DEI and Women in Physics: does DEI work?

I believe it is necessary to establish a dedicated union for women in academia, rather than relying on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) strategies, to facilitate campaigning for our interests. I won’t discuss specific union structures, but rather defend the concept of unionisation for women in the workplace as the way forward. My points are mostly relevant to fields where women are largely outnumbered, such as my field – theoretical physics, but my beliefs extend to any minority group in any workplace. I was inspired to write after celebrating graduation and reflecting on my own experience so far at Imperial.  

Each year, while International Women’s Day and Women at Imperial week roll around, the reality remains bleak: in Physics, the number of women stays low, leaving me ever more uninspired.  

Firstly, I will discuss my general distrust of DEI initiatives. It appears universities and workplaces invent lip-service strategies so they can appear to be aiding change. It appears the focus of DEI initiatives is “raising awareness” rather than doing anything. Crucially, these initiatives do not focus on retention (ensuring minorities are not pushed out of academia over time). The first point which makes me skeptical about DEI strategies is how easily they blend into capitalist structures, which unfortunately include education, and the corporate world.  

DEI is a recent trend, but I have not seen historical examples of organisations which demanded better conditions for workers be supported by those at the top. In general, movements which were successful in changing working conditions usually had to campaign against management. Socially changing any environment usually comes with some kind of pushback or opposition and should require campaigning if the changes are to be substantial. We see that relevant organisations, like trade unions, tend to consistently be at odds with management. We also see that, if allowed to operate properly, they are very effective in protecting workers. Organisation and unionisation are crucial to achieve social advancement in the workplace. Effective movements certainly don’t blend easily into management structures. DEI does, which is the first red flag. If it were doing something, those changes would be apparent, not just directly (e.g., substantially increased numbers of women in academia and better retention), but we would see substantially more opposition, as we have come to expect with any impactful social change. Additionally, senior management level departments generally have an interest in the reputation of the company or institution.   

There is a reasonable question to ask: can DEI strategies even solve the issues? For this, we need to ask firstly why women don’t enter fields like physics, and secondly, why so many quit.  

The answer to the former is a complicated blend of socialisation and misogyny, with boys still dominating school classes. These problems are far too extensive: the socialisation pushing women away from academics starts almost from birth and can’t be solved by compulsory empathy courses for students when they arrive at university. One thing universities can do, however, is attempt to investigate their own biases in admissions processes. This would demand thorough, transparent investigations into whether there are links between, for instance, male–majority admissions committees, and lower female admission rates, and strategies to change this. I believe measures like this, which would threaten the reputation of universities, are things that university heads would be unwilling to implement fully without significant campaigning.  

The latter point, resulting in a female proportion of approximately 10% at professor level in physics, is again complicated by social issues including uncompensated and disproportionate domestic labour requirements for women. There is another question as to what universities can do about these issues, and I honestly think that they cannot do much to fix the root causes without radical social change. Yet, there are ways that they can contribute, for example by designing more flexible work schedules for women specifically. Overall, the rights of workers need to be lobbied and campaigned for; they are not just given from employer goodwill. I cannot fathom why social change for women is not viewed in the same way, and why we trust DEI schemes to help us.  

There is another obvious reason women leave academics: routine misogyny by their male majority cohort or colleagues. Things will not change until men in academia treat women better, and they will not do this willingly for the most part. It certainly helps to have strong communities like departmental women’s societies, but until we are treated with dignity by the majority, nothing will change. Solving this will have to involve some form of enforcement as a matter of policy, as it is extremely unlikely that men who enter academia as undergraduates after two decades of patriarchal socialisation will change so easily. For example, easier mechanisms to report experiences, however minor, and swift investigation and disciplinary action, could be instated even at undergraduate level. Calling to implement harsher policies will require protest, and then negotiation for which we must organise.  

This culminates in the crux of my point: there is no point relying on the goodwill of those in charge of universities to aid radical change to the status quo. Trade unions focus on improving pay and conditions, a cause for which they are important. The treatment of women in academia, and specifically in fields like physics, warrants organised action too. This could be done by establishing a new type of trade union altogether, or ensuring existing unions implement new departments or divisions to lobby for systematic change for both women and minorities. The work environment will not change instantly, but it will never change at all if we continue to rely on false promises.