Why does the difference between female and male scientists persist, if the agents are well researched and documented, and have a great predisposition? Researchers from three universities in Australia, Holland and the United States have tried to answer this question and have published their results in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution.
According to them, despite the numerous studies and initiatives undertaken to bridge the gap, women scientists have fewer opportunities and less recognition than men. To this end, they have concluded that the problem has many dimensions (individual, family, work and social), which makes it difficult for measures to be effective, since the beneficial for one dimension can be detrimental to another.
For example, measures that encourage women to be leaders can lead to the renunciation of aid for reconciliation. Or that campaigns to increase the percentage of women in areas where mathematics predominates (physics, engineering) underestimate the areas in which women predominate.
In fact, solutions such as the interpretation of the basic question are proposed and there is no single and consensual definition of gender equality in the scientific field.
According to the authors, the topic should be approached from a holistic perspective, taking into account the contempt of culture and the care of organizations. In this sense, they denounce that it has not been investigated whether surveillance work benefits the scientific career and, where appropriate, or in what. In his image, a caring experience can be a good antidote to self-centeredness.
Saioa hasi iruzkinak uzteko.