Guidelines for Gender Equality Programmes in Science - GeNet

a feeling of “gender inauthenticity”, to be
listed among the reasons for the leaky
pipeline phenomenon (Faulkner, 2007).
Stereotypes of women, and also
stereotyped images of science and “the
scientist” play a certain role in discouraging
young women. Some widespread representations
can be pointed out, reflecting
features that are typically presented as an
unchangeable and masculine model of doing
science, as opposed to an equally
stereotyped “feminine model” (Etzkowitz,
K e m e l g o r, Neuschatz, & Uzzi, 1994;
European Commission, 2000; Thielen, 2002;
Equal Opportunity Commission, 2002):
– The idea that science is a perfectly
rational activity, dominated by objective
and purely logical procedures, and
therefore not completely compatible with
the assumed attitude of women as more
oriented to the emotional, and preferring
perspectives of analysis that privilege
subjectivity (Keller, 1991; Wa j c m a n ,
1995);
– The idea that research is a very
demanding activity that has to be
performed on a full time basis and, for this
reason, is incompatible with the activities,
assumed to be as demanding, of family
care.
– The idea that scientific and technological
research is a sector where strong
competition is required, and therefore
researchers have to be very aggressive,
as men would typically be.
Male knowledge
It is not only a matter of image. Feminist
studies have also analysed the influence of
gender on our conceptions of knowledge,
bringing to light the costs of the exclusion of
women and other under-represented groups
from full participation in science (Harding,
1998 and 1986; Haraway, 1991).
It has been for instance demonstrated how
political and social interests, as well as
personal prejudices, have an impact on the
production of scientific knowledge, deeply
a ffecting research priorities, contents and
methods (Longino, 1990). G e n d e r e d
assumptions may in fact influence:
– How scientists decide upon the priorities
of scientific research;
– Which questions are posed with respect to
a given subject;
– Which explanatory and theoretical
contexts are used;
– Which methods are applied;
– Which data are considered valid or not
valid;
– How data are interpreted;
– How data are compared to those of other
studies;
– Which conclusions are drawn from
analyses of scientific data;
– Which suggestions are formulated for
future studies.
So it may happen that, in a gender-unaware
male-dominated environment, medical research
only or mainly studies male subjects and later
extends its results to women (in some cases
with negative consequences for women’s
health); economic research only addresses
typical male situations; technological innovation
only considers male preferences or attitudes,
and so on.
Being unaware of the gendered assumptions
that are the basis of scientific and innovation
processes, besides limiting science itself and
its relevance to society, constitutes one of the
most serious, yet invisible impediments f o r
women in science. Women are led either to
feel that they are not adequate as scientists, or
that important issues are ignored or poorly
addressed in research.
2.3. Scientific leadership: missing
women
The under-representation of women
Despite their increased and ever more
qualified participation in most S&T sectors,
women are severely under-represented in
apical and decision-making positions. We
already presented in graph 2 the scissors
30