Gender bias in the scientific world from someone who knows the score

Professor Ben Barres says the reason there are fewer women in academic research is because of gender bias rather than a lack of aptitude.

Barres knows what he's talking about because he is a transgender scientist who has worked as both a man and a woman.

His is probably the most informed voice in the debate about whether men's brains are innately better suited for science than women's, as he is not presenting an abstract argument about the similarities and differences between the genders, because he has lived as both.

Ben Barres, MD, PhD, is a professor of neurobiology, neurology and neurological sciences at the Stanford University School of Medicine.

He says, in response to the comments of former Harvard University president Lawrence Summers, that the dearth of women in the upper levels of science is rooted in biology, that the scientific world is basically a 'street fight'.

Barres' comments are in the form of an article in the journal Nature and come less than a month after Lawrence Summers stood down as Harvard University's president having sparked controversy last year by saying innate differences between men and women may explain why so few women work in academia.

Where Summers sees innate differences, Barres sees discrimination and says as a young woman 'Barbara', he was actively discouraged from setting his sights on the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he ended up receiving his bachelor's degree.

Once there, he was told that a boyfriend must have solved a hard math problem that he had answered and that had stumped most men in the class.

Ben Barres says following his gender change in 1997 he overheard a scientist praising a seminar Barres had given and comparing the work as better than 'his sister's', when in fact the research was done by Barres when he was a woman.

From Barres' viewpoint the only thing that has changed is his ability to cry and apart from the absence of tears, he feels exactly the same; his science is the same, his interests are the same and he feels the quality of his work is unchanged.

Barres is angered that he could be treated differently by people who think of him as a woman, as a man or as a transgendered person.

But he says even worse is that some women fail to recognize that they are treated differently because, unlike him, they've never known anything else.

Barres says it is ironic that those who argue in favour of innate differences in scientific ability do so without scientific data to explain why women make up more than half of all graduate students but only 10 percent of tenured faculty.

Barres believes a meritocracy unconsciously exists and scientists at the top of the ladder mean no harm but operate within a culture that holds different standards for men and women, and people are blind to their inherent biases.

Barres backs his arguments with data from a range of studies showing bias in science where a woman applying for a research grant needed to be three times more productive than men to be considered equally competent.

Further evidence comes from Mahzarin Banaji, PhD, professor of psychology at Harvard who also supports that view.

She devised a test that forces people to quickly associate terms with genders and the results revealed that most people are less likely to associate scientific words with women than with men.

Barres is concerned about the evident inequality in science for a number of reasons and wants to see progress in making science fairer for all genders and races.

One focus is eliminating bias from grant applications, especially for the most lucrative grants where the stakes are highest.

Last year, Barres was instrumental in convincing the National Institutes of Health to change how it chooses talented young scientists to receive its Director's Pioneer Award, worth $500,000 per year for five years.

In 2004, the 64-person selection panel consisted of 60 men and all nine grants went to men.

In 2005, the agency increased the number of women on the panel, and six of the 13 grants went to women.

Barres is now challenging what he perceives as male bias in the lucrative Howard Hughes Investigator program, an elite scientific award that virtually guarantees long-term research funding.

Barres also has other ideas on how to retain more women and minorities in science, above and beyond the standard demands to simply hire more women.

He suggests that women scientists be judged by the quality of their science rather than the quantity, given that many of them still bear the brunt of child-care responsibilities.

He proposes enacting more gender-balanced selection processes for grants and job searches, and has called on academic leaders to speak out when departments aren't diverse.

Barres says that critics are too eager to dismiss women who complain of discrimination in science as irrational and emotional, but he said that the opposite argument is easy to make as it is overwhelmingly men who commit violent crimes out of rage and anger.

Female colleagues have expressed gratitude to Barres for speaking out.

Barres urged more scientists, both men and women, to speak out against discrimination and to encourage positive mentoring so women and other minorities can reach their full potential.