You have to understand the place of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in American science and science politics to grasp the sexist effrontery of the venerable institution.

With a Congressional charter signed by Abe Lincoln in 1863, the NAS is both a prestigious hall of fame and a scientific think tank, all rolled into one snooty organization, headquartered in a marble palace near the Washington Mall. In a profession that doles out honors like a nursery-school graduation, membership in the Academy is the greatest honor for an American scientist, second only to the Nobel Prize.

Each year, the current membership votes in a new crop of members. Universities boast of the number of academicians on their faculties. Scientists scheme and plot to get elected and to elect their allies. Conspiracy rumors are plentiful. Many aspirants are hopeful, but few make it. The U.S. pool of Ph.D. scientists — from which virtually all academicians are drawn — numbers about 625,000. Academy membership currently totals 2,041.

But in addition to bestowing recognition and honor, the Academy also serves as an adviser to the federal government — and to any one else who wants to sign up for its costly but influential ruminations. Business is good, bringing in over $100-million a year for studies of all kinds. Some members actively participate in NAS studies and other academy activities, serving gratis, as a service to the country. But since most members are too busy or too far over the hill to cogitate on contract, the real work is done by hired staff, which numbers over 1,000.

For scientists who are ambitious and who crave recognition — they are one and the same — Academy membership is extremely beneficial for getting to the top. In its role as adviser to the government, the Academy is often influential in promoting spending priorities for research. In conjunction with the honor that accompanies membership, it’s a power site for science politics. Which brings us to the share of membership possessed by women. It is minuscule.

Of the current 2,041 members, 220 are women. In the latest election of members, announced this week, 16 women were among the 72 electees. That’s an improvement over 2007, when nine women were elected, and 2006, which brought in 12 women. The peak election year for women was 2005, when 19 were elected.

The standard explanation for the paucity of female members is that women only recently entered the ranks of science in large numbers, and many have not been there long enough to establish the professional reputations that lead to Academy membership.

That was true 35 years ago, when women accounted for 9 percent of all doctoral-level employment on university science and engineering faculties, according to the National Science Foundation. Today, the comparable figure for female Ph.D. academic employment is 33 percent.

The American scientific community is blessed with large numbers of outstanding women scientists—in numbers far beyond the slight recognition accorded them by the National Academy of Sciences.

But even in science, despite its boasts of meritocracy, the old boys look out for their buddies.