This morning Dr. Isis fluttered open her long-lashed eyes, rolled over and reached for the coffee Mr. Isis had lovingly left for her on the bedside table, and checked her email as she laid propped-up in bed. She found 42 new emails from her loyal worshipers notifying the domestic and laboratory goddess that the discussion of whether Dr. Isis is a bimbo, has merely adopted bimbo style, or is potentially going to start turning tricks in the laboratory (or, something like that) continues on the Propter Doc blog. I don't care to engage this any further because I feel as though I have said my piece. However, Dr. Isis's lovely fellow Science Blogger Zuska has written a beautiful post reminding us all who defines the role of women in science and why we might feel the need to snark at each other as women in order to feel accepted in science.
Figure 1: Dr. Isis is moving on.
However, there is one post that has arisen from this discussion that I would like to address. JaneB over at Now What Was I Doing?, who Dr. Isis enjoys and who has weighed in on the issue of Dr. Isis's extreme hotness, writes:
It is possible to read overt sexual display into most of the style issues discussed, from high heeled shoes (show off leg, make you walk with wiggle, make you walk like you're fragile and catchable) to lipstick (make mouth look swollen, moist and reddened... need say no more). And how female sexuality is used SO often as a way to push female intellect into the background - it triggers learnt and instinctual behaviours in men who are trying NOT to be biased, it clouds further the perceptions of the unenlightened... I can really see the purpose of the birkies-dungarees-cropped-hair feminists of a former era.
I'm a scientist and I'm not and never have been girly. Clothes are about environmental protection, decency, comfort, and should be clean, ironed if appropriate, and colour co-ordinated - hotness is kind of irrelevant at the work place. I don't go to work to look at 'hot bods' or be assessed for hotness. I DON'T want someone staring at my tits when I'm talking. I don't like getting comments on my 'sexy boots' from male colleagues when we're supposed to be meeting about science. I don't like having my hair stroked because it's 'so shiny' by people I only know professionally. All these things happen, even to someone with fairly drab taste, it's part of our imperfect, sexist environment.
I can really appreciate Jane's interpretation of the implications of "dressing girly" and her desire to be taken seriously by her male colleagues. Still, I think there are two issues that come from her statement that are important -- a woman's intent when she chooses to dress a certain way in academia and the way that she is treated when she chooses to dress that way.
For example, I love beautiful shoes and dresses and make-up. That does not necessarily mean that I am ornamenting myself in order to attract men or that I am trying to exude sexuality. It means that I find particular things to be attractive and they make me happy. We could debate for the next several hundred posts about whether what I chose is more or less appropriate than the jeans and sweatshirts that another woman chooses. But, this discussion is really foder for Feminism 101 (and Zuska discusses the issue in her latest post)-- is a woman who embraces "stereotypically feminine" dress a tool of the patriarchy while a woman who attires oppositely is a "man-hating feminazi?" "Eh," on both accounts. I dress in a way that pleases me (and, as a result, am totally hot) and see no reason why other women shouldn't do the same (and still be totally hot).
JaneB brings up the issue of particular garments and lab safety when she writes:
For labs, even if the heels chosen met safety guidelines (e.g. closed toe, non-slip, possible to kick off when chemical splashes on them, whatever the local situation demands), I would strongly recommend that people did not wear heels when they are standing for long periods because of the long-term damage they can do to even the most heel-familiar feet and lower legs.
This is simple common sense. When Dr. Isis is in an environment where her Naughty Monkeys and crushed velvet blazer are not appropriate, Dr. Isis sports scrubs and appropriate flat shoes. Surely, Dr. Isis does not advocate sacrificing personal safety in order to sport sequined teal shoes. Surely.
Figure 2: Dr. Isis's idea of personal protective equipment for the days she works at the hospital?
But, what really struck Dr. Isis about Jane's post was a remark she made with respect to her own attire. Jane writes:
I don't go to work to look at 'hot bods' or be assessed for hotness. I DON'T want someone staring at my tits when I'm talking. I don't like getting comments on my 'sexy boots' from male colleagues when we're supposed to be meeting about science. I don't like having my hair stroked because it's 'so shiny' by people I only know professionally.
I fear that these types of thoughts are more important in the current discussion than we're addressing (although, again, Zuska deals with some of these issues nicely. Have you read Zuska's post yet?) and are reflective of the wide-spread misogynism that makes so many female scientists redefine who they are against their will. Being ogled is never acceptable, being touched against one's will is never acceptable, and feeling as though one needs to alter who they are fundamentally is never acceptable. But, we've already discussed this here, here, here, and here and concluded, or so I thought, that treating a woman as a sexual object in the workplace is the exact opposite of hotness.
And this is the crux of what I meant when I said that we must be supportive of each other (a statement that made so many of you totally lose your shit). I don't have to think every woman I meet is a great scientist, I don't have to particularly care for her personality, and I don't have to choose to interact with her on a professional or social level. But, I do have to be willing to speak out on her behalf when I feel she is being treated unfairly because of how she chooses to express her gender. I have to be willing to advocate for her when she is being harassed or is being discriminated against unfairly because she has girl no-no parts instead of boy parts. And I have to be willing to continue to make the statment that her decision to procreate or remain childless is irrelevant in her ability to perform good science. So many of you have stated that you want to be able to judge an individual based on their merits and that you disagree with the formation of an all-girls club. The simple truth of the matter is that young female scientists stand on the shoulders of the women who came before us, but only precariously. We have been invited to sit at the table, but many of us are still asked to leave or are not allowed to fully join in the conversation. And if you choose to reproduce, you had better move your seat to the children's table. We can either wait for the invitation of equality to be extended, or we can set the tone that it is not acceptable judge a woman based her femininity. Personally, I vote for the latter.
Finally, a little bit of blog business. I have heard it rumored that I have cleaned up my act and refocused the seriousness of my blog as a result of my move to ScienceBlogs. When your blog is picked up by ScienceBlogs there is actually a 30 page contract that comes with it in which you promise to no longer say anything offensive, use any bad language, blog about your sexual organs, write about recipes, or ever question the scientific status quo. So, Dr. Isis totally sold out and made the switch in order to gain an extra 10 or 20 readers.
But I am sitting on two emails from readers too fantastic not to blog about, so tonight I will be back up to my old shennanigans as I post an edition of "Ask Dr. Isis." Also, I will be announcing the winner of the pair my Naughty Monkey shoes (and I love your craziness Sol, and would happily review your book, but you are not the winner).
Finally, two weeks ago Dr. Isis was directed to a lovely new blog written by a New York bartender with almost as much snark as the domestic and laboratory goddess herself. Go check out Behind the Stick and learn that asshattery is not unique to academia. Dr. Isis will be in New York next week with her brother and hopes to score herself a single malt from her new favorite barkeep.
Education & Careers
Medicine & Health
Comments
Dr. Isis, if you were to EVER clean up your act, I would stop reading.
Also, I would just like to say that it is frickin' lame that we are wasting even one iota of energy on a discussion of whether or not a woman who wears heels in the lab is A) a serious scientist, B) inviting ogling (a.k.a. asking for it), or C) dumb.
I don't know a single scientist that goes to work showing off her tits or ass. The straw man just isn't going to win this argument.
I don't understand why we have to pick sides based on the level of effort you put into your wardrobe or daily physical appearance is just not relevant.
Posted by: ScienceMama | November 14, 2008 7:33 PM
As the kids say, OMFG! I am in love with this blog. Welcome to the neighborhood--nice to have some hot tits around to class up the place, doncha know.
Also, can I borrow that sweater? Seriously.
Posted by: Signout | November 14, 2008 8:27 PM
Dr. Isis, if you were to EVER clean up your act, I would stop reading.
Also, I would just like to say that it is frickin' lame that we are wasting even one iota of energy on a discussion of whether or not a woman who wears heels in the lab is A) a serious scientist, B) inviting ogling (a.k.a. asking for it), or C) dumb.
I don't know a single scientist that goes to work showing off her tits or ass. The straw man just isn't going to win this argument.
I don't understand why we have to pick sides based on the level of effort you put into your wardrobe or daily physical appearance is just not relevant.
Thank you, ScienceMama. And, believe me I hear you sister. Unfortunately, the reason we have to keep having the discussion is because it keeps on being had. Part of the reason I starting writing as Dr. Isis is because I felt like I did not have female role models as a young scientist and I felt like I could make a contribution by writing as a wife and a mother and a scientist. I don't always have all the answers (although I'm hot even when I'm wrong) but I feel like some of these issues are important that they are worth being said. But, the point of my post is that you do not need to pick sides at all. At all. You can love your Danskos and still appreciate my Naughty Monkeys. Whatevs.
As the kids say, OMFG! I am in love with this blog. Welcome to the neighborhood--nice to have some hot tits around to class up the place, doncha know.
Also, can I borrow that sweater? Seriously.
Welcome to the blog, Signout. I hope you'll grab a chair, pour a glass of wine, and stay a bit. Feel free to borrow the sweater whenever you'd like.
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | November 14, 2008 8:59 PM
...
" ... there is actually a 30 page contract that comes with it in which you promise to no longer say anything offensive, use any bad language, blog about your sexual organs, write about recipes, or ever question the scientific status quo. "
Wait; I thought that was the Obama staff background questionnaire..?? Now I am really confused.
And what is up with these centered comments..?? We all know no one is 'balanced' here on scienceblogs..!! Or any of your whacked readers/commenters either..!!
...tom...
.
Posted by: ...tom... | November 14, 2008 9:40 PM
In case it wasn't clear, I was upset that the topic continues to be brought up, not that you spent energy defending yourself.
Now post some shoes, dear goddess!
Posted by: ScienceMama | November 14, 2008 10:36 PM
Dear Goddess read about the comments I left for you here on Zuska's site. Please do not change your blogging style just because you moved here. I would prefer you move back then. Good luck here. Kick PZ's butt. Not literally of course, with those shoes that could hurt. You could become as big as him.
Posted by: Danimal | November 15, 2008 12:21 AM
Well said on the definitions of supporting women. My frustration is this sudden expectation that you must be this perfect professional person all the time. The everything to everyone. Seriously if they don't like you don't freakin read..
Posted by: ScientistMother | November 15, 2008 1:15 AM
oh and the janeb link is not working
Posted by: ScientistMother | November 15, 2008 1:21 AM
Hi Isis and readers,
Sorry to perpetuate the discussion in a way, but I was a bit behind in the discussion, and wanted to comment. Things that came up had meshed with some thoughts I have been juggling around following three recent things:
a) some needling from a (skinny, glamorous) colleague (who can walk well in heels - and wears them in her lab...) about my 'dumpy schoolmistress look' and how that was setting a bad and offputting example for the younger women [note: I make no pretence of being a role model. I'm 40, greying, substantially overweight and never have been that interested in fashion and in 'pretty' things. I'm a single-woman-with-cat comfort-before-style trousers-and-cardigan-wearing scientist who is juggling depression and a large work-load, and buying pretty clothes and shoes doesn't do much for me. Buying new books, shiny notebooks and fancy pens, however... add some erudite conversation and a pot of herb tea and I'm swooning! :-) ]
b) some uncomfortable borderline inappropriate interactions during an otherwise very good conference, including the latest version of a hair-touching incident, and some 'short-sighted' leaning down and peering at my name badge when it was clipped to the edge of the collar of my v-necked shirt (by someone who had no trouble reading the badge of a male colleague of similar height to me even though his was lower down on his shirt...) - and being told by some younger female colleagues that I was making a silly fuss about nothing and that was just 'how X is' when I mentioned these things half-jokingly, half as an explaination why I was choosing to join a different group of people for evening drinks...
c) some concerns about interactions among undergraduates and the way the girls in particular choose to dress for class and more seriously for laboratory work, about some of my younger male colleagues' discomfort around the amount of bared chest there is in some classes (when all the students are seated and you're walking around, apparently you can get quite paranoid about being perceived to be looking down their tops...), and about a particular MSc student of mine who furnished most of the examples in my post.
Some of the frustration, and certainly the example of the sequinned bra, relates to this very bright MSc student of mine who looks, frankly, like she deliberately TRIES to attract the most inappropriate sexual attention she can. She fits in perfectly with the working girls in the rough bit of town behind the station - that's a simple observation. She's also funny, smart, self-effacing, always puts equipment back where she got it from, and is generally a good person to have in the lab. I always wondered who wore the more extreme and overt fashions I saw in magazines - she's one of 'em. It bothers me at a very deep level because I don't really get what's going on in her head - is she afraid that her brains put boys off and this is her solution? Does she think she looks good in the mirror each morning? Does she have ANY idea of how to dress for job interviews or internships if this is what she thinks is OK for a lab? - and I'm sick of saying 'no, she really IS very bright' to male colleagues who find the display either scary or drool-worthy and often assume that at least some of her grades are not earned the conventional way. And my blog is where I tend to write about things that confuse me...
You and your commentators are LUCKY if you don't have students who do come to class and to work in the lab dressed for a somewhat dubious party - by my prudish standards anyway... I have real trouble taking boys with bright yellow tractor underpants on display seriously. This is my problem, but... I am baffled as to what they think when they choose to dress like this. Baffled!
And I really ENJOY that through the blogosphere cardigan-wearing-cat-lovers and glamorous high heeled baby tote-ers can get to know each other and share the things we have in common - and our common experience with being women in science.
Posted by: JaneB | November 15, 2008 10:10 AM
Hi Isis and readers,
Sorry to perpetuate the discussion in a way, but I was a bit behind in the discussion, and wanted to comment. Things that came up had meshed with some thoughts I have been juggling around following three recent things:
a) some needling from a (skinny, glamorous) colleague (who can walk well in heels - and wears them in her lab...) about my 'dumpy schoolmistress look' and how that was setting a bad and offputting example for the younger women [note: I make no pretence of being a role model. I'm 40, greying, substantially overweight and never have been that interested in fashion and in 'pretty' things. I'm a single-woman-with-cat comfort-before-style trousers-and-cardigan-wearing scientist who is juggling depression and a large work-load, and buying pretty clothes and shoes doesn't do much for me. Buying new books, shiny notebooks and fancy pens, however... add some erudite conversation and a pot of herb tea and I'm swooning! :-) ]
b) some uncomfortable borderline inappropriate interactions during an otherwise very good conference, including the latest version of a hair-touching incident, and some 'short-sighted' leaning down and peering at my name badge when it was clipped to the edge of the collar of my v-necked shirt (by someone who had no trouble reading the badge of a male colleague of similar height to me even though his was lower down on his shirt...) - and being told by some younger female colleagues that I was making a silly fuss about nothing and that was just 'how X is' when I mentioned these things half-jokingly, half as an explaination why I was choosing to join a different group of people for evening drinks...
c) some concerns about interactions among undergraduates and the way the girls in particular choose to dress for class and more seriously for laboratory work, about some of my younger male colleagues' discomfort around the amount of bared chest there is in some classes (when all the students are seated and you're walking around, apparently you can get quite paranoid about being perceived to be looking down their tops...), and about a particular MSc student of mine who furnished most of the examples in my post.
Some of the frustration, and certainly the example of the sequinned bra, relates to this very bright MSc student of mine who looks, frankly, like she deliberately TRIES to attract the most inappropriate sexual attention she can. She fits in perfectly with the working girls in the rough bit of town behind the station - that's a simple observation. She's also funny, smart, self-effacing, always puts equipment back where she got it from, and is generally a good person to have in the lab. I always wondered who wore the more extreme and overt fashions I saw in magazines - she's one of 'em. It bothers me at a very deep level because I don't really get what's going on in her head - is she afraid that her brains put boys off and this is her solution? Does she think she looks good in the mirror each morning? Does she have ANY idea of how to dress for job interviews or internships if this is what she thinks is OK for a lab? - and I'm sick of saying 'no, she really IS very bright' to male colleagues who find the display either scary or drool-worthy and often assume that at least some of her grades are not earned the conventional way. And my blog is where I tend to write about things that confuse me...
You and your commentators are LUCKY if you don't have students who do come to class and to work in the lab dressed for a somewhat dubious party - by my prudish standards anyway... I have real trouble taking boys with bright yellow tractor underpants on display seriously. This is my problem, but... I am baffled as to what they think when they choose to dress like this. Baffled!
And I really ENJOY that through the blogosphere cardigan-wearing-cat-lovers and glamorous high heeled baby tote-ers can get to know each other and share the things we have in common - and our common experience with being women in science.
Posted by: JaneB | November 15, 2008 10:10 AM
This is completely OT for clothing, appropriateness, gender, etc. but....Dr. Isis, it is sometimes difficult to tell where your quoting someone stops and your own comment begins. Would you please consider either using <i> </i> to quote in italics, or <blockquote> </blockquote> to offset the quotes entirely?
Just a readability thing, that's all.
I appreciate much of what you say. My only problem here is, I do not work in an ideal environment, or an environment where I feel like I can do a significant amount of redefining the reactions of everyone around me. Believe me, I've been working at it for years; it's just that the years have left me feeling, well, a bit ground down I guess. And in that setting, I still find it discouraging to go to seminars and conferences where the discussion after every paper presented by a guy is 100% on the content of the paper, and the discussion after every paper presented by a woman is maybe 60% on the content and 40% on her appearance. You have absolutely every right to hotness and to enjoyment of your life*. But, I just get uncomfortable, because of my experiences, and that is really all there is to it.
-----------------------
*...With the exception of long fingernails in the lab, as I have seen a REAL problem with contamination as a result of that, but that was someone here who I had very real problems with because she patently wasn't taking the job seriously on multiple levels, and was a spoiled brat with entitlement issues. Which is not gender-specific, by any stretch of the imagination.
Posted by: Luna_the_cat | November 15, 2008 12:40 PM
I agree. I made the mistake of wearing something I like to lab this week, for the first time in a very long time, only to be harassed by one of my PIs.
Since I became a postdoc, I choose to wear non-tempting clothing to make it a non-issue when I know I'll be in situations that could make me uncomfortable, but I wish I didn't have to do it as a defensive measure.
I hate that women feel powerless to change this culture, and may even buy into it. I remember all too clearly hearing a fellow female postdoc make a nasty comment about a graduate student in our lab and her choice of clothing (which was by no means inappropriate for lab, but also did nothing to hide her figure). Yes, that's someone my age who is attacking a younger female scientist.
I would be happy never to witness anything like that again. But I'm sure I won't be so lucky.
And as for standing on the shoulders of older women scientists? I've experienced some of the worst sexism from older women. I think we all learn over time to recognize when we're not being fair, but sometimes it takes a while.
In turn, I find myself amused and impressed at how overtly feminine some of the younger women are. I say more power to 'em.
But I also deeply hope they'll never feel the kind of discomfort I've felt, for example when I was alone in an office with a PI who made a joke about me taking off all my clothes. It was sort of an analogy with the science... but still, totally inappropriate and offensive. And I'm not sure if he even knew how much it bothered me. I'm not sure I wanted to admit how much it bothered me until afterward.
And I've overheard him joke about women when he's talking to male postdocs (rather than suggesting the guys should strip off their boxer shorts!).
But what can I do? It didn't quite cross the line. And I need a recommendation letter from this guy.
This is my reality. I wear what I wear because I want a job doing science. I hope someday I can wear what I want to wear because I like it and my colleagues and superiors respect me no matter where I go. I'm afraid that day might not come in my lifetime.
Posted by: msphd | November 15, 2008 2:59 PM
The trouble with reading threads like this is it makes me feel like apologizing for the Y chromosome. Not as bad as wanting to actually do something about the more proximate disgraces-to-half-the-species specimens that I run into in meatspace, but still unsettling.
Whatever. I do have a minor request, though.
Given that we're not all knuckle-dragging misogynists, and since intermittent reward is the most powerful behavior modifier, I do hope the jerks don't get all the attention. Sometimes those of us who are trying to tiptoe through a minefield and Do The Right Thing can use some reassurance that we're not too far off course. Give it an occasional thought if you would.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | November 15, 2008 7:20 PM
You know, DC, you might be right that I haven't given enough lip service (finger service?) to all of the well-behaved men I encounter. There are a lot of men I interact with professionally who I believe "do it right" and I certainly adore the men in my blogosphere harem. I will keep this in mind...
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | November 15, 2008 8:39 PM
Dear Isis, I assure you that, speaking as a heterosexual male professional in an extremely male-dominated field: it ain't easy. There are profoundly hot women I work with every day (although not, of course, as hot as you) who deserve nothing less from me than that I keep the howling beast caged so deeply that they don't have a hint that he's there. I'm sure that if they give it a thought they think it's because I'm a geezer; they forget that all geezers are 18 under the wrinkles.
The effort is well worth it. Never mind that $HERSELF and $DAUGHTER would dice for my huevos if they ever so much as heard rumors of my getting out of line; I'd probably cheer them on.
Still, male insecurity (and you know it's your friend) has its dark moments and we're walking a rather delicate line. It's nice to know from time to time that the effort isn't totally unnoticed or unappreciated.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | November 15, 2008 8:56 PM
Dude, you don't deserve cookies just for not being an asshole. Your reward is knowing you are behaving decently. Period.
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | November 15, 2008 9:02 PM
CPP- as I read it, D. C. Sessions wasn't asking for a pat on the back- he's just saying he wishes he could always tell if he's doin it right (as is extremely obvious from this thread, people often don't feel quite as free to call people douchebags as your esteemed self).
Posted by: becca | November 15, 2008 10:51 PM
I quite agree.
Now, since perhaps you're not familiar with the concept of "science," I'll point out that I brought in the subject of "behavior modification" and the fact that the science shows that reward, especially intermittant reward, is a more effective behavior modifier than punishment.
Of course, punishment is much more satisfying to administer, at least for some, so it's a question of priorities and perhaps rationalization. I've observed that there's a correlation (not to be confused with a causal relationship) between reactionary politics and a preference for self-righteousness over actual results.
In any case, self-reward for "doing the right thing" is a learned behavior which arises from "being caught doing it" and being rewarded. Eventually the association of external reward to "doing the right thing" causes the a self-reward stimulus from the action and the external reward becomes unnecessary.
All of which is of no benefit when the original behavior has not been established. Thus, the question remains of how one is to establish the desired behavior. Some, such as our current Republican Party, insist on preaching the moral bankruptcy and general worthlessness of those who don't do as they "should."
Like child abuse, this has the dual benefits of stroking their superiority while avoiding the risk that the victim will ever actually change, so that there will be just as much opportunity in the future.
So, Comrade, I come to the question: what is it about the prospect of men learning to treat women decently that threatens you?
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | November 16, 2008 11:39 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! Nice try, dude. Yeah, you're all about creating an incentive structure for other men, and not getting yourself some cookies:
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | November 16, 2008 12:08 PM
PhysioProf ... the basic principle of training animals is you get the behaviors you reward. And behaviors unrewarded or punished are headed towards extinction.
It's in a woman's enlightened self-interest to hand out cookies for good behavior, if only so that she can be surrounded by men behaving pleasantly and professionally.
Kneeing them in the crotch to discourage their acting like assholes is frowned upon by the HR department no matter how satisfying it is to administer aversive conditioning.
Posted by: Tsu Dho Nimh | November 16, 2008 1:56 PM
Kneeing them in the crotch just makes it easier to turn "I was an asshole" into "you are a bitch." The likely outcome is that they avoid learning anything and completely dismiss any messages from the same source again.
When the asshole in question has power, however much or little, that's not a very bright plan [1]. When the asshole in question has good moments and bad moments, ignoring the good ones means that the good moments are headed towards extinction. Kneeing said asshole in the crotch for the bad moments has a very real prospect to reward the "Bitch!" response and make MCPism just as self-reinforcing as CPP wants decency to be.
Is it right? Is "right" the right question? I was under the impression that this was at least partly a forum where science gets more respect than it does in Bush Administration cabinet meetings. Perhaps a better question might be, "what are the probable consequences of each alternative course?"
So, again, it boils down to two questions:
1) What is your real objective?
2) What courses of action are most effective in getting you there?
[1] Well, it depends on your objectives of course. If what you want is confirmation of your own self-righteousness by converting potential allies into passionate enemies, it's a great plan.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | November 16, 2008 2:49 PM
Honestly, D. C., you are THIS close to saying "If only women treat the NICE(TM) guys properly, there wouldn't BE any harassment." I discovered long ago, that I couldn't control the behavior of the people around me, much as I would like to. I try to treat ALL of my co-workers professionally. If they are decent people whom I know and like, I'll chat and joke around with them, time allowing. If they're assholes, I'll only talk to them about what's strictly nessary, and try (frequently unsuccessfully) to rein in my sarcasm. That's all you get - no cookies.
Love the blog, Dr. Isis. Personally, I am coveting some bad-ass motorcycle boots, an iphone, and a sparkly purple pen with a floating brain inside of it.
Posted by: antijen | November 16, 2008 5:31 PM
Don't be silly -- of course there will be harassment.
I'm inclined to suspect that the culture we're trying (or left no choice but) to create is in some ways fundamentally against the hard-wired nature we've inherited, just as nonviolence is. That's not an excuse for not insisting on it, but it would be silly to base our efforts on denial of the facts.
However, that's just speculation. I'm delighted to see my daughter and her colleagues working to find out what's really going on, even though I rather doubt that they'll have any really solid answers in my lifetime.
The rather more immediate question is, "what to do about it?" Being a child of the 60s, I picked up the "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" meme at a formative age. Thus the question: "what can we all do to move the work culture in a positive direction?"
Control, no. Influence? Rather a different question.
Now ask yourself the question: what does a young newcomer see? What will she see as her options in fitting into the group dynamics? What will he see as his options in fitting into the group dynamics? If someone has reasons (whatever they may be) for associating with the assholes, how will your behavior appear?
Nobody is always "decent" or always an "asshole." Even CPP has occasional lapses into polite behavior, after all. None of us are assholes in our own eyes, however much easier it is for us to think of them that way. So when someone who's normally a PITA acts "decent," do you respond to the PITA or the "decency?" If the latter, are you telling them that they are irredeemably damned and might as well not bother?
Thanks very much, but I'm on a diet anyway. If it isn't obvious I am in the "self-reward for doing the right thing" zone. If anything, I'd most appreciate an occasional ruler across the knuckles for what I should be doing differently since the motivation is there but the information on what is "right" is unavoidably imperfect.
I'm also very much aware that regardless of the lip service paid to politeness, professionalism, and general decency the sad fact is that especially for the youngsters being polite and professional gets you, at best, ignored. The jerks get attention. Some of it is bad, some isn't -- but it's attention, and even bad attention is better than no attention and reward (especially intermittent reward) always trumps punishment.
So, again: are we part of the solution or part of the problem?
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | November 16, 2008 7:12 PM