Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Blappy

(157 posts)
3. I generally agree but there are caveats
Mon Oct 30, 2023, 06:46 PM
Oct 2023

I don't think science is any more or less misogynistic than other fields, such as engineering, politics, or business. It is the people (men) in these fields (often Department Chairs or Deans) that were or are misogynistic. I agree that the contributions of women to science have been under-emphasized in much of general course work, but of course the pioneering work of giants such as Rosalind Franklin and Barbara McClintock have been taught in the biomedical research courses since the 90's.

While getting my Ph.D. at University of Chicago, the department I was in had several female faculty that outshined the male faculty members. Much of the recognition of gender bias that alarmed academics and allies in the 90's led to a backlash, and I saw females with fewer credentials than I being hired for faculty positions, in a form of affirmative action. This was 'bad timing' for my career, but I am absolutely convinced that women are the equal of men in any scientific endeavor.

At least in my experience, academic science requires far too many hours of work at low pay. Wish I had gone into nursing like all my sisters, the hours and pay are better.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»History of Feminism»A tale of two 19th-centur...»Reply #3