Addressing sexual harassment in science
Kayt is a member of the American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA), the Author's Guild and the National Association of Science Writers (NASW). She has recently returned to the United States after living abroad for six years and has just published her first book, DIRTY MINDS: HOW OUR BRAINS INFLUENCE LOVE, SEX AND RELATIONSHIPS, an exploration of the neurobiology of love (Free Press, 2012).
Kayt Sukel's writing credits include personal essays in the Washington Post, American Baby, the Bark, USAToday, Literary Mama and the Christian Science Monitor as well as articles on a variety of subjects for the Atlantic Monthly, Parenting, Cerebrum, BrainWork and American Baby magazines. She blogs regularly about traveling on the Lowell Thomas Travel Journalism Award winning travel blog, Travel Savvy Mom; and science, love and life at the Houston Chronicle's Hearts and Minds blog.
You can often find her oversharing on Twitter as @kaytsukel.
The stories come in surprising ways. An unexpected confession over a meal or a few drinks. A warning, perhaps, to keep your distance from a particular person before a conference. A breakdown during one too many late nights in the lab. But, eventually, one way or another, these stories come. And they are heartbreaking.
Stories of sexual harassment in the workplace. Tales of inappropriate comments, the odd (or not so odd) grope. Women being barred from particular research topics or tracks simply because of their gender. And sometimes, sexual assault and rape.
Unfortunately, for many of us who have worked in science, these stories are all too common.
In a recent blog post, Kate Clancy, an assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Illinois, discussed incidents of sexual harassment and sexual assault at field sites. Working with collaborators (and esteemed academics) Katie Hinde, Robin Nelson, and Julienne Rutherford, the group attempted to put together some real statistics behind those stories so many of us have heard. They put together a survey about sexual harassment and passed it around the community. They then shared the results at the American Association of Physical Anthropology symposium on ethics.
We heard many reports of women not being allowed to do certain kinds of field work, being driven or warned away from particular field sites, and being denied access to research materials that were freely given to men (and men who were given access were the ones telling us these things). Ultimately, not being able to go to certain field sites, having to change field sites, or not being able to access research materials means women are denied the opportunity to ask certain research questions in our field. This has the potential to limit the CVs of women and given them permanently lesser research trajectories. This can lead to not getting jobs, or getting lower-tier jobs. It also means certain research questions may get primarily asked by one gender, and reducing the diversity of people doing research has been shown to reduce the diversity and quality of the work.
Their findings weren't met with much surprise. And I was very happy to see that the American Anthropological Association immediately responded with a "no tolerance" statement concerning sexual harassment and assault.
Yet Clancy and colleagues continue to be criticized because they cannot determine the actual prevalence of sexual harassment and assault in the field. To that, Hinde replied, "How does one measure the prevalence or magnitude of the problem, assuming we could get a full reporting? Do we count the individual victims? Do we count the witnesses powerless to intervene who are also traumatized? Do we count the future junior scientists warned away from such sites who miss out on research opportunities? Do we count the family, friends, and colleagues of the victims whose hearts break at what they suffered? And if we do count all of these, or even a subset, is there an amount above zero that we should feel obliged to condone? What is a tolerable amount of harassment? What is an acceptable prevalence of rape?"
The answer is simple: none. Absolutely none. And since this sexual harassment go far beyond anthropology, to the labs and sites of other scientific fields, it's time the scientific community puts its collective foot down and works to make sure we never have to hear these kinds of stories again.
Photo credit: mypokcik/Shutterstock.com
A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration likely violated the reporter's Fifth Amendment rights when it stripped his press credentials earlier this month.
- Acosta will be allowed to return to the White House on Friday.
- The judge described the ruling as narrow, and didn't rule one way or the other on violations of the First Amendment.
- The case is still open, and the administration may choose to appeal the ruling.
Progressive America would be half as big, but twice as populated as its conservative twin.
- America's two political tribes have consolidated into 'red' and 'blue' nations, with seemingly irreconcilable differences.
- Perhaps the best way to stop the infighting is to go for a divorce and give the two nations a country each
- Based on the UN's partition plan for Israel/Palestine, this proposal provides territorial contiguity and sea access to both 'red' and 'blue' America
New research identifies an unexpected source for some of earth's water.
- A lot of Earth's water is asteroidal in origin, but some of it may come from dissolved solar nebula gas.
- Our planet hides majority of its water inside: two oceans in the mantle and 4–5 in the core.
- New reason to suspect that water is abundant throughout the universe.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.