Page 99 [99]
OCR
WOMEN IN THE SCIENTIFIC ELITE We can see here that identifying with feminists led to supporting more radical, collective action, and thatthere is a substantial critical attitude toward gender stereotypes.?®! 4th group: the “classical equality” type (progressive non-identifiers) A separate category was composed ofthose few interviewees who deemed that in science there is no need to care about who is male and who is female. They all stressed that they are present in their field not as women, but as representatives of themselves and their scientific area. Identification with the cluster of women was at its lowest in this group. They exclusively stressed legal equality, which they find to be sufficient for women as well. They find themselves to be more akin to their husbands / other men in the profession, or they did not address the issue of gender at all. The identification with a professional identity considered to be “manly” is clearly present in this model.*® The “progressive non-identifiers” of GIM (“non-identifiers” according to the multidimensional model, i. e. the MIA) identify neither with women nor feminists. They can however be linked to a branch of feminism that undermines womanhood and emphasises only legal (classical) equality. This is why all of them are explicitly against the gender issue appearing in the scientific field at all. They firmly state that gender is not relevant in science at all. Which is why they are completely indifferent to the number of female academicians. I don’t really like this “women need to be academicians too!” initiative. I think nobody intends to dance, so why is it not completely irrelevant who is a man or a woman at the Academy? If they really intend to be gender neutral, the question of how many men and women there are should not even arise. Whoever has the ambition on one hand and the merit on the other, should become an Academician, regardless of them being a man or a woman. (Subject no. 22, natural sciences) They think the numbers are misleading, because performance is all that matters. Therefore, the fact that there are only a few women at the academy is not considered an issue by them. They in fact emphasise that if women are really successful in their own field, that minor proportion should be just as sufficient in shaping a model role. They are in agreement in the opinion that receiving any sort of advantage solely because of being (born as) a biological woman is degrading and counter-productive. Their conclusion is that the issue 281 Van Breen et al.: A Multiple Identity, 9. 282 Becker—Wagner: Doing Gender Differently. + 97 +
