Page 87 [87]
WOMEN IN THE SCIENTIFIC ELITE
addressed somehow, it can even be positive discrimination, I honestly don’t care how
we name it. (Subject no. 3, natural sciences)
Since identification with the cluster of women cannot only be interpreted
and identified from the attitude toward positive discrimination, not least be¬
cause efforts to raise the number of female scholars can be accompanied with
other measures as well (like changing the electoral regulation of the Academy),
it became clear during analysis that a more polished method is required. The
additional dimensions created along the high or low intensity of identification
with the cluster of women are primarily shaped based on GIM. I find it im¬
portant to stress that the GIM introduced and applied in this paper has merely
assisted in grouping the Subjects. The separate categories can be applied in my
sample by necessity, they are however far from being sufficient (especially due
to the method being qualitative analysis). GIM-types can therefore not cover
every aspect that presented itself in the analysed sample. As a consequence,
the types to be found below have been created using both the models and
approaches (MIA) mentioned above as well as my own conclusions.
It became clear during the analysis of the interviews that, despite the fact
that all interviewees have similar family backgrounds (supporting parents,
parents with an academic degree), have the same academic title (MSc of the
MTA), had similar opportunities due to the historical context (state socialism),
and had faced the same political-ideological obstacles during their careers,
they nevertheless have vastly different opinions on several issues with regards
to certain aspects of the social role of women. That is why they could at first
be grouped similarly to women in a larger, more diverse population (as appear¬
ing in GIM by Becker and Wagner as well as MIA applied by Van Breen and
associates).
GROUPS ESTABLISHED FROM THE GENDER IDENTITY MODEL
As previously mentioned, four groups were initially created with the assistance
of GIM. It was clear during the process that the term “traditional” only refers
to family roles and not to career in the sample. The path of female scholars
preferring traditional roles in their family lives can be described by the so¬
called “dual attachment” model, specific to women who find a “family career”
equally important to their “labour market career”.** Gender identification was
found to be both low and high in the analysed sample, while being traditional
or progressive in terms of content.?®
264 Koncz: A mainstream nőpolitika zsákutca?!, 469.
265 Cf. Becker-Wagner: Doing Gender Differently.
+ 85 +