A Calculated Response
Offering a correction to a faulty conclusion.
Last week — as you may have picked up on your outrage-o-phone — a career advice columnist in a scientific magazine offered a piece of advice so awful Twitter blew up and the piece came down in a matter of hours. The editors replaced it with an apology. (But the internet doesn’t forget.)
This was a particularly big deal because Science is one of the biggest scientific journals in the world, by reach and by reputation. And the columnist Dr. Alice Huang, is a venerable microbiologist.In brief, a (presumably female) post-doc wrote in to say that whenever she met with her adviser in his office, she would catch him trying to peer down her shirt. She didn’t know what to do.
Dr. Huang’s answer was that life would be dull without sexual attraction, this probably didn’t meet the legal definition of harassment anyway, and in a conclusion as incendiary as it was insensitive.
“I suggest you put up with it, with good humor if you can.”
Be a pal! This answer is particularly shocking because of the source — a senior scientist with a track record of advocating for women. Dr. Huang’s message was that unwanted sexual attention from one’s superiors was to be expected. Unavoidable.
“I don’t mean to suggest that leering is appropriate workplace behavior — it isn’t — but it is human and up to a point, I think, forgivable.”
To leer is human! A dozen media outlets picked up on the outrage and joined in the vilification, because clicks. But there wasn’t much in the way of actual useful advice. I thought about that poor post-doc who just wanted to do science. If you pride yourself on being competent, it can be hard to ask for help. A response like that is shattering.
In fact, Dr. Huang did considerable damage. Given the opportunity to support one colleague, she undermined them all with an anecdote:
“Once, a friend told me that he was so distracted by an attractive visiting professor that he could not concentrate on a word of her seminar.”
You know what this says to women? That if you are attractive you should just give up hope of your work being taken seriously. Boobs trump brains, sister.
Why did she even include this little story? Why did she so deeply identify with the desire to be sexual over the duty to be professional? I’m not going to speculate. It doesn’t matter. She has a clear responsibility as a respected scientist and past-president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (the publisher of Science Careers). I do suspect her stature and that of an advice column in a peer-reviewed journal explain why this doozy didn’t attract editorial oversight before publication.
I am neither a scientist, nor a lawyer, but I do get paid to help organizations communicate. So, I have some thoughts.*
My Advice
This is a tricky human situation. I agree with Dr. Huang both that it’s probably common and that the advisor may not have even realized that he was doing it.
The 10,000 pound HOWEVER, however is that this in no way excuses the behavior. Giving unwanted sexual attention in the workplace is wrong. When “lots of people do it” and “no one realizes it’s a problem” that’s actually the time to do a thing called “raising awareness.” The greater the frequency with which something discriminatory and potentially illegal happens in the workplace, the more important it is to deal with it.
The post-doc expressed respect for the advisor, and no desire to punish or humiliate him. She just wanted to keep the focus on the work. It’s a million small scenarios like this that determine whether or not people feel welcome in a particular workplace or an entire field.
Dr. Huang could have helped her correspondent and the advisor, and everyone who finds themselves on any side of this situation. She could have served the entire scientific community simply by saying something like:
“This sort of thing happens all the time — and it’s not OK. I know we are thrown into close proximity with people we find attractive, and that can be a challenge because sexual attraction is strong. However, it is the duty of all professional scientists, especially if you are someone in a position of authority, to handle your personal feelings in the workplace and treat everyone with respect. It is also the law.”
Dr. Huang could have said, you owe it to your colleagues to respect them enough to focus on the content of their work. Let me repeat that:
You owe it to your colleagues to focus on the content of their work, regardless of how attractive you find them.
But she didn’t.
As far as advice for this specific situation, Phil Plait a science writer for Slate offered a decent suggestion.
This is not an easy situation by any means, but there is plenty of advice I can think of. As one example, pull him aside in private and say, “Listen, I know this is uncomfortable, and you may not even be aware of it, but I’ve seen you looking at my chest on more than one occasion. This is really inappropriate, and I’m asking you to stop.” If he does it again, give him a sterner warning. If he does a third time, leave footprints on his forehead — talk to the department chair.
And this be would much more powerful in the context of a strong generalized message carrying the authority of Dr. Huang and Science.
The Larger Lesson
This little debacle has much wider ramifications for anyone saying anything online. Even when you’re addressing one specific audience, never forget your communication is also a performance in front of an audience of potentially everyone. This is a huge responsibility and an ineluctable reality.
*For informational purposes only, not legal advice or SCIENCE.
