By Brigitte Manz-Brunner and Carla Zingg

Why do so many women turn their backs on a scientific career after obtaining their PhD? The usual answers, "There aren't enough women", "Women don't want to" or "Women aren't as career-minded]", don't provide an adequate explanation. The reasons are embedded in the culture of science.

Science is mainly done by men. Men define what science is. Science works in keeping with criteria that suits men, or, to be more accurate, criteria that are commonly attributed to men. There are no formal criteria that exclude women. Nor does it lie on the intellectual capabilities of women – or would anyone claim that women aren't as intelligent as men?

No, the crux of the matter lies somewhere else, namely in the picture we have of a "crack", an alpha personality with outstanding potential. What characterises a crack? How do we imagine true cracks to be? A crack obviously has a razor-sharp intellect, works most of the time, publishes a lot–and only in the most renowned journals, jets around the world from one conference to the next, sits on the most important commissions, ... in short, he lives for science.

Carla Zingg (l.) and Brigitte Manz-Brunner; Co-delegates of the Equal Opportunities Office at ETH Zurich.

But the list goes on: he is also boss and mentor, gathers the best young newcomers around him and drives them on to reach their absolute potential, fascinates his students with brilliant lectures, etc., (can any human being really meet such expectations?).

More to the point, can a women live up to the mental picture we have of a crack? If you employ someone or appoint them to a position you don't only judge their performance so far – you also imagine what the potential of the person is. In this respect less trust is placed in women than in men that they will devote themselves to science with life and soul. The few exceptions only serve to prove the rule.

It is supposed that, sooner or later, a woman will have a partner or even a child, thus insinuating that these "external" circumstances will hamper her mobility or reduce her motivation and that she will no longer live exclusively for science. Motherhood and success are not, however, incompatible – proved by the fact that of the 23 ETH female professors, who we recently portrayed with a loose-leaf brochure, 12 of them have children.

Images of women as unsuited to science or other sundry prejudices against them encroach upon the appointment chances of both women and men. If a man throws in his hand he is perceived to be a failure, whereas a women who leaves science does not lose face but cements the ubiquitous prejudice. What is to be done in the face of such stubbornly persistent prejudice – despite refutation by numerous scientific investigations – that is so difficult to dislodge from our minds?

	Become aware of the stereotyped prejudices that we all carry around in our minds. Get help! For example by looking in on our exhibition "In the skin of Jeanne, in the skin of Jean" (1) and slipping into another role!
	Appoint more women who, as role models, refute existing prejudice.
	Hold regular talks with female employees that leave room for a discussion of their career ambitions and possibilities of development.
	Change science culture so that it includes not only internationality but also more diversity, thus avoiding a monoculture!