An incomplete list of of things you can do, for white men in science who say "what can I do????"

On International Women’s Day, Kenyan poet and playwright Shailja Patel posted a poem to Twitter:

Days earlier, best ‘actress’ [sic] winner Frances McDormand had concluded her Oscars speech with the two words inclusion rider.

What would enacting Patel’s and McDormand’s exhortations look like in science and academia in New Zealand? Let's just say, because of recent events, I have little tolerance for performative 'But I don't know what to dooooooo?!' Instead of bemoaning the size of problem, get on with being accountable, transparent, and replicable - you know, like good science.

What can you do? Well, here's an incomplete list (rant); hopefully people will add things in the comments! 

Science journalist Ed Yong recently wrote about his 2-year journey towards fixing the gender imbalance in his stories. I challenge men in science who identify as allies to assess their own reading, citation, and crediting practises. Evaluate your own data – start a spreadsheet, and note your current statistics – then commit to improving them. Over say 2 years, like Yong, with effort, your reading and citations can be diversified. Don’t just read and cite women – read and cite non-men, read and cite non-white or non-dominant culture voices. Commit to this practise, and model this to your students and colleagues. Don’t tell me it is hard: look harder, do your research, YOU ARE A SCIENTIST, THIS IS LITERALLY YOUR JOB.

Next, review your pedagogic metaphors and scenarios – revise and update any biased and stereotyped descriptions or language. Commit to doing this regularly, and note this in your teaching practise. Let students know that you are keen to have their feedback about language and models – because you respect their lived experiences as expertise. Look at your supervision histories: how many people unlike yourself have you supervised? What training and development have you done in cultural competency to supervise in culturally appropriate ways for non-dominant cultures in your communities? How are you communicating your research group’s values? Have you made explicit statements on your research group website regarding equity, access, diversity, and inclusion? If not, DO SO. Tell potential students about the things you do to make sure they are safe at your institution – but only if YOU ARE ACTUALLY DOING THEM.

If you’re on editorial boards; publish the work of women, and under-represented minorities/non-dominant cultures. If you’re on committees that hire, award, pay, and otherwise reward scholarship – commit to regular training in bias and stereotypes, commit to quotas as one mechanism to right historic wrongs, commit to listening to the voices that are unheard in those rooms, or talked over. Ask for advice, bring in experts, revise decisions, make decisions in public, acknowledge when you are wrong. If you have a role in your institution which provides opportunity to be part of institutional decision-making (ie you are a head of department, a director of a large multi-institution project or research centre etc) be relentless in your demands for the prioritisation of equity, diversity, inclusion, and access. Do you know how TIRING it is to always be both a minority at the table AND the voice of dissent? Step up, ask the annoying questions, use your power. But also, wash the dishes. Do the small inglorious acts of mahi which support a better, more inclusive workplace.

Turn down opportunities to talk, present, and promote your work. EVERY TIME, ask what the diversity is of voices on the panel/the radio/at the event. Make your expectations clear. Reply with a list of diverse colleagues they should approach instead. If you are the major newspaper or TV show’s ‘go-to’ on science, promote other voices, unlike your own. Have a standard contract/email for invitations to conferences and panels which makes it clear that you will, at the last minute, embarrassingly and publicly withdraw if your expectations about the conference’s diversity and inclusivity are not met. Suggest other people that panel organisers and conference committees should approach instead of you.  Step aside, be quiet, sit down.

Every time you use something a woman or under-represented minority colleague or writer or scholar wrote or said or made, acknowledge them. EVERY TIME. If someone asks for something on twitter, link them to the work, and tag the writer/maker/creator BUT also say “person x, who wrote this, won’t have time to help you understand/answer your questions, BUT I DO”. You have 280 characters now – use them to take on some of the unpaid labour that EVERY SINGLE ONE of these colleagues of yours does, with no recognition. Regularly assess who you follow – how many diverse voices? How many people who will post things that will make you think? Follow more non-men, more people of colour, more indigenous voices. Listen, don’t ask them to explain things to you, do your own research. Notice their unpaid labour. Acknowledge it. Ask if there are bits of it you can help with or do. Don’t white-knight; ask if your help is required.

And for goodness’ sake. The gender pay gap exists; in EVERY single workplace and institution. So EVERY time you talk money at work, acknowledge this fact. Publicise your own salary and any additional payments, make it clear when you are negotiating your salary what your expectations are around transparency and fairness to your colleagues. Your institution monetises your research, your mana, your capacity to draw in graduate students – and in return you can add any number of requests to your inclusion rider. If you get paid for events, make sure that all the other speakers or invitees know that you got paid – and make sure that they’re getting paid too. The patriarchy relies on your silence about money to perpetuate pay gaps and financial inequities. Don’t be complicit.

 Hear our stories. Believe our stories. Understand that those stories are also ‘data’.  Listen to things that make you uncomfortable. Understand that we will hold you to account, even though we know you are trying, because only through feedback and calling in can we all make this, science and academia, better.