Women in Science

 

         Now that it’s finally spring break, I can relax and address an issue that has been in the news recently, the comments made by Harvard’s president regarding women in the sciences.  It’s a well-known fact that women aren’t as represented as men in the sciences, particularly in physics.  However, as a female hoping to become a physicist, I also reject the notion that there are innate differences the preclude women from succeeding in the scientific realms.  I don’t mean to say that women and men are precisely equal in every manner; common experience reveals that there are differences between the genders.  Women and men think and react differently, but I do not believe that these differences are equivalent to the claim that women and men are biologically designed to succeed in different fields.  In fact, I believe that a successful field should have a balance of diverse thought processes, because this would lead to deeper insights as the different thought processes interact, and I certainly reject the notion that these different thought processes and reactions make one gender superior to the other.

 

            In a society that considers itself egalitarian, however, how do we reconcile the fact that there are fewer women in the sciences with the notion that all are inherently equal?  Can we place the blame solely on social factors, and if so, how can we change society to promote women’s expansion into the sciences?  I have three thoughts on this subject-

 

1)         Patience is required.  Rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither will female presence in the sciences be.  I think it is worth noting that merely a few decades ago there were virtually no women in physics and many of the other sciences.  We have seen exponential growth already, and we need to remember that social changes don’t occur overnight.  We can’t expect a solution that will instantly equalize the amount of women entering the sciences tomorrow; we need to keep our expectations realistic and patiently wait.

 

2)         Having noted the need for patience, the fact that we’re still engaging in this debate shows that society still has not fully accepted women’s entrance into the scientific fields.  The fact that even now, in 2005, the president of one of the nation’s most prestigious universities encourages the notion that women just can’t do the hard sciences and engineering, shows that society still retains lingering fringes of inequality.  How can we think that women will be encouraged to enter the sciences when the president of Harvard is telling them that they can’t do it?  The most dangerous attack to women contemplating entering the sciences isn’t official regulations, which have virtually all been eradicated, but attacks on their belief that they can succeed.  From middle school onward, women are inundated with the message the science is a man’s realm of study, and they are encouraged to enter more ‘womanly’ fields such as English and the humanities.  While I fully encourage women pursuing positions in those fields (once I dreamed of being an author), it should not be at the expense of science.  However, it is difficult to identify the root of the problem, particularly since many women just decide that they’d rather pursue those other options than the sciences, and not that they can’t succeed in the sciences.  So, an important question is why do women choose not to follow careers in the sciences?

            There are many reasons why.  One of the most widely toted is that women quite simply don’t want to put in the many long years that it takes to be successful in the sciences.  I think this is a valid point, particularly in physics.  To be a theoretical physicist, a doctorate and university post is virtually required.  This takes up a large portion of a woman’s time, particularly when she may want to raise a family.  Unfortunately, there are no simple solutions to this problem.  It is vitally important for children to have at least one parent who isn’t a workaholic, and typically this parent is the mother.  One solution could be to encourage more stay-at-home fathers, to free the mothers to pursue careers.  I think, though, a better solution would be to reformat the structuring of the sciences.  I think we need to encourage more benefits for female professors, such as longer maternity leaves, and take advantage of the benefits of a mobile society.  With the internet being so pervasive, it is possible for someone to remain up-to-date on the work of colleagues, at the university and elsewhere, without physically being on the university.  In fact, it could even be possible for a theoretical physicist to be completely separate from the university, and only engage with other faculty via the internet.  Imagine the possibilities- a mother could work on a paper on string theory while her child naps, and then send it to a colleague before supper.  So, my solution to this problem would to decrease hours and increase time off for professors, to rectify the problem of having both a family and a career.  Also, the faculty in the sciences need to be more receptive to people taking a leave between stages of their education, such as between finishing their doctorate and attaining a university post, so that women can take a year or two off to stay at home without worrying about future repercussions on their careers.

            However, this is by far not the only social force pushing women away from the sciences, nor is it even the most potent.  By far the strongest, in my humble opinion, is the belief that women just can’t succeed.  Who knows how many aspiring female engineers and scientists are questioning their abilities in light of what Harvard president Larry Summer has said.  Regardless of the precise number, it’s too many.  Women should never question their ability to enter a field solely because of their gender.  This belief that they can’t do it, or that it would be easier if they pursue some other career path, combined with the competing interests of a family and social life, is what drives women away from the sciences and engineering.  Unfortunately, it’s virtually impossible to free society from the shackles errant beliefs- look at how diligently racism persists, even after the Civil War and the Civil Rights Movement, and there is no easy solution.  The best solution at present is to encourage women to pursue their dreams, including in the sciences, and to refuse to tolerate those who say otherwise.  As to Larry Summers, after he leaves Harvard, perhaps he should travel to one of the nations overseas where females regularly outperform males in math.  However, the encouragement must be sincere, and not of the “let’s put up posters that say they can do whatever they want’ type.  Posters rarely inspire people to pursue a career, but an influential person, such as a teacher or parent, who encourages and inspires a woman to ponder the fundamental questions of the universe, can.  Encouraging women to be physicists, or engineers, or whatever won’t work; you have to interest them in the fundamental questions that those professions answer.  If women aren’t interested in chemistry, biology, etc, she’s eventually going to reach a point where she realizes that, despite all the encouragement to enter into a scientific profession, she doesn’t want to.  So, let’s encourage women to think about things such as how gravity works, or how electricity powers things, or how fire creates ash.  Give girls science kits and let them explore the scientific around them, and tell those who discourage women from using their minds to their fullest potential to watch them discover.  The best solution is simply to discuss science with girls, and let their inquisitive minds pursue it, free from negative influences that cause them to doubt whether they can actually succeed.

 

3)         Of course, having said all of that, there’s one other point that must be made, which is to decrease our society’s focus on gender.  Yes, continue to track statistics and make sure that women are being encouraged, but for goodness sake quit harping on this dead horse.  Each time it comes up, it reopens the debate in every girl’s mind.  What if the other side is actually right?  What if I can’t do it?  What if all the guys are better at it than I am?  Maybe I should just be a humanities major instead, just in case the other side is right.  After all, I sort of like English…anthropology isn’t all that different than biology…  The last thing we need are aspiring female scientists asking these questions constantly because the debate won’t go away.  The solution I mentioned above, to encourage women in science, means inspiring them- something that should be done for every child, male or female.  Give girls and boys science kits, and don’t make the girls feel singled out because of their gender.  If we treat gender as if it is significant, it will become significant to the women, but if we act as though it doesn’t matter, then it won’t in their minds.  And when it doesn’t matter to them, they will pursue the sciences as they desire, unhindered by beliefs that they can’t succeed because of their gender.

So, my solution is this-

            Inspire women by encouraging them to contemplate scientific questions, without focusing on their gender, and remove influences that cause them to focus on their gender and wonder whether that can influence their scientific abilities.  Reduce the factors that cause scientific careers to conflict with things such as a raising a family, so that family concerns won’t prevent women from pursuing their scientific curiosity.  Finally, patiently wait for the effects of these factors to emerge.

 

(Note: I do advocate that there are differences between the genders, which are theologically relevant, but I don’t think these extend into the realm of math and physics.)

 

Return to Random Musings…