I agree with the problem women face: whereas men are viewed
positively for being "assertive", women with the same behavior are
viewed negatively as "aggressive" or "bitchy". However, if women are
not aggressive, they are largely overlooked by male-dominated fields
(e.g., not invited to speak at meetings). I have experienced these
problems first hand. As an undergraduate and graduate student, I
behaved aggressively and was viewed as a female "superstar". I was
accepted to the top graduate schools, gave talks in place of my
future Nobel laureate advisor at highly prestigious conferences, had
top-ranked unversities asking me to apply for tenure-track faculty
positions, etc. However, many of my male peers were jealous of me and
I didn't enjoy playing this highly aggressive game. Thus, I turned
down Harvard and other places where one has to be highly aggressive
to survive as a professor in favor of the University of
Wisconsin-Madison where I can do equally good work in a much
friendlier, less-competitive environment. I have been continuously
funded by major N.I.H. grants for the past 20 years, have exciting
findings that resulted in an "outstanding" rating on my recent
competitive renewal, give excellent talks, serve on study sections
and editorial boards, and am much happier with myself and my life.
However, I am no longer an invited speaker at conferences because I
am not playing the game by the same rules as are the "assertive old
boys". One can succeed without being forced to play the game the way
the "old boys" do. Don't give up. The only way we will be able to
change the rules of the game for all is by having a higher percentage
of the players being women in positions of power. Remember,
however, this problem is not peculiar to science. For example, Pat
Schroeder abandoned her race for U.S. President when she realized she
would be disliked as bitchy if she were assertive and considered too
weak to be president if not assertive.
Hang in there. We can make a difference and succeeed.
Janet Mertz
Professor
