You asked why you were brought into the conversation? Because you've said you are an ally. You have stated on your blog that you believe that gender equality in science is a good thing. Yet you rarely talk about some of the balancing issues or the parental issues. I have the link up that shows you think its important. Yet outside of that post originally done 2 years ago, you don't talk about fatherhood or balancing fatherhood and partnerhood with science.
Mr. SM stresses about child care, he stresses about balancing all his responsibilities, he stresses about making his career successful without costing him his wife/family. I am friends with male PI's who've just had kids that struggle with this. I have male grad student friends that struggle with this, but they don't always feel comfortable talking about it. The only male bloggers (that I know of) who have mentioned this stuff is PLS and PalMD. I don't think PLS does too much writing about balancing, but he does on occasion discuss the joys of daycare, sick child and travelling too much. PalMD has many posts about taking his daughter on rounds so they can spend time together and the women in his life. They make it OK to be dads, scientists and partners. This is important for everyone.
We live in a patriarchal society and until we change some of the "normative" ideals we will not achieve gender equity. You once wrote a post on shifting the window in regards to politics of extreme rightwingnutism. I can't find the link, but essentially it was how the extreme right is so extreme that it shifts what is palatable or acceptable to the right. If you blogged regularly about balancing your non-academic responsibilities or your kids( aka Dr.Freeride, Dr.Isis, DrdrA), you're reframing the problem not as a women in science issue but as a person in science.
Jim Austin is partly correct when he's says that alot of women have the majority of household responsibilities, but its not always true and I'm not sure its the majority of the time either. If I was to list out the household chores, I would be forced to admit that Mr.SM does more of them, they're just not critical to day to day life. I like to bug Mr.SM that he'd fall apart if I left because I cook and do the grocery shopping. We share the kid stuff and the dogs stuff. If he left I may have food, but I'd have no clean dishes, no clean laundry, a dirty house and a overgrown yard. This arrangement works for us, as it does for most working couples. Yet what he does it not seen a the normal thing an equal partner does. I'm supposed to be grateful that he pulls his own weight. I"m supposed to be happy, I'm so lucky. WTF? Partly this is because of the traditional culture I'm part of, but its also how science and society kinda works.
I left my original PhDlab for a variety of reasons, but one of the main reason was the inherent belief that kids were someone that your partner dealt with. When my PI was struggling to balance the needs of his scientist wife and his job, he was seen as being "whipped" and she was unreasonably selfish. When he had to write a grant with his kid on his lap, "where the fuck was his wife" was openly said.
You need to write about balancing your life with your science as you said yourself the The father/PI who is seriously concerned about gender equity in science will go out of his way to exhibit his status.
If the d00ds hear from d00ds, they're more likely to think about it. You're not going to change my inlaws or my parents, but you can shift the way the issue is viewed.
Posts
1 year ago
57 comments:
It is not accurate that I "say that I am an ally". I make no such claim nor am I particularly keen on describing myself as a "feminist". I say what makes sense to me and I take the actions that result from my various understandings of the right thing to do. claiming the ally or feminist label seems to me to be hollow chest puffery, however.
DrugMonkey- are you sure it doesn't just seem to be signing up for a set of responsibilities you might not be able to fully anticipate?
signing up for a set of responsibilities you might not be able to fully anticipate?
What, like getting partnered, or becoming a PI, or having kids?
To be fair, though, talking about some of this stuff on blog can be really hard when you feel like your own house is not in order (sometimes quite literally). There needs to be a balance between baring all and sitting out the conversation altogether.
I have to agree with DM, regarding men who like to say that they are feminists, in that actions speak louder than words. It always makes me cringe a little when a man describes himself as a feminist (for precisely the same reason you give). However, as a woman, I will openly refer to some of the men in my life as feminists, after I've had a chance to know them. Perhaps, DM, you may act like a feminist, but not like to talk about it? Or maybe not.
@ ScientistMother: It *is* sad to have to say that one is "lucky" to have a husband who will split the chores. But, that statement, in and of itself, highlights the reality on the ground.
-LadyDay
Perhaps, DM, you may act like a feminist, but not like to talk about it? Or maybe not.
There is the additional problem that if you label yourself x, y or z there is this seeming additional burden to get it right. I.e., to conform to what someone else considers to be qualifications for the label. Of course, human beliefs and actions do not come in neat categories.
It is not impossible, and indeed quite likely, that I have some attitudes and/or beliefs that are quite offensive to those who have a certain concept of "feminism". So why set oneself up for charges of hypocrisy or whatnot by adopting some label? I'll pass.
There needs to be a balance between baring all and sitting out the conversation altogether.
Not really. I don't see where bloggers have any obligation to jump into topics if they don't want to. Furthermore, a blog persona is a constructed persona. There is no obligation that it hew closely to one's IRL persona.
Feeling fighty today, ScientistMother?
"It is not impossible, and indeed quite likely, that I have some attitudes and/or beliefs that are quite offensive to those who have a certain concept of "feminism"."
feministhulk say: "HULK STRIVE TO RESPECT RIGHT TO SELF-IDENTIFY, BUT HULK COMPASSION STRAIN AND BREAK UNDER WEIGHT OF SARAH PALIN’S BULLSHIT."
As long as you're not in the Palin level of antifeminist hypocrisy, whatever pushback you'd get would likely represent a much lower level of conflict than your regular 'legalize eet, mon' baiting posts. That said, you know my position on labels that do not fit (rejecting labels is fine, but it's usually more entertaining to just create ever more labels, preferably using entertaining linguistic maneuvers).
"I don't see where bloggers have any obligation to jump into topics if they don't want to. "
Specific topics? Of course not. But the decisions by certain *types* of bloggers *not* to jump into certain *types* of topics can contribute to the ghettoization of such topics. But you're not hopelessly oblivious, so you know that.
More specifically, while I respect your right to draw your privacy lines where you will, I've also noted the type of semi-sentimental fatherhood posts you retweet. So I'll just take this opportunity to remind you that if you're don't ever find yourself stepping outside your comfort zone as a writer, it may well be time to try something different.
DM - Do you believe in the equality of men and women? If so, that makes you a feminist whether you like it or not. If you don't believe in equality take this as an opportunity to admit it. I suspect, like Becca, that you don't want the responsibility that come with openly admitting to being an ally / feminist.
Janet - Welcome to the blog. No, not the personal responsibility, the public responsibility of calling people out on the carpet for sexism. For practicing what you preach. I started reading science blogs about 2 years ago. DM was one of the first ones I started reading. In the post I linked to, he talks about the need of males scientist to be open about fatherhood and importance of leading by example. Hell he even gives examples of how to do those things. Yet he doesn't really explore those challenges. All I'm saying is talk about it the challenges for the same reason he says talk about being dads. The power of example.
I think in any relationship there needs to be flexibility in the relative workloads of partners so that the ebb and flow of each's "at work" work can change with the "at home" work. We all struggle with this to some degree and it doesn't always work perfectly. Some are in a situation for their partners to take up more slack than others.
LadyBug - welcome to the blog. Yes the fact that people say I"m lucky pisses the shit out of me. Same as when I am asked in Mr.SM is babysitting. The reality won't change, until we have examples of men doing it regularly.
Janet - back to you, I don't think anyone has their house in order. Thats the point. The female bloggers talk about it, the men don't. Which is why the whole life/balance is seen as a women's issue. Its not. I'm calling out DM, because he himself as posted on the power of example when it comes to fatherhood.
DM - the decision not to jump into the conversation perpetuates the idea that its women's issue.
Shout out to PLS for blogging how he balances things.
PLS - each relationship is different. You've talked about Ms.PLS first being at home, now working, the changes that was going to cause. the stress of childcare. You felt those issues as much as Ms.PLS did. I appreciate those posts and I think more men need to be open about these things.
DrdrA has talked about how her and MrdrA deal as a 2 academic household as does Janus Prof. The more example of how diff people do it, the more options we have to figure out (a) system that works (b) its not up the me, the female, to figure it out.
Interesting post ScientistMother...
...I agree the more you see the Men Folk willing to be open and talk about this sort of thing is what changes the culture. One of the managers where I work admonished one of his employees for taking a WEEK off work for the birth of his first child, saying he had been back at work the next day. So okay, we're nowhere near "paternal leave" here at MegaCorp (or even maternity for the most part, kiss of death to most women who take it). But you do see a difference when the next generation is willing to take a few weeks off for their baby. And maybe some other guy who wants to take a few months off won't be so afraid to because he'll know somebody else did it. And maybe when the guys start talking about the difficulty of raising their kids and getting stuff done it won't make offspring the forbidden fruit, or won't make it seem like only women with children should be punished in their careers when hey, dudes have kids too. I don't know what this means for any kind of obligation for DM, but I'm certain he struggles with these issues himself, and his choosing to write about them would certainly mean something to a lot of people. But then I guess that's his choice, and the next set of managers here might decide they'd rather be back at work the next day.
Frautech - Its all about the power of example. Which DM has talked about. He said
It is the power of the example. There were several areas in which I picked up either positive ("gee, that seems useful") or negative ("not gonna go there") PI patterns from this person. One of the former was this guy's role as father and scientist. Whenever one had to find this PI, if he wasn't around because of father duties his whole lab knew about it. "Oh, he's at Opening Day." or "He had a sick kid today, he'll be back later". or "He's taking his kid to [SportingActivityX]". This guy has a perfectly viable career with nice pubs, great NIH grant support, always seems to have at least 4-5 postdocs and a similar number of techs, serves study sections, organizes symposia, etc. In short, he's well respected and does not appear to have paid any obvious sort of career price to date. This had a great impact on YHN as I was transitioning both as PI and father.
The power of this example for me was basically "Screw it, if he doesn't worry about being known at work as a guy who takes his role as father seriously then I'm not going to worry about it either" . And I basically never worried about this sort of thing again. Now, I'm not going to claim that this is necessarily the smart thing to do, career-wise. The whole point here is an acknowledgment that there are people sitting in judgment of your career who do see too much parental-ness as being an indicator that you are not "serious" about science. But it is worth taking this rather minor risk for the greater good. After all, many of you have (or will have) female spouses with aspiration to scientific careers, no?
and then he continued with examples of how to set up a comfortable environment and one of his points was to talk mommy talk. Yet since then, he hasn't posted anything on that. Maybe he does IRL. I don't know. I'm just saying what he preached on the interwebs, he has not practiced on the interwebs
**emphasis is mine
I suspect, like Becca, that you don't want the responsibility that come with openly admitting to being an ally / feminist.
If you mean by "responsibility" making sure to express only a certain aspect of my beliefs and behaviors..yeah, guilty as charged.
Do I think men and women are equal? No. I think that men and women start with biological differences that are further shaped by extant culture. OTOH, I don't think that these sex differences are relevant to decisions in the scientific workplace, whether that be paper review, grant review, hiring or whatever might arise.
whatever pushback you'd get would likely represent a much lower level of conflict
I'm not certain how you can possibly know this, beyond your own personal reactions.
I should make it clear that I understand your arguments and even agree in the abstract. It *would* be better if out-as-men bloggers took up balance issues. Agree entirely.
@ DM: Does "equal" mean "identical," in your book? I don't think that men a identical to women. In fact, it's hard to find any person who is identical to any other person. "Equal," as I take it, means "worthy of the same rights," and that is where my definition stops.
-LadyDay
This is all very interesting to me, as someone who at the moment is simply trying to balance work and *dating*, let alone the complexities of married life, children, etc.
But I don't see why DrugMonkey should be called onto the carpet for having not written about topic X or Y. There's a lot of important things that should be discussed, but not everyone feels compelled or qualified to do so, for one reason or another.
That he hasn't written about these things extensively shouldn't constitute an inference into what he thinks about them, should it? (i.e. the decision not to jump into the conversation perpetuates the idea that its women's issue). Why can't it simply reflect that there are simply other things he wishes to spend his limited free time writing about?
"whatever pushback you'd get would likely represent a much lower level of conflict
I'm not certain how you can possibly know this, beyond your own personal reactions. "
I can't know for sure. Have you gotten a lot of stuff you couldn't handily manage* about not being feminist ally ish enough?
*Yeah, using the 'leegalize eet mon' standard of 'handily manageable conflict' may have issues. You do seem to personally thrive on some level of conflict, but maybe it is highly context-dependent and thus my comparison is inappropriate. Is it that you don't mind conflict about science/policy [even though the policy 'conflict' tends to be totes one sided- you can't be surprised by it at this stage], but feminist ally decisions would cut closer to an emotionally salient issue for you?
Summary thus far, as I understand it:
SM (and becca): "hey DM, it would be TOTES AWESOME if you blogged about something like this!"
DM: "well, it would be TOTES AWESOME if someone like me blogged about something like this! But I don't WANNA- too many ways of doin it rong."
SM (and becca): "are you sure you don't just mean you don't WANNA- is too hard?"
DM: "too hard to do it "RIGHT[tm]"
to which would say: 'if you only do things you are sure you will do right, life will be boring (Also, it makes it hard to do science)' *nudgenudgeidtynudgenudge*
Hmmmmmm.
I can certainly see the value in having high-profile male bloggers discuss this issue.
But I think it's a bit much to tell specific individuals that they should blog about a given topic (especially when the topic concerns their kids and their private life; not everyone wants to discuss these things on blog). I've had a few emails telling me I should blog about topic X (usually creationist stupidity). I just delete those messages. If the pressure was applied in public, rather than in private, I'd be annoyed!
If someone sends me a link and says "I thought you might find this interesting" - well, that's a different matter!
Maybe a special edition of Scientiae is called for - with this as the topic and an open, well-publicised invitation for male bloggers to contribute. Voluntarily. :)
I am an Assistant professor on a terminal year contract. My wife is a health care professional with a demanding job. Thus caring for my daughter became my primary job as well as most household chores. Unfortunately my academic department saw childcare and household work as the responsibility of the spouse (either wife or husband) and not the responsibility of professor. My mentor told me that he spent so much time at the lab and office that he was a stranger to his family once he obtained tenure. He then suggested that the sabbatical offered after obtaining tenure was the proper time to reunite with family.
I never demanded that DM jump into the conversation. He's was the example of someone who I know probably deals with these life/work balance issues, is aware of the fact hat is a concern BUT DOESN'T blog about it. He has also advocated for the importance of leading by example shall I quote his word verbatim?
here are some thoughts on what you male PIs and Professors who also happen to be dads should be doing. It is your responsibility to sent a comfortable working environment, is it not? And a real leader leads from the front, no? So step up.
Let them know you are expecting. IME the whole "I'll tell them just barely before I can't pull off the loose-labcoat anymore" thing is a big consideration for pregnant women. Unless your wife habituates your office place, your co-workers might be in the dark until you email the announcement. (Tell me you at least do that much, right?). Go ahead and leak the info at your workplace whenever your wife tells her workplace.
Be frank and open about bailing for "dad stuff". When you have to leave at 1pm to pick up a sick kid from daycare it is OK to say so to your lab or admin. Setting meetings with colleagues? Go ahead and say the reason you can't meet past 4 some day is because that is your day to take the early shift.
Talk "mommy" shop. Guess what? You don't have to avert yourself from the conversation, yes even if it is about the trials of "pumping". I mean after all your wife deals with this crap at work right? Pass her tips along. Engage. Let 'em know you agree it is stupid that the new "postdoc" offices don't have doors, nevermind locking ones (TrueStory). Recommend daycares.
Leave your screen saver set to your archive of pictures of the munchkins.
This was advice that he gave. Its akin to saying, oh yeah we should hire more women, diversity is good, but then still recommend your male beer buddy for the next job.
IRL - DM may do this, may not. I can only go by what I read on his blog.
ScientistMother demonstrates a fair bit of entitlement herself: she knows best what people should write about, calls them out when they don't, she knows exactly what people should think and how they are supposed to express their opinion in an approved fashion. And she is of course one of the blogosphere supresme judges of whether an opinion is allowed at all or not.
Not that DM needs defending, but what the hell? Leave the guy alone, and all male bloggers for that matter. No wonder no one wants to write about these things, since a whole pack of ScientistMother-like know-it-alls will jump for the kill for the slightest deviation from the approved standpoint. Who needs that kind of crap?
You need to write about...
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
No blogger "needs" to write about anyfuckingthing, and they certainly don't need some other fucking blogger telling them what they "need" to write about.
If it were me, I wouldn't have even gone as far as DM and dignified your blithering bullshit with any response other than fucking laughing in your face.
" So I'll just take this opportunity to remind you that if you're don't ever find yourself stepping outside your comfort zone as a writer, it may well be time to try something different."
This from someone who never links to her own blog?
If it were me, I wouldn't have even gone as far as DM and dignified your blithering bullshit with any response other than fucking laughing in your face.
I heart PhysioProf! xxx
The last Anon - DM doesn't need to defending, because this isn't an attack on him. He is the example of male science bloggers.
CPP - whatever, if you don't have anything constructive, don't bother coming here. I didn't tell DM that he HAS to blog about anything. As Janet said in her post, its about what we as a tribe value. As long as only women are talking about life/balance issues, it will be seen through a gender lens. This is not a gender issue.
Padraig - welcome to the blog. Yep Janet has very valid points and I have no issue with DM not wanting to blog about it. I feel like a broken record on this, more male science bloggers need to talk about these issues in order for it not to be viewed through a gender lens. Janets post is (which I'm not linking to as I'm on my iphone) an excellent (and much better written) reason for why more men (an example being DM) need to talk about it.
Cath - DM himself has talked about the importance of being open and public about things such as cutting early to deal with your kids. I'm asking him to follow-up his original post, by following his own advice. I'm not randomingly saying you should talk about it. There is a reason Massimo wasn't linked :)
@Dr. Isis- I have a blog like a three year old on a trike has a motorcycle. And unlike CPP, I let that stop me. :-P
My comfort zone is... ever shifting. I do try to write outside of it in various contexts though.
The last Anon - DM doesn't need to defending, because this isn't an attack on him. He is the example of male science bloggers.
The post isn't called "Step up to the plate male science bloggers," it is called "Step up to the plate DrugMonkey". So yes you called out on him specifically to do something *you* thought he should do. You had no business making him an example of anything; the guy writes a very balanced blog. You want men's opinions? Well, if you didn't act as an asshole but asked nicely maybe someone would actually respond. PLS is a brave soul, but most men don't appreciate being called on to do anything they don't want to do, and certainly not by someone they don't give a rat's ass about.
Scientistmother, I understand your point. I think it would be great if more men (and not just men scientists, but men in general) were to openly discuss family/work/balance issues; as you say, this acknowledges and reframes the "work/life/balance" issue as a general parental issue, not specifically a "women" issue.
I know many men who are deeply concerned with making time for their families and are committed to sharing equally in household and parenting responsbilities even as they pursue demanding careers (my husband is one of them). I think the typical "women-slant" on this issue (as in the recent ScienceCareers article that set off this uproar) does a disservice to these men as well as to women.
That said... hell, most men I know just don't like to discuss personal things much at all.
Cath, love your idea of a Scientiae inviting the male bloggers in to talk about this. Not demanding that you guys talk--just inviting you to.
Anon - Hmm, yeah because DM asked why he was named as an example. I've quoted already extensively from his post. So far, outside of you, there has been no name calling or attacking of opinions. Whether DM blogs or doesn't blog about topics is upto him. See his post for his views on the importance of this. As for PLS, this isn't the first time, and I'm pretty sure it won't be the last time he blogs about this stuff? Why do you think he's brave soul doing it? Possibly because its not "manly" to say your concerned? Well that is bullshit.
Oh yeah I forgot, I should ask nicely like a good little girl? Fuck that shit, but I wasn't rude either.
BeanMom - I have created a bit of tempest haven't I? The take home message of this is an issue that effects everyone, seems to have been lost. Partly, I think that is my fault for not communicating clearly, partly I think some people just want to focus on the "how dare you ask someone to blog about something" tangent.
Why do you think he's brave soul doing it? Possibly because its not "manly" to say your concerned? Well that is bullshit.
First of all, mind your spelling (you're, not your). Secondly, you have no business deciding what's manly or not, not having a dick and all. Just as you don't want men to tell you what women are supposed to say or do.
Oh yeah I forgot, I should ask nicely like a good little girl?
You said it, not me. Check out the comments on DrugMonkey. Let me reiterate: men hate being called out to do or say stuff by people they don't give a rat's ass about, and will simply not respond, which is presumably not what you were after. So yeah I think you should have asked instead of demanded. But whatever.
Anon - you really can't read can you? Everyone ,except for you and CPP, seems to understand the concept that's being discussed. If you don't have anything constructive don't bother commenting here.
I can't be bothered to get into a troll arguement with you. You're not worth my time or energy.
Whether DM blogs or doesn't blog about topics is upto him.
You keep saying this in the comments here, but did you even read your own fucking post? Because I am having trouble squaring your protestations that you didn't tell DoucheMonkey what to do with this sentence in your post:
You need to write about balancing your life with your science[.]
ScientistMother- see, you clearly didn't understand The Rules. You don't get to tell any (male) blogger what to blog about, yet every (male) asshole gets to tell you *how* to write your blog.
Mind, questions to clarify intent are very valuable when *how* a blog is written leaves room for confusion. But you've clarified your intent (even if your post wasn't crystal clear, your position surely is now), and you're still catching shit. Hmmm. I wonder why that might be.
That was the part that I picked up on too...
sorry, my post crossed with Becca's, so "that part" referred to the part of your post that CPP quoted.
see, you clearly didn't understand The Rules.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! What are you, Communication Is My Field, Junior Division?
@CPP- as you surely know, DrugMonkey has competently handled MANY more aggressive and douchey "you should blog about X" demands, than this one (the motivation for which he indicated he is sympathetic to). And yet, *this* is the one you jump out of the woodworks for. You are a chauvinist douche.
Becca, you have it exactly right. Plenty of people attack DrugMonkey for other material, and this is the first time I've seen so many people jump to his defense in this way. The Rules include:
-never, ever criticize anyone who has ever even once implied being an ally
-never, ever suggest someone behave more like an ally
-never, ever express the frustration that bubbles up from being a disempowered, second class citizen due to gender, sex, race, class, motherhood, etc
-close ranks around men who have ever been remotely sympathetic
And I do want to be clear here: I agree with ScientistMother that it would be great for DrugMonkey and others to talk about this more. DrugMonkey has kinda responded and indicated an unwillingness. Fine. What is pissing me off is all the other folks defending poor DM as though he can't respond to this stuff himself.
Also, Dr. Isis, I don't always link back to my blog either, because for a while my blogger profile was compromised and I needed time to pseudonymize it. I have noticed you and DrugMonkey and other SciBorg folks don't always link back to your blog, but you all, like ScientistMother, have recognizable enough pseudonyms that a google search readily reveals your blog. So why attack SM for not always linking back to her blog?
ScientistMother- see, you clearly didn't understand The Rules. You don't get to tell any (male) blogger what to blog about, yet every (male) asshole gets to tell you *how* to write your blog.
I am a female asshole, thankyouverymuch. And am totally with CPP on this one; ScientistMother was out of line and no one here is unable to read or somehow else "communication-challenged". Reread your own post, for fuck's sake.
@anon 'asshole female': "ScientistMother was out of line and no one here is unable to read or somehow else "communication-challenged". Reread your own post, for fuck's sake."
In what sense was she out of line? She has a difference of opinion with DrugMonkey regarding what qualifies one for a certain label ("ally"), but DM never said it was like, totes crazy/wrong/unacceptable for her to think of him that way or anything- he just asserted that something is not part of his identity. Look, if ScientistMother called DM "a hockey fan" and DM said "well, I don't think of myself that way because 'hockey fans' are pompous jerks, plus I don't want to have to defend all aspects of hockey" (keeping in mind DM has written posts praising hockey) I don't think ScientistMother would have been "out of line"- confused or incorrect, perhaps*, but not breaking rules (what else does 'out of line' mean, than breaking rules? It certainly has the connotation of out of bounds in a game, to my thinking, but maybe you thought it had some other connotation???)
(*depending on one's views on the primacy of self-identity in labeling).
Pray tell, why is it such a horrible thing to think DM, given what he has written, might be a good guy to do what we all pretty much agree would be a good thing (i.e. write about balance from a male perspective)?
Indeed, I am inclined to wonder: 'for fucks sake, did you even read DM's linked post'?
OK, lets see how this whole conversation started. Isis wrote a post about the ScienceCareers article about balancing science with the home responsibilities. Frustration was expressed how all the home responsibilities are some how a womens problem and how all the articles on a balancing science careers with other responsibilites (be it kids, partners, dogs, cats, fish, elderly parents, hobbies etc) are all catered and/or directed to women. As if only women deal with this.
In that comment thread I stated that the issues of balancing work with other responsibilities is thought of as womens issue because the majority of people who talk about it are women. DM was an example of a high-profile dude, who probably (I don't know for sure) deals with this but rarely talks about. Why did I use DM as the example to represent a class of men. Because he has posted on the importance of the power of example for changing cultures.
My point is not that DM must take charge and start posting on this topic. My point is that ALL MEN that deal with these issues need to be talking about it. I recognize that I can sit here forever talking about how work/life balance is not issue exclusive to men, but until men start talking about it the perception is not going to change.
If out of the whole post and following comment thread, you're going to pick out the one sentence where I said "you need to talk" that fine. You can do that.
Nor am I going to apologize for it, because he does need to. As does CPP, Bikemonkey, Duwayne, PalMD, PLS and every other guy that cares about this issue. If they don't want to, thats fine. But the need, the requirement that men have to talk about this as being their issue as well is not going to go away.
As I said at the end of the post, until the MEN talk about it, the perception that this is a womens' issue is not going to change.
Everyone that is coming here to say how dare you tell someone to write about X, don't bother leaving a comment. That is not the point of this discussion. The point of this post which, Bean-mom, Frau-Tech, Padraig, Janet, is that men struggle with balancing their responsibilities as much as women. The perception that balance is only a women's issue will not change until men start talking about.
Padraig - Use of declarative language, is probably problematic agreed.
You don't buy the premise that work/life balance is perceived as women's issue or that having men talk about it will change that perception? I think Isis made a good case for the perception in her original post.
If you think that having men talk about it will not change the perception, then how do you propose to change the perception?
Yes I do think that a large proportion of society thinks that men don't struggle with these issues. I don't have stats or studies to prove it, but I rarely notice articles in men's magazines or men's news section about it (which is why thats my opinion). From the comment thread of Isis's post, I understood the frustration was that the issues gets treated as a women's issue, even though its not. It does a dis-service to men to have articles/advice or the topic itself geared that way.
Personally, it annoys the crap out of me (in our local area) that politicians come to Women in Science events and talk about access to daycare, early childhood education, public education improvements etc. But never mention these things at their breakfast with the City Business Association.
How do we get these issues, which affect us all to be treated appropriately? I don't know. I think having more people talk about it increases awareness, which may leads to solutions.
Maybe blogging isn't the best medium for it, maybe real life action is better - I don't know. In real life I totally appreciate and admire my male colleagues and PI's that do talk about these issues and advocate for change with me.
Becca / Kate - yeah I totally did not read the rules. Did you know that "we" turned on DM? Who is this we that turned? Is it you, Becca and myself? Is it us ladies that wanted it all? or is it us individuals that want gender equity? or those that want to get rid of gender roles? Seriously, did I attack DM? I don't remember calling him names or physically attacking him. I did call him an ally, which he didn't like and I never pushed on. Was it that I quoted from him? I give up...
@Padraig- I was going to sit this one out, because I am not an academic and I actually feel like this is not one of the issues that creates problems in my personal life.
But I have to point out that we aren't necessarily looking for the stay at home dad perspective here. (Although it is certainly a valid perspective.) We're looking for the perspective of the male half of a dual career couple. That perspective is mostly missing from the discourse. Also, the two male scientist bloggers who are known to this group to have discussed the issue (PLS and PalMD) HAVE been linked to.
This is also not something that is limited to the blogosphere. I am asked very, very frequently about how I balance my career and my homelife now that I'm a mother. I have specifically asked my husband about this, and he confirms that no one- not one single person- has ever asked him that. We actually have made very similar adjustments to maintain "balance" and split chores and child-care as evenly as we can. (And yes, Scientist Mother, it drives me absolutely batty that I am supposed to feel lucky to have this arrangement. No, I feel like an equal.)
Finally, I want to point out that this issue is not unique to academics, or even to scientists. The data I have seen all imply that the problem as experienced in academia is fairly similar to that experienced in other demanding careers. The issue is discussed in many different work/life forums, and in all of those forums, I have seen similar concerns raised.
With all that said- I assume that DrugMonkey has some solid reason for not blogging about something he obviously cares about. I suspect it is a personal rule (or perhaps a rule agreed with his partner) to leave this sort of thing private, which I can respect. I have such rules myself, although obviously not about the arrangement of our household chores, because I actually wrote a detailed post about it quite awhile ago.
I can tell you who did -- Sci-mommies! We are teh evil! Someone over at DrugMonkey's blog came up with the name. Never mind that some of the folks closing ranks around DM are themselves scientists and mothers.
Sigh.
Padraig, I think you're arguing from a false assumption, that societal revolution does happen and is useful. Go check out PalMD's recent post on this issue of work. He's an "enlightened man" yet his wife stays at home and he works. And the whole comment thread is populated with women saying the same stuff: how did I get here, how did I get here.
Look, we all think we'll do it differently than our parents AND THEN WE DON'T. There is this ridiculous popular notion that biology is rigid and culture changeable, and it's just wrong. When we comfort ourselves with this idea that change will come, we don't do the work to make it happen, which is actually very hard. Culture, traditions, expectations, these are more entrenched in many ways than biology is "hard-wired." So yeah, there are a lot of us trying to get even more people off their butts and helping with that change. Because it won't happen with the same people saying the same stuff.
Oh, and the data that I have seen show that gay/lesbian couples tend to have much more equitable divisions of household chores than heterosexual couples do. That data covers all segments of the population, though, not just academia.
Padraig - You now have me confused How do you measure how things are perceived. Most look at popular culture. You may not think our anecdotal evidence is valid, but I think the large number of respondents in Isis's post supports it.
is the lack of visible instances of these discussions in a particular media truly a measure of whether or not men think something is or isn't a women's issue, or is it just an indicator that men are bad about talking about non-trivial personally weighty subjects on the whole?
You could be right if we were only looking at magazines / shows directed at either men or women. ScienceCareers is directed to both, as is The Globe and Mail, NY Times, popular culture forums, which many (rightly or wrongly) take has indicators of popular culture.
Look at the way politicians deliver speeches and target their messages, they do this largely based on perceptions and/or data on what is or isn't a women's issue.
A large part of social change come from changes in how mainstream media protrays issues/individuals. Shows like Ellen and Will&Grace are considered groundbreaking for a reason. Movies like Philadelphia, Roots. Why do minorities push for positive representation in mainstream shows? Because it helps to change perceptions.
I am linked to PLS, one the individuals that do talk about this. Apparently he's considered brave for doing so.
How do you think perceptions could be changed? How do you think this issue, which is a human issue be dealt with?
@Padraig- I think you just enjoy a good argument and like showing off how well you understand the mechanics of arguing. Fine. But this isn't just a fun argument for me or the other women commenting here. This issue, and the BS societal expectations that surround it, have a real impact on our lives. Does it impact your life? If you answered no, think about what that means.
I haven't looked for scientist men blogging about how they balance their work/life. Why? Because as I said, the actual mechanics of how to divide up our chores isn't a big concern in my life. Hubby and I have that sorted, thank you very much. If it weren't for the bile I feel rising every time I hear that motherhood is the reason that more women aren't making it to the top of science (or any other profession), I might just ignore these sorts of discussions.
My original point to you was that directing the people who are concerned with this issue to blogs written by SAHDs was missing the point but a long shot. You missed it by so far that you weren't really in the same neighborhood. Think about what it means that you missed the point by such a large margin.
(Here's an experiment for you: go google "work-life balance" or "dual career couples" and check the gender distribution of what you find. No, I'm not going to do this for you, but either of those searches would be more relevant than the search you did.)
If you'd read to the end of my comment, you would have seen that I agree that it is not fair to expect any particular male to blog about any topic he doesn't want to talk about in public.
But I find the overall trend of men not discussing this informative. Why should the question of who does the laundry be at all inflammatory?
If men don't think about this issue, why not? And why do women- even women like myself, who don't have a problem with it in their personal lives- think about it? Could it be that we're being told that this problem is the reason we're not advancing in our fields? No, there is no sexism. It is just that women are having such a hard time balancing their work and home lives. Well, that's utter sexist BS, because the problem is not properly a women's issue. It is a people issue. And all the men running around the comments sections on these posts telling us that there is no discrepancy, or if there is, it is just because men don't talk about these things- well, that is BS, too.
Ah well, at least we're now closer to discussing the actual issue than what looks to have been a misunderstanding. Who knew the internet could ever blow something like that up into a full-on pile-on controversy...?
I can't believe it took me so long to realize Padraig is a mansplainer. I am so glad he can school me on these issues.
Okay - I'm leaving 1-3 since we agree on them
(3&4) what do you mean by malignant directed action? Can we keep this to just work/life stuff. Because to say there is no malignant directed action against the female experience is incorrect. Sexual harassment in the workplace, violence against women, oppression of women's choice - I don't want to get into that.
(5) I agree that we're dealing with established bias. Do I understand that you don't think we should try to change those bias? The article below does an excellent examination of how current fiscal policies from tax breaks to child support policies reinforce traditional roles and help to maintain the gender gap in earnings which reinforces the traditional roles. Does that not mean we should change those policies?
The Just Commodification of Women, Equal Care Obligations for Men, and Autonomous Households:
Gendering the Comparative Analysis of Welfare States in 20 OECD Countries
Paul Kershaw, Ph.D
(6) I agree that some people are not going to change - my FIL will never pick up his dishes or do any housework. Unfortunately, that is the behaviour he has modeled to his sons. Had it not been for my husband and I modeling and discussing with them the importance of equality and respect, they would have the same misogynist views as my FIL. The younger BIL and the younger males cousins (also raised in a very traditional homes have changed) because of directed action from myself and my husband. When they come to my house, all the men are expected to pick up their dishes, help in preparing meals and assist in clean up. I've been married for over 10 years. It wasn't easy changing their attitudes, but now that some of them are married, their wives appreciate it.
Michael Johnson changed the perception that HIV/AIDs was gays man disease when he came out with being infected. Having role models changes perceptions. Isn't that well documented/accepted?
7/8 - I'm going to be honest and say Uh? I'm not sure what you're saying.
9- agreed
10 - I totally thinks is fair for one to opt not talk about something out of respect for partner or lack of interest. Doesn't me I can't want them to do talk about / write about stuff.
11 - yes there are individuals working to change this issue. And if you read some of Paul Kershaws research (i've heard him speak as well) he has written stuff on the lack of the masculine voice and the need for policies that enable men and women to be equal partners care (ie dedicated paternity/elderly care leave). Some bloggers do talk about (I linked to them) I feel that more need to do so.
Padraig - I comment on PLS blog regularly. When he talked about leaving the wee one at daycare, I left comments and talked to him about it.
IRL i have engaged with male PI's who have talked about. One sought me out to find out how they could help their grad student who was having kid (since I am a grad student with a kid) He wanted to know how to support her and we had an excellent discussion of strategies. He's come to me for help with finding childcare, he has advocated for more support for parents from the department. So I have engaged in those discussion. I have not engaged with the Stay-at-home dad community. Nor do I with the "mommyblogging" community. The community that embraced me was the tribe of science. Which I am so grateful for because with their help I've made some beneficial choices.
@padraig-
It seems to me that there are always plenty of people to advocate 'don't rock the boat, let the old eejits die off'- from the time of women's suffrage to the Civil Rights struggles of the 60s, and today with e.g. gay marriage.
It seems to me that successful movements generally depend on a committed group of people, both moderates and extremists, who are willing to act. And, dare I say it, ask (or demand!) that others act. Not *just* find people already acting and congratulate them in a recursive back patting exercise.
Padraig:
You referred a bunch of people talking about the problems balancing household chores in two career families to blogs written by stay at home dads... by definition not a two career family.
The fact that you don't know that motherhood and/or the problems balancing home and career are advanced as reasons that there aren't more women in science shows that you don't actually know anything about this subject. It is actually a very common explanation. Maybe you should do some background reading.
I don't agree with just dismissing you as a mansplainer, but I can certainly understand the temptation. You have demonstrated a remarkable lack of knowledge about a subject you seem willing to argue endlessly about.
I've assumed nothing about you except what I have tried to understand from your arguments. I'm done with that now.
Padraig - you're being lazy and I don't have time to be educating you at this moment. And you're doing a bunch of double speak which is annoying me. This isn't comparing men with non-traditional roles to women with careers. It was about the fact that the perception is that work/life balance is a women's issue. At least we can agree its not. I've given you the links to researcher who have shown this to be true.
Either all the researches in gender studies, the harvard business review, zuska are morons. Or you're too lazy to learn about an issue before critiquing the statistical approach. So no there is not self-selected self-confirmation bias.
I also didn't randomly big a guy to point out. Go read the post I quoted DM from. He values the importance of the issue and the need for men to open about it. There may be reasons why he's not blogging about it. its his choice.
Becca's already made the point about how to advocate for change. so i'm leaving that.
I'm also done with this post. I have comps I need to be studying for. Comments are being closed. Yes I get the last word. Its my blog after all
Padraig - I missed your last comments. You're engaging in critiquing the validity or reality of issues, you criticize the methods that individuals use to advocate for change, WITHOUT providing solutions. You need to go read Stephanie's Constructive Criticism.
As an awesome female postdoc once said to me. don't tell me the obstacles, tell the solutions.
Post a Comment