Academics by and large — at least, in my experience — strongly endorse norms of gender equality. The Psychonomic Society in particular has adopted a statement endorsing diversity and inclusion, which includes the explicit goal of “[w]ork[ing] towards strong representation in all aspects of the Society…that are not only gender balanced, but includes underrepresented groups.” The need for such a statement doesn’t merely lay out the values of the society; it also shows a recognition that there is a problem.

As a member of the Cardiff University School of Psychology equality and diversity panel, I’ve been responsible for summarizing data showing how our School is progressing on gender equality. I’ve been a participant at conferences and an organizer of conference symposia across several scientific societies, and I can report that yes, there is a problem. I know there is a gender equality problem in psychology not just because I can see it in the data, or because it is apparent at scientific meetings; I am part of the problem.

One entertaining way to get a sense of the scale of the problem across academia is to browse the “All Male Panel” tumblr, where examples run from unnecessary to patently absurd. All-male panels get an ironic “Hoffsome” thumbs-up stamp congratulating them for organizing a panel with no women. Of course, the tumblr is not a scientific survey of panels (for less fun, see this survey of virology conferences), but it is interesting to check one’s reaction. I laugh and say to myself “how does that happen?”

Until I realize I’ve organized an all-male panel.

Recently.

So, how did that happen?

The reason for my all-male panel (or, “manel”) was neither nefarious nor complicated. I simply asked people I know. The people I know and think of are mostly male. But my connections are certainly not the only people qualified to speak on this topic, and they certainly aren’t a random sample. Who I think of for a symposium is driven by who I see at conferences and who I know. These connections are affected by past bias in science. I am perpetuating that bias myself.

I didn’t actually think that much about that all-male symposium until Kathy Rastle pointed out the gender disparity in the symposia accepted for the International Psychonomic Society meeting in Amsterdam this May.

I was in one of those all-male symposia. I thought back to my own all-male symposium at the previous international Psychonomic Society meeting. I could not fault the planners of my symposium, or the organizers of the meeting, any more than I could fault myself. Luckily, the Psychonomic leadership was quick to respond, reiterating the Society’s values and promising to attempt to correct the imbalance. The end result does not represent the gender-balanced membership of the Society, but hopefully the Society will be more proactive in the future, if only to avoid such an inconvenient re-planning of the event (but hopefully, to reflect the stated values of the Society).

For my own part, I had to reflect on what I could have done to avoid being part of the problem, yet again. Here are some things I plan to do in the future.

• I will deliberately strive for gender balance when I organize an event. When building gender balance — or at the very least gender diversity — in from the beginning, it is much easier to achieve than scrambling to fix the problem after the event is planned. As a knock-on effect, inviting people I might not have initially thought of will connect me with a wider network of people. Gender disparity in events is caused, in part, by lazy thinking on the part of the organizers. If I am proactive in overcoming this lazy thinking, I can avoid reinforcing the status quo.
• I will mention gender balance to organizers of events to which I’ve been invited. I believe that many event organizers are like me: they have similar values, but they do not always effectively put them into action. An early reminder to the organizers can help push an event in the right direction. My own experience is that early in the processes, organizers are appreciative of nudges to think about gender balance. Later in the process, they are defensive and stubborn. Waiting until the event is already planned and then reacting to the lack of gender balance will mean awkward conversations and difficult decisions.
• I will hold organizers to a high standard, with consequences. If I am invited to an event, I will consider the gender representation when deciding to attend. At the very minimum, I have publicly pledged not to participate in all-male panels. This does not mean that I will stand for token female representation, but I will certainly try to evaluate whether the organizers have made done their part to improve the current situation. If not, I will withdraw my participation.
• As a more senior researcher, I should lead. This year, it will be 10 years since obtaining my PhD and starting a tenure-track job. I’m lucky to have some name recognition and respect. With this comes the responsibility to make clear my own values through action, because the potential costs of pushing on this issue are less. I should push those with higher status to put their values into action, as well. This will create an environment where exerting pressure for gender diversity is expected and reduce the costs for early career researchers to do the same.
• I will remember that I don’t have to do every event; I can pass opportunities to others. Part of overcoming the gender disparity in academic events must be, for me, participating less. Given the finite opportunities, I should be ready to suggest someone who might be as good a match, or better, for the event. This is contrary to our nature; as scientists, we are constantly looking for signs of imminence for both our egos and our CVs. But invitations occur in a context that is highly gender imbalanced. Male scientists — myself included — should have more imagination and be willing to refer good opportunities to female scientists who might have been overlooked.

These are all simple steps that, if taken early and often, can reduce the chances that I end up in yet another all-male symposium. I hope you’ll join me in deliberate action to help combat the status quo; as is plain from my own experience, doing nothing is not an option if you care about the issue. You’ll just find that you are, time and time again, part of the problem. We can do better than that.