On retrospect, I realize that at USC, almost all of my friends are women. This is true in both music and physics departments that I call home. When I first heard about the low statistics of women in physics, I didn’t believe them. If I made a list of women physicists who have inspired me, I couldn’t stop. Perhaps on a more personal note, I find that the book (and movie) by Carl Sagan “Contact” was the first story to provide me a role model in physics, and it featured a female physicist. Last semester, Dr. Johnson brought over Dr. Hewett to give an illuminated talk, and I still look back at her as an example of the kind of physicist I would like to become. At least in my experience, women have had a significantly larger role than men in my perspectives of physicists.

Now that I know that this is not the case for the majority of my colleagues, I’m somewhat appalled. Maybe it’s because I was raised after the civil rights movements, but I can’t believe I live in such a biased society. When Sheila Tobias listed off the dates when critical laws were made to equate women in our society I was shocked: it was only 30 years ago when the environment was so different! And I admit that I feel a lot shame that I have ventured into a field that is so unwelcoming to female colleagues.

But luckily now that I see the problem I can change my environment. Sheila Tobias’ suggestion of providing a gender equality group to help people who are unfairly treated is duly noted. It is brilliantly clear to me that I must take responsibility in cultivating a welcoming environment to all people wherever I follow my studies.

All I can say is that I am amazed by the work Katie and Amy did, and I am proud to be part of a department that bore the Women in Physics Conference 2006.

Working in the same lab, at the same level, as my wife for the past decade has given us a fair amount of anecdotal evidence for this. I offer here one case as an example.

you are exactly making the argument Lubos made already
> The more the two fields are dominated by men, the more enticing the chance of finding additional talent among women.

“Martin Luther King was alright. Still, I feel that the modern nations and ethnic groups in 2006 need slightly different leaders.”

He goes onto tell a somewhat irrelevant story about Czechoslovakia suggesting that groups of people display maturity by passively accepting the superiority of others.

It is reminiscent of the comment by the politician who suggested that women being raped just try to lie back and enjoy it.

Elliot

-Arun

Sami #96: As #98 already said – you are dead-on.

For all you women scientists out there who have experienced raising a point in a discussion only to have it ignored, then brought up again by a man who then gains the credit – say something, don’t just sit there and take it. My standard comeback is to smile and say in a calm voice, `Why, John, that’s what I just said. Thanks for reintroducing my idea.’ Works everytime and is non-confrontational.

a) Insider info about work-related opportunities brought up by SOME male profs only to the male students they bond with over beer and/ or sports. Somehow no one relays the info to those not present.

As one of the organizers of this conference, one of my greatest hopes is that the participants will share the information and encouragement that they received this weekend with their peers (both male and female). In fact, we ended the event with a breif discussion of where we can go from here. Many participants were eager to share with their classmates what they had learned about applying to grad school. (For those who are interested, we plan to have the power point slides from all the talks available on our website within a week: http://physics.usc.edu/~wiphys/conference.html)

I am not a professional scientist by trade. However in the business world I can tell you the discrimination against women and minorities can be well below the radar. A casual comment by one white male to another in the mens room etc. Stuff like that happens all the time despite very strict HR policies. I can’t imagine that Academia is any more pure when it comes to this type of stuff.

Elliot

> so maybe we could try a little harder to apply the scientific method in diagnosing the problem?

the point of LM (and to some extent I agree) is that every time the result is different from what people like to hear, it is ignored.

#88, #106: I believe M has an important point here, that the evidence for discrimination seems to be mainly anecdotal. If we stand back and look at it like we would look at a physics paper, would we consider it fit for publication? The few attempts at serious statistical analysis and model building which have been referred to here (La Griffe du Lion, Kanazawa) suggest that the primary cause of the observed disparity in representation may have little to do with discrimination; and as noted in #85, the MIT study referred to by Smolin, while too small to qualify as conclusive either way, also lends indirect support to this view.

None of this does in any way imply that discrimination does not occur, that it may not be the decisive factor in individual cases, that it is not vile or that it should not be stamped out where it turns up. Of course it should. But if the primary causes of low female participation in physics are other than discrimination, we run an obvious risk of barking up the wrong tree. Who’s served by that?

Most people contributing to this discussion are supposed to be very serious-minded scientific types, so maybe we could try a little harder to apply the scientific method in diagnosing the problem?

Lets see if it is only pure science or politics that affects your judgement.

Do you believe that the current (Bush Regime) approach to Nuclear Missle Defense, with the United States spending billions of dollars to shoot down incoming missles in flight discriminating between the real target based on infrared signitures is a wise expenditure of U. S. taxpayer dollars?