Throughout the day I've been reading bits and bobs, going back to the articles and blog entries I've come across in the past few days. Frankly, nothing has popped up as something I desperately want to comment on today. But, maybe my lack of radiating enthusiasm has to do, in part, with the fact that quite a bit of what I've read has been rather pessimistic. I started the day with this article titled "Women who quit careers in science to be parents." I followed that up with checking up on one of my favorite blogs, the one maintained by my friend K. Both blogs highlight the challenges of being a working mom. In her article Gwen Dewar goes beyond common assumptions to investigate why women are underrepresented in fields involving "hard science." I would say her findings apply to "soft science" fields, such as my own (anthropology), as well. Although women are equally hired for tenure-track jobs in academia, combining a research career with motherhood tends to be extremely challenging, if not highly conflicting and outright incompatible. She quotes Williams and Ceci,
Her thought raising blog entry raised quite a bit of discussion and specifically those comments brought about that sniff of pessimism I mentioned earlier. Many women wrote back to share their stories of working hard for PhDs and achieving tenures but losing their academic positions once they had children. How frustrated I feel for them! Many even said they've led similar career paths with their husbands until parenthood left the husband's career intact, or even improved it!, but set back or demolished that of the wives... However, at the same time many of these women understood and to a degree accepted why this had happened since they knew very well what up-to-date scientific careers demanded and knew that they did not have the time or focus required.
That brings me to K's blog. She wrote about the BlackBerry availability syndrome: how being fully committed to a high-impact job these days meant being glued to ones electronic communication devices 24/7. If career-building requires making sure the Home doesn't impact the Work, how do you make sure that the Work doesn't intrude your Home (for everyone's sanity's sake)? But, if you dream of having a family do you have to downscale your path up? Maybe switch to "softer" sectors?
But what if you treasure your family and want to genuinely and passionately contribute to society? When you have the driving force to go as high as your interest and commitment will take you, who will not encourage you to switch and "soften" but will support you and tell you to keep going? I'm not talking of the Iron Lady (as the movie gave quite a cold impression of Maggie the Mother) but of many women out there who are truly loving and present mothers but also feel driven to make it to the top, as we say. Mothers who are politicians, economists, presidents (Tarja Halonen, for one!), violinists, slum project managers, surgeons... Women who want to make a difference and who have the ability to impact society. There are women out there who truly do manage to do both impressively well - working and mothering.
“Motherhood – and the policies that make it incompatible with a tenure-track research career – take a toll on women that is detrimental to their professional lives."They point out that women's underrepresentation in the science community is not a result of biased hiring but due to the heavy commitment expected of researchers and the outdated university policies that allow and maintain such pressure. Dewar asks whether contributions to science can only be made through the sacrifice of family life. The time, energy, and effort required for science leaves little to none for family and friends. In her words,
If the academic life resembles a highly-competitive monastery, it’s because human beings have structured it that way for social reasons.Finally she asks what it means for society that intellectuals with a desire for family life are weeded out of high science - could allowing intellectual diversity actually contribute to society?
Her thought raising blog entry raised quite a bit of discussion and specifically those comments brought about that sniff of pessimism I mentioned earlier. Many women wrote back to share their stories of working hard for PhDs and achieving tenures but losing their academic positions once they had children. How frustrated I feel for them! Many even said they've led similar career paths with their husbands until parenthood left the husband's career intact, or even improved it!, but set back or demolished that of the wives... However, at the same time many of these women understood and to a degree accepted why this had happened since they knew very well what up-to-date scientific careers demanded and knew that they did not have the time or focus required.
That brings me to K's blog. She wrote about the BlackBerry availability syndrome: how being fully committed to a high-impact job these days meant being glued to ones electronic communication devices 24/7. If career-building requires making sure the Home doesn't impact the Work, how do you make sure that the Work doesn't intrude your Home (for everyone's sanity's sake)? But, if you dream of having a family do you have to downscale your path up? Maybe switch to "softer" sectors?
But what if you treasure your family and want to genuinely and passionately contribute to society? When you have the driving force to go as high as your interest and commitment will take you, who will not encourage you to switch and "soften" but will support you and tell you to keep going? I'm not talking of the Iron Lady (as the movie gave quite a cold impression of Maggie the Mother) but of many women out there who are truly loving and present mothers but also feel driven to make it to the top, as we say. Mothers who are politicians, economists, presidents (Tarja Halonen, for one!), violinists, slum project managers, surgeons... Women who want to make a difference and who have the ability to impact society. There are women out there who truly do manage to do both impressively well - working and mothering.
No comments:
Post a Comment