11th December 2008, 05:25 PM
I found Underscore's post very honest; it is really quite shocking that such things go on - Tom's response was a bit out of order: these are examples from the real world, not just the ramblings of a Gender Studies undergraduate dissertation.
It does raise a difficult point though - how does one deal with sexism in other contractors on site? It's a bit difficult when they are likely to outnumber the archaeologists and they are doing the 'important' work, rather than 'getting in the way'.
I can't say I've ever experienced any real discrimination in archaeology, but it is certainly generally quite a macho occupation and I would suggest that the women that seem to succeed, in the field at least, do so on terms dictated by men - i.e. by becoming one of the lads, and brushing off anything but the most offensive comments, which is far from fair.
I wonder how some of those who have responded with 'what about a group for men?' would deal with the sort of innappropriate comments that clearly happen on regular basis?
As for being offered a job on the basis of your ability to spin bowl, you should have said 'yes, I'm brilliant', and then, after your first game when you inadvertantly concuss the unit director and the lie is discovered, you could have a laugh taking them to an industrial tribunal - unfair dismissal for not being good enough at cricket. I've never heard anything so ridiculous in my life (was it in the 1920s?),but really you should have reported that to the IFA. Discrimination in all forms should not be tolerated.
It does raise a difficult point though - how does one deal with sexism in other contractors on site? It's a bit difficult when they are likely to outnumber the archaeologists and they are doing the 'important' work, rather than 'getting in the way'.
I can't say I've ever experienced any real discrimination in archaeology, but it is certainly generally quite a macho occupation and I would suggest that the women that seem to succeed, in the field at least, do so on terms dictated by men - i.e. by becoming one of the lads, and brushing off anything but the most offensive comments, which is far from fair.
I wonder how some of those who have responded with 'what about a group for men?' would deal with the sort of innappropriate comments that clearly happen on regular basis?
As for being offered a job on the basis of your ability to spin bowl, you should have said 'yes, I'm brilliant', and then, after your first game when you inadvertantly concuss the unit director and the lie is discovered, you could have a laugh taking them to an industrial tribunal - unfair dismissal for not being good enough at cricket. I've never heard anything so ridiculous in my life (was it in the 1920s?),but really you should have reported that to the IFA. Discrimination in all forms should not be tolerated.