Some listserves, faced with the problem of threads that might seem of differing relevance to their various subscribers, have adopted labelling systems for the headers of messages. For example, I know of a system that is largely professional and labels more broad reaching discussions with a header that starts with the word "Social". Might I suggest a similar system here?
best anthony waldron > Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 00:00:02 -0400 > From: [email protected] > Subject: ECOLOG-L Digest - 6 Jul 2013 to 7 Jul 2013 (#2013-185) > To: [email protected] > > There are 7 messages totalling 787 lines in this issue. > > Topics of the day: > > 1. Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance > supplements to NSF awards (2) > 2. Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance > supplements to NSF awards (5) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2013 18:22:28 -0400 > From: "Aaron T. Dossey" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life > Balance supplements to NSF awards > > NSF is not terribly concerned with the "furtherance of science". > > If they were, many many policies would be drastically different, including: > > 1) They would forbid any institution from being eligible for NSF funds > who engages in spousal hiring or any other form of nepotism. Usage of > any funding to hire based on marital status (and to whom) rather than > purely on CV content/merit is wasteful and counter to the "furtherance > of science". > > 2) The NSF would also mandate that any NSF- or federal-funding eligible > (or even accredited) institution was required to allow their postdocs > and staff scientists (at LEAST any PhD-holding scientist) to submit > grants with themselves as PI, sole PI if they wish. As it stands now, a > combination of institutional and agency policies (tons of buck passing > on this one as far as where the root of the problem lies) currently > forbid many (most?) of the best and brightest scientists in the US from > being PI of their own grants, or even owning > publication/patent/grantwriting rights to their own ideas/intellectual > property or work. > > 3) The NSF would also consider doing away with all postdoc positions all > together, and pressure institutions to hire many more independent > scientists and permanent staff scientists. > > 4) The NSF would create a robust and safe grievance/whistle blower > system for graduate students and postdocs to report unethical or > otherwise bad treatment or intellectual property theft at the hands of > their faculty bosses. They would also have a system to evaluate grant > submitters based on their MENTORING as robust as how they evaluate > research - and reject grants by poorly rated "mentors". > > 5) They would have a working group taking a long hard look at tenure and > whether it is still relevant or if it is largely abused and needs done > away with or replaced with a better system not as easily abused and more > based on protecting controversy rather than protecting lack of > productivity, employee abuse or IP theft. > > ... many other things they would do if they CARED about science, but the > above would be a fantastic start. > > > > On 7/6/2013 3:40 PM, David L. McNeely wrote: > > I assume you are not serious. > > > > What people who find fault with NSF doing this fail to acknowledge is that > > NSF is responsible for the furtherance of science. Projects suffer when > > participants must be away for family matters. So science suffers, and NSF > > money goes to waste. By providing PIs small grants to temporarily replace > > workers who must be away for family reasons, NSF is salvaging its projects. > > > > I assume that PIs have hiring and firing authority. Being absent for > > recreational reasons and letting the project suffer would in my mind > > justify replacement of such personnel. That shouldn't be hard to do in > > today's employment climate. > > > > PIs may be faced with an institutional family leave policy that requires > > that they provide time off for family reasons (which is a legitimate > > institutional policy -- it helps retain employees in which the institution > > may have valuable training invested). This policy provides for PIs to work > > around the difficulty to projects that that might cause. > > > > NSF seems to be responding to a need among grantees. David McNeely > > > > ---- "David M. Lawrence" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> What other choices that might "compete with their professional career," > >> would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a > >> bit half (if that) baked. > >> > >> Few other "choices" invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL > >> -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives > >> might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is > >> scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it > >> involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could > >> interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF > >> help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of > >> argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on > >> coral reefs and will involve some diving.] > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: > >>> We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no > >>> longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an > >>> informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal > >>> would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist > >>> who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete > >>> with their professional career. > >>> > >>> Michael > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> ------------------------------------------------------ > >> David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 > >> 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 > >> Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: [email protected] > >> USA | http: http://fuzzo.com > >> ------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo > >> > >> "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo > >> > >> "No trespassing > >> 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan > > -- > > David McNeely > > > ATD of ATB and ISI > -- > Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. > Biochemistry and Molecular Biology > Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs > Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from Insect-Based Innovation > http://allthingsbugs.com/about/people/ > http://www.facebook.com/Allthingsbugs > https://www.facebook.com/InvertebrateStudiesInstitute > 1-352-281-3643 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 04:39:07 +0000 > From: "Joos, Cara (MU-Student)" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life > Balance supplements to NSF awards > > Isn't the issue here really simply that, generally, (I realize there are sa= > me sex couples and single parents but lets set that aside for now) one man = > and one woman choose to have children. The woman should not have a dispropo= > rtionately more negative effect on her career than the man. This gets away = > from singles vs married and kids vs no kids. Whether, in general, people wi= > th children should be expected to perform at the same level as people witho= > ut children is a different topic. This is about making sure women are not l= > eft behind because of the physical demands of pregnancy and breast feeding = > etc. There will never be equality in academia without addressing this unavo= > idable reality. > > > > Cara Joos PhD > University of Missouri > Biological Sciences > 105 Tucker Hall > Columbia, MO 65211 > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > On Jul 6, 2013, at 2:40 PM, David L. McNeely <[email protected]<mailto:mcnee= > [email protected]>> wrote: > > I assume you are not serious. > > What people who find fault with NSF doing this fail to acknowledge is that = > NSF is responsible for the furtherance of science. Projects suffer when pa= > rticipants must be away for family matters. So science suffers, and NSF mo= > ney goes to waste. By providing PIs small grants to temporarily replace wo= > rkers who must be away for family reasons, NSF is salvaging its projects. > > I assume that PIs have hiring and firing authority. Being absent for recre= > ational reasons and letting the project suffer would in my mind justify rep= > lacement of such personnel. That shouldn't be hard to do in today's employ= > ment climate. > > PIs may be faced with an institutional family leave policy that requires th= > at they provide time off for family reasons (which is a legitimate institut= > ional policy -- it helps retain employees in which the institution may have= > valuable training invested). This policy provides for PIs to work around = > the difficulty to projects that that might cause. > > NSF seems to be responding to a need among grantees. David McNeely > > ---- "David M. Lawrence" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > What other choices that might "compete with their professional career," > would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a > bit half (if that) baked. > > Few other "choices" invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL > -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives > might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is > scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it > involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could > interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF > help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of > argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on > coral reefs and will involve some diving.] > > Dave > > On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: > We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer = > own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed ch= > oice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to = > make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made = > a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their profe= > ssional career. > > Michael > > > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 > 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 > Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > USA | http: http://fuzzo.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > > "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo > > "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo > > "No trespassing > 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan > > -- > David McNeely > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 04:21:22 +0000 > From: "Joos, Cara (MU-Student)" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life > Balance supplements to NSF awards > > I am not sure if it is a good decision for this to be my first post on ecol= > ogy but I feel I have to say something. > > Please do not make insensitive assumptions about peoples' life circumstance= > s. As a single woman with no children, being single with no children was no= > t really a life choice. It is just how things have turned out so far. Howev= > er, being married with children is absolutely a choice. There are pros and= > cons to all life situations. Being married without children provides a saf= > ety net for each individual which single people do not have. Life is more e= > xpensive and less secure as a single person compared to married childless p= > eople. Single people have more flexibility in moving for a job. The list is= > endless. > > While I don't agree with the tone of Aaron's comments, I relate. Society in= > general is geared towards people pairing up. Seeing all of my married peer= > s go through the same experiences but with the support of a spouse made me = > a bit bitter at times, not toward them of course. I perceived it was easier= > for them, but I got comments that suggested I was footloose and fancy free= > because I was single and had no responsibilities. Singles have the same re= > sponsibilities as childless couples but no one to share them with. Married = > graduate students may have an advantage by finishing sooner or having a hig= > her publication rate (http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/workingPapers/upload= > /cheri_wp94.pdf). but everyone is expected to finish on the same timeline r= > egardless of their life situation. Also, graduate stipends are set assuming= > the student is sharing housing costs with someone, so they are expected to= > have roommates or a spouse. Living with a roommate vs a spouse is a very d= > ifferent situation. I understand that marriage has different responsibiliti= > es too, I am just saying that the grass isn't greener on the other side of = > the fence, it is just a different species. There is no point in tossing i= > nsensitive assumptions back and forth because no one really knows what othe= > r people are dealing with. > > That said, I am ecstatic that something is being done to address the fact t= > hat women bear a disproportionate family burden, due to both biology and so= > cietal norms. How many women could have 2 children in 5-6 years and finish = > a PhD? I would imagine that would be very difficult, but I have seen father= > s do this. They are not expected to take as much time off, and it would not= > be excepted for them to either. Lets face it, in general, a woman would ha= > ve to take more time off even if she didn't want to. I hope we can all agre= > e that others shouldn't have different consequences than fathers for the ch= > oice of having chlldren, but they do. Perhaps having more women in the fiel= > d who make it to higher positions in academia is necessary to change the en= > vironment and this is probably the best way to start. > > > Cara Joos PhD > University of Missouri > Biological Sciences > 105 Tucker Hall > Columbia, MO 65211 > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > On Jul 4, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Alia T <[email protected]<mailto:alia.tsang= > @GMAIL.COM>> wrote: > > So an attempt to correct the institutionalized discrimination against women > in professional positions having children is discrimination against > child-free people? Then I suppose you can extend the argument that being > single with no children is a decision you've made with full knowledge of > its potential negative effects on your career. > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Aaron T. Dossey <[email protected]<mailto:= > [email protected]>> wrote: > > Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people > without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running > rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. > > I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various > things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets > that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and > cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balance > my LIFE and WORK. > > I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. > > > > On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: > > <http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/**nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_** > id=3DUSNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=3Dclick<http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf131= > 09.jsp?WT.mc_id=3DUSNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=3Dclick> > htt**p://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/**nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_** > id=3DUSNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=3Dclick<http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf131= > 09.jsp?WT.mc_id=3DUSNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=3Dclick> > > > Date: July 2, 2013 > > > BACKGROUND > > Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an > ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of > family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them to > activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, retain, > and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career > researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the rate > at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on the > CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. > > The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on > opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and elder > care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Early > Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance > opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career STEM > talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB > opportunities through other programs such as the Graduate Research > Fellowship Program (GRFP) and postdoctoral fellowship programs, as well as > expand opportunities such as dual career-hiring through the Increasing the > Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering > Careers (ADVANCE) program. Each of these opportunities will be described > and implemented separately. > > > PURPOSE > > The purpose of this DCL is to announce a gender neutral supplemental > funding opportunity for NSF research awardees that support postdoctoral > investigators. NSF recognizes that dependent care responsibilities and > other family considerations pose unique challenges for postdoctoral > researchers. > > Principal Investigators (PIs) of research awards are invited to submit > supplemental funding requests to support additional personnel (e.g., > research technicians or equivalent) to sustain research while the > postdoctoral researcher is on family leave. These requests may include > funding for up to 3 months of salary support, for a maximum of $12,000 in > salary compensation. The fringe benefits and associated indirect costs may > be in addition to the salary payment and therefore, the total supplemental > funding request may exceed $12,000. > > Special instructions for use by PIs and Sponsored Projects Offices in > preparation and submission of postdoctoral investigators-Life Balance > Supplemental Funding Requests are included as an attachment (see below) to > this DCL. > > Additional questions should be directed to the cognizant NSF program > director identified in the award notice. > > Sincerely, > > Wanda E. Ward > Office Head > Office of International & Integrative Activities > > > > ATD of ATB and ISI > -- > Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. > Biochemistry and Molecular Biology > Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs > Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from Insect-Based Innovation > http://allthingsbugs.com/**about/people/<http://allthingsbugs.com/about/peo= > ple/> > http://www.facebook.com/**Allthingsbugs<http://www.facebook.com/Allthingsbu= > gs> > https://www.facebook.com/**InvertebrateStudiesInstitute<https://www.faceboo= > k.com/InvertebrateStudiesInstitute> > 1-352-281-3643 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2013 22:25:56 -0500 > From: malcolm McCallum <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life > Balance supplements to NSF awards > > I don't get it. > The NSF puts together a program to help folks out, and people are up > in arms about it. > Maybe I missed something? > M > > On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Daniel Nidzgorski <[email protected]> wrote: > > As an early-career ecologist who's male and childless by choice, I'm > > definitely not the "target demographic" for the birth/adoption portion of > > the CLB -- and yet I'm going to benefit a LOT from it. > > > > It's already been pointed out that helping cover employees' or > > collaborators' absences benefits the project and everyone involved with > > it. We're also going to have more amazing scientists of all different > > stripes stay in the profession, which is another major benefit to all of us > > and to advancing our scientific knowledge. > > > > I'm also going to benefit directly, albeit a little further down the line. > > This effort is an important stepping-stone towards a scientific culture > > that respects and supports a wide range of career-life balance needs. > > Cultural shifts are a gradual process, with lots and lots of little steps > > over time adding up to some astoundingly big changes. This particular > > funding is the opening piece of a much larger Career-Life Balance Program > > that's already going beyond just kids, and will continue to expand its > > scope (especially if we keep pushing it to...). This is NSF putting its > > money where its mouth is, saying that we need to start valuing the fact > > that scientists are human, too. This is pushing back against the > > professors who still feel perfectly justified to say in public that it's > > better not to hire employees or take on students who might have kids in the > > near future -- and all the quiet or subconscious biases that agree with > > them. In doing so, it paves the way for us to build on these changes so > > all of our life choices are valued, working towards a scientific culture > > where it's normal and expected that one's career makes space to have a life > > (not just to have kids). > > > > We're going to see more people taking leave for having kids, for caring for > > relatives, etc -- and we won't see the sky fall. We'll watch this happen > > again and again until the firsthand empirical evidence finally overcomes > > our preconceived notions. And that will make it much easier for someone > > like me to say I need some flexibility for something major in life, too, > > and the sky won't fall then, either. > > > > Every time there's proactive support for some specific target demographic > > or another, there's a cry of reverse discrimination. It only looks like > > that because there's currently discrimination against (real or perceived) > > family-related needs -- but we don't call that out as "discrimination," we > > call it "normal." > > > > Best, > > Daniel > > > > Daniel Nidzgorski > > Ph.D. Candidate > > NSF Graduate Research Fellow > > Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior > > University of Minnesota-Twin Cities > > > > -- > Malcolm L. McCallum > Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry > School of Biological Sciences > University of Missouri at Kansas City > > Managing Editor, > Herpetological Conservation and Biology > > "Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - > Allan Nation > > 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert > 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, > and pollution. > 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction > MAY help restore populations. > 2022: Soylent Green is People! > > The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi) > Wealth w/o work > Pleasure w/o conscience > Knowledge w/o character > Commerce w/o morality > Science w/o humanity > Worship w/o sacrifice > Politics w/o principle > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any > attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may > contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not > the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and > destroy all copies of the original message. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 12:19:21 -0400 > From: Kim van der Linde <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life > Balance supplements to NSF awards > > I think it was a single person who objected to it, the rest seems to be > far more supportive. > > Kim > > > On 7/6/2013 11:25 PM, malcolm McCallum wrote: > > I don't get it. > > The NSF puts together a program to help folks out, and people are up > > in arms about it. > > Maybe I missed something? > > M > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 19:39:29 +0000 > From: Michael Clary <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life > Balance supplements to NSF awards > > I agree. Malcom you may have missed the undercurrent to this topic that sw= > irls around tender issues that have nothing to do with the NSF program; gen= > der discrimination, reverse discrimination, personal choices, culture shift= > s. My interests are in the consideration given to the divergent paths of k= > ids and career. The OP's opposition has provided a forum, but I'm not hear= > ing much opposition beyond that. > > Michael > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LI= > STSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Kim van der Linde > Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 9:19 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career = > - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards > > I think it was a single person who objected to it, the rest seems to be far= > more supportive. > > Kim > > > On 7/6/2013 11:25 PM, malcolm McCallum wrote: > > I don't get it. > > The NSF puts together a program to help folks out, and people are up=20 > > in arms about it. > > Maybe I missed something? > > M > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 13:37:08 +0300 > From: Dhenshel <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life > Balance supplements to NSF awards > > Aaron - you speak out of complete ignorance. > > First - there still is bias in the ivory tower wrt pay. Men with a family s= > till may get better pay raises because "they need the money because they are= > supporting a family," while women in some instances are still told that the= > y are only providing supplemental income. This despite that the woman may b= > e divorced; there is still an (often wrong) assumption that divorced women a= > re getting support from their ex-spouses. =20 > > Imagine having your job, having to take care of children, and being single, w= > hether man (there are some in that situation) or women (many more women in t= > hat situation). Everyone wants to "have a life" and everyone needs to feed,= > clothe, and house themselves and so have to take care of the corresponding c= > hores that go along with taking care of basic needs. (Do you really think c= > lothes start to wash themselves just because you have children? Quite the o= > pposite occurs, of course, all the basic chores multiply in size and time co= > nsumption.) You have no concept of how time consuming children are, in addit= > ion to the increased feeding/ cooking, clothes washing, and general cleaning= > requirements. In the beginning, kids just take time, tons and tons of time= > , all too often in the middle of the night. So anyone with young children i= > s running on little to no sleep either sometimes or regularly, and job deman= > ds do not adjust accordingly. Then there is schooling. In some places just= > finding a school takes time, research, appointments, testing (yes, even to g= > et into pre-school requires testing in some cities). Once the kids are in s= > chool, it may shock you but kids need help with homework. In fact, for my k= > ids, we were required to do edits on their papers when they were in elementa= > ry and middle school. I doubt that requirement is unusual. And any school p= > roject needs planning and usually shopping for supplies, not to mention the n= > ot so occasional third and fourth hand during gluing. Then, unless you want= > your kid to be babysat by the TV, there's activities to be gone to (varies b= > y kid's inclinations, but includes sports, ballet or gymnastics or art or...= > you name it, kids are doing it). These again take time, carpooling, watchin= > g, encouraging (all kids need encouragement and advising), and more shopping= > for equipment or uniforms or... something associated with activities. On to= > p of those time demands, children need emotional nurturing, advising, loving= > , and just being with. Children are not emotionally nurtured from the other= > end of a computer screen while you write you next paper, grant or book. Nu= > rturing takes face to face interaction, and dedicated time, at least some ti= > me daily until they are on their own. > > For many women, the decision comes down to where they want to spend their ti= > me. Is it more important to fight an uphill battle within the system and ha= > ve less time for your family, or is it more important to raise the next gene= > ration in a country that poorly supports families (unlike most European coun= > tries, at least), often in isolation from a familial support network since w= > e go where the jobs are and rarely find jobs close to the family home. For u= > s, our family and our jobs must be our life for the two decades or so that w= > e raise children. "Having a life" is something we can resume once we are em= > pty nesters. > > Diane Henshel > > Sent from my iPad > > On Jul 5, 2013, at 12:58, Amanda Newsom <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I hesitate to respond to stuff like this on Ecolog, but must voice my > > support of Alia and Emily. It is NOT easier to have a family than to be > > single in academia. I say this as a childless, single person. My > > colleagues with families face challenges of the sort I simply do not, and > > particularly women with families face discrimination in addition to the > > discrimination they face just being women. > >=20 > > Again, while having a family within academia is something I have not > > experienced, it is an issue that is close to my heart because I have seen > > very negative consequences to the status quo of NOT affording extra > > consideration to those academics with families. I have seen it lose the > > academy excellent people, particularly women, when small changes could hav= > e > > helped retain them. In this age, in this political climate, the academy > > needs to increase its intellectual capital, not continue to drive it away.= > > >=20 > >=20 > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Alia T <[email protected]> wrote: > >=20 > >> So an attempt to correct the institutionalized discrimination against wom= > en > >> in professional positions having children is discrimination against > >> child-free people? Then I suppose you can extend the argument that being > >> single with no children is a decision you've made with full knowledge of > >> its potential negative effects on your career. > >>=20 > >> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Aaron T. Dossey <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>=20 > >>> Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people > >>> without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running > >>> rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. > >>>=20 > >>> I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various > >>> things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets > >>> that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and > >>> cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balanc= > e > >>> my LIFE and WORK. > >>>=20 > >>> I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. > >>>=20 > >>>=20 > >>>=20 > >>> On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: > >>>=20 > >>>> <http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/**nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_** > >>>> id=3DUSNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=3Dclick< > >> http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=3DUSNSF_25&WT= > .mc_ev=3Dclick > >>>=20 > >>>>> htt**p://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/**nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_** > >>>> id=3DUSNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=3Dclick< > >> http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=3DUSNSF_25&WT= > .mc_ev=3Dclick > >>>=20 > >>>>=20 > >>>>=20 > >>>> Date: July 2, 2013 > >>>>=20 > >>>>=20 > >>>> BACKGROUND > >>>>=20 > >>>> Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an > >>>> ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of > >>>> family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them > >> to > >>>> activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, > >> retain, > >>>> and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career > >>>> researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the > >> rate > >>>> at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on > >> the > >>>> CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. > >>>>=20 > >>>> The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on > >>>> opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and > >> elder > >>>> care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Earl= > y > >>>> Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance > >>>> opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career > >> STEM > >>>> talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB > >>>> opportunities through other programs such as the Graduate Research > >>>> Fellowship Program (GRFP) and postdoctoral fellowship programs, as well= > > >> as > >>>> expand opportunities such as dual career-hiring through the Increasing > >> the > >>>> Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and > >> Engineering > >>>> Careers (ADVANCE) program. Each of these opportunities will be describe= > d > >>>> and implemented separately. > >>>>=20 > >>>>=20 > >>>> PURPOSE > >>>>=20 > >>>> The purpose of this DCL is to announce a gender neutral supplemental > >>>> funding opportunity for NSF research awardees that support postdoctoral= > > >>>> investigators. NSF recognizes that dependent care responsibilities and > >>>> other family considerations pose unique challenges for postdoctoral > >>>> researchers. > >>>>=20 > >>>> Principal Investigators (PIs) of research awards are invited to submit > >>>> supplemental funding requests to support additional personnel (e.g., > >>>> research technicians or equivalent) to sustain research while the > >>>> postdoctoral researcher is on family leave. These requests may include > >>>> funding for up to 3 months of salary support, for a maximum of $12,000 > >> in > >>>> salary compensation. The fringe benefits and associated indirect costs > >> may > >>>> be in addition to the salary payment and therefore, the total > >> supplemental > >>>> funding request may exceed $12,000. > >>>>=20 > >>>> Special instructions for use by PIs and Sponsored Projects Offices in > >>>> preparation and submission of postdoctoral investigators-Life Balance > >>>> Supplemental Funding Requests are included as an attachment (see below)= > > >> to > >>>> this DCL. > >>>>=20 > >>>> Additional questions should be directed to the cognizant NSF program > >>>> director identified in the award notice. > >>>>=20 > >>>> Sincerely, > >>>>=20 > >>>> Wanda E. Ward > >>>> Office Head > >>>> Office of International & Integrative Activities > >>>>=20 > >>>=20 > >>>=20 > >>> ATD of ATB and ISI > >>> -- > >>> Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. > >>> Biochemistry and Molecular Biology > >>> Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs > >>> Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from Insect-Based Innovation > >>> http://allthingsbugs.com/**about/people/< > >> http://allthingsbugs.com/about/people/> > >>> http://www.facebook.com/**Allthingsbugs< > >> http://www.facebook.com/Allthingsbugs> > >>> https://www.facebook.com/**InvertebrateStudiesInstitute< > >> https://www.facebook.com/InvertebrateStudiesInstitute> > >>> 1-352-281-3643 > >>>=20 > >>=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > --=20 > > Amanda Newsom > >=20 > > ``Life shrinks or expands according to one's courage'' -- Anais Nin > > ------------------------------ > > End of ECOLOG-L Digest - 6 Jul 2013 to 7 Jul 2013 (#2013-185) > *************************************************************
