Two things piqued my thoughts recently regarding my chosen profession. One is sexism in assigned readings in the study of international relations (interesting blog piece here that started me thinking and looking at my syllabi). The other was that APSA did not have insurance coverage that allowed babies in the annual convention exhibition room.
I do not consider myself to be sexist about academic work. Based on my judgment, 6 out of the top 10 students I have worked with were females at the undergraduate level. Based on those faculty members I was around as an undergraduate and graduate I have a limited sample, but anecdotally the female faculty I worked with were on par with the male faculty I worked with during the same time periods, which is to say some were fantastic, most average, and some, well some... I also had several female classmates as an undergraduate who were fantastic students and several female members of my grad school cohort who were great and several who were, well they were, and again the same could be said of all of the male classmates and grad school cohort members. I have been accused of being sexist because of my belief that some careers are meant for men to fill--I do not believe women should serve in special operations and combat arms areas of the military (go ahead an hate me for saying so if you want, but I have a right to my opinion--and it may stink also, educated though it may be). I have never and will never feel that academia is one of those areas where females should not find fulfilling careers--why, because women are just a smart or smarter than men and just as capable or often better capable than men when it comes to use of analytical thoughts. Which is why I had no surprises when looking at my bookshelf and looking at the readings I required of my students and finding that just shy of 50% of what I have read and/or am requiring my students to read was written by women.
For my two cents, the valid question involved in the issue of sexism in academic study of international relations is on the publishing side of the equation. Does the fact that male publications outnumber female publications create the situation where more male written scholarship appears in our syllabi represent sexism on the part of the syllabi authors or some degree of potential sexism in the editorial and review staff of journals and academic material publishers? As a reviewer I do not know the name of the author or authors who wrote the work I am reviewing. Can I guess, on a rare occasion I can guess the author(s) based on writing style and thematic content. But, the editors at the journals and the presses know. So the question of sexism may or may not be as validly aimed at the writers of syllabi as at the publishers.
On to the baby scandal at APSA. Apparently babies were turned away at the exhibition hall at APSA. Two reasons, one stupid, the other stupider were mentioned by the blogs I have read about the subject. One, only properly credentialed conference attendees are allowed into the exhibition hall (we would not want spouses and kids looking at books, coffee urns, meetings with editors, etc.). Two, APSA did not have the proper insurance to cover kids in the exhibition hall. You decide which is stupid and which is stupider. APSA was, for my two cents, being cheap and opted for a lower level of insurance coverage for the conference that did not cover kids in the exhibition hall. I will not tell you what I think about kids being at conferences as my opinion on the matter is worth no more or no less than anyone other opinion on the matter. Ok, I will tell you, I have taken my kids with me to conferences, but never to the exhibition hall or to professional activities at the conference (they and their mother or they by themselves were capable of staying in the room or engaging in other vacation type activities while I worked). So I really do not have an opinion as I have never been in the position of taking a child requiring adult supervision at all times to a conference and thus have never really thought about the issue until reading about it this week.
I do not consider myself to be sexist about academic work. Based on my judgment, 6 out of the top 10 students I have worked with were females at the undergraduate level. Based on those faculty members I was around as an undergraduate and graduate I have a limited sample, but anecdotally the female faculty I worked with were on par with the male faculty I worked with during the same time periods, which is to say some were fantastic, most average, and some, well some... I also had several female classmates as an undergraduate who were fantastic students and several female members of my grad school cohort who were great and several who were, well they were, and again the same could be said of all of the male classmates and grad school cohort members. I have been accused of being sexist because of my belief that some careers are meant for men to fill--I do not believe women should serve in special operations and combat arms areas of the military (go ahead an hate me for saying so if you want, but I have a right to my opinion--and it may stink also, educated though it may be). I have never and will never feel that academia is one of those areas where females should not find fulfilling careers--why, because women are just a smart or smarter than men and just as capable or often better capable than men when it comes to use of analytical thoughts. Which is why I had no surprises when looking at my bookshelf and looking at the readings I required of my students and finding that just shy of 50% of what I have read and/or am requiring my students to read was written by women.
For my two cents, the valid question involved in the issue of sexism in academic study of international relations is on the publishing side of the equation. Does the fact that male publications outnumber female publications create the situation where more male written scholarship appears in our syllabi represent sexism on the part of the syllabi authors or some degree of potential sexism in the editorial and review staff of journals and academic material publishers? As a reviewer I do not know the name of the author or authors who wrote the work I am reviewing. Can I guess, on a rare occasion I can guess the author(s) based on writing style and thematic content. But, the editors at the journals and the presses know. So the question of sexism may or may not be as validly aimed at the writers of syllabi as at the publishers.
On to the baby scandal at APSA. Apparently babies were turned away at the exhibition hall at APSA. Two reasons, one stupid, the other stupider were mentioned by the blogs I have read about the subject. One, only properly credentialed conference attendees are allowed into the exhibition hall (we would not want spouses and kids looking at books, coffee urns, meetings with editors, etc.). Two, APSA did not have the proper insurance to cover kids in the exhibition hall. You decide which is stupid and which is stupider. APSA was, for my two cents, being cheap and opted for a lower level of insurance coverage for the conference that did not cover kids in the exhibition hall. I will not tell you what I think about kids being at conferences as my opinion on the matter is worth no more or no less than anyone other opinion on the matter. Ok, I will tell you, I have taken my kids with me to conferences, but never to the exhibition hall or to professional activities at the conference (they and their mother or they by themselves were capable of staying in the room or engaging in other vacation type activities while I worked). So I really do not have an opinion as I have never been in the position of taking a child requiring adult supervision at all times to a conference and thus have never really thought about the issue until reading about it this week.
No comments:
Post a Comment