In article <1993Aug12.120423.1 at molbiol.ox.ac.uk> forsburg at molbiol.ox.ac.uk writes:
>>I'm about to move to a new job. I;ve
>been contrasting my experience as a single hard-working female postdoc
>with several male aquaintances who are also moving. Those who are
>married, to wives who consider the man's career dominant,
>are able to get to work rapidly at the new
>place because their wives will do the domestic stuff, look for houses,
>set up the utilities, etc etc. And once they are in the lab? Their
>dinner will be made, they wont have to "wait for the plumber", or whatever,
>and in my experience, a lot of them ARE unsympathetic about
>those of us who have to do everything ourselves. Domesticity is
>a burden to the single professional. A traditional
^^^^^^^^^^^
>"wife" is a real career advantage.
Strange, I'm not married and do "everything" for myself, also, but feel no
need for sympathy nor do I find it interferes with anything else I do.
My current lover feels more secure that I'm not interested in her to wash
my dishes, clean my apartment, etc. I've been doing domestic chores for so
long, I'm not likely to relapse. :^) I really enjoy her techno-competence
and don't miss her lack of domesticity.
Do you think a woman who does it all herself should get a special break on
tenure, much in the vein that others want mommies to have a year or two
knocked off of their tenure requirements?
>>Where do I find me one? ;-)
"Marry" a lesbian who is domestically-oriented: there is considerable
agitation in the USA for homosexual marriages, for-free lesbian artificial
insemination, joint-filing status for lower tax rates with the Internal
Revenue Service, etc.
Or, as I offered to my current girlfriend, I'd be happy to stay home and
raise "the childern" as long as she can suuport me in the fashion I'm
accustomed to....a serious offer that would solve her baby-urge while not
interfering with her career once she completes her Ph.D. She's thinking
about it. :^) So look for a house-husband!
>>Incidentally, a completely unsupported non-scientific poll of my
>postdoc colleagues suggests that the men are more likely to be married
>than the women. Is this true in Science at Large?
Not just Science-at-Large, but "older" women in general. My reference is a
poll on just this topic done by Newsweek (or was it Time)...and I disclaim
that it applies to the U.K.
It said that there is an inverse relationship between a woman's age and her
first marriage....and specifically, a woman over 30 y.o. has close to ZERO
likelihood of marrying--ever. Thus, if male companionship-marriage-style
is desirable, pay attention to the clock.
Though one might "blame" males for preferring "younger" women, it seems
that an "older" woman's standards are such that finding a man that they
will be "happy" with becomes more "difficult." I say it is not restricted
to Women-In-Science because high-ranking women in business complain very
loudly about how few "eligible" men are "available." And, frankly, I see
their point...to the point that a women with a superior IQ, an
adventuresome mind, exciting career potential and a Ph.D. is very
attractive, indeed.
>>susan
>--
>forsburg at molbiol.ox.ac.uk>then forsburg at salk-sc2.sdsc.edu
