next »

[lux__]

The department represents all the students on campus, and female students frequently find having female mentors relevant. That should provide a reason to hire at least one female professor. In addition, there are a lot of subjective variables that go into hiring decisions no matter how objectively they are supposed to be made. It's striking that the subjective variations in this department have led to the hiring of no women. What does that say about the department?

As for the slights towards the female math professor, I find those noteworthy. Those slights are serious from the standpoint of collaborating on articles with other faculty, and it sounds more like there's been a pattern of forgetfulness rather than a single oversight in mentioning a conference. I'd be a little unnerved if a fellow grad student's first and only comment to me was a dinner invite rather than a work discussion.

[starfleet_grad]

All-female departments can be as intimidating and as polarizing as all male ones. I am the only male person in an all female department, and I cannot tell you how many times I have been left out of important decisions that affect my work. One semester, I found out that a new textbook for a freshman intro course had been chosen when the students showed up with it the first day of class. When I was newer here, it was common for me to learn about my schedule when it came out in print for the students. At other times, decisions made unanimously by all department members during a meeting (including all women) were reversed or changed by some of my colleagues to what they would have wanted without further input and then presented to administrators as consensus.

I suppose someone might try to explain such actions by claiming that I probably act in an intimidating fashion or give of misogynistic vibes, but I have too often seen those arguments used to make excuses for women's bad behavior. My experience is that all-female departments can be as much of a closed society prone to abuse of power and cliquishness as all-male departments.

[cgfunmathguy]

Okay, it appears mathperson was a troll. I apologize for hijacking the thread. I now return to the OP's original question.

Having given this more thought, I don't believe that "lack of diversity" should stop you from applying. If you get to the campus visit, you will have a better idea of what is happening there once you visit. The human mind and intuition are wonderfully magnificient contraptions. If you feel uncomfortable in the department, then you turn down any offer. If you feel comfortable and find you like the place (for whatever reason), then you accept the offer. Don't judge a book by its cover. Give them a fair shake first.

[dr_strangelove]

Okay, it appears mathperson was a troll. I apologize for hijacking the thread. I now return to the OP's original question.

Wow. I'm going to be as polite as I can about this...why don't you try to pull your head out of your ... oh never mind.

I don't see anything in mathperson's post that is at all troll-like. Her reported experiences are in line with lots of things that I've seen and heard down the years in the science and mathematics community. Nothing that she said surprises me. But in your response to her, I do see a lot of what's wrong with that same community. 'nuff said.

[merce]

Since the last post I did which I include below I have found a checklist to give candidates an idea of the campus /dept. climate regarding gender issues. It is the "Check-list for Woman-positive Institutions" in _Lifting a Ton of Feathers: A Woman's guide to Surviving in the Academic World_ by Paula J. Caplan.

There was a similar question posted a few weeks back. The following was my response. Hope it is useful:

 Re: Experiences as the only representative of your gender in the department
« Reply #1 on: October 24, 2006, 05:23:06 PM » Quote 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am the only TT female in my new dept. It would seem to be more relevant than I would have thought. However, the dept culture is what it is here because of the unique personalities of each member. I could not have imagined what the feel would be before arriving but I did pick up on it as soon as I met with people during my on-campus interview.

I think it would be difficult to really make any sort of statement about your perspective depts until you've had a bit of contact.

I can tell you that had I been more astute then I might have done the following to prep:

- look at the history of female employees in the dept. (not sure how this can best be done, in my case I happened upon a v. revealing bit of info on ratemyprofessors.com by accident- give that a whirl)

- look at the CVs of your perspective dept members for clues as to how they work w/ women (collaborations w/ females, feministy conferencing, etc.)

- look at the administration for an idea of how females fare in admin on campus. then to other depts just for some sampling.

- consider culture: and ask questions that might subtly allow you to determine whether the males from macho societies buy into or reject macho business.


I look forward to the discussion your post generates because, as I said, I've been convinced that my dept is pretty quirky b/c of all of us quirky folks in it. but, hmmmm I wonder....

[cgfunmathguy]

Wow. I'm going to be as polite as I can about this...why don't you try to pull your head out of your ... oh never mind.

I don't see anything in mathperson's post that is at all troll-like. Her reported experiences are in line with lots of things that I've seen and heard down the years in the science and mathematics community. Nothing that she said surprises me. But in your response to her, I do see a lot of what's wrong with that same community. 'nuff said.

Okay, I'll bite.

First of all, mathperson has exactly one post and never responded to my response to her.

Second, while issues of "sexual discrimination" may have been valid 30 years ago, I do not believe they are rampant today. My response actually shows a much better situation than she described. Somehow, this illustrates "a lot of what's wrong with that same community." I don't get it. Help me pull my head out, dr. strangelove.

Thanks

[dr_strangelove]

Okay, I'll bite.

First of all, mathperson has exactly one post and never responded to my response to her.

Second, while issues of "sexual discrimination" may have been valid 30 years ago, I do not believe they are rampant today. My response actually shows a much better situation than she described. Somehow, this illustrates "a lot of what's wrong with that same community." I don't get it. Help me pull my head out, dr. strangelove.

Thanks

Assuming, against my better judgment, that you're serious...

First, if I posted a list of my experiences in being treated poorly because of my gender, and the response was:

Being a b**** generally gets you treated poorly by others, especially by men. The one female topologist I know never experienced any of this at a large, Southern R1. As the saying goes, you get more flies with honey than vinegar.

I wouldn't respond to you either. What are you trying to say here? That the person you were responding to is a b*tch and that she brought the treatment on herself? (After all, it doesn't happen to other people!) I honestly can't think of any other interpretation of your (very patronizing) comment. That's part of what I was responding to.

Second, someone posts how they feel marginalized in their discipline, and your response is to further marginalize her by calling her a troll! Way to go. I'm sure that will encourage her to respond to you.

I don't have time to recount all the talks I've attended, conversations I've had, articles and books I've read on this subject, etc. But, for example, just last spring I was at a very interesting talk by the (male) chair of an elite physics program about the climate for women faculty and graduate students in his department. He investigated the issue after what he perceived as a minor incident. The gist of his talk? The climate was terrible, much, much worse than he would ever have dreamed before looking into the matter.

I'll just give you one reference that I do have handy. Try reading the chapter on "Issues of Gender" in the book Talking about Leaving and then get back to us. It is pretty old, though (1997), so maybe the situation has improved since then...

[cgfunmathguy]

Assuming, against my better judgment, that you're serious...

Yes, I am quite serious.

I wouldn't respond to you either. What are you trying to say here? That the person you were responding to is a b*tch and that she brought the treatment on herself? (After all, it doesn't happen to other people!) I honestly can't think of any other interpretation of your (very patronizing) comment. That's part of what I was responding to.

I was responding to an attitude that I read in her response, perhaps hastily and in an unwarranted fashion. If that is the case, I'll acknowledge it as such and offer my apologies. However, I wrote the post with a WOMAN looking over my shoulder, and she saw nothing wrong with it. Also, I was not trying to be patronizing. If I was wrong about you, I would expect you to respond.

Second, someone posts how they feel marginalized in their discipline, and your response is to further marginalize her by calling her a troll! Way to go. I'm sure that will encourage her to respond to you.

See above.

I don't have time to recount all the talks I've attended, conversations I've had, articles and books I've read on this subject, etc. But, for example, just last spring I was at a very interesting talk by the (male) chair of an elite physics program about the climate for women faculty and graduate students in his department. He investigated the issue after what he perceived as a minor incident. The gist of his talk? The climate was terrible, much, much worse than he would ever have dreamed before looking into the matter.

I'm not saying that the wrongful sexual discrimination does not happen. It does. Often, it is not deliberate. Seeing deliberate discrimination where there may not be anything intentional is a good way to end up marginalized.

Prof 1: "Gee, Betty seems to be in one of her moods today."

Prof 2: "Yeah, she's probably still mad at me about ___. Guess I'll wait to tell her about ____."

By the time Prof 2 thinks he can talk to Betty, the deadline is passed, or the event has happened. Then, she's mad about not being informed of the event. There is not any deliberate discrimination here. However, Betty feels she's being left out. Hence the comment "you get more flies with honey than vinegar."

I also tend to find that women who think they were wronged once (and I'm not saying they weren't) tend to never see improvement. Every day is as bad as it was 30 years ago when the discrimination was deliberate. The two women at my grad school who were tt faculty (8% of the tt faculty vice the 4% mathperson quoted at top-rated schools) were treated well, included in everything, and made a point to tell undergrad and grad students that what looks like discrimination may very well be unintentional. In fact, the one made a point of that in a friendly discussion with me.

Again, if I'm wrong about mathperson, she is more than welcome to come on here and tell me so. I will then apologize. She is marginalized only if she allows herself to be.

[high_energy_photons]

It is both sad that discrimination still occurs today and that there are so many unable to see it.  I really wish that there were no issues of discrimination, and I wish that the issues brought up by mathperson did not resonate with my own experiences.  Some of my own experiences have been overt, such as an instructor that told me that I could not do math because of my gender, even though I was the top student in his class.

Others have been subtle in comparison, such as the advisor that suggested maybe I should not go to graduate school, since graduate school is "really hard".  He spoke like you would to a child trying to do an impossible task.  I was the top student in my undergraduate program, and he was advising male students that barely made the minimums to apply to graduate school.

There are more stories, but that's the past that I have overcome.  What matters is that people realize that there are still sexists out there, attempting to discourage women in many areas.  Most are not as obvious as the ones I mentioned.  Some create environments where it is difficult to work or study, but it is important to recognize the problem and correct it.  It is also important to refrain from blaming victims of discrimination.  Some may be very bitter and sound harsh or unrealistic to others who have not had similar experiences, but that does not mean you should attack them.

Back to the original question:
Some all-male departments or groups are sexist, but some are simply male due to chance.  It is not always easy to tell the difference.  In my field, smaller departments are often all-male, and I've seen some that make it easy to tell how bad they can be.  Some also make it clear how welcoming they can be to anyone, no matter who they are.  It doesn't hurt to apply and see how they treat you at an interview.

Whatever you do, just try not to judge someone based on their gender.  That applies to applicants and SC's.  There's enough other stuff to look at to leave that alone.

[cgfunmathguy]

I agree that it is sad that wrongful discrimination still occurs, and I find it humorous (I think) that people assume I (as a white male) have never experienced it. In fact, I have experienced it in three very different situations--once in the navy (where I sat through more "sensitivity training" than any teacher ever gets), once in an all-female department (in my first job as a junior-high math teacher), and once in a discussion with an African-American (whom I still consider a friend). In the first, it was blatantly intentional, while the second situation was one of omission and the third was unintentional. So, I know whereof I speak.

Also, I use my observations of the people around me to make generalizations. It is probably not the most correct way to do it, but I find that the generalizations usually transfer between situations. Not always, but usually.

HEP, congratulations on your perseverance and success. And you are right: there is way too much other stuff to help make a decision.

[anthroid]

I agree that it is sad that wrongful discrimination still occurs, and I find it humorous (I think) that people assume I (as a white male) have never experienced it. In fact, I have experienced it in three very different situations--once in the navy (where I sat through more "sensitivity training" than any teacher ever gets), once in an all-female department (in my first job as a junior-high math teacher), and once in a discussion with an African-American (whom I still consider a friend). In the first, it was blatantly intentional, while the second situation was one of omission and the third was unintentional. So, I know whereof I speak.

Also, I use my observations of the people around me to make generalizations. It is probably not the most correct way to do it, but I find that the generalizations usually transfer between situations. Not always, but usually.

HEP, congratulations on your perseverance and success. And you are right: there is way too much other stuff to help make a decision.

How is anything you've listed discrimination?  You were subject to diversity training in the Navy because the military, as one of the few fully integrated institutions in American life, values its various constituencies and insists on respect for all.  You had a job in the second example; no discrimination there.  Your African-American friend did what exactly to discriminate against you?  Refused to rent you an apartment?  Paid you wages lower than all of hu's African-American employees? 

Apparently the sensitivity training didn't take. 

[cgfunmathguy]

How is anything you've listed discrimination?  You were subject to diversity training in the Navy because the military, as one of the few fully integrated institutions in American life, values its various constituencies and insists on respect for all.  You had a job in the second example; no discrimination there.  Your African-American friend did what exactly to discriminate against you?  Refused to rent you an apartment?  Paid you wages lower than all of hu's African-American employees? 

Apparently the sensitivity training didn't take. 

You don't even know me; so, how the h*** could you tell if the training "took" or not?

I listed the situations, not the acts, of the discrimination. My point was that perceived discrimination occurs in many situations. Sometimes, it is deliberate, and many times, it is not. However, we have "sensitized" everyone to believe that all perceived acts of discrimination are deliberate and should be dealt with harshly. In fact, the deliberate acts of discrimination are very rare. I'm not saying they don't happen, just that they are rare. Most perceived acts of discrimination are unintentional and should be treated as opportunities for education, not comdemnation. Unfortunately, that's not how things tend to be handled.

Due to the sensitivity training in the military, I was very aware of acts that could be perceived as discrimination but were not deliberate. As for my African-American friend, he made an assumption during a conversation that I wouldn't understand a situation he was describing. When I finished the description for him and its consequences, he was stunned. He figured that I wouldn't know about the situation because I was white. I then turned the tables and described a situation in which few African-Americans find themselves. In the middle of my description, I asked him what he would say if I now said "but you wouldn't really understand". He admitted that he would be angry and probably call me a bigot. "Exactly." He got the point loud and clear. It wasn't deliberate discrimination, and we both understood that. However, it could be perceived to be discrimination. He stopped looking so hard to see discrimination everywhere, and I continued to make sure I did my best not be perceived as engaging in discrimination.

[fym22]

Your posting is one of the most racist and sexist ones I think I've ever seen on these forums.

Let's see if I've got this right. If a department is all male---and especially all WHITE male---then the department is academically deficient?  Really?

I noticed in none of your examples did you malign an all female department or an all black department.

Apparently, you have a real problem with white males in position of authority.

I frankly find that appalling and disgusting...

[dr_strangelove]

However, we have "sensitized" everyone to believe that all perceived acts of discrimination are deliberate and should be dealt with harshly. In fact, the deliberate acts of discrimination are very rare. I'm not saying they don't happen, just that they are rare. Most perceived acts of discrimination are unintentional and should be treated as opportunities for education, not comdemnation. Unfortunately, that's not how things tend to be handled.

I wasn't going to respond to this anymore, but I just have to say one thing here.

No, everyone hasn't been "sensitized" to believe that all "perceived" acts of discrimination are deliberate. As far as I can tell, you're the only one in this thread who has focused on "deliberate" discrimination. It certainly never occurred to me that your cluelessness was deliberate, for example, and I hope nothing I wrote implied otherwise.

[anthroid]

Discrimation consists of activites that openly and clearly harm an actual person. Nothing described by our dear friend cgfunmathguy (I'm not having any fun here with mathguy) constitutes discrimination.  Discrimination is an action, not an attitude.  The attitude is bigotry.  People who come from historically oppressed populations, such as women, African-Americans, Latinos/Latinas, etc., are not in a position to discriminate against anyone, generally speaking.  We rarely have the power to deny white men jobs, apartments, bank accounts, mortgages, insurance policies, reasonably-priced loans, cars, etc., etc., etc.  White men are rarely raped by members of historically oppressed populations.  The fact of the matter is that white guys pretty much control the United States.  Take a look at who controls American and multinational corporations.

So you were uncomfortable, mathguy.  So what?  Welcome to the world the vast majority of us have occupied for the bulk of American history.  I am unsympathetic.