Page 101 [101]
OCR
WOMEN IN THE SCIENTIFIC ELITE have always had a much bigger role, pushing the subject more to the foreground. The value of such scientific publications often depends on who wrote them under what circumstances. This is also proven by the fact that the majority of female scholars grouped into this category is representative of natural sciences, which are considered manly. The difference with the other models has presented itself in another aspect as well: while the earlier groups found the academic role and raising the number of female academicians (to a lesser or larger extent or even absolutely) to be important, the members of this group have not addressed this question during their career at all, and they have ambitioned neither academic nor leadership roles themselves. 5th group: the “alternative” type This type is not included in the GIM, and it differs from the 3rd group labelled “progressive identifiers” in one aspect: identification with women presents itself much more radically and fundamentally differently. This is why I found the creation of a separate group justified, drawing attention to these significant differences, which can also be interpreted as a reaction to recent social changes. As has already been mentioned in the theoretical section of the chapter, previous surveys show that radical collective action in the interest of improving the social status of women needs to be in positive relation with the politicised attitudes, the identification with feminists, whereas it is negatively related to identification with women — but only in case the radical action is considered to be atypical by women from a gender perspective. The 2nd group, labelled “essentialist identifiers”, can be considered the best example for the above.”** The identification with both feminists and women presents itself equally radically in the alternative group however, and means exclusively positive collective identification with regards to the latter. Women in the alternative group (only a few female scholars could be considered as belonging here) accept the traits labelled “masculine”, as well as the female stereotypes, but they typically do not separate traditionally womanly and manly attitudes based on gender. I was a pronouncedly manly leader. Even though my looks create motherly associations. But a mother can allow herself to be manly as well. (Subject no. 17, social sciences) They consider women to be both manly or womanly, just as a man can be either as well. Which means belonging to the female gender does not 284 Eagly et al., quoted by Van Breen et al.: A Multiple Identity, 1. + 99 +
