“That’s Nice, Sweetie”

I’m sure I’m not the only one who has experienced this: I give my parents an update on how my projects are progressing in the lab, and they just nod and reply, “That’s nice, sweetie.” This essentially means, “Good for you but I really don’t know what you’re talking about, and it would take too long to try to understand.” No problem, I totally get it; scientific research by nature is very esoteric and uses a completely different language. All of us scientists know that what we are researching is extremely important and will one day improve society by discovering the laws of nature, saving lives by curing a disease, saving the world by protecting the environment, etc. (to put it mildly). And it only bothers some of us that non-scientists don’t understand why what we are researching is important.

But it does bother me to hear “That’s nice, sweetie,” and that should have been my first clue. The reality is that many other professions face this same conundrum: I have a lot of computer programming friends, but I have absolutely no idea what they do – something about coding and C++, but that’s about it. The difference is that my programming friends are well-aware of the fact that I wouldn’t understand what they do on a daily basis because I am not a programmer. More importantly, I’m not supposed to understand what they do – that’s why they have these jobs and I don’t, so there’s no need for me to worry because they know what they’re doing. Still more importantly, it really doesn’t bother any of them that I don’t understand what their jobs entail. And this is the major difference – why was I getting so frustrated knowing that others didn’t fully appreciate the advancements I was making in my field? Why did I need to have this validation? Was this really just my problem or was it their problem?

Then I decided to try something new and talk to non-scientists about other people’s research instead of mine. I interviewed other scientists and wrote articles about their recently published work and the progress they are making in their labs to help address disease diagnosis and other health-related issues. For some reason, this worked out so much better! Scientists and non-scientists alike commended me on my writing skills and specifically enjoyed reading about the research I was highlighting. “Why couldn’t you write something like this about your own research?” my parents asked. (Sigh.)

The lesson I learned is to continue to be passionate to get people to understand science research, but just try talking about someone else’s research so it’s not so personal. You know that you have spent hours slaving away in the lab, and you know the other researchers did, too, but it’s still more removed. And the other researchers will really appreciate that you took the time to highlight their work! We’re all in the same boat, so if nothing else, we can pay it forward and help out our fellow scientists.

If you’ve experienced the same burden of not being able to accept the fact that others do not understand the importance of scientific research – don’t worry, just go with it. Make this problem into a solution – turn it into something useful! You just need to find the right topic to write or talk about and the right audience. There’s no reason this could not turn into a career, either. There are many great forums, such as “Science Cafés,” for recruiting an audience and discussing important research with them. I’m also a member of a group on campus that organizes a series of talks at the public library to discuss current hot-topic science issues, so that the local community can better understand what the actual problems and solutions are for these issues (and ultimately be appropriately informed on these issues when deciding how to vote). We are discussing everything from hydrofracking to personalized genome sequencing, and there is always a large audience that is very enthusiastic and receptive to the talks!

So if you ever hear “That’s nice, sweetie” after describing your research, don’t get frustrated – just think, “Challenge accepted.”

Why It Doesn’t Help to Discuss “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All”

I must begin by saying that I have never had a “real job,” other than summer internships or other similar short-lived experiences during my time as an undergraduate and now graduate student. Being stuck in the infamous bubble of the “Ivory Tower” has undoubtedly kept me sheltered from the “real world.” However, I feel that I can still comment on the topic of women in the workplace, specifically women in academia. A few months ago, a study was published (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109) showing the results of a social experiment: when professors were sent identical applications for a laboratory manager position in their lab (the only difference being that half the professors received an application where the individual was male, and the other half received an application where the individual was female), it was shown that the professors (both male and female) were more likely to hire the male applicant and pay him more, even though the female applicant had the exact same qualifications. This paper has gotten much publicity because it was the first study to truly conduct a controlled social experiment where the only variable was gender, and the outcome was that there is evident gender bias in academia.

After “Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students” was published, I had the privilege of attending a panel discussion about the results of this study.  The lead author of the paper, Corinne Moss-Racusin, mentioned that she was surprised that there was so much criticism because many others have also published that there is gender bias in academia; this is certainly not a new concept, especially in the sciences, which is traditionally a male-dominated field. Additionally, Moss-Racusin said that now that we know this gender bias exists, it’s time that we do something about it, and that this discussion about what to do must include both genders in order to move forward. I couldn’t agree more.

There were some men in the audience (although some of the comments they made were confusing or not that helpful), but at least it wasn’t a situation in which we are just preaching to the choir. As an aside, I compared this scenario to another situation in which I attended a forum about careers outside of academia for women PhDs, which featured a few women panelists. I remember noticing that there was one guy present, and I thought, “You know what, good for him; he attended the discussion because he wanted to hear what these panelists have to say because they are smart, successful individuals who would have a lot of great advice.” (The same was not true, however, of the freshmen writing seminar I took in undergrad about women’s literature; there was one male student in our discussion group, but he didn’t last; he switched to another class after the first session. But hey, at least he signed up and went to one session.)

I think every woman knows that there is still gender bias, even if she has not experienced it herself, and there will probably always be some gender bias. Don’t get me wrong, though; I’m happy that I didn’t grow up in the 1950s, and women’s rights are certainly a very severe issue in a number of other countries compared to the US. Still, we should always strive for what we believe in, and we have the right to do so. It’s time to move forward and have the discussions that we really need to be having: gender bias exists, so what are we going to do about it?  

Anne-Marie Slaughter’s article in “The Atlantic,” titled “Why Women Still Can’t Have it All,” (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/)  has also gained much publicity/notoriety. Her article addressed the ever-present dilemma of having to choose between raising a family and having a productive career. Again, my life will never be as busy as hers has been, and I probably have not experienced anything in the “real world” compared to what she has gone through, but I feel that even the title of this article isn’t helping us move forward as a society. It’s not helpful to say that women can’t have it all, especially if you are a woman. Furthermore, it’s really not helpful to discuss whether or not women can have it all. If we want to be equal, then we have to just say that we are equal. Discussing whether or not women can have it all indicates that we are not equal to men because men would never have this type of discussion; a man would never bother to write this type of article about his gender. I’m guessing it’s also less likely for a man to say in a thank-you speech for a prestigious award that he couldn’t have gotten to where he is today without the support of his spouse, but a successful woman almost always has to say that the reason (or at least part of the reason) for her success is because her spouse was so supportive and helpful. If you want to thank your spouse, please do so, but otherwise let’s just be proud of our accomplishments, man or woman.

Slaughter is being considered to be the next President of Princeton, which is another hot topic; if she wants the job, then she will become very busy again, but I’ve gotten over my frustrations with her article and decided to say good for her; she is very talented, and I’m sure she will find a way to handle it, if that’s what she wants. Same with Hillary Clinton running for President; I couldn’t think of a better woman for the job, and it would be amazing if she does want to do it. However, we all heard about her fainting, and she has said in many interviews that she is looking forward to just relaxing and spending time with her family after finishing her term as Secretary of State, so if that’s what she wants to do, then good for her, too. (This is still more interesting than discussing Michelle Obama’s bangs. I love Michelle Obama; she is an amazing role model and has so much to offer to our country that talking about her bangs is insulting to her intelligence.)