The former, from my students, because I really want them to do well, I care. The latter, from my professors, because I always and constantly feel ‘tested’ and  so my aspirations to succeed, impress and demonstrate that “I can”, take over. This is incredibly stressful. And here comes my idea, I believe that stress is perceived differently by men and women. Or better I think there are different thresholds. While men also get very stressed (and apparently can get more stressed than women in terms of hormonal stress measurements) i think they can handle more before getting stressed. Women can multitask better, but maybe multitask too much, take on too much that they can handle  (perhaps also to impress and try to make it into a men dominated world? here we have a chicken and the egg situation) and get stressed. But i was thinking: because historically women have had to do more extra thing including taking care of the family, while men always just had to work, could it be that maybe more women eventually see through it and see it as  not worthy? Again, we are back to not wanting it and a family, but I think from a different approach here. Women want it, really want it, but then it’s too much and they realise they are better off giving it up. Men historically were always the ones working, so maybe they don’t see it, maybe they can just focus on it and get on through to a tight deadline with just 4 hour of sleep in a week. I know I couldn’t survive on so little myself (this is a true example). 
I heard a theory that women care more , take more time, reply longer, sooner, more nicely in some cases. While  men tend to be more rational and just get it done.  I have observed it but I also noticed that it’s not entirely true. I have also had incredibly nice male professors who took their time with me, improving my career and chances. 
So, is it just that more men can handle it better? Should we pack it in as a defeat? I am not suggesting women are inferiors, just suggesting maybe we are not as cut for the job as it stands right now.  
So - if we want to (and i think we should)  encourage a more equal platform - how do we go about it?? 

1. Well, above all we should premiate the best researcher and the best science all along, regardless of gender. 
2. But I think we should change what we regard ‘best’, what we regard ‘productive’. A good idea is a good idea, and i believe men and women are equally capable of great scientific breakthrough and ideas. 
3. Does productive means more papers? Does productive means more grants? Does productive means more science? Or does it mean most novel? Most ideative? Most problem solving? 

I hope to have sparked some thoughts for a Sunday, and I really want to hear from you regardless of who you are gender wise, and whether you are inside or outside of academia and science. If you are on the outside, what would you like  a good scientist to do? 


Can’t wait for the start of the BES (British Ecological Society) annual conference,  which on Monday morning is featuring a women in science informal meeting. So hope to discuss this with some of the attendee! And if you are attending - see you bright and early on Monday to discuss how to make it through over some nice coffee.


I, for one, am not going to give up!