"Blind Spots: Seeing Sexism in STEM"

Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2014-11-01 15:36

Article here. Excerpt:

'Sexual harassment is widespread in academic fieldwork. Microaggressions in the form of Everyday Sexism are even more so. Sexism is not an old professor with wandering hands; most people have difficulty recognising it. Sexism in STEM is subtle and insidious, intrusive and unasked for. The looks, questions, comments, jokes, impediments and double standards; the (perhaps unconscious) marginalisation of women from collegiate discussions, activities and spaces. Unfortunately, even well-intentioned male colleagues can perpetuate it. If we have trouble recognising sexism, we are not equipped to address sexism. Ostensibly even-handed comments — “maybe you misunderstood what he meant” — defend the abusers and cast doubt onto the victims. The trolls are easy to spot. It is much harder to point out the blind spots that fester in well-meaning colleagues who believe they are being fair.
...
Actively listening to the needs of the people around you is an essential leadership skill, and it always surprises me how few people are able to listen to women sharing their experiences in STEM without feeling the urge to interrupt. A vital component of being an ally is the ability to listen to women without monopolising the conversation. This also extends to discussions about other areas of inequality, such as race or sexual orientation. The voice of the oppressed must not be drowned out by lectures from those who said they would listen.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

If you follow the author's advice, the net outcome of it is men in convos with female colleagues must seek out their input whenever engaged in a convo with another male colleague and then both just stay quiet while she tells them what she thinks abt the topic. When she's done, the men are to just agree with her and that's that.

That isn't "progress" in expanding discussion. It's a regression *from* progress on a few levels. And if a female STEM worker is put off by her male colleagues' focus on the matter in question, directly and openly disagreeing w/ her or others, then guess what? That's what STEM *requires* of ppl involved in it. STEM is about what ppl need to do to make things work and to understand the universe through scrutiny and forming logically rigorous explanations based on hypotheses. If you can't deal w/ being challenged directly by others to justify your opinions or findings, then regardless of your sex, STEM isn't the area of endeavor for you.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2014-11-01 15:37

"Male-male discussions leave the participants mentally boosted; male-female discussions end up demotivating women."

I wonder how she knows what happens in male-male conversations since, by definition, she is not part of those conversations.

"Men must proactively involve women in all conversations, and consciously reject gender stereotypes, even though it is not easy."

Men must be reject gender stereotypes. Women, on the other hand, should engage in gender stereotypes about men as much as possible and see everything men do in the worst light possible. Just as this woman does. Maybe if she didn't see sexism and micro-aggressions everywhere--which she admits are hard to see--she'd have better conversations with her male colleagues. And maybe these micro-aggressions that are so hard to see aren't really there; she sees them because she interprets everything men do in a bad way.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by el cid on Mon, 2014-11-03 13:34