So my feeling on this is that it is neither surprising nor that different from the bias that happens when people assess women for roles in medicine in the U.S.: nytimes.com/2018/08/03/wor… (e.g., check out stories with the #thatsbias hashtag)
Requiring women to have higher scores to get a job has been experimentally observed, by the way, in this study: jstor.org/stable/10.1086…
Study subjects were asked to judge hypothetical candidates for a job, and one of the q's was WHAT MINIMUM SCORE IS REQUIRED ON AN EXAM TO BE CONSIDERED FOR EMPLOYMENT?
Females who were not mothers, 68%, who were mothers: 72%
Males who were not fathers:, 67%, who were fathers: 67%
A word about the universality of gender inequity. When I talk about a subgroup, whether about gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, I look at the data across these groups. Women have a *propensity* to have certain experiences in medicine.
Are men EVER sexually harassed in medicine? Yes, of course.
Are straight people EVER rejected by patients? Yes, of course.
Do mentors EVER turn away a white gende normative mentee? Yes, of course.
But we aim to fix gross inequities, and many of them tend to fall across lines of gender & race. I don’t expect any of the gender-related biases to occur in every interaction 100% of the time any more than I expect 100% of my PEs to present with tachycardia and hypoxia.
“Are women harsher on women than men are?” This is a question that comes up once or twice or a thousand times during my talks. So here’s the thing.
First, I have not seen data that supports this. I *have* seen data that shows that women have *as much* bias against women in the workplace as men do, but not more. Perhaps it exists, and I don’t know about it.
Second, I have heard many, many anecdotal accounts of this phenomenon - so much that it makes me wonder if it is just understudied.
I have participated in many women’s programs, including being President of a @AWAEM and helping build @feminemtweets. We can create women’s networks until we’re blue in the face but until we make headway with male-dominated leadership structures, the workplace will suffer.
My next hypothetical book will be entitled “On the Golf Course: How Systems of Gender Inequity are Fostered in Plain View.” The culture of broships allows terrible behavior to flourish and sustains leadership structures in which only men can thrive.
“It’s just golf.” Right, right. Along with hours and hours to walk and talk and bond and negotiate and make implicit and explicit agreements. On a regular basis. That can’t possibly affect you when a peer is up for promotion or disciplinary action.
“Women are welcome.” I happen not to be born with the desire to shoot every ball I see into a circle or rectangle, but I know some women love golf. And all I can say is that for the most part we are not out there with the men in power golfing.
Tweets are so ephemeral it's hard to feel that it makes real impact. Once in a while, you feel that you have entered people’s brainspace in a meaningful way. More commonly, it’s more about steadily contributing drops to the ocean of conversation on a topic. A4/#behavioralmedchat
I have this thing about authenticity. You can kind of tell when people are going for attention and RTs and follows. There are a million people trying to get hits. There is only one voice that is yours. A4/ #behavioralmedchat
So I think posting what you know, what you are passionate about, in a way that is true to your own inner voice, is the way to go. The impact follows naturally from there. A4/ #behavioralmedchat
A3. Start with people you admire and who post interesting and thoughtful things. Then look at who they follow: they likely get their content from being in the same space with OTHER great people. #behavioralmedchat
A3. Join in on conversations with people you follow. If there's a thread and you can add, jump in - just like you would in real life! And chats like this help you find like minded people too. Who you follow and chat with becomes your audience. #behavioralmedchat
A3. I had a looooong stretch of tweeting into the void. I totally get it! Being consistent, finding your people, hopping into conversations, pushing out interesting content and your unique take on it - these will draw people to you. #behavioralmedchat
A2. I follow people I admire, including clinicians of all backgrounds, researchers, health economists, scholars, policymakers, journalists, and activists. Curating that list means that I mostly only have good content to choose from. #behavioralmedchat
A2. I’m focused about content: I'm mostly on Twitter to discuss health care policy, social justice, & gender equity.Having a sense of purpose brings things into focus so it's not so overwhelming trying to find content. #behavioralmedchat
A2. Over time, when your interests are clear, people start to tag you on news stories or studies relevant to you. That makes things easier. Another reason to be very clear and consistent about your interest areas. #behavioralmedchat
A1. Our mission as scientists, physicians, public health advocates is to have knowledge reach as many people as possible for the largest impact possible. Social media is a wonderful way to realize that goal. #behavioralmedchat
A1. Misinformation spreads quickly, and we can be the steady, sure voices that provide a link to data. And often we are the ones who have to point out where there is insufficient data to make a claim. #behavioralmedchat
A1. It’s not always sexy to be the steady, constant, voice of reason and data. But it’s so important. And the social media platform allows us to have fun and be creative, visual, and entertaining as we broadcast information. #behavioralmedchat
You may be thinking, "why should I get excited about a state seat, let alone one far from me? I'll save my $ and efforts for the exciting national Senate seats." I felt this way until I attended a @Sister_District event.
During the part of the presentation entitled "Why States Matter," I broke out in a cold sweat. I realized I had been totally neglecting state races out of sheer ignorance.
Here's why state seats matter:
1. State laws are felt quickly, and can mitigate devastating federal decisions. Look at the health care fight and how states are buffering the ACA / Medicaid, and you'll see that state legislatures have the power to save the lives that this admin is placing in peril.
1. The majority of these cases involve women, so we often ignore male victims. Men also experience grave mental and physical sequelae from abuse. In my advocacy for women, I could do a better job of pointing this out.
2. Who allows this abuse to happen? Not just one or two neglectful leaders. The organization fosters this abuse, creates the circumstances in which it can happen in the first place, and continue over years and years.
Via the brilliant Anoka Faruqee, an open letter to the media and all Trump critics. "I have a problem with how some of you speak of Trump. I often hear you focus on his personal shortcomings, calling him naive, stupid, incompetent, embarrassing, unstable, and unpredictable."
"Trump is negligent, dangerous, sociopathic, disgraceful, corrupt and self-serving. I prefer to use these words b/c each of these words implies the consequences of Trump’s actions and they assume a subject and an object-- or a network of people and objects in a larger system."
"Trump is one part of a larger longstanding machine to concentrate wealth and power in the hands of himself, his family, his friends, allies, and advisors who are by all measures moving us towards an anti-democratic oligarchy..."
Senior mentors have tremendous, disproportionate power over the careers of trainees and junior faculty in academia and medicine. In some cases, a single person holds sway over who advances in an area and who doesn't. This is a total set up for abuse. 1/
I think this is often a gendered interaction, but to be clear- it happens across the board. One senior professor can sabotage someone's career over difference of opinion, jealousy, or whimsy. It's terrifying & there should be more in place to check that from happening. 2/
So many ways our minimal protective mechanisms can break down -some demonstrated by Vinay’s thread above - when abuse happens across institutions and there is not a governing ombudsman or HR office, when sabotage is covert, when reporting is essentially career suicide... 3/