Soccer is very much like playing science. Let me explain how this analogy came about.
Yesterday I went for a cafe with the only other female postdoc in the department, LookALike. I have named her LookALike because an undergraduate researcher mistook her for me. She has olive-coloured skin, dark, square glasses, dark-brown shoulder length hair, and is thin.
But that is where the similarity ends. She is Caucasian and I am not. Funny though, how there are only two female postdocs and we look similar. Oh well my old Master's supervisor (who eventually became a PhD co-supervisor) always used to mistake me for this blonde-haired, blue-eyed female PhD student in our lab. Yeah, 'cuz I look so much like her Aspergers.
Anyway, LookALike and I got to talking and we actually had quite bit in common. For one thing we both played soccer competitively, although she played it much longer than I did. She played into her college years, and while a freshman played with such pioneer women like Brandi Chastain. Cool, huh.
Of course the conversation turned to a discussion about the future and whether or not we wanted academic positions, if we did, did we see ourselves at a LargeUniversity or a SmallUniversity?
And this is where the soccer analogy came in.
On the soccer field, although she played centre-forward, she really loved the elegance of setting up quality shots, instead of actually making the goals. When she played soccer she never had that competitive edge that drove her to take shots on net. This was exactly how she felt about the scientific process, she really enjoyed the collaborative process of science, brainstorming about questions, setting up the projects, etc but didn't get enjoyment from making a goal, i.e. getting a publication or writing and getting grants. At a LargeUniversity, the emphasis is on the goal not the set-up shot.
For me, the memory of soccer is conflicted.
I played soccer competitively for 10 years and I loved the intensity of the sport and the competition. We had won THE game, which would enable our team to represent BeautifulWater in the LandofBigTrees. But I couldn't do it. I couldn't play anymore.
Why you ask? Well so did my coach, AirBritish. In fact, he thought my parents didn't want me to play because it interfered with my studies, so he paid a visit.
Pleading with my dad, he said that the team would hire a private tutor and that he, personally, would make sure I worked on my studies. My dad told AirBritish that he and my mom had no problem with soccer. That it was I who had made the decision not to play. AirBritish asked my dad why. My dad, said to AirBritish, you'll have to ask her yourself.
(I could hear the whole conversation because I was hiding at the top of the stairs. At this point my 18 year old self was so incredibly mortified.)
The next thing I knew I was downstairs standing in front of my coach. The conversation went something like this:
AirBritish: I don't get it - why do you want to quit?
Me: (shrug of the shoulder)
AirBritish: You dunno?
Dad: Tell him the reason.
Me: Daaad.
AirBritish: What? What's the reason?
Me: I can't.
Dad: You owe him that much at least.
Me: (mumble mumble)
AirBritish: I can't hear you.
Me: My thighs are getting too big. I don't want to play because my thighs are getting too big.
AirBritish: Your thighs aren't that big. There are girls on the team with bigger thighs than you.
(Oh, the humiliation grows. And AirBritish that's no way to comfort an 18-year old who thinks her thighs are HUGE.)
I know, it seems silly now. But at the time the whole Beauty Myth had me, metaphorically, by the thighs.
So what does this whole story have to do with science?
I think it underscores the inner conflict I have about playing the game of science. I admit I enjoy the intensity and sometimes I think if it weren't for HippieHusband, I'd probably be doing science all the time. But I wonder if another part of me is holding back largely because I don't think I can or should do it. In other words I don't want my science *thighs* to get to big.
Well, it wouldn't look nice on a good girl ;)
-
I just finished reading an engaging article in The New Yorker, called " The Truth Wears Off. " The author Jonah Lehrer talks abou... -
[These ideas on Slow Science are a work-in-progress a first draft of sorts. With some help from those of you who read this post, via a chal... -
Okay peeps, I know that many of you are lurkers at this website (according to the visits from the sitemeter stats). But I want you to come ...
7 comments:
I have heard so many women tell themselves that they just want to have a supportive, not a leadership role, and honestly I think it is total bullshit. We, as women, as socialized to not have ambition. If we do have ambition, we are villified (i.e. Hillary Clinton). However, I think it is a very human desire to lead and have power. I don't think women don't want that. I think we are told by men we don't want that.
I once read a wise-saying that I liked "If what you are doing doesn't scare the hell out of you, it is not worthy of you." Meaning- sometimes you need to follow that fear.
Also, those qualities that Look-a-Like mentions (colloboration, brainstorming, setting up projects) sounds like the description of a great research professor at a MRU. That professor needs to come up with ideas, inspire her students, design projects, and then let the students carry them out. You can get your students to write the papers and you edit them- that helps them learn. I think look-a-like is selling herself short. Also, maybe she should consider industry, which highly values teamwork.
I am positive, without even knowing you, that you are capable of being a powerful force in chemistry.
By the way I love your "Beauty Myth" reference. I saw Naomi Wolfe speak not to long about about that book, and other political issues.
Something else that comes to me, while discussing this post with my feminist boyfriend, is that Look-A-Like (and me and you and all women) can change what a research professor looks like. We don't need to become the male professors we have been advised by- all of mine have been sorely lacking anyway. Look-A-like should allow herself to redefine the research professor role. I think that science is moving towards a much more collaborative future. Different disciplines are colloborating with each other all the time- that's where some really amazing innovation comes from. New institutes are always popping up- mixing disciplines like biology and nanotechnology to make small living machines and whatnot (just one example) Look-a-Like (and you) are very well the faces of the science of the future.
What has come before isn't necessarily what will lead us to our greatest future. The field of science needs to evolve and grow. It has been stuck in a white male paradigm that has really hindered progress. Women are restarting the evolutionary process.
Well, while science is stuck in a white male paradigm, the emphasis is still on papers and grants (goals). I also think it's slightly unfair to say that women are told by men that they can't have ambition. I think that some women don't want faculty jobs for many varied reasons (just like some men don't want them), and these aren't always cut and dried. Just because a woman with a PhD decides not to pursue a faculty/research job does not mean that she's letting the sisterhood down... Or so I keep telling myself : )
My soccer analogy was meant to help me think about how my (very) traditional and culturally specific upbringing has influenced my choices and my approach to science.
I think feministchemist is right thinking about the socialization process and how it influences how we think.
No woman, however, who makes ANY choice (either to stay in academia OR to pursue other avenues OR to be a mother) has let the sisterhood down.
It is the act of choice that matters.
After all, the early suffragettes fought and died for the right of women to make a *choice.*
BTW feministchemist, Thanks!
Awesome post.
I like the point feministchemist says about staying scared. I've heard that before but it bears repeating. I also like the idea about changing the face of science (so to speak).
@recovering academic, actually most women leave for the same reasons as men, but they leave earlier and in larger numbers because they experience more of it and earlier in their careers. Plus all the other bullshit men DON'T have to deal with.
I think if I were good at soccer, I'd want to make the goals. But your story about why you quit is sort of gut-wrenching, I think. Part of me wants to go back and scream at your parents for not knocking some sense and confidence into you. But that assumes they had some, and it's not entirely clear from your story that they really did.
But Girlpostdoc, I disagree with this so-called "choice." Check out this article from a couple of years ago: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=10659
One of the most interesting points is that the "choice" framing evolved out of the reproductive rights movement. But it's kind of a false choice. MOST women leave because they're miserable. They choose to leave because they decide not to put up with it. All that says is that the system is still fucked up, and we're not making any progress.
Post a Comment