Women in NAS, 2012
Dear friends of women in science,
The National Academy of Sciences has released the names of those elected for 2012. Twenty-six of the eighty-four new members elected were women this year. As you've seen, the overall percentage is about 10% for the NAS, and according to careful data analysis by AWIS, there have been a few years of noticeably low classes of women. But this year, women comprised 31% of those elected. Their names are: Susan C. Athey, Nancy Bonini, Susan L. Brantley, Robin M. Canup, Yuan Chang, Xinnian Dong, Patricia M. Dove, Carol S. Dweck, Susan Gelman, Rachel Green, Beatrice H. Hahn, Tina Henkin, Guinevere Kauffman, Barbara H. Liskov, Bonnie J. McCay, Sabeeha Merchant, Ann E. Nelson, Monica Olvera de la Cruz, Mary Power, Natasha V. Raikhel, Marcia J. Rieke, Yasuko Rikihisa, Gisela T. Storz, Ruth J. Williams, Melinda A. Zeder, and Xiaowei Zhuang. The Women in Academia Report covered the election (click here FMI about the fields of specialization of the newly elected members of NAS).
Okay, now I have to admit I have a mixture of feelings about this. I liked when the National Academy began a few years ago to elect more people each year, feeling that could lead to more women. When it didn't, I was not happy. But this big jump is puzzling. I'm sure all of the women elected are worthy. But having so many come in during 2012 will make people look sideways at this class. If they were spread evenly over the past few years, it would be much less noticeable and perhaps much more comfortable for them. And men have been complaining about pressure to elect women to NAS, so you can bet this class will take flak. Two different (male) Nobel laureates I've interviewed this spring have brought up the pressure to elect women to NAS without prompting by me, and said it was unfair. Both said they'd like to see more women elected, but did not appreciate pressure to do so. So, mixed feelings for me. What do you think?
cheers,
Laura
Hi FBP, Ricki, Marian, and Helen,
So the answer seems to be yes and yes. We shouldn't stop pushing for there to be more women selected for NAS, but when they get there, they can expect to be looked at sideways. Someday, we hope, they'll be treated like full members with no asterisks next to their name. It's sad that being a woman has the same effect as taking steroids if you're an athlete: people doubt your achievements. But we must keep asking for fairness, I have to agree.
cheers,
Laura
Even if it was spread out, with the backlash from their male colleagues, women would get glares at being appointed. Women deal with those attitudes every day, especially at that senior level. I doubt it will surprise or do more than irritate them:)
Laura,
I understand your concern but think we should push ahead to get more women recognized. I too have experienced the comments/sentiments that I got ahead because I was a woman; they are usually jealous whining. People tend to like, and associate with, those who are like them. This concept extends to male scientists. They, almost unconsciously, keep their community closed to those not like themselves.
As more women get recognition, I feel there will be a gradual move towards the acceptance that women belong in this elite community.
Marian
Hi Laura,
I think Female Biology Professor is correct. We can't stop the lack of respect or the whispering about women being elected "just because" they're women. But we know they couldn't be. Other women, indeed, would be picky and not vote for them if their presence there would be embarrassing. So, we have to just ignore the complaining and be proud of all these new women's achievements in science. They had the ovaries to keep on going in spite of all, and now they've been recognized. Viva!
Ricki
Hello Laura,
You remember what the women at MIT said about not getting respect even though they had done everything, discovered great things, published in top journals, even been elected to NAS? You can't really stop this sort of nonsense by holding back. Only going forward until there is equity will stop it.
FBP
