I'm not convinced. The proportion of women in biology is much higher than in physics; is biology really a better career than physics? (I don't know, I'm asking.)
I do agree that science isn't an attractive career from a lot of viewpoints (long hours, lots of pressure, moderate pay). On the other hand, looking around the field, I think science is actually a good field for what I'd call lower-middle-class people. I don't see very people who are from wealthy families, I don't see many from very poor families (though there are a handful), but there are quite a few who are from traditionally blue-collar type families (builders, farmers) and lots more from traditionally middle-class but poorly paid families (teachers, most obviously). Obviously there's a barrier for the very poor, who can't afford the long years of school, but if you don't mind a few years of struggling at post-doc stipends, and can scrape up the odd scholarship, then you can move into a fairly comfortable niche, salary-wise. Certainly there are better-paying options, but they all have downsides too.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-03 03:44 am (UTC)I do agree that science isn't an attractive career from a lot of viewpoints (long hours, lots of pressure, moderate pay). On the other hand, looking around the field, I think science is actually a good field for what I'd call lower-middle-class people. I don't see very people who are from wealthy families, I don't see many from very poor families (though there are a handful), but there are quite a few who are from traditionally blue-collar type families (builders, farmers) and lots more from traditionally middle-class but poorly paid families (teachers, most obviously). Obviously there's a barrier for the very poor, who can't afford the long years of school, but if you don't mind a few years of struggling at post-doc stipends, and can scrape up the odd scholarship, then you can move into a fairly comfortable niche, salary-wise. Certainly there are better-paying options, but they all have downsides too.