I. Forgotten successes
Women have been involved in the development of science since ancient times, but their participation was not always perceived. In the following part of the article will try to explain the under-appreciated and at the same time priceless position of women standing beside their husbands, promoters and fellow researchers. Women occupy only the position of assistants, so who would want to document in the discovery a secretary or housekeeper of scientist? Ridiculous, is not it? Thus, women were not appreciated for their participation in the study because they were taken only as a minor help. I will present an outline of a few selected (of a wide range) scientist and researchers. I want to only present occurring phenomenon and to highlight its existence and importance
Jocelyn Bell Burnell, a British astrophysicist, as a PhD student working under the direction of Antony Hewish. Jocelyn Bell first observed pulsars – the type of neutron star. In the 1974 for this discovery Hewish and Martin Ryle received the Nobel Prize in physics. Omission Jocelyn Bell in the Nobel Prize is considered to be one of the most controversial decisions in the history of Nobel Prize.
Another woman remaining in the shadow of a man, this time in the shadow of her husband is Esther Lederberg, a microbiologist, immunologist and geneticist. She worked on the bacteria genetics. Along with her husband dealt the work on replica planting, but Joshua Lederberg shared the success of Nobel Prize with George Beadle and Edward Tatum.
Lise Meither, Austrian nuclear physicist, the first years of working for free, as a volunteer at the side of the chemist Otto Hahn to the Institute in Berlin had to enter through the back door. At that time women were not allowed to study or engage in scholarly activities. There were also not allowed to participate in the classrooms and laboratories. In 1909 they co-discovered the phenomenon of radioactive recoil, and in subsequent years, many of radioactive nuclides. In 1944, Otto Hahn was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, Lise Meitner was omitted, not taken into account the workload.
When Maria Sklodowska-Curie, got the first Nobel Prize, has been written about it, she is «a devoted colleague of her husband», «that helps him bravely», that «feeds into the sacred fire, whenever she saw that dims» and that Mr. Curie «of gallantry shared with his wife honor of his discovery.» Because she could not achieve alone in the study. She was a woman.
In the similar situation were also other women : Chien-Shiung Wu which participated in the development of the atom bomb, Rosalind Franklin which discovered helical structure of DNA. Harvard University refused to give the title of Doctor to Mary Calkins Whinton, even that she fulfill all the conditions for doing so.
Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick in 2013 examined more than a thousand scientific articles from the years 1991 to 2005. The analysis showed that scientists prefer cite the work of men than women. Subsequently, in 2012, two researchers from Radboud University Nijmegen showed that in the Netherlands, gender has an impact on the evaluation of candidates for professors. That situation has been observed also in Italy and the USA.
The phenomenon referred here, got even the own name, which indicates that these cases are not only erroneous omission of women, but gender plays an important role in science and the pursuit of career success. Matilda effect, noticed by Margaret Rossiter in 1993, named this phenomenon after the American activist fighting for the rights of women, Matilda Gage, the first in the late nineteenth century, drew attention to the discrimination of women in scientific achievements.
In the book «Athena Unbound: The advancement of women in science and technology» Henry Etzkowitz, Carol and Brian Uzzi Kemelgor argue that «women to start their careers and achieve success, meet on their way a series of obstacles related with gender, which still ongoing, In spite of recent progress. «(free translation)
What is the reason for the low participation of women in modern science? How much time we need to break out of the stereotypes network? Let us continue this subject in the following second part related to the position of women in science and their image in the eyes of society and great thinkers.
II. The vicious circle
What influenced on the image of women and their place in the modern world? What and/or who led to the current state of what we call discrimination against women in areas of academia, work and study?
Image of a woman in the eyes of thinkers, of course, was not homogeneous, but you must remember that their phrase have often a significant impact on the general views of the world. In the follow part I quote a few subjectively selected, and at the same time favorite, quotes.
“Just as it sometimes happens that deformed offspring are produced by deformed parents, and sometimes not, so the offspring produced by a female are sometimes female, sometimes not, but male, because the female is as it were a deformed male.” ;
“A woman is worse than being a man, physically, morally and intellectually” -Aristotle (Generation of Animals, 1943)
“Men are by nature merely indifferent to one another; but women are by nature enemies” –Schopenhauer («On Women» 1970)
“God created woman. And boredom did indeed cease from that moment — but many other things ceased as well! Woman was God’s second mistake.” Nietzsche (The antichrist 1888)
“In the most intelligent races, there are a large number of women whose brains are closer in size to those of gorillas than to the most developed male brains. This inferiority is so obvious that no one can contest it for a moment”;
“Without doubt, there exist some distinguished women, very superior to the average man, but they are as exceptional as the birth of any monstrosity, as for example of a gorilla with two heads” ;
“A desire to give them the same education, and to propose the same goals for them, is a dangerous chimera.” – Gustave le Bon (1879)
For a long time there was the belief that a woman is not equal to man in the field of science and politics, and should only take care of the offspring and her husband. For this reason a woman do not have access to education, could not take part in making decisions process about the country’s policy or provide to the public.
In France, the word «student»(female) (une etudiante) meant «student’s lover» and so treated young women residing in the university district. Sorbonne began accepting women in 1867, so 610 years after it was created. However, for French women was very difficult to get to school because of the existing beliefs about the «role of women», or lack of proper education. In France, from 1880 the girls could attend school. Still, the curriculum of boys and girls was very different. Boys learned in high schools physics and biology, Latin and Greek, the knowledge of which was required for matriculation exams allow access to higher education. Girls in the newly created schools participated mainly in practical classes and prepared to drive home. After only 57 years female’s high school adopted the same curriculum.
Thus, scarcely in the twentieth century, most universities stopped accepting only men in the group of students. Until then, women were excluded from academic education. By mid-nineteenth century, the dominant view was that the cause of lower participation of women in science are the biological and psychological characteristics (biological determinism), which had caused them less able to deal with scientific activities.
Currently prevailing view, that the primary causes are social, cultural and religion (cultural determinism), which in many ways reduce (to women) dealing with scientific activities and achieving success in this area.
It is also worth to mention again the theory of Pier Bourdieu about symbolic power. That invisible force, which purpose to influence the upper classes on the lower classes( subordinated); has an internal stigma on the society and on the needs and intentions of people. Let’s look at an interesting example of symbolic power visible in the relationship between the sexes:
Think, most women want a man higher, stronger, with better social position and recognizes mindlessly that finding that partner just is in their personal interest, while this system places them in a subordinate position to this particular man (going on this road, men in general) and this situation is more in the interest of man. It is a simple and classic example of symbolic power. Women have such an idea as a result of the impact of a culture of male dominance.
Thus, closes the vicious circle…
Joanna H Królik
Tecnoreflexiva 