The Victorian branch of Australian Science Communicators recently enjoyed an evening of documentary film and science with a screening of “The Desperate Plight of the Orange-bellied Parrot” followed by a Q&A session.

Members and guests filled the LongPlay cinema in North Fitzroy for pre-film dinner and drinks in the cinema bar. After a short introduction of special guests, filmmaker David Neilson and conservation biologist Dr. Michael Magrath, viewers settled in for the film.

The Desperate Plight of the Orange-bellied Parrot is an intimate, sometimes comical, sometimes touching insight to the lives of these small, charismatic birds. The film spans the migration of the birds from the Tasmania wilderness to the Victorian coast. Shots of the parrot’s food plants and their wild, unforgiving habitat stirred sympathy for the vulnerable birds whose bright colours and cheery personalities belie their endangerment.

A bevy of threats are faced by the Orange-bellied Parrots, including the usual suspects of climate change and habitat destruction, but their story is also one of hope. Their story is one of dedicated scientists, volunteers and community. A story that pits the desires of the public to save the parrots against the legislation of the government. Interviews with the conservationists, including volunteer Bob Brown and project scientists, speak of a species on the brink with some stories of hope and indications of potential for recovery.

The Orange-bellied Parrot breeds well in captivity and several sites including Moonlit and Werribee Zoo feature in the film. Many branch members have visited the parrots in their sanctuary homes, but not before been privy to the scale of the work behind the scenes.

David Neilson said that ironically it is the very endangered status that made the footage of the birds so intimate, accessible and personable. They live in close quarters to human caretakers and their movements are monitored and recorded.

The screening was followed by a Q&A session with David Neilson and Michael Magrath, hosted by ASC-VIC president Lynette Plenderleith and the audience posed questions about the genetics of the birds, the migration routes and their celebrity status. David gave us the inside story of the birds and spoke of his inspiring passion for protecting them through documentary. Michael answered the audience’s questions about the techniques used to conserve them and the prognosis for the survival of the species, the answer to which will remain unknown for now, but all in the room were hopeful.

The event was funded by an event grant from Australian Science Communicators. ASC-VIC thanks the national body for enabling the event through its generosity.

We need to have a very serious talk about gender

Dr Craig Cormick

President, Australian Science Communicators

Rather than quote lots of facts and figures at you about the problems with portrayal of gender in science communications, I’m going to rely on the super powers of metaphor  and talk about the super hero Black Widow. You know the character played by Scarlett Johansson in the Marvel movies.

Well, one of the best scenes in the movie Avengers: Age of Ultronis when the Avengers’ Quinjet swoops down low over the streets and Black Widow drops out of the bottom of the aircraft on her motorbike and hits the road and zooms off to fight evil.

Yeah! Kick-arse awesome!

Except when the toy companies Lego and Hasbro released their tie-in toys, suddenly it was Captain America who was dropping from the jet and riding the motorbike. What the..?

The companies copped quite a serve in the media and online for replacing a female action figure with a male one, and their excuse was that female action figures don’t sell as well as male ones. Which is a pretty lame excuse really – because how do you make change if you are not part of the change?

I really think Black Widow needs to knock on their door and say, “We need to have a very serious talk!”

Or take the European Union’s clumsy attempt to make a video promoting more women to take up careers in science with their ‘Science: it’s a girl thing’ video, that put more emphasis on cosmetics and fashion than science. It generated such outrage it was gone in a few days.

There is data as well as anecdotes. A number of studies have found evidence for significant bias against female scientists. Compared with their male counterparts, they:

• Receive grants less often and receive smaller grant allocations.[1]
• Receive fewer citations.[2]
• Receive fewer scientific awards.[3]
• Are less likely to get promoted.
• Are less likely to present their research at conferences.
• Are less likely to publish their work or collaborate internationally.
• Are under-represented among inventors.
• Are less likely to hold academic leadership positions.
• Receive faculty recommendation letters that are less praiseworthy.[4]

It has even been stated that taken together, the data suggest a pervasive culture of negative bias — whether conscious or unconscious — against women in academia.[5]

So the ethics of gender are something you need to continually consider. The same as race and disability and other forms of diversity.

Ask yourself if you have really tried to get balance in representation in stories and activities you are doing. Here is a bit of a check list:

• Do you have quotes from both men and women that are equal in the worth of the quote, and from equality in work roles?
• Are you supporting gender stereotypes or helping to break them down?
• Are you using gender-fair language, such as avoiding ‘he’ as a generic pronoun and worlds like chairman, businessman, mailman etc.[6]
• Do your images promote equality of roles?
• Do you have a mission statement on gender equity and diversity to refer to?

After all, how do we ever get change if you are not going to be a part of the change?

Because if not, you should know the day is definitely going to come when Black Widow knocks on your door and says, “We need to have a very serious talk about gender!”

References

[1]Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H. D. (2007). Gender differences in grant peer review: A meta-analysis. Journal of Infometrics, 1

[2]Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Glynn, C. J. (2013). The Matilda effect –Role congruity effects on scholarly communication: A citation analysis of Communication Research and Journal of Communication articles. Communication Research, 40(1).

[3]Lincoln, A. E., Pincus, S., Koster, J. B., & Leboy, P. S. (2012). The Matilda effect in science: Awards and prizes in the US, 1990s and 2000s. Social Studies of Science, 42.

[4]Trix, F., & Psenka, C. (2003). Exploring the color of glass: Letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse & Society, 14.

[5]Ledin, A., Bornmann, L., Gannon, F., & Wallon, G. A. (2007). A persistent problem: Traditional gender roles hold back female scientists. EMBO Reports, 8.

[6]Ramšak, A. (2014) Guidelines for Gender Sensitive Reporting, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Slovenia.