Oldal 91 [91]
OCR
WOMEN IN THE SCIENTIFIC ELITE she is assertive, that means her womanhood suffers from it. (Subject no. 20, human sciences) My observations lead me to believe that the different attitude toward leadership roles is primarily not based on the biologically determined differences men and women are born with, but on individual character traits stemming from personality and the persona as well as socialisation. An example from my own life: I never wanted to become a leader, I have trouble enough as it is, I don’t need to be responsible for the troubles of others as well [...] And to appear in meetings, to decide the fate of people, do I hire them or not, are they sick or not, this is not something for me. (Subject no. 21, natural sciences) My other motive for not accepting the position of department head was that there were cutbacks back then and certain peers had to be sent away, and this was something I couldn’t possibly deal with. (Subject no. 16, social sciences) The literature links attributes like understanding, intuitiveness, empathy, sentimentality, conflict avoidance and paying attention to emotions — mainly associated with women — to failings in leadership. Members of this group have all unequivocally stated that women are excellent scholars and researchers, but no leaders. A psychological explanation can be linked to the above, which interprets differences in social roles with certain conflicts of character attached to both genders. What does it mean for example to be a good leader, a good academician, dean, physicist, etc.? Based on this myth, the image of a good leader, dean, physicist, etc. is almost exclusively linked to traits that are typically manly, considered manly or are commonly found in men. And this is certainly opposing the question “what does it mean to be a woman?”. The term?" “think manager-think male” (TMTM)?” has been made famous regarding leadership roles. Given, however, that women do not even wish to be leaders in their opinion, they deny the existence of any real conflict between the two genders in this area. Iam a great second. For example, I can give good ideas, etc., but if I were to take a step further up, I have doubts I would be capable of exerting that type of leadership attitude. (Subject no. 24, human sciences) One of the academicians interviewed — who is almost an archetypical example of this category — views the difference theory of Deborah Tanenn 269 As I have mentioned in the second chapter. 270 Ryan et al.: Think crisis—think female. + 89 «
