March 08, 2013
Giving Women in Academia Genuine Equal Opportunities
For this International Women's Day, Ingrid Robeyns in Crooked Timber (image from Wikimedia Commons):
I want to use this occasion to share some thoughts about how to given women in academia a fair chance. I’m not talking about affirmative action or quota, but rather making both the environment more welcoming to women, the formal practices fairer to women, and the informal practices such that they are less disadvantageous for women. The reason why these things need to be discussed is that I increasingly encounter academics (mostly men, I fear) who think that there are no further issues with the environment/procedures/practices, and who believe that in reality women now get better chances in academia than men. While there may be isolated cases of such favorable treatment of women, my judgement of the situation is that all things considered many women are still in many (subtle and not-so-subtle) ways disadvantaged, and that unfortunately many academics do not understand how the practices in academia are disadvantaging women. So, let us look at some of these factors, and ask what each of us can do to give women an equal chance in academia.
Implicit bias
In many situations the causes of women’s unequal chances are small and not visible to those not trained to diagnose the situation. One cause is the effects of implicit bias, which implies that if a piece of work is being done by women, it will be judged of lower quality than exactly the same piece of work done by me, due to non-conscious associations we hold. Or, a certain skill, capacity or personality trait will be judged positively if we see it in a man, and less positively or even negatively if it’s a trait of a woman. A typical case is being assertive, which is in men seen as a sign of leadership, but in women quickly interpreted as being aggressive. Implicit bias is often at work in how we judge CV’s and publication list: a woman with a strong publication list will be seen as ‘promising’, a man will be seen as ‘excellent’. These differences in evaluation are documented in studies on implicit bias, but many colleagues (from various universities and fields) who know about implicit bias, have seen it work in evaluative situations (like hiring committees) in which the work and capacities of men and women were evaluated.
Posted by Robin Varghese at 10:07 AM | Permalink






















Comments
Just because the right-wing has led a multi-million dollar propaganda campaign against affirmative action does not mean that thinking people should accept that position. Of course rich, white, powerful men are against affirmative action. They want to keep most of the money and the best jobs for themselves, for their buddies, and for their sons.
Without affirmative action, nothing changes. We should be able to acknowledge that, given decades of women out-performing men in various professional and graduate schools, yet continuing to be essentially denied tenure, partnership, other advances in the workforce.
I'll give you an easy example. Women law school graduates in California have been 40-50% for 30 years, yet women partners continue to lag at around 20% of the profession. Same for women judges: around 20%. This is not the result of failings by women, but instead institutional changes by men to keep women out.
It used to be that an attorney would work for a firm, and if their work was acceptable, they would continue to be employed for 7 years, at which time they would be given "tenure," meaning a partnership position. How they were compensated depended on a variety of issues, but they got the title of partner.
Once women entered the profession, men changed the rules so that now women are told they must bring in $500,000/year of work to be made partner. That is almost impossible, particularly in hard times. By changing the requirements, men now can rationalize their exclusion of women. As an aside, young men in the profession are being denied partnership as well since these exclusionary policies affect them too. The entire field has become more injust simply to accommodate the desire of the bosses to keep women (and non-whites) out of partnership positions.
We should demand 50% women professors, doctors, lawyers, accountants. Absent bias, they would be 50% of the top positions in these fields. Without affirmative action, women will continue to be driven out of the professions, and our society becomes more injust.
Posted by: NABNYC | Mar 8, 2013 1:55:31 PM
Post a comment