And it wouldn't hurt to put on some make-up, either.

[astra_nomer]

ayekamn has a great post about a recent study's findings on why women leave science. To quote from the article, "The reported contributing factors to this disparity fall into two categories: family responsibilities and self-confidence."

As ayekamn notes, there's no mention of institutional barriers that block women - the old boys' network, biased hiring practices, or even outright hostility to women in the workplace. Maybe that all falls under the category of "lack of self-confidence," as if all we had to do was fix the women and all would be well with the world. Well, I have news for you: all the self-confidence in the world isn't going to help you if you're still constantly judged as being less competent simply because you lack the smallest chromosome in the human genome.

Comments

[dcltdw]

That report is rather bizarre: Because women are more affected by family responsibilities, help during the transition from postdoc to tenured faculty — such as affordable, high-quality child care or the possibility to work more flexible hours — may encourage more women to stay in academic research, the study found.

"More affected"? Eh? Unless they're talking about the time being pregnant, how do they get to the assumption of more affected?

I feel like the report says "since 1+1=5, women should...".

I liked the original poster's comment to the effect of (I'm paraphrasing) "maybe women are just more realistic about their opportunities". *snerk* "No, dumbass, I wasn't rating myself; I was rating the f'ed-up system I'm entering."