| What do you do at the Museum?
My position as a curator comprises three quite different fields in the realm of research and education. In my research I focus on the bio-diversity and evolution of spiders and millipedes, and I conduct investigations into their behavior and ecological role. This research is driven alone by my curiosity and interests.
By following my interests, I acquire an extensive knowledge in various details of spider and millipede species. This knowledge is put to use in various ways. I assist in the development of exhibits. When you come to The Field Museum our curators and exhibit developers stand behind every label in our exhibits. I also participate in the development of educational material for schools. Book publishers request that I review texts dealing with spiders and millipedes; it may be that I reviewed sections in a schoolbook you use.
The third area of my work concerns the maintenance and growth of our specimen collections. The collections provide the base for current and future research in conservation, bio-diversity, ecology and evolution. Scientific research collections can be used by any researcher anywhere worldwide. Parts of The Field Museum's material are shipped to various countries where researchers use the specimens to follow their interest and to answer ecological and evolutionary questions regarding the organisms in their countries.
 What do you love about your work in your position?
It is especially the combination of these three areas that I cherish about my position. The Field Museum is one of the very few large research museums in the world. As such, it offers the extremely rare opportunity to "curiosity-driven" basic research into the diversity of living organisms.
Selection of research topics does not have to be rationalized by immediate economic goals or profits. This means that researchers are free to follow their individual interests and use their unique thinking patterns when investigating a scientific problem. This type of research has always been rare and sparsely funded. In the past such research was considered 'gentlemen-science': only persons of independent wealth were able to pursue it.
I deeply enjoy using my scientific expertise for exhibit development, educational, and environmental programs. It is very important to me that knowledge can be placed into the service of others.
The collections I help to build and maintain have been gathered by numerous scientists and amateurs before me and will serve long after new researchers and new research techniques will come along. Due to our worldwide loan traffic I am in constant contact with researchers in many other countries. This provides me with a very stimulating interaction across political and cultural barriers.
Do you see any ways that your work fits in with conservation?
All monographic work describing species forms the basis for conservation. We can't protect when we don't know what we have. For example, my work on African and Asian fishing spiders described all known species in detail so that they can be correctly identified. Also, species new to science are described. Any conservation effort must be based on a clear understanding of species diversity and species richness of a particular place.
I use my knowledge on spiders and millipedes to participate in ecological studies conducted by the Field Museum's Environmental and Conservation Program. By determining which and how many different spider and millipede species live in various prairie remnants around Chicago, I hope to help in restoration projects. A well-preserved and well-organized collection of identified specimens captures species distribution from different times.
Research on such specimen collections facilitates discovering changes in species composition. By building and improving existing collections I facilitate such future research.
Have gender differences affected the path of your career?
Absolutely yes. From as long as I can remember I was interested in science and was leaning towards physics and chemistry as fields of study. But when I grew up, biology was the only science that was considered acceptable for a woman. In 7th grade, our mathematics teacher commented about the uselessness of us girls learning mathematics, since "you will marry anyway." Our complaint about this statement to our female homeroom teacher was not well received.
Have you experienced barriers based on gender?
When I was asked the same question several years ago in a survey conducted by a German academic funding agency for gifted pre-doctoral students, I reflected on my past experiences in this regard. My memories consist of small anecdotes and comments, some of them hilariously ridiculous, from parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, teachers, professors, and the next door neighbor. A biology professor at my alma mater seriously suggested that I had to be a militant feminist and man-hater, because I studied spiders ("because all spiders kill their mates"). For the record: he was not a systematist, and most spiders do not kill their mates. I dare to suggest that part of my perseverance was to prove them wrong. Although I grew up in Europe where conditions may have been and are different from the States, inferring from reruns in American television we all grew up under severely restricting gender stereotypes. Cultural programs and the arts, most works of world literature we all studied in school, were and still are written from a male perspective. Major events in what is still considered "women's world" were not, and are not featured to an equal extent, and are not adequately addressed in the professional world. Since mothers still carry the main burden of child care, the issues around parenthood become the most significant problems for women when advancing their careers. A very recent quote from a successful (and still fairly young) female biologist: "I would not have this position if I would have had children."
Do you think that the situation is going to change?
Past and present gender stereotypes do not affect women alone. Men are similarly trapped, but in a different stereotype. In addition, current economic conditions influence the working conditions of scientists in the basic, non-applied life sciences in a unique way. The most pronounced feature in my experience is the difficulty to arrange family life with a scientific career path. My comments in this regard are not to be viewed as a comprehensive analysis of all factors, but I would like to highlight a few I found to be influencing my personal path.
The education for a Ph.D. level scientist is one of the longest time spans during which virtually no personal income can be realized. In addition, starting salaries in the basic life science field are alarmingly low. As a result, both male and female scientists are rarely parents, or become parents very late in life. Ph.D.-level research positions are very rare, and the number of positions has actually decreased in the past five years. In addition, colleges and universities (at least in urban areas) offer an increasing number of extremely low-paid, part-time positions with absolutely no benefits (while still charging parents and student full tuition). This practice has been reviewed in the press recently. Such positions do not help a Ph.D.-level researcher while waiting for one of the few research positions to open. Thus, the path to a research position becomes even harder to travel. Biologically, women simply cannot wait as long as males and the number of female scientists who are also mothers will not increase before these conditions change.
It is most likely not intentional discrimination that shapes the current gender make-up of research scientists and the under-representation of parents, especially of mothers, in the field. The persistence of working conditions, attitudes, and inflexibility that originated before women ever entered research science careers, combined with low starting salaries after too long an education period cause a selection against the "family-scientist."
|
