By Science!
In a letter to Science Careers, a post-doc asks what she should do about an advisor who’s frequently trying to peek down her shirt. The answer is a boon to men in positions of power everywhere.
As long as your adviser does not move on to other advances, I suggest you put up with it, with good humor if you can. Just make sure that he is listening to you and your ideas, taking in the results you are presenting, and taking your science seriously. His attention on your chest may be unwelcome, but you need his attention on your science and his best advice.
Yay! Now, having gotten that permission, I have to push the boundaries a little bit.
Can I drop things and ask her to bend over to pick them up?
How about making suggestions on appropriate lab attire? Short skirts, low-cut blouses, that sort of thing?
Is upskirt photography OK? I wouldn’t touch, no, not at all.
When I write letters of recommendation for students, would “Nice rack” be an appropriate comment? It might be very helpful in landing a position under another man, you know.
I also appreciate the nice excuse given in the reply.
Certainly there are worse things, including the unlawful behaviors described by the EEOC. No one should ever use a position of authority to take sexual advantage of another.
Oh, yes. I can imagine much worse things. Shall I tell you about them while I commit a few lesser offenses? The fact that I’m not fondling your breasts makes it OK that I’m just staring at them.
Unfortunately, I think this advice widely misses the mark. If the point is that your advisor is important to your career and that his experience can make useful contributions to your science, doesn’t the fact that he is focusing on your sex mean he’s going to have a difficult time treating you as an equal, a colleague, a student? It’s not so much the staring as the attitude behind it: you want an advisor who will look you in the eyes and respect your work.
My advice — and it’s easier said than done when dealing with an authority having power over your career — would be to tell the man privately that his wandering eye is a problem in your work relationship. If it then continues to be a problem, take it to the department chair, and if he retaliates (showing that he’s not such a nice guy after all), change advisors, if possible. These people are not going to ever change if no one confronts them.
The article has been abruptly taken down! Fortunately, the internet does not forget (pdf).
Far more shameful than the answer itself is that it was given by a woman.
He may not be aware that he’s doing it. Of course having the conversation could be awkward but that does seem to be better advice than “Just put up with it.”
cervantes, #2
Bull-fucking-shit.
Ew, that photo of Woody Allen made me nauseous before even starting to read the post.
I’m so sick of the “lesser offenses” bullshit that keeps getting peddled. At what point do we start saying, “Well, nobody was murdered, so I don’t see the problem with that kidnapping.”
How the fuck can he be paying attention to her science when he’s obviously paying attention to her tits? You can’t do both. You know, if you’re unable not to contradict yourself within two subsequent sentences, you should not be writing more than grocery lists.
Of course, she’ll also be accused of not having gotten her position/recommendation/grades because of her science, but because of her clevage. Heads you lose, tails I win.
A bigger problem: Men (and women) who behave badly in even small ways, often behave badly in big ways.
Your advice is spot on. Assume for a moment she simply allows the boorish behavior to continue. Then, shortly before she turns in her dissertation, the advisor proposes a tryst — after all, she’s tolerated his ogling all those months; why wouldn’t he be emboldened?
And she refuses? What is he likely to do?
An honorable advisor would apologize, and change behavior before any escalation. Why not find out now, before it’s too late?
As I recall, It seems to be perfectly kosher at TAM.
#1: Not only is the author a woman, she’s a former president of AAAS!
Saad — it’s not bullshit at all. You’d be amazed at some people’s lack of self-awareness.
Perhaps she could put a tape with words in his target zone: “If you can read this, please look at my face instead.”
Lessons that advisor missed in his childhood: It isn’t polite to stare. If I can expect that of a six year old, why not him?
Apparently the article has been pulled
The article is protected? or deleted. In any event I hope someone does Tsu’s suggestion sometime…maybe a warning sign letting them know how crappy it is?
Slymepit trolls turning up to whine that PZ once expressed admiration for Bill Clinton therefore hypocrisy in 5, 4, 3,..
Good move for Science, taking it down. <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20150601150626/http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2015_06_01/caredit.a1500140"<The Internet Archive caught it, though, if anyone wants to read it.
Damn! Wrong carat! Here, try this: https://web.archive.org/web/20150601150626/http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2015_06_01/caredit.a1500140
If his attention is on her chest, then he is not listening to her ideas. Hearing is not listening. How often have I been told that? I heard it a lot, but was not paying attention…
errrgggghhhh
So she’s just advising to be tolerant of creepy behavior, as long as it doesn’t involve anything physical? As in, stalking is okay, but touching is not? So I can be justified in all my stalkings, eh?
@11 cervantes
At best, i can imagine someone utterly distracted and looking at “nothing” without focusing if it gets in the way of your fixed gaze…but repeteadly looking at a woman’s chest during CONVERSATION without knowing that you are doing it? Nope…
What you are describing is total bullshit.
I (a woman) once worked with a man who freely and blatantly stared at women’s breasts. All The. Time. I did not report to him, but he was senior to me in rank. Never one to keep my feelings to myself, the very first time he did that to me (in front of a group of his male peers), I followed his gaze down to my chest and looked carefully to see what he was looking at. He looked away, then in a few minutes looked back, and I again followed his gaze. This was repeated several times. Finally I said something like, “Wayne, why do you keep staring at my chest? Have I spilled some of my lunch? [looking down at myself again] What?? Why are you doing that?” He was properly embarrassed. I don’t know if he changed his behavior with other women, but he did with me. It was somewhat of a risk given his and my relative status in the department, but OH was it worth it to shame him. :-D
Reminds me of a former boss who had the habit of putting his feet up on his desk when in conversation with people who reported to him [never with HIS bosses]. That’s really rude. I would just talk to the soles of his shoes until he put them back under his desk. That was fun, too. He was otherwise a good boss and mentor, and helped me to break through a mid-level glass ceiling at that giant corporation.
And they say women don’t have the focus for Science. :P
Also, this doesn’t seem to be just ‘staring’, which can be a passive thing (but let’s face it…), but ‘trying to look down [my] shirt’, which cannot be excused by any kind of ‘he doesn’t know he’s doing it’ excuses. This is an active thing. No excuses.
Dear Dr. Myers,
I’m not your student, and I’m a guy, but could you write me a one-line letter o’ rec with that sentence?
I’m hoping to apply for a job at AAAS as their Science Career Columnist and I’m sure a LOR from you would go a long way towards jumpstarting my career. It seems that my chosen profession of Garbage Burner has plateaued.
Nature > Science
Just saying.
Not surprising at all – clearly Huang has resigned to that after too many similar experiences. :-|
Unless maybe if he’s sleepwalking, that’s not possible.
Seriously, what’s the point of actively looking at boobs when you don’t notice you’re seeing them!?!
Saad #3, azhael #20
Most men are trying to ogle, but not everyone. There are people who can’t bring themselves to look into anyone’s eyes, there are people with heterotropia or other eye problems that seem to look elsewhere when they actually not (and yes, I’ve seen people like that being told to “look at me!”). Finally there is me – I have spine problems and try not to move my neck too much. This means that the point I’ll be looking at depends on the person’s height.
This is why confronting the person can be a good step. Not always, not even often, but sometimes.
I think that going to the dept. chair first might be a better way to go – that way if the advisor starts lashing out, it doesn’t look like a story concocted after the fact.
More likely he’s not aware that she’s noticed. (Some people are really dense about that sort of thing.)
Well, she can always point to this story to prove it wasn’t.
#25’s last sentence, except somewhere between often and always unless threats have been made. People should have the opportunity to face their accusers (a Constitutional right in criminal proceedings), and if she confronts him directly she gains power. Best case might be she goes to the offender accompanied by an HR advocate who can back up both “sides”.
Science should have said “people”, not “women”, in its notice.
@25 AlexanderZ
I don’t think that is consistent with what is described in the story in any way, and even so, surely an adult with these conditions would be aware that when they think they are looking at someone’s eyes, their eyes are pointing at chest level and would have done something to avoid these scenarios, like not attempting to look at the eyes or informing their interlocutors if they engage in conversation regularly. Also, these conditions don’t come and go conveniently, only when talking to breasted females. I’ve known individuals with strabismus, and you couldn’t confuse it with someone actively trying to stare down your shirt…
Contrary to conventional wisdom, HR’s sole mission is to protect the organization; employees/faculty are only a concern when it comes to affecting HR’s mission.
The question comes down to is the person willing to lay it on the line for the satisfaction of crushing her adviser? If she “wins”, then she will eventually be forced out and never get another position at any lab, anywhere. If she loses, then the same thing will happen.
Sadly, her “safe” options are get her PhD (I assume she’s not a postdoc) and GTFO as quickly as possible; pray that her adviser gets hit by a truck; or (if she’s a postdoc) jump to another lab* and hope the guys there aren’t scumbags.
* Open positions are rarer than hen’s teeth.
A tale told to me by my supervisor: He was an undergrad when mini skirts made their appearance. A crusty old lecturer walked into the lecture theater, fixed his stare on the acres of flesh on display and asked all the young ladies in the front row to cross their legs. After they complied he remarked: “Now that the gates of hell are closed we can get on with the lesson”.
How funny, garydargan.
Pray, tell us some more how we’Re really evil beings, we need to be reminded!
Giliell,
Taking a guess at the era this tale would have occurred in, and then generalizing based on likely eras’ harsh regulations on college women (e.g. they would have been relegated to their own special campuses, had curfews, and only allowed to study with men under a chaperone’s watch, etc), I find it hard to believe that “all” the women in the front row would have been sitting sprawled-legged, anyway. Which makes it all the more obvious that the story is just a way to get people to laugh at the idea that vaginas are the “gates of hell”. God, the hilarity is killing me.
Or he just can’t tell where her eyes are.
It’s extra-hilarious because of course the distraction from the lesson is all the fault of those evil temptresses … not at all the fault of the august sage who
wasn’t paying attention to his own class and interrupted proceedings in the first placemade the oh-so-witty remark. ’cause that makes it even funnier, right?Oh yes.
Seems more likely.
Yeah, had a good laugh at garydargan‘s story.
Not.
Also, repeating the story for each generation anew makes it extra funny, you know?
Remind people of the good old times, when people could have an innocent laugh at such things…
Well, if he’s not looking at her face, he might be having trouble reading her expressions that say “WTF?” So I think he’s actively avoiding that part, too.
goaded @ 27
Having experienced such staring myself, he knows. He knows and he doesn’t care, or it actively makes it more fun for him to cause women discomfort. The most likely answer is that he has done this before to other women (probably a lot) and got away with it (again… a lot). He knows.
My advice would be document every time he does it. Because if she says nothing, chances are, he’ll escalate and she’ll have some evidence against him. If she does say something, she’ll have some evidence to refute his inevitable counter-charges.
But I’m only a guy, and I could count the number of times I’ve been sexually harassed on one hand. The average woman probably runs out of fingers by lunch.
mariove @40,
Totally agree. The power differential seems to be a big part of the thrill for these creeps, and their positions shield them from consequences.
From the article:
No, we’re supposed to be fucking professional. Nobody thinks that people who aren’t asexual to start with magically become asexual on command. It’s entirely possible to be attracted to somebody without disrespecting or marginalizing them — particularly without going out of your way to disrespect or marginalize them, as this idiotic adviser seems to be doing. At work, when you’re angry, that’s a very natural emotion, but you don’t get a pass to clench your fists and make false swings at the object of your rage (but if you don’t actually hit them, then no foul according to this idiot); when you’re attracted to somebody, you don’t start conspicuously ogling their body. I’ve been attracted to many people and I’ve managed to make it through all of our interactions without pointedly starting at their chests, arms, crotches, etc. I mean, who the fuck thinks this kind of behavior is okay?
There’s a Twitter hashtag now: #DontAskAlice for this. Folks have used the wayback machine to find situations and a couple more of her columns with advice that fits the category.
From my experience I’d say it’s possible to not know you’re doing it.
Some time ago my boyfriend informed me that I’d been staring at the breasts of a woman I know when I was talking to her. I had no idea. If it was obvious enough that he saw it, presumably she could have seen it too. I was mortified. I can assure you I got no thrill out of the realization that she might have been aware of me doing it.
I do have that thing where I’m super uncomfortable looking people in the eyes, so my eyes do tend to wander, and I know people are aware that my sight lines aren’t where social convention says they should be. Maybe that plays a part in this. But I can totally believe this was more than that, that I really was ogling her.
So I’m trying to be more conscious of what I’m doing moving on.
As to PZ’s suggestions of the appropriate responses, I would appreciate being taken aside and informed of my behavior if it was offending. I mean I wouldn’t enjoy it, I hate such corrections at least as much as anyone else. But I like her, she was one of the first contacts I made in the various fandoms I’ve been participating in. She’s only been nice to me and I really don’t want to make her uncomfortable.
“I’m not an attorney but hey, I’m a scientist! How hard can it be?!”
On the plus side, it’s good to see that men don’t have a complete monopoly on mansplaining.
Pun intended?
This^.
Which is where the advice columnist got it wrong. I agree, unfortunately that’s what’s actually true. But as a former AAAS president and current writer for Science, the advice columnist was in an incredibly strong position to take a public stand against such nonsense and be a force to try to turn public opinion around to the norm of don’t do that kind of demeaning shit to your postdocs what the hell is wrong with you instead. And she whiffed it. And then Science just pulled it down so they wouldn’t have to talk about it.
carlie,
With stories that cross certain borders, I’m all for taking them down because I think that even with a mile of disclaimers leaving them up does more harm than good. But in this case, I would have loved if they’d left the article, but with a disclaimer and link to a folllow-up article explaining all the things wrong with the first one.
Good catch.
Certainly.
Also, mirror on a stick?
THIS+
It is going to take a lot of pressure to make situations like this change. Pressure needs to be applied to those in power (university regents, chancellors, deans, chairs, etc) to implement a real policy and enforce it rigorously and fairly.
Were it so easy to confront the person directly, but that has many, many consequences for the victim.
Science posted an apology (thanks to Phil Plait/Bad Astronomer for pointing this out):
http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2015_06_01/caredit.a1500140
Full text:
The apology from Science Careers is, ahem, weak. Only the last sentence allows the merest chance of taking a principled stand to speculate about the possibility of crossing its mind.
But @WieldARedPen has already said it better.
They’ve posted a replacement article Better advice for ‘Bothered’ based on quotes from other people such as Janet Stemwedel, Dr. Isis, and Phil Plait. The original apology now includes a link to it at the bottom.