Young Scientists Say They're Sexually Abused In The Field - Polidicks

[QUOTE][IMG]http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2014/07/16/archeology-harrasment_slide-5e022e7c5c863da1e834dcb8a0de27d2b3d78755-s40-c85.jpg[/IMG] [I]Students work at an archaeological dig near Silchester, England.[/I][/QUOTE] [QUOTE] Many young scientists dream of their first trip to a remote research site — who wouldn't want to hang out with chimps like Jane Goodall, or sail to the Galapagos like Charles Darwin, exploring the world and advancing science? But for many scientists, field research can endanger their health and safety. In a survey of scientists engaged in field research, the majority — 64 percent — said they had personally experienced sexual harassment while at a field site, and 22 percent reported being the victim of sexual assault. Most of the people reporting harassment or assault were women, and the vast majority were still students or postdocs. And for female victims, the perpetrator was more likely to be a superior, not a peer. "This is happening to them when they are trainees, when they are most vulnerable within the academic hierarchy," says evolutionary biologist Katie Hinde, an author on the study published Wednesday in PLOS ONE. Hinde and her colleagues say this could be a factor in the large number of women who enter scientific fields but don't continue. A total of 666 scientists, primarily in the fields of anthropology and archaeology, completed the voluntary Internet survey. And while the results do not reflect the true prevalence of sexual abuse in field research — this type of survey is not designed to measure that — the numbers are still alarming. While sexual violence can occur in all workplaces — roughly 50 percent of women report experiencing sexual harassment at some point in their careers — Hinde says the particular nature of field sites, where researchers are far from home, and the lines between work life and personal life are blurred, may make them more prone to this type of wrongdoing. But in the survey, fewer than half of respondents recalled ever having encountered a code of conduct or sexual harassment policy at their field sites. "People are being told 'what happens in the field stays in the field,' " says biological anthropologist Kathryn Clancy, who led the survey team. Many academic sciences have a problem retaining women. Though they enter the disciplines in high numbers, many leave before they reach the postdoctorate or professor level. The lack of role models and mentors and professional demands that leave little time for family life have been cited as reasons. "One of the things that is not discussed out loud very much is how sexual harassment and sexual assault play into this problem," says Hinde. Psychologist Rebecca Campbell, who studies the effect of sexual harassment on communities, says that while all workplace harassment is harmful, it can be particularly damaging when coming from a superior.She also says these findings should be incorporated into the broader discussion about campus sexual harassment and violence. "The cultural narrative is that this is two drunk college kids in a dorm room, and we are seeing now that sexual assault is occurring as part of the core curriculum," says Campbell. While both Hinde and Clancy say that it was difficult to parse so many stories of wrongdoing perpetrated by and against their colleagues, they hope the results spur scientific communities to come together in search of a solution. [/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/07/17/331737485/young-scientists-say-theyre-sexually-abused-in-the-field[/url]

1 in 4 women being sexually assaulted during field research is fucking disgraceful. Especially when it's someone who has control over your career future and is using it to leverage you into agreeing to something. No fucking wonder there aren't more women doing applied science in the field.

[quote]A total of 666 scientists, primarily in the fields of anthropology and archaeology, completed the voluntary Internet survey.[/quote] Proof that women are the devil.

[QUOTE=Monkah;45433914]Proof that women are the devil.[/QUOTE] No you idiot, it's proof that science is the devil and that evolution is too. [editline]18th July 2014[/editline] and not real like dinosaurs or science

[QUOTE=LSK;45433945]No you idiot, it's proof that science is the devil and that evolution is too. [editline]18th July 2014[/editline] and not real like dinosaurs[/QUOTE] why do we need science when we have god?

[quote]who wouldn't want to hang out with chimps like Jane Goodall[/quote] Wow, that was uncalled for.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;45433980]Wow, that was uncalled for.[/QUOTE] Amphibology in action.

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;45433911]1 in 4 women being sexually assaulted during field research is fucking disgraceful. Especially when it's someone who has control over your career future and is using it to leverage you into agreeing to something. No fucking wonder there aren't more women doing applied science in the field.[/QUOTE] no but you see, is because women don't actually like science/its just nature, let nature takes its course!(this is the argument some facepunchers use in the many threads about gender issues in most scientific fields). :v: like this one. [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1213518[/url]

[QUOTE=Wizards Court;45434058]no but you see, is because women don't actually like science/its just nature, let nature takes its course!(this is the argument some facepunchers use in the many threads about gender issues in most scientific fields). :v: like this one. [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1213518[/url][/QUOTE] Can we get an English version of this post?

[QUOTE=Martele;45434378]Can we get an English version of this post?[/QUOTE] Here you go. [QUOTE=Wizards Court;45434058]No, but you see... this is because women don't actually like science. It's just in their nature and we should let nature take its course! (This is the argument that some facepunchers use, in the many threads about gender issues regarding most scientific fields). :v: Like this one: [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1213518[/url][/QUOTE] [added]1405745908[/added] Creepy harassment type bosses, need to piss off. They're scaring all of my Sarah Hardings and Ellie Satlers away... But, seriously though... these dudes need to back away from the ladies.

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;45433911]1 in 4 [B]people[/B] being sexually assaulted during field research is fucking disgraceful. Especially when it's someone who has control over your career future and is using it to leverage you into agreeing to something. No fucking wonder there aren't more women doing applied science in the field.[/QUOTE] Fixed, the article said nothing about the gender of those statistics, but no one cares if a guy gets raped.

Satan planted fake dinosaur bones into the Earth so perverts could molest women at digsites.

Fucking disgraceful.

Not to downplay what is obviously a terrible problem, but what are the boundaries that define 'sexual harassment' in this study? In cases like these it could be something like making comments about a woman's body, or it could just be two guys making a penis joke in earshot of one of the women. 64% is a ridiculously high amount if it's the former. The sexual assault is a different story.

[QUOTE=darcy010;45434991]Not to downplay what is obviously a terrible problem, but what are the boundaries that define 'sexual harassment' in this study? In cases like these it could be something like making comments about a woman's body, or it could just be two guys making a penis joke in earshot of one of the women. 64% is a ridiculously high amount if it's the former. The sexual assault is a different story.[/QUOTE] Sexual harrassment is 'bitch I'd rip those panties and fuck you brainless, come with me' being said to you a good 20 times per day with increasing insistence. sexual assault is when one day they eventually grope you after all those [i]flattering[/i] comments.

-disregard-

That's some disgusting behavior going on. "No, I don't want to!" "It's just me and you and the chimps baby and I don't like them hairy...well, not THAT hairy."

[QUOTE=lapsus_;45435052]Sexual harrassment is 'bitch I'd rip those panties and fuck you brainless, come with me' being said to you a good 20 times per day with increasing insistence. sexual assault is when one day they eventually grope you after all those [i]flattering[/i] comments.[/QUOTE]That's the reasonable way of looking at things, darcy010 was asking if the terms were applied... [i]more liberally[/i] than necessary. Unfortunately it's a question that's going to come up because some people are a bit weird and think sexual harassment is all sorts of things that it's not. [QUOTE=Glitchbunny;45435114]What? Salesman took the 22% sexually abused statistic from the article and only stated women. The article itself mentions both men and women victims. The only comment it makes on this is that the majority were women.[/QUOTE]I'm pretty sure that was the point. Salesman incorrectly said "women" when the article doesn't explicitly say that all 22% were women. So if there were 15% women and 7% men that were harassed, the statement that one in four women are harassed would be incorrect as it would be one in five women instead.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;45435169]Unfortunately that's the reasonable way of looking at things, darcy010 was asking if the terms were applied... [i]more liberally[/i] than necessary. I'm pretty sure that was the point. Salesman incorrectly said "women" when the article doesn't explicitly say that all 22% were women. So if there were 15% women and 7% men that were harassed, the statement that one in four women are harassed would be incorrect as it would be one in five women instead.[/QUOTE] Yeah you're right, my bad. Didn't read it correctly. Apologies Crimor.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;45435169]That's the reasonable way of looking at things, darcy010 was asking if the terms were applied... [i]more liberally[/i] than necessary. Unfortunately it's a question that's going to come up because some people are a bit weird and think sexual harassment is all sorts of things that it's not.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]The survey used operationalized definitions of phenomena generally characterized as "harassment" by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [17], and "assault" by WomensLaw.org [20] without specifically using the terms "harassment" or "assault" to avoid making respondents name their experiences (see Materials S1 for the full survey). This design is consistent with other studies [21] that address prevalence of these phenomena because the survey data allow for objective and subjective assessments of experience.[/QUOTE] It isn't in the article, yo, I had to actually look at the PlosOne page.

[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;45435236][/QUOTE]Oops, looks like Darcy010 and I can't read. D: Thanks for clearing that up.

[QUOTE=Crimor;45434779]wat about the men????[/QUOTE] lol [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Db9P4fW.png[/img_thumb] look at the study before you post your mens right BS

[QUOTE=Shadaez;45435260]lol [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Db9P4fW.png[/img_thumb] look at the study before you post your mens right BS[/QUOTE] Not to say women don't have it bad, but as the data you chose would also reflect, this survey is really, [I]really[/I] bad to show actual rates of sexual harassment. [QUOTE]Researchers distributed the link to the survey to potential respondents through e-mail and online social networks (Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn). Links to the survey on field experiences were posted on Facebook group pages for the Evolutionary Anthropology Society Social Network, Biological Anthropology Developing Investigators Troop, Biological Anthropology Section of the American Anthropological Association, Membership of the American Society of Primatologists, and BioAnthropology News. These links were then shared and retweeted by colleagues and disseminated using chain referral sampling (in a snowball manner) [23]. Links to the survey were also provided on science and service blogs operated by two of the study's authors [24], [25], [26] (KC and JR) and at the conclusion of print and online news reports of the ongoing study [27].[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]The sample was potentially biased by ethical, pre-participation disclosure that questions regarding these topics were in the survey. Some people may have been more likely to participate in the survey if they had negative experiences, some people may have been more likely to forward the survey link to individuals who had previously disclosed negative experiences in private conversation (snowball sampling), and some people may have been less inclined to participate in this survey to avoid emotional stress of sharing their experiences. Several colleagues directly informed the study authors that they would not participate because revisiting their experiences was too traumatic. Thus, it is unclear if the self-selection of this sample produces over- or under-reporting of negative field experiences.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]One potential concern one could have was that individuals with negative experiences could take the survey multiple times, becoming disproportionately represented in the dataset of their experiences. However, nearly all respondents provided a unique identifier in the form of an e-mail address (N = 628, 94.3%). Comparison between the group that provided a unique identifier and those that did not (N = 38) revealed that the two groups did not significantly differ in the composition of their gender, sexual orientations, race/ethnicity, ages, countries of origin, or career stages (all p>0.4). We combined the two groups for subsequent analyses, but did evaluate for differences in harassment and assault (see results).[/QUOTE] The article said so as well, and the headline actually reflects this ("Young scientists say they're sexually abused in the field" and not "x percent of scientists have experienced sexual harassment"). So really, the numbers aren't that useful - but that's not to say women don't get sexually harassed, as they very well might be. The study is just not that great at showing actual rates.

[QUOTE=lapsus_;45435052]Sexual harrassment is 'bitch I'd rip those panties and fuck you brainless, come with me' being said to you a good 20 times per day with increasing insistence. sexual assault is when one day they eventually grope you after all those [i]flattering[/i] comments.[/QUOTE] Yes but that's not what he was asking. He was asking what constitutes sexual harassment and assault in this context. I'd also like to know how many of these allegations are legitimate, some people define something as innocent as "I like your hair" as sexual harassment, or someone touching their arm as sexual assault. Not saying that's necessarily the case in any of these instances but without actual investigation it's hard to say either way.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;45435505]The article said so as well, and the headline actually reflects this ("Young scientists say they're sexually abused in the field" and not "x percent of scientists have experienced sexual harassment"). So really, the numbers aren't that useful - but that's not to say women don't get sexually harassed, as they very well might be. The study is just not that great at showing actual rates.[/QUOTE] I was going to post this but you already have so I'm just going to emphasize the importance of this factor: this kind of selection process along with the nature of the survey means that it is very hard to take any usable numbers away from this study. To rephrase: this study shows there seems to be a problem with sexual abuse in the field, but the numbers are, at best, a guideline. Don't start quoting off things like "1 in 4 women" because the accuracy of that statement cannot be verified at all. A more rigorous study will be required before that kind of thing can be said with any reliability. For the less statistically inclined who may wonder why you should refrain from directly quoting these numbers, the brief answer is this: - non-random sample + potentially shared with known victims (increases likelyhood of over or under reporting) - self-administered (no scientist to answer questions and provide definitions, which will decrease the accuracy of answers overall. See penis-size surveys for why this a problem) - over 5% took survey twice with same email address, potentially more retook it with different addresses (self-explanatory I hope) - the well-known issue of underreporting of sexual assault (both men and women are sometimes reluctant to report sexual assault for a wide variety of reasons) It's good to talk about this problem, just please don't quote the numbers. [QUOTE=Morbo!!!;45436204]Yes but that's not what he was asking. He was asking what constitutes sexual harassment and assault in this context. I'd also like to know how many of these allegations are legitimate, some people define something as innocent as "I like your hair" as sexual harassment, or someone touching their arm as sexual assault. Not saying that's necessarily the case in any of these instances but without actual investigation it's hard to say either way.[/QUOTE] Because of the confusion I'm reading the documents and questions given to the subjects now. I'll edit this post once I get through it. [quote]Have you ever personally experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes, at an anthropological field site?[/quote] [quote]Have you ever experienced physical sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual contact in which you could not or did not give consent or felt it would be unsafe to fight back or not give your consent at an anthropological field site?[/quote] These are the two big questions in the study (the rest are either descriptions of yourself, the worksite, or subsections of these two questions). As you can see, the questions are very open to personal interpretation, and the first one includes some iffy content. The questions were not free-write questions, they were multiple choice with the choices "Yes", "No", and "I don't know". Also the documents included no definition or description of what may or may not be sexual harrassment or assault, along with no description of what is or is not consent, so it's all up to the interpretation of the person taking the study. This is the fault of self-administered studies, you will get these problems almost every time.

[QUOTE=Crimor;45434779]Fixed, the article said nothing about the gender of those statistics, but no one cares if a guy gets raped.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Shadaez;45435260] [QUOTE=Crimor;45434779]wat about the men?????[/QUOTE] lol [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Db9P4fW.png[/img_thumb] look at the study before you post your mens right BS[/QUOTE] Because [I]clearly[/I], pointing out how rape against men is often overlooked without realizing that the article has statistics for that is just like being one of those awful reddit fedora-wearing men's rights activists, right? Better edit their quotes to turn them into a strawman! :downs:

[QUOTE=Aphtonites;45436362]Because [I]clearly[/I], pointing out how rape against men is often overlooked without realizing that the article has statistics for that is just like being one of those awful reddit fedora-wearing men's rights activists, right? Better edit their quotes to turn them into a strawman! :downs:[/QUOTE] In a response to trying to correct an already correct statistic from a study to make it about men, it's pretty shitty and detracts from the major point of it. I got a bit excited to get to point out someone being wrong on the internet, so I apologize for the name calling

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;45433911]1 in 4 women being sexually assaulted during field research is fucking disgraceful. Especially when it's someone who has control over your career future and is using it to leverage you into agreeing to something. No fucking wonder there aren't more women doing applied science in the field.[/QUOTE] Same thing happens in politics and the army. It's fucking disgraceful. Hopefully soon enough people start mostly getting away with this shit.

This is like that Star Trek TNG episode when Picard raped all of his female crew in the name of science and fact. Oh.. nevermind. Picard was a good leader and an actual scientist. Not some perv looking to get some ass.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;45435169]I'm pretty sure that was the point. Salesman incorrectly said "women" when the article doesn't explicitly say that all 22% were women. So if there were 15% women and 7% men that were harassed, the statement that one in four women are harassed would be incorrect as it would be one in five women instead.[/QUOTE] I don't think that's how math works. Let's say that there were an equal number of male and female scientists, just as an example. If the 22% was made up of 15% women and 7% men, then [I]30[/I]% of women and [I]14[/I]% of men would be assaulted. You have to divide by the percent the population takes up. [QUOTE=outlawpickle;45436678]This is like that Star Trek TNG episode when Picard raped all of his female crew in the name of science and fact. Oh.. nevermind. Picard was a good leader and an actual scientist. Not some perv looking to get some ass.[/QUOTE] No, no he was not. He's a [I]fictional[/I] scientist. I have no idea why you would post this.