Susan wrote
>> But another problem is the tendency to couch everything
> as a family-related problem. I know a number of well-meaning senior
> male faculty who think that if they try to make their corner of science
> "family friendly", then they will solve all the issues related to women.
> That's simply not true, and contributes to unfair stereotyping.
> I have no kids and don't want any; while I applaud efforts to
> improve the situation for families on principle, the difficulties
> I face as a woman in this male-dominated profession are not
> related to any desire to have children in my "most creative" years.
> Yet the attitude is that if I don't want children, what have I
> possibly got to complain about?
Thank you, thank you, thank you! I understand that for people (both men
and women) with kids, that family friendly policies are very important. In
fact in this lab it is the men who all have kids and they do take
advantage of these policies, much to their delight!
On the other hand, I get really fed up with the idea that these are the
*most* important or only issues that impact women's success. I think,
though, that the mother vs. nonmother thing is often used as a wedge to
divide us. It happens in the greater society with this whole silly debate
about "stay at home" vs. "working" mothers (unless of course you are on
welfare and then you are *wrong* not to be a working mother).
>> We must try to change things on multiple fronts and
> acknowledge that a family-friendly policy is but one step to making
> science as a profession humane and inclusive.
I totally agree!
Linnea
