Female academia blues.

Speaking of academia blues, Christy sent me another link this week to a  press release from the University of Utah:

April 17, 2008 -- A new study from the University of Utah shows that women in academia have fewer children compared to other professional women -- primarily because it takes longer to achieve the job security of tenure -- and concludes that gender equality in the "ivory tower" has come at a cost.

More accurately, gender equality in the "ivory tower" hasn't happened at all.  If it were equal, effects on males and on females ought not be so different, no?  "Equality" is more about appearances than realities.  You can always strive to improve it, but in the end men and women, on average, are coming from different directions and when you try to apply equal operators you don't get the same effect.

The data shows that professors have fewer children than either doctors or lawyers...female professors have the lowest number of babies of all. Although male faculty are 21 percent less likely than male doctors to have a baby in their households, female faculty are 41 percent less likely than are their female physician counterparts.

Female professors are also more likely than female doctors or lawyers to be separated or divorced. The authors of the study apparently suggest that the structure of the tenure system -- a profoundly anti-young-family structure, I think -- is to blame.   Women are disproportionately affected by anti-family structures, but it's important to remember that involved fathers (and would-be involved fathers) are affected too.

One thing that is coming out of the research is a "Family-Friendly" initiative at University of California-Berkeley -- some of the initiatives described there look like really good first steps.

(Cross-posted at Heart Mind and Strength, where I may have mentioned once that I co-blog.)

Comments

[Christy P]

There was a follow-up article to this press release in the SL Tribune in which they mention the U's generous family leave policy that allows professors to take off 1 semester with nearly full pay for the birth or adoption of a child. The article doesn't mention that it doesn't include those of us in the School of Medicine. The current policy for the med school is up to 6 weeks leave at partial pay depending on your rank. You are also allowed to use your accumulated vacation and sick time. This is far better than what was in place when I had Z - I was allowed to use my vacation and sick, which since I hadn't yet been at the U for a year, meant that I was back full-time 5 weeks post-partum. Z attended many meetings in a sling and spent a lot of time in my lap.

[Derek]

I have a problem tenure in general. For one, I don't know of many other fields where you can work for several years and then be guaranteed employment. It also creates a culture of entitlement among tenured professors. It pressures younger investigators to fit in to the culture of academia - this actually produces more homogeneity and stifles academic debate rather than protecting it, as tenure is expected to. The fact that women must be so productive early on at the expense of other things in their lives seems yet another reason to abolish tenure.

Regarding the baby issue, you write: "Although male faculty are 21 percent less likely than male doctors to have a baby in their households, female faculty are 41 percent less likely than are their female physician counterparts." As I read this, it is not simply a question of female professors having fewer children, but fewer professors having any children. This fits with my experience - there is a self-selection process that goes on as well. I have met numerous women in academics who simply do not want to have children (and not just the womyn's studies professors). There are different goals, personalities, and self-image of people who go into these various fields. Not everyone to be sure, but I believe it plays an important role.