Wie "offen" sind die europäischen Wissenschaften für Frauen?
Titelübersetzung:How "open" are the European sciences for women?
Autor/in:
Tüür-Fröhlich, Terje
Quelle: Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis, 62 (2011) 6-7, S 279-284
Inhalt: Die Geschlechterungleichheit in den Wissenschaften ist weiterhin ein ungelöstes Problem. Viele Studien befassen sich mit genderspezifischen Problemen in wissenschaftlicher Kommunikation und in wissenschaftlichen Karrieren. Die EU-Statistiken ("She Figures") dokumentieren das nach wie vor dominante Muster geringerer weiblicher Präsenz in höheren akademischen Rängen in fast allen EU-Mitgliedsstaaten. EU-Wissenschaftspolitik und die nationalen Sozialpolitiken widersprechen einander. Die vorherrschende "publish or perish"-Logik, atyptische Beschäftigungsverhältnisse als akzeptierte Norm und die forcierte internationale Mobilität behindern vor allem die Wissenschaftskarrieren der Jungen und Frauen. Wie offen sind die sogenannten "offenen Initiativen" für Frauen? Frauen sind gegenüber der Open-Source-Bewegung (FLOSS) skeptisch, sie fühlen sich vom dort herrschenden männlich dominierten "frostigen" Arbeitsklima eingeschüchtert. Nur 13 Prozent der internationalen Wikipedia-Autorenschaft ist weiblich. Nur Artikel über klassisch männliche Themen wie Fußball werden in der deutschen Wikipedia als "relevant" eingestuft und dürfen daher "überleben". Es gibt kaum deutschsprachige Genderstudien im Modus Open Access. Meist ignorieren die Erhebungen zu den Einstellungen und Praktiken von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern beim Open-Access-Publizieren die Geschlechtervariable. Einzige Ausnahme bildet eine größere Befragung durch die DFG. In dieser Studie wünschen mehr Frauen als Männer Training in Open-Access-Publikationstechniken.
Inhalt: Gender inequality in sciences is an ongoing unsolved issue. Many studies have
been carried out to tackle the gender specific problems in scientific communication
and scientific careers. The EU-Statistics ("She Figures") document the still
dominant pattern of lower female presence in higher academic ranks in almost
all European Union member states. There are discrepancies between EU science
policy and national social policies. The prevailing "publish or perish" attitude,
atypical employment as accepted norm and the forced international mobility are
factors which hamper the young and female academics' scientific careers. How
open for women are the so called "open initiatives"? Women are sceptical towards
FLOSS (free/ libre open source software), they feel intimidated by the male dominated
"chilly" working climate. Only 13 percent of the international Wikipedia
writers are female. Only articles on traditionally male topics as soccer are considered as relevant in the German Wikipedia and are allowed to "survive". There is
almost no open access publishing in German gender studies. Generally the surveys
of attitudes and practices of scholars on open access publishing ignore the gender
variable. The only exception is a larger survey of the DFG. In this study women
more often than men wish more training in open access publishing techniques.
Schlagwörter:publication; gender relations; EU; Gleichstellung; open access; science; Publikation; Open Access; Karriere; Work-life-balance; woman; Geschlechterverhältnis; affirmative action; career; EU; work-life-balance; woman; female; career; scientific communication; scholarly communication; review; Wissenschaftskommunikation; Literaturübersicht; mentor; mentorship; dual career management; mobility; science policy; social policy
SSOAR Kategorie:Wissenschaftssoziologie, Wissenschaftsforschung, Technikforschung, Techniksoziologie, Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung
Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to
raise fertility? : the first "YES"
Autor/in:
Toulemon, Laurent
Quelle: Demographic Research, Vol. 24 (2011) , S. 179-200
Inhalt: "Together with three colleagues, the author has been asked by the MPIDR to debate
the following question: 'Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing
for gender equality to raise fertility?' Setting aside the 'lighthearted' side of
this 'Rostocker Debate', (12 minutes for each speech, one minute for each comment),
the author saws this as a good opportunity to think about the stakes behind the question.
In order to address this complex issue, it is necessary to think about the many 'preliminary
questions' that we have to ponder before responding: Why should fertility be raised?
Are political measures legitimate? Are they efficient? On what basis are we qualified
to give 'expert' opinions on such a topic? When the question comes to the fore, we
as scholars are sometimes asked to provide an answer. It would, of course, be more
comfortable not to answer, but our interlocutors (politicians, journalists, teachers,
and also funding agencies) often want a definite response one way or the other. Even
though our position may be a matter of politics as well as a matter of science, we
must give an answer. The empirical evidence shows that European countries where gender
inequality is lower are also the countries where fertility is the highest. This is
the evidence-based response that we can give to that question. European countries
need to find a new equilibrium after the end of the baby boom period, when gender
equality was very low. In all countries, the empowerment of women is underway, thanks
to the economic independence given by work-related income. Increasing gender equality
is an efficient way to reduce the opportunity costs of having and raising children,
and thus to increase fertility. Finally, 'pushing for gender equality' may have many
positive effects other than raising fertility, and has few negative side effects.
Gender equality is thus a convenient political aim per se; an institutional goal which
leaves many political questions open. So, yes, we agree that governments in Europe
should be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to raise fertility!" (author's
abstract)|
Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to
raise fertility? : the first "NO"
Autor/in:
Philipov, Dimiter
Quelle: Demographic Research, Vol. 24 (2011) , S. 201-216
Inhalt: "This paper takes the 'no' side in the debate on the question posed in the title.
The paper assumes that the dual-earner/ dual-carer household model is the most likely
aim of policies that push aggressively for gender equality in order to raise fertility.
Five objections are discussed: the model does not necessarily lead to a fertility
increase; aggressiveness will lead to an imbalance of labor supply and demand, and
is likely to confront slowly changing cultural norms; similar policies will also confront
the issue of innate gender differences; and country idiosyncrasies prevent the application
of a unified policy approach. The paper briefly concludes that compatible gender-neutral
family policies and fertility-neutral gender policies are likely to lead to an increase
in fertility." (author's abstract)|
Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to
raise fertility? : the second "YES"
Autor/in:
Oláh, Livia Sz.
Quelle: Demographic Research, Vol. 24 (2011) , S. 217-224
Inhalt: "This paper is based on the authoress's contribution to a debate, organized by MPIDR,
on the question displayed in the title above. She was asked to present arguments for
the 'yes'-response (together with Laurent Toulemon, and arguing against the 'no'-side
represented by Gerda Neyer and Dimiter Philipov). As pointed out in the paper, the
most important theoretical reasoning relevant for this question is the gender equity
theory. A number of studies provide sound empirical support to it, as discussed in
the paper in details, and thereby also a rationale for a positive impact of increased
gender equality on fertility. As the dual-earner family is here to stay, and given
the well-known negative consequences of long-term very low fertility for a society,
pushing for gender equality seems to be a reasonable strategy to be considered aiming
for sustainable societal development." (author's abstract)|
Die Allgegenwart der "Androkratie" : feministische Anmerkungen zur "Postdemokratie"
Titelübersetzung:The omnipresence of "androcracy" : feminist comments on "post-democracy"
Autor/in:
Sauer, Birgit
Quelle: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte : Beilage zur Wochenzeitung Das Parlament, (2011) H. 1/2, S. 32-36
Inhalt: Der Beitrag beleuchtet aus feministischer Perspektive die Situation von Frauen in der so genannten Postdemokratie. Den Ausgangspunkt der Erörterung bildet der Standpunkt von Colin Crouch, der die nachdemokratische Konstellation als eine entpolitisierte Situation beschreibt, in der es zwar konkurrierende Parteien und Verbände gibt, in der zwar noch Wahlen stattfinden, aber die BürgerInnen zu bloßen KonsumentInnen eines politisch kaum noch zu unterscheidenden Angebots degradiert werden. Die Autorin geht nun der Frage nach, ob es in liberalen Demokratien im Sinne von Selbstherrschaft, Selbstbestimmung und Autonomie aller BügerInnen überhaupt ein 'Davor' gegeben hat. Zeichnen sich repräsentative Demokratien nicht gerade durch die Kontinuität der Herrschaft über Frauen und ihres Ausschlusses aus politischen Institutionen sowie der Negierung ihrer Interessen - also durch Prädemokratie - aus? So werden im Folgenden die Stagnation bzw. die Rückschläge in der Geschlechtergleichstellung durch einen Blick auf die Geschlechtereffekte der Transformation von Demokratie im Kontext postdemokratischer Entwicklungen erklärt. Vor diesem Hintergrund werden abschließend die Chancen der Geschlechterdemokratisierung thematisiert, wofür drei Aspekte maßgeblich sind: (1) die Schaffung öffentlicher Räume der Diskussion über Fraueninteressen, (2) Institutionen der Vermittlung von frauenbewegten Öffentlichkeiten in das politische System hinein und (3) die Ermächtigung von Frauen zur Politik im Zuge einer sozialen Gleichstellung. (ICG2)
Schlagwörter:Frauenförderung; Frauenpolitik; Feminismus; Demokratie; politische Partizipation; politische Kultur; politisches Handeln; politisches System; Gleichberechtigung; Gleichstellung; Demokratisierung; soziale Ungleichheit; Öffentlichkeit
CEWS Kategorie:Geschlechterverhältnis, Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung
Gender equality and fertility intentions revisited evidence from Finland
Titelübersetzung:Gleichstellung der Geschlechter und Fruchtbarkeitsabsichten, korrigierte Ergebnisse aus Finnland
Autor/in:
Miettinen, Anneli; Basten, Stuart; Rotkirch, Anna
Quelle: Demographic Research, Vol. 24 (2011) , S. 469-496
Inhalt: "Stimulated by the recent debate on gender roles and men's fertility behavior (Puur et al. 2008; Westoff and Higgins 2009; Goldscheider, Oláh and Puur 2010), the authors present evidence from Finland as a country well into the second phase of the so-called gender revolution. They examine how gender role attitudes relate to childbearing intentions at the onset of family life, intentions to have many (3 or more) children, and high personal fertility ideals among low-parity men and women. Gender equality attitudes are measured for both the public and the domestic sphere and the influence of work and family orientation is controlled for. Finding signs of a U-shaped association among men, the authors conclude that both traditional and egalitarian attitudes raise men's expected fertility compared to men with intermediate gender attitudes and independently of family values. Among Finnish women the impact of gender attitudes is smaller and more ambiguous." (author's abstract)
Gleichheit im Job - und am Wickeltisch : Kinderbetreuung durch beide Eltern ist für Wissenschaftlerinnen zentral
Titelübersetzung:Equality in the job - and on the diaper-changing table : child care by both parents is vital to female scientists
Autor/in:
Althaber, Agnieszka; Hess, Johanna; Pfahl, Lisa
Quelle: WZB-Mitteilungen, (2011) H. 133, S. 34-38
Inhalt: "Hochqualifizierte Frauen sehen sich nach der Geburt eines Kindes häufig mit Schwierigkeiten konfrontiert, ihre Karriere fortzuführen. Auch in der Wissenschaft ist für Frauen die Vereinbarkeit von beruflicher Karriere und Familienleben keine Selbstverständlichkeit. Neben vielen anderen Faktoren spielt hierbei auch der private Bereich eine wichtige Rolle. Viele Wissenschaftlerinnen erwarten, dass ihre Partner sich bei der Kinderbetreuung engagieren. Sie tragen aber überwiegend die Hauptverantwortung für die gemeinsamen Kinder. Ohne Entlastung in diesen Aufgaben durch den Partner erfahren Wissenschaftlerinnen häufig Karrierenachteile." (Autorenreferat)
Inhalt: "Highly qualified women often face career disadvantages after the birth of their children. For women in academia, the balance between professional and family duties cannot be taken for granted either. In addition to other factors, the private sphere does play an important role in women's career prospects. Many female academics expect their partners to help with the children. However, women still maintain primary responsibility for children and as a result their academic careers often suffer." (author's abstract)
Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to raise fertility? : the first "YES"
Titelübersetzung:Sollen die Regierungen in Europa mehr für die Gleichstellung der Geschlechter tun, um die Fruchtbarkeit zu erhöhen? : die Antwort ist "ja"
Autor/in:
Toulemon, Laurent
Quelle: Demographic Research, Vol. 24 (2011) , S. 179-200
Inhalt: "Together with three colleagues, the author has been asked by the MPIDR to debate the following question: 'Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to raise fertility?' Setting aside the 'lighthearted' side of this 'Rostocker Debate', (12 minutes for each speech, one minute for each comment), the author saws this as a good opportunity to think about the stakes behind the question. In order to address this complex issue, it is necessary to think about the many 'preliminary questions' that we have to ponder before responding: Why should fertility be raised? Are political measures legitimate? Are they efficient? On what basis are we qualified to give 'expert' opinions on such a topic? When the question comes to the fore, we as scholars are sometimes asked to provide an answer. It would, of course, be more comfortable not to answer, but our interlocutors (politicians, journalists, teachers, and also funding agencies) often want a definite response one way or the other. Even though our position may be a matter of politics as well as a matter of science, we must give an answer. The empirical evidence shows that European countries where gender inequality is lower are also the countries where fertility is the highest. This is the evidence-based response that we can give to that question. European countries need to find a new equilibrium after the end of the baby boom period, when gender equality was very low. In all countries, the empowerment of women is underway, thanks to the economic independence given by work-related income. Increasing gender equality is an efficient way to reduce the opportunity costs of having and raising children, and thus to increase fertility. Finally, 'pushing for gender equality' may have many positive effects other than raising fertility, and has few negative side effects. Gender equality is thus a convenient political aim per se; an institutional goal which leaves many political questions open. So, yes, we agree that governments in Europe should be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to raise fertility!" (author's abstract)
Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to raise fertility? : the first "NO"
Titelübersetzung:Sollen die Regierungen in Europa mehr für die Gleichstellung der Geschlechter tun, um die Fruchtbarkeit zu erhöhen? : die Antwort ist "nein"
Autor/in:
Philipov, Dimiter
Quelle: Demographic Research, Vol. 24 (2011) , S. 201-216
Inhalt: "This paper takes the 'no' side in the debate on the question posed in the title. The paper assumes that the dual-earner/ dual-carer household model is the most likely aim of policies that push aggressively for gender equality in order to raise fertility. Five objections are discussed: the model does not necessarily lead to a fertility increase; aggressiveness will lead to an imbalance of labor supply and demand, and is likely to confront slowly changing cultural norms; similar policies will also confront the issue of innate gender differences; and country idiosyncrasies prevent the application of a unified policy approach. The paper briefly concludes that compatible gender-neutral family policies and fertility-neutral gender policies are likely to lead to an increase in fertility." (author's abstract)
Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to raise fertility? : the second "YES"
Titelübersetzung:Sollen Regierungen in Europa mehr für die Gleichstellung der Geschlechter tun, um die Fruchtbarkeit zu erhöhen? : das zweite "Ja"
Autor/in:
Oláh, Livia Sz.
Quelle: Demographic Research, Vol. 24 (2011) , S. 217-224
Inhalt: "This paper is based on the authoress's contribution to a debate, organized by MPIDR, on the question displayed in the title above. She was asked to present arguments for the 'yes'-response (together with Laurent Toulemon, and arguing against the 'no'-side represented by Gerda Neyer and Dimiter Philipov). As pointed out in the paper, the most important theoretical reasoning relevant for this question is the gender equity theory. A number of studies provide sound empirical support to it, as discussed in the paper in details, and thereby also a rationale for a positive impact of increased gender equality on fertility. As the dual-earner family is here to stay, and given the well-known negative consequences of long-term very low fertility for a society, pushing for gender equality seems to be a reasonable strategy to be considered aiming for sustainable societal development." (author's abstract)
