Oldal 106 [106]
IZOLDA TAKÁCS: THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY
the traditional stereotypes), and they consider themselves to be bearers of
assumed female traits (from statements like: “we women tend to be more...”,
“women don’t want that (to be leaders)”, “Women are not fit to lead...”, etc.).
Gender stereotypes were denied by the 4th group (“classical equality”) the
most, and - interestingly — the members of the “alternative” grouping do not
identify the majority of known stereotypes as gender-specific. The recognition
of these latter can already be seen in society, and can be explained by the
phenomenon of norm violations, which tends to be more and more natural.
(See above, Subject no. 17: “The young adults [...] find this old, traditional di¬
vision as an object of ridicule”.)
Ihe analysis has also allowed us to conclude that the interviewees find
gender identity and subjective value judgement to be a less important aspect
in the field of natural and technical sciences. Objectivity in a given field push¬
es the subject as a person — and thereby the issue of gender — into the back¬
ground. This is why female scholars tend to accept the existing set of rules
created by men more in these areas, and do not intend to change them, nor
introduce the specific female identity or point of view onto the playing field.
Their assimilation supports the status quo from a certain perspective, mean¬
ing they paradoxically maintain gender stereotypes by entering a male-dom¬
inated field.
The phrase ‘female scholar’ had long been considered an oxymoron, the
characteristics and roles defined and limited by gender were always arbitrarily
attached to men and women. This is why the lack of footing in the academic
field, the lack or fragmented nature of reinforcing norms — which has a deter¬
mining presence to this day — has made the scientific self-articulation of
women problematic in general. It is, however, apparent that the reasons behind
the phenomenon have to be investigated from further aspects in order to get
a clearer picture. The sample, on the other hand, showed that differences
mainly originate from how and to what extent female scholars can identify
with women as a social cluster (gender identity). This question revealed dif¬
ferences in spite of the similar background and level of education — which in
many aspects is not dissimilar to what can be considered generally true for
women in the society.