Thread by @bencasselman

The American Economics Association has released its final report on its "climate survey," which looked at race and gender description in economics:
aeaweb.org/resources/memb…

@jimtankersley wrote about the preliminary results of the survey back in March:
nytimes.com/2019/03/18/bus…

The quantitative findings here are familiar at this point, although there are some new details here. But what's really new are selections from the open-response questions. Some of them are really striking.

This one was a punch to the gut:
“I would not recommend my own (black) children to go into this field. It was a mistake for me to
choose this field. Had I known that it would be so toxic, I would not have…”

Or this one:
"…I have seen female faculty colleagues routinely "mommy-tracked" into adjunct status after
childbearing, while males with significant childcare responsibilities were supported in their
tenure-track roles."

“I think men don't realize the negative externality of using the pool of junior female economists as
a dating pool..." (cont'd in next tweet)

"...it might seem like not a big deal to flirt with a student or a junior faculty member when an individual man does it, but when every man makes that choice, the climate of going to conferences and informally networking is very uncomfortable for young women in economics."

“I was hesitant to report or pursue legal action (even within the university) after an economics student in my program attempted to assault me precisely because I knew the field was very small,
word gets around. "

In reporting on these issues, we've heard from lots of women and people of color that much of the profession remains resistant to taking on these issues. Few people have gone on the record with those opinions, but they show up here anonymously:

“Devoting any time or attention to 'diversity' and 'inclusion' and 'climate' is a ridiculous 'politically correct' waste of time in the field of economics, as in most if not all fields of academia
and workplaces generally..." (cont'd)

"... While there are certainly cases of sexual harassment, these should not
be lumped together with non-existent problems and non-existent issues. The profession should instead focus attention on real issues, such as the suppression of free speech on many campuses.”

Or this one:
“I am saddened by the AEA's decision to undertake such a survey, with such loaded questions that seem aimed at a predetermined outcome, namely that we allegedly need to focus on anything other than determining economic truths, as best we can."

Discrimination against LGBTQ+ people in economics has gotten less attention, but this AEA survey has troubling findings there too:

“Once I came out, people dropped me from grants. Administrators took advantage of me. At …one of the national meetings, my ideas were dismissed by a prominent economist by saying Keynes was a homosexual and therefore his ideas were not worthy of consideration.”

Disability too:
“I have personally found that Ph.D. programs do not accommodate temporary or permanent disabilities, with or without official leave of absences. The field is focused on ‘what year you are in the PhD program’ regardless of medical leave and obstacles."

There's a lot more here. Worth reading through this report in more detail (and @jimtankersley have more stories in the works). If you have stories we should know about, our DMs are open.
aeaweb.org/resources/memb…